Jahwist

The term Yahwist (abbreviated J ) refers to the historical-critical biblical scholarship one of the suspected source writings, with edition scientific method is deducible in the five books of Moses, the Pentateuch called. The theory of the " Yahwist " - he got this name because its associated text passages use the Jahwenamen for God (Ex 3,15 EU) before the disclosure of which - originated with the historical-critical study of the Bible in the 18th century, loses but since the mid-20th century, more and more approval in the Old Testament research.

• 5.1 Classical designs
• 5.2 Recent Literature

History of Research

With the Enlightenment began in Europe, the historical-critical study of the Bible. Since the 18th century the Bible was no longer rezipiert only in its capacity as the revealed word of God, but also perceived in shape as historically developed book and studied. Historical criticism conceded from the 18th century on the force for centuries notion that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch.

The first mark the observations of the Hildesheim pastor Henning Bernward Witter ( 1683-1715 ). He discovered in the first three chapters of Genesis a double tradition. The creation of the world twice in succession, each with a different focus and each different names for God told here (once in Gen 1:1-2:4 a, using the name of God, Elohim and a second time in Genesis 2:4 b -3, 24 using the God's name Yahweh). Also found in Genesis further double and multiple traditions; about the story of the Flood (Gen 6-8), the story of the threat to the ancestress ( Gen 12, 20 and 26) or the formation of the sanctuary at Bethel ( Gen 12, 28 and 35). The observations Witters have long been ignored or recognized.

Only similar insights of the Frenchman Jean Astruc, which the physician to the French King Louis XV. was met with critical research on the Old Testament. He discovered in the multiple traditions within the Pentateuch (especially Genesis) two continuous and two other shorter, formerly independent source documents that underpin the current text based. This source writings were of Moses in four columns ( Astruc calls these sources A, B, C and D) have been compiled. A later, nachmosaischer editor worked the four sources into one another.

Older documentary hypothesis

In Germany Johann Gottfried Eichhorn extended the thesis Astruc on the text complex gene 1 - from Ex 2 and separated the sources into a pre-Mosaic Elohist (named after the use of the god title "Elohim" ) and a post-Mosaic Jehowist (named after the use of God's name "Yahweh "). The spelling " Jehowist " corresponds to the former reading of the divine name "Yahweh", which was erroneously read into the 19th century as " Lord Jehovah ." Karl David Ilgen built the thesis Eichhorn from further when he still took on a second Elohist and therefore different three sources. History research this theory was under the name Older documentary hypothesis (also: source hypothesis ) is known.

Fragments hypothesis

In the 19th century counter- theories that attempted to reconstruct the origin of the Pentateuch otherwise developed. The so-called fragments hypothesis went by numerous, formerly self- narration wreaths of ( individual stories to each various topics such as Abraham, creation, flood, and other ), which have only worked successively in an overall narrative. Representatives of this hypothesis were the English Pastor Alexander Geddes and the German Johann Severin father.

Complement hypothesis

Whose main representative Wilhelm Martin Leberecht de Wette 's: As a kind of mixture of documents and fragments hypothesis, the supplement hypothesis ( base font hypothesis also ) developed. After its reconstruction, the Genesis has evolved from a single ( Elohist ) the document or source file in which a jehowistischer Editor einarbeitete gradually individual, is outstanding narrative wreaths.

Recent documentary hypothesis

For many years determinative was the so-called recent documentary hypothesis, which was developed in the late 19th century by the Old Testament scholars Karl Heinrich Graf, Abraham Kuenen and especially Julius Wellhausen.

Wellhausen differed for the entire Pentateuch four sources:

• The Jahwequelle, so the Yahwist ( J ) to 950 BC from the period AD
• The Elohimquelle (E ) to 800 BC from the period AD
• The Priestly Code (P), from the exile around 550 BC
• The ( original ) Deuteronomy (D), dating from the 7th century BC

In the Yahwist source font ( J) Editor ( RJE ) worked from the time immediately after the fall of the northern kingdom of Israel in 722 BC, the Elohist source (E ), and so created the " Jehowistische historical work " (JE). This was in turn incorporated into the postexilic period in the Priestly source.

Martin Noth put themselves Wellhausen's thesis at the beginning of the 20th century further and helped it through its " tradition -historical studies" of long years of implementation and wide reception in the Old Testament research. After Noth's view of the Yahwist source font was built around 950 BC in circles around the Jerusalem court. It tells the story of Israel from the creation of the world up to the reconnaissance of the promised land ( in the books of Genesis through Numbers ).

Theological profile and style characteristics

The use of God's name "Yahweh" is used primarily in the biblical prehistory (Gen 1-11) as a characteristic for the demarcation of the Yahwist texts. In another Pentateuch, the exclusion of the relevant texts is difficult. They are usually characterized by a narrative style, while the texts of the priestly writings are more dominated by a " report style ". In terms of content for the Yahwist especially the motif of blessing and promise of land to Israel important, as is the relation of blessing to the other nations, for Israel to be a blessing to themselves.

Since there is no consensus on the scope and the dating of those texts are in current research that have been classically assigned to the Yahwist, can here only the classical characterization of the Yahwist, as it has worked out the recent documentary hypothesis, are presented.

Recent research - Farewell to the Yahwist

Since the mid- seventies of the 20th century, the existence of a Yahwist source font is increasingly disputed ( first described by Hans Heinrich Schmid). Therefore, J can not be a source of recent research considers that, since it at a closer look, the essential characteristics of a source is missing.

So the Yahwist does have a beginning in the story of creation, but no discernible end. It was found that the Yahwist significant to find in the books of Genesis and Exodus (see table below), barely in the book of Numbers and not at all in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. A putative source J would therefore have ended with the reconnaissance of the country and the Balaam story, which would not really be clear as the end of a narrative. In addition, in recent research, the patriarchal narratives on the one hand and the Exodus narrative, on the other hand, as two independent, in parts even contradictory origin stories of Israel viewed. The literary bridge between Genesis and Exodus has created but only the author of the Priestly source, in the opinion of many researchers. In addition, the Yahwist lacking a clearly perceptible through ongoing narrative thread, a uniform basic theological direction and common vocabulary. For these reasons, met J is not strictly the criteria that has worked out the recent research for the detection of a source text.

Therefore, the current research is mostly made only from a real source within the Pentateuch, the Priestly source. But the priests have a font to the acquisition of land ranging from the creation of the world, continuous narrative thread. It is characterized by a clearly recognizable theological line and recurrent formulations.

All other texts - even those that were previously assigned to the Yahwist - are now expected generally to older or younger editors or considered older individual traditions that tell not the whole course of history. Instead of a Yahwist speaks the majority of recent exegetical designs - such as Reinhard Gregor Kratz, Erhard Blum, Eckart Otto, Erich Zenger, Jan Christian Gertz, Konrad Schmid, Markus Witte - therefore easy of pre- or non- Priestly texts.

Only a small part of the Old Testament research currently holds firmly to the Yahwist thesis. Firstly, the Munich Old Testament scholar Christoph Levin, who holds the Yahwist for a ( antideuteronomisch embossed ) Editorial layer, the various narrative wreaths (Creation, Abraham, Balaam, and more ) collects, works them and so a unified narrative of Genesis 1 - Num 24, " Yahwistic historical work " done.

John van Seters takes a different approach and looks at the Yahwist a Deuteronomic embossed exilic historian (similar to the Greek historians Herodotus Hesiod or ), is putting together motifs from the surrounding narratives and so his history of Israel writes. The Priestly document is for Van Seters, however, an editorial layer.

Central J- texts

One of the key texts that have been classically assigned to the Yahwist, include: