Journal for the Evangelical Study of the Old Testament 5, 2 (2016-2017)

The latest issue of the Journal for the Evangelical Study of the Old Testament is now available online. The main articles (listed below with their abstracts) are available from here, with a pdf of the entire issue available here. As always, it’s worth checking out its book reviews as much as anything else.

Andrew E. Steinmann

A Note on the Refrain in Genesis 1: Evening, Morning, and Day as Chronological Summary

The meaning of the refrain in Gen 1 “There was an evening and there was a morning, X day” (Gen 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31) has long been in dispute. This paper argues that the refrain is a chronological summary of the preceding text by demonstrating what the syntax and usage of such summaries are in the OT. The phrase then means “In summary there was an evening and then a morning, X day,” thereby encompassing an entire day beginning at sundown and ending at the next sundown. Moreover, the phrase “evening and morning” is further defined in the refrain as a single day.

Drew S. Holland

On the Commonalities of Deuteronomy 13 with Ancient Near Eastern Treaties

This article evaluates the numerous potential influences upon Deut 13 from ancient Near Eastern treaties. After assessing both the features Deut 13 shares with Hittite, Aramean, and neo-Assyrian treaties and the ways in which Deut 13 is distinct from them, it will become apparent that this biblical text shares some significant literary traits with these ANE treaties, but the degree to which it differs from them does not enable us to confirm literary dependence, a claim many scholars have asserted. Rather, Deut 13 expresses a uniquely Israelite treaty style within a general ancient Near Eastern treaty tradition.

Greg Goswell

King and Cultus: The Image of David in the Book of Kings

The image of David in the book of Kings is of a cultically-observant king, who does not commit the sin of idolatry, and, as a result, David becomes the model of proper royal behaviour for all kings that follow. In the theology of Kings there is an essential link between kingship and the temple cultus, and the kings who were like David reformed the cult and suppressed deviant cultic expression. The author of Kings measures and assesses the performance of every king by the rule of whether he supported the primacy of the YHWH and his temple in Jerusalem (of which piety David is the exemplar). It is argued that the image of David found in Kings is not without connection to the memory of David preserved in the preceding book of Samuel. In terms of the fate of the Davidic house in exile and beyond, various features in Kings suggest that the book is at best ambivalent as to the long term future of kingship as an Israelite institution.

Book Reviews

Allen R. Guenther on Kings and Chronicles

Allen R. Guenther, ‘Kings and Chronicles: Interpreting Historical Interpretation’, Direction 11, 2 (1982), 4-15.

Against approaches which would reduce Kings and Chronicles to a single account through artificial harmonisation, Guenther argues that they are ‘written from different perspectives and only when the church affirms both accounts as historical interpretation will these books begin to serve as revelation for the nurture and proclamation of the church’ (5).

He seeks to illustrate through a comparative study of Asa’s reign (1 Kings 15:9-24; 2 Chronicles 14:1-16:14), highlighting in turn the perspective of Kings (the Deutronomist) and Chronicles (the Chronicler).

The perspective of Kings
On this view, Kings is part of the larger history told in Joshua, Judges, and Samuel, which is introduced by Deuteronomy and in which the themes and perspectives of Deuteronomy dominate – the Sinai covenant and Israel’s obligation to observe the commands, with the promise of blessing if they do and punishment if they do not. The history of Israel is traced from the Sinai covenant to the Babylonian exile.

With the exception of Josiah, even the greatest leaders (including David) were a mixture of godliness and and disobedience, with judgment eventually falling on both Israel and Judah, even while the promises to the patriarchs (Deuteronomy 30:1-10) still provide some hope (8-10).

The perspective of the Chronicler
The Chronicler traces biblical history from Adam to the end of the Babylonian exile. After the initial genealogies, the history ‘is restricted to the Davidic line and the house of Judah’, the scope of the history suggesting that the Chronicler ‘is concerned to demonstrate the continuity of God’s redemptive activity from creation to the time of restoration following the Babylonian exile’ (10). The accounts of David and the temple are central (10-11).

•••

Each account needs to be read for its particular perspective.

Each reminds us that God’s word is addressed to people at a given time and place, coming ‘in concrete circumstances to real people to build faith according to specific needs’ (14). ‘When we perceive (wherever possible) the circumstances and needs of that faith-community, the texts can then be directed more profitably to specific contemporary faith-communities in our world’ (14).

‘Chronicles would speak more powerfully to a struggling, leaderless community than would Kings. On the other hand, Kings forces one to look for patterns of life and faith which may be cumulatively destructive or constructive; it provides a more powerful message of a complacent church, relying on the historical elective and redemptive experiences of God’ (14).

‘When we move beyond the concern to harmonize these histories to a concern for their meaning, we discover more inclusive and richer understandings of the truths of God. And we can then appropriately apply those truths to ourselves today’ (15).

Walter Brueggemann on 1 and 2 Kings

Walter Brueggemann, 1 & 2 Kings, Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary 8 (Macon: Smyth & Helwys, 2000), 645pp., ISBN 1573120650.

The publishers provide a pdf sample of this commentary, which includes a helpful five-page introduction.

1 and 2 Kings is ‘royal history’, tracing the ups and downs of kingship from the death of David to the destruction of Jerusalem.

Brueggemann notes that the narrative does not purport to be a full account of ‘factual data’, not least since it directs readers to other sources for further information (e.g., 1 Kings 15:7; 16:20). It is an ‘interpretive commentary… a “theology of history,” an attempt to understand the vagaries of lived public experience… with particular reference to Yahweh’ (2).

Brueggemann highlights four reference points by which to understand this theological interpretation (the one-word summary headings are mine).

1. Jerusalem
‘The defining “fact” is that, in the end, the Holy City of Jerusalem was destroyed by an assault of the Babylonian armies’ (2), with Babylon acting as the Lord’s agents.

2. Temple
‘The defining “fact” of the destruction of Jerusalem reminds us that the subject of this long narrative is finally Jerusalem, the people, the government, and the God who abides there’, plus the temple, ‘the core symbol of the city’s holiness’ (2), to which much of the narrative is devoted.

3. Torah
‘It is unmistakably evident, however, that the temple is a penultimate agenda for the narrator, for in the end, it is Torah that primarily occupies the interpretive energy of the narrative’, with 1 and 2 Kings being ‘a Torah-focused assessment of the royal history’ (3). The books begins with David charging Solomon to keep the Torah (1 Kings 2:2-4; cf. 11:1-11) and ends with Josiah, ‘the quintessential Torah-keper’ (2 Kings 23:25). Torah-obedience rather than power is the measure of prosperity or trouble.

4. Prophets
‘In close connection to the Torah, this narrative account of royal history allots huge amounts of space to the prophets who are seen to be advocates of Torah requirements’ (3), including Ahijah (1 Kings 11:31-34), an unnamed ‘man of God’ (1 Kings 13), Isaiah (2 Kings 19:20-34), Elijah, Micaiah, and Elisha.

‘All of this means that the reader of these books must not expect too much “royal history,” but can watch as royal history is variously enhanced by the temple, critiqued by the prophets, and judged by the Torah. The clue to the whole is that Yahweh is the definitive actor in the public life of Israel’ (4).

Donald Wiseman on 1 and 2 Kings

Donald J. Wiseman, 1 and 2 Kings: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Nottingham: IVP, 2009).

IVP have been reissuing the Tyndale commentaries (Old and New Testament) in a new format. IVP USA make available the (not insubstantial) Introduction to the volume on 1 and 2 Kings, written by Donald Wiseman (first published in 1993).

The blurb on the UK website reads:

‘The book of Kings is a unique source for understanding the history of Israel from the last days of the united kingdom under David to the eventual fall of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Presenting Israel’s national history from a divine viewpoint, these narratives measure the kings of Israel and Judah, not by the mark they leave on secular history, but by their ‘doing what is right in the Lord’s sight’. Embedded in this story are enduring lessons of the ways of God with his people in every age.’

The Introduction covers the following areas:

• The value of the books of Kings
• Themes and theology
• Chronology
• Archaeological evidence
• Sources
• Literary Form
• Composition and authorship
• Text

Given Wiseman’s expertise in the history, archaeology, languages and documents of the ancient Near East, the commentary is most helpful in providing an accessible and concise treatment of historical and related issues.

Not that theology is totally absent… Wiseman notes the following theological emphases in the books of Kings:

• God in history
• God in judgment
• God as deliverer: hope and restoration
• God’s promise to David
• Prophecy
• Other themes – models, the centrality of worship, kingship

Iain W. Provan on 1 and 2 Kings

Iain W. Provan, 1 & 2 Kings, New International Biblical Commentary – Old Testament Volume 7 (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995).

The publishers make available the Table of Contents, the Introduction, and the comments on 1 Kings 1.

1 and 2 Kings is a self-contained book, though it presupposes the story of Israel thus far, invites reflection in the light of Old Testament prophetic writings, as well as (from a Christian perspective) in the total canonical context of Scripture as a whole.

‘The book of Kings tells us a story; it is narrative literature. It is a story that is certainly about the past…; it is literature with historiographical intent. It is, finally, didactic literature – it seeks to teach its readers a number of things about God and the ways of God’ (1).

The Book of Kings as Narrative Literature
As a story, it presents characters and events, with a plot concerned ‘with the attempt that Israel makes (or more often, does not make) under its monarchy to live as the people of God in the promised land and with how God deals with the Israelites in their success and failure’ (2).

Although the landscape has changed in the intervening 15 years or so, Provan (writing in the early 1990s) comments on the dearth of studies dealing with the final form of the text itself ‘as it stands as a complete story’ (3). He seeks to make sense of the text ‘as it is read cumulatively from beginning to end, each part being seen in the context of the whole’ (4-5).

He also notes what has since become more commonplace among those interested in theological readings of Scripture that it is a reading of the final form of the story of Scripture as a whole that defines the church, and that the recovery of such a reading is of ‘utmost importance’ (5).

The Book of Kings as Historiographical Literature
Here he notes the ongoing debate (still ongoing) on the distinction between ‘historical Israel’ and ‘biblical Israel’. In response he draws attention to the ‘historiographical intent’ of the book, which must be taken seriously (7); he also notes with others that all history writing has a ‘story-like quality’ and is ‘in some sense ideological literature’, necessarily so given the selection and interpretation of material (8).

Beyond this, he also argues that the reader ‘who views Kings as part of Christian Scripture’ will see this as ‘one of the authorized portraits of Israel’s past’, to be received and studied (9).

The Book of Kings as Didactic Literature
‘The book of Kings is not only a narrative about the past. It is also a narrative that seeks to teach its readers a number of things about God and his ways’ (10). Various themes are prominent in the book – that ‘God is indeed God’, that ‘as the only God there is, the LORD demands exclusive worship’, that ‘as the giver of the laws that defines true worship and right thinking and behavior generally, the LORD is also the one who executes judgment upon wrongdoers’, as well as the theme of promise (11-13).

Provan concludes this section by reflecting on the importance of placing Kings in the Bible as a whole, read ‘with an eye to to that total canonical context’ (14). Not that it has no meaning by itself or that its meaning is bestowed upon it by the New Testament. Provan here sides with those who argue that the Old Testament ‘must be read as speaking to the church on its own terms – as providing the theological (and not simply the historical) context in which the NT is to be understood’ (14).

Provan draws attention to the role of patterning in Kings, where events and characters in later chapters recall events and characters in earlier chapters, inviting comparison and contrast, as well as functioning typologically, inviting us contemporary readers to read our own lives into the lives of the characters, attaching ‘our story to its larger narrative whole’ (15).

Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart on 1 and 2 Kings

Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible Book by Book: A Guided Tour (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002), 98:

‘The book of Kings is ultimately answering the question, “In light of God’s covenant with Abraham [the land] and with David [an everlasting throne], how did all of this happen to us?” The answer: God has not failed his people; his people, led by their kings, have failed their God. The covenants, after all, have the contingency of Israel’s faithfulness written into them. But the covenant also promises return from exile for those who return to Yahweh (Deut 30:1-10).’