Bible Dictionaries/Encyclopedia - Very pleased with purchase but one question about Anchor Yale

Page 1 of 2 (22 items) 1 2 Next >
This post has 21 Replies | 3 Followers

Posts 213
Greg Corbin | Forum Activity | Posted: Mon, Sep 6 2010 8:46 PM

As I have noted in previous posts, I believe that one of the main weaknesses of all Logos package levels is the lack of a top-shelf Bible dicitonary/encyclopedia. Last week, I upgraded to Gold (giving me the Baker Encylopedia) and purchased the ISBE because I knew that I wanted that resource. Tonight, I really used them both for the first time as I began gathering background information for preaching through Hebrews.  After spending a couple of hours working with them, I feel that the money is well spent and I have two resources that I will use all the time.  However, after comparing several articles, the ISBE seems to be superior overall - although Baker does have its worthy sections.

My question is regarding the Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary:  Many say they find it valuable, but how does it practically differentiate itself from these two aforementioned resources?   I seem to remember the Anchor Yale being on sale for a substantial discount at some point last year. While I probably would not pay the full price for another dictionary, I would like some insight about it in case it goes on sale again in the future.  Trying to decide if I should add it to my list of "get it at the right price" resources.  Thanks in advance for your insight.

Posts 18075
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 6 2010 10:43 PM

Anchor Yale is the more academic of the three, and it's written by a large and broadly ecumenical collection of authors. It will engage more with Jewish and liberal scholarship, among other things. If you're aware of that and aren't thrown by it, you can find some excellent material in it.

If you contact a sales rep at Logos you can sometimes get the "right price" on a resource even when it isn't on sale. Sometimes even a better price than the latest sale price offered. So it's always worth checking, especially for major purchases.

Posts 11777
Forum MVP
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 1:42 AM

Anchor is significantly bigger than the other dictionaries you mention. It's not evangelical, so if you are looking for an evangelical perspective you need to be aware that articles may not be as helpful to you as some other dictionaries would be. So, for example, the ISBE has a very detailed discussion defending the authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles. The AYBD, on the other hand, has a reasonably large section on authorship, but basically just lists all the possibilities, and prefers the second century view, but there's not much explanation as to why, and certainly not vigorous defending of the position. That's the AYBD style - some like it, some don't. Nevertheless, background articles in particular (people/places) are likely to be much more comprehensive than your other dictionaries (see example below), and for that alone it is worth the money. That said, in your position I'd go for the Essential IVP collection which includes some terrific dictionaries, particularly on the NT.

Here's a comparison of a relatively obscure topic so you can see the greater depth of AYBD. The topic is Bediah:

AYBD: [Heb bēdĕyâ (בֵּדְיָה)].  A descendant of Bani and one of the returned exiles whom Ezra required to divorce his foreign wife (Ezra 10:35 = 1 Esdr 9:34). Bedeiah might mean "Branch of Yahweh," or it might be an abbreviated form of ˓ăbēdyāh, "Servant of Yahweh." Bedeiah was a member of a family from which a group of exiles returned with Zerubbabel (Ezra 2:10). The three-month investigation of the men who had married foreign women (Ezra 10:16-17) produced a relatively short list of names, leading some scholars to believe that it includes only prominent members of the community (see discussion in Myers, Ezra, Nehemiah AB, 87-88). Bedeiah's position in the community, however, remains a mystery. While it seems probable that Bedeiah divorced his foreign wife (note the prior oath taken by the people [Ezra 10:2-5]), that is not certain. There is some debate whether v 19 may originally have been reported after each group. 1 Esdr 9:36 clearly states that everyone on the list did indeed divorce his foreign wife and put away his children; however, Ezra 10:44b is so corrupt that the final outcome of the investigation is left in doubt. For further discussion, see Williamson, Ezra, Nehemiah WBC, 157-59.

ISBE: be-dēʹyə [Heb bēḏeyâ-'servant of Yahweh']. A son of Bani who married a foreign wife (Ezr. 10:35).

Baker: Bani's son, who obeyed Ezra's exhortation to divorce his pagan wife after the exile (Ezr 10:35).

Posts 8583
Forum MVP
TCBlack | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 6:21 AM

Mark,

Thanks for the excerpt - if that's the consistent treament of topics in AYBD I think I'll also add it to my "get it later" list.  I already have several Bible Dictionaries and had wondered what this would add to the mix.  Now it suddenly seems useful.

Truth Is Still Truth Even if You Don't Believe It

Check the Wiki

Warning: Sarcasm is my love language. I may inadvertently express my love to you.

Posts 11777
Forum MVP
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 8:19 AM

Thomas Black:
if that's the consistent treament of topics in AYBD I think I'll also add it to my "get it later" list.

It's not universally true, but it's mostly true for people and places. You'll get lots in ABYD of things only loosely related to the Bible, but which can be very useful if you need to do background work (e.g. 'Egyptian Literature', 'Mark Anthony', 'Cynics'). What you won't get in ABYD is theological stuff like the long ISBE article on 'Patience'. There's not even an article on prayer, though these is one on 'Prayer in Early Judaism', and another on the Lord's Prayer.

But for people/places, and background study, AYBD is hard to beat. Here's another example chosen at random:

ISBE:

ANAK āʹnak [Heb (hā)'anāq]; ANAKIM anʹə-kim [Heb 'anāqîm; Gk Enakim, Enakeim]; AV ANAKIMS. Some of the pre-Israelite inhabitants of Canaan, descendants of Arba (Josh. 15:13; 21:11). Their name may mean "people of the necklace." They resided in the Hebron area, but may have occupied considerably more terrain originally (Josh. 11:21f). Hebrew tradition uniformly regarded the Anakim as a formidable people (cf. Dt. 2:10, 21; 9:2), who in Nu. 13:33 are regarded as descendants of the Nephilim (Gen. 6:4). While Joshua dispossessed them from the hill-country, it was left to Caleb to drive them out of Hebron completely.

The eighteenth-century B.C. Egyptian Execration Texts seem to point to the presence in Palestine ca 2000 B.C. of a tribe named Anak whose leaders bore Semitic names, but apart from this possible allusion there is no extrabiblical evidence for this ancient people.

AYBD:

ANAK (PERSON) [Heb ˓ănāq (עֲנָק)]. ANAKIM. A people who occupied Canaan before the arrival of Israel and traced their ancestry back to Anak. Apparently, anaq was originally a common noun whose meaning was "neck" or "necklace," and gradually Anakim became the name of a tribe, with the possible meaning "long necked" (=giant).

Anak was the son of Arba (Josh 15:13; 21:11), the founder of Kiriath-arba (i.e., Hebron; Josh 21:11). Though his son's name gave rise to the gentilic, Arba was regarded as "the greatest man among the Anakim" (Josh 14:15).

All of the biblical references agree that the descendants of Anak were tall, of gigantic size (Deut 2:10, 21; 9:2). When the Hebrew spies returned from their mission in Canaan, they warned Israel about the Amalekites, Hittites, Jebusites, Amorites, and Canaanites (cf. Num 13:29), but the spies were especially concerned about the Anakim. In Num 13:28 it is recorded that the spies made general comments about the strong people who lived in the land, in large and fortified towns, but then they added, "and besides, we saw the descendants of Anak there" (cf. Deut 1:28). Num 13:33 connects the Anakim with the infamous Nephilim: "the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim" (cf. Gen 6:4). Deut 2:10, 20-21, and 9:2 identify the Anakim with the Emim, Zamzummim, and Rephaim. So it is not surprising that the hearts of the grasshopper-sized Hebrew spies melted at the sight of these giants, and this report had the same result on the Israelites who heard it. But Moses predicted that the Lord would give the Israelites victory over the Anakim, "a people great and tall" (Deut 9:2-3).

While most biblical references locate the Anakim in S Canaan, more specifically in the environs of Hebron (Num 13:22; Josh 14:12-15), there is a single passage that says the Anakim originally inhabited a much wider territory. This passage, Josh 11:21-22, reports that Anakim used to occupy the hill country of Judah (at Hebron, Debir, and Anab specifically) and the hill country of Israel. More importantly, it reports that this dreaded enemy was virtually wiped out by Joshua (with Caleb being responsible for the expulsion of the Anakim from Hebron; cf. Josh 14:12-15; 15:13-14; Judg 1:10), with the only survivors remaining in the Philistine cities of Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod. Incidentally, the RSV rendering of Jer 47:5 follows this tradition and places the Anakim in a Philistine context as well. It is most probable that Goliath of Gath and the other giants of 2 Sam 21:16-22 (cf. 1 Chr 20:4-8) were regarded as descendants of the Anakim remnant in Philistia.

In the Egyptian Execration Texts (ANET, 328-29), there are references to several princes with Semitic names who are identified as rulers of Iy-˓anaq. Many scholars regard this as a tribal name related to the Anakim, but this connection is not certain (cf. Albright 1928). Apart from these texts, which date to the 19-18th centuries B.C., there are no other extrabiblical references that shed light on the Anakim.

Bibliography
  Albright, W. F. 1928. The Egyptian Empire in Asia in the Twenty-first Century B.C. JPES 8: 223-56.

Posts 220
LogosEmployee
Mike Aubrey | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 8:53 AM

Thomas Black:
Thanks for the excerpt - if that's the consistent treament of topics in AYBD I think I'll also add it to my "get it later" list.  I already have several Bible Dictionaries and had wondered what this would add to the mix.  Now it suddenly seems useful.

Its also significantly bigger -- if you've seen ISBE and Anchor in print beside each other, you know what I'm talking about. Anchor has roughly 3000 pages of content more than ISBE. And since ISBE is only 4500 pages to begin with, we're talking about nearly twice the size.

UPDATED:

Mark Barnes:
. It's not evangelical, so if you are looking for an evangelical perspective you need to be aware that articles may not be as helpful to you as some other dictionaries would be.

Its true, but there are many evangelical contributors. For example the NT portion of the article on Redaction Criticism is written by Robert H. Stein, who was (at least in 1992) professor at Bethel College in Minnesota and wrote the NAC volume on Luke--which, incidentally, is a fantastic volume.

 

 

Posts 3605
Forum MVP
Friedrich | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 9:11 AM

Greg,

I got AY last December (the sale) and am really glad I got it.  I am probably classified a more conservative evangelical (with a few wild hairs, like loving my week spent at Little Portion Monastery at the end of August with my wife and 2 of my children).  Mark and Rosie's assessment of the larger spectrum of contributors is correct, as is  Michael's reminder of the many "evangelical" contributors.  In general, I find the articles extremely well written, and often more informative (and deeper) than ISBE (and I like ISBE a lot).

 

Another set you might put on the shelf is the new Zondervan Enc. of the Bible.  Still getting used to it, but it seems a lot more helpful than the old "Zondervan Pictorial Enc. of the bible".  ANd it has very nice pictures!  Wink

HP Pavilion dv 7z 1000   AMD Turion X2 Ultra Dual-Core Mobile ZM-80 2.10 GHz  3.00 GB RAM 64-bit Win 7

Posts 8583
Forum MVP
TCBlack | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 9:22 AM

Mark, out of morbid curiosity could you post the excerpt for Nephilim?

Truth Is Still Truth Even if You Don't Believe It

Check the Wiki

Warning: Sarcasm is my love language. I may inadvertently express my love to you.

Posts 220
LogosEmployee
Mike Aubrey | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 9:30 AM

Thomas Black:
Mark, out of morbid curiosity could you post the excerpt for Nephilim?

Its by an evangelical ;)

NEPHILIM [Heb nĕpilı̂m (נְפִלִים)]. A group of antediluvians who were the product of the union of the sons of God (hā˒ĕlōhı̂m) with the daughters of humans (hā˒ādām) (Gen 6:1–4). They are described as heroic (hāggibbōrı̂m) and famous (˒anšê hāššēm). In Genesis 6, the Nephilim are connected with the multiplication of humanity on the face of the earth (v 1) and with the evil of humanity which brings about God’s judgment in the form of the flood (vv 5–7). Verse 4 includes a reference to later (postdiluvian) Nephilim. The majority of the spies who were sent by Joshua to spy out Canaan reported giants whom they called Nephilim, and who are designated in the account as the sons of Anak (Num 13:33). The reference to Nephilim as ancient dead warriors in Ezek 32:27 requires a textual change from the MT’s nōpĕlı̂m (Zimmerli, Ezekiel Hermeneia, 168, 176; Hendel 1987a: 22).

Their heroic attributes were noted in translating Nephilim in the versions. Both the LXX and the Vulgate render the expression as gigantes. The Syriac has gnbr˒. The Samaritan Pentateuch and Targums also follow this custom (Alexander 1972), using either gybryh (Samaritan), gybrym (Neofiti), or gbr˒ (Onkelos). Targum Pseudo-Jonathan translates Nephilim with the names of the fallen angels (šmḥz˒y w˓z˒l) mentioned in 1 Enoch as leading the rebellion. Nephilim are referred to as “giants” in the Apocrypha/Pseudepigrapha, usually with reference to their pride and wickedness, and to God’s judgment upon them (e.g., Bar 3:26–28). The fullest development appears in 1 Enoch 6–19, and this is followed by allusions in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Midrashim, and the NT (Dimant 1974; Hanson 1977).

2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6 are the NT allusions to the Nephilim. Here they are identified as angels who rebelled and have been imprisoned by God. They lead a list of biblical examples of rebels and their punishments current in contemporary Jewish paraenisis (Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter WBC, 46–47). Although elements of Greek Titan mythology have been identified here and in Gen 6:1–4 (Kraeling 1947, who separates the gibbōrı̂m from the Nephilim), the presence of a common source for the traditions of 1 Enoch and those of the Greek world is more likely (Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter WBC, 50–53, 248–49). Speiser (Genesis AB, 46) identifies this source as Hurrian. Kilmer (1987) has sought to identify the Nephilim with the apkallu of Mesopotamian tradition.

The root npl, “to fall,” seems to be the basis of Nephilim, i.e., “the fallen ones.” This may refer to their fall from heaven, their “fall” into sin, or their fallen status as dead at the time when the events are recorded. The earliest use of the W Semitic npl supports the last option. It occurs in a military context, the 14th century B.C.E. letter of Lab’ayu of Shechem to the pharaoh (EA 252, lines 25–27), “Fall under them that they may smite you!” The sons of Anak, who are identified with the later Nephilim in Num 13:33, are also identified with the Rephaim in Deut 2:11 As the Rephaim are understood as ancient warriors slain by Israel and others, so the Nephilim, “the fallen ones,” are those who are doomed to die.

Source critics have ascribed Gen 6:1–4 to J, while recognizing it as uncharacteristic (WPGI, 329; Gunkel, Genesis BKAT, 52; Noth 1948: 29). Recent studies have ascribed the text to a Canaanite origin (Westermann, Genesis BKAT, 499–500) or to later editorial activity (Scharbert 1967: 66–78; Schreiner 1981: 65–74). Hendel (1987a; 1987b) argues that the improper mating of deities and humans was the original reason for the Genesis flood. However, later additions to this tradition changed the reason to the matter of a general evil in the imaginations of humanity.

As fathers of the Nephilim, the identity of the sons of God is important in understanding whether the Nephilim of Genesis 6 were semi-divine or completely human. The sons of God (hā˒ĕlōhı̂m) have been understood as nonhumans (gods, angels), rulers, or descendants of Seth. The first interpretation is supported by the term’s use in Ugaritic myths, in the OT (Ps 29:1; Job 1:6), and in the intertestamental and NT material noted above. It allows for a real contrast with “daughters of men,” which would be nonspecific if it were to mean daughters of nonrulers or daughters of the descendants of Cain (Cassuto 1973; van Gemeren 1980–81; Wenham, Genesis 1–15 WBC, 139–40). Further, the mating of deities with women appears in ANE and Greek mythology (Bartelmus 1979: 36–78). Support of identification with rulers may be found in a similar designation given to the Ugaritic king Keret and to the Davidic king (2 Sam 7:14; Ps 2:7), and in traditional Jewish exegesis (Alexander 1972; Tsukimoto 1979: 19–21). The Sethite interpretation has few modern adherents (Junker 1935; for a reversal of this argument, in which the Sethites are the daughters of man, cf. Eslinger 1979).

For Wenham (Genesis 1–15 WBC, 141), the key seems to be the limitation of human life span in v 3 The daughters of men willingly cohabited with divine beings in order to produce offspring who would gain much longer life spans and perhaps achieve immortality. By rejecting this attempt, God has established a rigid distinction between the mortal and the immortal (Clines 1979: 33–37; Petersen 1979: 58– 59; Schreiner 1981: 70–72). The mating of the sons of God with the daughters of men became but one example of the “cosmic imbalance” created in Genesis 1–6

 

  Bibliography

  Alexander, P. S. 1972. The Targumim and Early Exegesis of “Sons of God”in Genesis 6 JJS 23: 60–71.

  Bartelmus, R. 1979. Heroentum in Israel und seiver Umwelt. ATANT 65. Zurich.

  Cassuto, U. 1973. The Episode of the Sons of God and the Daughters of Man. Pp. 17–28 in Bible and Oriental Studies. Volume I. Trans. I. Abrahams. Jerusalem.

  Clines, D. J. A. 1979. The Significance of the “Sons of God” Episode (Genesis 6:1–4) in the Context of the “Primeval History” (Genesis 1–11). JSOT 13: 33–46.

  Dimant, D. 1974. “The Fallen Angels” in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphic Books Related to Them. Diss., Hebrew University.

  Eslinger, L. 1979. A Contextual Identification of the bene ha˒elohim and benoth ha˒adam in Genesis 6:1–4. JSOT 13: 65–73.

  Gemeren, W. A. van. 1980–81. The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1–4 (An Example of Evangelical Demythologization?). WTJ 43: 320–48.

  Hanson, P. D. 1977. Rebellion in Heaven, Azazel, and Euhemeristic Heroes in 1 Enoch 6–11. JBL 96: 195–233.

  Hendel, R. S. 1987a. Of Demigods and the Deluge: Toward an Interpretation of Genesis 6:1–4 JBL 106: 13–26.

  ———. 1987b. When the Sons of God Cavorted with the Daughters of Men. BRev 3/2: 813, 837.

  Junker, H. 1935. Zur Erklärung von Gen. 6, 1–4. Bib 16: 205–212.

  Kilmer, A. D. 1987. The Mesopotamian Counterparts of the Biblical Nĕpı̄lı̂m. Pp. 39–43 in Perspectives on Language and Text: Essays and Poems in Honor of Francis I. Andersen’s Sixtieth Birthday, ed. E. W. Conrad and E. G. Newing. Winona Lake, IN.

  Kraeling, E. G. 1947. The Significance and Origin of Gen. 6:1–4. JNES 6: 193–208.

  Noth, M. 1948. Überlieferungsgeschichte des Pentateuch. Stuttgart.

  Petersen, D. L. 1979. Yahweh and the Organization of the Cosmos. JSOT 13: 47–64.

  Scharbert, J. 1967. Traditions- und Redaktionsgeschichte von Gn 6, 1–4. BZn.s. 11: 66–78.

  Schreiner, J. 1981. Gen 6, 1–4 und die Problematik von Leben und Tod. Pp. 65–74 in De la ToÆrah au Messie, ed. M. Carrez et al. Paris.

  Tsukimoto, A. 1979. “Der Mensch ist geworden wie unsereiner”—Untersuchungen zum zeitgeschichtlichen Hintergrund von Gen. 3, 22–24 und 6, 1–4. AJBI 5: 3–44.

       RICHARD S. HESS

Posts 8525
Forum MVP
Mark Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 9:33 AM

Thomas Black:
Mark, out of morbid curiosity could you post the excerpt for Nephilim?

The other Mark here, but wanted to second the recommendation. I would not want to be without the AYBD. Don't always agree, but think it is good to hear the other side when I don't.

Here's Nephilim:

NEPHILIM [Heb nĕpilı̂m (נְפִלִים)]. A group of antediluvians who were the product of the union of the sons of God (hā˒ĕlōhı̂m) with the daughters of humans (hā˒ādām) (Gen 6:1–4). They are described as heroic (hāggibbōrı̂m) and famous (˒anšê hāššēm). In Genesis 6, the Nephilim are connected with the multiplication of humanity on the face of the earth (v 1) and with the evil of humanity which brings about God’s judgment in the form of the flood (vv 5–7). Verse 4 includes a reference to later (postdiluvian) Nephilim. The majority of the spies who were sent by Joshua to spy out Canaan reported giants whom they called Nephilim, and who are designated in the account as the sons of Anak (Num 13:33). The reference to Nephilim as ancient dead warriors in Ezek 32:27 requires a textual change from the MT’s nōpĕlı̂m (Zimmerli, Ezekiel Hermeneia, 168, 176; Hendel 1987a: 22).


Their heroic attributes were noted in translating Nephilim in the versions. Both the LXX and the Vulgate render the expression as gigantes. The Syriac has gnbr˒. The Samaritan Pentateuch and Targums also follow this custom (Alexander 1972), using either gybryh (Samaritan), gybrym (Neofiti), or gbr˒ (Onkelos). Targum Pseudo-Jonathan translates Nephilim with the names of the fallen angels (šmḥz˒y w˓z˒l) mentioned in 1 Enoch as leading the rebellion. Nephilim are referred to as “giants” in the Apocrypha/Pseudepigrapha, usually with reference to their pride and wickedness, and to God’s judgment upon them (e.g., Bar 3:26–28). The fullest development appears in 1 Enoch 6–19, and this is followed by allusions in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Midrashim, and the NT (Dimant 1974; Hanson 1977).


2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6 are the NT allusions to the Nephilim. Here they are identified as angels who rebelled and have been imprisoned by God. They lead a list of biblical examples of rebels and their punishments current in contemporary Jewish paraenisis (Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter WBC, 46–47). Although elements of Greek Titan mythology have been identified here and in Gen 6:1–4 (Kraeling 1947, who separates the gibbōrı̂m from the Nephilim), the presence of a common source for the traditions of 1 Enoch and those of the Greek world is more likely (Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter WBC, 50–53, 248–49). Speiser (Genesis AB, 46) identifies this source as Hurrian. Kilmer (1987) has sought to identify the Nephilim with the apkallu of Mesopotamian tradition.


The root npl, “to fall,” seems to be the basis of Nephilim, i.e., “the fallen ones.” This may refer to their fall from heaven, their “fall” into sin, or their fallen status as dead at the time when the events are recorded. The earliest use of the W Semitic npl supports the last option. It occurs in a military context, the 14th century B.C.E. letter of Lab’ayu of Shechem to the pharaoh (EA 252, lines 25–27), “Fall under them that they may smite you!” The sons of Anak, who are identified with the later Nephilim in Num 13:33, are also identified with the Rephaim in Deut 2:11 As the Rephaim are understood as ancient warriors slain by Israel and others, so the Nephilim, “the fallen ones,” are those who are doomed to die.


Source critics have ascribed Gen 6:1–4 to J, while recognizing it as uncharacteristic (WPGI, 329; Gunkel, Genesis BKAT, 52; Noth 1948: 29). Recent studies have ascribed the text to a Canaanite origin (Westermann, Genesis BKAT, 499–500) or to later editorial activity (Scharbert 1967: 66–78; Schreiner 1981: 65–74). Hendel (1987a; 1987b) argues that the improper mating of deities and humans was the original reason for the Genesis flood. However, later additions to this tradition changed the reason to the matter of a general evil in the imaginations of humanity.


As fathers of the Nephilim, the identity of the sons of God is important in understanding whether the Nephilim of Genesis 6 were semi-divine or completely human. The sons of God (hā˒ĕlōhı̂m) have been understood as nonhumans (gods, angels), rulers, or descendants of Seth. The first interpretation is supported by the term’s use in Ugaritic myths, in the OT (Ps 29:1; Job 1:6), and in the intertestamental and NT material noted above. It allows for a real contrast with “daughters of men,” which would be nonspecific if it were to mean daughters of nonrulers or daughters of the descendants of Cain (Cassuto 1973; van Gemeren 1980–81; Wenham, Genesis 1–15 WBC, 139–40). Further, the mating of deities with women appears in ANE and Greek mythology (Bartelmus 1979: 36–78). Support of identification with rulers may be found in a similar designation given to the Ugaritic king Keret and to the Davidic king (2 Sam 7:14; Ps 2:7), and in traditional Jewish exegesis (Alexander 1972; Tsukimoto 1979: 19–21). The Sethite interpretation has few modern adherents (Junker 1935; for a reversal of this argument, in which the Sethites are the daughters of man, cf. Eslinger 1979).


For Wenham (Genesis 1–15 WBC, 141), the key seems to be the limitation of human life span in v 3 The daughters of men willingly cohabited with divine beings in order to produce offspring who would gain much longer life spans and perhaps achieve immortality. By rejecting this attempt, God has established a rigid distinction between the mortal and the immortal (Clines 1979: 33–37; Petersen 1979: 58– 59; Schreiner 1981: 70–72). The mating of the sons of God with the daughters of men became but one example of the “cosmic imbalance” created in Genesis 1–6

Bibliography
Alexander, P. S. 1972. The Targumim and Early Exegesis of “Sons of God”in Genesis 6 JJS 23: 60–71.
Bartelmus, R. 1979. Heroentum in Israel und seiver Umwelt. ATANT 65. Zurich.
Cassuto, U. 1973. The Episode of the Sons of God and the Daughters of Man. Pp. 17–28 in Bible and Oriental Studies. Volume I. Trans. I. Abrahams. Jerusalem.
Clines, D. J. A. 1979. The Significance of the “Sons of God” Episode (Genesis 6:1–4) in the Context of the “Primeval History” (Genesis 1–11). JSOT 13: 33–46.
Dimant, D. 1974. “The Fallen Angels” in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphic Books Related to Them. Diss., Hebrew University.
Eslinger, L. 1979. A Contextual Identification of the bene ha˒elohim and benoth ha˒adam in Genesis 6:1–4. JSOT 13: 65–73.
Gemeren, W. A. van. 1980–81. The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1–4 (An Example of Evangelical Demythologization?). WTJ 43: 320–48.
Hanson, P. D. 1977. Rebellion in Heaven, Azazel, and Euhemeristic Heroes in 1 Enoch 6–11. JBL 96: 195–233.
Hendel, R. S. 1987a. Of Demigods and the Deluge: Toward an Interpretation of Genesis 6:1–4 JBL 106: 13–26.
———. 1987b. When the Sons of God Cavorted with the Daughters of Men. BRev 3/2: 813, 837.
Junker, H. 1935. Zur Erklärung von Gen. 6, 1–4. Bib 16: 205–212.
Kilmer, A. D. 1987. The Mesopotamian Counterparts of the Biblical Nĕpı̄lı̂m. Pp. 39–43 in Perspectives on Language and Text: Essays and Poems in Honor of Francis I. Andersen’s Sixtieth Birthday, ed. E. W. Conrad and E. G. Newing. Winona Lake, IN.
Kraeling, E. G. 1947. The Significance and Origin of Gen. 6:1–4. JNES 6: 193–208.
Noth, M. 1948. Überlieferungsgeschichte des Pentateuch. Stuttgart.
Petersen, D. L. 1979. Yahweh and the Organization of the Cosmos. JSOT 13: 47–64.
Scharbert, J. 1967. Traditions- und Redaktionsgeschichte von Gn 6, 1–4. BZn.s. 11: 66–78.
Schreiner, J. 1981. Gen 6, 1–4 und die Problematik von Leben und Tod. Pp. 65–74 in De la ToÆrah au Messie, ed. M. Carrez et al. Paris.
Tsukimoto, A. 1979. “Der Mensch ist geworden wie unsereiner”—Untersuchungen zum zeitgeschichtlichen Hintergrund von Gen. 3, 22–24 und 6, 1–4. AJBI 5: 3–44.
       RICHARD S. HESS

BTW: Dr. Hess is now teaching at Denver Seminary

http://www.denverseminary.edu/about-us/our-faculty/dr-richard-s-hess/

Pastor, North Park Baptist Church

Bridgeport, CT USA

Posts 8583
Forum MVP
TCBlack | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 9:42 AM

@Mark A. Smith and Michael Aubrey,

Thank you.  Now I just need to scrape the funds together.  It's my next purchase methinks.

 

Truth Is Still Truth Even if You Don't Believe It

Check the Wiki

Warning: Sarcasm is my love language. I may inadvertently express my love to you.

Posts 11777
Forum MVP
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 10:22 AM

How about you ring academic sales and ask if you qualify? It's a lot cheaper on academic. Those two weeks in Haiti might just scrape you in!

Posts 401
Timothy Ha | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 10:26 AM

Thomas Black:
It's my next purchase methinks.

During Twelve days of Christmas AYBD was available for under USD 190.  Don't know if the Sales people will give you at the same price (but you're MVP :-))

And I also found that coupon YALE (from one of older blog posts) gives you 30% off.  That gives a price of about USD 204.

JesusChrist.ru - Russian Christian Portal, with free Bible software; Timh.ru - blog

Posts 5578
Forum MVP
Todd Phillips | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 10:42 AM

Timothy Ha:

During Twelve days of Christmas AYBD was available for under USD 190.  Don't know if the Sales people will give you at the same price (but you're MVP :-))

And I also found that coupon YALE (from one of older blog posts) gives you 30% off.  That gives a price of about USD 204.

 

Actually 30% off of $269.95 (Logos current price) is $188.97, which is similar to the Christmas price, if not the same.  In fact, I paid $188.97 for it in Feb 2009, and I'm not sure how I got that price--either a sale or a salesperson's discount, so it seems 30% off is fairly common.

Wiki Links: Enabling Logging / Moving Logos between systems / Detailed Search Help - MacBook Pro (2014), ThinkPad T520

Posts 8583
Forum MVP
TCBlack | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 10:44 AM

Timothy,

I've never tried the "hey I'm an MVP" thing with sales.  I'm not sure it'd matter but It is funny.  Mark, I think I may call about that - at one point I was told it qualified me but I haven't tested it much since most of my purchases have been CP and Prepub which generally beats even the academic pricing AFAIK.

The real trick here is to find the budgetary coverage - which may have to wait till next January when my book budget refreshes.  :-)  But I can wait till then if I must.

Truth Is Still Truth Even if You Don't Believe It

Check the Wiki

Warning: Sarcasm is my love language. I may inadvertently express my love to you.

Posts 11777
Forum MVP
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 7 2010 4:26 PM

Thomas Black:
I haven't tested it much since most of my purchases have been CP and Prepub which generally beats even the academic pricing AFAIK

Academic pricing is usually equivalent to the highest pre-pub price, so I only use it when you miss a prepub.

Posts 1
Shiekh Lief Mauricio | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 9 2017 9:44 AM

The coupon code YALE still works for 30% off of AYBD (from $269.99 to $204.12).

Posts 165
Michael S. | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Sep 11 2017 4:22 AM

The Academic discount is currently 40% off, making it $159.

Posts 1341
Edwin Bowden | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 12 2017 6:57 AM

I think that one of the best additions anyone can make to their Logos library is the 8 volume IVP Bible Dictionary series. It is unique in that each volume focuses on one particular section of the Bible. I constantly find excellent detailed material, very well organized, that I do not find elsewhere. The set is 8800 pages long.

I even have 9 volumes of this 8 volume set. The first volume issued, Jesus and the Gospels, has been revised. I added the revised volume when it became available and it was worth the upgrade. This set is frequently offered at a sale price. Put it on your wish list and you will be alerted when it comes on sale.

https://www.logos.com/product/37742/the-ivp-bible-dictionary-series

 

Posts 2689
Michael Childs | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Sep 12 2017 7:35 AM

In my opinion, Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary and the New Interpreters Bible Dictionary are both top-shelf Bible dictionaries.   I would also agree that the Intervarsity Press Dictionaries are very good.

"In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church," John Wesley

Page 1 of 2 (22 items) 1 2 Next > | RSS
Copyright 1992-2015 Faithlife / Logos Bible Software.