dinsdag 29 januari 2013

Review of: R.N. Boyce, Leviticus and Numbers (Westminster Bible Companion), WJK Press, 2008

R.N. Boyce, Leviticus and Numbers (Westminster Bible Companion), WJK Press, 2008
 
Review in: The Expository Times 2009 120: 517
Review door: Mary Wang
 
LEVITICUS AND NUMBERS
Richard N. Boyce, Leviticus and Numbers (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2008. $24.95. pp. xi + 282. ISBN 978–0–664–25525–1).
A volume of the Westminster Bible Companion series, Richard N. Boyce’s Leviticus and Numbers explores the threefold nature of the composition of Leviticus and Numbers. He explains in detail why the detour through the wilderness is a succession of journeys: from one land to the next, from one temple to the next, from one world to the next. The author shows that this transitional stage in biblical history is much more than a transition from the Exodus to the entering of the Promised Land. It reveals not only the relationship between the people ‘of the way’ and their holy God, it also provides a guideline for the church of Christ during its journey of faith in the new millennium. The commentary contains three parts, each in agreement with the change of the sites. The first part (Lev 1:1 – Num 10:10) discusses the instructions on ritual laws, holy orders and the first census. The author explains these instructions in their historical context together with a fresh reinterpretation of the regulations. The second part (Num 10:11 – 21:9) is a narrative of internal threats, the central message is about how divine providence and gracious discipline interfere with human rebellion. The third part (Num 22:1 – 36:13) uses the story of Balaam, external threats, the new census and final victory to show that through atonement and faith, a generation of the covenant will inherit the Promised Land. The structure of the commentary is clear and reflects a careful exegesis in general. The author’s treatment of the text underlines the unity of the two books. By including Numbers 1–10 in the first part, the author tries to show the parallel relation between the beginning and the end of the journey. The repetition of certain themes in both parts, such as atonement and the census, highlights the theological motif of the two books. In a lucid style, the commentary exposes the spiritual significance of the literary journey, and makes it relevant to Christian practice. The commentary does not contain any exegetical information due to the purpose of the WBC series. However, the author’s familiarity with the Jewish tradition gives valuable insight into the differences between Christian and Jewish interpretation.
MARY WANG
Saint Paul University, Ottawa
 
 

Review of: E.F. Davis, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs (Westminster Bible Companion), WJK, 2000

E.F. Davis, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs (Westminster Bible Companion), WJK, 2000

Korte review in: The Expository Times 2001 112: 280
Korte review door: de Editor.
Gevonden op: http://ext.sagepub.com/content/112/8/280.full.pdf+html

The Westminster Bible Companion series is addressed primarily to the laity. Ellen F. Davis contributes Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs (Westminster John Knox Press, 2000, £9.99, pp. x + 306, ISBN 0-664-25522-1). While fully accepting the distance between the world of these wisdom books and the present day, Davis impressively brings out the meaning that they can have for the modern world. Accepting the impossibility of commenting on every proverb within the length and purpose of the commentary, she deals selectively with the proverbs in chapters 10 to 29 and offers ’meditations’ to stimulate the reader’s own ’theological retlection’. Interestingly, she regards the proverbs as popular sayings, reflecting the common sense of the faith  community. The main feature of Ecclesiastes which Davis brings out is humility, and she sees the value of the book as providing ’a kind of preface to the New Testament’, keeping us from hearing the gospel as ’a fairy tale about a fantasy world’. The imagery of the Song is brought out to the full (perhaps too close to allegory) as Davis seeks to discover its theological message as offering an answer to the tragic history of the failure of human love and responsiveness to God. The book depicts ’the reversal of that primordial exile from Eden’. This is a striking commentary which deserves to be on the shelves of every minister as well as being read by the laity.

Review of: Francis J. Moloney, The Gospel of John (Sacra Pagina Series, Volume 4), Liturgical Press, 1998

Francis J. Moloney, The Gospel of John (Sacra Pagina Series, Volume 4), Liturgical Press, 1998

Review in: The Expository Times 1999 110: 260
Review door: Larry Kreitzer
Gevonden op: http://ext.sagepub.com/content/110/8/260.3.full.pdf+html

THE GOSPEL OF JOHN
The Gospel of John (Michael Glazier, 1998, $34.95, pp. xxii + 594, ISBN 0-8146-5806-7) by Francis J. Moloney SDB represents the latest contribution in the Sacra Pagina commentary series under the editorship of Daniel J. Harrington SJ, a series written by an international team of Roman Catholic biblical scholars. The aim is to produce a commentary series which is of value to professional teachers, clergy and students alike. The volumes in the series attempt a sound critical analysis of the text itself, combining traditional insights and lines of interpretation with new methodological approaches. In Moloney’s case the new approach involves a narrative-critical reading of John, particularly as it applies to the narrative design of the Gospel as a whole (Moloney’s approach has been hammered out over the past six years in other publications). Not surprisingly, according to Moloney, John 20:30-31 has a crucial role to play in the original author’s intention, bringing, as it does, the Christian readership to the point of ’going farther in their belief in Jesus’ (p. 542). In fact, there is a compelling case made for the original author’s integrity, control and consistency in presenting his story of the life of the Lord, although the technically complicated (and inevitably) insoluble debate about the identity of ‘John’, ’the Beloved Disciple’, ’the one Jesus loved’, etc. is practically sidestepped within the commentary. The secondary literature handled is quite up-to-date, particularly in terms of journal articles, although there is a marked reliance upon the work of earlier Catholic scholars, notably R. Brown and R. Schnackenburg. Full indexes of texts and modern writers round out the handsomely produced volume.

LARRY KREITZER,
REGENT’S PARK COLLEGE, OXFORD

Review of: Markus Bockmuehl, The Epistle to the Philippians (BNTC), Hendrickson Publ., 1998

Markus Bockmuehl, The Epistle to the Philippians (BNTC), Hendrickson Publ., 1998

Korte review in: The Expository Times 2008 119: 422
Korte review door: Todd D. Still
In zijn artikel: An Overview of Recent Scholarly Literature on Philippians


The same (EW: “interested in and aware of the theological and pastoral tenor of the letter”) may be said of M. N. A. Bockmuehl’s commentary in the Black’s New Testament Commentary Series. Published in 1998, Bockmuehl’s comparatively brief treatment of Philippians (a ‘mere’ 326 pages!) is exegetically astute, theologically engaged, and pastorally aware. Bockmuehl also displays in the pages of his commentary an interest in and knowledge of the letter’s interpretation and impact beyond that of the contemporary academy. Taken together, in my estimation, if a teacher, pastor, or student were limited to a single commentary on Philippians, then one would be hard pressed to improve upon Bockmuehl’s learned work that is written in limpid style.

Todd D. Still
Truett Theological Seminary of Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA

Review of: Charles H. Talbert, Matthew (PAIDEIA), Baker Academic, 2010

Charles H. Talbert, Matthew (PAIDEIA), Baker Academic, 2010

Review in: The Expository Times 2011 122: 465
Review door: Paul Foster
Gevonden op: http://ext.sagepub.com/content/122/9/465.full.pdf+html

PAIDEIA COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW
Charles H. Talbert, Matthew, Paideia Commentaries on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2010. $29.99. pp. xxiii + 376. ISBN: 978-0-8010-3192-2).

The purpose of the Paideia commentary series is to comment upon sense units rather than verse-byverse analysis, and to highlight the theological concerns of the text under discussion. Talbert performs both of these tasks in an engaging and admirable manner, but without neglecting important historio-critical matters.

His introduction consists of three main sections. The first is a staccato, yet highly informative survey of major options relating to historical questions. In relation to authorship and language he notes the tension between patristic testimonies and modern scholar opinions (pp. 3-4). On dating, the general consensus of between 80 and 100 is noted, the locale is seen as a more open question, although the recipients are more confidently identified as urban non-elites (see pp. 4-5). In terms of source criticism, the Two Source Theory is broadly supported, but informed by more modern perspectives that discuss categories of  hypertext’ and ‘hypotext’ or ‘pretext’, as well as seeing Matthew’s story aligned with the phenomenon of ‘rewritten bible’. The second section is a substantial theological discussion concerning Matthean soteriology. Talbert states that in ‘NT scholarship it is believed that, at least to some degree, the relation of the indicative (gift) and imperative (demand) in Matthew constitutes a theological problem for Christians’ (p. 9). Talbert argues that Matthew’s soteriology (contrary to much scholarly opinion) is controlled by the prior indicative. It is suggested that divine activity (the indicative) is operative in the narrative through ‘omnipotence behind the scenes.’ This is achieved via four techniques in Matthew’s method of narration: (1) statements affirming ‘I am with you’; (2) invoking the divine name; (3) expressions such as ‘it has been revealed to you’; and (4) being with Jesus. The tekst of Matthew is read through this theological lens which Talbert detects, and it is this approach that gives the commentary its fresh approach.

Each section of the commentary discusses a range of different aspects of the text. Taking Matthew 1.1-2.23 ‘Birth Narratives’, as an example, Talbert first surveys ‘introductory matters’. He explains why Matt 1-2 should be treated separately from Matt 3-4, discusses possible pre- Matthean sources behind this material, and the arrangement of material in these two chapters (pp. 28-30). Next follow comments on the individual units and an analysis of the function of the whole unit (pp. 31-40). This section is interspersed with tables outlining the narrative structure or related issues of interest such as the role of the women in the genealogy, along with illustrations including a photograph of the Church of the Nativity and a Dürer woodcut depicting the visit of the magi. Such features, which occur throughout the commentary, ensure that readers will find its multimedia approach highly informative and usable.

Talbert has produced a commentary on Matthew that offers new insights into the text and meets the goals of the Paideia series. This treatment deserves a place on bookshelves alongside the more substantial treatments of the Matthean text. Like Talbert’s previous volume in this series on Ephesians and Colossians, this commentary offers rich theological insights into the text it analyzes.

PAUL FOSTER
School of Divinity, University of Edinburgh

Review of: Baruch A. Levine, Numbers 21-36 (AB), Yale Press, 2000

Baruch A. Levine, Numbers 21-36 (AB), Yale Press, 2000

Korte review in: The Expository Times 2001 112: 280
Korte review door: de Editor
Gevonden op: http://ext.sagepub.com/content/112/8/280.full.pdf+html

The book of Numbers is hardly the most popular of the books of the Old Testament, but it is nevertheless important. Baruch A. Levine completes his Anchor Bible commentary with Numbers 21-36 (Doubleday, 2000, $45.00, pp. xxi + 614, ISBN 0-385-41256-8). Levine appears to cover all the relevant issues at tremendous depth. The discussions of archaeological and other evidence are extensive, and particular questions are followed up with great diligence (cf. the lengthy discussion of the Balaam poems, including an  account of the inscriptions from Deir ’Alla, given in transcription and translation with detailed notes, or the account of the ’towns of asylum’ and the treatment of homicide). This is a major commentary on the book, though chiefly, I suspect, of interest to scholars.

Review of: David J.A. Clines, Job 21–37 (WBC 18A),Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006

David J.A. Clines, Job 2137 (WBC 18A),Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006

Review in: The Expository Times 2009 120: 410
Review door: John E. Hartley
Gevonden op: http://ext.sagepub.com/content/120/8/410.2.full.pdf+html

A New Portrait of Job
David J. A. Clines, Job 2137 (WBC 18A; Dallas, TX: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006. $39.99. pp. 559. ISBN 9780849902178).

Clines’ second volume on the Book of Job (Chaps 2137) is a treasury of linguistic, exegetical, form critical, and strophic analysis, leading into an incisive and perceptive exposition of the text. Clines redraws the portraits of Eliphaz and Job. Eliphaz is portrayed as the most encouraging of the interlocutors, even in his third speech. Job is depicted as an admirable character, especially in his unwavering determination to hold God accountable. Nevertheless, Job’s flaws are visible in the portrait, especially in his attitude toward his servants, the poor, outcasts, and the unrighteous. Throughout Clines engages the vast array of interpretations on Job in a concise manner, often stating how he finds a position adequate or wanting in a way that leads to a more nuanced understanding of a passage. In a few places, though, Clines lets a postmodern agenda surface in his comments. E.g. in Job’s avowal that he helped the poor (31:1923), Clines finds that Job failed to acknowledge his participation in the systemic order that confines people to poverty. Certainly Job did not recognize the social causes of poverty, but it is unlikely that the learning of his day had developed the conceptual tools for recognizing such causes.

Clines reorganizes the disturbed third cycle material in a new way: Job’s Eighth Speech (23:117; 24:117, 25), Bildad’s Third Speech (25:126:14); Job’s Ninth Speech (27:16, 1112), Zophar’s Third Speech (17:710, 1317; 24:1824; 27:1823), Elihu’s four speeches (32:137:24) + a conclusion (28:128). After the interlocutors ceased speaking, Elihu entered the fray. In Clines’ judgement his style is sufficiently similar to the other speakers that it is unnecessary to postulate another author for them. Clines assigns the Ode of Wisdom (28:128) to Elihu, viewing it as a proper conclusion that reinforces his teaching that God communicates with humans. In the oldest format of the book, then, Job’s final speech, in which he makes a formal complaint against Yahweh, followed the Elihu speeches and immediately preceded the Yahweh speeches.

John E. Hartley

Review of: Brian K. Blount, Revelation (NTL), WJK, 2009

Brian K. Blount, Revelation (NTL), WJK, 2009

Review in: The Expository Times 2010 121: 264
Door: Paul Foster
Gevonden op:  http://ext.sagepub.com/content/121/5/264.1.full.pdf+html

REVELATION – FRIGHTENING VIOLENCE AND BREATH-TAKING HOPE
Brian K. Blount, Revelation, NTL (Louisville: WJK, 2009. $49.95/£32.99. pp. xxvi + 462. ISBN: 978-0-664-22121-8).

Presenting a theological reading of Revelation, Brian Blount sees the text both as envisaging violence associated with God’s eschatological judgment while simultaneously promoting an ethic of non-violent resistance. As part of this understanding of the text, Blount seeks to explore traditional introductory questions. Although it is not possible to identify a specific named figure as author, this person ‘considered himself a prophet’ (p. 7) and based on the heavy dependence on Hebrew biblical material the author was ‘most likely a Palestinian Jew who had come to the conclusion that Christ was God’s messianic agent charged with the task of ushering in God’s reign.’ (p. 8). In regard to dating, the composition of the work at the end of the Domitianic reign is supported (p. 8).

Here the two pieces of evidence are seen as being a date after the destruction of the Temple and after the emergence of the Nero redivivus concern, which Blount notes is attested as early as A.D. 69. How one moves from these twin datum to a date at the end of Domitian’s reign is not entirely obvious. In terms of social setting, the work is positioned against a tendency towards accommodation of the Roman imperial cult in Asia Minor in the last decade of the first century. The genre is taken as being apocalyptic (pp. 14-20). The introduction concludes with a discussion of the structure of Revelation (pp. 20-22) and by outlining the principal textual witnesses (pp. 22-23).

The format of the commentary section consists of a brief explanatory paragraph to each section, an English translation of the textual unit under consideration, brief notes treating textual and translational issues, followed by the detailed commentary. The comments are mainly limited to explicating the English translation with reference to Greek being brought into the discussion when there is some grammatical or syntactical issue that arises in the original language. Greek is transliterated throughout the commentary.

On the section dealing with Rev 14:1-20, Blount entitles this as ‘God Strikes Back: Visions of Judgment’ (p. 263). Specifically in relation to the 144,000 (Rev 14:1-5), it is noted that this group function as a remnant community. He states, ‘As a narrative construct, they operate somewhat like the transfiguration of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark (Mk 9:2-8). That event was a narrative sign that Jesus and those who follow him, would be vindicated by God. This type of ‘throw away comment’ raises a number of issues. First, is there any parallel between the narratival function of the transfiguration and the

144,000? Secondly, is the thematic meaning of the Markan story about divine vindication? Thirdly, is there a danger of reading each element of Revelation in terms of Blount’s own thematic emphasis on vindication through eschatological judgment?

While Blount helpfully provides a unified reading of the text, the central question remains as to whether this reading is an integral feature of the text of Revelation, or a slightly over-imposed hermeneutical grid. There is also a tendency to assume that narrative flow is self-evident, and that connections are both linear and carefully sequenced. Despite these concerns, this is a useful and user-friendly commentary on the text of Revelation.

PAUL FOSTER
School of Divinity, University of Edinburgh

vrijdag 25 januari 2013

Review of: Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1-11: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 5), Doubleday, 1991; door Olson

Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1-11: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 5), Doubleday, 1991.

Review in: JBL
Gevonden op: http://www.academicroom.com/bookreview/deuteronomy-1-11-new-translation-introduction-and-commentary

Deuteronomy 1-11: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, by Moshe Weinfeld (AB 5), New York/London: Doubleday, 1991. Pp. xiv + 458. $34 ($42 Canada).

The book of Deuteronomy has been a frequent storm center in the history of biblical interpretation. Considered by some the linchpin of pentateuchal criticism and by others the "theological center" of the Hebrew Scriptures, Deuteronomy forms both the capstone of the Pentateuch and the introduction to the Deuteronomistic History. The frequent quotations of Deuteronomy in the New Testament and in the classic rabbinical sources are evidence of its authority within both Jewish and Christian traditions. Given Deuteronomy's importance at so many levels, there have been surprisingly few good commentaries on Deuteronomy which combine critical acumen, literary sensitivity and theological insight. The void has begun to be filled by a number of recent monographs on Deuteronomy. Among these welcome newcomers is Moshe Weinfeld's contribution to the Anchor Bible series: Deuteronomy I-U: A New Translation, Introduction and Commentary.Weinfeld is Professor of Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. He has distinguished himself over almost thirty years with a long list of books and articles on Deuteronomy. The best known is his 1972 monograph entitled Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic School, a book noted for its thesis that Deuteronomy was in large part the product of sages in the wisdom tradition of ancient Israel. Weinfeld has also stressed the importance of ancient Near Eastern treaty forms in understanding Deuteronomy, particularly the suzerain-vassal treaties of the Hittite and neo-Assyrian varieties. Weinfeld's scholarly attention to Deuteronomy has ranged broadly, covering ancient Near Eastern, biblical and contemporary historical and theological concerns. The present commentary is a mature and well crafted distillation of a lifetime of work and thought.

Deuteronomy 1-11 begins with an extensive and readable 84-page introduction. Weinfeld presents his own positions on various issues along with selected scholars with whom he significantly agrees or disagrees. The seventeen topics range from historical and tradition-critical concerns ("Deuteronomy and Its Northern Roots:' "Deuteronomy and the Reform of Josiah,""Deuteronomy and Wisdom Literature") to literary and critical questions ("The Literary Form of Deuteronomy:' "Composition and Structurcn"Singular and Plural Layers:' "Relation of Deuteronomy to the Tetrateuch), to issues of a more thematic and theological bent ("The Idea of the Election of Israel:' "The Land in Deuteronomy "Deuteronomy as Turning Point in Israelite Religion"). The introduction is followed by a thirty-seven page bibliography on Deuteronomy which clearly undergirds Weinfeld's work in both the introduction and the heart of the commentary on Deuteronomy 1-ll which follows.

Weinfeld divides chapters 1-11 into two major sections: Deut 1:1-4:43 (Moses' First Address: Historical Survey) and 4:44-ll:32 (Moses' Second Address: Introduction to the Exposition of the Law). Deuteronomy I-U is further subdivided into twenty-three smaller sections ranging from a few verses to whole chapters. Each section contains a fresh translation, textual notes, notes and comment. The "Textual Notes" are largely text-critical in character and include consideration of unpublished Qumran fragments of the text of Deuteronomy. The "Notes" defend translations against other options in understanding a phrase, explore historical and critical issues, introduce rabbinic readings, and refer to parallel texts elsewhere in Deuteronomy or the Hebrew Bible.

The "Comment" sections build on Weinfeld's broader concerns to illuminate the literary structure, themes and theology of Deuteronomy It is the integration of the work of a skilled translator, historical-critical scholar, and biblical theologian that is this commentary's overriding strength. Weinfeld reaches independent conclusions and cannot be easily placed in any one "camp:' Readers will not always agree with Weinfeld's positions, but one will always find his conclusions clearly stated and defended. Weinfeld's judicious sampling of traditional rabbinic and Jewish interpretations opens the reader to the range of interpretations available in the history of biblical inter-pretation. Ibn Ezra discerns an order in the subject matter of the last five commandments of the Decalogue; from destroying and violating another's body (murder, adultery) to taking another's property by force (stealing), by mouth (false witness) or by mere intention (coveting). Weinfeld comments on the brutal holy war requirement in Deuteronomy 21 that the native population must be exterminated: "the rabbis could not conceive the removal of the Canaanites in such a cruel, radical manner and circumvented plain Scripture" by reinterpreting Joshua's conquest to allow for Canaanites either to leave Canaan, make peace with Israel, or fight. Weinfeld cites Philo and Martin Buber when discussing the second person singular "you" form of the Ten Commandments and its implied "I-Thou" relationship. Weinfeld's broader interpretive concerns are woven into the entire commentary.

Some questions arise as the reader works through this commentary. Weinfeld, for example, argues that Deuteronomy comes after and not before the Priestly tradition in date. The Priestly tradent for Weinfeld seems more ritualistic, magical, sacral and hence more primitive and earlier. On the other hand, Weinfeld argues that Deuteronomy is more rational, humanitarian and "secular" and thus later. But can such a clear distinction between the sacral-holy character of P and the secular-social character of D really be sustained? The purity laws in Deuteronomy 14, the concern for the worship place, festivals and liturgy in Deuteronomy 12, 16 and 26, the consistent concern for Levitical priests and prophets all suggest that Deuteronomy is not so much a more secular document. Rather, it has a different understanding of the sacral. And even if one could argue for such a sacral versus secular distinction between P and D, the assumption that a more secular or humanitarian tone necessarily entails a later dating is not self-evident. D and P may simply represent two different traditions of separate groups within Israel whose relative dating must depend on comparisons other than just the alleged sacral versus secular distinction.

Weinfeld is known for his thesis that Deuteronomy is associated with the wisdom tradition in ancient Israel. He rehearses what he perceives as the distinctive verbal and conceptual affinities between Deuteronomy and the wisdom literature, especially the book of Proverbs. Weinfeld concludes, 'All of this might support my thesis that scribes and wise men were engaged in the composition of Deuteronomy" (p. 65). The key word here is "might." It seems that Weinfeld has backed off somewhat from his thesis in Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School, recognizing that a list of scattered parallels is not overwhelming evidence for authorship as much as some borrowing from the wisdom tradition. The most one can say is there "might" be a connection of some sort.

One final question arising from the commentary is this: what does Weinfeld think is the central purpose which this book served in ancient Israel? Is it liturgical, political or theological? At times, Weinfeld argues that an attack on the cult was the book's central aim. "The very purpose of the book of Deuteronomy," writes Weinfeld, "was to curtail and circumvent the cult and not to extend or enhance it" (p. 37). Deuteronomy, claims Weinfeld, replaces the temple with the synagogue and the system of sacrifice and ritual with prayer and Torah reading. At other times, Weinfeld links the central purpose of Deuteronomy with kingship and the political programs of King Hezekiah and Josiah in their nationalistic efforts to restore old Israel, both north and south. At other times, especially in the discussion of Deuteronomy 4 and 30, Weinfeld sees Deuteronomy's central concern as introducing a "new consciousness of sin" (p. 59) and a word of hope for the exiles. Deuteronomy, writes Weinfeld, proclaims that "there is hope for restoration if the nation returns with sincerity" (p. 216).

The scattered and varied nature of Weinfeld's responses to the question of Deuteronomy's central purpose suggests a need for the author to spell out more clearly his assumptions about how one interprets this biblical book. Which level is definitive Hezekian, Josianic, exilic, post-exilic? What criteria does one use to determine what is a central purpose of the book? Was the transformation of worship in Deuteronomy an attack on the cult or a reasonable adjustment to the realities of the exile and the loss of the temple as a place of worship? Questions such as these may b e answered in the second volume of Weinfeld's Deuteronomy commentary, which will cover chaps. 12-34. In light of the contributions of this present work, we are fortunate that we have not yet heard the last word from Weinfeld on Deuteronomy.

Dennis T. Olson
Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, KJ 08542


Review of: Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1-11: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 5), Doubleday, 1991; door Matthews

Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1-11: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 5), Doubleday, 1991.

Review in: Hebrew Studies Journal

DEUTERONOMY 1-11: ANEW TRANSLATION WITH INTRODUCTION AND COMMENTARY. By Moshe Weinfeld. AB 5. Pp. xiv + 458. New York: Doubleday, 1991. Cloth, $34.00.


With the large number of commentaries that are currently appearing on Deuteronomy (P. Miller [Interpretation], D. Christensen [WBC], G. Braulik [DNEB], J. Tigay [JPS]), it seems that this seminal book is at last getting the attention it deserves from modern scholars. However, the temptation among most of these commentators, including Weinfeld, is to analyze nearly every point so completely that many readers will simply become lost in the flood of information. The Anchor Bible's intent to attract a more popular audience than the Hermeneia series, for instance, has again been set aside in this volume in the interests of scholarly apparatus and analysis (122 pages are devoted to the introduction and bibliography).


Although it is appropriate to divide the commentary into separate volumes (chaps. 1-11, 12-34), it is also frustrating to have to wait for the second volume to appear in order to check and compare comments and linguistic analysis. In any case, Weinfeld's contribution to this group of commentaries on Deuteronomy is among the best and reflects his close reading of the text as well as his attention to parallels from ancient Near Eastern legal materials (as well as the vassal treaty forms), the Targumim, the Qumran archive, and the medieval rabbinic commentators.

It is interesting to note Weinfeld's views on the relationship between the Deuteronomic code and the other biblical legal codes. He contends that the Deuteronomist made little use of the priestly legislation, which Weinfeld calls "esoteric" in its emphasis on sacral legislation and the effects of impurity. Where priestly matters are dealt with in Deuteronomy (for example, on lepers, impure animals, and hybrid species), he advocates the primacy of Leviticus as the original source. In contrast, the JE (Covenant Code) and Deuteronomic code reflect "the general national milieu" of legal traditions (p. 19), with primary attention to the civil-secular sphere. Deuteronomy's dependence on the Covenant Code, however, is more in the nature of an updated revising of that earlier set of laws, based on the ideology of the seventh century. Among these new, more "humanitarian" concerns are the "protection of the family and family dignity" (see a list of changes on pp. 20-24 and the list of linguistic variations on p. 36).

Particularly stimulating in the introductory section is Weinfeld's discussion of Deuteronomy as a "turning point in Israelite religion" (pp. 37-44). He traces the maturing of the concept of Yahweh's presence separate from the Temple complex and the transformation of sacrificial practice. He emphasizes the greater importance placed on confession and prayer and the sharing of the offerings with the traditionally powerless groups (widows, orphans, and resident aliens) as well as the Levites. The centralization of worship, as part of the Josianic reform, is also put forward as a motivating force in the shaping of these laws.

In the commentary section, Weinfeld follows the traditional style of translation, textual notes, stylistic notes, and general comments. The layout of the book, with large print titles, helps break up the pages of closely packed script as well as the numerous abbreviations and transliterations. The inset of comparative texts is also helpful (see pp. 380-381 for a comparison of Exodus 23 and Deuteronomy 7).

Since he has more freedom to expound on particular texts in a two volume format, Weinfeld has written an extensive excursus on the Decalogue, which covers pages 236-327. In this remarkable section, he examines the history of its analysis by scholars, the relation between the text of Deuteronomy 5 and that of Exodus 20 as well as other legal collections, its use in worship, and the basic structure and meaning of each of the legal pronouncements. Textual and stylistic variants are skillfully outlined on pages 279-284, with attention given to massoretic vocabulary ("remember" vs. "observe" the Sabbath) as well as the Septuagint, papyri, Qumran, and Samaritan versions. In doing this, Weinfeld rejects the view of F. L. Hossfeld (Der Dekalog, Freiburg and Gattingen, 1982) that the Exodus material is a later, secondary development of the code (see pp. 290-291, 297, 305, and 312).

Much more attention is also given in this section to the first pentad, which is seen particularly as a reflection of the Deuteronomic ideology. One example of this new emphasis is the revision of the principle of familial solidarity. Weinfeld points to a rejection of the idea of communal punishment in the omission of the phrase concerning "visiting the father's sins on their descendants" (p. 299). In another case, the change in viewpoint is seen in the formulation of the fourth commandment, which, unlike Exod 23:12, does not place animals on the same level as humans during the Sabbath rest (p. 308).

Weinfeld makes good use of Hittite and Assyrian royal grants in his discussion of Yahweh's granting the land to the people (Deut 7:1-26). In doing this, he places the biblical material in the context of other ancient Near Eastern legal texts and highlights the manner in which the covenant with Israel parallels established legal form. For the Israelites, it would have been important that their covenant was written in a recognized treaty and land grant style, giving it legitimacy and the authority of long used tradition.

One deviation in this standard form is the clause regarding divine retribution against the violator of the covenant. Using Jer 31:28 and Ezek 18:2, Weinfeld again argues for a shift to "individual responsibility" and away from the idea of the father's sins being placed on the heads of his descendants (p. 371). While there may have been a greater recognition of the individual in these texts, it is hard to fathom that a society which was based on communal identity and recognition would absolutely reject this for individuality. More likely, these texts refer to individuals as they relate to the community as a whole, not to individuals separate from the community. Otherwise, the covenant promise to the nation as it is formulated throughout the biblical text loses its emphasis and ultimate force in governing the activities of a people.

In form and style, this commentary is very clear in setting out its position and in arguing forcefully for its understanding of Deuteronomy as a crux document. It should be read and used by all scholars interested in a better understanding of the transition of Judaism during and after the exilic period. Weinfeld has given us a important key to textual study which should be enhanced with the publication of his second volume.
Victor H. Matthews
Southwest Missouri State University
Springfield, MO 65804-0095

Review of: Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 23-27: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 3B), Doubleday, 2001

Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 23-27: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 3B), Doubleday, 2001.

Review in: Hebrew Studies Journal

LEVITICUS 23-27: A NEW TRANSLATION WITH INTRODUCTION AND COMMENTARY. By Jacob Milgrom. The Anchor Bible 3B. Pp. xxi + 1893-2714. New York: Doubleday, 2001. Cloth, $50.00. 

This volume marks the conclusion of Milgrom's magnum opus on Leviticus. The scope of his work can be glimpsed in the sheer number of pages he devotes to the last chapters of Leviticus (Leviticus 23, pages 1947-2080; Leviticus 24, pages 2080-2145; Leviticus 25, pages 2145-2271; Leviticus 26, pages 2272-2365; Leviticus 27, pages 2365-2436) and in his characteristic interest in bringing insights from rabbinic literature, in analyzing the interpretation of the Qumran community of the texts he treats, and in comparing ancient Near Eastern ritual texts, principally Hittite ones, to the priestly texts of the Pentateuch. Even though Milgrom must have been working on this commentary for decades, he energetically incorporates much more recent material and is engaged in a mighty battle with other interpreters from Ibn Ezra to the late Robert Cover.
 
Milgrom's work is brilliant and thought-provoking, studded with insights both philological and ideological. It does have limitations. The sheer mass of Milgrom's commentary can at times obscure his insights. (Here I will confine myself to the commentary on Lev 24:1-4). For example, Milgrom considers the problem of whether the candelabrum originally had seven branches and appears to conclude that the passage in question assumed that it possessed but a single lamp or bowl (p. 2088). The sole open question he leaves unanswered is whether the seven branches were a late First Temple or Second Temple development. However, a few pages later, after a host of other insights into the text, Milgrom notes that Lev 24:4 refers to the seven-branched candelabrum (p. 2091). How this coheres with what he argues persuasively for a few pages earlier is unclear to this reader. Moreover, Milgrom's ability to shed light on many conundrums leaves this reader disappointed in the cases where he does not. Milgrom explains that the reason why the two altars require daubing with blood, while the candelabrum and candle do not, is because the latter are purified by the sevenfold sprinkling of the curtain, while the altars, as the funnel of the people's prayers to God, symbolically represented by the ascending smoke of the altar, require stronger measures of protection from the forces of impurity (p. 2090). At the same time that Milgrom offers this sterling insight, he explains the reason for the apparent doublet of Exod 27:20-21 as anticipatory of Lev 24:1-4 without any argumentation (p. 2084). Lastly, the sheer complexity of the issues Milgrom addresses produces a certain amount of indecisiveness. In comparing Lev 24:1-4 to Exod 27:20-21, he highlights the ideological distinction between the two: in Exodus, the entire priestly group, holds the responsibility for setting up the lamps, while in Leviticus, the responsibility is Aaron's alone (p. 2084). A few pages later, Milgrom argues that ubanayw should be added to the Leviticus passage, obscuring the ideological consequences (p. 2088). Milgrom has so much to offer that he has difficulty holding it all together.

Another wrinkle in Milgrom's work originates in the very nature of commentary. In Milgrom's discussion of lex talionis, he observes that talionic punishment is far from precise, despite the implications of how the talionic principle is worded. The punishment of forty years' wandering in the Wilderness is generated from the forty days that the scouts reconnoitered the Land. Exact talionic punishment would mean the dissemination of disinformation that would make the Israelites panic and flee back to Egypt. Forty days is not equal to forty years, and the forty days of reconnaissance was not a sin. Rather the exaggeration of the abilities of the native inhabitants and the recommendation against invasion by ten of the spies were the sins. Milgrom is correct in pointing out that lex talionis in this case is more an expression of emphasis of the inevitability and irreversibility of punishment. Milgrom notes that talionic punishment is found in Mesopotamian law, but fails to note that it does not apply to capital punishment in Mesopotamian law. Serious offenses in Mesopotamian law are remedied by the death penalty, whether or not the offender has killed another. In Lev 24:10-23, the verbal expression of lex talionis is used for non-fatal bodily injuries, and a variant of it is used for the slaying of human beings. The principle of lex talionis is used in Mesopotamian law for non-fatal bodily injuries but not for capital cases, which fall under the rubric of serious offenses, whatever they might be, for which the penalty is death. This oversight is a genetic problem of commentaries. While Milgrom's publisher has allowed him the freedom of excurses, they can be too limited in scope to deal with complex issues that require a more sustained approach. Monographic works, on the other hand, can be so focused so as to ignore the demands of textual interpretation.

A final limitation arises from a focus on Leviticus that can obscure the greater culture from which it stems. Milgrom observes that holy days lack rituals of separation and incorporation and notes that blowing of the shofar could serve for this (pp. 1951-1952). There is more to pilgrimage celebrations than what is in Leviticus. Pilgrimage psalms were part of First Temple Israelite religion, yet they are not reflected in priestly texts.

This reader is grateful for Milgrom's efforts, in his commentaries and monographic works. His penetrating research has deepened our understanding of priestly texts, and those who study the Hebrew Bible will be forever in debt to Jacob Milgrom.
Pamela Barmash
Washington University in St. Louis
St. Louis, MO 63130
pbarmash@artsci.wustl.edu

Review of: Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16: A New Translation With Introduction and Commentary (AB 3), Doubleday, 1991

Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16: A New Translation With Introduction and Commentary (AB 3), Doubleday, 1991.

Review in: JBL
Gevonden op: http://www.academicroom.com/bookreview/leviticus-1-16-new-translation-introduction-and-commentary

Leviticus 1-16: A New Translation With Introduction and Commentary, by Jacob Milgrom (AB 3), New York/London: Doubleday, 1991. Pp. xix + 1163. $42.

In this first of two volumes on Leviticus in AB, Jacob Milgrom has brought together the results of his extensive research on the Priestly traditions. While Milgrom's published views on the Priestly traditions have not changed substantially, his basic arguments are extended and developed richly in the commentary. The exegetical skill, the breadth of knowledge, the command of the material, and the clarity of thought exhibited by Milgrom clearly mark this as an immediate standard in the study and interpretation of Leviticus 1-16.

The volume follows the typical AB format with an Introduction (pp. 1-67), an extensive and complete Bibliography (pp. 69-128), fresh translations of the texts followed by extensive and detailed notes, and a series of comments covering a wide range of topics. The exegetical work is organized around three major sections: Leviticus 1-7: "The Sacrificial System" (pp. 129-489); Leviticus 8-10: "The Inauguration of the Cult" (pp. 491-640); Leviticus ll-16: "The Impurity System" (pp. 641-1084). The volume concludes with a series of indices (Subjects, Terms, Authors, and Sources).

Milgrom states that his methodology is "synchronic"; it studies each literary unit as a whole (p. 2). Indeed, the commentary is filled with valuable stylistic and literary insights. At the same time, however, the actual exegetical analysis of the texts is strongly historical and comparative. Texts are interpreted in conversation with a wide range of ANE texts, rabbinic texts, Qumran texts, and medieval Jewish interpreters. Milgrom often draws on these texts to support or confirm his arguments. In this regard, the commentary makes an unparalleled contribution to the history of interpretation of cultic terms, rites, and ideas.

Drawing on and extending the work of A. Hurvitz, Milgrom argues for a pre-exilic date for the whole of P. He discusses a number of terms and institutions found in P that are either missing altogether or understood very differently in post-exilic documents (pp. 3-13). Tracing the probable origin of P's sacrificial procedures to the cult at Shiloh (p. 34), Milgrom believes that the basic P texts (PI) and supplements (PZ)were composed no later than ca. 750 BCE (p. 28). These texts were then redacted at the end of the eighth century by H. Finding several H passages in Leviticus 1-16 (3:16b-17;

6:12-18aa; 7:22-29a; 7:38b[?];9:17b; ll:43-45; 12:8; 14:34-53[?], 54-57[?]; 15:31; 16:2bp, 29-34a), Milgrom argues that H was the final redactor of P (p. 63). With the possible exception of a few redactional touches, both P and H "were composed by the priests of Israel, in the land of Israel, during the days of the First Temple" (p. 13). In addition, Milgrom argues that Deut 14:4-21 is an abridgment of Leviticus ??? and concludes that the writer of Deut 14:4-21 "had the entire MT of Lev ??? [including H material in w. 43-45] before him" (p. 704).

Drawing on and extending the work of I. Knohl, Milgrom begins to catalogue and evaluate the stylistic, terminological, and theological differences between P and H. For example, H has a tendency to blur certain terminological-ideological distinctions that are rigidly maintained in P (pp. 35-38), reflects a more artful and intricate use of chiastic structure (pp. 39-42), contains an absolute prohibition against common slaughter (pp. 28-29, 214-16), emphasizes the holiness of Israel (pp. 48-49), includes the gzr in many of its laws (p. 1065), and for the first time prescribes an annual date for the celebration of the Day of Purgation (initially in P, he argues, it was an emergency procedure for purifying the sanctuary, pp. 1061-1062). Milgrom promises more extensive treatment of H in the forthcoming volume.

The primary contribution of the volume is Milgrom's exegetical analysis and interpretation of the texts of Leviticus and the Priestly ritual system. His analysis of stylistic and structural features of texts is illuminating and convincing. His exegetical conclusions are stated clearly and his reasoning is supported with a wide range of information and data. His attention to detail is exemplary. He develops with precision and consistency the ritual meaning of the various types of sacrifices, the function of the larger ritual processes described or prescribed in P, and the nature of the Priestly cult reflected in these texts.

At the same time, Milgrom uses his analysis of the individual texts as a basis for discussing and clarifying the structure of the Priestly ritual system. More fully than before, Milgrom brings to light the larger theological and conceptual categories which are operative in the Priestly traditions. For example, he demonstrates that the sacrificial texts (Leviticus 1-7) and the impurity texts (Leviticus U-15) are significantly related through the dynamic interaction of the conceptual categories of life and death which are then reflected in the cultic categories of holiness and impurity. Thus, while he recognizes development within these texts, he also brings to light certain overarching issues and concerns which run throughout the Priestly traditions. In addition, he demonstrates various ways in which Priestly theology is significantly related to other parts of the Hebrew Scriptures (e.g., "The Priestly Doctrine of Repentance:' pp. 373-78 and "The Prophets and the Cu1t:'pp. 482-85) and the importance of the Priestly materials for theology. The synthetic work is undertaken primarily in the comments following the textual notes which are, in this volume, arranged according to specific topics (I count some seventy-four distinct entries). These comments will be the most useful for many readers who will find the textual and exegetical notes difficult to follow.

As is the case with any volume of this size and forthrightness, there are specific points of interpretation which will find disagreement. It is clear, however, that future discussions of Leviticus and the Priestly traditions will have to begin with Milgrom's work. His views on the chronological development of P and H and D will have to be given careful and critical consideration. It is hoped that in the second volume Milgrom will clarify his understanding of the development of the whole of Leviticus and the relationship of this process to the development of the Pentateuch. In addition, it would be helpful if Milgrom clarified his understanding of the nature of ritual. For example, what constitutes a ritual or ritual activity? Are rituals to be understood in terms of their performance and enactment or primarily in terms of the ideas to which they point? While these issues are not central to Milgrom's enterprise, future discussions of Priestly ritual will need to address them more fully.

Unfortunately, the usefulness of the volume is limited by the absence of chapter and verse divisions at the top of the pages. The pages devoted to chapters 1-10 (pp. 133-640) do not even have the indication of chapter divisions! This is particularly problematic and irritating because of the large amount of very important and helpful cross-referencing done in the volume. This flaw in production will certainly be an obstacle to the extensive use of a commentary that is deserving of a wide audience. At the same time, it is clear that the massive amount of information contained in the notes, the technical nature of the analysis, and the highly nuanced nature of many of the arguments will prove daunting to those outside of the academy. It is this reviewer's hope that Professor Milgrom will in the not too distant future put his views on the Priestly traditions into a more popular and readable volume so that a wider audience will have access to his very important and stimulating work.

Frank H. Gorman, Jr.
Bethany College, Bethany, WV 26032