Survey of The Bible

7/31/2019 Bible Survey 3: The Historical Books & Prophets, pt.
Survey of the Bible

Class 3: The Historical Books & Prophets, pt. 1
Paul Burkhart
PART 1: The Gospel
The Apostle’s Creed
We believe in God, the Father Almighty,

creator of heaven and earth.
We believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord,

who was conceived by the Holy Spirit
and born of the virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended into hell.
The third day He arose again from the dead.
He ascended
and is seated to heaven
at the right hand of God the Father Almighty.
from there he will come to judge the living and the dead.
We believe in the Holy Spirit,

the holy catholic church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.
This is our identity. In short, the early Christians would have said that if it’s
not in this creed, we can feel free to disagree about it and still consider
one another Christians. Our identity is not , first and foremost, what we
believe about the Bible, as important as that is. So we should be
generous, thoughtful, gracious, and charitable to brothers and sisters with
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bible-survey-3-the-historical-books-prophets-pt-1 1/36
7/31/2019 Bible Survey 3: The Historical Books & Prophets, pt. 1
The Books
Joshua
Moses having died, the last of the former generation has died and so the
new generation can now enter the Promised Land under the leadership of
the new leader, Joshua.
Content:
Four main sections: some introductory transitional speeches from Moses

to Joshua, stories about a swift and comprehensive conquest of the
Promised Land and in their indigenous peoples, reports about how the
Israelites went about settling in the land, and then a few final pieces of
story.
This conquest section is also in three sections: an account of the takeover

of three large cities (Jericho, Ai, and Gibeon), the crossing of the Jordan
river (in similar fashion as the Red Sea), and then an account of smaller
cities taken by the Israelites. Before each of these three big city battles,
there is a little story preceding it. The story of Rahab intros the destruction
of Jericho, the story of Achan precedes Ai (he's the guy who hoards some
plunder and the Israelites lose battles until he is found out and he and his
family are killed), and, before the last story of the defeat of a coalition of
five kings, the Israelites are tricked into exempting the Gibeonites from
conquest (but he still enslaves them).
The last section is a series of confusing endings, each of which offers

more problems to be solved in the rest of the Old Testament. The book
ends with the Israelites at Shechem where they commit themselves to the
Moab covenant that Moses had set up in Deuteronomy.
Background:
• Wow, is this book complex.
• The Septuagint, the Old Testament of the New Testament writers, is
significantly different than the Hebrew versions that we base our
translations on today. Our version is 4 to 5% longer and many verses
are very different. Further, in the Dead Sea Scrolls, even more
variations of this book are found.
• The book, therefore, looks like it has gone through a complex history
of additions, subtractions, and editing.
◦ There are parts that are unnecessarily repeated
◦ There are several unnecessary endings to the book.
◦ Otherwise coherent sections of narrative are broken up by
random seemingly-unrelated bits of poetry, story, etc.
◦ There are cities they end up, including the major city Shechem
in which they ratify Mose's covenant together after everything
is done, that are not mentioned anywhere else in the book.
How they got there is never talked about.
◦ Chronological and geographical markers don't make sense
and are contradictory.
◦ There are Kings that are talked about being conquered in
Joshua that pop up in Judges as if they were never conquered.
◦ The book can't seem to decide whether or not Israelites had
taken the land or not, if they are obedient or not.
• These books (primarily Joshua) cause lots of problems to our
modern ethical sensibilities. More conservative pastors and
theologians have articulated a whole range of justifications for
Yahweh's decrees, to declare them just. But still, modern atheism
clings to this book more than others to show how religion only
causes destruction. Further, this depiction of Yahweh appears
contradictory to God as he is most authoritatively and clearly
revealed in Jesus. Yet again, conservative pastors and theologians
have tried to show how this is not contradictory, yet something in us
still cries foul (See Excursus at bottom). Well, I have good news and
bad news:
◦ Good news: the is virtually zero archaeological evidence that
any of these things actually happened in history.
■ Concerning the three main cities mentioned in the book:
Jericho shows signs of being destroyed and having a
wall fall down a thousand years before Israelites ever got
there. Gibeon shows no signs of foreign occupation
during this period. And Ai was only a small village, and
didn't even pop-up until well after the Israelites were
around. Most of the rest of the cities either show no
record of having ever existed at all, or show normal
migration and settlement patterns and conflicts not
specific to the Israelites.
◦ Bad news: this challenges some of our ideas of the Bible. We

need to remember:
■ These things were written later
■ They were compiled/written after the exile by a victimized
people who had just gotten their land back.
■ They were written with specific agendas in mind that
were much bigger than conveying history.
Purpose/Identity Formation:
• Yahweh will go to great lengths for the singular goal of getting his
people home.
• The land is the tangible representation of God’s work for his people.
• Even here, we see the people begin to falter in their commitments to
Yahweh. This is supposed to hint at their need for a king, and how
they will live without one (Judges will flesh this out more clearly).
• There are three main emphases in Joshua: possession of the land,
obedience to the commands of Moses, and annihilation of the
peoples of that land. These were the usual marks of a specific
community in the ancient world: possession of territory, proper
religious observance, and ethnic separation.
◦ Through the story, each of these markers is affirmed and
compromised. By the end, there is only one thing that the
Israelites can base their identity on: the covenant of Yahweh,
specifically, the Moab covenant of Deuteronomy, which most
clearly points towards the New Testament and Jesus. The
book, therefore, subtly subverts claims of divine sanction for
the violence found int he book.
Interesting Bits:
• The Jordan river story interrupts the Jericho military campaign very
abruptly.
• In the last chapter, in the famous "choose this day whom you will
serve" section. The Israelites respond "We will serve Yahweh!"
Joshua replies, "You cannot serve Yahweh, and you won't!" This is
written by people that knew what was coming and was
foreshadowing it already.
Jesus/New Testament:
They ended up settling in the coastal areas, not being able to move
inland very far.
• There is a belief that, similar to ancient Greek and Roman tribal
associations, this group referring to themselves as "Israel" were
actually different ethnic peoples that gathered around central places
of worship (as it seems the city of Shechem is in Joshua, and Shiloh
is later on). Each "tribe" would take turns caring for the tabernacle on
a monthly basis, which is why most all of these groups would consist
of either 6 or 12 tribes (like Israel). It is thought that is why--even in
spite of many impracticalities and issues that arise--Israel is
insistent that they must keep 12 tribes--no less, no more. At the end
of Judges, this is why they stop in their destruction of the smallest
tribe, Benjamin: not because they're merciful, or think that they've
learned their lesson, but because they don't want to go to less than
12 tribes. This might also be why the Israelites split Joseph's tribe into
two for their apportionment of the land, to make up for the tribe of
Levi not having one for themselves.
• The point of the book: without a King, people will do what's right in
their eyes, which is what is evil in the eyes of Yahweh. The people
need a good king, in order to follow Yahweh. A King like… Josiah!
• The Israelites (and indeed all of humanity) seem to have a “soul-
gravity” that, apart from a stronger force acting in the opposite
direction, will move ever more downward into rebellion against
Yahweh and his covenant.
Interesting Bits:
• In the Samson story, the people don't cry out, nor does the land
have rest.
• Samson’s famous wife, Delilah, is actually a Philistine, a member of
the very people he’s trying to clear out. This shows his duality and
weakness, marrying a Philistine on one hand, while trying to kill them
on the other. He is trying to serve two masters, getting what he
wants.
• In the section recounting Judge who were triumphal, but still
“unnatural”, we you have a “left-handed” Judge and a female Judge.
• At the risk of sounding too allegorical, one could point out how the
ultimate enemy inhabitant of our "land" as God's people are no ethnic
group, but sin and death itself. And these enemies have been
conquered by our true and perfect Judge, Jesus.
• Samson ultimately takes death on himself in order to try and save his
people.
• Similar to Joshua, this book is a clear apologetic for the need we
have as humans for a flesh-and-blood leader. An abstract, high-in-
the-sky God as King does us no good. We need our kingship to be
exerted in front of us in real, tangible, dirt and sweat kinds of ways.
Application/Why Would You Go Here?:
Primarily, to see the logical conclusion of our hearts. To see what life looks
like when we "have no King", when our "land has no rest", and when we
"do what's right in our eyes." We should see ourselves in this book and our
helpless addiction that cycle. It should leads us to "cry out" for our Judge,
Jesus, longing for him to bring us rest and leadership.
Ruth
In the time of the Judges, amidst all the insanity and instability, there is set
this little story from the Bible. It's the story of a foreign Moabite woman
who casts her lot with the people of God, and through her faithfulness to
Yahweh, finds blessing and hope for her and her family (from which David
will ultimately come)
Content:
This is a story that deals with the royal family line of Israel. The "House of
David." This was super important to ancient people's and this should
explain its place in the Biblical corpus. There's lots of dialogue in Ruth.
This has led many to wonder if Ruth is meant to be an ancient play in four
acts:
Act 1: The Royal Line is put into crisis. Ruth's husband dies, has no sibling
(or other relative) to help Ruth continue the family line. Ruth and her sister-
in-law Naomi commit themselves to one another and the people of God. In
Act 2: We begin
do something to to seeitGod
keep move
going. and
They hope
move tobegins
anothertocity
form that
and God
just might
happen
to stumble across a relative of Ruth's dead husband!
Act 3 surrounds Naomi forming of a scheme and them implementing it to

try and get Boaz to fall for Ruth and take her as his own.
Eventually it works and in Act 4: all is made well as the court ratifies it. The
book ends with that Royal Line written out for all to see.
Background:
• Technically, this isn’t part of the “Deuteronomistic History”. It was
probably written at the time of David, not after the Northern Kingdom
went into exile.
• Ruth was David's great-grandmother. Many scholars believe Ruth to
have been written to justify David's Kingly reign. It describes David's
humble hometown of Bethlehem as a calm oasis and a land of honor
in the midst of the craziness of the Judges. As we'll see, opposition
to David's Kingship lasted, throughout his reign, especially by the
tribe
Davidofwas
Benjamin (where
giving extra Saul had
attention tocome from)tribe--Judah.
his home because they felt that
Many
think this book was written to help assert his rightful and honorable
place as King.
• It's very hard for scholars to know when this book was written. It
contains Hebrew grammar and turns of phrase that, by definition are
ancient and well before the exile, yet many think that it uses other
Aramaic expressions that they wouldn't have been exposed to until
after the exile. Further, there is a local custom involving a sandal in
4:7 that is explained to the reader, meaning it had to have been
written (or at least edited) after a time when people stopped knowing
about this custom on a wide scale. But, it also includes this custom,
implying some connection with the ancient context in which it takes
place.
• Even in the midst of the madness of Judges, God was still working
and moving to care for the future Kingly line.
• David is theDon't
kingly line. resultdoubt
of theGod's
directintention
and Sovereign
to havework to maintain
him be King. a
• Contrary to popular opinion at the time, Bethlehem is an appropriate
place for a Kingly line to come from, no matter it's size. It was at "rest"
even when the rest of the land was not. So stop beating up on
David's hometown!
• Interestingly, Ruth is not an Israelite, but is a Moabite--from a nation
that was frequently at war with Israel. This is one sign that this is not
part of the Deuteronomistic History, because it is a favorable
representation of a foreign woman in the story of Israel.
Interesting Bits:
• There's a weird bedroom scene in the book where Ruth climbs into
Boaz's bedroom and lies down at his feet. This was her way of saying
"Hey, I'm interested in you." Similar to the Shulamite woman in Song
of Solomon, Ruth takes charge in the book, taking the initiative to
make her desires known and pursue Boaz--not desperately, but
intentionally.
• Ruth is one of
theologians the favorite
because of thebooks of the Bible
relationships for study
amongst by feminist
women, how they
are spoken of, how they speak to one another, and how they are
used by God in his plan.
• Jesus is our "kinsman-redeemer". This is one of the most beautiful

parallels to Jesus in the Bible. He is our "kinsman", being referred to
in the New Testament as our Brother and our Redeemer. It's a
beautiful and paradoxical look of how one can--and must--be of us, in
order to save us from certain death.
• This also establishes Bethlehem as the "City of David" from whence
Jesus himself will be born about 1200 years later. Interestingly, Jesus
is also made fun of for his hometown. God brings about amazing
things from smallness and unexpected places.
• To see how the sovereignty of God works.
• To be reminded of the importance of community and close

relationships.
• Yes, there is a happy ending, but a whole lot of unfortunate pain and
suffering is gone through before the "kinsman-redeemer" shows up.
Ruth teaches us patience in the midst of suffering.
• To enjoy a good story.
(1 & 2) Samuel
The books of Samuel (they were originally one book--and still are in the
Hebrew Bible) lay out the events occurring right before Israel became a
monarchy, and what happened those first few decades of the monarchy.
The book is some of the most beautiful narrative theology in the Bible,
containing some of the most formative and significant theological ideas,
but without breaking the flow of the story at all, it seems to explain these
things. The stories are that powerful. (That begin the case, I may err on the
side of a more cursory overview of these books as their contents are both
straightforward and available.)
Content:
Five Acts: (1) Israel needs a King: if you remember, Judges didn't close

out very nicely. It's very unstable and chaotic. The book opens with
Samuel's story, which emphasize how sensitive he is to hearing the word
of the Lord and obeying it. Samuel is Israel's last judge and first "proper"
prophet. He delivers the people from the Philistines before settling in and
faithfully serving in the tabernacle at Shiloh, who's head priest is named
Eli. He's a very bad priest, and, in a way, to foreshadow how God will deal
with Saul, Yahweh rejects Eli as priest and exalts Samuel to replace him.
Then there's a section talking about how Israel lost its most saved object:
the ark of the Covenant. They eventually get it back and feel bad for
disobeying Yahweh, but it serve as a stark reminder of the realities that
come with disobedience.
(2) The reign of Saul: The elders of Israel come to Samuel, and say "Hey,
we're not doing to well without a king like everyone else. Can we have?"
Samuel is mad, because, Yahweh is supposed to be King! He takes this
request to Yahweh, and He obliges, allowing them to have a king, as long
as this is a king Samuel has a few sermons he gives critiquing the idea of a
king, trying got show the Israelites how putting their hope in a king will not
work (foreshadow alert!), the people do not hear this, and God allows a
King. Saul is found, anointed king, and has some victories over the
Philistines. Saul gets cocky and out of impatience waiting for Samuel, he
offers the sacrifice before a battle. At first, God says that Saul's kingly line
would not continue to his son, but after repeated rebellion by Saul, God
says that he needs to be replace now.
(3) The rise of David: Samuel is led to David, a young farmer and poet,

and anoints him king. Now, it gets awkward. Israel has two anointed kings,
and one that doesn't want to give up power. The rest of 1 Samuel, leading
into 2 Samuel talks about this strained transition. At first it's just an
annoyance as David gets more military battles than Saul (as in the case of
Goliath), but eventually Saul becomes obsessed with killing David. David
flees with 600 of his "fighting men", moving further and further from Saul's
capital (Gibeah) and having interesting encounters with others, at one
point living in hiding with the Philistines and fighting with them as
mercenary. Eventually, at the end of 1 Samuel, Saul dies.
(4) The reign of David: 2 Samuel opens up with David finding out about
Saul's death, his mourning. David returns and wins a civil war with Saul's
son. Then, settling in as King, he makes several key changes to the life of
Israel. He makes Jerusalem the new capital city of Israel, builds a palace,
clears the Philistines out of "their" area, and makes some religious reforms
concerning the ark and such. He appoints a priest from the North, Nathan
(where David is not from) and a priest from the South, Gad, (where David is
from and Jerusalem is). Nathan is always shooing down David and calling
him out, while Gad continually offers forgiveness to him. There's a
discussion about how David wants to build the temple, but God say no,
David's son will. Then the story turn to military stuff again, and this is
where David has his affair with Bathsheba. This is looked down on
greatly in the text and David's personal sin breaks forth into sin in his
whole family. His son rapes his half-sister, and his other son kills that son
and then tries to overthrow David, and that son dies. A clearly worn-out
and tragic David has a few more small skirmishes and conflicts, and this
part ends.
(5) A concluding Epilogue: These last four chapters of the book have
pretty random,
emphasize, non-chronological
even stuff thrown
after that tragic ending, Davidatisthe
stillend. It serves
the ideal kingto
of
Israel (it shows how Yahweh's anger is more towards Israel than David,
and has some songs of praise and his last words, and lists of people that
did heroic things under David's reign.
Background:
• Remember, at the end of Judges, the main people Samson is
fighting are the Philistines. As a reminder: they were the part of the
Sea Peoples that came in and started settling in the area, mainly in
around the coast. They popped up around the same time Israel and
both were duking it out for the land. The Philistines were annoying to
everyone in the ancient world at this time. They are complained
about a lot . These are the people that Saul and David spend their
time trying to fight.
• Many scholars believe that the writers of Samuel combined three
previously written documents into this one and then built off of that.
These three documents are considered some of the oldest and finest
pieces of ancient history writing and are thought to have been
written right at or shortly after the events they describe, and so are
considered pretty "literal" history (in the modern sense):
◦ The "Ark Narrative" (1 Samuel 4:1b-7:1)
◦ The "History of David's Rise" (1 Samuel 6:14-2 Samuel 5:25 [or
all the way through chapter7])
◦ The "Court History" (or "Succession Narrative") (2 Samuel
9-20, 1 Kings 1-2)
• This book greatly shapes and articulates Israel's concept of a king.

They are wrestling a lot with this. What is a "good" king under
Yahweh? What will this kingship look like, and how do we decide on
who the king is?
• The book has both positive and negative evaluations of the idea of
kingship. It's a tension it strives to hold well.
• Saul's selection and reign, as Israel's king "training-wheels", coupled

with Samuels' critiques of him helps describe what a true Israel king
should not look like.
Interesting Bits:
• The People and the Priest choose the King. The Prophets are King-
makers and King-Breakers.
◦ There is a caution and ambiguity about the King.
◦ They felt like he was a necessary evil, but came with his own
problems (similar to our debates about State's rights vs.
Federal)
• Twice in the book, the divided Kingdoms of Israel and Judah are
mentioned (even before they have divided!)
• Saul is so weak and passive as a King that many scholars don't even
consider him one. They consider him more like Israel's kingly
"training wheels".
• King & Messiah: In light of the other political structures that were
crumbling all around the Israelites, the King took on a an almost
"savior" quality to it. God promises David that through his seed will
come the most perfect King. The rest of the story shows how this is
highly unlikely in David's own literal kids. And so, anticipation began
rising for this "perfect" King in the line of David.
• Jesus ultimately comes from the line of David.
• Samuel is the first book to contain all three of the divine “offices” of
Jesus: Prophet, Priest, King. In this book, we see what obedient and
disobedient version of these offices look like, hearkening to the
eternal and perfect fulfillment of where these people are lacking.
• A discussion about and reminder that Yahweh is King. Not David.

Not the President. No dictator the world has ever known. Yahweh is
King and to focus your efforts any hopes on political power is to
focus it in the wrong place.
• There is a stress on repentance and forgiveness throughout the
book. The book is full of people repenting or not, and the
consequences they face. This book shows us what it looks like. In

response to his sin, David simply says "I have sinned" and then goes
away to pray. Nathan speaks forgiveness to him.
• David shows us what a very real, human leader looks like who is also
“good”. He models for us a man that screws up time and time again,
and yet is still called a “man after God’s own heart.”
• To be reminded of who God reveals himself, communicates himself,
and accomplishes his purposes, not through propositions, but through
the medium of story .
(1 & 2) Kings
The book of Kings, talks about the monarchical period (simple enough,
right?). Well, this book is where the can get really hard to follow.
It gives Israel’s history from Solomon to when Babylon conquered Judah in

the South (roughly a 350 year span). In the middle section of the two
books of Kings, the story jumps back and forth between these kingdoms.
It can be very confusing. Ultimately, though, this book was written for
Israelites while they were in exile, to tell their story in such a way that (1)
the exile made sense, but (2) Yahweh could also be trusted. And what is
that story? It's your fault for worshipping false gods, and the fault of our
bad kings for leading us there.
Content:
This book has three large sections: (1) Solomon (1 Kings 1-11), (2) the two-
kingdoms (1 Kings 12-2 Kings 17), and (3) just Judah (the Southern
Kingdom) (2 Kings 18-25). The book opens with the building of the temple,
and ends with its destruction.
Section 1 opens with David preparing to move things over to Solomon as

king, and then his death. Almost immediately, Solomon begins working on
the temple. The rest is then a detailed account of his reign and subsequent
"turning" from the Lord, followed shortly by his own death.
In Section 2, the Kingdom goes to Solomon's son, Rehoboam. Or rather,

it’s supposed to. The Northern Kingdom rebels under the young and gifted
Jereboam, thereby forming Israel in the North, which establishes its capital
at Shechem.
Why did this rebellion happen? Theologically, the Bible says it was
because of Solomon's sin. Politically, it was similar to our own North/South
division--except opposite. The North exerted a heavy hand of authority
over the Northern tribes. They gave away their land, had high taxes, and
imposed heavy labor and manufacturing requirements on the North. With
this new king, and as Jeroboam as their representative, they ask
Rehoboam for their load to be lightened. Solomon's son consults his
advisors and they encourage him to threaten to increase their load and
double-down. For some reason, he agrees this is best and does it.
Strangely, though the text says rather snarkily that Rehoboam "did not
listen to the people", Jeroboam is seen as the bad guy here, and it's his
legacy of idol worship as the first King of Israel that sets the tone for all the
other Kings of Israel to be bad.
The book then, starting with the North (with Jeroboam) goes back and
forth, chronicling each successive King of each Kingdom. This can make
the book confusing. Add to the mix that most of the prophets pop up in
this time and you have names flying all over the place.
According to this Deuteronomistic History, though, the most important

people in this story are Hezekiah and Josiah, the two best Kings Judah
ever knew. They led great revivals of the people, although both of their
children were some of the Judah ever had (especially, Manasseh,
Hezekiah's son).
Eventually, Israel, because of these sins, is taken into Exile, and the
Section 3 of the book just focuses on Judah, until they are also taken into
exile by the Babylonians.
The Final, Kingly Scorecard:

Israel, the rebellious Northern Kingdom, had 20 kings over a period of 200
years, all evil. They had no revivals, and 8 of them were either killed or
committed suicide. After these 200 years they were taken into exile under
the Assyrians.
Judah fared a little bit better than Israel. Judah, the Southern Kingdom,
had 19 kings and one queen over the span of almost 350 years. They had
occasional revivals, and 8 righteous (or at least mostly righteous) kings
and 11 unrighteous kings.
Background:
• We must remember, when reading this book that it is written from a

very biased perspective. This is the main part of the story that the
Deuteronomists compiled the rest of the Historical books to tell. For
that reason, strange irregularities when it comes to the background of
this book should not surprise us.
◦ There are several Kings who are very well-attested to in extra-
biblical literature, who according to other nations' writings, did
amazing things in the ancient world and on behalf of their
country, and yet Kings dedicated a mere verse or two that
person's reign.
◦ The biggest battle Israel was ever involved in was called the
battle of Qarqar. King Ahab of Israel helped lead a coalition of
10 other kings to defeat the King of Assyria. And it seems they
were victorious (even though the Assyrian King claims victory in
his records, he didn't get any further than this battle and
returned four more times to the area to try to get control of it
and couldn't). It was the biggest battle the ancient world had
ever seen, and it's talked about in lots of other kingly writings.
And yet it's not mentioned in the Bible. At all. Ever. Why? It was
a seemingly good thing that an Israelite King did, and
remember, from the perspective of our the writers of this book,
Israel did nothing good. Ever. Even if they did.
• Refer to the Prophets intro below. When reading this book, if you can
remember which Prophets spoke where, that really helps (and it's
easy. Only four Prophets functioned in the North, and only 3, maybe
4, functioned after the exile. All there set were in Judah. Find those
names and read the book).
The book has two main purposes of identity formation. Remember earlier
when we said that this Deuteronomistic History went through two "editions":
one after the North had been sent into Exile, and then one after the South
had been sent into Exile.
• The main (historical) point of the "first edition" of Kings, was to rally
support for the best King the nation had had since David: Josiah.
From the perspective of these Northern refugee Priests, who had
been unsuccessful (in their opinion) in bringing about true, religious
reform to their side of the country, it seemed like this was a new era
for the nation. Finally! A King that wanted to do what was necessary
to eradicate the worship of any other god in Judah. But, Josiah was
getting lots of crap for this from the people (as the "folk religion" of
Judah was still very polytheistic, even if the institutional religion was
not). So, they compile and edit this history to tell the Israelites "Hey!
Listen to King Josiah! Look at what happened when your King was
not doing these reforms! Things went very badly. In fact, look what
happened in the North with Assyria!"
• Well, the reforms were instituted, and it seemed like all would be well
for the nation. But…then they slipped into rebellion, bad Kings came
about, and eventually, Judah got sent into Exile as well. So, a new
"edition" was issued that explored this. The main point of those edits
was to emphasize that not even an earthly king can hold back the tide
of sinfulness that was seemingly engrained in the Israelites, even
from their earliest days. This edition focused on the sinfulness of
even the Southern Kings, trying to remind the people that they really
should only have one King: Yahweh.
Interesting Bits:
• Most of the book is some of the most fascinating and interesting

politics you can read. The way that the kings leveraged alliances,
resources, and planning is very sophisticated. If you pay attention,
and keep the big picture in mind (or at least read a good commentary
along with it), it's actually a very exciting book.
• There's also lots of exchange/communication between the North and
South (even some intermarriage of kings with the daughters of the
king in the other kingdom)!
• By the end of the book there's a strange tension: a King is the

forerunner of his people; where he goes, so will his people. And yet,
even among
tragedy, thereall of
was these Kings,
not found onein that
all their
couldglory
trulyand all of the
change their
people
in such a way that this fate of their's was not inevitable. In other
words, according to the Deuteronomistic History, it seems we need a
human king in order to keep us from chaos, and yet, a human king is
not enough. Somehow, we seem to need both a human king
and have Yahweh as our king. If only Yahweh could become our
human king…
• Throughout the Gospels and the rest of the New Testament, Jesus is
identified through several primary metaphors through which he
exercises his presence and authority among us. All of these elements
are seen in 1 and 2 Kings, and we can see how these things each
function together in the whole life of the community: Prophet, Priest,
King, Sacrifice, Word, Temple, and others. As you read, pay attention
these things and see them as metaphors of the One who was to
come.
• To lose your
leaders; idealistic
to remind hopethat
yourself evennoinmatter
the best of righteousness,
their human political they
cannot change the heart.
• To hear the growing crescendo of the Old Testament get louder,
leading up to final resolution in Christ.
• To see that our need for Christ as King is universal, total, and all-
encompassing.
• To look for shadows of how Jesus exercises his own Kingship in your
life and over his people today.
• Lastly, to make sense of the books of the Prophets. Most of the
prophets by we have books written, find themselves writing and
speaking to these very Kings, and even find themselves spoken of in
these narratives. Reading the Prophets alongside these stories gives
context and shape to the words they wrote.
The Priestly History
Having not completed the Deuteronomistic History, we now enter into

what scholars calls the Priestly History in Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah.
These all seem
certainly may have been
to have one book
been). at oneof
After some point (Ezra andreturned
the Israelites Nehemiah
to
Jerusalem, they were absolutely dismayed and discouraged. What did it
mean to be the people of God with no land to call their own, no temple,
and no king? If these were the markers of their identity, and they were now
gone, what do they make of their faith?
With no King around, the Priests took on a much more active role in the
daily lives of the Israelites. This Priestly History marks the beginning of a
radical shift and redefinition of Judaism that will continue to blossom and
see its fulfillment around the time of Jesus. Prophets were also speaking
during this time (Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, and maybe Joel), and they
spoke very optimistically about the political future of the Jews should they
maintain their obedience to Yahweh. The Priests, though, took a slightly
different approach, as represented in this History. Things to look out for
and notice:
• Reading the Deuteronomistic History, one would think that the most
important litmus test for the country was the King. The Priests went
about starting
and kings to re-locate
to one concerningthepersonal
Jewish faith
purityfrom
andone concerning
piety. Look for land
emphases on "mercy" and "obedience" rather than "sacrifice".
• If the role of the Jewish nation was no longer to grow and sustain an
independent political entity, then now it was to be a light to other
nations; to be a blessing to them, and show them what life could look
like under the reign and rule of Yahweh. They were to seek the
service and conversion of other nations' inhabitants to be Yahweh-
worshippes. Look for a more optimistic view of foreign nations.
• In trying rebuild the broken identity of these Israelites, there is a much
larger emphasis on the covenant rather than the nation or the land .
There are a lot more statements re-affirming the eternality of God's
plan and promise. Look for much more lofty and elevated and
abstract language that spiritualizes the things that were once thought
of as material promises from God.
• And lastly, and most importantly, look for a radically positive re-
interpretation of Israelite History. The Priestly re-telling is trying to
build up the people's confidence that they are a glorious people who
are the recipients of the eternal promises of God! If they can just get
their own personal, present piety in line, then all can be well once
more (even if it is "redefined").
1 & 2 Chronicles
The book of Chronicles can seem like deja-vu. It's a great example of how
the Israelites sought to stay faithful to their tradition in changing times by
updating and (dare I say?) even changing their tradition to make sense of
their current circumstance. Chronicles was written to those that had come
back from the exile and were super depressed with the state of things.
Content:
Chronicles is a retelling of the material found in Kings. Some of the

differences? Kings is a political account from the prophet's viewpoint;
Chronicles is the religious account written from the priest's viewpoint.
Kings emphasize the sins of the nation; Chronicles emphasizes the glory
of the nation, especially the four revivals in Judah.
This is why Chronicles omits almost all the bad stuff from the lives of David
and
sins Solomon. Noand
of Solomon, conflict withthe
almost Saul, no history
entire Bathsheba,
of theno rebellious
Northern son, no
Kingdom.
It's much more aware of the surrounding nations and how Israel is called
to serve them.
Background:
• The author(s) of Chronicles wanted to root this moral and religious

history of the people in as much of the Bible as possible, and so they
take much from other books of the Bible. Genealogies, quotes,
poetry, history, and laws, are copied verbatim from almost every other
book of Scripture, especially the Pentateuch and Samuel-Kings. It
seems like the author(s) used Samuel-Kings as a base text and then
edited it and built off of it, incorporating quotes from all the other
books as well. Remember, this was meant to be a glorious
celebration of Israelite History.
• There are some historical events that are not talked about in the other
historical books that are found only in Chronicles (the Egyptian
Shistak's campaign and Hezekiah's protection of the Israelite water
supply before the Assyrian attack are two examples).
• Several other books are quoted and referenced that we no longer
have, such as a book called Acts of Solomon. There are also
Prophets included in Chronicles that are not written about elsewhere,
like Ahijah and Shilonite.
• The main question of the book is this: who are we now that we've lost
everything? This book attempts to retell their history in such a way
that the file can happen and they can still be the glorious people of
God.
• The book is not trying to "hide" the "bad" parts of their history. After
all, the book is right next to Kings. It's rather trying to emphasize what
the Deuteronomists did not: that God is bigger than the king. God is
bigger than the nation. God is bigger than the temple. And he has
chosen us. And he has been working his purposes in and through us
then entire time, in spite of our sin.
Interesting Bits:
• Concerning the Passover lamb: Exodus 12 says to take the lamb and
roast it, but not boil it; Deuteronomy 16 says to boil it, but not roast it;
2 Chronicles 35 says to roast it in water . Chronicles represents a
combing of the traditions. (By the way, some translators, due to a
commitment to try and diminish any "apparent" "contradictions" in
Scripture translate that word "boil" in Deuteronomy 16 as "roast", but I
promise, in Hebrew, it does not mean roast--it means boil.)
• If you want one of the most well-known differences between Kings
and Chronicles, read about the dedication of the temple by Solomon
in both 1 Kings 8 and 2 Chronicles 7. They are very different and, in
the account, you can pick up almost every distinctive feature of the
Priestly History I mentioned above.
• Just Google "chronicles contradictions" to find list after list of the
many differences of Chronicles with other places in the BIble. You will
also find people's attempts at "resolving" many of these
"discrepancies", under an assumption that these differences does
damage to the Bible, rather than it just being a different emphasized

history.
• As said before, Chronicles begins retelling the Israelite History in a

way that sets the groundwork for a new era of Jewish theology that
can be compatible without the temple, a king, or an independent land.
By extension, this means that Chronicles is also setting the stage for
Christianity to come out of Judaism and it be a more logical
development than if Christianity had just popped up during the time of
David (for example).
• It represents various Kings as being part of a cosmic plan of
redemption, bringing about God's promises in the world. The nation
seems to have been swept up into the great universal story of which
Jesus will be the climax. Chronicles starts lifting our eyes upward
towards the God of Israel, rather than just the God of Israel .
• As said before, promises that were seen primarily as material, are
now seen in bigger, more eternal, more cosmic terms. This allows
room in their theology for Yahweh to fulfill these old promises of land,
peace, and political influence in more "spiritual" or abstract ways.
Jesus will ultimately be the bridge between Kings and Chronicles, by
accomplishing abstract spiritual goals (defeating sin and death, and
ushering in a New Creation), but by very material, earthly, blood-and-
sweat sort-of ways (his ministry, cross, and Resurrection).
As said above, the main question of the book is this: who are we now that
we've lost everything? This is a season we all find ourselves in now and
then. Chronicles is an amazing book to visit when you feel like you've lost
everything that made you a child of God. Either your church has failed you,
your marriage is gone, or you feel you've sinned away your day of grace.
Reading Chronicles reminds us of the promises of God and how God works
in spite of how life, our leaders, our churches, and our own sin tend to
muck it up.
Ezra & Nehemiah
Contents:
In
wethese books,the
hear about werebuilding
see the beginning of thethen
of the temple, rebuilding
we readof about
Jerusalem.
the First,
rebuilding of the city walls--a necessary defense in the precarious area in
which the Israelites find themselves.
Ezra
Cyrus the Great, prophesied about in Isaiah, takes over Babylon and with
it, takes all of its vassals as his own. He appoints Sheshbazar to begin
laying the foundation for the Jewish temple, and this is finished by
Zerubbabel.
Part 1 of the book is about the return of Jews to Israel and the rebuilding
and completion of the new temple, started by Zerubbabel, completed
under the guidance of Ezra. In the beginning of the book, as they start
rebuilding, we see a letter written by one of the neighboring peoples to the
King of Persia warning him that if he lets the Israelites grow too much in
power, they will try and rebel. The Persians look back in their archives, find
Cyrus’ decree and allow the Israelites to continue work. Ezra leads them to
rebuild and then dedicate the temple.

Part 2: Years later, Ezra returns to purify the Israelites as a people. He
reinstates the Mosaic law, and even carries with him the authority of the
Persian King saying that they must follow the rules of Yahweh. There is a
heavy emphasis by Ezra to purify the Israelites from their intermarriage to
other foreign, local peoples.
Nehemiah
Nehemiah is working in the court of King when he hears about the city's
lack of walls. He asks if he can go help rebuild them, and is appointed
governor of the area. He leads the people in rebuilding the walls, and then
leads the people back into obedience to the laws of Moses. He leaves for
roughly twenty years, then comes back for a visit, only to see the Israelites
have backslidden and have taken foreign wives again. He decides to stay
to enforce the marital ethnic purity. The book oddly ends with a
condemnation of mixed marriages.
Background:
• Babylon gave themselves up to Cyrus after one battle. Even before

gaining Babylon, Cyrus had amassed the biggest empire the world
had known at that time. Babylon was terrified of him and knew they
would lose. They tried to fight him once, it didn’t work, so they just
surrendered.
• After Cyrus died, there was a lot of drama for his throne, so
eventually, when the Kingship was settled, it is only natural that the
King didn’t know what a past King had decreed about the temple of
a small random province in his Kingdom. This is why they had to go
into their archives.
• It was the regular practice of the Persians to allow local peoples to
worship freely and maintain their cultural autonomy.
• A few things to remember about the Israelites at this time:
◦ When the Babylonians took the Israelites into exile, they only
took the “most important” Israelites--the “cream of the crop”;
they didn't take them all. They left a lot of Israelites behind.
◦ These Israelites had moved on. They had moved into the
abandoned city center, kept talking Hebrew (there returning
comrades spoke Aramaic now), and had even assimilated
themselves with the local religions and culture.
◦ There was, needless to say, a lot of cultural tension between all
of these "important" Israelites returning and all of the poorer
Israelites who were now being displaced by them.
◦ Also, there weren’t that many Israelites returning. It wasn’t like
a mass exodus back to Jerusalem or anything. The city was
just rubble, for the most part. Most Jews still lived abroad,
scattered throughout the world, having created lives for
themselves wherever they were, and they would stay that way,
even to today (this is why a Jew like Esther is still living in the
Persian capital years after the Jews are allowed to return
home).
• The man Ezra was also a priest, and is considered by Judaism one
of the most influential people of the faith since Moses. An old Jewish
saying says “if Moses hadn’t written the Law, then Ezra surely would
have.”
As part of the Priestly History, the main point is that God has a great
cosmic plan he is working in this world and he has invited his people to be
a part of it. They need to turn their focus from their woes and difficulties
and begin really focusing on their own personal obedience and holiness,
because that is now the locus for God’s work in the world: the righteous
lives of his people.
Interesting Bits:
• No one knows what happened to the first two governors of Judea.

Both Sheshbazar and Zerubbabel just disappear after the first few
sections of the books.
• The books of Ezra and Nehemiah are really interesting, as they are
very inconsistent in their storytelling. They jump from third-person into
the first person "memoirs" (as they are called) of Ezra and Nehemiah.
They include legal correspondence and letters that are thrown into
parts of the story that don't match when they were written (the letter
that opens up Ezra, for example: though it is in the part of the book
talking about the very beginning of the building project, it's
addressed--and was sent to-- a King that ruled twenty years after this
part of the story).
• Scholars argue whether or not Ezra or Nehemiah came first. No one
knows, and there are good arguments for both sides.
• Ezra begins with the last verse of 2 Chronicles, showing how these
books are connected.
If Chronicles laid out the history that enabled Jesus to make sense as part
Judaism, then Ezra was the one that ushered in the theology. He was the
one that drew the people into a Judaism based around personal faith and
piety, while maintaining a corporate identity. It was no longer the case that
the people could more or less do what they want while the leaders were
the representatives of the nation. No. They were, as God had called them
on Sinai, a “nation of priests”.
• To see what it looks like for people to pick up the pieces of their life
and identity. There's "happiness" in Ezra-Nehemiah, but it's not a
"happy book". It depicts real-life: even in the midst of trying to regain
your own stability and composure you will have to deal with annoying
and unnecessary set-backs (like annoying neighbors). Even after the
joyful dedication of the temple, the older Israelites who could
remember the previous temple tear their clothes in mourning because
this temple just isn't the same as the other one.
• The book stresses continued faithfulness and obedience in life's
difficult seasons in response to God's continued faithfulness towards
us.
• Many sermon series on leadership base their sermon points on these
books (mainly Nehemiah). Many lessons on leadership can be
gleaned by watching these governors successfully lead the people in
these building projects.
Esther
Welcome to one of the most unexpectedly difficult books in the Bible. It
does not read like religious literature, God's name is not mentioned there,
and our oldest collections of Hebrew Scriptures do not include it. It has no
connection with the rest of the Bible, except that it involves Israelites. It
takes place after Cyrus' decree for the Israelites to return, but there's no
mention of Israelites returning, Jerusalem, the covenant, or anything like
that. Further, there's nothing distinctively "Jewish" about Esther. She does
not seem to keep dietary laws, there are no prayers, songs, nor visions.
She freely hides her Jewishness and pleasures the King one night with all
the other virgins. She ultimately helps her people only after Mordecai
points out she will die as well if she does nothing. This is morally
ambiguous literature at best .
Content:
The book opens with Xerxes wife, Vashti defying her husband. She's
deposed, and when Xerxes anger dies down, he seeks a new wife. They
gather a bunch of virgins for him to choose from, and he chooses Esther
because of her beauty. When her cousin Mordecai doesn't give honor to
an official named Haman, Haman's anger leads him to call for a genocide
of all of the Israelites. Xerxes agrees, not knowing his wife is one of them.
Esther defies her husbands privacy requests and tells him about Haman's
true intentions. Haman ends up being put to death, the Israelites become
and exalted people, and Mordecai is exalted in the administration of
Xerxes.
Background:
• Though many point out the literary and artistic flourishes to the book,
there does seem to be a historic “core” to the book of some kind,
and though no name of Vashti or Esther appear in relation to Xerxes
outside this story, their is a reference that seems to be of a
"Morduku" working as official around the time Esther is to have
taken place.
• But, most scholars, even super-conservative ones, see this book as
mainly historical fiction, perhaps building off of the fact that there
seems to have been a Jew in the administration of the King at the
time. And that’s okay: the biblical writers were allowed to do that.
This is a tough one. The only connection that Rabbi's have been able to
find with this book and the rest of the OT is when Deuteronomy says that
God will "hide his face" from the Israelites. If taken prophetically, this
Hebrew word for "hide" is sort-of the same word (consonants-only) for the
name Esther . And so, in Rabbinic tradition, they would say that this is a
time when God was "hiding his face" from the Israelites. In other words,
it’s to encourage Jews living abroad that even though they are away from
their people and their land and their temple, God is still moving among
them in these foreign lands (remember that Priestly History! Although,
most scholars don’t include Esther in that History).
Interesting Bits:
• The Book of Esther is the only book of the Old testament not
represented or even mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
• The King here is the same King Xerxes in the movie 300 who tried to
take over Greece to no avail.
• From a feminist perspective, Esther is an interesting book, as it

shows Esther using her sexuality to make a place in the kingdom
that Xerxes’ previous wife did not have. In the end, it seems to exalt
authoritative women in the redemptive plan of God.
• In Jesus' own ministry and "working out of the redemption of his

people", you see him empowering and using women who had, for the
most part, abused their sexuality. Esther almost "feels" like a proto-
Mary Magdelene.
• In a more allegorical sense, we see in the story that a sentence of
death has been declared over God's people, and it isn't until one of
their own, who happens to be at the right hand of the king, enter into
the presence of the King and offers both intercession and propitiation
(a substitute--Haman: the one man who would die to save all of God's
people. Interestingly, Haman is served a "Last Supper" by Esther with
the King before being sent to his death).
• The “silence” of God in the passage hints that the nature of our God
is one of humility, quietness, and meekness. He need not always be
flashy or over-the-top. This hints at how he he will accomplish his
greatest miracles and acts of salvation: quietly, in a human being,
from a small town, in relative obscurity, surrounded by a group of
sinners and fisherman.
Historically, there is a long tradition of emphasizing the doctrine of

Providence in this book. In other words, in this book, you can see how
God often works in this world to bring about the salvation of his people.
Sometimes he is never named, sometimes he uses sinful people,
sometimes he uses people that are not his own, and sometimes he uses
people when they are far from his temple. It’s to be reminded of the subtle,
humble, quiet ways that God often works in our lives.
PART 3: The Prophets, Pt. 1

There were two groups (almost like political parties):
The Ephraimite/Israelite Prophets

• took on name of Nabi
• Northern Kingdom
• Marginal (they did not have the ear of the King. Not part of the
"central" prophets
• Typically "heard" the Word of Yahweh
• Associated with Deuteronomistic Literature
The Judean Prophets

• called themeselves Hozeh ("Seers") - Received messages through
visions
• Southern Kingdom
• Access to central powers of Jerusalem society
• Ezekiel: one of the first people deported (along with other "high up"
people)
• Associated with Priestly Literature
Israelite prophetic history follows their political history. Saul tore country
apart. David, wanting to unite nation, appoints two different prophets--one
from the North, one from the South. Nathan seems to be Ephramite = loyal
to centralized temple in Jerusalem, but he's also critical of David (he's the
one that condemns David after Bathsheeba stuff). There was also Gad =
Judean, offers a way of forgiveness for David so they can move on.
Divided Kingdom comes. Ephramites (1 Kings 12:31 & 13:33) = allied with
David and Temple, so they were out of power and judgmental of all kings
of the North. They were the ones that collected many of the Northern
traditions and brought them down to the South after Assyrians. They then
worked with Josiah to put together the D stuff. Elijah/Elijah are good
examples of an Ephramite Prophet. Isaiah and Nahum are great examples
of Judean prophets. Nahum attacks Assyria a lot. Seems to reflect
thoughts of Jerusalem folks
Exile and Post-Exile happens. These two "parties" begin to blend behind a
more urgent and common goal and identity. Distinctions begin to fall away.
• There comes a loss of confidence because of the fall of the city
• There were so many differing prophetic voices

• So, they relied more upon the already-written prophecy which they
knew were right
• Eventually, this gives rise to Apocalypticism (seen most clearly in the
Book of Daniel). As they begin to realize that their political fortunes
aren't changing anytime soon, they look outside for their salvation.
For a Messiah. Cosmic battle. Time will end. History will end. The
Garden of God will be bought back and everything will be "right"
again. This is when Daniel comes into play.
Israel only has four prophets that speak specifically to them: Elijah and
Elisha, Amos, and Hosea. Judah and the post-exilic.
The post-exile community has Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (there's some

disagreement as to whether Joel might have been here also, as well as
some parts of Isaiah).
It’s helpful to remember that every other Prophet spoken about is speaking
to Judah, the Southern Kingdom, for whom there seems to be more
“hope” that they might stay righteous and obedient.
Excursus
What do we make of the atrocities of God’s people?
In the books of Numbers and Joshua, God commands the Israelites to

commit genocide on many different people, including their women and
children. He also commands them to forcibly enslave others. And in still
another story, he commands Moses to take the remaining virgins of this
particular people of which they disobediently did not kill all, and divide
them evenly among the soldiers and the "rest of the Israelites". We can
only imagine what for.
A few quick thoughts: One, you can't appeal to any standard of "iniquity"

or sinfulness" or "all people deserve that kind of justice" because Yahweh
says specifically--several times--what his reasoning for commanding this
was. It was not because these people were evil. It was simply because

they lived in the land that Yahweh wanted to give to the Israelites, and
there was a fear their faith would woo the Israelites away.
Every Christian needs to figure out what they're going to do with this. This
is the main attack of our generation of atheists, and so each of us needs to
figure out how we might sleep easy while worshipping the God of this
Bible.
But first, there's a temptation some times when it comes to this stuff to try
and find the answer in studying the history/archaeology/cultural context
for these texts. This is certainly what I've done, and I've found a lot of help
in that. But, whatever you might want to do with this history of the text,
there has to be a way to appropriate these texts regardless of how much
studying the reader has done. We can and should investigate the
backgrounds of these books, but at the end of the day, the only truly
satisfying answer should come from within the materials we have to work
with here.
In other words, if our response is not something readily available to even

the most un-educated among us, then it won't be ultimately helpful in the
ways it needs to be.
While there's much more that can/should be said about this than what we

can do in this class, here's what I'll say to try and help us: our interpretive
framework and presupposition with which to approach these texts
cannot first and foremost be a belief about the Bible itself. The primary
filter we bring to this should not be a belief about the historicity or
literalness of the Bible--one way or the other. Our interpretive filter must
be Jesus himself .
Why? The Bible says that he is the clearest and truest revelation of the
nature of God-- not the Bible. As I’ve said in an earlier class, the Bible itself
is not the revelation of God ; it's the place where the Holy Spirit reveals God
to us within the text. Some writers have poetically articulated this by
saying that God is revealed "behind" or "in-between" the letters of the

Bible's words and not "within" them. The words on the page are not God,
no matter how "clearly" it seems to be making some claim as to his nature
or his prerogative. Jesus is.
So what does this mean practically? Well, lots of people whose most

important belief seems to be "the Bible is such-and-such kind of way"
seem to inadvertently prioritize the Bible over Jesus. They will twist and
force our picture of Jesus to fit him into the harder parts of Scripture,
rather than vice versa. They would rather greatly de-emphasize--and in
some cases, completely toss out--clear parts of Jesus' revelation of God
in order to make him seem in line with this God of Numbers and Joshua.
And though those justifications may satisfy us intellectually for a time, I

hope we all agree that these explanations still feel deeply hollow and
unsatisfactory at a spiritual and worshipful level.
As Christians, we have a responsibility to choose Jesus over the

Bible. And so, when you have to choose between God as revealed in
Joshua, and God as revealed in Jesus, being a Christian means you have
to choose Jesus. You must be at least willing--if necessary--to twist,
reinterpret, change your perspective on, and, yes, maybe sometimes even
toss some ideas out when anything goes against who God is as seen in
Christ. Many Christians will say that we'll never have to make that choice,
but the older I get, I personally have to question that.
The Bible is a human book. It itself is no more divine than a church

building. But, it is the sovereignly chosen meeting place of God with His
People, when used by the Holy Spirit to that end.
We also have to understand that in the whole sweep of redemptive history,

the Israelites at this point still have only a fuzzy picture of who Yahweh is.
He has not revealed very much about his nature yet at this point in the
story. In these early books, we have hardly any statements referring to the
afterlife, angelology, life after death, any sort of "heaven" idea, or even that
Yahweh is the only God in existence (the Israelites, for most of their pre-
exilic history, believed in the existence of other gods, they just believed
there's was superior)!
As an analogy, if you want as comprehensive and accurate of a picture of

someone's father as possible, would you rather talk to one of their children
when that child is two, or 42?
The book of Joshua is when the Israelites are still two, using whatever
words they can to describe their Daddy. The New Testament is, in a sense,
God's older children--with perspective, age, and wisdom--talking about
this Father. And ultimately, in Jesus, we're talking to the Father himself.
I hope these things begin a conversation and some thoughts that lead us
to seeing God more clearly--as he is seen in Jesus--and not more
confusedly as he is sometimes made in our silly attempts at resolving
things that need not ever be brought together.

Survey of The Bible

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Survey of The Bible

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Survey of The Bible

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are the main books discussed in the document?

What are the main books discussed in the document?

What is the author's view on how Christians should interpret the Bible?

What is the author's view on how Christians should interpret the Bible?

7/31/2019 Bible Survey 3: The Historical Books & Prophets, pt.

Survey of the Bible

PART 1: The Gospel

The Apostle’s Creed

We believe in God, the Father Almighty,

We believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord,

We believe in the Holy Spirit,

Four main sections: some introductory transitional speeches from Moses

This conquest section is also in three sections: an account of the takeover

The last section is a series of confusing endings, each of which offers

◦ Bad news: this challenges some of our ideas of the Bible. We

Application/Why Would You Go Here?:

Act 3 surrounds Naomi forming of a scheme and them implementing it to

• Jesus is our "kinsman-redeemer". This is one of the most beautiful

Application/Why Would You Go Here?:

• To see how the sovereignty of God works.

• To be reminded of the importance of community and close

Five Acts: (1) Israel needs a King: if you remember, Judges didn't close

(3) The rise of David: Samuel is led to David, a young farmer and poet,

(5) A concluding Epilogue: These last four chapters of the book have

• This book greatly shapes and articulates Israel's concept of a king.

• Saul's selection and reign, as Israel's king "training-wheels", coupled

Application/Why Would You Go Here?:

• A discussion about and reminder that Yahweh is King. Not David.

consequences they face. This book shows us what it looks like. In

It gives Israel’s history from Solomon to when Babylon conquered Judah in

Section 1 opens with David preparing to move things over to Solomon as

In Section 2, the Kingdom goes to Solomon's son, Rehoboam. Or rather,

According to this Deuteronomistic History, though, the most important

The Final, Kingly Scorecard:

• We must remember, when reading this book that it is written from a

• Most of the book is some of the most fascinating and interesting

• By the end of the book there's a strange tension: a King is the

Application/Why Would You Go Here?:

The Priestly History

Having not completed the Deuteronomistic History, we now enter into

Chronicles is a retelling of the material found in Kings. Some of the

• The author(s) of Chronicles wanted to root this moral and religious

damage to the Bible, rather than it just being a different emphasized

• As said before, Chronicles begins retelling the Israelite History in a

Application/Why Would You Go Here?:

Ezra & Nehemiah

rebuild and then dedicate the temple.

• Babylon gave themselves up to Cyrus after one battle. Even before

• No one knows what happened to the first two governors of Judea.

Application/Why Would You Go Here?:

• From a feminist perspective, Esther is an interesting book, as it

• In Jesus' own ministry and "working out of the redemption of his

Application/Why Would You Go Here?:

Historically, there is a long tradition of emphasizing the doctrine of

PART 3: The Prophets, Pt. 1

The Ephraimite/Israelite Prophets

The Judean Prophets

• There were so many differing prophetic voices