1994

A question of this kind begs a negative answer and, as a matter of fact, it is difficult to escape such an answer. As I see it, it is increasingly problematic to speak about an Israelite religion in the way that this concept is normally used. It is my intention to present but a select few of the arguments that might be directed against this understanding of Israelite religion. The decision to let the historian speak, instead of the student of religious history, is deliberate and it is my hope that the historian's perspective may help to cast light on the problems.

History versus religious history

Let me begin with a personal recollection: In 1986, during the IOSOT (International Organization for the Study of the Old Testament) congress, I was invited to the home of the grand old man of Israeli biblical scholarship, Benjamin Mazar. The obvious reason was my contribution to the then very lively debate about the origins of historical Israel. However, the real purpose of Professor Mazar's invitation was to ask me my view on the theological motives behind the position of George E. Mendenhall, as formulated in his famous article on the Hebrew Conquest. In spite of ferocious opposition, this article had caused a change of direction in the study of Israel's history. Professor Mazar and I were in total agreement: Mendenhall had not intended to further such a radical change in this study.