What do you think?
Rate this book
The Bible with Sources Revealed
For centuries, biblical scholars have worked on discovering how the Bible came to be. The consensus that emerged from experts of various traditions was the Documentary the idea that ancient writers produced documents of poetry, prose, and law over many hundreds of years, which editors then used as sources to fashion the books of the Bible that people have read for the last two thousand years. In The Bible with Sources Revealed , Richard Elliott Friedman, one of the world's foremost experts on the Bible and author of the bestselling Who Wrote the Bible?, offers a new visual presentation of the Five Books of Moses –– Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy –– unlocking their complex and fascinating tapestry of sources. Different colors and type styles allow readers to easily identify each of the distinct sources, showcasing Friedman's highly acclaimed and dynamic translation. This unique Bible provides a new means to explore the riches of scripture •Making it possible to read the source texts individually, to see their artistry, their views of God, Israel, and humankind, and their connection to their moment in history; •Presenting the largest collection of evidence ever assembled for establishing and explaining the Documentary Hypothesis; •Showing visually how the Bible was formed out of these sources; and •Helping readers appreciate that the Bible is a rich, complex, beautiful work as a result of the extraordinary way in which it was created. Now everyone can explore these rich resources. This new version will forever change the way you understand the Five Books of Moses.
Hardcover
First published November 25, 2003
About the author
Richard Elliott Friedman
20 books168 followersRICHARD ELLIOTT FRIEDMAN is one of the premier bible scholars in the country. He earned his doctorate at Harvard and was a visiting fellow at Oxford and Cambridge, a Senior Fellow of the American Schools of Oriental Research in Jerusalem, and a Visiting Professor at the University of Haifa. He is the Ann & Jay Davis Professor of Jewish Studies at the University of Georgia and the Katzin Professor of Jewish Civilization Emeritus of the University of California, San Diego.
He is the author of Commentary on the Torah, The Disappearance of God, The Hidden Book in the Bible, The Bible with Sources Revealed, The Bible Now, The Exile and Biblical Narrative, the bestselling Who Wrote the Bible?, and his newest book, The Exodus.
He was an American Council of Learned Societies Fellow and was elected to membership in The Biblical Colloquium. His books have been translated into Hebrew, German, Italian, Spanish, Russian, Japanese, Polish, Hungarian, Dutch, Portuguese, Czech, Turkish, Korean, and French.
He was a consultant for the Dreamworks film "The Prince of Egypt," for Alice Hoffman's The Dovekeepers, and for NBC, A&E, PBS, and Nova.
He is the author of Commentary on the Torah, The Disappearance of God, The Hidden Book in the Bible, The Bible with Sources Revealed, The Bible Now, The Exile and Biblical Narrative, the bestselling Who Wrote the Bible?, and his newest book, The Exodus.
He was an American Council of Learned Societies Fellow and was elected to membership in The Biblical Colloquium. His books have been translated into Hebrew, German, Italian, Spanish, Russian, Japanese, Polish, Hungarian, Dutch, Portuguese, Czech, Turkish, Korean, and French.
He was a consultant for the Dreamworks film "The Prince of Egypt," for Alice Hoffman's The Dovekeepers, and for NBC, A&E, PBS, and Nova.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
August 8, 2026
Dire. Friedman goes to bat for the documentary hypothesis (that is, the one where the Pentateuch is a composite work with four clearly identifiable sources J, E, P, and D), but in laying out the arguments in favour of it he ends up making it all look much shakier than it actually is.
Far too much weight is given to specific turns of phrase repeating both within the Pentateuch and between the Pentateuch and various Prophets, "demonstrating" a connection as if literary allusions and just picking up terms from texts you're familiar with aren't a thing, and to narrative continuity between the texts of a given source as if editors aren't a thing. Those are three-and-a-half of the Seven Main Arguments Friedman lists—the half-argument is mainly about the cultic preoccupations of P, which is fair enough. A fifth argument constructs an elaborate fantasy connecting the sources to real times and places, placing J in Judah and E in Israel and connecting P to Hezekiah and D to Josiah based almost entirely on arguments that only make sense if you already presuppose that the documentary hypothesis is true (and also buy into a massively overspecified theologian history of Israel and Judah, as per usual), and many of them are trivial even then.
The very first argument in his list is "Linguistic", and I want to quote that in its entirety here, actually:
This is bullshit from start to finish, of course. Do you know how much the few preexilic Hebrew texts that actually contain full sentences have specifically taught us about preexilic Hebrew? Next to fuck-all. We can't reliably date any preexilic Hebrew text based on linguistic features either absolutely or against any other—if we don't have the archaeological context, the best we can do is palaeographic dating. Typically we can't even be sure if the language really is Hebrew rather than some other Canaanite language, or if the distinction makes sense! And we certainly can't identify diachronic strata within Early Biblical Hebrew.
Anyway, the final argument is that all of his other arguments converge, which you'll observe wouldn't be an argument even if the other arguments were convincing.
After this abysmal introduction, the remaining 90+% of the book is a translation of the entire Pentateuch,† colour-coded according to the sources as Friedman sees them. AFAICT this broadly represents the consensus that existed in the late 20th century, and I expect it's broadly useful even today. Obviously nowadays most people don't see J and E as separate, coherent sources anymore, "despite" all of Friedman's bluster, but P and the Deuteronomists are still generally accepted.
After all this I'm not even sure the Pentateuch had any authors anymore.
----
† I don't want to comment on the translation but I do also want to show you what Friedman had to say about his process:
🤪✊↔️.
Far too much weight is given to specific turns of phrase repeating both within the Pentateuch and between the Pentateuch and various Prophets, "demonstrating" a connection as if literary allusions and just picking up terms from texts you're familiar with aren't a thing, and to narrative continuity between the texts of a given source as if editors aren't a thing. Those are three-and-a-half of the Seven Main Arguments Friedman lists—the half-argument is mainly about the cultic preoccupations of P, which is fair enough. A fifth argument constructs an elaborate fantasy connecting the sources to real times and places, placing J in Judah and E in Israel and connecting P to Hezekiah and D to Josiah based almost entirely on arguments that only make sense if you already presuppose that the documentary hypothesis is true (and also buy into a massively overspecified theologian history of Israel and Judah, as per usual), and many of them are trivial even then.
The very first argument in his list is "Linguistic", and I want to quote that in its entirety here, actually:
When we separate the texts that have been identified with the various sources, we find that they reflect the Hebrew language of several distinct periods.
The development of Hebrew that we observe through these successive periods indicates that:
• The Hebrew of J and E comes from the earliest stage of biblical Hebrew.
• The Hebrew of P comes from a later stage of the language.
• The Hebrew of the Deuteronomistic texts comes fom a still later stage of the language.
• P comes from an earlier stage of Hebrew than the Hebrew of the book of Ezekiel (which comes from the time of the Babylonian exile).
• All of the main sources come from a stage of Hebrew known as Classical Biblical Hebrew, which is earlier than the Hebrew of the postexilic, Persian period (known as Late Biblical Hebrew).
The chronology of the language of the sources is confirmed by Hebrew texts outside of the Bible. The characteristics of Classical Biblical Hebrew are confirmed through comparison with inscriptions that have been discovered through archaeology, which come from the period before the Babylonian exile (587 BCE). The characteristics of Late Biblical Hebrew are confirmed through comparison with the Hebrew of later sources such as the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Despite the power of this evidence, it is practically never mentioned by those who oppose the hypothesis.
This is bullshit from start to finish, of course. Do you know how much the few preexilic Hebrew texts that actually contain full sentences have specifically taught us about preexilic Hebrew? Next to fuck-all. We can't reliably date any preexilic Hebrew text based on linguistic features either absolutely or against any other—if we don't have the archaeological context, the best we can do is palaeographic dating. Typically we can't even be sure if the language really is Hebrew rather than some other Canaanite language, or if the distinction makes sense! And we certainly can't identify diachronic strata within Early Biblical Hebrew.
Anyway, the final argument is that all of his other arguments converge, which you'll observe wouldn't be an argument even if the other arguments were convincing.
After this abysmal introduction, the remaining 90+% of the book is a translation of the entire Pentateuch,† colour-coded according to the sources as Friedman sees them. AFAICT this broadly represents the consensus that existed in the late 20th century, and I expect it's broadly useful even today. Obviously nowadays most people don't see J and E as separate, coherent sources anymore, "despite" all of Friedman's bluster, but P and the Deuteronomists are still generally accepted.
After all this I'm not even sure the Pentateuch had any authors anymore.
----
† I don't want to comment on the translation but I do also want to show you what Friedman had to say about his process:
When I did my translation, I did not start at Genesis 1:1 and proceed in order. Rather, I translated the work in the order in which it was written. [...] I first translated J, then E Then I pursued the editing of J and E together by the redactor known as RJE. Then I translated P, then D (in its stages). Then I translated the remaining small texts (such as Genesis 14). And then I pursued the editing of all of these together by the redactor known as R.
🤪✊↔️.
May 24, 2020
It is a great reference book for JEDP theory on the sources of the Pentateuch from the perspective of one of the biggest modern proponents of the Documentary Hypothesis (DH). The main drawing feature is the color-coded Torah (first five books - Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy) according to the four proposed sources called J - Jehovist (or Y - Yahwist), E - Elohist, D - Deuteronomist, and P - Priestly source. It allows you to see the different proposed sources and how they are intermingled together in the proposed theory including later scribal emendations. Additionally, it *briefly* provides several arguments in favor of the Documentary Hypothesis on why scholars came to believe in these sources, including things like linguistic arguments and the names for God used.
It does not include any counter arguments against DH, but it only presents a very brief overview of the positive case for it in the first small section, followed by the color-coded Torah. The vast majority of the book is the color-coded Torah. When looking at the color-coded Torah and the positive arguments, I find that the proposed sources and convenient scribal emendations are what look to be little more than literary gerrymandering and not a robust theory of source criticism, unlike some Synoptic Problem hypotheses. A color-coded Synoptics would actually be really nice, just as this color-coded Pentateuch make a great way for perusing the four sources. For that reason, I recommend it. The positive arguments presented for the DH here are definitely insufficient, so other works are required to supplement, but it makes for a great reference book.
It does not include any counter arguments against DH, but it only presents a very brief overview of the positive case for it in the first small section, followed by the color-coded Torah. The vast majority of the book is the color-coded Torah. When looking at the color-coded Torah and the positive arguments, I find that the proposed sources and convenient scribal emendations are what look to be little more than literary gerrymandering and not a robust theory of source criticism, unlike some Synoptic Problem hypotheses. A color-coded Synoptics would actually be really nice, just as this color-coded Pentateuch make a great way for perusing the four sources. For that reason, I recommend it. The positive arguments presented for the DH here are definitely insufficient, so other works are required to supplement, but it makes for a great reference book.
March 30, 2014
A very interesting and readable investigation of the Pentateuch's various authors. According to Friedman, the myriad contradictions and anachronisms in the Bible betray the political conflicts and warring propaganda in pre-monarchal Israel as well as the conflict between the later-generation editors/redactors and the ingrained oral traditions precluding them from amending such contradictions. Some of the content, such as IDing the exact author of Deuteronomy, while logically argued and decently sourced, are still speculative at best. Great read if you're one of those contemptuous "which God?!" atheists or just want to learn more about how the Judeo-Christian myths were constructed and why they of all the obsolete ancient myths persevered.
February 20, 2018
I've enjoyed every book I've read by Friedman, and this is no exception. Granted, he didn't contribute much to the text in the way of words themselves, after all, this is just the Pentateuch with color coding; however, his translation is marvelous and his insight is honest. The documentary hypothesis is still contested in some circles, but reading each of the 4 supposed authors as a whole, without the others surrounding it provides strong evidence. Every portion is able to easily be a continuous and self contained text with its own voice and intention. You are able to see each author's different idea of who god was, how Israel should function, and how the people should behave.
What struck me most while reading this was the way that the often cumbersome nature of reading the Bible is stripped away when you're reading it without the doublets. The contradictions also become very clear. Even as an athiest, reading this version of the Pentateuch gave me a renewed sense of wonder and literary appreciation for the Old Testament.
What struck me most while reading this was the way that the often cumbersome nature of reading the Bible is stripped away when you're reading it without the doublets. The contradictions also become very clear. Even as an athiest, reading this version of the Pentateuch gave me a renewed sense of wonder and literary appreciation for the Old Testament.
April 8, 2013
If you're averse to reading the Bible, than this book might not be for you. But if, on the other hand, you are curious as to how the Bible was put together, and the many different sources which were used for it, than this book is an eye opener. With great care, Richard Elliott Friedman translates the Pentateuch from Hebrew, and then introduces us to the hypothesis that the Pentateuch derives from four (at least) identified sources, which were woven together by various redactors, in an attempt to keep harmony and synchronicity with historical accounts. The magnitude of such an exercise is quickly revealed when one realizes these source writers held different ideas, and biases, which unavoidably tainted their accounts: there are many eye opening discrepancies which are not only highlighted by the color and font differences used to distinguish between each source, but Friedman himself does an excellent job at pointing out to us many of the contradictions and account inconsistencies, in various footnotes. If one is a previous connoisseur of other popular Bible translations, one can also sense a favorable translation bias (on behalf of these other translations), where certain words were chosen over others, perhaps in attempts to smooth over our opinions of passages, or to conciliate past accounts. As a scholar, however, Friedman has no interest in courting reader sensibility.
The introductory chapters for this book come to life as one reads through the various Bible passages, and different sources -- they all start making sense: they simply underscore the strong claims behind the source hypothesis (or Documentary Hypothesis), and should probably be re-read at the end. It will all make sense then. It is much recommended to reach each source, in order in which it was written, rather than to read the Pentateuch in it's usual chronological order. It all, surprisingly flows very smoothly. This is a great book one ought to have as a reference manual.
The introductory chapters for this book come to life as one reads through the various Bible passages, and different sources -- they all start making sense: they simply underscore the strong claims behind the source hypothesis (or Documentary Hypothesis), and should probably be re-read at the end. It will all make sense then. It is much recommended to reach each source, in order in which it was written, rather than to read the Pentateuch in it's usual chronological order. It all, surprisingly flows very smoothly. This is a great book one ought to have as a reference manual.
March 9, 2011
The first five books of the Bible are traditionally understood to have been written by Moses. In places, Jesus appears to confirm this. Most critical Bible scholars since the late 19th-century, however, have recognized at least four different contributors of the books of Moses:
A text known as J was composed during the period when the kingdoms of Israel and Judah were divided. J was written by an author living in the southern kingdom. It’s known as J because it refers to God by the name of YHWH (Jahwe in German).
A second text known as E was composed in the same period, by a priest living in the northern kingdom. It’s called E because it refers to God as Elohim.
A third text is known as P because it concerns the priesthood. There remains some argument about when it was composed; Friedman suggests shortly after J and E were combined into one text.
The final source is known as D because it comprises most of the book of Deuteronomy. It’s part of a longer work, including Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings. It contains sources that date as early as J and E, but it was not compiled into one source until the reign of King Josiah, circa 622 BC.
All of these sources were spliced together by a redactor to create the Torah (the first five books of the Bible). Friedman discusses the evidence for this theory (called the Documentary Hypothesis), and then travels verse by verse through the Torah, color-coding the source and footnoting the setting. You’ll recognize two distinct creation stories in the Bible and two flood stories, and conflicting accounts within the Bible will suddenly make more sense, as the source and motive of the writings are revealed.
It’s best used as a reference book—I certainly haven’t read it straight through—but it’s a book I refer to often.
A text known as J was composed during the period when the kingdoms of Israel and Judah were divided. J was written by an author living in the southern kingdom. It’s known as J because it refers to God by the name of YHWH (Jahwe in German).
A second text known as E was composed in the same period, by a priest living in the northern kingdom. It’s called E because it refers to God as Elohim.
A third text is known as P because it concerns the priesthood. There remains some argument about when it was composed; Friedman suggests shortly after J and E were combined into one text.
The final source is known as D because it comprises most of the book of Deuteronomy. It’s part of a longer work, including Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings. It contains sources that date as early as J and E, but it was not compiled into one source until the reign of King Josiah, circa 622 BC.
All of these sources were spliced together by a redactor to create the Torah (the first five books of the Bible). Friedman discusses the evidence for this theory (called the Documentary Hypothesis), and then travels verse by verse through the Torah, color-coding the source and footnoting the setting. You’ll recognize two distinct creation stories in the Bible and two flood stories, and conflicting accounts within the Bible will suddenly make more sense, as the source and motive of the writings are revealed.
It’s best used as a reference book—I certainly haven’t read it straight through—but it’s a book I refer to often.
May 31, 2013
A long awaited arrival of a Documentary Hypothesis (DH) outlined Torah. Friedman, a disciple and student of Frank Cross (a colossus in biblical scholarship), continues to make a big name for himself in the ranks of bible scholars with this work. The book consists of an introduction, in which Friedman submits the evidence for the DH and addresses why some people are under the misguided impression that the DH is no longer accepted as accurate, and the Torah itself.
The Torah is neatly presented with its sources distinguished by font and color, and with footnotes of relevant scholarship and/or notes throughout. Certainly an invaluable tool for any student of biblical/religious studies as well as interested readers. Though only the first five books of the Bible are outlined, Friedman is judicious in elucidating their most prominent connections with other books within the canon.
I would recommend this book to everyone who maintains an interest in the Bible and would also strongly recommend Friedman's, Who Wrote the Bible? in which he cogently makes the case for identifying the sources of the DH. If you want scholarship presented for the layman with (most) technicalities and nuances preserved in translation, Friedman is your guy.
If you want to check it out first, it is available on Amazon for preview.
The Torah is neatly presented with its sources distinguished by font and color, and with footnotes of relevant scholarship and/or notes throughout. Certainly an invaluable tool for any student of biblical/religious studies as well as interested readers. Though only the first five books of the Bible are outlined, Friedman is judicious in elucidating their most prominent connections with other books within the canon.
I would recommend this book to everyone who maintains an interest in the Bible and would also strongly recommend Friedman's, Who Wrote the Bible? in which he cogently makes the case for identifying the sources of the DH. If you want scholarship presented for the layman with (most) technicalities and nuances preserved in translation, Friedman is your guy.
If you want to check it out first, it is available on Amazon for preview.
February 10, 2017
Friedman's opening two chapters are amazingly succinct. In a very few pages, Friedman lays out a compelling case for what is known as the Documentary Hypothesis. This is the widely accepted theory that the first five books of the Bible are a compilation of four main documents, known by the letters J, E, P, and D, which were woven together by later editors known as Redactors.
What does it matter whether you buy into the idea that sources by J, P, E, and D form the Pentateuch? Because, if you are somewhat familiar with this concept, certain "problems" with the text suddenly become clear as you read the new English translation that follows Friedman's opening chapters. By using two different ink colors (blue and green) and a variety of fonts, average Bible readers like you and me can easily understand various contradictions and redundancies in the text.
What does it matter whether you buy into the idea that sources by J, P, E, and D form the Pentateuch? Because, if you are somewhat familiar with this concept, certain "problems" with the text suddenly become clear as you read the new English translation that follows Friedman's opening chapters. By using two different ink colors (blue and green) and a variety of fonts, average Bible readers like you and me can easily understand various contradictions and redundancies in the text.
November 6, 2017
This book was excellent. It has taken me some time to finish, not Richard's work in the book as much as the texts. It took some time to get through Leviticus and Deuteronomy. My only thing I wish is that this book was longer. I wish Friedman gave us more. This book is excellent if you want to examine sources of the texts, and if you are into understanding the details of the Five Books of Moses. I loved this book!
dnfd
October 6, 2022I had to read this text for class, but we were only asked to complete the first two stories: Genesis and Exodus. Therefore, I do not want to give it a rating and am labeling as a DNF because I was not required to read the whole thing.
January 26, 2023
This book is a great resource for anyone wanting to dive into the topic of authorship of the early Hebrew Bible. It lays out the different voices and their potential motives for including what they did. Highly recommended.
May 13, 2026
IMO, a “must read” foundational treatment for anyone seeking awareness of the documentary hypothesis associated with biblical historicity.
Indeed, it would seem difficult to me to claim familiarity with the hypothesis without reading this or a similar treatment.
Indeed, it would seem difficult to me to claim familiarity with the hypothesis without reading this or a similar treatment.
July 7, 2022
4.5 stars. Outstanding
December 14, 2024
An absolute gem.
April 8, 2018
The Introduction and the Collection of evidence give a very concise and convincing argument for a Document theory for the Torah. It could be a good idea to read something longer. The rest of the text is just the Pentateuch in a relatively literal translation by Friedman himself, with the parts of the text colored according to the different sources and notes explaining the decisions around each part and its relation to other parts of the same source, to the corresponding versions in other sources, or to the intermingled text from another source. this division is by no mean the only one possible but in my opinion its convincing and is probably similar to others. It's pretty easy to follow the text along with the original, Friedman tried not to change the word order where there is a change of sources and if he had to do so he note it. Nonetheless I hope a Hebrew version will be release, because I think a lot of people in Israel will be interested.
June 18, 2015
This is exactly what I have been looking for: a framework for reading the narrative in the Pentateuch.
I've long attributed the difficulty in reading OT narratives to the King James English. I now see that as only one contributing factor. The larger difficulty is the repetitive and contradicting details that stem from interwoven sources. And though I've read enough to know about J, E, and P and the different flavors of each, I still have a hard time picking them out as I read through the scriptures. The color-coded sources in this book facilitate reading each narrative separately, without repetition or contradiction. Then, once I have a grasp on the story, I can compare the different ways each source tells it. The footnotes are particularly helpful in this regard. Additionally, footnotes are used to explain the evidence (or lack thereof) for assigning a block of text to a specific source.
For example, last night I discovered Exodus 15--perhaps the oldest composition in the Bible--has a dramatically different take on the drowning of Pharaoh's army (think tsunami) than the more popular account of the Red Sea crossing.
This book is most useful Genesis, Exodus and Numbers which are extensively interwoven. Leviticus and Deuteronomy are less heavily edited.
I've long attributed the difficulty in reading OT narratives to the King James English. I now see that as only one contributing factor. The larger difficulty is the repetitive and contradicting details that stem from interwoven sources. And though I've read enough to know about J, E, and P and the different flavors of each, I still have a hard time picking them out as I read through the scriptures. The color-coded sources in this book facilitate reading each narrative separately, without repetition or contradiction. Then, once I have a grasp on the story, I can compare the different ways each source tells it. The footnotes are particularly helpful in this regard. Additionally, footnotes are used to explain the evidence (or lack thereof) for assigning a block of text to a specific source.
For example, last night I discovered Exodus 15--perhaps the oldest composition in the Bible--has a dramatically different take on the drowning of Pharaoh's army (think tsunami) than the more popular account of the Red Sea crossing.
This book is most useful Genesis, Exodus and Numbers which are extensively interwoven. Leviticus and Deuteronomy are less heavily edited.
February 20, 2008
I found this book very interesting. It looks at the first five books of the Bible and has it written in different colors to represent the different authors. It was interesting to read the whole thing through in just one color at a time and still see the continuity in the stories. It was especially interesting to read stories with which I am familiar and knowing what is supposed to happen and finding that half the story is written by one source and the other half by another. Then I had to go back and read the whole thing through as it is written in the Bible. It was a very interesting experience.
October 14, 2012
The footnotes are interesting, and the visual identification of each individual author's contributions serves to make sense of some of the contradictions and repetitive phrases throughout the stories.
July 5, 2020
Richard Elliott Friedman uses different colors and font type styles to provide the reader a new, visual presentation of the Five Books of Moses to show the complex and fascinating tapestry of their origins. I use this book each week for Torah study.
Read
September 23, 2010The Bible with Sources Revealed by Richard E. Friedman (2005)
February 1, 2013
An enriching partner volume to daily bible reading or in-depth study!
August 11, 2013
An excellent book to learn the source of different sections of the first five books of Moses in the Bible. Through this evidence, one can easily determine what the priests wrote into the Bible.
July 23, 2025
Another great resource for fans of the documentary hypothesis, if that's your fancy.
July 9, 2025
very interesting book, did make me think, however as a beginner I found parts complex, however the underlying principles behind it do seem clear.
January 6, 2009
Very technical, but still mostly interesting.
Read
September 11, 2016Second read through. Find more each time with greater understanding.
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews