Book Review: Bridging the Testaments (George Athas)

If you’re like me, you’ve long been taught that after the prophet Malachi there was 400 years of silence until God’s sent John the Baptist. George Athas—Director of Research
and Old Testament and Hebrew at Moore Theological College—bucks against that idea in his new Bridging the Testaments.

After numerous (wonderful) tables, he offers a compelling introduction to his book that should lead you to realize that these four hundred years are vitally important for making sense of the New Testament.

Athas splits his book into four parts:

1. The Persian Era (539–331 BC);
   1. This begins with Cyrus’ rise to kingship and his decree that the Jews could go back to Jerusalem and begin building the temple. This covers Ezra, Nehemiah, Chronicles, the time after Nehemiah, and the prophets Zechariah, Haggai, and Malachi.
2. The Hellenistic Era (331–167 BC);
   1. Athas surveys the battles fought and won by Alexander the Great; David power*; the rise of Hellenism and Greek culture, religion, and philosophy; the rise and rule of both the Ptolemies the Seleucids; the rise of Rome; and a look at the writing of the Septuagint (LXX) and books like Ecclesiastes (237)*, Tobit, and the Wisdom of Ben Sira.
3. The Hasmonean Era (167–63 BC);
   1. While this section covers a short time span, but it is the longest section in the book (~200 pp). Athas covers the revolt* and the dreaded Abomination of Desolation (337)*; how the book of Daniel and Song of Songs fit here as resistance literature*; The Maccabean Revolt and its aftermath; more Seleucids; and Jewish independence (491)*.
4. The Roman Era (63–4 BC).
   1. Athas here covers the Roman conquest of Jerusalem; how Judaism developed through Pharisees, schools, and synagogues; the presence and influence of Julius Caesar; and what Herod has to do with all of this, the priesthood, and the temple.

The Chocolate Milks

For being a book that covers 400 years of umpteen events, numerous names, dates, and places, Athas writes very clearly. He is easy to read, and I would be so bold as to say enjoyable. Sure, the content might still bore you. This is a long, 600 page book, and there is a lot to remember. We might even ask if this could have been a bit short. But Athas intended for this to be a one-stop shop. You want to look up information about the Essenes or Pharisees? You will get more than two paragraphs about them. Herod? You’ll get his flight details, return trip, and all the weirdness of his family you could want to know.

Each chapter is divided and subdivided for easy reference and stopping points. Doing this (similar to Heiser’s The Unseen Realm) makes a long, detailed book feel much more manageable (even with smooth writing). Section Two covers the Hellenistic Period (331–167 BC); Section 2.6 looks at Ptolemaic Rule; and Section 2.6.2 the High Priest Hezekiah. Some sections are ten pages long. Some are one page. This is the sort of book you could work through in the morning after you—for example—read your Bible. You could read one or two sections and get a better idea of the history, flow of thought, and theological reasoning behind what happened all throughout the intertestamental period.

The Spoiled Milks

OT Prophetic Settings: Athas seems to understand the specific setting behind many of the OT books. The prophecy of Malachi is a critique of the coalition Sanballat II (353 BC), the governor of Samaria, makes with Judah, Idumea (Edom), and Yahwists in Transjordan. He believes Zech 11:4–17 refers to this same coalition, and Zechariah 11:1–3 recalls* the Tennes Revolt (351–345 BC, pp. 96–98).

According to Athas, the Book of the Twelve (Minor) Prophets (2.6.4) were put together and edited during the period of Ptolemaic sovereignty as a way to “keep the flame of David hope burning when the dynasty appeared to be descending into irrelevance” (211). Athas believes that after 301 BC these smaller works were brought together as a single scroll, “perhaps by the anonymous prophet who produced its latest oracle (Zech 12–14)” (211). But how do we know this? 

Prophecy

In his introduction, Athas writes about how the author of 1 Maccabees believed that genuine prophets had not emerged since long before the death of Julius Maccabeus in 160 BC. The Hasmoneans were happy to believe prophecy had ceased so that no one could deny their power. When Stephen accuses the Sanhedrin (made up of Pharisees and Sadducees) of resisting the Holy Spirit, Athas writes, “The insinuation is that the Holy Spirit, which had inspired the Torah, was the very same spirit who had been prophetically active down to the time of Jesus but whom the Jewish leaders were now railing against. One wonders what words Stephen would have for modern readers who perpetuate the notion of prophetic silence” (7).

He writes that the hyper-literalistic Pharisees assigned authorship of prophecies to early named prophets. Athas notes, “Even late anonymous prophecy was attributed to earlier prophets on the basis of hyper-literal interpretations of scrolls” (9). As I wrote above, writing that Zech 11:1–3 “recalls” the Tennes Revolt (351–345 BC) seems to mean the “prophecy” was written after the fact, looking back to the Tennes Revolt. (Athas writes that this revolt was “remembered in the short but vivid oracle of Zechariah 11:1–3,” p. 96.)

Why make a fuss about what Stephen would have to say about modern readers perpetuating the notion of prophetic silence (whether that’s in the intertestamental period or if it includes present-day cessationism, I do not know), only to set many prophecies at a later date so that they are pseudonymous and written after the fact?

Accordingly, some written prophecies are edited or recontextualized. The Masoretes supplied vowels to the Hebrew Old Testament in the medieval era. According to Athas, Zech 9:1–8 was “reworked and recontextualized to reflect Alexander [the Great]’s arrival” in Egypt (156). It can be read two different ways. Through the Masoretes supplying the vowels, the poem seems “to praise Tyre’s economic mastery,” but the surrounding military context leads us to suspect something else. Athas notes how the Hebrew reader (or listener) would have to listen carefully to know how to vocalize the text. He writes, “The result of this dynamic is a double entendre that on the one hand appears to laud Tyre, but on the other gives a palpable sense of Tyre’s cataclysmic downfall” (156). According to a footnote on page 123, Zech 9:1–8 is also a “highly polished but much redacted text” with an “original kernel” going back to the far past (123n40). I couldn’t find anything corroborating this view in Boda’s NICOT and Petterson’s AOTC volumes (there may be other commentaries that do though, I just don’t have them. Although I suspect they would be much more source-critical commentaries). Again, how would we know? 

Ecclesiastes is set during the “waxing and waning fortunes of the Ptolemies and the Seleucids” (late third century BC) as seen in Eccl 1:6 and 11:3b. The Song of Songs “relates metaphorically to the crisis of the Antiochene persecution” (340), which also happens to be when the book of Daniel takes place (344). According to Athas, this is also when the doctrine of the resurrection developed (348).

Recommended?

I honestly don’t quite know what to say about this. Regarding the history of what happened, Athas is a pleasure to read. To say that this book is pleasing might seem like an exaggeration, but a history book can be much, much worse. Athas is easy to follow without getting too lost. On the other hand, because of how he seems to know the exact setting behind some of the prophetic books, I also wonder how he knows so many specific details of what happened in these events and why they actually happened. Strangely, for a book of this size with so many details, there is no bibliography. This comes recommended, but read cautiously.

Buy it on Amazon or from Zondervan Academic! .

Lagniappe

• • Author: George Athas
  • Hardcover: 688 pages
  • Publisher: ‎ Zondervan Academic (November 14, 2023)

Disclosure: I received this book free from Zondervan Academic. The opinions I have expressed are my own, and I was not required to write a positive review. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/16cfr255_03.html.

Amazon Affiliate Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.