Literary Forms/Techniques & Methods of Study

Abstract

Literary Forms/Techniques & Methods of Study Thomas Hieke, Christopher T. Begg, and Paul R. Redditt 85. David Tuesday Adamo, "The Extent to which [the] OTSSA Journal (OTE) Reflects the Indigenous African Culture and Tradition from 2001-2016," OTE 31 (2018) 42-65. This article examines the journal cited in its title for the period in question in order to determine the extent to which articles published in the journal reflect indigenous African culture and tradition. In carrying out his investigation, A. examines each volume of OTE available to him for the above years to ascertain the percentage of articles published in each that do reflect that perspective. Even though OTSSA is an African organization and its journal belongs to and is published [End Page 27] in Africa by Africans who live in Africa, can one, A. asks, truly say that it exemplifies African OT studies as compared with Eurocentric OT studies? At a time when scholars all over the world are taking seriously the indigenous approach to the study of the Bible (OT), can one, A. further asks, truly say that OTE is taking African OT studies or African contextual approaches seriously? The objective of A.'s article in raising these questions is basically to challenge OT scholars who, irrespective of color, have the advantage of living, studying, and lecturing in Africa to take African OT studies seriously. [Adapted from published abstract—C.T.B.] 86. Aryeh Amihay, "Biblical Myths and the Inversion Principle; A Neoconstructionist Approach," JBL 137 (2018) 555-79. The postmodern turn in the humanities is now at a point that requires response and revision to certain deconstructionist trends. As a case study, A's article examines the inversion principle formulated by Claude Lévi-Strauss vis-à-vis Yair Zakovitch's analysis of mirror narratives on the basis of three examples. In the first example, the mirror narratives of two destructions in Genesis are shown to be better explained by the inversion principle. A.'s second example considers aspects of the Mesopotamian flood hero Utnapishtim that have been divided in subsequent Jewish traditions between Enoch and Noah. The third example focuses the transformation of the myth of the sacrificial son in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. These three examples lead A. to the following conclusions: (1) that other myths, particularly in Genesis, should be reconsidered in light of the inversion principle; (2) that the principle is crucial for the reception history of narratives as seen in the development of the protagonist of the flood narrative in Second Temple Judaism; and (3) that intentional adaptations are also susceptible to the subconscious changes that occur in the intercultural journeys of myth, as described by Lévi-Strauss. [Adapted from published abstract—P.L.R.] 87. [Exodus 2; 1 Kings 22] Collin Cornell, "Brevard Childs and the Treasures of Darkness," Scottish Journal of Theology 71 (2018) 33-51. Contemporary biblical studies is populated by "comparativists" and "theological interpreters," i.e., by scholars who read the Bible either in the context of ancient artefacts or in that of Christian theology. These camps relate to one another mostly by feuding—or by mutual avoidance. The late OT theologian Brevard Childs is usually taken as a champion of the theological interpretation approach, and hence as reinforcing one side of the disciplinary divide. Under certain conditions, however, Childs advocated a use of ancient artefacts ("the treasures of darkness") in reading Scripture theologically. C.'s article seeks to reactivate this latter possibility within Childs's interpretative program on the basis of two case studies: the first by Childs himself when he uses the Sargon legend to interpret Exodus 2; and the second a reprise of Childs's approach using the Mesha inscription to interpret 1 Kings 22. [Adapted from published abstract—C.T.B.] 88. Philip R. Davies, "Literary-Historical Exegesis as a Social Science," Scripture as Social Discourse, 29-36 [see #716]. In this essay, D. is especially interested in the contributions that both archaeology and the sociological subdiscipline of "social memory" can make to exegetical scholarship [End Page 28] concerning ancient Israel and the ideological construction of "Israel" in the Hebrew Bible. Like many others...