PENe
Yahweh
And to Seth also was born a son, and he called his name Enosh. Then it was begun to call on the name of Yahweh (Gen 4:26).
And Moses said to God, “If I come to the Israelites and I say to them, ‘the God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they will say to me, ‘What is his name?’ What shall I say to them?” God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “thus you shall say to the Israelites, ‘”I am” has sent me to you.’” And God also said to Moses, “thus you shall say to the Israelites, ‘Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is my name forever, and this is my Memorial-name to all generations’” (Exod 3:13–15).
God spoke to Moses and said to him, “I am Yahweh. I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by my name Yahweh I did not make myself known to them (Exod 6:2–3, “I am Yahweh” is repeated three times in Exod 6:6–8).
According to the first account, the name Yahweh is first invoked in primeval times, long before Abraham and Moses. Nevertheless, in the second, Moses at the burning bush explicitly confesses that neither he nor the Israelites know God’s name, Yahweh. Moses requests this insider information as a means of verifying that he has indeed had a private audience with their God. The third account is a divine speech, beginning and ending with the declaration “I am Yahweh.” He presents this as a pivotal moment, up to which God has been invoked by the name “God Almighty,” but now is to be known by the name “Yahweh.”
​
“You shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk.” This strange ritual prohibition is repeated three times in the Pentateuch. In each case it is appended to a liturgical calendar (see immediately below, Exod 23:19; 34:26) or to a list of clean and unclean foods (Deut 14:21).
​
Liturgical Calendars. Liturgical calendars are important to many religions. For Christians, the four Sundays of Advent prepare them for Christmas, and the season of Lent prepares them for Good Friday and Easter. Similarly, the OT has the three pilgrimage festivals of Passover, Weeks/Pentecost, and Tabernacles/Booths. The Pentateuch contains no less than five liturgical calendars: Exod 23:14-17; 34:18-23; Lev 23:1–44; Num 28:1-29:40; Deut 16:1–17. The first two calendars name the festivals by their agricultural designation: Unleavened Bread, Harvest, and Ingathering. The remaining three list them by their more familiar historical designations: Passover, Weeks, and Tabernacles. They also contain considerably more details, and the calendars in Leviticus and Numbers include additional observances.
​
Duplications in the book of Exodus. The book of Exodus contains numerous duplicate passages, some of which are discussed in some detail in Module 8. These include the dialogue at the burning bush (esp. Exod 3:7–10), the rites of Passover (Exod 11–13), the crossing of the Reed Sea (Exod 14), and Moses’ ascents up Mount Sinai after the giving of the law (Exod 24). In addition, there are two law codes (Exod 20:1–23:33; 34:10–27) and three covenants (Exod 24:7–8; 31:16; 34:10, 27).
​
Duplications in the Ancestral Narratives (Gen 12–50). (See Module 9.)
Duplications in the Creation Accounts (Gen 1–3). (See Module 10.)
​
​
​
The Duplications Align among Coherent Literary Strands
These duplications appear to reflect 4-5 literary strands or sources (JEDP).
The duplications that we have observed above can be traced along coherent threads. In other words, they are not just isolated pearls; the pearls align along four to five distinct strands that cover the entire range of the Pentateuch. These strands share common vocabulary and common perspectives and themes.
The prevailing theory for reconstructing the Pentateuchal strands is called the “Documentary Hypothesis,” also known as JEDP, which is an acronym for the postulated sources.
J = Jahwist/Yahwist (Jahwist represents the German spelling). This source takes its name from the divine name, Yahweh, which is used from the beginning of this strand (Gen 2:4; cf. 4:26). It provides the overall plot line of the Pentateuch and contributes most of the narratives. Its portrayal of Yahweh tends to be anthropomorphic.
​
E = Elohist. This source is name from the divine name, Elohim, which is the Hebrew word most frequently used for “God” in the OT. Its portrayal of Yahweh is slightly more remote. For example, he sometimes appears in dreams, rather than in direct conversation (as in J). This strand features the Sinai covenant and law code.
D = Deuteronomist. This source is essentially the book of Deuteronomy, at least its earliest sections (see further Module 12). Deuteronomistic verses have likely also been inserted elsewhere in the Pentateuch, especially in Exodus. Its theological perspective and themes can be summarized as one God, one sanctuary, and one covenant. The word/Torah of God takes center stage over theophanic revelations (as in the appearance of the God of the skies at Sinai). Moses is a central figure and mediator, along with the Levites/Levitical priests.
P = Priestly. Most of this strand centers on Yahweh’s revelations to Moses at Mount Sinai (Exod 25–31; 35–40; Lev 1–16, 27). The content focuses on sacred personnel in the priests, sacred space in the tabernacle, and sacred rituals, such as sacrifice and festivals.
H = Holiness Code. This strand is found primarily in Leviticus (Lev 17–26). Whereas in P the priests are “holy,” in H all the people are to be “holy” (esp. Lev 19:2; 20:7, 26). While P privileges sacred space (“holy place”), H privileges sacred time, especially Sabbath.
The Literary Strands Reflect the Historical Development of Israelite Religion
Not only do the duplicate passages of the Pentateuch cohere into four or five literary strands, these literary strands align with historical developments in Israel’s religion, as recorded in the Bible itself. The customs and laws contained in JE reflect those found in 1–2 Samuel.
​
J and E allow for multiple altars, while D later permits only one. D refers to "levitical priests," while P later distinguishes priests from Levites.
For example, Exodus 20:22–26 (E) allows for multiple altars. So Samuel built an altar at his hometown of Ramah (1 Sam 7:17), and David builds an altar to forestall a plague (2 Sam 24:18, 21, 25). But the book of Deuteronomy (D) permits only one altar and one sanctuary (Deut 12:5–6), which is a code followed by the narrator in 1–2 Kings and especially by King Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:4, 22) and most notably by King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:4–20). The pre-exilic prophetic book of Jeremiah also echoes this Deuteronomic principle of a single sanctuary.
​
Deuteronomy refers to “Levitical priests,” as does 1–2 Kings. But the Priestly strand of the Pentateuch (P) clearly distinguishes “Levites,” who are descendants of Levi (one of the 12 sons of Jacob), and “priests,” who are descendants of Aaron (a later descendent of Levi). Levites are clearly subordinate to priests. 1–2 Chronicles echoes this distinction and subordination, unlike the parallel texts in Samuel–Kings. The question emerges, if this distinction were in place in the time of Moses, then why does it not surface in Deuteronomy, which purports to be a series of Mosaic sermons, or in Samuel–Kings?
​
During the exilic period Ezekiel presents the priest-Levite distinction as a new policy. The Chronicler adopts this new distinction when he retells the Deuteronomistic History.
The exilic prophetic book of Ezekiel may contain a clue. In the book’s final section, a vision of the new temple (Ezek 40–48), the prophet announces judgment on the Levites, “who went far from me when Israel went astray, who went astray from me after their idols” (Ezek 44:10).
Their punishment is, “they shall not come near to me to serve me as priest, nor to come near to any of my holy objects, nor to my most holy things” (Ezek 44:13). Instead, they shall have “oversight at the gates of the house” and “slaughter the burnt offering and sacrifice for the people, and they shall stand for them to minister to them” (Ezek 44:11). By contrast, “Levitical priests, the sons of Zadok, who kept charge of my sanctuary when the Israelites went astray from me, they shall come near to me to minister to me. And they shall stand before me to offer me the fat and the blood—an utterance of the Lord Yahweh. They shall enter my sanctuary and they shall come near to my table to minister to me” (Ezek 44:15–16). Ezekiel is in agreement with the Priestly strand of the Pentateuch, but he introduces the subordination of the Levites to the priests as a new policy! This development may explain why the Deuteronomistic history makes no distinction between priests and Levites, but the Chronicler’s history does.
​
In view of these considerations, most scholars locate the four main strands or sources to the following time periods and locations.
Jahwist source is the earliest, reflecting the perspective of Judah that Jerusalem is the rightful capital of the United Monarchy, dating to the 10th/9th century B.C.E.
Elohist source reflects the perspective of northern Israel (Ephraim), dating to the 9th/8th century BCE.
JE sources were combined after the northern kingdom falls to the Assyrians in 722 BCE, in part to unite the refugees from the northern kingdom with the kingdom of Judah.
Deuteronomist source likely originated among the Levites of northern Israel and shares many common themes with the prophetic book of Hosea. After 722 BCE, they likely fled south to Judah as refugees. The archaeology of Jerusalem, in fact, reflects population growth at the end of the eighth century when Hezekiah was king. Their influence likely prompted the religious reform of Hezekiah and possibly his attempted rebellion against the Assyrian Empire. His successor, Manasseh, instead complied with Assyrian rule and thus probably suppressed Deuteronomy and its policies. This sequence would explain its later discovery during Josiah’s reign.
​
Priestly source, while certainly containing older traditions, was probably compiled during the sixth century exile in Babylon.
The Benefits of Analysis and Synthesis
Whether or not one finds the JEDP hypothesis convincing, this debate has brought to light the variety of perspectives within the Pentateuch (as in a "mosaic").
JEDP is a “hypothesis” or more accurately a theory because it has considerable explanatory power for the literary, historical, and theological dimensions of the Pentateuch. It can explain what might regarded as contradictions and loose ends, if one were to insist on a single author maintaining a consistent perspective throughout.
Nevertheless, it remains a theory and continues to be hotly debated. Readers may choose to reject it, but the observations above, especially regarding duplications, bring to light features of the Pentateuch that demand some kind of alternative proposal.
​
Some readers might insist on a “final form” or canonical reading of the Pentateuch. Indeed, this is how it has been transmitted as Scripture—not as discrete sources. But, in view of the above, even a final form reading must read the Pentateuch as an edited text, not an authored text written from a single coherent perspective. We shall see that the Bible from the outset in Genesis 1–3 notifies readers that it is presenting revelation through multiple perspectives. Rather than hearing Scripture in “Mono mode,” we hear more when we hear the alternative voices speaking in stereo.
​
We should recognize that the JEDP writers were not themselves authors who are in command of their material in order to create a coherent narrative. They are editors, gathering together their own disparate sources while connecting them with their own editorial transitions and imbuing them with their own literary themes. They are not the starting point for literary production in ancient Israel, but simply key players in transmitting oral and written traditions into the final form of the Pentateuch.
​
The Documentary Hypothesis is not merely about literary analysis and attempting to fragment a narrative. Nor is it about historical analysis and attempting to delineate the history of composition or to deconstruct a literal history. Nor is it about religious analysis and attempting to pit one school against another. It is fundamentally about our reading strategy and theological interpretation: how has revelation been packaged in the Pentateuch? What is Yahweh’s means of torah/instruction for his people?
​
A variety of metaphors might help us to appreciate the value of this kind of analysis and synthesis. The Psalms liken Scripture to light:
A lamp to my feet is your word,
and a light to my path (Ps 119:105).