Story as Torah...

In his book Story as Torah, Gordon Wenham sets out to propose a methodology for reading Old Testament narratives ethically. Wenham points out that Jewish and Christian interpreters have always done this in their attempts to "instill ethical principles in their hearers" (1). While I'm unsure about looking for "models" or "examples" in biblical narratives to imitate (cf. Sidney Greidanus' book Sola Scriptura which critiques the "we-need-to-have-courage-like-David" approach to scripture), I think Wenham is correct to underscore the moral/ethical worldview of the implied author (i.e., the author that the real author projects into the text). Surely as part of a normative text, the narratives contained in the Torah have ethical goals for their readers. (Again, to avoid a moralistic emphasis, I'm using the term "ethical" in a deliberatively broad way--i.e., encompassing core beliefs which create certain patterns and habits of behavior.)

Having just started the book, I look forward to seeing how Wenham works out and applies his methodology. In the meantime, I thought I would share a wonderful little quote from chapter 3 where Wenham is busy dealing with the rhetorical features of Genesis. Speaking of the similarities between Adam and Noah in the narrative, Wenham writes:

[After the flood] It is not long before the ubiquity of sin is illustrated. The blameless Noah falls victim to the fruit of the vine. The ironic similarities to and differences from Adam's eating of another fruit show that we are dealing with another fall. For example, whereas Adam's fruit made him aware of his nakedness so that he tried to cover it up, Noah's fruit led him to uncover himself unwittingly. As in Adam's case the son's behaviour is even more reprehensible than the father's and leads to dissension among the three brothers. And just as Cain's descendants appear to be the ungodly line in Genesis 4, Ham's descendant Canaan is cursed by Noah.

This is a wonderful insight into the text. While many people catch the New Adam language surrounding the flood, etc., I don't think I have heard anyone outline all of the other ironic similarities and dissimilarities.

continue reading Story as Torah...

Wyoming upsets Fresno State!!!!

My team actually won!!!!!

continue reading Wyoming upsets Fresno State!!!!

Pratt on interpreting as Christians...

As someone who will seek ordination after finishing my studies, I am extremely interested in how one can apply biblical scholarship within an ecclesiastical setting. This is especially true of preaching. I am always thinking about how my studies in the Hebrew Bible can be fruitful in the pulpit.

One of the key issues with preaching the Hebrew Bible is how to interpret/apply it as Christians. Too often we moralize its stories and lift up certain characters as models of good or bad behavior. Ironically, in doing so we often forget to make the most important hermeneutical move that we can make as Christians: bringing the Hebrew Bible into contact with the person and work of Jesus Christ. As Christians, by definition we think that the world, time, reality, etc. all revolve around Jesus. Yet when we seek to apply the stories of the Hebrew Bible, it is easy to sidestep the Messiah and draw some homiletical analogy between Ancient Israel's situation and our own. While that's all fine and good as it goes, such is not a distinctly Christian move.

Let me explain with a brief example from my own preaching experience. Early in my seminary career, I preached a sermon on Jacob and Laban's argument at Mizpah (Gen. 31). Following good procedure, I sent a recording of it to my pastoral mentor. A couple of weeks later, I got a call from him, and he was full of praise. Phrases like "well done" came out quickly, but after this short burst of praise, he paused and said, "However, there's one thing that bothers me about this sermon. You only mentioned Jesus once, as something of an add on. Minus that one place you could have preached this entire sermon in a synagogue." He then went on to encourage me to always make Christ central in all of my sermons.

Initially, I was not quite sure what to think of this comment. At one level, I understood where he was coming from, but on another level I kept thinking, "But isn't it eisegesis to cram Jesus into every passage?" Looking back now on this incident a few years later with (hopefully) a bit more perspective and wisdom, I think understand now what my mentor was saying. My preaching professors at Calvin Seminary used to say it best: "We do not preach a text. We preach the gospel of Jesus Christ." Now, to be sure one can easily abuse this principle. One has only to think of the ghastly "Jesus-is-the-answer-to-every-question" kind of sermons. Nonetheless, as Christians we confess that Jesus Messiah is the center of history, the One that the Hebrew Scriptures anticipate. Thus, our preaching must reflect this if it is to be distinctly Christian.

Yet the question still remains: how does one do this without succumbing to shallow "Jesus-is-the-answer" cliches? Richard Pratt, Jr. in his book He Gave Us Stories offers a helpful suggestion. He writes:

In much the same way, the lordship of Christ colors everything we read in Old Testament stories. The basic Christian confession "Jesus is Lord" (Romans 10:9; 1 Corinthians 12:3) forms a pivotal hermeneutical consideration whenever we direct these texts to modern life. Christ brought the world into existence (Colossians 1:16); He sustains it day by day (Colossians 1:17); He is the end of all things (Romans 11:36). As followers of Christ, we must strive to see how every Old Testament narrative reveals His lordship over us. Every application is a personal response to Christ Himself.

How can we make Christ the center of our applications? Interconnections between the original meaning of Old Testament narratives and Christ are vast. No single approach will cover all relevant issues. Yet one helpful strategy is to ask how Old Testament stories anticipate Christ's three offices: Prophet, Priest, and King. (346)

Expanding on this later in the light of redemptive history, Pratt elaborates:

Distinctions among the inauguration, continuation, and consummation of the Christian theocracy present us with three options every time we apply Old Testament stories to our day. We may look at the past, present, or future work of Christ on our behalf. We may ask: 1) How does the passage offer insight into Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King in His first coming? 2) How does it apply to the present continuation of Christ's prophetic, priestly, and royal offices? 3) How does the passage shed light on the consummation of Christ's prophetic, priestly, and royal ministry at His second coming? (354)

I think Pratt is onto something here, and I look forward to trying this strategy out in the coming years in my sermon preparation.

continue reading Pratt on interpreting as Christians...

To the right you will see Political Jesus and the Mighty Magenta...

I thought it was about time that I updated my blogroll to the right. For all of those interested, I have added Rod's blog over at Political Jesus. Rod, a colleague here at Brite, always gives one plenty of good food for thought and has been graciously reading and commenting here at Epiginoskein since before I moved to Texas.

I have also added my good friend Mike Fox's blog: Fox's Wanderings. Here at Brite Divinity School, he is simply known as the Mighty Magenta. Ask him about it sometime. I'm sure he'll be more than happy to elaborate :)

Anyway, Dear Reader, check out both of their blogs.

continue reading To the right you will see Political Jesus and the Mighty Magenta...

God came down...

In reading Richard L. Pratt Jr.'s book He Gave Us Stories this morning, I ran across this passage which brought a smile to my face:

The writers of Old Testament narratives chose their words because of their denotations and connotations. Consider one verse from the story of the Tower of Babel: "But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower that the men were building" (Genesis 11:5). What did Moses mean when he wrote that God "came down" (yrd)? We find clues by considering the other words he might have selected. For instance, why did he say "came down" (yrd) instead of "went up" ('lh)? Apparently he wanted a word that denoted a downward movement. Why did he say "came down" (yrd) instead of "came" (bw')? "Came" (bw') would have sufficed since the readers knew that God dwells in heaven. But Moses chose "came down" (yrd) because of its denotative specificity. Finally, the word "came down" (yrd) may also have been chosen because of its emotive connotation. In the previous verse, Moses had said that the tower "reaches to the heavens" (Genesis 11:4). It is likely that he chose "came down" (yrd) for its satirical consequences. The people building the tower thought they had reached heaven, but the Lord had to come down just to see it.

It just cracks me up thinking of the author of Genesis sitting pen in hand smirking as he scratches onto the scroll "God came down."

continue reading God came down...

Some wisdom from Avigdor Bonchek...

With classes done for the semester, I'm trying to get a bit of a jump start on next semester. So I've been doing some reading for my independent study on Narrative Criticism in the Hebrew Bible. The first book I read was Avigdor Bonchek's wonderful little book Studying the Torah. As a conservative Jew, Bonchek has an intriguing take on exegesis. Not surprisingly many of his "keys" for interpretation mirror traditional Christian hermeneutical rules. For example, one of his overarching keys to a proper reading of Torah is to always read the Torah in context. Likewise his third "key" of finding similarities between texts within the whole of Torah sounds a great deal like the traditional Christian understanding of the "analogy of scripture" (though, to be sure, there are some differences).

However, while I was reading the book I was especially struck by Bonchek's second overarching key: the Law of Parsimony. Basically, what this means is that a reader of scripture ought always to go with an interpretation that is the simplest, most concise, and deals with any questions about the text in a clear way. To put it another way, always use the principle of Occam's razor when interpreting. If a particular reading of a text is convoluted and has to do textual jumping jacks to make sense, avoid it.

Granted, there are plenty of places in scripture where one has to embrace a convoluted reading. However, as whole I think Bonchek's on to something. If we have to do too much special pleading for our reading of a certain text, one has to wonder how accurate it is.

In closing let me leave you with a wonderful quote from Bonchek on reading the Torah:

The Torah uses words sparingly. Phrases are chosen with a premeditated conception and a fine-tuned sensitivity to what the reader needs to hear in order to understand its message. At the same time, the Torah is quite subtle in its method of conveying its message. A sharp eye and sensitive ear are necessary to mine its meaning.

But even more important than this reading skill is one's basic attitude toward the Torah-text. Essential to productive and creative In-Depth Interpretation of the Torah is a deep-seated respect for the significance of every word and every nuance in the text. The attitude that nothing in the text is for naught is the springboard which impels us in our search for meaning in the Torah. This attitude hardens into firm conviction the more one successfully probes the depths of Torah interpretation. (15-16)

continue reading Some wisdom from Avigdor Bonchek...

Merry Christmas to me...

The Accordance Premier Scholar's pack is on the way! I'm excited about having an exegetical software that is native to the Mac operating system. (I've been using Libronix on the PC side of my mac (via Bootcamp), and it has been helpful. However, since I remain a loyal Mac owner, I've decided to take the plunge and go with the simplicity and beauty of Accordance.)

Now to get a word processing software that works with right to left scripts (i.e., Hebrew, Arabic, etc.). Word for Mac has been a complete headache when it comes to typing in Hebrew. I'm thinking about either Pages or Mellel. Whatever I end up with, I want it to be my software for the next 3 and 1/2 years (i.e., all the way through my dissertation). Does anyone out there have any suggestions?

continue reading Merry Christmas to me...

1 down 3 more to go...

Today I handed in my last paper of the Fall 2009 semester and thus officially finished my first semester of PhD coursework. I'm feeling pretty good right now. All the stress lifted as I placed the paper in my prof's mailbox. I am thankful that I started all of my papers early in the semester. It gave me time to refine my thoughts and precluded any last second hurrying.

I have to say that after one semester of study, I think one of my former prof's at Calvin Seminary was spot on when he counseled me: "Nevada, the key to getting done with a PhD is just doing it: butt to chair. Sit down and do the work." Most of a PhD is a willingness to work, and has much less to do with "native talent" (whatever that means!).

Anyway, that's one semester of coursework down and three more to go!

continue reading 1 down 3 more to go...