Documentary theory holds that the Pentateuch was composed or compiled from several different documents or traditions written by several different authors. It has been argued that these original documents favored different styles and names for God and were therefore written by different authors. One document might favor “Elohim,” while another might favor “YHWH.” These sources are generally considered to be sources J, E, P, and D. However, Genesis only shows traces of J, E, and P. Some have even subdivided the four major sources. However, this theory fails to adequately explain the origin of the Pentateuch. Religious documents from the Ancient Near East were not written in this manner, nor are variations in style and word choice conclusive. Dating the various documents is extremely difficult and far too subjective to prove the documentary theory.1 Spinoza questioned the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch and developed what is called "higher criticism." This is a form of internal analysis2. Spinoza argued that the Pentateuch was compiled from several documents, some of which were mosaics.3 Astruc went further and actually distinguished two sources, one which preferred the divine name "Elohim" and the other preferring “YHWH.”4 Davis refuted this theory based on several factors. First, no other ancient Near Eastern religious documents have been compiled in this way. Isolating sources based on divine names is an extremely trivial practice. Davis points out that the author of Genesis could very well have chosen certain divine names over others at certain times due to theological emphasis rather than the source documents. Second, it is irrational to base document theory on differences in style. As Davis notes...... middle of paper...... says it very well.39 This small change in the formula indicates that humanity was the crowning achievement of creation.BibliographyDavis, John J. Paradise to Prison. Salem: Sheffield Pub Co, 1998. Phillips, Scott. “Genesis: Introduction.” Liberty University. http://bb7.liberty.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_1504533_ (accessed June 28, 2011). Ham, Ken. “What about gap theories and ruin reconstruction?” www.answersingenesis.org. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/gap-ruin-reconstruction-theories (accessed June 29, 2011). Waltke, Bruce K. and Cathi J. Fredricks. Genesis: a commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001. Walton, John H. Old Testament Chronological and Contextual Charts (Zondervan Charts). Ed. revised. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1994.