Customer Reviews

Theme of the Pentateuch (Library Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies)

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

 

 

The Theme of the Pentateuch looks at the Pentateuch in its final shape rather then in its sources. Cline prefers to let the sources play a minor role while he asks what the theme of the whole Pentateuch is about. He treats the Pentateuch as a complete literary work. Cline agrees with other scholars that the material from which the Pentateuch was written came from different periods, he even coincides to the possibly of an oral stage. But he admits not being a devotee of the hypothesis, and feels it's not important in any case, and reminds the reader several times that the Documentary Hypothesis is only hypothetical. His interests lie in the final form of the Pentateuch, in what theme that form is trying to sustain. The approach of Clines does not differ too much from canonical criticism methods used by B.S. Childs and J.A. Sanders. Cline acknowledges the encouragement he personally received from Childs while writing this paper. However, B.S. Childs and J.A. Sanders primarily deal with texts that are later then the Pentateuch. As Torah, it had little competition in sacred writings, it had already combined the major competing beliefs when it was composed. It was by the Second Temple Period and later that Israel had several writing from which to select, and the canonical models work better with these texts. Cline does not believe redactors (or believing communities) had necessarily intended to reshape (or select) the texts to present their kerygma via a theme. Cline argues that the theme may have developed "beyond the conscious intentions of the redactors." The combination of sources may have resulted "perhaps unintentionally" in new theological insights. Cline appears to have taken an almost fideistic position here; he makes little reasonable effort to explain why the theme originally developed.

David Clines argues that the promise of blessings to the patriarchs is a consistent thread that binds the five books together. He writes that the thematic promise contains three elements that dominate the focus of the Pentateuch. These elements are the promise of posterity, divine-human relationship and land. According to Clines, with the exception of Genesis Chapters 1-11, this threefold promise creates the movement and message of the Pentateuch.

In approaching his subject, Clines contrasts his method with the atomism of his contemporary Biblical scholars and the geneticism of two significant works in Pentateuchal studies. He also looks at the literary history of the five books examining the several possible authors of the Pentateuch and how their writing contributes to his assertion of a consistent theme.

Clines links the theme of promise to the forward movement and anticipation of the Pentateuch. Clines writes that the promise itself is found mainly in Genesis and the opening chapters of Exodus; however, specific allusions to the promise continue throughout the Pentateuch and are especially emphasized in Deuteronomy. Elements of the promise are fulfilled to an extent in the order of descendants, relationship and then land. Clines lists a plethora of verses from each of the five books that state or allude to the promise. He categorizes them according to the three elements above. In his expositions of each of the five books, Clines examines how the promise unfolds.

Clines devotes a separate chapter and approach to the primaeval history of Genesis 1-11. He considers these chapters prefatory to the patriarchal promise to Abraham in Genesis 12. He examines three potential themes for this section and settles on a combination of the two most realistic to him. In the final chapter of the original edition of the book, Clines discusses the historical and theological functions of the Pentateuch.

Clines dates the final form of the Pentateuch to the Babylonian exile. He believes that it addresses itself to the exilic community and inspires the reforms led by Ezra and Nehemiah. Clines then provides an elaborate assertion of how the exilic or restoration Jews would have seen their own story in the Pentateuch and God's promise to them

The latest edition of Clines' book includes an "Afterword" in which Clines defends or criticizes his work in The Theme of the Pentateuch. To me, this is a troubling chapter that undermines rather than adds to the message he works to support in the book. The afterword seems to further analyze the Pentateuch according to the subjectivity of the "postmodern" culture rather than according to the research and study that characterizes the main body of the book.

I think a lengthy discussion on authorship also distracts from the focus of his book that is the theme of the final form of the Pentateuch. In trying to respond to other scholars' views and to each of the potential authors' (J, E, D & P) contribution to a theme, Clines' loses the momentum in building his case for theme that he only regains in the final chapter on "Function."

Similarly, his attempt to date the Pentateuch as a product of the Babylonian exile limits the scope of its audience. Although his reading of it through the historical eyes of the exiled or restored Jews is intriguing, I think his exilic dating of authorship avoids the indicators that point to an earlier authorship of the five books. Even if a priestly redactor packaged the Pentateuch for the exile community, I do not think the book's message and theme can be traced to that historical context at the loss of considering its message to a much earlier original audience as primary historically.

I think Clines' examination of the issues of authorship and historical context contradicted his stated purpose for this book and were an example of his admitted defensiveness in taking a thematic, literary approach.

Clines' afterword contradicts his concept of theme and interpretation that are the basis for his book. In concluding his afterword, Clines writes,

"These days, I am not so sure that the authors of the Pentateuch were speaking on every page in the name of God, and not also (or rather) speaking in the name of interests, social, political and ideological, that they represented...I am happy to admit my own continuing fascination with its challenge to our notions of what it means to be truly human." (141)

One can only conclude that the author's own interests, social, political and ideological have changed since his writing of this book; the Pentateuch has not changed. I think this underscores the effect of overlooking the Pentateuch's emphasis on the sovereignty and holiness of God. In the afterword, Clines questions whether the Pentateuch is good theology that is good for us. (138) This contrasts his approach throughout the book in which he states, "The Pentateuch as story confronts us existentially, that is, with a probing of our own existence." (114) I agree that the Pentateuch especially confronts us with the holiness of God and our own inadequacy before him. Contrary to his view in the afterword, it is good theology and is good for us.

So basically, Clines provides his own rebuttal to his book. The subjectivity of the afterword does not overrule the mostly objective approach in the book.

Craig Stephans, author of Shakespeare On Spirituality: Life-Changing Wisdom from Shakespeare's Plays