Elohist
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Elohist (E) is one of the sources of the Torah postulated by the documentary hypothesis.
- This article describes the opinion of the documentary hypothesis without taking into account alternative opinions; see the documentary hypothesis article for details on the disputes to this theory.
Contents |
[edit] Nature of the Elohist text
In this source God's name is always presented as Elohim (Hebrew for God, or Power) until the revelation of God's name to Moses, after which God is referred to as YHWH. E treats God as a human-like figure, capable of regret, and appearing in person at events.
E has a particular fascination for traditions concerning biblical Israel and its heroes such as Joshua and Ephraim (a son of Joseph, and the tribe to which Israel's king belonged). E supports Israel against Judah, in the case of Shechem claiming that it was purchased rather than won via a massacre.
E supports the Levitical priests of Shiloh (who were not descended from Aaron), who were not given authority in Israel, both against the new priesthood set up in Israel, and against the priesthood of Judah (who were descended from Aaron). E tries to show Aaron and his supporters in a bad light, for example via the story of the golden calf (which also happened to be the symbol of the new version of the religion set up in Israel).
[edit] Contrasted with the Jahwist
The Elohist's story appears to begin after Abram has begun migration, with the wife vs. sister story that is also present in the Jahwist tale. The first major story is that of the sacrifice of Isaac. In the Elohist work, Isaac does not ever appear again after this story, and the story appears to imply that Isaac was sacrificed. However, the Jahwist does not mention this tale, although the Jahwist mentions Isaac extensively, and thus when the redactor combined their writings, Isaac's continued presence would need to be explained. Text attributed to the redactor presents a literal scape-goat, allowing Isaac to live, but nevertheless, an early tradition recorded in the midrash still preserves a version of the tale in which Isaac was killed. Understandably, the next tale in the Elohist is of other children for Abram.
While the Yahwist presented an anthropomorphic God who could walk through the Garden of Eden looking for Adam and Eve, the Elohist frequently involves angels. For example, it is the Elohist version of the tale of Jacob's ladder in which there is a ladder of angels with God at the top, leading to Jacob later dedicating the place as Beth-El (House of God), whereas in the Jahwist tale, it is a simple dream in which God is simply above the location, without the ladder or angels. Likewise, the Elohist describes Jacob actually wrestling with God, and the tale of Balaam and his divinely talking donkey, although this is often considered a tale that was accidentally added to the manuscript, as it appears quite unconnected to the rest of the work.
Further into the text, the Elohist exhibits a noticeably positive attitude to the main northern tribes - those of Joseph. Unlike the Jahwist, the Elohist contains stories of the political position of the Joseph tribes -the birth of Benjamin, and pre-eminence of Ephraim. Also, whereas the Jahwist portrays Joseph as the victim of attempted rape, in the tale of Potiphar's wife, which would have been mildly humiliating to the Joseph tribes, the Elohist instead portrays Joseph as an interpreter of dreams - as one who can understand God. This pre-occupation with northern concerns extends to the Elohist explaining the northern cultic object known as the Nehustan.
Contrasting with this is the profoundly negative attitude the Elohist exhibits toward Aaron and his family. It is the Elohist source that contains the tale of the Golden Calf, in which Aaron is implicitly condemned for allowing heresy, and later the Israelites suffer by being banned from Canaan in consequence, explicitly identified as being because of the calf which Aaron made [emphasis added]. It is the Elohist source that also contains the story of Snow-white Miriam that superficially appears to be a condemnation of racism, but is also an attack on Aaron via Miriam his sister, for the opinions they share.
With regard to leaving Egypt, the Elohist presents a more elaborate tale than the Jahwist. Firstly, the Elohist version expands on the supposed cruelty of the Egyptians by presenting them as asking for difficult work such as bricks without straw. And secondly, whereas in the Jahwist version of the Plagues of Egypt involves Moses only acting as an intercessor to ask God to stop each plague that God has wrought, the Elohist instead presents Moses as threatening the Pharaoh, and then bringing the plague down on the Egyptians himself. To the Elohist, the threat of the passover is enough to cause the Egyptians to chase the Israelites out, whereas the Jahwist presents the Egyptians as reluctantly giving in, and then changing their mind, and chasing after them to bring them back.
Notably, where the Jahwist simply presents its version of the Ten Commandments as the law given by God at Sinai, the Elohist instead presents the more extensive Covenant Code. The Elohist then goes on to deal with how such an extensive code can be used in practise, by using a relative of Moses, Jethro, as a mouthpiece to explain the reason for the appointment of judges. Just to enforce the code further, the Elohist describes the process of the law code being read out to the people.
[edit] Origin of the Elohist text
E is theorized to have been composed by collecting together the various stories and traditions concerning biblical Israel and its associated tribes (Dan, Napthali, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulon, Ephraim, Manesseh, Benjamin), and the Levites, and weaving them into a single text. In particular it records the importance of Ephraim, which was the tribe from which the King of Israel happened to derive.
Some independent source texts thought to have been embedded within the text include:
- The Covenant Code, a legal text used in Exodus at Chapters 21 - 23
E is thought to derive from amongst the Shiloh priesthood, and to reflect their polemic opinion in the text. E denigrates the priesthood of Aaron, having a reduced focus on Aaron's importance (the rival priesthood in Jerusalem being Aaronids), and sometimes indirectly (since Aaron was too much of a past hero to attack directly) attacking Aaron (e.g. via the stories of the Golden Calf, and the story of Aaron's criticism of Moses' wife). E also denigrates the rival non-Levite priesthood created by the King of Israel, for example by one of its version of the ten commandments, which condemns Golden and Silver statues (condemning the molten gold calves of the non-Levite priesthood and the plated gold Cherubim of the Aaronid priesthood).
E explains the importance of the symbols controlled by the Shiloh priesthood such as the Nehustan and the religious importance of Shiloh itself (associated with the Tent of Meeting, which tradition stated had rested there until the Temple was built at Jerusalem). E never mentions the Temple or the Ark associated with the Aaronid priesthood.
