My review of Der Bibelkanon in der Bibelauslegung: Methodenreflexionen und Beispielexegesen (eds Egbert Ballhorn, Georg Steins) has at last been published on RBL.

To view or download the review, go here.

Tags: Deutsch, Canon

The Nature of Biblical Criticism Author: John Barton ISBN: 9780664225872 Publisher: Westminster John Knox Press         Release: May 2007 Format: Paperback         Pages: 206 My Rating:

Over the weekend I finally read the above. I had picked it up at SBL last summer, in Vienna, and skimmed parts of it thereafter, but I only just blocked out time to read it carefully from cover to cover.

I resist the urge to say much about it yet, or even to rate it. I'll have to interact with the book in my dissertation and I don't want to pre-empt what I'll say there. I do note, however, that this essay of Barton's, which originally heralded The Oxford Bible Commentary in September 2001, anticipates themes in the book at several points. This is especially true of the last two sections, "A Turn to Theology" and "'Advocacy' Readings." Under the former, for instance, Barton states

Every so often there is a movement to ‘reintegrate’ biblical studies and theology, or to ‘give the Bible back to the Church’. I personally believe that scholars have never really taken it away from the Church, and have often indeed been if anything too ‘reverent’, avoiding hard critical questions. But there can be no doubt that many people do feel there is a division between the scholar in the study and the worshipper in the pew, with the preacher in the pulpit uneasily wedged between them. And a repeated reaction to this perception has been to try to develop some way of making biblical study more ‘theological’.

Similarly in the book he concludes: "There is a battle going on at the moment between those who believe that biblical criticism is too much in the grip of a secular and skeptical spirit and those who think it has still not managed to escape the hand of ecclesiastical and religious authority. My sympathies lie on the whole more with the second group" (185).

Barton's dissent from the many advocates of theological exegesis makes his new book essential reading for those with an interest in the same. He sees his program as closer to the essence of true religious reading, which makes it especially provocative. That his thoughts show evidence of long reflection (themes from his classic Reading the OT [1984] are also present in 2007) makes the argument all the more important.

Of course, not all will agree with Barton's diagnosis, let alone his prescription. Regarding canonical approaches he writes (in the online essay, but again in line with the book):

Older biblical criticism was often practised by scholars who did have a high commitment to the inspiration and authority of Scripture. But they thought the proper way to study it was first to analyse it critically in the ways I have described, and only then to move on to questions of its religious significance. This was true of Catholic and Protestant biblical scholars alike. The newer movement denies that this division of labour is desirable, or even possible.

But practitioners of the canonical approach are likely to reply that any division of labor will be different simply because the task envisioned is different. In short, Barton's work aims at the very core of the confessional exegesis movement (if it is proper to speak of such a thing). In particular he targets Brevard Childs, Chris Seitz, Francis Watson, and Walter Moberly. And debate with these figures (indeed, among them) has long been underway.

Finally, I understand that a response to Barton's book, by Moberly, is already due to appear this year in JTI (issue 2/1). One hopes that engagement from all parties will turn up fresh soil where the ground has already so often been plowed.

Tags: Barton, Theological Exegesis, Moberly

What does it mean that "the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Cor 3:6)? Dawson, through Origen, explores several suggestions. And a fellow student of mine at St Andrews, who successfully defended his PhD mid-December, focuses a different but related set of considerations through an "Augustinian" reading of Jer 31.

Restitutio ad Integrum: An 'Augustinian' Reading of Jeremiah 31:31–34 in Dialogue with the Christian Tradition Author: Johshua Moon ISBN: Publisher: PhD         Release: Oct 2007 Format: Hardcover         Pages: 325 My Rating:

Comments/Quotes: “In his anti-Pelagian writings, emerging at the height of his influence, Augustine put forward a reading of Jer 31:31–34 that contrasted belief and unbelief—a state of affairs deserving judgment and salvation ('Heil und Nicht-Heil'). The point at issue for Augustine’s reading was the claim by Julian of Aeclanum that the Holy Spirit was tied to the novum testamentum, and thus was absent in the vetus. In an argument that shifted the point of contrast in Jer 31:31–34, Augustine made a distinction in the use of vetus testamentum—the popular use (referring to the era or part of the Christian canon from before Christ), and the use of Scripture. In this latter the members of the vetus testamentum are distinguished form the novum in an absolute or ‘salvific’ sense—the possession of the Spirit, regardless of the era in which one lives. The contrast involved in Jer 31:31–34 was for Augustine the contrast of unbelief apart from the Spirit, and faithfulness with the Spirit. Though Augustine’s reading would remain overshadowed by uses of the contrast with reference to the mutatio sacramentorum or a similar contrast of two successive religio-historical eras, Augustine’s influence can be seen at a number of significant moments in Western theological history… In modern interpretations the discourse shifted significantly, so that many theological concerns of the previous era were distanced from the consideration of a ‘historical’ location of the oracle. But the central issue remained the same: to what is the ‘new covenant’ contrasted?” (284–285). Moon argues that the contrast is with the “broken covenant” (cf. in particular Jer 11, 7). “What is made the case in the oracles of salvation is an idyllic state—everything is made the way it always ought to have been. What we find in 31:31–34 is precisely this contrast: the universal infidelity bringing judgment is overturned in a promise of universal fidelity to Yhwh. The people of Yhwh are restored to their proper state (restitutio ad integrum), and a world is projected in which all is as it always ought to have been” (286).

Moon provides some really excellent details in his reading of the tradition, from Augustine, to Thomas, to the reformation period, through the break typified by Duhm, and on to Lohfink, Dohmen and Levin. I'm glad I took the time out to read through it today. Somebody needs to publish the thing soon!

Tags: St Andrews, Theological Exegesis

Over the holidays I re-read one of the first books I tacked for this PhD:

Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity Author: John David Dawson ISBN: 9780520226302 Publisher: University of California Press         Release: Dec 2001 Format: Hardcover         Pages: 309 My Rating:

Comments/Quotes: “Figural reading in the Christian tradition seeks to express the dynamic process of spiritual transformation in ways that respect the practitioners’ commitment to both past and future, both old identity and newly refashioned identity. Imbedded in figural practice is all the drama of discerning the point of existence and identifying one’s place in it, figured as a journey from a former mode of existence through various states of transformation toward some ultimate end” (216). “Those familiar with a religion that affirms that submission to God’s agency constitutes human freedom, or that Jesus of Nazareth is no less human for being diving, or that divine power is manifested as divine suffering, or that wholly historical action is the realization of a transcendent divine intention, will not be surprised by the equally unexptected claim that fulfillments are more, and yet again not more, than their figures” (218).

Dawson’s tightly written book is one of the more intriguing comments on supersessionism I know. And as an exploration of its core concern, Christian figural reading, I know nothing else quite like it. It sets three modern concerns about figural reading—the body (represented by Daniel Boyarin), history (Erich Auerbach), identity (Hans Frei)—against a treatment of Origin, that ancient, (in)famous allegorizer, chosen for what he has to say to those who would read Hebrew Scripture as the Christian Old Testament. The book repaid a second reading every bit as much as my first. Highly recommended.

Tags: Figura, Frei

While it is still 2007 I felt I should mention two new collections of essays on canon ("kanon" in the German spelling). I've had the chance to work through them both by now, and have just submitted a review of the larger collection to RBL. Since it has to be approved by the editors first, I expect it will not appear there for a few months yet (but if you're desperate for an English summary, feel free to contact me).

The first to appear, in September, was Bernd Janowski, ed., Kanonhermeneutik: Vom Lesen und Verstehen der christlichen Bibel (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2007). It contains essays from six contributors.

          

The second to appear, in November, was Egbert Ballhorn and Georg Steins, eds., Der Bibelkanon in der Bibelauslegung: Beispielexegesen und Methodenreflexionen (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2007). It contains 21 essays by 17 scholars. I quoted from this volume here recently, and I will certainly link my review once RBL processes it.

Tags: Deutsch, Canon, Psalms

I am currently reviewing a new collection of essays which puts me in mind of two canon sessions I attended at SBL. As I mentioned before San Diego, that the sessions were separate seemed a recipe for parties of the debate not just talking past one another, but talking to themselves. Unfortunately this seems to have occurred to some extent. In one session S. Chapman argued for a core canon extending to the biblical period. In the other, several panelists upheld a “consensus” moratorium on canon terminology.

But as one editor of the new volume writes (in context, he is addressing four typical strategies for banning talk of canon):

Nach der dritten Strategie ist „Kanon“ ein „anachronistischer“ Begriff, weil er in den biblischen Texten selbst nicht auftauche. Dieses neben den genannten Strategien ebenfalls in mehreren Beiträgen von Hubert Frankemölle ständig wiederholte Argument ist wenig überzeugend, eigentlich sogar unwissenschaftlich, weil es den Status von „Kanon“ als Reflexionsbegriff ignoriert. Mit dem gleichen Argument müsste man den anachronistischen Begriff „Theologie“ mit Bezug auf das Neue Testament streichen; denn weder kommt dieser Terminus im Neuen Testament vor, noch wird er heute in der gleichen Weise gebraucht wie etwa in der profanen oder christlichen Antike. Die auch bei Frankemölle zu Recht weiterhin verwendete gewohnte exegetische Fachterminologie hat ebenfalls keinen Anhalt in den zu untersuchenden Texten; aber das ist auch wissenschaftlich überhaupt kein Problem. Mit der unverzichtbaren Differenzierung von vox und res und der Einsicht in die Wandelbarkeit von Begriffen entspannt sich die Situation und verlieren auch die Vorbehalte gegenüber einer Reihe gängiger exegetischer Begriffe ihren Grund. Im Übrigen ist jede Bibelauslegung notwendigerweise „anachronistisch“, wenn sie relevant sein will.

And a little later Steins suggests:

Unausgesprochen scheint mir den genannten Vorbehalts-Strategien die Sorge zugrunde zu liegen, dass die Exegese sich unter der Hand von einer primär historischen in eine dogmatische Disziplin wandeln könnte, also Weichenstellungen des späten 18. Jahrhunderts revidiert werden könnten. Diese „Weichenstellung“ bedarf jedoch ihrerseits der Kritik, denn sie hat verhindert, im 19. Jahrhundert den Kanon als historisches Phänomen in die Exegese zu integrieren. Der Kanon ist gewissermaßen als Phänomen der Verfremdung der Bibeltexte aus der kritischen Bibelwissenschaft ausgeklammert worden. Dass in der gegenwärtigen Diskussionslage ein anderer Umgang mit dem Kanon in exegetischer Perspektive möglich ist, sehe ich als großen Fortschritt an; die Gefahr des Dogmatismus besteht immer, ist aber kein Argument.

Those quotes come from 115 and 116, respectively, of G. Steins, “Kanon und Anamnese,” in Ballhorn and Steins, eds., Der Bibelkanon in der Bibelauslegung: Beispielexegesen und Methodenreflexionen (Kohlhammer, 2007). I’ll post more on the collection under review in due course.

Tags: Deutsch, Canon

It can take a while to find your legs again after a period of non-PhD-related reading. At the end of this week, with HP 7 long behind me, and a list of things to grab at the library starting Monday, I'm finding my stride again. This week I enjoyed dabbling in or pushing through:

*Brandt, Peter. Endgestalten des Kanons: Das Arrangement der Schriften Israels in der jüdischen und christlichen Bibel. Bonner biblische Beiträge 131. Berlin: Philo, 2001.
*Dohmen, Christoph. Exodus 19–40. Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Alten Testament Freiburg/Basel/Vienna: Herder, 2004.
*———. Die Bibel und ihre Auslegung. 3rd, revised edition. Munich: C. H. Beck, 2006.
*Levin, Christoph. Das Alte Testament. 3rd, revised edition. Munich: C. H. Beck, 2006.
*MacDonald, Neil B. Metaphysics and the God of Israel: Systematic Theology of the Old and New Testaments. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.

With a little French practice thrown in each day, it starts to feel like I'm making headway again. I've been saying I'll be done in a year for how many months now?

Tags: PhD

This'll be an odd first post after a hiatus due to the Hebrews Conference, which went well, and is now thankfully past! Partly it's a bookmark for later (poet Scott Cairns gets the Guggenheim!). It's also a notice that he has a new book out, Compass of Affection. I hope to review the book here later.

Always exciting to get a new book in the mail. Two I expect this week:

Joseph Groves. Actualization and Interpretation in the Old Testament (SBL Dissertation Series, 86) . Atlanta, Scholars Pr: 1987.

Ed Ball, ed. In Search of True Wisdom: Essays in Old Testament Interpretation in Honour of R E Clements (JSOTSup 300). Sheffield, 1999.

These volumes were added to my shelves yesterday, thanks to two friends who carried them across the Atlantic for me.

Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon Old Testament: Study Edition, 2 Volume Set
Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament - HALOT
Edited by Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner
Brill Academic Publishers,2002
cxii + 2094 pages,English
Cloth
ISBN: 9004124454


Needless to say I'm very excited and have had to resist the temptation to look up new words every ten minutes.