Two Complementary Traditions

In the Old Testament, there are several intertwined narratives: Deuteronomic, Priestly, Yahwistic and Elohistic. I need only mention the last two right now, as they impact Genesis, Exodus, and Numbers; the others will come up later.

The Yahwistic tradition is earlier than the Elohistic tradition, written in the southern kingdom of Judah sometime around the 10th century BC. When we say "written in the 10th century BC," we do not mean "created in the 10th century BC." We mean that this is the point at which the author pens the oral traditions. [And one should note that the sequence of these histories are more firmly established than their position on the timeline.] It's called "the Yahwistic tradition" because of the preference the author shows for the divine name Yahweh, the peculiarly Israelite personal name for God. This is the larger of the two traditions, and begins with the Exodus, then expands to include the Sinai covenant and conquest of Canaan. The moving backwards, the author gathers stories of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob -- around a common theme of the promise made to Abraham. Finally, the primeval, prehistory stories are added.

The Elohistic tradition covers the same span of time; however, it wasn't written down until about a century later in the northern kingdom of Israel. It's called "the Elohistic tradition" because of the author's preference for the divine name Elohim (the common Semitic name for God). This history is not as broad in scope or content, which may mean that it is only partially preserved. It appears to be based on the Yahwistic account, with which the author may have been familiar, given it being an older account.

The two traditions were combined by Judean authors soon after the fall of the northern kingdom in 722/721 BC. They naturally gave preference to their southern (Yahwistic) account, but interestingly, the preserved parts are often counterpoints rather than confirmations. The authors were doubtlessly aware of the differences of the two traditions, yet they did not eradicate one in favor of uniformity. Apparently they were able to do what many modern Christians and secular "thinkers" are not able to do today -- find them complementary, rather than contradictory.

By the way, much of this information came from that textbook that I mentioned. It's People of the Covenant: An Introduction to the Old Testament, by Flanders, Crapps, and Smith. Mine is the 2nd edition. The book now has a slightly revised title, People of the Covenant: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, and in its 4th edition. Y'all know me -- I now have a 4th edition ordered; I want to be sure what I'm sharing represents the best research and conclusions.