E-Book Content
T H E V I T A L I T Y OF T H E INDIVIDUAL IN T H E T H O U G H T OF A N C I E N T ISRAEL By AUBREY R. JOHNSON
CARDIFF U N I V E R S I T Y OF WALES PRESS 1964
FIRST EDITION 1 9 4 9 SECOND EDITION 1 9 6 4
P R I N T E D I N ORBAT B R I T A I N
TO T H E M E M O R Y OF
ANN ELIZABETH HALL A DEAR F R I E N D OF T H E F A M I L Y THROUGH THREE G E N E R A T I O N S
PREFACE T H E ensuing study is of a preliminary character, being the first of a series of monographs designed to elucidate the famous saying of Habakkuk (ii. 4b): ΠΉ? I n p O p p ^ S I This, as it seems to me, formulates a principle which in one way or another runs like a thread through the whole of the Old as well as the New Testament, and so is of fundamental importance for the fashioning of a sound Biblical Theology. Accordingly the following pages should not be regarded as in any way representing an attempt to furnish a com prehensive picture of the Israelite conception of man. In deed one should not fail to ask the question as to how far we may be justified in holding that there was, as a matter of fact, anything like a uniform conception. Nevertheless, as the Israelite appears to have shown little interest in specula tive thinking, it does seem possible to take a broad general treatment of this kind as being fairly representative. At the same time I have tried constantly to bear in mind the possible existence of different levels of thought, the more so as there seems to be a real danger in Old Testament study as a whole of misinterpreting what may be different but contemporary strata in terms of corresponding stages of thought, which can be arranged chronologically so as to fit into an over-simplified evolutionary scheme or similar theory of progressive revelation. Further, my employment of the familiar symbols J, Ε, \ D, H, and Ρ should not be construed as indicating a com- \ plete acceptance of the documentary theories usually as- \ sociated with them, although I have yet to be convinced \ that some such analysis (with the possible exception of Ε \ or much of E) is not required by the facts. It should certainly not be held to imply an acceptance of the normal attempt to present the religion of Israel in its historical
vi
Preface
development which is now commonly associated with the name of Wellhausen. If an apology be required for the fullness of the notes, which may well seem burdensome to many readers, it must be that these are intended as much for my own future use as for anyone who may wish to examine the evidence for my statements or even pursue a similar line of inquiry for himself. The fact is that the monographs referred to are also designed as prolegomena to something like a Biblical Theology; and this, if it is to be done properly, must pro ceed from a searching analysis of all the data and a willing ness to use every philological aid at one's disposal. Having made this ambitious claim, however, I must add that no one can be better aware than I of how far short I come of attaining this ideal; I can only say that I have done my best amid the many demands made upon my time by my ordinary professional duties. I take this opportunity of acknowledging the generous help which I have received from Professor O. Eissfeldt, who was kind enough to furnish me with certain German material which would not otherwise have been available, and Professors S. A. Cook and G. R. Driver, and the Rev. Professors N. W. Porteous, T. H. Robinson, and Η. Η. Rowley, each of whom has kindly read through the whole of the typescript and given freely of his own expert know ledge and criticism. I am also greatly indebted to the Rev. Professor G. H. Davies, not only for similar kindness, but also for his assistance in reading the proofs. Finally, I should like to express my warm thanks to the University of Wales Press for again acce