If scholars are correct that the Pentateuch is a composite work that evolved over time how does that knowledge affect your view of the work's authenticity and religious authority?

Answer 1

If the scholars are correct it totally destroys the authenticity and authority of the work, since much of it is therefore not true as stated.

Answer

In the scriptures itself it is written that "all scripture is inspired by God," meaning that regardless of who wrote it or when, the content was given by God to the writer. For instance, the Pentateuch includes Genesis, and which one of us was there to write it? It's either a total fabrication or it was truly conveyed by God to the author.

Answer

As suggested above, Genesis stands apart within the Pentateuch as a work with which Moses was not personally involved. Nowhere in Genesis is Moses even mentioned, although the work has been attributed to him. Many now understand that Moses was likely the final editor of information which he collected from previous generations. Since writing was in existence for centuries before Abraham, many consider him as a likely source for much of the information.

None of this, in relation to Genesis, contradicts anything in the text itself, since the text is silent on this issue. The case of course is different with the other works, since Moses was a direct participant in much of what occurred.

If the contention that the Pentateuch is a composite work does not contradict data within the work itself, this contention is valid. However such a claim usually includes ideas which flatly contradict what the work itself states. The data of Archaeology also contradicts the claims made as it tends to support authorship by Moses.

So the claims made by scholars are generally shown to be incorrect when compared to the mass of data supporting authorship by Moses. If the scholars were to be correct it would greatly degrade the value of the work as a reliable source of information.

Answer 2

Acknowledging the composite nature of the Pentateuch does not necessarily diminish its religious authority or authenticity; it simply highlights the complex nature of its composition. Understanding its evolution over time can provide insights into the cultural and theological developments of ancient Israel. Ultimately, its significance and message for believers can remain powerful regardless of its formative history.

Answer 3

The authority of the Pentateuch is not ultimately based on whether it was written by one author or another. It is also useful to consider what Yair Zakovitch, Dean of Humanities at Hebrew University is quoted as saying, "The thing to remember about the Bible is that the events and characters are just vehicles to convey messages. The biblical narrative was written to educate our young nation, not so much to tell us what really happened."

So, The Bible - including the Pentateuch - is meant for religious instruction, not necessarily as an accurate report of everything that really happened, and retains its authority regardless of authorship. Also remember that the basis of religion is faith, and faith does not require proof.

For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/bible/the-pentateuch-explained

Answer 4

Clearly, if the unstated supposition of (at least some) Bible critics was true (that the Pentateuch had no Divine source), its authority would diminish from the level of God's direct words, to that of (at best) wise allegory and poetry with parallels worldwide. While Judaism has always seen the Torah as an intricate tapestry that nonetheless had one Divine source, some modern authors such as Wellhausen (the father of modern Biblical-criticism, 1844-1918) have suggested artificially chopping up the narrative and attributing it to various authors, despite the Torah's explicit statement as to its provenance (Exodus 24:12, Deuteronomy 31:24). This need not concern believers, since his claims have been debunked one by one, as archaeology and other disciplines have demonstrated the integrity of the Torah. No fragments have ever been found that would support his Documentary Hypothesis, which remains nothing more than an arbitrary claim, whose falsehood has been pointed out:
http://www.whoreallywrotethebible.com/excerpts/chapter4-1.php

http://www.pearlmancta.com/BiblicalcriticswrongRShlomoCohen.htm

And see also the wider picture:

http://judaism.answers.com/hebrew/does-archaeology-support-the-hebrew-bible