Reading the Old Testament: Method In Biblical Study by John Barton

This book is a useful and beneficial read, but for a relatively specialized audience. I would not recommend this book to anyone who does not have a solid background in hermeneutics. I certainly would not recommend it for a lay reader. It will make little sense without some background in Biblical interpretation. Taken straight and without a context, it will prove ponderous at best, and damaging to one's faith at worst. Without a background in some of the issues and history, it can feel as if reading the Bible to gain any insight is a hopeless pursuit.

I would definitely recommend it for the seminary student who is looking for a solid introduction to the various methods of Biblical, and specifically, Old Testament, criticism. The book is, to be generous, uninterested in what we might call a conservative hermeneutic. While Barton does not land on a specific method and seeks to demonstrate the options, a conservative view of, say, Mosaic authorship is, for Barton, not possible. Where Barton is helpful is in taking us through the development of various methods of reading the Bible. For each, he suggests some background reading on the subject. After a discussion of each method, he applies these methods to a specific text (Ecclesiastes) to show how each works in practice. The methods he works with include Form, Redaction, Canonical, Structuralists, "New," and Reader Response Criticism.

What, you may ask, is the benefit for the conservative pastor or seminary student to be gained from reading a book that is somewhat antagonistic to the way we read the Scriptures while being agnostic on the rest? First, it helps one to see how the various methods of reading the Scripture developed. Secondly, it helps prevent a straw-man view of the various approaches. Given the presuppositions and what each movement is reacting against, one can see why and how they developed. Third, it makes one think about how the various methods can be appropriated in positive ways while rejecting the negative outcomes. This, of course, will take some serious engagement and thought, but if conservative Christians are to have a voice in the Scholarly world of Biblical Studies (which, I submit, we must), it is incumbent on us to understand the discussion and the methods applied to the Bible. This is hard work, and there will be much temptation to compromise, but we must be involved in these discussions, even if our voice largely falls on deaf ears. Fourth, it helps in engaging commentaries from a wide variety of perspectives. One could, of course, only read conservative commentaries, but there are excellent exegetes and linguists outside of Evangelical realm. This book gives one categories with which to engage such works and better helps the Evangelical pastor or student sift through the chaff to find the wheat. Finally, knowing the ways of reading the Bible that are current in scholarship will help us to engage those in our congregations who come from outside of Evangelicalism, and our children who engage these issues in university settings.

For some, Barton's book will be frustrating, but if the purpose of the book is kept in mind, I think it will prove beneficial. This is not meant to propose a method of biblical study, but to provide a survey of current opinion. For the student or pastor familiar with the issues and who would like to get a feel for the development, method, and application of the various approaches, Barton's book will prove beneficial and helpful.

Cor meum tibi offero, Domine, prompte et sincere.