The Church in Rome: Jews and Greeks

July 30, 2015 randymccracken 14 Comments

The Church in Rome: Jews and Greeks

Why did Paul write the Church in Rome? This article helps to answer that by looking at the beginning and makeup of the Church in Rome.

Paul’s letter to the Romans is full of the use of ethnic terms. In fact, no letter in the New Testament uses as many ethnic terms, or duplicates the frequency with which Paul uses such terms as Romans. A tabulation of the following words illustrates my point. The word “gentiles/nations” occurs 29 times in Romans; “circumsion/uncircumcision” occurs 15 times; “Jew” is found 11 times as is “Israel”; “Greek” is used 6 times; while “Israelites” occurs 2 times and “barbarians” once. This comes to a total of 75 ethnic references in Romans. Although Paul uses various ethnic designations, all of the words can be boiled down into two distinct groups of people: Jews and Greeks (or gentiles). This would be similar to an author today using ethnic designations such as “Afro-American,” “black,” “Caucasian,” and “white.” Although 4 different words are being used, only two groups of people are being described. Paul’s frequent usage of these ethnic terms suggests something about the population that made up the church in Rome in the first century, as well as potential reasons why he was writing to them. The following article seeks to fulfil a promise made last year in a post entitled, “Jews and Greeks in the New Testament.” I recommend reading that article first (or rereading it if it has been awhile) as it provides some necessary background for what I will be discussing here.

The Beginnings of the Church in Rome

All scholars agree that the beginnings of the Church in Rome are shrouded in obscurity. However, it is noted that “visitors from Rome” were among those who heard Peter’s sermon on that first Pentecost Sunday that the church began (Acts 2:10). It is usually thought that the gospel may have first reached Jewish synagogues in Rome through some of these witnesses. Even if this was not the case, Jews in Rome were closely in touch with what was happening in Jerusalem, and there were frequent goings and comings between these two important cities in the Roman empire. So it is reasonable to assume that the gospel message reached Jewish ears in Rome not long after that first Pentecost in one way or another, and that some responded by becoming believers in Jesus. This reconstruction suggests that the original makeup of the Church in Rome would have been mostly Jewish in the beginning, with perhaps some proselytes or God-fearers (Gentile attenders of the synagogue) also coming to faith.

We know from Roman records that in 41 A.D. the emperor Claudius restricted the public meeting of the Jews in Rome. The reason seems to relate to trouble within the synagogues in Rome. While the cause of this trouble is not specified, an educated guess would be that it involved disputes over Jesus as the Messiah. We know from the Book of Acts (e.g., Acts 17:1-9; 18:4-8, 12-17) that this was a major cause of, not only disruption in the synagogues, but civil disruption as well. Further evidence may be provided by Claudius’s expulsion of the Jews from Rome in 49 A.D. The Roman writer Suetonius states that Claudius “expelled the Jews from Rome because they kept rioting at the instigation of Chrestus.” Although the correct form for Christ in Greek would be “Christos,” many scholars think that Suetonius simply got the name wrong. This statement, as well as the evidence from Acts, suggests that the synagogues in Rome were experiencing the same kind of conflict going on in synagogues throughout the empire regarding the proclamation of Jesus as the Christ. Indeed, we might ask, what else could cause such violent conflict in Jewish synagogues of this era?

The Church in Rome and the Gentile Majority

This interesting tombstone from Rome shows 2 Jewish menorahs, but the inscription is in Greek. Paul's letter to the Romans makes it clear that the Church in Rome consited of Jews and Greeks. — This interesting tombstone from Rome shows a Greek inscription flanked by 2 Jewish menorahs, as well as other Jewish symbols. Paul’s letter to the Romans makes it clear that the Church in Rome consisted of Jews and Greeks.

With the expulsion of the Jews from the city of Rome in 49 A.D., the Church in Rome would have mostly consisted of gentiles (Many scholars believe only Jewish leaders were actually expelled from Rome. If this was the case, some Jewish believers would have remained in the Church.). After the death of Claudius in 54 A.D., many Jews returned to Rome. Aquila and Priscilla are examples of this. Although they left Rome when Claudius expelled the Jews (Acts 18:1-2), they had returned to Rome by the time Paul wrote his letter to the Church in Rome (Rom. 16:3-5). However, by the time some of these Jewish believers returned, circumstances would have changed. The Church in Rome would now have consisted of gentile leadership and a gentile majority. That the Church in Rome consisted of a majority of gentiles when Paul wrote his epistle, seems clear from a number of references in the letter (e.g., Rom. 1:5-6, 13). As Thomas Schreiner states, “When he [Paul] reflects on the composition of the Roman church, he apparently conceives of it mainly as Gentile. This is confirmed by Rom. 11:13, which specifically addresses the Gentiles, and by 15:15–16, where Paul justifies his boldness in the letter since he has a particular calling as a ‘minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles’” (Schreiner, T. R. (1998). Romans (Vol. 6, p. 14). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books). This historical shift from a church which consisted mainly of Jewish believers and leadership to one that consisted mainly of Gentile believers and leadership, was bound to create some problems when Jewish believers began returning to Rome. Ben Witherington III sizes up the problem this way: “They [the Jews] have been marginalized by the expulsion, and Paul is addressing a largely Christian Gentile audience in Rome which has drawn some erroneous conclusions about Jews and Jewish Christians” (Witherington III, Ben. (2004). Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (p. 12). Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).

Historical and Cultural Context and Paul’s Letter to the Church in Rome

The Church in Rome shifted from a Jewish majority to a Gentile majority

Being aware of the historical context described above, as well as the cultural context (i.e., problems between Jews and Greeks, see my previous article cited above), opens a new window of understanding into Paul’s Letter to the Romans. First, the 75 ethnic references in the letter (Jew and Greek, etc.) suggest that ethnic relationships in the Church in Rome are a major concern of Paul’s. Second, a number of the doctrines that Paul writes about in the letter begin to make sense against this background of ethnic tension. For example, Jews and Greeks are all sinners (Rom. 3:9), both Jews and Gentiles are saved in the same way–by faith (Rom. 3:28-30), and Abraham is the father of those who are uncircumcised as well as those who are circumcised (Rom. 4:9-12). Furthermore, as one understands the historical switch from Jewish majority to Gentile majority in the Church in Rome, Paul’s exhortations in Romans 9-11, as well as Romans 14-15 make a lot of sense. For example, Paul argues that God is not finished with Israel (Rom. 11:11-12, 15, 25-26), and that the Gentiles need to recognize their debt to Israel and not be arrogant (Rom. 11:17-23). Paul’s discussion about not being divisive over food and the observation of certain days also highlights some of the struggles between Gentile and Jewish believers (Rom. 14:1-15:6). This understanding of the historical/cultural situation in the Roman Church helps us to better appreciate how significant Paul’s statement in Romans 10:12 is when he says, “For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all bestowing his riches on all who call on him” (ESV).

The Church in Rome was Not a Church As We Think of Church

An excellent article in italymagazine.com on Roman housings shows an artistic rendering of what ancient tenement houses or insulae would have looked like. — An excellent article in italymagazine.com on Roman housing shows an artistic rendering of what ancient tenement houses or insulae would have looked like.

To further appreciate the situation Paul is addressing, one other historical/cultural insight is important. When we talk about the “Church in Rome,” we are not referring to a single congregation which meets in a large public building somewhere in the city. Nor are we speaking about a “megachurch” in the sense that some might think of today. Rather, we are speaking of a number of groups of people meeting throughout the City of Rome, either in houses or apartment (tenement) complexes. Paul’s greetings in Romans 16 are instructive regarding this point. Paul notes that some Christians meet with Priscilla and Aquila “in their house” (Rom. 16:5). Besides this group Paul mentions several other groups meeting in Rome (Rom. 16:10, 11, 14, 15). Along with these groups, Paul mentions a number of individuals but does not cite what group they may be meeting with. Rome was a city of one million people in the first century and Christianity was not a legal religion, therefore, Christians could not meet in a public building. The groups that Paul mentions suggests that the Church in Rome was scattered throughout the city and meeting in houses or apartments. This small-group setting would mean that any tension between believers would be very noticeable and potentially volatile. This makes Paul’s words in Romans 14:1 and 15:7 about “welcoming” one another very significant. People who feel unwelcome in a small-group setting will not stay around for long. Conversely, those who are making them feel unwelcome may not even invite them in! The result would be a horrible fractioning of the body of Christ in Rome, something that the fledgling church certainly did not need.

How History and Culture Help Us Understand the Letter to the Romans

The unity of Jews and Gentiles was a primary concern of Paul's, not only in Romans, but also in other espistles written by the apostle. — The unity of Jews and Gentiles was a primary concern of Paul’s, not only in Romans, but also in other espistles written by the apostle.

Although Paul’s letter to the Romans probably had several purposes (one being his desire to receive their assistance on a trip to Spain–Rom. 15:24), the historical and cultural background we have traced in these two articles relating to “Jews and Greeks,” demonstrates that the unity of the Church in Rome was a significant concern of Paul’s. As Craig Keener points out, “Given this situation, what the Roman Christians needed was what we would call racial reconciliation and crosscultural sensitivity” (Keener, C. S. (1993). The IVP Bible background commentary: New Testament (Ro). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press). This is a message that is easily overlooked without the proper background knowledge. Yet it is arguably one of the most important teachings in the Letter to the Romans. There are many good resources available today for understanding the background to Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. I have noted a few of them in this post. Hopefully, these posts (about Jews and Greeks) will help to encourage those interested in the study of the Bible about the significance of knowing the historical and cultural background in which the Bible was written.

Insights from Family Portraits

Free EBook Giveaway

July 27, 2015 randymccracken 15 Comments

Free EBook Giveaway

Purchase at Amazon USA / UK, or get the ebook from westbow press.com — Get a free ebook copy of Family Portraits from westbow press.com by letting me know in the comment section below.

As a way of saying “thank you” to those of you who visit this blog and read the articles posted here, I would like to offer you a free ebook of my recently published book entitled, Family Portraits: Character Studies in 1 and 2 Samuel. To obtain your free ebook simply post a comment below. I will email you a number that will enable you to receive a copy of Family Portraits from WestBow Press. My one request is that you commit to writing a review on Amazon when you have read the book. If you’d like to read an interview about Family Portraits click here. I have also posted a short video (click here) where my friend Mike Neglia from Calvary Chapel Cork does a short interview with me about the book. Alternatively, you can read sample pages of Family Portraits at Amazon USA / UK or at the WestBow press link above (or order a hardcopy of Family Portraits if you prefer!). There are also a number of excerpts directly from Family Portraits in various posts on this website. Click here to scroll through the list to read some of them. Please help me spread the word by telling your friends about this free ebook offer. This offer is for a limited time or as long as supplies last. So please request your free ebook copy today.

Unfortunately this offer has expired. Please consider ordering a copy from one of the links above. Thank you!

Commentaries, The Book of Genesis

Favorite Genesis Commentaries

July 21, 2015 randymccracken 5 Comments

Favorite Genesis Commentaries

Last year I intended to begin a series of posts on my favorite biblical commentaries. I began with a post on my favorite commentaries from 1&2 Samuel (click here), but unfortunately I have not taken the time to continue this series until now. Below I list some of my favorite Genesis commentaries. But before proceeding to the list below I’d like to explain a little about my selection of commentaries for biblical books. As Michael Heiser explains in his mobile ed course from Logos, Introducing Biblical Interpretation, there are 3 different kinds of commentaries: 1. Devotional or Popular (a one volume commentary with very general info); 2. Expositional (more specific, English based, dealing with some textual issues); and 3. Scholarly (based on research in the original languages, with more indepth discussion of the various issues raised by a text). Generally, my commentary selections come from category 3 because I have found these kinds of commentaries to be the most insightful and beneficial. Sometimes a selection may also come from category 2. Although devotional commentaries are a great resource for getting some basics and for inspiration, my focus is on those commentaries that give a deeper insight into the text. Following the lead of my previous article on Samuel commentaries, I will list my 5 favorite Genesis commentaries, although this time I have listed them in the order of my preference from 5 to 1.

This Genesis commentary is available at Amazon USA / UK

5. James McKeown, Genesis, The Two Horizons Old Testament Commentary, (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2008), 398 pp.

What I like about the Two Horizons Commentary format is that the first part of the book focuses on the commentary proper while the second half of the book treats important theological topics raised by the biblical book under discussion. The commentary on Genesis itself in the first part of this book is only 193 pages. My first reaction was that this was a thin treatment of a biblical book with 50 chapters! However, McKeown doesn’t waste any space and does an excellent job of focusing on the main points of the text. The second half of the book greatly enriches the commentary portion and allows McKeown extra space to focus on important topics in Genesis. McKeown breaks his treatment down into 3 parts: 1) Theological Message of the Book; 2) Genesis and Theology Today; and 3) Genesis and Biblical Theology. Under “Theological Message of the Book,” McKeown devotes 100 pages to the important themes of Genesis. His opening discussion concerns “Main Unifying Themes,” of which he sees descendants (the theme of the seed), blessing (or relationship with God), and land as the key themes of Genesis. McKeown states that, “The theme of descendants is the foundational or key theme, since the others, blessing and land, can only be recognized by their relational function to those who benefit from them–the descendants” (p. 197). In Part 2: “Genesis and Theology Today McKeown examines the various questions regarding Genesis and Science (Creationist and other approaches, the Day/Age theory, etc.). Part 3: “Genesis and Biblical Theology,” examines the influence of Genesis (including quotes, allusions, and ideas) on the rest of the biblical canon. If someone was looking for an insightful, but shorter treatment of the Book of Genesis, this is a commentary I would definitely recommend.

4. Bruce K. Waltke, Genesis: A Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 656 pp.

One of the greatest strengths of this Genesis commentary by Waltke, is also one of its weaknesses. Waltke pays great attention to the structure of the Book of Genesis. He believes it is an intricately woven set of concentric patterns (some would say chiastic patterns). Although Waltke really opened my eyes to the literary beauty of the Book of Genesis, and taught me to look at it in a way I had not before, many would argue that at least some of his concentric patterns are forced. Nevertheless, I appreciate the fact that his commentary follows the outline of the Book of Genesis by using the “these are the generations of” (Hebrew: toledoth) formula. A lot of the introductory material is designed to familiarize the reader with various literary techniques that can be found in the Book of Genesis. Things such as key word, contrast and comparison, foreshadowing, and inclusion, to name a few. Besides a commentary section, Waltke has many other useful ways in which he examines the passage. He summarizes the theme of each “book” (or toledoth), provides an outline, does a literary analysis showing the structure, summarizes the theology and adds other helpful discussions. For example, in “Book 2,” (Gen. 5:1-6:8), Waltke provides helpful discussions on genealogical structure and the use of numbers. While one may not agree with all of Waltke’s conclusions, this Genesis commentary is packed full of information and insight, and presents a very illuminating way of looking at the Book of Genesis.

Volume 1 of Hamilton's 2 volume Genesis commentary, available at Amazon USA / UK — Volume 1 of Hamilton’s 2 volume Genesis commentary, available at Amazon USA / UK

3. Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament, vols. 1&2 (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1990, 1995), 522 & 774 pp. respectively

The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (NICOT) series is simply one of the best commentary series out there (its companion on the New Testament is also excellent–see my review here). If you’re looking for high quality evangelical scholarship, this series is hard to beat. Hamilton certainly upholds this standard in his excellent 2 volume Genesis commentary. Hamilton begins in volume 1 with a 100-page introduction which concludes with a whopping 25 page bibliography! In the Introduction, Hamilton discusses such topics as the structure, composition, theology, and canonicity of Genesis, as well as others. Unlike the other two commentaries mentioned above, the NICOT includes a translation by the author from the original Hebrew. Thus each section begins with this fresh translation and any footnotes the author deems necessary in explaining the Hebrew text and his translation of it. A verse by verse commentary follows. Each section (usually following chapter divisions) concludes with a helpful section entitled: “New Testament Appropriation.” This section looks at NT quotes from Genesis or the NT’s appropriation (hence the title) of certain concepts from Genesis (e.g., the image of God). As one might expect from a commentary that is approximately 1300 pages, Hamilton’s commentary patiently discusses significant problems in Genesis interpretation (e.g., who are the “sons of God?”) and provides a lot of wonderful insights.

Wenham's 2 volume Genesis commentary is available at Amazon USA / UK — Wenham’s 2 volume Genesis commentary is available at Amazon USA / UK

2. Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis, Word Biblical Commentary, 2 vols. (Waco: Word Books, 1987, 1994), 353 & 517 pp. respectively

For those of you who read any of my reviews, you may be aware that Gordon J. Wenham is a favorite author of mine (see my review of Exploring the Old Testament: Pentateuch, by Wenham). This is actually my favourite Genesis commentary, but my reason for putting it at number 2 will be discussed below under number 1. Wenham spends more than half of his introduction discussing “Genesis in Recent Research,” which involves the authorship and composition of Genesis. It includes a look at the documentary hypothesis (JEDP) and the “New Literary Criticism” approach. Wenham argues for the unity of many of the Genesis narratives and concludes that the most likely scenario for Genesis is that it was written by one author whom he designates as “J” (using the old terminology) somewhere between 1250 – 950 B.C., with a few late editorial updates (e.g., “Ur of the Chaldeans”–Gen. 15:7). Wenham sums up his discussion of the theology of Genesis by stating “If the message of Genesis is essentially one of redemption, Gen. 3-11 explains why man needs salvation and what he needs to be saved from” (p. lii). For those who are unfamiliar with the format used by Word Biblical Commentary, each section contains the following: 1) an original translation of the Hebrew text by the author; 2) notes on the translation itself; 3) comments on the form, structure, and setting of the passage under consideration; 4) a comment section (this is the verse by verse commentary); and 5) an explanation section which sums up the meaning of the text and seeks modern-day application. Each section also includes a detailed bibliography. One of the strongest aspects of Wenham’s commentary, in my opinion, is his analysis of the structure and flow of the narrative in Genesis. While this is more commonplace in commentaries today, Wenham’s Genesis commentary was among the pioneering efforts of the New Literary Criticism approach. The careful reader will be greatly rewarded working his or her way through this excellent commentary.

This 2-volume Genesis commentary by Mathews is available at Amazon USA / UK

1. Kenneth A. Mathews, Genesis, The New American Commentary, 2 vols. (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996, 2005), 528, 960 pp. respectively

My reason for giving the nod to Mathew’s commentary on Genesis over Wenham’s is because Mathews has the benefit of reaping the insights of Wenham, Hamilton, and many other Genesis commentators before him. If you could only buy one Genesis commentary, this is the one I would recommend because of the great synthesis of material that it contains. This is not to say that Mathews does not offer his own contributions to understanding the text of Genesis, but only to affirm that he has greatly benefitted from the work of others before him. The sheer size of this commentary, nearly 1500 pages, suggests its thoroughness (at least as far as can be expected on any one book of the Bible). Mathews excellent 90 page introduction in volume 1 only covers that volume (which treats Gen. 1:1-11:26). In volume 2, Mathews has another 60 pages of introductory material before beginning the commentary on Genesis 11:27-50:26. Mathew’s favors a literary approach, and this is one of the first things he discusses in the Introduction of volume 1. The stated purpose of the New American Commentary series by the editors includes “illuminating both the historical meaning and contemporary significance of Holy Scripture” (Editors’ Preface) and focuses on two concerns: 1) how each section of a book fits together; and 2) a theological exegesis which provides practical, applicable exposition. The NIV translation is used throughout the commentary with the author’s comments on the Hebrew text when necessary. Each section begins with an outline of the passage under consideration followed by introductory comments, commentary on the verses themselves. Theology and application is interwoven in the commentary and at points the commentary is punctuated by “Excurses” on important topics. Mathews demonstrates a mastery of the material and no important discussion is omitted. This commentary is the most comprehensive commentary on Genesis that I have come across. It should definitely be a part of any Christian’s library who desires to be a student of the Word.

There are, of course, many other commentaries on the Book of Genesis worthy of reading. Those mentioned above are simply my favorites. Honorable mention should also be given to Umberto Cassuto’s 2- volume Genesis commentary, Walter Brueggemann’s Genesis commentary in the Interpretation series, and Gerhard Von Rad’s Genesis commentary in the Old Testament Library series. For a popular treatment of Genesis that is based on scholarly research (but reads as if the author is telling you about his discoveries in Genesis), one should consult Genesis: The Story We Haven’t Heard by Paul Borgman. By the way, Borgman is the author of David, Saul, & God, previously reviewed by me at the following link (click here).

As the first book of the Bible, and as the book that provides the foundation for all the rest, I would greatly encourage you to study the book of Genesis. I am confident that studying it with one or more of the commentaries above by your side would be a blessing and greatly enhance your knowledge and understanding of Genesis. For an overview of the main theme of Genesis see my article: The Theme of the Book of Genesis.

Book Reviews

Reading the Historical Books

July 16, 2015 randymccracken Leave a comment

Reading the Historical Books

Written in a clear, nontechnical style, with an eye toward the modern young reader Reading the Historical Books: A Student’s Guide to Engaging the Biblical Text by Patricia Dutcher-Walls is an excellent introduction on reading the historical books of the Old Testament. For those who might wonder, the historical books include Joshua, Judges, 1&2 Samuel, 1&2 Kings, 1&2 Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah. Dutcher-Walls lays out her purpose as follows: “How do we read the historical books in the Old Testament well? What do we need to know about this part of Scripture in order to appreciate the beauty and meanings of the text? This small volume will introduce you to aspects of the genre of history writing in the Old Testament in order to make your further reading and study of Scripture more informed and sensitive” (p. xv).

Chapter 1 demonstrates the importance of understanding 3 historical contexts: 1) The context of the events; 2) the context of the one recounting the events (which is sometimes years after the events have happened); and 3) the context of the reader. Whenever people communicate with one another, common assumptions about language and culture leave certain things unspoken. Dutcher-Walls argues for the significance of understanding some of these background issues. For example, a reader of these Old Testament histories may be unfamiliar with the geography of the ancient Near East, or of the ancient nations mentioned in the text. Dutcher-Walls seeks to create a common ground for all her readers by surveying the story of the historical books while noting some of the important background information. She accomplishes this task utilizing the following subtitles: “Geographical and Political Context and the Story in Summary (Parts 1&2);” “Religious Context of the History Writing;” (e.g., writing with the assumption that God, or gods played a part in the story) and “Social Context of Biblical History Writing” (e.g., group mentality vs. individualistic outlook).

Anyone reading the historical books of the Old Testament quickly realizes that the accounts are related in story form. Dutcher-Walls spends chapter 2 focusing on important aspects of biblical story-telling such as “Plot Development,” “Characterization,” “Point of View,” and “Time Flow.” Dutcher-Walls’s discussion of plot development is very informative. She writes about how to discover “beginnings and endings,” how to detect “scenic structure,” the importance of following the “story arc,” and recognition of “sequences” (e.g., command-enactment-report). Other important observations include how, “biblical narrative art . . . prefers actions over long descriptions of a person” (p. 55), and how the most common point of view in the historical books is that of the “third-person narrator” (p. 62). While many of these observations are common-place for biblical scholars, they can be eye-opening for the beginning student.

Chapter 3 entitled, “Discerning the Interests of the Text,” is a helpful chapter that “examines the principal ways that the Old Testament passages convey the concepts and theology inherent in its writing” (p. xix). The ways that the historical books convey their interests include: “Building Presence” (repetitive emphasis on important points or people–e.g., the large amount of material focused on King David); “Establishing Authority” (e.g., the words of leaders or prophets); “Crafting Repetition” (the importance of repetition); “Setting Up Analogies Between Accounts” (defined as “an analogy between two stories, in which the story line in one passage closely resembles the situation in the other so that a comparison is set up, ” p. 80); “Using Direct Evaluation,” “Creating Patterns” (such as the formula for kings’ reigns); “Setting Up Models” (setting up one character to be compared against others); “Creating Dramatic Impact” (“using drama and intensity to focus an audience’s attention,” p. 91); and “Using Detail to Increase Presence.” For each of these sub-categories, Dutcher-Walls provides examples.

Patricia Dutcher-Walls, author of Reading the Historical Books.

Chapters 4 and 5 are entitled: “Examining History in the Text,” and “Examining the Shape of History in the Text,” respectively. These two chapters focus on the following questions: “How do these biblical texts work as ancient history writing? When these texts tell us about the past, in what ways do they do this? What are the characteristics of how the texts write history, and how do those characteristics fit into the history writing done by other ancient cultures that surrounded ancient Israel and Judah?” (p. 103). Dutcher-Walls begins by noting that all historical writing is selective (p. 104). She also makes the important observation that “ancient history writing did not use the same standards and principles used in modern history writing, and it would be unfair to use modern standards to judge ancient history writing” (p. 106). According to Dutcher-Walls, the historical books follow certain conventions of ancient historical writing including: 1) a chronological structure; 2) use of narrative content; 3) the use of past traditions and archives as sources; 4) the use of direct speech; 5) a presentation of patterns or statement of causes behind various events; 6) providing evaluations and interpretations of the past; and 7) using past events to address the present.

Dutcher-Walls draws the essentials of her book together in a fine 10-page conclusion. This conclusion not only summarizes the important points of her book, it also gives a very useful outline of chapters 2 and 3 for anyone wanting to apply the principles of interpretation that she delineates in those chapters. These helpful outlines are typical of the book as a whole. Throughout the book Dutcher-Walls provides helpful panels with important information (e.g., a panel on “Writing Materials in the Ancient Near East,” p. 123; or a panel entitled “Perspectives and Interests in Modern History Writing,” p. 147). The book is also interspersed with questions for the thoughtful student throughout. Besides questions at the end of every chapter, she includes small panels entitled, “Questions for Careful Readers.” The questions add a note of authenticity to her desire to provide “A Student’s Guide,” as the subtitle of her book suggests.

I have a few minor disagreements with Dutcher-Walls. One being the implication that the historical books, as well as other ancient historical writings, follow a chronological approach. It is hard to disagree with this in the broad scope of things, however, the biblical historical books, as well as other ancient documents, often display a creativity of arrangement. The biblical histories are not averse to changing the chronological order if it helps to communicate a point (e.g., Judges 19-21; 2 Sam. 21-24), and it is important that the modern reader be aware of this as it can affect one’s interpretation. That being said, however, Dutcher-Walls has written a fine book for the beginning student who desires to read the historical books more profitably. I highly recommend it to beginning students and teachers of the biblical historical books.

For those of you who would like to read an interview with Patricia Dutcher-Walls, or see some short video clips of her talking about Reading the Historical Books, please click on the link here: https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2014/08/reading-the-bibles-historical-books-an-interview-with-patricia-dutcher-walls/

Reading the Historical Books is also available at Amazon USA / UK

(My thanks to Baker Academic Books for providing a copy of this book in exchange for a fair and unbiased review.)

Character Studies, Insights from Family Portraits

Jeremiah, descendant of Eli Prophesies Hope for the Future

July 13, 2015 randymccracken 7 Comments

Jeremiah, descendant of Eli Prophesies Hope for the Future

Jeremiah 29:11, “For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the Lord, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope,” is one of the most popular Bible verses among evangelicals. In its original context, God, through Jeremiah, is speaking hope to the wayward citizens of Judah who had been taken captive to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 29:1). This word of hope which resonates with so many today, may have been born out of Jeremiah’s own personal family history and experience. It appears that Jeremiah’s own family history was acquainted with rejection, while his own call confirms that God does not give up on those who were once rejected. What do we know about Jeremiah’s family history and how does this rejection/acceptance theology play out in his own life?

The evidence suggests that Jeremiah was a descendant of Eli.

Jeremiah 1:1 introduces Jeremiah as “the son of Hilkiah of the priests who were in Anathoth.” This brief statement has convinced many scholars that Jeremiah was a descendant of Eli, the high priest whose story is recorded in 1 Samuel 1-4. There are a number of good reasons for such a connection. Abiathar, a descendant of Eli, was one of the high priests during the reigns of David and Solomon (2 Sam. 20:25). Shortly before Solomon’s accession to the throne, Abiathar joined a coup headed by David’s son Adonijah (1 Kgs. 1:7). As a result Solomon, deposed Abiathar from the high priesthood and sent him packing to the town of Anathoth where Abiathar owned land (1 Kgs. 2:26-27). Since Anathoth was a small village (only about 3 miles northeast of Jerusalem), it is unlikely that there would have been more than one priestly family living there. Thus, the fact that Jeremiah is from a priestly family from the town of Anathoth makes it very likely that he was a descendant of Abiathar, and thus also a descendant of Eli. During the priesthood of Eli, God had warned him that the priesthood would be taken from his family and given to another (1 Sam. 2:27-36). That prophesy was fulfilled during the high priesthood of Abiathar (1 Kgs. 2:27, 35). Therefore it seems that Jeremiah’s family history was a legacy of failure and rejection.

When Eli heard the news of the ark's capture, he fell backwards off of his chair and died (1 Sam. 4:18). These stories about Shiloh's destruction were probably a part of Jeremiah's family history. — When Eli heard the news of the ark’s capture, he fell backwards off of his chair and died (1 Sam. 4:18). These stories about Shiloh’s destruction were probably a part of Jeremiah’s family history.

There are other hints from the Book of Jeremiah that strengthen his ties to the priestly family of Eli and Abiathar. Jeremiah is the only prophet to speak about the destruction of God’s sanctuary in Shiloh during the days of Eli (Jer. 7:12-14; 26:6; 1 Sam. 4). This may well suggest a vivid family memory that was passed down from generation to generation. Since Shiloh was a part of the northern tribes, some suggest that this might explain Jeremiah’s concern for Israel. Regarding Jeremiah’s connection to Abiathar and the sanctuary at Shiloh, Thompson writes, “Such an ancestry would explain Jeremiah’s deep feeling for Israel’s ancient traditions, his special interest in Shiloh and its fate, his genuine concern for the people of Northern Israel, and his affinity with Hosea, the great prophet to the people of Northern Israel in the eighth century B.C.” (Thompson, NICOT, p. 140). Jeremiah is also the only prophet to mention Samuel. In Jeremiah 15:1 the Lord tells Jeremiah that “Even if Moses and Samuel stood before Me, My mind would not be favourable toward this people.” Samuel, of course, had a very special relationship with the family of Eli (1 Sam. 1:24-28; 2:11, 18-20; chapter 3).

Jeremiah's own family history mirrors the words that God spoke to him through his visit to the potter's house. — Jeremiah’s own family history mirrors the words that God spoke to him through his visit to the potter’s house.

In spite of this family history of failure and rejection, Jeremiah was a specially chosen mouthpiece for God. The call of Jeremiah to the prophetic ministry begins in Jeremiah 1:4 with these words: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you; I ordained you a prophet to the nations.” In many ways, Jeremiah’s family history made him the perfect individual to speak about God’s ability to transform former failures into new beginnings. On one occasion when Jeremiah visited a potter’s house, he was given the following message: “O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter. . . .The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it” (Jer. 18:6-10). The message continues with a warning that when God speaks about building and planting a kingdom, if that kingdom does evil, He will relent concerning the good He said He would do. Although the nation of Judah did not respond positively to Jeremiah’s prophetic ministry, and God eventually sent them into exile, Jeremiah was led to proclaim words of hope, such as the words in Jeremiah 29:11. Perhaps Jeremiah’s most famous utterance of hope, however, was the proclamation that God would make a new covenant with His people (Jer. 31:31-34). One way in which Jeremiah was commanded by God to act out this hope for the future was by buying his uncle’s field in none other than the town of Anathoth (Jer. 32:7-15). This real estate transaction took place while Jeremiah was in prison and while the Babylonian army was besieging the city of Jerusalem! Even in the face of judgment, God holds out hope for people from a rejected family or nation. No one knew this better than Jeremiah.

Family, or personal failure, does not disqualify you from God's grace. — Family, or personal failure, does not disqualify you from God’s grace.

Do your family’s failures haunt you? Does the past seem to have an ironclad hold on you? Take heart in the example and message of Jeremiah, a man from a family with a legacy of failure, who rose above it by God’s grace. Jeremiah 18:7-8 sends the clear message that God does not hold the failures of the past against anyone who has a repentant heart. Even the judgment of the exile, could not hold back God’s desire to begin again. In the midst of that judgment, God was already promising His people a new start by announcing a new covenant. His spokesperson was from a rejected house with a legacy of family failure. It was Jeremiah, descendant of Eli, whom God called to proclaim words of hope for the future.