25 January 2025
Ancient Israelite Literature in Its Cultural Context, John H. Walton, Zondervan 1990 (ISBN: 0-310-36591-0) -- roughly $20 on Amazon.
This won't be like previous book reviews on this blog. It's hard to summarize a book that is a string of summaries in itself. In Biblical Studies, it falls into the category of "comparative studies" -- comparing the Bible with the literature of civilizations adjacent in time and geography. Thus, it is a volume of annotated bibliography. We'll have lots of lists and I'll try to reduce the jargon, but the Walton is already aiming this volume at those with no particular degree in Biblical Studies.
Also, be aware that we will not be plowing hurriedly through the text day after day. It's simply not that kind of book. You can be sure I'll be motivated to interpret and comment as much as I survey the contents. Most of what I've seen so far is not new to me, but the author admits to being a fairly standard evangelical. I am not. He tries to avoid any blatant bias, but you can discern the influence in how he approaches the task.
The primary difference I have with Walton is the academic orientation on the material. I've always believed that Ancient Near Eastern literature was inherently symbolic first and foremost, and that you should avoid assuming anything is meant literally. In his care to avoid too much of a slant, Walton is more likely to take things at face value, not realizing that such an approach is a slant. While he's obviously aware of the difference between West versus ANE thinking, he's typical of evangelicals in not embracing the latter at all for himself. We do, and this is a critical element in what separates our community from the mainstream.
His introduction contained at least one important item I didn't know.
In 1902 Franz Delitzsch delivered his now famous "Babel and Bible" lectures in which he attempted to elevate the religion of the Babylonians at the expense of the Israelites and the Old Testament literature... Delitzsch attempted to demonstrate that the Israelite religion, far from being superior to the supposed crude paganism of the Babylonians, had actually evolved from the Babylonia culture. He presented Old Testament texts as being merely edited versions of Babylonian myths.
There was a backlash of efforts to beat back this ugly attack, but the damage was done. To this day, secularists still promote this viewpoint. What Walton doesn't mention is that the Delitzsch lectures fell into a period of broad attacks on faith throughout the West in most branches of academia. He was just one more major figure doing his part, a movement that resulted in the Tavistock studies on how to dumb down classical public education, the birth of the Federal Reserve, and a whole range of leftist moves to seize control of American government and life in general.
However, Walton does note that this attack represented one extreme, and that a part of the mainstream church reaction was to drift to the other extreme of ignoring Babylonian (and Egyptian) literature altogether. This literature helps us to understand the context in which the Scriptures appeared. For those of us who want to embrace the ancient Hebrew mind, a balanced view of how the cultural context gave the Bible meaning is essential. Thus, we engage books like this one.
This survey divides the materials into genres, though this may be loosely interpreted at times. Walton isn't doing anything new, only reporting the work already done. It's not a comprehensive survey of all the ANE literature, only those items that are pertinent to the Bible. One of the problems we could easily run into is the same with any other social science approach: We are making generalizations about Babylonians, Sumerians, Egyptians, etc., when those cultures and civilizations represent a sometimes quite fractured source. Over time, each location offered contradictory materials reflecting mythology that varied greatly. For example, are you aware that Egypt was originally two entirely different empires and cultures, Upper and Lower Egypt? Thus, the Hebrew word for "Egypt" means "two kingdoms".
Just so, we should also recognize that different periods of the history of Israel will manifest significant differences in terms of internal politics as well as their religious beliefs when gauged internally. However, when we back out to a longer and wider view, we can still discern useful trends in the sources that contrast clearly against each other. Be aware that generalizations can't be made to apply too strictly.
If you are building a library, this book is a good candidate for inclusion. If not, you should still be able to learn something you didn't already know as we work through this volume.
This document is public domain; spread the message.