2. About the Author: 100words
This article’s author is Yitzhak Berger.In 1994 he received Rabbinic Ordination from the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary, Yeshiva University. From 1986 to1992 he got B.A.-M.A. program in Biblical Studies at Bernard Revel Graduate School for Jewish Studies, Yeshiva University. He got B.A.-M.A. degrees in 1992. In 2003 he was awarded Ph.D. Biblical Studies at Bernard Revel Graduate School for Jewish Studies, Yeshiva University. In 1994-99 he was Jewish Studies Faculty at Yeshivah of Flatbush Joel Braverman High School. In 1996-2003 he was an Adjunct Instructor of Bible at Yeshiva College. In 1999-present he has been a Part-time Faculty at Drisha Institute for Jewish Education.In 2002-2003 he was a Instructor of Hebrew Division at Department of Classical and Oriental Studies, Hunter College of the CUNY. In 2003-present he has been a Assistant Professor of Hebrew Division at Department of Classical and Oriental Studies, Hunter College of the CUNY. He has membership in Society of Biblical Literature, Association for Jewish Studies World Union for Jewish Studies, Orthodox Forum Steering Committee.

3. Bibliographic Data: Journal name, vol., No., year)
Journal for the study of the Old Testament, vol.33, No.4, 2009

4. Outline of the Article:
Abstract
Keywords
1.For Want of Empathy: The Tragic Flaw of David in 2 Samuel 11
2.Reader Expectation and Irony in the Bathsheba Narrative and in Ruth
a.Thwarted Expectations in 2 Samuel 11
b. Thwarted Expectations in Ruth 3
(1)Ruth’s departure from Naomi’s instructions
(2)Boaz’s response to Ruth’s request
(3)Ruth’s report to Naomi
3.Boaz, David, and the ‘Isolation’ motif
4.Ruth, David, and Nocturnal deception
5.Conclusion

5. What is the article all about? 350 words minimum

Many scholars argue that the book of Ruth alludes to the Judah Tamar narrative in order to provide a contrasting portrait of the ancestry of David. The book of Ruth also alludes to the related narrative of David and Bathsheba, casting David’s conduct in that episode as a departure from the favorable qualities of the bloodline modeled by Ruth and Boaz. The latter half of the book of Ruth contains three subtle features each of which bears a unique resemblance to a feature of the Bathsheba tale. The author of Ruth seeks to underscore a contrast between the characters in the two respective stories. The central flaw that emerges from David’s conduct in ch.11 is his lack of empathy, borne of the distance he has placed between himself and his subjects. The most central example appears after the elaborate instructions that Naomi provides to Ruth at the beginning of the chapter. With the Tamar parallel already established, the reader’s expectations are directed toward the successful implementation of Naomi’s plan. In the chapter, Naomi instructs Ruth to enter the threshing floor surreptitiously in order to enhance her perspects of enticing Boaz using the same passive form of the verb, Baoz tells Ruth to leave surreptitiously lest anyone receive the mistaken impression that something untoward did indeed take place. The highly specific means raises the genuine possibility of some kind of literary relationship. One serious option is that the author of Ruth is reacting to the unfavorable portrait of David which the narrator’s deliberately misleading remarks in 2 Samuel 11 help to develop. Every one of the analogous examples we have seen in this pivotal chapter of Ruth serves to underscore the frustration of Naomi’s seductive plot, in favor of a wholesome union that functions to cleanse the royal bloodline of the associations generated by the story of Judah and Tamar. Scholars have revealed many and varied links between seemingly unrelated biblical narratives in recent decades. Through considerable methodological caution, scholars evaluate the dizzying array of correlations. The author of Ruth generated a range of meaningful intertextual connections. The author of Ruth composed the work with the David Bathsheba story prominently in mind. Troubled by the portrait of the royal bloodline that emerges from the Judah Tamar episode and from the David Bathsheba story, our author set out to paint a distinctly more favorable picture. Alluding to several key components of 2 Samuel 11 that highlight the king’s flawed conduct, the book of Ruth provides subtle contrasts that underscore the supreme character and integrity of Boaz and Ruth whose line gives rise to Judean royalty.

2. About the Author: 100words
The writer of this article is David C. Sim. David C. Sim is an Associate Professor in Theology at Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia. He completed a PhD at King’s College London in 1993, and since 1994 has been a member of the School of Theology and the Centre for Early Christian Studies at the Australian Catholic University. He received M.A. at LaT. He is the author of two monographs on the Gospel of Matthew, the editor of a further two books on that Gospel, and has published forty articles on a wide variety of New Testament themes. Professor Sim has held Visiting Professorships at the University of Pretoria and Cambridge University. In 2001-2005 he was co-chair of the Matthew Seminar of Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas(SNTS) at the annual conferences in Durham, Montreal, Barcelona, Bonn, and Halle.

3. Bibliographic Data: Journal name, vol., No., year)
Journal for the study of the new testament, vol.31, No.4, 2009.

4. Outline of the Article:
Abstract
Key Words
Introduction
Intertextuality
Intertextual methods
The Criterion of Availability
The Criterion of Volume: What Do we Listen for?
The Criterion of Volume: A Test Case-Mt.16.17-18a//Gal.1.12, 16-17; 1 Cor.10.4c
Conclusions

5. What is the article all about? 350 words minimum
Through this article, the author examined the possibility that the author of Matthew’s Gospel had access to the Paul’s letters. He used the methods of intertextuality. When we understand that Matthew was opposed to the more liberal theology of Paul, we can clarify the intertextual relationship between the Gospel and the Pauline corpus. A single test case shows that the evangelist was reacting to certain claims of the apostle expressed in his letters, and raises the prospect of further intertextual connections between these early Christian documents. He especially uses the words of Anti-Pauline, intertextuality, Pauline corpus, and Gospel of Matthew. The author argued that the Gospel of Matthew was designed to critique the apostle Paul and his liberal or law-free theology. The evidence includes the continuing role of the whole Torah in Matthew’s community, the evangelist’s treatment of the disciples and family of Jesus, and the similarity between Matthew’s theology and that of Paul’s opponents in Galatia. He explained that a number of Matthean redactional texts were intended to counter certain passages in the Pauline epistles. The analysis of the Matthean Gospel and the Pauline epistles according to intertextual principles leads to the important conclusion that the evangelist probably knew the letters of Paul and in some passages he was responding to specific Pauline texts. As a preliminary investigation of this theme, a single example will suffice to prove the point. He concludes that the evangelist alludes to and reacts to certain Pauline texts in this particular case. The method of intertextuality can be employed with equal benefit in a study of Matthew’s Gospel and the Pauline epistles. Collections of the epistles were widely distributed throughout Christian circles by the end of the first century and they were available in Antioch. A much better approach is to accept the evidence that Matthew was anti-Pauline in orientation and to listen for echoes of his correction of Pauline statements or themes. The test case of actual Matthean use of the Pauline literature further satisfied the other primary criterion, that of volume. The volume was clear and distinct with regard to the intertextual echoes between Mt.16.17-18a and Gal.1.12, 16-17 and 1 Cor.10.4c. here the evangelist sought to challenge Paul’s claim that he was commissioned to conduct a mission independently of the Jerusalem church. Matthew describes Peter instead as the recipient of a divine revelation and as the foundation of Jesus’ church with the authority to match. One example of the intertextual relationship between the Gospel of Matthew and the Pauline corpus is this discussion of Mt.16.17-18 and these Pauline texts. Through the basis of the preliminary analysis, we can beckon the task to find further intertextual links between the earlier Pauline corpus and the later Gospel. We should attune our attention to the correct frequency to catch these echoes.

2. About the Author: 100words
The author of this article is Hee Sung Lee. The author is at Chongshin University, in Seoul, Korea.

3. Bibliographic Data: Journal name, vol., No., year)
Scripture and Interpretation, vol.2, No.2, 2008.

4. Outline of the Article:
Ⅰ. Introduction
Ⅱ. Two Views on Providence and Evil
Calvinist Theology
Openness Theology
Ⅲ. Satan in Job 1:6-12 and 2:1-7
Satan and the Satan?
Role of Evil
Ⅳ. Evaluation of Arguments
The Classical Views on God’s Relation to Evil
The Openness Views on God’s Relation to Evil
Ⅴ. Conclusion

5. What is the article all about? 350 words minimum
This paper gives a unique voice for the book of Job and its systematic and biblical theological contribution to the recent debate regarding the problem of evil and God’s relation to evil. The Thesis is that “In God’s universe, God permits evil and suffering, even the activity of Satan, all according to his sovereign plan.” We should consider three considerations. The present writer will elaborate on the theological context of the current controversy between classical theism and open theism. In dealing with God’s relation to evil within the book of Job, the identity and role of Satan in the prologue of the book of Job is crucial. Through this article, the identity and role of Satan in the prologue is discussed by utilizing semantic and syntactic analyses and interacting with biblical scholars. The theological discussion on evil within the scope of the prologue of Job will be examined. Because the evil, there is controversy among scholars, questioning whether it was from God or from Satan. According to Classical theists, God is the first and primary cause of every occurrence in the world. They argue that God does not take risks ever about evil. The notion of Satan in the prologue is not compelling but the malicious evil character of Satan is. His role and identity is somewhat ambiguous but the text shows that the activity of Satan is restricted to God’s permission. God exercises absolute control over Satan. The notion is further confirmed by Job’s statement. To use the term “permission” was hesitated by Calvin. He rather maintains that Job suffered because of the God’s divine will. This minimizes the role of Satan. Job’s confession and the narrator’s commentary in Job 42:11 support his claim. The evil is described as God’s sovereign will. Tiessen argues that God’s permission accords with the prologue. So, the narrator of Job considers the term “God’s sovereign permission” as more adequate. Through God’s sovereign permission, evil and suffering which is the activity of Satan can happen in God’s universe. God has the ultimate authority over the evil in the world. Some people regard the view as problematic but the others regard the view as hopeful.

The reason why I have used the Holy Bible, Old and New Testaments Korean Revised Version and the Holy Bible, New International Version for personal Bible Study, for teaching, and for preaching is that the two versions are very comfortable and easy for me to study and teach and preach. Another reason is that the two versions are the quite clear translations and the modern translations. So I think the two versions express the original Bible texts clearly and well. And the two versions are so accessible and readable that contemporary people can read and use them easily. Another reason is that a lot of Christians have used and read the two versions. A lot of Korean Christians who have lived in foreign lands have used and have read the Holy Bible, Old and New Testaments Korean Revised Version. A few years ago, the New Korean revised version came out in Korea. So, I bought the new Korean version of the Bible and carried it with me but I rarely have used and read this new Korean version of the Bible. Because our pastors and church members do not use the New Korean revised version but use the Holy Bible, Old and New Testaments Korean Revised Version, I usually use the old Korean Revised Version. A lot of Christians have read and used the Holy Bible, New International Version all over the world. Last reason is that the origin of the two versions is so reliable and faithful. Especially, the Holy Bible, New International Version was made by over a hundred scholars from the best available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts.

So, I usually  read and use the Korean Revised Version and the New International Version for personal Bible Study, for teaching, and for preaching.

2. About the Author:
The author of this article is Andrew D. Clarke. Andrew D. Clarke is the senior lecturer in New Testament at the University of Aberdeen, Scotland. He works at the Department of Divinity and Religious Studies, King’s College, University of Aberdeen. He got MA and PhD at Cambridge University. I was the Research Librarian at Tyndale House Biblical Studies Research Library in Cambridge before moving to Aberdeen in 1995. He is currently the Chairman of the Tyndale House Council. His research has focused especially on the Pauline communities and the ways in which these communities differed from each other in regard to how leadership was exercised. He is writing a commentary on 1 Corinthians for the Word Biblical Commentary series. He is also exploring the nature and characteristics of the early Christian communities in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria.

3. Bibliographic Data:
Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Vol. 31, No.4, 2009

4. Outline of the Article:
Abstract
Key Words
A History of Interpretation
The Markan Context: The Universal Cost of Discipleship
Markan Characterization
The Minor Character
The Disciples
The Rich Man
Conclusion

5. What is the article all about?
In Abstract part, the author explains that Mark’s account of the rich man has been read as suggesting the character’s ultimate rejection of Jesus’ call.
In Key Words part, he shows us the key words which are Discipleship, Mark 10:17-31, and rich man
In A History of Interpretation part, he explains that Mark concluded without a description of the eventual outcome. Interpreters have considered that the rich man’s sad departure reflects a rejection of the invitation to sell all and give to the poor. Unlike other ancient commentators, Clement does not frown on riches noting that they can be tools for good. Chrysostom focuses on the way that this man was in subjection to his wealth. Through a history of interpretation, the interpreters distinguish between those who are critical of the rich man’s response and those who countenance a glimmer of hope.
In The Markan Context part, he stresses the universal cost of discipleship. He describes that there is a universalizing aspect as Jesus turns to his disciples. There is the call for disciples to deny themselves, and take up their cross and follow Jesus.
In Markan Characterization part, he tells about the three important parts which are the Minor Character, the Disciples, and the Rich Man. The minor characters who are little people have an importance that is not diminished by their brief appearances. Mark’s Gospel repeated contrasts between the disciples and the minor characters. The rich man ought to be identified as one of the minor characters. As Jesus was beginning on the way, the rich man ran to him, knelt before him, and addressed him as good teacher. Jesus’ immediate response is to challenge that no one is good except God alone. After confirming that, Jesus refers to many commandments for the rich man to follow. Jesus finally urged him to do the one thing he still lacked. The one thing means four imperatives which are ‘go’, ‘sell’, ‘give’, and ‘follow me’.To the disciples, Jesus affirms that it is hard for the rich to enter the kingdom of God and it is also hard for any to enter the kingdom of God. Jesus warned that those who are first to respond may be the last in the end, but those who appear to be last may be first in the end.
In Conclusion part, the author explains that Mark does not disclose the subsequent response of the rich man. It shows the cost of discipleship and God’s ability to achieve the impossible. The message for Mark’s readers is that God can achieve the impossible for those who approach him genuinely, even those burdened by wealth.

There is the principle of Intended Meaning out of the principles of interpretation. The literal principle is the usual account for the principle of one level of meaning. The term literal can be often misunderstood.

First, to some scholars, the literal principle means “Letterism”. They understand and interpret the whole words of the Bible literally. Some scholars even argue that the visions of the Book of Revelation can be interpreted literally. But no one can argue that every word of the Bible can be interpreted with the literal interpretation. Because the Bible says that Jesus is called a lamb, when a scholar interprets Jesus, it comes to have the possibility to interpret Jesus as a real lamb. A lamb means a four-footed animal literally. It symbolizes the concepts of innocence and sacrifice. When the interpreter interprets the word lamb literally, he can misunderstand the intended meaning of the author. So, the interpreters should interpret the word not literally but symbolically. The interpreters should not interpret every word in the Bible literally.

Second, to other scholars, the literal principle means the author’s intended meaning. The interpreters should understand the symbolism in order to recognize what the author intends to say. Words are communicated as symbols. Usually, man uses words to communicate the concepts of his experiences. Through his own experiences, he expresses his interpretation to others. The one who hears words tends to interpret them according to his own experiences. When the interpreter has a good family relationship, he is subject to understand and interpret the word father as love and respect. But when the interpreter had a fearful father, he is subject to understand and interpret the word father as fear and hatred. So, the interpreter should determine exactly what the author meant and communicate the concepts in contemporary understandable terms. Understanding the words, phrases, and sentences in their texts is very helpful to know the intended meaning. When the interpreter understands the word in sentences, paragraphs, chapters, and the whole book, he can get the intended meaning of the author well.

To sum up, the intended meaning is different from the literal meaning.

2. About the Author: 100words
The author of this article is Ryan E. Stokes. She is a professor at Yale University.

3. Bibliographic Data: Journal name, vol., No., year)
Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 128, No.1, 2009

4. Outline of the Article:
Ⅰ. A brief survey of the use of “Satan” elsewhere in the Hebrew Scriptures
Ⅱ. Previous scholarship on the Satan in 1 Chronicles 21:1
Ⅲ. The nature, Identity, and Literary Origins of the Chronicler’s Satan
Ⅳ. Conclusion

5. What is the article all about? 350 words minimum
The author deals with the significant and recent arguments about the identity and nature of the Chronicler’s Satan figure. He describes his own explanation of the figure’s identity and his presence in the story. In 2 Samuel 24:1, God was angry with Israel and incited David against them. In 1 Chronicles 21:1, God regarded David’s error as a certain “satan” in 1 Chronicles.
In part 1, the author surveys briefly about the use of “Satan” in the Hebrew Bible. Most passages in the OT Bible mean “adversary” or “opponent”. In some cases, it means “accuser”. The other four passages are the story of Balaam and his donkey in Numbers 22, the narrative prologue to Job in Chronicles 1-2, the vision of the high priest Joshua’s trial in the heavenly court in Zechariah 3, and the story of David’s census in 1 Chronicles 21. It refers to a heavenly adversary.
In part 2, he deals with the previous scholarship on the Satan in 1 Chronicles 21:1. Many commentators and translators understood the “satan” of 1 Chronicles as the same Satan. That assumption is understandable and makes some sense. In 1988, Peggy Day argued that the figure was not Satan but an heavenly accuser. She explained that until the mid-second century the “satan” was not used as a proper noun. She maintained that the “satan” should not be accepted as Satan. She considered the “satan” as a heavenly opponent. Sara Japhet argued that lack of the articles about 1 Chronicles 21:1 means that it is a generic noun. Japhet emphasized one should distinguish between “standing to the right” of someone for the purpose of accusation in Zech 3:1 and “standing up against” someone in 1 Chronicles 21:1
In part 3, he explains the nature, Identity, and Literary Origins of the Chronicler’s Satan. He explains the preference of superhuman interpretation because of parallels of earlier and later texts, the closest parallel, and accuracy of interpretation. He tells that the conceptual and terminological parallels between this passage and other passages give the best evidence. One can meaningfully compare 1 Chronicles 21 with the story of Balaam and his donkey in Num 22. Num 22: 22-35 are similar to 2 Samuel 24. By the Dead Sea Scrolls, we can know the Chronicler depended on a copy of Samuel which was close to 4QSam than to MT Samuel. Numbers and 4QSam describe the God’s angel and the encounters of Balaam and David with armed messenger. One should understand that redactor revised the Deuteronomistic census story and be careful to distinguish the superhuman-opponent interpretation from the heavenly-accuser interpretation.
In conclusion, the “satan” of 1 Chronicles means not a human opponent of Israel but an angelic figure. The opponent signifies a superhuman adversary. So, the “satan” is not the devil but a messenger of the deity who carries God’s punishment.

First, the liberal scholars rejected the traditional view of authorship of the Bible and they thought the Bible as a mere human book. They did not believe the Bible as God’s Word but stressed the human experiences. Because the liberal scholars were influenced from the rationalism which destroyed reverence for the Bible, they stressed the scientific method to be applied to the Bible. They thought the Bible contains human insight into religious truth and tried to determine the value of Scripture by the moral and ethical standard. So, they respected the religious experiences rather than the Bible’s authority and regarded their moral, human senses as the standard through which they judged the Bible.

Second, the liberal scholars regarded Paul and the apostles as the real founders of Christianity instead of Jesus. Even, the liberals described Jesus as an ethical teacher. They thought the Theological concepts accommodated the people of the day. They described the death of Jesus in terms of the bloody Jewish sacrifices or the rituals of mystery religions. In addition, they emphasized the historical interpretation of the Bible and tended to develop the literature instead of the revelation’s background. They emphasized the social conditions rather than God’s provision and intervention.

Third, the liberal scholars interpreted the Bible by the basis of the evolutionary presuppositions. They thought the Bible is not divine revelation but an Israel’s religious story. They also regarded the Genesis as the primitive and childlike religious story. They also used radical criticism, so they destroyed the divine revelation and judged the Bible as a human work. The liberalism even reduced human’s responsibility of sin. The liberal scholars considered men’s behaviors as the results of the physical circumstances. The liberalism presumed the regularity of nature and excluded miracles. So they rejected not only the divine revelations but also the existence of God.

In conclusion, the characteristics of the liberal scholars’ approach to the bible are not valid.

2. About the Author:
The Authors are Norman Perrin and Dennis C. Duling.
Norman Perrin was the Associate Professor of New Testament at the Divinity School of the University of Chicago and was a clear-headed thinker and writer. He was a distinguished New Testament scholar and developed his views on a number of New Testament interpretations. He was the author of The Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus and published numerous articles and book reviews. He was one of the more popular scholars of the Second Quest and also the author of major works in New Testament scholarship. He died unexpectedly in 1976.
Dennis C. Duling is a professor of department of religious studies and Theology at Canisius College in New York. He received B.A. at the College of Wooster in Ohio 1960, B.D. at McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago 1963, M.A. at the University of Chicago in Chicago 1967, Ph.D. at the University of Chicago in Chicago 1970. After he graduated, he studied advanced research at Yale University in 1979, at Heidelberg University in 1985, and at Yeshiva University in 1983. He had fellowships of T.B. Blackstone Fellow, University of Chicago Fellow, and National Endowment for the Humanities Fellow. He got the Distinguished Faculty Award for excellence in teaching, concern for students, service to the college, and scholarship at the Canisius College.

3. Table of Contents:
Preface
Chapter one: The world of the New Testament
Chapter two: The nature of the New Testament
Chapter three: A history of New Testament Christianity
Chapter four: Apocalyptic Christianity
Chapter five: Paul: Apostle to the Gentiles
Chapter six: The Theology of Paul in his letters
Chapter seven: Deutero-Pauline Christianity and the letter to the Hebrews
Chapter eight: The Gospel of Mark: The Apocalyptic drama
Chapter nine: The Gospel of Matthew: Christianity as Obedience to the New Revelation
Chapter ten: The Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles: The Idea of Salvation history
Chapter eleven: The Gospel and Letters of John: The Literature of the Johannine School
Chapter twelve: The church on the way to becoming an institution
Chapter thirteen: The Presupposition of the New Testament: Jesus
Epilogue: Ways of being religious in the New Testament
Appendix 1: The Canon of the Bible
Appendix 2: The Text of the New Testament
Appendix 3: English Translation of the Greek New Testament
Appendix 4: Major Archeological, Textual discoveries, and publications
Appendix 5: Religious and Philosophical Texts from the Greco-Roman world

4. What is the book all about?
This book encourages readers to read the New Testament and offers us the brief and good explanation of the New Testament books. This book has the special characteristics. It deals with Apocalyptic Christianity, emphasizes on literary factors and includes a literary analysis of the longer books, and shows the social contexts of various early Christian communities by analyzing social environment, social status, and the distribution of power. It tells about the recognitions and contributions of the Synoptic Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, shows materials ascribed to Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels, explains a survey of the New Testament with Jesus and examines developments in the later church, and extensively uses the exegetical surveys. Every major book of the New Testament is surveyed and the outline and the contents of the New Testament books briefly are discussed.
In the chapter 1, the author explains the world of the New Testament by taking up the history and religions of the Greek and Roman periods, especially those of Judaism. In the chapter 2, he presents the nature, authorship and date, a book and a collection of the New Testament. In the chapter 3, he shows a systematic account of the theological history of New Testament Christianity. It has three important factors in the history of New Testament Christianity and the phases of New Testament Christianity. From chapter 4 to chapter 12, he shows us each part of the New Testament against the background of its place in the view of that history. Through the chapters, He tells about Apocalyptic Christianity, Paul who was the Apostle to the Gentiles, the theology of Paul in his letters, Deutero-Pauline Christianity and the letter to the Hebrews, the Gospel of Mark as the Apocalyptic drama, the Gospel of Matthew as the Christianity as Obedience to the New Revelation, the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles as The Idea of Salvation history, the Gospel of John, Letters of John, and the Literature of the Johannine School, and the church on the way to becoming an institution. In the chapter 13, he concludes with a presentation of Jesus and his teaching.

5. Amazon Link and Photo of the Book