Institute for Christian Teaching
Education Department of Seventh-day Adventists
HEBREW THOUGHT: ITS
IMPLICATIONS
FOR ADVENTIST EDUCATION
by
Ferdinand O. Regalado
Adventist University of the
Philippines
Silang, Cavite, Philippines
449-00 Institute for
Christian Teaching
12501 Old Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD 20904 USA
Prepared for the
27th Integration
of Faith and Learning Seminar
held at
Mission College, Muak Lek,
Thailand
December 3-15, 2000
Seventh-day Adventists have
stressed the importance of the Bible as the basis and source of all Adventist
educational principles and philosophy.
Centrality of the Word of God in the Adventist educational endeavour is
a known sine qua non. However,
there are some misconceptions in understanding the Bible.[1] Some of its concepts and statements are
"both attributed to and viewed from a western perspective."[2] This is especially true in Asia. Since Christianity came to Asia from the
West, there is a tendency to look at the Bible as a Western book.[3] Such perspective arises when one overlooks
the original setting of the Scriptures which is basically Near Eastern.
By saying that the original
setting of the Bible is Near Eastern, I mean that the predominant biblical
thought is Hebraic. Our Christian Bible
expresses a certain concept of reality which is essentially Hebraic. Hebrew thoughts, concepts, and culture are
evident throughout the Bible,[4]
a situation we can only recognize. A
renewed understanding of Hebrew thought can have a number of crucial
implications to Adventist philosophy of education. In this essay, we shall see what implications the Hebrews, with
their wholistic outlook, their concrete and dynamic thinking, and their concept
of group or community, may have for Adventist education.
The Wholistic
Thought of the Hebrews
The Hebrew word '_b_dā
supports the idea that the Hebrew people view their life as a dynamic
unity. Interestingly, this word is
translated as both "work"[5]
and "worship."[6] Thus for the Hebrews, study is
worship. Abraham Heschel, in a similar
vein, poignantly noted: "Genuine reverence for the sanctity of study is
bound to invoke in the pupils the awareness that study is not an ordeal but an
act of edification; that the school is a sanctuary, not a factory, that study
is a form of worship."[7] The idea of "studying as a form of
worship" is a great motivation in learning. Such motivation in learning would make a Christian scholar
different from a non-Christian scholar.
The Christian scholar is different in the sense that there is no room
for all "intellectual dishonesty" and mediocrity because she "believes that in all that she does
intellectually, socially, or artistically, she is handling God's creation and
that is sacred."[8]
Today, learning and education are
viewed purely as secular pursuits. The
Hebrews viewed such pursuits differently.
Indeed, there are neither secular occupations nor sacred ones; every
Hebrews view their "God-given vocation--whether it be that of farmer,
herdsman, fisherman, tax collector, teacher or scribe--as a means of bringing
glory to God by the very privilege of work itself."[9] Paul reminded us in Hebraic idiom, "So
whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of
God" (1 Cor 10:31).[10] He expressed a similar thought in another
occasion saying, "Whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in
the name of the Lord Jesus" (Col 3:17).
For Paul, therefore, every aspect of life, including study, is to be
viewed as worship.
Moreover, the wholistic thought of
the Hebrews is clearly seen in their sacred view of life. For them everything is theocentric or
God-centered. There is no distinction
between the secular and religious area of life. This aspect of Hebrew thought
is clearly stated in the words of the psalmist: "I have set the LORD
always before me" (Ps 16:8). Thus,
to modern Jews, "blessings are recited over some of the most mundane
items, such as upon seeing lightning, hearing thunder, and even after using the
washroom."[11] The totality of existence embraces the whole
way of life. This kind of wholistic
thinking can be seen in some examples in the Bible. In the midst of his tragic experience, Job still blessed the name
of the Lord whether God gives or takes away (Job 1:21). It is with the same Hebraic frame of mind
that Joseph, before he died, uttered these words to his brothers who betrayed
him, "You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good"(Gen
50:20). We can see here that even in
some mysterious reversals of life, God is still recognized as the one who
providentially overruled such circumstances in life. Rom 8:28 adds the same thought, "And we know that in all
things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called
according to his purpose." It is to find the divine in the commonplace,
that make up the wholistic thought of the Hebrews.
The wholistic thought of the
Hebrews covers all aspects of life.
They see all of it in relation to God.
The purpose of their celebration of different festivals is primarily spiritual
or God-centered. "To the Israelite
the seasons were the work of the creator for the benefit of man. They manifested the beneficence of God
towards His creatures. By these feasts,
man not only acknowledged God as his Provider but recorded the Lord's unbounded
and free favour to a chosen people whom he delivered, by personal intervention
in this world."[12]
Both their civil New Year (which
starts at the month of Tishri) and religious New Year (which starts at the
month of Nisan) are viewed as theological.
The civil New Year festival or Rosh Hashanah, signaled by a
blowing of trumpets, was treated as religious due to the concept that "God
had created an orderly world"[13]
by the appearance of a new moon on that month.
Although the religious New Year is based on the barley harvest, yet it
is considered as theocentric, a reminder of "God's constant provision for
them"[14] for
the abundant harvest.
Related to this wholistic thought
is the emphasis on the totality of a person's being. The body itself is materially different from, but not essentially
separate from, the soul. The individual
is viewed as a dynamic unity. The
Hebrew word for "soul" (nepe), which is commonly understood
by many today as something a person has, is in fact, referring to the whole
person itself and implies "all the functions of man, spiritual, mental,
emotional, as well as physical."[15] Thus, Deut 6:5 enjoins every human being to
"love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and
with all your strength." It is a
call to serve and love God passionately, with one's whole being. What significance would such a passage have
for us as Adventist educators? One
reality is that we should treat our students wholly, not only as intellectual
persons but also as emotional, physical, and spiritual beings. In fact, the Hebrews "were interested
in producing what Jewish psychiatrists and educators today call a mensch
(a Yiddish word for one who has his total life put together in an
exemplary way)."[16]
Greek thought, on the other hand,
is dualistic in its view of persons.
Human beings are viewed in
dualistic terms of soul and body. We
can see such influence in most of our modern education. Thus, the strengthening of the mind alone is
emphasized to the neglect of the physical and the spiritual needs of
students. At times, the situation is
reversed where spirituality is emphasized rather extremely often viewed as some
kind of "ascetic or monastic spirituality." Looking at the earthly life of Jesus, we see that He exemplified
the true meaning of spirituality. His
life was not spent in some remote places alone, but between the mountain and
the multitude--a combination of a solitary and social life.
Part of the wholistic thinking of
the Hebrews is clearly seen in their outlook of one's illness. Accordingly, sickness is link to human
sin. Disease is the result of man's
disobedience to God. Thus, many
biblical texts describe obedience to God and to His laws as conditions of good
health. Let me cite some selected
texts.
If you listen carefully to the
voice of the LORD your God and do what is right in his eyes, if you pay
attention to his commands and keep all his decrees, I will not bring on you any
of the diseases I brought on the Egyptians, for I am the LORD, who heals you. (Exod 15:26)
If you do not carefully follow all the words of this
law, which are written in this book, and do not revere this glorious and
awesome name--the LORD your God--the LORD will send fearful plagues on you and
your descendants, harsh and prolonged disasters, and severe and lingering
illnesses. He will bring upon you all
the diseases of Egypt that you dreaded, and they will cling to you. The LORD will also bring on you every kind
of sickness and disaster not recorded in this Book of the Law, until you are
destroyed. (Deut 28:58-61)
If you pay attention to these laws and are careful to
follow them, then the LORD your God will keep his covenant of love with you, as
he swore to your forefathers. The LORD will keep on you the horrible diseases
you knew in Egypt, but he will inflict them on all who hate you. (Deut 7:12, 15)
The spiritual dimension of health and diseases is also pointed by Christ. After healing the woman, who have been crippled for many years, and after reproving the synagogue ruler, who questioned his healing on the Sabbath day, Jesus spoke of "this woman whom Satan has bound for eighteen years" (Luke 13:16). D. H. Trapnell, who discussed disease as one of the causes of suffering, made a good point in his own analysis of the case of Job's suffering.
The book of Job shows that the real issue is man's
relationship to God rather than his attitude to his own suffering. It is the principal OT refutation of the
view, put forward with great skill by Job's "comforters," that there
is an inevitable link between individual sin and individual suffering....It is
important to realize that the biblical picture is not a mere dualism. Rather, suffering is presented in the light
of eternity and in relation to a God who is sovereign, but who is nevertheless
forbearing in his dealings with the world because of his love for men (2 Pet
3:9). Conscious of the sorrow and pain
round about them, the NT writers look forward to the final consummation when
suffering shall be no more (Rom 8:18; Rev 21:4).[17]
Reflecting on such wholistic
thinking of the Hebrews, one could derive significant implications for
Adventist education. There is a
noticeable tendency to dichotomize or compartmentalize the whole educational
programs and experiences, even in a Christian setting. The secular and the spiritual activities are
being separated, conducted and operated in their own spheres. John Wesley Taylor illustrates this point
well:
Those that operate under the "spiritual"
designator include a brief devotional at the beginning of the day, the
"Bible" class, chapel period, the Week of Prayer, and church services
on weekends. Once these are over,
however, we must "get on with business." And we carry on the academic enterprise with a decidedly secular
orientation.[18]
After stressing the danger of such dichotomy in a
Christian institution, Taylor forcefully suggests, "we must think
Christianly about the totality of life and learning"[19]
in the whole educational programs and experiences.
Concrete and
Dynamic Thinking of the Hebrew People
The structure of the Hebrew
sentence gives us an idea of the manner in which the Hebrews think. The word order of the English language is
different from that of Hebrew. The
structure of the English language is analytic,[20]
meaning that the sense of the sentence is determined through its word
order. It places the noun or the
subject before the verb (the action word).
For example, "the king judged." However, the word order of the Hebrew language "is normally
reversed. That is, the verb most often
comes first in the clause, then the noun; thus, 'He judged, (namely) the
king.' In Hebrew grammar, the position
of emphasis is usually the beginning of the clause."[21] This kind of emphasis on the verb suggests
that the Hebrews are action-centered people.
Moreover, the root of all Hebrew words is derived from the verb.[22] They seldom used adjectives in most of their
sentences,[23]
indicating that their thinking is concrete rather than abstract. They are not like their Greek counterparts
who are philosophical and abstract in thinking. A person's or student's intelligence is usually measured by the
ability to make abstract and philosophical reasoning. The role of a teacher is more of transferring knowledge on the
intellectual areas. For the Hebrews
however, truth is something to do and not only to think, something to live out,
to apply, and not just theorize. This
is why the Hebrew Bible is more of the record of action, the record of God's
salvific act in history, than a "summary exposition of a theological
system."[24] Their emphasis is more on events and people,
and not so much on abstract ideas or concepts.
So in Adventist education, truth or ideas should not only be theorized
or philosophized, but something to live out and do. Ultimately, what is most important is the godly and Christian
life of a teacher that effects changes in the students' lives.
The root of the Hebrew word is one
of the indications of their frame of mind.
For example "the root word dab_r means 'to speak' and 'to
act.' The word is the act."[25] This is clearly seen in Isa 55:11, where God
acts as he speaks: "So is my word [Heb. dab_r] that goes out from
my mouth...[it] will accomplish ['a_ah] what I desire."[26] Furthermore, this Hebrew word means both
"event" and "word."[27] So the event (or the action) of the person
is understood as his or her word.[28] Any word must have the corresponding
concrete action. We will better understand then the words in Prov 14: 23 that
"mere talk (literally in Hebrew "words of lip") leads only to
poverty." It emphasizes also that
words are not cheap to the Hebrews.
This thought reinforces that
the Jews were pragmatists. They were never interested in making education a game of storing
up abstract concepts or theoretical principles. Education had to be useful in meeting the challenges and needs of
this world. To know something was to
experience it rather than merely to intellectualize it. In short, to "know" was to
"do" and learning was life.
The whole person was engaged in what John, a NT Jewish writer, calls
"doing the truth" (1 John 1:16).[29]
Being seen as an action-oriented
people, the Hebrews therefore are concrete in their thinking. They use few abstract terms. The Bible gives us many examples to
illustrate this point. "'Look' is
'lift up the eyes' (Gen 22:4); 'be angry' is 'burn in one's nostrils' (Exod
4:14); 'disclose something to another' or 'reveal' is 'unstop someone's ears'
(Ruth 4:4); 'no compassion' is 'hard-heartedness' (1 Sam 6:6); 'stubborn' is
'stiff-necked' (2 Chron 30:8; cf. Acts 7:51); 'get ready' is 'gird up the
loins' (Jer 1:17); and 'to be determined to go' is 'set one's face to go' (Jer
42:15, 17; cf. Luke 9:51),"[30]
to mention a few. Such concrete ways of
describing ideas and concepts signifies that "the Hebrews were mainly a
doing and feeling people."[31]
Another example of the
concreteness of the Hebrew thinking is the Hebrew translation of the English
word "love." The word love is
often associated with emotion or feeling.
Today, it is a common understanding that "to love" means
"to feel love." But, an
interesting study of Abraham Malamat[32]
of the Hebrew nuance of the word love, makes such emotive and abstract concept
of love concrete. According to him, ahav
(the Hebrew word for "love") may also mean to be useful or beneficial
or helpful. Hence, he translated the
love commandment in Lev 19:18 as follows: "You should be beneficial or
helpful to your neighbor as you would be to yourself." Then he concludes, "the Bible is not
commanding us to feel something--love--but to do something--to be
useful or beneficial to help your neighbor"(emphasis his).[33]
The concrete and dynamic thinking
of the Hebrew people implies that they are pragmatic people. They did not only want to think of truth but
to experience it, and knowing the truth means doing and living it. Is there a message in all of this for
Adventist education? How should this
Hebraic nature of being pragmatic improve Adventist educational programs? The message is very clear. Practical education should never neglected
as part of the curriculum. The purpose of this kind of education is explained
by Mrs. White. Practical training such
as the cultivation of soil and manual labor will fit students "to take
hold of any line of work in the fields to which they shall be
called."[34] Practical training in the "mechanic
arts," "various industrial pursuits, as well as in the several
branches of study," would develop habits of "self-reliance, firmness,
and decision."[35]
The understanding of the Hebrew
concept of knowledge and intelligence adds also to the concrete and dynamic
thinking of the Hebrews. Significantly
the Hebrew seat of intelligence is in the ears.[36] In Psalm 78:1, it says: "Give ear, O my
people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth" (KJV). You will find many examples in the Bible
where the term ears was used both in the transmission and acquisition of
knowledge, concepts and ideas.[37] Intelligence for them is the ability to
listen.[38] Moreover, this concept supports the idea
that knowledge to the Hebrew people is not intrinsic but something coming from
outside--something to be received.[39] It is devoid of any form of humanism, where
human beings are considered as the measure of all things, which characterizes
many secular universities and colleges today.[40]
We can see then the significant role
of "revelation" in Hebrew education.
So the revelation of God is the source of all wisdom and knowledge. The search of any kind of knowledge is
entirely dependent on divine revelation alone.[41]
This same principle could be
applied to Adventist education. There
is a need for reiterating the importance of the Word of God and biblical
revelation in the quest of wisdom and truth.
If we will not do this, Prov 29:18 reminds us that "where there is
no revelation, people perish."
After all, the goal of education is to have a practical knowledge of God
for salvation.
As we have pointed out throughout
this paper, there is a considerable difference between the Hebrews and the
Greeks in their view of life. Norman
Snaith correctly summarized this kind of difference on the acquisition and of
the source of knowledge.
The object and aim of the Hebrew system is da`ath
elohim (Knowledge of God). The
object and aim of the Greek system is gnothi seauton (Know
thyself). Between these two there is
the widest possible difference. There
is no compromise between the two on anything like equal terms. They are poles apart in attitude and
method. The Hebrew system starts with
God. The only true wisdom is Knowledge
of God. "The fear of God is the
beginning of wisdom." The corollary
is that man can never know himself, what he is and his relation to the world,
unless first he learns of God and be submissive to God's sovereign will. The Greek system, on the contrary, starts
from the knowledge of man, and seeks to rise to an understanding of the ways
and Nature of God through the knowledge of what is called "man's higher
nature." According to the Bible,
man has no higher nature except he be born of the Spirit.
We find this approach of the Greeks nowhere in the
Bible. The whole Bible, the New
Testament as well as the Old Testament, is based on the Hebrew attitude and
approach.[42]
Hebraic Concept
of Group or Community
The Hebraic concept of community
is reflected in their idea of "corporate personality."[43] This term denotes that "the individual
was always thought of in the collective (family, tribe, nation) and the
collective in the individual. This
corporate solidarity was further reinforced by the fact that the entire
community (past ancestors and future members) was viewed as one
personality."[44] This idea of corporate personality is
stressed even in the modern Jewish community, where at the celebration of the
"Passover each Jew is obligated to regard himself as if he personally had
come out of Egypt, not simply his ancestors."[45]
In the NT times, the idea of "one
family" had been underscored by Jesus who taught his disciples to pray as
"Our Father in heaven" (Matt 6:9), signifying that the Father in
heaven is not just a Father of an individual but the Father of the
community. Today, "most Jewish
prayer employs the plural 'we,' not 'I.'
It expresses the cry of the whole community."[46]
Relative to the idea of this
Hebraic notion of group or community is the idea of social unity and
brotherhood. This is reflected in the
idea of mishp_kh_ (clan or family).
This term covers the whole clan including uncles, aunts, and even remote
cousins. Each mishp_kh_ sees
itself as part of a single worldwide Jewish family.[47] Johannes Pedersen notes that "the
city-community is a mishp_kh_, and consequently the fellow-citizen
becomes a brother."[48] So the question being asked of Jesus,
"Who is my neighbor?" was "not so easy to answer in ancient
Israel because the neighbor, the fellow citizen, is the one with whom one lives
in community."[49]
Levirate custom points out the
Near Eastern concept of family or community.
The term levirate is "derived from Latin levir, meaning
'husband brother'."[50] This is a custom of the Israelites that
"when a married man died without a child, his brother was expected to take
his wife,"[51] and
"the children of the marriage counted as the first children of the first
husband."[52] This kind of regulation might be strange to
our modern society, but this was established with the permission of God (Gen
38:8-10; Deut 5:5-10) to protect the lineage of a family and to emphasize the
sacredness of life. In the Talmud we
read, "He who destroys a single life is considered as if he had destroyed
the whole world, and he who saves a single life is considered as having saved
the whole world" (m. Sanh. 4:5).[53] Moreover, the purpose of this seemingly
anomalous law "was to prevent the family from dying out."[54] "This institution accordingly had an
ethical foundation. The relative who
married the widow did not profit financially."[55] So the levir is actually sacrificing
himself if he would agree to be one, for the sake of preserving the
family. We can see that to the Hebrews,
sacrificing oneself is not that important as long as it is for the betterment
of the whole family.
Connected with the Hebrew concept
of group and community is the idea of mutual responsibility and
accountability. This is visible in the
kinsman-redeemer practice of the biblical Hebrews. All Israelites, through this practice, "are mutually
accountable for one another and mutually participate in the life of one
another."[56] In Leviticus 25, this practice is fully
illustrated. It describes how property
and personal freedom can be redeemed.
Land that was sold in time of need
could be repurchased by the original owner or by a relative of his (Lev
25:25-27). If a man became poor and had
to sell himself into slavery, he or a relative had the right to purchase his
freedom (Lev 25:48-53).[57] A good and true kinsman-redeemer is
responsible for such repurchase and restitution if the original owner could not
afford.[58]
How does this concept of
solidarity apply to the philosophy of Adventist education? The Portland Adventist Academy in Oregon
incorporated this concept in one of the principles of their character
development program, a concept of brother's keeper. This concept suggests "that
individuals are connected and are accountable to everyone whose lives they
touch." Greg Madson, chaplain of
that Academy, gave a testimony that he experienced in many occasions
"students, taking the principle of brother's keeper seriously, have sought
his help for friends who are involved in self-destructive behavior."[59] Moreover, the concept of solidarity and
mutual responsibility implies that our pursuit of learning is not an individual
work but a collective and corporate one.
The true meaning of education can only be found by the members of the
community in their relationship to each other.
However, there is too much
emphasis on rugged individualism[60]
in our modern society, where the sense of accountability is losing and
excessive self-interest is reigning.
Adventist institutions are facing the same danger of individualism. Remember that the biblical concept of
"the priesthood of the believers means that each Christian functions as a
priest not only unto God, but also unto his neighbor."[61]
It is interesting to note that the
teachers in the Old Testament times regarded their pupils as their sons (Heb. b_nīm). Archaeologists have discovered ancient
schoolrooms, which gives us an idea on how the instruction was being carried
out and about the relationships between teachers and students. For example, in the place called Mari of the
Sumerian civilization, "school staff included the professor, often called
'the school father,' with pupils called the 'school sons,' an assistant who
prepared the daily exercises, specialist teachers, and others responsible for
discipline was called 'big brother.'"[62] Here we will notice that even in the ancient
Near Eastern school setting, there is a prevailing concept of
"family" which may have influenced the Hebrew people or vice
versa. "In the Hebrew Bible,
teachers (priests) are called 'father' (Judg 17:10; 18:19), and the
relationship between teacher and student (e.g., Elijah and Elisha) is expressed
by 'father' and 'son' (2 Kgs 2:3, 12).
In addition, in the opening chapters of the book of Proverbs, the sage
regularly addresses his student as 'my son.'"[63] This emphasis on "relationships"
in education challenges today's growing technological type of education, where
students can get a degree on-line without attending any formal classes and
without any contact at all with the teacher--just with the computer at home or
in the work place.[64] Applying this Hebrew concept of
"family" suggests that healthy relational contact between students
and teachers is still profoundly important because the teacher can be an
effective living textbook. After all,
"it is the personality of the teacher which is the text that the pupils
read; the text they will never forget."[65]
Since Israel had no system of
formal schooling in their earliest years, learning commonly takes place at
home. Home was the center of education
and the main source of learning. The
father and the mother in the home played an important role in the instruction
of their children, not only about practical things in life, but most
importantly about God.[66] "Abraham is to instruct not only his
children, but his entire household in the way of the Lord (Gen 18:19). At an early age, children were trained in
the everyday duties of the family, such as the pasturing of sheep (e.g., 1 Sam
16:11) and the work of the fields (2 Kings 4:18). Girls learned household crafts, such as baking (2 Sam 13:8),
spinning, and weaving (Exod 35:25-26)."[67] Knowledge then is transmitted from person to
person, from parents to children and on.
Children were trained by their parents' example in the home. But because of the crushing experiences that
the nation of Israel had gone through, "home life had been disrupted and
parents themselves often needed instruction.
To remedy this situation schools were established with scribes as
teachers."[68] Nevertheless, we cannot deny the fact that
the home is still an ideal center of learning.[69] Consider the positive result of Hannah's
being a full-time homemaker and teacher to her son Samuel during his formative
years (1 Sam 1:21-23). Look also on the
kind of home education that Jesus received.
Although he was described as "without having studied" (John
7:15), because he did not attend rabbinical school in his time, "his
character and ethics as a man on earth were far superior to anything the
schools might have given Him."[70]
Conclusion
Clearly then, the Biblical Hebraic
wholistic thinking, its dynamic and concrete thought, and its concept of
"community," offer many profound contributions for Adventist
education. If we want the Adventist
educational process to remain authentically Biblical, we must never lose sight
of these significant implications of the Hebrew thought for Adventist education. With these insights on the Hebrew understanding
of things, we cannot afford to neglect the Hebrew thought of the Scriptures in
the formulation of philosophy, methodology, or curriculum of SDA
education. I think it is appropriate to
quote the words of Marvin Wilson to conclude this paper: "Truth must be
incarnate in each member of the community.
Quality education from a Biblical point of view is concerned with
integrating learning with faith and living.
This is the Hebrew model, and it is the lifelong task to which each
Christian must continually address himself."[71]
[1]This has been recognized by R. K. Harrison in the issue of approaching and understanding OT history. He notes, "Since modern occidental methods of historical interpretation may present decided problems when imposed upon oriental cultures, particularly those of antiquity, it is probably wise to consider the historical outlook and methods of compilation of the Near Eastern cultures on their own terms also, lest the historiographical attempts of antiquity unwittingly be assessed in terms of the scientific methods of more recent times, with equally unfortunate results." R. K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969), 295.
[2]Zdravko Stefanovic, "For the Asian First and Then for the Westerners," Asia Journal of Theology 4 (1990): 413.
[3]"A common error of the most Bible readers is to put into the Scriptures Western manners and customs instead of interpreting them from the eastern point of view." Merrill T. Gilbertson, The Way It Was In Bible Times (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1959), 2.
[4]See for example Stefanovic, 412-13, where some of the examples in the OT and NT which are Eastern or Asian in concepts and practices are enumerated. See also Ferdinand O. Regalado, "The Old Testament as One of the Resources for Doing Theology in Asia," Asia Adventist Seminary Studies 2 (1999): 41-50, for the same treatment although restricted to the OT only and its implications for "doing theology in Asia."
[5]There are many instances where '_b_dā is translated as "work." See, e.g., Gen 29:27; Exod 1:14; Lev 23:7-8; Num 28:18, 25-26; Ps 104:23; 1 Chron 27:26.
[6]See Walter C. Kaiser, "'_bad," Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, ed. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., and Bruce Waltke (Chicago: Moody, 1980), 2:639.
[7]Abraham J. Heschel, The Insecurity of Freedom (New York: Schoken Books, 1972), 42.
[8]Arthur F. Holmes, The Idea of a Christian College, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 48.
[9]Marvin R. Wilson, "Hebrew Thought in the Life of the Church," in The Living and Active Word of God: Studies in Honor of Samuel J. Schultz, ed. Morris Inch and Ronald Youngblood (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1983), 131.
[10]All scriptural references cited in this paper are from the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible unless otherwise indicated.
[11]Yechiel Eckstein, What Christians Should Know About the Jews and Judaism (Waco, TX: Word, 1984), 70.
[12]D. Freeman, "Feasts," in New Bible Dictionary, 2nd ed., ed. J. D. Douglas (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity, 1982), 374.
[13]Pat Alexander, ed., The Lion Encyclopedia of the Bible, new rev. ed. (Tring, Herts, England: Lion Publishing, 1986), 122.
[14]David and Pat Alexander, eds., The Lion Handbook of the Bible (Tring, Herts, England: Lion Publishing, 1973), 180.
[15]Jacques B. Doukhan, Hebrew for Theologians: A Textbook for the Study of Biblical Hebrew in Relation to Hebrew Thinking (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1993), 210.
[16]Wilson, "Hebrew Thought," 131. Emphasis mine.
[17]D. H. Trapnell, "Health, Disease and Healing," in New Bible Dictionary, 2nd ed., ed. J. D. Douglas (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity, 1982), 464.
[18]John Wesley Taylor V, "A Biblical Foundation for the Integration of Faith and Learning," a paper presented at the 27th International Seminar on the Integration of Faith and Learning, Mission College, Muak Lek, Thailand, 3-15 December 2000, 14.
[19]Ibid., 15.
[20]See Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation: A Textbook of Hermeneutics , 3d rev ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1956), 5.
[21]Wilson, "Hebrew Thought," 137.
[22]Doukhan, 192.
[23]Robert L. Cate, How to Interpret the Bible (Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman Press, 1983), 67, 68.
[24]Ibid., 42.
[25]Doukhan, 195.
[26]See also Psalm 33:6, 9; 12:1ff; 148:5; Gen 24:66; 1 Kings 11:41.
[27]Ibid., 201.
[28]Ibid.
[29]Marvin R. Wilson, Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1989), 131.
[30]Ibid., 137.
[31]Ibid.
[32]See his shorter article, Abraham Malamat, "'Love Your Neighbor as Yourself': What it Really Means," Biblical Archaeology Review 16 (July/August 1990):50-51, which is an adaptation of his article with full scholarly apparatus in the Festschrift Rolf Rentdorff, edited by E. Blum (Nuekirchen-Vleryu).
[33]Ibid., 51.
[34]Ellen G. White, Fundamentals of Christian Education (Nashville, TN: Southern Publishing, 1923), 512. Emphasis mine.
[35]Ibid., 72-3. See also Ellen G. White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students Regarding Christian Education (Boise, Idaho: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1943), 387-88.
[36]Doukhan, 194.
[37]See also e.g., Job 13:1, Exod 17:14, 1 Sam 9:15, Rev 2:7; 3:22.
[38]Doukhan, 194.
[39]See for example Ps 119:125, 144; Job 32:8.
[40]The prevailing "humanism" and other "isms" in secular universities has been emphasized by Eta Linnemann, Historical Criticism of the Bible: Methodology or Ideology,? trans. Robert W. Yarbrough (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990), 23-36, in the chapter entitled: "The Anti-Christian Roots of the University."
[41]See [P. Gerard Damsteegt], Seventh-day Adventists Believe...: A Biblical Exposition of 27 Fundamental Doctrines (Washington, DC: Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1988), 18.
[42]Norman H. Snaith, The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament (New York: Schocken Books, 1964), 184-85.
[43]H. Wheeler Robinson used this expression--"corporate personality." H. Wheeler Robinson, "Hebrew Psychology," The People and the Book, ed. A. S. Peake, pp. 353-82; idem, "The Hebrew Conception of the Corporate Personality," Werden und Wesen des Alten Testaments, ed. J. Hempel ('Beihefte zur ZAW,' 66), pp. 49-62. Quoted in Thorleif Boman, Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek (New York: W. W. Norton, 1960), 70, note 1.
[44]Wilson, "Hebrew Thought," 133-34.
[45]I. Breuer, Concepts of Judaism, ed. J. S. Levinger (Jerusalem: Israel Universities Press, 1974), 296, quoted in Wilson, "Hebrew Thought," 134. See also Exod 13:3-16.
[46]Wilson, "Hebrew Thought," 133.
[47]Wilson, Our Father Abraham, 188.
[48]Johannes Pedersen, Israel: Its Life and Culture, vol. 1-2 (London: Oxford University Press, 1926; Copenhagen: Branner og Korch, 1926), 59.
[49]Ibid., 60.
[50]J. S. Wright and J. A. Thompson, "Marriage," in New Bible Dictionary, 2nd ed., ed. J. D. Douglas (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity, 1982), 743.
[51]Ibid.
[52]Ibid.
[53]Quoted in Wilson, "Hebrew Thought," 134.
[54]Paul Heinisch, Theology of the Old Testament, trans. William G. Heidt (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1955), 204.
[55]Ibid.
[56]Wilson, "Hebrew Thought," 134.
[57]See Herbert Wolf, An Introduction to the Old Testament Pentateuch (Chicago: Moody Press, 1991), 24. Another practice recorded in Num 35, which emphasized mutual responsibility is the "blood-revenge"(or a "redeemer of blood") system. Since many Middle Eastern people are living in some remote desert place, far from any civil government, this kind of justice system is practiced. This is one way of surviving in a harsh desert society, where most people barely live. "All males are obliged to defend and avenge each other, just as they are all liable to suffer revenge for the misdeeds of one. For an individual does not exist in his own right, but only as the extension of his clan" (Clinton Bailey, "How Desert Culture Helps Us Understand the Bible: Bedouin Law Explains Reaction to Rape of Dinah," Bible Review 7 [August 1991]: 20).
[58]R. Laird Harris, "g_'al," Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, ed. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., and Bruce Waltke (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980), 1:144.
[59]Greg Madson, "The Christ-Centered, Character-Driven School," Journal of Adventist Education 62 (October/November 1999): 38.
[60]The American individualism was borne out, according to Lourdes Morales-Gudmundsson, of "Protestant understanding of individual responsibility in personal salvation." She continues "Americans admire the self-reliant, self-made person who overcomes obstacles to achieve success. Success, in turn, is measured by the individual's ability to earn money (ideally by dint of hard, honest labor, and clever money management) or to acquire high levels of education." Lourdes E. Morales-Gudmundsson, "Building Community out of Diversity," Journal of Adventist Education 60 (October/November 1997): 15.
[61]Wilson, "Hebrew Thought," 135.
[62]Alexander, Encyclopedia, 245.
[63]Wilson, Our Father Abraham, 280.
[64]I have nothing against the "on-line learning" or "distributed learning" program per se. Although, I have some reservations in some of its processes where there is no contact at all between on-line students and on-line teachers.
[65]Abraham J. Heschel, "The Spirit of Jewish Education," Jewish Education 24/2 (Fall 1953): 19. Quoted in Wilson, Our Father Abraham, 280.
[66]See e.g., Exod 10:2; 12:26-27.
[67]Kaster, 30.
[68]"The Jews of the First Christian Century," in The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, ed. Francis D. Nichol (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1956-1980), 5:58.
[69]The home as an ideal center of learning and training for children was changed. This was changed, according to Steve Farrar, because of the Industrial Revolution, especially in America. He keenly noted, "When factories became the source of income, men had to leave home, thus greatly diminishing their ability to influence their sons....Work now separated father from son, when for generations they had worked together in the master/apprentice relationship. Men stopped raising their boys because they weren't present to lead their boys. And as the years have gone by, that all-important male role model has eroded even further"(Steve Farrar, Point Man: How a Man Can Lead His Family [N.p.: Multnomah Books, 1990], 40).
[70]"The Jews of the First Christian Century," in The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, 5:59.
[71]Wilson, "Hebrew Thought," 131.