Search Results for: clines nehemiah

Naivety and laziness in biblical historiography (Nehemiah case study 5)

Laziness is common among historians. When they find a continuous account of events for a certain period in an ‘ancient’ source, one that is not necessarily contemporaneous with the events , they readily adopt it. They limit their work to paraphrasing the source, or, if needed, to rationalisation. — Liverani, Myth and politics in ancient Near … Continue reading “Naivety and laziness in biblical historiography (Nehemiah case study 5)”

How literary artistry has misled biblical historians: Nehemiah case study (4)

[W]e must understand the nature of our texts as literary works before we attempt to use them for historical reconstruction. (From David J. A. Clines, What Does Eve Do to Help? 1990. p. 163, my emphasis) In the case of the Book of Nehemiah, [biblical historians] have very often overlooked the fact that it is … Continue reading “How literary artistry has misled biblical historians: Nehemiah case study (4)”

Biblical historical methods and the Book of Nehemiah (3)

Continuing from the post previous to this one, Could Nehemiah have had reasonable access to their intentions? This is the passage being discussed. Sanballat and others repeatedly send messages to Nehemiah to meet them at Ono, but each time Nehemiah, believing that they intend to do him “harm”, declines their invitations with the same reply. … Continue reading “Biblical historical methods and the Book of Nehemiah (3)”

When Bible authors can read their characters’ minds (Nehemiah case study 2)

This post continues my earlier notes from David Clines’ discussion of traps biblical historians have often fallen into when reading a biblical text that sounds like an eyewitness, biographical record of historical events — with Nehemiah selected as the case study. Literary criticism must precede historical presumptions The lesson for historians to learn, argues Clines, … Continue reading “When Bible authors can read their characters’ minds (Nehemiah case study 2)”

Literary criticism, a key to historical enquiry (Nehemiah case study)

It is indeed usual for practitioners of biblical literary criticism to insist that the literary must precede the historical, that we must understand the nature of our texts as literary works before we attempt to use them for historical reconstruction. (From David J. A. Clines, What Does Eve Do to Help? 1990. p. 163, my … Continue reading “Literary criticism, a key to historical enquiry (Nehemiah case study)”

Why Josiah’s Reforms “Must Have Happened” – part 2

Continuing from Why Josiah’s Reforms “Must Have Happened” – part 1  Rainer Albertz is disputing the arguments of Philip R. Davies that the book of Deuteronomy could not have been written as early as the time of King Josiah. Argument 1: According to Davies, since Deuteronomy uses the name “Israel” to refer to all of … Continue reading “Why Josiah’s Reforms “Must Have Happened” – part 2”

How and Why the Gospel of Mark Used Scripture — a review of Writing with Scripture, part 1

When I offered to post a comprehensive review of Writing With Scripture by Nathanael Vette the publisher sent me a copy and now I hope this first in a series of reviews will begin to do justice to all concerned and interested. I write primarily as a layman for interested lay readers. Who is Nathanael … Continue reading “How and Why the Gospel of Mark Used Scripture — a review of Writing with Scripture, part 1”

Understanding Historical Sources: Primary, Secondary and Questions of Authenticity

There is no need, when I have found the source, to follow the streams (John Bolland in Acta Sanctorum 1845: vol. 1, xx). — cited by Henige (2005) . In fact, the historiography of historical Jesus scholars is eclectic and often unconscious or uninformed of a specific historiography. (McKnight 2005, p.16) . In my recent … Continue reading “Understanding Historical Sources: Primary, Secondary and Questions of Authenticity”

Casey’s Calumny Continued: Response Concluded

Maurice Casey continues: A number of Godfrey’s comments on himself when he was a member of the Worldwide Church of God are sufficiently similar to his comments on scholars as to give the impression that not only has he no clue about critical scholars, which is obvious from his many comments, but that he is … Continue reading “Casey’s Calumny Continued: Response Concluded”

History for Dummies (and Biblical Scholars)

A biblical scholar earlier this year publicly asked: Any recommendations on reading about the philosophy and methods of historical research, written by someone with no connection to Biblical studies? I did provide that professor with a number of suggestions (the post included major figures in the field of twentieth-century historiography and readings that would lead … Continue reading “History for Dummies (and Biblical Scholars)”

Bible: Story or History? Art or Real Life?

One New Testament scholar has written that Jesus’ real life was lived out just like a real Greek tragedy. Jesus’ travels, works and sayings, all his life, just happened to all follow a sequence and specific eventfulness that had all the appearance, to anyone who was observing, of working out just like a drama on … Continue reading “Bible: Story or History? Art or Real Life?”

Charity, suspicion and categorization — exchange with Rick Sumner contd

Rick has posted another constructive response, “Charity,” “Suspicion” and the Dangers of Categorization. Or, What I Learned from John Hughes, to my posts on historical method in the context of NT historical studies. Another is expected to follow discussing the nature of facts. (Previous post addressing Rick is here.) I suspect we are drawing closer … Continue reading “Charity, suspicion and categorization — exchange with Rick Sumner contd”