P's Gordian Knot

The priestly material (P) is widely recognized to be monotheistic. But where should one begin when seeking to analyze P’s theology? This is no idle question, but draws us deeply into the problems of determining the extent of P and the definition of monotheism.

In a perceptive analysis of the first volume of Jacob Milgrom’s impressive Leviticus commentary, Rolf Rendtorff articulated a sense of disorientation in reading Milgrom’s work. For historical-critical scholarship P means primarily the narrative thread, which parallels the non-priestly parts of the Pentateuch. For Milgrom P means Leviticus, and one seeks for P’s theology there. There is not even a backward glance to the other parts of P in the Pentateuch.

Milgrom is clear about the monotheism of Leviticus, but this book is not easily equated with monotheism, especially since monotheism has often been characterized as ethical, often as a contrast to ritualistic (still Gnuse). Milgrom deploys Yehezkel Kaufmann’s tendentious contrast between pagan and Israelite religion to bring Leviticus and monotheism into shape. Konrad Schmid’s exposition of P’s monotheism, on the other hand, begins – and virtually ends with – an exposition of P’s creation account in Genesis 1. This would accord with the sense that for P the primeval history presents the paradigm for the world. To understand P we need only make sense of this cosmic blueprint (cf. Lohfink).

So, how can we draw these different senses of priestly theology together? The solution of much recent redaction-critical scholarship has been to see the end of the priestly Grundschrift (Pg) with the completion of the Tabernacle in Exodus 25-40. But is this not just a case of cutting the Gordian knot?