I.

The goal for this lecture are as follows

A. to explain several major literary phenomenon in the narrative hebrew

bible

B. to explain how various schools of though have attempted to explain

these phenomenon

C. In the following lecture, I will propose an alternative approach to

understand these literary phenomenon.

II. Elements that can be recognized in the Hebrew narrative.

A. Multiple names for Gott

1. Multiple names for God are use, but two are the most commonly

used.

2. Elohim and YHWH

a) Sometimes narrative sections (Abschnitte) use the same

name

b) Sometimes both names are used in the same paragraph

or sentence

3. In Exodus [3.4] Als aber der HERR sah, daß er hinging, um zu

sehen, rief Gott ihn aus dem Busch und sprach:

B. Some stories are told more than once.

1. Two creation accounts (Gen 1,2)

2. Exod 19:16 cf 20:18

 a) [19.16] Als nun der dritte Tag kam und es Morgen ward,

da erhob sich ein Donnern und Blitzen und eine dichte

Wolke auf dem Berge und der Ton einer sehr starken

Posaune. Das ganze Volk aber, das im Lager war,

erschrak.

b) [20.18] Und alles Volk wurde Zeuge von dem Donner und

Blitz und dem Ton der Posaune und dem Rauchen des

Berges. Als sie aber solches sahen, flohen sie und blieben

in der Ferne stehen

C. Some events are not in chronological order

1. The days of creation in Genesis 1 and 2 are not in the same

order

2. In 2 Samuel, the major accomplishments of David’s life are not

in chronological order

3. Even in the book of exodus, the events are not in chronological

order

a) First example

(1) [4.14] Da wurde der HERR sehr zornig über Mose

[b] und sprach: [c]Weiß ich denn nicht, daß dein

Bruder Aaron aus dem Stamm Levi beredt ist?

[d]Und siehe, er wird dir entgegenkommen, [e]und

wenn er dich sieht, wird er sich von Herzen freuen.

 (2) [4.27] Und der HERR sprach zu Aaron: [b] Geh hin

Mose entgegen in die Wüste. [c]Und er ging hin

[d]und begegnete ihm am Berge Gottes [e]und

küßte ihn.

(3) Note what the logical order is. [4.27a] Und der HERR

sprach zu Aaron: [4.27b] Geh hin Mose entgegen in

die Wüste. [4.27c]Und er ging hin, [4.14d]Und

siehe, er wird dir entgegenkommen, [4.14e] und

wenn er dich sieht, wird er sich von Herzen freuen,

[4.27d]und begegnete ihm am Berge Gottes

[4.27e]und küßte ihn.

b) Second example:

(1) Exod 19:3-6, have announcement they will be a

kingdom of priests, and they should keep the laws

(2) Exod 24:4-8 have the radification of the written

covenant and a proclaimation that they will keep the

commandments.

D. Some statements seem to contridict each other.

1. As an example, Exod states that no one can see God and live;

yet, God spoke to Moses as a man, face to face.

III. Before we look at the different explanations for the phenomonom, we must

understand several philosophies which have heavily influenced biblical

scholarship.

A. Beginning in the enlightment, scholars argued that the bible could not

be accept as true soley because one claimed that it was an infaliable

Word of God. They argued that the bible should be analyzed critically

like any other historical document..1

B. Next Spinoza in 1670 argued that the historical books contained

many inconsistent and conflicting statements and therefore could not

be from the hands of the contemporary author.2

C. In the field of philosophy, Hegel proposed that ideas and concepts are

constantly changing. His well known concept of thesis, antithesis, and

synthesis have been accepted for years..

D. In the field of science, Darwin proposed the theory of evolution to

explain the origin of the species which did not require a creator. In his

theory, basic material elements became simple life by accident. The

natural environment and accidental change modified the simple forms

to become more complex life forms. Thus the the number of species

increased over long periods of time. The fundamental concept of his

theory is that the simple evolves into the more complex over long

periods of time. This is the exact opposite of the Genesis account

1 <Merrill, n. d., Pentateuch@7>.

2 <Merrill, n. d., Pentateuch@7>.

 where God created classes of life forms were made at the same time.

The Genesis accounts specifically states that all the animal life was

made at one time and that each reproduced according to its own kind.

In other words, one species did not merge with another.

IV. From these basic concepts, several theorms are used for bible

interpretation.

A. Supernatural events or miracles that are recorded in the bible are not

possible. Stories that include supernatural events are either false or

myths.

B. Inspired authors did not write the bible. Rather the bible is the result

of a long process of revision and modification from a large body of

unknown and unnamed editors and contributors.

C. Following the general concepts of evolution, the biblical stories,

content, or text grow from the simple to the complex. In other words,

the original stories were short and simple oral stories.

1. Each story begins as a simple story that raises in a parcular

setting or culture. Early stories were simple and were passed by

oral tradition. Each generation added material and changed

[Link] the story is retold and passed to following generations, the

story changes and more detail is added.

2. Thus the bible we have today is the end or final result of a long

process of change and growth. Thus a complex narrative text is

always later than a simple one.

 3. At some late point in the growth process, the stories were

written down. An editor incorporated all the stories and pieces

of written documents into the final form we have today.

D. In summary, the historical books are not a record of the historical

events that shaped the relationship between God and His people, but

rather the history of the changes in the relegion of Israel over the

ages.

V. These biblical observations and the secular philosophies are the basis for

the various theories for the formation of the biblical texts. We will examin

them in the order in which they developed.

A. The Documentary Hyopthesis

1. Several early scholars argued that the Pentateuch contain at

two source documents. The source could be identified solely on

the use of the divine name, elohim or JHWH. The sources were

called the E and J documents depending upon the name that is

used for God.. These scholars includt Astruc, J. G. Eichhorn, H. G.

A. Ewald.

2. In 1805 W. M. L. DeWette proposed the third, or D document. He

based his argument on 2 Kgs 22 where Josiah found a copy of

Deuternomny. Rather that accepting the text as stated, that a

copy of Deuternomy was found which inspired a reform, he

argued that the Josiah started the political reform and wrote
 Deuternomy to justify it. Thus the book of Deuternomy is dated

to 622 BC, the date it was found.3

3. In 1853 Hermann Hepfeld argued the what was considered “E”

could be divided further into two other documents based on

linguistic features and theological message. In other words,

there appeared to be two different theological messages, one

that was dealt with the priesthood and the cult and one that did

not. Thus anything that dealt with the cult or priesthood was

considered to be a “P” or priestly document.

4. At this point, it was considered that none of the four sources to

the Pentateuch had beenn written by Moses.

5. In line with what I mentioned earlier, K. Graf maintained that the

highly organized cultic religion such as that outlined in the P

texts is always the last stage of expression andnot the earliest.

Religion always progressed from the primitive animism, to

pantheism, to polytheism, to heotheism and finally to

monotheism. Because the “P” document is so elaborate, it just

be dated to the post-exilic date.

6. In 1884, Julius Wellhausen articulated the documentary

hypothesis. Although Wellhausen is generally credited with the

documentary hypothesis, or the theory of the JEDP documents,

he actually borrowed from the work of the earlier schholars.

3 <Merrill, n. d., Pentateuch@9>.

 7. Although there is a lot of disagreement over the dates of the

documents, most of these scholars would date the “P” as post

exilic, “D” at 622 BC and J and E in the 7-8th century BC. Note

that this dates the writing of the events in the Pentateuch at

least 5 centuries after the time the events recurred.

B. Form Criticisms

1. Hermann Gunkel rejected the documentary hypothesis primarily

because it did not explain the sources for the sources. In other

words, it did not explain the origin of the sources that were used

to form the biblical text. Again, returning to a evolutionary

perspective, Gunkel proposed that the original content of the

sources came from stories that were passed from one

generation to the next orally. Because the stories became more

embellished, the original story must be short, simple. It would

likewise be difficult to recognize because so much had been

added to it over the generations.

2. Gunkel proposed that rather than following documents, the

stories followed forms. In other words, a particular type of story

would always be told in a particular form. Each form had a

particular style and structure. Each form originated from a

particular socio-cultural-religion background. Thus if one could

identify the form, he could identify the source of the original

story.
 3. Gunkel was heavily influenced by Grimm brothers. He adapted a

similar process for the formation of the biblical text. (See Kurus)

See reading

C. Tradition Criticism

1. the attempts of Gunkel and subsequent generations of form

critics to trace the source of the oral and written traditions

which gave rise to the present literary compositions led

inevitably to still another method – the tratio-historical criticism.4

This criticism assumes that both oral and written continuities

play a role in the shaping of the traditions that finally

culminated in Scripture.

2. Von Rad and Martin Noth advanced Gunkel’s basic concept that

the basis for the biblical texts were more than simple stories,

but were rather collections of stories that had become part of

the primitives societies.

3. Von Rad argued that the Pentateuch was based unto collections

of stories that centered around three sections of schripture that

contained professions of faith (Deut 6:20-24; 26:5b-9; Josh

24:2b-13). Because these passaged refer to the Exodus,

wilderness and conquest (not Sinai), he argued these traditions

were incorporated into the cultic worship.5 Martin Noth argued

4 <Merrill, n. d., Pentateuch@11>.

5 <Merrill, n. d., Pentateuch@13>;<Noth, 1972, History>;<Rad, 1966, Problem>;

 that the Pentateuch was compiled from five different traditions

that originated independent of each other. they include the

Deliverance from Egypt, settlement in the land, promise to the

patriarchs, leadershhip in the wilderness and the revelation at

Sinai. Noth believes that these various tehems were lriginally

known only to individual tribes or tribal associations which over

a long period of time, began to form a twelve-tribe

confederation. (amphictyony)

4. For example, the festivals at different times of the years used

the stories in the celebrations. For exmple story of Santa Claus

is part of our Xmas tradition.

5. Both scholars recognized that historical events could be either

the origin of a tradition or were incorporated later into a

tradition. However, both claimed that the traditions had evolved

so much that any history that may be part of the tradition could

not be recognized.

6. Scholars were also proposing that the biblical text was a

collection of traditions that were collected into the final version.

In some cases, the traditions may have contributed to the

sources.

7. Noth did identify the five major narrative sections of the Exodus-

Joshua books called them the Exodus, the Wanderings, the

Conquest, and the revelation at Sinai. He proposed that each

 tradition originally separately and was later incorporated into

the biblical narrative.

8.

VI. Summary:

These critical methods deny the verbal-plenary inspiration of the bible,

reject the nnotion of direct, propositional revelation, insists on treating hte biblical

text as the product of human reflection on the acts of God in history and

circumstances and assumes that the biblical record is not historically reliale but is

a theological interpretation of real or imagined events by succedding generations

of Israelite traditionists. The Pentateuch thus is not the work of Moses, but, in tis

present form, the final edition of a centuries-long accumulation fo texts and

traditions wich may or may not confirm to theh realities of thich tehy testify.6

VII. The reason for this explanation.

A. As you read the literature, you note references to many of these

theories. For example, there will be discussions of the sources, either

J, E, D, or P, or even some variant of these.

B. You will also read about the traditions. In commentaries on the book fo

exodus, you will read about the various traditions, the exodus,Sinai, or

the wanderings traditions. There will be lots of references to the

insertion, rearrangement, and expansion of various sources or

traditions.

6 <Merrill, n. d., Pentateuch@13>.

 LECTURE 3

VIII. Another important point is that biblical scholars have generally regarded the

narrative books as history rather than theological books.

A. They have viewed the narrative as primarily a history of the religion of

Israel. In other words, it describes the evolution of the practice of

religion in Israel though its history.

B. But the narrative books are nor primarily history, but rather

theological. Each author, in this case Moses, wrote the book because

they wanted to explain the present condition or status of the people in

their lifetime. Or they wanted to warn a future generation or they

wanted to explain why something might happen in the future. The

best examples are Kings and Chronicles. Kings tends to explain the

reason for the exile. Chronicles tends to set the expectataion for the

coming King of Israel

C. Exodus is the same. As stated in the syllubus, your primary job for this

course is to discover and write a paper than explains why Moses wrote

the book of Exodus.

IX. An alternative proposal.

A. There are multiple passages in the OT that specifically state that a

particular person wrote a part of the text (deut 1:5;4:44; 31:9; 33:4;

Josh 8:31-34; 1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Kgs 14:6; 23:25; Ezra 3:2; Neh 8:1; Mal 4:4)7

7 <Merrill, n. d., Pentateuch@1>.

 The narrative texts, in particular the book of Exodus was written by

one author.

B. Propose that the Hebrew narrative is neither history nor fiction as

defined by contemporary standards.

1. Although the narrative man record events that actually

happened, the goal of the writer it not to provide a

comprehensive and detailed historical account of the things that

actually happened.

2. The primary purpose of the Hebrew narrative is to

C. There was a unique narrative style that was used by the ancient

writers.

1. Just reading the OT and the NT, one notices that narrative style

is very different. The NT style is easier to read because it is

closer to a modern style.

2. Some of the narrative style is still used in modern literature.

a) For example, flashback

b) Commentary

c) Background information

3. Some of the narrative techniques are present today

a) Telling the story twice from different perspectives. See

movie “point of view.”

 b) Telling the most important facts first. For example, a

newspaper articles typically gives the most important

details first, and then may retell the parts of the story

several times to provide more detail

D. In the next lecture, we will look at these narrative techniques in more

detail.

E. For our exegesis, we will assume that the author, in this case Moses,

wrote the entire book of Exodus and that He had a purpose for doing

so.

1. Exodus, like most of the Old Testament.

Exod 3:4, 13, 14

Flashback: Exod 4:19

Theming to show break: Exod 4:19, 20

4:21