Biblical & Theological Issues

by Daniel I. Block –

THE HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION
Who wrote the Pentateuch? The simple answer is, “Nobody [but God] knows.” Although Jewish and Christian traditions are virtually unanimous in attributing the Pentateuch to Moses, few issues relating to the Old Testament are debated as hotly today, and nowhere is the gulf between critical and evangelical scholarship so wide. Many conservative students of Scripture continue to believe that Moses wrote virtually all of the Pentateuch with his own hand. While the roots of critical theories lie much earlier, since the epochal work of Julius Wellhausen in the 19th century most critical scholars have rejected the notion that Moses played a significant role in the composition of the Pentateuch, preferring some version of what is called the Documentary Hypothesis. In its classical form, this hypothesis recognizes four sources underlying the Pentateuch, represented by the letters J, E, D, and P. The Yahwist (J) was a Judahite historian of the 9th century B.C. who preferred Yahweh (traditionally Jehovah) as the name for God and who had a special interest in the tribe of Judah and sites located in Judahite territory. The Elohist (E), a historian from the northern kingdom of Israel in the 8th century B.C., preferred to speak of God as Elohim, and was interested particularly in northern Israelite sites. D represents the Deuteronomist, who was responsible for much of Deuteronomy, which he wrote around 621 B.C. to support Josiah’s religious reforms, especially the centralization of worship in Jerusalem. The Priestly document (P) was composed during or shortly after the Babylonian exile about 500 B.C. by a member or members of the Priestly class who sought to preserve their own version of the history of Israel. According to the Documentary Hypothesis these sources were compiled and combined in the middle of the 5th century B.C., and introduced as a unit in public worship for the first time by Ezra in Nehemiah 8.¹

Critical scholars isolate these sources of the Pentateuch by paying close attention to a series of literary features: (1) variations in the names and titles ascribed to God (e.g., Elohim and YHWH in Genesis 1–2); (2) duplicate accounts (e.g., Abraham and Isaac passing off their wives as their sisters (Gen. 12:10–20; 20:1–18; 26:6–11); (3) contradictions (e.g., in the conception of God and the ways people relate to him: sometimes he is remote and approachable only through intermediaries and ritual [Leviticus 1–9]; other times he is personally present [Genesis 18]); (4) elements in the text that obviously belong to a later time (e.g., Philistines in Gen. 21:32–34; 26:1–18; they are attested in Canaan for the first time in 12th century B.C.); and (5) differences in style; some texts are pedantic and boring (e.g., the genealogies, Genesis 5, 11); others are lively and colorful (e.g., Genesis 22).

Variations in the documentary theory have existed side by side for more than a century. However, because of advances in literary studies, today Pentateuchal scholarship is confused, with new theories or radical modifications of old proposals appearing yearly. But this does not mean that Moses has been rehabilitated. On the contrary, the new theories push the dates for the origin of this composition ever later. Arguing that Deuteronomy was originally composed as the theological forward to the “deuteronomistic” historical work (Joshua–2 Kings), in a 1967 monograph Martin Noth cut Deuteronomy off from the Pentateuch altogether, creating the Tetrateuch (“four books”).² However, current scholarship tends to go in the reverse direction, recognizing more and more deuteronomistic features in Genesis–Numbers. Given the link between Deuteronomy and Josiah’s reform, some date the earliest sources behind the Pentateuch in the 6th century, during the exile, in response to the disasters that Judah and Jerusalem had experienced. Parts of the law “codes” may contain earlier material, but as a literary document, the entire complex is late, perhaps as late as the 4th century B.C.³

An Evangelical Response
How should evangelicals respond to these critical approaches to the authorship of the Pentateuch? Although the bewildering variety of theories fosters little confidence either in the methodologies or the results of scholarship, some are willing to grant the results of critical scholars’ work, while others continue to insist that Moses wrote virtually the entire Pentateuch as it is. The appropriate answer seems to lie somewhere between these poles. On the one hand, we must account for the textual phenomena that critical scholars observe. On the other hand, we may not deny or reinterpret textual features that expressly associate Moses with the production of these biblical texts. A high view of Scripture demands that we let them say whatever they want to say,⁴ but it also demands that we refuse to make them say more than they want to say.⁵ In searching for the origins of the Pentateuch we must respect those features that point to a Mosaic hand in its composition and those details that cast doubts on its Mosaic authorship. The failure of the author to identify himself adds to the problem, but the Pentateuch’s anonymity accords with ancient Semitic literary custom. While ancient Mesopotamian scribes who copied texts regularly identified themselves by name, authors of literary texts rarely did so.⁶

Concerning the possibility that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, the following facts are clear: (1) Specific texts declare that Moses (or someone under his authority) recorded at least some of Israel’s experiences during the desert wanderings.⁷ (2) Outside the Pentateuch, the Old Testament often associates the written Torah with Moses.⁸ (3) The New Testament expressly links the written Torah with Moses.⁹ (4) Linguistic archaisms occur, especially in the embedded poems and in features like the use of the pronoun hû’, “he,” for both genders.¹⁰ (5) The narratives of the Torah reflect a thorough acquaintance with Egypt, pointing to an author well-acquainted with Egypt: (a) Egyptian loanwords occur more frequently than elsewhere in the Old Testament; (b) the name Moses derives from an Egyptian provenance;¹¹ (c) the general viewpoint of the narrative and specific geographic details reflect a context foreign to Canaan;¹² (d) the seasons are Egyptian, and the flora and fauna are Egyptian and Sinaitic. Whether we date Moses in the late 15th or the early 13th century B.C., features like this point to an early date of composition, and increase the likelihood that Moses wrote much of the Pentateuch himself. Given the recent invention of a 22-letter alphabet, and Moses’ upbringing in an Egyptian court, his own literary qualifications should not be prematurely dismissed.

The Composition of Deuteronomy

Recognizing that Moses could have written the Pentateuch, what evidence does the Pentateuch offer regarding his role in its production? Since Deuteronomy provides more internal evidence for its composition than any other book in the Old Testament, we will begin exploring the issue here.¹³ In the first instance, this book exhibits features that suggest a date much earlier than critical scholars grant: (1) the archaic use of hû’, “he,” occurs in Deuteronomy, as elsewhere in the Pentateuch; (2) the prose style of preaching, which antedates the poetic form of prophets like Hosea and Amos; (3) the names of the earlier inhabitants of the region (Anakim, Rephaim, Emim, and Zamzummim), which probably date to a time when these names struck fear in Israelites’ hearts; (4) the anecdotal reference to Og’s huge bed of iron in Deut 3:11, suggests awareness of Late Bronze Age cultural realities; (5) the treaty form underlying the structure of Deuteronomy, which is linked most closely to 2nd millennium B.C. Hittite (rather than Neo-Assyrian) treaty forms.¹⁴ In addition to these features suggesting an early date, the narrator expressly credits Moses with writing “this Torah” and handing it to the priests (31:9), with writing “the words of this Torah in a ‘book’ to the very end” (31:24), and with writing down “this song” (ch. 32) the same day he taught it to the people (31:22).

These texts suggest that Moses not only uttered the speeches and poems that make up the overwhelming bulk of Deuteronomy, but also that he personally committed them to writing. However, this does not mean that Moses wrote the book as we have it. In the first instance, the references to Moses in the third person outside the addresses distinguish him from the narrator.¹⁵ Second, the book contains a series of features best interpreted as post-mosaica. That the speeches are located “across the Jordan in the wilderness in the Arabah opposite Suph” shows the narrator wrote from inside the land of Canaan. Expressions like “unto this day” (2:22; 3:14; 10:8; cf. 34:10) suggest significant chronological distance between the events described and the composition of these comments. Furthermore, the use of the past tense in parenthetical historical notes in the first speech (2:10–12; 2:20–23; 3:9; 3:11; 3:13b–14) and especially in 2:12, “just as Israel did to the land of their possession that YHWH gave them,” locate these notes long after the speeches in which they are embedded. Third, the account of Moses’ death points to a date (a) after the event, (b) after the crossing of the Jordan (32:48–52; 34:1–12), and (c) after the settlement of the tribes in their allotted territories, including the Danite migration to the north (34:1). Specifically 34:10 notes that since Moses’ passing there has been no prophet like him whom YHWH knew face to face (34:10). Obviously the narrator was aware of Moses’ prediction concerning the prophetic institution in 18:15–22, and knew at least a few prophetic figures with whom Moses could be compared. Fourth, although we use linguistic a r g u m e n t s cautiously, based on their morphology, vocabulary, and syntax, the Song of YHWH (chapter 32) and the Blessing of Moses (chapter 33) are generally recognized as among the oldest literary pieces in the Old Testament. By contrast, the language of Moses’ speeches seems to have been updated to Judaean/Jerusalem dialect Hebrew as represented by the 8th–6th century B.C. prophets.¹⁶

Although critical scholars generally regard Deuteronomy as pseudepigraphic (the speeches were supposedly written in the 7th–6th centuries and fictitiously attributed to Moses to invest them with authority and gravitas), there is no reason to doubt that Moses personally wrote down the speeches and songs he delivered on the Plains of Moab. At some point they were arranged to reflect ancient treaty/covenant form, transcribed on a single scroll, framed with a narrative introduction (1:1–5) and conclusion (34:1–12), and linked with narrative comments at the boundaries of the addresses and songs. We can only speculate when this might have happened, but with these literary acts the Torah of Moses became the book of Deuteronomy. This was the document that David commended to Solomon (1 Kgs. 2:3–4), that Josiah’s men discovered in the temple in 621 B.C., and that Ezra read to all the people in Jerusalem in ca. 444 B.C. (Neh. 8:1–8). Whoever composed this literary masterpiece, he was a true prophet like Moses (cf. 18:15),¹⁷ raised up by God, inspired by his Spirit, and faithful to the message and passion of his predecessor.

The Composition of the Rest of the Pentateuch——-

In contrast to the book of Deuteronomy, internal evidence for the composition of Genesis–Exodus is more difficult to find. In Genesis the tôlĕdôt formula, “These are the
generations of,” offers the most promise. Of the eleven occurrences of the formula,¹⁸ Genesis 5:1 is unique: “This is the ‘book’ of the generations of Adam.” The reference to a written document (sēper) suggests that what follows comes from a preexistent text. If that is true of 5:1–6:8, it probably also applies to the material introduced by the rest.¹⁹ While Genesis offers no clues concerning the author of these “sources” or the editors who collected them and shaped them into the present text, some have proposed that during the Israelites’ journey from Egypt to the Plains of Moab, Moses assigned the Levites custody of the ancestral traditions and that they produced the first written records.²⁰

The situation changes slightly in Exodus–Numbers. Unlike Genesis, these books do not recount events from the distant past, but YHWH’s great acts of salvation in the present. The only occurrence of the tôlĕdôt formula (Num. 3:1) links Moses’ and Aaron’s generation to the generations in Genesis and suggests that the system of record-keeping for the present generation was applied retrospectively to the ancestral traditions. While the hand responsible for this text is not identified, elsewhere the narrator notes that Moses acted as a scribe, memorializing in writing the victory over the Amalekites (Exod. 17:14) and keeping a record of the Israelites’ travels from Egypt to Sinai and then on to the Plains of Moab (Num. 33:1–49; see esp. v. 2). The registrations of Israel’s fighting forces in Numbers 2–3 and 26 and the booty list after the battle with Midian in 31:32–54 look like they are based on written records,²¹ but the text does not say so.

These observations concern the narratives of Exodus–Numbers, but what about the stipulations of the covenant at Sinai, which are presented in direct divine speech?
The divine origin and authorship of the Decalogue is repeatedly affirmed; both the original (Exod. 31:18; cf. 24:12) and the replacement copies (34:1, Deut. 10:1–5) were written by YHWH’s own fingers.²² Whereas YHWH delivered the terms of the Decalogue directly to the people, the narrator presents the remainder of the Sinai revelation as divine speech to Moses on top of Mount Sinai (Exod. 20:21–22; 24:18–25:1) or in the Tent of Meeting (e.g. Lev. 1:1–2; etc.). Exodus 24:3–8 notes that in the course of the ratification of the covenant, after Moses had “recounted” (sippēr) all the “words of YHWH” (presumably the Decalogue; v. 3) and the “judgments” (presumably the Book of the Covenant, viz., Exod. 21:1–23:19), he wrote down all the “words of YHWH” (v. 4) and he read “the Book of the Covenant” before the people. Both the verb “to read” (qārā’) and the noun “book” (sēper) presuppose a written record of this revelation. This is the last we hear of Moses’ writing activity. How then was the rest of the divine revelation committed to writing? Since that revelation occurred in the context of private audiences with God, either he transcribed the revelation himself or he dictated it to Levitical scribes when he returned to the camp. In either case, the written product would bear the stamp of Moses’ authority.

Even though Moses was engaged in writing specific documents, and even though his presence dominates the narratives, it is unlikely he authored the Pentateuch as we
have it. First, unlike segments of the books of Ezra (e.g., Ezra 7:27–9:15) and Daniel (chs. 7–9), and the entire book of Ezekiel, which are cast as first person memoirs, in the Pentateuchal narratives not even Moses’ intimate conversations with YHWH suggest an autobiographical genre; they always speak of him in the third person. Second, although the narratives highlight Moses’ virtues, particularly his self-sacrificing commitment to his people and the divine agenda (Exod. 32–34), unlike extra-biblical accounts of and by great political leaders, which celebrate their flawless character and superhuman accomplishments, these narratives are remarkably frank in recounting Moses’ faults (Exod. 3–4; Num. 20:1–13). When the narrator comments explicitly on his character, he characterizes him not as “the greatest man,” but as “the humblest man in all the earth” (Num. 12:3), which would be patently self-serving and obviously contradictory if it came from Moses’ own pen.

Third, like the book of Deuteronomy, from Genesis through Numbers, the text is punctuated with obvious post-mosaica, which are problematic for a 13th–15th century B.C. date for the book: (1) Anachronistic elements: the references to Dan (Gen. 14:14), Ur of the Chaldaeans,²³ and the Philistines,²⁴ and the comment, “before any kings reigned over the descendants of Israel” (Gen. 36:31). (2) The particular interest in Jerusalem (Genesis 14) and Judah,²⁵ long before Jerusalem was a significant Israelite city or Judah emerged as the dominant tribe. (3) The expansive definition of the Promised Land (Gen. 15:18–21; Exod. 23:31), which contrasts with other statements (Num. 34:1–12; Josh. 13–21; cf. Ezek. 47–48) but accords only with the boundaries of the Davidic empire. If we interpret these texts as predictive, their significance may not have been recognized until the Davidic period.

A Modest Proposal——–

If we read biblical texts as the authors wanted us to read them, we must respect statements in the Old Testament²⁶ and in the New (Luke 24:44; 1 Cor. 9:9) that associate Moses with a written Torah, or that speak of him as a writer.²⁷ However, we should not make them bear more freight than the authors intended. In these contexts “the Torah of Moses”²⁸ refers not to the Pentateuch as a whole, but to Deuteronomy in particular, which explicitly declares that Moses wrote down the instructions he had proclaimed. Admittedly, once Genesis–Numbers was attached to the book of Deuteronomy, the generic designation Torah was applied retrospectively to the entire Pentateuch,²⁹ but this is not the default meaning of the expression. That later references to the “Torah of Moses” never allude to material in Genesis–Numbers reinforces this conclusion. Our exclusion of the earlier Pentateuchal narratives does not diminish the significance of New Testament references to that which Moses wrote, but seeks to interpret the phrase, “Torah of Moses,” more precisely.

As noted earlier, it should not surprise us that the Pentateuch never identifies the final author—the literary and theological product is more important than the composer. However, neither should we be surprised if the Pentateuch bears the stamp of Moses from beginning to end. Recent scholarship has recognized increasingly that the Genesis narratives function as background to the primary event—YHWH’s great acts of salvation and his incorporation of Israel into his covenant with Abraham at Sinai (cf. Gen 17:7)—and that these narratives were written in the light of the Sinai revelation and Moses’ instructions in Deuteronomy (cf. Gen 26:5). But who put all this material together into a coherent narrative and when did he live?³⁰ While critical scholars assume that the Pentateuch’s final form represents Israel’s response to the crisis of exile, it seems more likely that a literary masterpiece like this would have been produced in a more tranquil time. We might compare the production of the Pentateuch with the construction of the tabernacle. We may imagine that just as divinely inspired craftsmen fabricated the pieces that made up this sacred structure (Exod. 35:30–36:8) and then submitted them to Moses for his stamp of approval (39:42–43), so divinely inspired scribes composed the bits and pieces that make up the Pentateuch, and then submitted them to Moses, who stamped them with his imprimatur. When the Israelites crossed the Jordan the Levites carried not only the pieces that belonged to the tabernacle, but also the “files” that had been produced under Moses’ supervision and that would eventually be combined to produce a magnificent and coherent literary and theological whole. Whatever Moses’ involvement in the composition of “sources” used by the author, in this larger document, particularly in Exodus– Deuteronomy, his role is analogous to that of Jesus in the Gospels; he is the principal earthly character, whose actions and speeches drive the story. While allowing for later updating of the language, the narrative frame of Deuteronomy suggests the terminus a quo for the composition of this story was sometime—perhaps generations—after the death of Moses, while David’s organization of temple worship probably represents a possible terminus ad quem. Assuming the final author of the Pentateuch was the same as the author of Deuteronomy, he was indeed a “prophet like Moses,” raised up by YHWH (Deut 18:15), energized by the substance of Moses’ work, and inspired by the Holy Spirit of God. For all these reasons we may look upon the entire Pentateuch as essentially Mosaic in content and authority. These were Israel’s first Scriptures, which priests were to teach, which psalmists praised, to which prophets appealed, by which faithful kings ruled, and righteous citizens lived.

So who wrote the Pentateuch? In answering this question, we need to follow the lead of the Apostles, who were so certain of its Mosaic nature that they can substitute the man’s name for the document itself. In Acts 15:21, James declares, “From ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues” (ESV). Similarly Paul writes of his fellow Jews, “To this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains un-lifted, because only through Christ is it taken away. Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their hearts” (2 Cor. 3:14-15, ESV [italics mine]).³¹ Here Moses is identified with the “old covenant,” by which he presumably means the Pentateuch.³² Whether or not they believed Moses put his own signature to the forms of the text they used in worship, they certainly accepted it as coming with Moses’ full authority. In that sense the first five books of the Bible are rightly called The Five Books of Moses.³³

Daniel I. Block is the Gunther H. Knoedler Professor of Old Testament at Wheaton College. He is the author of numerous works including Judges, Ruth in the New
American Commentary series (Broadman & Holman), How I Love Your Torah, O Lord (Cascade), and The Gospel according to Moses: Theological and Ethical Reflections on the Book of Deuteronomy (Cascade), and he is the editor of Israel: Ancient Kingdom or Late Invention? (Broadman & Holman).

Notes

1Because the book of Joshua recounts the fulfillment of the promises of land to the patriarchs and because of stylistic links to Deuteronomy, Gerhard von Rad added Joshua to the Pentateuchal corpus, creating the Hexateuch (“six books”).
2Martin Noth, The Deuteronomistic History (JSOTSup 15; Sheffield: 1981 [translated from the 1967 edition of the German original]).
3 Norman R. Whybray (The Making of the Pentateuch: A Methodological Study [JSOTSup 53; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987]) insists the Pentateuch is a unitary composition, but it was written in the fourth century, inspired perhaps by the Greek Histories written by Herodotus.
4 Contra critical scholarship. According to Michael Fox, “[T]he willingness not to take a text at face value is the essence of critical scholarship.” Character and Ideology in the Book of Esther (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1991), 148.
5 Contra simplistic versions of fundamentalism.
6 In 1957 W. G. Lambert (“Ancestors, Authors, and Canonicity,” JCS 11 [1957]:1) could cite only two literary texts (the myth of Erra and Ishum and the Babylonian Theodicy) that mention the name of the author, and the situation has scarcely changed since then. The legendary Adapa was apparently recognized as the author of written texts, presumably by dictation from a god, and the Etana Epic is attributed to a certain Lunanna. See W. G. Lambert, “A Catalogue of Texts and Authors,” JCS 16 (1962):
67, 72–76. For discussion of the present awareness of ancient authors, see B. R. Foster, Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature, 2 vols. (Bethesda: CDL, 1993), 19–21.
7 Exod. 17:14; 24:4, 7; 34:27; Num. 33:1, 2; Deut. 31:9, 11.
8 E.g., Josh. 1:7; 8:31, 32; 1 Kgs. 2:3; 2 Kgs. 14:6; Ezra 6:18; Neh. 13:1; Dan. 9:11–13; Mal. 4:4.
9 Matt. 19:8; John 5:46, 47; 7:19; Rom. 10:5.
10The use of what is elsewhere consistently the 3rd person masculine singular pronoun for both genders occurs only in the Pentateuch, but it occurs in every hypothetical source (JEDP). Gary A. Rendsburg (“A New Look at Pentateuchal HW’,” Biblica 63 [1982]: 351–369, suggests that the distinction between genders in pronouns reflects Hittite influence.
11 Cf. Exod. 2:10. Compare the name with Ahmose, Thutmose, and Rameses.
12 E.g., a comment like, “the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan.” (Gen. 33:18). A comment like this is improbable after the Exile, since by then
Israel had been in the land for 900 years.
13 For fuller discussion, see Daniel I. Block, “Recovering the Voice of Moses: The Genesis of Deuteronomy,” in The Gospel according to Moses: Theological and Ethical Reflections on the Book of Deuteronomy (Eugene, OR; Cascade, 2012), 21–51.
14 See most recently Markus Zehnder, “Building on Stone? Deuteronomy and Esarhaddon’s Loyalty Oaths (Part 1): Some Preliminary Observations,” BBR 19 (2009): 341–74; idem, “Building on Stone? Deuteronomy and Esarhaddon’s Loyalty Oaths (Part 2): Some Additional Observations,” BBR 19 (2009): 511–36. Cf. Kenneth A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 283–94.
15 See especially Deut. 1:1–5; 4:41–5:1a; 27:1–11; 31:1–30; 32:44–52.
16 For extra-biblical examples of updating ancient texts see K. A. Kitchen, Ancient Orient and Old Testament (Chicago: InterVarsity, 1966), 142–43.
17Cf. Robert Polzin, Moses and the Deuteronomist: A Literary Study of the Deuteronomistic History [New York: Seabury, 1980], 61.
18 Gen. 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10, 27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1, 9; 37:2.
19 So also Roland K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969), 547–53.
20 Cf. Duane A. Garrett, Rethinking Genesis: The Sources and Authorship of the First Book of the Pentateuch (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991), 208–34.
21 See also Num. 11:26, which speaks of a written (kĕtûbîm) registry of men.
22 It is possible to read Exod. 34:28 as attributing the transcription to Moses.
23 Gen. 11:31; 15:7. The Chaldaeans first appear as an ethnic group in ninth-century B.C. neo-Assyrian documents.
24 Gen. 21:32–34, 26:1, 8, 14–15; Exod. 13:17; 15:14; 23:31. The Philistines first appeared in the eastern Mediterranean at the beginning of the twelfth century.
25Gen. 37:26; 43:1–14; 44:14–34; 46:28; 49:8–12. Judah was neither the firstborn (Reuben) nor the favored son of Jacob (Joseph).
26 See note 8 above.
27 Deut. 31:9, 22; Mark 12:19; Luke 20:28; John 1:45; 5:46.
28 Taking the lead from Greek nomon Mōuseōs, tôrat Mōšeh is commonly mistranslated in English as “the Law of Moses.” “Instruction of Moses” is more accurate.
29As in New Testament references to “the Law and the Prophets [and the Psalms],” Matt. 7:12; 22:40; Luke 16:16; 24:44; Acts 13:15; Rom. 3:21.
30The favorable portrayal of Bethel and Shechem suggests the composition antedated the division of the kingdom in 931 B.C.).
31 Both texts use the Greek verb anaginōskō, which means “to read a text that has been written or inscribed,” usually aloud.
32The statement seems to assume that the covenant made with Abraham (Genesis) and the covenant made with the Israelites at Sinai (Exodus 1–Leviticus)
and renewed on the Plains of Moab (Deuteronomy) are one and the same.
33 I am grateful to my colleague Richard Schultz and my assistants, Carmen Imes and Austin Surls, for their careful helpful responses to earlier drafts of this essay. Nevertheless, any flaws in style or argumentation are my own.

(First published in Areopagus Journal Vol. 12 No. 2 -Who Wrote the Bible?)