Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

I've noticed a number of instances where someone attributes a pericope, a verse, or even a phrase to the {J|E|D|P|R}-source with an almost casual certainty. What is the current status of the Documentary Hypothesis?

Thank you.

Good question. I wonder about this too.

The documentary hypothesis is dead

Krupin wrote:The documentary hypothesis is dead

So too, apparently, is the practice of offering well considered and substantiated claims.

I have an excellent counter-hypothesis

Krupin wrote:I have an excellent counter-hypothesis

Thank you, Krupin. Clearly something so excellent deserves a thread of its own.

Do not rush to laugh. It took me four years to understand the origin of the Torah.

My articles in Russian:
https://www.proza.ru/avtor/krupinsj

My sense is that the DH is in some technical trouble.

The main DH supporters are typically Jewish scholars that seem to be getting old. Personally, I'm not aware of a whole lot of younger adherents.

There is at least one Richard Elliot Friedman Passover thread from a year or two ago. That recounts the absurd theory that the Levites were the only tribe involved in the Exodus. Granted Dr. Friedman is getting old and the theory itself seems mostly designed to promote an interesting discussion at the Seder table. Still waiting for the book to come out.

My impression is that the DH is more or less caught between Jewish religious observance and academia, and at the moment it seems tilted to the right of mainstream academic understanding.

At least they don't think that Moses wrote the Torah.

Documentary hypothesis is ridiculous Initially. Say, the pope decided to combine the four gospels into one gospel. Do Christians recognize this book as sacred?