Conflict (Complication) Resolution/ ConclusionOne of the things that puts off many Christians reading the Old Testament is its seeming long-windedness; there is such a lot of seemingly pointless repetitions! Why can't the text get to the point? And once the point is made, to leave it at that?
In fact that is how the OT gets to the point, and there is a great deal to the repetitions.
At the most basic level, repetitions in all cultures function to emphasize what is said. No one can miss the point of "Do not enter. I repeat, do not enter." This use of repetition for emphasis is obvious in such passages in the OT as Isa 6:3:
Holy, holy, holy is the Lord Almighty;
the earth is full of his glory.
and Jer 22:29:
O land, land, land, hear the word of the Lord!
Though this triplication for emphasis may not be usual they do not stump any of us. The thing that many people find difficult reading the OT is its seeming long-windedness in which details are often repeated needlessly, and soon we get bored. We want to shout, "Get on with the story!" Those of us with more patience simply pare away the repetitions and stick with the "real point" of the story.
Actually, the authors of the OT were "getting on with the story" precisely because of those repetitions, and those of us who pare them away thinking they are simply a bad Hebrew habit of speech may well miss the "real point" of the story.
Biblical scholarship in the last few decades have come to recognize that different cultures have different ways of saying things and telling their stories. As a result, our understanding of the OT has gone though somewhat of a 'transformation.' A comparison between an exegetical commentary written in the last ten years and another written, say, forty years previously will quickly show up the transformation. One of the main reasons for this change has to do with how we understand the abundance of repetitions in the OT are structured and what they do for the story.
Narratives tell stories; they relate events. OT narratives tell stories with masses of details and repetitions of those details. Often we pare these repetitions out of our retelling of these stories in our sermons and teaching. We want to get to the real story.
The approach most preachers take in doing this is to read the story along the following line:
Introduction Conflict (Complication) Resolution/ Conclusion
The "introduction" paints the setting for the story (the when and where) and introduces the main characters (the who; the eventual-hero and eventual-villian, for example).1 So, e.g., the story of Abraham is introduced by the genealogy in Gen 11:10-26, which sets the story, temporally, within the aftermath of the "Tower of Babel" fiasco. The next two verses set the story, geographically, in the city of Ur.
The "conflict" provides the primary ingredient for the plot of the story. Without it a narrative simply becomes a chain of meaningless events. The conflict in a story may be stark and plainly stated or it may be disguised in subtlety, depending on things such as the reader's familiarity with the culture, and so on. In the story of Abraham, we are told very soon after the introduction that Abram's wife "Sarah was barren, she had no children" (v30). A reader familiar with Hebrew culture, which placed great importance on progeny and lineage, this was a catastrophy; it meant that Abram's story was already in a dead-end at the beginning of his story. A reader unfamiliar with the culture may well miss that as an incidental detail. Then God is introduced but instead of solving Abram's problem and need for a child, He sends him away from his people. The promise that God then makes to Abram to make him into a great nation adds another layer of tension to the conflict.
The "resolution" of the conflict takes up the rest of the story once the conflict has been introduced. What makes stories interesting, of course, are the twists and turns in the process of the resolutions that make up the "complications." Abram, e.g., went to the land that God showed him as he was instructed, but then he sets out for Egypt, when the land was hit by a famine, and his wife landed up in pharaoh's herem. He yearns fo the son but all that God does for him is rescue him, bless him, enrich him, and make him more promises. Then Sarah makes him sleep with her slave Hagar adding to the complication they did not need. But as each of these complications and delays are resolved, the primary conflict reaches closer and closeer to resolution, which in Abraham's case, came when God "was gracious to Sarah as He had said and did for Sarah what He had promised" and she conceived and Isaac was born, ten chapters later. In the OT especially, the resolution of one story provides the setting for another cycle of introduction (with new circumstances, new characters), conflict, complications and resolution.
Notice how the retelling of the "real story" of Abraham above can be told without any of the repeated details. Take Gen 11:27-32, for example:
27This is the genealogy of Terah: Terah begot Abram, Nahor, and Haran. Haran begot Lot. 28And Haran died before his father Terah in his native land, in Ur of the Chaldeans. 29Then Abram and Nahor took wives: the name of Abram's wife was Sarai, and the name of Nahor's wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran the father of Milcah and the father of Iscah. 30But Sarai was barren; she had no child. 31And Terah took his son Abram and his grandson Lot, the son of Haran, and his daughter-in-law Sarai, his son Abram's wife, and they went out with them from Ur of the Chaldeans to go to the land of Canaan; and they came to Haran and dwelt there. 32So the days of Terah were two hundred and five years, and Terah died in Haran.
Notice the masses of details and repetitions here. Yet, apart from the fact of Sarai's infertility, almost nothing else in these six verses ever gets noted in sermons (certainly not in any of the sermons I have heard). So, why does it require six verses just to make one simple statement of fact?
The repetitions are, in fact, not haphazard or incidental, but carefully and artfully arranged if only we would pay them som attention. Here is how they are arranged:
A. Terah and his family in Ur of the Chaldeans, v27-29a,
B. The name of Abram's wife was Sarai, v29b,
C. The name of Nahor's wife was Milcah, v29c,
C'. she was the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah and Iscah, v 29d,
B'. Sarai was barren; she had no children, v30,
A'. Terah and his family set out from Ur of the Chaldeans, v32.
Notice that there are two different levels of repetition here. Firstly, on a macro-level, A is paralleled in A', B in B', and C in C'. This arrangement—a burger of sorts—is often referred to by various names: concentric structure, envelope structure, palindrome. Sometimes the repetitions in a passage may be arranged with a non-repeated core (A - B - C - D - C' - B' - A'), in which case it is referred to as a chiasmus or chiasma.2
Secondly, on a micro-level, the fact of Sarai's infertility is repeated. We are first told that "Sarai was barren." The fact is then repeated, "she had no children." The second sentence is really unnecessary, but it makes sure that we had not missed the point. On a macro-level, notice how by setting Nahor and Milcah at the centre of the arrangement, Abram and Sarai are sidelined. This is further emphasized by the mention of Milcah's lineage: "she was the daughter of Haran." We know whose daughter Milcah is, we know nothing of Sarai's lineage or background. Milcah is thus legitimized and honoured in a way that leaves an air of uncertainty over Sarai's.3 In this way, the repetitions serve to paint a dismal picture of Abram's beginning; his wife is "doubly" infertile, and of uncertain background. What an unlikely couple to work out a great story! And yet.
An appreciation of what the repetitions do in this passage may not change the flow of "the real story" by much but it adds depth and zing to it. When we have gone through the entire story of Abraham, and understood the layers of nuances offerred by the many more repetitions used in the story, the difference in our understanding of the story may be liken to the difference between eating bland and tired-looking raisins, their flavours bleached and sweetness concorted from added sugars and flavours, and eating sun-ripened grapes plucked off the vine, plump, succulent and nectar in the mouth. Imagine what that can do for your sermons.
Modern writing conventions make use of full-stops (periods), commas, colon, semi-colon, paragraphs, and headings to distinguish units of texts. These provide clearer contexts for understanding what is said. These conventions, except for the equivalent of the full-stop, were absent in ancient times. In Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament, the sentences run on in a continuous flow, so that very often, context was the only thing to go by in deciding where one unit of the biblical texts begins and ends. Later scribes develop a system of signs inserted beneath the texts to perform what modern conventions do but they were late and of uncertain value. We now know that the authors of the OT often used repetitions as frames to mark off units of the biblical text. A good example of such usage is Gen 1:1-2:4.
Much has been written and debated whether, e.g., the first unit of the Bible should end at 2:3 or 2:4, as well as how 1:1 is related to 1:2. Recognizing the pattern of repetitions in the story may well solve the puzzle:
. . . the heavens and the earth, v1,
The Six Days of Divine Work, vv2-31.
. . . the heavens and the earth, 2:1,
The Seventh Day of Divine Rest, 2:2-3.
. . . the heavens and the earth . . .
(the earth and the heavens—), 2:4.
Notice how the repeated expression "the heavens and the earth" serves as a frame that provides the episode with a "double-burger" structure that parcels out 1:2-31 and 2:2-3 into two units that contrasts the six days of divine work with the seventh day of divine rest.4
A contested question in biblical scholarship is whether 2:4 ends the first unit or introduces the second. The pattern of repetition suggests strongly that it does both by acting as a janus. A janus is a literary device that serves as a bridge between two passages by looking backwards and forwards. 5 The first half of 2:4 has the expression "the heavens and the earth" and serves to close the first episode. The expression is repeated but in reversed order—"the earth and the heavens"— in the second half and serves to introduce the second episode (i.e. Gen 2-3). It seems as if the expression "the heavens and the earth" expresses a cosmic perspective (which we find in Gen 1:1-2:4b) whereas "the earth and the heavens" introduces an local perspective, which is what we find in the second episode of Genesis. When used as frames, repetitions demarcate the different parts of the texts and help us appreciate the different contexts.
Sinews connects muscles to bones and thus serves to bind different parts together. Repetitions often serve this function in the OT. Gen 38 is classic example of this function. Gen 38 tells the sordid story of Judah mistaking his daugther-in-law for a prostitute and fathering two sons with her. Sitting between the story of Joseph being sold by his brothers in Gen 37 and of Joseph in Potiphar's household in Gen 39, the story seems like a rude intrusion that has nothing to do with anything. There are in fact clear connections though a) they are almost always obscured by the habit of Bible translators who, out of stylistic considerations, use different English words for the same Hebrew words,6 and b) they are the kind of connection not often encountered in English literature because they are provided by the repetitions.
In the story Judah mistoke Tamar for a prostitute and asked to sleep with her, promising to send her a young goat as the price for her favour. She then asked for a pledge until the kid was sent, and Judah gave her his "seal and its cord, and the staff" (v18). When Judah sent the kid through his friend the Adullamite, he could not find her. Months later, Judah was told her daughter-in-law was "had played the harlot and is pregnant with child." He immediately calls for her to be brought forth and burned to death. Now let us look at the text (vv25-26):
When she was brought out, she sent to her father-in-law, saying, "By the man to whom these belong, I am with child." And she said, "Please recognize (hakker na') whose these are—the signet and cord, and staff."
Judah recognized them (wayyakker) and said, "She is more righteous than I, since I wouldn't give her to my son Shelah."
Now let us turn to the previous episode in Gen 37. After Joseph's brothers had sold him off to the Midianite caravaneers, they slaughtered a goat, dipped Joseph's coat in it and presented it to their father. Here is the text (37:31-33):
They took the ornamented robe back to their father and said, "We found this. Please recognize (hakker na') it whether it is your son's robe."
He recognized it (wayyakkirah) and said, "It is my son's robe! Some ferocious animal has devoured him. Joseph has surely been torn to pieces." Then Jacob tore his clothes, put on sackcloth and mourned for his son many days.7
Here we see how the word "recognize" links the two chapters together. In the OT, however, repetitions very often involve ideas, not just words. The long and painful journey of Jacob's family into dysfunction and alienation and then restoration and healing began when Isaac failed to recognize Jacob as the fraud he was when he gave his blessing away thinking he was Esau. Jacob was in turn dubbed into "recongnizing" the coat as his beloved son's. Judah recognized the articles of pledge. Healing and restoration began when Joseph recognized his brothers who had come down to Egypt to buy food but they failed to recognize him.
The story is made more exciting with the repetition of the clothes motif. Isaac blessed Jacob because Rebekah had taken Esau's clothes and put them on Jacob so that "when Isaac caught the smell of his clothes, he blessed him" (27:27). Jacob showed off his favouritism by giving Joseph a "multi-coloured coat." Joseph's brothers striped him of the coat and used it to trick their father into thinking Joseph had been killed by a wild animal. Tamar took off her widow's clothes and put on a veil to meet her father-in-law, and afterwards re-adorn her widow's clothes (38: 14 & 19). Potiphar's wanted Joseph to sleep with her but only got his coat, which she used as evidence against him. When Joseph was summoned to interprete Pharaoh's dream he changed his clothes (41:14) and then, when he was made chief minister of the land, he was dressed in "robes of fine linen" (41:42). When he finally identified himself to his brothers when they came down to Egypt to buy grains, he gave them new clothes (45:22). These repetitions are not there by accident. Like sinews that weave muscles and skeletons together to bring life and animation to the body, so these repetitions knit together to add power, colour and layers of nuances to the story. They are meant to do the same for our retelling of them in our sermons and teaching. Don't pare them out. A "curry" that leaves out the tumeric, mustard seeds, funegreek, coriander, cardamon, chilli, and curry-leaves, is no curry at all.
If repetitions can be used to say much, so can absence in the midst of such repetitions, especially when the absence is glaringly obvious.
The story of Samuel's conception and early apprentice-ship under Eli is taken up in 1 Sam 1:1-3:18. The next verse begins the next phase of his life as God's prophet and judge. But just four verses into the new story, Samuel disappears from the scene and we hear nothing of him for the next three chapters. And when he reappears in 7:3 the story continues on as if nothing at all had happened in-between. Here is how the story is set out:
A. The Lord . . . let none of his words fall to the ground . . . Samuel's word came to all Israel as they got ready to fight the Philistines, 3:19-4:1.
B. The Exile of the Ark, 4:2-11,
C. The Death of Eli and his Sons, 4:12-22,
B'. The Return of the Ark, 5:1-7:2,
A'. Samuel said to all the house of Israel . . . commit yourself to the Lord . . . and he will deliver you out of the hand of the Philistines, 7:3-14.
This episode begins with the clear assertion that "the Lord was with Samuel and let none of his words fall to the ground" (3:19). The pronoun "his" may be understood either as Samuel's or the Lord's word. Either way, the sentence harks us back to the word that Samuel had delivered to Eli from Him (3:11-18). By setting the demise of the Eliade family at the core this episodes serves to validate the truthfulness of the introduction; none of his words falls to the ground! Eli's demise is set within the context of the loss of the ark. The event is packed with theological significance. One of the presumption of OT theology is that Yahweh's presence is appropriated by faith, not by magic. Underlining the use of magic is the assumption that power can be commandeered by the mere presence or possession of an object. That is the essence of taking the ark of God out into the battle field. Yahweh showed His disapproval by allowing His ark to be dispossessed from the Israelites. The return of the ark resulted also out of the sheer and lone acts of Yahweh; no humans decide where and when He chooses to be present. He does. By leaving Samuel's name out of the accounts of the events leading to the loss of the ark, the demise of the Eliades, and the return of the ark, the author absolves Samuel from any blame either for the superstitions of Israel or the death of his mentor.
What we have described so far relate to simple repetitions. We are beginning to discover that othen the OT is far more complex than we imagine. The book of Deuteronomy is a good example. Most studies of the book have focused on the exposition of specific instructions in Chaps 12-26 of the book. While these chapters are the most visibly obvious parts of the book, closer examination shows that they are only part of a very extensive chiasma embracing Chaps 5-29. Here is part of that structure:8
A. “Yahweh our God made a covenant with us at Horeb.” (5:2.)
B. The Ten Commandments, 5:6-21.
D. “These commandments . . . are to be upon your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates.” 6:6-9
G. “Remember what Yhwh your God did to Pharaoh and to all Egypt. You saw with your own eyes the . . . signs . . . the mighty hand and outstretched arm . . .” 7:18-19.
I. “Yhwh gave me two stone tablets inscribed by the finger of God. On them were all the commandments Yhwh proclaimed to you on the mountain out of the fire, on the day of the assembly.” 9:10.
K. “I turned and went down the mountain . . . I saw that you have sinned . . . you had made . . . a calf." 9:15-16.
L. “. . . he was angry enough with you to destroy you, but again (gam) Yhwh listened to me.” 9:19.
L'. “Yhwh was angry enough with Aaron to destroy him, but at that time I prayed for Aaron too (gam).”
K'. “I took that sinful thing, the calf you had made . . . I crushed it . . . and threw the dust into a stream that went down the mountain.” 9:21/
I'. “Yhwh wrote on these tablets what he had written before, the Ten Commandments he had proclaimed to you on the mountain out of the fire, on the day of the assembly. And Yhwh gave them to me. 10:4.
G'. “Remember today that your children were not the ones who saw . . . the discipline of Yhwh, his mighty hand, his outstretched arm, the signs he performed in Egypt . . . to Pharaoh and to his whole country . . . it was your eyes that saw all these great things that Yhwh has done.” 11:2-7.
D'. “Fix these words of mine on your hearts and minds; tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. Teach them to your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates.” 11:18-21.
B'. Exposition of the Law, 12-26.
A'. “These are the terms of the covenant Yahweh commanded Moses to make with the Israelites in Moab, in addition to the covenant he had made with them at Horeb.” 29:1
Within this broad chiasma other chiastic structures are found, some seeming to overlap the boundaries of the sections indicated above, so that there are whorls within whorls. At the moment we cannot yet say if these patterns are in fact patterns or mere appearances. We also do not yet know what, if any, is the full measure of their significance. The chiasma set out above, however, sets Yahweh's anger with Israel but also with her high priest, Aaron, at the center of the book. This raises the question, if even her first and high priest can earn Yahweh's anger, and finding his salvation only through the grace of God mediated through Moses's prayer, what hope is there for the rest of the nations. This shifts our focus from the laws and suggests that the final author/editor of Deuteronomy intends us to understand that, however we understand the law, the fundamental context for understanding them is that Israel is a stiff-neck people. This suggestion represents only a tentative beginning of a whole new way of reading Deuteronomy. We can look forward to even more exciting days for biblical studies in the days ahead.
Low Chai Hok
©Alberith, 2020