The Shape of Authority of Israelite Tradition
iriegner at concentric.net
Mon Feb 1 09:37:02 EST 1999
To Lloyd Barre's more general questions, I would like to add the following, more specific ones:
There are two accounts describing the occupation of the land:
Conquest by all Israel in Joshua; in Judges, small, tribal victories and
partial defeats---and co-existence with the natives. Why are there two
accounts? What (ideological) function does Joshua have? Why do
biblical interpreters focus on Joshua rather than Judges? How does the
archeological data fit the two reconstructions?
Lloyd Barre wrote:
> Dear List People,
> I am interested in the shape of selected Israelite traditions that created and maintained various types of authority in Ancient Israel, and in how it was that they were variously applied to specific historical situations. For example, how do the Sinai traditions function to legitimate cultic law, how does the notion of an eternal dynasty serve the political ambitions of David and his descendants, how does the traditions of the promises to Abraham or Psalm 2 justify political imperialism, or how does the Dueteronomic emphasis on the "chosen people" sanction invasion with the context of war ideology? When did these traditions take shape and what political programs did they serve and when?
"form is emptiness and the very emptiness is form; emptiness does not differ from form, form does not differ
from emptiness; whatever is form, that is emptiness, whatever is emptiness, that is form, the same is true of
feelings, perceptions, impulses and consciousness.
----from the Heart Sutra----
More information about the b-hebrew