The Ethics of Judith: Sex, Lies, and Murder

Judith is a paragon of virtue who lies repeatedly and seduces Holofernes in order to murder him. But did the writer of Judith intend the reader to see Judith as a model of virtue?

Judith Beheading Holofernes, Caravaggio

In her prayer prior to entering the Assyrian camp, she tells God she has a plan and asks him to “By the deceit of my lips strike down the slave with the prince and the prince with his servant; crush their arrogance by the hand of a woman” (9:10). She more or less says, “bless my lies.”

She dresses to entice men, “she made herself very beautiful, to entice the eyes of all the men who might see her” (10:4), and the people of Bethulia prayed to God to give her success (10:8). When the Assyrian soldiers see her “she was in their eyes marvelously beautiful” (10:14). In fact, they judge Israel positively because of Judith’s beauty, “Who can despise these people, who have women like this among them?” (10:19).

Yet the people of Bethulia praise Judith and God when she returns with the general’s head in a bag. “When she had finished, the people raised a great shout and made a joyful noise in their town” (14:9). The elders of Bethulia say she has walked “the straight paths of God” (Judith 13:20). The Hebrew Bible has many examples of characters who are morally corrupt, but their actions are not praised or set up as a model to be emulated. For example, David uses his power to sleep with Bathsheba and murders her husband to cover up the affair. Even though the ultimate result of that relationship is Solomon, the greatest king of Israel, nothing in the text implies David’s adultery was a noble act. Yet Judith 15:9-10 the elders of Bethulia call Judith the “pride of our nation.”

Judith 15:9–10 When they met her, they all blessed her with one accord and said to her, “You are the glory of Jerusalem, you are the great boast of Israel, you are the great pride of our nation! 10 You have done all this with your own hand; you have done great good to Israel, and God is well pleased with it. May the Almighty Lord bless you forever!”

David deSilva suggested the story of Judith be read through the lens of honor and shame. Moral obligations toward God, kin, and nation differed from moral obligations to outsides (“Judith the Heroine?,” p. 56). A lie told in order to protect the honor of one’s family or one’s nation was an “honorable means” according to deSilva. He illustrates this with several stories from the Hebrew Bible in which zeal for defending the family or the nation includes lies and violence. He mentions Simeon and Levi’s defense of their sister Dinah (Gen 34) and Jael’s breech of hospitality when she killed Sisera (Judges 4-5). Although Simeon and Levi are not praised in Genesis, the Second Temple period book Testament of Levi describes Levi’s perpetual priesthood as a reward for his zeal for keeping Israel pure. In deSilva’s view, Holofernes is a threat to the honor of Israel, so the use of lies and violence to meet that challenge is acceptable and honorable. God’s honor is at stake, so Judith’s actions as she defends God’s honor are acceptable. Still, for many modern readers Judith’s use of her sexuality to seduce the general seems offensive. This this, as deSilva suggests, a case of “all’s fair in love and war”?

Geoffrey Miller suggest Judith is depicted similar to Israel’s Divine Warrior, God rising up to rescue his people in the day of distress. The writer of Judith did not intend for Judith to be an example for people to follow. (I would add here, this is unlike Daniel, who is presented in the first part of Daniel as model for resisting the empire.) For Miller, Judith’s behavior is difficult to justify (p. 232) and any attempt to do so falls short. Miller therefore argues Judith’s words are similar to divine utterance and her character is designed to evoke divine warrior theme from the Hebrew Bible.

Judith is often described as a heroic woman, “a woman who fights with a woman’s weapons, yet far from being defined by her ‘femininity,’ she uses it to her own ends.” (Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, 117).

The book of Judith is especially striking for its feminism. In creating a protagonist the author has chosen a woman, who calls to mind the Israelite heroines of the past-Judith “the Jewess.” As the narrative unfolds, Judith is consistently depicted as superior to the men with whom she is associated: Uzziah and the elders; the Assyrian army and their general. George Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981), 108.

Pamela Milne, for example, is not comfortable using Judith as a feminist icon and tracks a range of views from feminist interpreters moving away from the view of Nickelsburg. She suggests that “feminist readers reject any suggestion that she is a feminist heroine or a feminist’s heroine.” (Milne, “What Shall We Do with Judith?,” 55) For Milne, Judith is still presented “from a male, patriarchal perspective” even if she is a heroic figure.

There is a spectrum of responses to threats to Israel in Second Temple literature. Daniel was willing to die rather than eat the king’s food or pray to the Persian emperor. In fact, there is no hint of a violent resistance in most of the book of Daniel. God’s faithful resist and are willing to die rather that cross certain boundaries. Judith represents another response to similar challenges. Perhaps God’s people ought to actively resist by any means to protect the honor of God. Maybe I am overreading what was intended as an entertaining story, but the story of Judith provides support for the violent resistance of the Maccabean Revolt.

What would Daniel do in a similar situation?

Bibliography: deSilva, David A. “Judith the Heroine?: Lies, Seduction, and Murder in Cultural Perspective.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 36 (2006): 55–61; Efthimiadis-Keith, Helen. “Judith, Feminist Ethics and Feminist Biblical/Old Testament Interpretation.” Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 138 (2010): 91–111; Miller, Geoffrey David. “A Femme Fatale of Whom ‘No One Spoke Ill’: Judith’s Moral Muddle and Her Personification of Yahweh.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 39 (2014): 223–45; Milne, Pamela J. “What Shall We Do with Judith? A Feminist Reassessment of a Biblical ‘Heroine,’” Semeia 62 (1993): 36-56; Tamber-Rosenau, Caryn. “Biblical Bathing Beauties and the Manipulation of the Male Gaze: What Judith Can Tell Us about Bathsheba and Susanna.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 33 (2017): 55–72.

Logos Free Book of the Month for February 2021 – Joel Green, 1 Peter (Two Horizons Commentary)

Joel Green 1 Peter Two Horizons CommentaryLogos partners with Eerdmans for an epic Free Book of the Month promotion for February 2021. The free book is Joel Green’s two Horizon’s commentary on 1 Peter. The Two Horizons series uses the methods of Theological Interpretation of Scripture. Each commentary starts with a traditional exegetical commentary followed by a series of essays on theological issues arising from the exegesis. I have reviewed several of the Two Horizons commentaries over the years, see this review of Scott Spencer’s Luke volume (there is an index of all the Two Horizon commentaries reviewed). Geoffrey Grogan’s Psalms commentary in the series is only $2.99, both are excellent additions to your library.

There are two Pillar Commentaries offer at significant discounts, Robert Yarbrough’s The Letters to Timothy and Titus (read my review here) and a pre-order of the second edition of Douglas Moo’s James commentary. A pre-order is a great way to save on new resources. Logos measures interest in new resources by taking pre-orders, but you will not be charged until the book ships.

There are also two New International Commentaries offered this month, Robert Mounce’s excellent commentary on Revelation and Bruce Waltke’s Proverbs 1-15. Although a little more expensive than the rest, these are both excellent exegetical commentaries and worthy addition to your library.

  • Joel B. Green, 1 Peter (The Two Horizons New Testament Commentary), Free!
  • Juan I. Alfaro, Justice and Loyalty: A Commentary on the Book of Micah (International Theological Commentary series), 99 cents
  • Geoffrey Grogan Psalms (The Two Horizons Old Testament Commentary) $2.99
  • Robert Yarbrough, The Letters to Timothy and Titus (Pillar New Testament Commentary), $3.99
  • Gordon Fee and Robert Hubbard, eds., The Eerdmans Companion to the Bible, $5.99
  • Walter Brueggemann, A Commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and Homecoming, $7.99
  • Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation (The New International Commentary on the New Testament), $9.99
  • Bruce Waltke, The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 1–15 (The New International Commentary on the Old Testament), $14.99
  • Pre-Order Douglas J. Moo, The Letter of James, 2nd ed. (Pillar New Testament Commentary), $19.99

Pitre, New Covenant JewUsually Logos does “Another Free Book” promo mid-month, but this month they posted it early. (HT to Ruben De Rus for pointing this out to me!) Get a free copy of John Pilch, A Cultural Handbook to the Bible. This book was the 2000 Catholic Press Association Award Winner. From the blurb, “For those who seek to understand the Bible as a document from the ancient Mediterranean world and communicate it to people in other cultures, The Cultural Dictionary of the Bible is an ideal tool.” On deep discount is Brant Pitre’s excellent study on Jesus and the Last Supper (his chapter on the Last Supper and the Messianic Banquet has some really good footnotes). I reviewed Pitre, Barber, and Kincaid, Paul, a New Covenant Jew: Rethinking Pauline Theology here.

Here are the other discounted resources from Eerdmans on the “Another Free Book” page.

  • Frank Matera, God’s Saving Grace: A Pauline Theology, $3.99
  • J. Patout Burns Jr., Romans: Interpreted by Early Christian Commentators (The Church’s Bible), $5.99
  • Brant Pitre, Jesus and the Last Supper, $7.99
  • Pitre, Barber, and Kincaid, Paul, a New Covenant Jew: Rethinking Pauline Theology, $9.99
  • Oliva Blanchette, Maurice Blondel: A Philosophical Life, $9.99

If you do not have Logos 9 yet, you can get the Logos 9 Fundamentals or the (free) Basic Edition and begin reading these books right away. Right now First-time Logos users save 50% on the Fundamentals bundle, only $49.95. By following that link you can also choose five additional resources for free. Logos Basic is the free version of Logos Bible Software and has limited free resources, but you do get the Lexham Bible Dictionary and can use the basic edition to add the free and discounted resources listed above.

These free and discounted commentaries are only available through February 2021.

 

 

 

 

Biblical Studies Carnival 179 for January 2021

What is a Kindle? memeJim West posted the first Biblical Studies Carnival of 2021at Zwinglius Redivivus. Jim expresses the hope “Let’s Hope It’s Not Another 2020, but it Started Off Pretty Horribly And Ended Better.” It is a great carnival, collecting the best and brightest blog posts in biblical and theological studies in January. Jim included Archaeology and a few book reviews as well. As usual Jim’s carnivals are a great template for future hosts.

Jim is occasionally active on Twitter, follow him if you dare (@EmilBrunner1).

A number of people stepped up to volunteer to host future carnivals. in 2021, at least through June. But there is still plenty of time for you to get your name on the list for hosting a biblical studies carnival in 2021. Here is what I have lined up for 2021:

You can contact me via email, plong42@gmail.com or DM on twitter (plong42) to discuss hosting a carnival in 2021. I would love to see some veteran bloggers step up and cover a month in 2021. If you are a new BiblioBlogger, this is a good way to get your blog’s name “out there.”

Check out the Biblical Studies Carnival Master List at the top of this page to visit past carnivals.

Book Review: Joe Sprinkle, Daniel (Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary)

Sprinkle, Joe M. Daniel. Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary. Bellingham, Wash.: Lexham Press, 2020. xix+470 pp.; Hb.; $49.99. Link to Lexham Press

Joe Sprinkle’s commentary in Daniel is the first Old Testament volume in Lexham’s Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary. Originally three New Testament volumes were published by Broadman & Holman as the Biblical Theology for Christian Proclamation series. Lexham has repackaged those volumes and added three new commentaries on Joshua (David G. Firth), Psalms (James M. Hamilton) and Daniel. The series introduction indicates forty volumes are slated for the series.

The commentary series uses the text of the Christian Standard Bible (Broadman & Holman) although the exegetical commentary itself is based on the Hebrew and Aramaic text of Daniel. As might be expected from the original publisher, although the authors of the series come from a variety of backgrounds, they all affirm inerrancy and inspiration of Scripture (xv). Since the series intends to do biblical theology, the commentary is divided into sections exegesis and theology. Similar to the Two Horizons Commentary published by Eerdmans, theological issues rise from the exegesis of the text. Unlike the Two Horizons Commentaries, The EBTC volumes do not use the methods of Theological Interpretation of Scripture, and there is less interest in broader canonical issues (although Hamilton’s Psalms commentary may address canonical issues).

In the forty-four-page introduction to Daniel begins with a brief overview of the structure before launching into a spirited defense of the traditional view of Daniel’s authorship and historicity (pp. 6-40). Sprinkle was a student of Gleason Archer and he expands on his mentor’s arguments, concluding that “Daniel contains real history and genuine predictive prophecies” (40). For Sprinkle, “rejecting the critical view of the book is essential to preserving its theological and practical value” (345).

There are several points in the commentary which illustrate Sprinkle’s view that Daniel contains genuine prophecies. The third kingdom is the “Greek kingdom of Alexander the Great” and the four heads are the diadochi, the four successors who divided Alexander’s kingdom. Sprinkle prefers to call the fourth kingdom is “Rome and beyond” since the Roman empire has long since ceased to exist (177-78). To call the fourth kingdom a “revived Roman empire” is “special pleading.” Nevertheless, this fourth kingdom is a Rome-like kingdom. Since Revelation draws on Daniel 7, Sprinkle says, “Rome is at most a prototype of what this terrifying kingdom will be like” (178). The “one like a son of man” in Daniel 7:14 refers to the divine messiah (184-86) and observes similarities to other messianic texts such as Psalm 110 and Isaiah 9.

The little horn in Daniel 7 is not the same as the little horn in Daniel 8 (195). Antiochus IV “foreshadows the antichrist typologically.” He argues Revelation 13 draws on the imagery of fourth beast and the little horn in Daniel 7 (196). Antiochus IV is an illustration of the “biblical theological pattern in which kings and kingdoms exalt themselves against God” (226).

Regarding the seventy weeks of Daniel, Sprinkle rejects the view the seventy weeks lead up to Antiochus IV, but he is also unconvinced by the classic dispensational view which leaves a “awkward parenthesis” of two millennia between the sixty-ninth week and the seventieth (268). He leans towards E. J. Young’s view of the seventy weeks as a general time period from Cyrus’s decree to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in A.D. 70 (273).

As is well-known, Daniel 11 contains accurate predictions of the movements of the Ptolemy and Seleucid empires but does not accurately predict the fate of Antiochus IV. Sprinkle does not think Daniel 11:36-45 is a failed prophecy. He argues this section of Daniel 11 describes neither Antiochus IV nor Roman activity in first century Palestine, but rather Daniel 11:36-45 describes eschatological events (322).

The body of the commentary runs nearly three hundred pages. Although there is no indication of a new chapter, each unit begins with a reprint of the exegetical outline for the unit. An English translation is provided, followed by a brief paragraph placing the unit in context. Sprinkle then moves through the section verse by verse, commenting on the syntax and lexical issues and historical issues where necessary. Hebrew, Aramaic and occasional Greek appear in the commentary’s body without transliteration. Some knowledge of Hebrew is helpful but not necessary. He occasionally comments on suggested repointing of Hebrew or (more often) Greek translations of Daniel, but he usually concludes the Masoretic text is correct (see p. 299, for example). Sprinkle concludes his exegesis of each chapter with a summary entitled “Bridge.” Here he makes a few observations on the context of the section within Daniel and in a larger canonical context.

The last section of the commentary is Biblical and Theological Themes. At just under one hundred pages, Sprinkle traces several theological issues raised by Daniel. Almost forty pages are devoted to God, divided into a section on his attributes and his relationship to his people. Although there is much to say about angels in the book, only five pages discusses what Daniel contributes to a biblical theology of angels. Since Sprinkle dates the book early, he does not relate Daniel’s view of angels to developing Jewish theology in the Second Temple period. Sprinkle surveys what Daniel says about the Messiah and relates this material to other Old Testament texts and New Testament interpretations of those texts. For example, following Hippolytus, she relates the “stone cut without human hands (Dan 2:34-35) Psalm 118:22, a text Jesus quotes and applies to himself (Luke 20:17-18). For Sprinkle, Jesus is Daniel’s stone (401).

Finally, Sprinkle summarizes Daniel’s “Theology of History.” Daniel demonstrates that God has sovereignty directed history and has set appointed precise times for events to occur (421). Much of this section concerns eschatology, including a description of the antichrist (1 John 2:18) or man of lawlessness (2 Thess 2:3-4) drawn from the arrogant little horn (Daniel 7). Antiochus IV Epiphanes is the prototype of this evil, eschatological figure and a study of his character based on Daniel 8 and 11 “provides insight into what the antichrist might be like” (425).

Conclusion. Joe Sprinkle’s commentary is a fine example of a conservative evangelical commentary which takes Daniel as containing predictions of future events, some of which have been realized, others remain unfulfilled. Even if one disagrees with his conclusions on the historicity of Daniel, his exegetical notes are very good and will be helpful for understanding what the text of Daniel says.

NB: Thanks to Lexham Press for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.

Is Judith Historically Inaccurate?

There are several historical errors in the book. Or are these obvious historical blunders ironic? “The storyteller, speculated Torrey, might even have given his listeners “a solemn wink” as he delivered his opening sentence” (Moore, “Judith, Book of,” ABD 3:1121). As David deSilva suggested, any attempt to defend the historicity of Judith is doomed to failure (Introducing the Apocrypha, 94).

There are many historical problems in the book, I list just a few here:

  • The book begins in the twelfth year of Nebuchadnezzar, ruler of Assyria and the great city of Nineveh. Nebuchadnezzar was a Babylonian king (not Assyrian) and Holofernes was a Greek (not Assyrian).
  • Holofernes marches his massive army from Nineveh to Cilicia in three days, over 300 miles (2:21). Two verses later the army is fighting in Put and Lud, in North Africa, then remarkably they are back in Cilicia in the next verse.
  • The place names may have been created by the author. Bethulia, for example, did not exist. But the name means “young woman” and may be a hint of Judith’s victory later in the book. As Otzen says, “The topography of the book of Judith is also bewildering” (81).
  • The book claims Jerusalem can only be reached by a narrow pass, which anyone reading the book would know was geographically false.
  • The king of the Medes, Arphxad, is also fictional, the name is (probably) drawn from Genesis 10:22, one of the sons of Seth.
  • The book constantly refers to people living in Judea as the Israelites, a historical anachronism since Israel ceased to exist in 722 B.C.

How could any intelligent Jewish writer living about 150 B.C. make such a historical error as Nebuchadnezzar was king of Assyria, after the Jews returned from the exile? They only solution that makes sense is these anachronisms are intentional. As Lawrence Wills puts it, “The book of Judith telescopes multiple historical epics into one imaginary frame” (Wills, Judith, 9). There is a little Assyrian assault on Jerusalem (2 Kings 18), Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian Exile, and Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

I agree with Wills: “the author was intentionally playing with a fanciful story line that would have been obvious to the audience” (Judith, 9). But what is the point if intentional historical errors? Should the reader look for a real historical figure behind the un-historical references to Nebuchadnezzar or Holofernes?

Wills offers the example of the Christian writer Sulpicius Severus (c. A.D. 403, Sacred History 2.16) who identified Nebuchadnezzar with Artaxerxes III Ochus of Persia (358-338 BC). It is also common for commentaries to take the reference to Nebuchadnezzar as a reference to the Assyria king Ashurbanipal (668–626 B.C.), although this does not solve the problem of the claim the Jews have only recently return from exile after 539 B.C.) Since Otzen says there are at least twenty suggested historical solutions, perhaps these historical errors are not substitutions for actual historical facts.

Although Judith is entirely fictional story, I suggest the author drew on stories of heroic women from the Hebrew Bible and well-known historical threats to the Jewish people to create a story which encourages readers to resist the empire, whatever empire happens to be oppressing at the time. Looking back at Jewish history, threats from Assyria, Babylon, Persian and the Salticid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes are bended together.

If the book is written just after the Maccabean revolt, perhaps the writer wanted to encourage readers to consider violence as a possible solution to threats and oppression. While Daniel encouraged passive resistance and a willingness to die rather than compromise, Judith describes a woman who does what is necessary to end the threat by assassinating an Assyrian general. The historical details are fuzzy because the Jewish people are always under a threat from a Gentile empire.

Do the books of Daniel and Judith represent two different approaches for Jews living in the exile?

 

Bibliography: Benedikt Otzen, Tobit and Judith (Sheffield Academic, 2002); Lawrence M. Wills, Judith (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2019).

 

What is the Book of Judith?

Judith is a novella written shortly after the Maccabean revolt, probably 150-100 B.C. Carey Moore suggested Judith is reminiscent of the general spirit of the days of Judas Maccabeus” (“Judith, Book of,” ABD 3:1123). The book appears in the Apocrypha and tells the story of a threat to the Israelite village Bethulia. Judith is a beautiful widow who acts bravely and saves both her village and all of Israel from the Assyrian threat. The story is reminiscent of other Jewish women in the Hebrew Bible, including Rahab, Jael, Ruth, and Esther.

Judith 4:12 may allude to Antiochus’s desecration of the Temple in 167 B.C., “the sanctuary to be profaned and desecrated to the malicious joy of the Gentiles.” The defeat of Nicanor in 1 Maccabees 7:43-50 is remarkably similar to Judith’s assassination of Holofernes. Nebuchadnezzar demands to be worshiped as a god, recalling Daniel 3. Some place names which can be identified in the book suggest a date after 107 BC, after Alexander Janneus destroyed the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim. Judith is only known in Greek although Jerome was familiarity with Aramaic version of the book. It does not appear in the Qumran library and is not mentioned in rabbinic literature.

Even if Judith was rarely considered canonical, the book important for both Christians and Jews. The book was included in the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate and the Syriac Peshitta, and appears in many early and important Greek Bible (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Alexandrinus). Although it was never considered part of the Jewish canon, it is considered canonical in Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox and Ethiopian Orthodox traditions.

Moore suggests a major problem for Jewish acceptance of the book is the conversion of Achior, an Ammonite. Deuteronomy 23:2 specifically states, “no Ammonite or Moabite may enter the assembly of the Lord, even to the tenth generation.” Achior is a gentile convert to Judaism who submitted to circumcision but is not baptized. Later Halakah required both for a Gentile to become a Jew (Moore, “Judith, Book of,” ABD 3:1124).

In his recent commentary on Judith, Lawrence Wills suggests Judith may have been known by the authors of Greek Esther and Pseudo-Philo, Biblical Antiquities (Wills, Judith, 2), but there are no citations or clear allusions to Judith. He suggests the reason Judith was never canonized may be as simple as the language, since it was not written in Hebrew it was considered secondary from the beginning.

Some early readers may have found the character Judith to be too brazen (Toni Craven, Artistry and Faith in the Book of Judith, 117). Yet her actions are not too different than Ruth or Esther. She was not too brazen to keep the book out of the western Christian canon.

Both Clement of Alexandria and the council of Nicaea considered Judith canonical, as did most of the western church fathers. Luther questioned the canonicity of the book but treated it allegorically as a “passion play.” For modern Protestants, the historical anachronisms are enough to reject the book. The historical and geographical errors are a problem for anyone who holds to biblical inerrancy. However, modern studies of Judith treat these obvious errors as a sign to the reader that the story is fictional. For conservatives like Geisler and Nix, Judith is “subbiblical and, at times, even immoral,” citing God’s assistance and approval of Judith’s lies (9:10-13; A General Introduction to the Bible, Rev. ed.; [Moody, 1986], 271). It may be the case Geisler and Nix forgot about the prostitute Rahab’s lies (Joshua 2:4-7).

Even though the story of Judith is fiction, it reflects what some Jews thought about the struggle between Hellenism and Judaism. In Daniel, the four young men resisted the imposition of the empire and were willing to die rather than compromise. In Judith, resistance to the empire takes a more violent turn as Judith assassinates the Assyrian general Holofernes, forcing the invading foreigners back to their own territory.

Does story of Judith support to the Hasmoneans? Perhaps, but it may be the case the readers of Judith looked back to Judas Maccabees as the ideal defender of Israel rather than the later Hasmonaean kings.

Who was Ahikar?

Also spelled Ahiqar, Ahikar is Tobit’s nephew (Tobit 1:21-22) and an example of a faithful Jew living in the Assyrian empire.

Tobit 1:21-22 (NRSV) But not forty days passed before two of Sennacherib’s sons killed him, and they fled to the mountains of Ararat, and his son Esar-haddon reigned after him. He appointed Ahikar, the son of my brother Hanael over all the accounts of his kingdom, and he had authority over the entire administration. 22 Ahikar interceded for me, and I returned to Nineveh. Now Ahikar was chief cupbearer, keeper of the signet, and in charge of administration of the accounts under King Sennacherib of Assyria; so Esar-haddon reappointed him. He was my nephew and so a close relative.

Ahiqar is “one of the best-known and most widely disseminated tales in the ancient modern world” (Lindenberger, OTP 2:480). The text is quite old, probably dating from the fifth or sixth century B.C. Fragments appear in the Elephantine documents. The book likely had an influence on several Apocryphal books, such as Tobit 1:41 and was popular well into the Christian Era. The book was “still being copied in Arabic as late as the eighteenth century and in Syriac as late as the end of the nineteenth “(Lindenberger, 492).

By Osama Shukir Muhammed Amin FRCP(Glasg) - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=92797982

Elephantine Papyrus of Ahiqar Photo Credit: Osama Shukir Muhammed Amin FRCP(Glasg)

While the book is wisdom literature, it may not be Hebrew wisdom literature, at least in its most basic form. The genre of Ahiqar is a “court tale,” so often a parallel is made to Daniel (Goldingay, Daniel, 6) and there are parallels to Esther (Ahiqar saved a man’s life then later that man has power over him) The value of the book for New Testament studies is primarily in the “sayings” section. There are many sayings which have parallels to Old Testament wisdom and therefore may be present in the New Testament as well. Likely as not the New Testament stands on the foundation of the Old rather than on a book like Ahiqar. The book does serve to show the sort of proverbial wisdom which was current in the centuries before Christ and an interesting study could be done tracing the trajectory from Old Testament wisdom to Ahiqar then to Sirach and the Wisdom of Solomon, then into Christian wisdom like material.

The plot of the book concerns the retirement of Ahiqar after the death of Sennacherib. Ahiqar requests that his adopted son Nadin take his role as advisor and scribe for the new king, Esarhaddon. Nadin spreads a rumor that Ahiqar has devised a “wicked plot” against Esarhaddon, so the king orders him killed. The guard sent to capture and execute Ahiqar was once involved in a court intrigue himself and Ahiqar spared his life. This guard proposes to kill a eunuch slave and tell people it was Ahiqar in order to spare his life. They do this, and Ahiqar hides himself while everyone thinks he is dead.

The story breaks off at that point, but Lindenberger summarizes the rest of the story as reconstructed from later versions: The king of Egypt contacts Esarhaddon and asks for the wisest man in Assyria to come and supervise the building of a temple between heaven and earth. No one can meet the challenge of the king’s riddles and Esarhaddon rues killing Ahiqar. The guard realizes the time is right, so he brings Ahiqar out of hiding and the king rejoices. After the king apologizes, Ahiqar asks to punish Nadin (which involves being chained up and beaten while Ahiqar lectures him.)

The Sayings of Ahiqar amount to several pages of proverbial wisdom. Many are nearly identical to Proverbs (line 82, for example, “spare the rod and spoil the child” cf. Prov. 23:13). Some are obscure and difficult to understand the point (line 117, there is no lion in the sea, therefore the sea-snake is called labbu, Akkadian for lion). Other proverbs invoke the name of various gods (Shamash the Sun-God, Baal Shamayn, “The Merciful” in line 107).

Several sayings can be describe as supporting the word of the king, as expected from someone who served the empire for many years. For example, “Quench not the word of a king; let it be a balm [for] your [hea]rt. A king’s word is gentle, but keener and more cutting than a double-edged dagger.”(100-101). “The k[ing]’s tongue is gentle, but it breaks a dragon’s ribs. It is like death, which is invisible” (105-106).

There are a few lines reminiscent of New Testament verses. Line 100, for example, describes the king’s word as sharper than a double-edged sword, compared to Hebrews 4:12, “the word of the Lord is sharper than a double-edged sword.” The parallel is superficial but may indicate the figure of speech was part of common in the first century. Other parallels are thematic, such as line 137 which condemns amassing great wealth, a common theme in the Old and New Testament (1 Timothy 6:10, for example). Line 171, “If a wicked man grasps the fringe of your garment, leave it in his hand” is similar to Matthew 5:40, “And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well.”

Although Ahiqar has not left his mark on the literature of the Second Temple period quite like Daniel or Tobit, he is another example of a faithful Jewish exile who finds success serving a pagan king, is persecuted unfairly, yet God protects and prospers him.

Why are stories like Daniel, Esther, or Nehemiah so popular during this period? What do they have to say to the Hellenistic Jew living far from Jerusalem?

 

Bibliography: J. M. Lindenberger, “Ahiqar: A New Translation and Introduction,” ITP 2:479-507; James C. Vanderkam, “Ahikar/Ahiqar (Person),” ABD 1:113; Vanderkam, “Ahiqar, Book of,” ABD 1:119.

What is the Letter of Aristeas?

The book uses an epistle format to present Jewish faith as a rational religion worthy of the respect of the Hellenistic world. In addition, the Letter describes the apocryphal origin of the Septuagint. While there are a number of historical references in the book, these may very well be literary devices used to tell the story of the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek.

The Letter of Aristeas

Majority opinion dates the book to 150-100 B.C., although it may be dated as late as the first century. Since the book demonstrates a detailed knowledge of Judaism it is undoubtedly the work of a Jewish writer, likely from Alexandria. The book is extremely valuable for the study of the New Testament since it has a great deal of information about Judaism in the century before Christ. Of primary importance is the detailed description of the temple service and the city of Jerusalem. The letter contains a description of temple service as it was performed a little more than a century before the Jesus. While the book is usually thought of as the “origin of the Septuagint,” it is far more important for what it says about first century B.C. Judaism both in theory (the banquet questions and answers) and in practice (temple worship).

The first eight lines introduce the work. Like Luke and Acts, Aristeas addresses his work to Philocrates, who is praised in the prologue for his scholarly mind and understanding. The purpose of the book is to relate the meeting Aristeas had with Eleazar and the circumstances through which Aristeas led a group of Jewish scholars to Alexandria for the purpose of translating the Hebrew Bible into Greek.

Lines 9-51 relate the decision of the king of Egypt to collect books from all over the world into a single library. The Jewish books, however, cannot be used since they are written in Hebrew. They need to be translated before they are suitable for the great library. The king frees the Jews living in Egypt from slavery and honors them greatly. A letter is written from the king to Eleazar the high priest in Jerusalem explaining to him the plan to translate the Hebrew Bible for the library. Eleazar responds positively to this invitation and Aristeas leads the delegation to Jerusalem to bring the translators to Egypt. Six men are selected from each of the twelve tribes, a total of seventy-two men in all.

Lines 52-82 is a detailed description of the furnishings the Temple in Jerusalem. The items described are fantastic and beautifully adorned with gold and jewels. Lines 83-120 describe Jerusalem and the area of the Temple in detail, including a wonderful description of the vestments of the priests and the process by which they lead in the sacrifices. “Everything is carried out with reverence and in a way worthy of the Great God” (95). All of the details given have an “eyewitness” quality about them, although we must take into account the probability of exaggeration and boasting on the part of our faithful Jewish author. The impression we have is of great wealth and artistic skill in the design of the Temple and the surrounding city.

Aristeas returns to the intended theme of the letter in line 120b, with a slight apology to Philocrates for the detailed diversion. Eleazar selected men for the translation committee who were of the most noble character and well educated in the study of the Law (120b-127). Aristeas questioned Eleazar with regard to these men and he receives a lengthy discussion of the rationality of the Jewish religion (lines 128-171). The bulk of this section concerns the food laws, which the author seems to think need a special explanation. Some animals are forbidden for good reason: mice pollute everything they touch. Weasels are unclean because they were though to give birth out of their mouths. Eleazar convinces Aristeas in each case of the truth of the Jewish religion, and he tells Philocrates he desired to impart to him the “solemnity and characteristic outlook of the Law.”

Eleazar makes appropriate sacrifices and sends seventy-two representatives with Aristeas to Alexandria (172-186). They arrive with gifts for the king and are settled into quarters and well provided for by the king. A huge banquet is prepared, and the men as seated in the order of their age (cf. Gen. 43:33, Joseph seats his brothers in order as well.) There is a long section (187-300) in which the king asks each man in turn some question (usually ethical, philosophical or political) and the man pauses for a moment then gives a brief yet wise answer. The king is impressed by each and increasingly demonstrates his approval of the answers.

Each night of the seven-day banquet the king asks ten men a question. Each of these questions and responses gives an insight into the thinking of Judaism just before the turn of the centuries. It would be interesting project to take each question and answer and search for parallels in the debates between Hillel and Shammai in order to determine how current these questions may have been in the first century. It would also be possible to take each answer and find parallel in the New Testament, especially in the teaching of Jesus and Paul. For example, there seems to be a running theme of self-control and self-sufficiency throughout the responses which find a parallel in the letters of Paul (Gal. 5:23, Phil 4:10-13, for example.)

After the king is satisfied with the worthiness of the translators, they are taken to an island where they would set about the work of translating (lines 301-321). This is the most famous part of the letter as it relates the legendary origins of the Septuagint and the abbreviation LXX for the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. Each of the translators sets about their work for seventy-two days. After the work is finished, the books are read and accepted by the Jews with applause and no one suggested any changes be made to the translations. The translation was read to the king and he marveled at the wisdom of the Lawgiver. The translators are rewarded and told that if they ever wanted to return to Egypt the king would receive them gladly.

Like the rest of the Letter of Aristeas, this idealized apocryphal story of the origin on the Greek Old Testament is an attempt to show the Hellenistic world the Jewish faith is worthy of respect. But is that really the purpose? Who would read and be convinced of the excellence of the Jewish faith about 100 B.C.? I think it is highly unlikely a Greek living in Alexandria, Egypt would read the Letter of Aristeas and be convinced Judaism was a worthy religion and contemplate converting.

I think this Letter is apologetics for insiders. Aristeas does not write to convert Greeks to Judaism, but rather to convince young Hellenistic Jews that their faith is worthy of respect and to encourage them to remain in the faith. The Jewish people do not need to be embarrassed about their Scripture or their Laws because they are rational, and they can be proud of their worship in the Jerusalem Temple. By way of analogy, most Christian apologetics is not read by atheists who are considering converting to Christianity; Christians read this literature in order to bolster their faith and remain Christians.

Is this a fair reading of Aristeas? Perhaps I am wrong and this is missionary literature rather than insider apologetics.

Another Free Book from Logos Bible Software: Paul Murray, Praying with Confidence: Aquinas on the Lord’s Prayer (Continuum, 2010)

Praying With AquinasIt is a good time to stock up on Thomas Aquinas resources for your Logos library. The “Another Free Book of the Month” promotion offers Paul Murray’s Praying with Confidence for free. This 128-page book is a “stimulating scholarly study and an ideal introduction for the general reader. Never before have the most important reflections by Aquinas on the Lord’s Prayer been drawn together and considered in a single book.”

In addition to the free book, Logos has other Aquinas and Aquinas-related resources at deep discounts. Here’s the list:

  • Paul Murray, Praying with Confidence: Aquinas on the Lord’s Prayer (Continuum, 2010), Free!
  • Peter S. Eardley; Carl N. Still, Aquinas: A Guide for the Perplexed, $1.99
  • Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles (4 vols.), $4.99
  • Daniel A. Keating; John Yocum; Thomas Weinandy, Aquinas on Doctrine: A Critical Introduction (T&T Clark, 2004), $7.99
  • Paul Murray, Aquinas at Prayer: The Bible, Mysticism and Poetry, (Bloomsbury, 2013), $9.99
  • John F. Wippel, The Ultimate Why Question: Why Is There Anything at All Rather than Nothing Whatsoever? (Catholic University Press, 2011), $9.99
  • Aquinas, Knowledge & By Love: Charity and Knowledge in the Moral Theology of St. Thomas, Aquinas, $9.99

The regular Free Book from Logos had a decidedly Reformed theme for January, featuring books  published by respected Reformed publishers P&R and Reformation Heritage. You can add the Lectio Continua Expository Commentaries (LCEC) on Galatians by J. V. Fesko for free for the month of January. Fesko is a well-known writer in the Reformed community, current he is Professor of Systematic and Historical Theology at Reformed Theological Seminary, Jackson, Mississippi. In addition to this free resource, there are an additional eight books on deep discount through the end of January:

  • Herman Ridderbos, Redemptive History and the New Testament Scriptures (P&R, 1998), 99 cents. 
  • J. V. Fesko, Songs of a Suffering King: The Grand Christ Hymn of Psalms 1–8 (Reformation Heritage, 2014), $1.99. 
  • Ian Duguid, Living in the Gap between Promise and Reality: The Gospel According to Abraham (Gospel according to the Old Testament series; P&R 2014), $2.99. 
  • Matthew Barrett, Salvation by Grace: The Case for Effectual Calling and Regeneration (P&R, 2013), $3.99. 
  • The Christian’s Reasonable Service, Volume 1: God, Man, and Christ, $5.99.
  • The Works of William Perkins, Volume 1, (Reformation Heritage, 2014), $7.99.
  • Richard Phillips, John, 2 vols. (Reformed Expository Commentary, P&R 2014), $9.99. 

If you were looking to load up on Reformed Resources, now is the time to head over to the Logos Free Book of the Month page.

These free and nearly free books are only available through January 2021.

 

 

 

 

Book Review: David G. Peterson, Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentary

Peterson, David G. Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentary. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2020. xx+332pp. Pb. $30.00   Link to IVP Academic  

David Peterson’s new commentary on Hebrews in the TNTC series is a welcome contribution to the study of this difficult book. The commentary is a model of generally conservative, evangelical scholarship in the tradition of F. F. Bruce.

Peterson, HebrewsPrior to his retirement, Peterson was senior research fellow and lecturer in New Testament at Moore Theological College in Sydney. He did his doctoral work on Hebrews under F. F. Bruce and has published monographs: Hebrews and Perfection (SNTS Monograph Series 47; Cambridge, 1982), Possessed by God: A New Testament Theology of Sanctification and Holiness (NSBT 1; IVP Academic 1995) and the Acts volume in the Pillar New Testament Commentary. His personal blog collects many of his published articles.

The sixty-page introduction to the commentary covers the usual issues expected in a Hebrews commentary. Peterson begins by examining the character and style of the book. As is well-known, Hebrews balances exposition of Scripture with exhortations. These two threads run through the entire book. Regarding the structure and argument of the book, he briefly notes the contributions of various commentaries which make use of Greco-Roman rhetorical handbooks. But he ultimately rejects rhetorical as helpful for reading Hebrews. Following Lane, he states that Hebrews resists Greco-Roman rhetorical texts and cannot be forced into the mold of classical speech (15). Nor is this commentary overly influence by Philo. (The Tyndale Series does not include any indices so I cannot count the number of times the body of the commentary alludes Philo.)

Peterson argues the audience of Hebrews was a mixed congregation of Christians with a synagogue background, some of whom were in danger of drifting away from the Gospel. The pastor therefore exhorts these believers to encourage them to endure suffering and even martyrdom (19). That “drift away from the Gospel” may be towards the Jewish synagogue, but this is not a major point in the commentary.  The author is addressing a “deteriorating situation” (16) in which some readers are becoming weary of pursuing Christian discipleship and are considering a return to the safer option of the Synagogue. The author’s motivation is this unwillingness to progress in their discipleship, as well as the threat of persecution from Rome. The book is therefore a pastoral exhortation “to run the race set before them with endurance” (12:1-2).

Regarding destination and date, Peterson draws parallels to the situation in the Roman church found in Romans 14:1-15:7. Paul deals with some hostility between two parties over certain Jewish practices, specifically food and holy days. The consensus view is that Romans was written from Corinth in the winter of 57-58 to several house churches in Rome; Hebrews was written after Romans and deals with similar issues on a more serious, detailed way (20). Since the audience has not yet suffered to the point of shedding blood, (12:4), Peterson suggests a date before Nero’s persecution of Roman Christians in A. D. 64.

A major section in any introduction to Hebrews is authorship. Peterson offers a few comments on the usual suspects (Paul, Barnabas, Apollo) and observes the book of Hebrews itself considers human authorship secondary to the Holy Spirit’s inspiration of human authors. For example, Hebrews 3:7 quotes Psalm 95 with the introductory phrase “As the Holy Spirit says…”  This is certainly an irenic strategy for stepping back from the usual heated debates about authorship, it may not satisfy those looking for support for their view.

The final section of the introduction offers an outline of the theology of Hebrews. Peterson argues God is central to the argument of Hebrews and the book as an “emerging Trinitarian perspective” (27). This Trinitarian God speaks through Scripture, and no other book of the New Testament makes use of the biblical text like Hebrews. As Caird observed, Hebrews is one of the earliest attempts to define the relationship between the Old and New Testaments (34).

Hebrews begins with the phrase “in these last days” so Peterson includes a section on eschatology and salvation in Hebrews. Hebrews argues “the end” was achieved by Christ and that salvation can be experienced as a present reality. Although there are a few hints of a future salvation (1:14, “inheriting salvation”), believers are encouraged to take part in the New Covenant and experience the fruit of sanctification at the present time. This leads to a major issue in Hebrews, apostasy and perseverance. The so-called warning passages address to the whole church (not just those in danger of drifting away from the Gospel). The author’s point is to encourage his readers to live faithful and fruitful lives and he is confident his readers will persevere (47). Peterson draws a parallel between Hebrews and the Parable of the Sower. There are some who are drawn to Christ but do not persevere. Perseverance is the mark of the genuine believer and warnings encourage the genuine believer to persevere (48).

The body of the follows the pattern of the Tyndale series. Chapters follow Peterson’s outline of the book, broken into shorter sections on each pericope. There is no new translation or textual notes, this sort of information is integrated into the body of the commentary (often in footnotes). Peterson begins each section with a brief paragraph setting the context, then works through the text’s sub-units (sometimes a single verse, but usually several verses at a time). All Greek appears in transliteration in both the body and footnotes, although Greek does not dominate the discussion. Peterson often comments on how major translations render a particular word or phrase. Each sub-unit ends with a brief paragraph, drawing some theological conclusions from the unit. Although he occasionally interacts with other major commentaries on Hebrews, Peterson’s goal is a concise explanation of the text rather than a report on what other commentaries have already said. This makes for a clear, readable commentary.

Conclusion. Peterson’s Hebrews commentary achieves the goal of providing a basis for Christian teaching and preaching of this important book of the New Testament. It will be useful for both Bible students and laypeople who want to study Hebrews closely.

The Tyndale New Testament Commentary series has collected some of the best short exegetical commentaries written by conservative and evangelical scholars. This new volume in the TNTC replaces Donald Guthrie’s 1983 commentary, which replaced Thomas Hewitt’s 1960 commentary. As typical happens, the commentary has expanded from Hewitt’s commentary was 217 pages and Guthrie’s 281 pages to 332 pages in this 2020 commentary. Given some expansive commentaries published in recent years, this commentary on Hebrews is a model of concise exegesis focused on the text itself.

 

Other reviewed commentaries in third Tyndale series:

Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 Corinthians

Ian Paul, Revelation

NB: Thanks to IVP Academic for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.