LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
JOHN W. RAWLINGS SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
Like Trees Planted by Streams of Water:
An Exploration of the Use of the Tree of Life in the Kethubim and Beyond
Submitted to Dr. Richard Fuhr
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the completion of
OBST860 B01 202330
Writings (B01)
by
Richard Bristol
Student Number L25569122
July 2, 2023
JOHN W. RAWLINGS SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
Like Trees Planted by Streams of Water:
An Exploration of the Use of the Tree of Life in the Kethubim and Beyond
Submitted to Dr. Richard Fuhr
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the completion of
OBST860 B01 202330
Writings (B01)
by
Richard Bristol
Student Number L25569122
July 2, 2023
Passage…………….…………………………………………………………………………….....iii
English Translation……………………………………………………………………………iii
Thesis……………….…………………………………………………………………………........iii
Abstract……………….………………………………………………………………………….....iii
Introduction……………….………………………………………………………………….....1
An Argument for Intent……………………………………………………………….....2
The Importance of Deliberate Design……………………………………………..2
Inevitable Failure of the Search for Text Within the Text……………….4
Evangelical’s Challenge for Academia………………………………………………6
Assumption of Reliability………………………………………………………………....7
Author, Compiler, Editor, Redactor…………………………………………………….9
Psalm One: More Than Simply a 3000-Year-Old Praise Song……11
The Psalmist as a Prophet………………………………………………………………..11
Inspiration and the Compilers of the Psalms……………………………………13
The Psalms as a Window to the Soul………………………………………………..14
A Tree Planted by a Streams of Water……………………………………………15
The Psalms as a Verbal Stained-Glass Window ……………………………….15
Tree (פָּלַג)…………………………………………………………………………………..........16
Ancient Near East Parallels …………………………………………….……….....17
Original Audience Imagery…………………………………………………….......18
Early Church Understanding…………………………………………………….....19
Streams (פָּלַג)…………………………………………………………………………….........20
Ancient Near East Parallels …………………………………………….……….....21
Original Audience Imagery…………………………………………………….......23
Early Church Understanding…………………………………………………….....23
Fruit (פָּרָה)………………………………………………………………………………...........24
Ancient Near East Parallels …………………………………………….……….....24
Original Audience Imagery…………………………………………………….......25
Early Church Understanding…………………………………………………….....27
Leaf (עָלֶה) and Chaff (מֹץ)……………………………………………………………….....27
Ancient Near East Parallels …………………………………………….………....29
Original Audience Imagery……………………………………………………......29
Early Church Understanding……………………………………………………....30
Wind (רוּחַ)………………………………………………………………………………..........30
Ancient Near East Parallels …………………………………………….………....31
Original Audience Imagery…………………………………………………….......32
Early Church Understanding…………………………………………………….....33
That Will Preach: The Tree of Life in The Psalms, Kethubim…….33
Preaching the Psalms in Connection with Psalm 1 Tree of Life……….34
Preaching the Kethubim in Connection with Psalm 1 Tree of Life……38
Ecclesiastes and the Trees of Eden……………………………………………..39
Job and Proverbs and the Trees of Eden……………………………………..43
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………......45
Bibliography…….……………………………………………………….........................47
Passage
אַ֥שְֽׁרֵי־הָאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֤ר׀ לֹ֥א הָלַךְ֮ בַּעֲצַ֪ת רְשָׁ֫עִ֥ים וּבְדֶ֣רֶךְ חַ֭טָּאִים לֹ֥א עָמָ֑ד וּבְמוֹשַׁ֥ב לֵ֝צִ֗ים לֹ֣א יָשָֽׁב׃
כִּ֤י אִ֥ם בְּתוֹרַ֥ת יְהוָ֗ה חֶ֫פְצֹ֥ו וּֽבְתוֹרָתוֹ֥ יֶהְגֶּ֗ה יוֹמָ֥ם וָלָֽיְלָה׃
וְֽהָיָ֗ה כְּעֵץ֮ שָׁת֪וּל עַֽל־פַּלְגֵ֫י מָ֥יִם אֲשֶׁ֤ר פִּרְיֹ֨ו׀ יִתֵּ֬ן בְּעִתֹּ֗ו וְעָלֵ֥הוּ לֹֽא־יִבּ֑וֹל וְכֹ֖ל אֲשֶׁר־יַעֲשֶׂ֣ה יַצְלִֽיחַ׃
לֹא־כֵ֥ן הָרְשָׁעִ֑ים כִּ֥י אִם־כַּ֝מֹּ֗ץ אֲֽשֶׁר־תִּדְּפֶ֥נּוּ רֽוּחַ׃[1]
English Translation
Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law, he meditates day and night.
He is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers. The wicked are not so but are like chaff that the wind drives away. [2]
Thesis
The compilers of the Tanakh purposefully use tree imagery from the Garden of Eden as a unifying thread throughout the books of the Kethubim and to weave these works together with the larger Tanakh.
אַ֥שְֽׁרֵי־הָאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֤ר׀ לֹ֥א הָלַךְ֮ בַּעֲצַ֪ת רְשָׁ֫עִ֥ים וּבְדֶ֣רֶךְ חַ֭טָּאִים לֹ֥א עָמָ֑ד וּבְמוֹשַׁ֥ב לֵ֝צִ֗ים לֹ֣א יָשָֽׁב׃
כִּ֤י אִ֥ם בְּתוֹרַ֥ת יְהוָ֗ה חֶ֫פְצֹ֥ו וּֽבְתוֹרָתוֹ֥ יֶהְגֶּ֗ה יוֹמָ֥ם וָלָֽיְלָה׃
וְֽהָיָ֗ה כְּעֵץ֮ שָׁת֪וּל עַֽל־פַּלְגֵ֫י מָ֥יִם אֲשֶׁ֤ר פִּרְיֹ֨ו׀ יִתֵּ֬ן בְּעִתֹּ֗ו וְעָלֵ֥הוּ לֹֽא־יִבּ֑וֹל וְכֹ֖ל אֲשֶׁר־יַעֲשֶׂ֣ה יַצְלִֽיחַ׃
לֹא־כֵ֥ן הָרְשָׁעִ֑ים כִּ֥י אִם־כַּ֝מֹּ֗ץ אֲֽשֶׁר־תִּדְּפֶ֥נּוּ רֽוּחַ׃[1]
English Translation
Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law, he meditates day and night.
He is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers. The wicked are not so but are like chaff that the wind drives away. [2]
Thesis
The compilers of the Tanakh purposefully use tree imagery from the Garden of Eden as a unifying thread throughout the books of the Kethubim and to weave these works together with the larger Tanakh.
Introduction
The tree imagery is essential in Biblical text. In many ways, the two named trees placed in the Garden at the beginning of the Biblical narrative are a picture of choice offered at the center of the Instruction of Moses and throughout the Bible. The importance of this imagery prompted the compilers of the Kethubim to use it woven throughout their work purposely. Exploring this use can provide important insight into the individual occurrences and suggests strong and intentional connections between each use.
The connectedness shows beauty and intentionality. Furthermore, their connection means they are not simply the result of disconnected religious thinkers. They are united as one work, giving each part a vital role in informing our understanding of the other parts together with the larger Tanakh. If this is the case, then this should inform how these texts are preached. The exploration of this idea needs to do four things.
First, it must establish the reasonable notion that those who wrote and compiled the Bible included and intended the audience to find the active links and connected ideas in one area of the Bible and apply them elsewhere. This is the idea of intent is the justification for John Calvin’s “sacra Scriptura sui interpres, or `Scripture interprets Scripture.’”[3] Then it is essential to find out what those themes might mean.
This exploration of themes begins with the connections of the Tree in Psalm One with the Tree of Life in the Garden. Then it will illustrate the intentionally related tendrils from this opening image. Critical images such as fruit, streams, and wind tightly connect with the tree image and show many interconnecting ideas. Next, one should explore themes through their usage in the Scriptures. The last phase will then be to explore and apply these ideas.
An Argument for Intent
The Importance of Deliberate DesignIn order to build an argument that a particular theme in one section is meant to inform and be informed by other sections of the Bible, a claim must be made first for the reasonableness of intentionality and how large a scale one can examine. Is the theme introduced at one point only informed by those texts that have come before, or can we trust that later developments are trustworthy? This question is why intentionality, authority, and trustworthiness may be even more critical to address initially than simply jumping into composition, genre, or discussions concerning the Tree of Life imagery elements.
It is reasonable to believe that the compilers made deliberate choices in forming the Tanakh. These conscious choices mean context can stretch across genre, time, and language divisions. Many scholars have studied the Bible, and its composition and authority inspire many debates and approaches. Discussions concerning the authorship of works a few thousand years old are naturally difficult, and this factors into beliefs concerning authorial intent. The discussion pertaining to authority, however, is a little clearer. Generally, positions with greater authority or trust in the Bible are labeled evangelical or biblically conservative.
The positions that place less authority on the reliability of the Bible are often labeled liberal and are popular in mainline protestant and secular schools. Steinmann says, “The majority of critical scholars continue to accept some form of the Documentary Hypothesis.”[4] Broadly, this group includes people like Osborne, who subscribe to what he calls a "nuanced form of inerrancy,"[5] and also some who do not believe in God. These groups tend to value critical textual analysis of the Bible over the acceptance of the book as a whole. McKenzie describes that their processes “are concerned with the relationship of the biblical materials to history.”[6] The textual critic seeks to analyze the text according to modern literary methods using comparison to available historical and cultural information.
Some tend to weigh extra-biblical evidence over the Biblical text. McKenzie voices a typical example of this position when he declares, “Most biblical scholars and archaeologists believe that major events recounted in the Bible, such as the flood, the exodus from Egypt, and the conquest of Canaan, either never occurred or did not happen in the way the Bible describes them.” [7] This statement ignores evangelical arguments and appeals to a consensus that does not exist.
Franke warns this can easily create a “hegemony of scientific and historical principles of interpretation that emphasize social and cultural backgrounds along with linguistic and philological concerns in pursuit of the precise meaning of the textual author.” [8] As a result, they “seem to condemn the theological and spiritual exegesis of the early church to the scrap heap of the past,”[9] and Ernesti denies “the proposition ‘that the Scriptures cannot be properly explained without prayer and a pious simplicity of mind.’”[10] This environment leads to the competition described by Waltke, where a “so-called scientific Enlightenment pitted the scientific method against this spiritual method.” [11] .Blaikie suggests some modern scholars view “the historical books of the Hebrews in much the same light as we look on those of other nations.”[12] For them, the text has no significant uniqueness. Therefore, all tools used to dissect other works can offer the same functions to the examination of the Bible. Increasing the cloudiness of the issue is the loss of the Rule of Faith or official standard.
McKenzie boldly declares, “There is no single “right” understanding of a biblical book or passage.” Yet he also believes this idea “is not to challenge the notion of the Bible’s truth or authority.” [13] This unchallenged academic doublespeak is all too common. Regardless of where these textual critics fall concerning various doctrines, the unifying idea is that they believe there may be some truth in the Bible, but it mixes in with some amount of error. They ultimately search for an accurate text behind the Biblical text.
Inevitable Failure of the Search for a Text Within the Text
Matthews, Chavalas, and Walton point out that “different scholars will have varying opinions of the implications [of the Scriptures] based on some of their own presuppositions.” [14] This process results in scholars struggling with challenges, perceived errors, paradoxes, or teachings they find problematic. This issue is further complicated by what Grant notes “It is natural to want the evidence to corroborate rather than challenge our presuppositions.”[15] Therefore, modern Scholars find points in the Scripture that they generally agree with and sections that confront their presuppositions, so they might propose that the Bible is a mix of error and truth. They have two general theories to justify the mix.
The first idea is that the Bible is the product of religious enlightenment. As a record of spiritual development, the Scriptures could include later trustworthy thoughts and other earlier less reliable or less developed ideas in the Biblical corpus. The latter approach allows the dismissal of anything that does not match current theories as a primitive artifact of a time when people “did not know better.” In this view, the newer ideas are more developed, and earlier texts can be discounted. The other notion approaches the text from the other direction,
The other theory suggests that over time, later scribal errors, omissions, and additions introduced the error. In this way, the earlier text is good, and the later mistakes are the problem. Doubting the authority of later insertions leads modern scholars to search for the form of the text closest to the “original autographs.” For example, McKenzie says modern scholars need deconstruction via textual criticism “by the fact that we do not possess the original version (the “autograph”) of any of the books of the Bible.”[16] For them, Biblical scholarship seeks to remove later additions to discover the earliest and, therefore, “most reliable” text.
The problem is that once the deconstruction begins in either direction, there is no bedrock of an original autograph or of the perfected theological text on which to land. The textual tools developed for examining other works rely on a certain amount of subjectivity and assumptions that might not apply to a piece that may have a unique status, like the Bible. Additionally, when used to find a “true” message within the larger text, the analysis fails, as you can never agree on the version it analyzes. The textual finish line continues to move as the use of critical tools risks moving those studying the text into a perpetual state of hypothetical reductions. The resultant fragments lose context clues discarded through some subjective method or assumption. For example, a scribal insertion meant to record an understanding that may have been passed on to the scribe’s generation could be discarded because of its lateness, even if accurate.
Evangelical Challenge for Academia
There is a significant challenge, not focused on the process, to this search for an authentic text within the Bible. The problem is in this approach’s similarity to the Marcion Heresy. That early heresy “sprang from a radical emphasis upon the discontinuity between Christianity and Judaism.”[17] This belief caused them to suggest the Old Testament was inferior and replaced by the New Testament. The earlier church fathers like Irenaeus push back against this when he declares we should read “each Testament in light of the other and, second, reads both in light of a grand scheme of the history of salvation”[18] or as a modern theologian astutely observes, “The New Testament is not an operating system that replaces the earlier Old Testament one.”[19]
Subsequently, evangelical scholars argue that presuppositions underlying more mainstream academic approaches weaken certain conclusions if not invalidate them. They suggest textual deconstruction can be unreliable in searching for the “original text underneath. The researcher must decide which part of the text is reliable and which is not. They then theorize what the author could have written and could not have written based on the researcher’s previous assumption. To do this, the researcher must theorize what happened during the theoretical author’s time to identify what he could have written. Next, the researcher has to consider what occasion inspired the book’s composition.
At best, this process is relatively extensive eisegesis. The method also excludes all text that does not correspond to the researchers’ theories. It, therefore, resembles the classic example of circular reasoning: “My reason is my ultimate authority because it seems reasonable to me to make it so.”[20] There is another approach available concerning the text.
Assumption of Reliability
Another approach has a beautiful simplicity that begins with the question, “What does the text say?” This question is superior to “Which text is authoritative” because it protects from endless subjective deconstruction. Both questions assume that the Bible has something valuable to say, and both may believe that God chose to influence humanity through the book.
Reliability extends from the idea that God can and would interact with His creation to get His message to His community. Oswald says, “God’s interventions in human life were the basis for the inspired interpretations.”[21] This concept is why Sailhamer suggests that the focus must begin and remain primarily on the text because “unless we focus on the scriptural accounts of God’s acts in history, those very historical events are open to an uncontrollably wide range of meaning and interpretation.”[22] He is not the only one making this case.
Kitchen correctly declares that “we must deal with the biblical record in the same way, using what we actually possess (objectively—we have nothing else!).”[23] Suppose the scholar begins with the assumption that he or she has access to the version of the Scriptures that God intended. In that case, any seams or edits appearing in the text are intentional and ripe for exploration, not artifacts of the “real text” lost to time. McKenzie calls this approach Synchronic and says it “concentrates on the literature as such—the artistry and interrelationships within the biblical text as we have it, regardless of how it came to be.”[24] Beyond looking at the received text, it addresses authority as well.
Instead of viewing the text’s authority linked to the original author, a scholar could view the power as tied to the current textual form to which they have access. This theory does not require adherents to hold to an open canon. The approach only assumes that those who recognized the Biblical canon were also entrusted to include insertions to enable future generations to understand God’s message better. This approach is not inconsistent with more traditional or theologically conservative positions as they already assume multiple authors over an exceptionally long period. For example, Moses, Samuel, Solomon, Ezekiel, and Ezra’s Bibles were all necessarily different but contained the same authority.
Presumed reliability assumes the same shared purpose of those entrusted with the work as those of the original author. This approach minimizes accusations that the trusted stewards of the texts would attempt to subvert the work of those who came before and would likely act to aid future generations. Those accused of being editors or redactors might be more like temporal translators. They may seek to pass on the institutional understanding of previous generations to their current generation by attempting to translate the ancient text they received to their contemporary audience. For example, they may insert new geographic names or author insertions to seek to clarify the text’s elements. These insertions would, therefore, not be attempts to improve the text.
Author, Compiler, Editor, Redactor
The terms author, compiler, editor, or redactor complicate discussions focused on the Scriptures because each label brings a particular set of connotations. Indeed, every person interacting with the text from its origin to its reception may have different goals and purposes that shape what they do with the text. If these differences are substantial enough, the later versions of the text can mask or eliminate earlier versions. Their historical and cultural context can radically shape their contributions even if the author and editor share the same goal. Again, the debates as to who or in which order texts link can also move those studying the text into a similar perpetual state of hypothetical deconstructions. Furthermore, there is another older approach that offers a reasonable alternative.
O’Keefe and Reno note that a “precritical presumption that the meaning of scripture is in words and not behind them explains why modern readers find patristic exegesis so unfathomable.”[25] As addressed earlier, Christians believed in the Bible. They did not need to search for more reliable or special gnosis within the text. Chou’s dual authorship[26] and Saint Paul’s “God-breathed (II Timothy 3:16) idea offer the same trustworthiness to the Bible through its reliance on the ministry of the Holy Spirit.
This idea is a reasonable theory based on a couple of presuppositions. This reliability springs from the idea that God can and would interact with His creation to get His message to His community. This belief aligns with the Bible's central narrative that God continues to use a faithful community of prophets, scribes, and other men and women of God as trusted conveyers of His message to their generation and those who will follow them.
This idea assumes that those entrusted with the work through time shared the same purpose as an original author. Kitchen notes authors “drew on the historical traditions available to him, selecting appropriate cases to exemplify his theme.” [27] Next, because of their shared goals and significant formative religious themes, any changes made were not an attempt to subvert the work of those who came before. This action might look like what we find in the text. Their insertions may not be extra material or new ideas. These insertions could be a means to archive earlier insights so as not to be lost to time or even cultural shifts. This idea means that identifying these potential layers does not create a superfluous textual artifact to be stripped off in our search for an original work. Instead, they give a record of the text’s historical background elements, which those entrusted with the text’s transmission did not want future audiences to lose sight of. Instead, they may seek to help faithfully transmit the ideas from those who came before to contemporary and future audiences.
These aids would likely not be attempts to improve the text but to enable the audience to understand certain context clues that the first audience understood almost automatically because they come from the same culture and time as the author. All this would mean that those accused of being editors or redactors might be more like translators. They may seek to pass on institutional understandings of previous generations to their current generation, not unlike those who function as Bible translators today, who seek faithful translations to modern audiences.
Psalm One: More Than Simply a 3000-Year-Old Praise Song
The Psalmist as a Prophet
The compilers of the Tanakh purposefully use tree imagery from the Garden of Eden as a unifying thread for the Psalms and throughout the books of the Kethubim. Ultimately this theme connects with other images to weave the works into the larger Tanakh. Chou suggests that the interconnectedness resulted from the dual authorship[28] of the Scripture, the Holy Spirit’s working with humanity (II Timothy 3:16-17). Regardless of origin, those who compiled the Bible deliberately placed Psalms One at the beginning to act as an introduction to the whole Psalms.
The first comparison that the psalmist uses for the Righteous person studying the holy writings is that of a tree. The Psalm One tree includes other images to help the reader decode that this is not simply any tree. It is the Tree of Life. The idea was that the followers of the Instructions of Moses are like a tree planted by a stream (Psalm 1:3). The reference to the Torah is essential as well because, as Sailhamer correctly notes, “The Pentateuch is neither an anthology of isolated stories nor a complete collection of laws. It is a book that tells a story that ultimately centers on one’s relationship to God.”[29] The relationship itself is because of this tree. In exploring the imagery of the tree woven into the Biblical text, it is vital to examine the reasonableness of believing images within the text are intentional and what contextual clues they offer the modern reader.
A psalmist is not simply a religious songwriter. There are many meaningful spiritual songs but only a select number of canonized psalms. Within the context of the Bible, a psalmist is someone through whom God uses to reveal His truth through poetic song. In this sense, a psalmist is a type of Biblical prophet, although his tools are more narrowly tailored.
In the Bible, a prophet is not simply one who sees the future. Future hope and future proclamations play a role in specific interactions, but the thing that unifies and defines the Biblical office is the phrase “thus saith the Lord.”. This phrase is also shared by psalmists, prophets, and those entrusted with the Scriptures. The personal nature allows expressions temporally connected to often intense moments within the life of a follower of Yahweh.
The compilers of the Tanakh chose to place a collection of songs within it. As addressed earlier, preaching a songbook could provide a contemporary pastor with difficulty preaching. The key to this difficulty may result in critically approaching the Psalms as a disconnected songbook. They may analyze the poem. Recognizing how a psalm weaves through the Bible offers clues to how anyone with a ministry of the Word should utilize it. In the most general sense, this means approaching the text as more than simple poetry. The text’s inclusion in the canon is the first lens through which it should be viewed.
Inspiration and the Compilers of the Psalms
Cole noted that modern form critics such as “Gunkel emphatically denied any purpose or meaning in the sequence while the unitary canonical approach asserts the opposite.”[30] The critical position has many adherents. Yet, it has an unescapable weakness. At some point, someone selected only these current psalms and arranged them in this particular order. The songs likely would have had independent origins. This origin does not preclude the possibility that these works were deliberately set into their current structure. God used original songwriters and later those who ordered the work into its current form. As Bulluck points out, “The editing of the Psalms, a massive process that itself required several centuries, has written a theological storyline into the collection.”[31] Howard says that “if we step back, we can also see patterns in the book’s ‘macrostructure.’” [32]
One could argue that the form is not a significant factor in interpreting the Psalms, but it is unreasonable to declare that the selection and order are entirely random. Therefore, the fundamental nature of the debate is not the existence of the intentionality of the structure. It is the authority with which that structure exerts. Additionally, whether the authority rests with the Psalm in its earliest form or derived from the final form passed on to future generations, it tells a theological story.
This theological story is a product of the Holy Spirit’s work as much as the original songs. Those preaching the Psalms would be served well by exploring individual pieces and their interconnectedness. This connection is why Childs suggests that Psalm One is an introduction that “gives coherence to the book,”[33] as each Psalm contributes to developing the wisdom matrix.”[34]
The Psalms as a Window to the Soul
There is a common challenge when dealing with the Hebrew narrative in the Tanakh. Hebrew is a language built around the verb and therefore does a fair job of describing actions. Therefore, a reader can “view” the activity through the narrative, but often the reader has to infer the rationale behind the move. Essentially you can “see” what someone does, but the inner struggle does not come forward either. The Psalms fill this piece well. An example of this challenge is found in Jacob’s wrestling with the Angel (Genesis 32:22-21). This story describes the fight, but the inner turmoil Jacob is struggling with has to be assumed.
Psalms give the reader an understanding of the hidden life, motivations, and conflict. At the same time, the narrative reveals the outside actions and consequences, and psalms offer a glimpse of the inside. Recognizing this importance motivates the student of the Psalms to address the assumptions that drive their understanding of the text. The Body of the Psalms matches life's spiritually high and low parts. More amazingly, the Psalms are always in effect, from laments to praises. At all times accurate, an individual Psalm might more directly correspond with the spiritual season through which a particular follower is walking. This idea reveals another clue toward understanding the Psalms. They form a bridge between the individual believer and the eternal.
The psalmist’s reflections on their internal struggle give voice to those struggles common to all Yahweh followers. This understanding is most critical when these struggles appear incongruent with the Biblical understanding of the psalmist. For example, in a lament, the psalmist can feel abandoned while declaring that he knows God is faithful. The psalmist’s expressions and experiences do not always need to describe a transcendent truth. It can be an honest expression of suffering. At the same time, the psalmists will often also proclaim the transcendent reality—a fact that is often a hoped-for relief of the current misery. Hopefulness is a thread that appears so quickly in the individual Psalms because it is the central unifying theme to the main structure of the Psalms. This hope points toward the future, restored life, and a recreation of the paradise image from the Bible's beginning.
A Tree Planted a Stream of Water
The Psalms as a Verbal Stained-Glass Window
Bullock says, “While the second commandment prevented Israel from imaging God in their iconography, it did not preclude their imaging him in word.” [35] This statement offers an essential lens through which to view the Psalms. The Psalms are verbal works of art functioning as personal and corporate acts of worship. In this way, they “are replete with “images” of God that are as powerful, or more so, than brush and paint could ever depict him.”[36] This understanding elevates the importance of themes and images.
The image that begins the Psalms is related closely to the images that start the Torah. The verbal stained glass picture is of a man who is “like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers. (Psalm 1:3).” Before exploring intent and meaning, the first thing which confronts the reader of this psalm is the elements: a tree, a stream, fruit, and leaf. The image offers a sense of peace and life. Can there be more to this image? Walton declares, “The idea of Scripture as God’s Word, his revelation of himself, carries a duty, an obligation, and a mandate for those seeking to read it seriously.”[37] Naturally, the next step would be the exploration of the elements of this image.
The Tree (עֵץ)
Exploring the word עֵץ (ʿēṣ), translated as a tree, reveals that it occurs over three-hundred times within the Tanakh. It is used consistently throughout the three broad collections of the Scriptures: the Torah, the Nevi’im, and the Kethubim.[38] The even distribution suggests that the word was most likely commonly available to all writers and did not require later scribal insertions. The earliest use of the word emphasizes that the word was likely important during all phases of Biblical writing. The earliest use is in the Genesis accounts of the creation of the Land and the Garden. It is a major plot point in the story and acts as the kernel in the development of the Torah.
There the “tree of life (ʿēṣ haḥayyîm) is mentioned…in the introduction and after the paradise narrative.”[39] Of course, there is another tree mentioned in that story as well. In the narrative, the choice between two trees is a significant plot point, just as the choice between righteousness and wickedness is presented in Psalm One. The end of the paradise narrative leads the reader to wish for the humans in the Garden to have made the other choice.
Ancient Near East Parallels
Niehaus suggests that parallelism is “rooted in truth: revealed truth in the Old Testament and the Bible, and distorted truth in the ancient Near East.”[40] Trees featured prominently in other Ancient Near East (ANE) cultures. There were many sacred trees such as “persea, holly, acacia, sycamore, tamarisk.”[41] Ringgren points out that since “wood is scarce in Egypt, it is, therefore, no wonder that trees, as providers of shade and fruit, played a role in religious ideas.”[42] For example, the Egyptian Book of the Dead notes that there are “two sycamores on the eastern border of the heavens, between which the sun rises.”[43] This imagery is exciting but not as significant as other texts.
The most apparent ANE parallel comes from the Egyptian wisdom literature: Thirty Teachings of Amen-em-ope. [44] This work offers a picture of two trees: one is a symbol of those who are foolish, and one is a symbol of those who are wise. It declares, “Fools talk out loud in the temple. They are like trees planted indoors (Psalms 1:4).”[45] and “The wise are soft-spoken. They are like trees planted in a garden. They flourish and double their yield (Psalms 1:3; Ezekiel 17:5–6).”[46] The similarity to Psalm One is apparent. The dating of the Egyptian text is somewhere between the writings of Moses and Solomon. It would be difficult to suggest which teaching influenced which.[47] What is also apparent is that the two trees in the learning are similar to “the best-known trees in the Old Testament… the two trees in the garden of Eden.”[48]
The Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil have a few near east parallels. Trees with magic powers, such as healing or holy trees defining sacred spaces, are ubiquitous. In a Babylonian tablet, there is a tale about Hammurabi. In this story, there is a reference to a sacred tree “as high as a mountain.”[49] This tree was either located at or was the Temple itself. Of another tree, Widengren points out that “the kiškanū tree appears to be ideologically important. He quotes an ancient text, “In Eridu, there is a black kiškanū tree; it was created in a pure place. Its appearance is like lapis lazuli; it spreads over Apsū.”[50]
Ringgren states, “trees played a role not only in the Canaanite cult of Baal but also in the cult of Yahweh [and] is reflected in vehement prophetic and Deuteronomistic polemics.”[51] The use of pagan worship at sacred trees or sacred orchards is a reoccurring theme of disobedience, with the Kings of Judea failing to remove these worship spaces as a sign of their inadequacy.
Original Audience Imagery
In the primal sense, a tree offers shade in the day's heat and food for people to eat. It is because of this that the ancient Israelites, “understood the fertility of the trees as a sign of God’s favor.”[52] Ringgren, Nielsen, and Fabry point out, "The significance of sacred trees for the Israelites can also be seen from descriptions of the temple.”[53] Sailhamer correctly observes that “the garden of Eden also appears deliberately to foreshadow the description of the tabernacle. The garden, like the tabernacle, was the place where man could enjoy the fellowship and presence of God.”[54] He also points out that “the Tree of Life stands guarded by the “cherubim” (Genesis 3:24), just as in the Sinai covenant, the Torah lies in the ark of the covenant guarded by the “cherubim” (Exodus 25:10–22; Deuteronomy 31:24–26).” [55]
In Genesis, the narrative of the image of the tree in the Garden seems to be repeated in the vineyard planted by Noah and finally by the altar where Abraham meets with the Angel of the Lord at the ʾēlôn môreh, oak of Moreh (Genesis 12:6–7). This pattern remains constant through the creation of the Tabernacle and the Temple and even in the ultimate Temple described in Ezekiel. Within the Qumran community, the word ʿēṣ appears a timber or wood, sometimes about a false wooden idol, but more interestingly, it is also used metaphorically in a Psalm that “compares the community to a tree that drinks the water of life.” [56]
Early Church Understanding
“To the one who conquers, I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God (Revelation 2:7)” The early church continued seeing the tree image connected to the Garden and heaven. Additionally, there was added connection to the “tree” on which Jesus was crucified; In this way, the death of Christ connects to the fruit of the Tree of Life. As Sailhamer pointed out, “Over time and throughout the remainder of the theology of the Old Testament, that promise increasingly develops and clarifies, finding its focus and fulfillment in the coming of Jesus Christ.”[57]
The church plays a role in this fulfillment as well. Niehaus says, “God has his Son build an earthly temple, the church, inhabited by God’s images, his people. God’s work of restoration will appear in its final form when his people inhabit that ultimate Eden.”[58] Niehaus nicely weaves the Eden image with the ʿēṣ of the Tree of Life. In this quote, he contrasts the correct image bearers of God, the church, with the false image bearers: the ʿēṣ of false gods or wooden idols.
From all this, it is apparent that the tree image bridges primal images and reflects that first paradise account. It can be used evangelistically cross-culturally, and it can be used as an image within the faith community to link and develop deeper theological thinking. It can then go reflected throughout the faith community until it finally comes to the psalmist who wrote Psalm One. Examining the other elements in the image promises to bring clarity and further ling Psalm One’s tree to the Tree of Life.
Streams (פָּלַג)
“There is a river whose streams make glad the city of God, the holy habitation of the Most High (Psalm 46:4).” Psalm 46 uses the same word as Psalm One, and it further blends ideas of the Garden of Eden, Jerusalem’s Temple, and Heaven. The lemma עַֽל־פַּלְגֵ֫י in Psalm 1:3 translated streams has a Hebrew root פָּלַג (peleg) and can mean an channel or canal. [59] It is used 26 times in the Old Testament. “All the forms of the verb refer to the secular process of dividing or employing… and Job 38:25 refers to the cutting off of an area by digging a channel for water.” [60] A concept like “watercourse” might be a solid conceptual idea hidden behind the word.
Ancient Near East Parallel
Water is essential within Mesopotamia as the region draws its name from being between two rivers. An Old Babylonian tale from the time of King Ammisaduqa (c. 1646–1626 BC)[61] declare about these two rivers, “The gods dug out the Tigris river. And then dug out the Euphrates … For 3,600 years, they bore the excess, Hard work, night and day. They groaned and blamed each other.”[62] This period is quite a bit longer than Yahweh’s six-day creation, but the idea of a sacred space defined by divinely established river boundaries is a strong parallel.
In an Akkadian story, there is a “holy river shore (in the underworld) where the (last) judgment of men is manifested.” In that holy place, salvation is offered as the Akkadian author declares, “(My) forehead was rubbed clean, my slavery mark was obliterated.”[63] Whether it was the Nile, the Tigris, the Euphrates, the Jordan, or the River Styx, there seems to be an understood connection to defining a holy space and eternal reward tied to these images. The river or channel imagery also appears to have a link to creation. In the Atum creations story, Nun declares, “I am the great god who came into being by himself.” Who is he? “The great god who came into being by himself” is water; he is Nun, the father of the gods.” [64]
In the tradition nearest to the Israelite belief, the “Ugaritic myth locates El’s home on the top of a mountain from which two rivers proceed to that provide all the water on earth.” This quote seems like the Garden, but it says that “his home is ‘in the midst of the headwaters of the Two Oceans.’ There El lived in a tent, and the divine assembly of the gods met at that place under his rule and authority.”[65] This imagery also parallels the Ezekiel Messianic Temple or even Heaven. As in other places, Ringgren notes that the context of the two rivers suggests, “we are therefore dealing with cosmic symbolism in the temple.”[66] In this picture, the water has a creative personification, but not everywhere in the ANE is the water imagery positive.
Currid notes, “The Enuma Elish teaches that the creation began as a cosmic struggle between order and chaos.”[67] The chaos was made up of three water gods, two of these deities, Apsu and Tiamat, gave birth to the other gods. “The gods of the lands, Anu, Enlil, and Ea, convened an assembly”[68] and rebelled to create the world in which humanity lives. [69] The water here is chaotic. Currid notes that while there are certainly similarities to the river and water referenced here, there is also a “stark contrast to that dark mythological polytheism.” [70]
Original Audience Imagery
Sailhamer notes, "A common view among early rabbis was that Adam was created from the same ground where the temple was later built, that is, in Jerusalem.” [71] In the Biblical account, glory goes to the single Creator, “who is the sole God of all reality. The water at creation (Genesis 1:2) is certainly no deity and not God’s foe or needs to be vanquished. It is mere putty in the hands of the Creator.”[72]
The word in peleg̱ with “the sense of a “watercourse” defines sacred spaces “with Yahweh, his city Jerusalem, and its sanctuaries.”[73] This meaning is the sense in has in Psalm 46. This sense used is the “‘watercourse’ of Yahweh is the source of all blessing (Psalm 65:10[9]) and “watercourses” make glad Jerusalem, the city of God (Psalm 46:5[4]) [74] It is not the same word used to describe the rivers that defined the Land in in Genesis, the peleg certain shares a range of meanings that fit well with the function of water in that account which divides and defines the Land and which channels the streams to water the trees in the Garden.
Early Church Understanding
“Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb(Revelation 22:1).” Neihaus lands on the early church understanding of the river image when he declares, “Christ is also Creator or Re-creator. He creates a “new heaven and a new earth,” with a temple presence that recalls Eden with its river and tree of life (Revelation 21:1–2; 22:1–2; cf. Genesis 2:9–10; Ezekiel 47:1–12).”[75]
In the apocryphal work, the Revelation of Paul, written between the Third and Fourth Century AD, the writer continues to use the same sort of imagery when he says, “he set me upon the river whose source springs up in the circle of heaven; and it is this river which encircleth the whole earth.”[76] It may be unclear how literal or figurative this reference is; what is clear is the similarity between the Garden and the Ezekiel Temple imagery.
Fruit (פָּרָה)The word translated fruit occurs 29 times in the Masoretic Text. The verbal form can be understood as “to bear fruit” or “to multiply.” [77] As a noun, it can be “tree fruit,” or it can be the product of some effort. In this way, it may correspond with the English phrase “fruit of your labor.”[78] In the LXX, the translators chose to emphasize “the idea of ‘multiplying’”[79] in their translations.
Ancient Near East Parallels
The importance of fruit for the survival of people makes the imagery reasonably straightforward. Additionally, certain fruits were viewed as helpful for virility or healing. Famously, within the Epic of Gilgamesh, the main character quests for a plant that will provide eternal life. To Urshanabi: Gilgamesh said, “This is the miraculous plant. This is the plant that gives eternal life. I will take this miraculous plant to Uruk, the city of sheep markets. An old man will eat it to test its properties.… He will become: ‘Old Man Now Young Again. ‘I will eat it myself and regain my youth.”[80] The parallel to the Tree of Life in the Garden has led some to suggest that one author may be “borrowing” another’s account.
In another curious similarity, Gilgamesh is cheated out of eternal life by a Serpent who steals the fruit. He says, “A snake smelled the fragrance of the plant. It came up from the water And carried off the plant. As it returned to the water, the snake shed its skin.” [81] Finally, this causes Gilgamesh to lament, “For whom has my heart pounded? I have nothing to show for my work. I have worked for this snake.….”[82]
Original Audience Imagery
“But their descendants, the Israelites, had many children and grandchildren. In fact, they multiplied [רָבָה] so greatly that they became extremely powerful and filled the land. (Exodus 1:7).” The image of fruit is more than just about immortality coming from the fruit of the tree of life to the original audience. The blessing of fruitfulness is pronounced early on and continues through the text in a more complex form. Sailhamer astutely observes the author of Exodus 1:7, “recalls the blessing of God in Genesis 1:28: “Be fruitful and multiply [רב].”[83] This blessing is first placed on humanity in the Garden, then restated after the Garden, and then after the flood, and then it intertwines with the blessings of the Patriarchs. Another image woven within it has both a positive and negative sense: the fruit of the vine.
Again, it is Sailhamer who notes that in the Garden, “God blessed humankind and planted (Genesis 2:8) a garden where they could enjoy his fellowship. At the close of the flood account, as the narrative returns to God’s “blessing” (Genesis 9:1) and Noah’s covenant with God (Genesis 9:17), the story of Noah turns again to the planting (Genesis 9:20) of an orchard.”[84] Like in the first account, the abuse of fruit leads to nakedness and shame. “Noah ate of the fruit of his orchard and became naked (Genesis 9:21), just as Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of their garden and realized their nakedness.”[85] The author of the Torah returns to this issue again as he describes an abuse with a similar element in the shameful account of Lot and his daughters (Genesis 19:30-38).
These examples do not mean the original audience viewed the fruit of the vine or wine as evil. It was used in worship, as noted when Melchizedek, king of Salem, high priest of the Most High, brought out bread and wine to celebrate Abram’s victory (Genesis 14:18). The problem is that as Sailhamer states, “The road from nature, and creation, will not lead back to God. Noah’s vineyard results in drunkenness, nakedness, and a curse, just as God’s good garden was the scene of the fall.”[86] Even good fruit can be used for a bad purpose when the use is disconnected from God’s intention. We cannot return to the Tree of Life through our wisdom, knowledge, and efforts. Even if we only seek to choose to do what we believe is good, the fruit becomes the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and not the fruit of the Tree of Life.
Early Church Understanding
“Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. (I Corinthians 11:27).” The early church was warned to approach the Lord's Supper with reverence as the partaking of this fruit of the vine could be celebrating and commemorating the salvation offered through Christ and therefore be similar to the fruit of the tree of Life, or it could be done in a way without Christ as a focus and be identical to the fruit from the other tree bringing judgment.
Fruit can also symbolize the consequence of sin. Neihaus notes, “‘Bloodshed and … violence’ (Ezekiel 7:23) are natural consequences of idolatry, in Ezekiel’s day as in our own because of idolatry and the spiritually “detestable things” that are its fruit, the Lord abandons his temple.”[87] Therefore, the believer's inner life could be revealed in the resulting fruit, whether the fruit of the Spirit or the fruit of disobedience.
The last element of the fruit imagery for the early church would be the multiplication of its membership and the compulsion to evangelize. Building upon the Jewish understanding of the multiplication of the Kingdom of God, evangelism resulting from obedience to the Great Commission is understood as the fruit of a faithful life, just as is the other expressions of the fruit of the Spirit.
Leaf (עָלֶה) and Chaff (מֹץ)
The words translated as leaf and chaff only occur in a handful of locations. They are not heavily utilized images weaving through the Bible, but they play roles in the Paradise narrative in Genesis and the imagery of Judgment at the end of time. The word (עָלֶה) ʿāleh, translated as “leaves, foliage,” occurs only 13 times in the Old Testament.[88] A couple of uses might provide insight into the imagery in Psalm One. After the flood, Noah released a dove who ultimately “returns with a fresh olive leaf, showing that vegetation has begun to grow on the earth once more (Genesis 8:11).”[89] There is a sense that a leaf or foliage reveals something about the tree on which they connect. Leaves may help identify a tree, but they are not the same or as important as fruit.
However, in the Wisdom and Prophetic literature, the leaf is used metaphorically, perhaps to denote a measure of health. For example, an author may describe something with withered leaves to describe something cursed or decaying. They may also speak of something never withering, pointing to something eternal. [90] There is a risk that leaves may also conceal to some degree as they are used in the Paradise narrative. Beyse noted that “After the sin “in the garden of Eden, e.g., Adam and Eve made loincloths out of fig leaves to cover their nakedness (Genesis 3:7).”[91] This action was unsuccessful. In this usage, the fig leaf has a curse and an insubstantial element.The lemma (מֹץ) mōṣ, can be understood as “chaff” or “straw” and occurs eight times in the Old Testament.[92] Ringgren says, “The most extensive use of this metaphor is found in Deutero-Isaiah (Isaiah 41:15f.)”[93] and points to winnowing, where the wind separates and removes the unwanted and useless material. This image of the wind, or perhaps God, separating is a critical element of this process.
Ancient Near East Parallels
“Leaves of three, let it be!” The idea of leaves revealing the health or identity of trees is a clear image that all cultures would readily understand. Nomadic or agrarian people groups needed a solid practical understanding of this in their daily lives. This understanding would naturally connect with the imagery here. The image of chaff was also universal. An example of the use of chaff is in the description of a weak enemy. One example was an ANE tablet that said, “Elamites, like those who bring forth woe, brandish their weapons. Above, like chaff blown about by the wind, the steppe.”[94] The point is that they are full of empty threats and can, therefore easily be discarded.
Original Audience Imagery
“The wicked are not so but are like chaff that the wind drives away. (Psalm 1:4).” Ringgren calls this “unequivocal: they do not endure, but quickly pass away. (Psalm 35:5) similarly wishes upon the petitioner’s adversaries: “Let them be like chaff before the wind, with the angel of Yahweh driving them on!” (Psalm 35:6 “Let their way be dark and slippery, with the angel of Yahweh pursuing them!”[95] The writers of the Psalms clearly express that those who remain wicked because they are working counter to the Torah ought to get their deserved punishment. The justice and Holiness of God are the focus of this imagery, as is the futility of remaining at war against God.
Early Church Understanding
The story of the cursed Fig Tree is a story that illustrates the use of leaf imagery by the early church. In that Gospel story, the tree looks healthy from afar, but on closer inspection, the fig tree does not have fruit. This scripture was a warning for the Temple worship, which looked good from afar, but many of the leaders there were not evidencing the fruit of obedience. Instead, they were preying upon those coming to worship. It also has a connection to the Garden account in that the fig leaves were used in an attempt to cover nakedness. This nakedness of Adam and Eve corresponded to their lack of the fruit of obedience.
Another lesson here is that the appearance of righteousness may be viewed a long way off. Where those leaves reflect the inner life, all are blessed, and the fruit of obedience is also found. However, a follower of Christ must do more than avoid the appearance of evil but cover their own nakedness. They must genuinely be righteous by trusting in Christ and showing the fruit of obedience.
Wind (רוּחַ)
The wind image has a subtle significance that increases as it is examined. The word (רוּחַ) ruach is used nearly 400 times throughout the Tanakh and almost a dozen times in Daniel alone.[96] It is related to the act of breathing, which helps explain how it translates as “wind,” “spirit,” and “life.” In the Pentateuch, most of the uses are in the sections focused more on faithful responses to God. It does not occur “in Leviticus and only twice in Deuteronomy; it is rare in legal material.” [97]
Ancient Near East Parallels
Mathews, Chavalas, and Walton remind us, "we must be impressed with how often God uses the familiar to build bridges to his people.”[98] The parallels between wind, breath, and spirit connection with life and creation are not uncommon. Neihaus points out, “Divine breath into mortals to make them alive recalls the creation of Adam, as God breathed into him the breath of life (Gen. 2:7). Such theological insights in Egypt are far from being innovations; rather, they echo primordial truth.”[99] While often mostly similar, there were often critical distinctions. Sometimes the breath itself was different. In one Mesopotamian creation myth, it was believed that while gods and people breathed, “only the gods, not humans, breathe the “good breath” of Marduk.”[100]
For the Egyptians, “Amon was originally the breath of life or the wind.” [101] Other ANE cultures had other similar images. For the Sumerians, Enli was the lord of the air. He was believed to be “the god of the wind and the atmosphere. According to one myth, he separated the sky from the earth, thus performing the fundamental act in the creation of the world.”[102] Both the Sumerian Enil and the Egyptian Amon share parallels with Yahweh. Like He, they were supposed to breathe life into humans and be involved in creation. Also, these beings were thought to be in a spirit form.
Original Audience Imagery
Sailhamer notes, “God’s theocratic rule is an act of creation/re-creation. Israel in its promised land is an emblem of humanity in the Garden, and Canaan is compared to Eden (Joel 2:3; in restoration prophecy, Isaiah 51:3; Ezekiel 36:35). So (symbolically) God recreates Eden by his theocratic rule.”[103] The wind element in Psalm 1:4 seems related to the judgment of removing the wicked at the end of time and is also strongly associated with the creation account.
The first occurrence of ruach is in Genesis 1:2. The word is understood as the Spirit of God hovering over the chaotic creations. The Spirit of God and a literal Wind sent by God are a major part of judgment and salvation in the Biblical narrative. In Noah’s salvation, “God made a wind blow over the earth, and the waters subsided (Genesis 8:1).” As Sailhamer points out, this foreshadows the later deliverance in the Exodus. He reminds us that God “sent “a strong east wind to dry up the waters before his people” (Exodus 14:21) so that they “went through on dry ground” Exodus 14:21–22).”[104]
This description of God’s rescue of Noah foreshadows God’s deliverance and is also used to show the giving of life and empowerment. Sailhamer pointed to Numbers Chapter Eleven when the “Lord sent “his Spirit” (ruach) upon the seventy elders (Numbers 11:25), and then “a wind” (ruach) went out from the Lord (Numbers 11: 31).[105] This picture of Life-giving and empowering imagery is carried through to the Early Church.
Early Church Understanding
“And the men marveled, saying, ‘What sort of man is this, that even winds and sea obey him (Matthew 8:27)?’” For the Early Church, the image of a “mighty wind” and the Spirit of God is deeply connected to the Church’s first Pentecost after the resurrection of Christ. This connection and its link to Psalm One is even further emphasized when it is understood that the celebration of Pentecost was the celebration of the Torah's giving and had a certain connection to the empowering of the seventy elders.
Through the Acts narrative, this imagery repeats, affirming God’s supernatural work through the various groups of people from Jerusalem to the Samaritans to the Gentiles. The wind and the Spirit descending like tongues of fire is an image that further links to the importance of the Holy Spirit coming upon the elders in Numbers Chapter Eleven.
That Will Preach: The Tree of Life in The Psalms, Kethubim
The new King Jehoiakim was instructed by Jeremiah the prophet to gather the people and speak “all the words that I command you to speak to them; do not hold back a word (Jeremiah 26:2).” This is the same calling of the modern pastor. When Paul describes his ministry, he declares, “I am innocent of the blood of all, for I did not shrink from declaring to you the counsel of God. (Acts 20:26-27).” Paul encourages those who follow him to continue this function. Passages written as arguments or narratives are reasonably straightforward, but what is one to do with those other sections? Certain sections do not fit into nice, weekly “bite-sized” pericopes or a standard six-to-eight-week sermon series.
Preaching poetry like in the Psalms or Wisdom literature like Proverbs or Ecclesiastes can be underutilized or skipped entirely because these written forms require more work exploring and exhorting within a typical preaching schedule. Köstenberger and Patterson even suggest the book of Proverbs is “perhaps the most difficult portion of wisdom literature to preach.”[106]
The Bible is not a collection of religious musings of disconnected individuals. It is work unified in the canonical landscape that Köstenberger and Patterson refer to as “the theo-drama, ‘big story,’ or meta-narrative of Scripture.”[107] The writers of the Bible understood this and used interwoven images and themes to help those searching God’s Word see the unity and provide the “reader sufficient rules to decode that message."[108]
Preaching the Psalms in Connection with Psalm One’s Tree of Life
The opening challenge with Psalms is to find a way to preach the whole text. It might be tempting to preach methodically, but the Bible is much more interconnected and organic. The essential element is understanding that the whole text is purposefully interconnected. When preaching in one area that is strongly connected with other places, it should be preached together. For example, Ecclesiastes should be preached with elements of Psalm One, Genesis, and Ezekiel because they all inform one another. Identifying and utilizing these major themes offer a way of keeping the whole message in view even while focusing on smaller sections.
The first two psalms are not the earliest written. Longman says, “According to the tradition of the titles, we have a poem as early as Moses (Psalm 90).”[109] Therefore, with Psalm One, the compilers of the psalms chose to add it to the beginning. The decision was to organize this collection of Psalms with a two-psalm opening into a five-book structure. The decision to divide the collection into five books, just as the Torah was also divided into five books, is likely more than a coincidence. As if to reinforce this similarity, the introductory psalm declares the righteous “delight is in the law [Torah] of the Lord, and on his law [Torah] he meditates day and night. (Psalm 1:2).”
Barber is correct that “the two first psalms as a prologue not only to the entire book but also to Book I:”[110] The two-book introduction work in tandem where the first sets “forth the blessedness of loving and keeping the law, and the latter celebrating the enthronement of Messiah.”[111] The five books, the Psalms’ main structure, bring hope. There is a choice to be part of the faithful, in league with the King, or remain rebellious with the wicked.[112] This choice is framed by the righteous-wicked divide set up in Psalm One. Furthermore, the Tree of Life image brings to the mind of the Torah reader that other tree in the Paradise story.
The compilers weave recurring themes throughout the work to reveal crucial theological doctrine. While Psalm One might be characterized as guiding a follower of Yahweh into properly living in His Kingdom, showing the King, or Messiah, throughout the Psalms is critical. In their commentary, Radmacher and Allen suggest “almost all the psalms point forward in some way to the coming Messiah and His eternal reign of righteousness.”[113] Even laments reveal their desire and hope for a better world.
The Psalmists also oscillate between physical oppression and oppression due to sinfulness to help move the experience beyond whatever might be specifically bothering the audience to a systemic problem that only God can address. He uses praises to remind the audience of the virtue and strength of their God. In this way, their hope for salvation and a restoration of that Paradise Garden and relationship with Him is reinforced.
The Psalm also develops the idea of an Eternal King who rules for the Father. From a Christian perspective, this is very much in line with teachings related to Jesus. Yet even without Jesus in view, the things the Messiah is to do are distinctly supernatural. The Righteous King emerges, offering deliverance promised by God. As Heiser suggests, this fuzziness between the Lord in Heaven and the Messiah Lord could lead one to “wonder whether there are two Yahwehs, one invisible in heaven and one visible on earth.”[114]
Furthermore, Heiser points to Paul’s work in Ephesians 4:8, which appears to be expounding on Psalm 68:18. According to his thinking, “Yahweh who is described as the conqueror of the demonic stronghold. For Paul it is Jesus, the incarnate second Yahweh, surrounded by the demonic Elohim, “bulls of Bashan,” fulfilling the imagery of Psalm 68.”[115] Heiser’s argument is strong, but its similarity to Paul’s argument further strengthens it.
Viewing the righteous-wicked struggle connected to the trees in Eden adds essential elements to the teaching. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is not seductive because people desire to be evil. It is because they believe that they will be able to be good gods themselves. The fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil results from not only diabolical desires but legalistic hypocrisy.
Throughout the collection, each book builds on one another, the Garden imagery developing and pointing toward Psalms Book V, where “the Davidic kingship reappears in important ways, so much so that we might speak of “the return of the king” as a keynote in this book.”[116] For example, Psalm 46 transfers the Garden image to a heavenly vision with a sacred river. The imagery blends the temple in the heavenly realms with the Temple in Ezekiel. Therefore, the promise points to a promised return ending with humanity under the authority of the Messiah. It promises hope for how things ought to be and how they once were in the Garden of Delight.
This structural hopefulness pointed the first audience toward a hope of a future Messiah. Now that he has been revealed, Psalms tells of the ability to share in that Garden experience. In the Great Commission, Jesus announces, “And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age (Matthew 28:20).” The threads of the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil move throughout the Kethubim. While the descriptions are not always on the surface, understanding is essential.
Preaching the Kethubim in Connection with Psalm One’s Tree of Life
The collection of books called the (כְּתוּבִים) Kethubim in Hebrew, the Hagiographa in Greek, or the Writing in English[117] were the last of the Old Testament books finalized.[118] It is reasonable to assume that those who completed the Biblical canon were involved in or impacted the selection of some elements within the completed Old Testament. In the Torah, humanity is defined by the choice to trust God and live in obedience or to rebel against Him and seek to define good and evil subjectively. Moses emphasizes this in the narrative with the fruit of two trees.
In Psalm One, the compilers want to remind the readers that the fruit of the Tree of Life is available to the righteous, obedient follower and that it is not the fruit they would receive if he or she attempts to pick only the “good” fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The righteous one is the one who trusts that the fruit God will offer is from the Tree of Life. A conscious connection to the first Trees in the Garden of Eden makes the reader sensitive to the life-giving Spirit/ Wind and the fruit and fruitfulness of a life dedicated to God.
The authors and compilers continue utilizing structures and purposeful insertions to reinforce critical ideas. The division of the righteous and the wicked move through the narrative with repeated tree and garden imagery that are also purposefully woven throughout.
It is a crucial and significant theological teaching that the tree that humanity continues to choose is not simply the Tree of the Knowledge of Evil. The choice to rebel against God does not always appear as diabolical fruit. It is often pleasing to the eyes (Genesis 3:6). The warning in Genesis is against the prideful legalism common to Pharisees who rejected Christ and those seeking empowerment through demonic powers and became active agents of the sinister.
Ecclesiastes and the Trees of Eden
“Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity.”(Ecclesiastes 1:2). This idea is central to the book of Ecclesiastes. Called Qoheleth in Hebrew, Ecclesiastes repeatedly uses the word (הֶבֶל) or heḇel throughout. According to Hamilton, this word is used thirty-six times in Qoheleth and “occurs at least once in each of the twelve chapters except chapter ten.”[119]
This constant use throughout is a significant reason for the “modern preference for reading the book as a whole.”[120] For example, Shead observes the consistency from the main title to the epilogue and argues for an essential unity.[121] The idea of reading Ecclesiastes as a whole book certainly has value, and the same argument can also apply to reading it in connection with the entire Kethubim. When that is done, the connection to Psalm One’s righteous-wicked dichotomy helps, but it is the extension of the idea to the two trees in the garden which bear the most fruit.
Two distinct voices emerge when reading this book in its present form. Webb points out, “In the main body of the work, we hear the Teacher speaking in the first person and addressing us directly.”[122] This means of instruction is effective as it gives the audience a general understanding of things by letting the Teacher voice both things the audience agrees with and things that challenge them. Furthermore, the Teacher can even give voice to something that is not wholly true, thereby setting up the narrator’s voice. The second voice is the narrator and likely the writer or compiler of the book.
As Webb astutely notes, “We shall need to be attuned to both voices, but the second is the interpreter of the first.”[123] The Teacher in Qoheleth declares, “That all human endeavor is heḇel is the basic conviction of the book.”[124] Some suggest that, like other wisdom books, Qoheleth teaches broad generalities that might have situational exceptions. For Example, Köstenberger and Patterson warn, “Don’t preach a proverb as if it had no time or covenantal constraints.”[125] This idea is convenient but results in a whole lot of subjective deconstructions.
A better approach can be seen with a different Patterson. He suggests that the Teacher’s goal was to “drive out from Israel and [the] church all who trade with fraudulent coin, and sweep the place clean with his broom, heḇel.”[126] Peterson shows that not all “heḇel” things are identical in this image. Instead, they are a “heḇel” because they will be treated similarly. This treatment is a bit of an oversimplification, but it does point to the importance of comparison within the word’s usages. Webb correctly observes that the idea “that something is heḇel forms the basis for a piece of advice or a question.”[127] This argument can come another way. When something is declared heḇel, the writer asks us to consider what is not heḇel. This idea leads to the best approach, which uses a Genesis parallel and the Psalm One tree.
The word heḇel contains within it the idea of a breath. Specifically, Swanson calls it a “unit of air that passes in and out of the lungs through mouth and nostrils, with a focus on its briefness and lack of content.”[128] Seybold says the word “consistently retains the meaning “breath.”[129] The “breath” points to creaturely existence and connects this idea with the breath of life.”[130] He notes that in a few instances, “ruach has an equivalent or similar meaning to heḇel”[131] It is the רוּחַ (ruach) or Spirit / Breath of the Lord that is hovering above the chaotic waters in Genesis 1:2.
Occurring within that same verse is the word תֹּהוּ (tohu) or emptiness to describe the empty land. Significantly, heḇel and tohu share a semantic field.[132] Further, the link between heḇel and ruach reinforces the idea that it compares God's eternally sustaining or essential things and the finite and fleeting things of this world or humanity.
Hamilton says heḇel’s uses can be subdivided into three groups: “vanity,” “senseless,” or “unsubstantial.”[133] Hamilton makes significant observations that are useful in translations. His focus on heḇel is good, but the main key to understanding is the larger Hebrew phrase is רַעְי֥וֹן רֽוּחַ. The phrase is translated as some form of “all is vanity [heḇel] and a striving after wind [ruach]” (Ecclesiastes 1:14, 17; 2:11, 17, 26; 4:4, 6, 16; 5:16, 6:9 )” in the ESV. This phrase directly compares heḇel and ruach. The sense of absurdity is in the comparison of one human breath measured against a great wind. An even more significant connection is in the relationship between heḇel and ruach.
Solomon’s creation of his version of the Garden of Eden (Ecclesiastes 2:4-8) further strengthens this relationship. In this garden, he planted trees, established a watering system, and peopled it. His garden, too, was insubstantial compared to God’s Paradise. The garden image brings the ultimate clarity because it has been the fruits of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil that the Teacher has been lamenting.
One might accuse the Teacher in the Qoheleth as the ultimate pessimist that views everything as meaningless. This accusation may have even been true of the Teacher, but it is not true of the author. In the presentation, he shares the Teacher’s pronouncement against all things that are not reliant on God as heḇel. The result of the Teacher’s call is not to reject everything but to abandon everything heḇel.
In the end, the narrator likely has the Garden of Eden in view as he calls humanity to reject the fruits of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and instead trust the eternal God and His Tree of Life as he declares, “Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14).”
Job and Proverbs and the Trees of Eden
Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs are considered wisdom literature.[134] On its face, a wisdom book may appear straightforward in its presentation; however, Job and Proverbs require the expositor to keep a firm eye on both the larger message of the book and the larger message intended by those who compiled the books together in the form of the Tanakh. Specifically, these books benefit from a connectedness to Psalm One and a comparison of the trees of Eden.
The approach to Job and Proverbs also benefits from an approach similar to that offered for Ecclesiastes. All three of these works address wisdom in different ways but share significant themes. All three include elements that can almost suggest they are themselves an attempt at a theodicy. Each work is presented in its form and might be its own subgenre. The book of Proverbs appears to be a collection of wise observations offering the reader the choice between being wise and foolish.
In Ecclesiastes, the reader is confronted by the teacher’s preaching, discussing his life’s search, and has some similarities to the split genre of Job. Fyall notes of Job, “No consensus has been reached on the overall genre of the book.”[135] Job oscillates between both narrative sections and poetic dialogue. These specific sub-genres show significant distinctives which would impact both how they are to be understood and how they can be presented. Even more important than genre is these books’ theological and Biblical interconnectedness. Apart from this context, a reader can draw the wrong conclusions from a text if viewed with too narrow a focus. For example, a superficial reading of Proverbs may lead a reader to believe that if one does good things, good outcomes will always happen, yet when looking at Job, the reader finds something different.
The Trees in the Garden significantly impact the Biblical Wisdom books. The Tree of Life rests on continual trust and submission to Yahweh. In Proverbs, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” is the recurrent theme.”[136] This wisdom is the fruit from the Tree of Life. Behind the image of this tree is the promise of restoration and salvation that is woven throughout. This tree is encouraging; however, the other Tree offers the best key to connecting all these works.
In the Garden, the Serpent promised that humanity would become gods by taking the other tree’s fruit. Mankind could experience good and evil and become definers of what would be good and evil. Throughout the Bible, generations rise in rebellion to live according to their desires or wisdom. This rebellion always ends with tragic consequences.
In Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, we hear the voice of people like Solomon, who describe the good fruit they found in their pursuit of wisdom. In Ecclesiastes, the narrator even points the reader to the idea that even the “best” fruit picking from the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil was inferior to the fruit resulting from fearing the Lord and eating from His Tree of Life. In Job, this conflict has ripples in the material and spiritual realms.
With Job, the story begins in the spiritual realm. The battle that plays out here should be viewed in light of the Serpent’s garden temptation. Understanding this as a continuation of that earlier battle helps inform both the preaching and the understanding of Job. Job is more than just a theodicy about why bad things happen to good people. It is the record of a continual battle with chaos.
Fyall correctly relates the Serpent in the Garden with the Behemoth and the Leviathan. He points out this Cosmic battle stretches throughout time and notes, “In Revelation 12 and 13, the dragon summons two beasts from sea and earth.”[137] The poetic imagery conveys a vital spiritual truth that echoes in the material world. More importantly, in both the account in Job and Revelation, we are reminded how the spiritual war that began in the Garden ends.
Conclusion
The Bible is a document based on hope. The hope of the Bible connects to two significant realizations. It is the shadow of two trees. In our lives, there is a sense that “things ought to be some way” and, at the same time, “they are not that way.” The hope whispers that perhaps there will be a time when the way things ought to be will be restored and replace how things are now. Apart from the Bible, humanity continues to seek to pick better fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Yet, even our best efforts are vanity, resulting in suffering and wickedness. There is another way.
In Psalm One, those who arranged the Bible have sought to shine a light on the other tree. The Tree of Life, connected with submission and following God (Psalm 1:2), has the fruit of obedience readily available. They highlight this availability with consistent themes to look backward and forward at the same time, yet always with the implied request for Humanity to choose this day who they will serve. The righteous-wicked divide is not based on picking better fruit but on faithing and following God.
The interconnections and consistent message in Psalm One link the Paradise account with future hope. The Old Testament moves the reader from trusting in their own works into trusting God’s plan and Anointed. We find the new Tree of Life and the New Living Water in this Messiah. This discovery defines renewed life. By His obedient death, Christ made the new fruit of the Tree of Life available. The choice from the Garden highlighted by Psalm One is available to humanity today. Yet through the efforts of the psalmists, authors, and compilers, we need not guess at the shadows. Their beautiful act of verbal worship has presented a clear picture of the same two trees shown in the Garden today. The result of the tree imagery is the apparent call from the authors and compiles for their readers to “choose this day which tree from which you will eat.”
Bibliography
Andersen, F. I. and Freedman, D. N., Amos. Anchor Bible 24A (New York, 1989).
Archer Jr., Gleason., A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 3rd. ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994).
Arnold, Elizabeth “Climate and Environment of the Levant,” in Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts, ed. Jonathan S. Greer, John W. Hilber, and John H. Walton (Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2018).
Augustine of Hippo, The City of God, Books VIII–XVI, ed. Hermigild Dressler, trans. Gerald G. Walsh and Grace Monahan, vol. 14, The Fathers of the Church (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1952).
Barr, James, The Semantics of Biblical Language (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1983).
Berkouwer, G. C., Holy Scripture, ed. Jack Bartlett Rogers, Studies in Dogmatics (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1975), 139
Beysem K. -M., “עָלֶה,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, trans. David E. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001).
Blaikie, William Garden, The Book of Joshua, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll, Expositor’s Bible (Hartford, CT: S.S. Scranton Co., 1903).Block, Daniel I., The Gospel according to Moses: Theological and Ethical Reflections on the Book of Deuteronomy (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2012).
Blomberg, Craig L. and Markley, Jennifer Foutz, A Handbook of New Testament Exegesis (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010).
Bodi, Daniel, “Mesopotamian and Anatolian Iconography,” in Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts, ed. Jonathan S. Greer, John W. Hilber, and John H. Walton (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2018).
Bosserman, Christina, “Iconography,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
Brenton, Lancelot Charles Lee, The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament: English Translation (London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1870).
Briggs, Charles A. and Briggs, Emilie Grace, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms, International Critical Commentary (New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1906–1907).
Brown, Francis, Driver, Samuel Rolles, and Briggs, Charles Augustus, Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977).
Bullock, C. Hassell, “The Psalms and Faith/Tradition,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2013).
Caiafa, Luigi, “Mesopotamia, Archaeology Of, Middle Bronze through Iron Age,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
Calvin, John and King, John, Commentary on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis, vol. 1 (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2010).
Cassuto, U., A Commentary on the Book of Genesis: Part I, From Adam to Noah (Genesis I–VI 8), trans. Israel Abrahams (Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, The Hebrew University, 1998), 282.
Charles, Robert Henry, ed., Apocrypha of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913).
Chou, Abner, The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers: Learning to Interpret Scripture from the Prophets and Apostles (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic, 2018).
Clabeaux, John J., “Marcion,” ed. David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992).
Clines, David J. A., ed., The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew: English–Hebrew Index; Word Frequency Table, vol. IX (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2016),
Cole, Robert L., “Psalms 1–2: The Psalter’s Introduction,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2013).
Collins, C. John, “Reading Genesis 1–2 with the Grain: Analogical Days,” in Reading Genesis 1–2: An Evangelical Conversation, ed. J. Daryl Charles (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2013).
Cross, F. L. and Livingstone, Elizabeth A., eds., The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2005).
Cundall, Arthur E. and Morris, Leon, Judges and Ruth: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 7, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1968).
Currid, John D., Against the Gods: The Polemical Theology of the Old Testament (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2013).
Currid, John D., A Study Commentary on Genesis: Genesis 25:19–50:26, vol. 2, EP Study Commentary (Darlington, England; Carlisle, PA: Evangelical Press, 2003).
Day, John, From Creation to Babel: Studies in Genesis 1–11 (London; New Delhi; New York; Sydney: Bloomsbury, 2013).
Dell, Katharine J., “Reading Ecclesiastes with the Scholars,” in Exploring Old Testament Wisdom: Literature and Themes, ed. David G. Firth and Lindsay Wilson (Apollos, 2016),
Dempster, Stephen G., Dominion and Dynasty: A Biblical Theology of the Hebrew Bible, ed. D. A. Carson, vol. 15, New Studies in Biblical Theology (England; Downers Grove, IL: Apollos; InterVarsity Press, 2003), 30.
Dods, Marcus, “The Book of Genesis,” in The Expositor’s Bible: Genesis to Ruth, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll, vol. 1, Expositor’s Bible (Hartford, CT: S.S. Scranton Co., 1903).
Dodson, Derek S. and Smith, Katherine E., eds., Exploring Biblical Backgrounds: A Reader in Historical and Literary Contexts (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2018).
Elwell, Walter A. and Comfort, Philip Wesley, Tyndale Bible Dictionary, Tyndale Reference Library (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001).
Ernesti, J. A., Principles of Biblical Interpretation, trans. Charles H. Terrot (Edinburgh: Thomas Clark, 1832), 1:5
Faro, Ingrid, “Semantics,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
Firth, David G. Including the Stranger: Foreigners in the Former Prophets, ed. D. A. Carson, vol. 50, New Studies in Biblical Theology (London; Downers Grove, IL: Apollos; IVP Academic: An Imprint of InterVarsity Press, 2019
Firth, David G., “The Teaching of the Psalms,” in Interpreting the Psalms: Issues and Approaches, ed. David Firth and Philip S. Johnston (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2005).
Forlines, F. Leroy, Biblical Systematics: A Study of the Christian System of Life and Thought (Nashville, TN: Randall House Publications, 1975).
Franke, John R., ed., Old Testament IV: Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1–2 Samuel, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005).
Freedman, David Noel, ed., “Kethubim,” The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992).
Freeman, James M. and Chadwick, Harold J., Manners & Customs of the Bible (North Brunswick, NJ: Bridge-Logos Publishers, 1998).
Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G., Ariel’s Bible Commentary: The Book of Genesis, 1st ed. (San Antonio, TX: Ariel Ministries, 2008).
Fuhr Jr., Richard Alan and Köstenberger, Andreas J., Inductive Bible Study: Observation, Interpretation, and Application through the Lenses of History, Literature, and Theology (Nashville, TN: B&H, 2016
Fyall, Robert S., Now My Eyes Have Seen You: Images of Creation and Evil in the Book of Job, ed. D. A. Carson, vol. 12, New Studies in Biblical Theology (Downers Grove, IL; England: InterVarsity Press; Apollos, 2002).
Gane, Roy E., Old Testament Law for Christians: Original Context and Enduring Application (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A division of Baker Publishing Group, 2017).
Garrett, Duane A., Rethinking Genesis: The Sources and Authorship of the First Book of the Pentateuch (Fearn, Great Britain: Christian Focus Publications, 2000).
Garrett, James Leo Jr., Systematic Theology: Biblical, Historical, and Evangelical, Fourth Edition., vol. 1 (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2014), 123.
Gilliland, Maegan C. M. and Mangum, Douglas, “Writing in the Ancient Near East,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
Goldsworthy, Graeme, Proverbs: The Tree of Life, ed. Paul Barnett, Reading the Bible Today Series (Sydney, South NSW: Aquila Press, 2011).
Greer, Jonathan S., Hilber, John W., and Walton, John H., “Introduction,” in Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts, ed. Jonathan S. Greer, John W. Hilber, and John H. Walton (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2018).
Grudem, Wayne, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, Second Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2020).
Hamilton, Victor P., “463 הָבַל,” ed. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999).
Harris, R. Laird, Archer Jr., Gleason L., and Waltke, Bruce K., eds., Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999).
Heiser, Michael S. and, Penner, Ken, “Old Testament Greek Pseudepigrapha with Morphology” (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2008).
Heiser, Michael S., The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible, First Edition. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2015).
Hepper, F. N., “Trees,” ed. D. R. W. Wood et al., New Bible Dictionary (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996).
Hess, Richard S., “The Ancestral Period,” in Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts, ed. Jonathan S. Greer, John W. Hilber, and John H. Walton (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2018.
Hodge, Charles, Systematic Theology, vol. 1 (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997),
House, Paul R. Unity of the Twelve- Bible and Literature Series, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Supplement Series, 27 97. (Sheffield Academic Press, 1990).
Howard Jr., David M., “Divine and Human Kingship: As Organizing Motifs in the Psalter,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2013).
Irenaeus of Lyons, The Writings of Irenæus, ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, trans. Alexander Roberts and W. H. Rambaut, vol. 1, Ante-Nicene Christian Library (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: T. & T. Clark; Hamilton & Co.; John Robertson & Co., 1868–1869).
Jamieson, Robert, Fausset, A. R., and Brown, David, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, vol. 1 (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).
Kedar-Kopfstein, B. and Fabry, Heinz-Josef, “פָּרָה,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, trans. Douglas W. Stott, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003).
Kitchen, K. A., On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006).
Köstenberger, Andreas J. and Patterson, Richard D., Invitation to Biblical Interpretation: Exploring the Hermeneutical Triad of History, Literature, and Theology, Invitation to Theological Studies Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic & Professional, 2011).
La Sor, William Sanford, Hubbard, David Allan, and Bush, Frederic William, Old Testament Survey: The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996).The Lexham Analytical Lexicon of the Hebrew Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2017).
Lawson, Steven J., “Chapter 6: The Preacher of God’s Word,” in John Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine, and Doxology, ed. Burk Parsons (Lake Mary, FL: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2008).
Liddell, H.G., A Lexicon: Abridged from Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1996).
Louth, Andrew and Conti, Marco, eds., Genesis 1–11, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001).
Longman III, Tremper, How to Read the Psalms (Downers Grove, IL; Nottingham, England: IVP Academic; Inter-Varsity Press, 1988).
Lust, Johan, Eynikel, Erik, and Hauspie, Katrin, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint: Revised Edition (Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft: Stuttgart, 2003).
Maclaren, Alexander, “The Psalms,” in The Expositor’s Bible: Psalms to Isaiah, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll, vol. 3, Expositor’s Bible (Hartford, CT: S.S. Scranton Co., 1903).
Matthews, Victor Harold and Benjamin, Don C., Old Testament Parallels: Laws and Stories from the Ancient Near East, 4th ed. (New York; Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2016).
Matthews, Victor Harold, Chavalas, Mark W., and Walton, John H., The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000).
McDowell, Catherine L. The Image of God in the Garden of Eden the Creation of Humankind in Genesis 2:5-3:24 in Light of the Mīs Pî Pīt Pî and Wpt-r Rituals of Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt /. Vol. 15. Winona Lake, Indiana :: Eisenbrauns,, 2015.
McKenzie, Steven L., Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: William. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010).Merwe, Christo van der, The Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2004).
Mouton, Alice, “Hittite Literature,” in Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts, ed. Jonathan S. Greer, John W. Hilber, and John H. Walton (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2018).
Maclaren, Alexander, “The Psalms,” in The Expositor’s Bible: Psalms to Isaiah, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll, vol. 3, Expositor’s Bible (Hartford, CT: S.S. Scranton Co., 1903).
Matthews, Victor Harold and Benjamin, Don C., Old Testament Parallels: Laws and Stories from the Ancient Near East, 4th ed. (New York; Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2016).
Matthews, Victor Harold, Chavalas, Mark W., and Walton, John H., The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000).
Niehaus, Jeffrey J., Ancient Near Eastern Themes in Biblical Theology (Kregel Academic, 2008).
O’Keefe, John J. and Reno, R. R., Sanctified Vision: An Introduction to Early Christian Interpretation of the Bible (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005).
Osborne, Grant R., The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, Rev. and expanded, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006).
Oswalt, John N., The Bible among the Myths: Unique Revelation or Just Ancient Literature? (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009).
Peterson, Eugene H., Five Smooth Stones for Pastoral Work (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1992).
Pitkänen, Pekka, “The Settlement Period,” in Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts, ed. Jonathan S. Greer, John W. Hilber, and John H. Walton (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2018).
Pritchard, James Bennett, ed., The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament , 3rd ed. with Supplement. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969).
Radmacher, Earl D., Allen, Ronald Barclay, House, and Wayne, H., Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Commentary (Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers, 1999).
Rainey, Anson F. and Notley, R. Steven Carta’s New Century Handbook and Atlas of the Bible (Jerusalem: Carta Jerusalem, 2015).
Reardon, Patrick Henry, Christ in the Psalms (Chesterton, IN: Ancient Faith Publishing, 2000).
Ringgren, Helmer, “מַעֲלָל, מַעֲשֶׂה and מֹץ,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck and Heinz-Josef Fabry, trans. Douglas W. Stott, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997).
Ringgren, Helmer, Nielsen, K., and Fabry, Heinz-Josef, “עֵץ,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, trans. David E. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001).
Roberts, Alexander, Donaldson, James, and Coxe, A. Cleveland, eds., “Revelation of Paul,” in Fathers of the Third and Fourth Centuries: The Twelve Patriarchs, Excerpts and Epistles, the Clementina, Apocrypha, Decretals, Memoirs of Edessa and Syriac Documents, Remains of the First Ages, trans. Alexander Walker, vol. 8, The Ante-
Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1886).
Sailhamer, John, First and Second Chronicles, Everyman’s Bible Commentary (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1983).
Sailhamer, John H., “Genesis,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1990).
Sailhamer, John H., Genesis Unbound: A Provocative New Look at the Creation Account, 2nd ed. (Colorado Springs, CO: Book Villages, 2011).
Sailhamer, John H., Introduction to Old Testament Theology: A Canonical Approach (Grand Rapids, MI: ZondervanPublishingHouse, 1995).
Sailhamer, John H., The Meaning of the Pentateuch: Revelation, Composition, and Interpretation (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009).
Sailhamer, John H., The Pentateuch as Narrative: A Biblical-Theological Commentary, ed. Gary Lee (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992).
Sala, Maura “Beit Mirsim, Tell,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
Sarna, Nahum M., Genesis, The JPS Torah Commentary (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1989).
Schunck, K. -D., “פָּלַג,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, trans. David E. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001).
Seybold, K., “הֶבֶל,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, trans. John T. Willis and Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978).
Sheridan. Mark, ed., Genesis 12–50, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 32.
Simian-Yofre, H. and Heinz-Josef Fabry, “נחם,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, trans. David E. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998).
Smith, James E. The Books of History, Old Testament Survey Series , 1995).
Snearly, Michael K. “The Return of the King: An Editorial—Critical Analysis of Psalms 107–150” (Ph.D. diss., Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary, 2012).
Sparks, Jack Norman, The Orthodox Study Bible: Notes (Thomas Nelson, 2008).
Starling, David I., Hermeneutics as Apprenticeship: How the Bible Shapes Our Interpretive Habits and Practices (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2016).
Stanglin, Keith D., The Letter and Spirit of Biblical Interpretation: From the Early Church to Modern Practice (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2018).
Steinmann, Andrew E., Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary, ed. David G. Firth, vol. 1, The Tyndale Commentary Series (London: Inter-Varsity Press, 2019).
Strong, Augustus Hopkins, Systematic Theology (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1907).
Strong, James, Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon (Woodside Bible Fellowship, 1995).
Stuart, Douglas K., “Documentary Hypothesis,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
Swanson, James, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Hebrew (Old Testament) (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).
Tan, Randall and DeSilva, David A., Logos Bible Software, The Lexham Greek-English Interlinear Septuagint: Rahlfs Edition (Logos Bible Software, 2009).
Tengström, S. and Fabry, Heinz-Josef, “רוּחַ,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, trans. David E. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2004).
Tov, Emanuel, The Parallel Aligned Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Texts of Jewish Scripture (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2003).
VanGemeren, Willem A., “Psalms,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1991).
VanGemeren, Willem A., “Entering the Textual World of the Psalms: Literary Analysis,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2013).
Waltke, Bruce K., “Biblical Theology of the Psalms Today: A Personal Perspective,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2013).
Walton, John H., “Interactions in the Ancient Cognitive Environment,” in Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts.
Walton, John H., “Reading Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology,” in Reading Genesis 1–2: An Evangelical Conversation, ed. J. Daryl Charles (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2013).
Webb, Barry G., The Book of the Judges: An Integrated Reading, vol. 46, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1987), vol. 46.
Webb, Barry G., Five Festal Garments: Christian Reflections on the Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, ed. D. A. Carson, vol. 10, New Studies in Biblical Theology (Apollos; InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, IL; England, 2000).
Wesselschmidt, Quentin F., ed., Psalms 51–150, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture OT 8 (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2007).
Whybray, R. N., The Making of the Pentateuch (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987), 221–42
Wolf, Herbert “Judges,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992).
Wright, J. Robert, ed., Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005).
Zuck, Roy B., A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, electronic ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1991).
[1] Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: With Werkgroep Informatica, Vrije Universiteit Morphology; Bible. O.T. Hebrew. Werkgroep Informatica, Vrije Universiteit. (Logos Bible Software, 2006), Ps 1:1–4.
[2] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Ps 1:1–4.
[3] Steven J. Lawson, “Chapter 6: The Preacher of God’s Word,” in John Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine, and Doxology, ed. Burk Parsons (Lake Mary, FL: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2008), 76.
[4] Andrew E. Steinmann, Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary, ed. David G. Firth, vol. 1, The Tyndale Commentary Series (London: Inter-Varsity Press, 2019), 15.
[5] , Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, Rev. and expanded, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006). 25.
[6] Steven L. McKenzie, Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: William. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010), 26.
[7] Ibid., 7.
[8] John R. Franke, ed., Old Testament IV: Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1–2 Samuel, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), xvii.
[9] Ibid.. xvii.
[10] J. A. Ernesti, Principles of Biblical Interpretation, trans. Charles H. Terrot (Edinburgh: Thomas Clark, 1832), 1:5.
[11] Bruce K. Waltke, “Biblical Theology of the Psalms Today: A Personal Perspective,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2013), 24.
[12] William Garden Blaikie, The Book of Joshua, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll, Expositor’s Bible (Hartford, CT: S.S. Scranton Co., 1903), 633.
[13] McKenzie, Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading, 38. Chavalas
[14] Matthews, Chavalas, and Walton, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000)
[15] Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, Rev. and expanded, 2nd ed.,.
[16] McKenzie, Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading, 27.
[17] John J. Clabeaux, “Marcion,” ed. David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 514.
[18] Keith D. Stanglin, The Letter and Spirit of Biblical Interpretation: From the Early Church to Modern Practice (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2018), 30.
[19] Roy E. Gane, Old Testament Law for Christians: Original Context and Enduring Application (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A division of Baker Publishing Group, 2017), 3.
[20] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, Second Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2020), 68.
[21] John N. Oswalt, The Bible among the Myths: Unique Revelation or Just Ancient Literature? (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 150.
[22] John H. Sailhamer, Introduction to Old Testament Theology: A Canonical Approach (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995), 200.
[23] Kenneth A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006), 499.
[24] McKenzie, Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading, 26.
[25] John J. O’Keefe and R. R. Reno, Sanctified Vision: An Introduction to Early Christian Interpretation of the Bible (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005), 13.
[26] Abner Chou, The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers: Learning to Interpret Scripture from the Prophets and Apostles (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic, 2018), 28.
[27] Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament, 218.
[28] Chou, The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers: Learning to Interpret Scripture from the Prophets and Apostles, 28.
[29] John H. Sailhamer, The Meaning of the Pentateuch: Revelation, Composition, and Interpretation (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009), 283.
[30] Robert L. Cole, “Psalms 1–2: The Psalter’s Introduction,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2013), 185.
[31] C. Hassell Bullock, “The Psalms and Faith/Tradition,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2013), 54.
[32] David M. Howard Jr., “Divine and Human Kingship: As Organizing Motifs in the Psalter,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2013), 204.
[33] David Firth, “The Teaching of the Psalms,” in Interpreting the Psalms: Issues and Approaches, ed. David Firth and Philip S. Johnston (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2005), 159–74.
[34] Willem A. Vangemeren, “Entering the Textual World of the Psalms: Literary Analysis,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2013), 30.
[35] Bullock, “The Psalms and Faith/Tradition,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, 59.
[36] Ibid., 59.
[37] John H. Walton, “Reading Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology,” in Reading Genesis 1–2: An Evangelical Conversation, ed. J. Daryl Charles (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2013), 141.
[38] R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, eds., Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999), 689.
[39] Helmer Ringgren, K. Nielsen, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, “עֵץ,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, trans. David E. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001), 272.
[40] Jeffrey J. Niehaus, Ancient Near Eastern Themes in Biblical Theology (Kregel Academic, 2008), 178.
[41] Ringgren, Nielsen, and Fabry, “עֵץ,” Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 266.
[42] Ibid.
[43] Ibid.
[44] Victor H. Matthews and Don C. Benjamin, Old Testament Parallels: Laws and Stories from the Ancient Near East, 4th ed. (New York; Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2016), 325.
[45] Ibid., 328.
[46]Matthews and Benjamin, Old Testament Parallels: Laws and Stories from the Ancient Near East, 328.
[47] Ringgren, Nielsen, and Fabry, “עֵץ,” Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 266.266.
[48] Ibid., 272.
[49] James Bennett Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament , 3rd ed. with Supplement. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), 271.
[50] Ringgren, Nielsen, and Fabry, “עֵץ,” Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 267.
[51] Ibid., 271.
[52] Ringgren, Nielsen, and Fabry, “עֵץ,” Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 270.
[53] Ibid., 271.
[54] John H. Sailhamer, Genesis Unbound: A Provocative New Look at the Creation Account, 2nd ed. (Colorado Springs, CO: Book Villages, 2011), 80.
[55] John H. Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative: A Biblical-Theological Commentary, ed. Gary Lee (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 110–118.
[56] Ringgren, Nielsen, and Fabry, “עֵץ,” Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 276.
[57] Sailhamer, Introduction to Old Testament Theology: A Canonical Approach, 187.
[58] Niehaus, Ancient Near Eastern Themes in Biblical Theology, 172.
[59] Harris, Archer Jr., and Waltke, eds., Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999), 723.
[60] K. -D. Schunck, “פָּלַג,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, trans. David E. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001), 547.
[61] John D. Currid, Against the Gods: The Polemical Theology of the Old Testament (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2013), 50.
[62] Ibid., 50–51.
[63] Pritchard, The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 437.
[64] Pritchard, The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament , 4.
[65] Currid, Against the Gods: The Polemical Theology of the Old Testament, 133.
[66] Ringgren, Nielsen, and Fabry, “עֵץ,” Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 267.
[67] Currid, Against the Gods: The Polemical Theology of the Old Testament,, 36.
[68] Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament , 3rd ed. 593.
[69] Currid, Against the Gods: The Polemical Theology of the Old Testament, 37.
[70] Ibid., 46.
[71] Sailhamer, Genesis Unbound: A Provocative New Look at the Creation Account, 2nd ed., 230.
[72] Currid, Against the Gods: The Polemical Theology of the Old Testament, 46.
[73] Schunck, “פָּלַג,” ed. Botterweck, Ringgren, and Fabry, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 548.
[74] Ibid..
[75] Niehaus, Ancient Near Eastern Themes in Biblical Theology, 31.
[76] Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, eds., “Revelation of Paul,” in Fathers of the Third and Fourth Centuries: The Twelve Patriarchs, Excerpts and Epistles, the Clementina, Apocrypha, Decretals, Memoirs of Edessa and Syriac Documents, Remains of the First Ages, trans. Alexander Walker, vol. 8, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1886), 577.
[77] B. Kedar-Kopfstein and Heinz-Josef Fabry, “פָּרָה,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, trans. Douglas W. Stott, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003), 82.
[78] Ibid..
[79] Ibid., 83.
[80] Matthews and Benjamin, Old Testament Parallels: Laws and Stories from the Ancient Near East, 51–52.
[81] Ibid., 52.
[82] Ibid.
[83] Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative: A Biblical-Theological Commentary, 121.
[84] Sailhamer, The Meaning of the Pentateuch: Revelation, Composition, and Interpretation, 307.
[85] Ibid.
[86]Sailhamer, The Meaning of the Pentateuch: Revelation, Composition, and Interpretation, 586.
[87] Niehaus, Ancient Near Eastern Themes in Biblical Theology, 127.
[88] K. -M. Beyse, “עָלֶה,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, trans. David E. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001), 114.
[89] Ibid..
[90] Beyse, “עָלֶה,” ed. Botterweck, Ringgren, and Fabry, trans. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 114.
[91] Ibid..
[92] Helmer Ringgren, “מַעֲלָל, מַעֲשֶׂה and מֹץ,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck and Heinz-Josef Fabry, trans. Douglas W. Stott, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997), 464.
[93] Ibid..
[94] Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament , 3rd ed. 616.
[95] Ringgren, “מַעֲלָל, מַעֲשֶׂה and מֹץ,” ed. Botterweck and , trans. Stott, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 465.
[96] S. Tengström and Heinz-Josef Fabry, “רוּחַ,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, trans. David E. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2004), 372.
[97] Tengström and Fabry, “רוּחַ,” ed. Botterweck and Ringgren, trans. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 372.
[98] Matthews, Chavalas, and Walton, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament.
[99] Niehaus, Ancient Near Eastern Themes in Biblical Theology, 41.
[100] Tengström and Fabry, “רוּחַ,” ed. Botterweck and Ringgren, trans. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 372.
[101] Niehaus, Ancient Near Eastern Themes in Biblical Theology, 41.
[102] Tengström and Fabry, “רוּחַ,” ed. Botterweck and Ringgren, trans. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 369.
[103] Niehaus, Ancient Near Eastern Themes in Biblical Theology, 31.
[104] Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative: A Biblical-Theological Commentary, 127.
[105] Ibid., 385.
[106] Köstenberger and Patterson, Invitation to Biblical Interpretation: Exploring the Hermeneutical Triad of History, Literature, and Theology, Invitation to Theological Studies Series, 766.
[107] Ibid., 237.
[108]Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, Rev. and expanded, 2nd ed., 26.
[109] Tremper Longman III, How to Read the Psalms (Downers Grove, IL; Nottingham, England: IVP Academic; Inter-Varsity Press, 1988), 42.
[110] Cole, “Psalms 1–2: The Psalter’s Introduction,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, 183.
[111] Alexander Maclaren, “The Psalms,” in The Expositor’s Bible: Psalms to Isaiah, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll, vol. 3, Expositor’s Bible (Hartford, CT: S.S. Scranton Co., 1903), 9.
[112] Cole, “Psalms 1–2: The Psalter’s Introduction,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, 184.
[113] Earl D. Radmacher, Ronald Barclay Allen, and H. Wayne House, Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Commentary (Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers, 1999), 722.
[114] Michael S. Heiser, The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible, First Edition. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2015), 140.
[115] Ibid., 292.
[116] Michael K. Snearly “The Return of the King: An Editorial—Critical Analysis of Psalms 107–150” (Ph.D. diss., Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary, 2012).
[117] David Noel Freedman, ed., “Kethubim,” The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 31.
[118] William Sanford La Sor, David Allan Hubbard, and Frederic William Bush, Old Testament Survey: The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996), 599.
[119] Victor P. Hamilton, “463 הָבַל,” ed. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999), 204.
[120], Katharine J. Dell, “Reading Ecclesiastes with the Scholars,” in Exploring Old Testament Wisdom: Literature and Themes, ed. David G. Firth and Lindsay Wilson (Apollos, 2016), 83.
[121] Shead, A., ‘Ecclesiastes from the Outside In’, RTR 55 (1996), pp. 24–37.
[122]Barry G. Webb, Five Festal Garments: Christian Reflections on the Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, ed. D. A. Carson, vol. 10, New Studies in Biblical Theology (Apollos; InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, IL; England, 2000), 84.
[123] ibid., 84.
[124] ibid., 88.
[125] Andreas J. Köstenberger and Richard D. Patterson, Invitation to Biblical Interpretation: Exploring the Hermeneutical Triad of History, Literature, and Theology, Invitation to Theological Studies Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic & Professional, 2011), 767.
[126], Eugene H. Peterson, Five Smooth Stones for Pastoral Work (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1992), 154.
[127] Webb, Five Festal Garments: Christian Reflections on the Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, 87.
[128] James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Hebrew (Old Testament) (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).
[129] K. Seybold, “הֶבֶל,” ed. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, trans. John T. Willis and Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978), 315.
[130] ibid., 318.
[131] ibid., 315.
[132] ibid., 314–315.
[133] Hamilton, “463 הָבַל,” ed. Harris, Archer Jr., Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 205.
[134] Köstenberger and Patterson, Invitation to Biblical Interpretation: Exploring the Hermeneutical Triad of History, Literature, and Theology, Invitation to Theological Studies Series, 766.
[135] Robert S. Fyall, Now My Eyes Have Seen You: Images of Creation and Evil in the Book of Job, ed. D. A. Carson, vol. 12, New Studies in Biblical Theology (Downers Grove, IL; England: InterVarsity Press; Apollos, 2002), 23.
[136] J. Robert Wright, ed., Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), xx.
[137] Fyall, Now My Eyes Have Seen You: Images of Creation and Evil in the Book of Job, ed. Carson, vol. 12, 189.
Our Ministry Partners
|
|
|
"Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you..." MATT 28:19-20a NLT
Proudly powered by Weebly