Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: ncramer@bbn.com (Nichael Cramer) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Documentary Hypothesis: the State of the Question? Message-ID: Date: 29 Nov 90 05:34:37 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA Lines: 85 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu daved@westford.ccur.com writes: > I'm arguing the plausibility of the Documentary Hypothesis (apropos > of Genesis-- the Yavist, the Elohist, etc.) with a > Biblical conservative (but not a fundamentalist (?) or a literalist). > If anyone has some recent (1970 - ) citations, these would be indeed > useful. Besides those suggested by the moderator, I'd like to suggest three more sources (in order of increasing complexity): 1] Richard Elliot Friedman: _Who Wrote the Bible_ (Summit Books, 1987). Friedman gives a good, very popular overview of the state of modern scholarly OT studies. Since the main focus of the book (about which more below[*]) deals with the component source of the (early) OT, it necessarily deals extensively with the Documentary Hypothesis. All in all, a very readable account. 2] _The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible_: Supplementary Volume. ("Yahwist", "Elohist", "Priestly Writers", "Redaction Criticism OT") A standard reference work, the IDBS contains medium sized (~4pp), concise yet highly detailed articles describing the characteristics of each of the five actors of the DH as laid out in the standard model. And for those who want to really get their feet wet: ;) 3] Frank Moore Cross: _Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel_ (Harvard, 1973). As the subtitle suggests, this book deals primarily with the historical development of the Israelite religion and so only deals with the DH in passing. Nonetheless, it contains a great deal of detailed information from the entire field of the study of the sources of the OT, both literary (i.e. oral/textual) and otherwise. Now in answer to the question that keeps popping up, are these single, exhaustive sources that lay out the detailed verse-by-verse argumentation for the DH in the straightforward way that Dave's friend seems to be looking for? In short, no. Friedman's book and IDBS take the DH as given and Cross's book, while detailed in argument is less focused on the DH. On the other hand all three books (particularly Cross's) give extensive documentation in support of their arguments; much of it as pointers into the technical literature. In short, this may be the best that we can hope for; clearly such detailed argumentation exists, but whether it is localized in a single (accessible!) source remains to be seen. Ideally what we need is a detailed "critical" (in the technical sense) commentary on the books of Pentateuch. Our moderator has already discussed Speiser's translation in the Anchor Bible series. Does anyone know the Genesis volume of the Hermenea(sp?) series? (I've only recently discovered this series, but my initial impression has been quite favorable; this might be worth looking into.) Nichael [* NOTE]: A couple provisos concerning Friedman's book: First, a minor quibble: I think it has a dreadful title. It sounds like your standard drugstore paperback, dime-a-dozen bible book. Moreover, to be truly nit-picking, Friedman deals only with the early OT: specifically the Pentateuch and the Deuteronomistic History. Oh well, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume the publisher foisted it on him. Secondly, like many "popular technical" books of this kind, WWtB contains two parts: 1] a careful, readable account of the current standard model and 2] a "punchline" that lays out the author's personal pet theory. In particular Friedman gives extensive arguments leading up to what appears to be at least a reasonable guess as to the identities of the Pentateuchal Redactor and the author of the Deuteronomistic History (it would probably be unfair to Friedman to say more at this point ;). I need to point out, however, that Friedman is very careful to make clear what is personal conjecture and what is the standard model. Provided one keeps this point in mind, this is a valuable book. And, again, the exposition of the standard model itself is clear and balanced. [I haven't seen the Hermeneia Genesis, but generally the series tends to be briefer, so I'd be surprised to find the rather extensive introduction that is present in Speiser. --clh]