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

Hebrew Studies 40 (1999) 287 Reviews say that this is by far one of the best available. I highly recommend it as a foundation and a springboard for further study of the Old Testament. Carol J. Dempsey University ofPortland Portland, OR 97203 dempsey@up.edu OLD TESTAMENT SURVEY: THE MESSAGE, FORM, AND BACKGROUND OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. By William Sanford LaSor, David Allan Hubbard, and Frederic William Bush. Second edition. pp. xvii + 860. Grand Rapids. MI: Eerdmans, 1996. Cloth, $40.00. Like all good introductions the purpose of this book (as stated in the preface to the first edition) is clear and unambiguous: "to introduce the reader to the background, content, literary quality, and message of the OT as a whole and of its various books" (p. xiii). It is intended for college and seminary students which means in effect that the treatment is more thorough than one would expect for an undergraduate textbook with extensive notes and bibliographical data. This together with the size of the volume may be off-putting to the undergraduate student but who can argue with the fact that "thousands of college and university students" (p. x) use it annually. . The fundamental aim of the authors is to introduce the Old Testament in such a way as to "enhance the devotion and obedience of its readers to Scripture and to Scripture's Lord" (p. xiv). The authors believe that the Old Testament is inspired, authoritative, and part of the "Holy Scripture" of the Christian church. They also believe that it is incumbent on the believer "to take with full seriousness the historical, cultural. and social setting of Scripture together with the literary and linguistic means by which it was recorded" (p. xiv). Theological candor like this is, of course. all the rage in these ideologically self-conscious days and we should be glad for it. No hidden theological agenda here. What this means. in effect, is that they have written an introduction to the Old Testament that is sensitive to the pre-understandings conservative evangelical Christians have about the Bible: that it is reliable and that it anticipates the New Testament. The second edition differs from the first edition more in terms of style and presentation than in terms of content By making the language and style simpler, sentences shorter. and by adding additional charts and maps, the authors intend to make it more usable for the undergraduate reader. The Hebrew Studies 40 (1999) 288 Reviews most obvious change is the move of "The Background" section to the back of the book (where "backgrounds" belong). There are nine maps and at least as many tables or charts outlining things such as Israel's sacred calendar (pp. 92-93) and the chronology of Jeremiah's prophecies (p. 353). There is also a plethora of boxes highlighting key texts or themes. It is a shame, however, that notes and bibliographies have been moved to the end of the volume for the second edition. Although the bibliographies have been updated, the discussion in the text does not on the whole reflect the changes that have occurred in Old Testament scholarship since the early 1980's. The critical issues dealt with are basically of the "conservative evangelical versus the historical critical" variety . This book is not, however, simply reactionary. If one applies the litmus test of "conservative orthodoxy" then one fmds that the authors do not defend (in the R. K. Harrison tradition) the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch , the unity of Isaiah (pp. 282-288) nor an early date for Daniel (pp. 574-576). They are, however, concerned that the discussion of authorship and date not detract from the literary unity these three "books" display. In other words, they accept in a limited way the conclusions of historical criticism but they allow them no independent force. For example, although they accept that "the documents of the Mosaic age may have been fmally fonned into a single collection by Ezra in the period of the restoration after the Exile" (p. 9), it is treated as if it more or less accurately reflects the Mosaic age. The bulk of the book is a more or less straightforward survey of the...

pdf

Share