[Archaea]

The Documentary Hypothesis which Friedman is summarizing has its supporters, but also legitimate detractors.

Take for example an old one but legitimate one, Umberto Cassuto, who endeavors to explain away the Jawist versus Eloihist usage into distinctive types of usage.

Take for example Kitchen, a noted biblical scholar who defends the authenticity of the OT based on real good work.

I'm not stating I accept these positions, only that if we read a summary we will receive a distorted view of what the scholarship really is. For example, in NT scholarship, Q is generally acceptd but Mark Goodacre makes a convincing argument without Q.