Written by some of the best bookmans of the Old Testament, this book gives a proper history and description of the Old Testament, cultural scene, genres of literature used, historical scene and societal facets which provide the reader with a proper platform to read and understand the old testament good. It illuminates on the events of this subdivision of the bible, how they are interrelated to the natural universe and the position of the Hebrewss at that peculiar clip in history.

Right from chapter one which deals with “ lineation of the history of old testament survey ” , Rogerson familiarizes the reader with the history of such a survey, and points out the bing differences between the old acquaintance with old testament which was based on church scene or for schooling intents and his survey which is aimed at enabling helpful survey of the old testament ( John William et Al, . 1998, 6 ) . This academic survey subjects the Old Testament to critical and close examination than merely the face value of the contents of this testament. Pointed out in this chapter is the fact that, critical scholarship started even before the clip of reformation. Critics of some incompatibilities in the Old Testament pointed out that, some poetries presented troubles in believing as they went against the truth as human perceive it or scientific accounts. Questions were raised on whether Saul truly ruled at the age of one and this led to some transcribers merely giving their ain ages ( John William et Al, . 1998, 9 ) . This poetry is said to hold contradicted the expected human development procedure and many transcribers of the pre-Christian clip take to exclude this poetry. Incompatibilities are besides apparent in the mention of poetries in the New Testament as some poetries refer falsely to poetries in the Old Testament.

There's a specialist from your university waiting to help you with that essay.
Tell us what you need to have done now!


order now

The narrative of creative activity was besides a topic of treatment and examination by early bookman as they did non understand the nature of length of the yearss during creative activity nor did they understand how it was possible to make light before the Sun. Writers like Origen studied the Old Testament before 245 CE and provided bookman with survey ushers and interlingual renditions. The 4th century besides saw Jerome and Eusebius compile of import plants explicating topographic points quoted in the Old Testament, wrote commentaries, and translated these books from Hebrew to Greek which was widespread during that clip.

Scholars have written ushers to most books of the Old Testament, and many have demonstrated the desire the right text of the Old Testament, made comparing of its text with other Hagiographas and other text, and criticized this testament as being uncomplete. Scholars have been involved in the critical survey of the Old Testament through the centuries, to transmutation, reformation, Protestant Scholasticism, up to the current epoch bookmans who have raise unfavorable judgment even to the signifier of the OT content.

This chapter raises serious concerns about the credibleness, and the content of the OT as it clearly highlights the fact that, bookmans have non been interested with the survey of the OT late, but inquiries have been raised by different persons across the centuries ( John William et Al, . 1998, 23 ) .

Chapter Three trades with, “ Old testament History and the History of Israel ” . This chapter explores the clip lines used in the bible and the existent grounds available in the specified country. This chapter gives reappraisals of ancient histories like the Assyrian records in order to put OT clocking confidently in specific clip and infinite. Archeology has proved most of the bible to be a true historical history, but at that place still exists critical information indicating out to the fact that, the surface comparing given by the OT may radically differ from the faith of the Israelites. This chapter critically examines the manner history is written and the handiness of stuffs during the clip the OT was proposed written and the current tools for entering and remembering history. It is interesting how this chapter explores the male monarchs of Israel and even raises some uncertainties on their being ( John William et Al, . 1998, 32 ) . Much visible radiation is shade on the nature of remembrance of stuff by these writers where by some are seen to hold maintained objectiveness due to the nature of personal remembrances.

The effort by Rogerson to measure the credibleness of historical resources and their handiness to the OT authors serves the intent of doing us appreciate the fact that, the OT was written merely like all other histories and that the bing spread between ourselves and the Old Testament period can be bridged. One of the chief issues pointed out in this chapter is the difference between the OT authorship and the normal historical authorship. It is clearly pointed out that, some of the events recorded in the Old Testament are backed up merely by a little group of Prophetss unlike modern history which is based on mention ( John William et Al, . 1998, 53 ) . The readings of the events are besides based upon the same lines which raise inquiries about the sequence of the events and even the happening of the events. Although godly purpose is besides questioned in the Reconstruction of scriptural narratives, this claim of the being of godly purpose can non be invalidated but sunglassess much visible radiation on the being of possible inaccuracies in the historical Reconstruction. It would non be incorrect to reason that, the Old Testament does non give an accurate history of ancient Israel but instead gives a really closely related narrative which portions some resemblance with the modern history on antediluvian Israel as shown by OT and some excess scriptural texts.

Chapter four tackles the issue of “ The World-View of the Old Testament ” . This chapter is merely concerned with how Hebrewss responded to the universe and how they saw it as they used a really different linguistic communication and reading from our ain. More is explained about thaumaturgy, nature, miracles, societal organisation and forfeit. The universe of societal relationship and nature are clearly marked with rigorous boundaries. There is a clear differentiation of what should be eaten, and what should non. It is besides clearly explained what is of Godly nature, heavenly nature and world nature ( John William et Al, . 1998, 58 ) . They depended on annual rhythm of nature merely like their neighbours and adored and feared God ( they knew Him to be involved in all natural procedures ) . Natural phenomena like Earth temblors, drouth, inundations and crop called for much attending from the Israelites and stirred much concern.

More frequently than non, the Hebrewss were over whelmed by the spiritual beliefs of their neighbours which largely were guided by magico-religious rites which clashed with the prophetic faith ( John William et Al, . 1998, 43 ) . The monarchy besides supported these types of faith as demonstrated by the worship of Baal. It is nevertheless apparent that, Israelites saw God as the centre of all natural phenomena. As pointed out by Rogerson, Israelites had no word for miracle or thaumaturgy and had no good formulated regulations of nature but easy saw God ‘s power in the events which they could non explicate ( John William et Al, . 1998, 64 ) . This greatly reduces the credibleness of the being of excess ordinary events being related to or referred as the work of God as these people had no scientific backup.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *