317-548-2146

03. Book Cover Photoshop Template 1 182x300 - Introdution to the Historical Books: Book Review

Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading

In the book Introduction of the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading, Steven McKenzie provides a highly accessible look into methods that modern scholars use to read and understand the books of the former prophets.[1] McKenzie emphasizes a historical-critical approach to studying the former prophets. One of the strengths, and likely the greatest strength, of McKenzie’s book is its ability to summarize clearly and concisely modern scholarship’s perspective on genre, historicity, compositional development, and methods. Regarding methods, McKenzie both defines and explores the diachronic and synchronic methods of analysis. Critical initiatives and arguments are no longer novel, but McKenzie provides a clear presentation of diachronic methods as historical-critical approaches that plumb the depths of verticality, and he presents synchronic methods as literary-critical approaches that investigate the horizontal riches of the text. The presentation and juxtaposition seem to provide a necessary clarity to the reader. Specifically, McKenzie nicely connects the organizational dots by clarifying that literary source criticism, redaction criticism, form criticism, and historical reconstruction fall within the historical-critical diachronic category, while simultaneously placing canonical and narrative criticism into the synchronic category that has led to certain deconstructionist initiatives. In sum, the explanation and organization of modern scholarship’s approach to studying Scripture is strong.

On a more granular basis, McKenzie offers readers an insight into the way modern scholars approach historicity and compositional developments within the Old Testament, and specifically, within the former prophets. In a religious world where empathy is often declared bankrupt, deeply understanding disparate viewpoints is absolutely essential. McKenzie’s approach not only presents many scholars’ perspectives, but also provides a brief scholarly history regarding historicity and composition. First, regarding historicity, McKenzie leans on the work of John Van Seters who attempts to define the genre of history in ancient Israel without relying on a strict modern definition: facts from the past. Accordingly, McKenzie suggests the genre of history arises from biblical authors who compiled traditions into nationalistic literature that offered an account of ancient Israel. Whether the events actually happened in history is not of primary importance. What is important is that the biblical authors “provide explanations from the past for Israel’s self-understanding…history writing was theology.”[2] Along with historicity, McKenzie also provides a succinct, yet effective, presentation of Martin Noth’s hypothesis of Deuteronomistic History (DtrH) where the books of Deuteronomy through 2 Kings were written as a single unit. Noth assumes that the author of the DtrH lived during the time of the Babylonian exile and compiled, edited, and composed the books around 562 BC. Modern scholars have subsequently developed Noth’s proposal, but scholarly consensus does not currently exist. Regardless, a strength of McKenzie’s work is the elucidation of modern scholarship’s view of historicity and DtrH pertaining specifically to the former prophets. In agreement with Randall McKinion, McKenzie’s book is a “valuable contribution to the classroom.”[3]

McKenzie’s first and likely most obvious weakness is that he does not identify the weaknesses or at least the limitations of a historical-critical approach to study. First, as a matter of course, it is important to state that nothing innately objectionable exists about the constituent parts of historical-critical methods such as textual criticism, source criticism, redaction criticism, and form criticism. However, the risk occurs when historical-critical methods are applied without highlighting the potential obstacles. Noth’s Deuteronomistic History is a relevant example of a hypothesis that McKenzie presupposes and, although he recognizes other scholarly views, spends little or no time discussing its potential shortfalls. The proposed compositional development of the former prophets as a DtrH rests on source criticism and, in particular, the correct identification of the sources that underlay the final textual product. Unfortunately, a diachronic approach can be taken too far. The various DtrH hypotheses can easily lead to a form of atomization and, as Trent Butler explains, the biblical writers “did not start with half verses and add small bits and large bits until the process was finished. Such a process of redaction criticism simply takes critical studies to the brink of the unbelievable.”[4]

Another risk associated with source and redaction criticism might be coined “discovering conclusions in faulty assumptions.” For example, a source critic may conclude that a particular verse was a later redaction of an original older text. The later redaction then may lead the critic to conclude with certainty that the event described must have happened at a given date. The date may then be compared to evidence from ancient Near Eastern records. It may then be discovered that the biblical event does not match evidence corroborated by certain archaeological evidence. Accordingly, the critic concludes the event described in Scripture is fiction. However, if the original hypothesis, which was that the verse was a later redaction, is incorrect, then all the remaining logic falls apart. Finally, it is important to recognize that, in general, the indisputable determination of any given source does not exist, which is proven by the absolute lack of consensus by modern scholars. Without accusing McKenzie of making these mistakes, the weakness of his work is not addressing their potentiality.

McKenzie’s second and likely most damaging weakness pertains to the assumption that biblical history is not historical, which also may evolve from the risks associated with historical-critical methods. Granted, the possibility of later editors does not automatically require historicity to be undermined. However, as Butler explains, the historicity of the book of Joshua is questioned by the supposed DtrH if the “conquest tradition is nothing else than an invention by Deuteronomistic scribes.”[5] Furthermore, the more obvious concern regarding historicity seems to occur within the discipline of form criticism. To reiterate, genre analysis is a valuable tool and needs not to undermine historicity. However, McKenzie’s redefinition of biblical history certainly calls into question the historical veracity of the former prophets. To be clear, the former prophets do appear to utilize sources and provide an etiological purpose, but to suggest a theological work cannot be completely historical seems to represent McKenzie’s antisupernatural presuppositions rather than conclusive arguments. The weakness of McKenzie’s efforts is the absence of alternative views. However, by shifting the focus away from hypothetical sources and presupposed conclusions and, instead, toward the actual text, the study can engage the unity of the content and, per Barry Webb, resolve the tensions within the text through various forms of narrative analysis and development.[6] Although McKenzie does briefly mention synchronic approaches, the text once again moves into the background as he presumes that meaning may reside within the reader rather than the text. In sum, McKenzie provides a clear and concise overview of several modern scholarly approaches to the former prophets, but the lack of comprehensiveness and unwillingness to point out the potential pitfalls of those approaches is disconcerting.

__________________________________________

[1] The following analysis is an exploration of the following content: Steven L. McKenzie, Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2010), 1–38.

[2] Ibid., 12.

[3] Randall L McKinion, “Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 53, no. 3 (September 2010): 628.

[4] Trent C. Butler, Joshua, 1-12, ed. Nancy L. deClaissé-Walford, 2nd ed., vol. 7a, Word Biblical Commentary (Nashville: Zondervan Academic, 2014), 92.

[5] Ibid., Joshua, 1-12, 90.

[6] Barry G. Webb, The Book of the Judges: An Integrated Reading (Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2008), 39.

 

Bibliography

  • Butler, Trent C. Joshua, 1-12. Edited by Nancy L. deClaisse-Walford. 2nd ed. Vol. 7a. Word Biblical Commentary. Nashville: Zondervan Academic, 2014.
  • McKenzie, Steven L. Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2010.
  • McKinion, Randall L. “Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 53, no. 3 (September 2010): 627–628.
  • Webb, Barry G. The Book of the Judges: An Integrated Reading. Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2008.
Wilder - Introdution to the Historical Books: Book Review
Derek Wilder Executive Director
DEREK WILDER, PhD, is the Executive Director of Lives Transforming Group, Inc., a Christian counseling ministry focused on personal transformation, and the author of FREEDOM and Minds on Fire. Wilder has a Master of Theological Studies, an MDiv in Pastoral Counseling, and a PhD in Biblical Exposition. Wilder's scholarly focus lies in Pauline studies, with his doctoral dissertation specifically examining the ontological implications present in the eighth chapter of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Wilder, an adjunct professor, founded Convergence Therapy, integrating cognitive therapy and grace-based theology into the accredited college course: “Thought Life & Spirit Growth.”