The Universalization of Torah:
Sirach 24:23 as a Resource for Jewish-Christian Dialogue
David Alcorn
Contained within the great wisdom traditions of Israel are many sage counsels about how to live a good life “marked by length of days, prosperity, and prestige.”1 Israel was certainly not the sole pursuer of wisdom; wisdom was, rather, as James Kugel notes, an “international pursuit” among the peoples of the ancient Near East.2 Certainly there are commonalities between Israel’s wisdom traditions and those of other nations, but there is also something unique. Situated within a monotheistic framework, the attainment of wisdom was often connected to God and, more precisely, to the fear of God and the observance of his commandments.3 Yet, there is more that makes Israel’s wisdom tradition distinct, and this leads us to the Book of Sirach (or Ben Sira) and his celebrated poetic discourse on wisdom in chapter 24. Here, wisdom is personified as a female figure like in Proverbs 8. Ben Sira, however, does something striking when he takes the image of wisdom a step further and equates her with the Torah of Moses. Sir 24:23 reads as follows: “All this is the book of the covenant of the Most High God, the law that Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the congregations of Jacob” (NRSV). Suddenly, wisdom is no longer some sort of independent pursuit, but is, in fact, what God has already given the people of Israel in his revelation to Moses. Sir 24:23 is a direct allusion to Deut 33:4: “This is the Law
(or Instruction) that Moses appointed for you as a possession of the congregation of Jacob.”4
1 Roland E. Murphy, “Introduction to Wisdom Literature,” in The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, ed. Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990), 447. 2 James Kugel, “Wisdom and the Anthological Temper,” Prooftexts 17.1 (1997): 9. 3 Patrick W. Skehan and Alexander A. Di Lella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, The Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987), 75-76. Cf. Prov 3:5-7. 4 This is my own translation from Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. What, therefore, does this mean, and what impact should it have on Christian theology and Jewish-Christian dialogue? In our attempt to discover the meaning of Ben Sira’s equation of
Wisdom and Torah, I will proceed by first looking at the passage in question and making some observations. Then I will examine three different explanations as follows: the first argues that
Ben Sira has “nationalized” Wisdom and made it the property of Israel; the second advocates the opposite, namely, that Ben Sira has “universalized” the Torah to such an extent that it is subsumed by Wisdom; and the third attempts to bridge these two explanations by saying that neither Wisdom nor Torah loses its identity, but that they are “correlated.” I do not find myself satisfied by these explanations, and so will offer my own in an attempt to make sense of this most intriguing (and sometimes controversial) passage of Ben Sira. Finally, I will end our this study by looking at the implications of my conclusions, and see how they might apply to Jewish-
Christian relations and the practice of these faiths.
1. Sirach 24 in Context
Scholars believe that the Hebrew text of Ben Sira, which we do not have in its entirety, was composed around 180 BCE and later translated by the author’s grandson into Greek around
5 117 BCE. Chapter 24 begins with the personified Lady Wisdom praising herself and describing her movements across the heavens and the earth seeking a resting place, and eventually finding one at God’s command among the people of Israel. Gerald T. Sheppard comments that “[i]t is as though the wisdom song in Sir 24:3-22 were a kind of riddle and one could not speculate on how long a reader would take to discover the proper key.”6 Maurice Gilbert observes that this text
5 Daniel J. Harrington, Invitation to the Apocrypha (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999), 79. 6 Gerald T. Sheppard, “Wisdom and Torah: The Interpretation of Deuteronomy Underlying Sirach 24:23,” in Biblical and Near Eastern Studies: Essays in Honor of William Sanford LaSor, ed. Gary A. Tuttle (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978), 167. does not have any legal statements or citations of ritual laws. “None of the Law’s commandments are recalled,” he writes, “not even an allusion, and the closing verses of the speech are more like an exhortation, an invitation of the sapiential style, than a legal injunction.”7
Gilbert also comments that the Torah, with which Ben Sira was familiar, was composed of more than just legal statutes. It also contained the history of Israel from creation to the “eve of the
Conquest.” So “it is not for nothing that Sir 24:3 can make allusion to Gen 1:1-3, while Sir 24:23 quotes Deut 33:4.”8 Verses 13-17 contain images of Wisdom comparing herself to a cedar, a palm tree, a rose-bush, and so on. There are in fact, as Alain Fournier-Bidoz notes, several first-
9 person verbs accompanied by the repetition of hōs and kai in the Greek text. This brings us to the famous and contentious statement of Ben Sira in v. 23 that this personified Lady Wisdom, which sages across creation have sought after, is actually the Torah of Moses revealed by God.
What are we to make of this? How can Wisdom be the same thing as Torah, or vice-versa? Is there some middle way that nuances Ben Sira’s apparent equation of the two? Is there a way to understand their relationship in a way that honours the plain sense of Ben Sira’s statement, but which can propel us forward in such a way that neither Torah nor Wisdom are negated? To these questions we now turn.
2. Wisdom is Nationalized
The first explanation of Sir 24:23 suggests that, by equating Wisdom and Torah, Ben Sira is “nationalizing” the former.10 E. P. Sanders argues that Ben Sira, as part of a covenant
7 Maurice Gilbert, “L’Éloge de la Sagesse (Siracide 24),” Revue théologique de Louvain 5 (1974): 345. My translation. 8 Ibid. My translation. 9 Alain Fournier-Bidoz, “L’arbre et la Demeure: Siracide XXIV 10-17,” Vetus Testamentum 34.1 (1984): 1. 10 Greg Schmidt Goering, Wisdom’s Root Revealed: Ben Sira and the Election of Israel, Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 2009), 6. I am borrowing Goering’s phrase because it fits very well. We will hear more from him shortly. community had a special relationship with God that, “was intentionally defining the values of the well-established wisdom tradition in terms of the Mosaic covenant: that wisdom which is universally sought is in fact truly represented by and particularized in the Torah given by God through Moses.”11 In other words, Sanders is arguing that Sir 24:23 “nationalizes” Wisdom in the sense that, if it is equal to the Torah of Moses, and only the Jews possess the Torah of Moses, then only the Jews have real, true, and authentic Wisdom. Although the other nations may seek
Wisdom, they will not find it in its perfection unless they find it in the Torah.12 Sanders then bolsters his argument by noting that Ben Sira does not say much about gentiles, except to pray for the day when they will be eviscerated so that Israel could be re-united and re-establish their theocracy.13 This interpretation may sound harsh, but it is not unreasonable given the circumstances of the day. Hellenism was a creeping threat to Jewish culture and religion, and, if
Sanders’ view is correct, one cannot completely fault Ben Sira for this reaction given the threats and obstacles he and his followers were no doubt facing. Furthermore, Ben Sira, if indeed this is his view, was not the only one to hold it.14 What foundation, therefore, would he or an interpreter like Sanders have to posit this kind of “nationalization” of Wisdom? At least a partial answer to this question involves the theology of election.
Election is the idea that God specifically chose Israel as his Chosen People and set them apart from all other nations. As Sanders expresses, “Ben Sirach, like the Rabbis after him, presupposed the biblical view of the election of Israel and wrote within the context of the
11 E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977), 331. 12 Ibid. 13 Ibid. 14 A good example of this occurs in the Book of Baruch, which, while not in the Hebrew canon, is in the Catholic and Orthodox canons. See Bar 3:9-4:4, especially 4:1. The NRSV reads: “She is the book of the commandments of God, the law that endures for ever. All who hold her fast will live, and those who forsake her will die.” Throughout 3:9-4:4, Baruch withholds no emotion when he explains the cause of the exile, but also the uniqueness of Israel. The other nations do not have wisdom—only Israel does because it has the Torah of Moses given by God. doctrine of the covenant.”15 This is true, but to interpret election in a way that excludes other nations or makes it seem that God does not have any regard for them is not at the doctrine’s essence. David Novak puts it quite aptly when he states: “[I]t is taught that the creator of the world chooses the Jewish people for a unique relationship. However, no matter how special that relationship is, it is still one that occurs in the world, a world which God still governs and for which God still cares.”16
Thus, this is the first interpretation of Ben Sira’s equation of Wisdom and Torah in 24:23.
I have borrowed Greg Schmidt Goering’s phrase that wisdom has been “nationalized” because it most aptly describes this viewpoint. God has elected Israel and revealed his Torah— which they believe to be the only true and authentic Wisdom. Other nations may seek wisdom, but they will not find it apart from the Torah of Moses. The universal concept of Wisdom has been particularized.17
3. Wisdom Subsumes Torah
The second explanation of Sir 24:23 opposes the of the first one entirely. Rather than
Wisdom being “sacrificed” to the Torah, Wisdom has subsumed the Torah. This is a radically different perspective: instead of safeguarding Israel’s uniqueness, it threatens it by making the
Torah, the revelation of God given to his Chosen People, a subset of something greater and wider. Gerhard von Rad expresses it this way: “It is not that wisdom is overshadowed by the superior power of the Torah, but vice versa, that we see Sirach endeavouring to legitimize and to
15 Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 330-31. 16 David Novak, The Election of Israel: The Idea of the Chosen People (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 6. Emphasis in original. 17 See Goering, Wisdom’s Root Revealed, 4. interpret Torah from the realm of understanding characteristic of wisdom.”18 Everything has been flipped on its head; suddenly the Torah no longer judges the wisdom of “outsiders” but is judged and subsumed. Von Rad goes so far to suggest that, in Ben Sira’s view, the Torah “is of relevance only in so far as it is to be understood on the basis of, or as it is otherwise connected with, the great complex wisdom teachings.”19 This is a provocative statement as it seems to suggest that Ben Sira does not fully appreciate the gift of the Torah as he ‘should’ based on
Jewish tradition. Other passages in his book, however, make it clear that he does. For example, his “Praise of the Fathers” (chapters 44-50) would make little sense if Ben Sira did not have a high regard for his faith tradition or national identity. Neither would the manner in which he opens his book make much sense: “All wisdom is from the Lord and is with him in eternity”
(1:1).20
An important point to make is that “wisdom” ought not to always be equated with secular thought. Robert Pfeiffer points out that Ben Sira “carried on the instruction of the sages.”21 By keeping himself and his students open to the progress of thought and progress of hermeneutics,
Ben Sira was not giving the Torah a second-class status, but rather protecting it from being locked into one era of time and imprisoned in one historical context. If the Torah of Moses really is the revelation of God, then it must contain teachings that extend beyond the time period in which it was revealed. This is part of Ben Sira’s genius, and so, therefore, I disagree with von
Rad’s seemingly harsh statement that, for Ben Sira, the Torah was subsumed.
18 Gerhard von Rad, Wisdom in Israel, trans. James D. Martin (London: SCM Press Ltd., 1972), 245. Emphasis in original. 19 Ibid., 247. 20 My translation from The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English. 21 Robert H. Pfeiffer, History of New Testament Times With an Introduction to the Apocrypha (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1949), 370. By keeping the Torah open to interpretation in the light of wisdom, Ben Sira helped set forth a way in which the historical religion of the Israelites would continue to survive in later times. This, of course, relates to the idea of the Oral Torah or Oral Law, a concept popular among the Pharisees.22 By allowing the light of wisdom to shine upon the Torah, Ben Sira did not allow the Torah to be subsumed, but rather allowed it to adapt and remain meaningful and life-giving for the Chosen People (and anyone else studying the Torah) beyond the historical context in which it was revealed. If our interpretation of Sir 24:23 falls into this category of options in this essay, then Ben Sira was not denigrating the Torah of Moses—quite the opposite: he was protecting it.
4. Wisdom and Torah are “Correlated”
This section will focus on the argument of Greg Schmidt Goering who, in his book
Wisdom’s Root Revealed, attempts to mediate between the two positions explicated above, namely, that wisdom is neither nationalized nor does it subsume the Torah. Goering writes that
Ben Sira, in 24:23, “juxtaposed the universal wisdom tradition and Israel’s historical traditions.”23 This is certainly what Ben Sira has done, so the question concerning its meaning remains. If Wisdom is a universal possession and meant for everyone, and if the Torah of Moses is uniquely for the Jewish people, then how can the two be the same? Goering states that the
Torah was “intended for Jews alone.”24
There is a sub-issue at play in this discussion concerning what we might call general revelation and special revelation. General revelation is that which can be accessed by everyone
22 Anthony J. Tomasino, Judaism Before Jesus: The Events and Ideas that Shaped the New Testament World (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 167. 23 Goering, Wisdom’s Root Revealed, 3. 24 Ibid., 4. through reason and observation of one’s surroundings. Special revelation, by contrast, is
“special” in the sense that it is given or revealed by God and may contain material that reason alone would not grasp. These definitions are, admittedly, abstract and should not be chained to the walls of the temple of systematic theology. However, we can shed light on them using examples from a Christian context. Observation of the processes of the natural world can lead a person to conclude that some supernatural force (such as a god or gods) must have created it.
Indeed, many thinkers throughout time have made such a conclusion. This would be an example of general revelation. However, to posit a doctrine such as the Trinity would require special revelation. No human being could arrive at such a doctrine by reason alone; it is “specially” revealed by God—thus, special revelation. In the historical context and social location of Ben
Sira, the tension between these two types of revelation was something with which he evidently struggled. As Goering aptly puts it, “Ben Sira’s Judaism must wrestle with a central theological problem: the relation between the general revelation given to all human beings through creation and the special revelation given to Israel through its historical experience.”25
It is at this point that Goering addresses the two conflicting interpretations we examined in the previous sections. What does Ben Sira mean when he equates wisdom and Torah? Is wisdom being nationalized or is Torah being subsumed? Goering does not like either option and proceeds to offer his own. “Both of these avenues of interpretation,” he explains, “prove unsatisfactory in that they define one idea—Wisdom or Torah—in terms of the other. One category subsumes the other, with the result that the subsumed category wanes in importance.”26
25 Ibid., 5. 26 Ibid., 8. He goes on to state: “On the one hand, if all Wisdom is submerged into Torah, no role remains for the former. All wisdom derives from the specific revelation of the Torah. On the other hand, if the Torah is defined in terms of Wisdom, no separate purpose endures for the former. The special revelation of the Torah is generalized to such an extent that Wisdom alone suffices as a guide for life” (ibid.). In order to bridge this apparent chasm, Goering suggests that neither Wisdom nor Torah is truly being sacrificed for the other in Ben Sira’s theology. Ben Sira is not equating them at all, but
“correlating” them instead. They are two types of “wisdom.” To explain his idea, Goering uses the image of a plant: special revelation (or special wisdom) is the root of the plant which cannot be seen by everyone, but must be “revealed.” General revelation (or general wisdom) is that part of the plant which is above ground, and which everyone can see.27 In this respect, although there are two kinds of wisdom, all wisdom ultimately comes from God. Yet God has “apportioned” wisdom in two ways: generally to everyone, and especially to Israel through the Torah of
Moses.28 One is not sacrificed at the expense of the other; thus, this is how Goering believes
Wisdom and Torah are “correlated.”
Goering also bases his argument on the doctrine of election. He explains that it is a way to describe the “distinction between YHWH’s relationship to humanity in general and the particular relationship that YHWH enters into with Israel…I interpret election as a way to understand a specific relationship between part and whole.”29 This is a good description of election, and we must remember, as we saw above, that God’s election of one people does not exclude his beneficence for the non-elect.30 Goering acknowledges this when he rejects an “us- versus-them” mentality by explaining that Ben Sira sees “good and evil, wisdom and foolishness” among all peoples inhabiting the earth.31
Although Goering makes some valuable insights, his concept that Wisdom and Torah are
“correlated” is not ultimately satisfying. Neither, it must be said, are the two other interpretations
27 Ibid., 9. 28 Ibid. 29 Ibid., 10. 30 Novak, Election of Israel, 6. 31 Goering, Wisdom’s Root Revealed, 11. of Sir 24:23 offered above. I do not believe that Ben Sira nationalizes Wisdom, nor do I accept that Torah has been subsumed by Wisdom. Rather, I believe that Ben Sira is playing a role in
God’s overall plan to universalize Torah. To this idea we now turn.
5. Torah is Universalized
Luis Alonso Schökel writes that the Torah is “wisdom of Israel for all.”32 This is an apt five-word summary of the position I wish to put forward and explain in this section. Maurice
Gilbert also offers a helpful preliminary summary: “By [the commandments of the
Deuteronomistic Law], the community of Israel situates itself indeed in the world, in relation to
God, but also in relation to the world and in relation to other peoples.”33 It is my argument that
Ben Sira, in 24:23, is actually equating Wisdom and Torah, but not so that one is sacrificed for the other. Instead he hopes that the Torah may progress in becoming more and more universalized. This, from the beginning, was the plan of God as delivered to Abraham in the
Torah itself: “I will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven, and will give to your offspring all these lands; and all the nations of the earth shall gain blessing for themselves
34 through your offspring” (Gen 26:4 NRSV).
To illustrate this argument, we will turn back to Goering’s image of the plant and its roots. The branches of the plant correspond to the wisdom accessible to all, and the hidden roots correspond to the special revelation given to the Israelites in the Torah. There are some problems with this image if Goering desires that it illustrate his point that Wisdom and Torah are
“correlated.” It does not seem resolve the problem because everyone has access to general
32 Luis Alonso Schökel, “The Vision of Man in Sirach 16:24-17:14,” trans. Clevy Strout, in Israelite Wisdom: Theological and Literary Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien, ed. John G. Gammie, Walter A. Brueggemann, W. Lee Humphreys, and James M. Ward (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1978), 243. Italics in original. 33 Gilbert, “L’Éloge de la Sagesse,” 346. My translation. 34 See also Gen 17:4-6, 16; 18:18 revelation (the branches of the plant). Yet only the Israelites are given access to special revelation (the roots) which no one else can see. So it would seem that Israel is getting more
“revelation” than everyone else. Just as the roots of the plant are only part of it, does that mean that Torah is only part of Wisdom as some kind of subset? Moreover, Goering’s statement that
“YHWH has revealed wisdom to human beings in two apportionments” is problematic.35 Are the two apportionments, general and special revelation, equal apportionments? If so, then we find ourselves looking again at the problem Goering attempted to bridge: Torah is equal to Wisdom, and Wisdom is equal to Torah. However, what if they are not equal? In this case, we are again back at a problem Goering tried to resolve: either Wisdom is higher than Torah, or Torah is higher than Wisdom (the positions of the first two interpretations we examined).
Another important question that arises from Goering’s plant image is as follows: if Israel has access to the entire plant (i.e., all of wisdom), then are they held to a higher standard by God because they have been given more than the nations around them? If so, this would conform easily to their national identity as the Chosen People of God selected to bring about God’s message to the whole world. Thus, perhaps Torah is supposed to be universal and eventually become identified with Wisdom. Perhaps Ben Sira is playing his part in this plan to universalize
Torah and thus make the knowledge of the one God and his will available to everyone. This seems more in line with Sir 24:23 than an attempt to choose between extremes or attempt the construction of a bridge.
Another point is important to note: We have been reasoning thus far on the assumption that general revelation (the branches of the plant) is something that is available to all and upon which our faculty of reason can make observations and recognize some truths about the world.
35 Goering, Wisdom’s Root Revealed, 9. This is indeed true; however, we must take a step back and recognize that the ordered nature of the world and our reasoning abilities are themselves not of ourselves. By this I mean that we cannot be credited with how the world and our cognitive processes function. To be even more direct, we did not make the world nor did we make our ability to reason. Goering states, “[F]or
Ben Sira, general wisdom is characterized by three qualities: it is revealed through creation, it is universally available, and it is codified in the teachings of the sages.”36 If we function within the theistic worldview of Ben Sira, by the mere fact that God made the world the way it is, including human beings with the capacity to reason, then we can say that God’s methods of creation are revelatory in nature. In other words, God created the world with order and gave us reason to seek what is true. Therefore, even our abilities and efforts to discover Wisdom are dependent upon the fact that God made it thus. Just as special revelation is dependent on God, so likewise is general revelation and its ability to be perceived and understood.
How, then should we understand the important theological concept of election? As we saw David Novak explain above, the special relationship or covenant (bĕrîṯ) God shares with
Israel does in fact occur in the world. As Schökel explains, and as Goering also describes,37
“[E]lection [is not] a monopoly, but [is given] so that Israel may share it with others. If the
Greeks of that time had something to offer to other peoples, a wise Jew has something more important to offer.”38 Special revelation is meant for the whole world.39
Wisdom, then, is not being nationalized as the possession of one group of people, nor is it being subsumed to the point where it loses its uniqueness as a special revelation of God. Torah is
36 Ibid., 79. Emphasis mine. 37 Ibid., 11. 38 Schökel, “Vision of Man,” 243. 39 Goering, Wisdom’s Root Revealed, 14. on its way to being universalized so that all may come to know that there is only one God who gave this mission to his Chosen People.
6. Conclusion: Implications for Jewish-Christian Dialogue
How then does this argument relate to the greater context of Jewish-Christian dialogue?
If indeed Sir 24:23 equates Torah with Wisdom so that Torah may become universalized, what impact could this have on the interactions of these two faiths? One impact is that these two groups can compare and appreciate their respective theologies regarding how Wisdom is indwelt.
For example, in Sir 24:8 we read as part of Wisdom’s praise of herself, “Then the Creator of all things gave me a command, and my Creator chose the place for my tent. He said, ‘Make your dwelling in Jacob, and in Israel receive your inheritance’” (NRSV). The Torah of God was commanded to dwell in a tent among Israel. This parallels the prologue of the Gospel of John in which, referring to Jesus, it is written: “And the Word became flesh and lived among us” (1:14
NRSV). However, the Greek text quite literally means “And the Word became flesh and made a tent among us.”40 In the context of my argument about the universalization of Torah, the different ways in which each tradition depicts Wisdom indwelling among particular people shows how the boundaries of God’s covenant are growing wider and wider in both traditions.41
A second impact on Jewish-Christian relations is that it may give both Jews and
Christians reason to look beyond themselves and their own, distinctive traditions to see how the core message of monotheism and a compassionate and merciful God is being spread (or universalized) by others, perhaps especiallyMuslims. Jews, Christians, and Muslims make up a sizable share of the world’s population, and as heirs of Abraham, play a role in universalizing the
40 The transliterated Greek is kai ho logos sarx egeneto kai eskēnōsen en hēmin. See Novum Testamentum Graece. 41 For other instances in the New Testament where Jesus is called Wisdom, see Matt 11:19; Luke 7:35, 11:49; 1 Cor 1:24. message of the Torah, which continues now as it did in the days of Ben Sira. The Second Vatican
Council states:
One is the community of all peoples, one their origin, for God made the whole human race to live over the face of the earth. One also is their final goal, God. His providence, His manifestations of goodness, His saving design extend to all [people], until that time when the elect will be united in the Holy City, the city ablaze with the glory of God, where the nations will walk in His light.42 In other words, the message of God is designed for all people, and the more it expands across the earth, the closer to fulfillment will be the promise made to Abraham. Therefore, a practical consequence of the more theoretical argument I have made in this essay is that these three groups of people, among others, can and should work together to express a simple message of divine beneficence towards humanity and the world at large. In this way, without abandoning their distinctiveness, all three traditions may participate in the ongoing indwelling of Wisdom and universalization of the Torah.
In conclusion, we have looked at competing arguments and interpretations of Ben Sira
24:23. In this verse, he seemingly equates Wisdom and Torah, thus setting off, perhaps unbeknownst to him, a debate about its very meaning. Has Wisdom been nationalized? Or has
Torah been subsumed? Or is there a way to bridge the two? I have argued that the best interpretation of 24:23 is that Ben Sira is playing an important role in the universalization of
Torah, a process that began before him and continues now through, what I believe should be, the collaborative work of the Abrahamic faiths. Ben Sira is a respecter of Wisdom, of Torah, and of the entire mission of God to bring about his presence and will for all humanity.
42 The Second Vatican Council, Nostra Aetate, no. 1, The Holy See, , accessed 16 April 2015, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/ documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra- aetate_en.html. Bibliography
Aland, Kurt, et al., eds. Novum Testamentum Graece. 28th rev. edition. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012.
Brenton, Sir Lancelot, ed. The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1980.
Elliger, K. and W. Rudolph, eds. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997.
Fournier-Bidoz, Alain. “L’arbre et la Demeure: Siracide XXIV 10-17.” Vetus Testamentum 34.1 (1984): 1-10.
Gilbert, Maurice. “L’Éloge de la Sagesse (Siracide 24).” Revue théologique de Louvain 5 (1974): 326-348.
Harrington, Daniel J. Invitation to the Apocrypha. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999.
Kugel, James. “Wisdom and the Anthological Temper.” Prooftexts 17.1 (1997): 9-32.
Murphy, Roland E. “Introduction to Wisdom Literature.” In The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, edited by Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy, 447-452. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990.
Novak, David. The Election of Israel: The Idea of the Chosen People. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Pfeiffer, Robert H. History of New Testament Times With an Introduction to the Apocrypha. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1949.
Sanders, E. P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977.
Schmidt Goering, Greg. Wisdom’s Root Revealed: Ben Sira and the Election of Israel. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism. Leiden: Brill, 2009.
Schökel, Luis Alonso. “The Vision of Man in Sirach 16:24-17:14.” Translated by Clevy Strout. In Israelite Wisdom: Theological and Literary Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien, edited by John G. Gammie, Walter A. Brueggemann, W. Lee Humphreys, and James M. Ward, 235-245. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1978.
The Second Vatican Council. Nostra Aetate. The Holy See. Accessed 16 April 2015. http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/ documents/vat- ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html.
Sheppard, Gerald T. “Wisdom and Torah: The Interpretation of Deuteronomy Underlying Sirach 24:23.” In Biblical and Near Eastern Studies: Essays in Honor of William Sanford LaSor, edited by Gary A. Tuttle, 166-176. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Skehan, Patrick W. and Alexander A. Di Lella. The Wisdom of Ben Sira. The Anchor Yale Bible. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987.
Tomasino, Anthony J. Judaism Before Jesus: The Events and Ideas that Shaped the New Testament World. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003. von Rad, Gerhard. Wisdom in Israel. Translated by James D. Martin. London: SCM Press Ltd., 1972.