Subsequent to its adoption by many creationists as a feasible understanding of the compositional origin of the book of Genesis, the tablet model has been repeatedly advanced as the most likely explanation for how Moses could have written about historical events that occurred long before his time. This model maintains that Moses relied upon preexistent sources, clay tablets documenting the lives of Adam, Noah, and the Patriarchs. The boundaries between these sources are purportedly refected in the book of Genesis by the presence of the Hebrew word תוֵֹלדוֹתּ. This paper investigates whether the tablet model is a viable understanding of the composition of Genesis and whether it warrants continued promotion. It concludes that the tablet model is suffciently problematic that its continued promotion may actually prove detrimental to the creationist cause. If advocated at all, it should be as one of many possible biblical theories of the composition of Genesis,with a tentativeness that befts it.