Thinking Beyond the Hebrew Bible: A Response to Christian Frevel

Abstract: In “Thinking Beyond the Hebrew Bible: A Response to Christian Frevel,” Alma Brodersen makes a further contribution to analyzing the potential development from bodily to abstract thinking in the Hebrew Bible. Her response widens the focus to include ancient texts outside the Hebrew Bible, namely from the Book of Ben Sira and the Dead Sea Scrolls. These texts date from the later period of the development from bodily to abstract thinking outlined in Frevel’s contribution. At the same time, they clearly connect thinking with various body parts. These findings seem to contradict the argument that there was a development towards abstract thinking and raise questions for future research.Zusammenfassung: In “Thinking Beyond the Hebrew Bible: A Response to Christian Frevel” (“Denken über die Hebräische Bibel hinaus: Eine Antwort auf Christian Frevel”) führt Alma Brodersen die Analyse einer möglichen Entwicklung von körperbezogenem zu abstraktem Denken in der Hebräischen Bibel weiter. Die Antwort weitet den Fokus auf antike Texte außerhalb der Hebräischen Bibel, nämlich Texte im Sirachbuch und in den Qumranschriften. Diese Texte werden an das Ende der Entwicklung von körperbezogenem zu abstraktem Denken, die in Frevels Beitrag gezeichnet wird, datiert. Gleichzeitig verbinden diese Texte in auffallender Weise Denken mit Körperteilen. Dieser Befund scheint einer Entwicklung hin zu abstraktem Denken entgegenzustehen und wirft Fragen für weitere Forschung auf

The end of the Psalter

"The End of the Psalter" argues, based on original text-critical and intertextual research, that Psalms 146-150 are originally separate texts, contrary to current Psalms research viewing them to be written partly as an originally coherent end of the Psalter. Firstly, rather than focussing on the Masoretic Text only, all three oldest text forms of each Psalm are interpreted separately: the Hebrew Masoretic Text as the oldest complete text form of the Hebrew Bible in its original language, and the older sources of the Hebrew Dead Sea Scrolls and the Greek Septuagint. The thesis highlights considerable differences in these three sources which call the supposed original coherence of Psalms 146-150 into question. Secondly, rather than merely listing other texts similar in their words or ideas, possible intertextual references are assessed using clear criteria and explicating consequences for the interpretation. The thesis demonstrates that intertextual references differ between each of the Psalms and between the sources, leading to shifts in aspects of content and to a lack of original connection of Psalms 146-150. Thirdly, rather than presupposing Psalms 146-150 as one originally coherent group, each Psalm is examined on its own. The thesis demonstrates that the individual Psalms 146-150 cannot originally be seen as one group, and that differences in the content of each individual Psalm should not be smoothed out. The thesis provides a new historical-critical commentary and intertextual analysis of Psalms 146, 147, 148, 149, and 150, each in all three different oldest text forms. It includes fresh translations and detailed comments on form, intertextuality, content, genre, and date, combined with a comparison of the different Psalms and text forms and an extensive evaluation of previous interpretations

Traditional Figures and Textual Authority in Ben Sira’s “Praise of the Ancestors”

Traditional Figures and Textual Authority in Ben Sira’s “Praise of the Ancestors” Ben Sira’s “Praise of the Ancestors” (Sir 44-50) describes several traditional figures but in highly varying detail. For example, Moses is praised in 6 verses (Sir 44:23-45:5), Aaron in 17 verses (Sir 45:6-22), and Josiah in 4 verses (Sir 49:1-4). Nehemiah appears once in Sir 49:13, and Eleazar is only mentioned as the name Phinehas’ father in Sir 45:23 and as the name of Ben Sira’s father in Sir 50:27. Hannah and Ezra are not mentioned at all. Ben Sira’s praise also includes other figures such as Enoch (Sir 44:16; 49:14) and the High Priest Simon (Sir 50:1-21). Based on the Hebrew and Greek texts, this paper will give a survey of the use and interpretation of traditional figures in Ben Sira’s “Praise of the Ancestors”. Special emphasis will be placed on the relation between Ben Sira’s text and texts today included in or excluded from the Hebrew Bible. How does the description of these figures differ from texts in- and outside the Hebrew Bible? Which role do textual authority, oral tradition, and the political and cultural context play in Ben Sira’s interpretation of traditional and contemporary figures? Can textual authority explain why some leaders are described extensively while others do not appear at all