Throughout the first five books of the Bible, scholars observe subconscious differences in vocabulary which strongly indicate multiple authors.    In whole sections of Exodus and Numbers, the masses following Moses are called "the people."  In other lengthy sections they are called "the congregation."  The sections where they are called "the people" don’t contain the phrase "the congregation."  Likewise, the sections where they are called "the congregation" don’t contain the phrase "the people."  In some sections, the Israelites are called "Hebrews."  In other sections, they are called "the children of Israel."  Some sections refer to the monarch of Egypt as "the king of Egypt," but other sections call him "Pharaoh."  Some sections call the town of Hebron "Mamre by Hebron."  Other sections call Hebron "Machpelah by Mamre."  The two names never occur together in the same section.  The same is true of northwestern Mesopotamia, which is variously called "Haran" in some sections and "Padan-Aram" in others.  Why does the Bible use two names for the same place?  As for the deserts south of Israel, some sections call it "the Negev" while other sections call it "The Wilderness of Zin," or "The Wilderness of Paran."

     As there is no theological reason for such trivial differences in vocabulary, the best explanation is that the first few books of the Bible were compiled from multiple authors, each manifesting unique subconscious preferences for certain vocabulary.

     There are even more signatures of the Priestly source which identify it and separate it from the earlier sources.  In the Priestly text, the main characters are almost all male, in contrast to the Elohist and especially the Yahwist sources which often include women as main characters.  The Priestly text is the only source to use the names Horeb and Sinai interchangeably.  This indicates that the Priestly text was written after the other sources, that is, after the northerners had moved south, bringing the name Horeb with them and identifying it with Sinai. 

     Besides this, other phrases that distinguish the Priestly text from the earlier sources include "the sons of Aaron," "perpetual ordinance," "a statute throughout all your generations," "to be observed throughout all generations," and "all flesh."  These are repeated frequently in the Priestly text, but are elsewhere non-existent.  Priestly sacrifices are "without blemish" and God’s Law is an "everlasting covenant."  Whoever breaks the Law is "cut off from his people."  There is also an inordinate amount of emphasis on "the ark of the covenant," priestly garments called "ephods," the colors "blue, purple, and crimson," and the "holy place."  These items are rarely mentioned in the other sources.  

     Most people who read the Priestly material find it to be boring ritualistic dribble, which is neither good for spiritual edification nor for entertainment. 

     In contrast, the earlier Yahwist and Elohist texts are packed full of poetry, exciting adventures, and moral lessons spiced with gratuitous dirty little stories.  The main characters cheat, lie, steal, kill, and commit incest.  They get married, get drunk, and have sex.  These earlier texts are fond of vocabulary such as "he knew his wife," "nakedness," and "a land flowing with milk and honey."  Phrases like "face of the earth," "flocks and herds," "the ground," "Thus says the LORD," "let my people go," "Here I am," and "the hill country," are used often, but the Priestly sections don’t use these phrases.   Lots of places are discussed that the Priestly Text fails to mention – Shechem, Bethel, Gerar, and Beer-Sheba.  Stories explain the origin of place names.  The compound name for God is sometimes used – Yahweh Elohim –  "the LORD God."

     Now we see why Jeremiah said that Genesis 1 is a forgery. Genesis 1 is part of the Priestly Document, which scholarship has proven to be a fraud written long after the Biblical events it supposedly describes.

     You don't have to trust the scholars to believe that the Documentary Hypothesis is true.  You can see it for yourself.  Everyone has the tools to investigate it for themselves, regardless of their brainpower or knowledge of the Hebrew language.  All you need is a good old-fashioned King James Bible and a set of colored pencils.  In fact, the King James is preferable for this excersize, since it is more consistent and literal than most other translations.  Color-code words and phrases such as "the LORD," "God," "congregation," "the people," and the other phrases mentioned above.  Start in the beginning, Genesis 1, and skim your way forward. 

     It won’t take long to become a believer in the Documentary Hypothesis.  You will find that whole passages use one set of vocabulary, and that other passages use an entirely different set of vocabulary.  Try to identify some theological reason for why this might be.  You will find that there is no theological reason.  The only explanation is multiple authors.

     Beyond mere differences in vocabulary and style, even deeper differences emerge among the sources - differences which concern theology and doctrine.  The most striking differences occur when the Priestly text is compared to the earlier traditions, namely the Yahwist and Elohist sources. 

     Angels are never mentioned in the Priestly text.[1]  This links the Priestly text with the Sadducees, who likewise did not believe in angels.[2]  Dreams and visions from God are never mentioned in the Priestly text.[3]  This is also similar to the doctrine of the Sadducees, about whom Josephus wrote, "they don't believe in fate at all, and suppose that God does not worry with what we do."[4]  In contrast, the earlier sources do mention angels, dreams, and visions. 

     The Priestly text emphasizes rituals, priestly orders, and the Law given on Mount Sinai.  In contrast, the earlier sources piece together a history from anecdotal stories concerning the Hebrews' ancestors.

     One of the most defining doctrines the Sadducees shared with the Priestly text was the doctrine of God's nature.  They both saw God as all-powerful, all-wise, spiritual, and heavenly.  In contrast, the earlier sources had a much more down-to-earth concept of God.  The earlier sources say that God repented and changed his mind about the Flood and about wishing to destroy Israel.  He prefers to walk when it is cool outside.  He asks Adam and Eve and their son Cain some questions as if he did not know the answers. He even feels threatened by human achievements such as the Tower of Babel.[5]  In contrast to the Priestly text's view of God, the God of the earlier sources is prima facie not all-powerful, not all-wise, not spiritual, and not heavenly. 

     These factors enable us to separate the theology of Genesis 1 from that of the earlier sources, for the God of Genesis 1 is all-wise, all-powerful, and is heavenly.  Seven times Genesis 1 insists about creation that "God saw that it was good."[6]  This runs quite contrary to the Yahwist account which records that "Yahweh repented that he created Adam."[7]

     In Genesis 1, and indeed throughout the entirety of the Priestly text, God is super-cosmic – dwelling above all creation.  When he created rainbows, he distinguished himself from "the flesh on the earth."[8]  But in the earlier sources, God takes visible form inside the cosmos, walking as a man alongside Adam, Noah, Abraham, and Jacob.[9] 

     In the Priestly text, when the Israelites suffered slavery in Egypt, God did not come down to investigate; rather, "their cry ascended to God."[10]  This is in sharp contrast to the God of the earlier Yahwist source, who actively comes down to investigate when the Tower of Babel is being built.[11]    One God observes from the heavens.  The other God observes from the earth.

     When the God of the Priestly text came to Mount Sinai, he hid himself in a fiery cloud and no one was permitted to see him.[12]  This contrasts with the earlier Elohist account where "Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet God."  In the Elohist account, it is the people who choose not to meet God because they are frightened of him – God does not hide himself, rather the people hide from God.[13]  In the Elohist account, God even eats dinner with Moses and the elders while he is thundering commandments from the mountaintop.[14]

     Yet for all of his invisible heavenly glory, the God of the Priestly text still demands idols of cherubim be built.[15]  This is in sharp contradiction to the Ten Commandments, which forbid all graven images.  The Ten Commandments most likely come from the Elohist-Deuteronomist tradition with which Abiathar and Jeremiah were affiliated.[16] 

          In short, the God presented in Genesis 1 is consistent only with the God of the Priestly text, and can in no way be forced to reconcile with the God of the earlier sources.

Click to read more about how we know Genesis 1 is a forgery.

The creationist narrative in Genesis 1 is contradicted by many ancient Christian texts.  Instead of an Almighty Creator God, ancient Christian texts espouse that the universe is born from blind arrogance and stupidity.  The angels caused evolution to occur from species to species.  There are many gods, (or aliens?), and the Christian God is just one among them.  Satan the Devil writes scripture, and thus the Bible was polluted with Genesis 1.  Archaeology and modern scholarship demonstrate that Genesis is indeed corrupted.  Cavemen walk with Adam and Eve.  Esoteric prophecies reveal the coming of Christ, and also reveal the dark forces that govern the cosmos.  Such are the ancient Christian writings.

Science vindicates the truth of these ideas.  Evolution often happens too fast for Darwin’s theory.  Gaps in the fossil record indicate that some kind of unnatural force acts together with natural selection.  Astrobiology reveals that intelligent life probably evolved long before us.  The fossil record reveals strange clues that aliens abducted species and transported them across oceans, and that DNA from diverse lineages was combined to spawn hybrid species.  Evidently, aliens influence evolution, and they are the gods of the world’s religions. 

This is not fiction.  All these facts are thoroughly documented in the links above.

---