In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Hebrew Studies 33 (1992) 95 Reviews semitisms, the inner-Greek corruptions, the omissions, and the awkward Greek of the Greek witnesses to the Acts of Thomas to demonstrate that it was originally written in Syriac. G. W. E. Nickelsburg discusses the rationale for preserving 1 Enoch and an Ezekiel Apocryphon in Christian codices, for example, Codex Panopolitanus and Chester Beatty Papyrus XII. The chief rationale was an interest in the resurrection of the dead and the coming judgment. The Ezekiel text may have been included for potential converts to the eschatological community of the pious and the righteous. D. Levenson presents a bibliographical review of all documents from the fourth to the fourteenth centuries as well as sixteenth-century Jewish accounts that speak of Julian's attempt to rebuild the Jerusalem temple in 363 CEo Phillip R. Callaway 949 0'Hara Court Jonesboro, GA 30236 DAVID IN LOVE AND WAR: THE PURSUIT OF POWER IN 2 SAMUEL 10-12. By Randall C. Bailey. JSOTSup 75. Pp. 214. Sheffield: JSOT, 1990. Cloth, $45.00. The book is a revised dissertation that was written at Emory University under the direction of David M. Gunn. Although its focus is on 2 Samuel 10-12, this work makes a significant contribution toward the on-going discussion of Leonhard Rost's thesis that 2 Samuel 9-20 and I Kings 1-2 comprises a unified piece of literature, the so-called "Throne Succession Narrative." Bailey begins with brief synopses of Rost's methods and the results of his analyses of the "Ark Narrative" and the "Throne Succession Narrative." Then, leaving the"Ark Narrative" aside, he summarizes the current state of scholarship on 2 Samuel 9-20 and 1 Kings 1-2 under four separate headings: (1) Limits of the work. Whereas Rost posited that the original Succession Narrative began before chap. 9 because the theme is present in the David-Michal confrontation of 2 Sam 6:16, 20-23 and in portions of Nathan's oracle to David in chap. 7, recent scholarship has tended to look for the beginnings in chaps. 2-4, because the Succession Narrative Hebrew Studies 33 (1992) 96 Reviews presupposes (for example) a crippled Mephibosheth and Joab's murder of Abner and shares several stylistic parallels with chaps. 2-4. On the other hand, some scholars have also challenged Rost's thesis that the original narrative extended beyond 2 Samuel 20: the David, Nathan, and Bathsheba of I Kings 1-2 emerge as radically different characters from their depiction in 2 Samuel. Perhaps the later writer of I Kings 1-2 had access to 2 Samuel as a complete work. (2) Unity of Composition. Those scholars who have followed Rost regarding literary unity have done so primarily on the basis of thematic continuity within the story-line. But there is no agreement whatsoever on what that unifying theme might be (succession, a second "fall," sexual sin leading to death, love gone awry, antithesis of wisdom, rebellion-both familial and national, deception, etc.). Also, the strikingly disparate positive and negative depictions of David throughout the entire narrative have led scholars (especially those who believe that the text was written as political propaganda) to posit a more complex redaction process. Finally, there is the problem of Nathan's judgment oracle in 12:7b-12, which many scholars now see as the most important segment giving unity to the entire work. Rost himself admitted that elements within the oracle may be secondary , and this initial doubt has given rise to major suspicion that the entire oracle is the work of a later redactor. (3) Genre and Intention. Even the scholars who support Rost's general theory have failed to reach agreement concerning the narrative's genre. Genre designations have ranged from "historical narrative" to "earliest form of ancient Israelite historiography" to "family story" to "wisdom novel." There has been just as little consensus regarding intention. Rost had theorized that the work's purpose was to legitimate Solomon's accession to the throne. Recent scholars, however, noting Solomon's absence from major portions of the narrative and finding descriptions of David that are either strongly positive or strongly negative, posit either an early critique...

pdf

Share