Old Testament Introduction: Text, Interpretation, Structure, Themes

By Robin Routledge

The Old Testament is part of the canon of Christian Scripture and, as such, has continuing significance for the church. However, the writings are set within a different historical era, a different culture and a different religious context. To understand the Old Testament in a meaningful way, it must be read against its historical, cultural and theological background.

Here, Robin Routledge enables readers to engage with the text. He discusses:

? date, authorship, the writers’ intention and purpose, and significant textual issues
? key scholarly approaches to the text, including historical-critical and literary approaches

To help us comprehend and interpret the Old Testament, and so apply it to current belief and praxis, Routledge includes an overview of exegetical and hermeneutical approaches. He also offers some guidance through the maze of new treatments and terminology.

The volume provides specific introductions to the sections and books of the Old Testament, following the canonical order of the Hebrew text. In addition, Routledge notes key distinctive issues and points to sources for further study.

The author’s hope is that this volume will not only aid students but will also benefit others who want to take the Old Testament seriously, and to apply its message to the life and ministry of the church today.

‘Scholarly and lucid, Old Testament Introduction is designed especially for those who want to understand how to read the Old Testament as Christian Scripture, while doing justice to its nuances and enormous diversity. I commend it warmly.’
Gordon McConville, Professor of Old Testament Theology, University of Gloucestershire

• Language: English
• Publisher: IVP
• Release date: Jul 21, 2016
• ISBN: 9781783594887

Robin Routledge

Robin Routledge is senior lecturer in Old Testament at Mattersey Hall in England. He also teaches at the International Baptist Theological Seminary in Prague and the Continental Theological Seminary in Brussels.

Book preview

Robin Routledge has now produced an invaluable companion volume to his highly successful Old Testament Theology. He gives a comprehensive orientation to all the dimensions of the study of the Old Testament, including canon, text, criticism and forms of interpretation, as well as an in-depth treatment of each individual book, and extensive bibliographical resources. Scholarly and lucid, it is designed especially for those who want to understand how to read the Old Testament as Christian Scripture, while doing justice to its nuances and enormous diversity. I commend it warmly.

Gordon McConville, Professor of Old Testament Theology, University of Gloucestershire

Title page

APOLLOS (an imprint of Inter-Varsity Press)

36 Causton Street, London SW1P 4ST, England

Email: [e-mail]

Website: www.ivpbooks.com

© Robin Routledge, 2016

Robin Routledge has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Author of this work.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher or the Copyright Licensing Agency.

Unless stated otherwise, Scripture quotations are taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Hodder & Stoughton Publishers, a member of the Hachette UK Group. All rights reserved. ‘niv’ is a registered trademark of International Bible Society. UK trademark number 1448790.

Scripture quotations marked nrsv are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, Anglicized edition, copyright © 1989, 1995 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Scripture quotations marked av are from the Authorized Version of the Bible (The King James Bible), the rights in which are vested in the Crown, and are reproduced by permission of the Crown’s Patentee, Cambridge University Press.

First published 2016

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

ISBN: 978–1–78359–429–0

eBook ISBN: 978–1–78359–488–7

Set in Monotype Garamond 11/13pt

Typeset in Great Britain by CRB Associates, Potterhanworth, Lincolnshire

Printed and bound in Great Britain by Jellyfish Print Solutions

eBook by CRB Associates, Potterhanworth, Lincolnshire

Inter-Varsity Press publishes Christian books that are true to the Bible and that communicate the gospel, develop discipleship and strengthen the church for its mission in the world.

IVP originated within the Inter-Varsity Fellowship, now the Universities and Colleges Christian Fellowship, a student movement connecting Christian Unions in universities and colleges throughout Great Britain, and a member movement of the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students. Website: www.uccf.org.uk. That historic association is maintained, and all senior IVP staff and committee members subscribe to the UCCF Basis of Faith.

Table of Contents

Preface

Acknowledgments

Abbreviations

1. The significance of the Old Testament

What’s in a name?

The Christian significance of the Old Testament

The Old Testament as revelation

2. What is the Old Testament? Canon and text

The Old Testament canon

The text of the Old Testament: textual criticism

Historical criticism

3. The Old Testament in its context

The geographical background

The historical background

The Old Testament and ancient Near Eastern literature

4. What kind of text?

Genre criticism

Poetry

Old Testament narrative

Prophecy

Wisdom literature

Apocalyptic

5. Interpreting the Old Testament

The ‘meaning’ of a text

Approaches to the interpretation of the Old Testament

Meaning and the author’s intention

6. The Pentateuch

Introduction to the Pentateuch

Genesis

Exodus

Leviticus

Numbers

Deuteronomy

7. The Former Prophets

The Deuteronomistic History

Joshua

Judges

1 and 2 Samuel

1 and 2 Kings

8. The Latter Prophets

Isaiah

Jeremiah

Ezekiel

The Twelve (Minor Prophets)

Hosea

Joel

Amos

Obadiah

Jonah

Micah

Nahum

Habakkuk

Zephaniah

Haggai

Zechariah

Malachi

9. The Writings

Psalms

Job

Proverbs

The mĕgillôt (scrolls)

Ruth

Song of Songs

Ecclesiastes

Lamentations

Esther

Daniel

Ezra-Nehemiah

Chronicles

Further reading

Old Testament canon

Historicity of the Old Testament

Wisdom teaching in the Old Testament

Bibliography

Search names for modern authors

Search items for subjects

Search items for Scripture references

Notes

Preface

The OT is part of the canon of Christian Scripture, and as such has continuing significance for the church. However, the writings are set within a different historical era, a different culture and a different religious context that often incorporates unfamiliar worship practices. As a result, in order to understand the OT in a meaningful way, it must be read against its historical, cultural and theological background. My aim here is to provide readers with the relevant information to enable them to engage with the text. This will include discussion of date, authorship, the writers’ intention and purpose, as well as significant textual issues. It will include, too, discussion of key scholarly approaches to the text, including historical-critical and literary approaches. And, because a key aim in facilitating understanding of the OT is that Christian believers are better able to interpret the text in order to apply it to current belief and praxis, it will also include substantial discussion of exegetical and hermeneutical approaches to the OT. There has been an increase in discussions in these areas in recent years, and it is easy for readers to become overwhelmed with the volume of material available. Part of the intention of this OT introduction is to provide an overview of relevant approaches, and to offer some guidance through what can appear to be a maze of new treatments and terminology. There will also be some discussion of key theological themes; though this will be kept to a minimum. For a more detailed treatment of theological issues, the reader is referred to commentaries and OT theologies, including my own.

Of course, it is impossible to look at the OT without considering the books that make it up, and there will also be some discussion of individual books, but because of the constraints of space, that must, necessarily, be limited. There will, however, be substantial footnotes, which point to more detailed discussion, and references to key texts for further reading, including lists of commentaries on individual books.

Following the discussion in the opening chapter of the significance of the OT, which seems a necessary starting point in that it is what justifies and motivates the study of the text, it seems logical, next, to enquire in more detail into what constitutes the OT. That, too, seems determinative for all that follows, and so chapter 2 focuses on the canon and text of the OT. Because of the significance of context, chapter 3 goes on to consider the world in which the OT came to be written: primarily its geographical, historical and literary background. This is followed by discussion of different genres present in the OT and the significance of genre for interpretation (ch. 4). Then, with much of the groundwork set out, chapter 5 will look, more particularly, at exegetical and hermeneutical approaches to the text, including what has become an important area of recent discussion: the location of a text’s meaning, and the significance of the author’s intention. The rest of the volume will then offer more specific introductions to the sections of the OT and of individual OT books; noting key distinctive issues and pointing to sources for further study. For convenience, particularly in the grouping of similar material, this follows the canonical order of the Hebrew text.

Like my previous volume, this book has grown out of a teaching context, and it is my hope that it will be of value to students. It has also grown out of many years of experience as a Christian minister, and I hope, too, that the emphasis on interpretation will be helpful to those teaching and preaching on OT texts.

As before, I refer to bc and ad, rather than the more widespread bce and ce, reflecting my conviction that the coming of Jesus Christ marks a turning point in history, and that, while it has significance in its own right, the OT also points forward to, and finds its fulfilment in, him.

Acknowledgments

This book is the result of several years’ work, and I want to express my thanks to those who have helped me reach this point with it. I continue to be indebted to Martin Selman, who nurtured my love for the OT, and to John Rogerson, who encouraged me throughout my PhD studies. I am grateful, too, for friends and colleagues at Mattersey Hall, and to several cohorts of students, at Mattersey and elsewhere around the world, who have helped me ‘try out’ and develop the material that has found its way into this volume. Their comments and challenging questions have been very valuable in keeping me on my toes, and helping me to produce a volume that, I trust, will be useful to them and others.

My thanks, too, to Philip Duce, Eldo Barkhuizen and the team at IVP and SPCK, for their support, encouragement, hard work and considerable patience, especially during the recent period of significant transition.

Finally, my thanks to my family. To my wife and best friend, Ailsa, who has patiently borne with me when I have kept disappearing into the study to ‘do just a little bit more’. I am glad that I can now answer her frequent, and quite understandable, question ‘Isn’t it finished yet?!’ in the affirmative. Thanks, too, to my children and especially the grandchildren, Darcey, Rex, Lucas and Leo, who have seen much less of me over the last year or two than they might have liked. Whenever they come round they are now accustomed to go straight to the study to look for Granda. I am sure they think I live there! They seem to be of the opinion that playing with them should be my first priority. Darcey (6) recently asked me ‘Are you being an author?’ When I rather proudly said that I was, she replied ‘Well stop it.’ Now that this book is finished, I hope to be able to give them a little more attention. My apologies to them, though, that there are not more pictures!

Abbreviations

1QIsaa – 1QIsaiaha (1QIsaiah) (Dead Sea Scrolls)

1QpHab – Habakkuk commentary (Dead Sea Scrolls)

4QDanc – 4QDanielc (Dead Sea Scrolls)

4QJera – 4QJeremiaha (Dead Sea Scrolls)

4QJerb – 4QJeremiahb (Dead Sea Scrolls)

4QJerc – 4QJeremiahc (Dead Sea Scrolls)

4QMMT – 4Q Miqṣat Ma‘aśe Ha-Torah (Dead Sea Scrolls)

11QTgJob – 11Q Job Targum (Dead Sea Scrolls)

AB – Anchor Bible

ABD – Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. D. N. Freedman, 6 vols. (New York: Doubleday, 1992)

AbOTC – Abingdon Old Testament Commentary

ABRL – Anchor Bible Reference Library

Ag. Ap. – Against Apion (Josephus)

ANE – ancient Near East, ancient Near Eastern

AOTC – Apollos Old Testament Commentary

AS – Assyriological Studies

ATJ – Ashland Theological Journal

AUSS – Andrews University Seminary Studies

av – Authorized (King James) Version

BA – Biblical Archaeologist

BAR – Biblical Archaeology Review

BASOR – Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

b. B. Bat. – Babylonian Talmud Baba Batra

BBR – Bulletin for Biblical Research

BCOTWP – Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms

b. Ḥag. – Babylonian Talmud Ḥagigah

Bib – Biblica

BLS – Bible and Literature Series

b. Meg. – Babylonian Talmud Megillah

b. Menaḥ. – Babylonian Talmud Menaḥot

b. Šabb. – Babylonian Talmud Šabbat

BSac – Bibliotheca sacra

BSL – Biblical Studies Library

BST – The Bible Speaks Today

BT – Bible Translator

BTB – Biblical Theology Bulletin

b. Yebam. – Babylonian Talmud Yebamot

BZAW – Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

CBC – Cambridge Bible Commentary

CBQ – Catholic Biblical Quarterly

CBR – Currents in Biblical Research

CC – Continental Commentary

ChrCent – Christian Century

COS – The Context of a Scripture: Canonical Compositions, Monumental Inscriptions and Archival Documents from the Biblical World, ed. William W. Hallo and K. Lawson Younger Jr., 3 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 2003)

CTJ – Calvin Theological Journal

CTM – Concordia Theological Monthly

CurBR – Currents in Biblical Research

DBI – Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, ed. L. Ryken, J. C. Wilhoit and T. Longman III (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press; Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1998)

DH – Deuteronomistic History

DOTHB – Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books, ed. Bill T. Arnold and H. G. M. Williamson (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press; Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 2005)

DOTP – Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press; Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 2003)

DOTPr – Dictionary of the Old Testament: Prophets, ed. Mark J. Boda and J. Gordon McConville (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press; Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press, 2012)

DOTWPW – Dictionary of the Old Testament: Wisdom, Poetry and Writings, ed. Tremper Longman III and Peter Enns (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press; Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press, 2008)

DSB – Daily Study Bible

DTIB – Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005)

EA – El-Amarna tablets, numbered according to J. A. Knudtzon, Die El-Amarna Tafeln: mit einleitung und erläuterungen herausgegeben, 2 vols. (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1915), and A. F. Rainey, El-Amarna Tablets 359–379: Supplement to J. A. Knudtzon, Die El-Amarna Tafeln, 2nd ed., Alter Orient und Altes Testament 8 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1978)

ECC – Eerdmans Critical Commentary

EJT – European Journal of Theology

Enc – Encounter

EvQ – Evangelical Quarterly

evv – English versions

ExAud – Ex auditu

FAT – Forschungen zum Alten Testament

FCB – Feminist Companion to the Bible

FOTL – Forms of Old Testament Literature

GBS – Guides to Biblical Scholarship

Ger. – German

Gk – Greek

GTJ – Grace Theological Journal

HAR – Hebrew Annual Review

HBM – Hebrew Bible Monographs

Heb. – Hebrew

HSM – Harvard Semitic Monographs

HTR – Harvard Theological Review

HTS – Harvard Theological Studies

HTS – Hervormde Teologiese Studies

HUCA – Hebrew Union College Annual

IBC – Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching

IBD – The Illustrated Bible Dictionary, ed. J. D. Douglas, N. Hillyer et al., 3 vols. (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1980)

ICC – International Critical Commentary

IDB – Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 4 vols., ed. G. A. Buttrick, T. S. Kepler, J. Knox, H. G. May, S. Terrien and E. S. Bucke (New York: Abingdon, 1962)

Int – Interpretation

IRT – Issues in Religion and Theology

ISBE – The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. G. W. Bromiley et al., 4 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979–86)

JANER – Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions

JANES – Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society

JAOS – Journal of the American Oriental Society

JBL – Journal of Biblical Literature

JEBS – Journal of European Baptist Studies

JESOT – Journal for the Evangelical Study of the Old Testament

JETS – Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

JHS – Journal of Hebrew Scriptures

JNES – Journal of Near Eastern Studies

JPSBC – Jewish Publication Society Bible Commentary

JPSTC – Jewish Publication Society Torah Commentary

JPT – Journal of Pentecostal Theology

JSNT – Journal for the Study of the New Testament

JSNTSup – Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Supplement Series

JSOT – Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

JSOTSup – Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series

JTS – Journal of Theological Studies

LAI – Library of Ancient Israel

LBS – Library of Biblical Studies

lxx – Septuagint

mg. – margin

mt – Masoretic Text

m. Yad. – Mishnah Yadayim

NAC – New American Commentary

NCB – New Century Bible

NCBC – New Cambridge Bible Commentary

NDBT – New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. T. D. Alexander, B. S. Rosner, D. A. Carson and G. Goldsworthy (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press; Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000)

NIBCOT/UBC – New International Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

NICNT – New International Commentary on the New Testament

NICOT – New International Commentary on the Old Testament

NIDOTTE – New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. Willem A. VanGemeren, 5 vols. (Carlisle: Paternoster; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996)

niv – New International Version (1984)

NIVAC – New International Version Application Commentary

NovT – Novum Testamentum

nrsv – New Revised Standard Version (1995)

ns – new series

NSBT – New Studies in Biblical Theology

NT – New Testament

OBT – Overtures to Biblical Theology

OT – Old Testament

OTE – Old Testament Essays

OTG – Old Testament Guides

OTL – Old Testament Library

OTS – Old Testament Studies

PEQ – Palestine Exploration Quarterly

Presb. – Presbyterion

Proof – Prooftexts: A Journal of Jewish Literary History

RSR – Recherches de science religieuse

RTR – Reformed Theological Review

SBJT – Southern Baptist Journal of Theology

SBLDS – Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series

SBLMS – Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series

SBLSBL – Society of Biblical Literature Studies in Biblical Literature

SBLSP – Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers

SBT – Studies in Biblical Theology

SBTS – Sources for Biblical and Theological Study

SemeiaSt – Semeia Studies

SHBC – Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary

SJT – Scottish Journal of Theology

SOTBT – Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology

Sound – Soundings

sp – Samaritan Pentateuch

SSN – Studia semitica neerlandica

STR – Southeastern Theological Review

SwJT – South Western Journal of Theology

TBC – Torch Bible Commentaries

TDNT – Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. G. Kittel and G. Friedrich; trans. G. W. Bromiley, 10 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964–76)

TDOT – Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry, trans. John T. Willis, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, David E. Green and Douglas W. Stott, 15 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974–2006)

Tg. Lam. – Targum Lamentations

Them – Themelios

THOTC – Two Horizons Old Testament Commentaries

ThTo – Theology Today

TMSJ – The Master’s Seminary Journal

TOTC – Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries

TS – Theological Studies

TynBul – Tyndale Bulletin

UBC – Understanding the Bible Commentary (formerly New International Biblical Commentary on the Old/New Testament)

VE – Verbum et Ecclesia

VT – Vetus Testamentum

VTSup – Supplements to Vetus Testamentum

WBC – Word Bible Commentary

WMANT – Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament

WTJ – Westminster Theological Journal

WUNT – Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament

WW – Word and World

ZAW – Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

1. The significance of the Old Testament

What’s in a name?

The Christian Bible is traditionally divided into the Old and New testaments.

¹

‘Testament’ comes from the Latin testamentum, which, in Latin versions of the Bible frequently translates the Hebrew and Greek terms for ‘covenant’.

²

This terminology indicates that a key point of distinction between these two sections of the Bible is the new covenant relationship between God and his people, which is promised in the OT (Jer. 31:31) and inaugurated through the death and resurrection of Jesus (e.g. Luke 22:20), and the earlier covenant relationship embodied, primarily, in the covenant between God and Israel at Sinai.

³

This contrast is evident in passages such as 2 Corinthians 3:4–18, which contains one of several references to the ‘new covenant’ (Gk kainē diathēkē, v. 6),

⁴

and the only specific biblical reference to the ‘old covenant’ (Gk palaia diathēkē, v. 14). The parallel here with the reading of ‘Moses’ (v. 15) suggests that ‘old covenant’ here refers to the books of the Law (the Torah or Pentateuch).

⁵

Similar language appears in Hebrews 8:7–13, where the ‘new covenant’ (vv. 8, 13) is contrasted with the earlier covenant that is ‘obsolete’ (v. 13, from the Gk palaiō, ‘to grow old’).

⁶

This gives some biblical warrant for the term ‘Old Testament’, though in a limited and fairly negative context. The use of the expression to refer to a wider collection of biblical texts appears to have been coined later, during the patristic period; one of the earliest references to ‘Old Testament’ is by Melito of Sardis, in the second century ad.

⁷

The designation ‘Old Testament’ may indicate that it is no longer relevant or has been superseded by what follows, and to emphasize its continuing significance as part of the ‘canon’ of Christian Scripture,

⁸

it has been suggested that ‘first testament’ is a more appropriate term.

⁹

However, ‘Old Testament’ has persisted in common usage.

The expressions ‘Old Testament’ and ‘first testament’ are distinctively Christian. They suggest that this collection of texts is incomplete on its own, and points forward to the ‘New Testament’ and the fulfilment of all that has gone before in and through Jesus Christ. In recent years the term ‘Hebrew Bible’ has become increasingly popular.

¹⁰

This description is not strictly accurate, since parts of the text are in Aramaic (Ezra 4:8 – 6:18; 7:12–26; Jer. 10:11; Dan. 2:4 – 7:28), however, it does emphasize that before it became part of the Christian Bible it was, and continues to be part of the canon of Jewish Scripture. And its pre-Christian origin needs to be taken into account in interpretation.

¹¹

This designation is more acceptable to Jews, and promotes discussion between Christian and Jewish interpreters of what is, essentially, the same text. Another term, ‘Tanak’, is an acronym based on the three sections of the text of the Hebrew Bible: Torah (Law), comprising Genesis–Deuteronomy (the Pentateuch); nĕbî’îm (Prophets), which is further divided into the former prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings – which, in the Hebrew text appear as single books), and the latter (or writing) prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the twelve minor prophets); and kĕtûbîm (Writings or Hagiographa), comprising Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ruth, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah and Chronicles.

¹²

However, as with the term ‘Old Testament’, ‘Tanak’ also has a confessional aspect: the Hebrew text of both is the same, but its readers reflect the faith communities to which they belong. This confessional stance may not have a direct impact on the exegesis of individual passages within their historical context, where some degree of objectivity is important. It is significant, though, for the way those texts are understood within their wider biblical context, and particularly in the area of biblical theology.

¹³

It is argued that by referring to the text as the ‘Hebrew Bible’, those confessional elements that may be less acceptable to other groups are minimized, thus giving greater scope for scholars from different faith communities to work more closely together.

Differences between Christian and Jewish approaches to the text are evident in two important ways. First, as noted already, although the text is essentially the same, the ordering of their respective canons is different (see Table 1.1). The Tanak ends with Chronicles, which has as one of its key emphases the planning and building of the Jerusalem temple, under David and Solomon. Following a relatively brief review of the history of Judah to the exile and a description of the destruction of the temple by the Babylonians, the book closes with the edict of Cyrus that the temple will be rebuilt (2 Chr. 36:22–23), and in the final sentence the people are urged to ‘go up’ (v. 23). In this way the Hebrew Bible points to a new beginning for God’s people after the exile, linked with the restoration of the religious life of the nation (including the birth of Judaism, which is primarily associated with Ezra). The OT ends with the prophetic books, suggesting a link between the future hope of the people of God and the second part of the Christian Bible.

¹⁴

In particular the last book, Malachi, points to the coming of the day of the Lord, which will be preceded by the return of Elijah. This opens the way for the NT focus on John the Baptist and his announcement that the kingdom of God has come in the person of Jesus Christ. These are the same Scriptures, but the different canonical ordering means that they prepare their respective readers for different historical fulfilments. These different expectations are seen, too, in the second important distinction: the ways in which the text is read forward into other religious literature. Clearly, Christians read the OT forward into the NT. As noted already, the OT is incomplete without the NT (just as, we could argue, the NT is incomplete without the OT). The Tanak, similarly, is incomplete without later writings, in particular the Mishnah and the Talmud.

¹⁵

Table 1.1

Table1_1

Rendtorff’s observation that ‘we read the same text as the Jews when studying the first part of our Bible in its original language, but we do not have the same canon’

¹⁶

is significant. It is important not to lose sight of the historical and cultural roots of the OT; it is important, too, to be open to the insights of those who are studying the same texts from a Jewish perspective. It is equally important, though, particularly when looking at the way texts function within the wider biblical canon, to recognize the importance of the confessional context in which the text is being studied. For that reason, I will refer to this part of Scripture, which I read as a Christian, as the ‘Old Testament’, though without the suggestion that it may be considered to be outdated or irrelevant to the life of the church.

The Christian significance of the Old Testament

The first Christians were Jews who viewed the OT as authoritative Scripture. Indeed, for a time this would have been their only sacred text. They recognized the significance of the new relationship with God that was made possible through the death and resurrection of Jesus, and of the new revelation they had received, but they did not discard the OT, which was to them already an important document of faith. On the contrary, a key concern of NT writers was to present the coming of Christ as the fulfilment of OT hope, and to demonstrate continuity both between the faith of the OT and that of Christian believers, and between the people of God in the OT and the community of those who put their trust in Jesus Christ.

¹⁷

The NT writers were convinced that what God had promised to his people in the past was now being fulfilled in and through the person and work of Jesus, and this gave continuing significance to the OT.

However, as the Christian church moved beyond its Jewish roots it came to comprise, predominantly, Gentiles, who had little or no cultural interest in the OT; and, other than the fact that it was already in circulation as a Christian text, they had no reason to attach religious significance to it. The question for these non-Jewish believers was not how to read what was already an important document of faith in the light of the coming of Jesus but, more fundamentally, why bother with the OT at all? One solution, set out, for example, in the Epistle of Barnabas, was to claim the OT as a distinctively Christian text, which had been misunderstood by the Jews, who interpreted things like the sacrificial and food laws literally rather than spiritually.

¹⁸

A more extreme solution, put forward by Marcion in the second century, was to remove the OT from the Christian canon altogether.

¹⁹

Marcion reflected Gnostic thought in presenting a contrast between the inferior God of the OT and the loving Father proclaimed by Jesus. He claimed that the attempt by the early Christian community to emphasize continuity between the Old and New testaments was mistaken. For Marcion, only Paul properly understood the gospel of grace and, as a result, Marcion suggested a canon that excluded not only the OT, but also much of the NT.

²⁰

The response to Marcion included an affirmation of the importance of the OT, though still as an essentially Christian document that could be properly understood only in the light of the coming of Christ.

²¹

These two extremes, one that regards the OT, or a substantial part of it, as irrelevant to the life of the church, and the other that seeks to ‘Christianize’ it, are represented in the modern debate. There are those, such as Adolf von Harnack, who have argued for rejecting the OT entirely as a document of the Christian church;

²²

though the more common approach is to subordinate the message of the OT to the teaching of the NT and to other perceived sources of moral authority, so that any value depends on the OT’s agreement with them. Thus the OT has no authority of its own, and its retention as part of the canon seems more out of historical interest or as a concession to Christian tradition than out of a sense of its own intrinsic worth. In an attempt to give the OT greater value as part of the Christian canon another approach is to interpret it primarily as a witness to Christ and to find direct links between the OT text and the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Christ.

²³

While of some value, this approach means that the OT is of value only in so far as it can be linked to aspects of NT teaching about Christ. Some OT texts may be open to such a reading, though there is considerable debate about which ones. But does that mean that a text has value only if it can be given such a ‘Christian’ interpretation? A consequence of this may be that commentators and preachers either ignore the large sections of the OT that cannot easily be related to Christ directly, or engage in imaginative and speculatory interpretations in an endeavour to make the link.

One further consequence of recognizing the significance of the OT only in so far as it can be related directly to the NT is that the text may be spiritualized to such an extent that important aspects of its meaning are not developed. So, for example, the Song of Songs (Song of Solomon) is frequently taken to refer to the relationship between God and his people or between Christ and the church. However, it also includes the sexual expression of the love between a man and a woman, and that aspect of the text is rarely expounded. Another example may be the approach to OT sacrifices. Instructions regarding animal sacrifices in the OT are not relevant to the practice of the church today: Christ’s sacrifice makes them no longer necessary. Consequently, OT texts referring to sacrifices may be taken simply to point to their fulfilment in the death of Christ. They do that, of course; but they also contain important spiritual principles, including recognizing the seriousness of sin, the importance of confession, the nature of sacrifice as something meaningful and costly, and so on. These principles need to be recontextualized, but they remain relevant to the life of the church.

²⁴

A key problem associated with both of these approaches is that they fail to recognize the significance of the OT as Scripture in its own right. Certainly, the OT cannot be fully understood in isolation from the NT; but nor should it be subordinated to the NT, or derive its authority solely from its agreement with the NT. The OT is the Word of God, and as such has its own inherent worth.

²⁵

Reasons for reading the OT as authoritative Christian Scripture include the following.

The Old Testament is part of the biblical canon

As noted already, both Christian and Jewish faith communities have accepted the OT as part of the canon of Scripture. That gives the text a particular status and authority in matters of faith and practice. Just how the OT operates in this way presents a challenge; but because it has been widely recognized as canonical Scripture we must not overlook or neglect it.

The Old Testament reveals truths about God, and his dealings with his people and his world

We recognize that it is the same God who is revealed in the OT and the NT, and that there is, therefore, a consistency and coherence in the nature of God and in the way he acts in relation to his people, the nations and the world.

²⁶

That allows us to draw correspondences between the OT context and our own, and to apply the theological principles that underlie his dealings with his people and his world in the OT to the life of the church today, and to the world today.

Jesus and the writers of the New Testament accepted the Old Testament as Scripture

Jesus made frequent reference to the OT. He used it to support his claims and as a basis for his teaching, and, significantly, he maintained that the OT pointed towards him (e.g. Luke 4:21; 24:27; John 5:39). The NT writers were also rooted in the OT. They saw faith in Christ and the emergence of the church as continuous with OT expectation, and they frequently refer back to the OT to give authority and credibility to their own message. As Wolff observes, ‘no New Testament writer felt he was in a position to witness to Jesus Christ without constantly opening and quoting the OT. Both the proclamation of Jesus and the preaching of the early Christians are unthinkable without the Old Testament’.

²⁷

The Old Testament helps us to understand the New Testament

Because the NT writers are so dependent on the OT, any proper understanding of the NT needs to be grounded in an understanding of the OT. This is all the more necessary because when NT writers develop OT concepts, they may not offer much explanation, on the assumption that these things were already well known. Examples include references to ‘covenant’, to the ‘kingdom of God’, to the ‘Passover’ and to links between Jesus and the ‘Passover Lamb’, to the role and function of ‘temple’ and to the description of the church as ‘the people of God’.

²⁸

References to the ‘Law’ in the NT are best understood in the light of the use of the term in the OT.

²⁹

There is also a growing body of literature on the use of ‘new exodus’ or ‘second exodus’ imagery in the NT;

³⁰

and this, too, assumes a, sometimes detailed, knowledge of the OT. Permeating these things, we see, too, the developing drama of redemption history, which runs through the OT and reaches its climax in the sacrifice of Christ. Individual scenes of that drama may be viewed separately; but each one is properly understood only in the light of the biblical whole. Thus, Wolff comments, ‘the proposition that the OT can be properly understood only in the light of the New . . . stands in need of its converse: The New Testament Christ-event can be fully understood only in the light of the OT’.

³¹

John Goldingay makes a similar comment: ‘the Old Testament’s insights must be seen in light of those of the New, but only as we immediately add that it is necessary to see the New Testament’s insights in light of those of the Old’.

³²

The Old Testament is the primary source of some biblical teaching

There are some things that may be assumed by the NT writers, but about which they say little because the primary discussion is in the OT.

³³

So, for example, while NT writers refer to God as the Creator (e.g. Rom. 1:25; 1 Pet. 4:19), and emphasize Christ’s role in creation (e.g. John 1:3; Col. 1:16–17; Heb. 1:2–3), that teaching builds on the more developed view of creation found in the OT.

³⁴

An important element in the creation story is the creation of human beings in God’s ‘image’ (Gen. 1:26–27; cf. 1 Cor. 11:7), with the task of exercising responsible stewardship over creation.

³⁵

This is relevant to the current ecological debate and, again, is found, predominantly, in the OT.

³⁶

It is in the OT, too, that we are given details of human beings’ fall into sin; a fall that has, in traditional theological understanding, brought all of the created order under a divine curse, and that necessitates God’s plan of redemption, fulfilled in Christ.

³⁷

There are some NT allusions to this ‘fall’ (e.g. Rom. 3:23; 8:19–22; 1 Cor. 15:21–22), and the NT sets out God’s response to it, but in general it and its effects are assumed. In these, and other areas, the NT writers build on what has gone before, and the primary source of the teaching is found in the OT.

The Old Testament as revelation

The nature of revelation

As we have seen, the OT has been accepted as Scripture, an acceptance underpinned by the conviction that its human writers were moved to set out divinely inspired revelation. There is not the opportunity here to discuss this in detail;

³⁸

though some aspects will be considered at relevant points in what follows. But it is appropriate to say something of how this volume approaches the issue of the OT as revelation.

It is a common article of faith that God reveals himself in a variety of ways, including through the created order (e.g. Ps. 19:1–4; Rom. 1:19–20). In general, though, primacy is given to the written, biblical text. It is frequently noted that, particularly in the OT, God is made known through what he does, and God’s activity in history plays an important part in revelation.

³⁹

But we are made aware of that divine activity through the biblical account. According to the NT, God is revealed, supremely, through Jesus Christ (e.g. John 1:18; 14:9; Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:1–3); but there, too, our access to that revelation is, primarily, through the written text. The text, then, is central, and the text that has been accepted as the source of that revelation is, as noted already, the canon of Scripture.

⁴⁰

There is debate about the precise content of that canon and when it might have been formalized.

⁴¹

It seems clear, though, that from an early stage within Judaism there was a reverence for those written texts that were believed to have been inspired by God, and which might be designated ‘Scripture’.

⁴²

And this was carried over into the church.

There are several views relating to how God reveals himself through Scripture. At one end of the spectrum it may be argued that the Bible contains the testimony of those who are simply bearing witness to their experiences of God. Understood in this way Scripture may be helpful in guiding our own reflections, but has no real authority. At the other extreme is the view that God dictated the text of Scripture to its human writers, putting his words into their mouths, and overruling their personalities and agendas, so that what we read is precisely what God has said. If that were the case, though, we would not expect to see the variety of styles and different theological emphases that are clearly present within the Bible. The best way to view the divine inspiration of Scripture would appear to lie somewhere between those extremes. On the one hand, the OT is the work of human writers and editors, who may indeed be reflecting on their own, and the nation’s, experiences of God – recalling what God has said to them, or seeking to apply their understanding of God to their own context. And what is written, including content, style and language, reflects their agenda and is set within the cultural and theological world view, of the writers and of their first audience. That is why context and background are important for a proper understanding of the text. However, while in one sense this is a ‘human book’, there is also a divine element: God has ‘breathed into’ the human writers in such a way as to ensure that what has been written down is, indeed, divine revelation.

The precise mechanism of what we generally call ‘divine inspiration’ is unclear. Sometimes we are told that God spoke directly to, or through, individuals and groups. Sometimes, particularly in the case of OT prophets, that revelation is linked with the agency of God’s Spirit;

⁴³

and Jewish and Christian tradition has further linked the Spirit of God with the inspiration of the Scriptures as a whole.

⁴⁴

Often, though, while readers may, rightly, hold to that general view of divine inspiration, individual texts themselves make no such claims, even implicitly. The OT writers penned, we may assume, what they considered to be important messages; but relatively rarely do they attribute that writing directly to divine inspiration. And yet God was working in them in such a way that what they wrote may, legitimately, be described as God’s Word. Some see a link between the human and divine elements present in this written ‘word’, with the human and divine natures perfectly united in Jesus Christ – the true Word of God.

⁴⁵

We may also see an analogy with the way OT writers understood God’s activity in history.

⁴⁶

There are occasions where God appears to intervene directly in the history of his people, for example in the events of the exodus. Often, though, that is not the case. When Joseph, now a ruler in Egypt, confronts the brothers who had sold him into slavery, he acknowledges God’s hand in it all (Gen. 50:20). Von Rad comments on this,

only at the very end, when God has resolved everything for good, does one learn that God has held the reins in his hand all along and has directed everything . . . But how? No miracle ever occurred. Rather, God’s leading was worked in secret, in the plans and thoughts of men’s hearts.

⁴⁷

The result is, nevertheless, that God’s purposes were fulfilled. Similarly, God may be seen to work within and through the agendas, reflections and decisions of human agencies to ensure that what is recorded in Scripture may be considered to be his inspired word. This includes any editing of the text into its final canonical form.

⁴⁸

This is of particular importance when it comes to the discussion of narrative approaches to the OT text.

Inerrancy?

One of the points of, sometimes heated, discussion when it comes to viewing Scripture as inspired divine revelation is the issue of ‘inerrancy’.

⁴⁹

This represents an attempt to maintain the integrity of divine revelation and the authority of Scripture in the face of modern biblical criticism;

⁵⁰

and asserts that, because God cannot lie, and because every word in Scripture comes from him, every word in Scripture must therefore be free from error. However, a difficulty arises over what constitutes ‘error’. Current approaches to inerrancy generally allow that the Bible writers wrote within a particular context, which must be taken into account in interpretation.

⁵¹

However, that does not go far enough for many evangelicals.

⁵²

A significant problem is that the point at which accommodation to ancient cultural, historical and theological ideas crosses the boundary into error can appear arbitrary. Some things, including non-chronological history writing, imprecise quotations and describing the world in phenomenological terms (i.e. as it appears to the writer rather than using exact scientific language, for example ‘the sun rises’), are deemed acceptable on the grounds that they conform to the literary conventions of the day. On the other hand, the suggestion that OT writers describe creation and the created order using the kind of mythological language and imagery that is found elsewhere in the ANE is often seen as crossing the line into error;

⁵³

even though it can be argued that that, too, is likely to have been normal practice at the time.

⁵⁴

This issue is a complex one. On the one hand, it is important to affirm a commitment, not only to the authority, but also to the integrity, truthfulness and reliability of Scripture. On the other hand, that commitment must be accompanied by the recognition that the message of the OT writers is set within a particular historical, cultural and theological milieu, which will, necessarily, be reflected in the language and imagery of the text. As Christian readers of the OT we believe that its message has universal significance: it is for all people for all time. However, it was also written for a particular audience at a particular point in history, and for its message to be communicated effectively its writers needed to present it in a form that would make sense then. That includes writing in the light of their own and their contemporaries’ world view. The OT writers were people of their time, sharing many of the ideas of those around them;

⁵⁵

and the process by which they were inspired to write Scripture, unless specifically required to do so by the nature of the revelation, did not override those characteristics, even if that meant some accommodation to their limited understanding in the way key theological ideas were communicated. In my view such an accommodation does not constitute error, and it should not be seen as undermining the integrity and reliability of the biblical account.

Progressive revelation

God did not reveal everything that human beings need to know about himself and his purposes at once. Theological understanding was gradual and progressive. This progression is particularly evident between the OT and the NT, and the complete revelation found in Christ; but it is also seen within the OT. This may take the form of new truth that is directly revealed. So, for example, Exodus 6:3 indicates that the name of God revealed to Moses had not hitherto been known.

⁵⁶

Similarly, Jeremiah 31:31–34 points to a new covenant, which, though continuous with the earlier Sinaitic covenant, will also be substantially different from it;

⁵⁷

and passages that indicate a move from corporate to individual responsibility (e.g. Jer. 31:29–30; Ezek. 18:2–3) present that, too, as an innovation. And, though not stated directly, there may be evidence of a growing theological understanding within the text itself. While there continues to be debate about when much of the OT material came to be written down in the form that we now have it, there is wide agreement that the traditions that lie behind the text cover many centuries. And during that time there appears to have been some development in the perception of God and his relationship with his people and his world. I am not suggesting that God himself is changing.

⁵⁸

In my view he remains constant! The issue here is how he is perceived and portrayed by writers who do not have the whole picture set out for them from the beginning. That said, where there is development it builds on rather than contradicts earlier perceptions.

Examples of this latter kind of progression include the move towards a more strictly defined monotheism. The patriarchs are portrayed as worshipping one God; but their attitude to those who worshipped other gods was fairly easy going. The exclusivity of Israel’s relationship with its one God was formalized in connection with the exodus, the covenant at Sinai and the Law. Even at this point, though, there is not the outright denial of the existence of other gods, which full monotheism requires. The view that other gods exist as no more than worthless idols seems to come later, particularly in the prophetic texts of Isaiah 40 – 55 and Jeremiah.

⁵⁹

Another example is the OT understanding of afterlife. This is an important element of Christian faith, and it is tempting to assume that it formed an important part of the faith of the OT writers, too; but that does not seem to be the case. For much of the OT period, the idea is not prominent and there is no clearly articulated theology of an afterlife; not one, at least, that was sufficient to have a substantial impact on life here and now.

⁶⁰

That is significant when it comes to interpreting and applying OT texts. The OT, as the rest of the Bible, does hold to the principle of divine vindication, reward and punishment. However, if there is no strong expectation of an afterlife, then the focus for these things shifts to the present. Thus Job receives his vindication within his lifetime; and, conversely, there is a sense of injustice because the wicked do not appear to be punished in this life, but instead prosper (e.g. Ps. 73:3; Jer. 12:1).

The view of supernatural spiritual agencies in the OT, and particularly the idea of Satan, also seems to undergo some development. In the earlier part of the OT, perhaps in the light of the constant temptation towards polytheism, everything, good or bad, is attributed to God. There is little emphasis on demons and evil spirits, and where they appear, they remain under God’s control (e.g. 1 Sam. 16:14; 1 Kgs 22:19–23).

⁶¹

Even (the) Satan in the book of Job can act only with God’s permission, and within clearly prescribed limits (e.g. Job 1:12; 2:6). This development is evident in the parallel accounts of the census carried out by David. In 2 Samuel 24:1 we are told that God incited David to number the people. This reflects the view, emphasized in the earlier period, that God is responsible for everything. By contrast, in 1 Chronicles 21:1, which is generally thought to have been written later, perhaps in the fifth or fourth century bc,

⁶²

the census is taken at the behest of Satan. By this time spiritual agencies appear to have come to be viewed as operating independently of, and in opposition to, God.

A fourth, important area of theological development is in relation to the non-Israelite nations. In the early days of Israel’s settlement in Canaan the surrounding nations posed a threat to their life as the people of God, and that is reflected in instructions to remain distinct from them. For much of the rest of their history, the people of Israel were oppressed by the nations and, understandably, saw their future vindication in terms of the defeat and subjugation of oppressive enemies. However, alongside what seems to be an exclusive, nationalist agenda, there is a developing universalistic view that sees the future people of God made up of those from all nations, who come on the basis of their faith, and who will share equally in the blessings of salvation.

⁶³

I have argued that aspects of this are present within the OT from the beginning;

⁶⁴

however, its theological articulation develops over time.

One of the significant events in the development of the theology of the OT was the Babylonian exile. The destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, and expulsion from the land, led to a serious evaluation of the nation’s relationship with God. A major issue was the question of how a faithful God could allow such a thing to happen.

⁶⁵

Another was how to maintain that relationship in a hostile, polytheistic culture, and that is reflected both in the focus on monotheism, and also in a clearer articulation of the view of God as the Creator, which distinguishes him from the worthless gods of Babylon. Linked to that, a third important issue related to the nation’s future hope: the God who has created order out of chaos is able to transform the exile, which is viewed as a return to the disorder of Genesis 1:2 (e.g. Jer. 4:23), and bring about a new creation.

⁶⁶

It is important to emphasize that this is still divine revelation; it is not merely a human response to a particular crisis. There may be an element of discovery, as God’s people reflect on what they already know of him and apply that to their current situation. Nevertheless, that needs to be seen as part of the continuing divine–human interaction within the process of inspiration. And by the same token these are not theological innovations. Rather, they build on an earlier understanding of God; though within that new historical context they take on a fresh importance and as a result find clearer articulation.

In the study of the OT it is important to be aware of progressive revelation, and to read texts, not only against their historical and cultural background, but also against the theological background of what was understood and believed by the writers and their audiences at the time. For Christian readers, this includes