Transmission of the Greek Text

Papyri, Uncials, and Miniscules

The first thing that needs to be realized is that during the period when the New Testament was written, ordinary writing was done on pressed sheets of papyrus fibers. This plant was commonly used in Egypt and around the Mediterranean Sea for writing purposes…and it was inexpensive. Most literature from the period was collected into scrolls which could be rolled up into a bundle and would be unrolled when the time came to read them. OT manuscripts, written on leather parchment, were bundled this way. However, for reasons still unknown to us, the New Testament writings are not found in the scroll format, but in codex or book form. That is, sheets of papyrus would be arranged into a book, which was sewed together similar to the way modern books are made. It may be that blank codices were easy to come by.

By the fourth century, parchments made from animal hide came into widespread use. Parchement was far more durable than papyrus but had some obvious drawbacks: to transcribe the entire NT onto parchment would require the killing of a good sized flock of sheep or goats! Therefore, parchment manuscripts could only be commissioned by those who were very wealthy. In later centuries (IX on), paper came into use, eliminating the need to slaughter animals for parchment.

All of the Greek New Testament originals were written in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS with no spaces and probably no punctuation, and all of the earlier manuscripts are in this style, whether on parchment or papyrus. This is because the Greek alphabet did not have punctuation until at least the II century, and there were no minscule (lower case) letters until much later. The surviving manuscripts on papyrus are classed by themselves: papyri. The parchment manuscripts written in all capitals are called uncials, and those written later (IX century on) using upper and lower case letters are called miniscules. Various commonly written words were often abbreviated. This are mistakenly called nomina sacra, “sacred names,” but it is not only special names and titled which were abbreviated this way.

A. Papyri. The earliest of these Greek New Testament manuscripts are the papyri,

written on an ancient type of writing material made from the fibrous pith of the

papyrus plant, which in ancient times grew plentifully along the river Nile.

Eighty-one of these papyri have now been discovered, many of them fragments.

The most important of these papyrus manuscripts are the Chester Beatty Papyri

and the Bodmer Papyri. The Chester Beatty Papyri were published in 1933-37 and

include Papyrus 45 (Gospels and Acts, c. 225 A. D.), Papyrus 46 (Pauline Epistles,

c. 225 A. D.), and Papyrus 47 (Revelation, c. 275 A. D.). The Bodmer Papyri

were published in 1956-62. The most important of these are Papyrus 66 (John, c.

200 A. D.), and Papyrus 75 (Luke and John 1:15 c. 200A.D.).

B. Uncials. All the rest of the Greek New Testament manuscripts were of velum

(leather), except for a few late ones in which paper was used.

The oldest of the velum manuscripts are written in uncial (capital) letters. These

uncial manuscripts now number 267.

The three oldest complete (or nearly complete) uncial manuscripts are B (Codex

Vaticanus), Aleph or ! (Codex Sinaiticus), and A (Codex Alexandrinus).

1. Codex B was written about the middle of the 4th century and is the

property of the Vatican Library at Rome. It is not known when it arrived

there but it must have been before 1475 since it is mentioned in a catalogue

of the library made that year.

The Text of the Greek New Testament 2

2. Codex ! was discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 at the Monastery of St.

Catherine at the foot of Mt. Sinai. Tischendorf persuaded the monks to

give it as a present (receiving in return money and favors) to the Czar of

Russia. In 1933 it was purchased from the Russian government by the

Trustees of the British Museum. It is generally considered by scholars to

have been written in the second hail of the 4th century.

3. Codex A was for many years regarded as the oldest extant New Testament

manuscript. It was given to the King of England in 1627 by Cyril Lucar,

patriarch of Constantinople, and is now kept in the British Museum.

Scholars date it from the first haLf of the 5th century.

4. Other important uncial manuscripts are W (Gospels, 4th or 5th century), D

(Gospels and Acts, 5th or 6th century), and D2 (Pauline Epistles, 6th

century).

C. Minuscules. About the beginning of the 9th century minuscule (small letter)

handwritting began to be used for the production of books. Thus all the later New

Testament manuscripts are minuscules. According to Aland, 2,764 minuscules

have been catalogued. These date from the 9th to the 16th century.

D. Lectionaries. Another important class of Greek New Testament manuscripts are

the lectionaries. These are service books which contain in proper sequence the text

of the passages of Scripture appointed to be read at the worship services of the

church. These lectionaries are of two kinds, the synaxaria, which begin the year at

Easter, and the menologia, which begin the year with the first of September.

Enumeration of Greek New Testament

                                    List 4(1954-Von Dobschutz)                          list 7(k.aland)

Papyri                         48                                                                    81

Majuscules                 208                                                                  267

Minuscules                 2370                                                                2746

Lectionaries               1609                                                                2143

Total                           4235                                                                5255

Examples (for Older and Newer Browsers)

The Development of Text Types

As far as we can tell, most or all of the earliest copies were done in what is called a “free” style. People copied liberally, perhaps correcting what they saw as mistakes, and even adding comments in the margin. Some copies are called “normal” because they are not exactly free, but then again they do not appear to fall into the third category of “strict” copies. Strict copies, like their name suggests, have little or no paraphrasing, comments, etc..; the copyist was trying to preserve the exemplar exactly. Strict copying would become more common as time passed.

Copying freely and then more strictly tended to produce local variations in the text. As more copies were made, as time passed, the text of the New Testament came to settle down into roughly two or three Text Types. Each text type preserves certain variants in the text, and as even more time passed, manuscripts which are partly of one text type and partly of another would appear. The formation of Text Types is generally assigned to the fourth century. After this time, it became more common to make multiple copies from a single exemplar in scriptoria. Aland writes: “Until the beginning of the fourth century the text of the New Testament developed freely. It was a ‘living text’ in the Greek literary tradition, unlike the text of the Hebrew Old Testament, which was subject to strict controls…” [i.e., on account of Rabbi Aqiba's masoreh process]. He remarks that to an extent, within their text types, the text remained “living” throughout the centuries.

The Alexandrian Text Type seems to have largely developed around Egypt. It is the general scholarly consensus that the Alexandrian type often preserves the original reading. The typical Alexandrian manuscript is older than the typical manuscript of the other major type. Codex Sinaticus, Codex Vaticanus (B), and quite a few other uncials and miniscules follow this type.

The Byzantine Text Type seems to have developed in the area of Syria. Some call this the Koine type or (when they all agree) the Majority Text. The vast majority of late miniscule manuscripts belong to the Byzantine type, including those which were used in making early translations from Greek into English. The earliest extant manuscript of the Byzantine type is Codex Q, of the fifth century.

The D Type may have developed in Egypt also, although it was once called “Western.” The champion of the D Type manscripts is Codex Bezae Catabrigiensis (D 05). Some people once believed that wherever the D Type reading was shorter, it represented the original reading. This is now known not to be true. However, the D Type often preserves unique readings, some of which may be the original. Some alterations in the D Type are regarded as intentional.

Note: Of the manuscripts known as of 1989, the earliest manuscript is of the style that would become the D Type dates to the III century. The Byzantine influence probably began in the IV century. As Latin became the major world language, the demand for Greek manuscripts declined. By the time the lower case alphabet came into widespread use, the majority of manuscripts being copies in Greek were from areas where the Byzantine text type was dominant. There is still some debate as to whether the Byzantine type preserves the original readings.

J5

Title of the Article: Job the Pious? The character of Job in the Narrative Framework of the Book (JSOT 43 (1989) 37-52)

Author: Athalya Brenner

Outline:

i.                     the problems

ii.                   job’s origin and pious character

iii.                  three and seven

iv.                 preemptive sacrifice

v.                   piety and questioning

vi.                 job of the epilogue

vii.                job of the framework and the job of the poem

viii.              conclusion: prose and poetry, ‘unreal’ and ‘real’

 About the Article?

            The article starts with the identification of the problem of the literary set-up of the book of Job. The questioning of who is to be portrayed in the book is it Satan or Job? Within the narrative framework itself, it is difficult not to notice that the Satan- so prominent in the prologue-is surprisingly absent from the epilogue. Should he not be, at least, referred to at the end of the book, when all meaningful strands are drawn together? It is unreasonable to assume that the author has forgotten all about him, or decide to delete him from ending for no reason.  The dispute between God and Satan in the prologue cannot be disposed of in epilogue through silence alone, unless the silence is deliberate. Another literary problem is that of the literary form. Why are the prologue/epilogue section written in prose, while the rest of the book is poetry?

            The traditional persona of Job, together with the story it featured in or similar ones, was probably known to the Author’s audience. Two references to Noah, Daniel and Job in Ezekiel 14:14, 20 as outstanding examples of righteousness are testimony to the popularity of the literary figure of Job, which must have been a byword for stereotyped piety. However while so doing, was really ‘keeping its principal feature unchanged’ simply because ‘it is a characteristic of Semitic literary usage that the writer keeps its traditional source intact, even when there are obvious discrepancies between them’ (ibid)? This observation may be valid as a general principle. Is it applicable, though, to the text in hand? A number of item enhances the suspicion that, from the outset, the Job of the prologue is not to be taken literally as an exceptionally exemplar person. First, he is a foreigner. Although OT foreigners recognize YHWH’s power on occasion and sometimes capable of pious behavior towards Him (e.g. are Abimelech, Gen 20; Balaam, Num 22-24), they are never depicted as Job is-as the epitome of religious devotion. Further, whether the legend was originally Edomite or of another foreign province, the foreign framework and nomenclature is retained through it more or less consistently.

            The difference between the frame story and the main (poetic) body of the text of the book of Job is heightened by an additional device: the editorial stance changes from the former to the latter. In the Narrative, the Author is overly omniscient. He knows everything about Job; is familiar with the Heavenly court, is certainly better informed about the reason for Job’s fate than Job himself is. Within the poem this aspect of authorial presence undergoes a shift. The author is still omniscient\, in the sense that he determines the progress of the discussion and the allotment of the view points to the character, but he is covertly so. External events give way to internal drama, action is supplanted by speech and view points depicted not through deeds but, instead through the convention of speaking voices.

            Concludes that the writer is retelling the story, while maintaining it’s over all structure and the trick of juxtaposition is achieved. And in this way, ‘discrepancies’ of style and content are perceived as an integral and meaningful part of the literary structure and the ideological message.  The stylistic ‘discrepancy’ actually saves the author from being ‘cheap’.

J4

Title of the Article: Dying He lives: biblical image, biblical narrative and the redemptive Jesus (Semiotics).

Author: Michael Root

Table of Contents:

I.                    Biblical image

II.                 Biblical narratives

III.               The redemptive Jesus

What is the Article all about?

            It’s about the how Jesus is pictured in several angles in His image and His definite role. Starts with how Jesus is pictured as a lamb and a lion. In the first lamb image this illuminates the reconciliation works of Jesus that He alone has the power to forgive sin (mark 2:10). Images of reconciliation tend to focus on Jesus death. He is the High priest who carries His own blood into the Holy Place (Heb 9:11), the slain Lamb of God (Rev 5:6), the Isaianic suffering servant (1 Pet 2:4). His blood is poured out for the forgiveness of sins (Matt 26:28), and for us He become a curse (Gal 3:18). On the other Hand Jesus is portrayed as the Lion image.  Jesus appears in order to destroy the works of the devil (1 john 3:8), “to destroy Him who has the power of death.” (Heb 2:14). He has disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example of them.” (Col 2:15). Jesus is the lion of the tribe of Judah…has conquered. For all these images, the human predicament is not a bondage that grasps from without, but an act or habitual state that arises from with in. Humanity has turned from God and righteousness and is accountable for that turning. We then have two image groups focusing the soteriological meaning of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. Both groups can be found in almost all the tradition of the New Testament. This brief outline of the group, without any attempt to specify what these might means for us today, will have to suffice. The submissive redeemer is a redeemer only as His submission is somehow also His conquering activity. At this level as explained by Michael Root the story depicts the ultimate confrontation between God and His enemies. On this reading, Jesus’ passivity is His self surrender to God. How??? The answer implicit in the story is that, while the enemies of God are genuinely God’s enemies. God’s sovereignty is still such that the enemies can act only in a way that fulfills God’s intentions. The liberation images develop the picture of Jesus as the agent of God combating the image which God opposed. The reconciliation images develop the depiction of Jesus as the object of an action of God meditated in some way through Jesus’ persecutors. The duality of soteriological images meshes with a basic double sidedness in the New Testament narratives. Narratives allow two poles of the tensions to be closely interwoven without implying an explanation of their compatibility. The narratives do display devices (dramatic irony, typological shaping) that allow both poles of tension to be imaginatively held together. They also fill out the identity of Jesus, so that he is not a mere cipher at the dialectical junction point of the poles of paradox. But no scheme is presented or implied that would resolve the tension. The Ambiguity is preserved.

Title: The Social profiles in the Colossian debate JSNT 66 1997 pp73-90

Author: Harold Van Broekhoven

Outline of the Article:

I.                    The social profiles of the Parties of the Colossians.

II.                 The social profile of the opponents according to the writer.

III.               The christologies of the two-parties at Colossae

IV.              The writer’s Christology

V.                 The rivals Christology

VI.              Conclusion

About the Article:

            The article is about the analyses of the Colossian controversy usually explore the conceptual background of the rivals describe in chapter 2. the outcome of this exploration has been such a wide diversity of opinion that some have argued that the conflict at Colossae has little to do with Christological controversy and more to do with the behavioral implications which each party drew from their Christology. Harold Van Broekhoven seeks to explore the socio-structural base for the competition at Colossae by drawing a social profile of the writer and the rivals describe in chapter 2. He also elaborates that the hymn is not the writer’s weapon with which he refutes a heresy rather, the hymn belong to both the rivals and the writer and constitutes the common ground for the debate. The two parties could agree on language asserting that Christ (1) is uniquely related to God, as the ‘image of God’, (2) is ‘first –born of all creation’, having a certain priority over the creation, (3) was the agent of creation, in whom, by whom and for whom all things were created, (4) had pre-eminence over creation and was sustainer of all things, (5) was first born from the dead for the fullness of God dwelled in Him and (6) was the agent of reconciliation of all things. We need not assume a disagreement between the writer and the rivals on the centrality of Jesus Christ or on the cosmic dimension of His nature and agency in creation and reconciliation. The writer visions of the church corresponds to what Douglas would call a high-group/high grid social or tendency. There is both affirmation of group boundaries and conformity to generally accepted structure. The vice-virtue lists help define boundaries and internal cohesion while the House-table rules define structure. The writers, and his co-workers, exemplify a personal identity shaped by group loyalty and strongly internalized sense of role. Rituals reaffirm group loyalty and constitute a rite of passage from one world to another. But in one rituals identification with Christ one also identifies with mediation of him who was resolved the cosmic conflict and rendered evil impotent. The evidence here is that the writer desires a high group, high grid community or institutional church. The writer describes their ethical rules and rituals behavior in 2:16-18 and 20-23. The first passage suggests a moralistic rigorism with respect to food and drink and observance of the holy days while the negative regulation of the second passage is less explicit. This rigorism has to do with ritualism as suggested by the word self-abasement –which in 2.18 is associated with the ‘worship of angels’ and ‘visions’ and 2.23 with ‘self imposed piety’ following Francis, the asceticism has little to do with purity rules designed to protect the community  but rather with rules that must be mastered to succeed ritually and mystically. In conclusion Paul’s task is to socialize the church to become a harmonious, caring, stable community with some concern with the social and cultural world of his time. His own self-denial mentioned in 1.24, serves as a counterpoint to that more self-serving asceticism of the rivals, but it is mentioned as a rhetoric strategy to attract them to his position and to himself. When knit together in love, the threat of erroneous practice and belief recedes, but left unchecked the individualism, and elitism and escapism of the Colossian party could lead to division and worse to error.       

Title of the Article: The Iniquity of the Sanctuary (Biblical Literature) vol 60 1941 pp311-314

Author: C.A. Ben-Mordecai

Outline of the Article:

I. The meaning of the word iniquity

II. Other citing of the term Iniquity on other passages

III. The usage of the term “iniquity”

What is the Article all about?

The article is about the usage the term “iniquity” in the passage of Numbers 1:18 And the Lord said unto Aaron: ‘Thou and thy sons and thy father’s house with thee shall bear the iniquity of the sanctuary; and Thou and thy sons with thee shall bear the iniquity of your priesthood’. The term stands for “hazard”, “danger”, or “risk”. It has the same usage in the passage of Gen 4:13 -14 Cain said to the Lord, my iniquity is too great to bear! Behold, you have driven me this day from the face of the ground; and from your face I will be hidden, and I will be a vagrant and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me. This passage explains the nature of the danger or hazard imposed upon Cain. Where C.A. Ben-Mordecai The accepted rendering of “my punishment” for “iniquity” is clearly incorrect, fort it is not punishment but rather danger or hazard that Cain is complaining of. Mr. Ben-Mordecai find the term in many instances denotes ‘harm”, “trouble”, “mishap”, “accidental”, or “calamity”. Thus ion 1 Samuel 28:10 should be rendered, “no harm shall befall you” In this sense iniquity is a synonym to the term iniquity in Gen 44:29, where the same verb is used to wit. Also we find a similar passage in 2 kings 7:9 where the phrase “punishment will overtake us” should be rendered, “it will cause us trouble.” The traditional rendering, “we shall find punishment” or “punishment will overtake us.” is not correct. The four lepers have not committed any actual offense for which they should fear punishment but it is evident that they feared they might get into trouble by their failure to report “good tidings.” Also in Psalm 59:5a “They run without mishap, and they are steadfast.” The accepted rendering, “without my fault, they run and prepare themselves,” fails utterly to convey any intelligibly meaning. It is inconceivable that the psalmist could have expressed himself in such awkward phrase. Ben-Mordecai objects the accepted rendering of Psalms 49:6, “why should I fear in the evil days when my deceitful foes encompasses me with iniquity…” the gist of this verse is “why should I fear some days of calamity when every one of my footstep is fraught with hazard.” Ben-Mordecai has illuminated the usage of the term “iniquity.”

Seminar Q12:
“Which English Version of the Bible do you use for the following: preaching/teaching, group devotional, personal devotional, easy reading, quoting in letters? And Why?” 

            I usually use The New living Translations for my devotionals. It’s shallower but it helps me understand to understand and grasp the direct and simple meaning because it’s like reading a novel authored by a high school. It is a great help because the thought is direct like in Psalms 40:17 as for me I am poor and needy but the Lord is thinking about me right now. You are my helper and my Savior. Do not delay. The emergency neediness of the message is available and it helps me to ponder on the simplified meaning of the message of the bible in this age of time. This is the bible that I use in our group devotionals. The New Living Translation emphasis thought-for-thought translation that would be easier for a simple mind to grasp the intended meaning that the author himself would like to address to the readers of the scripture that would illuminates them logically in sense.

            During my studies I prefer to use the New American Standard Bible. I believe in their fourfold aim that 1. These publications shall be true to the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. 2. They shall be grammatically correct.3. They shall be understandable 4. They shall give Lord Jesus Christ His proper place, the place which the word gives Him; therefore no work will ever be personalized. Studying the word is a humble act that there will be no biases and unfairness, it requires diligence to be able to exegesis the message of the bible in this age of time. The words of God is the sword of the spirit that if I’m well immersed in His teaching I would be thoroughly equipped in my defense against the Rulers of darkness and its principalities. I believe also that as a scholar my learning is progressive when it comes to studying the bible. I believe that using a version that is using a word-for word translation would challenge me to see context that are biblical in logic.   That’s my place by now but if there will be chances that I will be given the privilege of studying the original Greek and Hebrew meaning it will be an Honor on my behalf.

Title of the Journal: The meaning of “SON OF MAN”.

Bibliographical Data: Journal of Biblical Interpretation, Vol. 60, No. 2 (Jun., 1941), pp. 151-157

Outline of the Article:

Intro

Quotations of the son of man in the Old Testament

The English Titular Interpretation

Summary

What is the article all about?

The article is all about the proper titular interpretation and usage of the title “Son of Man”. It is a survey of the usage of the son of man which is “commonly” associated with Jesus. But this is not a new thesis. In Daniel 7:13 it is the common usage of the term “Son of Man” where “the son of man is coming with the clouds of Heaven” also in 8:16. The passages in Isaiah 51:12 and 56:2 and Psalms 8:4,80:17,and 144:3 are of special interest since Jesus so often referred to this book- actually quoting Is 56 at Mk 11:17 and Ps 8 at Mt 21:16. It can hardly doubted that his use of the phrase was influence by these passages, yet in every one of them the words are simply a poetic equivalent for “man” or “mankind” with no messianic significance. In Daniel 8:17 “son of man”, he said you must understand that the events you have seen in your vision relate to the time of the end”. We can see in here that it is not always a general rule comparing Daniel 7:13 and 8:17 that the term “Son of Man” is not always related to the Messianic of Jesus. Daniel 7:13 is a messianic indication to Jesus but in here the expression is mainly descriptive not a title at all as cited by parker that it indicates that the figure looks like a man, and has no other meaning. In summary, ‘son of man” in the English version of the similitudes represents three different phrases in the original, two of which are applied both to the messianic and to Enoch. Nor the Jewish literature afford better evidence for equating “Messiah” and “The Elect One”. The Phrase is never so used in the Talmud. In the New Testament of the twelve patriarchs, which bound in messianic predictions, its only occurrence is in a paraphrase of Numbers 23:19 and even in the New Testament is not always a titular as in e.g. in Mt 16:13 and Jn 12:34. That Jesus’ title did indicate prophetic leadership is suggested by the examples, in pre-Christian literature, where the term is applied to individuals. The three men thus styled are Ezekiel, Daniel, and Enoch, each of whom has received a divine revelation. It may be argued that if “son of man” ever took on technical connotation, it was as this divinely uttered vocative, spoken individually to three apocalyptic seers. Then Jesus, in taking the title, will have a marked himself not as Messiah but as one who, in the line of Enoch, Daniel and Ezekiel, envisaged the kingdom as explained by Parker.

Are any of the characteristics of the liberal scholars’ approach to the bible valid? Explain.

            No, because the Liberals do not uphold the inerrancy and infallibility of the scriptures. However critical liberal scholars may hold a conservative theological scholar position which is a natural theology of knowing God. Upholding the inerrancy and infallibility of the scripture is a way of honoring the authority of the scripture that the scripture is God’s own word relayed to man and using his own personal character thru the inspiration of the Holy Spirit the scripture is formulated. Liberals have a lot of biases in their interpretation of the scripture like the method of Bernard Ramm where his method is base on “scientific outlook and method are to be applied to the bible” which is a very limited measure of the authority of the bible and as cited by Viertel that this method will contain limitedly presumes the regularity of nature which limits the miracle work of God and they will just base miracles as a natural work of nature. They also based “the inspiration of the bible is determined by its power to inspire religious experience” which this replaces the authority of the revealed word which is God’s personal revelation itself also God’s ability to inspire is not based on daily experience but the seasons that God Himself revealing His character thru daily events. Also the interpretation that “Paul and the Apostles are the real foundations of Christian” this replaces the Jesus himself is the rock which is a misinterpretation of Mathew 16:18 that peter is the rock but its Jesus Himself which is the extreme literal interpretation of the bible. The over rationalism has destroyed the reverence for the bible and caused it to be studied as just another book as cited by Viertel and also the liberal school  presented Jesus as simply an ethical figure but I will contradict that Jesus has come to redeem the world and doing ethical teaching is just a minor occupation of Jesus.  Rationalism (Latin ratio,”reason”), in philosophy, a system of thought that emphasizes the role of reason in obtaining knowledge, in contrast to empiricism, which emphasizes the role of experience, especially sense perception which a Human limited activity that can not perceive God that is not valid in the interpretation of the bible.

Title of the Book: The Land of the Bible

About the Author:

            Yohanan Ahoroni lived in Palestine for forty-years. He was Senior Lecturer in Archeology at Hebrew university. Ahoroni carried out extensive archeological excavations, directed the first exploration of the Judean Desert Caves near En Geddi, and the discovering of the Bar kochba caves, mysterious limestone formations in the southern region of Israel. It was here that the Jews took refuge from the Romans, who persecuted them. In the year 132 C.E., the Jews planned and began their revolt against the repressive regime. He also co-Authored the book the Carta Bible Atlas, the Macmillian Bible Atlas, the Historical Atlas of the Jewish people, the Macmillian Bible Atlas and other books that He contributed.

Table of Contents:

Part 1: the introductory survey

1. The General setting
2. The land of many contrast
3. roads and highway
4. boundaries and names
5. the historical source
6. the study of toponymy

Part 2: Palestine during the ages

1. the Canaanite period
2. Israel conquest and settlement
3. the united monarchy
4. the kingdom of Israel and Judah
5. the later day of the Judean kingdom

Appendices

List of chronological table

List of site identification

About the Book:

            In part 1 the book tells about the introductory survey where it shows the history of any land and people is influenced to a considerable degree by their geographical environment. This includes not only the natural features such as climate, soil, topography, etc. but also the geographical relationship with neighboring areas. This is especially true for Palestine, a small and relative poor country, which derives its main importance from it’d unique centralized location at a juncture of continents and a crossroads for the nations. In the general setting is the bridge between continents and civilization, the table of nations, between sea and desert, the geographical situations, and the pastoral agrarian reform economy. In the land of many contrasts shows the coastal zone: the plain of Acco, the Jezzrel valley, the Sharon, the Philistine coast, the shephelah, and the western Negreb.

The central mount range: galilee, mount Ephraim, the Judean hill country, and the eastern negeb. The Jordan rift: the huleh valley, Chinnereth, the Jordan valley, the Dead Sea,and  the arabah. The transjordanian highlands: bashan, gilead, moab and Edom. In the roads and highway covers the International highways and the internal roads. In Boundaries and names: the land of canaan-covers the southern boundaries, the western border, and the eastern boundary and the land of Israel its borders and boundaries. In the Historical sources this covers the bible’s historical geography of Palestine during the Israelite period also the administrative territorial lists and the expeditions and conquests. In the study of Toponymy  covers the continuity of ancient sites, origin of place and their meanings, the original form of the name, the preservation of the name, transferences of names,  and principles of identification.

            In part 2 explain that to properly understand the biblical periods we must first examine briefly the beginnings of culture in Palestine. Then the author traces the growth of source material from small trickle in the third millennium B.C. to the abundance of texts which shed a flood of light on the country at the eve of the Israelite invasion. In the Canaanite period covers the Proto-Historic period, the Amorite  wave, the execration texts, the hyksos period, the rise of the new Egyptian empire, the campaign of thut-mose III, the campaign of seti I, and the reign of ramses II and mereptah. In chapter II is the Israelite conquest and settlement covers the first stages of penetration, the exodus and the desert wanderings, the conquest of transjordan, the house of joseph, Judah, the wars in the north, the limits of Israelite occupation, settlement in the hill country, the tribal league and its border description, the cities of simeon, The deeds of the judges and the philistines. Chapter III is the united monarchy touches Saul, The campaign of David, the kingdom at the height of its expansion, the levitical cities, the growth and development of the solomonic kingdom, and Solomon’s administrative districts. Chapter IV is the kingdom of Israel and Judah covers the house of jeroboam and baasha, shishak’s campaign, rehoboam’s fortress, the ombride dynasty, the rebellion of moab under mesha, the house of jehu and the lastr days of the Israelite kingdom, the district of Judah, the samaria ostraca, and the tiglath-pilaser III campaigns and the fall of Israel. Chapter V is the latter days of the Judean kingdom where it covers the sennacherib’s campaign, the royal seal impressions and their geographical administrative significance, the last kingdoms of Judah, and the exile and restorations.

            Yohanan Aharoni has presented the evidences that a biblical scholar will need.

SQ9

Compare and contrast the hermeneutics of Alexandrian and Antioch?

The two hermeneutics have both the same good motive goal to interpret the Scripture to the believers that the believers will have a basis for their own personal faith and practice. The two differ in the process of interpretation in Alexandria they use Allegory method by which the principle which is to convey the meaning of the scripture rather than in its own literal meaning and with the combination of Literal method. Allegory is generally treated as a figure of rhetoric. Their goal is to interpret the Scripture in a way that they will not relay the literal sense but the problem is the extreme allegory interpretation which will convey a different meaning and this result to a false doctrine which may result to different sense of faith. This will endanger the faith of the believer in Alexandria. Philo (20BC-50AD), also known as Philo of Alexandria or Philo Judaeus and also as Yedida was a Hellenized Jewish philosopher born in Alexandria, Egypt. Philo used allegory to fuse and harmonize Greek philosophy and Judaism. His method followed the practices of both Jewish exegesis and Stoic philosophy. He formulated a set of rules that will guide the interpreter to achieve a well define biblical truth. Origen, who was a student and successor of clement, formulated the three levels of meaning such as the literal, moral and Spiritual which are the basis of interpretation of intensive scripture study that He emphases the spiritual meaning rather than the literal meaning. On the other side is the Hermeneutics of the Antioch which promoted the historical reality which is a different approach from the allegory method which is the opposite of allegory method which their interpretation is based on the Historical facts and the literal interpretation where they focus is the History of Israel and the future coming of Christ. Their predictions was both historical and christocentric. Like Theodore of Mopsuestia where he saw the difference of giving attention to linguistic details. He paid close attention to particles, mood, prepositions, and terminology in general. He endeavored to study the each passage within its context and not to isolate verses. He first  first considered the sequence of thoughts, then He examined the phraseology and the separate clauses, and finally he gave a scholarly exegesis of the passage as explained by Viertel which is different from allegory method that they consider a lot of Historical factors which includes christocentric to be able to come up with a well define exegesis.