DOCSLIB.ORG

Volume 8/Number 1/ November 2020/Article 5

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Volume 8/Number 1/ November 2020/Article 5 ANUJAT/VOLUME 8/NUMBER 1/ NOVEMBER 2020/ARTICLE 5 Volume 8/ Number 1 November 2020 Article 5 Exploring the Relationship between the Mosaic Code and the Hammurabi Code ISAAC BOAHENG ISAAC BOAHENG is a PhD Candidate in Theology and a Research Fellow in the Department of Religion and Biblical Studies, University of the Free State, South Africa. He holds a Master of Divinity degree from the Trinity Theological Seminary and has research interests in Biblical Studies, Public Theology, Translation Studies and Mission, among others. Currently, Isaac is an ordained Minister of the Methodist Church, Ghana and serves as a Translator for the Bible Society of Ghana. For this and additional works at: anujat.anuc.edu.gh Copyright © November 2020 All Nations University Journal of Applied Thought (ANUJAT) and Authors Recommended Citation: Boateng, I. (2020). Exploring the Relationship between the Mosaic Code and the Hammurabi Code. All Nations University Journal of Applied Thought (ANUJAT),8(1): 77-89. All Nations University Press. doi: http://doi.org/ 10.47987/ CEFD7600 Available at: http://anujat.anuc.edu.gh/universityjournal/anujat/Vol8/No1/5.pdf ANUJAT/VOLUME 8/NUMBER 1/ NOVEMBER 2020/ARTICLE 5 Research Online is the Institutional repository for All Nations University College. For further information, contact the ANUC Library: [email protected] Abstract Over the years there has been a growing interest in the connections between the Old Testament and other Ancient Near East literature. The Hammurabi Code, a Babylonian legal document which predates the Mosaic Code by about 300 years, is one of the ancient documents that have featured prominently in such comparative studies. The remarkable similarities between the Hammurabi Code and the Mosaic Code raises questions about the originality of the Mosaic Code. Scholars often ask whether Moses copied and/or revised the Hammurabi Code and gave it to Israel as a divinely inspired Law or whether Moses actually received his Law as an original document from God. If Moses plagiarized the Hammurabi Code, then the inspiration of the Mosaic Code and (by extension) the inspiration of the entire Hebrew Scriptures is in doubt. The relevance of this textual and source issue for Old Testament scholarship has prompted the present study which aims at investigating the relationship between the Mosaic Code and the Hammurabi Code through a comparative study. After a critical assessment of the key similarities and differences between these two ancient documents, the paper suggests keys factors that might have accounted for the similarities and the proceeds to contend for the originality and authenticity of the Mosaic Code. Keywords: Ancient Near East, Hammurabi Code, Mosaic Law, Old Testament, Plagiarism Introduction Law codes are important traditional conventions meant to ensure social order. Traditional laws contain regulations and procedures establish the rules for proper conduct and also serve as the means by which laws are enforced. According to Kenton L. Sparks, the production of legal documents (including “loans, leases, contracts, pledges, marriage agreements, adoption, real-estate transactions, lawsuits, royal edicts, and law codes”) was common among Ancient Near East societies.1 There are thousands of clay tablets containing both private and state legal documents in ancient Mesopotamia that have survived till now, some dating as early as the twenty-seventh century BCE.2 In addition, there are many ancient documents on court proceedings and religious activities that have been preserved to date. Some biblical materials, especially Old Testament texts, allude to some of these ancient documents. In other words, some biblical texts show intertextual connections with extra-biblical texts. Examples of Ancient Near East laws which may have links with biblical laws include Sumerian laws (such as laws of Ur-Nammu and laws of Lipit-Istar) and, 1 Kenton L. Sparks, Ancient Texts for the Study of the Hebrew Bible: A Guide to the Background Literature (Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.: Peabody, 2005), 417. 2 Kathryn E. Slanski, “The Law of Hammurabi and Its Audience,” Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities vol. 24 (1) (2012): 96-110, 98. 77 ANUJAT/VOLUME 8/NUMBER 1/ NOVEMBER 2020/ARTICLE 5 Akkadian law and Misaru edicts (such as the laws of Ešnunna, the Hammurabi Code, the Old Babylonian Misaru Edicts, the middle Assyrian laws, the middle Assyrian Harem edicts and others).3 Two main forms of ancient law codes can be identified, namely, Casuistic and Apoditic laws. Both kinds of laws are present in the Old Testament. Casuistic laws, also called Case/Procedural/Conditional laws, comprise laws that consist of a potential case followed by a prescribed verdict.4 Walter C. Kaiser Jr. opines that these laws “took up various circumstances and built precedents for specific cases that demand practical wisdom in applying the absolute principles from the moral or absolute law.”5 Such laws are conditional laws, applying only when certain conditions are fulfilled. Therefore, casuistic laws do not apply to all people. Structurally, casuitic laws have a conditional clause which is introduced by a temporal clause providing the case-context for the condition. Casuistic laws have a protasis that establishes the case to be treated and apodosis that pronounces the penalty. Thus, the common structure of any casuistic law is “If a person does so-and-so…then” or simply, “If . then” (see Ex. 22:16–17). Apoditic laws or absolute laws, on the other hand, are “promulgated in unconditional, categorical directives such as commands and prohibitions.”6 That is to say, apoditic laws are characterized by absolute or general commands or prohibitions, as in the Decalogue. They are not common in the ancient law codes and hence are unique to Israel. Apodictic laws give laws in unconditional covenant demands and prohibitions. They issue absolute orders which allow no exceptions. They may appear in the positive form as “You shall…” or in the negative form as “You shall not …” (see Ex. 20:3). Unlike casuistic laws, absolute laws are unconditional and prohibitive in nature. Over the years there has been a growing interest in finding what connections exist between Ancient Israel laws as stipulated in the Old Testament and laws that existed in other Ancient Near East cultures. Israel lived in the neighborhood and had interactions with their neighbors which had an impact on the culture of Israel. Consequently, the Old Testament text which was Israel’s main religious text did not exist as the only texts available in the Ancient Near East. There were a number of Ancient Near East texts which predate the Old Testament text and at the same time share significant similarities with part of the old Testament text. Of particular interest to the present study is the Hammurabi Code, a set of laws decreed by the Babylonian King Hammurabi for his society. Scholars have observed remarkable similarities between the Hammurabi Code and the Mosaic Code in terms of form and content. Since the Hammurabi Code predates the Mosaic Code, one may argue that Moses copied his Code from the Hammurabi Code. If this assertion is true then the whole episode at Mount Sinai is false and the inspiration of Old Testament is false. Another 3 Sparks, Ancient Texts for the Study of the Hebrew Bible, 419-425. 4 Ronald L. Eisenberg, Dictionary of Jewish Terms: A Guide to the Language of Judaism (Rockville: Taylor Trade Publications, 2008), s.v. “Causuitic.” 5 Walter C. Kaiser Jr., History of Israel: From Bronze Age Through the Jewish Wars (Nashville, Tennessee: B&H Publishing Group, 1998), 122. 6 William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg and Robert L. Hubbard Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Dallas: Thomas Nelson Publishing, 2004), 276. 78 ANUJAT/VOLUME 8/NUMBER 1/ NOVEMBER 2020/ARTICLE 5 view is to consider the Mosaic Code as something that Moses received from God in the form that it has been recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures. The confusion over the relationship between these two Codes have prompted this research which purposes to bring out some of the similarities and differences between the Hammurabi Code and the Mosaic Code, and to account for these similarities and differences. Methodology for the Study No scholar is exempted from the methodological problem associated with studying the connections between Ancient Near East texts and the Old Testament. The genesis of modern comparative study between biblical and ancient near east literature and culture can be traced to Friedrich Delitzsch’s 1902 series of lectures— titled “Babel und Bibel”— which he presented under the auspices of the German Oriental Society. Delitzsch argued that the biblical writers depended on and even borrowed from Mesopotamian literature. These presentations motivated the formation of a “Pan-Babylonianism” which contended that all world myths and the Christian Bible are just versions of Babylonian mythology.7 Later, this approach became unpopular as it became clear that the motivation behind this approach was to reduce the values of the Old Testament so as to contrast them with those of the New Testament.8 Since then, various scholars continued the search for an appropriate methodology for studying the connections between the Bible and other Ancient Near East cultures until a more acceptable methodological was developed by W. W. Hallo, who promoted a balanced method called the “contextual approach,” which seeks to identify and examine both observable similarities (comparative) and differences (contrastive) between the Bible and Ancient Near East literature.9 Hallo did not aim at finding “the key to every biblical phenomenon in some ancient Near Eastern precedent, but rather to silhouette the biblical text against its wider literary and cultural environment.’”10 His studies show similarities between the Ancient Near East and the Old Testament on historical, cultural, social, and religious backgrounds as well as differences in conceptual, functional, and theological backgrounds. Roberto Ouro citing J.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Similarities and Differences Between the Old Testament and the Ancient Near Eastern Texts
    Andrews University Seminary Studies, Vol. 49, No. 1, 5-32. Copyright © 2011 Andrews University Press. SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN TEXTS ROBE R TO OU R O Adventist School of Theology Sagunto, Valencia, Spain Introduction In 1902, the noted Assyriologist Friedrich Delitzsch presented a series of lectures on comparative studies under the auspices of the German Oriental Society. Delitzsch’s lectures, entitled “Babel und Bibel,” claimed that the literature of the Bible was dependent on, and even borrowed from, the literature of Mesopotamia. He questioned the appropriateness of the traditional theological terminology used to describe the Bible (e.g., revelation, inspiration) in light of its now evident dependency.1 Delitzsch’s work spawned a movement called “Pan-Babylonianism,” which argued that all world myths and Christian Scriptures (OT and NT) were simply versions of Babylonian mythology.2 As the series developed, however, it became clear that the lecturer’s motives were not entirely pure. His interest was to minimize the values of OT teaching so that it could be contrasted with that of the NT.3 The widespread interest in finding connections between the Bible and other ANE cultures has bred its own reaction in the warning raised by several scholars against exaggerating the importance of such similarities, a practice baptized with the name “parallelomania.”4 Of particular concern has been the often tacit assumption that such parallels can be construed as evidence for a genetic connection between the cultures that share them. Despite such warnings, the pendulum of biblical studies has continued to swing back and forth with remarkable regularity over the generations, as initial archeological discoveries have led to enthusiastic claims of similarities with various biblical practices and the implied, if not always stated, conclusion that these constitute the source for the biblical practice in question.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    T ABLE OF CONTENTS Epigraph v Dedication vii Acknowledgements ix Introduction xi PART ONE 3 Post-Bellum Aftermath: An Anthology of Anomalies, Elites, and Agendas 1. Koldewey’s Conundrum and Delitzsch’s Dilemma 5 A. Koldewey’s Conundrum: The Sirrus 6 B. Delitzsch’s Dilemma: Babel und Bible 14 1. The CuneiformT ablets and an Out-of-Place Name for God 20 2. The Documentary Hypothesis: Astruc to DeWette 21 3. The Documentary Hypothesis: 24 Hupfeld’s “Copernican Revolution” 4. The Documentary Hypothesis: 25 Karl Heinrich Graf and Julius Wellhausen 5. The Critical Suspicion of an Agenda 26 6. The Suggestions of an Agenda at Work with the Critics: 27 Weishaupt’s Strange Comment and a Hidden Illuminist Role in Early Old Testament Criticism? 7. The Explosive Thunderclap of Delitzsch’s Dilemma 28 2. “Marduk Remeasured the Structure of the Deep”: 31 The Megalithic Yard and the Sumerian Reform A. An Oxford Professor Overturns the Standard Model: 33 Alexander Thom, isH Work, and its Implications 1. Thom’s Megalithic Yard and the Expansions 35 of Knight and Butler 2. TheM ethods 37 a. Thom’s “Ancient Bureau of Standards Theory” 37 GGMM-guts_FIRSTPASS_UPDATED.indd 19 3/1/11 1:10 AM 3. Celestial Geometries and the Pendulum Method 38 4. Beautiful Numbers: The 366-, 365-, and 360-Degree Systems 41 5. TheN ext Step: Measures of Weight and Volume 44 6. Ancient and Megalithic Anticipations of the Imperial 45 and Metric Systems B. The Hidden Elite and the Cosmic War Scenario 46 1. The Ancient Elite: Astronomy, Finance, and the God of Corn 46 versus the God of Debt 2.
    [Show full text]
  • The Polemic Nature of the Genesis Oosmology by Gerhard F
    81 The Polemic Nature of the Genesis Oosmology by Gerhard F. Hasel This paper, emphasizing that the creation narrative of Genesis I, far from being dependent on the "creation" stories of Babylonia and other ancient Near Eastern comogonies, designedly polemicizes against them, was originally presented to the Uppsala Congress of the International Organization for Old Testament Studies in August, 1971. We are glad to publish it in this revised form. Dr. Hasel is Associate Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Theology in Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan. LMOST one hundred years ago a new phase of OT study was A inaugurated with the publications of the Babylonian versions of the flood t and the creation account.2 Soon a school of thought arose which attempted to show that there was nothing in the Old Testament that was not but a pale reflection of Babylonian ideas.3 This "pan-Babylonian" school led to the well-known "Bible versus Babel" controversy which was started in the first decade of our century by Friedrich Delitzsch,4 who claimed that the Old Testament was lacking almost completely in originality. Today the situation has changed radically. We can no longer talk glibly about Baby­ loaian civilization because we now know that it was composed of three main strands and that even before the end of the third mill­ ennium B.C. as W. G. Lambert and othersS remind us. The cultural and religious situation is not only multi-layered but also extremely complex and diverse with its own long history of traditions.6 The finds at U garit have made it apparent that Canaanite mythology does not need to agree with that of Mesopotamia.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes from the Oriental Seminary
    JOHNS HOPKiNS UNIVERSITY CIRCULARS Published with the approbation of the Board of Trustees VOL. XXIJ.—No. 163.1 BALTIMORE, JUNE, 1903. [PRICE, 10 CENTS. ENTERED AS SECOND-CLASS MATTER AT THE BALTIMORE, MARYLAND, POSTOFFICE. NOTES FROM THE ORIENTAL SEMINARY. EDITED BY PROFESSOR PAUL HAUPT, LL. DA~ More than twenty years ago Delitzsch delivered a lecture on BIBLE AND BABEL. the location of Paradise,0 which contained, perhaps, just as By PAUL HAUPT. much that was new and revolutionary from the traditional point of view as his recent lectures on Babel and Bible, but—the [Abstract of a paper read at the meeting of the American Oriental Society, Baltimore, April 17, 1903.] German Emperor was not present and did not command a repetition of the lecture at the Imperial Palace; nor did he deem The pessimistic philosopher who wrote the original portions of it necessary to define his faith in an open letter. Delitzsch’s the Book of Ecelesiastes, probably not long before the time of 1 says, The race does not belong to the swift, nor Ex Oriente Lux, written about five years ago for the German our Savior, the battle to the strong: everything depends on time and chance. Orient Society, did not stir up a sensation, although he pointed (EccI. 9, 11). If my distinguished friend, Professor Friedrich out there just as plainly I that the Old Testament contained a Delitzsch, of Berlin, had not delivered (Jan. 13, 1902) his lecture great deal derived from Babylonian sources.—Everything depends on Babel and Bible2 in the presence of the German Emperor, on time and chance.
    [Show full text]
  • Kaiser, Christ, and Canaan
    Forschungen zum Alten Testament Herausgegeben von Konrad Schmid (Zürich) · Mark S. Smith (Princeton) Hermann Spieckermann (Göttingen) · Andrew Teeter (Harvard) 122 Paul Michael Kurtz Kaiser, Christ, and Canaan The Religion of Israel in Protestant Germany, 1871–1918 Mohr Siebeck Paul Michael Kurtz: born 1984, in Harrisburg; 1999–2003, Diploma, Dunlap High School, Illinois; 2003–2007, B. A., Harding University, in English Literature and Biblical Languages; 2007–2010, M.Div., Princeton Theological Seminary, in Hebrew Bible and Northwest Semitics; 2010–2012, Doctoral Fellow, University of Chicago; 2010–2011, Fulbright Scholar, University of Göttingen; 2012–2016, Dr. phil., University of Göttingen, in History and Religion; 2016–2017, Research Associate, University of Göttingen; since autumn 2017, Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual European Fellow, University of Cambridge, and Postdoctoral Research Associate, Queens’ College, Cambridge. ISBN 978 3-16-155496-4 / eISBN 978-3-16-155497-1 DOI 10.1628/978-3-16-155497-1 ISSN 0940-4155 / eISSN 2568-8359 (Forschungen zum Alten Testament) Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data is available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2018 by Mohr Siebeck Tübingen, Germany. www.mohrsiebeck.com This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproduc- tions, translations and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was typeset by Martin Fischer in Tübingen, printed by Gulde Druck in Tübingen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Germany. To my mother and my father for all they’ve done for me, known and unknown … history itself is in many respects the most undisciplined of disciplines.
    [Show full text]
  • The Babel-Bible Controversy
    1911.] The Babel-Bible Controvers'y. 641 ARTICLE VI. THE BABEL-BIBLE CONTROVERSY. BY PROFESSOR WILLIAM NOTZ, PH.D., WATERTOWN, WIS. AMONG the epoch-making achievements .. scientific research during the past century which possess a lasting character, the results of the explorations carried on in the countries of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers stand forth preeminently. Al­ though excavations had been 'carried on systematically in Mesopotamia since 1842, the interest of the educated Christian world was more generally aroused in France in 184-6 at the return of Paul Emil Botta from his successful expedition to Assyria. In England the interest of the public reached a climax when George Smith, in October, 1872, discovered, among the clay tablets of Assurbanipal's library at Nineveh, an account of the Deluge, which he made public on December 3, 1872, to a representative audience over which Gladstone presided. A similar wave of enthusiasm swept over at least the Eastern States of this country, when the magnificent re­ sults of the various expeditions sent out by the University of Pennsylvania to Nippur in Babylonia, under Peters, Haynes. and Hilprecht, were made known. Again a clim,ax was reached when, in the autumn of 1902, Professor Hilprecht, in a course of public lectures to large audiences, reviewed the remarkable finds made at Nippur. What a deep and perma­ nent interest was createci may be seen by the fact that, within the past twenty-five years, courses in Assyriology have been established in all the leading universities of this country. 642 The Babel-Bible Controversy. [Oct.
    [Show full text]
  • The End of Biblical Studies Will Mean the End of History Or Even the End of Religion
    Philosophy and Religious Studies Books Philosophy and Religious Studies 2007 The ndE of Biblical Studies Hector Avalos Iowa State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/philrs_books Part of the Biblical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Avalos, Hector, "The ndE of Biblical Studies" (2007). Philosophy and Religious Studies Books. 2. http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/philrs_books/2 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Philosophy and Religious Studies at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy and Religious Studies Books by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS 9 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 11 NOTES TO THE READERS 13 INTRODUCTION 15 Brief Statement of Our Thesis 16 Irrelevance Defined 17 Irrelevance by the Numbers 18 The Paradox of Biblical Scholarship 20 Canons and Professionalism 22 Anti-intellectualism and Our Thesis 24 The End of Everything? 25 Personal Background 26 Organization 28 Summary 29 PART 1: HOW THE MAIN SUBDISCIPLINES OF BIBLICAL STUDIES CONCEAL THE IRRELEVANCE OF THE BIBLE 35 CHAPTER 1: TRANSLATIONS: HIDING IN PLAIN SENSE 37 Basic Translation Theory 38 5 6 CONTENTS Dynamic/Functional Equivalence 40 Politically Correct Polytheism 43 Creating Mistranslations 44 Numerous Mistranslations 47 Dehumanizing Humanism 49 Sugarcoating Jesus 50 Engendering lnclusivity 53 Sanitizing Anti-Judaism 56 Summary 58 CHAPTER
    [Show full text]
  • The Significance of the Cosmology in Genesis 1 in Relation to Ancient
    Andrews University Seminary Studies 10 (1972) 1-20. Copyright © 1972 by Andrews University Press. Cited with permission. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE COSMOLOGY IN GENESIS I IN RELATION TO ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN PARALLELS GERHARD F. HASEL Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan When in 1872 George Smith made known a Babylonian version of the flood story,1 which is part of the famous Gilga- mesh Epic, and announced three years later a Babylonian creation story,2 which was published the following year in book form,3 the attention of OT scholars was assured and a new era of the study of Gn was inaugurated. Following the new trend numerous writers have taken it for granted that the opening narratives of Gn rest squarely on earlier Babylonian mythological texts and folklore. J. Skinner speaks, in summing up his discussion of the naturalization of Babylonian myths in Israel, of "Hebrew legends and their Babylonian originals."4 More specifically he writes ". .. it seems impossible to doubt that the cosmogony of Gn I rests on a conception of the process of creation fundamentally identical with that of the 1 The first news of this flood account was conveyed by Smith in 1872 through the columns of The Times and a paper read to the Society of Biblical Archaeology on Dec. 3, rS7z, which was printed in the Society's Transactions, IT (1873), 13-'34. 2 In a letter by Smith published in the Daily Telegraph, March 4, 1875. 3 G. Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis (London, 1876). 4 John Skinner, Genesis (ICC; 2d ed.; Edinburgh, 1930), p.
    [Show full text]
  • Bahel and Bible. Third and Last Lecture
    BABEL AND BIBLE.* BY FRIEDRICH DELITZSCH. THIRD AND LAST LECTURE. I. ONCE again let me point out how the restoration of Babylonian and Assyrian antiquity is broadening our spiritual insight, how, together with the achievements of Old Testament research, it is radically changing our judgment in regard to the essential value of ancient Hebrew literature, and how it seems destined to shed light upon the most vital religious questions. The horizon of the tribal genealogy of Genesis x (the so-called Volkertafel) only extended as far as the Persian Gulf, and its geography and ethnology corresponded to the limited knowledge of about the seventh century before Christ, yet no one would hold it responsible for its many errors and omissions. In the second verse Japheth's oldest son is given as Gomer (mentioned also in Ezekiel xxxviii, 6), and the third as Madai. While the Indo- Germanic Medes (Madai) first came within the horizon even of the Assyrians in the time of Sargon (722-705 B. C), this is not the case with Gimir (Gomer) until Asarhaddon.'s time (681-668 B. C.)^ The Sapardseans were the inhabitants of the land Saparda-u which is named in the inscriptions of King Darius together with Cappadocia and Ionia and was probably also in Asia Minor ; and these people appear on the clay tablets (Sm. 2005, K. 4668 and others) together with the Girmirrgeans, Medes, and Mannseans as enemies of Asarhaddon. Thus a little light falls on the land Sepha- rad mentioned by the prophet Obadiah (i. 20) to which the people of Jerusalem were taken as captives probably by Ionian merchants or pirates.
    [Show full text]
  • A Christo-Canonical Approach to the Book of Psalms
    THE BOOK OF PSALMS AS THE BOOK OF CHRIST: A CHRISTO-CANONICAL APPROACH TO THE BOOK OF PSALMS by Jerry Eugene Shepherd A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy 1995 Faculty Advisor : Tremper Longman III Second Faculty Reader : Peter E. Enns Chairman of the Field Committee: Vern S. Poythress Librarian : D. G. Hart To my loving wife Cheryl, and my three wonderful children, Jennifer, Joel, and Timothy TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS . ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . xiv PREFACE .. xvii CHAPTER PART ONE THE HISTORY OF MESSIANIC PSALM INTERPRETATION AND CANONICAL INTERPRETATION . 1 1. A HISTORICAL SURVEY OF MESSIANIC OR CHRISTOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION OF THE PSALMS . 2 Apostolic Fathers to ca. AD 200 The Alexandrian and Antiochene Schools to ca. 500 The Alexandrian School The Antiochene School Middle Ages to ca. 1500 The Reformation to ca. 1600 Martin Luther John Calvin Other Reformers From the Reformation to the Present "Conservative" Exegesis to the Twentieth Century "Liberal" Exegesis to the Twentieth Century Twentieth Century Developments The Early History of Religions School Form Criticism The Myth and Ritual School Sensus Plenior Neo-orthodoxy and the Biblical Theology Movement 2. THE CANONICAL APPROACH OF BREVARD CHILDS . 63 A Description of Childs's Approach Objections to Childs's Approach 1. The Question of Methodology 2. The Question of Definition 3. The Question of Focus 4. The Question of Intentionality 5. The Question of Canonical Plurality 6. The Question of Emphasis 7. The Question of Tradition 8. The Question of the Whole Canon 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Gunkel Versus Delitzsch
    : GUNKEL VERSUS DELITZSCH. BY THE EDITOR. ASSYRIOLOGY came prominently before the public when Professor Delitzsch delivered his lectures on Babel and Bible before the Emperor. It was an unprecedented advertisement for higher criticism and Biblical research in general, and many good Christians were in this way, for the first time in their lives, informed that a new conception of the Bible was all but universally acknowl- edged within the academic circles of theological scholars. We have published Delitzsch's lectures on "Babel and Bible" because they are one of the most interesting publications of the present time and give us much food for thought. In order to enable the reader to form his own opinion, we incorporated in our edition the letter of Emperor William and the most significant criticisms of Delitzsch's position, partly entire and partly in extract. A few weeks ago we took occasion to notice a translation of Koe- nig's "Bible and Babylon," and now find that some anonymous scholar has ventured into translating Professor Hermann Gunkel's reply to Delitzsch, which appeared some time ago under the title of "Israel and Babylon." Gunkel is a representative theologian, well versed in both Babylonian religion and Old Testament theol- ogy, and if any man ought to be called upon to have his say on the subject, it is he. The pamphlet as it lies before us is a painstaking and even pedantic translation of Gunkel's essay. The translator seems to be aware of the shortcomings of his labors. In the preface he says of his translation "In the first place it has been made to conform to the original as closely as possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Excavating Imperial Fantasies: the German Oriental Society, 1898–1914 Kristen E. Twardowski a Thesis Submitted to the Faculty
    Excavating Imperial Fantasies: The German Oriental Society, 1898–1914 Kristen E. Twardowski A thesis submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of History. Chapel Hill 2015 Approved by: Karen Hagemann Konrad H. Jarausch Daniel J. Sherman © 2015 Kristen E. Twardowski ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Kristen E. Twardowski: Excavating Imperial Fantasies: The German Oriental Society, 1898–-1914 (Under the direction of Karen Hagemann) Though established near the end of the age of exploration and empire, after its formation in 1898, the Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft (the German Oriental Society or DOG) quickly became a leading international archaeological society. This thesis explores this period of growth during the DOG's founding years in the 1890s until the First World War. It examines the motives that led to the DOG's inception, the structure and composition of this organization, and the ways in which the DOG used its publications to present itself to the public. Though members of the society held diverse professions, religions, and perspectives, they shared two aims: to extend Germany's international influence using archaeology and to solidify a respected place within the male elite of the German Empire. Unlike the rich literature on French and British Orientalism, studies on German Orientalism have only recently emerged. This thesis hopes to contribute to this developing scholarship. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………….1
    [Show full text]