Documentary Hypothesis and the Pentateuch: A Necessary Combination in Understanding the Pentateuch - Essay Example

One would therefore think that what calls for an explanation is not why most people stopped believing in the dogma of Mosaic authorship, but rather why anyone believed it in the first place. (p. 1) This centuries-old view has been assailed as to its accuracy in declaring Moses as the sole key author of the Pentateuch. Various Scriptural inconsistencies and conflicting statements undermine the contention that the oral composition of the Pentateuch. Jewish tradition regarding Mosaic composition of the Pentateuch is, therefore, in part late (with respect to the composition of all of the books of the Pentateuch) and in part shaky (with respect to Deut.

1-30, because of internal contradictions). In cannot be regarded as proven by the evidence of the text itself. (p. 14) Among those inconsistencies and contradictions, Rofe (1999) continues the argument against the Traditional view by stating "there are numerous passages in the Pentateuch that appear at face value to postdate Moses." (p. 14) Substantially, those enumerated and elaborated by Rofe are: Genesis 12:6-7, which describes how Abram came into land of the Canaanites, where he received Yahweh's promise of giving this land to his offspring.

At that time, it seemed impossible to do, but indeed happened, as the land had become inhabited by Abram's descendants. This passage was written after the Israelites had settled into that land, and clearly shows temporal evidence that this passage was written in post-Mosaic fashion, generations after Moses. Deuteronomy 3:11 talks about Og, king of Bashan as being "nine cubits long and four cubits wide, by the standard cubit." (p. 15) Indeed, had Moses been this passage's original author, he would not have had to make reference on evidence that affirm his description of Og's true size.

This kind of description would indeed have been necessary for the generations succeeding, who would have never seen Og with their own eyes. Genesis 26:33 states "He named it Shibah which is called Beer-sheba to this day." (p. 15) That short sentence indicates that in the time of Isaac, as seen in prior verses of the same chapter, that city had yet to even exist. The way it is written indicates that the author and the readers are very familiar with this place, and thus the author deems fit only to state the etymology of the name.

Such act is rooted from the human tendency to explain origins of contemporary names, sayings and customs which are already familiar to the author and