Vana Testament

by Christoph Levin, Katrin Metsma (Translator)

„Kui kaasaegses maailmas ähvardab kaduda Piibli tundmine, pole kultuurilist ja religioosset kaotust võimalik enam millegagi korvata,“ kirjutab Müncheni ülikooli professor Christoph Levin. Ükski teine raamat pole läänemaailma religiooni ja kultuuri mõjutanud rohkem kui Piibel ja selle suurem, juute ja kristlasi ühendav osa: Vana Testament. Christoph Levin kirjeldab Vana Testamendi ülesehitust, kaanoni tekkelugu ning tekstide traditsioonilugu. Ta tutvustab Vana Testamenti muistse Lähis-Ida kultuuri ja religiooniloo osana ja näitab ühtlasi, et see on tekkinud judaismi pühakirjana ja mitte vana Iisraeli ajalooraamatuna. Nii üliõpilastele kui ka laiale lugejaskonnale mõeldud sissejuhatust Vanasse Testamenti täiendavad ajatabel ning ulatuslikud lugemissoovitused.

Genres: Religion, Nonfiction, Theology, History

171 pages, Paperback

First published March 14, 2005

Reviews

[Jack R.]

Reading introductions in the academic fields, in this case biblical studies, that I attempt to specialize in⁠— or at least try to demonstrate a degree of competency amidst scholars, preachers, and fundagelical bible memorizers⁠— is always important, I believe. Not only do such works allow us to gain insight into potentially radically differing perspectives emerging from the base elements and primary premises of the field (here, the Old Testament itself), which make us question our readings and assumptions and bibliographical biographies, but it is helpful to constantly familiarize oneself with the foundations, again and again. Our memories will be sharpened and we may become inspired to venture off into study concerning topics once thought disinteresting or overly scrutinized. There is also the great benefit of discovering a new citation, a delightful turn of phrase, a particular theological point that might find resonance in other writing, researching, speaking, what have you. Further, the necessity of just being abreast in the field: there is a virtue and value in knowing the source(s) and structure(s) of past arguments lest they come up again, presupposed or explicit, in the past, present, and future scholarship of peers. This is my reasoning for flipping through Christopher Levin’s The Old Testament: A Brief Introduction.

Sadly, this is not a particularly good or useful work for the novice. And for the expert (of which I am not but only reading another half-dozen or so more books from being one), this work provides little by way of revelation, merely giving a few neat facts and figures to pepper an already overly-long footnote in embryonic essays. In , Levin’s employs a diachronic, source-critical approach⁠, whereby he elaborates the Old Testament and its theologies from the earliest fragments, traditions, and collations to the latest. This arrangement has the author jumping around the entire biblical canon (and even single canonical books), giving little sense of direction for one to actually read and interpret the Hebrew Bible (which Levin sees as an imperative), either beginning in Genesis or somewhere else. Having two extended discussions on Hosea, for example, almost one-hundred pages apart, is unnecessary. On another note, while this may be from a bad translation, Levin’s prose is terribly terse and elliptical, lacking a sequential coherence at times. For a “brief introduction,” Levin assumes much from the reader⁠— some background knowledge in regards to the subject matter as well as a willpower to parse his occasionally befuddling sentences.

[Brice Karickhoff · Rating 2 out of 5]

I didn’t like this and I keep forgetting to rate books I read because I don’t have time to put my all thoughts into a review. So here are just two thoughts.

Objectively I often thought it was wrong. Surely the author is more of an expert than I, but I have sort of studied the Old Testament a few times a week for over a decade, so if I thought he was wrong 100 times, he was probably wrong at least 10.

Subjectively I thought it was irreverent. But that’s just me. If you don’t think the Old Testament is worthy of reverence, you’ll at least like this book a little more than me.

Learned a couple new pieces of historical context though and that was cool.

[Erika_kartmann · Rating 3 out of 5]

Für Theologen ist das Buch mit seinen 124 Seiten plus Literaturempfehlung und Zeittafel sicher nicht umfangreich genug,
für Nichttheologen arbeitet es aber zu sehr mit Fachbegriffen und setzt meiner Meinung nach zu viel Wissen und eine profunde Bibelkenntnis aus.


Der Schreibstil ist aber sehr gelungen: Kurze, knackige Sätze, die das Gelesene schnell in den Kopf bringen und auch dort verweilen lassen.

[Leo]

Despite the subtitle, this is not a good introductory work. I already had some knowledge of the Old Testament, yet I still had trouble following the book because of how much pre-existing knowledge the author presupposes. If you're looking for a book with the nuts and bolts, what's in the OT, what we know about its writing, what is its significance etc., then I'd look to read another book.

[Heiki Eesmaa · Rating 2 out of 5]

Short book, even too cursory. I doubt you'll get much out of it except in the context of an Old Testament course.

[Bryan Richard]

Great book.

[Philipp · Rating 4 out of 5]

A long, long time ago I read an essay by Stephen Jay Gould on how weird it is that there are two genesis stories, and how that proves that you can't take the bible literally. Back then that was a relevation to undergrad-me (that was coincidentally at the height of 'new atheism').

However, theologians knew that for about 200 years, and this book is a summary of all of that knowledge. It starts from the point that the old testament isn't one book (it's after all the 'book of books', a collection of other books) and that all of the books themselves are made up of stories that have been shuffled around (for example, the details about the big flood contradict themselves, leading to the finding that the details come from two different stories that have been merged - many other places in the bible suddenly change in tone, or 'appropriate' paragraphs or sentences from other places, etc.), pieces of different books, and different political systems that needed justification for their changes from 'above'. Think remix culture.

Die Bibel ist aber kein absolutes, sondern ein historisches Buch. Wenn sie das Absolute offenbart, dann in der Verhüllung des Relativen. Deshalb verschließt sie sich einseitiger Inanspruchnahme, aber ist offen für viele, auch konkurrierende Deutungen.

Rough translation:

The bible isn't an absolute, but a historical book. Where it shows the Absolute it does so by hiding the relative. That's why the bible blocks onesided claims, but is open for many, even competing interpretations.

Levin's book is a short intro to what the field established in the last 200 years, clearly written, possibly too condensed (tip: read the old testament before, I had to look up stuff too often) like all CHBeck Wissen books.