SINAI THEOLOGY IN DIALOG WITH ZION THEOLOGY THROUGH NAHUM 1 A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Claremont School of Theology In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by Benjamin Taufoua Laie May 2017 © 2017 Benjamin Taufoua Laie ALL RIGHTS RESERVED NT S C HOOL OF T O H M E O E L R O A G L Y C 1885 This dissertation completed by BENJAMIN TAUFOUA LAIE has been presented to and accepted by the faculty of Claremont School of Theology in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Faculty Committee Dr. Marvin A. Sweeney, Chairperson Dr. Tammi J. Schneider Dr. Jon L. Berquist Dean of the Faculty Sheryl A. Kujawa-Holbrook May 2017 ABSTRACT Sinai Theology in Dialog with Zion Theology Through Nahum 1 By Benjamin Taufoua Laie Claremont School of Theology The acrostic poem in Nahum 1 has unfortunately not yet found a rightful place in the book of Nahum. It is not finding its place in four ways: its similarity to foreign materials; its incompleteness to be considered an acrostic poem; the mixture of personal forms; and the mixture of perfect and imperfect verbs. In past scholarship, these issues suffice to consider Nahum 1 a composite work. This dissertation addresses these shortcomings by employing the new face of form criticism to engage both literary and historical analyses to reach a more comprehensive understanding of the function of Nahum 1 in relation to the Sitz im Leben of the seventh century B.C.E era, rather than to be considered as a later insertion. Based on the literary features of Nahum 1 and the Sitz im Leben of the seventh century, Nahum 1 presents a coherent structure. The nuances of Nahum 1 clearly make sense in the historical context of the seventh century, especially after Judah have been suffering under Assyrian hegemony for almost two centuries. The mixed forms (persons and verbs) are not redactional layers, but signs of Nahum being specific. This dissertation will attempt to demonstrate the coherent structure of Nahum 1 and its clear reflection on the social and political realities in Judah during the Iron Age period. Acknowledgements There is a Samoan saying that goes: “Ole tele o popo e sua ai le lolo.” The English translation of this saying would be “many coconuts make more cream.” Coconut is an important plant in Samoa for food, cultural events, house buildings, mechanical, weaving, trading product, cosmetic, medicinal, and many other purposes. This is why the coconut tree in Samoa is called the “Tree of life.” However, the saying is not meant to emphasize its various uses, but the gathering of many coconuts to accomplish the purpose of a coconut. Without a great amount of bodies to gather numerous coconuts, the goal of a coconut would not be accomplished. My utmost gratitude to God and his faithfulness throughout my whole life. I am indebted to the EFKAS, Board of Regents- faculty of the Kanana Fou Theological Seminary, and the Claremont School of Theology, where I was privileged to study over the years. This journey has provided me with the wisdom and courage to pursue my passion in the Hebrew Bible. In particular, I have had the honor to learn under the instructions of Rev. Tafailiematagi Muasau, Rev. Mamoe Mamoe Jr, Rev. Fa’atauva’a Alaelua, Rev. Nafatali Falealii, Rev. Luaao Leasiolagi, Rev. Reupena Alo, Rev. Tautua Amosa, Rev. Folauga Tupuola, Rev. Iosefa Autele, Rev. Eleasaro Fa’ata’a. Rev. Viliamu Leilua, Rev. Tafale Fuiava, Rev. Ekitoa Sopoaga, Rev. Lalomauga Paau, Rev. Sepulona Tanuvasa, Rev. Matapo’o Peniamina, Rev. Samuelu Mauga, Rev. Elder Vaela’a Taula, Dr. Sekuini Seva’aetasi, Dr. Moreli Niuatoa, Dr. John Strazicich, Dr. Ho Kim, Dr. Tony Hollister, and Dr. Donald Samuel. Above all, I must pay homage to my dissertation committee, including my academic advisor Marvin A. Sweeney’s endless support and advice throughout my studies here at Claremont School of Theology. His expertise in the form critical method and its new face has convinced me that Form Criticism will always remain an essential reading to the Hebrew Bible. I v am proud to call him my Doktorvater. Tammi J. Schneider’s fortitude has taught me to work harder and harder. Her expertise in the ancient Near Eastern studies has convinced me that the Hebrew Bible will always remain vague without acknowledging the ancient Near Eastern literatures. Jon L. Berquist’s expertise in the social world of the Hebrew Bible has been tremendously helpful to understand what life was like in ancient Israel. For these reasons, I am proud to shout aloud that I am fortunate to have these top-notch scholars as my dissertation committee. Special thanks to my colleagues and friends in the Hebrew Bible program – Nick Pumphrey, Nancy Meyer, Gavrielle Blank, Jason Tron, Inchol Yang, Soo Kim, Edens Elveus, Seongeun Jeong, Christopher Clarke, Emmanuel Ukaegbu-Onuoha, Tim Seals, Dr. Pam Nourse, Nick Pappani, Shelley Birdsong, Chris Clarke, Kyunsik Park, Koog Hong, Beau Harris, and Leah Laird. Next, I am forever indebted to my family, friends, and the EFKAS, whose prayers and support gave me courage. My parents, my late father, Taufoua Asoau Laie and mother Elisapeta Fano Laie, instilled within me the love of education and that the sky is the limit. Thanks to both of their families here and abroad for their support. Also, a big thank you to my wife’s family for their support, including my late mother-in-law, Tavu’i Lene Seanoa, whose wisdom and knowledge have instilled in us the love with no boundaries. Last but not least, I must thank my wife Nunuiasolelei Laie and our four children: Gracelene, Eliana, Lupefa’alele and Taufoua for their support and patience during this long journey. My wife was the backbone to this long journey. For her wise advice and encouragement when I’m down and especially the challenges I have faced during this journey, I am forever thankful. Without her, this journey would never have come to its completion. vi CONTENTS Abstract Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………...v-vi Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………………vii-ix CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………1 1.1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………..1-6 1.2. Evidence of the Problem: A History of Research………………………………..6-10 1.3. A Solution to the Problem………………………………………………………10-17 1.4. Limit and Scope……………………………………………………………………...7 1.5. Methodology and Its Historical Development: Form Criticism………………...17-18 1.5.1. Wilhelm and Jacob Grimm (1800’s) …………………………………18-19 1.5.2. Hermann Gunkel (1901) ……………………………………………...19-20 1.5.3. Sigmund Mowinckel (1921) ………………………………………….20-21 1.5.4. Claus Westermann (1991) ……………………………………………21-22 1.5.5. James Muilenburg (1969) …………………………………………….22-23 1.5.6. Ferdinand de Saussure (1916) and Wolfgang Richter (1970’s)………23-24 1.5.7. Rolf Knierim (1973) ………………………………………………….24-26 1.5.8. Marvin A. Sweeney (2014) …………………………………………..26-31 1.6. Relevancy of the new face of Form Criticism to Nahum 1………………………...31 1.7. Overview of the Study………………………………………………………….32-33 CHAPTER TWO: A FORM CRITICAL READING OF NAHUM 1:1-15……………………34 2.1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………..34-36 2.2. Nahum 1:1-15 Structural Analysis……………………………………………...36-38 2.3. Superscription (1:1) ………………………………………………………………..39 2.3.1 Structure / Form …………………………………………………………..39 2.3.2. Genre……………………………………………………………………..40 2.3.3. Setting………………………………………………………………...40-42 2.3.4. Narratological…………………………………………………………43-44 2.3.5. Interpretation………………………………………………………….44-53 2.4. Interpretation of Past Events (1:2-5) ………………………………………………53 2.4.1. Structure / Form………………………………………………………53-54 2.4.2. Genre………………………………………………………………….54-56 2.4.3. Setting…………………………………………………………………….56 2.4.4. Rhetorical……………………………………………………………..57-61 2.4.5. Narratological…………………………………………………………61-64 2.4.6. Intertextuality……………………………………………………………..64 2.4.7. Interpretation……………………………………………………………...65 2.5. The Omnipotent Control of Yahweh over Assyria (1:6-8) ………………………...66 2.5.1. Structure / Form……………………………………………………….66-72 2.5.2. Genre…………………………………………………………………..73-74 2.5.3. Setting…………………………………………………………………74-75 2.5.4. Rhetorical…………………………………………………………………76 2.5.5. Narratological…………………………………………………………76-77 2.5.6. Intertextuality……………………………………………………………..77 vii 2.5.7. Interpretation…………………………………………………………..77-78 2.6. Theodicy Issues (1:9-11) …………………………………………………………...79 2.6.1. Structure / Form……………………………………………………….79-80 2.6.2. Genre…………………………………………………………………..80-81 2.6.3. Setting…………………………………………………………………81-83 2.6.4. Rhetorical……………………………………………………………...83-85 2.6.5. Narratological……………………………………………………………..85 2.6.6. Intertextuality………………………………………………………….85-86 2.6.7. Interpretation…………………………………………………………..86-88 2.7. Oracle of Salvation for Judah (1:12-15) ……………………………………………89 2.7.1. Structure /Form………………………………………………………..89-92 2.7.2. Genre…………………………………………………………………..92-93 2.7.3. Setting…………………………………………………………………93-95 2.7.4. Rhetorical……………………………………………………………....95-96 2.7.5. Narratological………………………………………………………….96-98 2.7.6. Intertextuality……………………………………………………………...98 2.7.7. Interpretation…………………………………………………………99-101 CHAPTER THREE: TRADITIONS IN ANCIENT ISRAEL AND JUDAH…………………102 3.1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………...102-104 3.2. Sinai and Zion Traditions ……………………………………………………..104-111 3.3. Are Traditions Reliable? Why were they Important? ………………………..111-115 3.4. Traditions in Pre-Monarchical Age…………………………………………..115-120 3.5. Traditions During and Post-Monarchy: Disunity Amongst the People……….121-126 3.6. Prophetic Usage of Traditions: Confliction…………………………………...126-132 3.7. How were both traditions available in Judah during Nahum?..........................132-135 3.8. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………135-137 CHAPTER FOUR: PENTATEUCHAL AND OTHER CITATIONS AS RHETORICAL DEVICES IN NAHUM 1:1-15………………………………………………………………...138 4.1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………...138-141 4.2. Rhetorical Criticism and Nahum 1…………………………………………...141-142 4.3. Past Scholarship on the Allusions in Nahum 1……………………………….143-144 4.4. Pentateuchal and Other Biblical Allusions in Nahum 1…………………………..144 4.4.1. Nahum 1:2 – A Righteous God……………………………………..144-147 4.4.2. Nahum 1:3a-b – A Powerful God……………………………………147-149 4.4.3. Nahum 1:4a1 – Crossing of the Red Sea……………………………149-151 4.4.4. Nahum 1:4a2 – Crossing of the Jordan River………………………151-152 4.4.5. Nahum 1:4b1 – Bashan and Carmel Events………………………..152-156 4.4.5.1. The Bashan Event – Numbers 21………………………...156-158 4.4.5.2. The Carmel Event – 1 Kings 18………………………….158-162 4.4.6. Nahum 1:4b2 – the bloom of Lebanon fade………………………...163-165 4.4.7. Nahum 1:15 – Sinai and Zion in Dialog…………………………...165-168 4.5. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………168-171 CHAPTER FIVE: JUDAH’S POLITICAL STATUS DURING THE IRON AGE…………..172 5.1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………..172-176 5.2. A Brief History of the Neo-Assyrian Empire in Relation to Israel’s Iron Age Period………………………………………………………………176-179 viii 5.2.1. Assyria and Babylon……………………………………………….179-181 5.3. Early Ninth Century BCE………………………………………………………...181 5.3.1. Shalmaneser III (858-824 BCE) …………………………………..181-187 5.3.2. Adad-Nirari III (811-783 BCE) …………………………………...188-196 5.4. Latter Half of Eighth Century BCE………………………………………….196-197 5.4.1. Tiglath-pileser III (744-727 BCE) ………………………………...197-200 5.4.2. Shalmaneser V (726-722 BCE) and Sargon II (721-705 BCE)……200-202 5.4.3. Sennacherib (704-681 BCE) ………………………………………203-205 5.5. Seventh Century BCE…………………………………………………………….205 5.5.1. Esarhaddon (680-669 BCE) ………………………………………205-207 5.5.2. Assurbanipal (668-627 BCE) ……………………………………..207-210 5.6. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………...210-211 CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………..212 6.1. Nahum 1 and the Sitz im Leben of Judah in the seventh century BCE………212-213 6.2. Nahum 1 and the Twelve Prophets…………………………………………..214-217 6.3. Nahum 1:15 (MT: 2:1) Influence on Isaiah 52:7…………………………….217-219 6.4. Nahum 1’s Influence on Isaiah 55……………………………………………219-221 6.5. A Theological Overview of Nahum 1………………………………………..221-223 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………………...224-241 ix