Against the “Hebrew Bible”

Against the “Hebrew Bible” October 20, 2015

Not surprisingly, Robert Jenson spends a lot of time in his Brazos commentary on Ezekiel talking about Trinity and Christology and other topics that biblical scholars would tell him do not appear in Ezekiel’s prophecy. 

He knows that his method will offend “the modern exegetical academy’s chief dogma,” namely, the notion that “exegesis of the Old Testament might call up points of Christian doctrine.” the notion that Christian doctrine might shape interpretation is even more offensive (25).

Jenson finds these objections odd, since “it is indeed as Christian scripture that the church reads what she calls the Old Testament” (25). Why should the church give up the claim that the Old Testament constitutes a large portion of the church’s book?

He addresses one reason in a footnote: Christians should give up claims about the Old Testament because it is offensive to Jews. Jenson’s response is right on target: “Rabbinic Judaism and the church have equal and parallel claims to obey the Tanakh/Old Testament as scripture. Neither is a direct continuation of old Israel. In the long run, each could obey old Israel’s scripture only by adding a second volume: the rabbis added the Mishnah, and the Christians the New Testament. The Mishnah is a legal complex; and rabbinic Judaism reads the Tanakh fundamentally as Torah, given narrative context by the narrative and other nonlegal genres. The New Testament tells and comments on a story that claims to continue one told by the Old Testament; and the church reads the Old Testament fundamentally as narrative with a telos, given its moral structure by Torah.” Neither Jews nor Christians can accept the “jejune” designation “Hebrew Scriptures” (25, fn 26).

Christian abandonment of the notion of an “Old Testament” fails to impress Jews, and it inevitably misidentifies the contrast between Judaism and Christianity.


Browse Our Archives