DOCSLIB.ORG

The Portrayal of Outsiders in the Abrahamic Narratives As a Case Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Portrayal of Outsiders in the Abrahamic Narratives As a Case Study View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by British Columbia's network of post-secondary digital repositories AN ANALYSIS OF THE ONGOING VALIDITY OF THE DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS FOR FINAL FORM INTERPRETATION: THE PORTRAYAL OF OUTSIDERS IN THE ABRAHAMIC NARRATIVES AS A CASE STUDY by DANIEL E. HAWKINS Bachelor of Arts in Biblical Studies, Trinity Western University, 2016 Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN BIBLICAL STUDIES in the FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES TRINITY WESTERN UNIVERSITY Dr. Craig Broyles, Ph.D.; Thesis Supervisor Dr. Andrew Perrin, Ph.D.; Second Reader February, 2020 © Daniel Hawkins, 2020 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………….. v ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………….. vii INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………….... 1 A Survey of the Documentary Landscape 3 The Questions Asked and Methodology 6 THE PORTRAYAL OF OUTSIDERS IN THE J SOURCE…………………………….... 11 Introduction 11 Characteristics of the J Source 11 If there is a J Source, Is it a Contiguous Narrative or Fragmentary? 13 Historical Context of the J Source 14 Textual Context of the J Source 20 Occurrences of Outsiders in the J Source 21 Genesis 12:1–4a: Abraham’s Calling 21 An Excursus on the Niphal Verbal Stem 30 Genesis 12:10–20: Abraham’s Descent to Egypt 38 Genesis 13: A Preamble to Sodom 41 Genesis 16:1b–2, 4–14: Hagar’s Expulsion 42 Genesis 18–19: Entertaining Angels 44 Genesis 24: A Wife for Isaac 48 ii iii Genesis 25: Nations Descending From Abraham 50 Conclusion 51 THE PORTRAYAL OF OUTSIDERS IN THE E SOURCE............................................... 53 Introduction 53 Characteristics of the E Source 53 If there is an E Source, Is it a Contiguous Narrative or Fragmentary? 55 Historical Context of the E Source 58 Textual Context of the E Source 61 Occurrences of Outsiders in the E Source 62 Genesis 15: Covenant Ceremony 62 66 יהוה Genesis 20: Abimelech and Genesis 21: Hagar and Ishmael 74 Genesis 21: Covenant with Abimelech 79 Genesis 22: The Binding of Isaac 85 Conclusion 91 THE PORTRAYAL OF OUTSIDERS IN THE P SOURCE………………....………...… 92 Introduction 92 Characteristics of the P Source 92 If there is a P Source, Is it a Contiguous Narrative or Fragmentary? 95 Historical Context of the P Source 100 Textual Context of the P Source 107 Occurrences of Outsiders in the P Source 107 Genesis 16: Marriage to Hagar 107 iv Genesis 17: Covenant Ceremony 110 An Excursus on Circumcision 112 An Excursus on the Relationship Between Genesis 15 and 17 120 Genesis 23: The Purchase of a Burial Plot 124 Conclusion 128 THE PORTRAYAL OF OUTSIDERS IN GENESIS 14………………………………….. 130 Introduction 130 Characteristics of the Source 130 Is it a Contiguous Narrative or Fragmentary? 131 Historical Context 132 Textual Context 136 Occurrences of Outsiders 137 Genesis 14: War and Peace 137 Conclusion 141 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………. 143 BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………. 148 v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis has been a journey through the unexpected. It always felt that its completion was too distant to imagine and that the topic was too complex to navigate. The process of crafting this thesis has been lengthy, but the lessons I have learned about myself and scholarship along the way have been invaluable. It would have never been possible for me reach this point in my academic career without the support of others or the grace of God. Therefore, I would like to immensely thank the following: To the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, thank you for your generous support and removing one of the biggest hurdles to post-secondary education, thereby enabling me to focus on my studies. To my home church and the churches in Langley, thank you for your encouragement, support, and for helping me to bridge the church-academy divide. To the Department of Religious studies at Trinity Western University. Thank you for your kind words, rigorous scholarship, and showing me what it means to be a thoughtful Christian and a biblical scholar. I want to specifically thank Jocelyn Chapman for always being willing to help and answer my questions, even if I was asking the same question many different times. Dr. Jim Scott, thank you for allowing me to have the opportunity to work on your projects and gain invaluable experience and connections. Dr. Dirk Büchner, thank you for your encouragement, demonstration of excellent scholarship, and the many conversations about mechanical devices. Dr. Craig Allert, thank you for your guidance and encouraging words. To all the others in Seal Cap, again, thank you for helping train the next generation of biblical scholars with integrity and thoroughness. vi To Dr. Andrew Perrin. Thank you for your helpful insights and tips regarding academic life. I chose you as a second reader because I knew that you had an expectation of academic integrity and excellence and because I knew you would challenge me and make the end product better as a result. Thank you for bringing out the best. To Dr. Craig Broyles. Thank you for convincing me to undertake a Master of Arts degree and for the patience, encouragement, and kindness you have shown along the way. You have helped shape my ideas, and guided this thesis to become what it is now. I am honoured to have been your student. To my friends and family. Thank you for your encouragement on this journey, and for constantly asking if I was done that “paper” yet. A special thanks to my mother and father for their willingness to support me from a distance and come to the coast at seemingly the drop of a hat. I would not be here without the can-do attitude and work ethic which you instilled from a very young age. You taught me that if I was going to do something, then I better do it right, and I hope this thesis lives up to that expectation. To God be the glory. vii ABSTRACT There are few discussions in biblical studies that contain as much promise and controversy for understanding the biblical text as does a conversation on the proposed sources of the Pentateuch. The following work on the portrayal of outsiders in the Abrahamic narratives, specifically how they are portrayed in the traditional sources of Genesis, necessarily enters into this controversial world. This thesis will investigate three inter-connected questions. First, how are outsiders portrayed in the Abrahamic narratives? Secondly, is the portrayal of outsiders different between the different sources of Genesis, and, if so, what does the possible historical context of each source contribute to an understanding of why these differences exist? This in turn will contribute to the larger and third question: does the Documentary Hypothesis specifically, and diachronic analysis in general, have sufficient value for understanding the text as it now stands? It will be shown that while the Documentary Hypothesis involves some speculation, it offers a more coherent framework through which one can interpret and understand many of the complexities that arise in a reading of the Pentateuch. As such, diachronic analysis proves to be an invaluable tool for interpreting the final form of Genesis, if one is aware of its limitations. INTRODUCTION There are few discussions in biblical studies that contain as much promise and controversy for understanding the biblical text as does a conversation on the proposed sources of the Pentateuch.1 The following work on the portrayal of outsiders in the Abrahamic narratives, specifically how they are portrayed in the traditional sources of Genesis, necessarily enters into this controversial world. It must be stated, that much of any source-critical work on Genesis rests on some amount of hypothetical assumptions. This can make it quite dizzying and frustrating for even the avid scholar who attempts to embark on a journey cataloging and interacting with the sources of Genesis. Indeed, throughout my own research there were moments where I was sorely tempted to throw up my hands in frustration and pursue a more clear-cut method of studying the text, such as narrative or literary criticism. However, as helpful and enlightening as these methods are, they do not answer the question which, for me, stands at the base of the text: how was the text formed to be what we have now? To some this is an unanswerable question, a mystery best left unsolved; to get behind the text is an impossible task that will only serve to make a mess. Indeed, to some extent this is true. The traditional Documentary Hypothesis becomes more convoluted and less defined the closer one looks at the text as a more nuanced and fragmented picture emerges. When entering the scholarly discussion, one encounters a diverse range of opinions on the classification and social settings that surround each passage. Each of these opinions are put forward by scholars who believe they offer the most cogent and defensible understanding of a 1 For excellent introductions to the discussion of the Documentary Hypothesis, see Richard Elliott Friedman, Who Wrote the Bible?, 1st ed. (New York: Harper & Row, 1989), 15–32; Gordon J. Wenham, “Composition of the Pentateuch,” in Exploring the Old Testament: A Guide to the Pentateuch, vol. 1 of Exploring the Bible (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 159–85. 1 2 passage, and quite often the opinions of different scholars regarding the same passage are mutually exclusive. This can lead readers to feel more like they are witnessing an argument between schoolchildren bickering about seemingly insignificant points than a serious scholarly discussion. Yet, despite this ambiguity, the Documentary Hypothesis, in some form, continues to hold sway in Pentateuchal studies because in a broad context it sufficiently answers many questions that emerge in the study of the text.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1) Meeting Your Bible 2) Discussing the Bible (Breakout Rooms for 10
    Wednesday Wellspring: A Bible Study for UU’s (part 1) Bible Study 101: Valuable Information for Serious Students taught by Keith Atwater, American River College worksheet / discussion topics / study guide 1) Meeting Your Bible What is your Bible’s full title, publisher, & publication date? Where did you get your Bible? (source, price, etc.) What’s your Bible like? (leather cover, paperback, old, new, etc.) Any Gospels words in red? What translation is it? (King James, New American Standard, Living Bible, New International, etc.) Does your Bible include Apocrypha?( Ezra, Tobit, Maccabees, Baruch) Preface? Study Aids? What are most common names for God used in your edition? (Lord, Jehovah, Yahweh, God) The Bible in your hands, in book form, with book titles, chapter and verse numbers, page numbers, in a language you can read, at a reasonably affordable price, is a relatively recent development (starting @ 1600’s). A Bible with cross-references, study aids, footnotes, commentary, maps, etc. is probably less than 50 years old! Early Hebrew (Jewish) Bible ‘books’ (what Christians call the Old Testament) were on 20 - 30 foot long scrolls and lacked not only page numbers & chapter indications but also had no punctuation, vowels, and spaces between words! The most popular Hebrew (Jewish) Bible @ the time of Jesus was the “Septuagint” – a Greek translation. Remember Alexander the Great conquered the Middle East and elsewhere an “Hellenized’ the ‘Western world.’ 2) Discussing the Bible (breakout rooms for 10 minutes. Choose among these questions; each person shares 1. Okay one bullet point to be discussed, but please let everyone say something!) • What are your past experiences with the Bible? (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • “As Those Who Are Taught” Symposium Series
    “AS THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT” Symposium Series Christopher R. Matthews, Editor Number 27 “AS THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT” The Interpretation of Isaiah from the LXX to the SBL “AS THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT” The Interpretation of Isaiah from the LXX to the SBL Edited by Claire Mathews McGinnis and Patricia K. Tull Society of Biblical Literature Atlanta “AS THOSE WHO ARE TAUGHT” Copyright © 2006 by the Society of Biblical Literature All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed in writing to the Rights and Permissions Office, Society of Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Atlanta, GA 30329 USA. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data “As those who are taught” : the interpretation of Isaiah from the LXX to the SBL / edited by Claire Mathews McGinnis and Patricia K. Tull. p. cm. — (Society of biblical literature symposium series ; no. 27) Includes indexes. ISBN-13: 978-1-58983-103-2 (paper binding : alk. paper) ISBN-10: 1-58983-103-9 (paper binding : alk. paper) 1. Bible. O.T. Isaiah—Criticism, interpretation, etc.—History. 2. Bible. O.T. Isaiah— Versions. 3. Bible. N.T.—Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. McGinnis, Claire Mathews. II. Tull, Patricia K. III. Series: Symposium series (Society of Biblical Literature) ; no. 27. BS1515.52.A82 2006 224'.10609—dc22 2005037099 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 5 4 3 2 1 Printed in the United States of America on acid-free, recycled paper conforming to ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R1997) and ISO 9706:1994 standards for paper permanence.
    [Show full text]
  • Canonical Reading of the Old Testament in the Context of Critical Scholarship
    CANONICAL READING OF THE OLD TESTAMENT IN THE CONTEXT OF CRITICAL SCHOLARSHIP - -■11111.44.0411,■.--- ROLF RENDTORFF In the early seventies of this century a new term appeared in biblical scholarship: Canonical Criticism. It was James Sanders who explicitly introduced this term in his essay Torah and Canon (1972). The discussion on this program was from its very beginning also closely linked to work of Brevard Childs. In the meantime this term and its manifold implications are widely used and debated. Let me first of all say something about terminology. The word 'canon' has been used, of course, much earlier in Bible scholarship, but under a different aspect. We can now distinguish between two main aspects of canon studies. I quote the categorization by one well-known expert in this field: Sid Leiman in the foreword to the second edi- tion of his book, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture (1991), speaks about two related but distinct categories, not to be confused with each other. The one category may be termed 'canonization studies.' Its focus is on the history of the formation of the biblical canon from its inception to its closing. The other category has been termed 'canonical criticism.' Its focus is primarily on the function of the biblical canon throughout the reli- gious history of a particular faith community. For the latter Leiman mentions explicitly Childs and Sanders, "among the founders and major proponents." In my eyes the first category is very important, not only from a historical point of view but also to understand under what circumstances and religious conditions the canon of the Bible, as we now have it, came into being.
    [Show full text]
  • HOPES-AND FEARS ROLF RENDTORFF University Of
    THE PARADIGM IS CHANGING: HOPES-AND FEARS ROLF RENDTORFF Universityof Heidelberg This has been a great century in Old Testament scholarship. At its dawn we find a number of names that have left their stamp on the whole century, and the ideas of these scholars still serve as guide- lines in many areas of Old Testament studies. I name three of them: Julius Wellhausen, Bernhard Duhm, and Hermann Gunkel. Wellhausen, in a sense, represented the conclusion of one epoch of research and, at the same time, the opening of a new one. The question how to interpret the history of the origins of the Pentateuch was discussed throughout the whole of the nineteenth century, and different models were proposed and applied. Now one model gained the upper hand: the "newer documentary hypothesis". It was not invented by Wellhausen. His own contemporaries, for example, Heinrich Holzinger in his famous Einleitung in den Hexateuch (1893), called it the "Graf Hypothesis", because Karl Heinrich Graf was the first to publish the new hypothesis. But Wellhausen was so fas- cinated by it, and his impact on Old Testament scholarship of his time was so overwhelming, that during the following decades it be- came more and more the Wellhausen hypothesis, as it is to this day. Let us consider for a moment what happened when, after a short while, this new theory became commonly accepted. In a more tech- nical sense, it was the victory of the "documentary hypothesis" over the earlier "fragment hypothesis", and in particular over the "sup- plementary hypothesis" that had been widely accepted in the de- cades before Wellhausen.
    [Show full text]
  • The Documentary Hypothesis
    Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 12/1 (2001): 22Ð30. Article copyright © 2001 by Greg A. King. The Documentary Hypothesis Greg A. King Pacific Union College How did the Pentateuch or Torah come to be written?1 What process was in- volved in its composition?2 That is, did the author simply receive visions and write out word for word exactly what he or she3 had heard and seen in vision? Did he make use of written sources? Did he incorporate oral traditions? Who was the principal author anyway? Do these questions really matter? If so, why? While many average church members consider Moses the author of the first five books of the Bible, most biblical scholars of the last century have maintained that questions related to the composition of the Pentateuch are best answered by referring to the documentary hypothesis. This is the popular label for the theory of pentateuchal authorship and composition that has dominated most liberal biblical scholarship for the past century. In fact, so thoroughly has it dominated the field that some scholars simply assume it to be correct and feel no need to offer evidence to support it.4 This in spite of the fact that recently penetrating critiques from both 1The term Pentateuch refers to the first five books of the Bible and is a transliteration of a Greek term meaning Òfive scrolls.Ó The term Torah, though it has other meanings also, is sometimes used to denote the same five books and is a transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning Òinstruction.Ó See the discussion of these terms in Barry Bandstra, Reading the Old Testament (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1995), 24.
    [Show full text]
  • The Documentary Hypothesis
    THE PENTATEUCH in the battle for I So, thirdly, Israel must keep the covenant announced publicly to the whole nation, for the ; with a series of wholeheartedly. 'Love the LORD your God with Lord's appearance on the mountain was too ter­ s and how the all your heart and with all your soul and with all rifying. Instead they were made known to rng the secular your strength' (6:5) sums up the whole message Moses alone (Ex. 20: 19-21; Dt. 5:5), who then Levi (chs. 34 ­ I of Moses. This meant keeping the Ten Com­ passed them on to the people. o the establish­ mandments given by God at Sinai (ch. 5). It Moses' role as a mediator is stressed those guilty of meant applying the Commandments to every throughout the Pentateuch. Time and again ~ I i sphere of life. The second and longest sermon laws are introduced by the statement, 'Then the land was more Ile land in which of Moses consists of a historical retrospect LORD said to Moses'. This implies a special in­ vas therefore, a followed by an expansion and application of the timacy with God, suggesting that if God is the Jfe: especially of commandments to every sphere of Israel's life ultimate source of the law, Moses was its chan­ . (ch. 35).It was, in Canaan; the laws in chs. 12 - 25 roughly nel, if not the human author of it. This impres­ for ever, and the follow the order of the commandments and ex­ sion is reinforced most strongly by the book of :signed to ensure pand and comment on them.
    [Show full text]
  • The Miracle at the Sea Remarks on the Recent Discussion About Origin and Composition of the Exodus Narrative
    The Miracle at the Sea Remarks on the Recent Discussion about Origin and Composition of the Exodus Narrative Jan Christian Gertz* 1 Introduction: The Exodus Narrative and the Debate about the Formation of the Pentateuch The story of the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt in Exod 1–15 “constitutes the point of crystallization of the great Pentateuchal narrative in its entirety.”1 It is, therefore, hardly surprising that the Exodus narrative plays an important role and often served as a paradigm in the recent debate about the formation of the Pentateuch.2 As a result there is much controversy about these chapters in pentateuchal scholarship. The classic formulation of the New Documentary Hypothesis assumes a Yahwistic, Elohistic, and Priestly source in Exod 1–15, as well as several pre- and post-priestly additions that were joined in successive stages. If we survey the commentaries and monographs of recent years, we find copious refutations and modifications of this model.3 By name but hardly with regard to approach, * My sincere thanks to my colleague Anselm C. Hagedorn for the translation of this article. The research was done while I was part of the group “Convergence and Divergence in Pentateuchal Theory” at the Israel Institute for Advanced Studies in Jerusalem and supported by the eurias Fellowship Programme. 1 Martin Noth, A History of Pentateuchal Traditions (trans. with an introduction by Bernhard W. Anderson; Chico, Calif.: Scholar Press, 1981), 51; trans. of Überlieferungsgeschichte des Pentateuch (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1948), 54. 2 Cf. inter alia Marc Vervenne, “Current Tendencies and Developments in the Study of the Book of Exodus,” in The Book of Exodus (ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel and Judah
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-02431-1 — The Legacy of Israel in Judah's Bible Daniel E. Fleming Excerpt More Information part i INTRODUCTION Israel and Judah © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-02431-1 — The Legacy of Israel in Judah's Bible Daniel E. Fleming Excerpt More Information 1 Why Israel? The Bible would make a fascinating historical source, if only we could figure out how to use it as such. It is unique as a written corpus from the ancient world, not because it is religiously sacred, though perhaps its uniqueness is a result of the process that made it so. The Bible regales us with tales from the world of Egypt, Assyria, and Babylonia, offered from the perspective of the runaways and the defeated. It reports the reigns of kings not in the voice of royal propaganda but with distance and capacity for critique. It presents what are cast as the ruminations of men who spoke for God against both the people and the powers that led them. All this writing may date to settings long after the occasions portrayed, yet the literature is patently a patchwork of reused materials, not always well understood, certainly not a straightforward work of unified fiction.1 Often, current discussion of the Bible’s relationship to history revolves around the notion of “historicity.”2 Did it happen, or happen the way the story says? Did the individual characters exist? More broadly, does the story preserve some memory or knowledge of the time portrayed? If the answer is “no” or there is significant doubt about the matter, it can be difficult to make a case for historical investigation before the date of the latest editor’s hand, and this will in no way illuminate the object portrayed.
    [Show full text]
  • GENESIS in the PENTATEUCH Konrad Schmid I in the Heyday of the Documentary Hypothesis It Was a Common Assumption That Most Texts
    GENESIS IN THE PENTATEUCH Konrad Schmid Introduction In the heyday of the Documentary Hypothesis it was a common assumption that most texts in Genesis were to be interpreted as elements of narra- tive threads that extended beyond the book of Genesis and at least had a pentateuchal or hexateuchal scope (J, E, and P). To a certain degree, exe- gesis of the book of Genesis was therefore tantamount to exegesis of the book of Genesis in the Pentateuch or Hexateuch. The Theologische Realen- zyklopädie, one of the major lexica in the German-speaking realm, has for example no entry for “Genesis” but only for the “Pentateuch” and its alleged sources. At the same time, it was also recognized that the material—oral or written—which was processed and reworked by the authors of the sources J, E, and P originated within a more modest narrative perspective that was limited to the single stories or story cycles, a view emphasized especially by Julius Wellhausen, Hermann Gunkel, Kurt Galling, and Martin Noth:1 J and E were not authors, but collectors.2 Gunkel even went a step further: “‘J’ and ‘E’ are not individual writers, but schools of narrators.”3 But with the successful reception of Gerhard von Rad’s 1938 hypothesis of a tradi- tional matrix now accessible through the “historical creeds” like Deut 26:5– 9, which was assumed to have also been the intellectual background of the older oral material, biblical scholarship began to lose sight of the view taken by Wellhausen, Gunkel, Galling, and Noth. In addition, von Rad saw J and 1 Julius Wellhausen, Die Composition des Hexateuchs und der historischen Bücher des Alten Testaments (3rd ed.; Berlin: Reimer, 1899); Hermann Gunkel, Genesis (6th ed.; HKAT 1/1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1964 [repr.
    [Show full text]
  • A Farewell to the Yahwist? the Composition of the Pentateuch In
    A FAREWELL TO THE YAHWIST? The Composition of the Pentateuch in Recent European Interpretation Edited by Thomas B. Dozeman and Konrad Schmid Society of Biblical Literature Atlanta CONTENTS Abbreviations ...............................................................................................vii Introduction Thomas B. Dozeman and Konrad Schmid..................................................1 Part 1: Main Papers The Elusive Yahwist: A Short History of Research Thomas Christian Römer ..........................................................................9 The So-Called Yahwist and the Literary Gap between Genesis and Exodus Konrad Schmid .......................................................................................29 The Jacob Story and the Beginning of the Formation of the Pentateuch Albert de Pury ........................................................................................51 The Transition between the Books of Genesis and Exodus Jan Christian Gertz ................................................................................73 The Literary Connection between the Books of Genesis and Exodus and the End of the Book of Joshua Erhard Blum ..........................................................................................89 The Commission of Moses and the Book of Genesis Thomas B. Dozeman ............................................................................107 Part 2: Responses The Yahwist and the Redactional Link between Genesis and Exodus Christoph Levin ....................................................................................131
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Table of Contents Introduction 1 Chapter One: The Scholarly Origins of JE 11 Hermann Hupfeld 13 Karl Heinrich Graf 19 Abraham Kuenen 24 Julius Wellhausen 27 August Dillmann 37 Eduard Riehm 40 Conclusion 43 Chapter Two: JE and the Documentary Hypothesis in the Twentieth Century 45 Hermann Gunkel 46 Gerhard von Rad and Martin Noth 48 Rudolf Smend, Otto Eissfeldt, et al 51 Paul Volz and Wilhelm Rudolph 54 Rolf Rendtorff, et al 60 Brevard Childs 78 John Van Seters 85 Richard E. Friedman 94 Conclusion 97 Chapter Three: The Relationship of D to J and E 99 Deut 1:9-18: Appointing of judges 106 Deut 1:19-45: The spies 114 Deut 2:2-3:11: Edom, Sihon, and Og 130 Deut 3:12-20: Apportioning the Transjordan 141 Deut 4:10-14; 5:2-5, 19-28; 9:8-21, 25-10:5: Horeb 153 Deut 8:15-16: Testing in the wilderness 172 Deut 9:22-24: Additional examples of disobedience in the wilderness 173 Deut 10:6-9: Travel and the Lévites 179 Bibliografische Informationen digitalisiert durch http://d-nb.info/992561043 X Table of Contents Deut 1 l:2b-6: The acts of YHWH 181 Deut 23:4-6: Ammonites, Moabites, and Balaam 184 Deut 25:17-19: Amalek 184 Deut 31:1-8: The authority of Joshua 185 Conclusion 188 Excursus: The Relationship of P to JE 197 Chapter Four: RJE - The Reliance on the Redactor 209 Factual Discrepancies 211 Genesis 16:8-10 211 Genesis 21:32, 34 and 26:15, 18 213 Exodus 4:13-16, et al 218 Exodus 34:1, 4 221 Exodus 32-34 223 Terminological Overlap 225 Genesis 20:18 228 Genesis 28:21 230 Genesis 31:3 232 Exodus 3:7 234 Secondary Additions 236 Exodus 3:14, 15* 237
    [Show full text]
  • The Current Discussion on the So-Called Deuteronomistic History: Literary Criticism and Theological Consequences1)
    The Current Discussion on the so-called Deuteronomistic History: Literary Criticism and Theological Consequences1) Thomas C. Römer The key position of the book of Deuteronomy The book of Deuteronomy holds a particular position in the Hebrew Bible in that the report of the death of Moses in Deut 34 brings the Pentateuch to an important conclusion. The last verses in Deut 34:10-12 mark a major break by stating that never again a prophet like Moses arose in Israel, a prophet whom Yhwh knew face to face. To a certain extent the Pentateuch, the Torah appears to be a vita Mosis, since Exodus 2 opens the narration with his birth and Deuteronomy 34 ends the narration with his death, whereas the stories of the patriarchs and matriarchs in Genesis function as an introduction. Nevertheless, Deuteronomy points forward, as much as it marks an end, towards the following books. 1) This article is based on a paper given at the Tokyo Union Theological Seminary on May 9th 2014 during a stay for teaching at the International Christian University, Tokyo. I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Professor Johannes Unsok Ro for his kind invitation and hospitality and to the assistants for their invitation to publish this paper in the journal Humanities: Christianity and Culture. The following is a summary of my former research on the Deuteronomistic History, especially “The Form-Critical Problem of the So- Called Deuteronomistic History” in The Changing Face of Form Criticim for the Twenty-First Century (ed. Marvin A. Sweeney and Ehud Ben Zvi; Grand Rapids, Michigan - Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2003), 240-252; The So-Called Deuteronomistic History: A Sociological, Historical and Literary Introduction (London - New York: T & T Clark - Continuum, 2005; Japanese translation: Thomas Römer, Shinmeiki-shisho: Kyuyaku-seisho Ni Okeru Rekishisyo No Seiritsu [Tokyo: The Board of Publications.
    [Show full text]