DOCSLIB.ORG

Journal of Biblical Literature

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Biblical Literature VOLUME 122, No. 2 Summer 2003 “Until This Day” and the Preexilic Redaction of the Deuteronomistic History JEFFREY C. GEOGHEGAN 201–227 Who Was the Chronicler’s Audience? A Hint from His Genealogies YIGAL LEVIN 229–245 Purity beyond the Temple in the Second Temple Era JOHN C. POIRIER 247–265 The Fourteen Triads of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:21–7:12) GLEN H. STASSEN 267–308 Why Did Matthew Get the Shema Wrong? A Study of Matthew 22:37 PAUL FOSTER 309–333 Brotherly Love and the High Priest Christology of Hebrews PATRICK GRAY 335–350 What Was Doeg the Edomite’s Title? Textual Emendation versus a Comparative Approach to 1 Samuel 21:8 SHAWN ZELIG ASTER 351–359 Book Reviews 363 — Index 400 US ISSN 0021–9231 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE PUBLISHED QUARTERLY BY THE SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE (Constituent Member of the American Council of Learned Societies) EDITORS OF THE JOURNAL General Editor: GAIL R. O’DAY, Candler School of Theology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322 Book Review Editor: TODD C. PENNER, Austin College, Sherman, TX 75090 EDITORIAL BOARD Term Expiring 2003: SUSAN ACKERMAN, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755 MICHAEL L. BARRÉ, St. Mary’s Seminary & University, Baltimore, MD 21210 ATHALYA BRENNER, University of Amsterdam, 1012 GC Amsterdam, The Netherlands MARC BRETTLER, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA 02254-9110 WARREN CARTER, St. Paul School of Theology, Kansas City, MO 64127 PAUL DUFF, George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052 BEVERLY R. GAVENTA, Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, NJ 08542 JUDITH LIEU, King’s College London, London WC2R 2LS United Kingdom KATHLEEN O’CONNOR, Columbia Theological Seminary, Decatur, GA 30031 C. L. SEOW, Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, NJ 08542 VINCENT WIMBUSH, Union Theological Seminary, New York, NY 10027 2004: JANICE CAPEL ANDERSON, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844 MOSHE BERNSTEIN, Yeshiva University, New York, NY 10033-3201 ROBERT KUGLER, Lewis & Clark College, Portland, OR 97219 BERNARD M. LEVINSON, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455-0125 THEODORE J. LEWIS, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218 TIMOTHY LIM, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH1 2LX Scotland STEPHEN PATTERSON, Eden Theological Seminary, St. Louis, MO 63119 ADELE REINHARTZ, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, OH N2L 3C5 Canada NAOMI A. STEINBERG, DePaul University, Chicago, IL 60614 SZE-KAR WAN, Andover Newton Theological School, Newton Centre, MA 92459 2005: BRIAN K. BLOUNT, Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, NJ 08542 TERENCE L. DONALDSON, Wycliffe College, Toronto, ON M5S 1H7 Canada PAMELA EISENBAUM, Iliff School of Theology, Denver, CO 80210 STEVEN FRIESEN, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211 A. KATHERINE GRIEB, Virginia Theological Seminary, Alexandria, VA 22304 JEFFREY KAH-JIN KUAN, Pacific School of Religion, Berkeley, CA 94709 RICHARD D. NELSON, Perkins School of Theology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX 75275 DAVID L. PETERSEN, Candler School of Theology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322 ALAN F. SEGAL, Barnard College, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027 GREGORY E. STERLING, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556 PATRICIA K. TULL, Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY 40205 Editorial Assistant: Susan E. Haddox, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322 President of the Society: Eldon Jay Epp, Lexington, MA 02420; Vice President: David L. Petersen, Candler School of Theology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322; Chair, Research and Publications Committee: James C. VanderKam, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556; Executive Director: Kent H. Richards, Society of Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329. The Journal of Biblical Literature (ISSN 0021–9231) is published quarterly. The annual subscription price is US$35.00 for members and US$75.00 for nonmembers. Institutional rates are also available. For information regarding subscriptions and membership, contact: Society of Biblical Literature, P.O. Box 2243, Williston, VT 05495-2243. Phone: 877-725-3334 (toll free) or 802-864-6185. FAX: 802-864-7626. E-mail: [email protected]. For information concerning permission to quote, editorial and business matters, please see the Spring issue, p. 2. The JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE (ISSN 0021– 9231) is published quarterly by the Society of Bib- lical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30329. Periodical postage paid at Atlanta, Geor- gia, and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Society of Biblical Literature, P.O. Box 2243, Williston, VT 05495-2243. PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA JBL 122/2 (2003) 201–227 “UNTIL THIS DAY” AND THE PREEXILIC REDACTION OF THE DEUTERONOMISTIC HISTORY JEFFREY C. GEOGHEGAN [email protected] Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467 Over a century ago Abraham Kuenen identified two distinct strata in the book of Kings.1 In one stratum, he observed that the phrase “until this day” both confirms realities no longer true after the exile and occurs in passages bound to the very structure of the book (2 Kgs 8:16–24; 14:1–7; 16:1–9)—a structure Kuenen attributed to a Deuteronomistic redactor (his Rd1).2 His analysis of other occurrences of “until this day” in Kings led him to conclude that they all derived from Rd1—a conclusion that was subsequently embraced by Julius Wellhausen, and, when combined with Martin Noth’s landmark study a half century later, helped lay the foundation for Frank Moore Cross’s theory of a dual redaction of the Deuteronomistic History (DH).3 Since Cross’s origi- nal studies, the theory of a dual redaction of the DH has had numerous defend- ers and now stands on firmer evidentiary ground.4 The purpose of this article is 1 Abraham Kuenen, Historisch-kritische Einleitung in die Bücher des alten Testaments (Leipzig: Otto Schulze, 1892; Dutch original, Leiden, 1861–65), 1:90–91. 2 Ibid., 1:91. 3 Julius Wellhausen, Die Composition des Hexateuchs und der historischen Bücher des alten Testaments (4th ed.; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1963; 1st ed., 1866), 298–99; Martin Noth, The Deuteronomistic History (JSOTSup 15; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1981; German original, Halle: Niemeyer, 1943); Frank Moore Cross, “The Structure of Deuteronomic History,” in Perspectives in Jewish Learning (Annual of the College of Jewish Studies 3; Chicago: College of Jewish Studies, 1968), 9–24; idem, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973), 274–89. 4 See, e.g., the early studies of R. E. Friedman (The Exile and Biblical Narrative [HSM 22; Decatur, GA: Scholars Press, 1981]) and R. D. Nelson (The Double Redaction of the Deuterono- mistic History [JSOTSup 18; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1981]). Cross’s theory of a double redaction of the DH, in general, and his proposal of a Josianic edition, in particular, have since found wide acceptance among scholars, although oftentimes with modifications. See, e.g., M. Cogan, “Israel in Exile—The View of a Josianic Historian,” JBL 97 (1978): 40–44; R. G. Boling, Joshua: A New 201 202 Journal of Biblical Literature not to retread this ground but to pick up where Kuenen left off in identifying the source of “until this day” not just for Kings but for the whole of the DH. Although the only study devoted solely to this phrase has argued that “until this day” derives from “many different redactors,”5 there are compelling reasons to assign this phrase to one redactor: the Deuteronomistic Historian (Dtr), who employed “until this day” as his own personal witness to geographical, political, and cultic realities mentioned in his sources that still existed at the time of his historical enterprise. Moreover, the evidence of “until this day” indicates that the Dtr was active during the reign of Josiah and that his preexilic history con- tained most of what we now have before us (as Cross originally argued). Finally, the Dtr’s use of “until this day” suggests that, when compiling the DH, he sought to represent the interests of both the Judean monarchy and the Levitical priesthood. Translation with Notes and Commentary, with introduction by G. E. Wright (AB 6; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1982); S. McKenzie, The Chronicler’s Use of the Deuteronomistic History (HSM 33; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1984); idem, The Trouble with Kings: The Composition of the Book of Kings in the Deuteronomistic History (VTSup 42; Leiden: Brill, 1991); M. Cogan and H. Tadmor, II Kings: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 11; Garden City, NY: Dou- bleday, 1988); G. N. Knoppers, Two Nations Under God: The Deuteronomistic History of Solomon and the Dual Monarchies (HSM 52, 53; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1994); and A. F. Campbell and M. A. O’Brien, Unfolding the Deuteronomistic History (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000). Cross’s original theory also has undergone more significant changes in recent years. Most notably, a number of scholars have argued for an earlier Hezekian history. See, e.g., B. Halpern, “Sacred History and Ideology: Chronicles’ Thematic Structure—Indications of an Earlier Source,” in The Creation of Sacred Literature: Composition and Redaction of the Biblical Text (ed. R. E. Friedman; Near East- ern Studies 22; Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1981), 35–54; B. Halpern and D. S. Vanderhooft, “The Editions of Kings in the 7th–6th Centuries BCE,” HUCA 62 (1991): 179–244; and I. W. Provan, Hezekiah and the Books of Kings: A Contribution to the Debate about the Composition of the Deuteronomistic History (BZAW 172. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1988). Con- versely, both before and since Cross’s study, Noth’s theory of a unified DH has been revised by some scholars to include multiple exilic redactions. See, e.g., the work of the so-called Göttingen school: R. Smend, “Das Gesetz und die Völker: Ein Beitrag zur deuteronomistischen Redaktions- geschichte,” in Probleme biblischer Theologie (ed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Magic in the Biblical World,” Tyndale Bulletin 34 (1983): 169-200
    Edwin M. Yamauchi, “Magic in the Biblical World,” Tyndale Bulletin 34 (1983): 169-200. Magic in the Biblical World Edwin M. Yamauchi The Institute for Biblical Research lecture, 1981 [p.169] I INTRODUCTION There can be no doubt that both the Old Testament and the New Testament were born in environments permeated with magical beliefs and practices.1 It should come as no surprise to find Moses contesting with magicians in Egypt, later identified as Jannes and Jambres (2 Tim. 3:6-8),2 as magic was a dominant factor in Egyptian [p.170] culture.3 For Egyptians to attain to an afterlife they had to provi6e themselves with magical incantations such, as the Pyramid Texts in the Old Kingdom, the Coffin Texts in the Middle Kingdom. and the Book of the dead in the New Kingdom.4 Magic was also a potent force in 5 other contemporary cultures, such as that of the Hittites. 1 Magic is distinct from but closely related to ‘divination’, the foretelling of the future by various signs. See my essay, ‘Divination in the Biblical World’, presented to the American Scientific Affiliation, August. 102. My own interest in the subject of magic has grown out of the research for my dissertation, published as Mandaic Incantation Texts [hereafter MIT] (New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1967). As I included an extensive bibliography on magic in this volume (pp. 372-395), 1 will for the most part refrain from repeating titles listed there. I am indebted to a fellowship from the Institute for Advanced Christian Studies for aid in continued research on ancient magic and divination.
    [Show full text]
  • Book Reviews
    Theological Studies 68 (2007) BOOK REVIEWS OPENING THE SEALED BOOK:INTERPRETATIONS OF THE BOOK OF ISAIAH IN LATE ANTIQUITY. By Joseph Blenkinsopp. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerd- mans, 2006. Pp. 335. $25. Blenkinsopp recently completed Anchor Bible’s three-volume commen- tary on the Book of Isaiah. His work there not only resulted in detailed analysis of the shape and purpose of the Isaian text, but also led B. to realize the influence of the interpretive process, already begun in the final redaction of the book, on a variety of works and movements in the fol- lowing centuries. Here B. explores three models of Isaiah drawn from the book itself: (1) the prophet who announces judgment as God’s critic of society and defender of the marginal; (2) the prophet as apocalyptic seer who announces imminent final judgment; and (3) the prophet as “man of God” who (in general a hero of the past) heals, intercedes, works miracles, and the like. Each model played a role among different groups, but the most important trajectory for B. is that of the apocalyptic seer, given Isaiah’s heavy influence on the Book of Daniel, the Qumran sectar- ians, and the earliest Palestinian Christianity. Two themes are key: the penitent remnant that survives the Exile, and the sealed book hiding Isa- iah’s words until a future completion (Isa. 8:16; 29:11–12). B. concludes that both Qumran and Christianity likely emphasized these themes because each of their founders, the Teacher of Righteousness and Jesus, applied them to himself. Studies of their respective uses of Isaian texts can help exegetes reach better comparative understandings of the first Christians and the Qumran community, and see more clearly how Jesus and Chris- tianity stood within the orbit of sectarian Judaism.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright © 2016 Matthew Habib Emadi All Rights Reserved. The
    Copyright © 2016 Matthew Habib Emadi All rights reserved. The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary has permission to reproduce and disseminate this document in any form by any means for purposes chosen by the Seminary, including, without limitation, preservation or instruction. THE ROYAL PRIEST: PSALM 110 IN BIBLICAL- THEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by Matthew Habib Emadi May 2016 APPROVAL SHEET THE ROYAL PRIEST: PSALM 110 IN BIBLICAL- THEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE Matthew Habib Emadi Read and Approved by: __________________________________________ James M. Hamilton (Chair) __________________________________________ Peter J. Gentry __________________________________________ Brian J. Vickers Date______________________________ To my wife, Brittany, who is wonderfully patient, encouraging, faithful, and loving To our children, Elijah, Jeremiah, Aliyah, and Josiah, may you be as a kingdom and priests to our God (Rev 5:10) TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................ ix LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ xii PREFACE ........................................................................................................................ xiii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Why Did God Smite Uzzah?
    Why did God smite Uzzah? The ark of the covenant had fallen into the hands of the Philistines (1 Sam 4–5), and David was finally bringing back the lost ark to Jerusalem. The festivities basically included a big parade with dancing, celebrating and a marching band. Suddenly, the cart carrying the ark shook as the oxen that were pulling it stumbled. Uzzah, one of the men walking alongside it, reached out to stabilize the ark, but Yahweh got angry at Uzzah and instantly killed him. God Behaving Badly: What prompted this divine display of rage? Wasn’t Uzzah doing a good Is the God of the Old thing by protecting the ark from tipping over? Surely whatever he was Testament Angry, doing didn’t deserve a death sentence. Why did God have to kill him? Even Sexist and Racist? David, a man after God’s own heart, got mad at Yahweh for the outburst. June 2011 Stories like this give the God of the Old Testament a bad reputation. $15, 205 pages, paper 978-0-8308-3826-4 While the story of Uzzah and the ark is deeply troubling, as we begin to examine the causes of God’s anger it becomes more understandable. Yahweh was angry here for three main reasons. Carrying the ark. First, Yahweh told the Israelites how to carry the ark, and they weren’t obeying. Yahweh told them that they were not to transport the ark on a cart, but it was to be carried by the priests on poles through rings on the side of the ark (Ex 25:10-15; Num 4:15; 7:7-9; Deut 10:8).
    [Show full text]
  • 1. from Ur to Canaan
    Copyrighted Material 1. FromUrtoCanaan A WANDERINg PEOPLE In the beginning there were wanderings. The first human -be ings, Adam and Eve, are banished from Gan Eden, from Paradise. The founder of monotheism, Abraham, follows God’s com- mand, “Lech lecha” (“Go forth”), and takes to wandering from his home, Ur in Mesopotamia, eventually reaching the land of Canaan, whence his great-grandson Joseph will, in turn, depart for Egypt. Many generations later Moses leads the Jews back to the homeland granted them, which henceforth will be given the name “Israel,” the second name of Abraham’s grandson Jacob. So at least we are told in the Hebrew Bible, certainly the most successful and undoubtedly the most influential book in world literature. Its success story is all the more astonishing when one considers that this document was not composed by one of the powerful nations of antiquity, such as the Egyptians or Assyr- ians, the Persians or Babylonians, the Greeks or Romans, but by a tiny nation that at various times in the course of its history was dominated by all of the above-mentioned peoples. And yet it was precisely this legacy of the Jews that, with the spread of Christianity and Islam, became the foundation for the literary and religious inheritance of the greater part of humanity. By Copyrighted Material 2 C H A P T E R 1 this means, too, the legendary origins of the Jews told in the Bible attained worldwide renown. The Hebrew Bible, which would later be called the Old Testament in Christian parlance, contains legislative precepts, wisdom literature, moral homilies, love songs, and mystical vi- sions, but it also has books meant to instruct us about historical events.
    [Show full text]
  • THRESHING FLOORS AS SACRED SPACES in the HEBREW BIBLE by Jaime L. Waters a Dissertation Submitted to the Johns Hopkins Universit
    THRESHING FLOORS AS SACRED SPACES IN THE HEBREW BIBLE by Jaime L. Waters A dissertation submitted to The Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Baltimore, Maryland August 2013 © 2013 Jaime L. Waters All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Vital to an agrarian community’s survival, threshing floors are agricultural spaces where crops are threshed and winnowed. As an agrarian society, ancient Israel used threshing floors to perform these necessary activities of food processing, but the Hebrew Bible includes very few references to these actions happening on threshing floors. Instead, several cultic activities including mourning rites, divination rituals, cultic processions, and sacrifices occur on these agricultural spaces. Moreover, the Solomonic temple was built on a threshing floor. Though seemingly ordinary agricultural spaces, the Hebrew Bible situates a variety of extraordinary cultic activities on these locations. In examining references to threshing floors in the Hebrew Bible, this dissertation will show that these agricultural spaces are also sacred spaces connected to Yahweh. Three chapters will explore different aspects of this connection. Divine control of threshing floors will be demonstrated as Yahweh exhibits power to curse, bless, and save threshing floors from foreign attacks. Accessibility and divine manifestation of Yahweh will be demonstrated in passages that narrate cultic activities on threshing floors. Cultic laws will reveal the links between threshing floors, divine offerings and blessings. One chapter will also address the sociological features of threshing floors with particular attention given to the social actors involved in cultic activities and temple construction. By studying references to threshing floors as a collection, a research project that has not been done previously, the close relationship between threshing floors and the divine will be visible, and a more nuanced understanding of these spaces will be achieved.
    [Show full text]
  • PDF Document
    7 Cs of a Firm Foundation Message Notes Lesson 16 “Confusion” – The Great Dispersion "Now the whole earth used the same language and the same words. And it came about as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there." (Genesis 11:1-2) Leaving the Ark Where they settled—The most ancient people leaving written, historical records were inhabitants of that valley (the Sumerians), followed by the Nile Valley of Egypt and other near-Eastern areas. What they did—Within 100 years, built cities, making brick for stone and using tar for mortar. Built a tower that probably acted as an artificial mountain with a miniature temple at the top of the Tower. Who they were—Intelligent, yet foolish, men! Their forefathers built cities, herded livestock, played musical instruments, made tools of bronze and iron (Gen. 4:17-22) and built the unsinkable Ark! The builders’ sin was immense pride which led to open rebellion against God, declaring independence of Him. A common language enabled the rebellion. Did It Really Happen? Expected evidence through archaeology, written records, and language studies that all people have migrated from that area and similarities of cultures in civilizations spread thousands of miles apart, including histories that contained traces of the Creation, Fall, and Flood. All people have migrated from Shinar Ice Age land bridges connected England to mainland Europe, Asia to North America, and the Malaysian Straits to New Guinea and perhaps Australia. Travel on foot, by wagon and by boat. Most civilizations appeared about the same time, only a few thousand years ago.
    [Show full text]
  • A Penis Bone in Genesis 2:21? Retrodiagnosis As a Methodological Problem in Scriptural Studies
    A Penis Bone in Genesis 2:21? Retrodiagnosis as a Methodological Problem in Scriptural Studies Hector Avalos Professor of Religious Studies, Iowa State University Ziony Zevit is the Distinguished Professor in Bible and Northwest Semitic Languages in the Ziegler School of Rabbinic Studies at the American Jewish University. He has done widely respected work on the religion of ancient Israel (see Zevit 2001; 2013). However, Zevit makes a claim that is difficult to accept or understand linguistically, exegetically, and medically. In so doing, he is engaging in “retrodiagnosis,” the practice of providing modern medical categories and descriptions for conditions unknown or of no interest to ancient writers (Arrizabalaga; Muramoto). Critiques of retrodiagnostic approaches are now numerous in scriptural studies, and these include those of Hector Avalos, Joel S. Baden, and Candida R. Moss. Typically, such approaches seek to diagnose a condition mentioned in the Bible in precise modern medical terms. Debra A. Chase attributed one condition mentioned in the Mesopotamian creation epic known as Atra-Δas•s to Kwashiorkor-Marasmus, which is associated with starvation. Malcolm Gladwell (13-14), a popular writer who is not a biblical scholar, believes that Goliath suffered from “acromegaly—a disease caused by a benign tumor of the pituitary gland.” For Gladwell, this condition explains why Goliath has poor vision and so asks David to come to him in 1 Samuel 17:44. S. Levin attributes Isaac’s blindness in Genesis 27:1 to diabetes. In the case of Nebuchadnezzar, Henze (92-93) discusses the long tradition in scholarly biblical commentaries of diagnosing Nebuchadnezzar with a medical condition known as “zooanthropy” in Daniel 4 (see also Avalos).
    [Show full text]
  • The Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 44 EDITORIAL BOARD Mark S
    The Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 44 EDITORIAL BOARD Mark S. Smith, Chairperson Lawrence E. Boadt, C.S.P. Richard J. Clifford, S.J. John J. Collins Frederick W. Danker Robert A. Di Vito Daniel J. Harrington, S.J. Ralph W. Klein Léo Laberge, O.M.I. Bruce J. Malina Pheme Perkins Eugene C. Ulrich Ronald D. Witherup, S.S. Studies in the Greek Bible Essays in Honor of Francis T. Gignac, S.J. EDITED BY Jeremy Corley and Vincent Skemp The Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 44 © 2008 The Catholic Biblical Association of America, Washington, DC 20064 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the Catholic Biblical Association of America. Produced in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Studies in the Greek Bible : essays in honor of Francis T. Gignac, S.J. / edited by Jeremy Corley and Vincent Skemp. p. cm. — (The Catholic biblical quarterly monograph series ; 44) Includes bibliographical references and indexes. ISBN 0-915170-43-4 (alk. paper) 1. Bible. Greek—Versions—Septuagint. 2. Bible—Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Gignac, Francis T. II. Corley, Jeremy. III. Skemp, Vincent T. M. BS38.S78 2008 220.6—dc22 2008026572 Contents FOREWORD Alexander A. Di Lella, O.F.M. ix INTRODUCTION Jeremy Corley and Vincent Skemp, editors xiii PART ONE GENESIS CREATION TRADITIONS 1 CREATION UNDER CONTROL: POWER LANGUAGE IN GENESIS :–: Jennifer M. Dines 3 GUARDING HEAD AND HEEL: OBSERVATIONS ON SEPTUAGINT GENESIS : C. T. Robert Hayward 17 “WHAT IS epifere?” GENESIS :B IN THE SAHIDIC VERSION OF THE LXX AND THE APOCRYPHON OF JOHN Janet Timbie 35 v vi · Contents PART TWO LATER SEPTUAGINTAL BOOKS 47 A TEXTUAL AND LITERARY ANALYSIS OF THE SONG OF THE THREE JEWS IN GREEK DANIEL :- Alexander A.
    [Show full text]
  • A Survey of Old Testament
    God, His People & the Messiah: A Survey of Old Testament 18 – DAVID & THE ARK (2 SAMUEL 6:1-23; 1 CHRONICLES 13:1-14; 15:1-16:43) I. David Seeks the Ark (2 Samuel 6:1-5; 1 Chronicles 13:1-8) - David consulted with leaders of Israel to gather the Levites who were spread throughout Israel. - They would then bring the Ark back to nation since no one has inquired of it since the days of Saul. - The leaders of the Israel agreed to do this since it seemed right to them. - So David gathered all Israel from the north to the south to bring the Ark. - They carried the Ark on a new cart and two men drove the cart. - David and all Israel played music before God in a procession with the cart. II. Uzzah & the Ark (2 Samuel 6:6-11; 1 Chronicles 13:9-14) - During the journey, the oxen pulling the cart stumbled and Uzzah touched the ark to steady it. - God’s anger was immediately aroused and he killed Uzzah while he was near the Ark of God. - David became angry because of Uzzah being killed, which then turned to fear. - David questioned if the Ark would ever come to him and it was taken to house of Obed-Edom. - The Ark stayed there three month and God blessed Oded-Edom with his household. III. David’s Second Attempt (2 Samuel 6:12-15; 1 Chronicles 15:1-28) - Seeing that the Lord was blessing Obed-Edom, David decided to make another attempt.
    [Show full text]
  • When God Doesn't Seem Fair
    Wheelersburg Baptist Church 2/17/02 Brad Brandt Leviticus 10:1-3; 2 Samuel 6:1-11 "When God Doesn’t Seem Fair" ** Main Idea: Today we want to tackle two difficult to explain texts from God's Word that illustrate God's holiness. They also help us respond to situations when God doesn’t seem fair. I. Keep in mind two illustrations of God's holiness. A. Nadab & Abihu experienced His holiness (Leviticus 10:1-3). 1. God judges holy men by a higher standard. 2. There is no such thing as a small sin. B. Uzzah experienced His holiness (2 Samuel 6:1-11). 1. Uzzah was guilty of presumption. 2. He presumed he knew better than God what was best for the ark. 3. We’re in big trouble when we tamper with God’s Word. II. Keep in mind the implications of God's holiness. A. A holy God must deal justly with sin. 1. The amazing thing is not that God took the lives of Nadab, Abihu, and Uzzah for their sins. 2. The amazing thing is that God doesn't do the same with us when we sin. B. God does not owe us mercy. 1. We tend to think that because God is longsuffering, He’s not offended. 2. God will deal with sin—in His time. C. Don't presume upon the patience of God. 1. There's only one person with whom God was "unfair." 2. His name is Jesus Christ. 3. God treated Him the way we deserve to be treated.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Chronicles 13:9-11 (
    The Berean: Daily Verse and Commentary for 1 Chronicles 13:9-11 (http://www.theberean.org) 1 Chronicles 13:9-11 (9) When they came to the threshing floor of Kidon, Uzzah reached out his hand to steady the ark, because the oxen stumbled. (10) The LORD's anger burned against Uzzah, and he struck him down because he had put his hand on the ark. So he died there before God. (11) Then David was angry because the LORD's wrath had broken out against Uzzah, and to this day that place is called Perez Uzzah. New International Version I Chronicles 13:1-3 introduces an episode containing a presumptuous act, immediately followed by a sobering display of divine justice. However, this time, one of the most respected names in Israelite history is directly involved. It is the story of Uzza's sudden death while moving the Ark of the Covenant, the most sacred and revered of Israelite objects. The Ark, representing the throne of God and containing the tablets of stone Moses received from God on Mount Sinai, normally resided in the Holy of Holies. David desired to move the Ark to Jerusalem to continue to consolidate the kingdom under himself. As they were moving it on an oxcart, the oxen stumbled, and the Ark appeared to be toppling to the ground. Uzza, in what may have been pure reflex, put out his hand to steady the Ark, but upon touching it, he was immediately struck dead (verses 9-10)! At first, David was angry that God ruined his party (verses 8, 11) - as the whole atmosphere of the Ark's transfer was celebratory - but shortly after, he became extremely fearful (verse 12).
    [Show full text]