FINDING BIBLE TRUTH - THE 'WRITINGS'

Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Chronicles.

PSALMS.

Both Jewish and Christian tradition for a long time attributed the Book of Psalms to David, in the same way as the whole of the Pentateuch was attributed to Moses. However it is clear that they were written over a long period of time and by a large number of individuals. Some, probably from Israel use Elohim, others from Judah use Jehovah. David is mentioned in connection with some seventy- three psalms but some of these were clearly written after the building of the Temple by Solomon. The phrase "A psalm of David" in the superscription to a Psalm most probably implies that it was part of a collection made in David's time.

The theological value placed on the Psalms will depend on whether you consider them directly inspired, or regard them as the works of praise, of prayer or the hopes of men. Direct inspiration would mean that God calmly and deliberately set out to write fulsome praises of himself, a proposition that most would find unacceptable.

Psalms are widely quoted in the New Testament, sometimes to offer confirmation that Christ was the forecast Jewish Messiah, however the true significance of the words at the time of writing is often impossible to determine today. The first lines of Psalm 101 is : 'The LORD (YHWH/Jehovah) said to my Lord (Adonai), "Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool"'. Adonai is sometimes used as a synonym for God, sometimes as referring to anyone to whom an extra-ordinary degree of respect is due (such as Kings or Judges). In the latter sense the Psalm plainly does no more than speak of a Messiah who would be treated as a Priest (the `order of Melchizedek' implies a priest who is not a Levite). If Adonai is translated as God, the extract can be interpreted as meaning that the Messiah would be a God. In Mark 12:36 Christ toys with some of his Pharisee questioners and confounds them by playing on the alternative meanings. In the latter sense both Peter and Paul use the psalm to try to show that Christ was the Jewish Messiah.

The Psalms are full of promises that can only be regarded as hopelessly over-optimistic. Look at 34:9-10, 34:16-20, 37:3-5, 41:1-3, 50:15, 55:22-23, 145:16, 146:7-9 etc, etc.

* * * *

PROVERBS.

Like Psalms the Book of Proverbs, although attributed to Solomon, represents a collection made over a period of time from different sources. Solomon may indeed have started the collection, but most certainly did not write them all. One section (22:17-24:22) shows a close relationship to an old Egyptian papyrus, "The Instruction of Amenemope", other sections are headed "Words of Agur" and "Instruction of Lemuel". The viewpoint of Proverbs is almost entirely secular and is complacent and elitist: The wise constitute a select nurtured by inheritance, training, and self-discipline; hunger, poverty, and slavery are the fate of the lazy. In a different vein Man's destiny is said to depend entirely upon his own actions.

Again like Psalms, the over-optimism and plain inaccuracy of many verses makes it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to ascribe them to the perfect wisdom of God.

* * * *

JOB.

Traditionally JOB is said to have been written by Moses, reporting events that occurred around 1650 BC, but for this there is no evidence whatsoever. Archaic language and the respect shown to Edomites shows that the prose part of the work, recounting the basic legend, (the prologue in Ch 1 and 2 and the epilogue in 42:7-17) were written very early and the eighth century BC has been suggested. The prologue is followed by a poetic section which presents a radically different Job, an anguished and violently indignant sufferer rather than a patient and loyal servant. This section is said to show a literary dependence on Jeremiah and is considered by scholars to be a much later addition.

Whatever the period and whoever the author may have been, JOB is a most powerfully and often beautifully written exposition of how men should react to inexplicable and undeserved misfortune. The more critical may wonder how Satan, who supposedly has already brought death and sin upon mankind, is allowed is allowed to persecute Job, even to the extent of killing all his children and his servants. Perhaps the Book of Job is best treated as pure allegory.

* * * *

THE SONG OF SONGS.

The book was put together after the Babylonian Exile perhaps as late as the 3rd century BC but the poems in it may date from the 10th century BC. It is not generally considered probable that Solomon himself had any responsibility for it although it has traditionally been attributed to him.

The book comprises a collection of love poems alternatively spoken by a man and a woman. There are various (somewhat unlikely) interpretations of the book - an allegory of God's love for the Israelites, a popular Hebrew drama, songs associated with the practice of sacred marriage as observed by the Sumerians and other ancient Mesopotamian peoples - but the most common scholarly view is simply that the Song of Solomon is a collection of secular love poems without any religious implications.

* * * *

RUTH.

Ruth is a fine short story about a traditional heroine. Whenever written it certainly has to be grounded on a solid core of fact, for no one would have invented a Moabite ancestress for David, Israel's greatest king. It is significant because the heroine is non-Hebrew and its inclusion in the canon indicates a softening of the 5th century narrowness of Ezra and Nehemiah and offers a welcome to converts to Judaism.

* * * *

LAMENTATIONS.

Consists of five poems (chapters) in the form of laments for Judah and Jerusalem when they were invaded and devastated by the Babylonians in 586 BC, for the sufferings of the population, and for the poet himself during and after the catastrophe. Traditionally attributed to Jeremiah but the content and style argue against this.

* * * *

ECCLESIASTES.

Although traditionally associated with Solomon all the internal evidence points to a date in the late 4th or early 3rd century BC. The writer demonstrates a religious scepticism that rejects all facile answers to life's mysteries and God's ways, and offers a fatalistic philosophy of a day-to-day acceptance of such small pleasures as God offers. Jewish tradition records that it was so contrary to the spirit of the earlier Old Testament books that the rabbis originally sought to suppress the book, and that it was only the belief that it was written by Solomon that gained it acceptance.

* * * *

ESTHER.

A lively and patriotic tale, probably dating from the 2nd century AD, recording a story from around 480 BC. It has no apparent religious message or purpose and God is not mentioned in it. It was presumably included in the Hebrew canon to explain how the festival of PURIM came into existence. There is some internal evidence that the stories related in Esther actually came from Persian sources as a Judaised version of a story of the shrewdness of a harem queen. Purim itself has been said to reflect the adoption of the Persian New Year festival. The Roman Catholic canon includes six chapters that are considered apocryphal by Jews and Protestants.

* * * *

DANIEL.

The figure of Daniel arouses great controversy. Some Churches regard him as a figure of the utmost importance, others as no more than the author of dubious prophesy and overblown Apocalypsy. Ezekiel (a contemporary) rates him alongside Noah and Job as an example of great righteousness, however, other than in Ezekiel and the book attributed to Daniel he is unknown in the Old Testament. In the New Testament he is almost ignored as an individual but some of his images are re-used. The Book of Daniel is not part of the Jewish Canon of the Prophets (where Ezekiel is included) which includes such post-Exile figures such as Haggai and Zechariah. This could be because the book was not considered authentic or, more likely, because it had not yet been written. The Jewish writer Ben Sira (c.180 BC) does not mention Daniel among the extant literature.

From the evidence of Ezekiel it may be assumed that Daniel was a real individual, whose deeds were highly regarded during the Exile. It is probably reasonable to consider that the biographical detail in Daniel has some truth, and that descriptions of his influence with Nebuchadnezzar have some basis in fact. Whether the details are acceptable is a different matter; for example the story of Bel and the Dragon, accepted by the Roman Church, gives a substantially different tale of Daniel in the Lion's Den. The translation of the Bible into Greek by Theodotion uses a somewhat different version of Daniel.

Serious difficulties arise in trying to decide when the book itself was written. There are some inaccuracies in the text, there are problems with names; Darius was a successor of Cyrus to the Persian throne, not of Belshazzar (or Nabonides); Belshazzar was the son of Nabonides, not of Nebuchadnezzar, and acted as Regent in the absence of Nabonides; Cambyses, Cyrus's son, took over Babylon not Darius. 3:5 refers to musical instruments which are thought not to have appeared until the 2nd century BC, there are anachronistic Greek words in the text, usage of the word Chaldeans is also said to be anachronistic. Errors such as these would not occur in a contemporary account. Finally the later chapters of the book have no message for contemporary readers. Part of the book, dealing with the dream interpretations of Nebuchadnezzor, was probably first written down fairly early, perhaps in the 5th century BC, but the view of most Biblical scholars is that the rest is much later, perhaps written in the latter half of the 2nd century BC (see also the article on Prophesy), and that its purpose was to persuade 2nd century readers to accept Daniel as an authentic prophet.

The probable source of the error in naming Darius as taking over Babylon is instructive. In the reign of Darius 1 in Persia (522-486 BC) and some twenty-five or more years after Cyrus had taken the city, there was a rebellion in Babylon , led by a man named Nidintu-Bel, who took the name of Nebuchadrezzar and called himself King,. Darius put down the rebellion, recaptured Babylon, and executed Nidintu-Bel. At this time the real Daniel would have been well over ninety, which would make the stories of his life and promotion under Darius lack any credibility. However, even if this is disregarded the confusion between the taking of the city by Cyrus and its capture by Darius could not have occured in a contemporary account.

* * * *

EZRA.

Ezra was a priest/scribe who, returning from Babylon with a commission from the Persian king, became the religious leader of the Jews in the latter half of the 5th century BC.

The commission came from 'Ataxerxes' , this was almost certainly Ataxerxes I. His return could have been in 458 by which time some eighty years had passed since the initial return from Babylon in 538 BC and religious observance and discipline had fallen to a low ebb. The Book of Ezra tells of his return to Jerusalem and of his immediate action in condemning the practice of taking foreign wives. Jewish tradition says that he carried out many other reforms, effectively restoring the Law of the Torah, and he has been called the Father of post- exilic Judaism. He is also traditionally credited with writing - or directing the writing - of Chronicles and is one of the main contenders for the role of redactor of the Pentateuch. In the apocryphal book of Ezra4 it is claimed that Ezra with five scribes wrote ninety-four books "everything that has happened in the world from the beginning, the things which were written in thy law" of which only twenty-four were to be made public.

* * * *

NEHEMIAH.

In the Jewish canon Ezra and Nehemiah form a single Book, and it is clear that they have the same author (and highly probable that the same author wrote Chronicles). It cannot be determined with certainty whether or not Ezra and Nehemiah were contemporaries as the true chronological sequence of events cannot be decided from the text, however their works and reforms are plainly complementary.

Ataxerxes I appointed Nehemiah in about 445 BC as Governor of Judea. Clearly a man of great character and determination he rebuilt Jerusalem's walls and defences against strong opposition from Judah's neighbours, and either with or as a forerunner to Ezra, restored Judah's spiritual integrity.

* * * *

CHRONICLES.

Chronicles provides a parallel account of Hebraic history from Adam to post-exilic Judah, borrowing heavily from Samuel and Kings, but leaving clear marks of the author's own Judaic and priestly interests and prejudices. It is primarily a history of Judah - after the separation in the time of Rehoboam Israel is scarcely mentioned except as an enemy. David and Solomon are glorified and their defects ignored or glossed over. The activities of the priesthood are covered in considerable detail, but the Prophets get little or no attention. Currently the consensus among scholars is that it was written, along with the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah in the period 350-300 BC (although this seems very late).

* Return to HOME