Amos Frisch

The Exodus Motif in 1 Kings 1–14

The appearance of the Exodus motif in several books of the Bible has been the subject of several studies. The present article examines the use of the Exodus motif in chs. 1–14 of the first book of Kings, first identifying explicit references, and concluding with more oblique ones. These allusions appear in passages attributed to various redactional layers, and are raised by a variety of figures (the narrator, God, the characters). Through their very appearance, the Exodus allusions contribute to the overall unity of the text. It is proposed that these references serve several different functions: to heighten the importance of the United Kingdom and its link to the Exodus; to abet the assessment of the characters of Solomon and Jeroboam, including the reversal of the assessment concerning them; to underscore the debt of fealty to God, and the justification of the punishment meted out against the sinners. Conversely, they highlight the commitment of God to his people, leading to their pardon.

The Narrative of Solomon's Reign: a Rejoinder

Three main points are clarified in the rejoinder to K.I. Parker, ’The Limits to Solomon’s Reign: A Response to Amos Frisch’, JSOT 51 [1991], pp. 15-21: (1) Considerations for including ch. 12 in NSR. (2) The basis for paralleling the visions of 6.11-13 and 9.1-9. (3) Solomon’s fidelity to the covenant as the criterion for assessing him in NSR (and the contribution of the parallels in emphasizing this criterion).

The Sins of the Patriarchs as Viewed by Traditional Jewish Exegesis

The attitude of traditional Jewish exegesis toward the sins of the patriarchs and matriarchs, recounted in Genesis, is an interesting but complex issue. Here we shall address it in the following order: first, the basic facts that the commentators had to deal with; then, two case studies of problematic conduct by the patriarchs and how various commentators evaluated these actions, with the focus on commentaries that react to earlier ones; then we shall consider the issue from the opposite angle, and investigate how two commentators approach the issue. Finally we shall present our conclusions (some of them will have been presented as interim conclusions earlier).

Ephraim and Treachery, Loyalty and (the House of) David: The Meaning of a Structural Parallel in Psalm 78

The parallel between the first and last units (vv. 1-8, 68-72) of the concentric structure that Zakovitch discovered in Psalm 78 is interpreted differently than he does: we should not infer from the first unit that Davids election, mentioned in the last unit, is conditional. Rather, in light of language common to both two units [vv. 5, 71], the parallel actually involves the Lords two gifts to Israel: the Torah and the Davidic kingdom. That is, here David is an object. The emphasis that Ephraim violates the Torah is significant, because that tribe constituted the opposition and alternative to the House of David. It is possible that through the parallel with the first unit the last unit suggests the duty of loyalty to the Lords second gift—the Davidic monarchy. Similar ideas can be found in 2 Chronicles xiii 5-11 and xxx 7-8.