Bible Review
Bible Review opens the realm of Biblical scholarship to a non-academic audience. World-renown scholars detail the latest in Biblical interpretation and why it matters. These important pieces are paired with stunning art, which makes the text come to life before your eyes. Anyone interested in the Bible should read this seminal magazine.
Footnote 4 - P—Understanding the Priestly Source
Footnote 3 - P—Understanding the Priestly Source
The J(ahwist) and E(lohist) sources were so named because in the narratives in Genesis attributed to them God is called Yahweh and Elohim respectively. The D(euteronomist) gets its name from the Book of Deuteronomy—though portions of the books of Joshua through Kings are also attributed to this source. The P(riestly) source is named for the interest it has in matters of concern to priests.
Footnote 2 - P—Understanding the Priestly Source
Footnote 1 - P—Understanding the Priestly Source
Footnote 4 - How Jesus Saw Himself
Footnote 3 - How Jesus Saw Himself
See John Dominic Crossan, “Why Christians Must Search for the Historical Jesus,” BR, April 1996.
Footnote 2 - How Jesus Saw Himself
In current scholarship, “apocalyptic” denotes a literary genre, a world-view or the belief common among first-century Jews (and frequently, though not always, expressed in the writings of the genre) that their history, and with it world history, was reaching a great climax. I use the word in the last sense in particular. “Apocalypse” denotes either writings belonging to the apocalyptic genre (especially the Book of Revelation, also known as the Apocalypse) or the climactic historical event itself.
Footnote 1 - How Jesus Saw Himself
Q, a hypothetical fifth gospel, consists of non-Marcan material common to Matthew and Luke. See the following BR articles: Stephen J. Patterson, “Q—The Lost Gospel,” October 1993; Eta Linnemann, “Is There a Gospel of Q?” August 1995; and Patterson, “Yes, Virginia, There Is a Q,” October 1995.
Footnote 1 - When God Repents
Here, I resume the discussion of “The Persistence of Chaos in God’s Creation”; see BR, February 1996. At points this discussion overlaps with my essay, “The Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory: The Sovereignty of God in the Bible,” Theology Today, April 1996, pp. 1–11.
Pages
