Kings and Prophets, Donkeys and Lions: Dramatic Shape and Deuteronomistic Rhetoric in 1 Kings Xiii*

KINGS AND PROPHETS, DONKEYS AND LIONS: DRAMATIC SHAPE AND DEUTERONOMISTIC RHETORIC IN 1 KINGS XIII*

JAMES K. MEAD Princeton

1 Kings xiii has been the focus of numerous studies over the past decade.1 During this time and previously, scholars have sought the main thrust of the text in four major areas of inquiry: the dynamics of true and false prophecy; 2 the ful llment of “the word of Yahweh”; 3

*An earlier version of the paper was read to the “Nevi "im/Prophets” section of the 1998 AAR/SBL Mid-Atlantic Regional meeting. I wish to thank the participants in the session for their helpful comments as well as Professors Dennis T. Olson, Katharine Doob Sakenfeld, Karl Oelke, and Brent A. Strawn for their careful reading of the paper. 1 Six of these have appeared in Vetus Testamentum : D.W. Van Winkle, “1 Kings xiii: true and false prophecy” , VT 39 (1989), pp. 31-43; J.T. Walsh, “The contexts of 1 Kings xiii”, VT 39 (1989), pp. 355-370; D.G. Deboys, “1 Kings xiii—A ‘new crite- rion’ reconsidered”, VT 41 (1991), pp. 210-211; P.T. Reis, “Vindicating God: another look at 1 Kings xiii”, VT 44 (1994), pp. 376-386; C. Levin, “Amos und Jeroboam I”, VT 45 (1995), pp. 307-317; and D.W. Van Winkle, “1 Kings xii 25-xiii 34: Jeroboam’s cultic innovations and the man of God from Judah”, VT 46 (1996), pp. 101-114. Other important and recent articles include: A.H.J. Gunneweg, “Die Prophetenlegende I Reg 13—Miß deutung, Umdeutung, Bedeutung”, in Prophet und Prophetenbuch , ed. by V. Fritz et al., BZAW 185 (Berlin, 1989), pp. 73-81; E. Eynikel, “Prophecy and Ful llment in the Deuteronomistic History: 1 Kgs 13; 2 Kgs 22, 16-18”, in Pentateuchal and Deuteronomistic Studies, ed. by C. Brekelmans and J. Lust (Leuven, 1990), pp. 227-237; D. Marcus, “Elements of Ridicule and Parody in the Story of the Lying Prophet from Bethel”, in Proceedings of the Eleventh World Congress of Judaism: Jerusalem, June 22-29, 1993 (Jerusalem, 1994), Div. A: pp. 67-74; J. Briend, “Du Message au Messager: Remarques sur 1 Rois xiii”, in Congress Volume Paris 1992 , ed. by J.A. Emerton, VTS 61 (Leiden, 1995), pp. 13-24; and B. Herr, “Der wahre Prophet bezeugt seine Botschaft mit dem Tod: Ein Versuch zu 1 Kön 13”, BZ ns 41 (1997), pp. 69-78. 2 In addition to Van Winkle, “True and false prophecy”, and Deboys, “New crite- rion”, see also J.L. Crenshaw, Prophetic Con ict: Its EVect Upon Israelite Religion , BZAW 124 (Berlin, 1971), pp. 39-49; T.B. Dozeman, “The Way of the Man of God from Judah: True and False Prophecy in the PreDeuteronomic Legend of 1 Kings 13”, CBQ 44 (1982), pp. 379-393; and S.J. De Vries, 1 Kings (Waco, 1985), pp. 171-174. 3 In addition to Eynikel, “Prophecy and Ful llment”, see also U. Simon, “I Kings 13:

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 1999 Vetus Testamentum XLIX, 2 192 james k. mead the example of the disobedient prophet; 4 and the theological implica- tions of the prophetic word and deeds. 5 These eVorts, often using form- criticism or traditio-historical analysis, have o Vered valuable insights into the literary background and theological context of the passage. Recently, D.W. Van Winkle has made important arguments in favor of the unity of 1Kings xii 25-xiii 34; these have gone far to helpplace this passage within the Jeroboam narratives and the Deuteronomistic framework of the Books of Kings. 6 Nevertheless, certain interpretive problems remain: the use of psy- chological explanations for the behavior of the characters in the story; the nature of the nal literary form, given what has generally been regarded as two originally independent traditions ( vv. 1-10 and 11-32); and a dramatic element that has received little attention, namely, the strange behavior of the animals who gure prominently in the narrative. At the heart of these unresolved questions lies the fact that, on the whole, scholars have not addressed the story’s literary shape or the dramatic features that contribute to an understanding of how the narrative works. This paper will propose a new shape for 1 Kings xiii that is in keeping with its rhetorical purposes and dramatic movement 7 and that will provide an additional basis for upholding the unity that Van Winkle and others have defended on di Verent grounds. The chapter’s dramatic shape and the interplay of human and animal characters in the

A Prophetic Sign—Denial and Persistence”, HUCA 47 (1976), pp. 81-117; R.D. Nelson, First and Second Kings (Atlanta, 1987), pp. 83-90; G.M. Hagan, “First and Second Kings”, in A Complete Literary Guide to the Bible , ed. by L. Ryken and T. Longman (Grand Rapids, 1993), pp. 182-192. 4 J.A. Montgomery, The Books of Kings , ed. by H.S. Gehman (Edinburgh, 1951), p. 261. S.L. McKenzie sees this as a possible motif for verses 11-32a; see his discus- sion in The Trouble with Kings: The Composition of the Book of Kings in the Deuteronomistic History, VTS 42 (Leiden, 1991), pp. 51-56. 5 In addition to Reis, “Vindicating God”, see also W.E. Lemke, “ The Way of Obedience: 1 Kings 13 and the Structure of the Deuteronomistic History”, in Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God: Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. Ernest Wright , ed. by F.M. Cross, W.E. Lemke, and P.D. Miller (Garden City, 1976), pp. 301-326; K. Barth, Church Dogmatics , ed. by G.W. Bromiley and T.F. Torrence, trans. by G.W. Bromiley et al. (Edinburgh, 1957), vol. II.2, pp. 393-409; W. Gross, “Lying Prophet and Disobedient Man of God in 1 Kings 13: Role Analysis as an Instrument of Theological Interpretation of an OT Narrative Text” , trans. by R. Robinson, in Perspectives on Old Testament Narrative , ed. R.C. Culley, Semeia 15 (Missoula, 1979), pp. 97-135. 6 Van Winkle, “1 Kings xii 25-xiii 34”. 7 I am here drawing primarily on the insights of Phyllis Trible as expressed in her Rhetorical Criticism: Context, Method, and the Book of Jonah (Minneapolis, 1994).