Documentary Hypothesis Not Compatible With Modern Research

The Graf-Wellhausen theory or Documentary Hypothesis has been shown to be a defective device for interpreting the different theological perspectives found in Genesis. Although incompatible with anthropological and archaeological studies, the Documentary Hypothesis continues to obscure the cultural uniformity of Abraham's ancestors and his descendants up to the time of the Babylonian captivity.

Genesis: An Authorship Study in Computer-Assisted Statistical Linguistics (Analecta Biblica No. 903, Vol. 20) by Yehuda T. Radday and Heim Shore (Sept 1, 1985) is yet another rebuttal of the Documentary Hypothesis.  Radday explains:

Biblical scholarship in the nineteenth century, and until quite recently, concentrated either on Lower Criticism, i.e. reconstructing an allegedly corrupt Massoretic text, or on Higher Criticism, i.e. differentiating the sources from which the Massoretic text was thought to be composed. Lower Criticism, as it would be, finds little need to attend to matters of structure, while Higher Criticism, which takes any repetition in the flow of a narrative as evidence of separate source materials, is by definition bound to overlook the very essence of chiasm, namely the fact that such repetitions may have been employed in a given composition as an intentional stylistic device. The result, in the final analysis, is that both approaches, and indeed the somewhat myopic scholarly fixation on detailed and minute analysis generally, can combine to preclude even the most dedicated scholar from perceiving the overall structure of many compositions which reveals the presence of chiasm in longer passages and entire books.

But scholarly attitudes are changing. The general attitude toward biblical exegesis has become less text-critical, especially as the discoveries of Ugaritic and Essene literatures frequently sustain the Massoretic text against its major detractors. Furthermore, disillusionment with the crass rationalism of the last century has brought about a more cautious posture vis-î-vis ancient literatures than the confident attitudes which spawned much of Higher Criticism. These changes in the intellectual climate have slowly enabled scholars to agree that several techniques other than the naturalistic manner of telling a tale may exist in the Bible.

From here.


Radday designed a statistical study of the Documentary Hypothesis. Using computer-assisted statistical linguistics, his research team  produced an interpretation of the authorship of Genesis. The team did not find statistical validity for the attribution of the book to J, E, and P. Instead, the evidence calls for a division of the book into three categories: divine speech, human speech, and the narrator. The book provides much of the mathematical material on which the conclusions are based.

Apparently the King Lists were not part of the analysis. In my opinion, this necessarily skews the results.


Related reading:  The Documentary Hypothesis; Should Genesis Be Taught in the Public Schools?