CHAPTER ONE Introductory Matters Being a sacred document of faith and socio-religious history, the Old Testament or the Hebrew Bible1 has been subjected to various scholarly investigations since the dawn of the modern era. At the on-set, Old Testa- ment study was dominated by the quest for a theological understanding of the Hebrew Bible. This earliest orthodox confessional approach made no distinction between biblical theology and dogmatic theology or between Old Testament theology and New Testament theology. Old Testament theology as a discipline in the modern sense is just about two centuries old. As Ralph Smith notes, many Old Testament scholars ascribe its foundation to an eighteenth-century rationalist, Johann Philipp Gabler, who attributed the confusion in the Christian world to “an improper use of the Bible” and lack of distinction “between dogmatic theology and the simple historical religion of the Bible.” Through his March 30, 1787, inaugural speech at the Univer- sity of Altdorf, he thus “called for a separation of dogmatic and biblical theology,” and hence “he is often called the father of biblical theology.”2 Gabler’s call was in response to a demand for what was termed “biblical theology” since about the mid-seventeenth century—a critical trend which resulted from the insufficiency of and danger posed by the Protestant Reformation principle of sola scriptura with regard to the method of doing theology. Of course, neither Gabler nor the Reformers did originate the phrase “biblical theology.” He rather employed and described this concept as a “historical discipline” to be distinguished from dogmatic theology, while he articulated the purpose and a three-stage method of a theology which, ironically in years to come, would also be called “biblical theology.”3 In the quest for a proper frame of reference, however, several generations of scholars after Gabler have raised a dense cloud of semantic debates over the term “biblical theology.”4 Beginning with the Renaissance through the Protestant Reformation, the historical-critical approach was gradually applied to Old Testament study. During the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, this method became full- fledged from Germany to the Western world with a sharp departure from the orthodox approach. Regardless of noticeable Jewish and Christian hostility to this departure, a dialogue was introduced between the two approaches (the traditional theological and the historical studies of the Hebrew Bible) during 2 CHAPTER ONE the world-wars era.5 This synthetic approach resulted in the formation of the so-called “biblical theology movement”6 and the emergence of the neo- critical era. With its sole preoccupation with the literary rather than the theological nature of biblical texts, the New Criticism further became a threat to the discipline of biblical theology.7 Since the thirties, Old Testament theology has witnessed a gradual shift from methodological preoccupations to concerns for the meaning or message of the Old Testament. This shift was accelerated in some significant ways by the inception of the biblical theology movement. First, the movement introduced a radical way of doing theology, which served (in my evaluation) as a kind of “back-to-the-Bible” track for those who, in search for a way better than the earlier approaches, seemingly have strayed from doing true biblical theology. Second, the relationship between biblical studies and biblical theology became heightened through the numerous literature produced by the movement’s adherents. Brevard Childs sketches five common concerns of the biblical theology movement as: the attempt “to recover a theological dimension” or “to penetrate the heart of the Bible,” to study the Bible as a unified whole, the divine revelation as historical, the biblical thought as distinctive, and the biblical faith as uniquely outstanding in its ancient Near Eastern setting. Although this seeming consensus gradu- ally suffered a breakdown due to both internal and external pressures which eventually killed the movement itself, Childs asserts that the need for doing biblical theology remains a challenge to biblical scholars.8 Thus, scholars have made various attempts to construct or structure Old Testament theolo- gies. One of such efforts has been the quest for a center or an overarching theme of Old Testament theology. Some examples of these thematic ap- proaches include the following. Walther Eichrodt uses the covenant idea as central to all faith statements in the Old Testament.9 Gerhard von Rad focuses on the concept of salvation history based on the great acts of Yah- weh.10 To Walther Zimmerli, “the thematic significance of the first com- mandment,” that is, “obedience to Yahweh, the one God, who delivered Israel out of slavery and is jealous of his own uniqueness, defines the fundamental nature of the Old Testament faith.”11 Samuel Terrien develops his study around the theme of the “presence of God.”12 Walter Kaiser sees the theme of “promise” as the backdrop of Old Testament theology.13 Disputing the idea of “the center of the Old Testament,” Claus Westermann calls for doing Old Testament theology via the original tripartite nature of the Old Testament―the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings, since “the structure of an Old Testament theology must be based on events rather than concepts.”14 Using Exod. 5:22–6:8 as his own premise, Elmer Martens as CHAPTER ONE 3 well argues for “God’s design” as the central theme of Old Testament theology.15 Challenges and Purpose of the Study Some other scholarly advancements have been made beyond the quest for a central theme in Old Testament theology. One of such recent and current trends in biblical theology is the treatment of a single theme through- out the Old Testament or the entire Bible. The “Overtures to Biblical Theology” series is notable in this respect. Some examples of single biblical themes already investigated in this series include: blessing (Claus Wester- mann, 1968/1978), land (Walter Brueggemann, 1977), death (Lloyd Bailey, 1979), suffering of God (Terence Fretheim, 1984), power (J. P. M. Walsh, 1987), holiness (John Gammie, 1989), and prayer (Samuel Balentine, 1993).16 The attempt at developing single themes has begun to spread beyond the borders of biblical theology since the past three decades. Building on the foundations laid by the nineteenth-century classic sociologists like Max Weber and Emile Durkheim, who introduced an inter-disciplinary dialogue between religion (theology) and sociology, and those of W. Robertson Smith (1889), Herman Gunkel (1917), Alfred Bertholet (1919), Johannes Pedersen (1920), and Gustaf Dalman (1928–29), who “pioneered the use of anthropol- ogy in biblical interpretation,”17 modern scholars also have attempted a similar dialogue between religion (theology) and gerontology. The responses of biblical scholars to this challenge of inter-disciplinary study of aging and old age have come in forms of articles, essays, and books. The earliest of such works addressed the theme of “elders.” In 1895, Otto Seesemann completed his pioneer study (a doctoral dissertation) at Leipzig on “Die Ältesten im Alten Testament” (“The Elders in the Old Testament”), which evaluates the role of ancient Israelite elders mainly as family/clan chiefs or judges. He structures his research after one of the early traditional patterns of Old Testament studies, covering “der Hexateuch,” “die historischen Bücher,” “die Propheten,” and “die Ketubim.” He introduces his work with the argument that no separate proof is needed besides the projection in his broadly means “old (advanced) in years” (“alt an זָקֵן study that the Hebrew Jahren”), a social status characterized as “respected and superior” (“angese- hen und vornehm”). He notes that, on the basis of their superiority (“Vornehme”) and authority (“Behörde”), elders were acknowledged as natural advocates or representatives in the pre-monarchical Israel. He further observes that, as the Hebrew settlements in Canaan grew from individual villages to stable cities, however, the leadership authority and appearance of 4 CHAPTER ONE the ancient Israelite elders dwindled. Whether and to what extent the Ca- naanite-Phoenician influx partook of this change in social order cannot be determined. Apart from the apparent urbanization, Seesemann stresses that the monarchy was largely responsible for the relegation of the elders. No wonder, with the continuing cessation of the monarchy during the post-exilic era, he concludes, ancient Israelite elders regained their traditional social status as highest authorities over the Jewish communities (“als oberste Behörde an der Spitze der jüdischen Gemeinde”).18 Between the early fifties and early sixties (more than fifty years after Seesemann’s epochal research), a cluster of studies on the theme of “elders” also appeared. In 1950, H. Duesberg issued his article on “Old Men Accord- ing to the Old Testament.” In his opinion, God sets death in old age as a farewell to a happy life (“la mort est l’adieu à la vie heureuse,” p. 262) and as a reminder (“mort et rappelle,” p. 241) that human life is not endless (“non avec l’éternité,” p. 238). He also observes that regardless of physical discomforts of old age, the aged (“vieux”) are accorded honor for their wisdom (“sagesse”), which is rarely found among the youth (“jeunes,” pp. 244ff.).19 While John McKenzie (1959), Jean van der Ploeg (1961), and G. Henton Davies (1962) employ this theme also under the common title of “The Elders in the Old Testament,”