Biblical Exegesis

Ps 13 contains a so-called »change of mood« (»Stimmungsumschwung«) between vv.2–5 and v.6, a phenomenon that occurs in individual laments and petitions.
Since the hitherto widely accepted explanation, according to which a priestly oracle of salvation is the cause for the »change of mood«, is now highly disputed, a new evaluation is presented that is based solely on the text of the Psalm. Despite the caesura, there are interrelationships between vv.2–5 and v.6, The expression בחסדך (with Beth causae: »because of your mercy«) in 6a shows what makes possible a new beginning. By the phrase »But I …« ( ואני ) a
new, liberated »I« is introduced that is different from the suffering »I« of the previous verses. Because of the mercy that is granted by God to the one who prays, he is able to express trust (not without recalling previous experiences of mercy). The mode is changing in v.6b, where a jussive is used. Presumably, God’s re-established presence of salvation is expressed proleptically, here. V.6c continues v.6b, and the praise of the heart exits the mouth. A future song is announced, the beginning of the Song of the Sea (Ex 15:1) is intonated and reshaped as an individual thanksgiving song. Finally, the gain of this study is summarized in 9 theses. Accordingly, one can perceive a process of prayer, in which the experiences of distress are not excluded but interwoven in the Psalm. Actual distress has not changed in the present speech of the Psalm, but
the latter expresses confidence in God’s response and anticipates the thanksgiving that is to offer after the petitioner has been rescued. The fact that the present Psalm has been preserved and transmitted may lead us to the conclusion that the words of the Psalm have been heard and answered for salvation and that they had an effect on many of those who prayed by them.

This book’s six essays pertain to the “piercing of the clouds,” or the experience of heavenly mysteries, which characterizes lectio divina practiced well. Moreover, these peer-reviewed essays give special attention to the practice of lectio divina during preparation for ministry, especially the ministry of Catholic priests. That being said, any current or prospective Bible-reader may profit from this book; most of its content applies to Catholic seminarians and literate Christians alike.
    Here follow brief descriptions of each chapter. Laurence Kriegshauser, OSB, begins the book with a chapter on the Western monastic tradition of lectio divina and seminary formation, including an historical survey of lectio divina, a description of its characteristics, and reflections on its practice in seminaries. Michael Magee reflects upon the implications of exegetical method for lectio divina, with a comparison and critique of three commentaries’ treatments of John 6. Konrad Schaefer, OSB, advocates for fostering growth and formation through lectio divina, beginning his chapter with a description of its theological underpinnings and then taking up some practical considerations for students. Marcin Kowalski focuses on meditatio of lectio divina following upon exegesis-informed lectio, with an examination of Romans 7:7–25 as a test case. Daniel Keating examines oratio and contemplatio (and actio) of lectio divina, giving attention to theologians from twelfth-century Carthusian Prior Guigo II to Pope Benedict XVI. Anthony Giambrone, OP, contributes the final essay, on searching the Scriptures and the mystery of preaching. For him, exquisitio (intellectual engagement) leads to supplicatio (prayerful supplication), which culminates in praedicatio (preaching).

Every speaker, teacher, or preacher has on some occasion encountered an audience that was either unreceptive to or unsympathetic with what he or she had to say. One dominant response to this communication breakdown given by both the Old Testament prophets and New Testament authors was to declare that "they have hardened their hearts to the message" or "God has hardened them." What is this hardness of heart phenomena? Who became hardened and why? Was it “compensation” for some “deficiency” in communication?  What were the consequences of such a disposition? Of what does this unreceptivity consist? Was there any hope for a “change of heart”? The implications of such a study are not only significant for understanding key issues in biblical criticism and theology, but are relevant for anyone concerned with (a) communication issues between an addresser and addressees and (b) for understanding the oppositional behavior and the psychology of resistance.

The poet and classicist Anne Carson speaks of reading and writing as a painful separation from the world, a shutting down. A person who reads and writes learns "to close or inhibit the input of his senses, to inhibit or control the responses of his body, so as to train energy and thought upon the written words. He resists the environment outside him by distinguishing and controlling the one inside him. This constitutes at first a laborious and painful effort for the individual, psychologists and sociologists tell us. In making the effort he becomes aware of the interior self as an entity separable from the environment and its input, controllable by his own mental action." (Anne Carson, Eros the Bittersweet: An Essay, 63). But I have been luckier. I have never felt alone in my writing nor do I feel as resisting the world around me. And as I write these words now I am deeply aware of those in my life that have made reading, thinking and writing possible for me. My intellectual home and alma mater is Tel Aviv University. I have seen Jewish Studies in Tel Aviv University grow from strength to strength and become a truly unique place of Torah. In a deep sense it is where I learned to read. My work has been encouraged and supported by several TAU grants over the years of my PhD, and mainly, a generous scholarship from the School of Jewish Studies that allowed me to dedicate myself to my research. My deepest gratitude goes to my mentors. Prof. Ishay Rosen-Zvi's commitment to my success, growth and learning has proven to be endless. Ishay taught me how to ask our ancient texts questions and what to listen for when they answer. In a way, I always think and write in conversation with Ishay. His intellectual energy and optimism saw me 3 through all the rough patches I met on this road, and I am privileged to have him as a mentor and friend. Prof. Paula Fredriksen taught me to read critically and write deliberately. She has opened my world to the possibilities and impossibilities of Paul scholarship, and I cannot imagine reading Paul and writing about him without her.

Article based on a presentation given at the Thomas Latinus - Thomas Graecus. Thomas Aquinas and His Reception in Byzantium International Conference held at the Hellenic Library of Athens (Stavros Niarchos Cultural Center) in Dec. 15-16 2017, co-organized by The Hellenic Institute, Royal Holloway, University of London.

This dissertation explores a process of cross-cultural communication that spans centuries of time between two different cultures, that of the Hebrew speaking Israelites of the seventh-century a.C. and the Susu people of Guinea West Africa today. The question is how, given that the two groups operate with completely different worldviews and historical backgrounds, might one translate a Hebrew religious hortatory discourse into Susu in such a way that it would be understood and appreciated as a relevant message to their culture.
The author attempts to do this beginning with an analysis of the Hebrew discourse, first from a rhetorical perspective (Chapter 2), and then from a textual perspective (Chapter 3). The presentation of the message employs a rhetoric dependant upon an understanding of the historical background of the audience. The author crafts the message not only with rhetorical nuances, but also with a textual artistry designed to enhance the overall impact of the presentation.
The author then procedes to use the same process on an analogous discourse from the Susu target culture. Since the Hebrew book of Zephaniah consists of religious hortatory, the same genre was utilized from the Susu culture, a Muslim Xutuba (Friday sermon). Again, the analysis covers the rhetorical component of the communication (Chapter 4) and then the textual structure component (Chapter 5). Having completed an analysis of the rhetoric and the textual discourse structure of a discourse both in the source language and in the target language, the author delves into two possible approaches to the translation of the Hebrew discourse.
The first, “a documentary translation,” focuses on the forms used in Hebrew to express the message in such a way to have a rhetorical and structural communicative impact (Chapter 6). The second, “an instrumental translation,” shifts the focus to forms used in the target language, with the express purpose of communicating the same message with rhetorical and structural devices that would have a communicative impact on the Susu people.
Ultimately, the preferred translation approach depends upon the scopos of the translator. If the objective is to present an ancient document to highlight the “foreign” forms used in the original communication, the documentary approach works well. However, if the objective is to present the message of said document in such a way as to transfer the relevancy of the message to the target culture, an instrumental approach is advantageous.

Despite John's distinctive and theological character, however, it still renders an independent memory of Jesus of Nazareth deserving full consideration in any effectively critical quest for the historical Jesus. The question is how do to so adequately, given the unique origin and development of the Johannine tradition. If John represents a self-standing Jesus tradition with its own points to make, however, differences with Mark and the Synoptics might contribute to a sense of history rather than diminishing it.

Desde el resurgir del igualitarismo 1 Corintios 14:34–35, escrito por el apóstol Pablo, ha causado un revuelo interpretativo. En un sentido, se podría decir que aunque léxica y sintácticamente el significado natural de estos versículos es relativamente sencillo, su complejidad textual enturbia su interpretación. Por lo que es necesario lidiar con algunas dificultades textuales que aparentemente justifican el igualitarismo antes de clarificar el significado de estos versículos.

This chapter examines some of the assumptions that are typically employed when dealing with the development of the Hebrew Bible. The first part of the chapter is a critique of the very term "Jewish Bible." It points out some of the problems with the term and make a plaidoyer against being politically correct. The second part focuses on what it means to explain the "development" of the Hebrew Bible and suggests that diachronic analysis alone cannot fully explain its formation. In this author's view, proper understanding of the development of the Bible requires drawing upon intellectual and literary models more commonly associated with the period of the “reception of scripture” than with conventional composition history.

El Apóstol en 1Cor 7, partiendo de un posible eslogan que circulaba en esta comunidad «bien le está al hombre abstenerse de mujer» (v. 1), desarrolla el tema de la
sexualidad, del matrimonio y también de la renuncia al matrimonio, todo desde la perspectiva del evangelio de Jesús.
La sexualidad y el matrimonio son percibidos como un don de Dios, una gracia, un carisma, es decir, un regalo divino y, por tanto, no cabe una visión pesimista de estas realidades. Son algo bueno, querido por Dios, participan de la bondad de la creación.

The murmuring narratives of the books of Exodus and Numbers depict Israel in the desert as constantly complaining. By taking these ten narratives, Walter Bührer shows that and how Israel's murmuring is more and more negatively interpreted – both in canonical terms as well as regarding the formation of the texts, which become increasingly interwoven.

Since Charles Darwin made the theory of evolution popular, the church has been faced with the problem of either denying the validity of evolution or finding a way to interpret the Bible that will harmonize with both an old-earth scenario and with the belief that humans evolved from lower forms of life. This article will not deny either of these scientific conclusions. Its purpose will be to discuss some of the proposed interpretations of the Bible's teachings that have been presented for the purpose of harmonizing the Bible and science, showing that some of these have serious problems. But first I will present an alterative view that has both mathematical and exegetical support to undergird it. Two benefits that are inherent in this view are its simplicity and its employment of the historical-grammatical hermeneutic. Also it does not contradict any New Testament teaching, which should be a requirement for any methodology employed to discover the Bible's teaching on human origins. I appreciate all those who have taken in hand to harmonize an inspired view of Scripture with the present views of the science community.

From pragmatical point of view there are three ways to read the Bible. The first, here called philological or analytical, has been cultivated in the Bible departments of continental theological schools since the Enlightenment.  According to it, the Bible is to be read like any other ancient document. To Interpret it  means to reconstruct its original meaning(s)  using the tools of the historical-critical method (Biblia a se). In contrast to it, the theological way of reading the Bible understands the Bible as a part of the tradition of a believing community. As such, it is to be read synthetically or holistically, on the tacit assumption of its general consent with -- or even normative function for --  the teaching of the believing community (Biblia pro nobis).  Finally, the spiritual way of reading the Bible represents an existential appropriation of a particular biblical text by an individual reader (Biblia pro me).
As this study argues,  each one of the three ways of reading the Bible is motivated by different question and yields different results. Yet they complement each other and all three belong to the repertoire of responsible theological exegesis.

This article argues that the narrator of 1 Samuel presents Saul as a sacrificial victim. As the first king, he becomes the object of divine wrath that arises from Israel's request for a king. His suffering and death redirect divine wrath away from the nation, thus allowing it to survive.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a case for the Exodus mentioned in the Hebrew Bible as a historical event. In an academic environment where most people simply ignore certain parts of the Bible due to the so-called "supernatural" aspects, debates like this ultimately go around in circles more than necessary. The first body paragraphs of this paper, therefore, tackle the stigmas which keep the Exodus from being considered as a serious topic from which history can be determined in one way or another, beginning with a supposed lack of archaeological evidence which, ironically, is rather comparable to what is only slightly more available for the Scythians as compared to the Hebrews. The rest of the papers deals in various historical, linguistic, cultural, geographical, and literary contexts  from which the historicity of the event in question can be sufficiently determined in either the affirmative or negative. The coherence of the arguments made herein will be left up to all the qualified scholars in related fields to determine.

This essay was published in The Bible and Early Trinitarian Theology, edited by Christopher A. Beeley and Mark E. Weedman, for the CUAP Studies in Early Christianity (Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2018); this is the uncorrected proofs. Exploring the humanity and divinity of Jesus, the Son's relation to the Father, and the agency of the Holy Spirit, it is one of five essays suggesting Johannine contributions to trinitarian discussions in the early church.

For me, Bernd's great commentary evoked two contradictory sayings. The ancient Alexandrian librarian, Callimachos gave us an epigram that became proverbial, "Mega biblion, mega kakon-Big book, big evil." But Epimenides produced a hexameter line which, when emended, may be used to refute Callimachos' proverb: "Alexandrians are always liars, evil beasts, lazy guts."

Reading verses like Matthew 28:18-20 was previously seen as that “missionary” statement – for those who felt called to foreign missions – as it was always used to promote and propagate missionaries and their work overseas. Yet, it was through the class whilst preparing a sermon that my eyes were opened to the Truth; that these verses, this statement by Jesus Christ was not just a call to missionaries, not just a “if you feel like it” adventure for Jesus. In the original Greek, it is a literal command, for all of us, not just the few who go overseas; but what Christians are supposed to be doing on a daily basis, and not just to the world and nations, but to individuals, your friends, family, neighbors, strangers – making disciples, baptizing them and teaching them all Christ has taught us

Der folgende Aufsatz versucht, eine zusammenfassende Darstellung aller orthodoxen
Stellungnahmen bezüglich der historisch-kritische Methode sowie aller westlicher
Positionen dem kirchenväterlichen Bibelverständnis gegenüber. Zumindest auf der Ebene
der orthodoxen Bibelwissenschaftler stellt man heutzutage eine schwer erklärbare Tendenz
fest: die meisten Orthodoxen lehnen grundsätzlich alle vom Westen gekommenen
Einflusse ab, obwohl sie in deren Arbeiten stark auf die im Westen entwickelten Werke
rekkurieren. Andererseits zeigen sich die meisten westlichen Biblizisten eher skeptisch
im Gegenüber zu der hermeneutischen und auslegerischen Funktion der Kirchenväter,
obwohl sie etwas darstellen, was im Westen fast verlorengegangen ist – die Aktualisierung
der Textbotschaft. Allmählich aber setzten sich die Orthodoxen, auf einer wissenschaftlicher
Manier, mit der historisch-kritischen Methode oder mit deren Arbeitsschritten
auseinander, während die westlichen Bibelwissenschaftler allmählich Zeichen der Wiederentdeckung patristischen Erbes setzten. Ist eine konstruktive Wechselwirkung
zwischen diesen beiden hermeneutischen Polen zu postulieren? Wenn ja, unter
welchen Umständen? Was schlagen die beiden involvierten Teilen vor?

Palestine is known as the birthplace of Christianity. However the Christian population of this land is relatively insignificant today, despite the continuing institutional legacy that the 19th century Western missionary focus on the region created. Palestinian Christians are often forced to employ politically astute as well as theologically radical means in their efforts to appear relevant within an increasingly Islamist-oriented society. My thesis focuses on two ecumenical Christian organisations within Palestine, the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Centre in Jerusalem (headed by the Anglican cleric Naim Stifan Ateek) and Dar Annadwa Addawliyya (the International Centre of Bethlehem-ICB, directed by the Lutheran theologian Mitri Raheb). Based on my field work (consisting of an in-depth  familiarisation with the two organisations in Palestine and interviews with their directors, office-staff and supporters worldwide, as well as data analyses based on an extensive literature review), I argue that the grassroots-oriented educational, humanitarian, cultural and contextual theological approach favoured by the ICB in Bethlehem is more relevant to the Palestinian situation, than the more sectarian and Western-oriented approach of the Sabeel Centre. These two groups are analysed primarily according to their theological-political approaches. One, (Sabeel), has sought to develop a critical Christian response to the Palestine-Israel conflict using the politico-theological tool of liberation theology, albeit with a strongly ecumenical Western-oriented focus, while the other (ICB), insists that its theological orientation draws primarily from the Levantine Christian (and in their particular case, the Palestinian Lutheran) context in which Christians in Israel-Palestine are placed. Raheb of the ICB has tried to develop a contextual theology that seeks to root the political and cultural development of the Palestinian people within their own Eastern Christian context and in light of their peculiarly restricted life under an Israeli occupation regime of over 40 years. In the process, I argue that the ICB has sought to be much more situationally relevant to the needs of the Palestinian people in the West Bank, given the employment, socio-cultural and humanitarian-health opportunities opened up by the practical-institution building efforts of this organisation in Bethlehem.

This is an abridged version of my "Counting Stars with Abraham and the Prophets" (JETS 2015). Paul’s application of the “seed” designation to both Jews and Gentiles in Christ marks a redemptive-historical shift from an age of promise to an age of fulfillment. Both the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants initially restricted “seed” language to physical descent and marked covenant membership by physical birth. Nevertheless, they also pointed ahead to a day when covenantal, spiritual adoption would replace ethnicity and biology as the foundational mark of the patriarch’s “fatherhood.” The OT’s promised royal deliver would initiate this eschatological and ecclesiological development, which by its nature supports a progressive covenantal flavor of Baptistic new covenant ecclesiology.

This Survey Chart was created for Dr. Andreas Köstenberger and the biblical backgrounds Ph.D. seminar at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary for Second Temple Jewish and Greco-Roman literature. This chart surveys the key literature, historical timeline, and information surrounding the Second Temple period as well as offers a select bibliography for each section for further research. This 234 page survey chart is divided into nine major sections: Second Temple History, Greek OT (LXX), OT Apocrypha, OT Pseudepigrapha, Dead Sea Scrolls, Philo and Josephus, Targums and Rabbinical Literature, NT Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, and Greco-Roman literature.

An increase of cross-cultural learning as a consequence of increased travel and migration between Egypt and the Levant during the Iron Age occurred after millennia of migration in earlier times. The result was an Egyptian-Levantine koine, often not recognized as relevant by historians due to an uncritical reproduction of ancient myths of separation. However, the cultural exchange triggered by migration is attested in the language, in the iconography of the region, in the history of the alphabet, in literary motifs, in the characterization of central characters of the Hebrew Bible and, last but not least, in the rise of new religions, which integrated the experience of otherness in a new ethos.

Isaiah 6 is filled with brilliant imagery, passion, and religious depth that stir the calling of God in the souls of believers, especially in the first eight verses of the chapter.  But, the mood quickly changes, as Isaiah 6:9-13 records the Prophet Isaiah’s eighth century declaration of desolation for his homeland, with specific warnings of God’s intent to remove the spiritual awareness of His people. This deadening of spiritual realization becomes critical to first century Jews and Christians as the presence of Christ and His testimony establish the New Covenant of the LORD God with believers. Isaiah 6 clearly warns Judah of the coming desolation and records God's promotion of obduracy, which highlights the relationship between understanding and redemption in the salvation process.

A quick overview of Israel’s history reveals a tendency among Israel to continually sway away from the original purposes of their covenant with Yahweh, that is, to be “a holy people to Himself” (Deut. 28:9).  Hosea’s life and prophetic ministry focused on bringing much-needed spiritual and social transformation to the nation of Israel by urging people to return to the original Mosaic covenant. The main argument of this study states that the prophet’s utterance in Hos. 4:1–19 should be understood as a reinforcement of the covenant made between Yahweh and his people. With this is mind, this paper seeks to analyze the overall message of Hos. 4:1–19 in order to (1) identify in the text both explicit and implicit references to the covenant stipulations as well as curses resulting from the covenantal disloyalty, (2) explore the social dimensions of spiritual transformation based on Smith’s model of the social construction of reality, and (3) draw some hermeneutical principles established by the text for contemporary audience.

كتاب "لغة الله في التقليد الآبائي" من إعداد مارك شريدن وترجمة الباحثين بيشوي جرجس وموريس وهيب، يهدف كتاب "لغة الله في التقليد الآبائي" إلى توضيح كيف فهم اللاهوتيون المسيحيون المبكرون المعضلة التي تطرحها النصوص التي تنسب الخصائص والعواطف البشرية إلى الله، وتفصيل كيفية تعاملهم معها. لإنجاز هذه المهمة، يزود الكاتب القارئ بالكثير من النصوص الأولية من آباء الكنيسة إلى جانب شروحات مفصلة لتفسيراتهم، وهو يعتمد باستمرار على مؤلفين مثل كليمنضس، وأوريجانوس، وديديموس، وذهبي الفم، وغيرهم. يتمحور جوهر بحثه حول أن هناك معيارًا مزدوجًا مستخدمًا على نطاق واسع لتفسير النصوص الصعبة في الكتاب المقدس، ويشرح كيف قرأ الكتاب اليهود والمسيحيون المبكرون هذه النصوص مجازياً أو لاهوتياً من أجل اكتشاف الحقيقة الواردة فيها، حيث أدركوا أن التفسير البنائي والملائم لهذه النصوص يتطلب أن يبدأ المرء من فهم أن “الله ليس إنسانًا”. يجلب المؤلف التقليد الآبائي إلى حوار مع المفسرين المحدثين لإظهار الأهمية الثابتة للتفسير اللاهوتي الخاص بهذا التقليد لعصرنا هذا.

Focusing on the work of N.T. Wright, J. Louis Martyn, and Douglas Harink, in this essay I offer a theological analysis of the debate between salvation-historical and apocalyptic readings of Paul as a debate in Christology. I argue that in the end they are Christologically deficient in ironically similar ways: both positions conceive of Christ as accidental to the divine intent for creation, a notion that falls short of the robust Christology Paul adheres to. I offer an alternative that preserves both the notions of a salvific history and an apocalyptic revelation, but is also imbedded in what I call a supralapsarian Christology

Biblical scholars have long debated the identity of the suffering servant of Isaiah 53. Most Christians identify the servant as Jesus and interpret Isaiah 53 as a description of Jesus’ unique, substitutionary death. However, Isaiah 40–55 repeatedly identifies God's servant as Israel. Was Isaiah 53 about the unique experience of a future individual, or was the passage about what all of God’s people would experience? The aim of this paper is to determine how best to understand the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 from an exegetical (rather than a modern theological) standpoint. The thesis is that the suffering servant was to be both the forerunner to and the paradigmatic exemplar of the ideal people of God—a paradigm the people of God were called to conform to. Thus, in light of the ancient conception of corporate solidarity, the answer to the question of whether the servant was to be an individual or a group is: “both.”