domingo, 20 de maio de 2012


http://www.forerunner.com/blog/onward-christian-soldier-a-tribute-to-jeff-ziegler


Onward Christian Soldier - A Tribute to Jeff Ziegler

The Church Universal has only two divisions.
  1. The Church Militant – Ecclesia Militans – are those Christians living on earth. They are the Christian militia who struggle against sin, the flesh, the devil and “… the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” (Ephesians 6:12).
  2. The Church Triumphant – Ecclesia Triumphans – are those Christians who are in Heaven. Although progressive sanctification takes place through this struggle on earth, those who pass on to be present with the Lord are made perfect “in the twinkling of an eye” (1 Corinthians 15:52).
As much as anyone I have ever known, Jeff Ziegler was a man who understood the meaning of the Church Militant. On Tuesday, February 28, 2012, Jeff became part of the Church Triumphant. He has been relieved of all earthly struggle and has been made perfect in Christ.
Jeff had suffered a cerebellar aneurysm in late 2009 and had been recovering from what is certain death in about 97 percent of cases. Doctors called his recovery late December of that year a “Christmas miracle.” Last week, Jeff suffered a heart attack while doing work at the Ohio State House. This was apparently unrelated to the earlier episode.
I first met Jeff when he was a speaker in our church, The Boston Worship Center, in 1987. A group of us took him on a “revival tour” of northern New England visiting several of the churches where a hero in the faith, George Whitefield, had preached. Jeff later traveled to England and Scotland and was able to preach in one of the pulpits frequented by Whitefield. In the 25 years I knew him, Jeff was a man driven by a vision for Revival and Reformation.
He went through quite a theological evolution in his lifetime. However, in all my dealings with Jeff, he was always Jeff. In the early 1990s, after I came to Florida to work on The Forerunner. Jeff would contribute frequent articles, which I’ve posted links to below. Our phone calls often went on for a long time and covered every topic imaginable. Jeff had a huge impact on my thinking as a young Christian involved in full-time missionary and evangelistic work. I saw him whenever he came to Florida and visited Cleveland for two conferences he organized. Jeff was always very gracious, yet direct when he needed to be. For example, he used to call me when I was doing print version of The Forerunner to give me names of donors that were generous with him. He did that without my solicitation just trying to help me.
Jeff took a role in leading several organizations throughout Ohio for the purpose of direct action in reforming culture and politics. One of the former members of his church recently described him as “a gentleman of the first order … he lived what he believed, a rare commodity in 2012.”
He later took part in video productions I produced, including God’s Law and Societyand the following clip as part of a World Changers Seminar on the Capitol Mall in Washington D.C.
One of the hallmarks of Jeff’s preaching is that he always threw his whole heart and being into his message, speaking with the same forceful tone and volume no matter if it were a crowd of hundreds or less than a handful of people in a small seminar. We recently worked together on the Statesman Global Initiatives website and blog. Jeff’s most recent book, Republic Restored, was accepted into the Library of Congress.
Recent years had more than their share of personal trials and medical turmoil that took a toll on this soldier for Christ, but he can rejoice that he has joined the Church Triumphant.


  • Perfect Love and Revival
  • The Path of Revival - Part One
  • The Path of Revival - Part Two
  • What is Revival and Spiritual Awakening?
  • Who Will Rule the Earth?
  • The Reformed Paradigm
  • Covenantal Inheritance
  • The Million Man March
  • Puritan Storm Rising
  • Imprecatory Prayer! - The Church's Duty Against Her Enemies
  • Enforcing the Crown Rights of Christ
  • A Prayer for Ohio
  • Impact of Calvinism on Culture
  • Creeds and the Cultural Mandate
  • He Who Reads, Leads!
  • The Declaration of Independence: Christian Masterpiece or Humanist Tripe?
  • The Bipolar World of Death Penalty Politics
  • Schizophrenic! The Muddled World of Egalitarian Media Politicos
  • The Image of God, the Incarnation, and the Spirit of Herod
  • Political Vision of Christian Patriotism
  • Dangers of Nativism in the Religio-Political Sphere
  • Take Me Out to the Ball Game
  • Puritan New World Thinking vs. The Nativistic Urge
  • Political Propaganda: Not the Exclusive Domain of Tyrants
  • Of Reformers, Separatists and Elections
  • Topical Questions for the Resurgent National Reform Association
  • Prophetic Voice and Campaign Finance Reform
  • True Life: Faith, the Assault against Maturity, and Its Political Impact
  • For Renewed Vigor!
  • Puritan Storm Rising!
  • A Call For A Renewed Reformation Zeal
  • Paradigm Shift: Ecclesiology and Eschatology
  • The True Nature of History
  • Imprecatory Prayer: The Church's Duty Against God's Enemies
  • Obama and Infanticide: The issue that will not go away
  • An Imprecatory Prayer Proclamation: Barack Obama
  • An Interview with Jeff Ziegler
  • God's Law and Society (DVD)
  • Reed Worship
  • Election 2012: What Will You Do?



  • God's Law and SocietyGod's Law and Society (DVD)

    Download the Free Study Guide!
    God’s Law and Society powerfully presents a comprehensive worldview based upon the ethical system found in the Law of God.
    Speakers include: R.J. Rushdoony, George Grant, Howard Phillips, R.C. Sproul Jr., Ken Gentry, Gary DeMar, Jay Grimstead, Steven Schlissel, Andrew Sandlin, Eric Holmberg, and more!
    Sixteen Christian leaders and scholars answer some of the most common questions and misconceptions related to this volatile issue:
    1. Are we under Law or under Grace?
    2. Does the Old Testament Law apply today?
    3. Can we legislate morality?
    4. What are the biblical foundations of government?
    5. Was America founded as a Christian nation?
    6. What about the separation of Church and State?
    7. Is neutrality a myth?
    8. What about non-Christians and the Law of God?
    9. Would there be “freedom” in a Christian republic?
    10. What would a “Christian America” look like?
    Perfect for group instruction as well as personal Bible study.
    Ten parts, over four hours of instruction!
    Running Time: 240 minutes
    Watch over 60 on-line video interviews from God’s Law and Society.
    $19.95 — ORDER NOW!
    (We accept all major credit cards and PayPal.)Click here for more information


    God’s Law and Society: An Interview with Jeff Ziegler


    Question:— Didn’t the Apostle Paul say that we are no longer under law but under grace? If so, then what is the use of the Law of God under the New Covenant?
    Jeff Ziegler: The notion of being “under grace and not law” is something not to be underestimated or undermined. But what is it Paul is saying? We are not saved nor justified by law. We are justified by faith in Christ. It is His finished work alone that secures our redemption. However, how is it that we are to live our lives? Is it by every whim or every fancy of our own wicked heart — a deceitful heart that we cannot know? The Law of God has not passed away in terms of our guide for life in godliness. Jesus himself said that “not one jot nor tittle will pass away” until all things are fulfilled. Christ as the fulfillment of the law gives us the grace, which is divine almighty power effective on our behalf. He gives us the grace to live according to the law not to transgress the law. We see in Romans 6:1, “Shall we sin that grace may abound? God forbid!” And how is it we know that we sin? We have an unchanging standard in God’s Law.
    Now granted, there have been portions of Old Testament Law that have been changed or nullified. For example, the sacrificial system is no longer needed and is repugnant to God because Christ is the final and last sacrifice. The dietary laws have been modified and changed. But the moral law is still binding. For example, the laws against bestiality in the Old Testament are no where repeated in the New. Yet no one will say that bestiality is somehow now under grace. It’s still sin. The ideas and notions of our conduct are in the Law of God. They are not options. They are commands. They have not been nullified or abridged in any way by Christ’s finished work. In fact, now that law is written upon our heart and our mind and we are given grace to follow hard after them in a way that was not possible in the old dispensation.
    Of course, Christianity is ultimately personal and intimate. We come by the finished work of Jesus Christ into a living, real and vital relationship with God. The creation can touch the Creator — the Christ. That brings joy unspeakable and full of glory — there can be no doubt. But then what? This personal, real and vital relationship must be manifest. The Great Commission says that we are to be a witness unto all nations. We are to teach those nations all the things that Christ did depict and declare. That means that we are to enforce, declare and disciple the nations, every tribe, every kindred, every ethnic grouping under and according to God’s Law.
    The idea that religion is only personal is actually heretical. That’s an ancient heresy called Gnosticism. They said that the material world was evil and the unseen world was innately spiritual. That’s why so many Christians in that era, and even today, have not had a proper view of sexuality, the family, the role of the Church, their role in society, and even the idea of work and creating wealth. They think the material world is evil. And therefore, they must cultivate material monastic ideas to be closer to Christ. But the idea of being close to Christ, the chosen fast of God, is to go out and set at liberty the captives. So whether it is preaching the Gospel to men so that they may be redeemed. Or whether that means going into the civil realm as a politician and declaring the Crown Rights of Jesus Christ there and ruling diligently according to the Law of God. Or whether that means being a home schooling mom and raising a generation of champions for Jesus Christ. At every realm, Christ the expression of the Gospel, His life is real and vital, and therefore it must have an outward flow.


    Question:— Was the New Testament Church really a “New Testament” Church as we think of it today? In what ways was their situation different from ours?
    Jeff Ziegler: The battle in America is between two ideas or notions and it is the Lordship of Jesus Christ versus the authority of the state or “Caesar.” And that’s really always been the question. Even in Christ’s day, in the Gospels we see that the issue is always framed around: What allegiance do we owe to Caesar? What are our duties? And what allegiance do we owe to Christ?
    Romans 13 gives us the parameter by which we are to judge our actions in this way. Romans 13 declares what kind of civil magistrate or elected official is endorsed by God. This kind of civil magistrate be he a monarch, a king, a parliamentarian, a congressmen, a president, must affirm God’s law, punish wickedness, and affirm and reward righteousness. That is the kind of civil magistrate we are to obey. However, if the civil magistrate becomes tyranny to God’s ways and in fact punishes righteousness and rewards wickedness, by virtue of their call to obey God’s Law-Word in every jot and tittle, by His grace, Christians must be resolved to resist tyranny and to stand against such injustice.
    While there was no implicit call to resist the tyranny of Rome by Paul, the fact that he gave us that filter in Romans 13 actually was a defense of the civil disobedience of the early church. The very preaching of the Gospel, the serving of Christ as the Lord of the nations, as He being God alone and no the Caesar cult, that was an act of civil disobedience. That’s the reason why the Christians were persecuted and hounded and sent to the catacombs and put into the coliseums in the fierce competitions and the persecutions of Imperial Rome. It was the fact that they were not obeying the Caesar cult. So Romans 13 is a defense of the Gospel, but when we act upon the Gospel, when we preach the Gospel, when we live the Gospel, it is inevitably going to bring us in conflict with Caesar — or the state that would be God.
    When we look throughout the book of Acts and we see the Apostles, the deacons, and simple Christians being brought before civil magistrates giving an account for their faith and the Apostle Paul is one of these. And the question comes down to: When it is Christ versus Caesar, do we obey God and His Law or man? That is the issue between Christ and Caesar and on that there can be no neutrality, if we consistently live the Gospel, preach the Gospel, demonstrate the Gospel. Even the idea of rescuing babies — the early church were taking abandoned babies that were left under the bridge abutment to die by Roman paganism. They were taking them as their own and adopting them and raising them in the faith. That was against Roman law. A true Gospel expression will always bring us into conflict, not with the civil magistrate that God ordains, but with the civil magistrate who seeks to dethrone God and become God himself.


    Question:— Can we really legislate the biblical standards of morality on non-Christians? The non-Christian doesn’t even believe in the Bible, so how can we even talk about building a society based on the Law of God?
    Jeff Ziegler: The idea that we can be governed by many moralities, or pluralism, is really a myth. We are either in obedience to God’s Law or we are in opposition to God’s Law. Now there is a concern in a mechanistic sense that we are going to impose God’s Law through an ecclesiocracy, that is a rule through the clergy, or through some dictatorship as in an Islamic nation. That is a misinterpretation of biblical Law. Biblical Law when it regards civil polity, is the ultimate decentralized government. Scripture does not support nor trust dictatorships. The whole idea behind God’s judgment at the Tower of Babel was that man was coming together. He had all of his strength in one central location and had a global government. And God by once stroke of the hand decentralized that government and turned the languages against one another and formed nation-states from that one expression of a global tyranny.
    That is the paradigm of the liberal. Liberals and humanists think in terms of statism. They must have the state to coerce and to force their ideas upon the people. They don’t have another way of thinking. The state is messiah for them. When they look upon us and see our ideas and notions, that we are fighting for biblical law being applied to all of life, they can’t think in any other terms. They think it’s going to be a top-down theocratic, oligarchic or monarchic system. Nothing could be further from the truth. It’s not revolution or political dictatorships that we place our faith in, rather it’s the power of conversion. We are converting literally millions to the idea that God’s Law is supreme. We see these revolutionary trends in home schooling, in ecclesiastical reform, and in the civil realm as we elect expressly and explicitly Christian politicians — not simple neo-conservatives — but Christians who acknowledge God’s Law.
    As we see this, one family at a time, one church at a time, one community at a time, one state at a time, America will be converted. It will be through conversion and not revolution that we see this great reordering and restructuring and reanchoring of our society to God’s Law. Now there will always be those who are autonomous rebels, who trample underfoot the Son of God, who count the blood of the covenant to be unholy. They will always seek to overthrow God’s rule. In the family, we see it with divorce and abortion. We see it in the church with ecclesiastical anarchists, those who will not be governed by sound doctrine. We see it in civil states. But only if they resort to violent means to overthrow godly order would they be suppressed. But they would not be suppressed by clergymen, but by a decentralized federal republic.


    Question:— How did Christian philosophy influence our form of civil government?
    Jeff Ziegler: There is great consternation and controversy about what Christ’s Lordship actually means in the real world. Most Christians will not argue with the fact that He does rule our lives. He is the ruler, the Lord, the King of their families and their church. But much beyond that, the idea of Christ’s Lordship begins to fall on deaf ears. The retort you often hear revolves around the time period when Christ is before Pilate’s inquisition and says, “My kingdom is not of this world.” Let’s put this in context however. Christ was not saying that His kingdom was not manifest in the world. What he was saying to Pilate “My kingdom does not gain it’s authority from Rome or the Sanhedrin. My authority comes from on high.” Pilate understood this. The irony is that the pagan tyrant understood, but Christians don’t today. So the authority of Christ’s kingdom is not of this world, but nonetheless, the kingdom has invaded this civil realm, the family realm, “the earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof.” Every aspect of society is touched by the kingdom of God.
    Now how does this work practically? If every time we’ll confess, “Every knee will bow” before Christ, that He is the Lord, that monarchs, kings, state representatives, congressmen, and presidents must bow their knee before God. By what standard will they bow the knee? Yes, it gets back to God’s Law. The kingdom has no place in terms of seeking approval or legitimacy here in the earth. It doesn’t need the president’s approval to exist. It’s authority comes from the other world. And therefore it is superior and higher. But the kingdom is manifest in the world and Christ’s Lordship is manifest in the world in the civil realm, in the family, in every aspect of society, economics, science etc. Christ’s Lordship has the claim.
    We talk about the crown rights of Jesus Christ. By virtue of the finished work of Jesus Christ, He has the right to rule. He has the keys to the kingdom of heaven. He has reconciled all things in heaven and in earth, the visible and the invisible, the living and the dead. He rules over all. Christ’s kingdom is comprehensive in scope and absolute in its authority.


    Question:— Were the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution drafted to uphold the moral laws of God — or were they Deistic humanist documents? If they were Christian documents, where have we gone so far off track?
    Jeff Ziegler: There is no question that our Founding Fathers were an amalgamation of some Deistic humanists, Puritan thought as well as high Anglicanism, all mixed together and jostling for position in the context of our founding federal documents. However, there was an acknowledgment of man’s overriding depravity, the idea that absolute power corrupts absolutely was not a foreign idea to these men. In looking at the Hebrew Commonwealth in its decentralized forms of government, our founding fathers in their wisdom, set about to create a system where there would be checks and balances against this idea of absolute power, government by man, tyrannical carnality, with three branches of government, all of which are supposed to work to counter balance the other. At least theoretically, they would keep in check any tyrannical impulse.
    Unfortunately, that assumes these three institutions are appealing to God’s Law. No matter how good the system, unless it is under the aegis and covering of God’s Law, any system can revert to tyranny. It can be the tyranny of the majority of paganism, of humanism. Even in Israel, in the Hebrew Commonwealth, when they began to apostatize and fall away from God’s Law, what did they begin to cry out for? — a tyrant, a king “like all he other nations.” They paid the price for it in terms of wars, tyrannical suppression and taxation, and ultimately in the division of their nation in two separate entities and then the invasion of foreign pagan powers to bring them under the enslavement of their anti-God ways. So they ultimately paid the price and we will too if we don’t turn back to God’s Law.
    When we can compare biblical law versus natural law, scripture is the final immutable authority on every subject of which it speaks. It is binding not only on the regenerate that is the Christian, but the unregenerate alike. You’ll either are following God’s Law and prospering accordingly, or you’ll be broken by it. It doesn’t change. So whether you acknowledge it or not, it exists, and all men are judged by its standards.
    Now there is certainly natural revelation. God has made himself known in the creation — there is evidence of his creation everywhere. But ultimately it is not evidence that man needs. It’s conviction of sin and to have his miscreant depraved nature arrested. The role of the civil magistrate is to keep a biblical and sound order, to prosper the righteous and to punish wickedness. You can’t do that by natural revelation or natural law. Now it’s true that in a godly or predominantly godly society, men will understand natural law in a way that mimics or comes close to biblical law. We see that in the embryonic stages of our nation. However, natural law can be co-opted and pirated by corrupt alien and humanistic worldviews. Natural law can be interpreted from many different angles. In so doing, morality become relativistic.
    However, that cannot be said of the Ten Commandments because not only do we have the explicit injunction “Thou shalt not kill” (or murder) or “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” But we have case laws which interpret that law and how it is to be administered in the civil realm. So biblical law is superior because it is defined revelation. It is specific and applicable.


    Question:— What about the “establishment of religion” clause in the U.S. Constitution? Doesn’t the U.S. Constitution forbid the display of religion in the civil sphere?
    Jeff Ziegler: The main differences between the Roman Empire under the Caesar cult and the early Church’s reaction to it and Christians today in a constitutional republic, despite the fact that we’ve lost so many of our freedoms, we still have remedy at law to begin to work within the process to restore and reconstruct our nation along biblical lines — simply to restore it to what it once was. Under the Roman authority, Christians did not have the means to defend themselves. Christians did not have the right to an appeal. But we have that process here. We have the right to defend ourselves. We have a Constitution. We have a Bill of Rights. We have elected representatives that we can work with, lower civil magistrates that we can work alongside, convert to the faith and even elect those who are explicitly Christian to these lower realms and then begin to work up into the governmental powers that be.
    Reconstruction and reformation is a ground-up idea. The idea of seizing control of Washington D.C., of the Congress and presidency, is hopelessly naive. We have to reconstruct families. We have to reconstruct churches. We have to begin to work at the local level. We have to develop regional zones of kingdom influence. Within that realm, we are exhibiting, testifying, and working for the Crown Rights of Jesus Christ. So in that realm Christians have a greater hope and an easier road to hoe than the early Christians did versus the imperial power of Rome.
    It’s not as if this is a new thing that we are talking about. Our nation was founded under these strictures. If you go to any of the early colonial charters, the Fundamental Charters of Carolina, for example, there was a test for Christian orthodoxy for all civil magistrates and even land owners that they had to adhere to before they could be a recognized and vibrant part of the social fabric. We are not talking about anything that has not been done. It was done and accomplished in our nation and prior to the War Between the States, America prospered under such a mandate.
    So we are not talking about Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iran. We are not talking about Islamic law. We’re talking about biblical law. If we go back and we look at the Commonwealth of the Hebrew Republic, before the kings, we see a very decentralized system of government. Many people have the notion that Moses was a dictator, but that was only in the initial stages of the Exodus, which was primarily a military operation. Soon after that we see that Moses was going to wear away the people and God not only gave 70 elders, but princes and captains of fifties and tens. So you had this incredibly decentralized system of government among the tribes of Israel. People could say it was inefficient, but the whole idea was a check and balance against man’s depravity. We modeled our constitutional republic after the Hebrew Commonwealth. That’s what we’re talking about here.


    Question:— What about the idea that the government should be neutral and should recognize that we live in a democratic, pluralistic society?
    Jeff Ziegler: Probably the greatest evidence of humanism’s collapse and the reactionary statist hand being felt is in the former monopoly that we call public education. Public education is no such thing; it’s government indoctrination. After all, whether it be Hitler, Stalin or Mao, tyrants always try to grab hold of the next generation to perpetuate their rebellion. The public school system on a number of different fronts is beginning to collapse — academically, economically because people are no longer voting for levies, and because it is becoming more centralized in Washington D.C. Centralization is never an answer. Any business man could tell you that if the public school elitists definitely wanted to succeed, they would not want to centralize, but that is what they are doing. As these things begin to happen, more and more individuals leave the public school system either for parochial schools, private schools or for home school.
    The correct reason for home schooling is not simply the quality of education in the government run school system. It is to say that the government has no authority whatever over you children., You are the one who is ultimately responsible.
    As more have home schools, as more move to the parochial schools what is happening is a literal depopulation of the public system. Laws are being enacted at the state and federal level to destroy the freedom the parents have over their children. Home schoolers think that they have fought most of the legal battles in the 1980s. Actually they are going to see that their own success is going to breed a greater backlash by the state against their efforts. Ultimately, the state believes, whether at the local municipality, state or federal government, that they own the children. And that is where the great backlash of a collapsing humanism is going to be felt. It is going to take courage, conviction and sound theology by Christian parents not only to resist the tyranny, but to fight for justice.


    Question:— Wouldn’t a Christian Republic run according to God’s Law become oppressive to non-Christians?
    Jeff Ziegler: Freedom, liberty, has one chief end, and that is to advance Christ’s rule, His reign, over all the nations and all the realms of the earth. Liberty without the sure anchor of Christian orthodoxy is really a Greco-Roman idea. It leads either on one hand to unfettered licentiousness and moral anarchy, or on the other, to a paternalistic tyranny. Because when you have moral anarchy, the state will move to suppress that anarchy. Without Christian orthodoxy, the hope of freedom and liberty for which our Founding Fathers fought is elusive at best.
    When autonomous man seeks liberty from God, his first action is to revolt against God’s law in order to fulfill the lusts of his flesh. Thereafter this period of anarchy, the messianic state seeks to suppress this moral anarchy. At that point, you have tyranny. You have the liberal or the right wing imposing their own morality apart from God. And so the whole idea of liberty is connected intrinsically to the idea of God’s moral law. Liberty apart from God’s law is an impossibility. There is no neutrality on this issue. It’s either God’s law or chaos. And if we have chaos, we will have tyranny. God has designed all governments, whether they are fascist, communist or democratic republics, to gravitate towards stability. The only question is will it be the governance of God’s Law or communism or fascism or any other man-centered humanistic ideal. So man can have his licentious, lust-filled day in the sun. But he will pay a price in the ultimate loss of all freedom.
    It is no accident that apostasy and heresy in the church and civil tyranny among nations walk hand in hand. The orthodox expression of Christianity is the final guarantor of our freedoms. And so if heresy and infidelity to orthodoxy gains ascendancy within the church, it will eventually work its way out into the civil sphere. People often ask me why we have such oppressive government in America today. And my answer is: Don’t point to Washington D.C., because, while it is Sodom on the Potomac, the real problem lies with the pulpits of America. Unless we affirm Christian orthodoxy and the resulting freedoms it has birthed and guaranteed throughout the years, we will continue to be enslaved by our statist masters.


    Question:— What can Christians begin to do from a practical standpoint to begin to rebuild our nation according to the standard of the Law of God? What would a Christian America look like?
    Jeff Ziegler: The way that the state attempts to supplant God is to intrude upon the God-given rights of personal property and the pursuit of happiness — the things which are codified in our founding documents. This is true of communism, fascism, socialism and even a democratic republic. When the state begins to tax property, when it says that property which is given to you by God is now subject to their rule and their reign. You no longer own that property. You have become a serf through property taxes and income taxes. God gives you the power to get wealth. He is not the disburser of wealth, but gives you the power to get wealth to honor God. When they begin to tax income, property and things of this nature, they are intruding upon rights that God has given you. If they curtail your speech regarding the Gospel. We see that around abortion mills in these “buffer zones” where you cannot preach the Gospel or declare God’s Law. These notions to control the freedom to worship God are all signs of tyranny.
    But the good news is this. Tyranny only goes so far and so long before it begins to burn out. First, because of its own corruption. Second, because there is only so much money and so much property to tax. Eventually, this insatiable appetite for more has to be curtailed by simple arithmetic. In America today, we have reached the point where moral corruption, infidelity to Gods law in the civil realm, humanism as a life assistance in the collegiate realm among the intellectual elite, Darwinism, all of these notions are coming to the end of their political and social life span. In fact, I can hear the death rattle in the throat of humanism. They know it. This is in one way encouraging, but in another way it leads us to the most dangerous period. Whenever these systems begin to collapse, men who have tied their fortunes, their lives, their reputations to these corrupted and fallen paradigms become very vicious and violent.
    We see this in the old Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union began to collapse, it was uneven. We see anarchy, murder, the Russian Mafia. Yet there could be more political tumult there and in Eastern Europe. We don’t see the end of this yet. The same thing could happen in America. When humanism ultimately collapses and Christians rise to the fore, we could see things like the break-up and realignment of the United States. What is happening in the Soviet Union could certainly happen here. Those are dangerous times when one system is collapsing and another system arises. My great hope is that there is sufficient reformation and reconstruction in the church so that when the paradigm of humanism ultimately collapses, we will be able in the crisis to fill that vacuum. Otherwise, we’ll exchange one tyranny for another.


    Jeff Ziegler: The Reformation Worldview
    On September 3rd, 2000, a few Christian activists and scholars gathered on the Mall in Washington D.C. to conduct a day-long seminar on “world changing.” Exactly one year later, terrorists attacked Washington and New York. It became apparent that America must fight a long and costly was on two fronts. While international terrorism is being fought on one front, Christians activists must wage a war against a more subtle attack by anti-Christian “terrorists” within.
    This seminar has become more relevant in light of the events of 9/11.
    We offer this seminar to the next generation of world changers who can be used of God to turn our nation back from humanist domination.

    YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME!

     
    Textile Help 

    The Four Keys to the Millennium (Book)

    Foundations in Biblical Eschatology
    By Jay Rogers, Larry Waugh, Rodney Stortz, Joseph Meiring. High quality paperback, 167 pages.
    All Christians believe that their great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, will one day return. Although we cannot know the exact time of His return, what exactly did Jesus mean when he spoke of the signs of His coming (Mat. 24)? How are we to interpret the prophecies in Isaiah regarding the time when “the earth will be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea” (Isa. 11:19)? Should we expect a time of great tribulation and apostasy or revival and reformation before the Lord returns? Is the devil bound now, and are the saints reigning with Christ? Did you know that there are four hermeneutical approaches to the book of Daniel and Revelation?
    These and many more questions are dealt with by four authors as they present the four views on the millennium. Each view is then critiqued by the other three authors.
    $12.95 — ORDER NOW!
    (We accept all major credit cards and PayPal.)Click here for more information

    Reversing Roe: The Norma McCorvey Story (DVD)

    In 1969, a pregnant 21 year old Norma McCorvey felt abortion was her only answer. He case was used to challenge the Texas abortion law and she eventually became the Jane Roe of the 1973 US Supreme Court decision, Roe v Wade. She never had an abortion, but instead became an icon in the national abortion debate. For 22 years, Norma McCorvey’s life was a battlefield. She worked inside abortion clinics. She promoted legalized abortion. But she was tormented by what she saw and felt. In the summer of 1995, her life changed forever.
    Through the friendship of a pro-life leader and a special invitation from a 7-year old child, Jane Roe finally died so Norma Leah McCorvey could live. This is her story.
    Running Time: 28 minutes
    Watch a clip from Reversing Roe.
    $9.95 — ORDER NOW!
    (We accept all major credit cards and PayPal.)Click here for more information

    Go Stand Speak (DVD)

    With “preaching to the lost” being such a basic foundation of Christianity, why do many in the church seem to be apathetic on this issue of preaching in highways and byways of towns and cities?
    Is it biblical to stand in the public places of the world and proclaim the gospel, regardless if people want to hear it or not?
    Does the Bible really call church pastors, leaders and evangelists to proclaim the gospel in the public square as part of obedience to the Great Commission, or is public preaching something that is outdated and not applicable for our day and age?
    These any many other questions are answered in this documentary.
    $19.95 — ORDER NOW!
    (We accept all major credit cards and PayPal.)Click here for more information

    Dr. Francis Schaeffer - How Should We Then Live? (DVD)

    Special Two-Disc Set!
    After 40 years of intense study and world-wide ministry, Dr. Francis Schaeffer completed his crowning work of scholarship – to present profound truths in simple film language. Dr. Schaeffer’s brilliant analysis of the past and predictions for current trends have proven so uncannily accurate that this amazing series still feels contemporary almost three decades after its initial release. Ultimately, Schaeffer concludes that man’s only hope is a return to God’s Biblical absolute, the truth revealed in Christ through the Scriptures.
    Available for the first time on DVD, this documentary spectacular also includes intimate in-depth conversations with Francis and Edith Schaeffer. With the on-disc study guide, this presentation forms a unique course of comprehensive study. While this series forms an innovative analysis of the past, this outstanding work is more than history. Each episode focuses on a significant era, yet speaks clearly to 21st-century man with answers for modern problems.
    $49.95 — ORDER NOW!
    (We accept all major credit cards and PayPal.)Click here for more information

    The Abortion Matrix: Defeating Child Sacrifice and the Culture of Death (DVD)

    Download the free Study Guide!
    Is there a connection between pagan religion and the abortion industry?
    This powerful presentation traces the biblical roots of child sacrifice and then delves into the social, political and cultural fall-out that this sin against God and crime against humanity has produced in our beleaguered society.
    Conceived as a sequel and update to the 1988 classic, The Massacre of Innocence, the new title, The Abortion Matrix, is entirely fitting. It not only references abortion’s specific target – the sacred matrix where human beings are formed in the womb in the very image of God, but it also implies the existence of a conspiracy, a matrix of seemingly disparate forces that are driving this holocaust.
    The occult activity surrounding the abortion industry is exposed with numerous examples. But are these just aberrations, bizarre yet anomalous examples of abortionists who just happen to have ties to modern day witchcraft? Or is this representative of something deeper, more sinister and even endemic to the entire abortion movement?
    As the allusion to the film of over a decade ago suggests, the viewer may learn that things are not always as they appear to be. The Abortion Matrix reveals the reality of child-killing and strikes the proper moral chord to move hearts to fulfill the biblical responsibility to rescue those unjustly sentenced to death and to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves (Proverbs 24:11,12; 31:8,9).
    Speakers include: George Grant, Peter Hammond, RC Sproul Jr., Paul Jehle, Lou Engle, Rusty Thomas, Flip Benham, Janet Porter and many more.
    Ten parts, over three hours of instruction!
    Running Time: 195 minutes
    $19.95 — ORDER NOW!
    (We accept all major credit cards and PayPal.)Click here for more information

http://www.restoringtheoriginalbible.com/purpose.html


 
The basis for this new translation is the inspired Word of God, originally written and canonized by God’s chosen servants in the Hebrew and Greek languages. God the Father and Jesus Christ have jealously guarded the Word of God so it would never be lost or destroyed. Jesus promised He would uphold His words: “The heaven and the earth shall pass away, but My words shall never pass away” (Matt. 24:35).
In every respect, this translation has been an endeavor to uphold the true teachings of the Word of God—and to present the Holy Scriptures in their original, God-inspired order. While no translation is flawless, this translation far surpasses the standards of many recent English translations and has indeed fulfilled the requirements for a faithful translation.
This new translation involves the following key areas:
1) Accurately conveying the meaning of the words of the original text;
2) Phrasing that accurately expresses the thoughts of the original writers;
3) An understanding of Hebrew and Greek idioms—which cannot be translated literally, but must be translated according to their cultural and historical usage;
4) Punctuation that is honest to the original meaning; and,
5) The careful insertion of words (in italics) to clarify the meaning.

This Second Edition of The Holy Bible In Its Original Order includes a vital 25-page addition to its appendices—“Understanding Paul’s Difficult Scriptures Concerning the Law and Commandments of God” (Appendix Z). While some of the apostle Paul’s writings are admittedly difficult, widespread misinterpretations of his writings by theologians and teachers have spawned centuries of confusion—especially in Protestantism. Indeed, numerous misplaced assumptions have unfortunately led to a greatly distorted view of God’s Law. Critical New Testament passages are systematically examined in Appendix Z, showing their correct meaning as originally intended by Paul.
As with all first editions of publications, there are inadvertent errors. In this Second Edition, the unintentional miscues and typographical errors have been corrected. In addition, approximately 1200 Old Testament passages have been brought into sharper focus, giving some a more literal reading. (While that may seem like a great number, it is less than half of one percent of all the verses in the Old Testament.) In the First Edition, for example, Psalm 12:8 reads, “The wicked walk on every side when the vilest of them is exalted among the sons of men.” In the Second Edition, the verse has been modified to read, “The wicked walk on every side when vileness is exalted among the sons of men.” In all of the passages that have been clarified, their essential meaning remains the same as in the First Edition.
In Genesis chapter one, a slight alteration has been made to give a more literal rendering on how the days of creation are designated. In the First Edition, verse five reads, “And the evening and the morning were the first day.” More literal, it now reads, “And the evening and the morning were day one.” The first five days of creation are re-designated in this manner. However, the sixth day—as it is specifically the day of preparation—was left to read, “the sixth day.” Since the seventh day is the holy Sabbath of God, we also retained the reading, “the seventh day.”
The additional appendix and the adjustments to the scriptural texts warrant calling this printing a “Second Edition.” In all other aspects, this Second Edition of The Holy Bible In Its Original Order is identical to the First Edition published in 2008.
This translation is not the work of any committee. Typically, translation committees have demonstrated that they are more interested in carnal-minded, special interest groups—who desire to make the Bible conform to a particular political, sexist or ecumenical religious agenda—than in accurately translating the Word of God. Moreover, they frequently corrupt the Word of God by using common street language and superimposing a gender-neutral language on the Scriptures in an effort to please radical feminists and homosexuals. In summary, they have allowed societal mores to determine how they should present their translations; in effect, they have allowed the community to “frame” the Word of God.
The obligation of any translator of the Scriptures is to present to the reader a faithful translation of the God-breathed words—precisely as God moved His faithful servants to write and canonize them. Thus, the philosophy underlying this translation—The Holy Bible In Its Original Order—is a return to translating the Word of God faithfully from the Hebrew and Greek into English. The goal of this version is: 1) To seek the truth and best represent the original texts’ meaning in English; 2) To convey the Word of God as accurately as possible with the same divine character that is conveyed in the original; 3) To recapture the original teachings of the Old Testament writers and the doctrines of Jesus Christ that the apostles taught the primitive Church as recorded in the New Testament; and 4) To cherish and uphold every “jot and tittle” of the Old Testament writers and of the apostles of Jesus Christ—so that, today, true believers may know how to live by every Word of God in a personal, intimate relationship with God the Father and Jesus Christ.
Ultimately, the Word of God is a call to repentance—a call to return to the true faith of Jesus Christ as taught by the original apostles and written in the original God-breathed Scriptures. In his short Epistle to the followers of Jesus Christ, the apostle Jude wrote a most impassioned plea for true believers to return to the faith once delivered. When Jude wrote his urgent message, the apostolic age was coming to a close, a great apostasy was gaining momentum, and false apostles and ministers were leading Christians astray. Likewise, in our day, false teachers and pseudo-scholars are again busily seeking to undermine the Word of God and destroy the faith of true Christians. Jude wrote: “I was compelled to write to you, exhorting you to fervently fight for the faithwhich once for all time has been delivered to the saints” (Jude 3-4).
May God the Father and Jesus Christ bless you with a humble heart, a contrite spirit, and a deep hunger and thirst for righteousness and eternal salvation.



Home
 - Author - Purpose - Reviews - Testimonials - Order - Contact
Copyright © 2009 York Publishing Co.

 Site created by Vild Productions

Royal Expectations in Genesis to Kings: Their importance for Biblical Theology

http://beginningwithmoses.org/bt-articles/215/royal-expectations-in-genesis-to-kings-their-importance-for-biblical-theology


http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-05262008-155326/unrestricted/06bibliography.pdf


Royal Expectations in Genesis to Kings: Their importance for Biblical Theology

T. Desmond Alexander


Summary

This article explores two related issues in Biblical Theology: (a) the relationship between the testaments, and (b) the New Testament belief that Jesus Christ fulfils Old Testament expectations concerning a divinely appointed royal saviour or messiah. These issues are discussed from the perspective of the books of Genesis to Kings which, as a continuous narrative, form the backbone of the Old Testament. While many contemporary writers view these books as providing an account of Israel’s history (the reality of which is debated), a careful reading reveals that they are equally interested, if not more so, in the fulfilment of divine promises centred on a future king through whom all the nations of the earth shall be blessed. According to the New Testament, the realisation of these promises, foreshadowed in the Genesis-Kings narrative, comes through Jesus Christ.

I. Introduction

As an academic discipline Biblical Theology is especially interested in the organic unity of the writings which comprise the Old and New Testaments. This raises two important and closely related issues. First, there is the question of the relationship between the two testaments. David L. Baker outlines well the nature of this problem:
Christianity has the New Testament as the record and testimony of the life, death and resurrection of its founder, Jesus Christ, and of the formation of the Christian church. One of the most fundamental questions which has faced theology and the church in every age and still demands an answer today is whether or not Christianity also needs an Old Testament. Is the Old Testament to be thrown away as obsolete, or preserved as a relic from days of yore, or treasured as a classic and read by scholars, or used occasionally as a change from the New Testament, or kept in a box in case it should be needed some day? Or is the Old Testament an essential part of the Christian Bible, with continuing validity and authority alongside the New Testament?
Such questions highlight well the important and unresolved issue of the relationship of the Old Testament to the New Testament.
Second, fundamental to the New Testament understanding of Jesus of Nazareth is the idea that he fulfils Old Testament expectations regarding a divinely-appointed royal saviour or messiah. While Christians, by definition, are those who believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the messiah predicted in the Old Testament, there has been a growing tendency since the eighteenth century to challenge the validity of this claim. This trend, which may be traced back to the writings of the Deist Anthony Collins, has depended heavily on the observation that many of the supposedly messianic Old Testament proof-texts quoted in the New Testament are not messianic according to the ‘plain meaning’ of the Hebrew text. As a result there has arisen a substantial scholarly consensus (a) that many Old Testament passages previously assumed to be messianic actually relate to ordinary kings, and (b) that the expectation of a future messiah originated first in the post-exilic period, following the demise of the Davidic dynasty .
In spite of these developments the Old Testament’s witness to the messiahship of Jesus continues to be an important factor in defining the relationship between the testaments. With some justification Baker includes ‘Christology’ as one of five concepts that may be used to explain the theological relationship between the Old and New Testaments. Given, however, the doubts that have been expressed regarding the use of supposedly messianic Old Testament passages in the New Testament, alternative ways of explaining the relationship between the testaments have gained popularity. Thus, alongside Christology, Baker highlights as significant the concepts of salvation history; typology; promise and fulfilment; continuity and discontinuity. While Baker’s study provides a helpful survey and critique of modern approaches to the problem of the theological relationship between the testaments, there is scope for refining and developing various aspects of his discussion. In order to do this we shall focus our attention on the books of Genesis to Kings.

II. The Books of Genesis to Kings

Various factors have influenced my decision to restrict my observations to the books of Genesis to Kings, and it may be helpful to mention briefly the more important of these. First, these books may legitimately be viewed as forming the backbone of the Old Testament. Not only do they make up almost half of the Old Testament in terms of length, but, as we shall observe more fully below, in their present form they constitute a unified narrative. Second, in marked contrast to their prominence within the Old Testament, the books of Genesis to Kings usually play a minor role in discussions regarding the messianic nature of the Old Testament; most proof-texts tend to be drawn from the prophetic books (i.e., the Latter Prophets) and the book of Psalms . Consequently, we may legitimately ask, if no witness to Christ is present in Genesis to Kings, or, if it is very limited, can one maintain that messianic ideology is a major aspect of the Old Testament as a whole? Although modern Old Testament scholarship does not favour a messianic reading of the books of Genesis to Kings, it will be argued below that the content of these books is central to understanding how the Old Testament witnesses to Christ. This also has important implications for the way in which we should view the relationship between the testaments.
For the purpose of this study we shall adopt a synchronic reading of Genesis to Kings. From the perspective of their final redaction it is obvious that these books were intended to be read as a unified narrative. This is apparent both in terms of the overall picture provided, and of the way in which individual books are linked together. Viewed as a whole, Genesis to Kings records selected events from the creation of the earth to the demise of the Davidic monarchy at the time of the Babylonian exile. Later books in the sequence presuppose that the reader is already familiar with those that have gone before. For example, the introductory verses of Exodus assume that the reader is acquainted with the story of Joseph. Similarly, references to the deaths of Moses and Joshua at the very start of the books of Joshua and Judges respectively serve the purpose of linking these books with those immediately preceding . Whatever the prior oral and/or literary history of these books they have been deliberately linked together to form a continuous narrative, and, on the basis of content and language, we may with reasonable confidence assume that this material was brought together in the exilic or early post-exilic period . For present purposes there is no need to determine a more specific date for the final redaction of these books.
By adopting a synchronic reading of Genesis to Kings, we avoid the necessity of unravelling the process by which these books were composed. Given present uncertainties regarding the validity of the Documentary Hypothesis, and continuing debate about the redactional stages involved in the composition of the Deuteronomistic History, the whole issue of the growth of the books of Genesis to Kings is presently in a state of turmoil. We shall probably witness in the coming years a renewed discussion of the process by which all these books were compiled . Since such investigations are primarily intended to clarify the historical development of ancient Israel’s traditions, they are of secondary importance to the subject of this article. Our present concern is not to explore the authenticity of the traditions recorded in Genesis to Kings; rather it is to examine how these traditions are used within the final redaction of these books.
Unfortunately, Old Testament scholars tend not to read and comment on the books of Genesis to Kings as a unified narrative; attention is usually given to either the Pentateuch or the Deuteronomistic History. Those who do comment on Genesis to Kings as a whole are inclined to describe it as a record of the history of the people of Israel. This is implied by R.N. Whybray who remarks that the Pentateuch is ‘a history of the origins of the people of Israel, prefaced by an account of the origins of the world’, which may have been intended as a ‘supplement (i.e. a prologue) to the work of the Deuteronomistic Historian, which dealt with the more recent period of the national history’. According to C. Houtman, Genesis to Kings ‘presents itself as a description of Israel’s history from the perspective of its calling and its continual unfaithfulness’ . E.T. Mullen has recently proposed that the Tetrateuch was composed as a prologue to the Deuteronomistic History in order to provide ‘a narrative foundation for the reformulation and maintenance of ‘Israelite’ ethnic and national identity in the Second Temple period’.

III. Nationhood

At first sight the idea that the books of Genesis to Kings were brought together to provide an account of Israel’s history seems to be the obvious explanation for their redactional unity. Beginning in Genesis we trace the growth of Israel from the initial call of Abraham through to the establishment of his descendants as a nation in the land of Canaan. Years of struggle and frustration eventually give way to a time of stability and splendour during the reigns of David and Solomon. Thereafter, the nation’s history is marked by decline, leading eventually to the overthrow of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah at the hands of the Assyrians and Babylonians respectively.
Central to the development of the theme of nationhood in Genesis to Kings are the divine promises announced to Abra(ha)m in Genesis 12:1-3. These play a major role in linking together the books of Genesis to Kings by setting the agenda for most of what follows . Summoning Abra(ha)m to leave his family and homeland, the Lord promises, ‘I will make you into a great nation’ (Gn. 12:2). Several chapters later this promise of nationhood is developed more fully and confirmed by a covenant which focuses on two areas: numerous descendants (Gn. 15:1-6) and land (Gn. 15:7-21). The fulfilment of the divine covenant of Genesis 15 plays an important role in the development of the narrative in the Pentateuch and Former Prophets.
The divine promise of land is renewed with Abraham’s descendants, Isaac and Jacob (Gn. 26:3; 28:13; 35:12; cf. 28:4; 48:4; 50:24). In Exodus God’s promise of land to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is mentioned on various occasions (2:24; 6:4, 5; 13:11; 32:13; 33:1; cf. Lv. 26:42; Dt. 34:4), and there are several allusions to the covenant of Genesis 15 (Ex. 3:8, 17; 13:5; 23:23; 33:2; in these passages the peoples of Gn. 15:19-21 are named; cf. Dt. 1:7; 7:1; 20:17). Given specific references to slavery and release in Genesis 15:13-14, it is hardly surprising that this covenant features prominently in Exodus. Indeed, God’s deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt is directly linked in Exodus 2:24 to his covenant with Abraham. Later, after the Israelites are punished for making the golden calf, the renewal of the Sinai covenant is once again based on the promises made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob concerning land (cf. Ex. 32:13). Preparations for taking possession of the land are prominent in the book of Numbers. Occupation is delayed, however, through the unbelief and rebellion of the people. Nevertheless, after the death of all the adult Israelites who left Egypt, apart from Joshua and Caleb, the imminent fulfilment of the promise of land is anticipated in the later chapters of Numbers and in the book of Deuteronomy. The books of Joshua, Judges and Samuel, up to the reigns of David and Solomon, record the gradual completion of this process .
The promise of land and its fulfilment clearly plays an important role in the books of Genesis to Samuel. The same is true as regards the promise of descendants, the other aspect of becoming a great nation. A recurring theme in the patriarchal narratives is God’s intervention in overcoming the barrenness of the matriarchs, Sarah, Rebekah and Rachel (Gn. 21:1; 25:21; 30:22-24). In the opening chapter of Exodus the remarkable increase of the Israelites causes resentment in Egypt and leads to the repressive policy of the Pharaoh (Ex. 1:6-10). Later, as the Israelites prepare to enter the land of Canaan, Moses acknowledges that the promise of Genesis 15:5 has been fulfilled: ‘The LORD your God has increased your numbers so that today you are as many as the stars of the sky’ (Dt. 1:10; cf. Dt. 10:22; 28:62; Ne. 9:23). While the topic of population growth is less prominent in the books of Joshua to Kings, it is specifically noted that during the reign of Solomon ‘the people of Judah and Israel were as numerous as the sand on the seashore’ (1 Ki. 4:20; cf. 2 Sa. 17:11) .
Whereas the books of Genesis to 2 Samuel describe the gradual fulfilment of the divine promise of nationhood to Abraham, the books of 1 and 2 Kings chart the reversal of this process. Beginning with Solomon the narrative describes how the failure of both monarchy and people leads to the loss of territory and the deportation of many citizens. Of significance is the fact that these later events are anticipated even before the Israelites enter the promised land (cf. Dt. 28:64-68; 30:1,4). However, there are indications that the loss of land and population is not the final chapter in God’s dealings with Israel (cf. Dt. 30:1-5; 1 Ki. 8:46-51).
This brief survey reveals that the theme of nationhood plays a major role in linking together the books of Genesis to Kings. While in no way wishing to diminish the importance of this theme, we should observe that it is paralleled by another concept which is as important, if not more so, for understanding the redactional unity of the books of Genesis to Kings. This parallel theme concerns a king through whom the nations of the earth will be blessed.

IV. Royal Deliverer

While scholars have long recognised the importance of the promise of nationhood in Genesis, they have failed, by and large, to observe that Genesis also focuses on a divinely-promised royal ‘seed’. This failure results, in part at least, from a general tendency to neglect the final form of Genesis in favour of source- and form-critical approaches. When, however, Genesis is viewed as a literary unity, there can be little doubt that it is especially interested in pointing towards the coming of a unique king. Viewed against this background, the theme of kingship in the books of Exodus to Kings takes on a new dimension.
Although the promise of nationhood (i.e., land and descendants) is a central feature of the patriarchal narratives in Genesis, it is not the only promise highlighted. The Lord instructs Abraham:
Leave your country, your people and your father’s household and go to the land I will show you, so that I may make you into a great nation and bless you and make your name great. Be a blessing, so that I may bless those who bless you, and curse the one who disdains you, and so that all the families of the ground may be blessed through you (Gn. 12:1-3; my translation) .
This statement falls naturally into two halves, each introduced by an imperative. Whereas the first part focuses primarily on the promise of nationhood, the second centres chiefly on the blessing of others . The entire speech comes to a climax in the statement: ‘so that all the families of the ground may be blessed through you’ . The promise that Abraham will become a ‘great nation’ is probably best understood as part of God’s plan to bless all the families of the ground. The primary motive behind the call of Abraham is God’s intention to bless, rather than curse, humanity . By commanding him to leave his homeland and be a blessing, God places the onus on Abraham to obey in order that the promises concerning nationhood and blessing may be fulfilled.
As we have already observed the fulfilment of the promise of nationhood is later guaranteed through the divine covenant made with Abraham in Genesis 15. A further covenant is introduced in Genesis 17 . Most commentators, unfortunately, tend to focus on the sign of the covenant, circumcision, without noting that the essence of this covenant lies in the promise that Abraham will be the ‘father of many nations’ (17:4-5). Since this promise is later associated with Sarah-‘she will be the mother of nations’ (17:16)-it is unlikely that it includes the nations descended from Abraham through his relationships with Hagar (cf. 17:20) and Keturah (25:1-4). The Old Testament, however, is remarkably silent concerning the idea that Abraham would be the biological ancestor of different nations. In the light of this, we should observe that the word ‘father’ is sometimes ‘used of a variety of social roles that carried authority or exercised a protective or caring function. It could be used of a prophet (2 Kgs 6:21), priest (Judg 18:19), king (1 Sam 24:11), or governor (Isa 22:20-21)’ . By taking the word in this non-biological sense, we may understand Genesis 17:4-5 as stating that Abraham will be the ‘father of many nations’ not because these nations are his physical descendants but because he will be for them a channel of divine blessing. As N.M. Sarna observes, the phrase ‘father of many nations’ ‘has a more universal application in that a large segment of humanity looks upon Abraham as its spiritual father.’ In support of a non-biological understanding of ‘father’, it is noteworthy that Abraham is instructed to circumcise those who are not his offspring; this includes those born in his ‘household or bought with money from a foreigner’ (Gn. 17:12-13). This suggests that circumcision, and the covenant associated with it, was never intended to be a sign of racial purity.
Although all the male members of Abraham’s household are circumcised, including Ishmael, the Lord emphasises that the covenant will be established with Isaac, and him alone; Ishmael is specifically excluded in spite of being circumcised. This introduces an important distinction between those who may enjoy the benefits of this covenant and those through whom the covenant will be established. Whereas the former includes all who are circumcised, the latter appears to be restricted to a single line of descendants. On this I shall have more to say below.
The Abraham narrative moves towards an important climax in Genesis 22. After testing Abraham’s obedience by demanding that he sacrifice his much loved son Isaac, the episode concludes with a divine oath (Gn. 22:16-18). This speech corresponds closely with the initial divine speech in Genesis 12:1-3, and taken together they frame the main section of the Abraham narrative. This oath possibly also marks the ratification of the covenant announced in Genesis 17. As it stands the Lord’s proclamation to Abraham falls into two distinctive parts; whereas the first half affirms that Abraham’s ‘seed’ will become very numerous, the second half asserts that Abraham’s ‘seed’ will defeat his enemies and mediate blessing to the nations of the earth. While each half of the oath refers to ‘seed’, syntactical considerations strongly suggest that in the second half, in contrast to the first, the term ‘seed’ denotes a single descendant of Abraham. In other words, God swears that the nations will be blessed through one of Abraham’s descendants rather than through all of them collectively. Moreover, this individual descendant will be victorious over his enemies.
This emphasis upon a single descendant takes on special significance when viewed against the whole of Genesis. As I have discussed elsewhere, several distinctive literary features reveal that the book of Genesis traces the development of a unique line of ‘seed’ beginning with Adam and ending with Jacob/Israel and his twelve sons. One of these features is the t?led?t formulae (‘These are the generations ofÉ’) which, in part, function like the lens on a zoom-camera by focusing attention on a single individual and his immediate descendants. Used in conjunction with the linear genealogies found in Genesis 5 and 11, the t?led?t formulae enable the Genesis narrative to follow the progress of a unique family line which includes figures such as Enoch, Methuselah, Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Linked to the t?led?t formulae in terms of purpose is the word ‘seed’ which is used in Genesis as a Leitwort; it occurs throughout Genesis 59 times compared with 170 times in the rest of the Old Testament. Genesis draws attention to the existence of a distinctive line of ‘seed’ which begins with Seth, the third born son to Adam and Eve (cf. Gn. 4:25), and concludes with Perez, the son born as a result of Judah’s unusual relationship with Tamar (Gn. 38:27-29). Throughout Genesis, and especially in the patriarchal narratives, special care is taken to establish the identity of the one through whom this line of seed is traced; occasionally this results in the first-born son being passed over in favour of a younger sibling.
When due attention is given to the t?led?t formulae and the keyword ‘seed’, it becomes evident that the book of Genesis in its final form anticipates the coming of a king through whom God’s blessing will be mediated to all the nations of the earth. The coming of such an individual is first intimated in Genesis 3:14-15 when the Lord God says to the serpent:
Cursed are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life. And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring [seed] and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel (NIV).
Although modern trends in Old Testament scholarship have led many writers to reject the idea that the ‘seed of the woman’ refers to an individual, the case for such an interpretation remains strong, especially if one takes into account J. Collin’s recent observations on the syntax of Genesis 3:15.
The linear genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11 trace the ‘seed of the woman’ to Abraham, through whom God promises to bless all the families of the ground (Gn. 12:1-3). This same promise probably underlies the covenant of circumcision and the idea that Abraham will be the ‘father of many nations’. Although this covenant is made first with Abraham, it is clearly orientated towards the future. The Lord states that it will be established with Abraham’s ‘seed’ ‘for the generations to come’ (Gn. 17:7), and the establishment of the covenant is linked specifically to Isaac. As we have already observed, the Lord later swears to Abraham, presumably in Isaac’s presence, that all the nations of the earth will be blessed through his ‘seed’ (Gn. 22:18). The fulfilment of this divine oath, which is unique within the Pentateuch, also lies in the future.
The Abraham narrative builds on the divine promise given in Genesis 3:15 regarding the ‘seed of the woman’ overcoming the ‘seed of the serpent’. The motif of blessing which is very prominent in Genesis 12:1-3 stands in marked contrast to that of cursing which dominates the divine judgements announced in Genesis 3. In addition, within the Abraham narrative there are indications that the line of seed will give rise to royal descendants. At the outset this is reflected in the promise that Abraham’s name will ‘become great’, and, although he is nowhere designated a king, Abraham is presented in various episodes as enjoying a status similar to that of contemporary monarchs (Gn. 14:1-24; 21:22-34; 23:6). Furthermore, it is significant that the Lord promises Abraham that ‘kings will come from you’ (Gn. 17:6; cf. 17:16).
The theme of royalty is less evident in Genesis 25-36. Isaac, like his father Abraham, enters into a covenant with Abimelech, king of Gerar (Gn. 26:26-31). Upon his return from Paddan Aram, Jacob receives the divine promise that ‘kings will come from your body’ (Gn. 35:11). The existence of a future monarchy in Israel is also suggested by the brief comment in Genesis 36:31, ‘These were the kings who reigned in Edom before any Israelite king reigned.’
In marked contrast, kingship is important in the account of Joseph’s life, being the dominant motif in the two dreams which he experiences (Gn. 37:5-11). Although his brothers, filled with jealousy and hatred, remark, ‘Do you intend to reign over us? Will you actually rule us?’ Joseph’s father ‘kept the matter in mind’. In spite of the brothers’ attempt to rid themselves of this arrogant upstart, Joseph later emerges from an Egyptian prison to become second only to Pharaoh in authority over the kingdom of Egypt (Gn. 41:39-43). Ironically, when years later Joseph’s older brothers travel to Egypt, the narrative describes how they bow before him with their faces to the ground (Gn. 42:6). In due course, however, Joseph reveals his identity to them, and remarks how God has made him ‘father to Pharaoh, lord of his entire household and ruler of all Egypt’ (Gn. 45:8; cf. 45:9, 26).
Although the account of Joseph’s life dominates Genesis 37-50, when in old age Jacob gathers his sons around him to tell them what will happen in days to come (cf. Gn. 49:1), it is noteworthy that kingship is associated with the descendants of Judah (cf. Gn. 49:8-12), and not Joseph (cf. Gn. 49:22-26). While the poetic language of Genesis 49 makes it possible for differing interpretations to be placed upon Jacob’s remarks, viewed against the book of Genesis as a whole, these verses clearly point to a powerful future ruler before whom the nations will submit in obedience. In the light of this the earlier description of the birth of Judah’s son, Perez, takes on added significance for this is clearly the continuation of the line of ‘seed’ through whom all the nations of the earth will be blessed .
The account of the Israelites’ divine deliverance from bondage in Egypt and their journey towards the promised land dominates the books of Exodus to Deuteronomy. These books advance the theme of the promised king by describing the creation of a holy nation which will play an important role in bringing to fulfilment God’s eternal covenant with Abraham. While the theme of kingship surfaces only rarely in these books (e.g., Nu. 24:17-19; Dt. 17:14-20), it becomes much more prominent in Joshua and Judges. The latter books anticipate the establishment of a monarchy in Israel by focusing on the divine provision of spirit-empowered deliverers who rescue the repentant Israelites from their enemies, thus enabling them to live in peace within the promised land. Although those appointed by God as leaders fulfil many of the tasks of a king, they are prohibited from creating royal dynasties, as highlighted in the story of Gideon’s son, Abimelech (Judg. 9:1-57). The picture in Judges of ever increasing moral and spiritual decline comes to a climax in the final four chapters of the book. Significantly, these are framed by the refrain, ‘in those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit’ (Judg. 17:6; 21:25; cf. 18:1; 19:1).
The book of Samuel describes the appointment of Saul as the first king of Israel. However, due to his own shortcomings he is soon replaced by David, the youngest son of Jesse, a descendant of Judah . When David is eventually enthroned as king over all Israel, he establishes Jerusalem as his capital, and brings there the ark of the covenant. This event symbolises David’s commitment to serving the Lord. The Lord then makes a covenant with David in which he promises to establish David’s dynasty for ever (2 Sa. 7). While David succeeds in delivering the Israelites from their enemies, his reign is marred by his failure on various occasions to obey God . The reign of David’s son Solomon provides an interesting picture of the kind of rule which God intends to establish through the promised ‘seed’ of Abraham. Unfortunately, Solomon fails to remain loyal to the Lord and the kingdom is partitioned following his death, with the house of David keeping control over only the region of Judah. Throughout the book of Kings God’s promise to establish David’s dynasty for ever stands in tension with his warning that he will punish the disobedience of David’s descendants. Eventually, Kings records the destruction of the Jerusalem temple and the removal of king Jehoiachin to Babylon. While this marks the end of the Davidic dynasty’s rule over Jerusalem, the final episode in the book of Kings focuses on the release of Jehoiachin from prison, an event that possibly anticipates better times to come .
The preceding survey reveals, if somewhat sketchily, that the books of Genesis to 2 Kings focus considerable attention upon the divine promise of a royal deliverer . The process by which this promise will be fulfilled unfolds so gradually throughout Genesis to Kings that it is easy to overlook it. Yet, our reading of Genesis, and the Abraham narrative in particular, suggests that the promise of a future king through whom the nations will be blessed is more important than the promise of nationhood . However, in spite of this, the divine pledge of a royal saviour remains unfulfilled by the end of Kings. Nevertheless, some progress towards fulfilment occurs as the line of ‘seed’ introduced in Genesis is traced through to the creation of the Davidic dynasty (Gn. 38:1-30; Ru. 4:18-22). Furthermore, following the establishment of David as king over Israel, God makes a covenant with him confirming that through his royal line the nations of the earth will be blessed (2 Sa. 7:5-16; 1 Ch. 17:4-14) . As the books of 1 and 2 Kings reveal, however, the cumulative disobedience of David’s descendants appears to thwart the fulfilment of God’s promise to bless the nations. There are, nevertheless, strong indications in Kings that the removal of the house of David from the throne in Jerusalem is not the end of the story. Although God punishes with complete justification the sins of David’s descendants, the hope remains that there will yet be a ‘son of David’ through whom the nations will experience God’s favour.
Before drawing this survey to a close, several brief comments should be added. Since the books of Genesis to Kings, as a coherent narrative, cannot have existed prior to the exilic period, the disastrous events of the exile may well have been catalytic in bringing together into a continuous account all of the material presently found in these books. This does not mean, however, that the tradition of a divinely-promised royal saviour originated after 587 B.C. Arguably, the eighth century prophets were already familiar with this idea; we see it reflected, for example, in the final chapter of Amos and in Isaiah 7-11 . There are also grounds for believing that much of the material contained in Genesis to Kings existed long before the exile occurred; unfortunately, scholarly opinion is currently divided concerning the nature and date of the sources used to compose the books of Genesis to Kings. From a different perspective, it is worth observing that it would require an author of exceptional genius and religious optimism to compose these books ab initio after the demise of the Davidic monarchy and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem.

V. Implications for the Relationship between the Old and New Testaments

Having focused on the books of Genesis to Kings as a unified narrative, let us return briefly to the issue of the relationship of the two testaments.
A. Promise-fulfilment
Our survey of Genesis to Kings supports the idea, noted by Baker, that the two testaments are linked on the basis of promise-fulfilment. The whole movement within the Genesis-Kings narrative is from promise towards fulfilment. Remarkably, however, the promise of a descendant from the ‘seed’ of Abraham through whom the nations will be blessed remains unrealised, with only a partial fulfilment occurring during the reigns of David and Solomon . In marked contrast, the New Testament documents affirm positively that God’s promises are fulfilled in Jesus Christ, the ‘seed’ of Abraham (e.g., Acts 3:25-26; Gal. 3:13-16) and ‘son of David’ (e.g., Mt. 1:1).
While agreeing with Baker that promise-fulfilment is an important factor in defining the relationship been the two testaments, my observations highlight an important way in which his approach should be modified. In common with many others, he discerns on the basis of Genesis 12:1-3, three main elements to the promises in Genesis: land, descendants (‘a great nation’), and a relationship with God (‘blessing’) . Although these three elements reflect different aspects of the divine promises in Genesis, Baker fails to identify with sufficient clarity the main promise which centres on a future individual through whom the serpent will be defeated (Gn. 3:15) and all the nations of the earth blessed (Gn. 22:18; cf. 12:3). This is the divine promise which lies at the heart of Genesis to Kings . Moreover, of all the promises, it provides the strongest link between the two testaments.
B. Christology
A further way advocated by Baker as important for explaining the relationship of the testaments is Christology. While the Genesis-Kings narrative does not directly ascribe to the divinely-promised royal saviour the title of messiah, there can be little doubt that the New Testament concept of messiah is rooted in the traditions reflected in this material. While twentieth century Old Testament scholarship has generally reacted strongly against finding messianic ideology within the books of Genesis to Kings, we have observed the viability of doing otherwise. By giving due attention to the existence of a unique line of ‘seed’ in Genesis, it becomes apparent that the entire Genesis-Kings narrative is especially interested in the coming of a divinely-promised king. As we look for the fulfilment of this divine promise in the books of Genesis to Kings, the judges and kings of Israel and Judah pre-figure in a rich variety of ways the one who has yet to come . Compared with alternative approaches, this provides a much more satisfactory basis upon which to build a Christological reading of the Old Testament.

VI. Conclusion

In this article it is not possible to do justice to all of the material in Genesis to Kings that relates to the divine promise of a future royal deliverer through whom the nations of the earth will be blessed. Hopefully, however, sufficient has been said to demonstrate that the presence of ‘royal expectations’ in the books of Genesis to Kings may be of substantial help to Biblical Theologians in defining the relationship between the two testaments. This is especially so given its importance for the concept of promise-fulfilment. Furthermore, by noting the centrality of ‘royal expectations’ in Genesis to Kings, we are in a much better position to understand how the Old Testament functions as a witness to Christ .

Endnotes

D.L. Baker, Two Testaments, One Bible: A Study of the Theological Relationship Between the Old and New Testaments (revised ed.; Leicester: Apollos, 1991).
A. Collins, Discourse of the Grounds and Reasons for the Christian Religion (London, 1724); idem, The Scheme of Literal Prophecy Considered (London, 1727).
This position is exemplified in the influential study of S. Mowinckel, He That Cometh (ET; Oxford: Blackwell, 1956).
We see this reflected, for example, in W.C. Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament (Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology; Grand Rapids/Carlisle: Zondervan/Paternoster, 1995).
To these examples many others could be added; see C. Houtman, ‘The Pentateuch’, in A.S. van der Woude (ed.), The World of the Old Testament: Bible Handbook, Volume II (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989) 199.
For a recent defence of this dating based on linguistic considerations, see A. Hurvitz, ‘The Historical Quest for ÒAncient IsraelÓ and the Linguistic Evidence of the Hebrew Bible: Some Methodological Observations’, VT 47 (1997) 301-15. An exilic or early post-exilic date for the final redaction of the books of Genesis to Kings does not necessarily indicate that the ideas reflected in the text are late. On the contrary, the text itself claims to be reporting events that took place over a long period of time. It is not, however, the purpose of this paper to assess the authenticity of these traditions.
Cf. J. Van Seters, Abraham in History and Tradition (New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 1975); R. Rendtorff, Das ?berlieferungsgeschichtliche Problem des Pentateuch (BZAW 17; Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1977); R.N. Whybray, The Making of the Pentateuch: A Methodological Study (JSOTSS 53; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987). For a summary of the contributions made by these scholars to current Pentateuchal studies, see T.D. Alexander, Abraham in the Negev: A Source-critical Investigation of Genesis 20:1-22:19 (Carlisle: Paternoster, 1997) 20-27.
Cf. J.G. McConville, Grace in the End: A Study of Deuteronomic Theology (SOTBT; Grand Rapids/Carlisle: Zondervan/Paternoster, 1993); idem, ‘The Old Testament Historical Books in Modern Scholarship’, Themelios 22 (1997) 3-13.
Cf. C. Westermann, Die Geschichtsb?cher des Alten Testaments: Gab es ein deuteronomistisches Geschichtswerk? (Theologische B?cherei 87 AT; G?tersloh: Chr. Kaiser, 1994); E.T. Mullen, Ethnic Myths and Pentateuchal Foundations: A New Approach to the Formation of the Pentateuch (JBLSS; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997).
The Making of the Pentateuch, 242.
‘The Pentateuch’, 200.
Ethnic Myths and Pentateuchal Foundations, 327.
Cf. e.g., J. Bright, Covenant and Promise (London: SCM, 1977) 24; G.J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15 (Waco: Word, 1987) 283; C.H.H. Scobie, ‘Israel and the Nations: An Essay in Biblical Theology’, TynB 43 (1992) 285-86.
On the fulfilment of the promise of land, see T.E. McComiskey, The Covenants of Promise: A Theology of the Old Testament Covenants (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1985) 42-55.
It is perhaps worth noting that 1 Ki. 4:20 is immediately followed by the comment that ‘Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the River to the land of the Philistines, as far as the border of Egypt’.
Two aspects of the translation adopted here require clarification. First, the imperative form wehyeh (‘be’) in 12:2d is maintained. This is also the conclusion reached by L.A. Turner, Announcements of Plot in Genesis (JSOTSS 96; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990) 53-55, who reviews briefly other possibilities. Second, special consideration has been given to the fact that the imperatives ‘go’ and ‘be a blessing’ are both followed by cohortatives. In such contexts the cohortative normally expresses purpose or result (cf. E. Kautzsch [ed.], Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar [Oxford: Clarendon, 1910] 320; S.R. Driver, A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew [10th ed.; London: Methuen, 1916] 64; P. Jo?on, Grammaire de l’h?breu biblique [2nd ed.; Rome: Institut Biblique Pontifical, 1947] 314-15; T.O. Lambdin, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew [London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1973] 119). To highlight this syntactic arrangement, the imperatives ‘go’ and ‘be a blessing’ are followed by ‘so that’.
Although God states that he will ‘curse the one who disdains you’, the emphasis rests upon blessing. This is underlined by the distinction that is drawn between ‘those who bless you’ and ‘the one who disdains you’; it is surely implied here that whereas many will be blessed, only a few will be cursed. The priority of blessing over cursing is also underlined by the five-fold repetition of the verb ‘to bless’ in verses 2-3.
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 278, comments, ‘this clause brings the passage to a triumphant and universal conclusion’. There has been considerable debate regarding the correct translation of the verb. Three possibilities exist: it may be translated as (a) a passive (‘they will be blessed’); (b) a middle (‘they will find blessing’); or (c) a reflexive (‘they will bless themselves’). Since the earliest versions (LXX, Targum Onkelos, Vg; cf. Acts 3:25; Gal. 3:8) reflect the passive sense, that is the translation adopted here (cf. O.T. Allis, ‘The Blessing of Abraham’, PTR 25 263-98; V.P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1-17 [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990]) 374-76.
On the importance of the promise of blessing, see V.P. Hamilton, ‘Genesis: Theology of’, in W.A. VanGemeren (ed.), New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997) Vol. 4, 667.
While the covenant of ch. 15 focuses primarily on nationhood (land and descendants), the covenant in ch. 17 highlights Abraham’s special status as regards the nations. Unfortunately, biblical scholars have tended to blur the differences between these two covenants, some viewing them as parallel accounts of the same covenant, preserved in different sources. For a fuller discussion of the Abraham narrative, see T.D. Alexander, ‘Abraham Re-assessed Theologically: The Abraham Narrative and the New Testament Understanding of Justification by Faith’, in R.S. Hess, P.E. Satterthwaite, G.J. Wenham (eds.), He Swore an Oath (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids/Carlisle: Baker/Paternoster, 1994) 7-28.
C.J.H. Wright, ‘'ab’, in NIDOTTE, Vol. 1, 221.
This understanding of ‘father’ is probably reflected in the unusual comment that Joseph ‘was father to Pharaoh’ (45:8). Furthermore, when God blesses Jacob in 35:11, echoing an earlier blessing by Isaac upon Jacob (28:3), a distinction is drawn between ‘a nation’ and ‘a community of nations’ coming from him. The implication would seem to be that whereas many nations will be closely associated with him, only one nation will be directly descended from him.
N.M. Sarna, Genesis (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1989) 124.
Later in Genesis the men of Shechem undergo circumcision in order to establish a bond of kinship with Abraham’s descendants (Gn. 34:14-17). In view of this, their subsequent slaughter by Simeon and Levi is all the more reprehensible.
Cf. Gn. 21:12. A similar pattern may be observed concerning Esau and Jacob. The covenant is established with Jacob, but not Esau. The importance of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as successive recipients of the divine promises is reflected in the way they are mentioned together in later passages.
Three factors suggest that Gn. 22:20-29:11 forms an appendix to the main Abraham narrative. First, genealogies are frequently used in Genesis to separate narrative sections. Although 22:20-24 is short and does not follow the pattern of the main genealogies in Genesis, its contents are clearly genealogical in nature. Second, the divine speeches in 12:1-3 and 22:15-18 form an inclusio, framing chs. 12 to 22. While the speeches differ in their terminology, they are remarkably similar in substance, and the divine oath in 22:15-18 forms a very fitting conclusion to the process started by the call of Abraham in 12:1-3 (cf. R.W.L. Moberly, ‘The Earliest Commentary on the Akedah’, VT 38 (1988) 322-23 = idem, From Eden to Golgotha: Essays in Biblical Theology (South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992) 73. Third, A. Abela, The Themes of the Abraham Narrative: Thematic Coherence within the Abraham Literary Unit of Genesis 11,27-25,18 (Malta: Studia Editions, 1989) 9, suggests that the material in 22:20-25:18 is a self-contained unit, forming a palistrophic pattern.
Cf. T.D. Alexander, ‘Genesis 22 and the Covenant of Circumcision’, JSOT 25 (1983) 17-22.
Cf. T.D. Alexander, ‘Further Observations on the Term ÒSeedÓ in Genesis’, TynB 48 (1997) 363-67; this builds on J. Collins, ‘A Syntactical Note (Genesis 3:15): Is the Woman’s Seed Singular or Plural?’, TynB 48 (1997) 139-48.
Cf. T.D. Alexander, ‘From Adam to Judah: the Significance of the Family Tree in Genesis’, EQ 61 (1989) 5-19; idem, ‘Genealogies, Seed and the Compositional Unity of Genesis’, TynB 44 (1993) 255-70.
Gn. 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10, 27; 25:12, 19; 36:1, 9; 37:2.
The significance of Perez as the one through whom the line of ‘seed’ will be continued is marked by several features. By interrupting the account of Joseph’s life, priority is given to the birth of Perez and his twin brother Zerah. Moreover, the special attention given to the motif of ‘seed’ in 38:8-9, and the subsequent account of Tamar’s extraordinary actions in order to secure the continuation of the line of ‘seed’, suggests that the birth of Perez is significant. This is possibly also indicated by the manner in which Perez ‘breaks out’ of his mother’s womb prior to his twin brother Zerah.
Seth takes priority over Cain (Gn. 5:3), Isaac over Ishmael (Gn. 21:12); Jacob over Esau (Gn. 27:36).
Cf. T.D. Alexander, ‘Messianic Ideology in the Book of Genesis’, in P.E. Satterthwaite, R.S. Hess and G.J. Wenham (eds.), The Lord’s Anointed: Interpretation of Old Testament Messianic Texts (Grand Rapids/Carlisle: Baker/Paternoster, 1995) 27-32.
Collins, ‘A Syntactical Note (Genesis 3:15)’. While Genesis 3:15 does not explicitly state that this individual will be of royal status, W. Wifall notes links with various ‘royal’ Psalms, and these he takes as indicating a Davidic or royal background to Genesis 3:15. According to Wifall, ‘David is addressed as God’s ÒanointedÓ or ÒmessiahÓ (Ps 89:21, 39; 2 Sam 22:51) whose ÒseedÓ will endure forever under God’s favor (Ps 89:5, 30, 37). As Yahweh has crushed the ancient serpent ÒRahabÓ (Ps 89:11), so now David and his sons will crush their enemies in the dust beneath their feet (Ps 89:24; 2 Sam 22:37-43)É In Ps 72:9, the foes of the Davidic king are described as Òbowing down before himÓ and Òlicking the dust.Ó In the familiar ÒmessianicÓ Psalms, God is described as having placed Òall things under his feetÓ (Ps 8:6) and will make Òyour enemies your footstoolÓ (Ps 110:1)’ (‘Gen 3:15-A Protevangelium?’, CBQ 36 363).
Cf. Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 275-76; Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1-17, 372-73.
Joseph’s description of his position in Egypt appears to be overly stated.
Cf. Alexander, ‘Messianic Ideology in the Book of Genesis’, 32-37. In passing, we should also observe that the reign of this destined king will be marked by a time of abundant fruitfulness, a sign of divine blessing.
The continuation of the line of ‘seed’ is a dominant theme in Genesis 38.
The significance of David’s ancestry for the fulfilment of the divine promises announced in Genesis is highlighted in the book of Ruth; cf. E.H. Merrill, ‘The Book of Ruth: Narration and Shared Themes’, Bibliotheca Sacra 142 (1985) 130-39.
Cf. P.E. Satterthwaite, ‘David in the Books of Samuel: A Messianic Hope?’, in The Lord’s Anointed, 41-65.
Cf. I.W. Provan, ‘The Messiah in the Book of Kings’, in The Lord’s Anointed, 67-85.
Further evidence is provided in T.D. Alexander, The Servant King: The Bible’s Portrait of the Messiah (Leicester: IVP, 1998) 15-96.
Although the promises of nationhood and royal saviour are distinctive, it would be a mistake to divorce them from each other for the latter can only be fulfilled through the existence of the former.
For a fuller discussion of the Davidic covenant and in particular the expression ‘and this is the law of mankind’ (2 Sa. 7:19), see McComiskey, The Covenants of Promise, 21-35. O.P. Robertson, The Christ of the Covenants (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1980) 33-34, notes that the bringing of the ark to Jerusalem is linked by David to the covenant promised to Abraham (1 Ch. 16:15-18). Further links between David and Abraham are discussed by R.E. Clements, Abraham and David (London: SCM, 1967).
There is no need to document in detail here the importance of the Davidic dynasty within the religious thinking of ancient Israel. We see this not only in the historical and prophetic books of the Old Testament, but also, for example, in the books of Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon.
This partial fulfilment foreshadows the full realisation that has yet to take place.
Baker, Two Testaments, One Bible, 215-18; cf. e.g., D.J.A. Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch (JSOTSS 10; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1978) 29-43; L.A. Turner, Announcements of Plot in Genesis (JSOTSS 96; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990) 51-114; J. McKeown, A Study of the Main Unifying Themes in the Hebrew Text of the Book of Genesis (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, The Queen’s University of Belfast, 1991).
Although the promise may be traced back to Gn. 3:15, later passages expand upon it, fleshing out in more detail how the promise will be fulfilled.
See Alexander, The Servant King, 41-96.
I am grateful to James McKeown and Paul Williamson for offering constructive comments on an earlier draft of this article, which was originally delivered as the 1998 Tyndale Biblical Theology Lecture.

This article first appeared in Tyndale Bulletin 49 (1998), 191 - 212 and is used here with permission. No part of this article may be copied or transmitted in any form without the permission of Tyndale Bulletin.
------------------------------------------------

http://dailytheology.blogspot.com.br/2011/09/genesis-to-kings.html

Genesis to Kings

Genesis to Kings
    The books of Genesis to Kings may rightly be viewed as forming the foundation upon which everything else in the Bible rests. Comprising almost one-third of the entire biblical corpus, they form a continuous narrative which describes events from the creation of the world to the 6th century BC. The events selected for inclusion within this narrative focus almost exclusively on the early history of the Hebrew people. While the contents of the books of Genesis to Kings are far from homogeneous, with different types and styles of material having been incorporated into the whole, the entire corpus displays a remarkable coherence.
    Two main plots, which are themselves closely related, link together Genesis to Kings: 1. the promise of land and 2. the promise of a royal deliverer. While the former is usually traced from the call of Abraham in Genesis 12:1–3, it has antecedents in Genesis 1–11 where the themes of expulsion and exile appear in various episodes. Although the early chapters of Genesis are integral to the development of both plots, we shall focus initially upon how the books of Genesis to Kings trace the fortunes of the Hebrew nation from the time of the patriarch Abraham to the release of the Judaean king Jehoiachin from prison in Babylon in 561 BC.

The Promise of Nationhood

    In Genesis Abraham is promised by Yahweh, the Lord, that his descendants will become a great nation in the land of Canaan (e.g. Gen. 12:2; 15:1–21). This promise is later renewed to Abraham’s son, Isaac, and his son, Jacob (whose name is changed to Israel). However, before it can be fulfilled, Jacob’s family must migrate to Egypt, from where, after a period of oppression, they are miraculously delivered by God, under the leadership of Moses (Exod. 3–15). Following their Exodus from captivity in Egypt, the Israelites are invited by the Lord to enter into a covenant relationship with him (Exod. 19–24). At the heart of this agreement is the requirement that they should acknowledge, through love and obedience, the sole lordship of Yahweh as their God.
    The formal establishment of this covenant between Yahweh and the Israelites leads to the construction of a ‘royal’ tent or tabernacle, which becomes the locus of God’s presence among his people (Exod. 25–31; 35–40). However, it has significant ramifications for the Israelites. New structures and customs have to be set in place in order for the people to live in safety close to Yahweh. These are described in considerable detail throughout the book of Leviticus. Holiness is particularly important; the Israelites must sanctify themselves and maintain an appropriate state of holiness in order to remain in the presence of the Holy One.
    While the books of Exodus and Leviticus focus on the transformation of Israel into a ‘holy nation’, this stands in tension with the people’s failure to live up to their covenant obligations. Whereas the record of Israel’s time at Mt Sinai highlights the immense privilege which Yahweh bestowed upon the Israelites by choosing them to be his ‘treasured possession’ out of all the nations (Exod. 19:5), the story of the Israelites’ journey from Egypt to the promised land contains a long catalogue of failures. Indeed, the book of Numbers graphically reveals that of all the adult Israelites who experienced God’s deliverance from slavery in Egypt and witnessed the spectacular theophany at Mt Sinai, only Joshua and Caleb survive to enter the promised land (cf. Num. 26:63–65). Even Moses, the faithful servant of the Lord, is condemned to die outside the land, having struggled to lead the people for forty years in the wilderness.
    After the untimely death of those who entered into the covenant relationship at Mt Sinai, Moses invites the next generation of Israelites to make a similar commitment to Yahweh. The book of Deuteronomy describes in detail the renewing of the covenant, this time ‘in the desert east of the Jordan’ (Deut. 1:1). Here the Israelites stand on the threshold of the land God promised centuries earlier to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
    In Deuteronomy the obligations of the covenant are set out by Moses in several lengthy speeches which abound in exhortations challenging the people to be faithful to Yahweh. When he has finished speaking, Moses records this ‘law’ – the Hebrew term tora® is best translated ‘instruction’ or ‘teaching’ – in a book and gives it to the priests and elders of Israel (cf. Deut. 31:9, 24). Moses commands them to read the book to the people regularly so that future generations will ‘learn to fear the LORD’ (Deut. 31:13).
    The concluding sections of Deuteronomy, however, clearly predict, in a variety of ways, further acts of disobedience; see for example the long list of curses (Deut. 28:15–68; cf. 27:15–26) and the contents of the ‘Song of Moses’ (Deut. 32:1–43).
    Although the final chapter of Deuteronomy concludes with the burial of Moses, his birth and death framing the books of Exodus to Deuteronomy, further developments are expected; the Israelites have yet to occupy the land of Canaan, an event anticipated by much of the material in Genesis to Deuteronomy. In the light of this, it is apparent that the opening verses of Joshua have been deliberately composed to continue the story. The divine commissioning of Joshua as Moses’ successor echoes Deuteronomy 31:1–8 (cf. Josh. 1:1–5), and Joshua’s success as a leader will depend upon his obedience to the ‘Book of the Law’ (Josh. 1:7–8)
    While the book of Joshua describes how the Israelites succeed in taking possession of much of the land of Canaan, the next book, Judges, provides a contrasting sequel. No longer does the occupation of the land proceed smoothly. On the contrary the Israelites find themselves losing ground to their enemies. Whereas their success under Joshua was due to their obeying the Lord, failure thereafter is the result of disobedience. Even the divinely appointed and spirit-empowered ‘judges’ are increasingly tainted by the sin of the people as a whole.
    The pattern of events described in Judges continues into the opening chapters of Samuel, climaxing in the capture of the ark of the covenant by the Philistines. This would have symbolized the total defeat of Yahweh himself but for the fact that he permitted it to happen. When the ark of the covenant is brought as a trophy of victory into the temple of Dagon in Ashdod, Yahweh’s power is demonstrated through the falling over of Dagon’s stone image (1 Sam. 5:1–5).
    Subsequent developments lead to a new phase in God’s dealings with the Israelites, involving the creation of a monarchy. While most of 1 Samuel focuses on the establishing of Saul as the first king of Israel, he is overshadowed by the figure of David, the one anointed by the prophet Samuel to replace Saul as king.
    2 Samuel records how, after Saul’s death in battle, David becomes king over all Israel and establishes Jerusalem as his capital. To confirm his divine appointment as monarch, David transports the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem. Soon afterwards, when he expresses a desire to construct for Yahweh a temple in Jerusalem, the Lord intervenes and delays the project. However, in response to David’s desire to build a ‘house’ or temple for God, the Lord promises that David’s ‘house’ or dynasty will be established for ever. The importance of David is underlined by the fact that all of 2 Samuel is devoted to describing his period as king.
    Attention shifts in the opening chapters of 1 Kings to Solomon, who succeeds to his father David’s throne. Through the divine gift of wisdom Solomon extends the boundaries of the kingdom and brings peace, prosperity and justice to the Israelites. He then constructs a splendid temple to Yahweh in Jerusalem. As a result, the impression is conveyed that the promise of nationhood made centuries earlier by God to Abraham has come at last to fulfilment.
    Yet the account of Solomon’s life concludes on a dark note by highlighting how his many wives lead him into idolatry. Consequently, after his death, God divides the kingdom between Solomon’s son Rehoboam and one of Solomon’s officials, Jeroboam. While Rehoboam retains control of the region around Jerusalem, known as ‘Judah’, Jeroboam becomes king of the much larger portion of Solomon’s kingdom designated ‘Israel’.
    The fortunes of these two kingdoms, and in particular the activities of their kings, are recorded in the rest of 1 and 2 Kings. Whereas the northern kingdom of Israel is ruled by a series of short dynasties, control of the southern kingdom remains in the hands of David’s descendants. Although both kingdoms are portrayed as failing to remain loyal to Yahweh, the apostasy of Israel is much greater, resulting in its downfall at the hands of the Assyrians by 721 BC. While Judah survives on this occasion, a similar fate befalls it just over a century later when the Babylonians invade the country, destroy the temple, and carry away many of the population into exile. Once again, the blame is placed upon the failure of the monarchy and people to remain loyal to Yahweh.
    Although the narrative in Genesis to Kings ends with the subjugation of Judah, there are indications that the story is not finished. The concluding chapters of Deuteronomy anticipate God’s judgment coming upon the Israelites, climaxing in their exile from the land. However, Deuteronomy 30:1–10 also describes a subsequent return to the land. This theme is echoed later by Solomon in his prayer at the dedication of the temple (1 Kgs. 8:46–51). It is noteworthy that the final episode in Kings focuses on the release of Jehoiachin from prison in Babylon and his kind treatment by the Babylonian king, Evil-Merodach. Does this offer a glimmer of hope for the future?

The Promise of a Royal Deliverer
    We have observed that the books of Genesis to Kings are bound together by God’s promise to Abraham that his descendants will become a great nation, occupying the land of Canaan. This, however, is only one part of what Yahweh promises Abraham, and possibly not the most important. Alongside the promise of nationhood is the promise that Abraham will be a source of blessing to the nations of the earth. Not only does this promise play a very significant role within the Abraham narrative and subsequent narratives; it also links this material with the opening chapters of Genesis.
    The divine promise of blessing through Abraham, introduced in Genesis 12:1–3, is clearly set against the background of Genesis 1–11. These chapters open with the creation of the earth and humanity. All living creatures are blessed by God (Gen. 1:22, 28) and everything is described as ‘very good’ (Gen. 1:31). However, Genesis 3 concludes with the expulsion of the human couple from the Garden of Eden, Yahweh having punished them for disobeying his instructions. Various curses are listed in Genesis 3:14–19, which have the effect of reversing, in part at least, the blessings previously announced by God. As the following chapters reveal, humanity, alienated from God, struggles to survive in a world that is dominated by evil. Eventually the growth of human wickedness is so great that God intervenes, destroying through a flood all human beings apart from Noah and his closest relatives. In spite of this, however, the sinful nature of humanity remains essentially unchanged (Gen. 8:21). People continue to challenge and reject God’s authority over them.
    While the events of Genesis 3–11 highlight the disastrous consequences of living under God’s curse or disfavour, the call of Abraham offers hope. Yahweh promises to bless all those who bless Abraham (Gen. 12:3). Much later, in response to Abraham’s obedience, this promise is confirmed by a divine oath which guarantees that God’s blessing will come to ‘all the families of the earth’ through one of Abraham’s descendants (Gen. 22:16–18).
    This guarantee of future blessing is linked to a unique line of ‘seed’, which begins with Seth (cf. Gen. 4:25) and is traced downwards through two linear genealogies to Abraham (Gen. 5:1–32; 11:10–26). (Significantly, the Lord has already announced that this ‘seed’ will overcome the ‘serpent’ [Gen. 3:15]). From Abraham it proceeds through Isaac to Jacob/Israel and then Joseph. In spite of his brothers’ actions against him, Joseph is protected by God and, from being a prisoner in an Egyptian jail, is dramatically exalted to become prime minister of Egypt. In this capacity he is a source of blessing to many nations during a seven-year famine.
    Although Genesis undoubtedly makes much of Joseph’s place within the family line descended from Abraham, attention is drawn also to Judah, especially in Genesis 38. Of note here is Tamar’s determination to continue the line of ‘seed’ (38:6–26) and the remarkable account of the birth of twin boys in which the younger breaks out ahead of the older (38:27–30). The reader is clearly meant to reflect upon the significance of this event in the light of other birth stories in Genesis. Later, Jacob’s blessing of Judah highlights the importance of his descendants, suggesting that from them shall come a royal line (49:8–12).
    While there are indications that Judah’s descendants may include a future royal dynasty, the line of ‘seed’ is initially traced from Joseph to his younger son Ephraim (cf. Gen. 48:1–22). Jacob’s blessing of Ephraim ahead of his older brother Manasseh is reminiscent of Jacob’s own experience in relation to his older twin brother Esau. After the Israelites’ Exodus from Egypt under Moses, Joshua from the tribe of Ephraim successfully leads the people into the promised land, establishing a central sanctuary at Shiloh in the territory allocated to the Ephraimites (Josh. 18:1).
    Thereafter, however, the Ephraimites gradually lose control of the nation as the people forsake Yahweh for other gods. Through Samuel God moves to establish a monarchy in Israel, and this leads, after Saul’s failure as king, to the creation of a Davidic dynasty from the tribe of Judah. Interestingly, the divine rejection of Ephraim coincides with the departure of the ark of the covenant from Shiloh and the death of the high priest Eli and his sons (cf. Ps. 78:56–72).
    Whereas Joshua had established Shiloh as the location for Israel’s central sanctuary, David selects Jerusalem and proceeds to transport the ark of the covenant there. Although he prepares for the building of a temple in Jerusalem, the actual task of construction is left to his son Solomon. These activities confirm God’s choice of David and his descendants as the lineage through whom God’s blessing will come to all the families of the earth. However, although much of Solomon’s reign is portrayed positively (through wisdom he brings blessing to the Israelites and is admired by foreigners) his many wives eventually lead him into idolatry. As a result, God divides the kingdom between Solomon’s son, Rehoboam and Jeroboam, an Ephraimite.
    Although the appointment of Jeroboam as king may have been interpreted by some as heralding the restoration of the line of Joseph, the book of Kings continues to focus upon the fulfilment of God’s promises to David. While different dynasties come and go in the northern kingdom of Israel, David’s descendants remain upon the throne in Jerusalem. Nevertheless, the unrighteous activities of some of David’s descendants place the nation of Judah in jeopardy, resulting in its punishment at the hands of the Babylonians.
    With the destruction of the temple and the apparent demise of the Davidic dynasty, the book of Kings comes to its conclusion. In contrast to the promise of nationhood, God’s promise to bless the nations of the earth through a royal descendant of Abraham has remained unfulfilled. However, Jehoiachin’s release from prison in Babylon possibly suggests that the story is not finished.

The Literary Unity of Genesis to Kings

    The preceding survey provides grounds for believing that the books of Genesis to Kings form a unified literary composition. To say this is not to claim that their style is uniform throughout; the individual books have their own distinctive features, and even within each diverse material may be found. To the reader this presents a challenge, for it is easy to lose sight of the big picture. Yet throughout Genesis to Kings a rich variety of components has been worked together to produce a remarkable literary collage.
    These observations on the literary unity of Genesis to Kings have important implications for our understanding of this material, and this may be contrasted briefly with other approaches. Within Judaism, it has been traditional to view the books as forming two distinctive blocks: the Torah (Genesis to Deuteronomy) and the Former Prophets (Joshua to Kings). However, because greater authority was given to the first of these, a division was created between Deuteronomy and Joshua. With the development of critical approaches to the OT scholars began to question seriously the value of treating Genesis to Deuteronomy as a unity. Observing that Deuteronomy had no account of the Israelites taking possession of the promised land, they soon included the book of Joshua in discussions regarding the composition of the Pentateuch. This marked an important shift, from thinking of a Pentateuch to thinking of a Hexateuch. A further development was the introduction by Martin Noth of the concept of a Deuteronom(ist)ic Historian, who composed the books of Deuteronomy to Kings in the exilic period. Focusing on the unity of these books, Noth dismissed the concept of a Pentateuch, favouring instead that of a Tetrateuch. While Noth’s proposals have been very influential, the process by which the books of Genesis to Kings were composed continues to be the subject of intense debate among scholars, and new theories regarding their composition continue to be offered. This should not distract us, however, from considering how all these books, viewed as a unified narrative, contribute to a Christian understanding of biblical theology.
    Although absolute certainty is impossible, it seems likely that the books of Genesis to Kings were given their present shape shortly after 561 BC, the date of Jehoiachin’s release from prison (2 Kgs. 25:27). While the process by which these books were composed remains obscure, they were probably written to give hope to those affected by the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, the demise of the Davidic dynasty, the deportation of many leading Judaean citizens to Babylon and the flight of others to Egypt.
    The books of Genesis to Kings not only offer an explanation for these traumatic events by focusing on the nation’s failure to be faithful to Yahweh, but also preserve the hope that God will one day raise up a descendant of David through whom he will bless all the nations of the earth. Similar optimism is found in other writings, some of which originate prior to the exile (e.g. Is. 9:1–7; 11:1–5; Jer. 23:5–6; 30:8–9; Ezek. 17:22–24; 34:23–24; 37:24; Amos 9:11–12).
    Thus, although the books of Genesis to Kings narrate the past history of the Hebrew people, they are firmly orientated towards the future. By tracing the line of ‘seed’ from Seth to Jehoiachin, the narrative highlights God’s ongoing faithfulness to his promises in spite of many obstacles to their fulfilment. Moreover, a picture is gradually drawn of the one who is yet to come, for the reader is given to expect that he will resemble and excel the prominent figures in Genesis to Kings. Like Abraham, he will trust and obey God. Like Joseph, he will save ‘many lives’ (Gen. 50:20). Like Joshua, he will do everything written in the ‘Book of the Law’. Like David, he will be divinely exalted from humble circumstances. Like Solomon, he will rule with great wisdom.
    In the light of this expectation, it is easy to understand how Jesus is portrayed in the NT as the one who fulfils the Law and the Prophets (e.g. Matt. 5:17; Luke 24:27, 44; John 1:45; Acts 26:22–23; 28:23). He is the promised ‘seed’ of Abraham and of David (e.g., Acts 3:25–26; Rom. 1:2; Gal. 3:16). Although Genesis to Kings contain other themes of significance for biblical theology, there is an urgent need to recognize afresh that these books point, above all else, to the coming of one through whom the nations of the earth will be blessed.

Conclusion
    Thus far, our main purpose has been to show that the narrative in Genesis to Kings is bound together by two interrelated plots which centre around the divine promises of nationhood and a royal deliverer. However, by the end of Kings the latter promise is at best only partially fulfilled, thus creating the expectation that its fulfilment still lies in the future.
    In line with this expectation, it is apparent that other elements in Genesis to Kings have a paradigmatic function, pointing forward to and/or anticipating events that have yet to take place. Probably the most important of these elements is the account of the deliverance of the Israelites from slavery in Egypt and their taking possession of the promised land. These events, viewed in the light of the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden, provide a preview of the greater deliverance which God has planned for the whole earth. Thus, although the Israelites enter into a special covenant relationship with the Lord at Mt Sinai and, consequently, are distinguished from all other nations by having God come and dwell in their midst, they enjoy at most only a partial restoration of the idyllic conditions which existed on earth prior to the rebellion of Adam and Eve. While the building of the tabernacle enables the Lord to live among the Israelites, direct access to him is still very restricted, and numerous provisions must be made in order for the people to atone for their ongoing sins. Moreover, as the books of Genesis to Kings bear witness, these arrangements by themselves provide no permanent solution to the fractured relationship between God and humanity. They do, however, provide an important guide to the means by which a lasting solution will be achieved.
    In the light of the preceding observations, the importance of the books of Genesis to Kings for biblical theology is evident. As numerous articles elsewhere in this dictionary demonstrate more fully, these books not only introduce a rich variety of theological ideas, but also provide the foundation upon which everything else rests.

Bibliography
    T. D. Alexander, From Paradise to the Promised Land: an Introduction to the Main Themes of the Pentateuch (Carlisle and Grand Rapids, 1995, 1998); idem, ‘Royal expectations in Genesis to Kings: their importance for biblical theology’, TynB 49, 1998, pp. 191–212; D. N. Freedman, ‘The earliest Bible’, in M. P. O’Connor and D. N. Freedman (eds.), Background for the Bible (Winona Lake, 1987); J. G. McConville, Grace in the End: A Study in Deuteronomic Theology (Carlisle and Grand Rapids, 1993); M. Noth, The Deuteronomistic History (ET, Sheffield, 1981); R. N. Whybray, The Making of the Pentateuch: A Methodological Study (Sheffield, 1987).
T. D. ALEXANDER