![]() Since we know when those empires existed if we can see a distinct match between the Pentateuch covenants and those S/V covenants of other nations then a date can be placed on the writing of the Pentateuch. ![]() Kenneth Kitchen gives a large amount of information about the changes to the suzerain covenant forms of the surrounding nations (during the era of the empires of those nations, such as the Hittite Empire, when they were producing Suzerain/Vassal covenants) in his book "On the Reliability of the Old Testament". And the date of the Exodus obviously affects the date of the writing of the books of and by Moses. However, Kenneth Kitchen believes the Exodus happened about 1260 BC (Late Exodus) and Bryant Wood believes the Exodus happened 1446 BC (Early Exodus). This is what the evidence of the covenant forms from the Pentateuch compared to the covenant forms of the surrounding nations is telling them: and this is why the seeking of a match with the covenant forms of the surrounding nations is so valuable. In the red corner we have Dr Bryant Wood.īoth take the Bible seriously, both believe the Exodus actually happened, and both argue that the Pentateuch was written before 1200 BC: both are emphatic that the Pentateuch could not have been written after this date, and the match of covenant structure in the Pentateuch with covenants before 1200 BC is yet another piece of strong evidence against a late writing of the books. So in the blue corner we have Professor Kenneth Kitchen with a lot about the different covenant forms over the centuries in the Ancient Near East (ANE). The aim of finding a match between the suzerain covenant form of the Pentateuch and that of the ancient suzerain covenants is to put a date on the Pentateuch, the supposition being the author of the Pentateuch has used/copied the covenant form of the era in which he wrote. One of main issues of discussion amongst archaeologists (not theologians) is not where suzerain covenants per se orginated, but which covenant forms the covenants of the Pentateuch are most similar to in structure. ![]() The suzerain covenant structures differ between empires and over the centuries. The terms of such covenants are decided by the suzerain king, they are not negotiated between the two kings. A suzerain covenant is a covenant between a sovereign king (suzerain), in effect an emperor, and a vassal king and thus with the vassal nation. What are some evidences against my argument?Ī covenant is simply a binding agreement or treaty. Also, God who had previously made covenants with Adam, Abraham, and Noah followed the same pattern when He made another covenant with Moses. Hence, I would rather believe that ANE people had an understanding of a covenant (or treaty) from the covenant of Noah. So, the concept of covenant lingers in both believers and unbelievers. Jacob swore by YHWH., but Laban swore not by YHWH, but rather by the god of Nahor. We also see that Laban and Jacob made a covenant. The knowledge of the covenant was passed down through them, even until Moses' time, who then wrote everything down. ![]() After the covenant, the Scripture recounts the descendants of Noah's sons (Gen. Right after the flood, God made a covenant with Noah (Gen. 9:19) and his sons because of the Great Flood. All human in ANE region (if not the whole world) were derived from Noah (Gen. I'm rather inclined to think otherwise that ANE treaties were derived from Noahic covenant and Mosaic covenant followed the pattern of previous biblical covenants (Adamic, Abrahamaic, Noahic). Why do some theologians argue that the Mosaic covenant follows ANE treaties? ![]() For example, here is the view of Meredith Kline: Suzerain Treaties & The Covenant Documents the Bible. I often heard theologians said that Mosaic covenant followed the structure of Ancient Near East (ANE) treaties that were there in Moses' time. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |