The Graf-Wellhausen Theory

I am constantly amazed by the depth of my own ignorance. This latest trip around O’Hoolihan’s barn began with an off-hand reference to the Graf-Wellhausen Theory. I don’t even remember the context of the reference but it led me off on a twisted journey through the basics of biblical scholarship as it relates to the Hebrew Bible.

Even someone who is semi-illiterate can tell that there is something strange about the first few books of the Hebrew Scriptures called the Pentateuch, or Torah, and consisting of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. There are, despite what the average Evangelical Christian will tell you, contradictions, sometimes in close proximity, as well as duplications and strange breaks in thought and story line. The style of the text also varies, sometimes within the same book. It’s almost as if two distinct stories were merged like shuffling a deck of cards.

Well that’s what the Graf-Wellhausen Theory hypothesizes. Only it says not just two stories but four, plus some adjustments and insertions by the redactors that did the actual merging.

By tradition the first five books of the Bible were written by Moses. The Graf-Wellhausen Theory says that isn’t even remotely possible and the majority of scholars apparently agree. This is a bigger whack against Fundamentalist Christianity than Evolution! As Apologist Don Closson from Leadership U. says, “since other Old Testament authors affirm Mosaic authorship, as do numerous New Testament writers and the early church fathers, the veracity of the Bible as a whole begins to crumble if Moses is not the author of the Pentateuch.”

This is the same old “argument from consequences” that Fundamentalists are so fond of. First they scare the reader into thinking his religion and salvation are at risk and then they heave a life line of arguments refuting the source of that risk that the reader is desperate to grab on to regardless of whether or not the arguments make any sense. In this case the arguments against Graf-Wellhausen seem to consist primarily of coming up with ingenious ways to resolve the contradictions and anachronisms, claiming that this scholar or that scholar has produced a devastating refutation of the theory, without ever identifying exactly what that refutation was, and saying the bible says Moses wrote the Torah so it must be so.

I’ll concede that it is just barely possible to resolve the discrepancies, duplicates and anachronisms, such as Moses listing the Kings of Edom hundreds of years before Edom existed, because my definition of “possible” is extremely flexible. But most non-fundamentalists, including other believers, would have a hard time accepting these resolutions as little more than wishful thinking. Let me put it this way, I've yet to locate a "scholar," that isn't a Fundamentalist Christian Apologist, that still thinks Moses wrote the Pentateuch.

So what does the theory say exactly? I alluded to it in my earlier post on the Two Creation Stories; according to the Graf-Wellhausen Theory, which is also called the Documentary Hypothesis, there are four basic texts that form the Pentateuch called J, E, P and D.

The J, or Jahwist, source is believed to have originated in the Southern Kingdom of Judah and to have been written sometime between 950 BCE and 800 BCE. The E, or Elohist, source is believed to have come from the Northern Kingdom of Israel and to have also been written sometime between 950 BCE and 800 BCE. J and E are believed to have been combined just after the fall of the Northern Kingdom around 722 BCE.

The D, for Deuteronomist, source is believed to have been written sometime during the reign of King Josiah of Judah around 620 BCE and to consist of not only the Book of Deuteronomy but also Joshua, Judges, 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 & 2 Kings. Some scholars associate D with the book of laws “discovered” in 2 Kings 22. D is believed to have been a ploy to justify Josiah’s reforms as well as a demonstration of what a great guy Josiah was, as opposed to the past kings of Judah and Israel. In other words, Josiah had himself a publicist.

The final source is the P, for Priestly, source. Wellhausen originally theorized that it was the latest source from around 530 BCE. However others argue that it was written much earlier, perhaps during the reign of King Hezekiah, around 700 BCE.

Most scholars seem to agree that the final editing and combination of the stories, including a significant update to D called Dtr2, reflecting the kings after Josiah and the reasons for the fall of Jerusalem, occurred between 530 BCE and 400 BCE.

Over the years scholars have added to, modified and adapted the details of the Graf-Wellhausen Theory, buts its core has essentially remained intact for the past 120 years. Professor Richard E. Friedman, in his excellent book "Who Wrote the Bible," even attempts to deduce who, if not by name, then at least by occupation, wrote the source texts.

The theory is based upon techniques of Textual and Literary criticism, in other words, observation, inference and deduction. To be honest with you, I don’t know what to make of this. If you read “scholarly” descriptions of the Documentary Hypothesis you get definitive statements as if somewhere there’s a mathematical treatise as well as tons of forensic evidence justifying the faith of academia in this hypothesis. There isn’t. It is purely based upon the inferences and deductions made from the literary and textual study of the Hebrew Bible. If you read Fundamentalist descriptions, you can hear the indignation generated by a theory that essentially undercuts the veracity of the Bible and, by extension, Fundamentalist Theology over the last 400 years or so.

Compared to this, The Theory of Evolution is one of Fundamentalist Christianity’s best buddies. One saving grace is, while this theory is widely known in academic and theological circles, the general public is mostly oblivious to its existence and implications. I agree with Closson, the veracity of the bible as well as the veracity of Conservative Christianity does crumble in the face of this hypothesis.

A second saving grace is that even a heathen like me is having a hard time accepting this theory as definitive. The most I’m willing to concede is that most scholars seem to think that some form of the Documentary Hypothesis is probably valid. There is considerable disagreement about the details and as new information is discovered, or new techniques developed, the theory will probably continue to evolve and adapt. Biblical scholars have developed a biography of the Pentateuch based upon literary criticism, logical inference and circumstantial evidence. This biography may be little more than a fantasy, a meme that perpetuates itself from teacher to student in universities in Europe and the United States. On the other hand, it might be pretty close to the truth.

This theory is much, much weaker in terms of evidence than something like Evolution and if we can’t get Fundamentalists to accept that, they’re never going to accept that this theory may even be remotely possible. This is why these people are so dangerous. They will hold onto their beliefs regardless of the evidence and constantly come up with, sometimes reasonable but often ludicrous, rationalizations as to why their pre-determined beliefs are unquestionably true. In their minds there can be no doubt. They can’t seem to live with any degree of uncertainty. At least not in relationship to religion.

I don’t accept the Graf-Wellhausen Theory as definitive (then again I’m not convinced the Theory of Relativity is definitive so don’t go by me) but I do recognize that, given its wide acceptance by lots of very intelligent people that know a lot more about this than I do, it may very well be pretty close to reality.

Someday we’ll talk about archaeology and its relationship to the bible but I’m still trying to sort that out in my own mind. It’s one thing to imply that the story of David was written down 400 years after David lived and probably contains considerable legend. It’s something entirely different to claim that David never existed! I’ll never accept that conclusion because even if David didn’t exist, he should have.