This article introduces ten Hexaplaric readings that are cited in Greek and Latin Christian literature that is not exegetical or treats a biblical book other than the one the Hexaplaric reading relates to.
The article casts doubt on Shimon Gesundheit’s theory, published in this journal (VT 62  29-57), that in the case of Jer 25,1-14—contrary to mainstream scholarly opinion—the Masoretic text form commands priority over the edition represented by the LXX. Even though Gesundheit’s approach is basically sound, his results fail to convince. The conclusions drawn from a diachronic analysis of the passage hold wider implications for the redaction history of the book of Jeremiah, the working philosophies of the ancient tradents of the book, and exegetical method in general.
When looking at the literary history of the dynastic oracle in 2 Sam 7:1-17 and its narrative embedding in the historiographic concept of Samuel and Kings, one can argue that in the beginning, there was a royal oracle of salvation shaped by a common Ancient Near Eastern royal ideology. Even though the exact wording or the original ‘Sitz im Leben’ of the oracle cannot be identified with any certainty, some observations in the literary structure of the narrative indicate that the ‘deuteronomistic’ narrator in 2 Sam 7 used an earlier form of the dynastic oracle in order to combine it with the motive of building the temple and creating a coherent story that plays a key role in the historiographic structure of his narrative work. Later (dtr) editors enhanced the concept of building the temple over the dynastic promise and interpreted the time of David as the final stage of Israel’s conquest of the land. The dynastic oracle has not been revoked, but the political reign of the Davidides has been relativised, so that the text was opened up for new interpretations and applications, which can be studied in the wide range of its history of reception.
The article applies the conceptual blending theory of metaphor to a specific imagery in the Psalms: metaphors of miscarriage or stillbirth. It asks whether miscarriage is considered a real threat or a “mere” metaphor in these texts, and situates the texts within the conceptual systems about miscarriage and stillbirth in the Hebrew Bible and the ancient Near East. In the Psalms, miscarriage and stillbirth are described by three terms with different connotations: שכל (bereavement) in Ps 35:12, נפל (falling down) in Ps 58:9, and יצא (going forth/coming out) in Ps 144:14. Conceptual blending offers a framework to integrate both “literal” and “metaphoric” references to miscarriage in the Psalms.
This study suggests that the difficulties associated with the interpretation of לְאַרְצוֹ in Job 37:13 can be resolved, if it is assumed that v. 13 is thematically linked to vv. 11-12, and the word should be separated into two words. Elihu capitalizes in his poem on the puzzling behavior of clouds, such as their constant moving from place to place, their yielding rain, generating thunders and seemingly their causing the jagged form of lightning, to describe God’s greatness in creating and controlling precipitation. In v. 13 Elihu concludes his poem by stating that God will withhold his order (לֺא יְצַו) to the clouds when he wants to punish (אִם־לְשֵׁבֶט), but will provide his order (יַמְצִיא הַצָּו) when he wants to show his goodness (אִם־לְחֶסֶד).