Customer Reviews

A Biblical History of Israel

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The actual text of the book is just over 300 pp, with the rest devoted to notes and indexes. Provan wrote 6 chaps, Long 3, and Longman 2. I originally purchased this book because I was somewhat familiar with the work of Long and Longman. I was unsure of Provan's writing. This is no longer the case. Provan has amazed me with his depth and thoroughness. His name is now on my list of favorites.

The first 100 pp, mostly by Provan, address methodology. In it, he makes a compelling case for the value of testimony. He points out the inconsistency of modern historians who wish to give greater credibility to extra-biblical texts and archaeology, while exercising maximal skepticism towards the biblical accounts. His arguments are clear and well-reasoned.

The next 200 pp are a history of Old Testament Israel. The authors leave open the question of the date of the exodus. A discussion on the archaeology of the conquest occupies 20 pp.

There are no maps, charts, or images; and only 6 tables. The type size is about 9 point, allowing the authors to pack a lot of material between the covers of the book. The pages have decent margins for the reader who likes to make notes. There are 83 pp of notes, along with a Scripture index, Scholars Cited index, and an Index of Select Topics.

If for no other reason, purchase this book for its discussion on methodology.

The modern arguments for how a methodology should be when approaching the Bible are challenged, and challenged well! The book borders on overemphasizing its counterarguments. There really is no reason to do this, for the arguments are very good and hardly need any repetition.

This history is one that is selective, on purpose. You do not get a great sense of how Israel interacted in a society with each other, as different classes and occupations.

But this book very much fills a void in Biblical Historical Studies, and makes people aware of all the issues that go into scholars' work on the Bible. Similar to Dever, who has a comment of the back cover of the book, this book gives both the Biblical author and editors, and modern day Bible historian, credibility to be both confessional and critical.

It doesn't shy away from the harder supposed discrepancies many find in the Bible, and instead of stooping to a lazier approach of simple harmonization, engages the text and other extra-biblical sources, to show that the Biblical narratives in no way contradict other sources, and that by reading the text carefully, one can make sense of what is going on.

This kind of book has been a long time in coming. It is most excellent!

The first 100 pages discusses the methodology of modern historiography and demonstrates how biblical critics continue to use out of date methodologies in their attempt to destroy the concept that ancient Israel actually existed. Especially telling is his discussion on testimony. They maintain that the biblical testimony about Israel's history is as valid a source as any other. Even modern archeaology is not neutral but needs to be interpreted; therefore it becomes another testimony in the mix.

The next two hundred pages discuss the history of Israel with this positive-testimony model. They do not paint as comprehensive a history as some might like (along the lines of Bright). Instead they focus on the problem areas rasied by the text.

This is a terrific book and it is taking a very important place in my library.

Having only recently dived into the pool of historiography, this book has helped me tremendously to understand the complexities that go into a historiographer's reconstruction of history.

As to why this book is leaps and bounds better than most of your popular apologetic works, here are a few differentiating factors:

A. Philosophy of historigraphical reconstruction. This is perhaps the most unique feature of the book. Before even diving into the various evidences being considered for a reconstruction of the history of Israel, the authors spend roughly 100 pages in dealing with the philosophical underpinnings of historiography. I found this section IMMENSELY enlightening and the book is worth the price for this exposition alone. On what grounds do we accept or reject historical testimony? Does the presence of ideology in a text imply that historical details have been interpolated? What can archaeological evidence tell us about the past? What are the limitations of science in reconstructing history? These and more questions are dealt with in "History of Israel". Rather than merely beginning with a given set of assumptions, the authors dissect the assumptions of themselves and their counterparts in Israeli historical reconstruction.

B. Expertise in the field of historiography. Unlike the many Josh McDowells and Lee Strobels, the authors of this book are professionals in this field of study and it shows in their knowledge of the material at hand, as well as their treatment of the material.

C. Objectivity in a reconstruction of Israel's past. What I loved about this book, especially in comparison to other books on the trustworthiness of the Old Testament texts, was the cool-headed, objective handling of the evidence. The word "prove" is rarely, if ever used. The authors' make it clear that nothing in history is "proven"; only plausible and implausible. This is a breath of fresh air in comparison to the oftentimes dogmatic assertions that are made by many other Christian authors who propound their conclusions with a matter-of-fact, case-closed confidence that leaves many, like myself, wondering what side of the story I'm not hearing from dissenters. The author of "History of Israel" provide ample examples (although sometimes too brief, but there is only so much room when dealing with an topic of this magnitude) of those who do not believe in the historicity of the Biblical texts. Mud-slinging and demonization of dissenters is not present in any of the book. Dissenting views are given what I considered to be a fair (but perhaps too brie) treatment.

"History of Israel" does not set out to prove the Old Testament reliable. It attempts to demonstrate how the Biblical texts can, and likely do, fit in with the evidence at hand. Can this be proven? No. But they certainly make a compelling case for why we ought to trust the traditions handed down to us.

As a relative newcomer to the field of historical criticism, I appreciate Provan/Long/Longman's work. It is truly a sign of good scholarship to be able to take the complex and make it understandable. I don't mean easy, but understandable. Provan's command of his topic is clear and thorough, especially in regard to epistemology and testimony. Those who by faith and reason trust the Biblical texts as reliable testimonies of ancient Israel will find encouragement in this book.

I have always felt that you should believe someone unless you have good reason not too. Many biblical minimalist seem to take the view that the bible is wrong as history with very little, if any proof to back their claims up.

This book is a ultra maximalist defense of the bible as a historical work. If you are interested in this subject, its a must read.

The authors are to be congratulated for their beautifully laid out and tightly argued book. The first third of the book lays out their philosophical basis for the history and provokes many questions and encourages much thought. We are in their debt for this fine, fine book on Israel's history as its comes to us from the "testimony" of Scripture. The authors are to be appreciated for their answering the so called "minimalists"
approach to "biblical" history. I found the book well written, wonderfully argued, and extremely helpful. This book should belong on the shelf of everyone interested in ancient Israel's history.

I found Provan et al's treatment of Old Testament History to be a valuable contribution to an understanding of this history, particularly how it stands up to scholarly criticism. The book starts weakly in my opinion with a focus on something some guy said, why this guy is wrong, harsh critiques, and so on. But then it gets on to its subject, and there it works well. The book is heavily footnoted, so my impression is that you will have one finger in the chapter and one in the footnotes. However, the footnotes are very informative and so the system seems to work well, albeit requiring back-and-forth. I learned many fascinating things and feel I have a better grasp about what experts believe are the issues related to Israelite history and how reasonably balanced Christian scholars (which I take the authors to be) answer those issues. I read it for a seminary class and it was well worth the time.

An extremely helpful History of Israel, especially the first several chapters which not only create a foundation for reading the OT but which give an excellent discussion of the various approaches to the text. Their primary thesis seems to be that the ancient Hebrew literature should be treated with at least the same respect as other ancient testimonies, be they literary or archeological in nature. The authors allege with thoroughness and authority a skeptical bias against the Hebrew texts in current scholarship. Their argument requires a response.