Category Archives: Biblical Studies

On McDonald’s The Biblical Canon

Back in January I wrote about Lee Martin McDonald’s book The Biblical Canon: Its Origin, Transmission, and Authority (Hendrickson, 2007), detailing a number of errors that I’d noticed that finally put me off reading the book. As you can see there, Dr McDonald has left a very illuminating comment, in addition to sending me a private email covering the same points, showing that several of these errors were actually caused by the editor, rather than being allowed to slip past the editor, as I had so ungenerously assumed. As I explained in my apology to Dr McDonald, it simply had not entered my mind that a professional editor could be so inept. The lesson here is quite obviously caveat scriptor! I reproduce his comment in full here:

Dear Readers:

Thank you for these comments. I looked at the manuscript that I sent to Hendricksons to see what I actually had sent to them because the sentence about Sirach translating the Septuagint on p. 80 was just as surprising to me as to you. My original manuscript to them said: “These “writings” circulated in Palestine and were later translated from Hebrew into Greek— probably by the time of Sirach’s translation—not only for the Jews in Egypt, but also for the other Jews in the Diaspora.” The editor dropped out “the time” and it came out absolutely wrong. As you can see on pages 83-84, I only claim that the grandson of Sirach translated his grandfather’s work. I would not consciously claim that any one individual translated the LXX –no one says that. Thank you for catching this.

Also, the word “theraputae” (a plural form) should, of course, be “Therapeutae.” It is listed as Theraputai in some volumes, but here it is clearly wrong in my volume.

I was just as disappointed as you when I saw how the editor butchered the Neusner dictum on p. 170. changning “not” to “know” destroyed the whole point of the saying.

By the reference to three-dimensional stelae on pp. 39-40 I mean to focus on height, breadth, and depth. I am sorry for the confusion.

I do accept the other comments also as quite helpful. I was told by one of the readers that Hendrickson has issued a new printing in March and they were supposed to have caught several of these mistakes. I called them about several of them in January, but I do not know if they were caught. I have not yet seen the new printing, but several of the mistakes were, of course, embarrassing and I apologize that they appeared. The pressure to get the volume out after many editorial delays allowed for a quick read and not a good one. Ultimately the errors are my responsibility and I accept that. I assure you that I will be much more careful in my next volume.

Thank you again for your help. If you find any other errors, I will be most happy to receive them and I will ask that they be corrected in the next printing. I am on sabbatical leave at the moment, but I may be still be contacted this year at lee.mcdonald<at>acadiau.ca

Thank you again.

Lee Martin McDonald

I intend to recommence reading the book, making a detailed list of everything that seems odd. If any other readers were so inclined, it would be good to forward those lists to Dr McDonald for the sake of corrections made in a future printing, or perhaps a second edition. The book itself, corrected, would be a great resource, I think, and an excellent summary of the status quaestionis about the Biblical canon. It would certainly make a fine textbook for any classes on the subject.

At this point I also want to recommend to those readers who may not know it, a volume co-edited by Lee Martin McDonald and James Sanders, The Canon Debate (Hendrickson, 2002). Each chapter is by a different scholar covering various subjects related to the development of both the Old Testament and New Testament canons. Several of the chapters in that book were starkly illuminating, and altered my thought on several issues regarding canon formation, particularly the Mason, Lewis, and Lightstone chapters. Keeping in mind that the work is multi-authored, with some overlap of coverage and even some minor instances of contradiction between chapters inevitable, the work as a whole flows well and coherently. I cannot recommend it more highly, and trust that I shall soon be able to recommend McDonald’s The Biblical Canon with equal enthusiasm!

❧

Samgar in Jeremiah 39.3

John Hobbins, Charles Halton [dead link], Chris Heard [dead link] and I have been discussing (offline) some other details regarding Jeremiah 39.3 in light of the Jursa discovery. John has the latest update out of the gang, here. These are just some preliminary notes on one aspect of that conversation that seem good to share. I’ll be sure to post any major adjustments to the below, as they occur.

I’ve been focusing on the word sāmgār ( MT סַמְגַּר ) which is generally agreed to represent the Babylonian word sinmagir, or, more properly, Sîn-magīr. The relationship suggests that the Hebrew should perhaps be repointed to סִמַּגִר, with the Akkadian /n/ elided into the doubled /m/ in Hebrew. The word is obviously a title of some sort belonging to the immediately preceding name Nergalsharezer, just as the other two Babylonian officials mentioned also bear titular epithets. (Their titles, I’m sure, will be taken up elsewhere.) The issue is that of the meaning of this title Sîn-magīr, not just here in Jeremiah 39.3, but even in Neo-Babylonian texts.

The epithet, when understood as such, has been taken as alternately either a place name (as is reflected in the NIV and NET translations of Jeremiah 39.3: Nergal-sharezer of Samgar) or simply as a title, “the Sîn-magīr official,” as is the preferred meaning in the Chicago Assyrian Dictionary. Throughout the last century and up to the present, there has been no decisive conclusion made regarding the meaning, and so some scholars treat it as a title, while others treat it as a geographic name. Neither of these, however, quite conveys the proper meaning, as this name (for indeed, it is a personal name) has a very long history in Babylonia.

It seems to have first appeared as the name of King Sîn-magīr of the First Dynasty of Isin, who ruled 1827-1817 BC. The name perhaps means “(the moon god) Sin is noble.” Thereafter, Sîn-magīr was a very popular name during the Old Babylonian period, as we see from it popping up in numerous legal and economic texts of the period. In the late Kassite Dynasty and in the Second Dynasty of Isin (circa 1200-1125 BC), we find that there was a province called Bīt-Sîn-magīr, “House of Sîn-magīr,” perhaps originally named for a Kassite tribal chief bearing the name Sîn-magīr. During this period the governor of that province was called šakin Bīt-Sîn-magīr, all of which was preceded by the logographic determinative LÚ, pronounced awīl or amēl in Babylonian, meaning “man” in general or more specifically “official” in contexts like this. Over the course of the next several centuries, something very interesting appears to have happened with the name of this territory and this governor’s title. By the time it is mentioned again in the late Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian periods, we see LÚ.DINGIR Sîn-magīr, that is, “Sîn-magīr man” or “Sîn-magīr official.” There is a mechanism to explain this.

Already in the Isin II period, the phrase šakin māti “governor of the land” was being reduced to simply šakin in the case of this governor and others. This may be because immediately following the māti would sometimes occur the KUR (read as māt, “land of”) logographic determinative right before the name of the region, and this duplication was considered dysphonic. Another interesting thing is that in the phrase Bīt-Sîn-magīr and in other such Bīt-PN phrases where the personal name is compound, the PN is not in the genitive, as it is in the case of non-compound examples: Bīt-Adini, Bīt-Zamāni, etc). This seems to be a rule, as it is consistent. In any case, the Bīt-, “House of…” drops from the phrase Bīt-Sîn-magīr during the course of the roughly five centuries between Isin II and the Neo-Babylonian period, for whatever reason, perhaps simply for hypocoristic reasons. The end result is that the remaining Sîn-magīr, which was always a personal name and was still understood as a personal name, does not appear to bear geographic determinatives, though perhaps future discoveries will show these to us. We also now find the title of the ruler of this province or territory now being simply LÚ.DINGIR Sîn-magīr, “the Sîn-magīr man” or “the Sîn-magīr official.”

Recognizing Sîn-magīr as a hypocorism, or familiar nickname, for Bīt-Sîn-magīr makes this title much more clear. In support of this particular understanding is a text often referred to as Nebuchadnezzar’s Hofkalender, a clay prism found in the Etemenanki, the temple of Marduk at Babylon. This text dates to Nebuchadnezzar’s seventh year, 598 BC, and give a list of his chief court officials, and also of the “chiefs of the land of Akkad,” first among whom is listed I.DINGIR Nergal-šar-uṣur LÚ.DINGIR Sîn-magīr, that is, Nergal-šar-uṣur the Sîn-magīr official, followed by a list of governors of all the other provinces of Akkad. The proper connotation of “the Sîn-magīr official,” therefore, judging from the above, appears to be “the governor of (Bīt-)Sîn-magīr.” This same individual appears in Jermiah 39.3 as “Nergalsharezer of Samgar,” and is often referred to in English as Neriglissar, the form of his name found in the epitomes of Berossus. He was married to the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar, and was the instigator of a successful coup which ended the reign and life of Amel-Marduk, and brought Neriglissar to the throne.

In summary, then, Sîn-magīr is a personal name hypocoristically standing for the fuller geographic name Bīt-Sîn-magīr, which had included that personal name. By the Neo-Babylonian period, the traditional title of the governor of this territory had also shortened to simply awīl Sîn-magīr, “man of Sîn-magīr.” I would thereefore suggest that the clearest ranslation of this phrase into English would be “governor of Sîn-magīr.”

Thanks especially to Charles for prodding me to express all this better, and his patience.

❧

Ethiopian Books of Maccabees

The Ethiopian Orthodox canon of the Bible (see here for a list of the OT books) includes several works unknown to other traditions, including three Books of Maccabees. They lack translations of each of the four books of Maccabees known to other traditions. An email correspondent, John Plummer, has found online translations of these Ethiopian Maccabees books in the Rastafarian dialect called Iyaric, done by someone named Ras Feqade Tebbaqiw:

1 Meqabyan

2 Meqabyan

3 Meqabyan

A list of all the translations into Iyaric that he has done directly from the Amharic Bible of 1948 EC (1955 AD), promulgated by the late Emperor Haile Selassie, is available here [dead link].

I might take a swing at bringing these into standard English, but don’t hold your breath. I don’t know Iyaric, and the glossary is not extensive enough to cover all the unusual words I’ve already seen. Perhaps reading them with some Bob Marley playing will help set the mood, and make the Iyaric more easily understood. Focus on Marley’s accent, and most of the rest will follow.

The very important thing to note is that this translation of these books is the first ever published in a modern language. Though the books have been summarized and described before, they have never been translated in full.

I do believe I’m equally as excited to read these as I am the last Harry Potter book, being released at midnight tonight. (I have a copy reserved at our local science fiction/fantasy/mystery bookstore, The Other Change of Hobbit. ALWAYS support your local booksellers!)

Thank you Ras Feqade Tebbaqiw!

❧

Jerusalem, 1872

Jerusalem was the city which the Lord did choose to place his name there. He loved the gates of Zion more than all the dwellings of Jacob. But while the land has been defiled, and the people have been scattered abroad, these gates have long fallen, and Zion has often been filled with judgment. The tomb of David stands without the wall of the present city ; but the palaces of Jerusalem have disappeared from Mount Zion. Not a vestige of its bulwarks that long withstood Roman hosts remains ; and the city of David that stood on Zion, has wholly vanished, as if that site of Israelitish royalty, like Samaria the other, had never been reclaimed from the plough. Only a small portion of the mount is now enclosed within the walls of the modern Jerusalem ; and Mount Zion may now be seen, as each successive traveller can testify, as the prophet saw it in vision, ploughed as a field, (see frontispiece.) In other places throughout the land, grain is sown around closer and larger olives than those of Zion as it is among them, while many open spaces or fields are there given up entirely to the plough. “At the time I visited this sacred ground,” says Dr Richardson, “one part of it supported a crop of barley, another was undergoing the labour of the plough, and the soil turned up consisted of stone and lime mixed with earth, such as is usually met with in the foundations of ruined cities. It is nearly a mile in circumference. We have here another remarkable instance of the special fulfillment of prophecy ; therefore shall Zion for your sake be ploughed as a field” (Richardson’s Travels, p. 349 ; Mic. iii. 12). Zion testifies against her children. On his first visit to Zion, the writer of these pages, together with his friends, gathered some ears of barley from a field that had been ploughed and reaped : but, on the last, we saw the plough, as in any other field, actually cleaving the soil of Zion.

And the mountain of the house as the high places of a forest (Jer. xxvi. 18). Jerusalem lay in heaps, after it was besieged, taken and destroyed by the Chaldeans, and also by the Romans. To this day the mosque of Omar may be seen, as in the plate, as the crescent of Mohammed towers over it, where the nobler temple of Solomon stood in its glory. The mountain of the house, with its trees around it, may still be said to be “as the high places of a forest,” devoted as it is, as were they, to the cause of false religion, and not to the worship of the Holy One of Israel. But the words of truth immediately subjoined to these denunciations of the prophet, tell of other times than these in which many a cresent, as now, glitters over it, in token that Jerusalem is still trodden down of the Gentiles. But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills ; and people shall flow unto it. And many nations shall come and say, Come and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob (Mic. iv. 1,2 ; Isa. ii. 2,3).

Rev Alexander Keith. Evidence of the Truth of the Christian Religion Derived from the Literal Fulfilment of Prophecy: Particularly as Illustrated by the History of the Jews and by the Discoveries of Recent Travellers, 39th edition, 1872, pages 256

❧

Psalm 6

Formal translation
O LORD, do not, in Your anger, rebuke me,
and do not, in Your wrath, chasten me.
Have mercy on me, O LORD, for I am weak.
Heal me, O LORD, for my bones are troubled
And my soul is greatly troubled.
But You, O LORD—how long?
Turn, O LORD, and deliver my soul.
Save me for the sake of Your mercy.
For there is, in death, no memory of You.
In Sheol, who praises you?
I am wearied with my groaning,
All night I make my bed swim,
with my tears I soak my couch.
My eye wastes away from grief,
it grows old with all my tormentors.
Turn aside from me, all you doers of iniquity,
for the LORD has heard the voice of my weeping.
He, the LORD, has heard my petition!
The LORD has accepted my prayer!
They will be ashamed and greatly troubled, all my enemies.
They will turn back, they will be ashamed in a moment.

Informal translation
Lord, don’t punish me while You’re angry!
Be gentle with me, because I’m so very weak,
even my bones are falling apart.
My whole life is a mess.
When, Lord, will You help me?

Come back, Lord, and rescue me
because of the covenant You made.
How can I tell of Your wonders if I’m dead?
How can I sing Your praise in the grave?

I am so tired of complaining.
Every night I soak my pillow with tears.
I cry so many tears my bed floats on them.
I’m losing my eyesight from all this weeping.
My eyes are all dried out like an old man’s.
All this because of my enemies.

Start running, evildoers,
for the Lord has heard the message in my tears.
He’s listened to my petition, and accepted my prayer.
Shame and terror are coming for all my enemies!
They’ll turn tail and run, shamed in an instant!

❧

Contextual scholarship

Biblioblogdom is all abuzz over the reading of a small cuneiform tablet in the British Museum. See John Hobbins’ fine summary of the issue, and follow the links to various other bloggers’ posts, especially Chris Heard’s. It’s pretty clear that this simple little tablet has resolved the proper reading of Jeremiah 39.3, which is somewhat confused in the Masoretic Text and the versions, and has been the subject of numerous proposed emendations, some more unlikely than others, throughout the years. This is, in part, a concrete example of the value of the contextual approach championed especially by William Hallo.

It’s not the simple fact that two texts in two cultures are being compared, and two names incidentally match in them. It’s rather that the approach of the scholarship involved in first recognizing that there was anything special in this tablet at all, for without both wide and deep reading in both Hebrew and Akkadian, Dr Jursa would not have been able to make the connection between this tablet, the Babylonian functionary, and the somewhat garbled Hebraicized name in Jeremiah. The tablet will have been only cursorily read before, for classification purposes at accession, as there were something like 10,000 tablets being cataloged within the space of only a few years, and time was of the essence. However, even had the tablet indeed been read, perhaps the examiner at that time was unread to the point that he noticed neither the title of a chief officer of Nebuchadnezzar nor the connection with Jeremiah, or perhaps simply didn’t even read as far as the names. In any case, it took the reading of Dr Jursa, familiar with both Neo-Babylonian court terminology and the Book of Jeremiah, to make this fascinating connection.

Similarly, those of us writing and commenting about this text on the blogs, teasing out the implications for the text of Jeremiah 39.3, are also working in an environment where several of us are also widely and deeply read in the Akkadian and Hebrew materials, so that recognition of these terms and names is apparent. This is necessary both for the recognition of direct parallels, as mentioned above in the particular case of this tablet, but even more importantly for the wider perspective of indirect parallels, or shared cultural conceptions.

Perhaps cheerleading the contextual approach is on my mind because of my current reading, a first of its kind: Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible by John H. Walton. Having assimilated various texts of the ancient Near East, he presents various chapters covering various conceptual perspectives (Walton’s “cognitive environment”) of several different cultures along with those evident from the Hebrew Bible. Sometimes their conceptual perspectives are quite similar, as in the case of cosmic geography. Others are quite divergent, as in the rather obvious case of the nature of divinity as understood by the Hebrews contra everyone else. The excellence of this book is located precisely in this necessary and refreshing comparison and contrast of the worldviews of the ancient Near East, with each comparison and contrast enlightening our understanding of all the cultures involved. It would obviously make an excellent introductory text for any Introduction to the Ancient Near East type of class, particularly if the Hebrew Bible is included in the prospectus. The only drawback with the book is that, although there are several illustrations, they seem gratuitous, lacking connection with the text, while certain others that would be useful aren’t included. It would be very useful, for instance, to include a diagram of the “three-tier world” understood by the ancients, something like the ones included in Othmar Keel’s The Symbolism of the Biblical World (Eisenbrauns, 1997), on pages 56 and 57. However, with Keel’s beautiful book at hand, such shortcomings are easily remedied, and such quibbling made unnecessary. Walton’s is an excellent book, a truly elegant yet impressive systematization and comparison of disparate texts. Consider it highly recommended.

❧

Caveat scriptor!

At the beginning of the year, I wrote a short review of Lee Martin McDonald’s new book The Biblical Canon: Its Origin, Transmission, and Authority (Hendrickson, 2007). He has just left a comment indicating he’s been working on a list of corrections to be incorporated in the second printing, thankfully. Take a look at his comments there. Also, for those of you who publish, it would apparently be quite a good thing for you to remember never to assume your editor knows anything more than where to put commas.

❧

Psalms 3-5

One of the things that I neglected to mention in my earlier short introduction to this set of formal and informal translations of the Psalms is that I’ll be implementing the division of the Psalm “titles” into postscripts and superscripts as I described in this post on the discovery of James Thirtle in this regard. For those inscrutable apparently musical terms in the Psalms (Selah, Negginoth, etc) I’ll use the NRSV translation’s mostly fine choices, but also some others. These informal translations are guided by impressions I pick up from the Hebrew as I read it, and often try to expose in my looser than literal English translation some of the wordplay, implications, and connotations of the Hebrew, as I’ve learned it. It’s often hit or miss, and none of this is to be taken as “gospel.” It’s all in fun. So, we continue.

Psalm 3
Formal translation
A Psalm of David, in his fleeing away from the face of Absalom, his son.
O LORD, how many are my enemies!
Many are those rising against me!
Many are those saying of my soul,
“There is no salvation for him in God.”
(Instrumental interlude)
But You, O LORD, are a shield around me,
my Glory, and the One lifting my head.
I cry out my voice to the LORD
and He answers me from His holy mountain.
(Instrumental interlude)
I laid down and slept, and I awoke
for the LORD supports me.
I will not fear tens of thousands of a people
who have all around set themselves against me.
Rise up, O LORD! Save me, my God!
For you have struck all my enemies on the cheek.
The teeth of the wicked have You shattered.
Of the LORD is salvation.
On Your People is Your blessing.
(Instrumental interlude)
To the director. With stringed instruments.

Informal translation
A Psalm of David, from when he escaped his son Absalom.
O Lord, look how many enemies I have now,
who all say of me, “God will not save him.”
(Instrumental interlude)
But You, Lord, are my shield,
You honor me and show me favor.
I cry aloud to the Lord,
and He answers me from His Throne.
(Instrumental interlude)
I can sleep, and wake up in the morning,
because the Lord protects me all night.
I will never fear the armies of any nation
who have surrounded and besieged me.
Rise up and save me, my Lord and God!
You always conquer my enemies,
knocking the teeth right out of their heads!
Safety comes from the Lord alone.
You have blessed Your People with it.
(Instrumental interlude)
For the conductor: use stringed instruments.

Psalm 4
Formal translation
A Psalm of David.
In my calling out, answer me,
O my God, my righteousness!
When in tight trouble, You have given me room.
Have mercy on me, and hear my prayer.
O sons of man, until when will my glory be for an insult,
will you love emptiness, will you seek a lie?
(Instrumental interlude)
But know that the LORD has separated the pious one for Himself.
The LORD hears in my calling out to Him.
Be angry, but do not sin.
Speak in your heart, upon your bed, and be silent.
(Instrumental interlude)
Offer sacrifices of righteousness, and trust the LORD.
Many are those saying, Who will show us a good thing?
Shine upon us the light of Your face, O LORD!
You have placed joy in my heart,
more than the time their wheat and new wine was abundant.
In peace will I both lie down and sleep,
for You alone, O LORD, make me dwell in security.
To the director. For flutes.

Informal translation
A Psalm of David.
Answer me when I cry out to you,
my righteous God!
When I’m in dire straits,
You always widen the way to safety.
Show me Your kindness and answer my prayer.
You people, when will you stop insulting my dignity?
When will you stop loving trivialities, and preferring lies?
(Instrumental interlude)
Know that the Lord has chosen me, His worshipper, for His favor.
The Lord answers me whenever I pray to Him.
You may be angry, but do not sin against others.
Work it out in your head, in private, and keep quiet.
(Instrumental interlude)
Offer up your righteousness, not your animals,
and put your trust in the Lord.
Many say, “Show me something good in the world!”
God will show you His face and change your life!
The Lord has given me inner joy
greater than the best times of my life.
I will always rest secure, for You, Lord, have made me safe.
For the conductor: use flutes.

Psalm 5
Formal translation
A Psalm of David.
Give ear to my words, O LORD,
consider my sighing.
Attend the sound of my cry,
my King and my God,
for to You I pray.
O LORD, You will hear my voice.
In the morning, I will arrange an offering for You,
and I will keep watch.
For You are not a God delighting in wickedness.
Evil will not dwell with You.
Boastful ones will not stand themselves before Your eyes.
You have hated all those doing iniquity.
You will destroy speakers of falsehood.
The man of blood and deceit the LORD abhors.
And I, in the abundance of Your mercy,
will come to Your House,
I will prostrate myself toward the Temple of Your Holiness,
in fear of You.
O LORD, lead me in Your righteousness,
because of my opponents.
Make straight before me Your way.
For there is not in his mouth any established thing.
Their heart is destruction,
their throat an open grave.
With their tongue they deceive.
Declare them guilty, O God.
Let them fall from their own plots.
In the abundance of their transgressions cast them out,
for they have rebelled against You.
But they will rejoice, all those who take refuge in You.
Forever they will sing joyfully.
Spread protection over them,
and they will rejoice in You,
those who love Your name.
For you will bless the righteous one, O LORD,
as with a shield of favor You surround him.
To the director. For stringed instruments. According to the Eighth.

Informal translation
A Psalm of David.
Listen to my heartfelt prayer, O Lord.
Always answer me, my Divine King,
because I only pray to You.
I know, Lord, you answer my prayer.
I set myself before You in the morning,
and only have to wait for Your answer.
For You find no pleasure in evil.
It has no place with You.
Braggards cannot stand before You.
You hate evildoers and destroy liars.
The LORD despises everyone violent and deceitful.
But through Your great mercy, I may come to Your House,
and worship You in awe in Your Holy Sanctuary.
O Lord, because I have enemies,
guide me in Your righteous Way.
For nothing they say is true,
and they are full of evil and corruption.
They like to deceive with slick lies.
Render Your judgment, O God,
and let their own machinations condemn them.
Throw them and all their sins away,
for they have rebelled against You.
But all those who come to You for refuge
will rejoice in You forever.
Protect all those who rejoice in You,
everyone who loves Your Name.
For You, O Lord God, always bless the righteous,
surrounding us with the shield of Your grace.
For the conductor: use stringed instruments. Eighth mode.

❧

Psalms 1-2

This post is the beginning of something I’ve been meaning to do for a long time: a translation of the Psalms in two forms, a formal, literal translation and a more informal, dynamic translation. This set of translations is from the Hebrew, though with reference to the Greek Psalms of the Septuagint especially. I use the Greek primarily to find the overlapping semantic range of words in Hebrew and Greek, narrowing down the potential meaning. Here are the first two psalms.

Psalm 1
Formal translation
Blessed is the man
who has not walked in the counsel of the wicked,
who in the way of sinners has not stood,
and who in the seat of scoffers has not sat.
Rather in the Law of the LORD is his delight,
and on His Law he meditates day and night.
For he is like a tree planted by streams of water,
which gives forth its fruit in its season,
and its leaves never wither.
For all that he does succeeds.
Not so the wicked:
for they are like the chaff which the wind scatters.
Therefore the wicked will not arise in judgment,
nor the sinners in the council of the righteous.
For the LORD knows the way of the righteous,
and the way of the wicked will perish.

Informal translation
Blessed is every one
who has never followed the advice of wicked people,
who has never participated in the actions of sinners,
and who has never associated with scoffers,
but rather who finds delight in the Law of the Lord,
and thinks about His Law day and night.
Such a one is like a tree planted by streams of water,
which always gives its fruit in the right season,
and its leaves never wither and fall.
For all that such a one does will succeed.
Not so for the wicked,
for they are like chaff scattered on the wind.
The wicked will never stand to receive a good judgment,
nor will sinners be counted in the community of the righteous.
For the Lord is watching the ways of the righteous,
but the ways of the wicked will only get them lost.

Psalm 2
Formal translation
Why do the nations rage,
and the peoples plot in vain?
The kings of the earth set themselves,
and rulers counsel together against the LORD,
and against his Anointed:
“Let us burst their bonds,
and cast from us their cords.”
He sitting in the heavens laughs,
my Lord derides them.
Then will He speak to them in His fury,
and in His wrath He will terrify them:
For I have installed my king,
on Zion, my holy mountain.”
Let me relate the decree of the LORD:
He said to me, “You are my son.
Today I have begotten you.
Ask Me, and I will give the nations as your inheritance,
and as your possession, the ends of the earth.
You will shatter them with a rod of iron,
and like a potter’s vessel break them into pieces.”
Now, kings, understand;
be corrected, judges of the earth.
Serve the LORD in fear;
rejoice in trembling.
Kiss the Son, lest He become angry,
and you perish,
for quickly kindled is His wrath.
Blessed are those seeking refuge with Him.

Informal translation
Why do the nations rage,
and the peoples of the world plot useless schemes?
The kings of the earth array themselves,
and various rulers conspire against the Lord
and His Chosen ruler, saying,
“Let’s revolt from their rulership,
and have freedom from them.”
The One enthroned upon the heavens laughs!
My Lord holds them in scorn.
He will speak to them in His fury,
and terrify them in His wrath, saying,
“I Myself have installed My King
on Zion, My holy mountain.”
Let me recall the decree of the Lord:
He said to me, “You are my Son.
Today, I have begotten you.
Ask and I will give you the nations as your inheritance,
everything to the ends of the earth as your possession.
You will shatter them with a rod of iron,
like a potter shatters a useless pot.”
Understand, you kings of the earth,
and be corrected, you judges of the world.
Serve the Lord, fearing His greatness.
Worship Him joyfully, trembling with humility.
Give all honor to the Son, His chosen ruler,
lest He become angry and you perish,
for His anger is quickly kindled.
Blessed are all those seeking refuge in Him.

Commentary
One of the most interesting things about Psalm 2 is the presence, explicitly, of the Messiah, in verse 2. The Davidic Messianic expectation as exemplified in the prophets and their supporters, whose archive the Hebrew Bible is, developed initially in the times of the monarchy in Judah to depict a coming perfect exemplar of the ruling Davidic line, all of whom were anointed as king. (“Messiah” means “anointed.”) The expected exemplary “Son of David” was understood to have several key characteristics: he posseses great power and rulership over all things awarded to him by God, Who considered him His Son; and (in an apparently leter development) he undergoes expiatory suffering in the place of and for the sake of his people (seen especially in the Suffering Servant in Isaiah). This ideal finds expression and further development particularly in the New Testament, after which this initial understanding is overshadowed by Christian theological development in a different direction, though with the beginnings of that development already present in various New Testament texts (most notably the “high Christology” found in the Gospel of John and in the letters of Paul and his co-authors).

❧

On the Confusion of “Canon”

The following post is extracted from a small notebook of mine that I used to carry around in my bookbag precisely in order to capture such thoughts that were stimulated by my reading or conversations. This entry, germane to John Hobbins’ Thinking About Canon conversation, was written 21 August 1999, beginning at 3:25 pm, at home. I have edited the original slightly, expanding abbreviations and such, and bringing the whole more in line with my current thoughts on the subject, deleting some extraneous, distracting passages along the way.

On the Confusion of “Canon”
There are two approaches:
1.) The canon is that of my church tradition only.
2.) The canon is that of all the churches: it includes every work that every tradition holds in its canon.

The second is purely my own ideal, but one that I think is valid philosophically, ecumenically, and kindly. To reject a book held sacred by another church is to reject that church. Whether one accepts that all of these are the Body of Christ or not, one cannot ignore them or their practices, traditions, arts and their canon. The result of learning the canons of the churches has been, for me, often surprising, and always enlightening. And that’s simply at the current stage of history! Seeing in older writings various other books being accepted in various traditions and in various ways adds yet another dimension (or layer of confusion!) to the understanding.

I can see several approaches, all of which require a certain amount of dilgence:
1.) Extreme familiarity with ALL the books is required.
2.) Doctrinal arguments, in seeking scriptural referents, should seek them only in that group of books which is common to all (basically the Protestant canon of 39 OT/27 NT books).
3.) Books which we still possess (sadly, so many have been lost) and which at one time were held to be canonical, should be included in some way. Also, some books were approved for reading (church or private), though not canonized, and these too should be included in some fashion. Then, too, various manuscripts of the Bible include various books not usually canonical, and yet there they are! These, too, must play a role.
4.) I think that three levels are called for:
1.} Canonical—which refers to that canon with which one is most familiar in the church to which one belongs.
2.} Deutero-canonical, which is—all the various writings that are currently held canonical in other churches than one’s own.
3.} Trito-canonical—all the various writings which we still possess that were once canonical, or that were “recommended reading,” or that appear in biblical manuscripts.
To simplify:
1.) (Primary) Canon
2.) Secondary Canon
3.) Esteemed Books
(“Secondary Canon” is perhaps preferable to “deutero-canon” as the latter is already in use with a specific meaning already in place.)
or:
1.) My Canon
2.) Our Canon
3.) Their Canon

Now, all this leads to a very large number of books! 39 + 12 + 27 = 78, and this is simply the number of Old Testament + Apocrypha + New Testament books in the Ecumenical NRSV (not counting additions: Esther, Psalm 151, Letter of Jeremiah [included as chapter 6 of Baruch], Daniel [Prayer/Song, Susanna, Bel & Dragon]). All those are just to begin with! Some others to add are Jubilees and First Enoch (Ethiopian Church, and for Enoch, Jude), Psalms 152 through 155 (some Syrian manuscripts, the Dead Sea Scrolls), First and Second Clement and the Apostolic Constitutions (Coptic Church), Odes of Solomon (some Syrian manuscripts, some Greek manuscripts), either the whole of Second Baruch or the Letter of Baruch (2Bar 78.1–86.1 or 87.1) [not sure about this one—definitely the Letter of Baruch, though], Apocalypse of Peter (formerly popular in the West), The Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas, and probably others.

Along with all these, there is the acknowledged necessity to familiarize oneself with the “literary context” of the Old Testament and New Testament, and thus, one takes up the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Charlesworth) and the New Testament Apocrypha (Schneemelcher) and the Apostolic Fathers (Lightfoot, in a handy edition edited by Harmer, then Holmes). All of the above-mentioned works will be found in one or more of those (except the Apostolic Constitutions, which can be found in the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, translated by William Whiston, edited by Donaldson; I may, or rather, I intend to produce a new, modern English translation of the Apostolic Constitutions, the lack of which is perplexing). Though such a wealth of reading is a daunting task, think of the rewards one finds upon gaining a deeper understanding and appreciation not only for this body of various writings, but also, and perhaps especially more importantly, for one’s fellow Christian in addition to oneself, for one will find beliefs held dear in these writings. Though one may also shy away from reading “apocryphal” books, and may not accept, say, a Syrian Orthodox or Ethiopian Tawahedo Christian as a brother, that does not mean that such an attitude is correct. This whole “I am, they’re not” attitude is not a pearl before swine, but rather something falling immediately behind the swine (let the reader understand!).

I think I like: Canon, Secondary Canon, Esteemed Books. Nice order, and quite clear.

❧