C. S. Lewis Roundly Mocked the Documentary Hypothesis

C. S. Lewis Roundly Mocked the Documentary Hypothesis October 6, 2019

No one need accept the Documentary Hypothesis, and there are many solid reasons not to:

In the last two decades of Pentateuchal scholarship, the source-critical method has come under unprecedented attack; in many quarters it has been rejected entirely. . . . [various factors] have led scholarship to the brink of abandoning the four sources, J, E, P and D. (The Tam Institute for Jewish Studies at Emory University: Spring 2009 Calendar of Events)

C. S. Lewis lampooned the theory in his letters:

This bloomer [a geographical error in his Screwtape Letters] has been pointed out several times already. The higher critics will use it to prove that the book was really written 200 years later by five different ‘Hands’ as they appropriately call them! (Letter to Thomas Wilkinson Riddle, 17 May 1944; in The Collected Letters of C. S. Lewis, Vol. II: Books, Broadcasts, and the War, 1931-1949, edited by Walter Hooper, HarperSanFrancisco, 2004, p. 614)

I envy you parts of your obituary. You get in very essential points which I had missed — his scepticism and his way of converting the other person’s mere stammer into great truth. A higher critic would deduce from this either that C. W. [Charles Williams] had never existed or that one or other of us was quite unhistorical. (Letter to Anne Ridler, 3 June 1945, Ibid., pp. 658-659)

I have addressed the Documentary Hypothesis in two articles of mine:

Documentary Theory of Biblical Authorship (JEPD): Dialogue [2-12-04]

Documentary Theory (Pentateuch): Critical Articles [6-21-10]

I also have lampooned it and/or the general skeptical / liberal theological flawed and wrongheaded approach to the Bible at least twice:

Silent Night: A “Progressive” and “Enlightened” Reinterpretation [12-10-04; additionally edited for publication at National Catholic Register: 12-21-17]

A Satire on the Modernist Distortion of Jesus’ Human Nature and Denigration of the Reliability of Holy Scripture [1-11-00]

Bottom line: I reject what I regard to be false premises of the Documentary Hypothesis, as to biblical interpretation.

G. K. Chesterton and Fr. Ronald Knox also agree, as documented in the combox for this paper (below).

***

Unfortunately, Money Trees Do Not Exist: If you have been aided in any way by my work, or think it is valuable and worthwhile, please strongly consider financially supporting it (even $10 / month — a mere 33 cents a day — would be very helpful). I have been a full-time Catholic apologist since Dec. 2001, and have been writing Christian apologetics since 1981 (see my Resume). My work has been proven (by God’s grace alone) to be fruitful, in terms of changing lives (see the tangible evidences from unsolicited “testimonies”). I have to pay my bills like all of you: and have a (homeschooling) wife and three children still at home to provide for, and a mortgage to pay.

My book royalties from three bestsellers in the field (published in 2003-2007) have been decreasing, as has my overall income, making it increasingly difficult to make ends meet.  I provide over 2500 free articles here, for the purpose of your edification and education, and have written 50 books. It’ll literally be a struggle to survive financially until Dec. 2020, when both my wife and I will start receiving Social Security. If you cannot contribute, I ask for your prayers. Thanks! See my information on how to donate (including 100% tax-deductible donations). It’s very simple to contribute to my apostolate via PayPal, if a tax deduction is not needed (my “business name” there is called “Catholic Used Book Service,” from my old bookselling days 17 or so years ago). May God abundantly bless you.

***

Photo credit: stuartpilbrow at Flickr (3-9-09) [Wikimedia CommonsCreative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license]

***

 


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment