The first two were Yahwist (J) source and Elohist (E) source, based on the way the two earlier documents referred to God’s name. The Yahwist source forms the heart of the Pentateuch structure as various traditions are built around the basic plot first found in J. Since form criticism has pointed out that the many different settings and types of traditional units that existed in ancient Israel, we can be certain that J did not write from whole cloth. He brought together old poetry, stories, and songs of the exodus that were living. Though J did not only write down facts and legends as he had received them, he used his many devices to create his own style. He put words and speeches into the mouths of famous people and these often foreshadow what later happened. For example, in Genesis 15:13-15 where God lays out for Abraham Israel’s coming history right up to the time of King David as a preview of the fulfilment of the divine promise to the patriarch. This speech helps the listener know what God’s plan is and how carefully God works everything out to fulfil his promises. Several biblical source critics think that the J epic ends at the point where Numbers 24:17-19 ends, because God has truly fulfilled his promise in our own time, for we have become a great nation and blessed in power over our enemies.
It soon became apparent that the passages in Genesis and Exodus which used elohim represented two separate writers. The one with old stories about Jacob and Moses was concerned with historical traditions and kept the name Elohist for itself. The Elohist is the reworking of the basic Yahwist account. It includes much less material as does the J story, and tends to favour northern ideas. For example, it pays much less attention to Abraham than to Jacob, a patriarch who lived in the area of Shechem, Bethel and other northern cities. It puts much less stress on the role of Moses and the elders in the giving of the covenant than J does, and it accepts a much larger role for all the people giving their assent to the covenant. This reflects the distinction between the J concern for suitable leadership and E’s suspicion of the systems which claim too much power.
The other had a priestly cast to it as it was interested in liturgical matters and therefore became known as the Priestly (P) source. The P source clearly anticipated to complement what J and E said about the historical traditions of Israel with special resources on worship, observance of the covenant in day to day life, and social structures of Israelite community. The P source was very concerned to give Israel a sense of trust in Yahweh’s goodness and fidelity so that they would not lose faith in their God. P structured many details of the old tradition into new patterns that put the emphasis on continuity. Some of these were; the use of genealogies- showing the care of God over his human creatures, place names, establishing laws for future generations, emphasis on the divine presence is Israel’s midst, God’s word is primary and the importance of blessing.
As the Book of Deuteronomy stood out with its long speeches and sermons compared to brief scenes and incidents, the fourth source was named Deuteronomist (D) source. Scholars have known that Deuteronomy did not come from the same time as the rest of the Pentateuch, and that it actually reflects a writer who looks back from a much later time to the days of Moses and the conquest, it makes a call for return to the proper obedience to the covenant. In general, almost every chapter gives away the secret that the authors are really not looking ahead to a new time but are rather looking backward from deep in the time of the monarchy.
However, in some stories critics have been able to detect more than once source merged together by the change in particular words. A clear example of this is the story of the flood (Genesis 6-9). Noah is told to take seven pairs of all clean animals and one pair of all unclean animals in Genesis 7:2, but in 7:9 and 15 it looks as though God told him to take just one pair of each animal species. At other times we find two different words appearing again and again throughout the Pentateuch for the same object. For example, the mountain on which God gives the covenant is sometimes called Sinai, and sometimes called Horeb. Also the people who live in Palestine are often called Canaanites and sometimes Amorites. All of these examples can be explained, and when analysed and sorted into the four different sources, the effect is much stronger. This shows how source criticism has contributed to our understanding of the Pentateuch.
Form criticism includes tracing a text through all levels from the most primitive oral saying up to the finished product. It seeks to capture the living spirit of Israel’s growing faith. A simple and popular way of describing the work of form criticism is to list the following four steps; defining the unit, naming the form used, describing its setting in life and identifying its purpose.
Form critics reacted not in favour of numerous of the conclusions of the documentary thesis, pointing out that the source critics time and again unobserved the verbal poetry and the primitive forms still in attendance in the Pentateuch. Many even denied that the Elohist source ever existed as a written source due to lack of substance. In short, the form critics have opened up a possibility that everything not in the original J account was handed on piece by piece, and over the centuries these were gradually added to the J account. The century of development from source criticism through form criticism summarizes that neither stands alone, script and spoken story-telling may have been used at the same time, in addition the Bible itself records that many written sources were known in Israel.
The addition of form criticism to the study of the Pentateuch has therefore prohibited us from seeing only four whole books put together so strongly that the main undertaking of Bible study is to unravel them. This may also return us to the original question- “Who really wrote the Pentateuch?”. Form criticism confirms that, while the Pentateuch was not actually written down by Moses, many of its traditions, legal practices and covenant forms may actually date back to the time of Moses, and their central importance for Israel may even have originated with him or at least with the community of the exodus and conquest.
