Although comparative studies of Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah and Jubilees are relatively few, the fact is that all three texts consciously interact with earlier, authoritative writings or contemporaneous writings that came to be known as authoritative, especially in the legal realm. Written near the midpoint of the Second Temple period, these three texts express a level of halakhic concern as they regularly invoke legal precedent, and at times they put forward instruction that appears sui generis. That is, the instruction expressed appears nowhere in any contemporaneous code of Israelite law or custom. Such rewriting of authoritative traditions often prompts an analysis of the text along political lines, although there are other factors that deserve consideration. One goal of this study is to adduce additional frameworks within which to consider inventive legal writing as one de-centers the political reading of these texts and focuses on other literary features. A related goal is to align examples of authorizing discourse that are common to Chronicles, Esra-Nehemiah and Jubilees and subject them to comparative analysis without rushing to judgment on questions of literary dependence. A third goal is to begin to delineate a hermeneutics of rewriting in the Second Temple period informed by groupings of texts that are aligned in terms of their legal language and contextually as well; in Neh 8 and Jub. 15–16 the accounts of Sukkot provide an intriguing comparison between experiences of human joy that authorise the respective narratives.

Franz Delitzsch is well-known as a profound specialist in and a defender of Judaism in late 19th-century Germany. However, the conservative Lutheran theologian, who interpreted biblical texts always also with regard to Jewish philology, was convinced of the mission to Jews and oscillated between contradictory notions of Judaism. His mainly christological biases, far more complex than evidently antisemitic prejudices of other theologians of his time, are a challenge for research. The paper shortly points out the main steps of Delitzschs view of Judaism along with his biography as reconstructed by recent research. With regard to selected current evaluations of his heritage, it identifies hermeneutical issues important for the general debate about antisemitism in Protestant exegesis.

This paper will consider how discussions of the »new Exodus« motif in Isaiah scholarship reflect the lasting effects of typological and supersessionist interpretations of the book of Isaiah. Firstly, this essay addresses that the majority of scholars who suggested that there is a »new Exodus« in Second Isaiah (40–55) construct a typological and supersessionist relationship between the »new« and the »old« Exodus. Looking at Isa 40 and 43, I compare approaches that argue for a typological relationship with the Exodus traditions and compare them with approaches that do not overemphasize the Exodus traditions in Second Isaiah. I suggest that alternative approaches to Isaiahs poetics which allow the texts literary tensions to remain unresolved are inherently opposed to the way in which Isaiah has been interpreted from »new Exodus« approaches. Therefore, these alternative approaches to Isaiahs poetics present not only more careful readings of Isaiah, but also function heuristically as a corrective against the legacy of supersessionist readings of Isaiah.

Hermann Gunkel (1862–1932) was an important representative of the so-called »Religionsgeschichtliche Schule,« and in his works he broke new ground in the study of the Hebrew Bible, for example, in the development of the form-critical method, the comparative exploration of creation and end-time concepts, and the interpretation of the books of Genesis and Psalms. Although well trained in historical criticism, Gunkels reconstructions and evaluations of ancient Judaism depended significantly on his personal views on Judaism and on his German nationalism. Gunkel changed his perspective several times over the course of his scholarly career, but he could never completely free himself of the Protestant supersessionism of his time, particularly pertaining to the field of biblical scholarship.

This article responds to the papers included in this volume of HeBAI. In general, the article argues that it is indeed timely and important to study Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah amid early Jewish literature. It furthermore agrees that the siloing of texts based on their later reception history should be challenged. Although the various later (biblical) canons played and continue to play important roles in their relevant communities of faith, and for both biblical theological thought and for academic studies of such thought, these later canons should not impact the way in which historians of early and late Second Temple period should reconstruct the history of their periods, including the ideological discourse and textual repertoires of the relevant communities. This contribution focuses on how each of the essays included in the volume, each in its own way, advances, exemplifies, and raises questions for further thought and for comparative studies of texts, books, and sets of books that cut across the existing silos.

This essay is a comparative study, on the portrayal of priests and Levites in Ezra-Nehemiah, Chronicles, and a few selected Qumran texts. Based on the idea that texts are relational, which includes that the social memory of Second Temple literati and audiences linked texts and concepts with one another, I decided to place texts across the boundaries of genres and origins in conversation with one another. I selected a few Qumran texts with references to kohen, and h-leviim to compare with Ezra-Nehemiah and Chronicles. I had a look at how these persons were portrayed or described in these texts, their roles, responsibilities, and privileges. I also tried to see if any persons and/or groups were chosen or promoted by these aspects. Conversations between texts across boundaries can assist in noting commonalities but especially help us to realise how the intertextual and social memory of the Second Temple literati influenced and created texts.