Threads from Henry's Web

Category: Bible Passages

  • Unbinding What Rules?

    A while back Dave Black linked to a review of Genesis Unbound by John Sailhammer.  The review is by Andrew Kulikovsky and is on the Answers in Genesis site, titled Unbinding the Rules.  The interesting thing for me about this review is that despite being very negative, it made me much more anxious to read Sailhammer’s book.

    It’s hard to evaluate some of the criticisms without having read the book itself, but I’m going to comment on one, and write a bit more after I’ve gotten my hands on a copy of the book itself.  The one issue is the translation of Genesis 2:19.  To state the problem simply, there is a difference in translation between the NIV (continued in the NIV2011, ESV agrees) for example, and the NRSV amongst others.  To illustrate:

    Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. (NIV2011) So out of the ground the Lord God formed every animal of the field and every bird of the air, (NRSV)

    The translation arises from the perceived need to reconcile the order of events in Genesis 1 and 2, since in 2:19 the animals would be created after human beings rather than before as in Genesis 1. Using a past perfect in English solves this problem.  The question, of course, is whether such a translation is legitimate.

    Regarding this, Kulikovsky says:

    According to Sailhamer, the rendering ‘ … now the Lord God had formed …’ for Genesis 2:19, is faulty because ‘the Hebrew  text doesn’t contain the proper verb form for such a translation’  (p. 89). This is a very surprising statement from a Hebrew  scholar. Firstly, Sailhamer seems to be confused over the  aspectual identification of the clause ‘had formed’—this is actually indicative of a pluperfect not a perfect. Secondly, the standard grammars1,4 stand against Sailhamer on this, as do modern translations such as the NIV.

    I was rather surprised to see this, because the standard grammars say no such thing, and the NIV and ESV are pretty much isolated amongst modern versions in this translation.  The NLT, also evangelical, translated “formed” for example.  I had recently been investigating this issue to see just what support the NIV had for their rendering, and had found very little such support.

    The footnotes, unfortunately, are duplicates of previous references, and simply point to Gesenius-Kautzsch (with the latter name misspelled), and to Waltke-O’Connor without referencing any particular page or section number in either grammar.  There are only two  direct references to Genesis 2:19, and only one provides a translation of the first part of the verse, which he translates “YHWH God formed …” (11.2.11d, p. 213), but there he is discussing the translation of the preposition min.  There are, of course, substantial discussions of Hebrew verb tense, but I cannot discover which would provide Kulikovsky with support for his view.  Sailhammer’s statement is hardly surprising; it’s pretty standard.

    I would note that I have found cases cited in which the waw-consecutive form can be translated with an English past perfect.  They are very rare, and not too similar to the case of Genesis 2:19.  I’ll provide some references when I read and comment on Sailhammer’s book.

  • 1 Chronicles 10-12 in the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary

    I’m continuing with brief notes on the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary volume on 1 & 2 Chronicles by Mark J. Boda.  I previously provided an overview and some notes on the coverage of 1 Chornicles 1-9.

    I have only a few comments on these three chapters, but I’m covering them in a separate post because I want to write a bit more about chapter 13 dealing with the ark and particularly with Uzzah.

    One of the key elements of Boda’s writing on Chronicles is that he is clearly not trying to force the text into some preconceived view of what it must be.  He lets the chronicler speak.  One of the ways in which he does this is by identifying the cases where the chronicler is using sources, such as Samuel-Kings, that are available to us.  Differences between these sources and Chronicles provide insights into the themes of Chronicles.

    In chapters 10-12 the issues involved are usually minor, but they are very important to understanding where we’re going with the story.  David is emphasized and Saul is minimized.  Boda doesn’t try to explain differences (or “errors” or “contradictions”).  Rather, he simply lays out the options that are available for understanding the text and why it is as it is.

    A good illustration of this is the commentary on 12:23-40, in which he states the problem succinctly on page 121:  “The numbers given in this section for the armed warriors who joined David at Hebron are inordinately large.”  Indeed they are.  So what do we do about it?

    First, Boda provides four traditions in interpreting the passage:

    1. They are precise figures representing historical reality
    2. The word for “thousand” was actually the title of a military unit
    3. The word for “thousand” should be repointed to represent the commander of such a unit
    4. The chronicler is using the numbers hyperbolically

    Mixed in with these options, but not excluding any of them, is the possibility of errors in textual transmission.  I personally would add the possibility of confusion in the sources, i.e. that the material used by the chronicler may have already confused some of the numbers.

    Boda then proceeds to evaluate these views, and finds that perhaps the fourth view fits best with what we see elsewhere in Chronicles.  I do note that he does not list as an option that the chronicler intended the numbers as real numbers, but that they were inaccurate in his source, something he hardly had the opportunity to check.  In my view there is no reason to expect the Holy Spirit to correct sources when that correction does not impact the message.

    In the end, Boda recommends the possibility that at various points in Chronicles different ones of these options may come into play, and that in chapter 12, the best option is likely that they speak of military units rather than actual numbers.

    What I find particularly helpful is that Boda explains the numbers without detracting from his main effort of explaining what these numbers are intended to accomplish in producing this history as a whole.

    I’ve already read and made my own notes on chapter 13, and I’ll try to get those posted in the next couple of days.

    http://www.deepbiblestudy.net/?p=1103

  • Biblioblog Top 50 Posted

    … and I have clawed my way back onto the list, at a miserable #43. Ah well, it helps if one actually blogs!

  • 1 Chronicles 1-9 in the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary

    I previously gave an overview of the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary on 1-2 Chronicles, but I’ve been spending more time with it since, reading the Hebrew text along with the commentary. While I do appreciate the NLT text on which the commentary is based, I’m not reading this for the NLT text, but rather for the commentary.

    I just completed chapter 9 which gets me to the start of the narrative portion of the book. In the genealogies especially, it’s hard to properly represent the Hebrew text in English translation. There are many ambiguities, name variants, and textual variants, especially in the versions. In several cases when I went to the NLT after reading the Hebrew I found that the reading I had chosen as I went through was in the NLT margin. That’s not a negative comment on the translation–it’s just very difficult to render this sort of text both clearly and accurately. Clarity is often purchased at the price of accuracy.

    My impression of the commentary on this section is very positive. Author Mark Boda focuses on structural issues and the way in which the structure of the genealogies sets the shape for the narrative of the remainder of the book. One can derive timing, sources, and the purpose of the author from the way the genealogies are named. This commentary tends to emphasize a key point about studying the Old Testament: Genealogies aren’t some sort of appendix or footnote, but are rather of great, even central importance to the writers.

    Within the limits of space (1 Chronicles 1-9 occupies pages 25-102), and the purpose of the commentary, which is for serious lay students or pastors, and not so much for scholars, the coverage is excellent. Boda includes a discussion of sources wherever they are used. It would be interesting to see more discussion of the implications of the way these sources are used, but what is provided is excellent.

    Connections with historical events are covered, including references to place or personal names in other ancient near eastern sources are covered. What is absent is any extended effort to deal with the historicity of either these chapters or their sources. The author presents options but doesn’t really push any particular approach. I think that’s a positive thing. With the number of rough edges involved, such a discussion could easily occupy the whole book.

    Overall, the commentary on these first nine chapters presents a structure that sees the post-exilic community built around the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, but with the Levites placed at the center of national religious life. The other tribes are included in such a way as to make a statement that they are part of the restored Israel as well. In some ways you can see Israel reinventing itself post-exile.

    I’ll post further notes as I study further.

  • Review – Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1-2 Chronicles

    I previously reviewed the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary on Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy on my book blog and have posted a number of notes about it on this blog.  So when I had an opportunity to review the volume in the same series on 1 & 2 Chronicles, I jumped at it.  I would say many of the same things I said about that previous volume with regard to this one, so if you want my thoughts on the series in general, read that previous review.

    Chronicles as a whole is not a staple of Christian teaching.  We use a number of individual passages, especially the various prayers, but as a whole, the method is a bit foreign.  From a historical point of view Samuel-Kings is closer to the events it relates as an historical source, while the emphasis on genealogy in Chronicles goes against the grain of our western minds.

    In this commentary, author Mark J. Boda has managed to continue the quality commentary that I expect from this series.  My personal tendency is to criticize a commentary such as this one for not including enough comment on issues of biblical criticism, the language, and translation issues.  But those are not the primary focus here.  This commentary is designed to be read by the non-theologian and people who do not read Hebrew.

    At the same time it does have considerable information on the structure of the book and on the language.  I found the introduction to the genalogies (pp. 25-31) particularly helpful, because it takes on issues such as the purpose of the genealogies and why they are included in the way that they are.  I’ve previously written about the importance of genealogies and why they should not be neglected.  These pages make many of those points and a number more as well.

    In the section on 1 Chronicles 1-9, the commentary section follows a consistent structure that differs from what it follows in the rest of the book.  The first portion discusses sources.  Chronicles is one of those sections of the Bible where we have source explicitly referenced and easily discernible.  The second portion discusses structure and content.  While most readers will probably be going more directly for content, the excellent discussion of structure is one of the strong points of this commentary.  Finally, there is a section on significance, particularly important because we are dealing with genealogies.

    The whole commentary is 449 pages, including the text of the NLT.  The remainder of the commentary starting with 1 Chronicles 10 is follows the more standard format of comment on short passages in succession.  The discussion is thorough.  References to Hebrew are transliterated and explained adequately for someone who does not know the language.  (Those who do read Hebrew will, or at least should, want to know more.)

    I would like to have an index in a book like this.  I realize that people generally read commentaries by going to the section on a passage in which they have an interest.  I would like to be able to follow some themes, such as prayer, through the commentary, and an index would be extremely helpful.

    The bibliography occupies 13 pages, and will prove useful.  I don’t have enough knowledge of the literature in this area to criticize the content, but it looks quite good in general.

    I’m delighted to be studying these two books using this commentary.  I personally want more comments on the language, but that is something I can get from other commentaries.  This one is accessible and useful especially to the pastor or teaching in the church.

  • Worship Song Rant

    I loved this post by Jeremy.  Enjoy!

  • Gifts to Build the Body

    T. C. Robinson has a post on the gifts of the Holy Spirit in Galatians 5:13.  He makes several points that I think are important, but I did not draw from that particular passage, though I did draw from Galatians 5:22-26 with the fruit of the Spirit.  T.C. points to the importance of 1 Corinthians 13 in connection with the purpose and use of the gifts.

    I wanted to connect this with a series of posts I wrote that make a similar point amongst others.  I think it is tragic that 1 Corinthians 13 is often disconnected from 12 & 14 in discussions of the gifts.

    Here’s the series:

    I illustrate the connection between the fruit of the Spirit and the gifts as follows:

    A B&W version of that slide is used in my book Identifying Your Gifts and Service (Workbook), designed for use in a classroom setting, and I discuss the issue in the Small Group edition of the same book.

  • Gordon Fee Discusses Interpreting Revelation

    … in this video, which has been all over the biblioblogosphere.  Sorry, I don’t even remember where I first saw it.

  • Text Today – Slave of Righteousness

    So now that you have been freed from sin, you have become enslaved to righteousness. — Romans 6:18 (my translation)

    Now you are free from your slavery to sin, and you have become slaves to righteous living. — Romans 6:18 (NLT)

    And yet there are those who think Paul taught easy believism!

  • Reading Genealogies

    I discuss why I think we should pay attention on the World Prayr blog today.