⬅ Back to Bible page
Introduction to the Pentateuch
The Pentateuch is the designation for the first group of books in the bible; assessing and naming a unified theme for the Pentateuch proves problematic: the development of Israel, the figure of Moses, as well as the covenant do not act as cohesive motifs for the entirety of the five books, composed at various different times, and by various differet peoples as they were, as such, scholars posit various extensions to the Pentateuch in order to group together such historical themes (the six books being the Pentateuch, plus Joshua, as well as the Enneateuch, or the nine books, for instance).
Torah, meaining in Jewish, Law; Greek, nomos (as found in the pre-Common Era Greek translation). Many examples of Law can be found in these opening books, such as the law of circumcision, the laws oncerning inheritance, the creation of the sabbath, as well as the Decalouge (the Ten Commandments), and the laws of sacrifice detailed after the introduction of the tabernacle.
Torah can also mean instruction, or teaching; teaching is not confined to law, as narratives and stories are as effective a medium of instruction.
Thus, given the predominance of narrative in significant portions of the Pentateuch, especially in Genesis, the beginning of Exodus, and Numbers, it is best to understand the biblical term torat moshe as "the instruction of Moses," an instruction realized through narratives and laws, which together elucidatet the proper norms of living and the relationship between God and the world.
The view that the Torah should be understood as the divine word mediated by Moses was the standard view of synagogue and church through the Renaissance; this is explicitly contradicted by the Torah's narrative, as Genesis refers to events that clearly happened after Moses' time ("at that time the Canaanites were in the land", implying that at the time of the author, the Cananites were no longer in the land, which was not the during Moses' lifetime).
The Documentary Hypothesis from the nineteenth century considers the Pentateuch to be composed of four main sources of documents that were edited or redacted together; this is supported by the fact that language and theological positions seem to differ from text to text: It has long been noted that chs 1-3 of Genesis twice narrate creation [. . .] [as] the second creation account does not simply mirror or repeat the first, but differs from the first both in outline and in detail, The manner in which God creates is of specific note, as in one case he speaks the world and man and woman into existence at once, but in the next he forms man and woman in sequence, fashioning them somehow in a manner that is distinctly not speaking.
Two of the apparent source documents of the Pentateuch (J and P) seem to speak of two distinct flood narratives, but the flood story as read in the collected work culminates in a tradition that God will never again bring a flood on the land; for this reason, the J and P flood narratives cannot appear as separate and complete narratives, so they are intertwined. The same happens again with the plague of Blood in Exodus, in one (J), Moses is the protagonist, and the blood affects only the Nile, and the main plague is death of fish, while in the other (P), Aaron appears as well, and blood affects all Egyptian water sources. Differentiating which source documents contributed to which part of the text is easiest in the original Hebrew, as many translations obscure differences, using neutral language where originally distinctions between composite narratives could be found.
The issue of slavery: Exodus differentiates between the treatment of male and female slaves, whereas Deuteronomy claims that they should be treated similarly: Such legal differences are not surprising given that the Bible is composite and that the different legal collections reflect norms or ideals of different groups living in different times or locations.
Some quick ways in which one can differentiate the proposed four sources of the Documentary Hypothesis:
J (Jahwist) is well known for its highly anthropomorphic God, who has a close relationship with humans (walking through the garden, making garments for the man and woman so as to clothe them).
E (Elohist) considers God as being more distant, typically communicating through dreams and intermediaries (such as angels and prophets).
P (Priestly) is characterized by a strong interest in order and boundaries, as well as an overriding concern for the priestly family of Aaron that supervises the Temple-based religious system.
D (Deuteronomist) is characterized by a unique hortatory (preaching style) and insists strongly that God cannot be seen, and is concerned with the specifics of how and where God is to be worshipped (in one place, understood to be Jerusalem).
Each of these sources have 'collections' of Pentateuch law associated with them, as such groupings of laws are thought to independently originate with each specific source.
Modern scholarship has largely abandoned rigid acceptance of the Documentary Hypothesis, as though it is clear the Pentateuch is drawing from numerous distinct sources, it is not so easy to group and date them in any meaningful manner (some presumed historical events that accompanied the dating of these sources have since been found to be largely mythical), scattered and diverse as they are.
Most scholars who continue to work with a documentary model no longer see each source as the work of a single author writing at one particular time but recognize that each is the product of a single group of "school" over a long time. Thus, it is best to speak of streams or strands of tradition and to contrast their basic underpinnings, rather than to speak of a source coming from a single auhtor, period, and locale. Yet, despite the unraveling of a consensus on the exact date and nature of the sources, it is still important to acknowledge the many contradictory perspectives found in the Torah, and to contrast the ideologies and worldviews of different passages, contrasting, for example, the Deuteronomic view of Israel's fundamental, intrinsic holiness—as seen, in Deut 7.6, "For you are a people holy to the Lord your God"—with the Priestly view, articulated most clearly in the Holiness Collection, which suggests that Israel must aspire to holiness—as in Lev 19.2, "You shall be holy."
The compilation and redaction of the Pentateuch is thought to have happened over a long period of time by a series of redactors (R) sometime during the Babylonian exile or soon thereafter in the early Persian period. This contrasts with the traditional view that Ezra alone compiled the books at the request of the Persian authorities (the so-called royal authorization hypothesis), a largely fictitious assertion. The redaction of the Torah, like the editing of other ancient works, was not interested in creating a purely consistent, singular perspective but incorporated a variety of voices and perspectives and wished to preserve them despite their repetitions and contradictions. This presents a problem to scholars: Do we concentrate on interpreting the indiviudal sources, on hearing the voices of the constituent parts of the text before redaction took place? Or do we focus on the final product, an approach that has been called holistic reading?
Introduction to the Pentateuch
The Pentateuch is the designation for the first group of books in the bible; assessing and naming a unified theme for the Pentateuch proves problematic: the development of Israel, the figure of Moses, as well as the covenant do not act as cohesive motifs for the entirety of the five books, composed at various different times, and by various differet peoples as they were, as such, scholars posit various extensions to the Pentateuch in order to group together such historical themes (the six books being the Pentateuch, plus Joshua, as well as the Enneateuch, or the nine books, for instance).
Torah, meaining in Jewish, Law; Greek, nomos (as found in the pre-Common Era Greek translation). Many examples of Law can be found in these opening books, such as the law of circumcision, the laws oncerning inheritance, the creation of the sabbath, as well as the Decalouge (the Ten Commandments), and the laws of sacrifice detailed after the introduction of the tabernacle.
Torah can also mean instruction, or teaching; teaching is not confined to law, as narratives and stories are as effective a medium of instruction.
Thus, given the predominance of narrative in significant portions of the Pentateuch, especially in Genesis, the beginning of Exodus, and Numbers, it is best to understand the biblical term torat moshe as "the instruction of Moses," an instruction realized through narratives and laws, which together elucidatet the proper norms of living and the relationship between God and the world.
The view that the Torah should be understood as the divine word mediated by Moses was the standard view of synagogue and church through the Renaissance; this is explicitly contradicted by the Torah's narrative, as Genesis refers to events that clearly happened after Moses' time ("at that time the Canaanites were in the land", implying that at the time of the author, the Cananites were no longer in the land, which was not the during Moses' lifetime).
The Documentary Hypothesis from the nineteenth century considers the Pentateuch to be composed of four main sources of documents that were edited or redacted together; this is supported by the fact that language and theological positions seem to differ from text to text: It has long been noted that chs 1-3 of Genesis twice narrate creation [. . .] [as] the second creation account does not simply mirror or repeat the first, but differs from the first both in outline and in detail, The manner in which God creates is of specific note, as in one case he speaks the world and man and woman into existence at once, but in the next he forms man and woman in sequence, fashioning them somehow in a manner that is distinctly not speaking.
Two of the apparent source documents of the Pentateuch (J and P) seem to speak of two distinct flood narratives, but the flood story as read in the collected work culminates in a tradition that God will never again bring a flood on the land; for this reason, the J and P flood narratives cannot appear as separate and complete narratives, so they are intertwined. The same happens again with the plague of Blood in Exodus, in one (J), Moses is the protagonist, and the blood affects only the Nile, and the main plague is death of fish, while in the other (P), Aaron appears as well, and blood affects all Egyptian water sources. Differentiating which source documents contributed to which part of the text is easiest in the original Hebrew, as many translations obscure differences, using neutral language where originally distinctions between composite narratives could be found.
The issue of slavery: Exodus differentiates between the treatment of male and female slaves, whereas Deuteronomy claims that they should be treated similarly: Such legal differences are not surprising given that the Bible is composite and that the different legal collections reflect norms or ideals of different groups living in different times or locations.
Some quick ways in which one can differentiate the proposed four sources of the Documentary Hypothesis:
J (Jahwist) is well known for its highly anthropomorphic God, who has a close relationship with humans (walking through the garden, making garments for the man and woman so as to clothe them).
E (Elohist) considers God as being more distant, typically communicating through dreams and intermediaries (such as angels and prophets).
P (Priestly) is characterized by a strong interest in order and boundaries, as well as an overriding concern for the priestly family of Aaron that supervises the Temple-based religious system.
D (Deuteronomist) is characterized by a unique hortatory (preaching style) and insists strongly that God cannot be seen, and is concerned with the specifics of how and where God is to be worshipped (in one place, understood to be Jerusalem).
Each of these sources have 'collections' of Pentateuch law associated with them, as such groupings of laws are thought to independently originate with each specific source.
Modern scholarship has largely abandoned rigid acceptance of the Documentary Hypothesis, as though it is clear the Pentateuch is drawing from numerous distinct sources, it is not so easy to group and date them in any meaningful manner (some presumed historical events that accompanied the dating of these sources have since been found to be largely mythical), scattered and diverse as they are.
Most scholars who continue to work with a documentary model no longer see each source as the work of a single author writing at one particular time but recognize that each is the product of a single group of "school" over a long time. Thus, it is best to speak of streams or strands of tradition and to contrast their basic underpinnings, rather than to speak of a source coming from a single auhtor, period, and locale. Yet, despite the unraveling of a consensus on the exact date and nature of the sources, it is still important to acknowledge the many contradictory perspectives found in the Torah, and to contrast the ideologies and worldviews of different passages, contrasting, for example, the Deuteronomic view of Israel's fundamental, intrinsic holiness—as seen, in Deut 7.6, "For you are a people holy to the Lord your God"—with the Priestly view, articulated most clearly in the Holiness Collection, which suggests that Israel must aspire to holiness—as in Lev 19.2, "You shall be holy."
The compilation and redaction of the Pentateuch is thought to have happened over a long period of time by a series of redactors (R) sometime during the Babylonian exile or soon thereafter in the early Persian period. This contrasts with the traditional view that Ezra alone compiled the books at the request of the Persian authorities (the so-called royal authorization hypothesis), a largely fictitious assertion. The redaction of the Torah, like the editing of other ancient works, was not interested in creating a purely consistent, singular perspective but incorporated a variety of voices and perspectives and wished to preserve them despite their repetitions and contradictions. This presents a problem to scholars: Do we concentrate on interpreting the indiviudal sources, on hearing the voices of the constituent parts of the text before redaction took place? Or do we focus on the final product, an approach that has been called holistic reading?