Search Results

Scholarly discussion of the regnal account of King Hezekiah in 2 Kings 18–20 points to Josianic interests in the presentation of Hezekiah as a righteous monarch. A number of scholars also argue for a Hezekian edition of the DtrH, insofar as Hezekiah appears to bring an end to the use of “high places” for illegitimate worship in Israel. An examination of these chapters indicates support for the contention of an early Hezekian edition of the DtrH, but shows that the narratives have been reworked for use in both the Josianic and Exilic editions of the DtrH to present the righteous Hezekiah as a partially flawed character, who anticipates Josiah and ultimately the Babylonian exile.

Although the superscription of Jeremiah maintains that the prophet began his career in the thirteenth year of Josiah's reign, the book contains little indication of Jeremiah's activity during this period. Nevertheless, various clues have led scholars to speculate that some of Jeremiah's Josian oracles may have been reworked in relation to later concerns. Redaction‐critical study of Jeremiah 2–6 and 30–31 indicate that these blocks of oracles originally called for the return of northern Israel to Judean, Davidic rule in keeping with Josiah's reform. The unexpected death of Josiah and the emergence of Babylonian power over Judah, however, prompted Jeremiah to reconsider his views and to rework his earlier oracles to address the Babylonian exile.

Royalists thought they were the true Israel and turned to the Hebrew Bible and Israelite analogies to create an ‘Anglican’ identity during the 1640s and 1650s for those who remained loyal to both monarchy and an English Church that had been dismantled by Parliament. Devotions and collections of psalms appeared, to be used by loyal subjects of Charles I, who was now identified with biblical David—an identity further elaborated by Eikon Basilike and Royalist pamphlets after the King's execution. But the narrative Royalists found most compelling was the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 bce and the subsequent Babylonian exile of the Jews. Psalms and Lamentations expressed Royalist grief about exile and destruction of their Temple. There was interest in Judaica and the Jewish Temple. The chapter discusses poetry by Cowley, Harvey, Herrick, Vaughan, and Crashaw but also publications by Thomas Fuller, John Lightfoot, Thomas Godwin, and John Gregory.

2 Kings 23:31–25:30 relates the history of Judah from the death of King Josiah in 609 b.c.e. through the destruction of Jerusalem and the Babylonian exile in 587 b.c.e. until the release of King Jehoiachin of Judah from prison. Scholars have consistently pointed to a marked changed in the formulation of the regnal formulas of the Kings of Judah during this period, which indicates that these narratives were written as a supplement to the history of Israel and Judah that originally concluded with the reign of Josiah. An examination of the texts and arguments relevant to this discussion supports the view that 2 Kings 23:31–25:30 were written as a supplement to an earlier Josianic edition of the DtrH.

This chapter describes the eventual destruction of Jerusalem/Zion, the ending of its supposedly eternal Davidic kingship, and the exile to Babylon of much of the surviving population of Jerusalem and Judah. It discusses some of the cries of Judeans in the wake of the destruction of Jerusalem. It also presents the views of major prophets, namely Ezekiel and his contemporary Jeremiah. It shows that the suffering servant, daughter of Zion, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah are examples of the processing of exilic trauma through depictions of individual figures to whom exiles could relate.

Although much of the Hebrew Bible is shaped to address the historical and theological problems posed by the Babylonian exile of 587 b.c.e., scholars have consistently noted that the program of religious reform and national restoration instituted by King Josiah of Judah (ruled 640–609 b.c.e.) appears to play a substantial role in the composition of the Hebrew Bible's legal, historical, and prophetic books. Nevertheless, scholars have been unable to provide a convincing case for this contention due to the difficulties in establishing appropriate redaction‐critical models for the composition of such generically distinct books. This study employs advances in redaction‐critical theory that call for a synchronic analysis of the present form of the biblical text as the basis for diachronic reconstruction of its compositional history. Although the archeological record indicates that Josiah did not succeed in carrying out his program, analysis of the relevant legal, historical, and prophetic books points to Josiah's efforts to provide an ideologically charged history, prophetic justification, and legal reforms that would support his efforts to reunite all Israel and Judah under his rule.

This chapter summarizes the primary conclusions of the book and points to the implications of this study. There is considerable evidence that the Deuteronomistic History was originally written in the reign of King Hezekiah to support his attempt to reunite Israel and Judah under Davidic rule, that it was reworked and expanded during the reign of Josiah to support his program of religious reform and national restoration, and that it was reworked and expanded once again to account for the Babylonian exile. Prophetic literature was heavily influenced by Josiah's reform, viz., Zephaniah and Nahum were written to support the reform; Isaiah, Hosea, Amos, and Micah were edited to support the reform; Jeremiah originally supported the reform but reworked his oracles in the aftermath of Josiah's death; and Habakkuk addressed the problem of theodicy following Josiah's death. The image of the righteous Josiah continued to have an impact on Judean thinking and literature insofar as it informed portrayals of postexilic restoration of Israel/Judah under the rule of a righteous Davidic monarch.

The present form of 2 Kings 21 in the Deuteronomistic History clearly blames King Manasseh of Judah for the Babylonian exile, insofar as it states that YHWH decided to destroy Jerusalem and the Temple because of his great sins. Prior scholarship contends that this chapter has been redactionally reworked to point to the exile, but has been unable to provide a coherent redaction‐critical analysis of the chapter to support this claim. An analysis of YHWH statements concerning Manasseh points to an interest in settling Israel securely in the land if the people would observe Mosaic Torah. This indicates that the oracle may have originally functioned as Huldah's promise of security to Josiah, but that it has been reworked and placed in its present position to justify the Babylonian exile.

This chapter discusses the biblical story of Moses. Moses was an ancient historical figure for the Israelite tribes, and he was the centre of some of the earliest writings of Israel. The Moses story revolves around collective trauma, whether in Babylon or in Egypt. Reshaped by exile and its survival, the biblical Moses story and the rest of the Pentateuch helped some Babylonian exiles avoid assimilation and survive into the next chapter of their story.

This chapter discusses the return of Babylonian exiles to Jerusalem, focusing on Ezra and the returnee exiles. It reveals that although the future generations of Jews would greatly suffer, Judaism has persisted while disruptions destroyed the other culture-based religions of the Near East.

The Jeremiah tradition extends the Deuteronomistic project, presenting scribes as the levitical bearers of Jeremiah’s prophetic teachings. This is rooted in Jeremiah’s own Levite heritage, alongside strong indications that he was enculturated in Deuteronomistic scribalism. What is implicit in Deuteronomy is made explicit in Jeremiah vis-à-vis the scribal transmission process and the relationship between Levite scribes and revelation: Jeremiah 36 and 51:59–64a are especially significant in fleshing out the intimate and even genetic relationship between the potency of YHWH’s divine word and the pen of (Levite) scribes. The texts they created—especially the precursor to the MT Jeremiah tradition—emerge as surrogate sanctuaries wherein identity is anchored in literary form. To transmit and teach these texts was to maintain and redefine who was, or who could be, part of Israel in exile.

This chapter, the conclusion, explores how—through the constituent parts and redactional activity detected underneath Ezra 7–10 and Nehemiah 8–10—the Ezra Memoir is well placed as a literary product of Second Temple Judaism. Through its construction of Ezra’s activities and the returnees from the Babylonian exile, it is argued that the Ezra Memoir is a type of super-narrative that ascribes authority to the antiquated past and utilizes its received traditions. In doing so, the Ezra Memoir reads, interprets, and fuses originally competing accounts of the Israelite wilderness. Through its deference to the Mosaic past and the trauma of the exile, the Ezra Memoir offers its own idealized vision of ritual and worship and presents the returnees from Babylon as the sole inheritors of the Israelite cult.

This chapter examines the scholarly model of a Deuteronomistic History and the modality of thought identified as ‘Deuteronomistic’ to assess the various claims on Samuel's memory. It first considers the definition of Deuteronomism as a concept, the meaning of the term ‘Deuteronomistic’, who the Deuteronomists were, and how the literature associated with this group developed. It then explores how the Deuteronomists constructed both a legal collection, Deuteronomy, and a theoretical narrative model of Israel's landed experience, the Deuteronomistic History, in order to establish a vision of society where sacral leadership and old covenantal ideals formed the basis for evaluating righteousness, theological fidelity, and social responsibility. It also discusses the emergence of the ultimate (or penultimate) form of these works during the period of the Babylonian Exile, along with the occurrence of a substantial amount of narrative and legal composition during the last few decades of the Judahite monarchy.

This chapter argues that, for modern scholarship, Ezra’s mission marks a crucial point in the process of the formation of the Pentateuch and—in relation to the larger picture—the origins of Judaism. Ezra’s activities in Babylonia and Jerusalem are recorded in the Ezra Memoir, generally acknowledged as all or portions of Ezra 7–10 and Nehemiah 8–10. Its report of Ezra proclaiming ‘the Torah of Moses’ in front of a gathered assembly has been viewed as the historical context for the publication of the Pentateuch. This study suggests that the Ezra Memoir reads, interprets, and reshapes the Pentateuchal accounts of the Israelite wilderness in order to elevate the returnees from the Babylonian exile as the true inheritors of the cult of Israel’s deity.