Andrew Steinmann Concordia University Chicago River Forest, Illinois

Transcription

1 RBL 12/2012 Sailhamer, John H. The Meaning of the Pentateuch: Revelation, Composition and Interpretation Downer s Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, Pp Paper. $ ISBN Andrew Steinmann Concordia University Chicago River Forest, Illinois Evangelical theologians have long sought to counter the standard critical view of the origin and growth of the Pentateuch as put forward in the Documentary Hypothesis. John Sailhamer s thick tome seeks to present another evangelical response to contemporary critical approaches to the Torah. However, Sailhamer s book does not read as if it is designed to engage critical scholars in a dialogue. Instead, it is aimed squarely at other evangelicals and is an attempt to offer a unique interpretation of the evidence and to correct what Sailhamer believes are missteps made by evangelicals in the past. In endeavoring to persuade fellow evangelicals to rethink their approach to pentateuchal origins and, more broadly, Old Testament interpretation, Sailhamer has incorporated much of his past publications into this offering while adding other material in order to present a magnum opus that seeks to be a comprehensive work on the theology of the Pentateuch that also addresses the issues of its composition and interpretative horizons. The Meaning of the Pentateuch is organized into three parts preceded by an introduction in which Sailhamer seeks to introduce and justify his primary thesis, that there is a clearly discernible compositional strategy that was employed by the author of the Torah and that this compositional strategy not only argues that the Pentateuch was largely the work of one person (Moses) but also reveals the message of these five books as a whole. Moreover,

2 like many evangelicals, Sailhamer acknowledges that there are some portions of the Pentateuch that were later editorial editions. Chief among these are the last chapters of Deuteronomy (Deut 33 34). Also important to his thesis is that some of these post- Mosaica are present in the major poems in the Pentateuch, and in many cases these were intended by a later editor to highlight the messianic features of the text (e.g., Deut 34:10 12). These later editors, according to Sailhamer, were responsible for organizing the Tanak into its threefold division of Law, Prophets, and Writings and were seeking to give the canon an overall messianic shape. Thus, the Pentateuch as we now have it is actually the product of two editions: the Mosaic first edition and the canonically shaped second edition. The introduction also seeks to set forth Sailhamer s approach to interpreting the Torah. There are a number of key assertions that he will later explore more fully. Among these is the purpose of the Pentateuch: the Pentateuch itself was not written to teach Israel the law. The Pentateuch was addressed to a people living under the law (Deut 30:1 2; Ezra 7:6 10) and failing at every opportunity (Neh 9:33). The purpose of the Pentateuch is to teach its readers about faith and hope in the new covenant (Deut 30:6) (26). Also, As the prophet Hosea saw, the Pentateuch is primarily not about a wedding, but a divorce (27). Sailhamer goes on to explain his view of the Pentateuch as a whole, noting especially his thesis that the key to discerning the Torah s compositional strategy is to understand how its author incorporated narratives, laws, and poems. He also briefly sets out his understanding of how these textual layers were woven together by Moses to teach about faith and hope in the new covenant and how later editors added the post-mosaica to integrate the Pentateuch into their completed the collection of books in the Tanak. In part 1, Approaching the Text as Revelation, Sailhamer devotes four chapters to hermeneutical issues that he considers vital to understanding the Pentateuch. Since this appears to be the foundational section of the book, I will spend more time examining it before moving on to brief treatments of the other two parts. In the brief first chapter, Understanding the Nature and Goal of Old Testament Theology, Sailhamer argues for a Christian Old Testament theology that grows organically out of the text and is not simply a theology of the New Testament thrust back into the Old Testament. Next, in Finding the Author s Verbal Meaning, he explores the history of evangelical approaches to hermeneutics, starting with its roots in Augustine, flowing through the Reformation s emphasis on sola Scriptura and Hans Frei s description of precritical readings and understanding of Scripture, and on to the collapse of the precritical view in the eighteenth and nineteenth century. This led evangelicals, according to Sailhamer, to focus on the revelation of God in events behind the biblical text rather than on the text itself.

3 This leads to the third chapter, What Is the Historical Meaning of Biblical Texts? Here Sailhamer argues that the historical-grammatical method of biblical interpretation as practiced by many contemporary evangelicals has been redefined over time. The result is that increasing attention has been given to the historical reconstruction of biblical events instead of to the meaning embodied in the biblical narratives of those events. To make this argument Sailhamer traces the history of evangelical interpretation from Johann August Ernesti s defense of a historical-grammatical method in which the historical meaning of the text was equated with its grammatical interpretation to a later redefining of historical-grammatical method in which the words historical and grammatical were understood not as equivalents but as complements. Chapter 4, Finding the Big Idea in the Final Composition of the Text, argues that to understand the Pentateuch we need focus on its words and literary features. This will help us see its overall message as expressed in the big idea it is attempting to communicate. The best way to discover this big idea is to find the concept that explains the most and the most important parts of the Pentateuch (152). According to Sailhamer s reading of the Torah, this central focus of the Pentateuch is both obedience to the Mosaic law and living by faith, or simply faith and trusting God (156). In this sense the Pentateuch is Pauline, not by reading Paul s theology into the Pentateuch, but by reading the Pentateuch s message into Paul. The rest of this chapter is concerned with finding the compositional strategy of the Pentateuch in order to justify Sailhamer s view of its big idea. Since he believes that the second edition of the Pentateuch was shaped to fit the final form of the Tanak, it is necessary also to explore its compositional shaping. Sailhamer assumes that the threefold organization of the Hebrew Bible (Law, Prophets, Writings) was already the shape of the canon by Hellenistic times (second century B.C.E. or later, 175) and that this shape was the result of careful organization by its final editors, who also were responsible for the final form of the Pentateuch. Thus, he views the Tanak as organized around compositional seams. These are Deut 34 and Josh 1 as well as Mal 3 and Ps 1. The addition of the final chapters of Deuteronomy was intentional in order to tie the Pentateuch to the wider collection of canonical books. To bind the authorship of Old Testament books, especially the Pentateuch, with the textual nature of biblical theology that he advocates, Sailhamer posits three goals: (1) to investigate the smallest segments of biblical texts, attempting to discover what they tell us about the work and intention of biblical authors (197); (2) to uncover how the author of the Pentateuch groups these literary segments; (3) to show how larger literary units are combined to form books and whole texts such as the Pentateuch and the OT canon in its totality (197). He discusses and rejects some recent evangelical models to explain the authorship of the Pentateuch. Instead, Sailhamer offers his compositional approach. He notes that the text of the Torah contains various comments (i.e., authorial observations

4 on the narrative) that reflect strategy rather than strata. They are an intentional and sympathetic retrofit of the original Mosaic Pentateuch (202). As such, these comments not only demonstrate the work of remaking the Pentateuch to fit into the final canon, but they also imply that the first edition of Pentateuch was a coherent composition by a single author. To substantiate his view that the canon was already accepted and organized into a threefold Law, Prophets, and Writings before the time of Jesus, Sailhamer points to three pieces of evidence: Luke 24:44, a reference in Sirach, and a passage from 4Q398. However, he only mentions this evidence. He does not defend his interpretation of it. Part 2, Rediscovering the Composition of the Pentateuch, contains three chapters presenting Sailhamer s reasoning and conclusions about the composition of the Torah. Four major premises lead to Sailhamer s conclusion that the Pentateuch is a unity with a single purpose: it recounts a single story that begins with the creation and ends with the postponement of the possession of [the Promised] land ; the blocks of narrative are linked around a single theme of faith ; the arrangement of narrative texts around major, homogeneous poetic texts in Genesis 49, Numbers 24 and Deuteronomy 32 suggests that the Pentateuch s narratives are linked by a single messianic theme (royal imagery) that recurs in these poems (242); and, finally, there is the arrangement of the various collections of laws within the narrative of the Pentateuch. What Wellhausen and other saw as remnants of earlier law codes prove to be, on closer examination, a carefully laid out textual strategy within the Pentateuch. At its center lies the account of the golden calf. That story shows that something has gone fundamentally wrong at Sinai. It is only at the end of the book, in Deuteronomy 30, that the reader finds the author s answer: the need for a circumcised heart and the promise of a new covenant. This message closely follows the teaching of Jesus and Paul in the NT. (243) Sailhamer develops his compositional view that leads to the conclusion that there are five major blocks of narrative in the Pentateuch: the primeval history (Gen 1 11), the patriarchal narratives (Gen 12 50), the exodus narratives (Exod 1 19), the wilderness narratives (Num 11 25), and the conquest narratives (Deut 1 11). He notes that in the first block there are smaller blocks of material and that each one ends with a short poem followed by an epilogue (e.g., the garden of Eden narrative [Gen 2:4 22]; Gen 2:23 [poem]; Gen 2:24 25 [epilogue]). This is not only an organizing principle for Gen 1 11, but it also introduces the reader of the Pentateuch to the author s programmatic compositional approach to the entire Torah. At the end of each major block of material is a major poem followed by an epilogue. These poems are: Gen 3:14 19; 49:2 27; Exod 15:1 19; Num 23 24; Deut Each of them is related to the others in that they develop a royal messianic theme for the Pentateuch as a whole. In addition, Sailhamer

5 believes that these poems also contain post-mosaica inserted into the poems in order to align the Pentateuch to the final shape of the canon. The other major issue Sailhamer addresses in this part of the book is the collections of laws in the Torah. He notes that there are five major law collections: the Ten Commandments (Exod 20), the Covenant Code (Exod 20 23), laws for priests (Exod 25 Lev 16), the Holiness Code (Lev 17 27), and Deut Sailhamer notes that three major law collections are embedded in the Sinai narratives and arranged around two narratives of Israel s idolatry (the golden calf in Exodus and the worship of goat idols in Leviticus). He concludes that the laws are intended to correct the people s tendency to idolatry and to add more restrictive controls on Israel because it was unable to maintain the faith of the patriarchs without these additional law codes. This highlights Israel s continued failure and is a compositional strategy by Moses to point readers to hope in a promised new covenant. Part 3, Interpreting the Theology of the Pentateuch, concludes Sailhamer s treatment. Now that he has established his argument for the Pentateuch as a unified composition with a clear authorial intent, Sailhamer uses these chapters to address what he sees as important theological themes that run throughout the Pentateuch and inform the later prophets of Israel and even the New Testament writers. Chapter 8 treats The Nature of the Covenant and Blessing in the Pentateuch and especially explores the concept of promise in the Old Testament in general and in the Pentateuch in particular. In chapter 9 Sailhamer explores the messianic nature of the Pentateuch and how one ought to read these leading to the New Testament instead of imposing the New Testament s view of Jesus as the messiah onto the Pentateuch. There are also chapters on the law in the Pentateuch and the Torah s view of salvation. A final short conclusion rounds out this work. Overall, Sailhamer s work presents a number of interesting observations and critiques of previous evangelical scholarship on the Pentateuch. For instance, his assertions that evangelicals need to avoid reading the New Testament s theology back into the Old Testament is good as far as it goes. However, it is difficult if not impossible for Christians not to read the Old Testament in light of the New. Perhaps it would be better had Sailhamer argued that evangelicals need to strive to avoid reading the Old Testament as if it were merely a prelude and servant to the New Testament. Instead, he could have more plainly stated what he seems to be implying, that the Old Testament in itself is messianic and that the New Testament is simply the expression of this same messianism in light of the work and ministry of Jesus.

6 This is a long book, and at times it is ponderous reading and seems repetitive. In some places I had difficulty seeing the larger picture Sailhamer was trying to paint because he treats so many topics without adequately alerting the reader as to the ultimate goal of a chapter or group chapters. Moreover, much of its contents especially the major theses put forward are not new but can be found in Sailhamer s previously published articles. If a reader is familiar with these, this book will offer few important theses that are new. However, for those who have not previously read his work, this is a convenient place to view his collected thoughts on the Pentateuch (and on evangelical hermeneutics of the Old Testament as a whole). How is one to evaluate Sailhamer s approach to the Pentateuch? Certainly many critical scholars will be quick to dismiss his work, since its assumptions run counter to theirs. This is a mistake, since some of Sailhamer s insights are worthwhile to consider from any perspective. However, the more important question, I think, is how Sailhamer s analysis of the Pentateuch will be received among evangelicals and other Christians who share his assumptions about biblical inspiration and are inclined to a Christian messianic reading of the Old Testament. From that point of view, Sailhamer s argument for a compositional strategy that is clearly discernible in the Pentateuch is an important contribution. His literary analysis of blocks of material in the Pentateuch that end with major poems and are linked by messianic themes is persuasive. It ought to be part of a Christian reading of the Torah. Unfortunately, I wish Sailhamer had dealt with the question of why the books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers were divided as they are. If his theory of canonical shaping of the Old Testament is correct, there needs to be an explanation for why these books cut across the grain in that they are divided in the middle of what Sailhamer views as large blocks of material. More questionable is Sailhamer s assertion that the Tanak was organized into the current three-part Law, Prophets, and Writings by the second century B.C.E. and then his use of this assertion to try to date the post-mosaica and in some cases to detect post-mosaica. He offers little evidence to support an early date for the three-part canonical organization, citing as evidence Luke 24:27, a passage in Sirach, and 4QMMT. None of these give unequivocal support to the three-part canon that is known today. Luke 24:44 mentions the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms. For this to be a reference to the three-part canon, Psalms would have to be synecdoche for the Writings. However, I am unaware of any evidence for such a use of the word Psalms in the first century. Elsewhere in Luke s work, Psalms refers to the book of Psalms (Luke 20:42; Acts 1:20).

7 4QMMT speaks of the book of Moses [and] the books of [the p]rophets and Davi[d]. This looks suspiciously like Luke 24:27, and it is hard to see how David could be a circumlocution for a section like the Writings that contain Ecclesiastes, Daniel, and Ezra- Nehemiah among its books. Moreover, the more likely grouping in 4QMMT is around the word sepher: (the book of Moses) plus (the books of the prophets and David). If anything, this appears to be a twofold canon with the second part subdivided into prophets and David. As for Sirach, if Sailhamer has the Greek translator s prologue in mind, there are three mentions of Law, Prophets, and other books. However, while Law and Prophets seem to be canonical groupings, it is not clear that the other books is. The translator may be referring to Scripture (Law and Prophets) and other Jewish books. This is a distinct possibility, since this third group of books is referenced three different ways ( the other books that followed them ; the other ancestral books ; the rest of the books ), while Law and Prophets are consistently referenced by those terms. On the other hand, Sailhamer may have in mind a passage such as Sir 39:1 3. This text mentions several types of literature the student of God s law reads: prophets, sayings of famous people, parables, proverbs, and so forth. However, this appears to be something akin to genre distinctions rather than organized sections of the canon. Moreover, the overwhelming majority of evidence from the first century B.C.E. and the first century C.E. appears to heavily favor a two-part canon of Law/Moses and the Prophets (2 Macc 15:9; 4 Macc 18:10; Matt 5:17; 7:12; 11:13; 22:24; Luke 16:16; 16:29, 31; 24: 27; John 1:45; Acts 13:15; 26:22; 24:14; 28:23; Rom 3:21). Josephus has, perhaps, the most explicit discussion of the canon during this era (Ag. Ap ). He divides it into books from two periods: up to the death of Moses and from the death of Moses to the reign of Artaxerxes. The first period produced five books of Moses. The second period produced thirteen books of the prophets and four books of hymns and counsel. This appears to be a two-part canon with the second part subdivided at least partly on the basis of genre. Even if Josephus is advocating a three-part canon, it is not the three-part canon we know in the Tanak today. This leads to a grave problem with Sailhamer s view of the post-mosaica in the Pentateuch as being the product of a late canonical organizer and redactor. While virtually all evangelical Christian scholars would acknowledge a number of small additions to the Pentateuch after Moses day, Sailhamer s argument most likely will fail to convince, because he neither acknowledges nor critically examines the large mass of evidence against a second-century B.C.E. dating of the organizing of the canon into three parts, and the evidence he cites in support of his thesis is dubious at best.

8 My observation in reading Sailhamer s book is that he uses this same type of procedure on a number of occasions: putting forth a proposition, citing evidence that superficially appears to support his proposition, then assuming that he has proven his case. This proved to me to be a distraction time and again. Moreover, it is somewhat tragic, because in many cases it detracts from other fine observations and arguments Sailhamer makes in this major work on the Pentateuch. Many of his theses are convincing and well-reasoned. However, the facile arguments put forward in some cases makes one want to view the entire enterprise suspiciously. Certainly I, as a confessional Lutheran, resonate to Sailhamer s contention that the Pentateuch was Pauline long before Paul, that it is an authorial unity with a clear compositional strategy, and that the author did not want to make the law codes in the Pentateuch the focus for his readers but instead used them to point to the failure of the covenant and the hope in a prophesied new covenant. I would suspect that readers of Sailhamer s work who come from the Reformed tradition will find even more to like. In the end, this is a worthwhile book to read and consider for evangelical scholars of the Old Testament. However, it is long and often moves slowly. There is gold to be mined in this book, but one also must be aware of the pyrite that is here, too.