parts of each are found missing, because, no doubt, they have not been required to make the whole. But we make the analogy of the Hexateuch even closer, if we further suppose that in certain parts of the quilt the bits belonging to, say, two of these groups are so combined as to form a subsidiary pattern within the larger pattern of the whole quilt, and had evidently been sewed together before being connected with other parts of the quilt; and we may make it even closer still, if we suppose that, besides the more important bits of stuff, smaller embellishments, borderings, and the like, had been added so as to improve the general effect of the whole.?

The author of this article goes on to point out three main portions of the Hexateuch, which essentially differ from each other. There are three distinct codes: the Covenant code (C = <022022>Exodus 20:22 to 23:33, and 24:3-8), the Deuteronomic code (D) , and the Priestly code (P) . These codes have peculiar relations to the narrative portions of the Hexateuch. In Genesis, for example, ?the greater part of the book is divided into groups of longer or shorter pieces, generally paragraphs or chapters, distinguished respectively by the almost exclusive use of Elohim or Jehovah as the name of God.? Let us call these portions J and E. But we find such close affinities between C and JE, that we may regard them as substantially one. ?We shall find that the larger part of the narratives, as distinct from the laws, of Exodus and Numbers belong to JE; whereas, with special exceptions, the legal portions belong to P. in the last chapters of Deuteronomy and in the whole of Joshua we find elements of JE. In the latter book we also find elements which connect it with D.

?It should be observed that not only do we find here and there separate pieces in the Hexateuch, shown by their characters to belong to these three sources, JE, D, and P, but the pieces will often be found connected together by an obvious continuity of subject when pieced together, like the bits of patchwork in the illustration with which we started. For example, if we read continuously <011127>Genesis 11:27-32; 12:4b, 5; 13:6a, 11b, 12a; 16:1a, 3, 15, 16; 17; 19:29; 21:1a, 2b ? 5; 23; 25:7-11a ? passages mainly, on other grounds, attributed to P. we get an almost continuous and complete, though very concise, account of Abraham?s life.? We may concede the substantial correctness of the view thus propounded. It simply shows God?s actual method in making up the record of his revelation. We may add that any scholar who grants that Moses did not himself write the account of his own death and burial in the last chapter of Deuteronomy, or who recognizes two differing accounts of creation in Genesis 1 and 2, has already begun an analysis of the Pentateuch and has accepted the essential principles of the higher criticism.

<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment