Scanned copy of Offutt's dissertation which is now in the public domain. Scanned as part of our digitization on demand service.

This dissertation examines the use of water imagery in the book of Psalms and argues that the psalmists primarily employed this imagery to allude to four accounts of God's works in the Pentateuch--the waters of creation, the water in the Garden of Eden, the flood, and the crossing of the Red Sea--as paradigms for understanding their present and the future. Each chapter examines the use of the water motif in a particular book of the Psalms. In each chapter I attempt to prove, through verbal and thematic links, that the authors of the Psalms were biblical theologians in that the Pentateuch shaped their worldview. Because of their scripture-shaped worldview, they employed water imagery from earlier scriptures to interpret present-day events. The psalmists' use of water imagery also pointed to the future. Through water imagery they alluded to the Garden of Eden to express hope for a new future Eden. For the psalmists the creation of the world was a model of how God would one day remake creation. The flood and the crossing of the Red Sea are also paradigmatic events that guided the psalmists' understanding of God's work of salvation and judgment in the present and the future. The psalmists' hope for a future of divine salvation and judgment took its design from the flood and the Red Sea.

The TSol is a Christian composition of late antiquity which narrates the story about how King Solomon built the Temple of God with the aid of demons he subjugated. Comparative analysis between the TSol and Jewish literature of late antiquity (between the closing centuries BCE and the Talmudic era), and the New Testament is primarily to establish any literary dependence and explore the nature of contact between the TSol and these materials; and also to isolate Jewish elements in the TSol. The Jewish materials discussed are the Hebrew Bible, the LXX, Tobit, Wisdom of Solomon, Pseudo-Philo, certain Qumran documents (11 PsApa and the Copper scroll), Josephus' Jewish Antiquities, Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, Song of Songs, rabbinic literature, and certain Aramaic incantation texts. My research has shown that parallels do exist between the TSol, the Jewish literature discussed and the New Testament. The parallels between the TSol and the aforementioned literature are twofold: verbal and conceptual. Verbal parallels occur in the form of technical terminology; quotations, allusions and echoes. The second type of parallels appears in the form of motifs, themes, structural elements and ideas. These parallels seem to dominate in my analysis. There is no need to explain the parallels between the TSol and the literature discussed in terms of literary dependence. I have attempted to demonstrate that these parallels in most of the literature are indicative of indirect influence through shared use of the biblical tradition: motifs, stories and themes regarding King Solomon; a common fund of oral tradition(s) regarding Solomon's magical power over demonic world; shared literary language, milieu, and cultural conventions. Moreover, the author of the TSol seems to have recycled Jewish materials pertaining to Solomon and related motifs in his work. Apart from the New Testament, the best case for a direct influence of a Jewish work on the TSol is Tobit.

No description available.

I began this investigation with the presupposition that the MT of Micah offered us a valid object upon which to apply the methodology of rhetorical criticism. The examination of the text proceeded along the lines of two emphases: (1) a structural analysis which studied the various blocks of material in order to describe a unity or cohesiveness in Micah, and (2) a thematic approach which identified underlying images which tend to enhance the coherence of the work. I used these two methodologies to address both pericopes and also larger units and even to discuss the book itself. Two other methodological strategies have also guided my analysis of Micah. In Chapter 1, I described two foci of the ellipse that is rhetorical criticism: first, those who emphasize the task of "listening" to the text, which I understand as more of an empathic approach, and second, those who utilize a quantifying style of investigation. Both these focal points are reflected in my structural and thematic analyses. Although no readily recognizable patterns such as A:B:A appears in describing the three parts of the book, there does seem to be a thematic development in Micah 1-7. Thus Part I (Micah 1-3) resounds with the words of witness followed by judgment and concludes with the destruction of Jerusalem. That scene of destruction gives way, however, to the restoration and encouragement of Part II (4:1-5:8), although the threats in 4:9-5:8 remind us that the restoration is not an accomplished fact. Part III (Mic 5:9-7:20) begins with what seems to be an assertion that the judgment will take place, especially with the appearance again of the witness/judgment model in 6:9-7:6. However, the final picture of restoration and covenant fidelity on the part of YHWH affirms that the judgment will be overturned. I have further suggested that echoes from the literary tradition of Israel enhance the movement from judgment to renewal in Micah. The conclusion to the judgment in Part I (Mic 3:1-12) has particular impact, because it is presented in the language of the judgment scene from the garden of Eden (Genesis 3). In fact, we see here again that theme and structure intermix in Micah. I suggest that the book begins with material which mimics and recalls older traditions (the theophany, David, and even Anat) and ends with similarly old recollections (David and Moses). Thus I posit that Micah comes to us wrapped in an envelope of ancient echoes.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Five passages in the Gospel of Mark are examined in which two separable narratives are intertwined': 5:21-43, 6:7-32, 11:12-25, 14:1-11, and 14:54-72. Literary analysis demonstrates that Mark is responsible for these intercalations. As to his motives, further investigation shows that they cannot be satisfactorily attributed to topical, literary or stylistic factors. The thesis defended here is that theologica1 motive behind these intercalations; that is; that the evangelist repeatedly employs this device primari1y to make a theological point. The theological implications which Mark thus draws are then described. In brief, they are that in fulfilling God's will, Jesus must suffer and die; nevertheless, his vindication and exaltation are assured. / Cinq passages de l'évangile selon Marc sont examinés dans lesquels deux récits séparables se sont entrelacés:5:21-43, 6:7-32, 11:12-25, 14:1-11, et 14:54-72. L'analyse littéraire démontre que Marc est responsable pour cesintercalations. Quant à ses motifs, une investigation plus profonde nous montre qu’on ne peut pas les attribuerde façon satisfaisante à des éléments topiques, littéraires, stylistiques. La thèse ici soutenue c'est qu’un motif théologique se trouve sous ces intercalcations; c'est-à-dire, que l’Evangéliste emploie régulièrement ce moyen essentiellement pour faire ressortir un argument théologique. Les implications théologique qu’en tire Marc sont ensuite décrites, Bref, elles consistent en ce qu’en accomplissant la volonté de Dieu, Jésus doit souffrir et mourir; néamoins, sa justification et son exaltation sont assurées. fr