Zeramim: An Online Journal of Applied Jewish Thought Vol. II: Issue 2 | Winter 2017-2018 / 5778

CONTEMPORARY JEWISH THEOLOGY IN LIGHT OF DIVERGENT BIBLICAL VIEWS ON REVELATION’S CONTENT

David Frankel

Introduction

Over the past two decades or so, discussion amongst critically oriented biblical scholars has been mounting regarding the possibilities of engaging in what is referred to as “Jewish biblical theology.” Of course, though some important books and articles have given voice to much debate and deliberation, no consensus has emerged as to what a Jewish biblical theology might look like, or what it ought to attempt to accomplish.1 Without denying the legitimacy of the various suggest- ions and approaches that have been put forward, I would like to present here my own conception of how a theological engagement with the Hebrew Bible might proceed, specifically within a Jewish context.2

1 Amongst the many noteworthy contributions to this discussion we mention only a few representative works: Marvin Sweeney, Tanak: A Theological and Critical Introduction to the Jewish Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2012); Benjamin D. Sommer, “Dialogical Biblical Theology: A Jewish Approach to Reading Scripture Theologically,” in Biblical Theo- logy: Introducing the Conversation, Leo Perdue (ed.) (Nashville: Abing- don Press, 2009), pp. 1–53 and 265–285; Ziony Zevit, “Jewish Biblical Theology: Whence, Why and Wither?” in Hebrew Union College Annual (HUCA) 76 (2005), pp. 289–340; Isaac Kalimi (ed.), Jewish Bible Theology: Perspectives and Case Studies (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2012); and James Barr, The Concept of Biblical Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1999), pp. 286–311. 2 Cf. also David Frankel, “Israelites and Non-Israelites in the Land of Promise: The Use of Biblical Models in the Construction of a Jewish The-

5

Contemporary Jewish Theology in Light of Divergent Biblical Views on Revelation’s Content David Frankel In order to illustrate my approach, I have chosen to focus on divergent biblical accounts of the revelation in the wilderness of Sinai. I will not be concerned with the question of how the divine will was thought to have been conveyed (verbally or in some other form) and to whom (Moses or or various combinations of the two) in the dif- ferent Pentateuchal accounts. This has been the subject of significant re- cent attention.3 I will focus, rather, on a less talked about issue within the theological context: the question of which specific demands were said to have been conveyed in the different and conflicting biblical accounts of the foundational revelation. This is the kind of question that is usual- ly left in the hands of the biblical critics who attempt, on the basis of these materials, to reconstruct the history of ancient Israelite law and religious institutions. The divergences and conflicts have not, as a whole, been employed constructively in contemporary Jewish theo- logy. Indeed, the great Jewish theologians of the recent past continually underscored the unity of the biblical message and either ignored or downplayed elements of internal incongruity.4 In my view, this one- sided emphasis on unity is unfortunate. The identification of divergent or conflicting biblical views on any issue, including the one to be dis- cussed below, provides rich resources not only for the historian, but also for the theologian. While the historian may see various historical developments behind the conflicting texts, and the sociologist may see behind them various social groups vying for power, the theologian can go beyond this. He or she can discern in the conflicting texts divergent and even antithetical theological orientations the differences of which are not fully accounted for by reference to the specific historical circum- stances within which they were expressed. Most important, these conflicting theological orientations may still be instructive for our own contemporary situation. The attempt to harmonize th