|
Dictionary of the Old Testament: historical booksGoldmineDICTIONARY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT: HISTORICAL BOOKS This book, as its name suggests, is not a book that you read through systematically — though the reviewer found it tempting as he turned the pages! Inevitably this review has been selective and random in the material assessed. The Dictionary is compiled for the general reader rather than the scholar and so is very accessible. It is not a dictionary of the history of these books, but covers a wide range of topics, including history and archaeology. Experts in the fields are used to give up-to-date and thorough coverage. The articles are generally well referenced, enabling the reader to pursue items at greater depth. Partial historyOne of the disadvantages is that it is concerned only with the ‘historical books’ (as normally defined) and so does not cover, for example, the Pentateuch. Not only do those books contain the underlying history of the later books, but many of the issues reviewed are developed from the books of Moses. Most of the writers examine interpretations other than their own. For example, in the section on the History of Israel, Dr. Meier acknowledges the alternative work by Dr. John Bimson (unfortunately he does not give a reference for those who wish to pursue it!). Similarly, Dr. Hubbard discusses the alternative locations suggested for Ai (to overcome the apparent inconsistency of the archaeology of the accepted site with the Bible). Because of the variety of writers, there is sometimes a conflict between them when issues overlap. One of the items which could have been more balanced in the reviewer’s opinion, was that on chronology. Prof. Kitchen was the natural choice for this subject, but his contribution is heavily biased in favour of the 13th century date of the exodus, against the traditional 15th century one. This does cause some tension with other entries. Some readers will probably be uncomfortable with his comments on the contribution of Jephthah to the chronology of the Judges and so the wider chronology. His dismissive attitude to this man’s claims are presumptive and open to challenge. Dr. Satterthwaite does indicate something of the problem arising from Kitchen’s position in his article on the Judges. Numerical inspiration?I was disappointed in the article on ‘Large numbers’. There are problems with the large numbers used in the modern texts of Scripture. Are these true or do they arise from a mistranslation? The author rightly discusses the different approaches but settles on a ‘numerical hyperbole’ interpretation. In other words, the authors were copying the exaggerated claims of other nations. I find this unsatisfactory when we believe in the inspiration of Scripture and believe that — if these numbers are to be ‘dismissed’ — a better textual argument is needed. Most of the entries are, rightly, fairly brief and to the point, but there are about 170 longer articles covering a range of topics in greater depth (for example, 20 pages on agriculture and on archaeology and on God). The History of Israel is in eight sections and takes up 74 pages. These are invaluable resources, of course. Surprisingly, there is only one figure in the main text, with a couple of maps in the appendix. Several of the articles would be helped by figures. One sentence took my attention in the article on prayer: there is ‘vast potential for study of prayer in the Historical Books’ (p.810). The author was obviously touched by the recorded prayers and triggers a desire in his readers to explore them further. This is a reaction I had to many other entries. This book is a goldmine of information and is one I expect to dig into regularly. It is worth having on your shelf as good value for the price. JHJP© Evangelicals Now - July 2006 |