Sárospataki Füzetek 20. (2016)

2016 / 2. szám - ARTICLES / STUDIEN - György Kustár: Ont he Slopes of Sinai - Some Hermeneutical Questions in Light of the Kabbalistic and Historical Critical Exegesis

György Kustár

c) Toward Unity?

In this section I will enumerate some of the latest attempts trying to synchronize the historical-critical method with the more text-centered literary approaches. First I will say a few words about Brevard Childs’ canonical-criticism, then Dozeman’s and Ravndal’s similar attempt to bridge the gap between the canonical-final form of the texts and their history of development. I will point out their incapability to produce a persuasive synthesis since the presupposition of the historical and text centered approaches are incompatible. This will serve as a basis for comparing and contrasting historical, narrative and Kabbalistic hermeneutics.

Brevard S. Childs offers a new solution for the problem posed by literary theory by seeing revelation in a canonical context. In his Exodus commentary, after a section devoted to the tradition-historical understanding, he offers a short chapter on both the Old and New Testament context, considerations about the history of exegesis on this passage and final theological reflections in the context of Canon.68 This promising change signifies a new direction in the understanding of the biblical texts.

However, his treatment is problematical in many ways. Although by this new focus he wishes to transcend the dilemmas of the historical understanding, the separate treatment of the diachronic and canonical dimensions leaves their relationship ambiguous.69 Moreover, in his later work Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture “this uneasy tension had turned into an outright polemic against diachronic approaches.”70

Childs’ dilemma was obviously shared by Thomas B. Dozeman, who tries to understand the diachronic method in terms of “canon conscious redaction ’.71 He understands the traditions through literary-critical theory as moving from metaphorical to metonymical understanding of God’s presence on the Mountain.72 Following the source critical conclusions of Rendtorff, her speaks about the development of text in terms of a progress concentrically expanding a core tradition. This new concept has the advantage of seeing the textual evolution as a more organic process that leaves room for the assumption of the relative wholeness of the tradition. He builds upon the presupposition of Childs that the text itself bears within it unifying

68 See Brevard S. Childs: The Book of Exodus-A Critical, Theological Commentary, The Westminster Press, Louisville, 1974, 337-384.

69 Brett, Mark C: Biblical Criticism in Crisis?, 3-4.

70 Ibid.

7' Dozeman, Thomas B.: God on the Mountain, A Study of Redaction - Theology and Canon in Exodus 19-24, (SBL Monograph Series 37.), Atlanta, Scholars Press, 1989,156f.

72 For him, and in this insight he builds upon the critique of Rendtorff against the New Documentary Hypotheses, the Sinai story is built upon a basic document called 'God of the Mountain'that was further elaborated through different redactors according to their theological disposition. The basic source represents a constant relationship between the mountain and the God permanently dwelling on it (this is the metaphorical relationship) and the redactorial works moving from this to the direction of distancing god from the mount, describing God as approaching or actually descending on the mountain. Cf. Dozeman: op. cit., 82, 86,100,102.

44 Sárospataki Füzetek 20. évfolyam 2016-2