DH-34: Dating the Sources

Last updated on: May 16, 2014 at 1:04 pm by William Hamblin

DH-34: Dating the Sources 2014-05-16T13:04:10-07:00 William Hamblin

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

As I noted in DH-33, although there are various schools of thought, biblical scholars can’t agree on how many supposed sources contributed to the Pentateuch. Unfortunately, things are even more complicated. There is also no agreement concerning the date of J among those scholars who agree that there is in fact a J-source. (Here is a summary of views of this who dispute the nature or existence of J in various ways; and more fully Dozeman, Thomas B; Schmid, Konrad A Farewell to the Yahwist? SBL, 2006)

The following are different dates for J suggested by people who accept one form of the Documentary Hypothesis in one form or another.

10th century BC (von Rad, 1938)

8th century BC (Friedman)

7th century BC (Schmid, The So-called Jahwist, 1976)

5th century BC (Exilic or Post-exilic) (Van Seters, Abraham in History, 1975)

3rd-2rd century BC (Thompson)

Now, imagine that we had a literary theory and method that permitted reasonable arguments from informed scholars proposing dates for Shakespeare ranging from AD 1300 to 1800. No one would take such a method seriously. In ordinary historical studies, a methodology with such a lack of methodological and theoretical control that it permits hypothetical dates for a text ranging over half a millennium would be considered a failure and be rejected. If Documentarians encountered texts in the Pentateuch that proposed five different dates for a patriarch, they would insist that there were five different sources, not universal consensus of a single source.

Part of the problem is, of course, a lack of sufficient data to resolve the issue. But, to that extent, the proper response should be to admit we don’t know, and are unable to resolve the debate. It is certainly not grounds for claiming the success of a method that has achieved scholarly consensus. The weaknesses of the method and lack of data necessary to resolve the question are not excuses for further speculation. It is rather a mandate for rejecting further speculation.

Bible

Documentary Hypothesis

Previous Post

May 16, 2014

Tikal Temple 5

Next Post

May 16, 2014 Mike Ash

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Ancient Studies Atheism Bible bibliography Book of Abraham Book of Mormon Book of Moses Christianity Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Deseret News Column Doctrine and Covenants Documentary Hypothesis Genesis Haram al-Sharif Historicity History Islam Israelite Religion Judaism LDS Mormon Studies Mormonism Mormons Movies Noah Penteteuch Photography Religion Temple Temple Mount Temples Third Temple Movements Uncategorized

Select a Month September 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 February 2014 October 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What did the Israelites grumble about after crossing the Red Sea?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Wild animals Lack of water Boredom Too much sun