- Tapa dura: 654 páginas
- Editor: Arkose Press (22 de octubre de 2015)
- Idioma: Inglés
- ISBN-10: 1345100965
- ISBN-13: 978-1345100969
- Valoración media de los clientes: Sé el primero en opinar sobre este producto
An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament (Inglés) Tapa dura – 22 oct 2015
Descripción del producto
Reseña del editor
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
No es necesario ningún dispositivo Kindle. Descárgate una de las apps de Kindle gratuitas para comenzar a leer libros Kindle en tu smartphone, tablet u ordenador.
Obtén la app gratuita:
Detalles del producto
Si eres el vendedor de este producto, ¿te gustaría sugerir ciertos cambios a través del servicio de atención al vendedor?
Opiniones de clientes
|5 estrellas (0%)|
|4 estrellas (0%)|
|3 estrellas (0%)|
|2 estrellas (0%)|
|1 estrella (0%)|
Opiniones de clientes más útiles en Amazon.com
Chapters 4 through 7:1 is a unit describing the disastrous war with the Philistines, the defeat of Israel, the capture of the ark, the experiences that the Philistines had with the ark resulting in them returning the ark to Israel, and what happened to the Israelites when the ark was returned. No mention of Samuel is contained in this narration, although it does continue the tragic history of Eli and his two sons. Driver, like other scholars, note that most biblical books were composed from collections of writings on the subject of the book and may have a different description of the event or be assembled in an meaningless or near-meaningless manner. He writes on page 174, “It is doubtful whether 4:1b-7:1 [b indicating the second half of the verse] was intended in the first instance as a continuation of c. 1-4:1a…and c. 1-4:1a appears to have been written as an introduction to 4:1b-7:1.”
On page 175, Driver, like others, contends that there are two different accounts of why Samuel stated that Saul’s dynasty will not endure: in 13:14 because Saul did not wait for him to arrive before offering a sacrifice to God, and in 15:23 Because the king offered sacrifices from the cattle taken as booty contrary to Samuel’s instruction to kill all the cattle. He notes there that there are also two versions narrating the manner in which Saul became king. The older story is in 9:1-10:16 and 27b, 11:1-11 and 15. This tale continues with chapters 13 and 14. In it Samuel meets Saul who was looking for lost asses. The newer version is in chapter 8, 10:17-27a, and chapter 12 where Samuel calls the people together to crown Saul during an assembly.
A third dual version is in chapters 16-18, where there are two radically different tales of David’s introduction to the history. In 16:14-23, he is of mature age and a man of war. He was brought to Saul’s service because of the king’s mental distress and was appointed Saul’s armor-bearer. In 17:1-18:5, he is a shepherd lad, inexperienced in warfare, but defeats Goliath. A second variation of the Goliath tale is in II Samuel 21:19, which states that Goliath was killed by Elhanan, the son of Jaare-oregim of Bethlehem. A third is in I Chronicles 20:5 where Elhanan son of Jair (perhaps, a variation of Jaare) slew not Goliath, but his brother Lahmi.
While we would expect a single ending to a story, drive points out on page 173 that “there are three concluding summaries, which occur in the course of the two books” of Samuel: 14:47-51, II Samuel 5:15-18, and 20:23-26.
Scripture describes biblical figures singing or reciting a song/poem at the conclusion of an important even, as Moses did in Exodus 15 and Deborah in Judges 5. These songs/poems are generally different than the narrative of the event in various ways. Sometimes they seem totally irrelevant, as in Jonah 2. Driver writes on page 174, “The Song of Hannah (2:1-10) is not early in style, and is unsuited to Hannah’s position: its theme is the humiliation of the lofty and the exaltation of the lowly (and)…presupposes the establishment of the monarchy.”
He wrote in the Preface to this 1897 book, “The aim of the present volume is to furnish an account, at once descriptive and historical, or the Literature of the Old Testament. It is not… an Introduction to the THEOLOGY, or to the HISTORY, or even to the STUDY, of the Old Testament… It is an introduction to the LITERATURE of the Old Testament; and what I conceived this to include was an account of the contents and structure of the several books, together with such an indication of their general character and aim as I could find room for in the space at my disposal… In a critical study of the Old Testament, there is an important distinction, which should be kept in mind. It is that of degrees of probability. The probability of a conclusion depends upon the nature of the grounds on which it rests; and some conclusions reached by critics of the Old Testament are for this reason more probable than others… It has been no part of my object to represent conclusions as more certain than is authorized by the facts upon which the depend….I desire what I have just said to be applied in particular to the analysis of the Hexateuch. That the ‘Priests’ Code’ formed a clearly defined document… appears to me to be more than sufficiently established by a multitude of convergent indications; and I have nowhere signified any doubt on this conclusion. On the other hand, in the remained of the narrative of Gen.-Numbers and of Joshua, though there are facts which satisfy me that this also is not homogeneous, I believe that the analysis … is frequently uncertain… Accordingly, as regards ‘JE’… I do not desire to lay equal stress upon all the particulars of the analysis, or to be supposed to hold that the line of demarcation between its component parts is at every point as clear and certain as it is between P and other parts of the Hexateuch.” (Pg. iii-v) He concludes, “The age and authorship of the books of the Old Testament can be determined (so far as this is possible) only upon the basis of the internal evidence supplied by the books themselves, by methods such as those followed in the present volume: no external evidence worthy of credit exists.” (Pg. x-xi)
He says of Genesis, “This source, or document, has received different names, suggested by one or other of the various characteristics attaching to it. From its preference … for the absolute use of the name God (‘Elohim’) rather than Jehovah, it has been termed the Elohistic narrative and its author has been called the Eloihist… it has been styled the ‘Priests’ Code.’ This last designation is in strictness applicable only to the ceremonial sections in Ex.-Nu; these, however, form such a large and characteristic portion of the work, that the title may not unsuitably be extended so as to embrace the whole; and it may be represented conveniently… by the letter P.” (Pg. 10)
Later, he suggests of Deuteronomy, “Inasmuch as our existing Pent, JE and P repeatedly cross one another, the constant absence of any reference to P can only be reasonably explained by one supposition… that when Dt. was composed JE and P were not yet united into a single work, and JE alone formed the basis of Dt.” (Pg. 81) He adds, “The influence of Dt. upon subsequent writers is clear and indisputable. It is remarkable, now, that the early prophets, Amos, Hosea, and the indisputed portions of Isaiah, show no certain traces of this influence; Jeremiah exhibits marks of it on nearly every page; Ezekiel I and II Isaiah are also evidently influenced by it. If Dt. were composed in the period between Isaiah and Jeremiah, these facts would be exactly accounted for.” (Pg. 88) He points out, “P, both in method and literary style, offers a striking contrast to either J or E. P is not satisfied to cast into a literary form what may be termed the POPULAR conception of the patriarchal and Mosaic age; his aim is to give a systematic view, from a priestly standpoint, of the origin and chief institutions of the Israelitish theocracy. For this purpose, the ABSTRACT of the history is sufficient.” (Pg. 126)
He comments on Isaiah 40-66: “These chapters form a continuous prophecy, dealing throughout with a common theme, viz., Israel’s restoration from exile in Babylon. There is no thought in the prophecy of the troubles or dangers to which Judah was exposed at the hands of Sargon or Sennacherib; the empire of Assyria has been succeeded by that of Babylon; Jerusalem and the Temple have been for long in ruins… Israel is in exile… And the power of the Chaldeans is to all appearance as secure as ever; the Jewish exiles are in despair or indifferent; they think that God has forgotten them, and have ceased to expect, or desire, their release.” (Pg. 230) He adds, “In the present prophecy there is no PREDICTION of exile; the exile is not announced as something still future; it is PRESUPPOSED, and only they RELEASE from it is predicted.” (Pg. 237)
He says of Daniel 9, “As commonly understood, it is a prediction of the death of Christ, and the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus. But this view labours under serious difficulties. (1) If the 490 years are to end with the Crucifixion, A.D. 29, they must begin c. 458 B.C., a date which coincides with the decree of Artaxerxes and the mission of Ezra (Ezra 7). But this decree contains no command whatever ‘to restore and rebuild Jerusalem’… (2) In the 490 years, the first 49 are distinguished from those that follow, their close being marked by a break, as though some epoch were signalized by it; but no historical importance is known to attach in Jewish history to the year 409 B.C. (3) Christ did not ‘confirm a covenant with many for one week’ (=7 years)…” (Pg. 495) Later, he adds, “The verdict of the language of Daniel is thus clear. The PERSIAN words presuppose a period after the Persian empire had been well established: the Greek words DEMAND, the Hebrew SUPPORTS, and the Aramaic PERMITS, a date after the conquest of Palestine by Alexander the Great (B.C. 332)… though … the name of [a musical] instrument … would seem to point to a date somewhat advanced in the Greek period.” (Pg. 508)
Driver was one of the architects of the OT documentary hypothesis; his comments are still of relevance and value to anyone critically studying the Old Testament.