Potts 1

Tyler Potts

Professor Yarchin

UBBL 100H

8 October 2012

Writing Project #1: Genre Recognition of Five Pericopes

The most important aspect of principled Bible study is genre recognition. A literary genre

is a category of writing which has distinctive form and content. Genre entails intention; that is,

authors devote thought into how they want to present certain information. Stated slightly

differently, genre is never a mistake, which suggests there is meaning in the reason why one is

chosen over all others. Secondly, each genre attempts to accomplish different tasks. It is prudent

to judge a text based on what it attempts to do, rather than on what one wants it do. For example,

it would be unreasonable to dismiss Shakespeare’s Hamlet as useless because it does not provide

directions from Los Angeles to San Diego. Finally, genre influences interpretation. For example,

if one fails to recognize Saturday Night Live’s segment Weekend Update as satire, then one will

arrive at an interpretation completely opposite of what was intended—and simultaneously doubt

the future of America. Proper genre recognition leads to proper interpretation.

The Bible is a collection of many genres. In it, there are narratives, laws, hymns,

proverbs, poems, prophecies, parables, letters, and more. As with any writing, the writing of the

Bible cannot be properly understood without genre recognition. Unlike any other writing, if the

Bible really is the word of God, genre recognition is a moral imperative because it leads to a

proper understanding of God himself. This examination will focus on five pericopes of the Bible,

where a pericope is simply a meaningful excerpt which can be mostly understood independent of

the text around it. The five pericopes are Genesis 2:4b-ch3, Exodus 15:1-8, Exodus 21:28-36,

Potts 2

Jeremiah 52:3b-34, and Matthew 13:44-46. While the following examination of various

pericopes of the Bible is by no means exhaustive, it should be enough to validate the level of

significance placed on genre recognition.

The general method of analysis used for each pericope is a step process. First, a summary

of the pericope is given. Second, the genre will be identified. Third, the genre identification will

be justified. Fourth, the implications of this genre designation on the interpretation of the

pericope will be explored. Finally, the implications of a false genre designation on the

interpretation of the pericope will be explored. In doing this final step, it will become apparent

why genre designation matters.

Genesis 2:4b-ch3

Before identifying and justifying this genre designation, it is necessary to summarize the

pericope so any quotes taken from it do not seem unfamiliar. At the beginning, God creates the

first man Adam and places him in the Garden of Eden. He is told to eat from any tree he desires

except the tree of knowledge of good and evil. God then creates the first woman Eve to

accompany Adam and be his wife. A serpent deceives Eve into eating fruit from the forbidden

tree. She gives some fruit to her husband and he too eats it. When God confronts them, Eve is

quick to blame the serpent, but God does not accept this excuse. Finally, God institutes

punishments that will afflict all the men and women of future generations, and then he banishes

the couple from the garden. Now that a background has been established, genre identification

and justification will be more relevant.

The pericope of Genesis 2:4b-ch3 is a narrative. More specifically, the narrative is a

myth. For purposes of this analysis, the word “myth” does not necessarily connote falsehood;

rather, myth may be one of the following definitions. Michael D. McGehee, in his book The

Potts 3

Bible Doesn’t Have to Be Hard to Read, provides three possible definitions of myth: “(1) A myth

is a story that seeks to explain why things are the way they are. (2) A myth is a story that deals

with gods or goddesses. (3) A myth is a story that holds a community of people together”

(McGehee 2000, 94). It will be argued that Genesis 2:4b-ch.3 meets all three definitions of myth.

The first definition fits, as Genesis 2:4b-ch.3 is thought to explain the origin of sin and

why evil exists in the world. The tradition Sunday school teaching is that when Eve bit into the

apple, sin entered not only into her but into all of human nature. Humanity is in a fallen state

because of the first two humans’ decision to disobey God. This teaching is widely accepted;

however, it is important to note that the author of Genesis himself never explicitly declares why

he is sharing this information. Moreover, the editors of The New Oxford Annotated Bible note

that even though many Christians found the doctrine of original sin on this narrative, “the word

‘sin’ never occurs in it” (Coogan 2010, 15). To debunk such critics, one might respond by

quoting Romans 5:12: “Just as sin came into the world through one man…” (NRSV). This

analysis does not seek to resolve debates over the doctrine of original sin. The point is that the

traditional Biblical understanding of the pericope would meet definition (1), although one can

reasonably disagree on other Biblical grounds.

On definition (2), Genesis 2:4b-ch.3 is undeniably myth. The Lord God—Yahweh—is

mentioned dozens of times in the pericope. No reasonable person could or would argue against

this indisputable fact.

Definition (3) is similar to definition (1). For the majority of Christians that hold to the

fallen state of man, the idea is central to their theology. If there was no fall, then there could be

no restoration in Christ. These two ideas—the Fall and the deity of Christ—are what define all

mainline Christian churches and hold them together.

Potts 4

If the reader grants that the pericope is a myth, the next question is to ask what limitations

does this genre designation place on the range of interpretations of the text. The main limitation

to recognize is that myth is not necessarily historical, nor does it seek to be. The believer need

not regard the historicity of Adam and Eve’s existence as essential. The broader point being

made by the myth is that there is a “damage of connections … between the Lord God, man,

woman, and earth,” but it makes no difference if this particular couple was the first to cause such

damage instead of some other (Coogan 2010, 15).

The reader should also recognize that myth, since it is not historical, can contain symbols,

metaphors, and even supernatural events. A scientist seeking to explain how a snake’s larynx

can, under certain circumstances, produce human-like noises would be completely missing the

point. Walton, Matthews, and Chavalas explain in The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old

Testament that the serpent in the days of Genesis represented “wisdom (occult), fertility, health,

chaos, and immortality, and was often worshiped” (Walton 2000, 32). When literal

interpretations are applied where they clearly do not fit, it is not only the individual person who

appears foolish but that which he represents as well. Thus, genre recognition is imperative

because it enables the believer to accurately and intelligently represent his holy book.

Exodus 15:1-18

In Exodus 15:1-18, Moses and the Israelites sing to God. They praise God for allowing

them to escape from Egypt by closing the parted sea on Pharaoh’s chariots. They make numerous

references to the grandeur of his power, which intimidates all the surrounding nations.

Although this pericope could be labeled a poem, a more inclusive label for it is a hymn,

or ode. A hymn possesses three essential characteristics: (1) It must be written in the form of a

Potts 5

lyric poem, which contains emotional and figurative language; (2) It must be sung to someone;

(3) It must ascribe exaltation. Exodus 15:1-18 does fulfill these three criteria.

The Exodus 15:1-18 pericope is full of poetic devices. In fact, Victor Hamilton notes in

Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary that it is so full of literary meaning that scholars have

argued that “the poetic compositions are so literally and rhetorically complex that the

individual(s) named could not possibly have produced them ‘on the spot’” (Hamilton 2011, 228).

In other words, scholars doubt the poem’s historicity on the sole basis that it could not have been

composed extemporaneous after crossing a sea. Such a poem would require more time. The best

example of the poem’s brilliance is exemplified in its “staircase parallelisms,” which is academic

jargon for phrase repetition (Hamilton 2011, 230). For example, in verse eleven, it is written,

“Who is like you, O Lord, among the gods, who is like you…?” (NRSV). Two other staircase

parallelisms occur in verse six—“your right hand”—and in verse sixteen—“until your people.”

A few other poetic devices are also worthy of attention. Verse eight personifies both God and the

water while providing vivid imagery: “At the blast of your nostrils the water piled up, the floods

stood up in a heap…” (NRSV). This is figurative language at its best. No prose is written like

this.

There is no debate over the assertion that this pericope is sung. Verse one explicitly states

that “Moses and the Israelites sang this song to the Lord: I will sing to the Lord …” (NRSV)

(emphases added). At the very least, it has been established as a poetic song. Its content is what

transforms it into a hymn.

The Lord God—Yahweh—is praised in every verse of the song. The Lord has

“triumphed gloriously” (v.1). The Lord is “my strength and my might” (v.2). The Lord is

“glorious is power” (v.6). The Lord is “awesome in splendor, doing wonders” (v.11). The list is

Potts 6

extensive enough that it would be fair to say exaltation is the author’s primary purpose. With this

final criterion of hymn grounded, it should be apparent by now that this genre designation is

legitimate.

The fact that Exodus 15:1-18 is a hymn should mold one’s interpretation of the text. The

words chosen and ideas conveyed by the singing men should be viewed as nothing more than

evidence of their love of their god. It is not a pericope on which to ground church doctrine or a

concept of Yahweh as benevolent. It is a subjective expression, pure and simple.

A literal and historical approach to the pericope will lead to objections that seem

ridiculous to all but the literalist. For example, one might argue that when the author writes

“Who is like you, O Lord?” in verse eleven he is implying that the Lord is beyond all

comparisons. As a result, God becomes unknowable and impersonal, because one cannot hope to

grasp him in any analogous means. If God is distant, then he can’t hear prayer or empathize with

his creation, which seems to contradict other passages of the Bible. A principled Bible student

would probably respond to this objection with a facepalm and nodding head, and then proceed to

open a dictionary to the entry entitled “hyperbole.” This student, through genre recognition, is

able to avoid certain objections to his faith because his overall picture of the Bible is more

coherent. His analysis has edified his belief rather than undermined it.

Exodus 21:28-36

In Exodus 21:28-36, the various methods of restitution for oxen that injure humans and

other oxen are discussed. In most cases, the recompenses involve execution by stoning the ox,

possible execution for the ox’s owner, and/or a monetary payment to the gored person or to the

owner of the gored ox. Punishments are generally harsher for oxen that have a past history of

goring.

Potts 7

This pericope—Exodus 21:28-36—is best categorized under the genre of instruction.

More specifically, the instruction takes the form of law. To avoid confusion, the genre of law

must be evaluated in contrast to the similar genres of order, commandment, and advice.

McGehee provides definitions for all four genres. Orders are “one-time instructions given to a

particular person or group.” In contrast, laws are “meant to be followed for an extended period of

time by a broader audience.” In higher contrast, a commandment is “ethical instruction that

seems intended for all people at all times.” Finally, advice possesses “ongoing character,” is

meant for a specific individual, and is tied to “specific social circumstances” (McGehee 2000,

58-60).

To justify this genre designation, it is best first to argue for the broader genre of

instruction, and then argue for law by process of elimination. The genre of instruction seeks to

tell somebody to do something, usually giving precise details. The genre can be seen in the

several verses in the pericope which state “the ox shall be stoned” (v.28, v.29, v.32). It is implied

that some person(s) must do this stoning since there is no record of Yahweh himself ever causing

stones to fall from the sky. That is, stoning is executed by humans. The author does not say who

is to carry out the stoning in this particular pericope, but if one examines the broader context of

the pericope, it seems that the instruction applies to all the Israelites. Exodus 20:22, which

closely proceeds this pericope, states “The Lord said to Moses: thus you shall say to the

Israelites…” and then Exodus 21:1 states “These are the ordinances that you shall set before

them” (NRSV). Now that the intended audience of the instruction is known, a few types of

instruction can be eliminated as possible genres. The pericope is not advice, because it is not

intended for a specific individual, but all the Israelites. It is not a commandment either, since the

Israelites do not comprise all people of all times. It is unlikely that the genre is order because

Potts 8

verse twenty-eight implies that the instruction is to be carried out more than once. Verse twenty-

eight in the pericope uses an indefinite article—“When an ox gores…”—rather than a more

specific term like this, that, or the ox (NRSV). With three of the four options eliminated, one can

only conclude that the genre is law. There is indeed a broad audience (the Israelites), and there is

an extended, indefinite period of time.

If it is true that Exodus 21:28-36 is law, then it follows from the definition of law that the

pericope would not apply to most people today. If it still did apply to anyone, it would be the

modern Israelites, but it seems likely that the law’s indefinite extended period of duration

expired long ago in the days of Christ. Beyond that, the uses of oxen in first world countries have

significantly diminished since the industrial revolution. Most Americans have never even seen an

ox. However, if any American legislators have seen oxen and are deeply moved, they are free to

pass any desired law related to oxen without regard to those laws expressed in this pericope.

The impact of misinterpreting Exodus 21:28-36 is not as detrimental as others. There has

never been a Bible critic who objected to the morality of the Old Testament based on its laws

regarding oxen. Moreover, it would be interesting to see a literalist try to obtain thirty shekels of

silver as payment, but there is certainly no atrocity. However, if one adopts a literal

interpretation, one would have to support capital punishment for owners of deranged oxen, rather

than capital punishment for the oxen only. Human life is a more serious issue than oxen liability.

That aside, there is a broader point being made about the believer’s relationship to law today. A

person can still glorify God without adopting the laws of the Bible. Although the Bible does

contain some political commandments, it is not a text primarily concerned political philosophy

and should not be treated as such.

Potts 9

Jeremiah 52:3b-34

The book of Jeremiah closes at chapter fifty-two with text taken from the final chapter of

another Biblical book: 2 Kings 25:1-30. King Zedekiah of Judah leads a failed rebellion against

King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon. Nebuchadrezzar responds by sieging Jerusalem, creating a

famine. Trying to escape the famine-stricken city, Zedekiah is captured and brought before

Nebuchadrezzar. Nebuchadrezzar has Zedekiah’s sons executed in front of Zedekiah before

Zedekiah himself is gruesomely killed. Necuzaradan leads the Babylonian army’s return to

Jerusalem in which they ransack the buildings, seize all the valuables, and exile 4,600 Judeans.

Thirty-seven years into exile, King Jehoiachin of Judah is released from prison and establishes

good relations with King Evil-merodach of Babylon.

The final pericope of the book of Jeremiah—52:3b-34—is best classified as narrative. It

might be historical narrative, but most readers of the Bible do not have the expertise to justify the

assertion that a certain narrative is a historical narrative. In general, it’s not wise to make claims

that one cannot justify. McGehee defines history in this way: “History is a record of the past that

attempts to provide a reasonable interpretation of people, events, and ideas” (McGehee 86). The

key phrase there is reasonable interpretation. A reasonable interpretation makes the most sense of

the most evidence. Most readers, however, are unaware of the evidence so there is nothing to

make sense of and therefore no warrant to attach the label of history. Similarly, there is no

warrant to attach the genre of legend, since that label implies that one knows which parts are true

and which are false. The apparently more modest claim is actually not modest at all. Because the

burden of proof in labeling a genre history or legend is too high, this analysis will settle for

narrative.

Potts 10

Having made a much more mild assertion than another reader of the same pericope

might, the task to justify the genre identified is easy. A narrative is nothing more than a story that

has a narrator and characters who set out to do something. In this pericope, the narrator is the

unnamed author. The main characters are the King Zedekiah of Judah, King Nebuchadrezzar of

Babylon, Nebuzaradan of Babylon, King Evil-mordach of Babylon, and King Jehoiachin of

Judah. The something that King Zedekiah does is rebel. Nebuchadrezzar orders the crushing of

the rebellion and the exile. Nebuzaradan carries out the crushing of the rebellion. King Evil-

mordach replaces Nebuchadrezzar, while King Jehoiachin replaces King Zedekiah. The actual

details are more complex, but the point has been validated that these characters at least did

something. The elements of a narrative are there, so it is a narrative.

By labeling Jeremiah 52:3b-34 a narrative, one is claiming that the pericope tells a story,

but not necessarily a story with a moral. There is no indication that believers are to emulate the

behavior of any of the characters. A narrative simply tells a story as is with no regard to ethics.

Readers are welcome to derive their own ethics as long as they do not ascribe intention to the

author. For example, a reader might think, “It’s probably best not to rebel against authority

because look what happened to Zedekiah.” This may be true, but regardless of the validity of this

claim, the author’s intention was probably not to persuade one to respect authority. A narrative

primarily informs; it does not necessarily persuade.

The genre designation of narrative does too have other implications. It represents a

commitment to inquiry. By not jumping to conclusions about the Bible’s elevated history, the

believer establishes himself as open-minded. The believer cannot expect the skeptic to consider

the possibility that the Bible is always right if the believer himself will not consider the

Potts 11

possibility that the Bible is sometimes wrong. If God is truth, as the believer claims, then truth is

the goal for which both believer and skeptic can mutually strive.

Matthew 13:44-46

The pericope of Matthew 13:44-46 is so small that it would be more helpful to reproduce

the text than attempt a summary. The text records words of Jesus spoken to his disciples:

The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which someone found

and hid; then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field. Again,

the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls; on finding one

pearl of great value, he went and sold all that he had and bought it (NRSV).

In essence, Jesus compares the kingdom of heaven to finding treasure and finding pearls,

where both experiences are assumed to be joyful ones.

Matthew 13:44-46 is best categorized as a parable. McGehee provides four possible

definitions of a parable.

Stories or statements that (1) compare something common with something

uncommon, (2) attempt to make a major point about correct behavior, (3) help

people think about a complex issue by providing an illustration that puts the issue

into the context of everyday life, or (4) convey a message to the wise that will be

misunderstood by the simple (McGehee 2000, 13-14)

After laying out these four definitions, McGehee clues in his readers on how to identify parables

using a variation of definition (3): “Their introductory clue is a question about something

complex, which is then answered by an illustration coming out of everyday life” (McGehee

2000, 15). Since McGehee gives special attention to definition (3), it will be assumed to be the

Potts 12

most authoritative definition. It will be argued that Matthew 13:44-46 meets the standard

definition (3) and the lesser definition (1) as well

The pericope is a parable in at least one sense since it meets definition (3). The complex

issue is the kingdom of God. Jesus illustrates the issue through the man who finds treasure and

the man who finds a pearl. The illustrations make the concept of the kingdom of God more

mundane because it is easy for a man to visualize himself finding treasures or pearls.

The pericope is a parable in a second sense too since it meets definition (1). In the

pericope, there are two similes, which are explicit comparisons as opposed to metaphors which

are implicit comparisons. For all similes, there are three keys words used to identify them: like,

as, and seems. The word “like” is chosen twice by the author. The uncommon concept being

compared is the kingdom of God, while the common activities in the comparison are finding

treasure and finding pearls.

Since Matthew 13:44-46 is a parable, it should be treated as one. It should be viewed as

nothing more than an illustration—and not even a perfect illustration. It does not intend to be a

detailed analysis of the characteristics of the kingdom of heaven. It seems likely that Jesus could

have used other mundane activities in his parable, so one should not assume that the kingdom of

heaven is only like finding treasure and pearls, but nothing else. Moreover, it matters not whether

the man described in the parable ever existed, since the point being made involves the kingdom

of heaven rather than the man. It simply aspires to provide an analogy that leads to some increase

in knowledge and simplicity.

A wrong interpretation of Matthew 13:44-46 may lead to some dangers. McGehee warns

readers that the two most common errors in interpreting parables are “looking for too many

messages” and to “assume that they are allegories” (McGehee 2000, 15). The primary message

Potts 13

of the parable seems to be that the kingdom of heaven is something so desirable that it is worth

giving up everything if necessary. A reader who adopts a more generalized message such as

“pursue what you love” is at odds with other instruction in the Bible to worship the Lord only

and avoid idols. Similarly, a reader who believes that the treasure and pearls are representations

of the joy of wealth, and thus he interprets the parable as an endorsement of materialism, is

completely misguided. There is usually one intended message that’s not symbolic.

Conclusion

In conclusion, there are several lessons that can be taken from these analyses of genre

recognition. In examining the pericopes of Genesis 2:4b-ch3 (myth), Exodus 15:1-18 (hymn),

Exodus 21:28-36 (law), Jeremiah 52:3b-34 (narrative), and Matthew 13:44-46 (parable), several

conclusions about genre recognition were reached. Genre recognition is a necessary skill for

accurately representing Bible text. It can enable one to refute various objections to Biblical

claims. It allows one to distinguish between the recording of facts and the teaching of them. In its

essence, it is a pursuit of truth to uncover original meaning. Finally, it enables one to make a

cogent argument for one specific interpretation proposed among many interpretations. For all

these reasons exemplified through the five example pericopes, genre recognition matters.

Potts 14

Bibliography

Coogan, Michael D, ed. The New Oxford Annotated Bible. New York: Oxford University Press,

2010.

Hamilton, Victor P. Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic

Publishing Group, 2011.

McGehee, Michael D. The Bible Doesn’t Have to Be Hard to Read. Macon, GA: Smyth &

Helwys Publishing, 2000.

Walton, John H., Victor H. Matthews, and Mark W. Chavalas. The IVP Bible Background

Commentary: Old Testament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000.