Pentateuch Christopher T. Begg, Lorenzo A. Tosco CSJ, Isaac Kalimi, and David A. Bosworth 1553. [Genesis 1–Leviticus 26] Paavo N. Tucker, The Holiness Composition of the Book of Exodus (FAT 2.98; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017). Pp. ix + 230. Paper €79. ISBN 978-3-16-155198-1. Ever since the third quarter of the 19th century, there has been a recurrent discussion in pentateuchal scholarship concerning the relationship between and relative dating of the Holiness Code (H, Leviticus 17–26) and the P materials in Genesis–Exodus. In this revision of his 2016 Asbury Theological Seminary dissertation (B. T. Arnold, director), T. revisits the question in monographic form. Following a review of the relevant scholarship of the last 150+ years, he devotes a chapter to showing how the opening P text in Genesis, 1:1–2:4a functions as a "Holiness Preamble," which, along with the other key P texts of Genesis (9:1-17; 17:1-27), serves to set up the requirements of H regarding Israel's call to holiness as exemplified above all in the observance of the Sabbath. In this same chapter, T. also endeavors to refute claims that P and H exhibit divergences on such matters as land ownership and covenant as well as profane versus sacred slaughter and Passover instructions. In his following two chapters, T. then works through the generally recognized P materials in Exodus 1–14 and 16–40, respectively, seeking to show that these materials have the same function of setting up and motivating the teaching of Leviticus 17–26 as do the above-cited P texts of Genesis. For T. it thus results that the P materials in Genesis–Exodus and the complex of Leviticus 17–26 are the work of the same author(s) and as such are most appropriately designated as the "H composition." The author(s) of that composition incorporated into his/their work a variety of pre-existing materials of both a narrative (e.g., Exodus 19–24*, 32–34*) and a ritual (e.g., the "manuals" of Leviticus 1–7 and 11–15) nature. Subsequently, the H Composition itself underwent amplifications that gave it a more explicitly priestly/cultic character, highlighting as they do, e.g., the preeminence of the Aaronides within Israel's polity.—C.T.B. 1554. [Gen 1:1–2:4a] Jean L'Hour, Genèse 1–2,4a: Commentaire (ÉBib 71; Leuven/Paris/Bristol, CT: Peeters, 2016). Pp. iv + 267. Paper €76. ISBN 978-90-429-3412-2. This work is a detailed study of what L. calls the "priestly Credo of creation." The first three chapters address general questions, concerning the cultural environment, the origin, and the literary characteristics of Genesis 1. L. points out the relationship of the biblical text to the cosmogonies of the ANE, while also insisting on its specificity, including the radical reversal of mythical thinking: nature is not divine, and humans, who are not a necessary evil but the climax of God's work, have total responsibility for their destiny and history. The chapter's present text may have developed in stages but was composed and then redacted by the same circle of priestly writer(s) who were influenced by the prophetic (especially Deutero-Isaiah) and wisdom traditions. From a literary perspective, no matter what its origin, Genesis 1 shows a remarkable overall architecture, even though its precise structure is debated. The various proposed structurings of the chapter (that climax on the 6th day) all have advantages but also difficulties. It could be then that the chapter's "architecture moulable reflects a variety of autonomous traditional themes" (p. 43), which is a recognized characteristic of the Priestly style. In terms of genre, Genesis 1 may well be a literary hapax, a sort of "liminary confession" that serves as a guide to reading the whole book of Genesis as well as the whole Torah. Chaps. 5 and 6 are dedicated to vv. 1-2. Besides being a "faith [End Page 527] confession," v. 1 is also a title, synthesizing the work of creation that follows. V. 2 presents the uncreated "earth" as something not orderly and not functioning, the contrary...
Read full abstract