According to textual scholars, this is really the Jahwist's account of the reunion after Joseph identifies himself, and the account of the threat to enslave Benjamin is just the Elohist's version of the same event, with the Elohist being more terse about Joseph's emotions towards Benjamin, merely mentioning that Benjamin was given five times as many gifts as the others.

According to biblical scholars, the Torah's genealogy for Levi's descendants, is actually an aetiological myth reflecting the fact that there were four different groups among the levites – the Gershonites, Kohathites, Merarites, and Aaronids ; Aaron – the eponymous ancestor of the Aaronids – couldn't be portrayed as a brother to Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, as the narrative about the birth of Moses ( brother of Aaron ), which textual scholars attribute to the earlier Elohist source, mentions only that both his parents were Levites ( without identifying their names ).

Textual scholars believe that this is the result of the genealogical passage, in which his children are named, being from a much later source than the Jahwist and Elohist narratives, which make up most of the Joseph narrative, and which consistently describe Benjamin as a child.

Since the 1970s there has been a revolution in scholarship: the Elohist source is now widely regarded as no more than a variation on the Yahwist, while the Priestly source is increasingly seen not as a document but as a body of revisions and expansions to the Yahwist ( or " non-Priestly ") material.

Of these, the first and third groups are considered, in the documentary hypothesis, to originate within the Elohist text, whereas the second group is considered to belong to the Jahwist.

It is thought that they may have been added to bring the number of poems either up to five, if inserted into the Elohist source, or up to seven, if only inserted once JE was constructed.

) and Additionally, Manasseh is absent from the poem ; in the Elohist and Jahwist texts Manasseh is also frequently absent, while Machir is mentioned.

Historical criticism attributes this description to the Elohist source ( E ), which is believed to have been written about 850 BCE or later.

According to textual scholars, the reason for the abrupt interruption this passage causes to the surrounding narrative, and the chronological anomaly it seems to present, is that it derives from the Jahwist source, while the immediately surrounding narrative is from the Elohist.

According to some Biblical scholars, the Torah's genealogy for Levi's descendants, is actually an aetiological myth reflecting the fact that there were four different groups among the levites-the Gershonites, Kohathites, Merarites, and Aaronids ; Aaron — the eponymous ancestor of the Aaronids — couldn't be portrayed as a brother to Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, as the narrative about the birth of Moses ( brother of Aaron ), which textual scholars attribute to the earlier Elohist source, mentions only that both his parents were Levites ( without identifying their names ).

According to some textual scholars, the reason for these features is that the passage derives from the Jahwist source, while the immediately surrounding narrative is from the Elohist, the two being spliced together at a later date.

According to the documentary hypothesis these variations are evidence of different source texts: Elohim is used as the name of God in the Elohist and the Priestly source, while Yahweh is used in the Jahwist source.

For example, it is the Elohist version of the tale of Jacob's ladder in which there is a ladder of angels with God at the top, whereas in the Jahwist tale, it is just a dream in which God is simply above the location, without the ladder or angels.

This is far from universally accepted today, as there is evidence of a later " Elohist redaction " ( post-exilic ) during the 5th century BCE which makes it difficult to determine whether a given passage is " Elohist " in origin, or only as a result of late redaction.

Firstly, the Elohist version expands on the supposed cruelty of the Egyptians by presenting them as asking for difficult work such as bricks without straw.

And secondly, whereas the Jahwist version of the Plagues of Egypt involves Moses only acting as an intercessor to ask God to stop each plague that God has wrought, the Elohist instead presents Moses as threatening the Pharaoh, and then bringing the plague down on the Egyptians himself.

Recent reconstructions leave out the Elohist altogether, proposing a Deuteronomist-Jahwist-Priestly source sequence written from the reign of Josiah into post-exilic times.

To enforce the code further, the Elohist describes the process of the law code being read out to the people.

For example, it is the Elohist version of the tale of Jacob's ladder in which there is a ladder of angels with God at the top, leading to Jacob later dedicating the place as Beth-El ( House of God ), whereas in the Jahwist tale, it is a simple dream in which God is simply above the location, without the ladder or angels.

Also, whereas the Jahwist portrays Joseph as the victim of an attempted rape in the tale of Potiphar's wife, which would have been mildly humiliating to the Joseph tribes, the Elohist instead portrays Joseph as an interpreter of dreams — as one who can understand God.

Textual scholars regard these two names as fragments of naming narratives coming from different sources-one being the Jahwist and the other being the Elohist.

From the late 19th century there was a general consensus around the documentary hypothesis, which suggests that the five books were created c. 450 BCE by combining four originally independent sources, known as the Jahwist, or J ( about 900 BCE ), the Elohist, or E ( about 800 BCE ), the Deuteronomist, or D, ( about 600 BCE ), and the Priestly source, or P ( about 500 BCE ).

Nevertheless, the poems themselves are considered to predate the Jahwist and Elohist, and simply to have been embedded by them in their works.

While the Elohist took off whatever introduction was present in the poems they chose, the Jahwist left it on.

19th century source criticism divided the Joseph story between the Jahwist, Elohist and Priestly sources of the documentary hypothesis.

Certain religious and political functions were reserved for the Levites, and the early sources of the Torah — the Jahwist and Elohist — appear to treat the term Levi as just being a word meaning priest ; scholars therefore suspect that " levi " was originally a general term for a priest, and had no connection to ancestry, and that it was only later, for example in the priestly source and Blessing of Moses, that the existence of a tribe named Levi became assumed, in order to explain the origin of the priestly caste.

While the Jahwist presented an anthropomorphic God who could walk through the Garden of Eden looking for Adam and Eve, the Elohist frequently involves angels.

Textual scholars regard the account of the burning bush as being spliced together from the Jahwist and Elohist texts, with the Angel of Yahweh and the removal of sandals being part of the Elohist version, and the Yahwist's parallels to these being God and the turning away of Moses ' face, respectively

The 19th century scholar Julius Wellhausen divided the Dinah story between two original texts, the Elohist, which tells of Jacob's purchase of land at Shechem and his erection of an altar, and the Jahwist, telling the rape-and-vengeance story which takes up the bulk of the narrative.

It is a combination and redaction of the Jahwist ( J ) and Elohist ( E ) source texts.

Unlike the Jahwist, the Elohist contains stories of the political position of the Joseph tribes: the birth of Benjamin, and the pre-eminence of Ephraim.

With regard to leaving Egypt, the Elohist presents a more elaborate tale than the Jahwist.

Notably, where the Jahwist simply presents its version of the Ten Commandments as the law given by God at Sinai, the Elohist instead presents the more extensive Covenant Code.

The text of the Torah argues that the name of Asher means happy / blessing, implying a derivation from the Hebrew term osher ( with the same meaning ); the Torah actually presents this in two variations — beoshri ( meaning in my good fortune ), and ishsheruni, which textual scholars attribute to different sources — one to the Yahwist and the other to the Elohist.

Thus the Elohist describes Balaam constructing giving two blessings, making sacrifices on seven altars, at the high places of Baal, before each, then deciding not to seek enchantments after the third set of sacrifices, but to set his face upon the wilderness, which Balak views as a third blessing, and so Balaam then gives the three final predictions of fate.

The text of the Torah gives two different etymologies for the name of Issachar, which some textual scholars attribute to different sources-one to the Yahwist and the other to the Elohist ; the first being that it derives from ish sakar, meaning man of hire, in reference to Leah's hire of Jacob's sexual favours for the price of some mandrakes ; the second being that it derives from yesh sakar, meaning there is a reward, in reference to Leah's opinion that the birth of Issachar was a divine reward for giving her handmaid Zilpah to Jacob as a concubine.

The Elohist then goes on to deal with how such an extensive code can be used in practice, by using a relative of Moses, Jethro, as a mouthpiece to explain the reason for the appointment of judges.

According to biblical scholars, the Torah's genealogy for Levi's descendants, is actually an aetiological myth reflecting the fact that there were four different groups among the Levites – the Gershonites, Kohathites, Merarites, and Aaronids ; Aaron – the eponymous ancestor of the Aaronids – couldn't be portrayed as a brother to Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, as the narrative about the birth of Moses ( brother of Aaron ), which textual scholars attribute to the earlier Elohist source, mentions only that both his parents were Levites ( without identifying their names ).

Their hypothetical reconstruction of the " Elohist source " mentions only that both parents were Levites ( without identifying their names ; ).

In the Elohist work, Isaac never appears again after the conclusion, and the story strongly implies that Isaac was truly sacrificed.

The composition of the Hebrew Bible began centuries after the Bronze Age collapse, but many of these names are still reflected in Biblical Hebrew, especially the Elohim in the Elohist source, and the title Ba ' al, originally a title of Hadad, as the rival or nemesis of Yahweh.