Origin of the Pentateuch: Tradition and Documentary Hypothesis

Authors

  • Skobelev Мoscow Theological Аcademy, St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31802/2500-1450-2019-32-39-51

Keywords:

prophet Moses, Pentateuch, Torah, Documentary hypothesis, source, God names YHWH and ’Elōhîm, Priesterkodex, Deuteronomist, Jahwist, Elohist

Abstract

In the article the problem of Pentateuch’s origin is researched. According to the traditional Church position, the Pentateuch was always considered a work of the prophet Moses. But already in XVII century - first half of XVIII century they were scholars (Benedictus Spinoza, Richard Simon, Jean Astruc), who argued, that the entire text of Pentateuch or some of its parts do not belong to Moses. These assumptions received a development in the works of protestant scholars Wilhelm De Wette, E. Reuss, Karl Graf, G. Hupfeld and J. Wellhausen. As a result, J. Wellhausen formulated a hypothesis, that the Pentateuch’s text consists of four sources (documents) - Jahwist (J), Elohist (E), Deuteronomist (D) and Priesterkodex (P). This hypothesiswas called the Documentary hypothesis. It is important to notice, that the earliest of these sources was dated by Wellhausen to the IX century BC. So there is an obvious contradiction between the traditional and critical views on the Torah’s origin. The A. sets forth the main arguments of the followers of the documentary hypothesis, who argue a composite character of the Pentateuch, and tries to understand the attitude towards it in pre-revolotionary Russian biblical studies, in Catholicism and traditional Judaism.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Skobelev, Мoscow Theological Аcademy, St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University

PhD in Theology, Associate Professor of the Department оf Biblical Studies of Мoscow Theological Аcademy

Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Lavra, Sergiev Posad 141300, Russia


Associate Professor of the Department оf Biblical Studies of St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University
6/1 Likhov pereulok, Moscow 127051, Russia

References

Источники

Василий Великий, свт. Творения. Часть 1. М., 1845.

Священное Писание в толкованиях святителя Иоанна Златоуста. М.: Ковчег, 2006. Т. 1.

Филарет (Дроздов), свт. Толкование на книгу Бытия. М.: Издательский Совет Русской Православной Церкви, 2003.

La Bible de Jerusalem. P.: Les éditions du Cerf, 1956.

Исследования

Гальбиати Э., Пьяца А. Трудные страницы Библии (Ветхий Завет). Милан; М.: Христианская Россия, 1992.

Елеонский Н., прот. Современная критика священных ветхозаветных писаний и ее слабые стороны. М.: [б.и.], 1904.

Мень А., прот. Исагогика. Ветхий Завет. М.: Фонд имени Александра Меня, 2003.

Ринекер Ф., Майер Г. Библейская энциклопедия Брокгауза. М.: Российское Библейское Общество, 1999.

Рыбинский В. П. Библейская ветхозаветная критика // ТКДА. 1908. T. 3. № 12. С. 575–613.

Тураев Б. А. История Древнего Востока. Т. 1 / под ред. В. В. Струве и И. Л. Снегирева. Л.: Соцэкгиз, 1935.

Феофан (Быстров), архиеп. Тетраграмма, или Ветхозаветное Божественное имя Иеговы: магистерская диссертация. СПб.: СПбДА, 1905.

Юнгеров П. А. Введение в Ветхий Завет. М.: ПСТБИ, 2003. Книга 1.

Cassuto U. The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch. Jerusalem; New York: Shalem Press, 2008.

Friedman R. E. Torah (Pentateuch) // The Anchor Bible Dictionary / ed. D. N. Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992. Vol. 6. P. 605–622.

Ska J. L. Introduction to Reading the Pentateuch. Winona Lake (Indiana): Eisenbrauns, 2006.

Wellhausen J. Die Composition des Hexateuchs und der Historischen Bücher. B.: G. Reimer, 1899.

Published

2020-12-25

How to Cite

(1)
Skobelev М. А. Origin of the Pentateuch: Tradition and Documentary Hypothesis. БВ 2020, 39–51.

Issue

Section

Biblical studies

Categories