lpetrich

I found that book in my collection, and I've recently read it. Its authors interpret it the way they would interpret any other book, without adding lots of theology, and the results are sometimes very interesting.

John Priest in "Government" finds the Bible less-than-coherent on that subject, though a consistent theme is the divine origin of government -- there is no trace of social-contract theory, no trace of "we, the people, in order to form a more perfect union..." in it. But writers of various parts of the Bible find fault with wicked leaders, and the Bible ranges from Romans 13 (government is always right, including the Roman Empire) to Revelation (Rome as the new Babylon, satanically evil).

Stevan Davies in "Miracles" maintains that miracles in the Bible were not suspensions of natural law but spectacular actions. Jesus Christ was considered far from alone as a possible miracle-worker; the authors of Matthew and Mark warn that one should not be impressed by the miracle working of "false Christs and false prophets".

Morton Smith in "Slavery" maintains that Biblical Hebrew was short of words for social relationship, using the same word for a king's official and a slave. So one has to infer from context whether the word referred to a slave. By comparison, ancient Greek had a word for "slave" (doulos) that was distinct from words for "servant" and "helper" and the like -- and it was a put-down when applied to someone free, like "slave of one's passions".

Mary Chilton Gallaway in "Women in the Old Testament" notes that the laws there often treat women as the property of their male relatives -- their fathers, brothers, and husbands. Marriage is a man giving his daughter to her future husband, and a man can also sell his daughter into slavery.

As Judith L. Kovacs notes in "Women in the New Testament", the record is rather contradictory. Women are both described as early church leaders and told to shut up and submit to their menfolk.

Finally, the editors note:

Toto

What the Bible Really Says