8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

1/164

A n d r e w s Universi tyS E M I N A R YS T U D I E SVolume 35 Autumn 1997 Number 2

Andrews U n i v e r s i t y Press

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

2/164

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

3/164

ANDREWS UNIVERSITY SEMINARY STUDIESVolume 35_________Autumn 1997 _______Number 2

C O N T E N T SARTICLES

KELLER, R O G E R R . Karl Earth's Treatment of theOld Testament as Expectation .....................16 5

SHEA , WILLIAM H. The New Tirhakah Text an dSennacherib's S e c on d P ale s t i n i an Campaign .......... 181

W E N D L A N D , E R N S T . Recursion a n d Variation in the"Prophecy" of Jonah: On the Rhetorical Impact ofS t y l i s t i c Technique in Hebrew Narrative Discourse,with Special R e f e r e n c e to Irony and Enigma .......... 189

W H I D D E N , W O O D R O W W . Sola Scriptura, InerrantistFundamentalism a n d the W e s l e y a n Quadrilateral:I s "No Creed But the Bible" a Workable Solution? ..... 11

Y O U N K E R , R A N D A L L W . Preliminary Report ofthe 1996 S e a s o n of the M a d ab a P la in s Project:Regional S u r v e y , T a l l Al-'Umayri a n d Tall JalulExcavations ( June 19 to July 31, 1996) ............... 2 7

DISSERTATION ABSTRACTSA N D E R S O N , LEWIS O., JR. The M i c ha e l Figure in the

Book of Daniel ................................ 41COLE, H. RO SS. The S a c r e d Times Prescribed in the

Pentateuch: Old Testament Indicators of theExtent of Their Applicability ..................... 4 2

H A N G Y A S , LASZLO I . The U s e a n d Abuse of Authority: AnInvestigation of the ESOYSIA Passages in Revelation . . 2 4 5

STELE, A R T U R A . Resurrection in D a n i e l 12 a n d I tsContribution to the Theology of the Book of Daniel . . . 2 4 6

161

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

4/164

162 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 35 ( S P R I N G 1997)

REVIEWS 47Abraham, William J. Waking from Doctrinal

Amnesia: The Healing ofDoctrine in TheUnited Methodist Church (W o o dro w W. W h i d d e n )A n d e r s o n , G e r a l d H ., Robe r t T . Coote, Norman A . Homer,a n d James M . Phil ips, eds . Mission Legacies:Biograph ical Studies ofLeaders of he ModemMissionary Movement (f on L. Dyb da h l)Beck, Astrid B., Andrew H. Bartelt, Paul R . Ra a b e , a n d Chris A .Franke, eds. Fortunate the Eyes that See: Essays inHonor ofDavid Noel Freedman in Celebration ofHis

Seventieth Birthday M ichael G. Hasel)Beinert, W o l fg a n g , a n d F r a n c i s Schi i s s le r Fiorenza, e ds .Handbook of Catholic Theology Frank Hasel)B or ge n , P e d e r . Early Christianity andH ellenistic Judaism Paul L. M a i e r )Botterweck, G. Johannes, Helmer Ringgren, a n d Heinz-Josef

Fabry, eds . Theological Dictionary of heOld Testament, vol. 7 .................. M ichael G . Hasel )

Co w ing , C e d r i c B. The Saving Remnant: Religion and th eSettling ofNew England Brian E. St r a ye r )D e M o l e n , R i c h a r d L., ed. Religious Orders of he CatholicReformation: In Honor of ohn C. Olin on HisSeventy-fifth Birthday ....... ......... ( K e n n e th A . St r a n d )Easley, Kendell H . User-Friendly Greek: A Common SenseApproach to the Greek New Testament ..... (Ronald L. Jolliffe)Ehrman, Ban D., a n d M i c ha e l W. Holmes. The Text of the NewTestament in Contemporary Research (Panayot i s Coutsoumpos)Fee, Gordon D . Paul's Letter to th ePhilippians Panayot is Coutsoumpos)Finkels te in , Israel. Living on the Fringe: The A rchaeology andHistory of the Negev, Sinai and Neighboring Regions in theBronze and Iron Ages M ichael G. Hasel)Fritz, Volkmar. An Introduction to BiblicalA rchaeology M ichael G. Hasel)Furcha, E . J. The Essential Carlstadt: F ifteen Tracts byAndreas

Bodenstein (Carlstadt) from Karlstadt. Classics of t heRadical Re format i on , no. 8 ................. 0erry M o o n )Gerr i sh, B. A . Continuing the Reformation: Essays on ModemReligious Thought ( K e n n e t h A . S t r a n d )

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

5/164

T A B L E OF CONTENTS 163

Grenz, Stanley J., an d D e n i s e Muir Kjesbo. Women in the Church:A Biblical Theology of Women in Ministry

Kostenberger, Andreas J., Thomas R . S c h r e i n e r , an dH. Scott B a l d wi n , e ds . Women in the Church:A Fresh Analysis of I Timothy 2:9-15 .. (Nancy J. Vyhmeister)

Guthrie, George H. The Structure ofHebrews:A Text-Linguistic Analysis (Matthew K e n t )

Hendrix, Ralph E., Philip R . Drey, and J. Bj0rnar Storfjell .Ancient Pottery ofTransjordan:An Introduction UtilizingPublished Wh ole FormsL ate Neolithic throughLate Islamic (Piotr Bienkowski)

Henry, Carl F. H. Gods of this Age orGod of the Ages? (Boxte r Kharbteng)H e s s , Richard S., a n d David Toshio Tsumura, e d s .

I Studied Inscriptions from Before the FloodAncientNear Eastern, Literary, and Linguistic Approachesto Genesis 1-11 ......................... Jon L. Dybdahl)

Hiebert, Paul G., and El o i s e Hiebert M e n e s e s . IncarnationalMinistryPlanting Churches in Band, Tribal, Peasantand Urban Societies Qoa L. Dybdahl)

Hughes, Richard T., ed. The Primitive Church in th eModern World (Mark F. Carr)

Jones , Scot t J. John Wesley's Conception andUse of Scripture (Woodrow W. Whidden)

Latourelle, Rene, and Rino Fisichella, e ds . Dictionary ofFundamental Theology Frank Hasel)

Lind, M i lla rd C. Ezekiel (James E. M i lle r )Matheson, Peter. Argula van Grumbach:

A Woman's Voice in the Reformation ( T e r e s a R e e v e )M cK nigh t, Scot. Galatians Greg A . Couser)Morris, Leon. The Gospel According to John ( P a n a y o t i s Coutsoumpos)O'Leary, Stephen D . Arguing the Apocalypse: A Theory of

Millennial Rhetoric (Kenneth A . S t r a n d )Peterson, Eugene H. Take and Read. Spiritual Reading:

An Annotated List D e l c y Kuhlman)Rodriguez, A n g e l Manuel. Esther: A Theological

Approach Qacques Doukhan)Spicq, Ceslas. Theological Lexicon of th e

New Testament (Roberto B a de na s )

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

6/164

164 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 35 ( S P R I N G 1997)S um m e r s , R ay . Essentials ofNew Testament GreekCox, S t e p h e n L. Essentials ofNew Testament Greek:A Student's Guide ( N a n c y J. V y h m e i s t e r )Terry, John Mark. Evangelism: A Concise History . . (Russel l Burri ll)Thomas, John Chris topher. Footwashing in John 13 and th e

Johannine Community, Journal for the S t u d y o f the NewTestament Supplement Ser i e s , no. 61 ..... Ronald L. Jolliffe)

W e a v e r , Mary Jo, and R . Scot t Appleby, e ds . Being Right:Conservative Catholics in America M a r k F. Carr)W enh a m , D a v i d . Paul, Follower of esus or Founder

of Christianity? ....................... Roberto B a d e n a s )Wolfers, D a v i d . Deep Things Out ofDarkness: The Book of ob:Essays and a New English Translation (Lael Caesar)Y oun g , R i c h a r d A . Intermediate New Testament Greek: A Linguisticand Exegetical Approach R on ald L. Jolliffe)

S O F T W A R E R E V I E W ......................................... 10BibleWorksfor Windows 3.5 (Gerald A . Klingbeil)

BOOK NOTICES ............................................. 13INDEX ...................................................... 15

The art icles i n th i s journal are indexed , abstracted, or l i s t ed in: A TLA ReligionDatabase on CD-ROM; Elenchus of Biblica; Internationale Zeitschriftenschau fiirBibelwissenschaft und Grenzgebiete; Index to Book Reviews in Religion; NewTestament Abstracts; Old Testament Abstracts; Orientalistische Literaturzeitung;Religion Index One: Periodicals; Religion Indexes: RIO/RIT/IBRR 1975- on CD-ROM; Religious and Theological Abstracts; Seventh-day Adventist Periodical Index;Theologische Zeitschrift; Zeitschriftfur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft.Copyright 1997 by Andrews University P r e s s I S S N 0 0 0 3 - 2 9 8 0

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

7/164

Andrews University Seminary Studies, A u t u m n 1997, Vol. 35, No. 2 , 165-179C opyr i gh t 1997 by A n d r e w s U n i v e r s it y P ress .

K A R L EARTH'S T R E A T M E N T OF THE O L D T E S T A M E N TA S E X P E C T A T I O NR O G E R R . K E L L E RBrigham Young University

Prove, Utah 8 4 6 0 2Introduction

With the continued prominence of the historical-crit ical methodologyin biblical research, the r e l a t i o n s h i p be t w e e n the OT a n d NT is often lost,except perhaps for a recognition of the literary dependency of the Newupon the Old. It is a mis take, however, for the church to permithistorical and literary methodologies alone to determine what is heardwithin the pages of Scripture.

One author who sought to hold the historical and the eternal inconstructive tension w a s Karl Ear th. Out of his Christological reflectionson the interactions between the eternal God and persons involved inhuman history, Earth d e v e l o p e d a p e r s p e c t i v e on the interrelationshipbetween the OT a n d NT that n e e d s to be r e c o n s i d e r e d in the face of a fartoo skeptical historical approach to the biblical literature. Thus, thisar t icle wil l explore the manner in which Earth understands the OT 2 and

'Henry V a n d e r Goot s tates : "It i s not out of proportion to the reality of the situationto speak today of a cr is i s in Biblical theology that i s owing to the fact that much Christianr e f lec t ion fails to v i e w the Sc r i p t u r e s as a s ingle narrative whole . Modern Biblical theologys e e m s unable to hold together in a pos i t ive , c om p r e h e n s i v e , a n d coherent unity the Old andNew T e s t a m e n t s " (Henry V a n d e r Goot, "Tola Serif urn: The Old Testament in the ChristianFaith a n d Tradition, in Henry V a n d e r Goot, ed., Life is Religion: Essays in Honor ofH. EvanRunner [St. Catherines, Ontario: Paideia, 1981], 97). While Va n d e r Goot recogn izes that KarlBar th seeks to deal with this problem, h e d o e s not agree fully with Earth's method, large lybecause Vander Goot's theology p r e s up p os e s that the incarnation is a response to the fall.A s will be noted, Barth sees the incarnation as the basis for all that God d o e s .

' S e ve ra l authors have de alt w i t h Earth's treatment of the OT, but their comments h a veb e e n in the context of a broader c on c e r n about Earth's use of the e n t i r e Bible. This study willfocus solely on Earth's treatment of the OT in his Church Dogmatics. Recent t r e a t i s e s of theformer type are Christina A . Baxter , " B a r t h A Truly Biblical Theologian?" TynBul 38(1987): 3-27; Geoffrey W. Bromiley, " T h e Authority of Scripture in Karl Barth, inHermeneutics, Authority, and Canon, ed. D . A . Carson a n d John D . Woodbridge, (GrandR a p i d s : A c a d e m i c Books, 1986), 271-294; D . F. Ford, "Earth's Interpretation of the Bible,"in Karl Barth: Studies ofhis Theological Method, ed. S . W . S y k e s , (Oxford: Clarendon, 1979),55-87; and Daniel L. Migliore, "Bar th and Bloch on Job: A Conflict of Interpretations," inUnderstanding the Word: Essays in Honor ofBemhard W, Anderson, ed. James T . Butler , E d g a r

165

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

8/164

16 6 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )NT to contain the Word of God, which is Jesus Christ. 3

According to Earth, Jesus Christ is the basis for and the fulfillmentof the covenant m a d e within the Godhead before creation.In this time God wrote His d e c r e e s and books, in which everything is

marked down that is to be a n d occur, including e v e r y name and thegreat and the small e v e n t s of e v e r y bearer o f e v e r y name. In this timeGod d e c i d e d to call into b e i n g the world and man by His Word, i n thewisdom a n d power of H i s e t e rnal Word. In th i s time He determined tosend this eternal Word into t h i s c r e a t e d world to this created man.Therefore, to reconcile the world with Himself He determined topermit the world itself, man, flesh, to be. In this time God e x e r c i s e d theprovidence and fore-ordination by which all the b e i n g and self-determination of created things is enclosed. In this time He decided onthe church as the fe l lowship of those who are to be wakened to faith inHis Word by His Holy S p i r i t a nd to be p r e s e r v e d in this fai th. And withthis He determined the goal of all His willing, the salvat ion of all whob e l i e v e a n d their b l e s s e dne s s in His own eternal hereafter. All t h i s w emust s a y it in view of i t s centre in J e s us C hr i s t w a s determinedbeforehand by a n d i n God Himself . For th is pretime is the pure time ofthe Father a n d the S o n in the fe l lowship of the Holy Spir i t . And in thispure d i v i n e time there took place the appointment of the eternal S o n forthe temporal world, there occurred the r e a d i n e s s o f the S o n to d o thewill of the eternal Father, and there ruled the peace of the eternalS p i r i t t he v e r y thing later r e v e a l e d at the heart of c r e a t e d time in JesusChrist. In th is pure d i v i n e time there took place that f r ee d i s p l a y of thedivine grace and mercy and p a t i e n c e , that f r e e r e s ol v e to which timeowes i t s e x i s t e n c e , i t s content a n d its goal. The name in which this ismanifested a n d known to us is Jesus Christ. 4In Christ one l e a r n s the true extent a n d m e a n i n g of the word

"history." All human histories ultimately find their meaning in thecovenant history of God. T h i s m e a n s that Earth sees the incarnationthecoming of God to be with humanity as a human beingas the reason forthe creation of the u n i v e r s e a n d all that f lows from i t , a purpose which isnot dependent upon the fall. The eternal intent w a s to be with humanW. Conrad, and Ben C. Ollenburger (Sheffield: JS OT Supplement Series, no. 37, 1985), 265-279.

'For Earth, the Word of God, in harmony with the Gospel of John, i s Jesus Christ, theo ne in w h o m God gives himself to humanity. N o other word that God may speak can beequivalent to the giving of himself. He nce , e v e n if the words on the pages of Scripture w e r ew r i t t e n by the hand of God, t h e y would not be more than a w i t nes s to the God who giveshimself in Jesus Christ. T h e Ho l y Scriptures are or become the Word of God w h e n t h e y bearw i t nes s to God's one Word, Jesus Christ. I t will be necessary to evaluate this posi t ion at thee n d of the article.

4 Karl Earth, Church Dogmatics, ed. G. W. Bromiley and T . F. To rrance , 4 vols.(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1936-1962), IVl, 622. Hereaf te r des ignated CD.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

9/164

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

10/164

168 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )proper con te n t . A s Jesus Chris t was "future" to the OT w i t ne s s e s , he w aspresent to t h e m in expecta t ion. A s Jesus Chris t wa s "past" to the NTw i t n e s s e s , he w a s p r e s e n t in recollect ion.Thus, reve la t ion in the OT is actually the e x p e c tat ion of revela t ion,or most properly, expected r evela t ion . R e v e l a t i o n w a s p r e s e n t to the OTcommunity because the peculiar c o n t e n t and con te x t of the OT e x p e c t e dit. Because the OT c o m m u n i t y aw ai t e d a n d ex pec ted God ' s r e v e l a t ion ofhimself in t h e future, t h e y already had a n d par t ic ipa ted in that r e v e l a t ion .R evel a t io n a n d g e n u i n e expecta t ion of r eve l a t io n are, h o w e v e r , boths u r r o u n d e d by hi dde nne s s . By this Barth means that n o amount of humanobserva t ion can d i s c o ve r Jesus Chris t as the Word of God or as Godrevealed in humani ty . I t takes an act f rom God ' s s i d e of t h e ve i l to mak er evela t ion a n d i t s expecta t ion clear. R e v e l a t i o n accosts human be i ngs a n dat tes ts i tself as r evela t ion by an act of God's grace. I f t h e s t a t emen t is truethat Jesus Chris t is manifes t in the OT expectat ion, i t i s t rue because JesusChris t confi rms i t himself a n d reveals himself to the church n o t on ly f romthe pages of the NT but also f rom t h e pages of the Old . 7

The New Testament and the Church Witness to the Old Testament'sExpectation of esus Christ

T h e NT wr i t e r s unan imousl y s a w in the his tor y of Israel, a s found int h e OT canon, the c o n n ec t in g poin t for the i r proclamation, doct r ine , a n dnar r a t iv e of Jesus Christ . In the O T , the s t o ry of Jesus Chris t wa s alreadybe ing told in expecta t ion. But the NT w r i t e r s also s a w i n t h e church'sproclamation, d oc t r i n e , an d n ar ra t i ve the fulf il lment of the history ofIs rael and of the Sc r ip tu r es read in the synagogue, for Jesus Christ is t h etruth of both. 8 For example, Paul s aw Chris t e x p e c t e d i n t h e OT, as 1Cor. 10:1-4 d em o n s t r a t e s . 9 Chris t ians, according to 1 P e t 1:10-12, see w h a tt h e OT proph e t s sought a n d about which t h e y p r op he s ie d . 1 0 M a n y more

7 CD 1/2, 70-72, 116-117, 119-120,481-482."CD 1 /2 , 72 .'"I d o no t w a n t you be unaware, brothers a n d sis ters, that our ances tors w e r e all underthe cloud, and all passed through t h e sea, a n d all w e r e bapt ized i n t o M o s e s i n t h e cloud a n din the sea, and all ate the same spiri tual food, and all d r a n k the same spiri tual dr i nk . For theydrank from the spiri tual rock, that followed them, and the rock wa s Christ." (All quotat ionsare f rom the N R S V unless o t h e r w i s e ind icated . )' ""Concerning this salvation, t h e p ro p h e t s w h o pr ophes ied of the grace that w a s to beyour s made careful search and inquiry , inquir ing about the p e rso n or t im e that t h e Spir i t ofChris t w i t h i n them i ndica ted w h e n i t test if ied in advance to the sufferings d e s t i n e d for Christand the subsequent glory. I t was revealed to them that t h e y w e r e s e r v i n g no t themselves butyou, in r eg a r d to t h e th in g s that have n o w been a n n oun c ed to you through those whobrought you good n e w s by the H o l y Spir i t sen t from heaventhings i n to whic h angels longto look "

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

11/164

K A R L E A R T H ' S T R E A T M E N T O F T H E O L D T E S T A M E N T 169t ex t s could be ci ted , but th es e t w o examples make clear w h a t w a saxiomatic for all NT wr i t e r s . T h e y bel ieved that Chris t w a s expected in t h eO T T h e church held this axiom a s basic to i ts faith from the s ec o n d to t h es e v e n t e e n t h cen tur ies ; to d emon s t ra t e th is fact, Barth gives a br iefs yn o ps i s of var ious w a y s the Father s and Reformers un d e r s t ood t h e OT'srela t ion to Christ. W h e n M a rc i on in the s ec o n d c e n t u r y a b a n d o n e d theOT, he d i d not leave b e h i n d only that T e s t a m e n t . I t wa s t h e church'sj u d g m e n t that he had ab an d on ed also t h e NT. Igna t ius of Antiochb e l i e v e d that the prophets' proclamat ions a im ed at t h e gospel, a n d thatthey ex pec ted and hoped for Chris t . I r en a eu s also held that t h e Old a n dNew T e s t a m e n t s w e r e o n e in that t h e y both c on t a i n ed t h e r e v e l a t ion ofJesus Chris t . For Augus t ine , t h e re w a s al ready grace before Chris t .Cal v in s t a t ed that t h e same on ly-b eg o t t en S o n of God in whom t h echurch r ecognizes t h e Father wa s also manifes t in Israel . The d i f fe r en c eb e t w e e n the OT a n d NT is o n e of form, not substance. Luther b e l i e v e dthat the OT w a s an epis t le of Chr is t open ed after his death a n d should bere ad through t h e gospel. E v e n A d a m w a s a Christ ian, according to Luther.Following Luther, Lutheran orthodoxy s a w o n l y o n e w a y o f salvat iona n d on e p r o m i s e in both the OT a n d NT.In Earth 's es t imat ion, if t h e p r e s e n t - d a y church ignores t h e almostuniversal assumption of ancien t a n d R e f o r m e d Chr i s t ians that t h e OT isa w i t n e s s to Chris t , then the pr es en t church m a y be cut t ing i tself off f roma n d bel iev ing in a d i f f e r e n t Christ than the o n e w o r s h i p e d by Ch r i s t i an sprev i ous ly . 1 1 By e x te ns ion , the church t o d a y c an n o t ignor e the OT as aw i t n e s s to Christ a n d still be a fully responsible part of the churchUn ive r s a l . There is n o que s t ion that t h e OT w i t n e s s e s to Chris t , for theNT a n d the church have se t t l e d that ques t ion long ago. The currentproblem for the church, accord ing to Barth, is to u n d e r s t a n d how JesusChrist is manifes t in t h e OT. 1 2

Examples of the OT's Expectation of esus ChristIt is t h e task of the p r e s e n t - d a y church, a n d thus of t h e church'stheologians, to follow up the truth e x pr e s se d i n the NT, i.e., that t h e OTw i t n e s s e s to a n d i s fulfilled in Jesus Christ . In the case of the NT, m o d e r nme thods of biblical research have helped to clarify t h e w a y in which NTauthors u n d e r s t o o d the OT a n d NT to be related. Such is not the case i n

terms of OT research. No mat t e r h o w brill iant a "his tory of Is rael i terel igion" m a y be, it is not , in Ear th 's es t imat ion, equivalen t to a Christian1 1 CD 1/2, 34-94.CD 1/2, 72-78.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

12/164

170 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )theology of the O T . T o make his point, Ear t h quotes Walther Eichrod t :"All the e v e r so brill iant results of historical research cannot se r iouslyoffer any subst i tu te for a grasp of the essent ial c on n e x ion b e tw e e n the O l dT e s t a m e n t a n d the New Te s t am e n t . " 1 3 A Chris t ian theology of the OT isa theology of fai th w hich takes ser iously the ne c e s s a ry c o n n e c t i o n witht h e NT. T h e r e are th r e e basic l ine s along w hich Bar th sees such a unity oft h e T e s t a m e n t s d e m o n s t r a t e d in the t ex ts themselves : ( 1 ) both w i t n e s s torevelat ion; ( 2 ) both w i t n e s s to the h i d d e n God; a n d ( 3 ) both w i t n e s s to thec omi n g G od. 1 41 . The OT Witnesses to Revelation

T h e OT bears w i t n e s s to God's free act ions in re lat ion to humanity.When t h e OT talks of the to g e th e r n es s of G o d a n d h uman beings, i t isspeaking of r e v e l a t ion . 1 5 Throughout t h e OT, God relates himself free lyto Israel, w h i c h c on f ron t s him through ind iv idual p e r s o n s f rom time tot ime. For example, t h e cov e nan t which creates Israel as a congr e ga t ion iscar r ied out in Israel 's del iverance f r o m Eg yp t a n d i s sealed at Sinai. In thecovenant , God is for humans. This i s first s e e n in the assembling of Is raelbefore G o d in t h e Ex o d u s a n d subse que n t l y in the church as the peopleof G od.Further e v i d e n c e that the OT p oin t s t o w a r d Jesus Chris t is to be s e e nin the fact that God's i n s t r u m e n t s in t h e OT are human. Abraham,M ose s , D av id , S ol omon, the "Servan t of God" are all human partners ofGod. In ad d i t i on , t h e h uman kings a n d judges r e p r e s e n t God'ssacramental admin i s t r a t ion among his people. T h e y r e p r e s e n t G o d as thesole King of Israel w h e n t h e y funct ion as God i n t e n d e d t h em to funct ion.The proph e t s also, as guardians of the cov en ant , make God's re lat ionshipto h u m a n i t y vis ible in that t h e y see that relat ionship as a future , supremer eal i ty which the y await. But this means that in n o single king, pr ies t , orprophet doe s o n e have G o d with h uman k i n d . Humanly, G o d wil l bem a d e m a n ifes t w h e n he is manifes t in Jesus Chris t . T h erefore , JesusChris t , the Immanuel, "God w i t h us," i s the O l d Te s tame n t ' s c o n t e n t a n dt h e m e . 1 6

I t is not to be ov e r l ooke d , howe v e r , that t h e OT's w i t n e s s to thea wa i t ed revelat ion, to Jesus Christ , occurs in a confusing v ar ie ty of forms ."Walther Eichrodt, Theologie des Alien Testament (Ber l in : E va n g e l i s c h e Verlagsanstalt,

1933) , 1:4. CD1/2 , 78-80.1 5 A s a lw a ys with Barth, revelation m e a n s God's g i v i n g of himself to people. Thus,

where human b e i n g s a n d God stand in a relationship, r e v e l a t i on is present."CD 1/2 , 80-82 .

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

13/164

K A R L E A R T H ' S T R E A T M E N T O F T H E O L D T E S T A M E N T 171For example, there are several c o ven a n t s i n t h e O T th e S in a i t i c , theAbrahamic, the Noachianplus those of w h i c h Jeremiah, Ezekiel , a n dIsaiah speak. One might also include t h e c o ven a n t s with D a v i d a n d t h ehouse of Levi . But THE cov e nan t s e e m s to be n o n e of these. Each se e msto be a p r omise of s omet h i n g y e t to come. In that promise , all awai t a n dbear w i t n e s s to the revela t ion of Jesus Chris t as t h e fulf il lment of thec o v e n a n t b e t w e e n G o d a n d human be ings . 1 7

There is also a n in c o m pl e t en es s to the funct ions of the OT kings,pries ts , a n d prophets . T h e ki ngs d i d not exerc i se God's law or his might,for Y a h w e h r e s e r v e d that for himself. T h e pr i e s t s d i d not forg ive s i n s orr econci le God a n d humanity w h e n they offered sacrifices. The prophetsonly r e c e i v e d a n d passed on t h e Word of G od, and d id not utter i tthemselves . In them, t h e Word of God d i d not become flesh. H o w e v e r ,to t h e e x t e n t that God's m e r c y a n d j u d g m e n t w e r e s e e n amon g humanbeings through such OT figures, Jesus Chris t was already the content a n dtheme of the OT c o ven a n t . T h i s means that G o d in t h e m i d s t ofhumanity wa s a n n o u n c e d to a n d through people l ike A b rah am, M os e s ,D a v i d , t h e kings , pr ies t s , and prophets . They s ignif ied the d i v i n e agent,Jesus Chris t , who in their expecta t ion w a s really p r e s e n t to the OTcommunity of faith. T h us t h e cov e nan t of G o d with his people, them y s t e r y o f the OT, i s fully r e v e a le d through t h e i nca rna t ion of the S o nof God. From t h e pos i t i on of the NT, o n e k n o w s that for w h i c h Is raelw ai t e d an d w h i c h wa s p r e s e n t , though hidde n , in their ex pec ta t io n th er e v e l a t ion of God in Jesus Chris t . 1 82 . The OT Witnesses to the Hidden G od

T o say that G o d i s h i d d e n in the OT a n d NT m e ans that God is notpresent to people as they expec t or w i s h him to be. W h e n Y a h w e he n t e r e d Pales t ine , w h a t occur red w a s the radical desacralizat ion of nature,his tory , a n d culture. In all the places that the Canaani tes thought G o d w a svis ible, the I s rael i t e s dec lared him to be inv i s ible a n d not p r e se n t . Therew a s n o d i v i n e p r e s e n c e save t h e o n e in t h e e v e n t of d raw i n g up thecovenant . B e t w e e n God a n d the na t ions the r e was an unbr idge abl e abyss,for God could not be manifes t in t h e m except as he was h i d d e n fromt h e m and judge d them. T h e hi dde nne s s of G o d in the NT t o w a r d s whicht h e OT h i d d e n n e s s poi n t s is t h e cross. In it, G o d w a s finally a n d reallyh i d d e n f rom t h e godless world, passing judgme n t upon th is aeon. To thee y e s of t h e world, G o d w a s h i d d e n in t h e i n c arn a t i on a n d t h e cross, but

" C D 1/2, 82." C D 1/2, 80-84.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

14/164

172 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )i n that v e r y h i d d e n n e s s , he w as re v e a le d to t h e e y e s of faith. 1 9

To those lookin g on, Israel must have appeared to be a godless nat ion.B e t w e e n t h e c o v e n a n t a n d i t s fulfillment, t h e r e s e e m e d to be onlys uffe r i n g an d death, not grace, for those in whom the c o v e n a n t shouldhave been fulfilled. Both Israel a n d the prophets se e me d to be grasped, putin their places, used, a n d us e d up b y t h e will a n d for t h e glory of anotherwith n o cons ide r a t ion for their o w n well-be ing or glory. M os e s , af ter allhe suffered a n d e n d u r e d , only sa w t h e land from a dis tance . Je remi ahcertainly d i d not walk on a n y high places. T h e "S e rv an t of G od" inDeut e ro- I s a i ah had n o beauty that he should be d e s i r e d . M a n y of theprophets w e r e put to death. All th es e p e r sons in their suffer ings w e r eexamples of the unsearchableness of God's w a y s in a s inful w orld . Theyhad to suffer to s h o w that the G o d w h o loves Israel is a G o d h i d d e n fromthe world a n d radically at o d d s with t h e j u d g m e n t s a n d values of th i sworld. 2 0

E v e n from his f r i en d s , G o d i s h id d en ; y e t they cling to him, for hehas m a d e his goodness known to t h e m in his de l i v e ranc e of t h e m . E v e nso, to Israel especially God is hi dde n , because the w orld ' s judgme n t is s e e ni n he r . Israel suffers pr ec i s e l y because she s t ands before t h e God who ish i d d e n f rom he r as she suffers a s the r epr es en ta t i ve of the sinful world. Inher suffer ings is portrayed t h e final h i d d e n n e s s of G o d toward whichIsrael 's history p oi n t s t he h id d e n n e s s of G o d in t h e suffer ings of JesusChris t . 2 1

In s o far as God acts mercifully toward Israel a n d comfor t s her, inspi t e of his h i d d e n n e s s , Christ is al ready suffer ing Israel, t h e suffe r ingprophet, the suffer ing r ighteous p e r son . In i t s expec tat ion of the o n e inwhom G o d is h i d d e n , t h e OT has that o n e already. 2 2 In expecta t ion, t h eOT at tes ts

the entire mystery of God's judgements . . . , and so not only themiseries of men involved i n this judgement, but the suffe r ing of Godhimself who has a s s u m e d and borne this judgement. It attests theexpectation of Jesus Chris t . I t a t te s t s not a n y s o r t of hiddenness of God,but that which points forward to the hiddenness of God in the s table atBethlehem a n d on the cross on Golgotha. Therefore a n d to that extent,i t attests revelation in the full s e n s e of the concept. 2 3Thus, through the covenant , God deals w i t h sinful humani ty . Human" C D 1/2, 84-86.2 0 C D 1 / 2 , 85-88.2 1 CD 1/2 , 88-90."CD 1/2, 8 9 .2 3 CD 1/2, 89-90.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

15/164

K A R L E A R T H 'S T R E A T M E N T O F T H E O L D T E S T A M E N T 17 3be ings s t r i v e agains t G o d a n d turn aside f rom God's will. T h e history ofIsrael is the history of Israel ' s self-will before God, a n d thus the humans ide of the h i d d e n n e s s of G o d i s Israel 's sin. In the face of that, God hideshimself from his people a n d pu n i s h es them, not by d i s solut ion of thecovenant , but through faithfulness to it. God, as the G o d of the c o ven a n t ,confron ts his sinful c o ven a n t pa r tn e r s a s he must w i t h his h i d d e n n e s s a n dholiness. Jud g men t must occur, and in the OT the d i v i n e h i d d e n n e s s is theform w h i c h G o d 's p u n i s h m e n t takes. Similarly, on the basis of the samec oven an t , Jesus Chris t had to be crucif ied, for if reconci l ia t ion w e r e totake place b e t w e e n G o d a n d h uman i t y , G o d had to m e e t the humanrebels. T h o s e rebels could o n l y be c o n f r o n t e d by the h i d d en God . W e r eanything else to have occurred, i t w o u l d have b e e n a d i f f e r e n t God a n dd i f fe r en t people than those s e e n in the OT. If the incarna t ion a n dreconcil ia t ion are the truth of Good Fr iday revealed by the light of Eas te r ,then the "had to" must also hold true for the OT. Con s eq uen t ly , thee v e n t s of the OT in w h i c h God is s e e n as h i d d e n are expec t a t i on a n dprophecy of the r e v e l a t ion of G o d in Jesus Chris t . In that God'sh i d d e n n e s s is expecta t ion, the truth of the OT's suffer ings a n d s i n are thes a m e as the truth of suffer ing a n d s i n as se e n i n the cross of Christ inwhich is found God's forgiveness of s i n . 2 4

In v i e w of the terrible encounter of God a n d man in the OldTestament, w e shall have to say that here, too, w e already h a v e thecommunion of sa in ts , the f or g i v e ne s s of s ins , the resurrection of theflesh and the life e v e r l a s t i n g . To e x p e c t Christ in this full andcompl e t e w a y , as w a s the case here , m e a n s to h a v e Christ and to h a v eHim fully. The fathers had Christ, the complete Christ. Here, too,naturally, not an i d e a of Chris t , but the i n c a r n a t e Word, the Christ ofhistory. Such a statement is allowable only from the standpoint of aGood Friday illumined by Christmas and Easter. . God's hiddennesswhich is genuine a n d man's rebellion agains t Him which is genuinewil l not be found attested in the Old Testament, i f the crucifixion ofJesus is a d j u d g e d to be an e p i s ode not completely explained on everys i d e . 2 5

3 . In the OT God is Present as the Coming G odBy s ay i ng that God i s both present a n d coming, o n e descr ibes the w a yi n which the OT is an ex pl ic i t w i tn es s to expecta t ionChris t is p r e s e n tin the OT because he is p r e s e n t as the coming one. There is an

eschatological th read in the OT w h i c h expec ts that the c ov en an t of Godwith humanity wil l be fulfilled a n d that the revela t ion of God wil l take" C D 1/2, 92-93.K CD 1/2, 93, emphasis a d d ed .

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

16/164

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

17/164

K A R L E A R T H ' S T R E A T M E N T O F T H E O L D T E S T A M E N T 175be built by God and not by human ha n d s . Not only Is rael , but allnat ions , wil l be drawn to it. The future temple gives the one in Jerusalemi t s continuing s ign if icance . 2 9The Lordship of God. In the OT, the Lordship of Yahweh m e a n sthat the people belong to him, and are ruled, punished and rewarded byhim. Out of Yahweh's Lordship a r i se s the hope of a kingdom withoutend which g i v e s power and possibility to faith in God's lordship as her e i g n s o v e r his c ho s e n people in OT history. But th i s hope never s e e s i t sfulfillment in Is rael , a n d in fact seems to grow more imperfect with thep a s s i n g centuries. Y e t , with the loss of political hope for a Kingdom ofGod c o m e s the expectation that God one d a y wil l put all his e n e m i e sunder his fee t a n d that his lordship wil l be e s t a bl i s he d over both theworld a n d the hear t s of his people. Once more, in the c o n c r e t e real i t ies ofOT history, there is a thread which points in hope beyond those r eal i t i esto the future of God. 3 04 . Judgment

In the OT, judgment is e x e c u t e d with regularity upon I s rae l in theform of national d i s a s t e r s ranging from the serpents in the wilderness tothe destruction of Jerusalem. Apart from this, Israel d o e s not know anyother kind of judgment. But something more terrible l ies behind Israel 'sj u d g m e n t t he wrath of God upon all n a t i o n s and f inal ly his judgment ofthe world. Strictly speaking , th i s is all future, but "it is a matter of thisfuture i n the present." The prophets looked beyond the flames ofJerusalem and Samaria to an unquenchable future flame, speaking of i twhile they spoke so threateningly of the near future. 3 1

King. The k i n g is the o n e who rules i n Jerusalem. But he is also anoutstanding f igure in the c o v e n a n t who s t an d s i n the s h a d o w of the d i v i n eh i d d e n n e s s . This alone is enough to s a y that he points beyond himself. A s2 Sam. 23:1-7 ind ica tes , the ki n g is a "righteous man." This righteous kingis the promised future M e s s i ah a n d world ki n g who is to appear at the endof d a y s . The k i n g s of Samar ia do not appear to share in the hope, onlythose of Jerusalem, but e v e n in Judah, the l i ne from David s e e m s to beconstantly broken and i n n e e d of mending.

Great accolades are he a p e d on Israel ' s king: he is God's son; he has thewisdom of an angel; he has s a c re d inviolability and the anointing of theSpirit. He is a godlike ruler, savior , and benefactor. That little Palestinewould use th i s kind of language c o n c e r n i n g i t s ki n g points beyond i t s own

2 9 CD 1/2, 96-97.3 0 CD1/2, 97.3 1 CD 1/2 , 97-98.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

18/164

176 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )political e x p e r i e nc e to a future expec ta t ion not to be con ta ine d within t h ebounds of i t s pres en t h i s t o ry . T h e concept ion of the king is t h e cent ralform of M e s s i an i c expecta t ion. T h i s basic form is a u g m e n t e d by suchfigures as "the se rvan t" of Isaiah, the son of D av i d i n Psalm 110, the pr ies t -king of Zechar iah 6, a n d the S o n of M a n of D ani e l 7. T h e r e will be a ruleof peace without e n d , a r e n e w e d w or ld , a n d a rule o v e r h uman sp i r i t s . Ina sense , all other expecta t ions come t og e t h e r in t h e figure of the M e s s i a hwho will be t h e king at t h e e n d of t ime . The on e aw ai t e d who w ill fulfillth i s hope is a p e r s o n w h o rules in the n a m e of GodJesus Chris t .

It is only ex eventu that o n e can so speak of the concr e te r e lat ion i nexpecta t ion b e t w e e n p e r s on s a n d ins t i tu t ions of the OT a n d the r evela t ionof God in Jesus Chris t as the NT recalls i t i n r e t r osp e c t . K n o w l e d g e thatJesus Christ is t h e on e to w h o m t h e OT t ex t s w i t n e s s is a k n o w l e d g ed e r i v e d f rom a dec is ion m ad e in faith. I f o n e recognizes revela t ion, eitherin the OT or in t h e NT, i t is because of the d i v i ne , u n m e r i t e d grace ofG o d . 3 25 . The Type of esus Christ

A s jus t s h ow n , Ear t h bel i eves that several OT motifs point beyondt h e m s e l v e s to Chris t . T h e s e motifs, h o w e v e r , are only shadows of thatl ight toward w h i c h all history has m o v e d f rom e t e rn i t y . In v i e w of ther e v e a le d goal, the se e l e m e n t s m a y be spoken of as " types" of Chris t . Thetrue m e a n i n g of th is word for Barth lies in t h e fact that Christ hasap p e ar e d a n d r evea l ed t h e objecthimselfwhich is e x p e c t e d in OT lifeand h i s tor y . " T y p e " m a y be equated in this s e n s e w i t h "wi tness." T h e land,the t emple , t h e kingship, etc., all w i t n e s s to God's turning towardh u m a n i t y in Jesus Christ . These people a n d i n s t i tu t ions are not , h o w e v e r ,suff ic ien t a n d comp l e te "types" of Jesus in themselves . No type iseq u i valen t to a n y other nor doe s i t bear w i t n e s s to Christ in t h e samew a y . All are only s h a d o ws a n d figures r e v e a le d in t h e light of theincarnate Word to b e w i t n e s s e s to Jesus Christ in their i n c o m p l e t e n e s sa n d multiformity. Each o n e is o n l y o n e small s t r a n d in t h e w h ole fabricof Israel 's history."T h e r e is, h o wever , o n e t rue t y p e of Chris t complete in all w ay s . T h i sis Is rael herself. What is sa id of Israel in her unity can in no w a y be said

"CD 1/2 , 98-101; s e e also I/I, 171, 209, 519; 1/2 , 203, 237-239, 2 4 4 , 249; HI/3, 374;IV/3/1, 4 2 0 - 4 2 1 . Barth s t r e s s e s the role of the Holy Spirit for the hearing of the Word ofGod. Apart from the Spirit, there is no hear ing. This is actual ly one aspec t of scripturalinspiration in Earth's thought. Sc r i p t u r e becomes revela t ion . I t be c om e s the Word of Godaw i t n e s s to Jesus Chris tin God's g ood pleasure. In this s e n s e , Scripture is inspired, not onlybe c a us e the Spirit w a s a c t i ve in the production of the text but because the Sp i r i t is alson e c e s s a r y for a n d a ct i ve i n the hearing of the t e x t .

"CD II/2, 289, 364-366, 390, 392; IV/1, 172; IV/3/1, 52 .

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

19/164

K A R L E A R T H 'S T R E A T M E N T O F T H E O L D T E S T A M E N T 177of a n y in d iv id u al proph e t or other OT figure. O f course, Israel a n d Chris tare not iden t ical . But o n e can say that in the hi s tory of Israel, in i t ss ingular i ty , t h e r e takes place the prophecy of Jesus Christ in i t s exactpref igurat ion . I t is a true t y p e and adequate pattern of him. The historyof Israel, in the d i v i n e w i s d o m w h i c h controls i t s m o v e m e n t s , is afore te l lin g of Chr i s t . S o i t was, says Ear th, that the NT understood thetruth of Israel 's history to be Jesus Chris t . 3 4

A Concluding EvaluationT h e c o n t e n t of the OT, according to Karl Earth, i s no d i f f e r e n t from

that of the N T . Both w i t n e s s to Jesus Chr is tthe OT in expec tat ion a n dthe NT in recollection. T h e y see ( 1 ) a togetherness of G o d a n d h uman i t y ,( 2 ) a h i d d e n n e s s of G od, and ( 3 ) G o d p r e se n t to humans as the comingGod. T h e r e are differences b e t w e e n the t w o T es ta m en t s , h o w e v e r . Christin the NT is the Chris t w h o has come, a n d is thus the object ofrecollection. Also, the NT k n ow s c on c re t e ly and expl ic i t ly w h o i t w a sthat the OT expected . T h e OT wil l always be expecta t ion, a n d the NTwil l always be recollect ion. 3 5 E v e n so, the confess ion of the unity of theT e s t a m e n t s f in d s i t s roots in NT faith, a n d is c o n t i n u e d in the churchf rom the s e c o n d to the s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y with no not iceable breaks. 3 6I f the church of t o d a y i s to be l i n k ed with i t s past, a n d thus with theChurch U n i v e r s a l , says Ear th, i t mus t take se r iously the unif i e d w i t n e s sof the OT a n d NT to Jesus Chris t .T h e r e are, h o wever , ques t ions which must be asked of Ear th re la t ingto his u n d e r s t a n d i n g s of hi s tory a n d revela t ion . In the area of history, i thas be e n char ge d that both Ear th a n d Rudolf B ul t man n d i d not takeh i s t o ry ser iously enoughEarth because of his Chris tocen t r ic orientationa n d Bul tmann because of his exis tent ial perspect ive. Wolf har t P anne nbe r gsought to correct th is def ic iency by suggest ing that a r e v e l a tor y e v e n t doesnot occur apart from the observable facts of hi s tory and w i ll be apparen tto the v i e w e r exactly as the his tor ian p or t rays them. Thus , historical-critical r esearch is essent ial a n d will uphold the faith. 3 7 The q ues t i onw h i c h must be asked, h o wever , i s w h e t h e r Ear th has i g n o r e d history a n dwhether P anne nbe r g ' s e s t imat ion of hi s tory is theologically appropr ia te .

"CD 1/2 , 72; IV/1, 167; IV/3/1, 65.3 5 CDI/2, 119.3 6 CD1/2, 72-78.J 7 Wolfhart Pannenberg, "Redemptive Event and History," in Basic Questions inTheology, trans. George H. Kehm (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1970), 1:18-19, 56-66. S e e also"What Is a Dogmatic S t a t e me n t ? " in Basic Questions in Theology, 1:198; a n d "D og m a t i c T he s e s

on the Doctrine of R e v e l a t i on , " in Revelation as History, ed. Wolfhart Pannenberg, RolfRendtorff e t al., trans. David Granskov (New York: M acmil lan, 1967), 135, 146.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

20/164

178 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )It is often said that hinds igh t is o n e h u n d r e d p e r c e n t accurate. A s far asu n d e r s t a n d i n g the OT's history is conce r ne d , Ear t h w ould agree. I f o n ek n o w s w h e r e a part icular ser i es of e v e n t s is leading, t h e e v e n t s havegr e a te r me an ing than they w o u l d if that e n d w e r e not known. I agree asa C hr i s t ian theologian that history makes n o se n se apart f rom God'srevelation of himself in Jesus Chris t . I cannot abst ract myself from thateven t , a n d a s a Ch r is t i an t h e re is n o logical r eason why I should. Thus , Iknow that all history to have a n y ult imate se n se must be understood i nthe light of Chri s t .

There is n o q ues t i on that in t h e Dogmatics Ear th c o n s id e r s humanhis tor y the s eq u en c e of human e v e n t s w i t h absolute ser iousness . I t isprec isely through a n d in th es e e v e n t s that G o d w ork s . But the his toricale v e n t doe s not c on t a i n i t s full meaning, v is ible to the e y e s of unfai th, asP a n n e n b e r g suggests. The C hr i s tocen t r i c h e r m e n e u t i c a n d thehermeneutic of the Holy S p i r i t hav e be e n lost to m o d e r n - d a y biblicalcr i t ic ism. The S p i r i t w a s act ively i n v o l v e d in t h e production of t h ebiblical t e x t s a n d t h e S p i r i t is essen t ia l to t h e ul t imate u n d e r s t a n d i n g ofthe se same texts . Likewise , t h e texts , especially the OT texts , mus t beinterpreted in t h e l ight of their end, Jesus Ch r i s t . T h os e w h o feelo t h e r w i s e are left, in my opi n i on , with a t runca ted conce p t of hi s tory . I fGod exists, h uman history has n o m ea n in g without b e in g s e e n in t h econtext of d i v i n e his tory . Such se e i n g can only take place through thee y e s of faith which are o p e n e d by the Holy Spir i t . M e m b e r s of the churchshould not apologize for v i e w i n g S cr ip tur e in this w a y .T h e issue of r evela t ion is perhaps mor e difficult to resolve. For Ear th,r eve la t i on m ea n s t h e se lf - impar ta t ion of G o d w h i c h takes place only inJesus Chris t . Thus, Jesus Chris t i s THE o n e a n d o n l y r e v e l a t ion . E v e nSc r i p t u re is not revela t ion except a s i t bears w i t n e s s to Jesus Chris t . Buthas not G o d revealed other th ings about his will a n d his w a y s within t h epages of the OT a n d NT w h i c h m a y properly be called revela t ion? Itwould appear that Earth's d ef i n i t i on of revela t ion is so narrow that i tleaves n o room for such th ings as t h e T e n C o m m a n d m e n t s , t h e lawsabout proper re la t ionships be twe e n p e op l e , or t h e Beat i tudes ase x p r e s s ions of God's wil land thus revela t ion. T h e i ssue is whetherrevela t ion can encompass pre pos i t ional t ru ths , as well as the self-giv ing ofGod. Earth has o p t e d for the la t t e r to t h e exclusion of t h e former . I tshould be affirmed, h o w e v e r , that G o d can make things known byrevelat ion , as well as making himself known.T h i s leads to the ques t ion of w h e t h e r E ar th has adequate ly t r e a te d there la t ionship b e t w e e n the OT a n d NT. Chris t ian biblical scholars who areconcerned about t h e OT's re la t ionship to t h e New are general ly not

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

21/164

K A R L E A R T H ' S T R E A T M E N T O F T H E O L D T E S T A M E N T 179sa t i s f ied with the p u r e l y historical-crit ical approach to t h e OT. E v e nBultmann, f i n d i n g t h e OT to be a failure, see s i t l ead ing to the N e w . 3 8T y p o l o g y i s sugges ted by v o n R ad a n d E i c h r o d t as an appropriate m ea n sof re la t ing t h e T e s t a m e n t s . A c c o r d i n g to v o n Rad, Israel ' s cont inualp r oce ss of reshaping her o w n t r a d i t i o n s gave the history of Israel aneschatological character a n d made i t a hi s tory t i n g e d with e x p e c ta t ion . 3 9Eichrodt's typology f inds i ts roots in t h e c o v e n a n t b e t w e e n G o d a n dhumanity. The w h ole hi s tory of God's concr e te acts with his peoplem o v e d toward Jesus Chris t , a n d wa s finally realized in him, although inan u n ex pec ted w ay . I n t h e s o v e r e i g n t y of God, the OT institutions w e r et y p e s of him w h o w o u l d be t h e fulfillment of God's c o v e n a n t withhumanity.4 0 Finally , to mai n t a i n t h e historical real i ty of the OldT e s t a m e n t , R o l a n d Murphy suggests a concept of "progressive r evela t ion"as t h e k e y to the union of the T e s tame n t s . 4 1

The above authors are all deal ing with the issues with which Bar thdeals, but like Barth, n o n e i s sat i sf ied solely with the resul ts of historical-critical methodologies. T h e OT for Chr i s t ian biblical scholars c an n o t betreated as if Christ had not come. In this light, i t i s my p e r sonalas s e s s m e n t that much i s to be l ea r n ed f rom Barth by looking at t h e OTfrom the e n d of God's his tory as i t i s made k n o w n in Jesus Chris t . God'shistory encompasses human his tory . Chr i s t is t h e o n e w h o makes s e ns eout of human history as he becomes i nca r na te in i t , although o n e n e e dnot exclude prepositional truths from t h e realm of revela t ion as Barthdoes. In the e n d , Barth r e m i n d s Chris t ians that t h e only proper c on t ex tfrom w h i c h to r e ad t h e OT a n d NT is the contex t of faith in Jesus Christas Lord. The agen t of that r ea d in g is the Holy S p i r i t who is t h ehe r me ne ut ica l tool with w h i c h God himself has suppl ied us .

3 Rudolf Bultmann, " P r o p he c y a n d Fulfillment," trans. James C. G. Greig, in Essays onOT Hermeneutics, ed. Claus Westermann a n d trans. James Luther M a y s (Richmond: JohnKnox, 1969), 75.

3 9 Gerhard von R a d , Old Testament Theology (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 2:355,365, 369, 374.4 0 Walther Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament, trans. J. A . Baker (Phi lade lphia:

Westminster, 1961), 1:508, 510-511."Roland E . Murphy, "T he R e l a t i on s h i p be t w e e n t he T e s t a m e n t s , " CBQ 2 6 (1964): 357-358.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

22/164

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

23/164

Andrews University Seminary Studies, A u t u m n 1997, Vol. 35, No. 2 , 18 1-18 7C opyr i gh t * 1997 by A n d r e w s U n i v e rs i ty Pr e s s .

THE N E W T I R H A K A H T E X T A N DS E N N A C H E R I B ' S S E C O N D P A L E S T I N I A N CAMPAIGNW I L L I A M H. S H E AT h e Biblical Res ea rc h In s t i t u t eSi lver S p ri n g, M D 20 9 0 4

IntroductionThe question of whether the Assyrian king Sennacherib conducted

one campaign or two against P hi li s t ia and Judah has been a long-standingi ssue in bibl ical s tudies . 1 The i ssue a r i se s from the fact that only one suchcampaign is known in A s s y r i a n sources. 2 The relevant bibl ical t e x t s (2 Kgs18-19 a n d Isa 36-39) can, on the other hand, be interpreted in such a wayas to sugges t that there were two campaigns . In this case, the firstcampaign is represented by 2 Kgs 18:13-16, a n d the s e c o n d campaignwould be described in 2 Kgs 18:17-19:36. Another approach to theproblems presented by the d i f f e r e n c e between t h e se two accounts is toconsider them as coming from different literary sources . 3 While biblicalscholars h a v e been divided upon the matter of whether there were twocampaigns or not, A s s y r i olo gi s t s a n d E g y p t o lo gi s t s have general ly f a v o r e donly one campaign because only o n e is mentioned in the A s s y r i a n annal s .4There is a di ff icul ty in us ing such an argument , however, s i n c e the annalsfor the last decade of S e n n a c he r i b ' s r e i g n a re miss ing , and thus we do notknow for sure just what ac t iv i t i es h e w a s e n g a g e d i n during that period.

When I wrote on th i s ques t ion prev iously , I assembled the argumentsfrom various sources which s e e m e d to favor a se c o n d c amp a i g n . 5 At thattime F. J. Yurco, who supports a one-campaign theory, r e j e c t e d all of the

'As far as can b e d e t e r m i n e d , t h e idea that Se n n a c her ib c on d uc ted a second campaignagainst Judah w a s f i rs t pr oposed in the l i t erature by G. R a w l i n s o n in 1858.2 ANET 287-288.'The mo s t r ec en t contribution following th is approach i s that of P.-E. D i o n ,"Sennacher ib ' s E x p e d i t i o n to Pales t ine," Eglise et Theologie 20 (1989): 5-25.The m ost r ec en t E g yptol og is t to favor o ne campaign is D . B. R e d f o r d in his Egypt,Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times ( P r in c e ton : P r i n c e t o n U n i v . Press , 1992), 351-359.5 W. H . Shea, "Sennacher ib ' s Sec on d P ales t in ian Campaign," JBL 104 (1985): 401-418.

181

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

24/164

182 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )l ines of e v i d e n c e I had assembled in suppor t of this t h eory . 6 S om e of thosel ines of e v i d e n c e m a y n e e d r ev i s io n , whil e others still s tand . M y purposehe r e i s not to evaluate those old arguments again; the i n t e r e s t e d r ea d e r cand o that by s im pl y evaluating the t w o articles s i d e by s ide. M y point he r eis to i n t r o d u c e n e w e v i d e n c e from Egypt , compat ible with a s e c o n dcampaign agains t Phil i s t ia a n d Judah c on d u ct e d b y S e nnache r ib e a r ly inthe de c ade of the 680s .

One of the major reasons w h y a second campaign has b e e n s ugge s t e dis that 2 Kgs 19:9 iden t i f i es o n e of Sennacher ib ' s opponents in the w e s t asTirhakah from E g y p t . I t is well k n ow n t h at T i rh ak ah d i d not come to t h ethrone in E g y p t unt i l 690. 7 T h e o n e well-at tes ted campaign of Sennacher ibto P hili s t ia and Judah occurred in 701. That i s e v i d e n t both from the da tesin the A s s y r i a n annals and 2 Kgs 18:13, w h e r e S e n n a ch e r ib 's campaignagains t Judah is d a ted in t h e 14th yea r of Hezekiah. D a t i n g from the dea thof his father Ahaz in 715, th is campaign occurred in 701, whichcor r e sp onds to the da t e of Sennacher ib ' s third campaign after he came tothe throne up on t h e dea th of Sargon n in 705. T h e r e fe r en c e to Tirhakahin 2 Kgs 19:9 w ould po i n t to a date mor e than a decade after the A s s y r i a ncampaign of 701.

S e v e ra l sugges t ions have b e e n m ade in at t empt s to r esolve th isproblem. One is that Tirhakah wa s o n l y a p r i n c e at t h e t i m e that heac c ompan i ed t h e E g y p t i a n troops to Canaan in 701, but la te r r e cor dsr e f e r r e d to h i m as king, w h i c h he later became. 8 T h i s arg umen t is note n t i r e l y sat isfactory because t h e Kawa stela IV f rom Nubia i d en t i f i e s thepharaoh w h o called Taharqa/Ti rhakah to L o w e r E g y p t for the firs t t i m eas S he bi tku. 9 R e c e n t s tu d ie s of Egypt ian chronology, h o w e v e r , havei n d i c a t e d that t h e pharaoh on t h e throne in 701 w a s Shabako. 1 0 T h u s i twould have b e e n imposs ible for Tirhakah to take his journey north asear ly as that, regardless of his official position at the t i m e .A n attempt to solve th is problem w a s p r o p o s e d b y Yurc o . Hesugges ted that the r e w a s a c o r eg en c y b e t w e e n Shabako a n d Shebi tku an d

'F. J. Yurco, "T he Shabaka-Shebi tku Cor eg en c y a n d the S u p p o se d S e co nd Campaignof Sen n a c her ib A g a i n s t Judah: A Critical Asse s sm e n t , " /AL HO (1991): 35-45.7 R . A . Parker , "T he Leng th of the R eign of Ramasis and t h e B e g i n n i n g of the T w e n t y -Six th D y n a s t y , " Mitteilungen des deutschen archaologischen InstitutsAbteilung Kairo 15(1957): 208-212. ''This is t h e approach of K. A . Kitc hen in his w o rk , The Th ird Intermediate Period inEgypt (Warminster : A r i s a n d Phill ips, 1973), 386, n . 823 .* F . L. M acadam, The Temples ofK A W A : I , The Inscriptions (Oxford: Oxford U n i v . Pres s ,1949), 14-21.1 0 K. Baer, " T h e L ibya n a n d Nubian Kings of E g ypt : N o t e s o n t h e Chronology ofD y n a s t i e s XXII to XXVI," JNES 32 (1973): 7, 2 5.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

25/164

T H E N E W T I R H A K A H T E X T 183i t wa s Shebi tku who, as junior coregent , called Ti rhakah to L ow e r E g y p tin time to accompany the e x p e d i t i o n to Phil i s t ia in 7 0 1 ." T h i s theoryf ounde r s , howe v e r , upon the fact that the r e i s n o i n scr ip t ional orarchaeological evidence for such a c ore ge nc y . 1 2T h e other w a y in which to look at the re fe rence to Ti rhakah in 2 Kgs19:9 is that i t is a g en u in e refe rence to Ti rhakah at a t i m e w h e n he wa s thet rue and bona f ide king of E g y p t a n d that he led an ex ped i t io n to Phil is t iaw h e n he was king, some t i m e early in his re ign. T h i s would have to haveoc c ur red b e t w e e n 689, w h e n Sen n a c h er ib f in i she d his f ive yea r s of campaign against Babylon, a n d 686, the death of H eze kiah of Judah accordingto m o s t s t a n d a r d biblical chronologies of Judah in the 7th c e n t u r y . 1 3The chronological w i n d o w that can accommodate all t h r e e of th es ekings in the same place at the same t i m e is n a r r o w . For Tirhakah i t mus thave take n place after 690, w h e n he became king. For Sennacher ib i t mustcome after his campaign to Babylon in 689, for that begins the blankp e r i o d to his de a th in 681, d u r i n g w h i ch w e d o not know w h e r e he wa sor w h a t he was doing. For Hezekiah the conjunct ion of th es e t h r e e kingsin P a l e s t i n e mus t have t ak en place before 686 w h e n he died. Thus, if i toccurred, such a campaign w ould have take n place dur ing the brief per i odof 688 to 686. No n e w A s s y r i a n t ex ts f rom th is period have b e e npublished, but a r e c e n t l y publ i shed t e x t from E g y p t aids in that project ,e v e n though i t has b e e n m i s d a t e d a n d thus m i s c o n n e c t e d .

The New Tirhakah TextDiscovery of he Text

A s a m e m b e r of the Karnak temple project , D . B. R e d f o r d cameacross a prev i ous ly un pub li s h ed stela of Taharqa in 1990. A p r e l i m i n a r ya n n o u n c e m e n t of th i s find was p r e s e n t e d to t he In t e rn a t i on al Con fe re n c eof A s i an a n d Nor t h -A fr i c an Stud ies in Toronto, Canada, in A ug us t 1990.Prel iminary publ ica t ion of the stela appeared in 1993. M A t the t i m e of th isw r i t i n g the d ef in i t i ve publicat ion of the t ex t has not b e e n i s s ue d y e t , butt h e p r e l i m i n a r y a n n o u n c e m e n t con ta ins adequate information to comple t e the s t ud y . One problem with that publicat ion is, h o w e v e r , that"Yu rco , 39.1 J Yurco admits that no anc ie n t E g y p t i a n t ex ts point to such a co re ge ncy ( ibid., 45). Inhis collection of Egy p t ian coregencies W. J. M u r n a n e passed ove r th i s poss ib i li t y c om pl e te l y(Ancient Egyptian Coregencies, S t ud i e s in A n c i e n t Ori en t a l Civil izat ion, vol. 40 [Chicago:U n i v . of Chicago Pres s , 1977], 189)."For a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e Israeli te ch ro no lo gy w i t h this conclusion, see E . R . Thiele ,Mysterious Numbers of he Hebrew Kings ( G r a n d Rapids : E er d m a n s , 1965), 158-159.H D . B. R e dfo rd , "Taharqa in W e s t e r n A s i a and Libya," Eretz Israel 24 (1993): 188-191.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

26/164

184 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )R e d f o r d ' s l ine d r a w i n g of the t ex t w a s publ ished u p s i d e - d o w n . 1 5 The t e x tw a s i n c i s e d in A s w a n gran i te , and t h ree large chunks of the s tela areextan t , s o e v e n though the t ex t is not comple te , cons iderable portions ofi t r e m a i n .The Contents of he Text

T h e fi rs t th r e e l ines of t h e s urv i v i ng text talk about the neglec t of t h ecult of an u n n a m e d god. S ome body , also un n amed , w a s r e sp ons ibl e forinterrupting the s t e ady f l ow of food for t h e god. T h e c us t omary r i tualsw e r e also i n t e r r u p t e d d u e to this neglect. In l ine 6 t h e mil i tary oppositionby an e n e m y appears in t h e s u rv iv in g t ex t . H e r e Tirhakah refe rs f irs t tothe preparations to m e e t the e n e m y : "I (came?) to th is c i t y in order top r o v i d e horses, chariots (and ? ) mor e than any th ing ." 1 6 In the m e a n t i m ethe e n e m y had d o n e s omet h i n g t h rea t en i n g , "he d i d all th i s in marc h i n gagains t me." H a v i n g m ade his prepara t ions , Tirhakah se t forth, "has ten ingto the place w h e r e they w e re . " Lines 1 0 a n d 1 1 tell of t h e e n g a g e m e n tbetween the two forces, " the y w e r e d e s t i n e d for a s e v e r e a n d gr ie v ousblow, the work of my hands. ... I had n o compass ion on t h e least ofthem nor [on the mos t influential of them?]. (Soon they w e r e ) flee ingbefore m e with fear pulsa t ing through their l imbs .... forced ( ? ) hisconf e de r a te s to the ground all at once."A s a result of his claimed victory Tirhakah took s o m e of t h ep r i sone r s or capt ives an d s e t t led the m in villages in E gy p t , includ ing someof those around t h e T e m p l e o f A m u n in Karnak. T h e r e t h e y had to workto support the god. T h i s t y p e of act iv i ty is d es c r ib ed in l ine 13: "[I placedthem] i n quar t e r s , I se t t l e d t h e m in villages, a n d [ their ] cattle [ i n ....].( T h e y came with the i r benevolences) in the i r hands, a n d I had brought themell i fe rs of the l e v y [ a n d I put t h e m in t h e t r easury?] of the House ofAmun a n d m a d e them respons ible for t h e d i v i n e i ncome of hone y ."T h e final s u r v iv in g portion of the t ex t in l ines 15-18 r e cor ds a prayerto Amun, that he would grant Tirhakah m a n y y e a r s of life. The k i n ga c k n o w l e d g e s that Amun had b e e n in his hear t s i nc e the d a y s of hisyouth, a n d that he had brought " m a n y valuables of eve r y l a n d , a n d bore( the c o n t e n t s of) their t r easur ies to A m u n , " an d t he god himself can tellwhat Tirhakah has d o n e for h i m . B e t w e e n l ine 13, w h i c h tells of thes e t t l e m e n t of the captives, a n d l ine 15, w h e r e his p r a y e r to Amun begins ,l ine 14 appears w i t h i t s chronological b oun d ary . T h i s l ine m e n t i o n s that" the inundation came as a cattle-thief, although for m a n y yea r s (it hadb e e n i n ) abeyance." The outline of the t ex t is as follows:

I 5 lbid., fig. 111. Ion 189."All quotat ions f rom the t ranslat ion of th i s t ex t are ta ken f r om R ed f or d , 190.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

27/164

T H E N E W T I R H A K A H T E X T 185I . Introductionneglect of the cult as the problemII. The Battle

A . Preparation for the battle. Tirhakah gathers troops andequipmentB. Approach of the enemyC. Tirhakah m o v e s his troops out to m e e t the enemyD. Tirhakah and his forces are victorious ( the battle i t self is

not d e s c r i b e d in the s u r v i v i n g t e x t )I I I . ResultsA . Captives are settled in the villages of EgyptB. Other c a p t i v e s are settled in the vicinity of KarnakC. S o m e of those settled near Karnak are g i v e n responsibility

for maintaining the cult, thus answering in part theproblem with which the reci tal of the text began, then e g l e c t of the cult.IV. An addi t ional unrelated re sul tthe high Nile c o m e s after years

of low Niles.V. The final benedictionA . Note of what the god had done for TirhakahB. Note of what Tirhakah had done for the godThe position in the t e x t a n d in th i s outline in which the reference to

the high Nile occurs m a y be emphasized again. It c om e s i n l i n e 14, afterl i n e 13, i n which the s e t t l e m e n t of the ca pt ive s concludes , and before line15, where the final prayer and benediction be g i n s .

According to the order of this text, the high Nile c a me after themilitary campaign of l i n e s 7-13. While the campaign w a s under way,Egypt w a s st ill suffe r ing from low N i l e s ; then came the high Nile. S i n c ethat high Nile can be d a t e d to the 6th year of Tirhakah, according toK a w a S tela V, 1 7 th i s military campaign must h a v e b e e n conducted beforeTirhakah's sixth y e a r . The connections of this point are d i s c u s s e d in thefollowing section.Connections of the Text

When Redford published his preliminary announcement of this text,he connected i t with the campaign Tirhakah conducted agains t theLibyans i n his eighth y e a r . 1 8 This d o e s not agree with the order of thet ex t . The Libyan campaign occurred after the high Nile of the sixth year,not before i t ; thus i t d o e s not fi t wel l with th i s campaign. To identify thecampaign of this new text, w e must look e l s e w h e r e among the records

' 'Ki tchen, 388; F. L. M acadam, 22-32 .1 8 D . B. R e d f o r d , "Taharqa in W e s t e r n Asia," 190.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

28/164

186 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )that deal with Tirhakah. Until the appearance of t hi s n e w t e x t there w a sn o d i r e c t E g y p t i a n i n d i c a t i on that Tirhakah c o n d u c t e d a n y militarycampaigns in the firs t half decade of his re ign. T h e r e w e r e s o m e h i n t s int e rms of small objects a n d t r a d e but noth ing d ef in i t e .A s R e d f o r d has pointed out, 1 9 t h e re i s n o e n e m y or targe t c i tym e n t i o n e d by n a m e in the s urv i v i ng por t ions of t h e t e x t . E v e n i f the t ex tw er e c om ple t e , the r e may not have been such a me nt ion , a s other t e x t s ofth i s type from Ti rhakah t e n d to be general a n d not specific.Lacking specific m e n t i o n of the e n e m y , w h e r e this battle w a s fought,or w h e r e the se capt ives came from, one mus t fall back upon theci rcumstant ial e v i d e n c e of chronology to see w h e r e th es e c on n ec t i on smight be t h e s t r onge s t . A s m e n t i o n e d above, t h e re is a v e r y narroww i n d o w of opportunity to locate the kings of As s y r ia , E g y p t , a n d Judahin a w a r at t h e same t ime. Tirhakah's accession yea r was 690, a n d 685 wa st h e y e a r of the high N il e , so the campaign a t t e s t ed by this t ex t w o u l d haveb e e n c o n d u c t e d after 690 and before 685. Sennacher ib could n o t hav e be e ni n v o l v e d in the w e s t be fore 688, for he w a s busy w i t h Babylon in the eastunt i l 689. Since He z e k iah d i e d in 686, a n y contact by him with Tirhakahw o u l d have to have take n place before that t ime. T h e s e conclus ions m a ybe outlined as follows:

Date of the campaign of the new Tirhakah t e x t b e t w e e n 689 and 6 8 6Date of any s e c o n d Palestinian c a m p a i g n conducted by S e n n a c h e r i b

between 6 88 and 6 8 6Date of the death of Hezekiah of Judahby 6 86S i n c e t h e E g y p t i a n t e x t doe s not m e n t i o n the targe t c i t y or country

or army with w h i c h t h e E g y p t i a n troops fought, sources e x te r na l toE g y p t n e e d to be brought i n to this analysis. A s s y r ia n s o ur c es of th i s t i m eare essen t ial ly s i l en t because of the absence of S e nnache r ib ' s annals bet w e e n 689 a n d 681. T h at leaves us with the r ecords f rom Judah. In 2 Kgs19:9 is a r e fe r e nc e to the appearance of T irhakah upon a battlef ield in t h evicinity of Phil is t ia . G i v e n t h e chronological cons t ra in t s mentionedabove, i t is un l i k e ly that Tirhakah could have c on d uc t ed two fullcampaigns in th is in te rval ; thus the o n e with t h e u n n a m e d ta r ge t i n hisown text is bes t associated with t h e o n e m e n t i o n e d in 2 Kgs 19:9, w h e nhe marc h ed i n to Phil i s t ia to m e e t t h e A s s y r i a n troops a n d thus broughtre l i ef to Hez ek iah of Judah. For w h a t e v e r reasons, th is general effortse e ms to have b e e n an E g y p t i a n success, for t h e biblical r ec ord i n d ic a t e sthat S e nnache r ib returned to his o w n land.

"Ibid.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

29/164

T H E N E W T I R H A K A H T E X T 187Summary

A n e w text of Tirhakah wa s d i s c o ve r ed at Karnak in 1990 a n d wa sannounced in p r e l i m i n a r y publ icat ions in 1993. T h i s t ex t tells of ap r e v i o u s l y unknown mi l i t a ry campaign of T i rh ak ah . T h e n a m e of thecountry or c i t y agains t w h i c h he campaigned has not s u r v i v e d in thefragments of this t ex t . T h e t ex t can be c o n n e c t e d with Tirhakah becauseof i t s r e fe r en c e to the high Ni le , w h i c h fi ts well with an e v e n t w h i c hoccurred in Tirhakah's s ix th year , 685. S i n c e that r e fe r en c e also comestoward the e n d o f the s u r v i v i n g portions of tex t , and the mi l i ta rycampaign is desc r ibed before that point, the mi l i t a ry campaign should bed a t e d prior to 685. The only t e x t that p oin t s to mil i ta ry ac t i v i t y in thefield a t that t i m e is the biblical r e fe r e nc e to Tirhakah's appearance inPales t ine w h e n Sennacher ib was besieging Hezekiah's Judah. This cannotbe the campaign of 701 because Ti rhakah wa s n o t on the throne at thatt ime and could n o t have be e n in L o w e r E g y p t that early, according to hiso w n stelae at Kawa. T h i s action in 2 Kgs 19:9 should, therefore, belong toa s e c o n d campaign of Sen n a c h er ib to Pales t ine . During that s e c o n dcampaign Tirhakah w o u l d have m e t him on the plain of Phil i s t ia after hel i f t ed the s iege of Libnah. This n e w E g y p t i a n t e x t tells of just such acampaign, w h i c h fi ts d i r ec t ly i n to that chronological n iche.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

30/164

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

31/164

Andrews University Seminary Studies, A u t u m n 1997, Vol. 35, No. 2 , 189-209Copyright 1997 by A n d r e w s U n i v e rs i ty P ress .

RECURSION AND V AR I AT I O N INTHE PROPHECY O FJONAH: ONTHE RHETORICAL IMPACT OF STYLISTICTECHNIQUE INHEBREW NARRATIVE DISCOURSE, W I T HSPECIAL REFERENCE TO IRONY AND E N I G M A

E R N S T W E N D L A N DUnited Bible Soc ie t iesLusaka, Zambia

P ar t T w o 4. Potential P roblems in the Functional Analysis ofLiterary FormNo s t u d y of l i t e rary form i s satisfactory or comple te in a n d of itself.I t must always be accompanied byor bet te r , i n t eg r a t ed witha study of

the specific c ommun i c a t i ve functions w h i c h the formal featuresin th iscase, r ec ur s i on and v a r iat ion (cf. P a r t One of th is ar t ic le )were s e l ec t edto c ar ry out in the d iscourse .In his e x t e ns i v e t r e a t m e n t of the poet ics of Biblical H e b r e w nar ra t ive ,M e i r S t e rn b e rg pe r i od i c ally emphas izes " the l imi te d value of the formalt ypolog i e s that so of te n pass for the bus iness of l i t e ra ry theory a n danalysis ." 2 He goes on to point out the n e e d for an i n t eg ra t edme t h od olog y , on e that combine s a careful de sc r ip t ion of formand, w eshould add, content as welltogether with a r e la ted d iscuss ion ofauthorial i n t e n t :This two-way divorce [i.e., between form a n d function] es tabl i shes theneed for a properly communicative approach, one that willaccommodate the interplay of m e a n s and e n d s in sophisticated art andre la t e the principle of repetition to the working of the narrative whole.

But the domain of funct ion i s cons ide r abl y m o r e difficult to handl e withc e r t a i n t y d ur i n g the process of t ex t l inguis t ic- l i te rary inves t igat ion. F i v enoteworthy problem areas that m a y arise in th is e n d e a v o r p e r t a i n t o

'Part One of this art icle a p p e a r e d in Andrews University Sem inary Studies 35 ( Sp r i n g1997): 67-98.

2 Meir S t e r n be r g , The Poetics ofBiblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the DramaofReading (Bloomington, IN: Indiana Univ. P r e s s , 1985), 3 9 2 .'Sternberg, 393.

189

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

32/164

190 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )methodology: genre , per s pec t i ve , s e t t i n g , a n d the m o d e or med i um ofmessage compos i t ion . Each of these factors, operat ing alone or i nconjunction with o n e or m o r e of the others , can ser iously affect one'sassessment of role or purpose in the case of a n y g i v e n s ty l i s t ic t echn ique,whether major or mi n or , in t e rms of the overall d e v e l o p m e n t o f aparticular plot or s t o ry .Methodology

T h e mat ter of general methodology i s the first issue that comes to thefore in c o n n e c t i o n with the functional analys is of biblical l i t e ra ture .Should the Scr ip tures be r eg a r d ed a n d t r e a t e d as ordinary written(l i terary) discourse i n t e r m s of analyt ical and evaluative procedure? Or isthere a qualitative d i f fe r en c e b e t w e e n the Bible a n d a n y other text orcorpuswhether religious or secular, historical or fictional, i nformat ionalor aes thet icwhich w o u l d call for a d i f fe r en t approach to the task ofi n ves t ig a t io n a n d i n t e rp re t a t i on ? O b v i ous ly , on e 's part icular theologicalp resup p os i t ions ( w i th specific r e fe r en c e to the " Wor d of God") willd e t e r m i n e a n y de c i s i on m ade in this regard. T h at i ssue c an n o t be t aken uphere . 4 Suffice i t to say that m y basic assumption c on c e rn i n g the real i ty ofd i v i n e inspiration a n d the consequen t unif y ing influence of d i v i n e purposein the composi t ion of the OT a n d NT inclusively governs m y per s pec t i veon both the nature of the original text a n d m y m o d e o f h ermen eu t i c alinquiry with respec t to it. Ac c o r d in g l y , I v i e w the fundamental nature ofbiblical narrat ive as being def inable in t e r m s of the following fourcharacterist ics, in d e s c e n d i n g ord e r of importan ce, but carefully i n t e gr a te dall the same:

(a) theological in re lat ion to overall c on t en t , i.e., thoroughlyYHWH/Christ-centered, d i r ec t ed , fulfilled, an d e m p o w e r e d ;(b) historical in re lat ion to quality, i.e., on the w h ole (except forclearly m a r k e d an d i n c lud ed subgenres , such as parables) a reliable,factual r e p r e s e n t a t i o n ( includ ing aut h or -d e t e rmi n ed se lect ion,sequencing, shaping, summarizat ion, shading, a n d s tyl izat ion) of thee v e n t s reported as h a v in g taken place;(c) rhetorical in re lat ion to purpose , i.e., aimed at "per suading"receptors to accept an all-govern ing d iv ine perspec t ive a n d i m p e r a t i v eon their prevail ing w o r l d v i e w a n d way-of-life; an d(d) artistic in relat ion to means, i.e., util izing a w i d e range of l i t e rary-poet ic dev ices a n d composit ional techniques according to the specif ic4 S e e the valuable d i s c us s i on in chaps. 2 and 3 of V. Philips Long, The Art ofBiblical

History, Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation, vol. 5 (Grand R a p i d s : Zondervan,1994) .

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

33/164

R E C U R S I O N A N D V A R I A T I O N I N T H E " P R O P H E C Y " O F J O N A H 19 1con te x t a n d cotext to ge ne ra t e the appropr iate voli t ional motivation,e m o t i v e i n v o l v e m e n t , c o g n i t i ve impact , and es the t ic appeal withr egard to the essent ial salvific message b e in g c on v e y e d .S o m e m o r e conserva t ive scholars might object to the r e la t iveimp or tance at tached toor e v e n the inclus ion offeatures ( c ) a n d (d) in

my analysis of biblical discourse. But in general I think the abundanttextual e v i d e n c e speaks for i t self in th is regard. T o be sure, one mus talways guard against the danger of "over in terpre ta t ion," 5 that is, rhetor ical"over reading" and/or creat ive ar t i s t ic " en h a n c em en t" with r e s pec t to theoriginal t e x t and the author 's i n t e n d e d object ives . A n un c r i ti c al adoptionof the subjec t ive approach of so-called " r e ce p t ion theory" mus t s imilar lybe f i rmly r es i s ted . But one must not go too far in the other d i r e c t i o ne i t h e r a n d discourage, discount, or disparage a t t e mp ts to p robe the d e p t h sof c ommun i c a t i ve poten t ial in these areas. T o conclude, for example, asDouglas S tuar t d o e s in re lat ion to Jonah, that "most of the repetition ofvocabulary that does exis t in the chapte r [one] a n d in the book as a w h o l eis d u e to a s ingle factor: the d e s i r e for s impl ic i ty ," or that "the n a r r a t i v ebears no h in t of humor," 6 w o u l d appear to be c on t rad i c t ed b y an h on es ta n d o p e n analys is a n d as s e s s m e n t of the t ext i tself. Such an evaluat ion isalso c oun t e red by his ow n characte r izat ion of Jonah as b e in g "sensationall i t e ra ture," that is, "composed with a high c o n c e n t r a t i o n of e l e m e n t sd e s i g n e d to arouse the imaginat ion a n d e m o t i o n of the audience ." 7Genre

The importance of g en r e to the funct ional analys is of literature isapt ly summar iz e d by D a v i d Clines: "Li tera ry works... ge ne ra t e m ea n in g[ove r a n d a b o ve lexical a n d grammatical means] through their overallshape, their s t ructure, a n d their d o m i n a n t t e n d e n c i e s , that is, throughtheir i d e n t i t y as wholes." 8 T h e iden t i f ica t ion of a work's overallmacr oge nr e a n d c o n s t i t u e n t subgenres enables o n e to better understandnot on ly how a story is told ( in t e r m s of i t s s tyl i s t ic features) a n d what i ttells (i.e., the nature of i t s c on t en t in re lat ion to real i ty) , but also why thestory is told (i.e., i t s i n t e rac t ional p urp ose in re lat ion to the assume di n t e n d e d audience). I have e l s e w he re d es c r ib ed Jonah as being gener ical lyan d un i q uely complex: a dramatic, didact ic, factual, t y pological n ar rat ive

'D ouglas Stuar t , Hosea-Jonah, WB C (Waco, T X : Wo rd, 1987), 456.'Stuart, 457, 4 8 5 . .'Stuart, 435, original emphas is .8 C i t e d in Long, 47.

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

34/164

192 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )with a s ign i f ican t underlying hortatory "prophetic" bent. 9 Such acomprehensive perspective on the text helps to d e f i n e the principalparameters within which o n e m i g h t c a r r y out the manifold hermeneuticalprocess of analys i s , interpretation, and contemporary applicationincluding idiomatic, but accurate, Bible translation.Perspective

The i s sue of m e s s a g e p e r s p e c t i v e , including the assoc ia t ed factor ofd e g r e e of pragmatic intentionality, is crucial in contemporary literary andtheological hermeneutics. It is particularly r e l e v a n t in any d i sc u ss i o n ofliterary or communicative function. Four basic s ta nces are p o s s i b l e w i t hmany different modifications a n d combinations in b e t w e e n : 1 0 anorientation from the point of v i e w of the source (or " i m p l i e d author") ofthe work; from that of the intended receptors ( " impl ied audience") of thein i t ial communicative e v e n t or, alternatively, the "real a u d i e n c e " today; 1 1and from that of the linguistic text i t self (i.e., in such a way that itsupposedly "speaks" for i t self without b e i n g t i e d to the original author orany particular a u d i e n c e ) . 1 2 It is not poss ible i n th i s e s s a y to consider ther e l a t i v e pros a n d c o n s of t h e s e d i v e r s e pos i t ions . I will simply concur withSternberg who s t r e s s e s the n e e d for adopting the standpoint of theassumed authorial source when undertaking the in i t ial phases of any

'Support for my rather complex g e n e r i c characterization of Jonah is provided in myart icle: "Text Analysis a n d the Genre of Jonah: What Can the Discourse Structure Tell Usabout a Unique Prophetic 'Word of the LORD'?"/rS 39 (1996): 191-206.

'"For a n o v e r v i e w of these d i f fe ren t me thodologies , s ee Tremper Longman I I I , LiteraryApproaches to Biblical Interpretation, Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation, vol. 3(Grand Rapids : Zondervan, 1987), chap. 1 ; also Grant R . Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral:A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity,1991), chap. 6.

"The two "receptor-oriented" settings and assoc ia ted hermeneutical approaches needto be distinguished because of the radical d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n them. A concern for theor i g in a l a ud i e n c e a n d context will often m a n i f e s t i t s e lf in a study that has grea t aff in i t i e s toone in which the "author" is the focus of attention, as in traditional evangel ical biblicalcriticism or, by way of contrast, typical "source cr i t i c i sm." In the case of modern r e a d e r -centered theories, on the other hand, the situational context is largely irrelevant, for "thereader create s the meaning of the t ext" or " in interaction with the text," an approach thatultimately leads to a "deconstruction" of the d i s c our s e ( Lon g m a n , 38, 41) .

' 2 S i n c e a completely "neutral," un bi a s e d interpretation is impossible, the fourth,supposedly "text-oriented" approach often m e r g e s i n pract ice with the third, which issometimes termed " r e a d e r - r e s p on s e " c r i t ic i s m . On the other hand, a focus on textual formin relation to the postulated original setting of use a n d composition is characteristic oftraditional "form cr i t i c i sm." Thus the overlapping nature of a n y proposed system ofhermeneutical classif icat ion is e v i d e n t .

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

35/164

R E C U R S I O N A N D V A R I A T I O N I N T H E " P R O P H E C Y " O F J O N A H 193exeget ical and/or l i t e ra ry s t ud y of t h e Scr ip tures . 1 3 I d o so d e s p i t e thelikelihood of b e in g accused by s om e of commi t t i ng the allegedhermeneut ical error known as "the i n t en t ional fallacy." 1 4M y r eason for choosing this p e r s p e c t i v e i s s imply , but s ignif icantly ,that "communicat ion pr es u ppo s es a speaker w h o r e sor t s to ce r ta inlinguis t ic and s t ructural tools in o r d e r to prod uc e cer ta in effects on theaddre s s e e " 1 5 and, i t m a y be added, to most effec t ive ly c o n v e y the fullextent of the d e s i r e d message. Such tools may be o v e r t ( w e might t e r mthem "cues") or cov e r t ("clues") in relat ion to the textual surface, a n d theyare s i t ua t ed on both the macro- a n d the micros t ruc ture of d iscourseorganizat ion. E x p l ic i t s ta t e me n t s of a w r i t e r ' s a t t i tude a n d i n t e n t arec ompara t i ve ly rare in H e b r e w nar ra t ive , but not e n t i r e l y absen t Qudg21:25; 2 Kgs 17:7-23; 2 C hron 36:14-21). Other c o m m en t s that pr es u ppo s eauthorial purpose an d p e r s p e ct i v e are less direct, such as the epilogues ofDeuteronomy (34:10-12) a n d Joshua (especially 34:21), the genealogy ofRuth (4:17-22), the autobiographical repor t of Ezra (9:1-2), a n d the prayerof N e h e m i a h (1:4-11). A t a n y rate, the pr incipal guide in a n y attemptedfunctional "recons t ruc t ion" mus t always be the t e x t itself, that is, how i tis rhetor ically a n d art is t ically shaped through formal m e ans such asrecurs ion or var ia t ion (plus in te r rogat ion, the use of i n t en s i f i e r s , etc.) a n dse mant ic t ec h n i q ues like irony a n d e n i gm a (plus figuration, hyperbole ,etc.) to effect ce r ta in basic communica t iv e objec t ives within i t s se t t i ng .T h is may sound ra ther subject ive, but the al terna t ive is much mor e so, fora s far as p r oce dur e a n d p e r s p e c t i v e are concerned , "the choice turns out tolie b e t w e e n r ec on s t ruc t i n g the author's intention a n d l icens ing thereader ' s i n v e n t i o n . " 1 6 A d v o c a t e s of the latter option would i nc l udenotably "the rhetorical cr i t ic [who] can f i n d s t ruc tures a n d m ea n in g s i nthe biblical text apar t from t h e i n t en t i on of the impl ied much less the realauthor." 1 7 T o be sure, "author i n t e n t i o n a l i t y c an n o t be assured," but atleast i t i s a reasonable goal to help "control interpretation of thet ex t" 1 8 its or iginal ly i n t e n d e d meaning, that is, but not necessar i ly also,i t s contemporary appl ica t ion and contextual ized e x te ns ion .

l 3 Sternberg, 6 9.''This supposed "fallacy" i s outlined ( a n d i t s v a l i d i t y partially supported) by PhyllisTr ible , Rhetorical Criticism: Context, Method, and the Book of onah, Old Testament G u i de s

to Biblical Scholarship (M inn eapolis : Fortress, 1994), 96. A g ood refutation of the m i s us e ofthis criterion is found in Osborne, 405-406, 414-415.

1 5 Sternberg, 9."Sternberg, 10."Trible, 2 2 9 .'"Contra Trible, 2 3 0 .

8/12/2019 AUSS19971001-V35-02__B

36/164

194 S E M I N A R Y S T U D I E S 3 5 ( A U T U M N 1 9 9 7 )Setting

T h e prob lem of in t e r p r e t i v e v i e w p o i n t i s in tegral ly r e la ted to that ofthe original s i tuat ional se t t ing, for the que s t ion of "who?" c an n o t besa t i sfactor i ly d e t e r m i n e d in isolation f rom others, such as "where?" a n d"when?" (i.e., "what?" t h e n p e r ta ins to c on t en t , "how?" to form, a n d"why?" to funct ion). S t e r n b e r g offers several important ob s e rva t i on s inth i s r egard: " T h e t ex t has n o m ea n in g , or m a y assume e v e r y kind ofme aning , out s ide those coor d ina te s of d iscourse that w e usually b un d lei n t o t he t e r m 'context ' ." A n d having d e c i d e d i n favor of a sour ce - or i e n te dper s pec t i ve , on e mus t v i g orous ly purs ue e v e r y analytical m e a n s a n dr e source available for ascer ta in ing the closest possible approximation ofthe or iginal compos i t ional milieu, for: "the m o r e comp l e te and reliableour k n o w l e d g e of the w o r l d from w hich the Bible sprang, the sharper ouri n s igh t i n to i t s working a n d m e a n i n g as text ." 2 0

The problem is that the bare t e x t of Jonah does not give us a greatdeal of i nformat ion c o n c e r n i n g the background of i t s l i t e ra ry or igin . Nodates are m e n t i o n e d , a n d the general geographical references to " Nin eveh ,""Tarshish," a n d "Joppa" (1:2-3) d o n o t help much to fix a prec i se historicals e t t i n g . About the b e s t w e can d o i s to adopt that w h i c h issugges tedinter tex tual lyby the S cr ip tur e s themselves : the only otherpassage w h e r e a " p r op he t" name d "Jonah, son of A mi t ta i" is m e n t i o n e d .Thi s t ex tual "se t t ing" is found in 2 Kgs 14:25, w h e r e t h e re is a rathercryptic r e fe r en c e a s e e r w h o m i n i s t e r e d in the land of Israel d u r i n g ther e la t i ve ly p rosp erous r e ig n of Jeroboam II. T h i s passage says nothingabout the c i ty of N i n e v e h a n d i t s "king," but obviously the nation ofA s s y r i a w a s a subject of conside rable c u r r e n t c o n c e r n s i nc e i t wa s e i t h e rthe dominant force or at least a major t h r e a t e n i n g world power in theM i d d l e East at that t im e . 2 1 T h erefore , the book about the prophet Jonahmus t be se t a n d is bes t i n t e r p r e t e d in l ight of the t ragic e v e n t s thatovertook Israel in the eighth c e n t u r y B.C., just a fe w short decades beforethe r u thl e s s Assy r ian armies o v e r r a n the Northern Kingdom, d e s t r o y e di ts capital Samaria, a n d d e p o r t e d i t s people e n masse (cf. 2 Kgs 17).A d d i t i o n a l sup p or t