The Use of the Word as a Title in the Old Testament

1969 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
J.R. Bartlett
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
General Sense ◽  
Ancient Israel

AbstractMany societies have used the word "head" metaphorically to describe the position of the leading figure in a society or in some smaller group, and this title usually has a vague and imprecise meaning. To be intelligible it needs to be given some known context or some further definition. For example, if we are schoolmasters, we may among ourselves refer to "the Head", but outside school, unless we are speaking to people who know the context of our work, we have to refer to "the Headmaster" to be fully understood. And even when the context of the headship is known, the title "head" by itself tells us nothing definite about the position of the person so described. We know nothing, for example, about the means of his appointment, the tenure of his office, or the scope of his powers. Thus the word "head" can often be used in a general sense of some position or office for which there is in fact an official or more descriptive title. In the Old Testament, however, the title is not always so vaguely used. Although the word "head" in Hebrew as in English has a natural ambiguity on many occasions, we can at least show that in the Old Testament the word is used of a person's position only in certain well defined spheres. And because the title "head" in the Old Testament has a fairly limited reference, the details of appointment, tenure of office or position, and scope of powers, though sometimes unknown to us, may not have been so generally unknown in ancient Israel.

scholarly journals Humans created God in their image? An anthropomorphic projectionism in the Old Testament

2018 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ndikho Mtshiselwa ◽  
Lerato Mokoena
Keyword(s):  
Social Construction ◽  
Old Testament ◽  
Main Question ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Social Construct ◽  
Ancient Israel ◽  
The World ◽  
Genesis 1 ◽  
History Of ◽  
Old Testament Studies

The Old Testament projects not only a Deity that created the world and human beings but also one that is violent and male. The debate on the depiction of the God of Israel that is violent and male is far from being exhausted in Old Testament studies. Thus, the main question posed in this article is: If re-read as ‘Humans created God in their image’, would Genesis 1:27 account for the portrayal of a Deity that is male and violent? Feuerbach’s idea of anthropomorphic projectionism and Guthrie’s view of religion as anthropomorphism come to mind here. This article therefore examines, firstly, human conceptualisation of a divine being within the framework of the theory of anthropomorphic projectionism. Because many a theologian and philosopher would deny that God is a being at all, we further investigate whether the God of Israel was a theological and social construction during the history of ancient Israel. In the end, we conclude, based on the theory of anthropomorphic projectionism, that the idea that the God of Israel was a theological and social construct accounts for the depiction of a Deity that is male and violent in the Old Testament.

scholarly journals Sidang Ilahi Elohim Dalam Mazmur 82:1

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marthin Steven Lumingkewas ◽  
Firman Panjaitan
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Hebrew Bible ◽  
Hebrew Text ◽  
The Other ◽  
Main Method ◽  
Religious System ◽  
Dialectical Theology ◽  
Ancient Israel ◽  
Divine Council ◽  
Religious Systems

In the Old Testament Yahweh is frequently called El. The question is raised whether Yahweh was a form of the god El from the beginning or whether they were separate deities who only became equated later. They whom uphold theory Yahweh and El were conceived as separate deities holds that Yahweh was a southern storm god from Seir and so on, which was brought by the Israelites and conflated with the Jerusalem patriarchal deity.On the other side there are scholars who hold and conceived Yahweh and El as one single deity. These scholars defend this position most commonly on the grounds that no distinction between the two can be clearly found in the Hebrew Bible. The methodology used in this paper is literary – historical and social interpretations, with the main method being the "diachronic and dialectical theology of Hegel". The simple Hegelian method is: A (thesis) versus B (anti-thesis) equals C (synthesis). The author analyzes (thesis) by collecting instruments related to ancient Semitic religions; it includes data on El and Yahweh assembly obtained from Hebrew text sources and extra-biblical manuscripts which are then processed in depth. The antithesis is to analyze El's assembly development in Israel – especially in Psalm 82. While the synthesis appears in the nuances of the El’s assembly believe in ancient Israel. The focus of this paper's research is to prove 2 things: first, is Psalm 82: 1, is an Israeli Psalm that uses the patterns and forms of the Canaanite Psalms; especially regarding religious systems that use the terminology of the divine council. Second, to prove that El and Yahweh in the context of this Psalm are two different gods, of which this view contradicts several ANET experts such as Michael S, Heisser who sets El and Yahweh in this text as identical gods. The results of this study attempt to prove that Israel and the Canaan contextually share the same religious system, and are seen to be separated in the Deuteronomist era with their Yahwistic reforms.

Shamanism and Healing Experts

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 216-232
Author(s):  
Ehrhard S. Gerstenberger
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Mediating Role ◽  
Hebrew Scriptures ◽  
Healing Rituals ◽  
Ancient Israel

Abstract This essay argues that evidence suggests that shamanistic-type healing experts were found in ancient Israel, and that the kind of healing rituals show similarities to other such shamanistic practices in other contexts. Hebrew Scriptures provides evidence for a range of designations for such persons dedicated to the mediating office between humans and the divine, some of which have certainly been involved with the art of curing. Narrative and prophetic literatures offer some illuminating evidence for healing specialists. Particular attention is paid to supplicatory psalms in the Old Testament which suggest the mediating role of healing experts. Further comparisons with Sumero-Babylonian professional rites and Navajo healing chants establish the likelihood of the presence and activities of such shamanistic-type healing experts in ancient Israel.

scholarly journals Who are the “servants” (Psalm 69:36c-37b)? A contribution to the history of the literature of the Old Testament

2003 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alphonso Groenewald
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Active Role ◽  
Special Group ◽  
Book Of Isaiah ◽  
Singular Form ◽  
Ancient Israel ◽  
Literary Heritage ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Voice ◽  
Shed Light

Psalm 69:37a refers to the "servants" in the composite "the offspring of his servants". This composite takes up a concept which already ap-peared as a self-indication of the supplicant of this Psalm, namely in its singular form "servant" (69:18a). The article aims to identify these "servants" (69:37a) who articulated themselves in the voice of the other "person" in Psalm 69. It is postulated that the connections which exist between the servants in Isaiah and the servants in the Psalter are far too distinct to simply regard them as a mere matter of coincidence. The article focuses on the book of Isaiah, as conclusions drawn from Isaiah can shed light on the identity of the "servants" in Psalm 69. Secondly, the focus shifts to the term "servants" in the Psalter, and specifically in book I and II. It shows that the term "servants" not only denotes the pious, but indicates a special group of people who played an active role in shaping the literary heritage of ancient Israel in post-exilic times.

Cities of Refuge

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Biblical Studies ◽  
Legal Issue ◽  
Kings 1 ◽  
Ancient Israel ◽  
City Of Refuge ◽  
1 Kings ◽  
The Relationship

Within the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament there is a provision for six cities of refuge (“cities of intaking” [ערי מקלט]), where someone who has unintentionally committed murder can go and not be subject to blood revenge (Exodus 20:12–14; Numbers 35:9–28; Deuteronomy 4:41–43, 19:1–13; Joshua 20; 1 Chronicles 6). This practice has been described as refuge, asylum, and sanctuary, and the cities have been given all three of these labels, which has resulted in differing understandings of the intention of these cities. The basic legal issue is the distinction between intentional and unintentional killing. For most societies in the ancient Near East, including ancient Israel, the idea of “blood revenge” (an “eye for an eye”; lex talionis) was the way in which the killing of a member of your clan or family was avenged (Exodus 21:23). The distinction made in association with the cities of refuge/asylum was how to deal with an individual who accidentally, without intention, killed another (Exodus 21:12–14; Number 35:16–28). Also associated with this idea is the nature of sanctuary or asylum that one can obtain when one reaches a cultic center with an altar (1 Kings 1:50–53; 2:23–24). One should also note that all the cities of refuge are also Levitical Cities (1 Chronicles 6), but it is not clear what the role of the Levites was in such a city of refuge. Among the issues associated with these cities are the following: Did they actually exist, or were they simply a fiction created at a later period of time? If they were real, what was their historical context? Was it premonarchic, the time of David and Solomon, related to the centralization of Josiah, or postexilic? When were the texts composed (a question associated with the previous issue and raising wonderings about different hands in the composition of the texts associated with the idea of asylum cities)? What is the connection between altars of sanctuary and the cities of refuge, and why the apparent replacement of altars with cities? Who and how was the validity of the claim of unintentional killing (Numbers 35:24–25; Joshua 20:4) decided, even if the killer was a “sojourner” (gēr) (Joshua 20:9)? What was the consequence of the death of the high priest (Numbers 35:27; Joshua 20:6), and how it was related to some concept of atonement? What was the relationship between the different biblical presentations of refuge or asylum? What was the connection with the Levites (See Oxford Bibliographies in Biblical Studies articles Levi/Levites) and Levitical Cities? Finally, what is the relevance to today’s society with its issues of sanctuary for immigrants and sojourners?

Egypt in the Old Testament

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Hays
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Direct Action ◽  
Buffer Zone ◽  
Military Aid ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Ancient Israel ◽  
Egyptian Religion ◽  
The Relationship

The relationship between Egypt and ancient Israel and Judah was far more complex than is often recognized. Egypt figures prominently in their national myths of origin as a way station for the patriarchs and as the “house of slaves” and starting point of the Exodus. Although no Exodus event can be confirmed from extrabiblical sources, its significance in the Bible suggests an historical kernel. The diverse existing traditions about Egypt in the texts of the Pentateuch and other early biblical writings, combined and written down at a later date, seem to reflect different experiences on the part of the groups that coalesced into Israel By the time of the monarchy, there is more direct evidence for Egyptian influence on Israelite culture, particularly in administrative affairs. It is also clear that Egyptian religion was practiced in the Levant at this time and would have been known in Israel and Judah. By the time of the divided monarchy, the historical picture comes into better focus. Relations between Egypt, Israel, and Judah were quite variable. Although Egypt’s New Kingdom empire in the Levant had ended, the region continued to be a useful trading outlet, and the pharaohs were not above raiding to assert their power. However, there are numerous examples of fugitives from the Levant finding refuge from their enemies in Egypt. In the interest of maintaining a buffer zone against the northern empires that encroached, Egypt and Kush gave military aid to Israel and Judah at times, through both direct action and supplies. The prophets had not forgotten Egypt’s role as an oppressor and frequently condemned it, as well as the tendency of Israelite and Judahite rulers to seek its help. But at times the prophets also envisioned peace with Egypt. There are a number of specific Egyptian texts that supply mutually illuminating points of comparison with biblical texts, including wisdom instructions, prayers, hymns, creation accounts, and autobiographies. These are indications of the extensive, ongoing, cultural interactions between Egypt and the cultures that produced the Old Testament.

Reconsidering the Salvation of Israel in Luke–Acts

2020 ◽  
pp. 0142064X2096266
Author(s):  
Philip La G. Du Toit
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Second Temple ◽  
Second Temple Period ◽  
Ancient Israel ◽  
The Way

In the prevalent interpretations of Israel’s salvation or restoration in Luke–Acts, Israel is understood as referring to descendants of ancient Israel who live in the present or beyond. In light of the predominant usage of the term ‘Israel’ in the second temple period, the prevalent interpretation of Israel’s salvation in Luke–Acts is reconsidered. This is done by mainly revisiting the realized language around Israel’s salvation in the Lukan corpus as well as the Old Testament context behind the language used. This re-evaluation also involves the way in which Israel’s forgiveness is presented, the involvement of the patriarchs in salvation, as well as the connection between Israel’s hope and their resurrection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document