On Authorship

In the course of studying and writing my way through more than fourteen different books of the Bible chapter by chapter and verse by verse for our ongoing Saturday series of expository posts, it’s been quite impossible to avoid the subject of authorship. I’ve had to consider that question at the beginning of every series, twelve times alone in our study on the Minor Prophets.

What quickly becomes evident is that unless the author specifically identifies himself in the text, we simply do not know who wrote any given book.

Who Wrote What?

Jewish scholarship and early church traditions assign certain books to certain individuals, but these are mere opinions, some more credible than others. No unattributed book is 100% verifiable. That does not stop the experts speculating, of course.

This post by Jeffrey Kranz lists 35 of the most likely writers of scripture, leaving the authorship of 31 books subject to debate. More conservatively, I would estimate that the authorship of perhaps 17 NT books is beyond any orthodox dispute. A few more OT books are in the same boat, especially those written in the first person (think Nehemiah, for example).

That still leaves the majority of Bible authors unnamed and unknown, and even that smaller number of “sure things” assumes the reader has a high view of scripture.

High Views and Low Views

Views about scripture exist on a spectrum. Holding the highest view (as I and many others do) means that if the text says so-and-so wrote it, we take the position that he was not lying about it, either from ‘good’ motives (the mythical ‘pious fraud’) or bad (the flat-out bamboozler). We may still have some difficulty identifying which of several possible James-es wrote the book of James, but we take it on faith (and a fair bit of common sense) that a man named James really did write it.

The lowest of low views takes the writer’s dishonesty for granted unless the text itself offers incontrovertible evidence to back his authorship claim, an absurd standard of proof that would call into question not just who really wrote the books of the Bible but the authenticity of nearly every literary work in the history of humanity.

Most views on authorship fall somewhere between these extremes. At a result, we see endless debates about attribution. To say that no two scholars agree completely concerning authorship from Genesis to Revelation may not exaggerate the case.

The Pentateuch Considered

For example, here’s a single paragraph from a Wikipedia article on Bible criticism:

“At the end of the 17th century, only a few Bible scholars doubted that Moses wrote the Torah (also known as the Pentateuch, traditionally called the ‘Five Books of Moses’), such as Thomas Hobbes, Isaac La Peyrère and Baruch Spinoza, but in the late 18th century some scholars such as Jean Astruc (1753) began to systematically question his authorship. By the end of the 19th century, some such as Julius Wellhausen and Abraham Kuenen went as far as to claim that as a whole the work was of many more authors over many centuries from 1000 BC (the time of David) to 500 BC (the time of Ezra).”

I haven’t read the whole article, but if it’s anything like most Wikipedia entries, its purpose is primarily documenting the various scholarly opinions about a particular subject area of scripture — in this case the Mosaic authorship of the first five books of the OT — rather than staging an obvious attack on the Bible by editorializing about its truth or falsehood. However, most Wikipedia authors skew materialist in their views, and that predisposition leaks out between the lines from time to time, especially in their choice of sources to quote, which are almost invariably secular and hostile to the biblical doctrine of inspiration.

Evolving Consensus

The takeaway from this part of the article at least is that the “respectable consensus” view among scholars on the authorship of the Pentateuch has evolved over time. It is not what it was in the 1600s. One assumption the writers make, if we care to parse it, is that the mere existence of historical debate over Pentateuchal authorship calls into question the reliability of its content. A second is that modern views must necessarily prevail over ancient views, being more “scientific” and intellectually sophisticated. Both these assumptions are false.

Perhaps I might begin to worry about the reliability of the Pentateuch’s content if every one of its five books began with “I, Moses” or similar wording asserting his authorship. Let me assure you they do not. The books of the Torah name no author. The basis for debates over its authorship are nothing more than inference and guesswork. Over time, as Israelite scribes and religious authorities debated possible authorship, the early popular view evolved that God dictated all five books to Moses (presumably word for word, since Genesis recounts events taking place many centuries prior to Moses’ birth). The last book includes the account of Moses’ death, and many early scholars believed God dictated that bit to him as well.

The Dictation Theory

That Mosaic authorship of the entire Torah was based on nothing more than educated opinion did not stop the medieval philosopher Maimonides from opining in his Thirteen Principles of Faith, “I believe with perfect faith that the entire Torah presently in our possession is the one given to Moses.” That’s a confident statement, but it should be immediately apparent to the reader that the sincerity of even the greatest scholar’s beliefs, up to and including his conviction he has “perfect faith”, has no bearing whatsoever on their veracity. Other equally erudite Bible scholars in other times and places have expressed differing opinions on the same question with comparable enthusiasm. No reader can agree simultaneously with all these different views about the Pentateuch. It may even be, notwithstanding their manifest sincerity, that all commentators to date have been in error.

The dictation theory was certainly at the highest end of the faithful-to-fake spectrum, but it’s theological basis is highly questionable. All scripture is God-breathed. If does not follow that all scripture was dictated word-for-word, though some certainly was. Modern believers concede the mechanism of word-for-word dictation of all five books in the Pentateuch is not beyond the realm of possibility, but it’s hardly the most likely way the entire text came to us. There’s no good reason other methods of transmitting or assembling content would not be every bit as reliable as dictation, and a great deal more natural, not to mention collaborative. The Lord loves to include his servants in his work whenever possible, preferably with their willing cooperation.

Other ‘High View’ Possibilities

These methods include oral traditions and written sources, inspired or otherwise, along with the personal witness of Moses concerning the Exodus, whether penned by Moses himself or by others who recalled his testimony. Provided the Holy Spirit of God editorially supervised the process, as most orthodox Christians believe, no rational person should have a problem with this methodology.

Beyond question, Moses received much of the legal and instructional content of the Pentateuch via something close to dictation; phrases like “The Lord spoke to Moses, saying” are so common in Leviticus as to be almost beyond accurately numbering. But personal preference apart, there is no compelling reason to believe Moses received most of the historical material he preserved in anything like the same way. There was no need for him to do so, and the Holy Spirit’s supervision of his work reliably precluded factual error and determined the spiritual emphasis of the histories Moses chose to include. So we believe.

That’s still a high view, but it’s not the early view.

Multiple Authorship and Editing

Nor is it necessary for a high view of scripture to maintain that the entire Pentateuch is the work of a single author. It may be, or it may not. With respect to the histories prior to the Exodus, I suspect Moses was more editor than author.

Human beings have always told stories about the past, and those who could write documented them for posterity. With the passage of sufficient time some details would invariably get blurry, but rarely so badly out of focus as to necessitate wholesale replacement by word-for-word Divine dictation. Moreover, quite early on in Israel’s history a whole caste of scribes began to preserve both history and revelation according to strict rules and procedures, with almost fanatical diligence. These records simply needed editing by someone who knew the truth, and we believe the Holy Spirit was at work in both Moses and numerous other writers throughout the process by which our Bibles came to be.

A process something like this would explain the wildly different human personalities that come through in the various books of scripture. There is one overriding theme — Christ — that points to a single editor, but no single, identifiable, consistent voice.

Name That Writer

So then, who wrote the Pentateuch, assuming a scenario like what I have just described? Would we choose from the various historians and witnesses who provided invaluable material for Genesis, their words redacted here and supplemented there? Would it be Moses, who presumably wrote Israel’s wilderness travelogue and chose much of the final content and word order? Should we credit the unnamed contributor — probably Joshua — who added the account of Moses’ death and burial in Deuteronomy 34? (Hmm. I wonder if he did any other editing.) And here’s a mind-blower: Where did the Balaam content come from in Numbers 22 through 24, especially the preserved prophecies? The donkey spoke, but I’m pretty sure she didn’t wield a pen.

Perhaps we should simply recognize that while some books of scripture had a single, identifiable author, many others were effectively collaborative works, intentionally or otherwise. That’s certainly the way I see the Bible histories that cover centuries. Apart from Divine dictation, I cannot conceive any other way to explain them.

Is Speculating Even Necessary?

What’s more, knowing the name of an author doesn’t help solidify the doctrine of inspiration in the slightest. I will go to my grave believing Hebrews inspired without doing much more than taking a wild stab at its author’s identity. The book’s glorious content authenticates it, even if it’s anonymous in the eyes of most of today’s readers. Why do we feel the need to say more than scripture says about itself?

We may still hold a high view of scripture — the highest, even — without anchoring ourselves to unprovable concepts like word-for-word dictation theory and without naming names where the Bible doesn’t.

Still, “God dictated it” certainly simplifies things, and probably explains why the dictation theory dominated among theologians into the 17th century.