WEBVTT 00:00.600 --> 00:02.940 Professor Christine Hayes: We were talking last 00:02.941 --> 00:05.461 time about evidence of the use of different sources in the 00:05.459 --> 00:07.399 biblical text, and I mentioned Richard Simon, 00:07.403 --> 00:10.143 who was the first to argue that perhaps Moses wasn't the author 00:10.142 --> 00:11.382 of the entire Torah. 00:11.380 --> 00:15.300 In the mid-eighteenth century a fellow named Jean Astruc first 00:15.298 --> 00:18.898 noticed the use of the name Yahweh in certain stories and 00:18.895 --> 00:21.515 passages, and the name Elohim in others. 00:21.520 --> 00:24.250 And on this basis he came, and others came, 00:24.250 --> 00:28.410 to identify what have come to be known as the J and E sources. 00:28.410 --> 00:32.950 J being pronounced "y" in German, as a "Y," so Yahweh is 00:32.951 --> 00:34.521 spelt with a "J". 00:34.520 --> 00:36.160 So the J and the E sources. 00:36.160 --> 00:39.560 Now Astruc actually happened to maintain the idea of Mosaic 00:39.558 --> 00:42.238 authorship. He argued the Moses was drawing 00:42.243 --> 00:45.473 from two separate long documents, which he identified 00:45.471 --> 00:47.931 as J and E. They used different names for 00:47.930 --> 00:51.550 God, and he was drawing on those in his composition of the Torah. 00:51.550 --> 00:54.830 But in the next century his work would be expanded by 00:54.834 --> 00:58.124 Germans who identified other sources that made up the 00:58.118 --> 01:01.008 Pentateuch especially, the first five books of the 01:01.014 --> 01:01.854 Bible especially. 01:01.850 --> 01:06.340 And in 1878 we have the classic statement of biblical source 01:06.337 --> 01:09.377 theory published by Julius Wellhausen. 01:09.379 --> 01:11.829 He wrote a work called The History of Israel, 01:11.831 --> 01:14.861 and he presented what is known as the Documentary Hypothesis. 01:14.860 --> 01:18.010 Now you've read a little bit about this in your source 01:18.010 --> 01:21.100 readings, but it's the hypothesis that the historical 01:21.101 --> 01:24.671 or narrative sections of the Bible--Genesis and stretching on 01:24.668 --> 01:27.998 really through 2 Kings--is comprised of four identifiable 01:27.997 --> 01:31.977 source documents that have been woven together in some way. 01:31.980 --> 01:35.510 And he argued that these documents date to different 01:35.513 --> 01:38.773 periods and reflect very different interests and 01:38.769 --> 01:41.769 concerns. These four prior documents, 01:41.774 --> 01:46.144 he says, were woven together by somebody or some group of 01:46.140 --> 01:50.350 somebodies to form the narrative core of the Bible. 01:50.349 --> 01:55.029 Wellhausen argued that these sources therefore do not tell us 01:55.032 --> 01:59.482 about the times or situations they purport to describe, 01:59.480 --> 02:02.560 so much as they tell us about the beliefs and practices of 02:02.559 --> 02:05.529 Israelites in the period in which they were composed. 02:05.530 --> 02:07.010 This is going to be an important claim; 02:07.010 --> 02:10.450 this is an important predicate of the documentary hypothesis. 02:10.449 --> 02:13.589 So although the sources claim to talk about events from 02:13.593 --> 02:15.343 creation, actually, forward, 02:15.340 --> 02:18.430 Wellhausen says, no, they really can only be 02:18.429 --> 02:22.379 used to tell us about the beliefs and religion of Israel 02:22.380 --> 02:26.150 from the tenth century, which is when he thinks the 02:26.146 --> 02:28.376 oldest was written, and forward. 02:28.379 --> 02:30.379 Now his work created a sensation. 02:30.379 --> 02:33.919 It undermined of course traditional claims about the 02:33.917 --> 02:36.827 authorship of God and the work of Moses. 02:36.830 --> 02:40.380 It's still disputed by conservative groups and Roman 02:40.378 --> 02:43.438 Catholic authorities, although Roman Catholic 02:43.439 --> 02:46.569 scholars certainly teach it and adopt it. 02:46.569 --> 02:49.299 The four sources that were identified by Wellhausen are, 02:49.297 --> 02:51.427 as I said, the J source and the E source, 02:51.430 --> 02:54.770 but also P, the priestly source, and D, 02:54.767 --> 02:58.717 which is primarily the book of Deuteronomy. 02:58.720 --> 03:01.810 Now as I said the first two sources are named because of the 03:01.810 --> 03:04.800 names of God that they employ, but it goes a little deeper 03:04.796 --> 03:06.616 then that. According to J, 03:06.616 --> 03:09.796 the knowledge of the proper or personal name, 03:09.802 --> 03:11.762 if you will, of God, Yahweh, 03:11.757 --> 03:15.737 begins with the first human, with the adam. 03:15.740 --> 03:19.080 So already in Genesis 4, adam seems to know this 03:19.080 --> 03:21.370 name and refer to God by this name. 03:21.370 --> 03:24.630 If we look at other sources such as P and even E, 03:24.625 --> 03:28.555 Yahweh's name is not known to humankind until he chooses to 03:28.559 --> 03:31.689 reveal it to Moses, and this happens in the time of 03:31.691 --> 03:33.901 the Exodus. So in Exodus 6:2-3, 03:33.895 --> 03:38.175 which is assigned by source critics to the P source, 03:38.178 --> 03:42.398 the Priestly source, God appears to Moses and he 03:42.402 --> 03:45.462 tells Moses then that he is Yahweh. 03:45.460 --> 03:49.090 He says, "I appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob," the 03:49.094 --> 03:51.944 patriarchs before you, "as El Shaddai, 03:51.942 --> 03:55.712 but I did not make myself known to them by name, 03:55.708 --> 03:57.918 Yahweh." So the P source has a different 03:57.920 --> 03:59.160 sort of theology, if you will, 03:59.164 --> 04:00.884 of God's name, or the revelation of God's 04:00.880 --> 04:03.370 name. And the same sort of thing 04:03.366 --> 04:07.636 happens in Exodus 3:13-16, and that's assigned to the E 04:07.638 --> 04:10.168 source. So once you've identified rough 04:10.172 --> 04:13.602 blocks of material according to not just the name of the deity 04:13.600 --> 04:17.200 but also their assumptions about when humankind knows the name of 04:17.197 --> 04:20.067 the deity, then you can analyze these 04:20.069 --> 04:24.209 blocks or chunks of text and begin to identify certain 04:24.207 --> 04:27.327 characteristic features: their style, 04:27.330 --> 04:28.920 the terminology they use. 04:28.920 --> 04:31.940 Source critics were able to come up with a list of what they 04:31.937 --> 04:34.597 believed were the main characteristics of the various 04:34.596 --> 04:37.026 sources. So the main characteristics of 04:37.030 --> 04:39.520 the J source, which begins with the second 04:39.517 --> 04:42.417 creation story, so the J source picks up in 04:42.416 --> 04:46.296 Genesis 2:4, second half of verse 4 are: (1) that it uses a 04:46.298 --> 04:50.178 personal name Yahweh for God from the time of creation, 04:50.180 --> 04:52.260 and that will be in your Bibles as "Lord"; 04:52.259 --> 04:56.219 (2) It describes God very anthropomorphically. 04:56.220 --> 04:59.660 It's the J source that has God shut the door of the ark after 04:59.658 --> 05:01.908 Noah. It's the J source that has God 05:01.912 --> 05:05.742 smelling the sacrifice after the Flood, the sacrifice that Noah 05:05.742 --> 05:07.872 offers. It's in the J source that God 05:07.867 --> 05:09.997 eats with Abraham and bargains with him. 05:10.000 --> 05:13.040 It's in the J source that God meets with Moses in this 05:13.035 --> 05:16.065 mysterious passage and tries to kill him one night; 05:16.069 --> 05:19.929 (3) J has a very vivid and concrete earthy style; 05:19.930 --> 05:24.680 and, (4) It uses the name Mount Sinai to refer to the place 05:24.678 --> 05:29.748 where the Israelites with Moses will conclude the covenant with 05:29.754 --> 05:31.974 God. As for the date? 05:31.970 --> 05:35.620 Well source critics felt that a clue to the dating of the J 05:35.618 --> 05:39.328 source could be found in the passage in which God promises a 05:39.329 --> 05:42.159 grant of national land to the Israelites. 05:42.160 --> 05:45.710 The boundaries of the land are given there as the River of 05:45.707 --> 05:48.007 Egypt, the Nile, and the Euphrates. 05:48.009 --> 05:52.029 It was argued by some that those were basically the borders 05:52.027 --> 05:55.557 of the Kingdom of Israel under David and Solomon. 05:55.560 --> 06:00.020 Think of 1000 as your date for David, that's basically when the 06:00.024 --> 06:03.154 monarchy begins. So the beginning of the tenth 06:03.151 --> 06:05.291 century. The argument is that under 06:05.293 --> 06:08.683 David and Solomon the empire reached that boundary and so 06:08.682 --> 06:12.312 clearly this is a writer from the tenth century who's seeking 06:12.312 --> 06:16.062 to justify Israel's possession of its kingdom from the River of 06:16.064 --> 06:19.864 Egypt to the Euphrates; it's presenting that kingdom as 06:19.862 --> 06:23.642 a fulfillment of a promise of land that God made to Israel's 06:23.636 --> 06:24.976 ancient ancestors. 06:24.980 --> 06:28.400 For that reason source critics thought J must date to about the 06:28.395 --> 06:31.475 tenth century and to the time of perhaps King Solomon. 06:31.480 --> 06:34.570 It also seems to reflect the interests of the south. 06:34.569 --> 06:37.659 Remember, we talked about the fact briefly that at a certain 06:37.661 --> 06:40.911 point in Israel's history there is a division upon the death of 06:40.909 --> 06:42.899 Solomon in the late tenth century. 06:42.899 --> 06:46.139 The kingdom divides into a northern kingdom now called 06:46.144 --> 06:49.394 Israel and a southern smaller kingdom called Judah. 06:49.389 --> 06:53.099 And the southern interests seem to be reflected in the J 06:53.098 --> 06:56.038 document. So source critics decided this 06:56.040 --> 06:59.340 is a Judean document from the tenth century. 06:59.339 --> 07:02.299 The E source, which source critics say begins 07:02.299 --> 07:05.729 around Genesis 15 is really the most fragmentary. 07:05.730 --> 07:10.180 It seems to have been used to supplement the J source rather 07:10.180 --> 07:12.820 than being used in a larger form. 07:12.819 --> 07:14.909 So sometimes it seems very difficult to isolate, 07:14.905 --> 07:16.675 and there's a lot of debate over this, 07:16.680 --> 07:19.860 but the E source's characteristics are that (1) it 07:19.862 --> 07:24.022 uses Elohim, again it's a plural form of the word god or gods, 07:24.019 --> 07:26.929 but when it's used with a singular verb it refers to the 07:26.932 --> 07:29.362 God of Israel; (2) it has a much less 07:29.363 --> 07:33.083 anthropomorphic view of God; (3) God is more remote. 07:33.079 --> 07:37.079 There aren't the direct face-to-face revelations in the 07:37.076 --> 07:39.896 E source; most communications from the 07:39.901 --> 07:41.411 divine are indirect. 07:41.410 --> 07:44.530 They'll be through messengers or dreams and; 07:44.529 --> 07:49.209 (4) there's also an emphasis on prophets and prophecy in the E 07:49.209 --> 07:51.499 source. Miriam, Moses--they're both 07:51.496 --> 07:53.916 referred to as prophets in the E source; 07:53.920 --> 07:58.580 (5) The style is more abstract, a little less picturesque, 07:58.579 --> 08:00.229 and; (6) the E source uses a 08:00.232 --> 08:02.912 different name for the mountain where the covenant was 08:02.912 --> 08:05.922 concluded. It uses the name Horeb. 08:05.920 --> 08:08.000 So you will sometimes see as you are reading the text, 08:08.002 --> 08:10.362 they will sometimes refer to Horeb instead of Mount Sinai, 08:10.360 --> 08:12.630 or you'll see the two names used interchangeably. 08:12.629 --> 08:15.729 And it's been the theory of scholars that that's because it 08:15.729 --> 08:17.439 comes from a different source. 08:17.439 --> 08:21.039 The E source seems to be concerned primarily with the 08:21.039 --> 08:24.499 northern tribes, therefore the northern kingdom. 08:24.500 --> 08:28.260 And so source theorists decided that it was most likely composed 08:28.263 --> 08:31.313 in the northern kingdoms about the ninth century. 08:31.310 --> 08:34.300 And then, according to this hypothesis, the J and E sources 08:34.300 --> 08:36.520 were combined, primarily J with E being used 08:36.517 --> 08:39.367 to supplement it, probably somewhere in the eight 08:39.368 --> 08:42.908 century, late eighth century; and that was the backbone of 08:42.914 --> 08:44.754 the Pentateuchal narrative. 08:44.750 --> 08:48.160 It covers the early history of humankind, of Israel's early 08:48.160 --> 08:51.160 ancestors known as the patriarchs and matriarchs. 08:51.159 --> 08:52.879 Their stories are told in Genesis. 08:52.879 --> 08:56.989 It contained the story of Moses and the exodus from Egypt in the 08:56.990 --> 08:59.180 book of Exodus, and the stories of the 08:59.175 --> 09:01.905 wandering in the wilderness that are found in the book of 09:01.912 --> 09:04.532 Numbers. The anonymous scribe or editor 09:04.526 --> 09:08.056 who combined these sources didn't care to remove any 09:08.057 --> 09:11.377 redundant material or contradictory material, 09:11.380 --> 09:13.170 as we've already seen. 09:13.169 --> 09:17.339 Now there are two other sources according to classical source 09:17.343 --> 09:19.573 theory, and these are D and P. 09:19.570 --> 09:24.860 D, which is the Deuteronomic source, is essentially the book 09:24.856 --> 09:27.906 of Deuteronomy. The book of Deuteronomy differs 09:27.914 --> 09:29.304 from the narrative sources. 09:29.300 --> 09:31.130 This is a book of speeches. 09:31.129 --> 09:34.899 The book purports to be three speeches delivered by Moses as 09:34.896 --> 09:38.976 the Israelites are poised on the east side of the Jordan River… 09:38.983 --> 09:42.773 I'm not good with directions; I had to stop and think… the 09:42.766 --> 09:45.946 east side of the Jordan River, about to enter the Promised 09:45.952 --> 09:48.142 Land. But according to the source 09:48.142 --> 09:51.562 theorists it clearly reflects the interests of settled 09:51.562 --> 09:53.522 agrarian life. It doesn't reflect the 09:53.524 --> 09:55.454 interests of people who have been wandering around 09:55.450 --> 09:57.310 nomadically. It has laws that deal with 09:57.308 --> 09:58.428 settled agrarian life. 09:58.429 --> 10:03.599 The main characteristic of D, however, which assisted source 10:03.595 --> 10:07.715 theorists in fixing its date, is the following: 10:07.721 --> 10:12.461 D is the one source in the Bible that clearly insists that 10:12.455 --> 10:16.935 one central sanctuary only is acceptable to Yahweh. 10:16.940 --> 10:21.080 God cannot be worshiped at makeshift altars. 10:21.080 --> 10:25.690 God cannot be worshipped through sacrifices at some local 10:25.691 --> 10:28.921 sanctuary; all sacrifices must be offered 10:28.918 --> 10:33.388 in the one central sanctuary where "he will cause his name to 10:33.394 --> 10:35.454 dwell." It doesn't actually ever say 10:35.454 --> 10:37.904 Jerusalem, which is why Samaritans think that it's at 10:37.895 --> 10:40.655 Mount Gerizim and that they have the correct temple and that 10:40.664 --> 10:42.734 they're authorized to offer sacrifices. 10:42.730 --> 10:45.040 They got it wrong when they thought it was Jerusalem; 10:45.039 --> 10:47.939 Samaritans think that that is where God caused his name to 10:47.942 --> 10:49.752 dwell. So Jerusalem is not actually 10:49.746 --> 10:52.236 mentioned in Deuteronomy, that's a later reading, 10:52.240 --> 10:54.600 but the place where God will cause his name to dwell, 10:54.601 --> 10:57.701 and only at the temple there, can there be sacrifices. 10:57.700 --> 11:00.200 This is a very different perspective from other biblical 11:00.196 --> 11:01.566 books. So you're going to see in the 11:01.567 --> 11:03.717 stories of the patriarchs that they're wandering all around the 11:03.720 --> 11:05.110 land and they're offering sacrifices. 11:05.110 --> 11:07.630 There are other books too where it's clear that there are local 11:07.630 --> 11:10.340 shrines, local sanctuaries, local priests who are offering 11:10.342 --> 11:12.542 sacrifices for people throughout the land. 11:12.539 --> 11:15.599 But Deuteronomy insists: one central sanctuary. 11:15.600 --> 11:19.550 All of the outlying alters and sacred places must be destroyed. 11:19.549 --> 11:25.329 Now centralization of the cult was a key part of the religious 11:25.325 --> 11:28.635 reform of a king of Judah in 622. 11:28.639 --> 11:32.689 I've marked a couple of dates on the timeline up here: 11:32.690 --> 11:37.280 722 is the fall of the Northern Kingdom, 622 a reform by King 11:37.275 --> 11:38.875 Josiah in Judah . 11:38.879 --> 11:43.239 We read about this in one of the historical narratives where 11:43.240 --> 11:45.680 the temple's being refurbished. 11:45.679 --> 11:48.239 A book is found that says one central sanctuary. 11:48.240 --> 11:50.180 King Josiah says: What have we been doing? 11:50.179 --> 11:52.969 Get rid of the outlying altars, everything has to be 11:52.970 --> 11:54.010 centralized here. 11:54.009 --> 11:58.259 So that reform, Josiah's reform has caused many 11:58.256 --> 12:01.576 scholars to associate Deuteronomy, 12:01.580 --> 12:06.160 the centralizing book or source, with the late-seventh 12:06.155 --> 12:09.345 century, around this time in Judah. 12:09.350 --> 12:12.350 The trouble is D seems to reflect a lot of northern 12:12.350 --> 12:15.890 traditions, the interests of tribes who are in the north. 12:15.889 --> 12:18.739 Well the Northern Kingdom was destroyed in 722; 12:18.740 --> 12:21.740 so this is the theory: source critics conclude that D 12:21.744 --> 12:25.044 is an old source that was originally composed in the north 12:25.037 --> 12:26.537 in the eighth century. 12:26.539 --> 12:30.249 When the northern kingdom fell, when the Assyrians conquered 12:30.245 --> 12:34.135 and many Israelites would have fled to the southern kingdom, 12:34.139 --> 12:37.699 Deuteronomy or the D source was brought to Jerusalem, 12:37.698 --> 12:41.388 stored in the temple where a hundred years later it was 12:41.393 --> 12:44.473 discovered and its centralization was put into 12:44.472 --> 12:46.322 force by King Josiah. 12:46.320 --> 12:50.310 P is the Priestly source, and that is found mostly in the 12:50.310 --> 12:53.940 books of Leviticus and the non-narrative portions of 12:53.944 --> 12:56.714 Numbers. Now the major characteristics 12:56.712 --> 13:00.272 of P, the Priestly source, are (1) a great concern with 13:00.274 --> 13:04.294 religious institutions, with the sacrificial system, 13:04.293 --> 13:06.843 with the Sabbath, with holidays, 13:06.843 --> 13:10.713 with rituals like circumcision, the Passover, 13:10.714 --> 13:15.844 dietary restrictions (the laws of kashrut) the system of 13:15.840 --> 13:19.930 ritual purity and impurity, and also holiness, 13:19.929 --> 13:24.219 ethical holiness and cultic or ritual holiness. 13:24.220 --> 13:27.350 P does have some narrative, and you've read some of it: 13:27.346 --> 13:30.816 Genesis 1, the first creation account, is attributed to P. 13:30.820 --> 13:32.890 It's orderly, it's systematized, 13:32.891 --> 13:35.431 the god is extraordinarily abstract. 13:35.429 --> 13:37.959 Because in the P source another characteristic is that; 13:37.960 --> 13:40.970 (2) God is transcendent, and even perhaps remote, 13:40.968 --> 13:43.348 much more so than in J, for example. 13:43.350 --> 13:47.500 Generally in the P source, God is concealed and revealed 13:47.495 --> 13:49.525 only in his kavod. 13:49.530 --> 13:56.000 13:56.000 --> 14:01.130 This is a word that's often translated as "glory," but what 14:01.126 --> 14:05.366 it refers to actually is a light-filled cloud. 14:05.370 --> 14:08.580 God seems to be the burning fire inside this light-filled 14:08.581 --> 14:09.771 cloud. He travels before the 14:09.771 --> 14:11.441 Israelites in that form, leading them through the 14:11.443 --> 14:12.283 wilderness and so on. 14:12.279 --> 14:14.809 That seems to be in the P source. 14:14.809 --> 14:19.109 P is also; (3) interested in covenants, in censuses, 14:19.107 --> 14:22.277 in genealogies. All of those sections very 14:22.281 --> 14:26.101 often that link stories, are attributed to the P source. 14:26.100 --> 14:29.860 And because P elements often serve that kind of function as a 14:29.862 --> 14:33.342 bridge between stories, or very often P sources seem to 14:33.338 --> 14:37.088 introduce a story or conclude a story, the source critics felt 14:37.094 --> 14:40.424 that priestly writers were probably responsible for the 14:40.419 --> 14:44.649 final editing of the Bible, bringing together J and E and D 14:44.648 --> 14:48.798 and adding their materials and finally editing the work. 14:48.799 --> 14:52.779 Now, Wellhausen dated the priestly source to the exilic 14:52.776 --> 14:57.116 period, the period after the fall of the Southern Kingdom in 14:57.121 --> 15:01.471 586 when the Babylonians have taken many of the Judeans into 15:01.466 --> 15:03.156 exile in Babylon. 15:03.159 --> 15:08.749 So the narrative parts of P, J and E are continuous parallel 15:08.746 --> 15:12.436 accounts of the history of the world, 15:12.440 --> 15:16.010 if you will, from creation until the death 15:16.011 --> 15:18.791 of Moses. Source critics believe that 15:18.787 --> 15:21.817 they have a uniform style, uniform vocabulary, 15:21.815 --> 15:25.445 uniform set of themes, and chronological framework. 15:25.450 --> 15:28.630 So according to Wellhausen, and I sort of schematized it 15:28.626 --> 15:32.046 chronologically for you up here, the priestly school drew 15:32.053 --> 15:35.533 together all of this older material, added some of its own 15:35.529 --> 15:38.399 editorial material--bridges, introductions, 15:38.401 --> 15:42.751 conclusions--inserted the large priestly documents of Leviticus 15:42.748 --> 15:45.918 and Numbers, and so the Torah--and they did 15:45.919 --> 15:49.589 this sitting in exile in Babylon--and so the Torah is 15:49.592 --> 15:53.202 really the result of five centuries of religious and 15:53.195 --> 15:54.815 literary activity. 15:54.820 --> 15:57.600 And this of course is a very, very different portrait from 15:57.603 --> 16:00.483 traditional claims about the authorship of the Pentateuch by 16:00.484 --> 16:03.294 one man, Moses, in approximately the 16:03.288 --> 16:05.258 fourteenth century BCE. 16:05.259 --> 16:08.639 There are different terms that we use to describe the modern, 16:08.643 --> 16:12.033 critical study of the Bible in the late nineteenth century as 16:12.027 --> 16:13.547 I've just described it. 16:13.549 --> 16:17.519 One term is literary criticism, because it proceeds by closely 16:17.517 --> 16:21.417 analyzing the literary features of the text: the terminology, 16:21.419 --> 16:23.109 the style, the motifs. 16:23.110 --> 16:27.390 But because the goal of this literary critical school was to 16:27.386 --> 16:30.426 identify specific sources, isolate sources, 16:30.430 --> 16:33.620 we also refer to it as source criticism. 16:33.620 --> 16:36.140 You'll see those terms used interchangeably in your 16:36.143 --> 16:38.473 literature. Today literary criticism has a 16:38.471 --> 16:41.421 slightly different connotation from what it was in the 16:41.423 --> 16:43.873 nineteenth century, so people prefer the term 16:43.874 --> 16:45.104 source criticism. 16:45.100 --> 16:46.960 But you should know both are used. 16:46.960 --> 16:50.280 However, the purpose of identifying and isolating these 16:50.279 --> 16:52.859 sources was not just to say, "Look at that, 16:52.862 --> 16:55.262 there are these different sources." 16:55.259 --> 16:59.519 The purpose was to ascertain as far as possible their relative 16:59.522 --> 17:03.042 dates to one another, and to therefore enable the 17:03.044 --> 17:06.164 work of historical reconstruction to proceed: 17:06.164 --> 17:10.354 primarily a reconstruction of the history of the religion of 17:10.349 --> 17:13.189 Israel, and the historical situation of 17:13.185 --> 17:15.615 the authors of the different sources. 17:15.619 --> 17:19.199 Therefore literary criticism is not only called source 17:19.199 --> 17:21.679 criticism. It's also called historical 17:21.680 --> 17:25.580 criticism, because its ultimate goal and purpose was not just to 17:25.577 --> 17:29.317 isolate the sources, but to arrange them according 17:29.316 --> 17:33.706 to relative dates as far as they might be ascertained, 17:33.710 --> 17:38.480 and then to chart changes in Israel's religion. 17:38.480 --> 17:41.540 You have a very readable introduction to some of this in 17:41.544 --> 17:43.164 Norman Habel's little work. 17:43.160 --> 17:47.080 Another excellent work which is not on your syllabus that is 17:47.075 --> 17:51.385 also critical of Wellhausen and some of the biases in his work, 17:51.390 --> 17:54.610 is found in a little work called Who Wrote the 17:54.605 --> 17:57.845 Bible by Richard Friedman, which has a great cover because 17:57.847 --> 17:59.827 it says "Who Wrote the Bible? Richard Friedman," 17:59.830 --> 18:03.100 [audience laughter]. 18:03.099 --> 18:06.889 So to sum up: the documentary hypothesis is 18:06.890 --> 18:10.680 an effort to explain the contradictions, 18:10.680 --> 18:14.000 the doublets, anachronisms and so on in the 18:14.003 --> 18:17.963 Bible by means of hypothetical source documents. 18:17.960 --> 18:20.230 So the theory posits hypothetical sources, 18:20.232 --> 18:23.502 traditions and documents to explain the current shape of the 18:23.502 --> 18:26.562 Torah the way we have it, to account for some of these 18:26.563 --> 18:27.813 phenomena that we find. 18:27.809 --> 18:31.459 As a next step the sources are assigned relative dates, 18:31.459 --> 18:33.959 not absolute dates, relative dates, 18:33.960 --> 18:37.290 and then they're analyzed to reveal the different stages of 18:37.286 --> 18:38.946 Israel's religious history. 18:38.950 --> 18:42.490 And so source criticism is also known as historical criticism 18:42.489 --> 18:45.379 because it's a tool for getting at the history, 18:45.380 --> 18:47.970 not just at the text, but ultimately a history of 18:47.967 --> 18:49.097 Israelite religion. 18:49.100 --> 18:51.410 That is how it has been used. 18:51.410 --> 18:56.180 Now Wellhausen's work is subtle and it's quite brilliant, 18:56.180 --> 19:00.780 but it certainly reflects biases of nineteenth- century 19:00.780 --> 19:05.020 German scholarship, which believed strongly in the 19:05.019 --> 19:08.209 superiority of Christianity over Judaism. 19:08.210 --> 19:11.360 In his writings Wellhausen has some things to say about Judaism 19:11.356 --> 19:12.926 that are none too flattering. 19:12.930 --> 19:17.020 He describes Judaism at the end of the biblical period as a dead 19:17.021 --> 19:18.971 tree, twisted and perverted. 19:18.970 --> 19:23.300 He especially harbored a distaste for things cultic: 19:23.295 --> 19:26.855 priests, cult, ritual, in keeping with what 19:26.857 --> 19:30.247 was going on in Germany at the time, 19:30.250 --> 19:33.850 and the Protestant movement and so on. 19:33.849 --> 19:37.469 And these sorts of biases are very apparent in his work, 19:37.472 --> 19:40.702 and very apparent in his dating of the sources, 19:40.700 --> 19:44.450 and in his description of the evolutionary stages of Israel's 19:44.452 --> 19:46.112 religion. So for example, 19:46.114 --> 19:49.434 source critics before Wellhausen all thought that P, 19:49.426 --> 19:52.636 the priestly material, was some of the oldest material 19:52.641 --> 19:54.851 in the Bible, that it was an early source. 19:54.849 --> 19:58.669 But Wellhausen said no, it must be a late source, 19:58.666 --> 20:02.476 because priestly, cultic, ritual material--that's 20:02.483 --> 20:07.103 clearly a degenerate stage of religion that shows a sort of 20:07.095 --> 20:09.555 guilt-ridden behaviorism. 20:09.559 --> 20:13.969 It's not true of spiritual religion, so clearly that's the 20:13.972 --> 20:18.152 latest stage of Israelite religion when it had died and 20:18.152 --> 20:23.032 was waiting to be reborn in new form with the arrival of someone 20:23.029 --> 20:25.119 in the first century. 20:25.119 --> 20:30.779 Clearly his dating of P owes a great deal to his biases and 20:30.780 --> 20:32.830 religious ideology. 20:32.829 --> 20:37.549 He saw the priestly material as having to come from the -exilic 20:37.551 --> 20:40.381 age, post 586, and this is one of Wellhausen's 20:40.377 --> 20:43.487 most controversial points that's still hotly debated today, 20:43.490 --> 20:47.020 and we're going to return to this debate when we actually 20:47.020 --> 20:49.480 take a look at Leviticus and Numbers. 20:49.480 --> 20:52.610 At that time we'll be able to see what's at stake in the whole 20:52.606 --> 20:55.166 question of the dating of the priestly material. 20:55.170 --> 20:59.050 The historical critical method, and the documentary hypothesis 20:59.052 --> 21:01.602 in particular, are not inherently biased, 21:01.599 --> 21:04.399 I want to make that point very strongly. 21:04.400 --> 21:08.130 They are simply analytical tools: look at the text and its 21:08.125 --> 21:11.655 features and draw some conclusions based on what you're 21:11.655 --> 21:13.875 finding. They are simply analytical 21:13.881 --> 21:16.111 tools. They're not inherently biased. 21:16.109 --> 21:19.199 They can be applied fairly to the text, and they're 21:19.196 --> 21:20.736 extraordinarily useful. 21:20.740 --> 21:23.920 It's just that some of the earlier practitioners of these 21:23.916 --> 21:26.296 methods did have ideological axes to grind, 21:26.298 --> 21:28.338 and we need to be aware of that. 21:28.339 --> 21:32.239 The documentary hypothesis works fairly well when you have 21:32.241 --> 21:33.611 parallel accounts. 21:33.609 --> 21:37.709 It works a little bit less well when the accounts are interwoven 21:37.707 --> 21:41.667 because sometimes picking apart the sources can become dry and 21:41.674 --> 21:44.224 mechanical, sometimes to the point of 21:44.219 --> 21:46.419 absurdity. Some of the people who have 21:46.424 --> 21:49.404 carried this method to its extreme will go through and 21:49.396 --> 21:52.776 almost word for word--this is J, this is E, the next word is 21:52.779 --> 21:55.989 P… it's quite remarkable how certain they feel that they can 21:55.986 --> 21:58.926 break things down almost on a word-to-word basis as if an 21:58.931 --> 22:01.351 editor sat there with scissors and paste, 22:01.349 --> 22:03.859 cutting out word for word, and putting them together. 22:03.859 --> 22:06.649 It sometimes can reach heights of absurdity, 22:06.654 --> 22:10.624 and it can really destroy the power of a magnificent story, 22:10.619 --> 22:13.349 sometimes, when you carve it up into pieces that on their own 22:13.349 --> 22:15.169 don't really make all that much sense. 22:15.170 --> 22:18.980 It needs to be remembered that the documentary hypothesis is 22:18.978 --> 22:20.268 only a hypothesis. 22:20.269 --> 22:23.399 An important and a useful one, and I certainly have used it 22:23.403 --> 22:26.163 myself. But none of the sources posited 22:26.158 --> 22:29.738 by critical scholars has been found independently: 22:29.743 --> 22:33.063 we have no copy of J, we have no copy of E, 22:33.059 --> 22:36.549 we have no copy of P by itself or D by itself. 22:36.549 --> 22:39.539 So these reconstructions are based on guesses. 22:39.539 --> 22:41.779 Some of them are excellent, excellent guesses, 22:41.781 --> 22:44.371 very well supported by evidence, but some of them are 22:44.371 --> 22:46.581 not. Some of the criteria invoked 22:46.582 --> 22:49.562 for separating the sources are truly arbitrary, 22:49.559 --> 22:51.759 and extraordinarily subjective. 22:51.759 --> 22:55.049 They are sometimes based on all sorts of unfounded assumption 22:55.051 --> 22:57.741 about the way texts were composed in antiquity, 22:57.740 --> 23:00.290 and the more that we learn about how texts in antiquity 23:00.286 --> 23:02.266 were composed, we realize that it's perhaps 23:02.266 --> 23:05.136 not unusual for a text to use two different terms for the same 23:05.142 --> 23:08.982 thing within one story, since we find texts in the 23:08.975 --> 23:14.375 sixteenth, seventeenth century BCE on one tablet using two 23:14.382 --> 23:18.652 different terms to connote the same thing. 23:18.650 --> 23:22.550 So the criteria that are invoked for separating sources 23:22.551 --> 23:26.381 often ignore the literary conventions of antiquity, 23:26.380 --> 23:28.990 and the more that we learn about that the better able we 23:28.990 --> 23:31.790 are to understand the way the biblical text was composed. 23:31.789 --> 23:34.879 Repetition isn't always a sign of dual sources; 23:34.880 --> 23:37.540 it often servers a rhetorical function. 23:37.539 --> 23:40.849 Variant terms aren't always a sign of dual sources; 23:40.849 --> 23:43.759 they may have a literary or aesthetic function. 23:43.759 --> 23:47.209 So most biblical scholars today do accept some version of 23:47.211 --> 23:50.541 Wellhausen's theory--yes, we feel the Bible is composed 23:50.539 --> 23:52.079 of different sources. 23:52.079 --> 23:55.069 We don't always have tremendous confidence, though, 23:55.070 --> 23:58.600 in some of the finer details and conclusions of his work and 23:58.599 --> 24:01.829 the work of other scholars who followed after him. 24:01.829 --> 24:05.869 Some doubt the existence of E altogether--it is so fragmentary 24:05.868 --> 24:08.778 and so isolated. Others defend the antiquity of 24:08.780 --> 24:10.730 P --we'll be coming back to that. 24:10.730 --> 24:13.930 Others argue that everything is post-exilic, everything's after 24:13.928 --> 24:14.958 the fifth century. 24:14.960 --> 24:17.210 It was written in the fourth, third century in the Persian 24:17.214 --> 24:18.934 period. None of it comes from an older 24:18.927 --> 24:20.577 period. Scandinavian scholars, 24:20.576 --> 24:23.846 they're not enthusiastic about source criticism at all. 24:23.849 --> 24:27.149 The whole Copenhagen School of Bible scholarship prefers--many 24:27.147 --> 24:30.497 of them prefer--to see the Bible as basically an oral narrative 24:30.499 --> 24:33.039 that just grew through accretion over time. 24:33.039 --> 24:36.169 So I did assign readings in the documentary hypothesis--it's 24:36.166 --> 24:39.346 extraordinarily important--but you do need to understand that 24:39.345 --> 24:42.215 it is one hypothesis, a major and controlling 24:42.223 --> 24:45.873 hypothesis out there, but it's not without criticism. 24:45.869 --> 24:49.529 Moreover, while it's a very important and worthwhile project 24:49.534 --> 24:53.144 to analyze the component sources and examine their specific 24:53.136 --> 24:57.236 concerns and contribution, and you'll see that I'm a very 24:57.238 --> 25:00.598 great fan of P, we must remember that whatever 25:00.596 --> 25:04.846 sources were woven together, they were woven together with 25:04.854 --> 25:08.614 great skill and care by a final redactor, or redactors, 25:08.609 --> 25:12.189 who wanted them to be read as a unity, and surely that must mean 25:12.188 --> 25:14.378 something. It must mean they can be 25:14.377 --> 25:17.337 read as a unity and that that's a challenge that's been issued 25:17.342 --> 25:20.022 to us. So the Bible can be read both 25:20.023 --> 25:22.503 analytically and synthetically. 25:22.500 --> 25:26.260 We need to combine an awareness of origins, not gloss over the 25:26.260 --> 25:28.850 problems and the contradictions and say, 25:28.849 --> 25:31.299 "Well, we can resolve it by coming up with some strange 25:31.297 --> 25:33.107 scenario that makes both things work." 25:33.109 --> 25:35.779 Be aware that there are problems, contradictions, 25:35.775 --> 25:38.935 these derive from different sources, but also be sensitive 25:38.941 --> 25:41.441 to the artistry of the final composition. 25:41.440 --> 25:44.140 What does it mean that both of these elements have been 25:44.140 --> 25:45.590 retained here side by side? 25:45.590 --> 25:50.340 What is the phrase? 25:50.339 --> 25:52.799 The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. 25:52.800 --> 25:54.830 So keep that awareness. 25:54.829 --> 25:58.129 And in the last 20 years or so, source criticism--actually 30 25:58.133 --> 26:01.493 years or so--source criticism in the conventional sense of the 26:01.492 --> 26:04.852 analysis of documentary sources has been supplemented by other 26:04.851 --> 26:08.321 new and exciting methodologies in the study of the Bible, 26:08.320 --> 26:09.820 and we'll see some of those. 26:09.819 --> 26:12.799 I've also included as optional reading for you sometimes, 26:12.804 --> 26:15.634 a couple of articles that analyze biblical stories. 26:15.630 --> 26:18.420 They are written by someone who thinks that documentary 26:18.417 --> 26:21.357 hypothesis just doesn't really help us out much at all, 26:21.359 --> 26:24.289 and she gives some wonderful, coherent readings of stories 26:24.294 --> 26:27.384 that argue this scene here or this contradiction here isn't a 26:27.383 --> 26:30.013 sign of a different source; it serves this literary 26:30.008 --> 26:31.438 purpose, that literary purpose. 26:31.440 --> 26:34.900 And I put those in subversively for you to have a look at in 26:34.901 --> 26:37.831 your own time. They're brilliantly written and 26:37.828 --> 26:41.548 they give you insight into the various ways in which we can 26:41.549 --> 26:44.169 read the text. But many of the alternative 26:44.174 --> 26:47.304 methodologies for studying the text do assume sources, 26:47.299 --> 26:50.649 in some broad sense even if not all the details of Wellhausen's 26:50.654 --> 26:53.364 theory, so it's clear that a great deal of biblical 26:53.359 --> 26:56.169 scholarship owes its accomplishments and its theories 26:56.172 --> 26:59.632 to the work that was done by the source critics of the nineteenth 26:59.634 --> 27:02.594 century. I want to flip back to text for 27:02.593 --> 27:06.853 a moment before I return to talk about a whole contradictory set 27:06.849 --> 27:09.979 of methodologies, or methodologies that pull in 27:09.976 --> 27:11.136 another direction. 27:11.140 --> 27:13.810 But first I want to get us up to the patriarchs and matriarchs 27:13.807 --> 27:15.947 where we're going to be starting off on Monday. 27:15.950 --> 27:20.650 We have just had a flood, and then we move into Genesis 27:20.645 --> 27:22.785 10; and Genesis 10 contains a 27:22.794 --> 27:24.924 genealogical table of nations. 27:24.920 --> 27:28.280 In this table, peoples of various lands are 27:28.279 --> 27:32.519 portrayed as having descended from a common source, 27:32.519 --> 27:36.039 a common ancestor, Noah, through his three sons, 27:36.035 --> 27:37.825 Japheth, Ham and Shem. 27:37.830 --> 27:40.730 Shem: Shemites, Semites. 27:40.730 --> 27:44.540 Shemites are said to descend from Noah's son, 27:44.543 --> 27:47.523 Shem. The biblical text at this point 27:47.524 --> 27:52.054 is understanding humanity as basically sharing a common root 27:52.045 --> 27:54.415 united by a common language. 27:54.420 --> 27:58.800 The story that follows in Genesis 11 can be understood 27:58.800 --> 28:02.540 then as an etiological tale, a tale that comes to explain 28:02.544 --> 28:04.714 something, and this tale is coming to explain the 28:04.711 --> 28:07.371 diversification of language: when we look around we see that 28:07.374 --> 28:09.994 in fact people don't seem to be that united and are in fact 28:09.993 --> 28:11.983 divided by their languages and so on. 28:11.980 --> 28:15.180 So how are we to account for the diversification of 28:15.179 --> 28:18.439 languages, the spread of different ethnic linguistic 28:18.442 --> 28:22.222 groups throughout the lands of the earth if we all come from 28:22.218 --> 28:26.218 one common creative moment, one common ancestor? 28:26.220 --> 28:28.470 Genesis 11 explains that. 28:28.470 --> 28:32.820 The story is therefore going to act as a bridge between the 28:32.817 --> 28:36.937 first section of Genesis which has a universal scale, 28:36.940 --> 28:39.870 a universal scope, and what happens in Genesis 28:39.872 --> 28:43.332 beginning in Chapter 12, where we're going to focus in 28:43.326 --> 28:46.946 on one ethnic, linguistic group and one land. 28:46.950 --> 28:49.950 This story serves as the bridge, first of all explaining 28:49.952 --> 28:53.392 how it is that a united humanity speaking a common language even 28:53.391 --> 28:56.341 becomes diversified linguistically and ethnically, 28:56.339 --> 28:59.079 to then focus in on one group and one land. 28:59.080 --> 29:02.760 29:02.759 --> 29:06.689 Babel, pronounced "bavel" in Hebrew, 29:06.685 --> 29:10.405 is Babylon. The tower in the story of the 29:10.414 --> 29:15.884 Tower of Babel is identified by scholars as a very famous tower, 29:15.875 --> 29:19.945 a ziggurat, a ziggurat to Marduk in Babylon. 29:19.950 --> 29:24.180 The Bible's hostility to Babylon--after all it's going to 29:24.179 --> 29:28.939 be the Babylonians who are going to destroy them in 586--but the 29:28.937 --> 29:33.617 Bible's hostility to Babylon and its imperialism is clear. 29:33.620 --> 29:36.850 This story has a satirical tone. 29:36.849 --> 29:39.049 The word Babel, Bavel, 29:39.054 --> 29:42.684 means Gate of the God, but it's the basis for a 29:42.676 --> 29:46.926 wonderful pun in Hebrew, which also actually happens to 29:46.927 --> 29:51.257 work in English. Babble nonsensical speaking, 29:51.262 --> 29:53.402 confusion of language. 29:53.400 --> 29:57.210 And I think there's obviously some onomatopoeic quality to 29:57.212 --> 30:00.962 "Babel" that makes it have that kind of a meaning both in 30:00.957 --> 30:03.697 English and a similar word in Hebrew. 30:03.700 --> 30:08.500 So this word can also with a little bit of punning mean 30:08.504 --> 30:11.534 confusion, or confused language. 30:11.529 --> 30:15.039 So this mighty tower that was obviously the pride of Babylon 30:15.036 --> 30:18.006 in the ancient world is represented by the biblical 30:18.008 --> 30:22.048 storywriter as the occasion for the confusion of human language. 30:22.050 --> 30:25.060 30:25.059 --> 30:28.569 The construction of Marduk's ziggurat is represented as 30:28.573 --> 30:29.943 displeasing to God. 30:29.940 --> 30:32.590 Why? There are very many possible 30:32.590 --> 30:36.030 interpretations and our commentaries are full of them. 30:36.029 --> 30:40.059 Some interpreters view the tower builders as seeking to 30:40.061 --> 30:44.391 elevate themselves to storm heaven by building a tower with 30:44.392 --> 30:46.112 its top in the sky. 30:46.109 --> 30:49.989 Others see the builders as defying God's direct order. 30:49.990 --> 30:52.480 Remember, God said, "Be fruitful and multiply and 30:52.479 --> 30:55.019 fill the earth," spread out and fill the earth. 30:55.019 --> 30:57.549 But these people are said to come together, 30:57.546 --> 31:00.976 they congregate in one place, and instead of spreading out 31:00.975 --> 31:02.895 they're trying to rise high. 31:02.900 --> 31:06.360 There seems to be a real defiance of God's design for 31:06.356 --> 31:09.346 humanity, and so God frustrates their plan for 31:09.348 --> 31:12.698 self-monumentalizing, and he scatters them over the 31:12.695 --> 31:13.795 face of the earth. 31:13.799 --> 31:17.409 He makes it more difficult for them to do this again by 31:17.411 --> 31:19.151 confusing their tongues. 31:19.150 --> 31:21.860 Once again there's a very steep learning curve for this God. 31:21.859 --> 31:25.379 He has to keep adjusting things depending on what it is that 31:25.377 --> 31:26.507 humans are doing. 31:26.509 --> 31:29.149 So now he's got to confuse their languages. 31:29.150 --> 31:32.470 Some interpreters see this story as representing a 31:32.470 --> 31:36.740 rejection of civilization or certain aspects of civilization. 31:36.740 --> 31:39.040 Monumental architecture, empire building, 31:39.042 --> 31:42.382 these are always things that are looked upon with suspicion 31:42.381 --> 31:45.721 for most of the biblical sources and biblical writers. 31:45.720 --> 31:48.290 Those sorts of ambitions are viewed negatively. 31:48.289 --> 31:51.119 They lead to human self-aggrandizement. 31:51.119 --> 31:53.469 They are indicative of an arrogant sort of 31:53.468 --> 31:57.128 self-reliance--that the prophets will certainly rail against--and 31:57.133 --> 31:59.313 in some sense a forgetting of God. 31:59.309 --> 32:02.779 So this is a time in which humans spread out, 32:02.776 --> 32:06.476 lose their unity, and this is also a time really 32:06.478 --> 32:10.258 when they turn to the worship of other gods. 32:10.259 --> 32:14.819 The first 11 chapters of Genesis then have given us a 32:14.822 --> 32:19.562 cosmic, universal setting for the history of Israel. 32:19.559 --> 32:23.769 Those first chapters cover 2500 years if you go through and add 32:23.767 --> 32:25.257 up the chronologies. 32:25.259 --> 32:28.319 The rest of Genesis, Genesis 12 through 50, 32:28.315 --> 32:32.025 will cover just four generations: the generations of 32:32.025 --> 32:34.785 the patriarchs and the matriarchs. 32:34.790 --> 32:38.850 They will be Abraham and Sarah; their son Isaac, 32:38.846 --> 32:41.736 his wife Rebekah; their son Jacob, 32:41.742 --> 32:46.712 his two wives Rachel and Leah, I am leaving out other wives; 32:46.710 --> 32:50.760 but finally their children, 12 sons and one daughter. 32:50.759 --> 32:53.289 So God's focus has shifted dramatically, 32:53.292 --> 32:56.152 the text's focus has shifted dramatically. 32:56.150 --> 33:00.500 Why? When you get to the end of 33:00.496 --> 33:05.836 Genesis 11 you feel that God has been rather shut out. 33:05.840 --> 33:07.890 Things aren't going well. 33:07.890 --> 33:11.060 Although God created the earth as an intrinsically good 33:11.063 --> 33:13.593 paradise, he created humans in his image, 33:13.589 --> 33:17.359 he provided for them, humans to this point have put 33:17.360 --> 33:20.830 their moral freedom pretty much to poor use. 33:20.829 --> 33:23.329 Many scholars, Kaufman, Sarna and others, 33:23.332 --> 33:26.962 say that one of the differences then between these myths of 33:26.961 --> 33:30.401 Israel and the mythologies of their neighbors is that in 33:30.403 --> 33:34.223 Ancient Near Eastern mythologies you have the struggle of good 33:34.220 --> 33:36.160 and evil cosmic powers. 33:36.160 --> 33:39.990 In the myths of the Bible this is replaced by a struggle 33:39.993 --> 33:43.343 between the will of God and rebellious humans. 33:43.339 --> 33:45.639 So these myths are telling also of a struggle, 33:45.636 --> 33:47.266 but it's on a different plane. 33:47.269 --> 33:50.299 Adam and Eve, Cain, the generation of the 33:50.301 --> 33:54.401 flood, the builders of the tower of Babel--God has been 33:54.395 --> 33:58.635 continually spurned or thwarted by these characters. 33:58.640 --> 34:02.180 So he's withdrawing his focus, and is going to choose to 34:02.175 --> 34:04.485 reveal himself to one small group, 34:04.490 --> 34:06.410 as if to say, "Okay, I can't reach everybody, 34:06.411 --> 34:08.291 let me see if I can just find one person, 34:08.289 --> 34:10.949 one party, and start from there and build out." 34:10.949 --> 34:14.069 And so in Genesis 12 which begins the second stage of the 34:14.065 --> 34:18.105 Bible's historical narrative, we read that God calls to Abram 34:18.106 --> 34:22.736 to leave the land of his fathers and travel to a land which God 34:22.739 --> 34:25.539 will show him, beginning a whole new stage of 34:25.543 --> 34:28.253 the biblical narrative, and we'll sense that there's a 34:28.251 --> 34:30.961 very different feeling when you get to Genesis 12. 34:30.960 --> 34:33.740 When you read that material, it will feel different to you. 34:33.739 --> 34:37.889 And because of that we need to talk a little bit more about 34:37.894 --> 34:42.554 ways to read the biblical text, methods of criticism and so on. 34:42.550 --> 34:47.080 In preparation for looking at the biblical narrative material 34:47.078 --> 34:50.548 that deals specifically with the Israelites, 34:50.550 --> 34:52.670 we need to think of some, or learn about some, 34:52.673 --> 34:55.083 of the other critical methodologies that are used in 34:55.080 --> 34:57.700 biblical scholarship, and for a moment we're going to 34:57.703 --> 34:59.243 the adopt the role of historian. 34:59.239 --> 35:02.419 I'm going to ask you to think like historians--whatever that 35:02.424 --> 35:05.454 might mean--now and as we move into next week and look at 35:05.446 --> 35:06.846 Genesis 12 through 50. 35:06.849 --> 35:10.829 The source critical method that we talked about today focuses on 35:10.829 --> 35:14.429 the hypothetical period of the compilation of the text, 35:14.429 --> 35:18.259 the compilation of the four sources into the Torah. 35:18.260 --> 35:22.080 But later scholars began to ask, "Well, what about the 35:22.077 --> 35:24.307 pre-history of those sources? 35:24.310 --> 35:27.770 What were the sources' sources?" 35:27.770 --> 35:30.650 Why should that be important? 35:30.650 --> 35:34.210 Remember that the source critics claimed and concluded 35:34.211 --> 35:38.111 that J, E, P and D were written from the tenth to the sixth 35:38.109 --> 35:40.019 centuries, and the implication, 35:40.021 --> 35:42.401 well actually not just the implication, the strong 35:42.400 --> 35:45.310 assertion of many of them was that despite the fact that they 35:45.314 --> 35:47.504 purport to tell of events prior to 1000, 35:47.500 --> 35:50.860 in fact they're just not at all reliable for those periods. 35:50.860 --> 35:53.020 They were written centuries after the fact, 35:53.017 --> 35:55.327 we really can't know anything about Israel, 35:55.329 --> 35:57.009 Israel's religion, Israel's history, 35:57.005 --> 35:59.155 religious history before the tenth century. 35:59.159 --> 36:02.329 That was a very dissatisfying conclusion to many people, 36:02.325 --> 36:05.605 because the writers of J, E, P and D probably didn't sit 36:05.612 --> 36:08.902 down at typewriters and just invent their documents out of 36:08.903 --> 36:11.943 whole cloth. It doesn't seem that that's the 36:11.940 --> 36:15.160 way these materials would have been composed. 36:15.159 --> 36:19.149 They didn't invent, probably, all of these cultic 36:19.154 --> 36:22.904 rules and ritual practices all of a sudden. 36:22.900 --> 36:26.360 It seems likely that they were drawing on older traditions 36:26.359 --> 36:28.789 themselves: older stories, older customs, 36:28.787 --> 36:30.787 older laws, ritual practices. 36:30.789 --> 36:33.959 Scholars in the next wave of biblical scholarship began to 36:33.955 --> 36:35.895 ask a different set of questions; 36:35.900 --> 36:39.950 they became interested in asking: what materials did the 36:39.947 --> 36:43.917 compiler or the compilers of J or E or P draw on in the 36:43.921 --> 36:46.351 composition of those sources? 36:46.349 --> 36:49.619 Did they use more ancient materials, and if so can we 36:49.619 --> 36:51.379 figure out what they were? 36:51.380 --> 36:55.240 Do they contain reliable traditions for an earlier stage? 36:55.239 --> 36:59.139 And if so, then maybe we do have access after all to 36:59.135 --> 37:04.095 information regarding Israelite history prior to the year 1000. 37:04.099 --> 37:07.269 Suddenly you see an analytical approach to the Bible that's 37:07.271 --> 37:10.171 going to pull in the exact opposite direction from the 37:10.169 --> 37:11.699 classical source theory. 37:11.699 --> 37:14.639 One of the leading scholars to take up this question was 37:14.641 --> 37:17.001 Hermann Gunkel, whose name is at the top over 37:16.995 --> 37:19.055 there. Gunkel had a great knowledge of 37:19.058 --> 37:21.718 the oral literature of other cultures, other nations, 37:21.719 --> 37:24.789 and that led him to ask: Can we perhaps analyze these 37:24.789 --> 37:28.389 four literary source documents and figure out the pre-literary 37:28.390 --> 37:30.280 stages of their development? 37:30.280 --> 37:33.570 What went into their compilation and composition? 37:33.570 --> 37:37.670 He found support for this idea within the Bible itself because 37:37.665 --> 37:41.215 at times the Bible seems to name earlier sources quite 37:41.223 --> 37:43.803 explicitly. We don't have records of those 37:43.798 --> 37:46.098 sources anymore, but they seem to be named in 37:46.100 --> 37:48.930 the Bible. In Numbers 21:14 there's a 37:48.929 --> 37:54.139 little poetic excerpt that gives the boundaries between Moab and 37:54.137 --> 37:57.267 the Amorites, and it's quoted and it says 37:57.266 --> 38:00.206 it's from the Book of the Wars of the Lord. 38:00.210 --> 38:02.870 It's quoted as if this is a source that the person is 38:02.873 --> 38:05.643 drawing on and using in the composition of his text, 38:05.639 --> 38:08.489 and it's quoted in a way that makes it sound as if the source 38:08.488 --> 38:10.148 should be familiar to the reader. 38:10.150 --> 38:13.020 We also have mention of something called the Book of 38:13.024 --> 38:15.054 Yashar in Joshua, that's also quoted, 38:15.052 --> 38:17.712 in Joshua 10:13. Or in 2 Samuel 1:18, 38:17.712 --> 38:21.702 we have David lamenting, a very beautiful lament over 38:21.695 --> 38:25.215 the death of Saul and his beloved Jonathan. 38:25.219 --> 38:29.009 It seems to actually be an epic song that recounts acts of 38:29.012 --> 38:32.002 Israel's heroes. He's reciting that now as he 38:31.996 --> 38:35.816 laments over the death of these two, and so it seems to be an 38:35.823 --> 38:39.713 earlier source that's been put into the story of David and his 38:39.714 --> 38:41.984 lament. So it seems reasonable in light 38:41.979 --> 38:44.639 of the practices of other people, other ancient cultures 38:44.638 --> 38:47.538 and literatures as well as some contemporary literatures, 38:47.539 --> 38:51.059 and it seems reasonable in light of the explicit citation 38:51.059 --> 38:55.019 of sources in the biblical text to suppose that in fact the four 38:55.018 --> 38:58.908 primary documents are themselves compilations from other source 38:58.914 --> 39:01.674 materials, or drawing on written or oral 39:01.668 --> 39:04.018 materials from an even earlier period. 39:04.019 --> 39:07.419 Gunkel began to focus on small little units. 39:07.420 --> 39:11.120 He was interested in small units within the four primary 39:11.123 --> 39:14.093 documents, and he identified genres or forms, 39:14.086 --> 39:15.766 what he called forms. 39:15.769 --> 39:17.789 The German word is a Gattung, 39:17.789 --> 39:19.289 Gattungen, forms. 39:19.289 --> 39:22.839 He would identify these small units, and that gave rise to the 39:22.844 --> 39:25.704 name of this approach, which is form criticism. 39:25.699 --> 39:29.139 He believed that what he was doing was identifying older, 39:29.143 --> 39:32.653 pre-literary forms that had been taken up and incorporated 39:32.648 --> 39:36.508 by the literary sources, by J, E, P and D. 39:36.510 --> 39:39.800 Examples of the kind of form, or Gattung, 39:39.800 --> 39:43.160 that he would identify are things like a hymn, 39:43.159 --> 39:46.729 a proverb--we often have biblical texts quoting proverbs 39:46.729 --> 39:49.129 that seem to be folk sayings--laws, 39:49.130 --> 39:53.030 rituals, folk stories of a particular type, 39:53.026 --> 39:57.476 poems, legends, songs, fragments of mythology. 39:57.480 --> 40:00.630 So for example he says of Genesis 6:1-4, 40:00.628 --> 40:04.138 a passage that you've read: When men began to 40:04.136 --> 40:06.446 increase on earth and daughters were born to them, 40:06.449 --> 40:09.049 the divine beings saw how beautiful the daughters of men 40:09.046 --> 40:11.876 were and took wives from among those that pleased them. 40:11.880 --> 40:14.170 The Lord said, "My breath shall not abide in 40:14.169 --> 40:16.139 man forever, since he too is flesh; 40:16.139 --> 40:19.149 let the days allowed him be one hundred and twenty years." 40:19.150 --> 40:20.560 It was then, and later too, 40:20.557 --> 40:22.937 that the Nephilim [these giants of some kind] 40:22.940 --> 40:26.130 appeared on earth--when the divine beings cohabited with the 40:26.134 --> 40:28.994 daughters of men, who bore them offspring [these 40:28.989 --> 40:30.329 giants, these Nephilim]. 40:30.329 --> 40:33.399 They were the heroes of old, the men of renown. 40:33.400 --> 40:36.270 That's just stuck in there, in Genesis 6:1-4. 40:36.269 --> 40:40.489 This is an older fragment of a mythology or a legend which is 40:40.491 --> 40:42.041 put into place here. 40:42.039 --> 40:46.939 It's explaining the origin of heroes and great men of renown 40:46.943 --> 40:49.603 in the old days. He also says that there are 40:49.598 --> 40:50.498 etiological stories. 40:50.500 --> 40:52.830 We've talked about those--legends that give the 40:52.828 --> 40:54.298 origin of a name, or a ritual, 40:54.296 --> 40:55.406 or an institution. 40:55.409 --> 40:58.379 There are different types of etiological stories. 40:58.380 --> 41:01.400 He says there are ethnological legends that will give you the 41:01.404 --> 41:04.134 story accounting for the origin of a particular people: 41:04.126 --> 41:06.996 so the Moabites for example, and the Ammonites--not a 41:07.001 --> 41:09.681 flattering story at all following the destruction of 41:09.683 --> 41:10.843 Sodom and Gomorrah. 41:10.840 --> 41:13.670 Obviously the Israelites didn't care for those people very much 41:13.667 --> 41:15.397 and gave them a pretty nasty origin. 41:15.400 --> 41:19.160 We also have etymological legends, because they're 41:19.156 --> 41:21.836 explaining the name of something. 41:21.840 --> 41:25.420 It's given this particular name because of an etymomological 41:25.416 --> 41:27.656 connection with some event earlier. 41:27.659 --> 41:30.509 So all of these things, he argues, are probably older 41:30.514 --> 41:33.864 existing traditions that have been taken up and adapted by the 41:33.862 --> 41:36.912 biblical writer, and they may preserve some 41:36.907 --> 41:38.777 historical reminiscence. 41:38.780 --> 41:42.230 More importantly, more important then the actual 41:42.230 --> 41:46.050 events that they might be reporting, is the fact that 41:46.048 --> 41:49.718 behind each of these is some sort of function. 41:49.719 --> 41:52.579 Each one of these did some sort of cultural work, 41:52.578 --> 41:55.078 it had some function or setting in life. 41:55.079 --> 41:58.289 That's what we can discover when we isolate these forms: 41:58.288 --> 41:59.628 this setting in life. 41:59.630 --> 42:03.340 That helps us learn something about ancient Israelite society 42:03.335 --> 42:05.925 or culture way before the tenth century. 42:05.930 --> 42:07.500 That's Gunkel's claim. 42:07.500 --> 42:11.420 So form criticism wasn't content with just identifying 42:11.419 --> 42:15.559 these various types of material, these various genres; 42:15.559 --> 42:18.249 it asked what was their function? 42:18.250 --> 42:20.000 What was their Sitz im Leben? 42:20.000 --> 42:23.950 What was their situation in life, their cultural context? 42:23.949 --> 42:26.489 What does it tell us that we have a large number of 42:26.493 --> 42:27.463 liturgical texts? 42:27.460 --> 42:30.040 What does it tell us that we have a large number of texts 42:30.036 --> 42:32.516 that seem to point to some sort of judicial context? 42:32.519 --> 42:35.259 What does it tell us that we have a great deal of proverbs, 42:35.261 --> 42:38.141 or wisdom material in certain parts of the Bible that we might 42:38.143 --> 42:39.423 date to a certain time? 42:39.420 --> 42:42.590 What does this tell us about society and what people were 42:42.587 --> 42:45.487 doing? Growing out of form criticism 42:45.491 --> 42:47.521 is tradition criticism. 42:47.519 --> 42:52.309 This is a type of criticism that focuses on the transmission 42:52.311 --> 42:56.291 of traditional material through various stages, 42:56.289 --> 43:00.069 oral stages and literary stages, until it reaches its 43:00.074 --> 43:02.044 present form in the text. 43:02.039 --> 43:06.299 Now you can imagine as a story is told and then it's retold, 43:06.303 --> 43:09.053 it is obviously changed and adapted. 43:09.050 --> 43:11.230 Tradition criticism looks at that. 43:11.230 --> 43:14.240 Looking at Ancient Near Eastern parallels is very helpful. 43:14.239 --> 43:17.159 You can see how some of those motifs and themes were changed 43:17.163 --> 43:19.693 in the process of being transmitted within Israelite 43:19.690 --> 43:22.810 culture and society, and again, to serve some sort 43:22.808 --> 43:25.068 of cultural function, or purpose. 43:25.070 --> 43:28.390 So the present text of the Pentateuch obviously rests on a 43:28.385 --> 43:30.765 very, very long period of transmission, 43:30.769 --> 43:33.299 both oral recitation and transmission, 43:33.303 --> 43:37.003 very much like the Greek classics, Homer's classics, 43:37.000 --> 43:38.690 the Odyssey, the Iliad: 43:38.691 --> 43:41.041 they also had a long history of oral recitation and 43:41.041 --> 43:43.971 transmission, and were transformed along the 43:43.974 --> 43:45.854 way. Tradition criticism likes to 43:45.850 --> 43:48.730 look at the way people receive traditional material, 43:48.730 --> 43:52.350 rework it in creative ways and then adapt it to their own 43:52.352 --> 43:54.942 purposes and contexts and transmit it. 43:54.940 --> 43:59.420 Sometimes that process is reflected in the Bible itself. 43:59.420 --> 44:02.550 Traditions in one part of the Bible will be picked up in a 44:02.547 --> 44:05.507 later part of the Bible, and written rather differently 44:05.509 --> 44:07.429 with a different point of view. 44:07.429 --> 44:09.049 So Deuteronomy, for example, 44:09.050 --> 44:12.170 recounts events that we've also read about in Exodus, 44:12.170 --> 44:15.050 and sometimes the differences are startling. 44:15.050 --> 44:18.930 Sometimes there are completely new emphases and the story can 44:18.927 --> 44:21.897 come out to be a very, very different story. 44:21.900 --> 44:25.260 1 and 2 Chronicles are a retelling and a reworking of 44:25.264 --> 44:28.634 much of the material from Genesis through 2 Kings, 44:28.630 --> 44:32.570 and it cleans up a lot of the embarrassing moments. 44:32.570 --> 44:37.110 It presses its own themes in retelling those stories. 44:37.110 --> 44:40.280 Early laws are subject to reinterpretation. 44:40.280 --> 44:43.280 Ezekiel comes along and does some interesting things with 44:43.281 --> 44:46.231 some of the legal material that we find in Leviticus. 44:46.230 --> 44:49.220 This is all the kind of thing that tradition criticism looks 44:49.216 --> 44:51.236 at. Tradition criticism wants to 44:51.236 --> 44:54.516 uncover the changes that occur in the transmission of 44:54.516 --> 44:56.026 traditional material. 44:56.030 --> 44:58.640 It's already happening--we can see it--within the Bible, 44:58.640 --> 45:01.350 and the assumption therefore is that it happens before the 45:01.346 --> 45:03.146 material even gets into the Bible. 45:03.150 --> 45:06.220 Perhaps we can figure some of that out, and it's a process 45:06.215 --> 45:08.685 that also aids in historical reconstruction. 45:08.690 --> 45:11.380 So you can see after classic source criticism, 45:11.379 --> 45:14.789 which came along and leveled people's interest in anything 45:14.786 --> 45:17.856 before the tenth century, and said: all we have are these 45:17.855 --> 45:20.435 written accounts that reflect the biases of the people at the 45:20.439 --> 45:23.569 time who wrote them, you then have the rise of types 45:23.571 --> 45:27.441 of scholarship that say: we're not satisfied with that. 45:27.440 --> 45:29.440 That's not really how literature works. 45:29.440 --> 45:32.000 People don't sit down and invent things out of whole 45:32.000 --> 45:34.210 cloth, particularly material of this type. 45:34.210 --> 45:36.780 It clearly has a history, they're clearly drawing on 45:36.784 --> 45:39.714 sources and maybe we can use analytical tools to figure out 45:39.712 --> 45:42.892 something about the period that you might think would be lost to 45:42.893 --> 45:45.713 history. So these types of criticism are 45:45.706 --> 45:49.096 emphasizing the real life historical setting of the 45:49.104 --> 45:52.234 materials that are in the biblical sources, 45:52.230 --> 45:55.760 their relationship to the wider culture, and that's something 45:55.764 --> 45:59.244 that earlier source criticism didn't care too much about. 45:59.239 --> 46:02.319 All of these analytical modes of studying the Bible--by 46:02.323 --> 46:05.753 analytical I mean sitting down and analyzing the features, 46:05.750 --> 46:09.180 the literary features of the text, and drawing conclusions 46:09.177 --> 46:12.787 from them--all of these modes of examining the Bible--most of 46:12.786 --> 46:16.146 them developed by German scholars--can be contrasted with 46:16.153 --> 46:19.943 the North American tradition of scholarship which emphasized the 46:19.942 --> 46:23.312 correlation of biblical and archaeological data. 46:23.310 --> 46:25.560 I've written the name Albright; William F. 46:25.557 --> 46:28.847 Albright, was a leading scholar at the American school of 46:28.846 --> 46:31.426 biblical studies, and he was an expert in the 46:31.429 --> 46:34.659 fields of Palestinian archaeology and Assyriology. 46:34.659 --> 46:37.749 He focused on illustrating the Bible with the Ancient Near 46:37.748 --> 46:40.618 Eastern sources that at that time were newly coming to 46:40.619 --> 46:44.209 light-- archaeological findings; and his argument was--and it's 46:44.212 --> 46:47.282 an argument that's to a large degree not accepted anymore 46:47.277 --> 46:50.507 but--his argument at the time was that archaeology supported 46:50.507 --> 46:53.187 the basic historicity of biblical tradition. 46:53.190 --> 46:56.250 There are some definite problems, however, 46:56.246 --> 46:58.926 with viewing the Bible as history. 46:58.929 --> 47:00.869 There are certainly problems with chronology: 47:00.867 --> 47:03.067 it's hard to pin down dates for a lot of things. 47:03.070 --> 47:05.550 Many of the events are given more then one date. 47:05.550 --> 47:08.330 A lot of the numbers...the Bible tends to use ideal 47:08.333 --> 47:10.473 numbers; it tends to use fives and 47:10.467 --> 47:13.177 multiples of five, or multiples of five plus 47:13.181 --> 47:15.421 seven. You have ten generations from 47:15.422 --> 47:17.642 Adam to Noah. You have ten generations from 47:17.640 --> 47:19.960 Noah to Abram. These things begin to raise 47:19.962 --> 47:22.292 suspicions. We have suspicious repetitions 47:22.289 --> 47:25.099 of events, things that happened to two or more of the 47:25.095 --> 47:28.435 patriarchs: twice Abraham goes into foreign territory and tries 47:28.441 --> 47:30.601 to pass his wife off as his sister. 47:30.600 --> 47:32.340 Isaac does the same thing. 47:32.340 --> 47:35.510 Are these three versions of one basic tradition that got 47:35.511 --> 47:37.531 assigned to different patriarchs? 47:37.530 --> 47:40.630 Are we supposed to think of these as representing three 47:40.625 --> 47:42.455 separate historical incidents? 47:42.460 --> 47:44.740 What's the likelihood of these things happening? 47:44.740 --> 47:46.240 Is that historically reasonable? 47:46.239 --> 47:51.049 So there are lots of reasons to feel that biblical chronologies 47:51.048 --> 47:55.778 of the patriarchal period are not accurate historical records: 47:55.780 --> 47:58.960 I use that phrase with some timidity. 47:58.960 --> 48:02.110 But in the twentieth century scholars of Albright's school 48:02.114 --> 48:04.774 argued that many of the traditions in the book of 48:04.771 --> 48:07.871 Genesis contained authentic reflections of the historical 48:07.871 --> 48:10.031 period they claimed to deal with. 48:10.030 --> 48:11.940 And they cited a number of considerations. 48:11.940 --> 48:15.520 We'll take those up on Monday, but I would like you--as you 48:15.518 --> 48:19.278 read Genesis 12 and forward and think about that material--I'd 48:19.282 --> 48:22.802 like you to ask yourself: Is this historical writing? 48:22.800 --> 48:25.710 By what criteria do I judge historical writing? 48:25.710 --> 48:27.820 What do I think historical writing is? 48:27.820 --> 48:29.910 What makes some writing historical? 48:29.909 --> 48:31.559 What makes other writing fictional? 48:31.559 --> 48:33.189 Where do we get these genres from? 48:33.190 --> 48:36.030 Why is so important to us to figure out what this is? 48:36.030 --> 48:39.880 Think about some of those issues, and we'll talk a little 48:39.877 --> 48:43.997 bit more about that as we turn to the texts in Genesis 12.