by Stephen Rodgers
The outlines for the wisdom books are now available, and the original article on the wisdom books has been updated as well.
In case you missed it, the necessity of catching up on the outlines was explained two weeks ago.
Next week, we finally get to prophecy.
by Stephen Rodgers
The outlines for the historical books are now available, and the original article on the historical books has been updated as well.
In case you missed it, the necessity of catching up on the outlines was explained last week.
by Stephen Rodgers
I know what you’re thinking: “Is this guy ever going to do the Prophetic Books?”
Lord willing, yes. But not this week. Because this week, (and for the next couple weeks), we’re going to play a little game of catch-up with the BOB series. Let me explain. (“No, there is no time; let me sum up.”)
I recently fielded a question about the BOB series from a church member who wanted me to know that they felt that the BOB series had a particularly glaring deficiency, because it didn’t have a section articulating exactly what happens in each book of the Bible. I explained that wasn’t an oversight, that was deliberate. After all, the hope with BOB is that it will provide a helpful reference for books of the Bible, but it’s not intended to obviate the need to actually read them.
That being said, I do think there’s some value in having an overview of the events and/or structure of the books, so I’ve put together something that I think is interesting. I’ve taken the outlines from three different study Bibles (MSB, NET, NIV), which are published by three different publishers (Thomas Nelson, whoever publishes the NET, and Zondervan). I could be wrong, but I don’t think there’s any crossover when it comes to the scholars and writers on those content committees, so we should wind up with three uniquely sourced outlines. I’ve then laid out those outlines side-by-side, and will be releasing a new section each week until we catch up to the Prophetic books. From that point on, I’ll include the outlines everytime we get to a new section, so that you’ll have something to refer to as you read the BOB articles. (I’ll also edit the old section articles so that people reading through this series in the future will have them from the beginning).
Now, a couple of disclaimers:
Alright then. For those of you who are interested, here’s the first outline for the books of the Pentateuch. I’ve also updated the original article on the Pentateuch to contain that as well. See you next week with the History books!
by Stephen Rodgers
SONG OF SOLOMON IN 10 WORDS OR LESS
“Married love is a beautiful thing worth celebrating.”
TITLE
I’ve been generally pleased with the way this section works when I quote MacArthur/MSB and/or Constable/NET…so I’m going to do that again.
From the MSB:
The Greek Septuagint (LXX) and Latin Vulgate (Vg.) versions follow the Hebrew (Masoretic Text) with literal translations of the first two words in Song 1:1—”Song of Songs.” Several English versions read “The Song of Solomon,” thus giving the fuller sense of 1:1. The superlative, “Song of Songs” (cf. “Holy of Holies” in Ex. 26:33, 34 and “King of Kings” in Rev. 19:16), indicates that this song is the best among Solomon’s 1,005 musical works (1 Kin. 4:32). The word translated “song” frequently refers to music that honors the Lord (cf. 1 Chr. 6:31, 32; Pss. 33:3; 40:3; 144:9).
From Constable’s notes:
In the Hebrew Bible the title of this book is “The Song of Songs.” It comes from 1:1. The Septuagint and Vulgate translators adopted this title. The Latin word for song is canticum from which we get the word Canticles, another title for this book. Some English translations have kept the title “Song of Songs” (e.g., NIV, TNIV), but many have changed it to “Song of Solomon” based on 1:1 (e.g., NASB, AV, RSV, NKJV).
If anyone is interested, the ASB’s, NIVSB, and NET all render it “Song of Songs,” whereas the ESVSB, MSB, and RSB all render it “Song of Solomon.” This is in keeping with the translation standards that Constable mentions (with the NET in the former category and the ESV in the latter).
AUTHOR & AUDIENCE
There is division among scholars as to the issue of Solomonic authorship. Jewish and Christian tradition have long and uniformly held that Solomon is the author of Song of Solomon, and that this is likely the greatest of the 1,000+ songs he composed. However, even among conservative scholars, this is not a uniform view. The ESVSB for example, cites the following reasons for doubting the traditional position on authorship:
First, Song of Solomon 1:1 is grammatically ambiguous: it need not mean that Solomon wrote the Song of Solomon, only that it was written in his honor. Second, what is known of Solomon himself from 1 Kings raises problems with the suggestion that Solomon was the author. For example, 1 Kings 2 gives a concise summary of how Solomon’s kingdom was established (cf. 1 Kings 2:46), which is followed immediately by the statement in 1 Kings 3:1 that “Solomon made a marriage alliance with Pharaoh king of Egypt.” Pharaoh’s daughter, however, could not have been the country girl (a Shulammite) who is the heroine of the Song of Solomon (though some hold that Solomon might have married the Shulammite before he married Pharaoh’s daughter). Likewise, Solomon’s full harem (1 Kings 11:1–8) makes him a very bad example of married love for Israel (though some have replied that the Song of Solomon reflects Solomon’s wisdom that came from his chastened perspective as he reflected on his own life). Third, the book mentions Solomon (Song 1:5; 3:7, 9, 11; 8:11–12), but generally as a distant, even idealized figure.
I’d like to take the opportunity to briefly rebut some of those objections if I may:
DATE
Regardless of the position one takes on authorship, dating the Song is a relatively easy affair. Those holding to the traditional view believe it was composed during Solomon’s reign (971-931 BC). Those holding to a non-traditional view of authorship date it to the exact same period. Per the ESVSB:
If it is not entirely certain that Solomon wrote the book, one can still argue that the book was written during Solomon’s reign (971–931 b.c.). The book mentions him and seems to assume his glorious reign as a known fact. At the same time, the heroine is a young Shulammite woman (Song 6:13); most take this to mean that she comes from the village of Shunem (Josh. 19:18; 2 Kings 4:8), which is in the tribal inheritance of Issachar. Furthermore, the town of Tirzah is mentioned along with Jerusalem in comparisons of beauty (Song 6:4). The towns of Shunem and Tirzah were located in what became the northern kingdom. These features make it likely that the book comes from the time before Israel was divided into the northern and southern kingdoms, which took place just after Solomon’s death (931 b.c.).
BACKGROUND & SETTING
Once the date has been established, the background and setting are quite clear: Solomon’s reign. The poem however, does not present a view of his entire reign. It’s a long poem, but not that long.
The poem itself presents its own unit of time, which is imprecise at best: assuming a chronology without gaps, the courtship, wedding, and ensuing marriage takes place over the course of at least one year (time can be marked by seasonal shifts, and spring occurs initially in Song 2:11-13, then recurs in Song 7:12.
HISTORICAL & THEOLOGICAL THEMES
There are three obvious themes that present themselves in reading Song of Solomon.
INTERPRETIVE CHALLENGES
In dealing with the Song of Solomon, one challenge stands out above all others: in a literary sense, how should the book be understood? Let me quote the MSB, then offer some of my own thoughts:
The Song has suffered strained interpretations over the centuries by those who use the “allegorical” method of interpretation, claiming that this song has no actual historical basis, but rather that it depicts God’s love for Israel and/or Christ’s love for the church. The misleading idea from hymnology that Christ is the rose of Sharon and the lily of the valleys results from this method (Song 2:1). The “typological” variation admits the historical reality, but concludes that it ultimately pictures Christ’s bridegroom love for His bride the church.
Let me tip my hand a little, and quote with great amusement and approval one particularly renowned commentator: “All things are possible to those who allegorize—and what they come up with is usually heretical.” (Warren W. Wiersbe, “Song of Solomon,” in The Bible Exposition Commentary/Wisdom and Poetry, p. 542.)
You see, this may be a bit of an oversimplification, but let me try to lay it out as I see it:
So on one side we’ve potentially got the worst elements of allegedly-puritanical censorship (and I say “allegedly” because having read the Puritans, they really aren’t very “puritanical” at all in that sense), and on the other side we’ve potentially got the worst elements of pseudo-Christian sensationalism. How’s that old song go? “Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right…”
At the risk of punching well above my weight here, it seems plain to me that Song of Solomon is a love poem, depicting courtship, a wedding, and a honeymoon/marriage, between two human beings. No more, and no less. Let me finish that MSB quote I started earlier:
A more satisfying way to approach Solomon’s Song is to take it at face value and interpret it in the normal historical sense, understanding the frequent use of poetic imagery to depict reality. To do so understands that Solomon recounts 1) his own days of courtship, 2) the early days of his first marriage, followed by 3) the maturing of this royal couple through the good and bad days of life. The Song of Solomon expands on the ancient marriage instructions of Gen. 2:24, thus providing spiritual music for a lifetime of marital harmony. It is given by God to demonstrate His intention for the romance and loveliness of marriage, the most precious of human relations and “the grace of life” (1 Pet. 3:7).
LITERARY FEATURES
The literary features that one finds when reading a text are going to be largely influenced by the kind of text one supposes it to be. However, assuming that Song of Solomon is best understood literally, then the ESVSB has this to say:
The best label that can be assigned to the book is love poetry, in which the lovers are shepherd and shepherdess and the setting is a flowery and fruitful rural landscape (of which a vineyard is the prime example). If a love poem celebrates the occasion of a specific wedding, it is called an epithalamion, and that is what takes place here.
OBJECTIONS
Apart from the issues of AUTHOR and INTERPRETIVE CHALLENGES (dealt with in the previous sections), there are no objections to the Song of Solomon that I am aware of, despite the controversy it has caused over the centuries.
NOTABLE QUOTABLES
DID YOU KNOW?
Other Works Referenced
by Stephen Rodgers
ECCLESIASTES IN 10 WORDS OR LESS
“Apart from God, life is empty and unsatisfying.”
TITLE
I’ll simply let the MSB do the bulk of the heavy lifting here for me:
The English title, Ecclesiastes, comes from the Greek and Latin translations of Solomon’s book. The LXX, the Greek translation of the OT, used the Greek term ekklēsiastēs for its title. It means “preacher,” derived from the word ekklēsia, translated “assembly” or “congregation” in the NT. Both the Greek and Latin versions derive their titles from the Hebrew title, Qoheleth, which means “one who calls or gathers” the people. It refers to the one who addresses the assembly; hence, the preacher (cf. Eccles 1:1, 2, 12; 7:27; 12:8–10). Along with Ruth, Song of Solomon, Esther, and Lamentations, Ecclesiastes stands with the OT books of the Megilloth, or “five scrolls.” Later rabbis read these books in the synagogue on 5 special occasions during the year—Ecclesiastes being read on Pentecost.
AUTHOR & AUDIENCE
So from the previous section, we know that the author is the Qoheleth…what we don’t know is whether this is intended to be a personal or titular identifier, and if titular, who it refers to. Let’s start by lifting a line from the ESVSB:
Scholars have debated whether Qoheleth is best understood as a personal name or a title, though the latter seems more likely in view of Eccles 12:8, where the definite article (“the”) precedes the word.
(Constable points to Eccles 7:27 as another possible instance that would argue in favor of the titular position).
Assuming it’s titular, the question remains: who is the Qoheleth?
The candidate for…uh…Qoheleth-ness…that dominates every single discussion is Solomon. No other historical personage is seriously considered as a candidate, though arguments for and against Solomon have been particularly fierce the last 200 years.
In favor of Solomon, we have the following arguments:
In opposition to Solomon, we have the following arguments (citing the ESVSB):
So now that we’ve got that all muddled up, let’s see if we can’t make heads or tails out of all this.
I won’t bore you all the nitty-gritty details (as is appropriate considering this is coming from someone who doesn’t speak Hebrew and isn’t particularly well-versed in the nuances of the ANE Hebrew lexicon), but the basic argument comes down to this: there are certain discrepancies and oddities in the Hebrew of Ecclesiastes that don’t fit with our understanding of 10th century BC Hebrew. However, this problem is complicated when one realizes that a number of these oddities in toto cannot be harmonized with any known chronological period of Hebrew, up to and including the post-exilic era. Some attempt has been made to place Ecclesiastes in the 450-250 BC period (J. Stafford Wright, “Ecclesiastes,” in Psalms-Song of Songs, vol. 5 of The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, pp. 1139-43.), but this has been vigorously refuted (“The Linguistic Evidence for the Date of ‘Ecclesiastes,’“ Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society12:3 (Summer 1969):167-81.).
Furthermore, pointing out that a particular word does not appear in the relevant body of literature until several centuries later generally does nothing to prove that word was unknown to the authors of a previous time (excluding certain noteworthy and rather obvious counter-examples based on particular derivatives or instances of coinage). However, the examples in Ecclesiastes don’t fall into these specific categories, and given the limited ANE texts at our disposal, we simply don’t have enough data to give a definitive answer.
Last but not least, in attempting to narrow down the date of composition, there is some evidence that the author was familiar with Babylonian and Egyptian literature that pre-dated Solomon’s reign (Eccles 9:8-9 strongly resembles passages from the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh and the Egyptian “Harper’s Song”) there is no evidence of similar familiarity with the classic Greek texts of the fifth century BC and following that one would expect to find if a late date of composition was true. I’m getting ahead of myself (see DATE below), but that’s alright.
It seems clear to me that you wind up a pretty clear argument for Solomonic authorship, with a bit of room left over for fun thought experiments regarding textual emendations, but that’s about it.
DATE
That was a lot of writing; MSB quote to the rescue:
Once Solomon is accepted as the author, the date and occasion become clear. Solomon was writing, probably in his latter years (no later than ca. 931 B.C.), primarily to warn the young people of his kingdom, without omitting others. He warned them to avoid walking through life on the path of human wisdom; he exhorted them to live by the revealed wisdom of God (Eccles 12:9–14).
BACKGROUND & SETTING
Once again, I’m going to let the MSB summarize this section (which largely reproduces information from preceding sections anyhow):
Solomon’s reputation for possessing extraordinary wisdom fits the Ecclesiastes profile. David recognized his son’s wisdom (1 Kin. 2:6, 9) before God gave Solomon an additional measure. After he received a “wise and understanding heart” from the Lord (1 Kin. 3:7–12), Solomon gained renown for being exceedingly wise by rendering insightful decisions (1 Kin.3:16–28), a reputation that attracted “all the kings of the earth” to his courts (1 Kin. 4:34). In addition, he composed songs and proverbs (1 Kin. 4:32; cf. 12:9), activity befitting only the ablest of sages. Solomon’s wisdom, like Job’s wealth, surpassed the wisdom “of all the people of the east” (1 Kin. 4:30; Job 1:3).
HISTORICAL & THEOLOGICAL THEMES
There are a multitude of themes running through the book: that wisdom and pleasure apart from God are worthless (Eccles 1:12-2:16), that God confers meaning upon work and labor (Eccles 2:17-3:8 vs. 3:9-6:7; 3:22; 3:1), the injustice (and pervasive reality) of oppression (Eccles 4:1-3; 7:15-18; 12:14), the superiority of divine wisdom over and against human wisdom (Eccles 6:10; 6:8-12:7), and the fact that God…just as He gives so many other gifts…gives us meaning for this life (Eccles 12:1-14; 12:14).
I’d like to dive just a little bit deeper though, because in order to really understand the themes, you have to first understand the refrains. And there are two refrains that are prevalent throughout this small-but-weighty book.
INTERPRETIVE CHALLENGES
Let me again rely on the MSB to get this started:
The author’s declaration that “all is vanity” envelops the primary message of the book (cf. Eccles 1:2; 12:8). The word translated “vanity” is used in at least 3 ways throughout the book. In each case, it looks at the nature of man’s activity “under the sun” as: 1)”fleeting,” which has in view the vapor-like (cf. James 4:14) or transitory nature of life; 2)”futile” or “meaningless,” which focuses on the cursed condition of the universe and the debilitating effects it has on man’s earthly experience; or 3) “incomprehensible” or “enigmatic,” which gives consideration to life’s unanswerable questions. Solomon draws upon all 3 meanings in Ecclesiastes.
To those three options, Wilson adds “inscrutable repetitiveness” in his commentary, which enjoys a certain clarity in regards to the great themes of the book. What the reader should note is that whatever “vanity” means given the contextual cues of the relevant passage, it does not mean “absolute meaninglessness.” As one commentator put it, Solomon is too wise a man to fall into the error and idiocy of modern existential relativism.
LITERARY FEATURES
The ESVSB summarizes it in this way:
Although Ecclesiastes is wisdom literature, it does not read like a typical collection of proverbs. The proverbs are molded into clusters, and furthermore there is a unifying plot line that organizes the units together. The units fall into the three categories of recollections, reflections, and mood pieces. All of these are expressed by a narrator who in effect tells the story of his quest to find satisfaction in life. This quest is reconstructed from the vantage point of someone whose quest ended satisfactorily. The transitions between units often keep the quest in view: “so I turned to consider,” “again I saw,” “then I saw,” etc. As the quest unfolds, one is continuously aware of the discrepancy between the narrator’s present outlook and his futile search undertaken in the past. In effect, the speaker recalls the labyrinth of dead ends that he pursued, recreating his restless past with full vividness but not representing it as his mature outlook. Along with the narrative thread, the observational format of much of the material gives the book a meditative cast.
OBJECTIONS
There are really only two objections that are raised against Ecclesiastes; the first pertains to authorship and the second pertains to orthodoxy.
NOTABLE QUOTABLES
DID YOU KNOW?
Other Works Referenced
by Stephen Rodgers
PROVERBS IN 10 WORDS OR LESS
“Pithy, memorable sayings encourage people to pursue wisdom.”
TITLE
Per Constable:
The title of this book in the Hebrew Bible is “The Proverbs of Solomon, the Son of David, King in Israel” (Proverbs 1:1). The Greek Septuagint called this book “Proverbs of Solomon.” The Latin Vulgate named it “The Book of Proverbs.” Translators of English Bibles place Proverbs among the poetic books (Psalms—Song of Solomon) whereas in the Hebrew Bible it is found among the “Writings,” the third and final major section.
It should be noted that there is some dispute as to whether the title of the book is intended to refer to the total collection of proverbs, or just to the first section. As a number of scholars have pointed out, this may be yet another case where either/or creates a false antithesis and both/and could well be correct. After all, even if Proverbs 1:1 refers only to the initial segment of the collection, the rest of the book still contains proverbs.
AUTHOR & AUDIENCE
I’m going to quote the MSB on authorship, then outline the timeline the follows in the DATE section:
The phrase “Proverbs of Solomon” is more a title than an absolute statement of authorship (Proverbs 1:1). While King Solomon, who ruled Israel from 971–931 B.C. and was granted great wisdom by God (see 1 Kin. 4:29–34), is the author of the didactic section (chaps. 1–9) and the proverbs of 10:1–22:16, he is likely only the compiler of the “sayings of the wise” in 22:17–24:34, which are of an uncertain date before Solomon’s reign. The collection in chaps. 25–29 was originally composed by Solomon (25:1) but copied and included later by Judah’s king Hezekiah (ca. 715–686 B.C.). Chapter 30 reflects the words of Agur and chap. 31 the words of Lemuel, who perhaps was Solomon.
It should be noted that on the other hand, Lemuel’s sayings contain several Aramaic spellings that may point to a non-Israelite background. Scholars simply don’t agree on this (admittedly minor) point.
In regards to the audience, Proverbs tends to divide itself between a general audience (an assumed Israelite seeking wisdom) and a specific audience (a young man who finds himself at a crossroads in regards to life choices).
DATE
For anyone interested in a rough chronology of the book of Proverbs, here is a simplified outline:
BACKGROUND & SETTING
Proverbs spans three contexts: 1) general wisdom literature, 2) a royal court setting, and 3) an inter-generational household. Against this multi-faceted backdrop the various exhortations and admonitions of the book will be developed.
In the context of the OT, wisdom literature was typically the purview of the Sage/Wise Man who dispensed good counsel (as opposed to the Priest who dispensed the Law and/or the Prophet who dispensed the Word of the Lord). As a result, we can typically expect the Wisdom literature to interact with the entities of the Law and Word, but to largely concern itself with the areas that are not explicitly addressed by either.
HISTORICAL & THEOLOGICAL THEMES
There are two dominant themes in the book of Proverbs:
INTERPRETIVE CHALLENGES
There are a number of issues that could be raised in regards to challenges to correctly understanding Proverbs, even from within a Christian worldview:
LITERARY FEATURES
Shockingly perhaps, the genre or Proverbs is proverbs.
To summarize the ESVSB in regards to some of the literary characteristics of the proverbs of Proverbs…
OBJECTIONS
There are no significant objections to Proverbs that haven’t already been addressed in the DATE, AUTHOR, and/or INTERPRETIVE CHALLENGES sections (at least that I’m aware of).
NOTABLE QUOTABLES
DID YOU KNOW?
Other Works Referenced
by Stephen Rodgers
PSALMS IN 10 WORDS OR LESS
“Ancient Jewish songbook showcases prayers, praise, and complaints to God.”
TITLE
As the ESVSB summarizes, he English title comes from the Greek word psalmos, which translates Hebrew mizmor, “song,” found in many of the Psalm titles and simply translated as “psalm” (e.g., Psalm 3). This Greek name for the book was established by the time of the NT (Luke 20:42; Acts 1:20). The Hebrew name for the book is Tehillim, “Praises,” pointing to the characteristic use of these songs as praises offered to God in public worship. The etymology of the Greek (interesting fact!) is a noun derived from the verb “to pluck strings” (referring to a musical instrument).
It should also be noted that 116 of the 150 Psalms contain some sort of superscription or “title.” These titles often contain information regarding to authorship, dedication, liturgical or musical instructions (some of which are not understood today, see DID YOU KNOW?), and historical context. Based on attestestion from other Biblical sources, we have reason to believe that the claims made by these superscriptions are accurate (although scholars continue to disagree and debate the proper form of the Hebrew preposition lamed which can variously mean “of,” “to,” “from,” “about,” “for,” and “by”).
AUTHOR & AUDIENCE
There is of course a single divine author of the Psalms, God Himself. From the human side however, authorship is much more varied. Psalms is unique in many ways, and one of those ways is the variety of authors. Just over 2/3 of the Psalms can be traced to a particular author: David (75 psalms), the sons of Korah (10 psalms), Asaph (12 psalms), Solomon (2 psalms), Heman (1 psalm), Ethan (1 psalm), and Moses (1 psalm…yes, that Moses). That leaves 48 Psalms anonymous, although most scholars believe that a number of those belong to previously mentioned authors (the attribution has simply been lost), and many scholars believe that Ezra likely penned several as well.
With so many authors writing over such a long period of time (see DATE), the Israelites who would have received the Psalms could hardly be a monolithic culture or community. Ranging from post-Exodus to post-Exilic, the common factor of course is the Israelite nation.
DATE
The earliest Psalm (90) was written by Moses sometime around 1410 BC, and the latest (126) was written sometime in the late 6th/early 5th century. This spans roughly 900 years, meaning that the book of Psalms can be considered contemporaneous with nearly the entirety of the OT writings. No other book of the Bible can make that claim.
BACKGROUND & SETTING
Any attempt to categorize the Psalms is less than expansive terms is likely doomed to failure. As previously mentioned, the book was written over a span of nearly a millennium, and primarily concerns itself with the character and worship of God as its theme.
That’s a lot of background and setting. Just sayin’.
HISTORICAL & THEOLOGICAL THEMES
There are three rather broad themes that emerge from a reading of Psalms:
INTERPRETIVE CHALLENGES
There are very few issues with the Psalms that cannot be overcome by a proper understanding of Hebrew poetry in general (which we discussed in the Wisdom Books article), and the various genres of poetry that are contained in that book: hymns of praise, laments, thanksgiving psalms, songs of confidence or trust, kingship psalms, and wisdom psalms (just to name a few of the more common ones).
Another structure of note that can present complications if not understood is the acrostic arrangement. The MSB describes it as follows:
On a larger scale, some psalms in their development from the first to the last verse employ an acrostic or alphabetical arrangement. Psalms 9, 10, 25, 34, 37, 111, 112, 119, and 145 are recognized as either complete or incomplete acrostics. In the Hebrew text, the first letter of the first word of every verse begins with a different Hebrew consonant, which advances in alphabetical order until the 22 consonants are exhausted. Such a literary vehicle undoubtedly aided in the memorization of the content and served to indicate that its particular subject matter had been covered from “A to Z.” Psalm 119 stands out as the most complete example of this device, since the first letter of each of its 22, 8-verse stanzas moves completely through the Hebrew alphabet.
LITERARY FEATURES
Any attempt to adequately describe the structure and literary features of the Psalms would likely result in yet another series or book (it is not an overstatement to say that dozens, if not hundreds, of scholarly tomes already exist to fulfill this very purpose). Rather than attempting to provide an inadequate overview of this, I would refer the curious reader to the Wisdom Books article, and the very curious reader to the resources linked and referenced at the bottom of this article. In particular, the ESVSB has an excellent (albeit brief) synopsis (please see below, since this is actually available to you despite their recent changes). I have deliberately chosen not to address the five-book structure of Psalms here since there is no clear consensus among scholars as to how to best understand that format (apart from loose agreement that it probably entails a rough chronological progression); I mention it only so that the reader is aware it exists:
OBJECTIONS
There are two objections that often arise in regards to the Psalms, both of which I consider to be minor. However, since the Christian may encounter these in such formidable and vaunted locales as the comments section of a Youtube video, I’ll include them here briefly.
NOTABLE QUOTABLES
DID YOU KNOW?
Other Works Referenced
by Stephen Rodgers
JOB IN 10 WORDS OR LESS
“God allows human suffering for His own purposes.”
TITLE
The title of the book is the same as that of the central character: Job. That name might have been derived from the Hebrew word for “persecution,” thus meaning “persecuted one,” or from an Arabic word meaning “repent,” thus bearing the name “repentant one.”
In either case, it is not a common Hebrew name. In fact, the only recognizably Hebrew name in the book is that of Elihu, himself a somewhat problematic character…but we’ll get to that later.
AUTHOR & AUDIENCE
The authorship of Job is hotly contested, and ultimately uncertain. It is generally agreed upon that the author could not have been Job, as his lack of awareness of certain elements of the story is a key point. Early Jewish tradition suggests that the author was Moses (supported somewhat by Midian’s proximity to the traditional location of Uz), although a number of scholars favor either Solomon or another well-educated Israelite during the Solomonic period. Elihu, Isaiah, Hezekiah, Jeremiah, and Ezra have also been suggested as possible authors, but with very little supporting evidence.
It is interesting to note that the author of Job frequently refers to God by His covenant name with Israel (“Yahweh”), whereas Job and his friends never refer to Him in this manner, using the more generic “God” or “the Almighty.” This suggests that author of Job did not share a chronological or cultural frame of reference with the subject of the book. Additionally, the author of Job shows a certain familiarity with other OT texts, often quoting them directly (Psalm 107:40; Isaiah 41:20).
Assuming ad arguendo that the book was written during Solomon’s reign, the target audience would have been Israelites living in the united kingdom at the time.
DATE
Care must be taken to separate the date of the content from the date of the composition.
Content-wise, Job is quite ancient, even archaic by OT standards. Many consider the events in Job to pre-date almost all other OT records, possibly occurring as early as Genesis 12, which would have made Job contemporaneous with Abraham. There are a number of other elements which would seem to support this thesis. As the MSB puts it:
This conclusion is based on: 1) Job’s age (42:16); 2) his life span of nearly 200 years (Job 42:16) which fits the patriarchal period (Abraham lived 175 years; Gen. 25:7); 3) the social unit being the patriarchal family; 4) the Chaldeans who murdered Job’s servants (Job 1:17) were nomads and had not yet become city dwellers; 5) Job’s wealth being measured in livestock rather than gold and silver (Job 1:3; 42:12); 6) Job’s priestly functions within his family (Job 1:4, 5); and 7) a basic silence on matters such as the covenant of Abraham, Israel, the Exodus, and the law of Moses. The events of Job’s odyssey appear to be patriarchal. Job, on the other hand, seemed to know about Adam (Job 31:33) and the Noahic flood (Job 12:15). These cultural/historical features found in the book appear to place the events chronologically at a time probably after Babel (Gen. 11:1–9) but before or contemporaneous with Abraham (Gen. 11:27ff.).
Composition-wise however, there is less agreement, although the bulk of most scholarly opinions is that it should be located either during the period of Solomon when Hebrew wisdom-literature was at its zenith, or even later during the post-exilic period. There simply are not enough indicators within the text to place it more precisely than that.
BACKGROUND & SETTING
As previously mentioned, the book of Job takes place most likely during the time of the patriarchs. This means that the context is closer to that of Genesis 12 than it is to Jerusalem after the return of the Babylonian remnant. However, much of the book concerns the character and nature of God, and as such is not bound to a particular time or place.
HISTORICAL & THEOLOGICAL THEMES
There are a number of themes that are prevelant throughout the book of Job:
INTERPRETIVE CHALLENGES
There are a number of minor challenges that arise out of Job. Notable among them are the fact that Job never fully understands the reasons for his suffering, the character of Elihu remains strangely incongruous and is never addressed in the final divine discourse, the fact that Job is both declared wrong for seeking vindication and yet ultimately vindicated (Job 42:7), and the fact that the reader must grapple with the fact that sometimes the righteous suffer and the wicked prosper.
Despite these minor issues, the central theme of Job remains the question of the so-called problem of evil: how can a good, powerful God allow suffering and evil? The MSB summarizes it this way:
Engaging in “theodicy,” i.e., man’s attempt to defend God’s involvement in calamity and suffering, is shown to be appropriate in these circumstances, though in the end, it is apparent that God does not need nor want a human advocate. The book of Job poignantly illustrates Deut. 29:29, “The secret things belong to the LORD our God… ”
LITERARY FEATURES
The book of Job has an interesting and somewhat unique structure, being a prose framework containing a series of lengthy poetic speeches. The speeches between Job, his friends, and ultimately the LORD Himself all take the form of a debate, with questions being posed and answered, rhetoric being bandied back and forth, and each side seeming to have the upper hand at one point. There is even what could be construed as a darkly humorous element when the LORD appears out of the whirlwind (Job 38:1; 40:6)…exactly as Job had commented He might do (Job 9:17), which constitutes sort of a “yup…saw that coming” moment. The ensuing “Yahweh speeches” silence all other debaters.
There are a number of other literary constructions within the framework of the book that are worth exploring, but we only have time for one: the contrast between the relationship of Job and God with the relationship (or lack thereof) of Job’s friends and God. Much has been written of how Job’s friends make astute theological observations regarding the character of God, but comparatively little has been written regarding how only Job seems to address God directly. While his friends have good theology, theirs seems to be a dead faith. In contrast, while Job occasionally lets his pain get the better of him, he does so from a position of deep reliance upon God, and from within a framework of deeply personal relationship with Him.
OBJECTIONS
In terms of its canonical status, Job’s position within the Scriptures has never been seriously questioned. What has been questioned however, is if the book is intended to be taken as historically literal, or merely as allegory. In other words, is the reader intended to understand that the events and persons that take place within the Job narrative actually happened, or is it just a sophisticated story exploring the question of theodicy in relationship with the Israelite God?
However, going solely on the internal evidence of Scripture, it seems as if Job was intended to be understood literally. NT writers directly quote Job two times (Rom. 11:35; 1 Cor. 3:19), plus Ezekiel 14:14, 20 and James 5:11 indicate Job was a real person, listing him alongside other historical personages.
While some critics would certainly maintain that certain elements of the story seem to present as mythological or mytho-poetic, it should be noted that 1) to assume that from the outset due to an anti-supernaturalistic bias simply begs the question, and 2) the Hebrew theology and narrative differs on a number of key points from other ANE sources (such as the Babylonian theodicy, or accounts of the Hittite storm god Telepinu). In those records, invariably the problem of evil is resolved by portraying the gods as less than omnipotent; Job makes no such concession when it comes to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
NOTABLE QUOTABLES
DID YOU KNOW?
Other Works Referenced
by Stephen Rodgers
Comparative Outlines of the Wisdom Books
Having briefly dealt with the historical books, we now turn our attention to the third major section of the OT: the wisdom books. Remember, the OT (as it appears in the Protestant Bible) can be broken down into four major sections:
The 5 wisdom books were written over a period of approximately 700 years (although excluding Job and Psalms would give us a much more manageable range of 40 to 245 years, with the bulk of the writing done in the first 40), and comprise some of the most beautiful, controversial, and confusing passages of Scripture.
It should be noted at the outset that scholars do not agree on the proper classification of books of this section. Some would make a distinction between what they consider to be “poetical works” and “wisdom literature.” Even in the Hebrew Tanakh, while all five books can be found within the broad section of the Kethuvim, they are divided among the Poetical Books and the Five Rolls (along with Ruth, Lamentations, and Esther). To keep things simple, I’ve opted to treat the poetical works and the wisdom literature as a single category.
AUTHOR & COMPOSITION
Unlike the Pentateuch (but like the historical books), the historical books do not have a single author. Job’s author is anonymous, the Psalms had multiple authors (including Moses), and the remaining three books were written primarily by Solomon. As previously mentioned, they were written over a period of more than seven centuries by some rather disparate authors.
THEMES
The ESV Study Bible highlights five major themes of the wisdom books:
GENRE
The wisdom books are predominantly poetry, and that requires some explanation, as ANE Hebrew poetry was quite different from poetry as we know it today.
Unlike English poetry, where each line of the poem is commonly given its own line on the page, Hebrew poetry gives no such visible cues. Instead, it’s presence is most commonly understood by the presence of various literary elements including rhythm, rhyme, terse expression, freedom in word order, and an absence of typical prose particles. Furthermore, a prominent feature of Biblical poetry not commonly found in English poems is the “seconding sequence:” a line in two parts, where each part has a particular relationship to the other (explained momentarily), along with certain commonalities of sound, syntax, and sequence. Again, this can be difficult to understand and explain since sound and syntax typically do not survive translation. However, the sequential elements typically have one of the following structures:
Other Works Referenced:
by Stephen Rodgers
ESTHER IN 10 WORDS OR LESS
“Beautiful Jewish girl becomes queen, saves fellow Jews from slaughter.”
TITLE
Invariably this book has held the title of “Esther;” unlike other books of the Bible, it has never been known by any other name. With the exception of Ruth, Esther is the only book of the Bible named after a woman, in this case one of the central characters of the book.
The name “Esther” itself is somewhat problematic: the Hebrew word (Hadassah) means “myrtle,” and derived either from the Persian word for “star” or the name of the Babylonian love goddess Ishtar. (This itself is potentially alarming since names have great significance in Scripture, and character with foreign names such as “Esther” and “Mordecai” would have set off warning bells in the minds of ancient Jewish readers).
AUTHOR & AUDIENCE
Jewish tradition holds that Mordecai was the author of Esther, although Ezra and Nehemiah have also been suggested. Ultimately the author is unknown, although the following characteristics of the author are known:
DATE
The events described in Esther occurred between 483 BC and 473 BC (the year Ahasuerus was assassinated).
The date that Esther was written is a bit more difficult to pin down, but it can be confined to a range of approximately 450 BC to 331 BC (the year that Greece conquered Persia).
BACKGROUND & SETTING
Understanding the context of Esther requires first placing it within the appropriate historical period: the Persian period of ca. 539 BC to 331 BC. Second, it requires placing it within the appropriate location of Biblical chronology, which is between the first return of the Jews under Zerubbabel ( ca. 538 BC) and the second return under Ezra (ca. 458 BC). The third return under Nehemiah (ca. 445 BC) would not occur until later.
A number of discrepancies in the book of Esther (the lack of direct mention of God, prayer, significant elements of Jewish identity) than have long alarmed readers and theologians (both ancient and modern) are best explained and understood as deliberate. After all, this is not a story of the Jews who were eager to return to their native land and practices; this is the story of the Jews who wanted to stay. While many Jews were eager to shake the dust of their exile from their feet and return home, others had adapted to their life in foreign lands and seemed quite comfortable and acclimated there.
As a result, we have a window into God’s sovereign care and protection of a people who have largely abandoned certain elements of their heritage (such as names, religious practices and devotion, etc.).
HISTORICAL & THEOLOGICAL THEMES
There are four significant themes that are on display in the book of Esther.
I want to briefly expand on the first point, by elaborating that God’s sovereignty in Esther is clearly exemplified in his invisible hand of providence. MacArthur explains it in this way:
Esther could be compared to a chess game. God and Satan (as invisible players) moved real kings, queens, and nobles. When Satan put Haman into place, it was as if he announced “Check.” God then positioned Esther and Mordecai in order to put Satan into “Checkmate!” … While God was not mentioned in Esther, He was everywhere apparent as the One who opposed and foiled Satan’s diabolical schemes by providential intervention.
INTERPRETIVE CHALLENGES
The primary interpretive challenge found in the book of Esther is the lack of any direct mention of God. While I address this at some length in the OBJECTIONS section below from the perspective of one outside the faith, I believe MacArthur does an excellent job of addressing it from an insider’s perspective:
It seems satisfying to respond that if God desired to be mentioned, He could just as sovereignly have moved the author to write of Him as He acted to save Israel. This situation seems to be more of a problem at the human level than the divine, because Esther is the classic illustration of God’s providence as He, the unseen power, controls everything for His purpose. There are no miracles in Esther, but the preservation of Israel through providential control of every event and person reveals the omniscience and omnipotence of Jehovah. Whether He is named is not the issue. He is clearly the main character in the drama.
LITERARY FEATURES
The literary form of Esther is a hero story; I like to think of it as the book of the Bible most likely to become a Disney movie. Think about it:
“…there’s an explicitly beautiful heroine, a romantic love thread, a dire threat to the good characters, a thoroughly evil villain, suspense, dramatic irony, evocative descriptions of exotic places, sudden reversal of action, poetic justice, and a happy ending.” (ESV Study Bible)
OBJECTIONS
The NET Bible notes does an excellent job of outlining the most common objection to the book of Esther,which ironically enough are theological in character:
“In the English Bible Esther appears adjacent to Ezra-Nehemiah with the historical books, but in the Hebrew Bible it is one of five short books (the so-called Megillot) that appear toward the end of the biblical writings. The canonicity of the book was questioned by some in ancient Judaism and early Christianity. It is one of five OT books that were at one time regarded as antilegomena (i.e., books ‘spoken against’). The problem with Esther was the absence of any direct mention of God. Some questioned whether a book that did not mention God could be considered sacred scripture. Attempts to resolve this by discovering the tetragrammaton (YHWH) encoded in the Hebrew text (e.g., in the initial letters of four consecutive words in the Hebrew text of Esth 5:4) are unconvincing, although they do illustrate how keenly the problem was felt by some. Although no copy of Esther was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, this does not necessarily mean that the Qumran community did not regard it as canonical. More recently, Martin Luther questioned the canonicity of this book. Although the book does not directly mention God it would be difficult to read it without sensing the providence of God working in powerful, though at times subtle, ways to rescue his people from danger and possible extermination.”
Additionally, there are two additional types of objections that are raised against Esther, albeit less often: historical and textual.
Historically, some scholars have argued that Esther is not reliable. This objection has been severely undermined by recent work by D. Clines who points to a number of details in Esther that are confirmed by extra-Biblical sources: 1) the extent of the empire under Ahasuerus (Esther 1:1), 2) the council of seven nobles (Esther 1:14), 3) the postal system (Esther 3:13; 8:10), 4) the keeping of official diaries (Esther 2:23), 5) the use of gallows (which is likely a misnomer) (Esther 2:23; 5:14; 7:10), 6) the practice of obeisance to kings and nobles (Esther 3:2), 7) the belief in lucky days (Esther 3:7), 8) crowns on horses (Esther 6:8), and 9) reclining on couches at meals (Esther 7:8).
Textually, Esther has a bit of a muddled pedigree, with three competing texts: the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT), the Greek Text (LXX), and another Greek Text known as the “alternative Alpha Text” (AT). They are probably best understood as relating to one another as follows:
NOTABLE QUOTABLES
DID YOU KNOW?
Other Works Referenced