Tuesdays Are for the Old Testament
5/28/24
Lessing, R. Reed, & Steinmann, Andrew E. (2014). "Chapter Twenty-one: Interpreting Prophetic Books." In Prepare the Way of the Lord: An Introduction to the Old Testament. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House. (355-366).
Lessing and Steinmann introduce the idea of the writing prophets by detailing some of the odd events recorded in their books. It seems the prophets are a special group of people who are not afraid to do unusual things at God's command (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 355). The oddities of the prophetic books may call for a special reading strategy.
Understanding the relationship of the prophets to the life of worship of Israel may help us in our interpretation.Yet this understanding has shifted in some ways over the past hundred years (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 355). At the start of this period, prophets were generally seen to be revolutionaries who fought against liturgy, sacrifices, and priests. In more recent years, Lessing and Steinmann consider the position to have moderated. Some of the prophets are clearly associated with the temple, while others value liturgy a great deal (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 356). The difficulty in interpretation may be related to "dialectical negation" in which two concepts are opposed to each other, seemingly because they are compatible. However, this practice may well simply call attention to the elements for purposes of comparison. Both are important, but there may be some tension caused by juxtaposing them. Lessing and Steinmann provide several examples of such tension.
Analytical methods, such as form criticism, have been applied to the prophetic texts. From the time of Herman Gunkel onward, scholars have attempted to apply various philosophical methods to the prophets, reducing the idea of tension. In the case of Gunkel, this meant that "an idea could be stated in only one way on any given occasion" (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 357). Therefore, anything which created tension would be taken as a sign of redaction. The genres were assumed to be entirely pure. Therefore a change of genre signaled a change of author. Any discontinuity would be flagged as another layer of development.
Following Gunkel, Sigmund Mowinckel identified four different types of prophetic materials.These would be used to distinguish among layers of development (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 358). Models of additional editorial layers were gradually added in attempts to take the material from the hypothetical words of an ecstatic prophet to the more finished product which appears in canonical writings (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 358). The resultant view was that of many layers of redaction which distorted an original idea of a text.
By the mid-1970s, Lessing and Steinmann consider a shift to be taking place, in which the work of the redactors would be evaluated throughout all portions of Scripture (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 359). Redaction criticism was born, focusing on a text from a prophet and a series of later editors who worked out the entirety of the prophetic message. Evaluation of discontinuity within a text would lead to the ability to reconstruct the process of redaction and the adaptation of prophetic messages to different circumstances (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 360).
Lessing and Steinmann go on to discuss the rise of rhetorical criticism. The subjective nature of exegesis in light of historical reconstructions means that it is difficult, at best, to find integrity in any of the prophetic compositions (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 361). This difficulty has led to the rise of rhetorical criticism, in which the text is analyzed in terms of the artistry of the work as a piece of literature. This discipline has arisen primarily since 1968. The emphasis comes to be on the atypical features of a written work, rather than what is typical.The works are considered as whole compositions which serve rhetorical purposes. The prophetic books are further evaluated in terms of their oral context (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 362).
5/28/24
Lessing, R. Reed, & Steinmann, Andrew E. (2014). "Chapter Twenty-one: Interpreting Prophetic Books." In Prepare the Way of the Lord: An Introduction to the Old Testament. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House. (355-366).
Lessing and Steinmann introduce the idea of the writing prophets by detailing some of the odd events recorded in their books. It seems the prophets are a special group of people who are not afraid to do unusual things at God's command (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 355). The oddities of the prophetic books may call for a special reading strategy.
Understanding the relationship of the prophets to the life of worship of Israel may help us in our interpretation.Yet this understanding has shifted in some ways over the past hundred years (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 355). At the start of this period, prophets were generally seen to be revolutionaries who fought against liturgy, sacrifices, and priests. In more recent years, Lessing and Steinmann consider the position to have moderated. Some of the prophets are clearly associated with the temple, while others value liturgy a great deal (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 356). The difficulty in interpretation may be related to "dialectical negation" in which two concepts are opposed to each other, seemingly because they are compatible. However, this practice may well simply call attention to the elements for purposes of comparison. Both are important, but there may be some tension caused by juxtaposing them. Lessing and Steinmann provide several examples of such tension.
Analytical methods, such as form criticism, have been applied to the prophetic texts. From the time of Herman Gunkel onward, scholars have attempted to apply various philosophical methods to the prophets, reducing the idea of tension. In the case of Gunkel, this meant that "an idea could be stated in only one way on any given occasion" (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 357). Therefore, anything which created tension would be taken as a sign of redaction. The genres were assumed to be entirely pure. Therefore a change of genre signaled a change of author. Any discontinuity would be flagged as another layer of development.
Following Gunkel, Sigmund Mowinckel identified four different types of prophetic materials.These would be used to distinguish among layers of development (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 358). Models of additional editorial layers were gradually added in attempts to take the material from the hypothetical words of an ecstatic prophet to the more finished product which appears in canonical writings (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 358). The resultant view was that of many layers of redaction which distorted an original idea of a text.
By the mid-1970s, Lessing and Steinmann consider a shift to be taking place, in which the work of the redactors would be evaluated throughout all portions of Scripture (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 359). Redaction criticism was born, focusing on a text from a prophet and a series of later editors who worked out the entirety of the prophetic message. Evaluation of discontinuity within a text would lead to the ability to reconstruct the process of redaction and the adaptation of prophetic messages to different circumstances (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 360).
Lessing and Steinmann go on to discuss the rise of rhetorical criticism. The subjective nature of exegesis in light of historical reconstructions means that it is difficult, at best, to find integrity in any of the prophetic compositions (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 361). This difficulty has led to the rise of rhetorical criticism, in which the text is analyzed in terms of the artistry of the work as a piece of literature. This discipline has arisen primarily since 1968. The emphasis comes to be on the atypical features of a written work, rather than what is typical.The works are considered as whole compositions which serve rhetorical purposes. The prophetic books are further evaluated in terms of their oral context (Lessing & Steinmann 2014, p. 362).
RSS Feed