Customer Reviews

The Old Testament Documents: Are They Reliable & Relevant?

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Most books dealing with the reliability of Biblical documents focus on their transmission history, and usually that of the New Testament, as we know more about it. How much less we know of the textual history of the Older Testament, however, is seen in that only 35 pages of this book are actually devoted to it! The rest of the work is filled out by discussions of whether or not the history and message recorded in those documents is reliable and relevant to today. These discussions are introductory and survey the field in a manner that seems to skate over some rather prickly issues, particularly in the areas where Kaiser argues for the reliability of the recorded history. Given that this work came out some six years after the first major public salvo from minimalist interpreters, who deny the historicity of the events Kaiser argues are historical, there should have been more interaction with them. Their views are becoming general public knowledge and should be interacted with. There also seems to be a tendency in the later sections on the reliability of the messages in the documents, to jump from the fact that something in the text is historically accurate to the view that the message is therefore reliable. The message of Ezekiel, for example, may or may not be reliable, but it isn't proven by the fact that other people at the same time also used bricks as writing materials. On the positive side, however, the discussion of the textual history is concise and informative, as is most of the book. There is also useful information on how many critical views of the text, which remain prevalent in the popular conscience and media, are actually either passe, dead, or under serious fire on the academic end. Over all, the book is worth reading as long as one keeps in mind its introductory survey nature and are willing to pursue the issues to greater depth via the footnotes. The book will give you a good foothold in and understanding of the field to make a solid start at it.

Kaisers work with the Old Testament Documents is an interesting read. I had the belief that the Old Testament documents were both reliable and relevent before I began to read this book, and after reading it my belief still stands. There are only two arguments that I would like to confront after reading Kaiser's work. The first thing that I dislike is how Kaiser skims over some topics of debait and basically just says that they are historically accurate because they are found in historical documents from more than one source. This could easily be construed by simple "word of mouth" or lack of an eye witness. A rumor or tale could be believable and convincing and yet not true or precise. The second thing that I noticed about this book, is the fact there is very little evidence to go by in regards to the Old Testament, and Kaiser does not thoroughly discuss this problem. Although further discussion of this topic might hurt Kaiser's points, it would only be fair to show how small the stack of evidence, even though convincing, really is. Overall, this book was very informative and serves as a great introduction to how the Old Testament can be both "reliable and relevant" today.

Walter Kaiser believes that the Old Testament documents are both reliable and relevant for Christians today. While he does not try to "prove" the infallibility of the Old Testament scriptures, his argument in favor of their reliability and relevance is generally persuasive. Especially fascinating is some of the supporting archeological evidence, such as Baruch's bullae and investigations into the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Kaiser also notes problems with the evidence when applicable; for example, the dating of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and various "missing people." His argument is weakest in regards to Genesis 1-11 for several reasons. First he argues against those who hold that certain portions of early Genesis are "scientific impossible." But the main problem with these portions is not their scientific impossibility, but the lack of scientific evidence in favor of the biblical account. While this is problematic for the long lifespans and early iron-working, nowhere is it more devestating than for the universal flood story-a story that Kaiser overlooks completely! Moreover, while arguing in favor of Moses authorship for the Pentateuch, Kaiser dismisses the various "strands" that provide the support for the JEDP hypothesis. Kaiser does rightly expose some flimsy assumptions of the JEDP hypothesis; however, the existence of various strands in the text do not necessarily undermine support for Moses' authorship (for which Wright argues). It certainly seems plausible that Moses collected various written or oral traditions when writing and compiling the Pentateuch, and so a wholesale dismissal of the JEDP hypothesis might be hasty. Despite these flaws, this book remains a good introduction to the topic.

Kaiser presents the argument that the Old Testament is crucial to a full understanding of the New Testament. The concept of the Old Testament no longer being treated as a historical document, but rather a story book, is appalling. Kaiser points out that under the American judicial system, we have the code of "innocent until proven guilty." In scientific evidence, we start with a hypothesis and test it to determine if it is false. If it passes the test (not false), then we can certify it as Law, or Truth. Where does this fit with our regard toward the scriptures? There have been no examinations as to the veracity of this historical document, but rather a condemnation simply because of the implication that we are held responsible to a Creator. "In an indictment of this so-called objectivity, the judgment of history has caught up with that bit of Enlightenment hubris and has exposed such claimants to objectivity as a plurality of subjective relativizers. And the rest, as they say, is now history>" (28).

The implications of regarding the Old Testament as no longer relevant, no longer reliable, are huge. Without the Old Covenant, we have no purpose for the New Covenant. And thus, we have a church born not out of sacrifice and repentance, but out of freedom and selfishness. We no longer have a church that seeks the Creator, but rather one that become their own creator, and in doing so, commits idolatry. But, after all, the Torah holds no ground, and thus, the Emergent Church can continue their sugared cereal breakfast, lacking all life-sustaining nutrients and health. In the end, they will hunger more.



See the Rest of this review at [...]

I am not able to review this book since I have been waiting for weeks to get it and to date I still have not received it or the other book I bought.