Revelation Book Review:. How Did We Get the Bible. Author : Tracy M. The Jefferson Bible. The Jefferson Bible Book Review:. The Gospel According to Mark. The Gospel According to Matthew. Author : Anonim Publsiher : Canongate U.
Who Really Wrote the Bible. Who wrote the bible a book for the people. Who wrote the bible a book for the people Book Review:. Jesus Interrupted. Author : Bart D. Jesus Interrupted Book Review:. Author : Robert Alter Publsiher : W.
William Tyndale. William Tyndale Book Review:. The Gospel According to John. Who Wrote the Bible Code. The Composition of the Pentateuch. Author : Joel S. The Composition of the Pentateuch Book Review:. The Acts of the Apostles. Author : P. The Acts of the Apostles Book Review:. I t was hot and humid along the coast, especially in summer.
It was drier in the hills, still drier in the desert. I t was cold enough to snow occasionally on the hills in winter. I t was beautiful. The people could see the beauty of the sea, the beauty of lake, flowers, and fields, and the beauty of desert all within a few miles of each other.
As striking as the variety of the land itself was the variety of its people. There were also the Philistines, who stood out as different from the others, apparently having come across the Mediterranean from the Greek islands. There was also a circle of people around the borders of the land.
To the north were the Phoenicians, who are usually credited with having introduced writing i n that region. Along the eastern borders were Syria in the north, then A m m o n , then Moab, then Edom to the south. Then of course there were the Israelites, the most numerous people w i t h i n the boundaries of the land from the twelfth century B.
The land lay along the route of travel between Africa and Asia, and so there were the influences—and interests—of Egypt and Mesopotamia in the region as well. The population was both urban and rural; i t is difficult to say i n what proportion.
Certainly the percentage of city residents was large. There were times of considerable economic prosperity and times of hardship. There were times of great political strength and influence, and there were periods of domination by foreign powers. A n d , of course, there were times of peace and times of war. The dominant religion across the ancient Near East was pagan religion. Pagan religion was not idol worship, as formerly it was thought to be.
The archeological revolution of the past hundred years has opened up that world to us and given us, among other revelations, a new understanding and appreciation of the pagan religious worldview.
A t Nineveh alone—the greatest archeological discovery of all time—were found fifty thousand tablets, the library of the emperor of Assyria. A t the Canaanite city of Ugarit, three thousand more tablets were found. We can read the pagan hymns, prayers, and myths; we can see the places where they worshiped; and we can see how they depicted their gods in art.
People worshiped the most powerful forces i n the universe: the sky, the storm wind, the sun, the sea, fertility, death. The statues that they erected were like the icons in a church. The statues depicted the god or goddess, reminded the worshiper of the deity's presence, showed the humans' respect for their gods, and perhaps made the humans feel closer to their gods.
But, as a Babylonian text points out, the statue was not the god. The chief pagan god i n the region that was to become Israel was El. El was male, patriarchal, a ruler. U n l i k e the other major god of the region, Haddu the storm w i n d , El was not identified w i t h any particular force i n nature.
He sat at the head of the council of the gods and pronounced the council's decisions. The God of Israel was Yahweh. He, too, was male, patriarchal, a ruler, and not identified with any one force i n nature. Rather than describing h i m i n terms of nature or myths, the people of Israel spoke of Yahweh in terms of his acts in history—as we shall see.
The people of Israel spoke Hebrew. Other languages of the area were similar to Hebrew: Phoenician, Canaanite Ugaritic , Aramaic, and Moabite are all i n the Semitic family of languages.
Hebrew and these other languages each had an alphabet. People wrote documents on papyrus and sealed them with stamps pressed i n wet clay. They also wrote texts on leather and on clay tablets and occasionally carved them i n stone or wrote them on plaster.
They wrote shorter notes on pieces of broken pottery. People lived i n one- and two-story homes, mostly of stone. I n cities the houses were built close together. Some of the cities had impressive water systems, including long underground tunnels and huge cisterns. Some houses had indoor plumbing. Cities were surrounded by walfe. People ate beef, lamb, fowl, bread, vegetables, fruits, and dairy products. They made wine and beer. They made pots and jars of all sizes out of clay. Their metals were bronze, iron, silver, and gold.
They had wind, string, and percussion musical i n struments. Contrary to every Bible movie ever made, they did not wear kaffiyehs Arab headdress. There are traditions about the prehistory of the Israelites: their patriarchs, their experiences as slaves in Egypt, and their wandering in the Sinai wilderness. Unfortunately, we have little historical i n formation about this from archeology or other ancient sources. The Israelites' political life i n their early years was organized around tribes.
According to biblical tradition there were thirteen tribes, with considerable differences i n size and population from the smallest to the largest. Twelve of the tribes each had a distinct geographical territory. The thirteenth, the tribe of Levi, was identified as a priestly group. Its members lived i n cities i n the other tribes' territories. Each tribe had its own chosen leaders.
See map, p. There were also individuals who acquired authority i n individual tribes or over groups of tribes by virtue of their position i n society or their personal qualities. These persons were either judges or priests. The office of judge did not involve only hearing legal cases. I t i n cluded military leadership.
I n times of military threat to a tribe or group of tribes, therefore, a judge could acquire considerable power and authority. A judge could be male or female. Priests had to be male. Usually priests had to be from Levi. Their office was hereditary. They served at religious sites, presiding over religious ceremonies, which meant, above all, performing sacrifices. I n return for their services, they received a portion of the sacrificed animal or produce.
One other type of person figured in a special way i n the leadership of the community: the prophet. Being a prophet was not an office or profession like judge or priest.
A person from any occupation could come to be a prophet. The prophet Ezekiel was a priest; the prophet Amos was a cowboy. The word i n Hebrew for prophet is nObi', which is understood to mean "called. The task might be to encourage or to criticize. I t might be i n the realm of politics, ethics, or ritual. The prophet generally would deliver his or her message i n poetry or i n a combination of poetry and prose.
The last of the judges, he wielded much political and religious authority. He lived at Shiloh, a city i n the northern part of the land, which was a major religious center at the time.
A tabernacle was located there which, according to a biblical account, housed the ark containing the tab' lets of the Ten Commandments; and a distinguished priestly family functioned there, a family which some scholars identify as descendants of Moses. When the Philistines' domination in the area became too strong for any one or two tribes to oppose, the people sought a leader who could unite and lead all of the tribes.
In other words, they wanted a king. I t was Samuel who, somewhat reluctantly, anointed the first king of Israel, King Saul. That was the end of the period of the judges and the beginning of the period of the monarchy. Though there were to be no more judges, there still continued to be priests and prophets.
A n d so Israel developod a political structure i n which the king was by no means an absolute ruler. O n the contrary, the king's power was checked and balanced by the powers of the tribal leaders, the chief priests, and, above all, the prophets. This had a profound effect on both the political and the religious life of Israel. I n order to become king and to maintain a stable rule, a man had to have the tribal leaders' acceptance, and he had to be designated by a prophet.
He also needed a supportive priesthood. This was partly because the priests, prophets, and tribal leaders held well-established positions by the time of the creation of the monarchy, and it was partly because of ongoing political realities. The king needed the tribes because the tribal musters of troops provided the king with his army, without which he was virtually powerless. The king needed prophetic designation and priestly support because religion not only was not separated from state in that world, it was hardly separated from anything.
I t was an inseparable, pervasive part of life. A king could not have political legitimacy without religious legitimacy. A king who lost the support of his prophets and priests was i n for trouble.
A n d that is what happened to Saul. Saul had a falling-out w i t h Samuel, the priest-prophet who had designated him as king. The book of 1 Samuel gives two different accounts of the events that precipitated the break from two different authors? Samuel's response, apparently, was to designate another king: David.
For a while he was a member of Saul's retinue, and he married one of Saul's daughters. Saul came to perceive David as a threat to his throne—quite correctly—and they became rivals. When David received the support of the priests of Shiloh, Saul had them all massacred—except one who escaped.
Saul reigned until his death i n battle against the Philistines. After his death the kingdom was split between his son Ishbaal and David.
Ishbaal ruled i n the northern portion of the country; David ruled i n his own tribe, Judah, which was the largest of the tribes, almost the size of all the other tribes together, encompassing the southern portion of the country. Ishbaal was assassinated, and then David became king over the entire country, north and south. Already at this early stage of Israelite history, then, we can see conflicts between king and priest, and between king and king. These political dynamics would one day play a decisive role i n the formation of the Bible.
David stands out as a major figure i n the Hebrew Bible, really the only one who comes close to the level of Moses in impact. There are several reasons for this. First, we simply have a larger amount of source material on him i n the Bible than on other figures. Second, David stands out because if even half of what the Bible says about h i m is true he lived an extraordinary life—by which I mean both his personal life and his political life.
The two are hardly separable in any case. The third reason for the singular place that David holds among biblical figures is that David established an enduring line of kings descended from him. The Davidic dynasty was i n fact one of the longest-lasting ruling families of any country in the history of the world. Hence the powerful endurance of the messiah tradition i n Judaism and Christianity—the trust that there would always be a descendant of David at hand i n an hour of distress.
There was therefore little threat that he and his tribe would be able to dominate the other tribes through his position. David, on the other hand, coming from Judah, the largest tribe, epitomized that danger. David was a sensible and able politician, though, and he took a series of actions that enhanced his kingdom's unity. First, he moved his capital from Hebron, which was the principal city of Judah, to Jerusalem.
Jerusalem had been a Jebusite city, but David captured i t , perhaps by a stratagem i n which some of his men climbed the nearly vertical shaft of a water tunnel under the city. The tunnel, now known as Warren's Shaft, was cleared in the City of David excavations of biblical Jerusalem and opened to the public in Since Jerusalem had been occupied by the Jebusites prior to David's capture of i t , it was not affiliated w i t h any one of the tribes of Israel.
Jerusalem, further, was fairly centrally located between the north and south of the country. David's second action that facilitated the representation of both north and south i n his new united kingdom was to appoint two chief priests i n Jerusalem, one from the north and one from the south.
N o t unlike the presence of two chief rabbis i n modern Israel, one from the Sephardic and one from the Ashkenazic community, David's two chief priests were a means of satisfying two formerly separate, now united, constituencies. David's southern priest was Zadok, who came from David's former capital i n Judah, the city of Hebron. Zadok and the priests of Hebron apparently were regarded as descendants of Aaron, the first high priest of Israel.
David's dual chief priesthood may therefore have been not only a compromise with respect to north and south. I t may also have been a compromise w i t h respect to two old, distinguished, and politically important priestly families: the family of Moses and the family of Aaron.
As strong as any other cement for holding the kingdom together was David's record of marriages. He married women who came from several regions of political importance, which could only strengthen the social bond between each of those regions and the royal family.
Most practical of David's policies was his establishment of a standing professional army. This military force included foreigners Cheretites, Peletites, Hittites and was responsible to David and his personally appointed general. David was therefore no longer dependent on the individual tribes to muster i. David had solved the main part of the problem of dependence on the tribes.
By one military success after another, David brought Edom, Moab, A m m o n , Syria, and perhaps Phoenicia under his dominion. He made Jerusalem both the religious and the political center of his empire, bringing the most sacred object, the ark, there and estab- The World That Produced the Bible: B.
I t was a politically significant empire i n that world. T h e Royal Family In order to see how the life, events, and individual persons of that world produced the Bible, one must also look into the story of the royal family. Their relationships, conflicts, and political alignments affected the course of history and, with that, the character of the Bible. David's having many wives meant that he also had very many children who were half brothers and half sisters to each other.
David's oldest son and likely heir was Amnon. According to the Court History of David, in one of the classically male-sexist depictions of all time, A m n o n first raped and then rejected his half sister Tamar. Tamar was the daughter of David and a Geshurite princess. Tamar's full brother Absalom killed A m n o n in revenge. The elimination of A m n o n accomplished more for Absalom, though, than revenge for his wronged sister—it also placed him i n contention for the throne.
So it is i n monarchic politics: family relations and political relations are inseparable. Absalom later rebelled against his father. The tribal musters of troops supported Absalom, the professional army was with David. The professionals won. Absalom was killed. In David's old age, two more of his sons contended for the succession to his throne: Adonijah, who was one of the oldest sons, and Solomon, who was the son of David's favorite wife, Bathsheba.
Each son had his party of supporters in the palace. Adonijah apparently had the support of the other princes. He also had the general who was over the tribal musters.
Solomon had the support of the prophet Nathan and of his mother, Bathsheba, both of whom were extremely influential with David, and Solomon also had the general of the professional army. They were the two chief priests. Abiathar, the northern priest, from the old priesthood of Shiloh, and possibly a descendant of Moses, supported Adonijah.
Zadok, the southern priest, from Hebron i n the tribe of Judah, and possibly a descendant of Aaron, supported Solomon. David chose Solomon. W i t h the professional army behind h i m , Solomon won without an actual fight. After David's death, Solomon ordered the execution of his half brother Adonijah and of Adonijah's general, Joab.
Solomon could not so easily eliminate the priest Abiathar, however. The king could not just execute a chief priest. Still, he could not tolerate the continued presence in power of those who opposed his succession to the throne. Solomon therefore expelled Abiathar from the Jerusalem priesthood and from Jerusalem.
He banished h i m to an estate in Anathoth, a small village located a few miles outside the capital. Solomon's Empire King Solomon is famous for his wisdom. The biblical picture of h i m is that he maintained a strong, prosperous kingdom and that he accomplished this through diplomatic and economic skill rather than on the battlefields as his father David had done.
He outdid his father i n marriage diplomacy. The biblical record asserts that he had seven hundred daughters of kings as wives and three hundred concubines. Even if we take that as an exaggeration, it indicates that political marriages were a major part of his policy. He carried on trade i n Africa and Asia, taking advantage of Israel's geographical location. He amassed enormous quantities of gold and silver. He built a Temple in Jerusalem, in which he placed the ark. This especially strengthened the image of Jerusalem as the nation's religious center as well as its capital.
The Temple was not impressive i n size. A cubit is the length of a man's arm from the elbow to the second knuckle of the hand, about eighteen inches. Size was not really important, though, because no one was ever allowed to go inside the Israelite Temple except the priests.
The impressive qualities of the Temple were rather its physical characteristics and its contents. Its walls were paneled i n cedar. Its interior was divided into two rooms, an outer room called the Holy and an inner sanctum called the Holy of Holies.
The Holy of Holies was a perfect cube, twenty cubits long, wide, and high. I n i t were two tremendous statues, the cherubs. Cherubs in that world were not the angelic little boys of later art who shoot arrows and make people fall i n love. A cherub was a sphinx, usually with the body of a four-legged animal, the head of a human, and the wings of a bird.
The Temple cherubs were carved out of olive wood and plated with gold. They were not idols. They were rather the throne platform of Yahweh, who was invisibly enthroned o n them. Under their wings, i n the middle of the room, was Israel's most sacred object, the ark, the golden box containing the tablets of the Ten Commandments. Besides the Temple, Solomon had numerous other building projects. He built a great palace for himself, which was bigger than the Temple. He also constructed military fortifications around the country.
To look into that world and especially to feel the political issues of life then, first one must have a good knowledge of the geography of the land. A n d then one must read carefully what most people would consider to be among the most boring passages i n the Bible: lists of territories, building projects, and notations of political developments in neighboring countries.
The best analysis of all of this, i n my judgment, is by an American biblical scholar, Baruch Halpern. I reached some of my conclusions concerning who wrote the Bible on several important points by applying his insights into political history to the Bible.
What is also impressive about Halpern's analysis of Solomon's political world is that he wrote i t when he was only twenty years old and an undergraduate at Harvard in He demonstrated that Solomon's domestic and foreign policies threatened the country's unity. From O n e Country to Two We must keep in mind that the country had once been two separate kingdoms, one in the north and one i n the south, and that the northern kingdom had itself been composed of individual tribes.
Many of Solomon's policies, nonetheless, alienated the northerners instead of encouraging their support. For one thing, he had removed the northern community's chief priest, Abiathar. For another example, there were, of course, taxes to be paid by everyone, north and south, but, as Halpern pointed out, the record of Solomon's building projects shows that he spent the tax revenues disproportionately on military defenses in the south.
He was providing his own tribe, Judah, with protection from the military threat of Egypt. But Syria had broken away from his empire during this period, yet Solomon did not give the northern tribes equal protection from the very real threat of Syria there. The people of the north were paying for the security of the south. As another example of Solomon's policy toward northern Israel, Solomon received help in building the Temple and the palace from Hiram of Tyre, king of the Phoenicians, who was Solomon's fatherin-law.
Actually, nearly every king in the ancient Near East must have been Solomon's father-in-law. Hiram provided the cedars of Lebanon and talents of gold. I n return, Solomon ceded to the Phoenician king a tract of northern Israelite territory containing twenty cities. I n this action, too, Solomon was building up his own capital solely at the expense of the north.
One of Solomon's policies in particular cut into the very structure of the tribal system. Solomon established twelve administrative districts, each of which was to provide food for the court in Jerusalem for one month of the year.
The boundaries of these twelve new districts did not correspond to the existing boundaries of the twelve tribes. Solomon personally appointed the heads of each administrative district. This is like gerrymandering, squared. Solomon's redistricting, to make matters even worse, was only of the north.
The twelve new districts did not include the territory of Judah. If all of this did not convince the populace that their king meant to exercise powerful centralized control from Jerusalem, Solomon established one more economic policy that could leave no doubt. He instituted the missfm. The term missim in Hebrew refers to a sort of tax, not of money but of physical labor. Citizens owed a month of required work to the government each year.
Given that we are talking about Israel, a nation that had a tradition that they had once been slaves i n Egypt and now were free, a law of required labor must have been a bitter pill to swallow. We have two pieces of evidence of just how bitter it was. The first is that one of the writers of the book of Exodus later described the Egyptian supervisee of the Israelite slaves not by the usual term "taskmasters," but rather as "officers of missim.
I shall chastise him with the rod of people and the lashes of humans if he does wrong, but my fidelity will not turn from him…. Your house and kingdom will be secure before you forever. Your throne will be established forever. There will not be cut off from you a man before me sitting on the throne of Israel only if your sons keep their way, to go before me as you went before me.
How could the Deuteronomist insert lines that blatantly contradicted each other? Was the covenant conditional or unconditional? This petty difference of wording was not so petty to the writer. For many years now, a debate lias raged among literary scholars as to who wrote the Pentateuch, the first five books of However, as we saw in Conversation 31, the general consensus of most scholars is that the author of The Gospel of John was not John the disciple.
That consensus holds true as well for these three letters. They may have been written by When we study the history of the several books, the history of the canon, the history of the distribution and reproduction of the manuscript copies, and the history of the versions, when we discover that the 'various readings' of the Written in question-and-answer format for easy access, these quick reference guides provide succinct summaries of authoritative information so readers can be confident of what they read and be prepared to discuss these topics with family,
0コメント