LITERARY CRITICISM OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

INTRODUCTION

The term Literary criticism is an approach to the study of the scriptures. In other words, it is a unique blend of literary pieces. As such, it invites us to appreciate its literary features as we interpret its unique content. In previous epochs, literary criticism referred to methods used by biblical scholars to determine linguistic and historical features of a biblical work or a particular passage. The kinds of features generally examined were: authorship, occasion and purpose, date, literary form, context, literary structure in its sociological setting, among others.[1]

Giving more focus and attention to the Pentateuch as our case study, our paper shall be based on three fold namely: the background to literary criticism, its approach, and its application to the Pentateuch.

LITERARY CRITICISM IT'S BACKGROUND

Literary criticism in traditional biblical studies has had a rather narrow focus referring primarily to source or documentary analysis. This attitude had its origins in the eighteenth century. When biblical interpreters became increasingly aware of difficulties in reading particular portions of the scriptures, they intuited that certain books such as 2^nd Corinthians and certain blocks of material such as the Pentateuch were composite of various documents. The tasks of separating out these sources or layers, of describing their content and characteristic features, and of relating them to one another eventually came to be designated “literary criticism.”[2] Consequently, different scholars use this term with different extensions of meaning. In its broadest meaning, Literary Criticism includes all questions regarding the text, that is, its authorship, historical settings and the various aspects of the language of the text.[3]

In Old Testament studies, literary criticism has from the beginning been associated with the discovery of literary patterns, and these, in turn, enable the critic to isolate various sources. From a study of sources (began especially in the eighteenth century), this inquiry further developed an interest in the authorship, date, unity, style, setting and intent of each source. Traditional, biblical scholarship had concerned itself with two disciplines: establishing the best text of a given passage, and determining its meaning. The former discipline was called “criticism” and the latter “hermeneutics.” With the rise of Old Testament source analysis, the terms “lower” (for textual) and “higher” (for literary) criticism began to be used. The higher critic goes beyond the text to ask questions about its authorship, background, and source.[4]

AIM OF LITERARY CRITICISM

As suggested by Norman Habel the purpose of literary criticism is to “provide the literary spadework for a better understanding of the function and importance of the document.” He points out, moreover that our commitment to the message of the Old Testament urges the use of every available tool to discern the full meaning of the biblical text.[5] Literary criticism or higher criticism can be defined as the study of the sources and literary methods employed by the biblical authors.

METHOD OF LITERARY CRITICISM

In studying the text, the literary critic attempts to discern the following: (1) clear structural or internal arrangements, (2) clear themes and its development, (3) the extent and literary history of separate units, if any; and (4) the stylistic features of those units which can be isolated.[6] To illustrate this, let us examine Genesis 1 and 2, for those chapters have frequently formed a basis for literary critical analysis.

In Genesis 1, we may observe a structural arrangement according to the seven days of creation or to the ten utterance of God. The passage is in fact so easy to outline that we suspect the writer was concerned to communicate a sense of orderly development. The universe begins as a formless mass and is progressively developed in response to the divine Word in seven stages. The account reaches a second peak in Gen. 2: 1-3 where the Sabbath, is set aside to represent God’s finial rest following the work of creation. However, not only the themes but the entire literary structure changes from 2:4 onward.[7]

THE ANALYSIS OF THE PENTATEUCH

The portion of the Bible which best demonstrates the result of the historical-literary criticism, is the Pentateuch. The five books were named by the Jews of Palestine according to the opening Hebrew words:

                    i.Bereshith: "In the Beginning"

                  ii.We'elleh Shemoth: "And these are the names"

                iii.Wayyiqra': "And he called"

                iv.Wayyedabber: "And he spoke"

                  v.Elleh Haddebarim: "These are the words"[8]

The names now used in the English translations are from the Septuagint:

                    i.Genesis: the beginnings of the world and of the Hebrew people

                  ii.Exodus: departure from Egypt

                iii.Leviticus: legal rulings concerning sacrifice, purification, and so forth of concern to       the priests, who came from the tribe of Levi

                iv.Numbers (Arithmoi) : the numbering or taking census of Israelites in the desert

                  v.Deuteronomy: meaning "second law," because many laws found in the previous books are repeated here.[9]

These writings, which begin with the creation of the world and trace the development of the Hebrew people through the patriarchal period up to the invasion of Canaan, were believed from very early times to be the work of one person - Moses.[10] About A.D. 500 a Jewish scholar wrote in the Talmud that the last eight verses of Deuteronomy which tell of Moses' death must have been written by Joshua. By the time of the Protestant Reformation, Roman Catholic and Protestant scholars were discussing the difficulty of maintaining the Mosaic authorship of the Torah.

Part of the problem lies in the fact that at no point in the Pentateuch is it stipulated that Moses is the author; certain portions are said to be by Moses, but not the total writing. On the other hand, there is good evidence that Moses could not have been the author. In Genesis 14:14, Abram is said to have led a group of men to the city of Dan, but elsewhere it is stated that this city did not come into existence until the time of the Judges (Judg. 18:29), long after Moses' time. The conquest by the Gileadites of the area called Havvothjair took place in the time of the Judges (Judg. 10:3-4), yet it is reported in the Pentateuch (Num. 32:41; Dent. 3:14). The time of the Hebrew monarchy is reflected in Gen. 36:31, yet this passage is set in a discussion of the patriarchal period.

There is some indication that whoever wrote certain parts of the Pentateuch was in Palestine, within the territory which in Moses' time had not yet been entered. Genesis 50:10, Numbers 35:14, and Deuteronomy 1:1, 5, 3:8, 4:46 speak of places which are located "beyond the Jordan," which is to say on the east side of the Jordan and outside of Palestine proper. Such a statement could only be uttered by someone on the western side of the Jordan River, and Moses, we are told in Deuteronomy 34, never entered that land.[11]

Other evidence also suggests that Moses did not write the Pentateuch, and that many different writers made contributions to it. There are contradictory statements, one of the most obvious of which concerns the number of animals Noah took into the ark. In Genesis 6:19 Noah is told to take two of every kind of living creature - one male and one female - but in Genesis 7:2-3 seven pair of clean animals and birds is required.[12]

Number 35:6-7 specifies that Levites were to receive certain territorial inheritances, but Deuteronomy 18:1 makes it quite clear that they are to have no inheritance. According to Exodus 3:13-15 and Exodus, 6:2-3, the personal name of God, "Yahweh,"[13] was revealed for the first time to Moses on the holy mountain. Prior to this revelation, Yahweh was known only as "Elohim," or as "El Shaddai." On the other hand, however, Genesis 4:26 indicates that from very early times men called upon God by his personal name of Yahweh, and in numerous places the patriarchs use the name Yahweh (Gen. 22:14, 26:25, 27:20, 28:13). In fact, the very manner in which divine names are used prior to the revelation of Yahweh's name in Exodus raises problems. In certain sections of Genesis "Elohim" appears exclusively (Gen. 1:1-31, 9:1-11); in other places "Yahweh" appears alone (Gen. 4:1-16, 11:1-9). It would appear that different traditions could have been brought together.[14]

Some stories appear more than once, in what scholars have called "doublets." For example, in Genesis 15:5, Abraham is promised many descendants, and in Genesis. 17:2 the promise is needlessly repeated. In Genesis 12:11-20 Sarah pretends to be the sister of Abraham. This same story appears in a slightly different setting in Genesis. 20:1-18, and is told again with Isaac and Rebecca as central actors in Genesis. 26:6-11. In the last two examples, Philistine kings are mentioned and the Philistines did not settle in Palestine until the twelfth century.  

COMPARING PARALLEL ACCOUNT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT

Going through the Pentateuch, we will notice a striking similarity in certain stories. The same incident or speech seems to be reported in several ways. Repetition of such is a relatively common literary device in the literature of the Ancient Near East. It was also true that some stories sayings were retold orally by different tribes and peoples for centuries.[15]

The Old Testament literary critic has the good fortune of possessing two variant of the history of Judah. The one is preserved in the books of Samuel and Kings and the other in 1 and 2 Chronicles. Each work beings with a common stock of tradition. For the Chronicle, this stock included a literary document that seems to have been the existing book of Samuel-Kings, or something very close to it.[16] In his account of the history of Judah, the Chronicler begins by eliminating all materials pertaining to Israel which have no direct bearing on the history of Judah and the temple. He treats his materials from a cultic rather than a political or historical point of view. The famous dynastic promise delivered by Nathan to David offers a clear illustration of how the writers of Samuel-King and Chronicles modify a common source to accent their own concerns.

CONCLUSION

At the course of this paper, we had attempted to introduce the background to literary criticism, its method and how it can be apply to the Pentateuch. We had equally responded to the authorship of the Pentateuch from the literary point of view, alongside compared accounts of the Old Testament in the literary statements.

To this end, literary criticism and other forms of criticism of the scriptures is not intended to prove errors in the bible, rather as earlier mentioned, it is aimed at studying the scriptures as a divine and inspired word of God, written by mere men under the guidance and influence of the Holy Spirit.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abba, R."The Divine Name Yahweh," Journal of Biblical Literature, LXXX, 1961.

Armerding, Carl. Old Testament and Criticism. USA: Eerdmans Publishing Co. 1983

Hayes, John & Holladay, Carl. Biblical Exegesis. USA: SCM Press Ltd.

Habel, Norman. Literary Criticism of the Old Testament. USA: Fortress Press, 1971.

Kizhakkeyil, Sebastainet and Ammanathukunnel Kurian. A Guide to Biblical Studies. Mumbai:

St Pauls 2008.

Larue, Gerald A. Old Testament Life and Literature. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/gerald_larue

Meek, J. Theophile. Hebrew Origins. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1950

Stravinskas, P., “Literary Criticism,” Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Encyclopedia, 1991

---

[1] P. Stravinskas, “Literary Criticism,” Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Encyclopedia, 1991 ed., p. 592

[2] John Hayes & Carl Holladay, Biblical Exegesis (USA: SCM Press Ltd), p. 73.

[3] Sebastian Kizhakkeyil et al, A Guide to Biblical Studies (Mumbai: St Pauls 2008), p. 299.

[4] Carl E. Armerding, Old Testament and Criticism (USA: Eerdmans Publishing Co. 1983), pp. 21-22

[5] Carl E. Armerding, Old Testament and Criticism. p. 23.

[6] Carl E. Armerding, Old Testament and Criticism. p. 23.

[7] Carl E. Armerding, Old Testament and Criticism. p. 23.

[8] Gerald A. Larue, Old Testament Life and Literature. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/gerald_larue

[9] Gerald A. Larue, Old Testament Life and Literature.

[10] 2 Chronicles 25:4   But he did not put their sons to death; this was in accordance with what is written in the Law, in the book of Moses…, Luke 2:22   And when the day came for them to be purified in keeping with the Law of Moses…, Luke 24:44 Then he told them, 'This is what I meant when I said, while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses…

[11] Gerald A. Larue, Old Testament Life and Literature. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/gerald_larue

[12] Gerald A. Larue, Old Testament Life and Literature.

[13] The personal name of God is represented in Hebrew by the consonants YHWH, often called the "tetragrammaton" (four letters). On the basis of Greek transcriptions most scholars believe that the proper pronunciation of the word is "Yahweh" (often spelled in the German form "Jahveh"). This name became so sacred that it was not to be uttered, and the term "adonai" meaning "Lord" was read in its place. Most English translations use the form "LORD" for the Hebrew YHWH. The form "Jehovah" is an English hybridization composed of the consonants J-H-V-H and the vowels from "adonai" producing JaHoVaH.

[14] Theophile J. Meek, Hebrew Origins (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1950), p. 82. Quoted in R. Abba, "The Divine Name Yahweh," Journal of Biblical Literature, LXXX (1961), pp. 320-328.

[15] Norman Habel, Literary Criticism of the Old Testament (USA: Fortress Press, 1971), p. 8

[16] Norman Habel, Literary Criticism of the Old Testament, p. 8.