"
Merged with Pentateuch
I merged this article with Pentateuch; there was nothing in the Pentateuch article that was not already in the Torah article, so there wasn't much point in making the distinction. If the article were to be recreated, I would suggest that attempts be made to focus specifically on that term as opposed to the Torah. podous 

 Dates and Wellhausen 

I think this edit  by  should be pulled, at least pending further consideration:

It must be noted that Wellhausen's knowledge of Jewish literature outside of the Bible was limited, and led to his considerable confusion in event chronologies and dating. Notably he supposed the receiving of Torah was dating from about 1450 BCE, and that of monarchy, established by Saul, c.1020 BCE, and the (later) prophets, 9th to 5th centuries BCE.[ Julius Wellhausen ] In the case of the first the date in Jewish chronology is established as 1313 BCE, Saul is dated to 879 BCE, and Isaiah during 619 BCE. [pp.33,47,53, Kantor]

These dates are based on Seder Olam Rabbah.  But a literalist reading of that book would give the destruction of the Temple in 423 BCE   way after the accepted dates for eg the Battle of Marathon (490 BC) or Xerxes' invasion of Greece (480 BC); so a wholesale new chronology for the entire history of Classical Greece would have to be found  which nobody seriously believes is credible.  (See Missing years (Hebrew calendar).

So people who use the Seder Olam Rabbah dates (though not eg chabad.org ) generally adjust them to make the destruction of the temple match its date in the Babylonian records, viz. 586 BCE.  

Adding that shift to Kantor's dates gives 1476 BCE for the Exodus, 1043 BCE for Saul, and 782 BCE for Isaiah (compare Chronology of the Bible).  Modern views tend to revise the numbers down very slightly (see eg Kingdom of Judah).  So Wellhausen's dates still match contemporary scholarship pretty much exactly.

Furthermore, what is important for Wellhausen's history is the relative dates of these events.  Even if one prefers not to add the absolute date shift, it makes no difference to the relative chronology of the events, and the relative dates between them.

I don't think therefore that this can be seen as a substantive objection to Wellhausen.    

I'm not sure I have ever seen Wellhousen mentioned to have been familiar with Seder Olam.
You seem to be well versed, so I need not explain to you how Greek chronology is rather problematic in itself.
What modern academics do with dates to support their individual hypothesis about record keeping in various ancient cultures is of course their province, but this particular subject, if it is to be consistent, can not be ""adjusted"" to match sources outside of its innate culture, or time, never mind that many academics who postulate the chronologies you suggest are neither Jewish, nor even monotheistic. 
I note that the Missing years (Hebrew calendar) completely lacks citations, so its hard to say who and how argues for ""the modern secular dating"". In any case, I will make sure to include a link to that article and will try to fix the citations in it.
Chronology of the Bible article, besides being likewise poorly cited, has four other templates at the top {{confusing|date=June 2008}}{{disputed|date=June 2008}}{{refimprove|date=June 2008}}{{totally-disputed|date=June 2008}}{{Cleanup|date=April 2007}} however, I will get to that also eventually. 
This article is about the Torah. Textual criticism is really not the place for it given the volumes of published works on the subject, so I'd like to keep that short. My point with the dates was to illustrate that not all 19th century theories about the Torah were well founded.Meieimatai 

The dates need not be ""scholarly"". They come from a source consistent with the method by which chronology has been established within the culture for which this text is held as the core source of social construct. I'd say that it has every right to adopt whatever dating it desires for its purposes. Lack of faith by the academic textual analysts is not required, however, deletion of what constitutes cultural me