When the end is the beginning? Or when the biblical past is the political present: Some thoughts on ancient Israel, “post‐exilic Judaism,” and the politics of biblical scholarship

Abstract

Biblical scholarship cannot be separated from its social and political context. Scholars such as Lemche, Davies, Thompson and Whitelam are to be commended for calling attention to the politics of Biblical scholarship in relation to the Israeli‐Palestinian conflict. However, they argue for a radical separation between a pre‐exilic “Israel” and a post‐exilic “Judaism.” This model first arose in nineteenth century Germany, where it served both to inscribe a common German Protestant identity and to promote the dissolution of a separate German Jewish identity. The terms “Israel” and “Judaism” are misunderstood and misapplied. The primary sources and archaeological evidence, read within the methodological framework of the above scholars, do not support this model of rupture, but instead suggest a model general continuity.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 46 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.