Thursday, March 1, 2012

SECSOR 2012 Handout

Tomorrow I leave for Atlanta to attend the SECSOR conference. I've noted a couple of times the paper that I am presenting there this year (but mainly here, where you can read the abstract). One of the positive things that came out of yesterday's graduate seminar (not that there were any negative things!), where I previewed my paper, was my realization (based on a comment from Nathan Daily) that I needed a handout.

So, here it is:

The End of the Bible? The Position of Chronicles in the Canon
Edmon L. Gallagher
Heritage Christian University
SECSOR 2012, Atlanta
Is our Bible supposed to end with Chronicles?
Internal Arguments
Georg Steins, Die Chronik als kanonisches Abschlussphänomen: Studien zur Entstehung und Theologie von 1/2 Chronik, BBB 93 (Weinheim: Beltz, 1995).
Julius Steinberg, Die Ketuvim: Ihr Aufbau und ihre Botschaft, BBB 152 (Hamburg: Philo, 2006).
Stephen Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty: A Theology of the Hebrew Bible (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2004), chs. 1–2.
  1. Chronicles echoes Genesis and other parts of the Torah, making it an appropriate conclusion to the Bible, thus giving the Bible a symmetrical structure.
  2. Chronicles recapitulates the entire sweep of biblical history, making it an appropriate conclusion to the Bible.
  3. Chronicles is misread as simply a supplement and/or expansion of Samuel-Kings when it is placed immediately after them, in accordance with the Greek order.
External Arguments
For: Roger T. Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and Its Background in Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985).
Against: John Barton, Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel after the Exile (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1986).
  1. Sirach Prologue: “Law, Prophets, Other Books”
  2. b. B. Bathra 14b: order of Ketuvim, concluding with Chronicles
  3. Matt. 23:35 // Luke 11:51: “blood of Abel [Gen. 4] to the blood of Zechariah [2 Chron. 24]”
Possible pre-rabbinic references to a tripartite canon: Prologue to Sirach, 4QMMT C 10, Philo, On the Contemplative Life 25; Luke 24:44; Josephus, C. Ap. 1.37–43.
References employing a bipartite formula (‘Law and Prophets’):
Qumran: 1QS 1.2–3; 8.12–16; CD 7.15–17; 4QDibHama 3.12–13
New Testament: Matt. 5:17; 7:12; 11:13 (// Luke 16:16); 22:40; Luke 16:29–31; 24:27; John 1:45; Acts 13:15; 24:14; 26:22; 28:23; Rom. 3:21.
Apocrypha: 2 Macc. 15:9; 4 Macc. 18:10.
Tannaitic literature: Sifre Deut. 21.18; m. R.H. 4.6; m. Meg. 4.1, 3, 4; t. B. Metzia 11.23; t. Terumoth 1.10. [Contrast t. R.H. 4.6, which has a tripartite formula.]
Current Hagiographa once among the Prophets?
            Daniel: 4Q174 1–3 II, 3–4; Matt. 24:15; Josephus, A.J. 9.267–69; b. Meg. 15a
            David: 11QPsa 27.3–11; Acts 2:25–31; Josephus, A.J. 8.109–10; b. Sotah 48b
            Solomon: Sifre Deut. 1.1; b. Sotah 48b
            Mordecai: b. Meg. 15a (cf. Barton, Oracles of God, 40–41)
Alternative orders:
            Melito of Sardis, end II CE (apud Eus., Hist. eccl. 4.26.12–14)
            Origen, early III CE (apud Eus., Hist. eccl. 6.25.1–2)

No comments: