Bons e maus reis: discutindo os governos de Josias e Manassés

GRABBE, L. L. (ed.) Good Kings and Bad Kings: The Kingdom of Judah in the Seventh Century BCE. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2005, 384 p. – ISBN 9780567082725.

According to the Bible, among the last kings of the kingdom of Judah was one of the most notorious kings-Manasseh-and one of the most righteous-Josiah. Are the accounts of their contrasting reigns anything more than the ideological creations of pious writers and editors? Does this juxtaposition of a ‘good king’ and a ‘bad king’ GRABBE, L. L. (ed.) Good Kings and Bad Kings: The Kingdom of Judah in the Seventh Century BCE. London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2005provide good historical information or only theological wishful thinking? In this volume the on-going discussions in the European Seminar on Methodology in Israel’s History have tackled the history of Judah in the seventh century BCE, with a focus on the reign of Josiah. Some essays survey the history and archaeology of Judah from Sennacherib to Nebuchadnezzar. Several examine the reign of Manasseh and address the question of whether it is ripe for re-evaluation. Others ask what we know of the reign of Josiah and, especially, what form his famous cult reform took or even whether it was historical. As always, the editor gives an introduction to the topic, with summaries of the contributions, plus a concluding summary of and personal perspective on the discussion. Contributors include such internationally known scholars as Rainer Albertz, Philip Davies, Axel Knauf, Nadav Na’aman, Marvin Sweeney, and Christoph Uehlinger

Reviews

“”Each scholar, across the spectrum of currrent thought about Israel’s history … does a superb job of rendering explicit the assumptions and methodological procedures with which he approaches the welter of material which must be considered when writing about this time in Judah’s history … the entire volume is strong” Expository Times” –

“Individual Reviews by Lester E. Grabbe and Francesca Stavrakopoulou in the International Review of Biblical Studies” – Intl. Review of Biblical Studies

“”The collection of essays provides a good overview of positions in the current debate on the usefulness (or lack thereof) of biblical and archaeological sources for the reconstruction of the history of seventh-century Judah.” 32.5 (2008)” – J.L.W. Schaper, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

“”Each of the articles presented here is well written, scholarly, and thought provoking” John Engle, RBL 04/2006,” – John Engle, RBL

“”This volume is of keen interest not only for commentators on the book of Deuteronomy but also for those working on a literary history of the Pentateuch or a history of the Yahweh religion…Grabbe presents a very helpful volume that delivers a kind of candid shot of the debate on the history of seventh century B.C.E…. This volume contributes a good deal to this methodology.”” – Eckart Otto, RBL

 

Este é mais um livro que preciso analisar com tempo. É resultado das discussões do grupo que constitui o Seminário Europeu de Metodologia Histórica.

Criacionistas e defensores do design inteligente em apuros com a descoberta do Tiktaalik roseae

O Tiktaalik roseae, de 375 milhões de anos, é o elo perdido entre os peixes e os vertebrados terrestres, inclusive os seres humanos

 

Paleontólogos americanos encontram peixe com pata

É o fóssil que todo estudioso da evolução pediu a Deus: um peixe com patas. Aliás, também com o começo de um pulso nas “mãos” e um pescoço. Os paleontólogos costumam fugir do clichê, mas não dá para negar: esse animal é o elo perdido na origem de todos os vertebrados terrestres, inclusive o Homo sapiens.

A história quase inacreditável do Tiktaalik roseae, um predador de águas rasas que pode ter alcançado até 2,7 m de comprimento quando vivo, começa a ser revelada na edição de hoje da revista científica “Nature”. O bicho foi retirado do meio de rochas com 380 milhões de anos por um trio de paleontólogos americanos, Neil Shubin, Edward Daeschler e Farish Jenkins Jr. “Nós o achamos em meio a um cenário ártico clássico, na ilha de Ellesmere [Canadá], rodeados por ursos polares e bois-almiscarados”, contou Shubin.

No entanto, durante o Período Devoniano (fase da história da Terra na qual o bicho viveu), a região estava muito mais próxima do Equador, de forma que o Tiktaalik Tiktaalik roseaeprovavelmente passava seus dias num agradável delta de rio subtropical, de águas rasas e cheias de barro. “Temos vários esqueletos articulados, e o mais completo vai até a base da cauda”, diz Shubin, que trabalha na Universidade de Chicago. O tamanho varia –o menorzinho pode ter tido 1,2 m– mas são todos membros da mesma espécie.

De brincadeira, os descobridores do Tiktaalik estão chamando o bicho de “peixápode” –mistura de peixe com tetrápode, nome técnico dado a todos os vertebrados terrestres (a palavra grega quer dizer “de quatro patas”). De fato, o fóssil cumpre perfeitamente essa função de intermediário entre os dois grupos. Antes dele, só se conheciam tetrápodes verdadeiros, com membros cheios de dedos, ou peixes com nadadeiras musculosas, mas que não chegavam perto de uma pata.

O Tiktaalik, por outro lado, tem “barbatanas” que parecem estar querendo virar braços e pernas, mas não chegaram lá –ainda. Os cientistas simularam sua postura e estimaram que as pontas das nadadeiras –os “pulsos”– podiam se dobrar, de forma a manter o bicho apoiado no solo. “Antes, as pessoas viam a mão inteira dos tetrápodes como algo que aparece de repente. O Tiktaalik muda isso”, afirma Neil Shubin.

É uma capacidade que pode ter sido útil para se mover em meio a pedras, lodo ou plantas aquáticas, e mesmo para se arrastar fora d’água por períodos curtos. Ele tinha brânquias para respirar na água, mas sua boca estava organizada de tal jeito que ele poderia também arrancar oxigênio do ar.

Os olhos no topo da cabeça, feito os de um jacaré, ajudavam a mantê-lo alerta tanto dentro quanto fora d’água, e o surgimento de um pescoço, com ossos móveis, facilitava sua atividade de predador. Faltam apenas os dedos –o principal “salto” evolutivo que ainda separa a criatura dos vertebrados terrestres.

Ajuda brasileira

O animal tem ainda uma característica pouco usual em peixes: suas costelas “montam” umas nas outras, como se fossem placas rígidas. “Isso serve para dar sustentação ao tronco”, disse à Folha Jenkins, paleontólogo da Universidade Harvard. “Acreditamos que essa característica apareça em criaturas que deixam a flutuação e precisam das costelas para apoiar o corpo num ambiente dominado pela gravidade.”

Essa hipótese anatômica, agora comprovada pelo novo fóssil, foi desenvolvida por Jenkins há mais de três décadas. E com uma ajudinha brasileira. O cientista conta que estava estudando costelas de vertebrados terrestres fósseis e atuais. E um dos raros casos de costelas sobrepostas está justamente num animal brasileiro, uma espécie de tamanduá.

“O problema é que eu não tinha nenhum esqueleto de tamanduá para estudar”, conta Jenkins. “Quem me arrumou um foi o grande zoólogo e compositor brasileiro Paulo Vanzolini”, lembra.

O trio de cientistas deve voltar ao Ártico no meio deste ano para coletar mais fósseis da criatura.

Jenny Clack, especialista em tetrápodes primitivos da Universidade de Cambridge, disse em comentário na “Nature” que o fóssil tem tudo para se tornar um ícone das transições evolutivas, tal como o Archaeopteryx, o dinossauro com penas que é considerado a mais antiga ave.

Fonte: Reinaldo José Lopes – Folha Online: 06/04/2006

Esta descoberta coloca os criacionistas e os defensores do design inteligente em situação delicada…

Como os romanos crucificavam uma pessoa?

Eu vi na semana passada o post de Jim Davila no biblioblog PaleoJudaica.com sobre os muitos modos usados pelos romanos para crucificar uma pessoa: Image of Jesus’ crucifixion may be wrong, says study.

Mas só hoje, lendo mais sobre o assunto, fiquei impressionado! Veja o artigo que está na página da ABC News, onde se explica que a pessoa podia ser pregada na cruz até mesmo pelos genitais… Jim Davila custa a crer, por não haver evidências de tal prática, mas não duvida da imaginação dos antigos romanos…

Right Side Up or Right Side Down? Doubts Cast on Jesus’ Crucifixion

British Study Tries to Prove How Jesus Died

By Mike Lee – March 30, 2006

Was Christ crucified upside down with his feet nailed to the top of the cross, his head toward the ground? Or was he not even nailed, but instead lashed to the cross with cords, perhaps to the side, rather than the front of the cross? These gruesome questions have suddenly been raised by scientists in a new study published by Britain’s Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (…) Sometimes a victim was nailed to the cross by his genitals, according to the authors. Although the study does not allege that this is what happened to Christ, it poses that possibility (cont.)

Nomeado novo arcebispo de Ribeirão Preto

Renúncia e nomeação para Ribeirão Preto

O Papa Bento XVI, acolhendo o pedido de renúncia apresentado por Dom Arnaldo Ribeiro, em conformidade com o cân. 401.1 do Código de Direito Canônico, nomeou hoje, 5 de abril, arcebispo de Ribeirão Preto (SP), Dom Joviano de Lima Júnior, SSS, transferindo-o da diocese de São Carlos, no mesmo Estado.

Fonte: CNBB – 5 de abril de 2006

Encontrada a verdadeira nascente do rio Nilo?

Team says it finds new source of Nile

By Arthur Asiimwe – Sat Apr 1, 5:30 AM ET

Nyungwe Forest, Rwanda (Reuters)

Surviving a rebel attack and braving crocodile-infested waters, a group of explorers has completed an 80-day voyage down the world’s longest river reaching what they say is the source of the Nile. The three explorers from Britain and New Zealand claim to be the first to have traveled the river from its mouth to its “true source” deep in Rwanda’s lush Nyungwe rainforest. “History has been rewritten,” British explorer Neil McGrigor told reporters on Friday. “This is the end of an 80 day amazing and exhausting journey.” (…) The team, which used a Global Positioning System (GPS), believes the Nile is at least 107 km (66 miles) longer than previously thought (cont.)

Equipe diz ter encontrado nova nascente do Rio Nilo em Ruanda

Sobrevivendo a um ataque rebelde e águas infestadas de crocodilos, um grupo de exploradores completou uma viagem de 80 dias pelo rio mais comprido do mundo e chegaram a um local que identificaram como a nascente do Nilo. Os três exploradores da Grã-Bretanha e Nova Zelândia dizem ter sido as primeiras pessoas a viajarem do delta do rio até sua “verdadeira nascente”, no meio da floresta Nyungwe, em Ruanda. “A história foi reescrita”, afirmou o britânico Neil McGrigor na sexta-feira. “Este é o fim de uma jornada de 80 dias.” A expedição, chamada de “Subindo o Nilo”, viajou por 6.700 quilômetros em três barcos, indo do Mar Mediterrâneo até onde dizem ser a nascente do rio. McGrigor e os neozelandeses Cam McLeay e Garth MacIntyre sofreram um ataque rebelde no norte da Uganda, que matou uma pessoa da equipe. Eles também se depararam com crocodilos antes de chegarem ao seu destino final. O debate sobre a verdadeira nascente do Nilo ocorre desde 1850, quando exploradores começaram a procurá-la [Obs.: link quebrado].

Thomas L. Thompson on Faith Based Scholarship

Veja no biblioblog Café Apocalypsis a entrevista com Thomas L. Thompson, professor de Antigo Testamento na Universidade de Copenhague. Thompson é considerado um dos mais polêmicos “minimalistas” no campo da História de Israel. Pioneiro na guinada dada, ainda no final dos anos 60 do século XX, nos estudos do Pentateuco!

 

It is good to be back and provide you with one last interview. Thomas L. Thompson, OT professor at the University of Copenhagen, offers his thoughts on the relationship between faith and scholarship. I wanted to thank Jim West for suggesting that I contact both Dr. Thompson and Dr. Davies. I hope that I now have succeeded in providing a balance in the diversity of perspectives. Note: Dr. Thompson has slightly revised some of the questions (this explains the asterisks)

How would you describe the role of (***) faith as it relates to biblical scholarship? What are some presuppositions that you might have when it comes to the interpretative task? What are some advantages and pitfalls of evangelical views concerning scripture? + What does the church have to do with the academy and vice versa. ***= delete “personal”

I delete the adjective “personal” here as I find it inappropriate in the context of the professional functions of a university scholar. For a biblical scholar, the way that faith influences his professional obligations raise a very serious question concerning conflict of interests. To the extent that a university scholar accepts the guiding principles of a specific faith, he or she is incompetent in the performance of their work as scholars. To the extent that an institution presupposes such a commitment, it is, I believe, incompetent as a university. Accordingly, among the premises I hold as professor of theology is the need to investigate and analyze the bible and religion in accord with the critical principles of secular scholarship, what I have often described as “secular theology.” In my experience, secular theology or university scholarship in the field of biblical scholarship is incompatible with the premises of a faith-based scholarship, which belongs to the realm of apologetics, a pursuit which may have some legitimacy within the context of a particular faith community, but which in the public or “secular” sphere is inappropriate to both the civil service role of the university professor–and in direct conflict with open and critical scholarly discourse. The legitimacy of such apologetics–exploring the rationality of the intellectual foundations of faith–is limited to propaganda fidei, as Catholics used to call it.

If such conflicts of interest that a scholar has with faith-based understanding of religious texts are avoided, church, synagogue and mosque have much to learn from a secular theology, particularly in regard to their own efforts to control and lessen the violence and hatred which religious commitment is capable of commanding. They can use secular scholarship to struggle against the lies and hypocrisy of well-meant religious efforts to maintain a given religious tradition’s distortion and manipulation of the tradition. They can also be served by the perspectives with which secular scholarship takes up the task of exegesis, without being tied by traditional commitments to a particular understanding.

What are the *** pitfalls associated with a more “secular” brand of biblical scholarship? What are the some possible avenues of fruitful dialogue between “faith-based” and “secular” approaches in biblical scholarship? *** = deleted: “advantages and”

The apologetically based resistance to scholarship by faith-based teachers of bible can influence scholars to ignore the dynamics of struggles for sincerity that exist among many faith-based colleagues, as well as influence scholars to ignore the potential offence their scholarship might give to the feelings of believers, whose understanding of reality can be threatened by a secular perspective on issues felt to be sacred. While I hardly consider a “faith-based approach” as a legitimate approach to scholarship, the history of Catholic biblical studies over the last 70 years clearly shows that what begins in a faith-based project of study and enrichment can often end in solid contributions to secular scholarship.

Who would you considered to be stellar examples of evangelical scholarship? Who are some of the best examples of *** critical scholars? ***= deleted “mainstream”

Among evangelical scholars, the first name that comes to mind is Gustav Dalman, with his great work in 7 volumes, Arbeit und Sitte in Palästina. I also much admired William Albright–especially for his work in Semitics, though I found his faith-commitments were always so much in his way in both biblical and historical studies that his results were never trustworthy. Similarly, I find William Hallo’s work in Sumerian studies and his great anthology simply wonderful, but his contributions to biblical studies are in comparison both weak and insubstantial. Among critical scholars, I have much admired Kurt Galling (editor of the third edition of Religion in der Geschichte und Gegenwart, 5 vols. 1953), not only for his encyclopedic competence and integration of biblical, ancient near eastern and archaeological scholarship, but also because he shunned every form of pious distortion in scholarship. This was also a characteristic of Gösta Ahlström’s scholarship (A History of Palestine, 1993) which I much admired. Among living scholars, I much admire Jack Sasson (editor of CANE), not only for his similar integrity as a scholar, but also for his great sensitivity for the personal motivation of scholars–even those he disagreed with.

Any additional thoughts on this subject?

I find the issue terribly important, particularly as evangelical scholarship is undergoing a development that in many ways reminds me of what occurred among Catholic scholars in the 1950s and 1960s. More and more evangelical scholars have acquired competency–especially in the cognate fields of biblical scholarship–over the past generation and have shown themselves at times to be as competent (in the sense as above question 1) within these narrow fields as critical scholars generally. They now stand at a turning point where they are undergoing a very serious struggle for academic recognition which goes hand in hand with an equally serious struggle for academic integrity, which, for many of the individuals involved, is consonant with personal struggles of faith.

Giovanni Garbini entrevistado por Jim West

Jim West entrevistou Giovanni Garbini, pesquisador italiano que escreveu obras importantes sobre o Antigo Oriente Médio e sobre as recentes questões que envolvem a História de Israel. Não perca, de modo algum, esta entrevista.

An Interview With Giovanni Garbini

Professor Giovanni Garbini of Rome has written extensively about the Ancient Near East and about the History of Israel. Born on the 8th of October, 1931, Professor Garbini has published over 50 books, essays, and studies and his most recent work, Introduzione all’epigrafia semitica, offers the student of epigraphy a very fine overview of the subject in relation to the Near East. What follows is an interview with Professor Garbini which he was kind enough to grant me. I leave unaltered both the questions I asked him and his responses. For those who do not read Italian, an English translation of the interview will be posted in the very near future (cont.) [Obs.: blog apagado: 22.03.2008]

Os melhores posts dos biblioblogueiros em março de 2006

Biblical Studies Carnival IV

Visite o blog de Loren Rosson, The Busybody, e veja uma seleção dos melhores posts dos biblioblogueiros no mês de março de 2006.

Claro, somente dos biblioblogs em inglês. Outras línguas, nem pensar. E quem, por aquelas bandas, lê português, por exemplo?

Se achar mais de dois está com sorte…

O que nos oferece desta vez Van Seters?

VAN SETERS, J. The Edited Bible: The Curious History of the Editor in Biblical Criticism. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006, 448 p. – ISBN 9781575061122

Há uma noção geralmente aceita na pesquisa bíblica de que a Bíblia como a conhecemos hoje é o produto da edição e reedição desde seus estágios iniciais de composiçãoVAN SETERS, J. The Edited Bible: The Curious History of the Editor in Biblical Criticism. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006 até sua forma textual final, definitiva e canônica. Tão persistente tem sido essa ideia desde o surgimento da pesquisa crítica no século XVII e tão difundida se tornou em todos os aspectos dos estudos bíblicos que virtualmente não há reflexão sobre a validade dessa ideia (da Introdução).

Van Seters passa a pesquisar a história da ideia de edição, desde suas origens no mundo grego pré-helenístico, passando pelos tempos clássicos e medievais, até a era moderna. Ele discute e avalia as implicações da aceitação comum da edição e dos editores/redatores e conclui que essa vertente de pesquisa levou a sérios desvios nos tempos modernos.

There is a generally accepted notion in biblical scholarship that the Bible as we know it today is the product of editing from its earliest stages of composition through to its final, definitive and canonical textual form. So persistent has been this idea since the rise of critical study in the seventeenth century and so pervasive has it become in all aspects of biblical study that there is virtually no reflection on the validity of this idea (from the Introduction).

Van Seters proceeds to survey the history of the idea of editing, from its origins in the pre-Hellenistic Greek world, through Classical and Medieval times, into the modern era. He discusses and evaluates the implications of the common acceptance of editing and editors/redactors and concludes that this strand of scholarship has led to serious misdirection of research in modern times.

Sobre John Van Seters, leia mais na Ayrton’s Biblical Page em A História de Israel no debate atual (item 2: Van Seters reinventa o Javista)