The Analysis of the Pentateuch: An Attempt to Overcome Barriers of Thinking

This essay addresses several methodological questions that constantly reappear in the discussion of the composition of the Pentateuch and that impede understanding among the various approaches to its analysis. The aim of this essay is not to argue for or against any particular hypothesis. Rather, it is to play out the different explanatory models, and to point out misunderstandings, one-sidedness, and inconsistencies in an effort to overcome barriers of thinking and to reopen the discussion. The following aspects are discussed in detail: 1) the three fundamental hypotheses (documentary, fragmentary, and supplementary hypothesis); 2) the role of empirical (external) evidence; 3) the criteria of the analysis; 4) the argument of quantity of literary layers; 5) the interrelation of literary layers; 6) the concrete situation of scribal practice; 7) historical presuppositions and expectations. In concluding, a proposal is sketched for how an analysis of the Pentateuch can be conducted that is based primarily on the phenomena found in the external evidence and in which all of the disputed methodological and historical presuppositions and options are left open to the greatest possible extent.