Bible Books

012

Points of View

Stories in Scripture and Inscriptions

Comparative Studies on Narratives in Northwest Semitic Inscriptions and the Hebrew Bible
Simon B. Parker
(New York and Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1997) x + 195 pp., $39.95 (hardback)

Reviewed by Susan Ackerman

As all good archaeologists know, even the most mundane pottery sherd can be crucial to reconstructing the history of a site. Still, hearts tend to race faster when more sensational remains, such as inscriptions, are unearthed. These inscriptions, we hope, might reveal information about events in Israelite history (as does the recently discovered Tel Dan inscription—the first extrabiblical reference to a Davidic dynasty);^a or about ancient Israelite religion (as do the famous inscriptions from Kuntillet Ajrud, with their cryptic reference to “Yahweh and his asherah,” among other things);^b or they might mention the name of some important biblical figure (as do the newly published impressions of the seals belonging to the Judahite kings Ahaz and Hezekiah).^c Simon B. Parker, however, aims to make use of inscriptions in a new way, by analyzing the ways different types of narratives are recounted in ancient inscriptions as compared with the Hebrew Bible.

Parker, a professor of Hebrew Bible at Boston University, looks at four different types of narratives—stories of military campaigns; stories of individuals who petition a higher authority; stories of appeals for military intervention; and stories of miraculous deliverance from a siege—and, specifically, at the account of the building of the Siloam tunnel. And he finds striking correspondences between the inscriptions and the biblical accounts. For example, both the inscriptional and biblical narratives of military campaigns might begin with remarkably similar announcements of an oppressive situation that developed in the past and now needs to be overcome. Thus, in the inscription of King Mesha of Moab (c. 850 B.C.E.), we read, “Omri was king of Israel, and he oppressed Moab for a long time,” while 2 Kings 13:22, in a description of the reign of King Jehoash of Israel, states, “Hazael, king of Aram, had oppressed Israel throughout all the time of Jehoahaz [Jehoash’s father].” In both texts, the opportunity for change comes at the same moment, when the oppressing king has died and his son has succeeded him.

To be sure, there are differences between the inscriptional and biblical materials, often having to do with the narratives’ point of view. The inscriptions usually have a first-person narrator relating stories from his own lifetime: Mesha, for example, recounts his success in freeing Moab from Israelite domination. The biblical accounts, however, are typically told by a narrator who writes in the third person and with hindsight, recounting the deeds of others: It is the seventh-century B.C.E. Deuteronomistic historian, for example, who describes the exploits of the eighth-century B.C.E. King Jehoash in 2 Kings 13.

Perhaps the most interesting example of this perspectival shift is found in the various accounts of the construction of the Siloam tunnel, which was built to bring water into Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege of the city (about 700 B.C.E.). The tale is told in two biblical passages (2 Kings 20:20 and 2 Chronicles 32:2–4, 30a) as well as in a six-line inscription that was found at the end of 013the tunnel and that dates roughly from the time of its completion. The inscription describes the moment when two teams of workers, which have been digging towards each other, finally meet:

And this was the account of the breakthrough. While [the excavators] were still [working] with their picks, each toward the other, and while there were still three cubits to be broken through, the voice of each [was hea]rd calling to the other, because there was a cavity(?) in the rock to the south and [to the nor]th. And at the moment of the breakthrough, the excavators struck each toward the other, pick against pick. Then the water flowed from the spring to the pool for one thousand two hundred cubits [1,750 feet]. And the height of the rock above the heads of the excavators was one hundred cubits.

As Parker writes, “the inscription is told from the point of view of someone caught up in the success of the project…and impressed by [the tunnel’s] scale.” Parker speculates that a likely author might be the project’s chief engineer, who would have been proud of his technological accomplishments and would have had the resources to produce an inscription that boasted of them.

The biblical accounts, however, which were written from the point of view of royal historians, focus on King Hezekiah’s contributions to the building of the tunnel: Summing up Hezekiah’s career, the Book of Kings tells us that “the other events of Hezekiah’s reign and all his exploits, and how he made the pool and the conduit and brought the water into the city, are recorded in the Annals of the Kings of Judah” (2 Kings 20:20). Note that these accounts have the king as the subject of the verbs that describe the making of the tunnel and the bringing of the water into the city!

Generally, I found this and similar comparisons made by Parker to be fascinating. Yet I found myself frustrated by the paucity of data. Parker ultimately analyzes only eight inscriptions in the core of his book simply because there are just not too many narrative inscriptions around that come from the Northwest Semitic world and date from the biblical period. I suspect some readers will also find themselves frustrated by Parker’s sometimes sketchy descriptions of the biblical narratives.

These caveats aside, Stories in Scripture and Inscriptions is a rewarding book, both for its insights into the storytelling techniques of ancient authors and for its suggestions of how we can use inscriptional materials in our study of the ancient Semitic world.

014

Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee

Mark Allen Powell
(Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 1998) 238 pp., $22.00 (paperback)

Reviewed by Anthony J. Saldarini

Overwhelmed by the flood of controversial books on the historical Jesus? Confused by their varying—often clashing—portraits? Or just curious about what scholars are saying about the historical Jesus? Then this excellent critical survey should satisfy you. Mark Powell crisply reviews important early contributors to the quest for the historical Jesus and their methodological disagreements. Then, in separate chapters, he analyzes in detail the positions of the Jesus Seminar, John Dominic Crossan, Marcus J. Borg, E.P. Sanders, John P. Meier and N.T. Wright. With his clear, lively style, Powell escapes the boredom of “who said what about that” by maintaining a sharp focus on key points of agreement and dispute.

Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up?

A Debate Between William Lane Craig and John Dominic Crossan Moderated by William F. Buckley, Jr.
Edited by Paul Copan
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1998) 186 pp., $14.99 (paperback)

Reviewed by Anthony J. Saldarini

If Bill Buckley moderates, sharp-tongued debate will surely follow. On a recent Chicago radio talk show, William Lane Craig, a prominent conservative Evangelical apologist, and John Dominic Crossan, a well-known and articulate liberal New Testament scholar, debated the reality and meaning of Jesus’ resurrection. They spoke, rebutted one another and engaged in dialogue with Buckley (whose view of Crossan’s liberal position appears in his humorous introduction: “If halfway through Dr. Crossan’s speech he disappears in smoke, you will know that Jesus has cleared his throat”). In this volume, the transcript of their remarks has been supplemented by written responses from two members of the Jesus Seminar (Robert J. Miller and Marcus Borg) and two other New Testament edge scholars (Craig Blomberg and Ben Witherington III) and final statements by Crossan and Craig. The arguments fly, the viewpoints clash, but Crossan does not disappear in smoke.

The Jewish People in Classical Antiquity: From Alexander to Bar Kochba

John H. Hayes and Sara R. Mandell
(Louisville,KY: Westminster/John Knox, 1998) 246pp., $28.00 (paperback)

Reviewed by Sidnie White Crawford

In the last 50 years, our knowledge of the “classical” period in Judea has been growing by leaps and bounds. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls and other archeaological treasures has provided fresh insight into this era of Greek and Roman donimation. As a companion volume to A History of Ancient Isreal by John Hayes and J. Maxwell Miller (Philadelphia/London: Westminster/SCM, volume left off, with Alexander the Great’s conquest of the ancient Near East in 054333/332 B.C.E. It includes two hundred years later with the Jewish defeat in the Second Revolt against Rome (132–135 C.E.)led by Bar Kochba. Authors John Hayes, of Emory University, and Sara Mandell, of the University of South Florida, are to be congratulated for synthesizing the newest material in a user-friendly format.

Some of the latest thinking about the period is immediately evident in their text. Take, for example, their treatment of Roman influence in the area. Older surveys note limited contacts between Judea and Rome during the Maccabean period (142–63 B.C.E.), when the Maccabee family established an independent Jewish state; direct Roman influence is generally dated to the conquest of Judea by the Roman general Pompey in 63 B.C.E. Hayes and Mandell, however, see Roman influences as far more pervasive in second century B.C.E. While all scholars might not agree on the extent of Roman influence, Hayes and Mandell do an excellent job of considering the wider historical context for Judean history.

Given that this book is a survey, the authors often present a historical construct without complete argumentation. The careful reader will note that many controversial items are passed over in silence. For example, when Hayes and Mandell discuss the Essenes, they state that the group came into being in the third century B.C.E., produced 1 Enoch and Jubilees, broke with the Jerusalem establishment over the change from the solar to the lunar calender and exiled themselves to the city of Damascus. Any one of these statements is highly controversial, as a quick of perusal of Dead Sea Scroll lieterature will reveal. The reader is warned against accepting Hayes and Mandell’s reconstructions as the product of scholarly consensus.

Nevertheless, this is an excellent book for upper-level college and graduate students or anyone with a working knowledge of Judaism in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. (The neophyte would do better to begin elsewhere, however, as the authors assume knowledge of certain terms, such as Macedonian, Seleucid, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and Josephus.) All in all, Hayes and Mandell should be commended for their achievement.

Points of View

Stories in Scripture and Inscriptions