Category Archives: review

The Meaning of the Pentateuch — Review and Giveaway

Christianity Today recently chronicled the Mark Driscoll/John Piper war-of-words regarding John Sailhamer’s newest book.  To recap, here was the online verbal exchange:

Driscoll noted that he received Sailhamer’s newest work, The Meaning of the Pentateuch, a book he felt was appropriate for “hardcore uber geek theological types who love footnotes.”

John Piper responded with an appropriate verbal beat down:

To all pastors and serious readers of the Old Testament — geek, uber geek, under geek, no geek — if you graduated from high school and know the word meaning, sell your latest Piper or Driscoll book and buy Sailhamer… There is nothing like it.  It will rock your world.  You will never read the Pentateuch the same again.  It is totally readable.  You can skip all the footnotes and not miss a beat.

In fact, you might have to skip the footnotes unless your German, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and French are up to par!

A Little Background

I was first introduced to John Sailhamer and his writings when I came to SEBTS in 2006.  After enduring four years of study at my undergraduate institution’s Religion department I was worn out from defending the historicity of the Hebrew Bible.  Reading Pentateuch as Narrative and Introduction to Old Testament Theology: A Canonical Approach was a breath of fresh air.  This hermeneutic took the text of Scripture seriously and made sense of of the New Testament writers’ interpretation of the Hebrew Bible.  These books provided a necessary corrective to my hermeneutic.  I had been so preoccupied by secondary textual issues in my reading of the Old Testament I had neglected to let the Old Testament shape my questions and concerns when I approached the text.  After listening to Sailhamer and re-reading the Hebrew Bible, I no longer felt self-conscious about the intentionality and cohesion of the Old Testament.  Further, from a scholarly perspective, I was made aware of the shortcomings of previous historical-critical approaches to the Hebrew Bible.  The method I was taught in my undergraduate studies (e.g., Wellhausen) had been demonstrated by modern scholarship to hold little prospect for consensus.  The meaning of the Hebrew Bible was opened as I saw new perspectives in reading the text as intended by its author(s) (e.g., Childs, Sailhamer, Rendtorff).

The Meaning of the Pentateuch

Sailhamer’s most recent contribution to Old Testament Studies is a legitimate tome in the field.  It is the magnum opus of his great career.  This text combines years of classroom teaching, scholarly research, and published books and articles into one collection.  The result is a comprehensive approach to the Pentateuch explaining and incorporating a robust Biblical Theology and well-defined Hermeneutic into serious, careful exegetical examination of the Hebrew Bible.  The reader will gain large overviews of subjects such as Biblical exegesis, Biblical theology, historical method, and philology.

What I most enjoy about this book is Dr. Sailhamer not only makes summary hermeneutical/theological/philosophical statements but he also demonstrates how he arrived to these conclusions.  Further, he demonstrates an exhaustive knowledge of the history of ideas in relation to Biblical exegesis and theology.  As a historian, Sailhamer is able to trace the historiography of Old Testament interpretation and explain how modern evangelicals have arrived at their current hermeneutical guidelines.

Exegesis

Sailhamer takes seriously the compositional strategy and the words of the text of the Hebrew Bible.  For Sailhamer, proper interpretation seeks to find the intended meaning of the author by the words he uses and the way the text is structured.  As a result he spends a significant amount of time exegeting the theological commentary that occurs at the seams of the Tanak (e.g., Deuteronomy 34, Joshua 1, Malachi 3/4, Psalms 1-2, Chronicles 36).  For him, these “seams” provide significant interpretive clues to the intended meaning of the Hebrew Bible.  Within the Hebrew Bible (and, even, the New Testament), Biblical authors act as Biblical theologians as they interpret previous text (e.g., compositional themes, prophets, apostles, etc.).

Organization of the Book

The book is organized into three sections dealing with foundational issues (e.g, hermeneutics, Biblical theology), text specific issues (e.g., compositional strategy), and theological conclusions drawn from a reading of the Pentateuch (e.g., covenant, blessing, messiah, Mosaic Law, salvation).

Concluding Remarks

Much more can be said about Sailhamer’s discussion of theology and compositional strategy.  Hopefully what has been discussed will whet your appetite to read this book and (more importantly) to examine the intended meaning of the Pentateuch.

Giveaway

In order to increase the traffic at my new blog and be generous, I have decided to give a brand new copy of John H. Sailhamer’s The Meaning of the PentateuchTo enter this giveaway merely comment on this post (make sure to use a valid e-mail address so I can contact you if you win). The winner will be chosen randomly and contacted via e-mail.  Please share this contest with other people via Twitter, Facebook, blog, or neighborhood flyers. Only one comment per person, but you’ll get an extra entry if you link to this post on your own blog!

“Why We Love the Church” by Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck

Overall Impression

I just finished reading the most recent DeYoung/Kluck collaboration (they previously teamed up on Why We’re Not Emergent).  My only previous experience with either writer was through DeYoung’s blog and hilarious book on finding the will of God (“without dreams, visions, fleeces, open doors, random Bible verses, casting lots, liver shivers, writing in the sky, etc.).  I was excited by the subject matter (as evidenced in the title) and the praise from theological heavyweights such as J. I. Packer, Al Mohler, and Mark Dever.  This book is well-informed, balanced, readable, funny, and God-glorifying.

Positive

The basic premise of this book is that there is no such thing as a “churchless Christianity.”  The authors are clear that they are trying to correct the common notion that Christians do not need “organized churches.”  In fact, the Scriptures indicate that organization (i.e., structure in corporate worship, leadership, etc.) is essential to the health of a church.

“Community” is a buzzword among modern evangelicals, but many “emergent” (whatever that means) types are unwilling to be shaped by a community of believers that does not mimic their particular hipster style.  It is essential that each believer be a part of a church that is full of imperfect Christians.  The result of old and young coming together to worship despite differences of opinion regarding musical style and church architecture is mutual edification and personal sanctification.

DeYoung and Kluck are particularly critical of modern Christian “revolutionaries.”  Christianity, they argue, needs more “plodding visionaries,” that is, people who are concerned with obedience to the gospel and faithfulness to the commands of Christ.  Giving up on local church because it does nothing for you or because you can find a deeper spirituality somewhere else is, frankly, narcissistic and contrary to the commands of Scripture.

I was thankful for the historical perspective the authors provided in two areas:  (1)  They clarified the oft repeated maxim that “Christians have done terrible things throughout there history.”  While this statement, they say, is true it is not absolutely true without qualification.  For example, while race-based slavery was condoned by some Christians it was also abolished largely because of Christian abolitionists.  (2)  The authors also busted the myth of the early Christian utopia.  You and I have both heard the call to be a “New Testament church.”  There are few problems with this statement.  On the one hand the Bible is full of terrible churches rife with division, heresy, and immorality.  On the other hand, just because something is not mentioned in the Bible does not mean that is impure (e.g., buildings, pews, etc.).

The authors argue that the most important reasons to love the church are because it is the God-ordained means for the proclamation of the gospel and the sanctification of believers.  Good reasons that stand in stark contrast to the modern Christian’s “what’s-in-it-for-me” mentality.

Negative

This book is an admirable attempt to correct many problems in modern evangelicalism.  Despite claiming a robust ecclesiology, this book is far from comprehensive.  It has barely a mention of issues such as covenant membership and ordinances.

The authors demonstrate a great balance in their personal understanding of the church’s relationship to God and culture.  However, they set up a false dichotomy between “emergent-types” and “traditional-types.”  The authors unfortunately caricature “emergents” as a modern incarnation of the liberal social gospel.  This dichotomy is unnecessary.  One can be concerned with a true gospel and a culturally appropriate presentation of that gospel.

Though I understand the intention to defend the “traditional” church, I am still uncomfortable with the language of church as “institution” and the authors consistently assume that particular incarnations of modern church are Biblical and healthy.

Concluding Remarks

On the whole this book provides balance to contemporary tendency to “church-hate.”  While neither comprehensive or without fault, the authors are clearly attempting to glorify God and obey the Scriptures.  Love Jesus and love his bride.