Baker Academic Books, 2000, 180 pgs.
Summary: The basic argument of the book is that the “Old Testament narrative books do have a didactic purpose, that is, they are trying to instill both theological truths and ethical ideals into their readers” (3). The ethical ideal of the Old Testament is not merely found in bare conformity to the letter of the law, but is found in the characters imitating God. Since, the characters so often fail at meeting the requirements of the law or the ethical ideal, God must then be a gracious and forgiving God.
The ethics of the Old Testament narrative can be recovered by constructing the “implied author” and the “implied reader.” (Both of these concepts are literary terms that help scholars discuss the authors’ intended purpose.) Once the author and reader have been placed, then Wenham creates a three point criteria for recognizing whether or not the “actor’s behavior in a particular situation is regarded as virtuous” (88): the behavior is “repeated in a number of contexts”; “it should be exhibited in a positive context”; “remarks in the legal codes, psalms and wisdom books often shed light on Old Testament attitudes” (89).
What we learn from Genesis 1 to 3 is that the intended goal of the law and personal behavior is to imitate God and to return the world to the pattern found in the Garden of Eden. Sin and death are unclean aspects of the world after the Fall of man, but life and holiness are gifts from God. Sin and death are to be avoided, minimized, and rejected as much as possible in the current era through obedience to the law.
Benefits: My hope is that this book was intended to reach academic researchers with an essentially secular argument that requires them to read the Bible in the ethical and textual manner intended by the original human authors.
Helpful in creating a systematic criterion for recovering the intended ethical teaching of Old Testament narrative texts. Also, the argument for a difference between the bare legal code and the ultimate ethic of imitating God is particularly valuable.
Detriments: Apparently, Dr. Wenham believes that Genesis was heavily edited during the Davidic monarchy (ftn. at 43). There is no discussion of the dual authorship of the Bible (God and man) and how this effects his conception of implied author and reader.
Further, he believes “Cain’s murder is more serious than Adam’s disobedience and his penalty, perpetual nomadism, is more severe than Adam’s exclusion from the garden” (23, cf. 33, 81-82). This statement is not defensible given the horizons of the human authors, let alone God’s perspective. Adam’s penalty, according to Genesis, was to be the cause of the regime of sin and death, the cause of all suffering that has fallen on humanity, and to participate in that suffering for some 900 years. Because Genesis teaches creation ex nihilo, Adam’s rebellion attempted to overthrow the Being on whom he was contingent physically and spiritually. In so doing he attempted to destroy God, the universe, himself and all his posterity in one act. And as the first image bearer of God, he had at least the capacity to murder humanity. Cain’s sin attacked an image bearer of God; it was not as direct nor can its penalty be considered “more severe.”
Finally, while there is a difference between the bare law and imitating God, the two great commandments are barely touched on as the ethical ideal. This is likely caused by the narrowness of his intended audience and his historical narrative scheme.