What do you think?
Rate this book
Walter C kaiser / Old Testament Documents Are They Reliable and Relevant? Signed
This rare and vintage book is a perfect addition to any bibliophile's collection
Paperback
First published August 17, 2001
1 person is currently reading
141 people want to read
About the author
Walter C. Kaiser Jr.
97 books53 followersWalter C. Kaiser Jr. (PhD, Brandeis University) is president emeritus of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Massachusetts. He previously taught at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School and at Wheaton College. Kaiser is active as a preacher, speaker, researcher, and writer and is the author of more than forty books, including Preaching and Teaching from the Old Testament and The Majesty of God in the Old Testament.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
February 24, 2010
Kaiser attempts to recreate F.F. Bruce's The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? for the Old Testament. He tries, like Bruce, to present the scholarly debate in a way that is understandable to the layman. And as a layman, I think he fails miserably. Where Bruce spent some time going over the academic debates over the date of the NT documents and most of his time arguing his case for their authenticity, Kaiser spends almost all of his book simply reporting the debate and pointing us towards the various scholars and works involved. While this would have been useful and interesting up to a point, it should not have been the majority of the book.
Having said that, there are some useful things that make it at least worth skimming. His discussion of archaeological evidence and the last section on the relevance of the OT are both interesting and worthwhile.
Having said that, there are some useful things that make it at least worth skimming. His discussion of archaeological evidence and the last section on the relevance of the OT are both interesting and worthwhile.
May 9, 2018
The book is okay. But considering the works I've read that cover this subject area, I prefer Josh McDowell's "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" (2 vols.) for reviewing the facts about the biblical documents....
September 25, 2023
Excellent in most every way. Kaiser plays off of F.F. Bruce's same title concerning the New Testament Documents. While this is pretty academic in style, it still remains (in my opinion) accessible to the Christian reader. Not only does Kaiser answer the question of reliability and relevancy (in the affirmative), but he has all the receipts to show it too. The one major hindrance of this book isn't even its fault. 20 years old is a long time to pass in this field without becoming somewhat obsolete. The book relies heavily in some ways to the archeological and historical data at the time of its writing. This book will catch you up to the 21st century but you must look elsewhere to take you to our current state today.
November 16, 2013
I thought this might be dry and indeed it was somewhat rough going the first few chapters but once you settle into the formality of the language it is really an excellent read, very thoughtful, seems relatively comprehensive (for a layman like myself), and -- like F. F. Bruce's comparable volume "The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?" -- spiritually rather than just intellectually insightful. Kaiser actually mentions Bruce's work as an inspiration -- that latter book was influential on a generation of readers yet there had not been a similar single volume covering the range of issues for the OT. As he begins researching the subject he starts to understand why -- it is further in the past and more distant in time and culture, and covers broader swathes of history, for a single researcher to credibly discuss reliability and relevance. For all that, it seems a job well done.
The first part of the book deals with reliability, dealing in turn with Genesis, the Pentateuch, the books of kings, and then the prophets. He skirts the question of creation/evolution, which is wise as that is more a scientific debate. Most fascinating to me from this section was the discussion of the mention in Genesis 6 where it is said the sons of God married the daughters of men; the solution here is to read 'sons of God' as a cultural reference to aristocrats, rather than spiritual beings. Later, in discussion of Song of Solomon, he also points out something I didn't know: there are actually three parties in the song -- the maiden, her lover from whom she was abducted, and Solomon the abductor; her exclamation of love at the end is to her lover to whom she has been returned, and not to Solomon as I had thought (this reading makes vastly more sense). There is other interesting (and also un-interesting) discussion on Babel and languages, the ages of men, attempts to reconcile the length of kings' rules with third party historical documents, etc.
The second half focused on the relevance of the OT and felt more engaging. He raises certain important questions, for example: Is there is conflict between the apparent demands of the law, and promise of unconditional grace and free blessings? (No, obedience is not the condition for grace, but it is the state in which grace can most fully be enjoyed.) How should we understand the parts of the OT, e.g. in the Psalms, where the writer hurls inhumane curses on his enemies, such as dashing infants to the rocks? (These are limited, and in context can be read as an expression of longing for justice with the right of action given to God, rather than as literal curses.) There is also a pointer toward the end of a common mistake in OT reading, which is to confuse what the word describes with what it proscribes.
The first part of the book deals with reliability, dealing in turn with Genesis, the Pentateuch, the books of kings, and then the prophets. He skirts the question of creation/evolution, which is wise as that is more a scientific debate. Most fascinating to me from this section was the discussion of the mention in Genesis 6 where it is said the sons of God married the daughters of men; the solution here is to read 'sons of God' as a cultural reference to aristocrats, rather than spiritual beings. Later, in discussion of Song of Solomon, he also points out something I didn't know: there are actually three parties in the song -- the maiden, her lover from whom she was abducted, and Solomon the abductor; her exclamation of love at the end is to her lover to whom she has been returned, and not to Solomon as I had thought (this reading makes vastly more sense). There is other interesting (and also un-interesting) discussion on Babel and languages, the ages of men, attempts to reconcile the length of kings' rules with third party historical documents, etc.
The second half focused on the relevance of the OT and felt more engaging. He raises certain important questions, for example: Is there is conflict between the apparent demands of the law, and promise of unconditional grace and free blessings? (No, obedience is not the condition for grace, but it is the state in which grace can most fully be enjoyed.) How should we understand the parts of the OT, e.g. in the Psalms, where the writer hurls inhumane curses on his enemies, such as dashing infants to the rocks? (These are limited, and in context can be read as an expression of longing for justice with the right of action given to God, rather than as literal curses.) There is also a pointer toward the end of a common mistake in OT reading, which is to confuse what the word describes with what it proscribes.
Read
October 20, 2016Kaiser was preaching to the choir on this one. Enjoyable, a little bland, but nothing revelatory. I read this as a part of a larger 3-4 year project focusing on the Old Testament. I'm winding up the initial phase of the project, which is more overview, and wanted to reorient myself with some of the questions that Kaiser handles before I dig in for the next couple of years.
Strengths:
As an overview, an introduction to textual criticism and archeology in the OT, The Old Testament Documents is solid if slight. It groups the OT by Pentateuch, Prophets, and Wisdom. Kaiser is forthright about the difficulties for textual criticism, archeology, and relevance for each grouping. At times he makes more out of certain archeological finds than may be warranted, but overall I thought he was fair. I also think he does a pretty good job, given the space, of arguing for why each grouping remains relevant to the Church today. I didn't need to be convinced, but many in the Church do need convincing, so I happily recommend the "relevance" sections to any layperson who is stumped or disinterested in the OT. He does an especially good job on the relevance of wisdom literature.
Weaknesses:
Kaiser is an Evangelical scholar. He rejects documentary hypothesis (rightly, imo), holds to the historical reliability of the OT (again, I agree), and views it as the word of God (ditto). The weakness is in the fact that the book doesn't seem to be written for anyone who doesn't already agree with these conclusions. It is brief and often cursory in its examination of a number of complex and important issues. I don't want to criticize a book for not being something it was never meant to be, but I think I would have found Kaiser more engaging if he had been more thorough in his approach. Still, it is a nice introduction to the issues and should be viewed as a springboard.
Strengths:
As an overview, an introduction to textual criticism and archeology in the OT, The Old Testament Documents is solid if slight. It groups the OT by Pentateuch, Prophets, and Wisdom. Kaiser is forthright about the difficulties for textual criticism, archeology, and relevance for each grouping. At times he makes more out of certain archeological finds than may be warranted, but overall I thought he was fair. I also think he does a pretty good job, given the space, of arguing for why each grouping remains relevant to the Church today. I didn't need to be convinced, but many in the Church do need convincing, so I happily recommend the "relevance" sections to any layperson who is stumped or disinterested in the OT. He does an especially good job on the relevance of wisdom literature.
Weaknesses:
Kaiser is an Evangelical scholar. He rejects documentary hypothesis (rightly, imo), holds to the historical reliability of the OT (again, I agree), and views it as the word of God (ditto). The weakness is in the fact that the book doesn't seem to be written for anyone who doesn't already agree with these conclusions. It is brief and often cursory in its examination of a number of complex and important issues. I don't want to criticize a book for not being something it was never meant to be, but I think I would have found Kaiser more engaging if he had been more thorough in his approach. Still, it is a nice introduction to the issues and should be viewed as a springboard.
December 17, 2024
Finally a work by Old Testament scholar Walter Kaiser to complement the FF Bruce's classic "The New Testament Document: Are they Reliable". This one on the Old Testament is surprisingly fun to read. Instead of a re-run on the analysis of JEPD documentary hypothesis (which there is a chapter on it), Kaiser presented some interesting discussions on the sources origination, revelation style, documentary preservation and canonicity traditions. The stories make it a page turner.
The first two parts are probably the most interesting sections. In the first part, "Are the Old Testament Canon and Text reliable", Kaiser presented 4 different revelation styles of the OT, namely, direct verbal communication to Moses, inspired lyrics in the Psalms, revelation by observation in creation and behaviour to the wisdom book writers, e.g., Proverbs, and, revelation by visions, dreams, and words to the prophets. In terms of the origination of the OT books, though Moses wrote about the book of the Law and the historical account of his time, Moses certainly did not write about his own death in Deuteronomy. It was Joshua who indicated in Josh24:26 he wrote about the book of the Law, which suggested he was at least one of the author of the postmosaica materials in The Pentateuch. The earlier prophets that wrote Kings, Samuel, and Chronicles were from an anthology of prophets sayings, with Chronicles boasting 75 sources. Kaiser suggested that the OT scripture writers were aware there was a growing collection of literature of revelation to constitute a "progressive recognition of scriptures" emerged from the writers themselves as they wrote, though without a church council to rubber stamp one by one into a canon. Writers progressively referenced the collection of literature consisting of the Pentateuch, Deuteronomy & the early prophetic books, the Prophets, the Psalter, and the Nehemiah collection. Some scholars suggested that the authoritative collection remained open up to 400 BC.
The first part of the book continues to address which books belong to the canon. Interestingly, due to the recognition of progressive recognition of scripture, one can see the writers passing of the mantle among each other by referencing each other's works. For instance, 1Chronicles declared that the history of David was written by Samuel and Nathan. 2Chronicles declared that the history of Solomon was written by Nathan, Ahijah, and Iddo. Daniel regarded Jeremiah wrote as the word of the Lord. In terms of the earliest OT canon, other than that the Dead Sea Scrolls already contained every book of the OT, the earliest indication of a canon is from 200 to 180 BC in the Apocryphal writings which already referenced the 3 fold division of The Law, The Prophets, and The writings. Josephus in 1st century referred to OT as a closed canon in his writings. It is important to note that Kaiser sees the canonicity is based on recognition by tradition in history without an ecclesiastical authority to rubber stamp it before the new Testament period.
The second part of the book addresses the reliability of OT history. From Genesis 1-11 of premosaic history, Moses mentioned that it was from a scroll in Genesis 5 which dispels the notion that the sources were from merely oral traditions. It is known that in Pharoah period and Sumerean period, people were already literate and recorded information. So one can accept Moses had written materials for his sources. In terms of the Patriarchal history, the names of places of the locations of the Patriarchs in the southeastern shore of the Dead Sea have been located though there is no external source to establish the existence of the Patriarchs. Also of somewhat amusing interest, the price of a slave at 20 shekels was used correctly to reflect the market price in the bronze age instead of 90 shekels if it was written in 600 BC.
Archeology helps to establish missing people and places, such as the Hittites were just the people resided in Anatolia or northern Syria. Solomon brought back a shipment of 30shekels of gold from Ophir was actually located north of Televiv with the shipment sign from Ophir on the Ostracon. The discovery of Jericho in the 1930s confirmed not only the city's existence, but the city walls were collapsed outward due perhaps to an earthquake offering invading troops a bridge to enter the city. Egyptian pottery and scarabs were also discovered in and nearby the city to confirm the exile story, and the dating was around 1400 BC.
The third part of the book addresses if the messages of the OT are reliable. In the chapter on the Pentateuch, Kaiser tackles the JEPD documentary hypothesis. The hypothesis broke the Pentateuch down into the 4 JEPD sources based on the assumption that the patriarchs did not know the name Yahweh and Elohim, and it was Moses and later writers who dropped the names. Kaiser thinks that contradicts that the usage was explicitly spelled out in Genesis that the usage was originated at that time. It seems ad hoc to suggest Moses made it up for no reason, not to mention there were no sources of antiquity to support the existence of such JEPD sources. Another criticism of the JEPD hypothesis was breaking up narratives into different sources which ignore a running theme of the covenant of God with the Jewish people to be fulfilled. It makes the theme incoherent. With regard to the wisdom books message reliability, it has to take into account the revelation style by observation in creation and behaviour in the world. The messages were by no means less reliable than books by more direct revelation method. The wisdom to be gleaned is based on the lessons taught in the context of the individual stories, which may not always to be generalised as general principles like typical God's commandments.
With regard to the message reliability of the prophets, Kaiser presented how well the text was maintained. Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest book of Isaiah in Hebrew was 1000 years from the Scrolls dated to 1st century BC. Only 13 changes were required to update from the Scrolls. It was considered strange that Ezikiel use brick to draw map, but archeological discovery from Babylon that maps,diagrams and plots were drawn on bricks
Jeremiah was transcribed by Baruch. The bullah or seal of Bullah was discovered on ancient documents of Jeremiah time showing Baruch's existence.
The last part of the book was on the relevance of the OT to believers today.
This work of Kaiser is written in prose that is smooth and engaging to follow, typical of Kaiser's writing style. The wealth of textual analysis, extra-biblical findings and archeological findings make this book an interesting read
The first two parts are probably the most interesting sections. In the first part, "Are the Old Testament Canon and Text reliable", Kaiser presented 4 different revelation styles of the OT, namely, direct verbal communication to Moses, inspired lyrics in the Psalms, revelation by observation in creation and behaviour to the wisdom book writers, e.g., Proverbs, and, revelation by visions, dreams, and words to the prophets. In terms of the origination of the OT books, though Moses wrote about the book of the Law and the historical account of his time, Moses certainly did not write about his own death in Deuteronomy. It was Joshua who indicated in Josh24:26 he wrote about the book of the Law, which suggested he was at least one of the author of the postmosaica materials in The Pentateuch. The earlier prophets that wrote Kings, Samuel, and Chronicles were from an anthology of prophets sayings, with Chronicles boasting 75 sources. Kaiser suggested that the OT scripture writers were aware there was a growing collection of literature of revelation to constitute a "progressive recognition of scriptures" emerged from the writers themselves as they wrote, though without a church council to rubber stamp one by one into a canon. Writers progressively referenced the collection of literature consisting of the Pentateuch, Deuteronomy & the early prophetic books, the Prophets, the Psalter, and the Nehemiah collection. Some scholars suggested that the authoritative collection remained open up to 400 BC.
The first part of the book continues to address which books belong to the canon. Interestingly, due to the recognition of progressive recognition of scripture, one can see the writers passing of the mantle among each other by referencing each other's works. For instance, 1Chronicles declared that the history of David was written by Samuel and Nathan. 2Chronicles declared that the history of Solomon was written by Nathan, Ahijah, and Iddo. Daniel regarded Jeremiah wrote as the word of the Lord. In terms of the earliest OT canon, other than that the Dead Sea Scrolls already contained every book of the OT, the earliest indication of a canon is from 200 to 180 BC in the Apocryphal writings which already referenced the 3 fold division of The Law, The Prophets, and The writings. Josephus in 1st century referred to OT as a closed canon in his writings. It is important to note that Kaiser sees the canonicity is based on recognition by tradition in history without an ecclesiastical authority to rubber stamp it before the new Testament period.
The second part of the book addresses the reliability of OT history. From Genesis 1-11 of premosaic history, Moses mentioned that it was from a scroll in Genesis 5 which dispels the notion that the sources were from merely oral traditions. It is known that in Pharoah period and Sumerean period, people were already literate and recorded information. So one can accept Moses had written materials for his sources. In terms of the Patriarchal history, the names of places of the locations of the Patriarchs in the southeastern shore of the Dead Sea have been located though there is no external source to establish the existence of the Patriarchs. Also of somewhat amusing interest, the price of a slave at 20 shekels was used correctly to reflect the market price in the bronze age instead of 90 shekels if it was written in 600 BC.
Archeology helps to establish missing people and places, such as the Hittites were just the people resided in Anatolia or northern Syria. Solomon brought back a shipment of 30shekels of gold from Ophir was actually located north of Televiv with the shipment sign from Ophir on the Ostracon. The discovery of Jericho in the 1930s confirmed not only the city's existence, but the city walls were collapsed outward due perhaps to an earthquake offering invading troops a bridge to enter the city. Egyptian pottery and scarabs were also discovered in and nearby the city to confirm the exile story, and the dating was around 1400 BC.
The third part of the book addresses if the messages of the OT are reliable. In the chapter on the Pentateuch, Kaiser tackles the JEPD documentary hypothesis. The hypothesis broke the Pentateuch down into the 4 JEPD sources based on the assumption that the patriarchs did not know the name Yahweh and Elohim, and it was Moses and later writers who dropped the names. Kaiser thinks that contradicts that the usage was explicitly spelled out in Genesis that the usage was originated at that time. It seems ad hoc to suggest Moses made it up for no reason, not to mention there were no sources of antiquity to support the existence of such JEPD sources. Another criticism of the JEPD hypothesis was breaking up narratives into different sources which ignore a running theme of the covenant of God with the Jewish people to be fulfilled. It makes the theme incoherent. With regard to the wisdom books message reliability, it has to take into account the revelation style by observation in creation and behaviour in the world. The messages were by no means less reliable than books by more direct revelation method. The wisdom to be gleaned is based on the lessons taught in the context of the individual stories, which may not always to be generalised as general principles like typical God's commandments.
With regard to the message reliability of the prophets, Kaiser presented how well the text was maintained. Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest book of Isaiah in Hebrew was 1000 years from the Scrolls dated to 1st century BC. Only 13 changes were required to update from the Scrolls. It was considered strange that Ezikiel use brick to draw map, but archeological discovery from Babylon that maps,diagrams and plots were drawn on bricks
Jeremiah was transcribed by Baruch. The bullah or seal of Bullah was discovered on ancient documents of Jeremiah time showing Baruch's existence.
The last part of the book was on the relevance of the OT to believers today.
This work of Kaiser is written in prose that is smooth and engaging to follow, typical of Kaiser's writing style. The wealth of textual analysis, extra-biblical findings and archeological findings make this book an interesting read
January 21, 2012
Very useful discussion of the archaeological evidence supporting the historical claims of the Old Testament. Otherwise, somewhat badly written and disjointed in its attempts to discuss the various arguments concerning the origins and reliability of the Old Testament. Still, the archaeological sections are a recommended read for believers and non-believers. If you have open questions concerning the relevance of scripture generally, you may find those sections useful too. For me, those sections were a re-hash of information contained in other works.
December 22, 2015
A great book on a great topic. A bright spot in the usually critical academic world.
May 7, 2025
The Old Testament Documents, Are They Reliable And Relevant?
A good book to pair with this reading might be –The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, F.F. Bruce
Walter C. Kaiser, an Old Testament Biblical scholar, makes an attempt to link a series with F.F. Bruce's previous work on the New Testament and recreate the success of that first volume. By doing it this way when it comes to advertising such a new volume, there would already theoretically be some generated interest. Kaiser starts his book by making the argument that the Old Testament is still relevant for Christians as a foundational document, written over a spread of many years. He breaks the book down into four Parts; the Canonicity, and how these texts formed and were woven together to become the standardised text, or were already evidentially considered canon among the Jewish nation before the usual post-exilic dates of composition according to some scholars today; Historicity of the Old Testament, and what the information revealed within the Pentateuch exposes in regards to place-names, peoples' names, the behaviours of chief groups, landmarks, and laws of that time that can help point a time within the Ancient Near-Eastern context of when such a Book was probably composed; the Message, being of two Parts describing and explaining how and why the Message, as it is written down, translated, and understood today, is a reliable source having been faithfully recorded and copied over the centuries by Jewish scribes. Kaiser attributes the Jewish scribes' ability to faithfully write the Books down through their absolute unwillingness to go against God's Providence and ensuring His Word, as He spoke it, was written without a letter added or removed - such is the Fear of God. Kaiser then supports this by using the Dead Sea Scrolls found at the Qumran caves as evidence of textual fidelity.
Ultimately, the book delivers with some degree and confidence. Whilst what is mentioned in the book is scholarly and plausible - one example being the rationalising of "sons of God" and Nephilim to mean those men that granted themselves the embodiment of their chosen god, or to be a son of such a god, to "make a name for themselves" and grant power and reputation among their own, the book is also mixed with evangelising elements. And while that is to be lauded, it also bears the risk of preaching to the already-evangelised. Kaiser also seemed to enjoy ending each Chapter with a brief conclusion, and by the point of reaching halfway through the volume, repetitive statements become quite apparent and vexing.
A good book to pair with this reading might be –The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, F.F. Bruce
Walter C. Kaiser, an Old Testament Biblical scholar, makes an attempt to link a series with F.F. Bruce's previous work on the New Testament and recreate the success of that first volume. By doing it this way when it comes to advertising such a new volume, there would already theoretically be some generated interest. Kaiser starts his book by making the argument that the Old Testament is still relevant for Christians as a foundational document, written over a spread of many years. He breaks the book down into four Parts; the Canonicity, and how these texts formed and were woven together to become the standardised text, or were already evidentially considered canon among the Jewish nation before the usual post-exilic dates of composition according to some scholars today; Historicity of the Old Testament, and what the information revealed within the Pentateuch exposes in regards to place-names, peoples' names, the behaviours of chief groups, landmarks, and laws of that time that can help point a time within the Ancient Near-Eastern context of when such a Book was probably composed; the Message, being of two Parts describing and explaining how and why the Message, as it is written down, translated, and understood today, is a reliable source having been faithfully recorded and copied over the centuries by Jewish scribes. Kaiser attributes the Jewish scribes' ability to faithfully write the Books down through their absolute unwillingness to go against God's Providence and ensuring His Word, as He spoke it, was written without a letter added or removed - such is the Fear of God. Kaiser then supports this by using the Dead Sea Scrolls found at the Qumran caves as evidence of textual fidelity.
Ultimately, the book delivers with some degree and confidence. Whilst what is mentioned in the book is scholarly and plausible - one example being the rationalising of "sons of God" and Nephilim to mean those men that granted themselves the embodiment of their chosen god, or to be a son of such a god, to "make a name for themselves" and grant power and reputation among their own, the book is also mixed with evangelising elements. And while that is to be lauded, it also bears the risk of preaching to the already-evangelised. Kaiser also seemed to enjoy ending each Chapter with a brief conclusion, and by the point of reaching halfway through the volume, repetitive statements become quite apparent and vexing.
January 4, 2020
I picked up this book because it was recommended to me by a pastor who is a good friend of mine. I only made it halfway through the book because it was so bad. This is exactly the sort of text that one would expect to see a seminary teaching - one that is designed to acknowledge mainstream criticism, but which does not meet it head on, only side steps it. Occasionally, the author is honest in saying that there simply isn't enough information to draw significant conclusions about a topic (for example: with regard to the actual existence of the OT patriarchs). Unfortunately, equally often he will make astonishing leaps of faith to confirm his theological bias rather than give an honest account of the historical or archaeological record (for example: because fires were discovered as starting on the roofs of houses at a certain archaeological dig site, the cite must be the remains of Sodom or Gomorrah, and God must have actually rained down fire and brimstone). Ultimately, the only thing I picked up from this text was that I was introduced to several OT critics who had much better arguments than Kaiser (particularly in both source and form criticism of the OT).
September 10, 2020
Very good.
July 17, 2024
It was ok, altough sometimes it didn't seemed really helpful: it had brief and introductory sections in really complex studies, so the only thing you learned was of the existence of that studies.
May 19, 2017
A valuable work from a faithful scholar. On the one hand, the first and second parts of the book contain evidence on why to trust the Old Testament books, Dr. Kaiser did a good job esp. with Archaeological evidences. On the other hand, the third part is the one I like most because, in it, the author succeeds to show that every portion of the Hebrew Bible is relevant to the modern reader.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews