The Hebrew Family . Earle B. Cross
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10207992 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Theophile J Meek (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1928 |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 622-623 |
| Publication date | 1928-10-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Journal of Religion (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0022-4189 • E-ISSN: 1549-6538 |
| Publisher | University of Chicago Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1086/480778 |
| OpenAlex | W2514852815 |
| Language | EN |
THE HEBREW FAMILYFrom time to time treatises on various phases of biblical sociology have appeared, but in most cases the authors have been specialists in only one field, either in sociology alone or in the Bible alone.Very few have been at home in both fields, and of these Professor Cross is one.'He writes both as a trained sociologist and a biblical exegete, and his book accordingly carries weight, as many of its kind do not.He has made a real contribution to our understanding of social development by his study of the changing status of the family with the Hebrews, and with his sociological approach he has cleared up certain difficulties in the Old Testament field.His plan has been to begin with the Hebrew family in its earliest form, manifestly the matronymic, and trace its development through the patronymic to the beginning of an improvement of woman's position toward the end of the Old Testament period.The book is well written and makes easy reading.At the end of each chapter is a summary, and the last chapter indicates how the study is pertinent to the question of the family today.Here and there the author's statements need to be modified, but in only one instance does this at all affect his position.In Deut.21:17 he follows the ordinary interpretation of the passage that the first-born son was to inherit a double share of his father's estate, but Ehrlich is clearly right in interpreting this as two-thirds.A few other points in no way affecting his thesis may be noted."Bethuel" may very well mean "daughter of God," but the u vowel here is not the old genitive ending (p. 33), Gesenius and the other grammarians to the contrary, for the very good reason that it is not attached to the proper word to be a case ending.It is rather a helping vowel, which is fairly common in Hebrew and quite characteristic of Babylonian.On page 82 Amraphel is identified with
Art · Download · Hebrew · World Wide Web · Biblical Studies and Interpretation · Classics · Computer Science · Historical and Linguistic Studies · Philosophy
| Highly cited | No |
|---|