Definitions

1. Introduction

Before undertaking a review of the Bible stories, it will be helpful to define several terms which will be used in this analysis so the reader will be able to understand what the essay writer had in mind when making the analysis. It will also be helpful to identify several themes which appear to be overarching in the Bible. Accordingly, this introduction will include a section on definitions of the terms used in the essays as understood and used by the writer. This will be followed by a section in which several themes are identified as overarching themes. Many of the essays are written from a viewpoint of the story fitting into an overarching theme. By identifying the themes which the writer feels are overarching, it will be easier for the reader to understand and follow the writer’s reasoning. Whether or not the reader agrees with the reasoning or point, is entirely up to the reader; but, the important point is to be sure the reader understands what the writer is trying to say so agreement or disagreement will be with conclusions rather than be tainted by a difference in understanding of terms or themes.

1. Definitions of important terms used in the essays in this collection

Hebrew Bible.

As used in the following essays, “Hebrew Bible” is what is also known as the Tanakah, which includes the Torah (the first five books, the Pentateuch) , Nevi’im (Prophets – which includes two sets of books: Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Isiah) and Minor Prophets (Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi)) and Kethuvim (Writings (Ruth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Daniel, Esther, Ezra, Chronicles), the twenty-four books considered to be authoritative in Jewish tradition.  The terms Tanaka, TaNaKa, Tanakah. As used herein, the term “Hebrew Bible” refers to the form in current use, such as the JPS Version, and is not intended to refer to the Hebrew Bible that was translated into Greek as the Septuagint. The principle reason for referring to this work as the Hebrew Bible is to emphasize that this work is not a testament (this work contains no testamentary such as appears in the Christian Bible) and to emphasize that this work is not simply an old version of the Christian Bible and has thus not been replaced by the Christian Bible.  Hebrew Bible and Hebrew Scriptures will be used interchangeably in these essays[1]. Unless otherwise noted, all citations to the Bible will be from the JPS Jewish Study Bible  edited by Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettleer (Oxford NY, Oxford University Press, 2004). No discussion will be presented regarding the term “canon” or even how the Hebrew Bible came to be divided (is it Torah, the first five books of the Bible, then everything else, or something else?) as it is. Such a discussion is beyond the scope of this work[3].

Theocentric and Theocentric history.

As used in this blog, the term “theocentric” refers to any explanation which places God, and/or God’s actions and desires either directly at the center of the explanation or as an important player in the explanation. Thus, theocentric history is a presentation of history in which God plays a central role. The Bible seems to indicate a theme which has a theocentric view of history (see the “Overarching Themes” Section of the bolg). That is, a history of how a people arrived at a particular time, place and station in life in partnership with their god. The stories are told in relation to this partnership, how it began, how it progressed and what happened along the way to alter (either positively or negatively) that partnership. This will be termed “theocentric history” in this blog to emphasize the historical and theocentered, God/human partnership, nature of the stories.

As used in this blog, the theocentric view is similar to, but differs from, the Deuteronomistic view. The Deuteronomistic view envisions a covenant between the people and their god which requires the people to live according to their god’s law. Under that covenant, God has promised the land of Canaan to the people so long as they remain faithful to their god. The Deuteronomistic history explains Israel’s successes and failures as the result of faithfulness, which brings success, or disobedience, which brings failure; the destruction of Israel by the Assyrians (721 B.C.E.) and Judah by the Babylonians (586 B.C.E.) are God’s punishment for continued sinfulness.

The theocentric view differs from the Deuteronomistic view in that the theocentric view envisions the people and their god as partners rather than having God being in total control. In the theocentric view, the people have some control over their destiny and neither God nor man  knows the outcome or future and God does not control, or even influence, the future. The theocentric view envisions a partnership between God and the people which is formed and developed in a trial-and-error fashion over a long period of time.  Each partner has his specific duties and does not infringe on the duties of the other partner. The partnership places one partner, God, in charge of certain events, such as protection of the overall experiment (see below for the definition of the term “experiment”) from a catastrophe which would destroy the experiment and against  which humans could not protect themselves, and the other partner, man, in charge of exercising dominion over the entities created in Genesis whereby, because God cannot exert any influence on these entities, all of the entities created in Genesis have free will. In the theocentric view, God is central, but so is man – they are partners. It is the partnership that is central to the story; the individual partners themselves are secondary to the partnership.

The Bible presents history as viewed through the lens of the theocentric view so past events and their results can be viewed by a present audience. The present audience will learn from the successes and mistakes of the past. The historical perspective is required because neither man nor God can predict the future; therefore, both partners must learn by a hindsight view of what results were associated with certain actions. Those events and actions which resulted in strengthening the partnership will be examples of what is desirable and encouraged, while those events and actions which had results that damaged or weakened the partnership will be examples of what is undesirable and which is to be discouraged and avoided. Both partners must learn from history; if one partner could predict the future, a hindsight view of past activities would not be required because that partner would know what result will occur from any particular action and the partnership would suffer as a result of placing the other partner at a disadvantage and that disadvantaged partner would not be able to fully trust the advantaged partner.

Theocentric history shows and explains, either directly or via example, what actions are required from each partner in order to maintain, strengthen and continue the partnership, and what actions might result in damage the partnership. The stories in the Bible in the presentation of theocentric history thus are intended to illustrate how the partnership was initially formed and what past actions strengthened the partnership and what past actions damaged the partnership – actions of both partners (if one believes that God cannot take actions which might damage the partnership, he should review the story of Job). Theocentric history is uneven and advances in fits and starts because the partners cannot predict the future and thus cannot be sure of the results that will be associated with present actions; therefore, some actions will be taken in error and have adverse or negative results which set the partnership back; whereas, other actions will have results which are positive and advance the partnership. The historical presentation of the Bible teaches a present audience which was which in the past so members of the present audience can use their imaginations to determine which actions are likely to be most appropriate for their present circumstances. Through this method of teaching, each partner to the partnership can learn what actions to select and what actions to avoid in order to, hopefully, continue, and strengthen, this partnership in the future. Note, the terms “exile” and “diaspora” can refer to two different concepts. The term “exile” is generally applied to the period from 587-539 B.C.E. when a great mass of citizens were forced from their homes in Judah and into Babylon. However, many people remained in Judah. And, in fact, the citizens of the Northern Kingdom as well as many of the citizens of the Southern Kingdom had been dispersed well before this time, beginning at least as early as 722 B.C.E. with as much as 70% of the population of the overall country already gone by 587 B.C.E.. Therefore, it might be more accurate to refer to the period from 722-539 B.C.E. as a dispersal, or as a Diaspora.

Assimilation. For the purposes of these essays, assimilation is defined as an individual allowing outside forces to destroy his identity. This is in contrast to an individual allowing his actions to accommodate outside forces without changing his basic beliefs. The difference can be best understood by comparing the assimilation associated with adopting the language, dress and laws of the society in which one lives in versus abandoning one’s religious beliefs (such as ceasing going to Temple, or stopping the observance of the Sabbath) due to pressures from society. It is assimilation which destroys an individual’s beliefs that is of interest here. In Judaism, this often occurs when the individual Jew replaces his practices which perpetuate the Jewish religion with practices derived from the non-Jewish world. This replacement first dilutes, then obliterates the elements and indicia of the religion, ultimately destroying the religion. Assimilation would be an especially important subject for the Hebrew Bible as much of its intended audience would be in exile or Diaspora and not in Israel.

Repentance and Teshuvah. These two concepts are critical to the progress of humans and humanity. These concepts are the basic learning process. This basic learning process requires several steps: recognition of the error, acceptance that it was the person’s own fault, correction of the error, understanding that there are consequences associated with the action that created the error, and internalizing the error/consequence connection so the human can use his imagination to visualize the consequences associated with the error the next time a similar or identical situation occurs whereby the error can be avoided. In this way, progress is made, both individual progress and community progress. Accepting one’s responsibility for the consequences requires additional steps of making anyone harmed by the error whole through repayment or the like, and accepting any punishment that may be necessary. This punishment can be self-imposed or imposed by another entity. Without these last two steps, repentance is not complete.

As used in the essays in this blog, the terms repentance and teshuvah are different. Both terms encompass the above-described basic learning process; however, teshuvah is repentance plus a re-examination of one’s entire life and a re-orienting of one’s basic character whereas repentance stops with a completion of the basic learning process. Teshuvah will include a religious re-orientation as well as a secular re-orientation.

The processes of repentance, teshuvah and human progress are interwoven with each other. The theme of repentance occurs several times, and the specific theme warning against assimilation occurred several times as well. Many stories in the Bible and stories based on Bible stories are directed to an audience living outside the geographic area of Israel (or Judah) and in secular societies, many of which were hostile to the Jewish religion. As such, it was always more comfortable to assimilate the surrounding religions and beliefs than to remain Jewish. Therefore, there was always a danger of assimilation. Because of these conditions, many Bible stories and stories based on the Bible are written to show that God did not want Jews to assimilate, but if they did, He would welcome them back under the right conditions. This is where the concept of teshuvah is particularly apt.  Therefore, one of the most important lessons that God wanted the humans to learn, specifically, the Jews, is to avoid assimilation. Assimilation would be an especially urgent and important issue to a people in exile as much of the Bible’s intended audience was[2]. The themes of repentance and assimilation were important as recognition of the evil and the process for avoiding it would allow someone who, because of the forces of exile, has assimilated, but now wishes to return. Repentance and teshuvah would allow that person to return and thus negate the action of assimilation. One of these two themes can be used to explain several stories that otherwise seem to be quite odd. Certainly, repentance would be of utmost importance as that same audience may have backslided and adopted the ways of the communities in which they were living and now wished to return to the religion. Repentance and teshuvah provide a way back.

Monotheism. As used in these essays, the term “monotheism” will be defined to refer to the belief that there is only one god, and no others. This differs from monolatry (henotheism) which accepts one god from among many others as “your” god, but acknowledges that there may be others. The concept of monotheism is interwoven with the concept of theocentric history.

Other terms will be defined as necessary to ensure the reader understands a term in the manner it is being used in a particular essay. This will put the reader and the writer on the same page, so to speak.

Experiment. As used in these essays, the term “experiment” refers to God’s creation of our universe in Genesis with the Hebrew nation as the human beings of that universe. The Hebrew Bible uses Jews as an allegory for that part of humanity with whom God wants to be partners. In this view, the Hebrew Nation is “chosen,” but is not restricted to Jews. Any human being, Christian, Jew, Buddhist, etc. can fall into the class of “chosen” human beings for the experiment. The only criterion for inclusion in this class is agreeing to be a partner with God and agreeing to undertake the human’s duty of exercising positive domain over the entities created in Genesis (thus, any human who seeks to harm or destroy those entities created in Genesis is disqualified from being “chosen” because that human has not agreed to undertake the duties required of the human partner in the God/man partnership). Therefore, while the Hebrew Bible focuses on Jews, this could be viewed as a literary device; the term “Hebrew” or “Jew” is literary shorthand for all humans who are partners with God. Since the story is in the Hebrew Bible, it is to be expected that the “chosen” class would be Jews (in much the same manner as Christians are “chosen” in the Christian Bible).

As discussed above in the definition of the term “theocentric history,” one of God’s duties is to protect the experiment (that is, the entire nation identified as the “Hebrew Nation,” but which represents all humans who have agreed to be partners with God in His undertaking that was begun in Gen 1:1) from destruction by forces over which the human partner has no control. For example, in the story of Exodus, God stepped in to protect the experiment (the entire population of humans who chose to be partners with Him, the fleeing Hebrews were thus the entire human partner in the God/man partnership) from destruction by the Egyptians, specifically the Egyptian army. The people were not equipped to defend themselves from the Egyptian army; they would have been either destroyed then and there, or they would have been captured and returned to Egypt where the nation would have been destroyed through assimilation into Egyptian society. Either way, destruction of the experiment through destruction of the entire part of the overall experiment which will exercise positive dominion over the entities created in Genesis, as represented by the fleeing nation, was inevitable and beyond the power of the people to prevent. Had the Egyptian army succeeded in its task, the entire experiment would have been derailed by destruction of the entire human partner. Thus, God, in carrying out His duty under the terms of the partnership stepped in (since the Egyptian army intended to destroy human life, they could not be partners because they sought destruction of an entity created in Genesis) and took proactive action to prevent the destruction of the human partner and the concomittant destruction of the experiment. God’s intervention in many Bible stories (such as God saving Sarai from Pharaoh) can be explained as God taking proactive action to save the experiment (since Sarai was the first, losing Sarai would have doomed the experiment before it even began; many actions taken by God with respect to the patriarchs and matriarchs can be explained in this manner). In some instances, God’s non-intervention can be explained using the same approach. That is, if the overall experiment is not in danger of total destruction, God need not step in, and if He did, he would be stepping on the domain of His human partner (by interfering with the free will of some of his partners) for no good reason – and God refrains from taking proactive action.

Universe.  Unless otherwise noted, as used in these essays, the term “universe” refers to the universe inhabited by human beings. As will be explained, our universe extends only as far as humans can sense which at the time of this work is about 42 billion light-years, the extent of the distance astronomers are able to see and represents our visual horizon. This accounts for improvements and advances in technology which allow us to probe farther and farther away from earth. Eventually, there will be a limit as to how far even the most advanced technology can probe (see, e.g., the Heisenberg uncertainty principle). This limit need not be large, it can also be small. There are scientific limits, and these limits are taken as the limit of our universe in the essays in this work. Imagination is also taken into account as humans can imagine things based on what they sense; however, in order for something to be considered as being within our universe, whatever it is, be it imagined or not, it must be verifiable. Merely because we can imagine something does not make it real. Therefore, anything that is imagined must be verifiable using our senses before it can be considered as being within our universe.

With regard to the term “universe,” it is interesting to note that there are several theories regarding the “universe”. There is a theory that our universe is infinitely old, infinitely large, uniform, and unchanging. This theory does not stand up when we observe stars exploding which could not happen in an unchanging universe. Plus, the existence of cosmic microwave background clearly shows that our universe is not infinitely old. A second theory of our universe has the universe is infinitely large, uniform, and unchanging. Again, the existence of exploding stars disproves this theory. A third theory has the universe expanding[1]. This theory seems to best fit observations. Using the Doppler Effect, astronomers have determined that galaxies around ours are moving away from ours at accelerating velocities. Thus, it appears that the best model of our universe is finitely old, finitely large, non-uniform and changing. That is the model which will be used in this work.

[1] An expanding universe would explain Olbers paradox which states that one should see a star in the sky no matter where one looked and the sky might be completely lit at all times. However, an expanding universe would have some stars too far away from earth to be seen and, since the amount of light reaching us from a star decreases as the square of the distance from us, other stars so far away that their light is overwhelmed by closer stars so that there will be portions of the visible sky devoid of light. A static universe would allow the light of distant stars to eventually reach us and would not have such dark portions and the visible sky would be completely filled with star light.

Human Beings. Since the Bible, specifically the Hebrew Bible, is what is being considered in the essays of this work, and the Bible is about Jews, and makes Jews the main character in the stories of the Bible, then Jews will be considered as being the human beings referred to in the Bible. This view is a common literary technique which makes a particular character the center of the story. This technique has implications for the concept of chosenness as it appears that the God of the Hebrew Bible has chosen the Jews. This is true, but is limited to the stories of the Bible and as a literary technique used by the Bible to tell its story because the Bible was written by Jews, for Jews and about Jews with Jews as the main character. Because the Bible was written with Jews as the main character, God’s entire experiment is centered around Jews and the universe of the Bible is centered around Jews, the main characters of the story being told by the Hebrew Bible. This is similar to the literary technique used in the New Testament which uses Christians as the main characters and centers the stories and universe around Christians.

Israel, Israelites, Jews.

The destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar’s armies in 586 B.C.E. marked a dramatic turning point in Biblical history. For six hundred years this community had enjoyed a degree of autonomy and a sense of control over its own destiny. All that came to an abrupt and brutal end with a finality that stunned and shattered this people.  This event was singular and represented a turning point in the history of these people. As such, the way we refer to them changed to match this change. During the earlier period of relative autonomy and self-determination, they are referred to as the people of Israel and Israelites which refers to all members of the people who professed loyalty to the one God, Yahweh, and adherence to the covenant detailed in the Book of Exodus, and/or to the people who lived in the Northern Kingdom, Israel, with its capital at Samaria (as opposed to the people who lived in the Southern Kingdom of Judah, Judaites or Judeans).

Today, the terms Jew and Jewish refer to a people of a monotheistic religion that worships YHWH regardless of where they are from or where they live. The God of Israel was the patron deity of the Israelite tribes. Later, the God of Israel was the patron deity of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah. However, after the Babylonian exiles returned to Jerusalem., when the people of Israel worshipped YHWH one way (as monolarters) and the people of Judah worshipped YHWH another way (as monotheists), there was a split in the religion determined according to geography. After this, because of the split, the term Jew took on a geographic identity and a Jew was defined as someone from the geographic region of Judah, who worshipped the God of Israel – a definition that combined both geography and religion.

Also, since, according to the Bible, the people exiting Egypt during the Exodus had not yet accepted the covenant and some may not even have accepted Yahweh as their god, they were not yet Israelites or Jews, just proto-Jews or proto-Israelites, these people will also be referred to as slaves or as Israelites or Jews. Note the Greek term loudaioi, refers to the ancient Jews or Judeans but does not make a distinction between the religion and the geographical location; it encompasses both meanings.

The terms Jew, Israelite, Jewish, and Hebrew may be used interchangeably and the meaning should be clear according to the context. It should also be noted that prior to the Exodus from Egypt, the people were a conglomeration of individual families, clans and the like. After the Exodus from Egypt, the people were a nation. Reference to the people will change accordingly, with Hebrew slaves being used to refer to the people who were not a nation, and Israelites being used to refer to a nation.

Temple, Synagogue

A temple is a structure which houses a deity and into which only a priest can enter. As such, a Temple is generally associated with a sacrificial religion. A synagogue is a place of worship, congregation, learning and a central meeting place. As such, a synagogue is generally associated with a prophetic religion. For example, a Greek Temple would house a Greek God, such as Athena, and only a priest ordained to service Athena would be permitted to enter while all others are excluded; whereas, a synagogue would be a place for people to gather for worship, learning and discussion. With respect to Judaism, these terms are often used interchangeably and such interchangeability will be continued in this work, but within the context of a particular discussion.

Temple Periods

As used herein, the “First Temple” will be the temple built by Solomon sometime around 960 B.C.E. and which was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.E. The “Second Temple” was  rebuilt by King Herod by 539 B.C.E., and completed in 516 B.C.E., and was destroyed by the Romans in 70 C.E. Thus, as used herein, the first temple period will be between 960 and 586 B.C.E. and the second temple period will be between 539 B.C.E. and 70 C.E. The people were in exile in Babylon during the period between 586 and 539. Thus, as used herein, the first temple period will be between 960 and 586 B.C.E. and the second temple period will be between 539 B.C.E. and 70 C.E. The period between 586 and 539 B.C.E. is the Babylonian Exile period.

 Rabbinic Judaism

After the destruction of the Second Temple, Jews were dispersed and had no common place to worship or sacrifice. As such, they had to transform the religion into one that was portable. This was done by changing the focus of the religion from a sacrificial religion which required a place and a priest to a prophetic or synagogue based religion that focused on teaching and the law. Those in charge of the laws were rabbis and spent their time studying and interpreting the Torah and the tradition of the written law. They would issue oral interpretations and rulings on the law.

Therefore, after the destruction of the Second Temple, several scholars who escaped Jerusalem prior to its destruction by the Romans resettled in a town called Yavne. The academy was initially established under the leadership of a rabbi named Johanan ben Zakkai who lived from about the beginning of the 1^st century C.E. until about 80 C.E. (and, legend has it, escaped Jerusalem in a coffin). Ben Zakkai was succeeded by Gamaliel II who lived until about 120 C.E. This academy replaced the Sanhedrin which was the Jewish law court responsible for administering Jewish Law.

These rabbis in this era were not rabbis as we know them, but were men who were learned in the laws of the Torah. They did not have to be ordained in the manner of today’s rabbis. The term “rabbi” as used in this context means “my teacher”. The origin of these rabbis is debated with some believing that these men were remnants of the Pharasee sect (after the destruction of the Temple, many of the sects including the Pharisee, the Seducees, and the Essenes, disappeared), especially when one reads stories such as the story of the oven of Akhnai in which Rabbi Eliezer advocated that the law must be applied as written whereas Rabbis Joshua and Jeremiah argued that the law is to be interpreted.

Oral Law

The rabbis would study the written law (Torah) and orally issue rulings and interpretations of issues which oral rulings and interpretations became known as oral law.

Mishnah     

The oral interpretations and rulings issued by the rabbis at Yavne, over time, became quite large and cumbersome, and about 200 C.E., were compiled into a single corpus. This compilation was an edited version of the corpus of oral law (as opposed to Torah which was written law) and is known as the Mishnah, which means teaching. The leader of this compilation was Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi (Judah the Prince) and he sifted through all the rulings associated with the rabbinic discussions and arguments regarding the oral law, categorized them (into six categories: Zeraim (“Seeds”) which are laws dealing with agriculture; Moed (“Appointed Times”) which are laws dealing with the Sabbath and festivals; Nashim (“Women”) which are laws relating to marriage and divorce; Nezikin (“Damages”) which are civil and criminal laws; Kodashim (“Holy Things”) which are laws dealing with the Temple of Jerusalem and sacrifices; and Tohorot (“Purification”) which are laws dealing with Jewish ritual purity). There was considerable commentary on the laws contained in the Mishnah. Therefore, this commentary on the laws in the Mishnah was finally compiled into the Gemara (“Compilation”).

Talmud

The Talmud is a combination of the Mishnah and the Gemara. As such, the Talmud is the authoritative basis for modern Jewish life. There are two editions of the Talmud: the Jerusalem Talmud completed about 300 C.E., and the Babylonian Talmud completed about 500 C.E.  The Babylonian Talmud is generally considered the more authoritative.

Midrash

Midrash elaborates on a text with the intent to discover deeper meanings or new questions behind the text. The term “Midrash” derives from the biblical (Hebrew) term lidrosh – to search or to seek, to examine or to investigate, and embodies one of Judaism’s most vibrant modes of wisdom, wondering and creativity. Midrash is meant to make a point, to stretch one’s thinking and should not be taken literally or as historical fact. Nobody can say for sure where Midrash began, but it has some commonality with stories by Greek philosophers such as Plato, but there may have been much crossbreeding with Greek stories being based on Jewish stories and vice versa.

Continue to Overarching Themes >>

---

^[1] Here is a good point to note that the Hebrew Bible is a theocentric view of the history of the people of Israel; whereas, the Christian Bible relates witness accounts to events, especially  in the life and teachings of Jesus (and a prediction that He will return), that in the absence of such accounts might be disputed or even dismissed, or without which there might be skepticism as to whether the events actually took place thereby rendering the gospel subject to being viewed as null and void (see The First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, Chapter 15, verse 14). The events related in the Christian Bible are presented as being unique and secrets heretofore hidden from mankind by God and are presented as being revealed by God to mankind. On the other hand, the events related in the Hebrew Bible are based on events that were probably familiar, either through history or myth, to the audience and are not presented as being facts for themselves, but as events retold to inform the audience about a theocentric history of themselves. The events discussed in the Hebrew Bible are presented as manifest to all and are not hidden or secrets that are revealed to only a chosen few. As such, the events presented in the Hebrew Bible are susceptible to analysis, argument, interpretation and re-interpretation in an effort to understand why and how the audience reached its point in time and space and their role in the present, especially with regard to the role of a people who may be scattered far from any homeland, and indeed may not even have a homeland and hence may be in danger of assimilation and disappearance as was the case in many other religions, and indeed may have been the case with the tribes of the Northern Kingdom, the “lost tribes”. It is for this reason that the theme of the mortal danger and sinfulness of assimilation appears so often in the stories of the Hebrew Bible and which can be used to understand many of the stories in the Bible that otherwise appear to be inconsistent, enigmatic or downright unfathomable. The same can be said for the theme of repentance as repentance will allow an individual to return to the religion after that individual left it so the religion would not lose that individual. Again, the theme of repentance allows many otherwise puzzling stories to be understood. Thus, the Hebrew Bible should not be read as having the same purpose as the Christian Bible and if it is, its meaning will be mutated at best and missed at worst. For this reason (among others), the term “Old Testament” will be avoided in these essays as that term implies that the two texts have a common purpose – which they do not.

^[2] As discussed in the essay on the Messiah, Ezra is considered by many to be a main editor of the Hebrew Bible. The Book of Ezra-Nehemiah offers the only detailed account in the Bible of the reconstruction of Jewish life in the province of Judah from 538 to about 400 B.C.E. under the auspices of the Persian/Archaemenid Empire. This book describes how the remnant from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi returned to their homeland after the Babylonian exile, rebuilt the Temple and the city and rededicated themselves to the Torah. During this effort, Ezra taught and implemented Torah. Ezra’s efforts were hampered by mixed marriages between Jews and non-Jews.  One of Ezra’s principal concerns was assimilation. Today, Ezra-Nehemiah is cited in discussions about communal boundaries and displaced populations and generates debates between those who support strong communal boundaries as necessary for survival and those who argue for a more universal and inclusive position (i.e., assimilation).  As will be understood, viewing many stories through a lens of assimilation and its dangers explains several otherwise mysterious stories. As principal editor, his concerns would be prominent in the Bible. Thus, the theme of assimilation and its dangers would be found in many places and stories of the Bible. As will be understood, viewing many stories through a lens of assimilation and its dangers explains several otherwise mysterious stories.

[3] It might also be interesting to point out that there may be many, many (perhaps hundreds or thousands) more books that are not included in the Bible because they were lost. These books may have been lost due to war, fire, deliberate destruction, or were simply discarded because a decision had been made not to include them in the official canon and the cost of maintaining and/or reproducing them was thus not warranted. An example of a lost book is Moses’s record of the Amalekite war; in Ex 17:14, God instructs Moses to write a record of that war, but we do not have such a record. Other books which are actually mentioned in the Bible, but have been lost include the Book of Wars of the Lord (Num 21:14), Annals of the Kings of Israel and Judah mentioned in both 1 Kings and 2 Kings, Book of Acts of Solomon (1 Kings 11:41, and the written report from the men sent out by Joshua to scout the land (Jos 18:8-10). Perhaps these lost books would shed much light on the texts that we do have, or maybe even re-interpret them. We will never know.

Continue to Overarching Themes >>