The Cited Documents of Ezra-Nehemiah: Does Their Authenticity Matter?
In: Biblical InterpretationSearch for other papers by Laura Carlson Hasler in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
Determining the authenticity of Ezra-Nehemiah’s sources was a central question among scholars more than a century ago and remains so today. In this article, I explore why posing questions of authenticity about the source documents endures as a mainstay of Ezra-Nehemiah scholarship and argue that the implications of the authenticity question are frequently overstated. This overstatement reveals a prevailing scholarly instinct to separate “the real” from “the ideological,” a dichotomy traceable since C.C. Torrey’s Ezra Studies. Using Ezra 4 as an example, I argue that determining the authenticity of Ezra-Nehemiah’s source documents is not a worthy litmus test of historical-critical scholarship. Instead, considering how Ezra 4 resembles a space of collection rather than a linear story collapses methodological boundaries, calling into question the usefulness of categories like authenticity and fabrication in our understanding of Ezra-Nehemiah and beyond.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 493 | 72 | 7 |
| Full Text Views | 146 | 6 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 249 | 8 | 0 |
The Cited Documents of Ezra-Nehemiah: Does Their Authenticity Matter?
In: Biblical InterpretationSearch for other papers by Laura Carlson Hasler in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
Determining the authenticity of Ezra-Nehemiah’s sources was a central question among scholars more than a century ago and remains so today. In this article, I explore why posing questions of authenticity about the source documents endures as a mainstay of Ezra-Nehemiah scholarship and argue that the implications of the authenticity question are frequently overstated. This overstatement reveals a prevailing scholarly instinct to separate “the real” from “the ideological,” a dichotomy traceable since C.C. Torrey’s Ezra Studies. Using Ezra 4 as an example, I argue that determining the authenticity of Ezra-Nehemiah’s source documents is not a worthy litmus test of historical-critical scholarship. Instead, considering how Ezra 4 resembles a space of collection rather than a linear story collapses methodological boundaries, calling into question the usefulness of categories like authenticity and fabrication in our understanding of Ezra-Nehemiah and beyond.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 493 | 72 | 7 |
| Full Text Views | 146 | 6 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 249 | 8 | 0 |