[Requiem]

I am rereading Richard Elliott Friedman's excellent book Who Wrote the Bible (1997 edition). Friedman convincingly argues that the Five Books of Moses were "composed by combining four different source documents into one continuous history". He identifies the documents by alphabetic symbols. The document linked with the divine name Yahweh was called J. The second document referring to deity as Elohim was E; the third document (legal sections dealing with Priests) was called P. The source only found in Deuteronomy is D.

Friedman repeatedly points out that "the challenge that this investigation presents is not to the belief in the revealed or inspired character of the Bible, but to traditions about which humans actually wrote it on the parchment" (p. 244). There are still unanswered questions (e.g. the authors of J and E); however, Friedman's analysis is thorough and compelling. Based on the historical evidence, there is little doubt the Pentateuch was written by multiple authors.

The dilemma posed by this book is predictable. Friedman contradicts traditional Mormon Doctrine which implies the Pentateuch was found intact on brass plates (1 Nephi 5:10-14). I found this quote in a Maxwell Institute article written in 1995 by Sidney Sperry:

"But the Book of Mormon affirms the truth of the old Hebrew tradition that Moses wrote the first five books of the Old Testament, or the Pentateuch as we call it (1 Nephi 5:11; 2 Nephi 2:15–19; 3:4–10; Moses 1:40–41). The Nephite record (together with the book of Moses) shatters—for Latter-day Saints at least—current "critical" views regarding the date, authorship, and composition of the Pentateuch. Even the book of Deuteronomy, which many critics especially contend was written in the days of Josiah (ca. 621 BC), is of Mosaic origin, according to the Book of Mormon (see 1 Nephi 22:20–21; 3 Nephi 20:23; cf. Deuteronomy 18:15, 18–19)."

In the spirit of this forum, which I believe is intended for scholarly discussion, I am interested in your thoughts regarding this apparent contradiction between Mormon Doctrine and authentic scholarly findings supported by an abundance of empirical evidence. Lest you tend to favor a "shoot the messenger" approach, allow me to conclude with Friedman's closing statement:

"For those who hold the Bible as sacred, it can mean new possibilities of interpretation; and it can mean a new awe before the great chain of events, persons, and centuries that came together so intricately to produce an incomparable book of teachings. And for all of us who live in this civilization that the Bible played so central a part in shaping, it can be a channel to put us more in touch with people and forces that affected our world. The question, after all, is not only who wrote the Bible, but who reads it."