JEPD theory

[didymus]

Is anyone familiar with this?
I’ve noticed in some Bibles the footnotes and study notes take the JEPD theory for granted as a fact & I just heard a podcast that attributed specific verses to the Yahwistic, Priestly, Deuteronomist sources, &c.

I don’t have a problem w/the idea that there are multiple traditions in the Pentateuch but this theory doesn’t sound as certain as people are trying to push it

 

[thistle]

Is anyone familiar with this?
I’ve noticed in some Bibles the footnotes and study notes take the JEPD theory for granted as a fact & I just heard a podcast that attributed specific verses to the Yahwistic, Priestly, Deuteronomist sources, &c.

I don’t have a problem w/the idea that there are multiple traditions in the Pentateuch but this theory doesn’t sound as certain as people are trying to push it

What is JEPD?

 

[Ocarm]

Is anyone familiar with this?
I’ve noticed in some Bibles the footnotes and study notes take the JEPD theory for granted as a fact & I just heard a podcast that attributed specific verses to the Yahwistic, Priestly, Deuteronomist sources, &c.

I don’t have a problem w/the idea that there are multiple traditions in the Pentateuch but this theory doesn’t sound as certain as people are trying to push it

The Graf-Wellhausen hypothesis is a default theory acknowledged by most biblical scholars who adopt a redactional or historical-critical methodology. Although aspects of the theory are frequently under review, it never really goes away; a scripture scholar of my acquaintance told me recently that a current reformulation of the theory holds that the Deuteronomist was the final redactor, editing the work of the first three authors and adding in the book of Deuteronomy.

I think there are few scholars other than biblical literalists who would say it is not at least partially correct. Apparently particular linguistic forms do indicate the specific sources in some verses, although the redactional (that is, editing) process might affect the level of such certainties.

Ultimately, you’re right, such things are unprovable. But this doesn’t mean that they are problematic or unorthodox (I note you didn’t say that they are, I’m merely commenting on the implications of such ideas for our faith).

The issues raised by this approach are discussed in a document published in 1994 by the Pontifical Biblical Commission entitled THE INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE IN THE CHURCH, which included a preface by then-Cardinal Ratzinger.

See ewtn.com/library/CURIA/PBCINTER.htm

This covers the complexities in a clear and interesting fashion. I think its notable that in the dogmatic constitution *Dei Verbum *these matters are not proclaimed upon in detail, because they remain a matter of scholarly debate.

 

[NHInsider]

What is JEPD?

The four initials refer to four different “threads” of material that were compiled to become our Pentateuch/books of Moses. (keep in mind that all ancient cultures preserved their histories and origin stories orally for centuries before committing them to written form).
The first two initials refer to the prefered term for God that distinguish the first two threads: Yahweh (Jehovah) or Elohim. P stands for Priestly and presumes that traditions that emphasize things that relate to the liturgy came from a Priestly tradition, and D stands for Deuteronomic (?) meaning the “second” telling/revision of the origins of the Jewish faith.

 

[NotWorthy]

The JEPD Theory is only about 100-150 years old. I don’t buy it. They may have been edited by later people of the JEPD variety, but 1850 years of Christian tradition, plus 1000+ years of Jewish Tradition, plus the very words of Jesus hold that Moses wrote the Pentateuch.

 

[CalCatholic]

Is anyone familiar with this?
I’ve noticed in some Bibles the footnotes and study notes take the JEPD theory for granted as a fact & I just heard a podcast that attributed specific verses to the Yahwistic, Priestly, Deuteronomist sources, &c.

I don’t have a problem w/the idea that there are multiple traditions in the Pentateuch but this theory doesn’t sound as certain as people are trying to push it

This theory is also used in The Navarre Bible commentary book ‘The Pentateuch.’

 

[hellopeople]

Is anyone familiar with this?
I’ve noticed in some Bibles the footnotes and study notes take the JEPD theory for granted as a fact & I just heard a podcast that attributed specific verses to the Yahwistic, Priestly, Deuteronomist sources, &c.

I don’t have a problem w/the idea that there are multiple traditions in the Pentateuch but this theory doesn’t sound as certain as people are trying to push it

I think there very well could have been these 4 sources, but likely even more.

 

[hellopeople]

The JEPD Theory is only about 100-150 years old. I don’t buy it. They may have been edited by later people of the JEPD variety, but 1850 years of Christian tradition, plus 1000+ years of Jewish Tradition, plus the very words of Jesus hold that Moses wrote the Pentateuch.

lol, Moses didn’t write the pentateuch. 1,500 years of the church held true that the earth was the center of the universe…do you believe that?

 

[CWBetts]

lol, Moses didn’t write the pentateuch. 1,500 years of the church held true that the earth was the center of the universe…do you believe that?

Moses (or one of his scribes) wrote it. The Church teaches infallibly with regards to faith and morals, but not science. There is one straw man down.

 

[hellopeople]

Moses (or one of his scribes) wrote it. The Church teaches infallibly with regards to faith and morals, but not science. There is one straw man down.

The church doesn’t teach that Moses wrote the pentateuch infallibly.

 

[CalCatholic]

Whether Moses wrote the Pentateuch or his teachings were passed down over time and written down at a later date by different authors, doesn’t effect one’s salvation.

 

[CWBetts]

The church doesn’t teach that Moses wrote the pentateuch infallibly.

But the burden of proof falls on the one claiming that the historical teaching of the Church is incorrect. One can be a faithful Catholic and accept JEPD, but we are not bound to hold to it. I choose to reject it.

 

[NotWorthy]

This theory is also used in The Navarre Bible commentary book ‘The Pentateuch.’

Yes, and it absolutely drives me nuts!!! Nevermind that, in the very same story (I believe it’s Genesis and Abraham during one of his Covenant exchanges with God), the author switches from the Yahwehist to the Elohist “tradition”.

 

[NotWorthy]

lol, Moses didn’t write the pentateuch. 1,500 years of the church held true that the earth was the center of the universe…do you believe that?

Did Jesus claim that Moses wrote of him?

BTW, why couldn’t Moses have written the Pentateuch?

 

[hellopeople]

Yes, and it absolutely drives me nuts!!! Nevermind that, in the very same story (I believe it’s Genesis and Abraham during one of his Covenant exchanges with God), the author switches from the Yahwehist to the Elohist “tradition”.

You should read up on the two versions of the flood narrative that are intertwined.

 

[hellopeople]

Did Jesus claim that Moses wrote of him?

BTW, why couldn’t Moses have written the Pentateuch?

Moses dies in the Pentateuch. That is a good one. Also, there are large differences in how God is portrayed that even correlate to changing God’s name. Sometimes God is portrayed as a man that literally walks on the earth and talks to people, sometimes God only communicates to people in dreams. It seems quite obvious that there are multiple sources at work.

 

[CWBetts]

Moses dies in the Pentateuch. That is a good one. Also, there are large differences in how God is portrayed that even correlate to changing God’s name. Sometimes God is portrayed as a man that literally walks on the earth and talks to people, sometimes God only communicates to people in dreams. It seems quite obvious that there are multiple sources at work.

There are some flaws on your supposed logic. Use of different names does not imply different sources, particularly when it is understood in the light of Ancient Near Eastern literature. Also the difference in God’s manifestations do not imply different sources, but rather in the modification of God’s relationship with humanity and hoe He chooses to interact. Moses’s death could have easily by added by a scribe, or was added as an example of oral tradition. You will have to try harder than that.

 

[NotWorthy]

Moses dies in the Pentateuch. That is a good one. Also, there are large differences in how God is portrayed that even correlate to changing God’s name. Sometimes God is portrayed as a man that literally walks on the earth and talks to people, sometimes God only communicates to people in dreams. It seems quite obvious that there are multiple sources at work.

I understand that Moses dies at the end of Deuteronomy. Is there any problem with Joshua finishing it? I mean, he is credited with the authoring of the next book in the Old Testament.

This seems to be the case with the Gospels of Mark and John. It seems widely accepted that the last chapters of each Gospels are addendums.

And I am familiar with the “two stories intertwining” theory, but again, I don’t buy into it. It seemed to be an ancient Literary style of the Hebrews. For instance, “Saul was the tallest of all the tribe of Benjamin. There was none taller than Saul”. I’ve heard that this is proof that there are two stories intertwined (I’m just using this Saul line as an example, I made the verses up in my head simply to illustrate a point). But instead, this is one of the literary styles of the Hebrews.

 

[hellopeople]

I understand that Moses dies at the end of Deuteronomy. Is there any problem with Joshua finishing it? I mean, he is credited with the authoring of the next book in the Old Testament.

This seems to be the case with the Gospels of Mark and John. It seems widely accepted that the last chapters of each Gospels are addendums.

And I am familiar with the “two stories intertwining” theory, but again, I don’t buy into it. It seemed to be an ancient Literary style of the Hebrews. For instance, “Saul was the tallest of all the tribe of Benjamin. There was none taller than Saul”. I’ve heard that this is proof that there are two stories intertwined (I’m just using this Saul line as an example, I made the verses up in my head simply to illustrate a point). But instead, this is one of the literary styles of the Hebrews.

Well, if you aren’t looking for it, it is possible you would never know about the flood story intertwining. As for the creation story, it is quite obvious that there are two creation stories one after the other…why would Moses include 2 contradicting stories of creation? I just think that the multiple source theory seems to make more sense, and the people that are claiming Moses to be the author usually have a theological reasoning behind it.

 

[NotWorthy]

Well, if you aren’t looking for it, it is possible you would never know about the flood story intertwining.

My brother, I’m wondering if you read my post.

And I am familiar with the “two stories intertwining” theory, but again, I don’t buy into it. It seemed to be an ancient Literary style of the Hebrews. For instance, “Saul was the tallest of all the tribe of Benjamin. There was none taller than Saul”. I’ve heard that this is proof that there are two stories intertwined (I’m just using this Saul line as an example, I made the verses up in my head simply to illustrate a point). But instead, this is one of the literary styles of the Hebrews.

If this is what you’re talking about, I am aware of it. If I’m going down the wrong path, I’d appreciate it if you’d steer me back on the right path, rather than claiming, “Notworthy, you must not be looking for it…”

As for the creation story, it is quite obvious that there are two creation stories one after the other…why would Moses include 2 contradicting stories of creation? I just think that the multiple source theory seems to make more sense, and the people that are claiming Moses to be the author usually have a theological reasoning behind it.

Theological reason? Yes. It’s called tradition, nothing more. As I mentioned in another post, the JEPD theory is only some 150 years old. Its simply a theory without any proof.

Two creation accounts? Yes, it makes perfect sense to me. One shows God, the Almighty Creator, who simply says the Word and the entire Cosmos comes into being. The Second Account shows God, the Loving Creator, carefully taking the clay and shaping it into a man and then breathing life into it.

Let me ask you, if the JEPD theory is simply a compiling of eons of traditions, why aren’t any of these traditions found on their own?