Min Suc Kee:

 Department of Christian studies, Baekseok University, Anseo Dong 115, Cheona Si, Choong Nam, Korea.

            Outline:

I.                    Abstract

II.                 Key words

III.               The passages of the Heavenly Council in the Hebrew Bible

IV.              The type-scene of the Heavenly Council

V.                 Conclusion

VI.              Bibliography

            As can read in the abstract,” this article proposes that the visual description of the outlook, the process and the location of the members are particular characteristics of the ‘heavenly Council’ in the Mesopotamia, Ugaritic and Ancient Israelites Text” (259).  As stated in the different passages of the Bible, (I Kings 22: 19-23; Isa. 6; Job 122; Psm. 82; Zech. 3; Dan. 7:9-14), this article also proves that there is Heavenly Council and God is the Head of it.

            The author here “Argues that distinctively represents the Heavenly Council in a typified way of scenery description; he grouped these as ‘major scenes’ of the heavenly council” (266). This argument was based from his doctoral dissertation (Kee 2003) on which these passages has also be read and described Near Eastern Literature and the Hebrew Bible, and in here the center point is about the “Type-scene” on which the high god is located at the centre of the council surrounded by its members. Moreover, many passages from the Bible like I Kings, Isaiah, Psalm, Zechariah, Daniel and Job also prove that YHWH governs and the enemies are destroyed. Here, the “Type-scene” is clearly portrayed as it is visually described.

            In the sub-topic “Type-scene” of the church, the Hebrew Bible described that attendees stand in front of YHWH. Also, the North Eastern Literature, “A vision of the neither world” was included and studies. Together with “Prayer to known God…” which exhibit a belief that important events in the history are caused by the decision made in the heavenly council…”  Passage from Enuma Elisha also stated that divine assembly gathered are multitude of members and the high God is the center of it (265). These passages and the passages from the Bible that was mentioned describe the service of the multitude toward the “superior in the assembly” (268).

            In the conclusion, the visions described by the author taken from the said passage, depicts the characteristics of the “heavenly council and the center is the high god, including its location.” The repeated and the commonly used expression are effective; literary consistency and the expectancy in the passages that describe the heavenly council (267-268). Hence, as Isaiah 40 describe this heavenly council, the author says that the chapter certainly does not describe the heavenly council in a new customary way… rather, to focus on the text of meeting which is attested in the Ancient Israelites ‘desert wandering period…though this correspond to those of the heavenly council.

Kee, Min Suc. “The Heavenly Council.” In Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Vol. 31.3. (2007): 295-310. London: Sage Publications, 2007.

Wendy E.S. North: 4 Trinity Road, Darlington, DL3 7AS, UK; james.north2@ntlworld.com

Outline:

>Introduction

>Points of Interest

>Lincoln’s Stands

>Aspects of Lincoln’s Study

>John’s Perspectives

>Proofs of Lincoln’s Contribution to Johannine Studies

Review

This article of Wendy North’s article about the Commentary of Andrew Lincoln on John has given a profound study on this dimension of the Gospel. Although the author did not give sub-titles or sub-topics on it, it described thoroughly the way how Lincoln commented on the book of John, which I have just made my own outline of it…

In her introduction, North has given the outline of the order of Lincoln’s Commentary on John, which has given the readers of this article insight on what is all about this commentary. As the author continues, she gave some points of interest on the commentary. First, Lincoln has given the form of John which has three stages: “the version of the gospel, revised version from the evangelist’s hand and, additional materials composed by a later editor.” (344) The second point of interest that the author has given is that Lincoln convinced that the ancient biography best suits the gospel of John that is about the historicity of it. The third point of interest is about the conversion and conviction of Lincoln as he writes the commentary. And the last point of interest is Lincoln’s empathy on John’s gospel. Moreover, the commentary has also appendix, bibliography and indexes for more information to get by the reader. Hence, this article also signifies that “Lincoln’s skills are such as to make this commentary indispensable to beginners and professionals alike; bringing fresh perspectives to the continuing endeavor to understand this extraordinary Gospel” (344).

North has also given the three points on Lincoln’s stands on the Gospel of John, regarding the context with the Judeans, the historical reliability, and the detail of the commentary’s reliability… Moreover, Lincoln has also given “acute literary awareness… and some remarkable insights both in terms of the craftsmanship that has gone into the Gospel…” (345), some aspects of Lincoln’s Study on the Book of John is also discussed by the author: the gospel’s relation to the epistles, and the discussion on John’s Christology. However, as the author has also written, Lincoln has also put in his commentary the perspectives of John in his gospel. First is “the significance of Jesus’ life, which is interwoven with theology, this book as Gospel’s Sitz im Leben, and finally, the question whether John’s presentation of Jesus has stretched and transformed Jewish categories…” (348 )

The last part of this article then has given the proofs of Lincoln’s commentary’s “invaluable contribution to Johannine studies… These are the facts that Lincoln is an excellent communicator, and his argumentations are accessible to all, which gives commentaries that are as literal as possible… (350).

North, Wendy E.S. “A Christology too Far? Some Thoughts on Andrew Lincoln’s Commentary on John:” In Journal for the Study of the New Testament 29.3 (2007) 343-351. London: Sage Publications, 2007.

John Nolland: Trinity College, Stoke Hill, Bristol, BS9 1JP, UK. nollanddj@trinity-bris.ac.uk

Outline:

>Introduction

>Important things about Commentaries

>Arragements/Challenges for Commentary Writers

Review

This article written by John Nolland has given a unique description on the importance of commentaries. Though it has no outline of sub-titles or sub-topics, the flow of thought of the author and the sequence of his explanations regarding the purpose and value of commentaries could satisfy the readers.

The author here started his discussion about the value and purpose of commentaries as he reminisce their discussion and argument that they should stop writing so many commentaries during their AAR/SBL Annual Meeting. Because of this, the author had the concept that there is a need of constant renewal of commentaries, influenced as it is and should be by context and time, and is helpful to the one who uses it. He also values the efforts of those who have tried to generate an open texture of communication… (305-306)

With these, the author then gave the important things or the purpose and value of commentaries: “Commentaries are of their own time and place is evident by looking at commentaries from different periods and settings… bringing together of the horizons that belong to the text and horizons that belong to the interpreter…” (306) For the author, “a good commentary will be sensitive to the tension involved here, and to seek to work with it creatively.” (306) Moreover, the up-to-dateness of a commentary is also very important as well as the settings of the commentaries. And the problem here is that there will come a time that even these up-to-date commentaries will be out-of-date. So it is really necessary to have new commentaries as the age goes on. This will also include the “communication between the reader and the writer…” (307) and this needs a successful and effective communication that is appropriate and understandable by all readers at any level… “Good commentators recognize that the texts on which they comment will never be a perfect encoding of what the biblical writers had in mind… which relates to the purpose of their writing and the ‘cultural artifices’ that they are only aware of.” (308 )

However, it is also an encouragement for the author to the writers to have “new methods that bring new possibilities of insight and new ways of focusing insight because new methods allow for the answering of questions thrown up in new ways by an ever-developing context of culture and intellectual life…” this will include a genuine insight to answer the important questions that a reader has… (309) Hence, commentators should give the right interpretations of the Bible because many people, from various ages, groups, beliefs, and places, will be using it as they study the Bible deeply.

Nolland, John. “The Purpose and Value of           Commentaries:” In Journal of the Study of the New Testament 29.3 (2007) 305 – 311. London: Sage Publications, 2007.

Michael D. Matlock: Asbury Theological Seminary, 204 N. Lexington Ave., Wilmore, KY 40390, USA

Outline:

>Introduction: Exception or Obedience

>Understanding Deuteronomy’s Literary Structure

>The Tenth Commandment

>The Levirate Marriage

>Associations Between the Levirate Marriage and the Tenth Commandment

>Concluding Remarks

Review

The author, Michael D. Matlock had made a deep examination regarding the Tenth Commandment and the levirate marriage. He talks about whether the levirate marriage in (Deuteronomy 25:5-10) is an obedience or an exception on the tenth commandment (Deut. 5:21). In the introduction, the author has given the idea or question whether this matter is really an exception or obedience. He has given examples of different scholars who studied or examined these verses deeply. So in order to know the answer, the author has given the need for “a brief overview of Deuteronomy’s structure; the determination of possible meanings of the tenth commandment and the levirate marriage law, and a careful examination of the precise and specific correlations between the tenth commandment and the levirate marriage law” (297).

First, “understanding Deuteronomy’s Literary Structure which is divided into five sections corresponding to the five headings of the book (1:1; 4:44; 6:1; 29:1; 33:1), it also talks about the sequence of the book and “how the statutes and ordinances in 12-26 are structured and thus how the laws relate to the Decalogue” (299). Next is the study of the Tenth Commandment which signifies that the statutes and ordinance of levirate marriage (25:5-10) seems to provide commentary on the first half of the last commandment” (300). Thus… the mosaic legislation was not intended to cover all customs” (303). Moreover, this also talks about the custom of dowry which regards to wealth of a wife; hence this should not be desired in marriage.

The levirate marriage is also explained that this statutes which has a “concern to preserve human procreative power in extending families” (304). The passage also is concern whether a levir chooses to marry or not. The author cited Ian Cairns who believe “that the custom started with three-fold purpose: to perpetuate the deceased’s name and clan, to preserve the balance in land inheritance and to provide for the widow.” (305). The Israelites has also a great concern for continuance of clan through children, balancing inheritance among tribes, and respect that a widow gains from her son” (306). “The tenth commandment then seems related to economic desire…” (307), with these, the levir then “faces a moral dilemma. He can exhibit obedience or disobedience to his duty” (310); the answer then to this issue is that the levir is obeying the Ten Commandments when consummating the levirate marriage as being concluded by the author.

Matlock, D. Michael. “Obeying the First Part of the Tenth Commandment: Applications from the Levirate Marriage Law:” In Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Vol.3 (2007): 295-310. London: Sage Publications, 2007.

Law and Life:Leviticus 18:5 in the Literary Framework of Ezekiel

Preston Sprinkle: Department of Divinity, University of Aberdeen, Kings College, Aberdeen AB24 3UB

Outline:

>Introduction

>Leviticus 18:5 in Ezekiel’s Literary Framework

>Statutes and Ordinances in H and Ezekiel

>Ezekiel 18

>Ezekiel 20

>Ezekiel 33

>Ezekiel 36:16-28; 37:24

>Ezekiel 37:1-14

>Conclusion

Review

This article about Law and Life, Leviticus 18:5 “’So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the LORD.” NASB was written purposely in order to reveal the verse’s connection to the book of Ezekiel. The author shows that Leviticus 18:5 is “referred to Ezekiel 18, 20, 33, 36, and 37 regarding the “statutes and judgments” of Yahweh to Israel and the life as a result of it. “This suggests that the text of Lev. 18:5, was selected to highlight the conditional nature of these covenant stipulations, which amplifies divine agency in the program of restoration” (275).

The author here has a good research to the formulas about the similarities of Leviticus 18:5 and Ezekiel by comparing the verses or passages written on the former to the latter. And as being studied, in Ezekiel 5, 11, 18, 20, and 33, the “statutes and judgments” of Yahweh to the Israelites were unfulfilled but was fulfilled through divine enablement in Ezekiel 36:27 and 37:24. Also, the “blessing of life” is unfulfilled in Ezekiel 18:20, 33 but was fulfilled through causation in Ezekiel 37:1-14… making these passages being summarized in Leviticus 18:5.

For further explanations of the author regarding this matter, prophet Ezekiel is concern on the Israel’s responsibility as a nation to obey the statutes and judgments of Yahweh, and together with this is their repentance (Ezekiel 18:30). With these, it suggests that “Ezekiel 18 is alluding to Lev. 18:5 when employing a similar law-life matrix” (284). Ezekiel 33 connects to Lev. 18:5 with the point that “if the righteous lives in his own righteousness, he will surely die” (Ezekiel 33:13). Thus, saying that a righteous man can only live if he turns away from his sins. However, Ezekiel 36 is connected to Lev. 18:5 through the concept of “restoration” because “Yahweh’s concern for His Holy Name forces Him to relent from destroying the nation” (Ezekiel 36:14, 22). And lastly, Ezekiel 37 fulfills His promise to give life through His Spirit.

In the last part, the author concluded that if man (like the Israelites) would obey God’s statutes and judgment, he or she shall live. God will fulfill His divine promise, in spite of “the conditional nature of Lev. 18:5 which is replaced by divine intervention” (293).

Prinkle, Preston. “Law and Life: Leviticus 18:5 in the Literary Framework of Ezekiel:” In Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Vol. 31.3 (2007): 275-293. London: Sage Publications, 2007.

Because of the different versions of the Bible, many people are confused on what to use, especially for the ministers, teachers, and Bible Study leaders in churches. But it is also important to know that these Bible Versions can be evaluated and classified in order to know how to use and what to use in different ministries. With these, the Bible can be classified into pulpit, study, and devotional, as I have read and studied it one by one.

Pulpit ministry Bibles are used in reading the text when preaching. First, The American Standard Version since this is considered as “public domain” and the text can be easily understood unlike the King James Version which is three Centuries earlier. The second Bible that can be used in pulpit ministry is The Revised Version aiming to be a readable and literally accurate, having a clearer understanding, and its simplicity.

However, for Bibles used for study are The Authorized Version, which is being adapted from King James Version, The Revised Version with marginal notes to alert the reader to variations in wording in ancient manuscripts, and The New English Version, which has a quite deeper sense of translation or explanation than other popular versions of the Bible. These Bibles are good for study use because of the different understandings and deeper translation that can be used for further information and knowledge of the Bible.

Lastly, Bibles that are classified for devotional use are The Good News for Modern Man, The Living Bible, and The Phillips Modern English, which are more readable and has more modern translations that can be easily understood by modern people, even the children because of its more literal translation. It is good for devotional so that at least everybody could understand easily and are related for their context for modern times.

            For some the literal interpretation is considered as the author’s intended meaning. However, there are differences in their methodology and usage. Literal interpretation is often or commonly defines as “letterism” which would mean interpretation of every single word into the literal meaning. In biblical interpretation “letterism” is too extreme because it may miss the real concepts of the intended meaning without taking its symbolism. Hence, to understand the literal meaning one must consider its symbolic meaning.  For example “Jesus is the Lamb of God.” Generally Lamb is four-footed animal and nothing else related with Jesus without its symbolic meaning. But when it is interpreted symbolically, it simply means innocence and sacrifice.  In the same way, literal interpretation is literally interpreting the author’s intended meaning but often times it need to interpret its meaning in symbolic.

            Intended meaning can be defined as something what the author or writer really intended to mean or to say. The author or writer normally do not intended to mean diversity of meanings in what they say or addresses but they intended to say one thing to mean a single meaning. The principle of author intended meaning must study thoroughly about the words in their own context because word changes from generation to generation and it may not be relevant to our contemporary world today. Thus, one must research the word with their context and find out the possible meaning of the word that is relevant to the present context because the word of God is to make sense to the hearers and its message must be meaningful to all ages to come.

            Indeed, we can not separate literal and intended meaning from each other because both have the same purpose that is to find the author’s intended meaning for the readers. Some of the common features are; one must interpret the word in its context, symbolic language, and also the diversity of possible meaning in a single word. Because the author may intend one meaning by a word whereas the same word may have varieties of meaning that could be discovered in the process.

No. I would argue with the following characteristics as invalid reasons.

1. Scientific outlook and methods can be applied to the Bible in order to get the fullest meaning as a help but science can not prove the divine Work of God called “Miracles.” It is purely the act of God for which scientific methods and findings can not prove it neither denies it.

1. Inspiration is from God and His divine activity and it was the method of receiving, interpreting and recording by human writers and yet it was through the guiding of the Holy Spirit upon those writers. The Holy Spirit is the source of Inspiration.

1. The Bible is not the evolution interpretation but it was the divine revelation of God to human being. The interpretation was done with many church fathers and scholars with deliberate explanation.

1. Yes theological concept accommodates the people of the day but one must remember the shedding of Jesus’ blood. Jesus did something new and unique in order to show the difference of right and wrong. He did it so that the old traditional beliefs of human sacrifice is ceased and brought a new perspective of worship and rituals. Hence, Jesus’ blood sacrifice is still relevant to our context which gives us to understand the new perspective of worship and offering.

1. The emphasis of historical interpretation on developmental literacy is meant to get the author’s intended meaning of what God had revealed to the writers. It is not avoiding the environmental background of the revelation.

1. From the very fall of man in the Garden of Eden, there was a promised between Satan and Eve that a man would rule the Satan. Jesus became the fulfillment of that promised and all the Old Testament pointed to Jesus Christ. The founder of Christianity is still attributed to Jesus alone. Although Paul and Apostle may be dynamic or effective preachers or teachers, and yet they are still the student of Jesus Christ. Only the apostles and Paul contributed great impact upon the transformation of the Christianity.

The hermeneutics of Alexandria was the product of Greek philosophy and Hebrew religion under the influence of a Philo, an Alexandrian Jew, who was a contemporary of Jesus. He claimed that Greek philosophy was developed from Moses’ writings of the Pentateuch. He believed the harmony of the doctrine of divine revelation (Old Testament) and the discoveries of the speculative thought (Greek Philosophy). Philo developed the set of rules for interpreting the scriptures either in allegory or literal meaning. For him the scripture can not be interpreted literally when: 1). The statement is unworthy of God, 2). There is any contradiction, and 3). Allegory is obvious. On the other hand the scripture can be interpreted both allegorically and literally when: 1). A word is repeated, and 2). If a word is superfluous. Moreover, if synonyms are used, an allegorical meaning is intended and unusual expressions imply something mystical.

The school of Antiochenes is the traditional interpretation based on its literal or historical meaning. But they saw and gave deeper meaning on the historical or literal interpretation than the Scripture and thus reject the hidden meanings or allegory because they believe the hidden meaning can be comprehended by the Gnostics alone. This school of interpretation gives more importance to linguistic details such as particles, moods, prepositions, and terminology (Theodore of Mopsuestia). This school also accepted the whole Bible in its literal interpretation as guide for conduct and rejects the dogmatism and allegory (Chrysostom).

The primary goal of interpretation of the Bible is to make sense to the readers in their own context and setting. The interpreters and writers of the Bible made interpretation sense and meaningful in their times of specific cultural context and setting. Today we live in different world of thoughts and perspectives of those original interpreters. Hence, different problems, worldviews, understanding, and approaches so one can not just reject school of Alexandria and give more importance to Antiochene School and vice versa rather we must integrate both school of interpretations and make sense to our present context and its related issues. For me, the interpretation of the Bible should not base exclusively on either one but must synthesize both of them in order to fit to the contemporary world and its related needs and issues.

Ashulo Seb

Having many translations of the Bible has given us both positive and negative impact on our readings. Some of the benefits or positive outcomes that derived from various translations are making available, accessible and easy reading and understanding for all people based on generation to generation because from the very beginning of the translation, the goal (e.g. Alfred the great) was to interpret the original Hebrews, Greek or latin translations into English so that all the English speaking people will hear it and understand the message of the Bible.

King James Version had given keen attention for the beauty of the original language of Hebrew and Greek and it was used by the churches for more than 300 years as the most authoritative translations. The outcome of this translation was in original language even though it might not be smooth and organized.

As the usage of language changes from generation to generation, the scholars keep updated the readers with new translations of latest English version which would focus on good structures, accurate sentences and even grammar compositions. Some translations like American Standard Versions are good intended for teachers, scholars, professionals, and the students who would benefits out of this specific translation because they did not go for Authorized Version or modern expressions of recent versions but the accuracy. Still there are new revised edition which had been given their best efforts to translate the Bible in a simplest way that it is very easy to read, understandable and would cost at the lowest price for the common people.

The translation come and goes in their own time and popularity, but the message of the Bible remains the same. Each translation had their own focused, goal of interpretations and produces the best result for the readers in their own time. Different translations give wider perspective and approaches in reading the Bible and its interpretations. It also enhances our current English usage and gives the possible rich meaning of the original languages. Above all, the greatest contributions of different translations are making the gospel message available, readable, understandable, relevant, low cost and accessible to every believer.

Ashulo Seb