The Hebrew Bible Today: An Introduction to Critical Issues

Great Tool.

When I first picked up this book, I expected it to be more conservative than it was. But it takes what is termed a "liberal" leaning; that is, for instance, an author will state that a particular prophetic text was written later (after the prophetic fulfillment) because they don't believe in supernatural predictions.Despite this liberalness, which is why I didn't give the book 5 stars, it does raise some important issues. It is open and honest about the issues and isn't afraid to bring forth the challenge against tradition (which is why I didn't give it less than 4 stars).Some of the reasoning by certain contributors is in desperate need of challenging because they make statements based on their presuppositions that don't have a basis, at least they don't provide one. Some of the authors speak certain views as "obvious" truth without providing evidence. I must state here that one should NEVER accept what a scholar, or group of scholars, says because he is a scholar. There are just as many scholars on the other side of the fence. So being a scholar does not equate with being right, just with maybe being worthy of a serious ear.Overall, this is a good book for a serious student of the Bible. There are points within the book that are not refutable, and there are many more that are. But the book causes one to think, something much needed with the once important fundamentalist movement now gone fundamentally unthinking. Today, most lay people have a blind faith concerning the Bible, and fear a critical approach. In the end, their refusal to face realities only leaves them in sometimes rediculous ignorance and embarrasment, except among themselves.On the other hand, this book, and any other on realistic and honest biblical criticism, should not be read or thrown in the face of those who are not strong in their faith. These issues can do more than simply open one's mind and provide a challenge; rather, for many, such issues would destroy their faith in God completely. Teaching believers in God requires more than just blatant truth; it requires shepherding, and many sheep aren't ready for this type of reality. This book will never make a good gift for someone else!Thus, this book is a good text for criticism and opens one's eyes to both liberal thought and to realistic, less liberal thought. And, of course, it is not all that could be said on either side of the issues.In the end, the book is very wrong about most everything, but I challenge thinking Christians to face the issues presented.

good tranx

This book is close to 15 years dated, but in some ways is still useful as an introduction to the Hebrew Bible. It's divided into several sections grouping the various books of the HB by genre or canonical division written by a team of contributors.I wanted to see in van Seter's essay on the Pentateuch more focus on different scholarly views and less on a summary of the components of the Pentateuch as van Seters' theorizes in his 'New Supplementary Hypothesis'. For instance, what about the approach of Whybray who's named in the bibliography but never in the essay? Van Seters dismisses E as a distinct source but doesn't account for the divine names criterion. In the traditional E doublet of the wife-sister motif in Genesis 20-1 the name 'Elohim' is of coursed used. Why, though, if it's dependent on the J doublet where 'Yahweh' is used? Van Seters never explains. (see 28) I wanted to see more emphasis on historical problems. The debate on the historicity of the patriarchs or the exodus (to which he contributed landmark studies), etc.? None of that is contained here. Van Seters himself says (14): 'The radical shift for J--dating the work 400 years later than most scholars formerly did--results in a very different way of thinking about this source and the whole development of Israelite religion.' We never receive a hint how though.Auld's essay by contrast concentrates exclusively on the history of scholarship on Dtr, but only with regard to the shape of the text. Again, no history-related concerns. Auld poses the question of why Dtr was written (57) and states that de Wette 'opened the way to a fresh understanding of Israel's early history' (59), but fails to go about addressing either of these points. He simply doesn't do it. There's no answer to the question of who wrote Dtr except to recapitulate what old rabbinic traditions and a couple 17th century writers say. (57ff.) Was it a school of prophets? Priests? Scribes? A mixture? What was their motivation and who were they writing for? Is Dtr historically reliable? How does the undertaking of writing this history find its place in the history of Israel itself? The reader is completely left in the dark about these 'critical issues'.There's unfortunately little commentary on the social role of the Hebrew prophets, only a few brief arguments or statements with examples of how the old prophet/priest religion dichotomy is unprecedented and that the prophets had a welcome place in the cult. A comparison of biblical prophecy to other ANE prophecy is nonexistent. Neither Sweeney on the major prophets or Petersen on the Twelve clue the reader into any of this.On the other hand, Farmer on the wisdom books is a much-appreciated contrast to these earlier essays. In the sweep of her moderate 21-page essay she discusses with nuance the general characteristics of the wisdom genre, editorial activity in the wisdom books, their date and setting, the social context of wisdom tradition (whether in trained scribal or common circles), the place of wisdom in Israelite religion in view of ANE parallels, the influence of wisdom circles on biblical literature, Jewish and Christian reception and understanding of wisdom traditions, and even feminist readings of the wisdom books...all in the context of a succinct yet well-done survey of critical scholarship.Hayes' essay on 'The Songs of Israel' would measure up to Farmer if he gave a direct evaluation of all the various suggestions on the use of the Psalms, their date and authorship. One turns the pages away from this essay really not knowing what to believe about the Psalms, except probably that scholars are still in the process of coming to a consensus about what to believe, or in other words there is nothing or little to believe. Hayes could have at least said that much. The summary of critical issues on Lamentations isn't much better, but I suppose it is a book on the margins of the canon what with it being little more than a protracted whine.After Farmer everything goes downhill again until Graham at the end. He doesn't discuss anything about Jewish literature in the Persian period sociologically speaking, but he does direct the reader to other publications that do.This book has some use but needed to be a little more comprehensive. The topics it omits coverage of were certainly live issues when this book was published.

Great resource for understanding critical issue in biblical iterpretation for the Old Testament. I highly recommend it to any who are seriouse about bible study and wanting to understand both the context and content of the scripture.