The Value of Ancient Near Eastern Literature
Ancient Near Eastern studies stormed the realm of Biblical studies in the early 1800s with the discovery of the Rosetta Stone. This discovery allowed scholars to begin to decipher hieroglyphic Egyptian writings. After this breakthrough, other ancient Near Eastern languages, such as Sumerian, Akkadian, Hittite, and Persian, began to be uncovered and deciphered. A later discovery that aided these Ancient Near Eastern studies immensely was the discovery of Ugarit which began in 1928. This discovery led to the uncovering of numerous writings in the Ugaritic language, which were eventually were deciphered in 1930. These breakthroughs in translation shed incredible light on the ancient world that produced the Hebrew Bible.[1]
Since these breakthroughs, scholars have been comparing these ancient Near Eastern texts with the more well-known ancient Near Eastern texts of the Hebrew Bible. This field of comparative studies has been, and is still being, wrestled with by many scholars. The question for those seeking deeper understanding of the Hebrew Bible is, what value might these comparative studies offer? That question is precisely what this paper will answer.
In the following paragraphs, this paper will set forth four unique benefits that come from these comparative studies: understanding historical and cultural contexts, ancient writing styles, ancient religious practices, and discerning theological distinctions. Each of these areas will be examined in greater detail and shown how they might aid students of the Hebrew Bible.
Understanding Historical & Cultural Contexts
History is only accurately determined by studying ancient writings. Every history book on the shelf derives its knowledge from ancient sources, which provide insight into the very events that gave them a voice. As John Walton said, “Students may study the history of the ancient Near East as a means of recovering knowledge of the events that shaped the lives of people in the ancient world.”[2] It is through those ancient writings (the Hebrew Bible and other ancient Near Eastern literature) that modern readers learn about the events and culture of the past.
The comparative study of the ancient Near Eastern literature that has been uncovered sheds quite a bright light on the historical backdrop of the Hebrew Bible. What is revealed in these comparative studies is not just events of history, but the way people viewed those events of history. For example, in the Mesha Stela, biblical events are written about from a non-biblical perspective. This inscription recounts Mesha’s revolt against Israel after the death of King Ahab (2 Kings 3:5), and it gives the Moabite side of the story.[3] This Moabite account of these historical events not only corroborates the fact of the revolt but also shows how another nation understood the role of its god, Chemosh, in giving victory. It highlights the cultural worldview that military success was attributed to divine favor. This is one small way the comparative studies of ancient Near Eastern literature shed light on the Hebrew Bible.
Understanding Ancient Writing Styles
Another great benefit of comparing ancient Near Eastern texts to the Hebrew Bible is the ability to understand ancient writing styles. Modern students can now see that the Hebrew Bible was not written in isolation but rather utilizes ancient writing styles found in all other ancient Near Eastern texts.
There are numerous examples of this, but one of the clearest is found in the comparison of Solomon’s Proverbs and the Instruction of Amenemope.[4] Much like Solomon’s Proverbs in the Hebrew Bible, the Instruction of Amenemope is a collection of wisdom sayings arranged as a father’s advice to his son. Another interesting detail found in comparison is the use of parallelism to communicate moral instruction. These are not signs of stealing ideas, nor mere coincidence. Instead, these comparisons reveal an ancient Near Eastern writing style that both Bible writers and other writers of the ancient Near East adopted as they produced their works. Christopher B. Hays notes that these patterns were a common narrative technique in Egyptian wisdom literature.[5] This example demonstrates another key benefit of comparative analysis of these ancient Near Eastern texts with the Hebrew Bible.
Understanding Ancient Religious Practices
The Hebrew Bible speaks often about religions of other nations. There are even some texts within the Hebrew Bible that shed light on the religious practices of other nations. However, the discovery and translation of many of these ancient Near Eastern texts has uncovered a whole new world in which Bible students had only scratched the surface previously. When comparing ancient Near Eastern texts with the Hebrew Bible, one of the most significant discoveries is that Israelite religion shared many similarities with the practices of the nations surrounding them. This is especially true of ancient temple building accounts.
The Gudea Cylinders revealed the temple building account of Gudea, King of Lagash. Hays identified six elements that were present in this temple building account, and are present in all temple building accounts: circumstances of the project, gathering of materials and workers, detailed description of the building, dedication rites and festivities, blessing of the king, and blessing and cursing for future generations.[6] These same elements can also be seen in the Biblical accounts (Exodus 25-40; 1 Kings 5-8). Another significant discovery that demonstrated this similarity was the Annals of Tiglath-Pileser I. These fragmentary accounts speak of a temple restoration that seemingly mirrors the restoration of Ezra in the Hebrew Bible (Ezra 6).[7]
These accounts provide unique insights into the ancient religious practice of temple building and dedication. What is gleaned from this is that Israel shared many similarities in religious practice with the nations surrounding them.
Discerning Theological Distinctions
Comparing ancient Near Eastern texts with the Hebrew Bible is incredibly insightful. The amount of common features, similar stories, and literary patterns that these ancient texts share is astounding! However, one of the most important elements of comparative studies is to notice the differences in these ancient Near Eastern texts and the Hebrew Bible. Finding common features is important, but not to the neglect of the features which distinguish the ancient texts. Hays comments on this necessity when he says, “Comparativists generally, and in the field of biblical studies especially, would do well to heed to differences between cultures and not only to likenesses.”[8] Walton takes this further in his analysis, saying, “When we read the Old Testament, we may find reason to believe that the Israelites were supposed to resist some of the currents in their cultural river. Be that as it may… they remain in that ancient cultural river.”[9] What these, among others, reveal is that the features which distinguish the Hebrew Bible from other ancient Near Eastern texts are profoundly important.
One key feature distinguishing the Hebrew Bible from other ancient Near Eastern texts is the portrait of Yahweh as the supreme God above all other gods. This is seen vividly in the contrasts between Genesis 1 and the Enuma Elish narrative. In the Enuma Elish narrative, the gods are pictured as ruling from a specific place on earth. In the Genesis 1 narrative, Yahweh is not a localized God, but one who exists beyond the earth.[10]
Another key distinguishing feature is in the covenant between Yahweh and Israel. In the narrative of the Hebrew Bible, Yahweh demands devotion to Him alone among the ancient Israelites (Ex 20:3; Deut 6:4, 13). In fact, they were punished when they devoted themselves to other gods. Israel was in a covenant with one supreme God, and that supreme God blessed and cursed based on their faithfulness to that covenant. In contrast, many of the nations around Israel believed that their devotion to and appeasing of a pantheon of gods was what kept them in good standing.[11]
There are some obvious similarities when comparing the Hebrew Bible with other ancient Near Eastern texts. However, the differences demonstrate the theological distinctions and claims of Yahweh and the nation of Israel. While the commonalities are of great value in understanding the cultural river Israel lived within, these distinctions demonstrate the uniqueness of Yahweh, Israel, and the staggering claims of the Hebrew Bible.
Conclusion: What do we do with this information?
All of this leads to the question of interpretation. As Hays points out in his introduction, scholars have debated how to interpret the data since these studies stormed the scene in the mid-1800s.[12] On one end of the spectrum are those who use these comparative studies as a polemic against the Hebrew Bible, and on the other end of the spectrum are those who see these comparative studies as a danger and threat to the biblical texts.[13] Hays correctly states that the only error greater than either of these extremes is the one that entirely ignores the data drawn out of these comparative studies.[14] The importance of these studies cannot be overstated. These are ancient texts produced by the same cultural climate as the texts of the Hebrew Bible. So, the question remains: how do we interpret the data?
To use Walton’s illustration, these studies help us to identify the larger “cultural river” that Israel found themselves swimming in.[15] Now that these studies are accessible, modern students can identify the broader cultural scope of the world that Israel was planted within. As Hays suggests, “we aspire to get inside the heads of ancient authors” by immersing ourselves into the cultures of those times and places.[16] This is perhaps the greatest asset gained from these comparative studies.
Studying the ancient Near Eastern culture which produced the Hebrew Bible is a necessary part of biblical studies. Without these insights the student is at risk of placing the Hebrew Bible in a vacuum, unaffected by the real world and the real people who produced this literature.[17] Comparative studies such as these do not undermine the Hebrew Bible. Instead, they point to its distinct nature. These comparative studies reveal the God-breathed lifeblood of the Hebrew Bible coursing through its veins, solidifying it as a text that continues to give life to those who read it.
Footnotes
[1] Christopher B. Hays, Hidden Riches: A Sourcebook for the Comparative Study of the Hebrew Bible and Ancient Near East(Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2014), 17-21.
[2] John H. Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible, second edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2018), 18.
[3] To read the Mesha inscription, see Hays, Hidden Riches, 193-195.
[4] To read the Instruction of Amenemope, see Hays, Hidden Riches, 297-310.
[5] Hays, Hidden Riches, 315.
[6] Hays, Hidden Riches, 207.
[7] Ibid., 205.
[8] Hays, Hidden Riches, 33.
[9] Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament, 6.
[10] Hays, Hidden Riches, 70.
[11] See the introduction to “Laws of Hammurabi” in Hays, Hidden Riches, 121-123. Here it is stressed that Hammurabi was chosen by the gods to establish justice, and that his success depended on honoring and appeasing the gods. The king is portrayed as the mediator who maintains divine favor, thereby ensuring prosperity and peace for the nation.
[12] For a history of interpretative approaches, see Hays, Hidden Riches, 15-38.
[13] Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament, 9.
[14] Hays, Hidden Riches, 37.
[15] Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament, 6.
[16] Hays, Hidden Riches, 35.
[17] For 10 practical guiding principles of interpretation of the comparative data, see Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament, 17-18.
