5경인가 6경인가

Abstract

The first five books of the Old Testaments (Gen., Ex., Lev., Num., and Deut.) were called Pentateuch since their canonization about 400 B.C. From jewish tradition Pentateuch was regarded as inspired Scripture and always retained a higher degree of authority and prestige than the rest of the O.T. and the samaritan community adopted only Pentateuch as its Bible, not the Prophets. The Pentateuch as a unit has been regarded different from the other writing, even from the book of Joshua. Many modern scholars, however, are accustomed to speak of the first six books of the Bible together as the Hexateuch, and to treat the Book of Joshua as a Part of the Pentateuch documents J.E.D. and P. In 1938, v. Rad also published his essay "Das for geschichitliche Problem des Hexateuch" and explained the reason why he proclaimed Hexateuch instead of Pentateuch. He said that the major emphasis of J and E since Gen 12, had been that Israel would one day inherit the Promised Land, and without an account and E would be a torso. This v. Rad's position had been supported from the conventional literary criticism. In the literary criticism, the first half of the book is customarily assigned almost entirely to J, E and D, with P confined to relatively few editorial additions, but almost of all the latter half of the book is assigned to the postexilic P document. Eissfeldt and Wellhausen belong to this literary criticism group. In recent years decidedly different approach to the problem has arisen. Martin Noth published his book "Das Buch Josua" and denied that Joshua contains any of the Pentateuch sources except for D. He reads the redaction of deuteronomic bistorian in Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, and calls those books as the books of deuteronomic history (dtr.) because the author was dominated by the view point and the style of D code. To answer the question, "Pentateuch or Hexateuch?" this thesis is to analyse the book of Joshua and tell if the Pentateuch source will be continued in Joshua or not. In Josh. 1-12, the basic material consisted of a series of etiological tales and a few hero tales. These had no original connection with one another, nor for the most part with Joshua, who was a tribal hero of Ephraim until magnified into the leader of all Israel. These tales were introduced about 900 B.C. into the continuous narrative which now comprises the bulk of chs. 2-11. Joshua became the hero of the whole conquest history in the process. In this narratives, there is no connection with J and E. It was rather rmbodied by the Deuteronomic historian. He succeeded the collector's work (Noth's Sammler) and supplied with introduction and conclusion with his typical style. Chs. 13-21 were not in the original Deuteronomic book. So to speak, the balk of chs. 13-21 consists of tribal boundary and city lists, and these two lists were adapted by deuteronomic historian some time after the seventh century to provide a coherent survey of the tribal holdings. There is no P documents in these chapters, the contribution of the P element being reduced, as in chs. 1-12 to a very few editorial additions. In conclusion, we can be certain that there is no Pentateuch sources in Joshua. We have no motiv to call the first six books Hexateuch as a unit. The Pentateuch tells the salvation history before the Settlement of Israel tribes in Palestine, in the meanwhile, deuteronomic history tells us the history after the settlement.