Updated:
June 8, 2003
Class
Notes
(for further thoughts only)
1.
A
few things to bear in mind
A.
It
is strongly recommended that the NRSV be used for all citations. If you want, you may use other
translations in addition to the NRSV, not in lieu of the NRSV.
2.
What
is the text of Samuel?
A.
For
our purpose it is the text of the NRSV, since we need a common text. The NRSV is only a translation produced by
the NRSV translation committee. As
of now, it is arguably the most updated critically sound translation. It is a version based on important
manuscript witnesses, which include the Masoretic
Text (MT), the Septuagint (LXX), and the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS).
i.
The
Hebrew text
ii.
The
Greek (older one and latter one)
iii.
The
manuscripts from the Dead Sea Scrolls
B.
One
should weigh the witnesses.
i.
External
witnesses: manuscripts
ii.
Internal
witnesses: grammar and other scribal matters
3.
Who
were the Hebrews?
A.
A
most debated issue is whether the term refers to an ethnic group or a social
group.
B.
The
notion of an ethnic group has become a very complicated issue. At least in most cases, an ethnic group
is a sociological construct.
C.
Still,
one can conceptualize ¡°ethnos¡± and ¡°class,¡± and the question remains which
category has more explanatory power in our study.
4.
The
Historiography of 1 and 2 Samuel
A.
1
and 2 Samuel represent a part of a longer historical work in the Hebrew Bible
called the Deuteronomistic History. It covers from the book of Deuteronomy
all the way to 2 Kings (except Ruth, which was not yet written when the DH was
put together.)
B.
All
histories are written from a certain perspective, which requires assessment.
C.
Do
we accept the historical viewpoint of the historian? Or, should we suspect that there was
something that has been suppressed (not out of malice or intent to deceive).
D.
I
have already noticed that many of us are adopting the historian¡¯s perspective
as well as his/her bias.
5.
The
Kingship
A.
Many
scholars argue that the introduction of the monarchy to
B.
Actually,
the accounts of 1 and 2 Samuel about kingship are ambivalent.
6.
El
Shaddai
A.
This
is not the Deuteronomistic way of rendering the name
of God.
B.
It
is arguably the oldest name of God in the Hebrew Bible.
C.
It
is usually translated as ¡°God Almighty,¡± which follows the practice of the
LXX. It is not clear how the
translators of the Greek Bible got the meaning of the phrase, and most
probably, they had no idea of what the word ¡®Shaddai¡¯
meant, and did their best on the basis of the literary context of the places where
the name of God appears.
D.
Some
scholars have argued that the phrase is related to the Amorite expression of bel shade, the lord of the mountain. In one inscription it appears as an item
in the luggage of the people who wandered around. That should remind us of the God of the patriarchs
in the Hebrew Bible.
E.
The
best source on this topic is T.N.D. Mettinger, In Search of God.
7.
Politics
and Religion
A.
We
tend to make a clear distinction between politics and religion. Such a practice is actually
cultural-specific, and we should not assume that the people in the biblical
times made the distinction in the way we do. Certainly, this does not mean that they
had no concept of politics and religion. Simply, we should not impose our
own way of conceptualization upon them.
1.
¡°Like
God¡¯s¡±
A.
Whenever
we use a theological category as an illustration, we are assuming that our
readers subscribe to the same theology. In a seminary setting, it is not
farfetched to do that; however, in a class discussion it is not a good practice
to assume that our audience will have the same understanding of God.
B.
The
metaphors of God are often loaded, and need a somewhat lengthy explanation. I wonder whether our illustrations can
be really effective when they themselves require a lot of explanation.
C.
I
will not stop using the metaphors of God¡¯s ways, but will always ask myself
about others who might have a different theological understanding.
2.
When
they talk about God¡¦.
A.
When
commentators talk about God, they are usually talking about the way God is
presented in the narrative account.
They are not necessarily making ontological statements on God.