Subscribe to Christianity Today
Subscribe to Christianity Today
Donate to Christianity Today
login | my account
February 11, 2012

Home > 2010 > January (Web-Only)Christianity Today, January (Web-Only), 2010
Theology in the News
Finding Meaning in the Pentateuch
Powerful endorsements bolster John Sailhamer's new tome on the Bible's first five books.




Late last year, Mark Driscoll announced through Facebook the publication of John Sailhamer's The Meaning of the Pentateuch (IVP Academic, 2009) with a special appeal to "hardcore uber geek theological types who love footnotes." But his friend and fellow pastor John Piper took issue with Driscoll's suggestion that only a nerdy remnant would appreciate the book.

"To all pastors and serious readers of the Old Testament—geek, uber geek, under geek, no geek—if you graduated from high school and know the word meaning, sell your latest Piper or Driscoll book and buy Sailhamer," Piper blogged. "There is nothing like it. It will rock your world. You will never read the Pentateuch the same again. It is totally readable. You can skip all the footnotes and not miss a beat."

Backed by these endorsements, Sailhamer's 610-page tome on the Bible's first five books briefly broke into the top 100 in Amazon.com's sales rankings. CT editor at large Collin Hansen interviewed Sailhamer, Old Testament professor at Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary, about his newest book, biblical criticism, and finding meaning in the text of Scripture.

How do you explain the meaning of the Pentateuch to evangelicals who revere these foundational books but do not see their relevance?

Experience has taught me that we really have to want to understand the meaning of the Pentateuch before we see its relevance for our lives. I've been fortunate to have students who have kept me looking for answers about the meaning and relevance of this book. The old theologians used to speak of "the love for Scripture" as a sign of true faith in Christ. They would say, "We should read the Old Testament as if it were written with the blood of Christ." For them, the Old Testament and the Pentateuch in particular was a Christian book, a book about Christ. For most evangelical Christians today it is a book about archaeology and ancient history.

Here we have to be careful because, to be sure, the Old Testament is about ancient history. But that is not its meaning. Its meaning is Christ. Saying that also calls for a great deal of caution. In my book, I take the view that the whole of the Pentateuch is about Christ, but that doesn't mean that Christ is in the whole Pentateuch. Finding Christ in the Pentateuch means learning to see him when he is there rather than trying to see when he is not there. I like to tell my students that we don't need to spiritualize the Old Testament to find Christ, but we do need to read it with spiritual eyes. 

I have a good friend who likes to chide me by saying you don't need "exegesis" to find Christ in the Old Testament. All we need is some "extra Jesus." I wrote my book in part to show my friend and others like him that serious scholarship leads one to find Christ in the Old Testament because he is really there. The author of the Pentateuch put him there when he wrote the book. I've found that if you show someone that Christ is really there in the Pentateuch and the Old Testament, they will come back to see more—not merely because they have come to revere the Pentateuch as a foundational book, but more importantly because they want to see more of Jesus.

What is the trickiest problem with discerning the meaning of the Pentateuch?

The problem can be a simple one. Christians just don't really believe the Old Testament is their Bible in the same way the New Testament is. For them the Old Testament teaches the law and the New Testament the gospel. The Old Testament is about Israel and the New Testament is about the church. They may not say it in so many words, but it's there, especially on those rare occasions when the preacher asks them to turn to an Old Testament passage. For them it's like reading someone else's mail. They feel they need to ask permission to obey its laws. Remember this: What we call the "Old Testament" today was the only "New Testament" Jesus and Paul ever had. All the evangelism we read about in the book of Acts was the result of the gospel they proclaimed from the pages of the "Old Testament."





Christianity Today


  


Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.


Click here for international orders2-for-1 Gifts!

Displaying 1–5 of 25 comments

doranna

January 18, 2010  3:06am

When you study the Pentateuch inductively Christ is ever present, especially in the ceremonies and feasts. I highly recommend the "Precepts" studies because you really learn to dig and study before you open a commentary. Genesis was exciting and so was Exodus and Leviticus. I am looking forward to Deuteronomy later in the spring. Genesis also teaches the sovernity of God which is an important foundation not only in studying the rest of the Bible but also a guide to be used in how we live as Christians.

Jim

January 14, 2010  2:42pm

Editorial comment: Speaking of editing, I meant to say "that sequential" not at. No, I am not English!

Jim

January 14, 2010  2:39pm

Don, I agree. It is sure something to chew on for a while. However, I do have problem with his suggestion at sequential historical events were rearranged just to make a point. It is obvious that Sailhamer has a high respect for scripture as a theologian; however, I am not too sure that he appreciates Biblical archeology quiet as much-I have a feeling that the overriding theme for him is of more importance than historical accuracy. I think you can have both. That there were editions, to me is obvious; but I would think that to present something as an historical narrative, then say, Well, I did juggle the facts around a bit to make it more to the point, is walking on shakey grounds. Just an opinion, however.

Don Olson

January 14, 2010  1:57pm

Great article. I didn't know about this book until now.

Jim

January 13, 2010  6:14pm

Thanks, Andy, I have downloaded the PDF file and will review it later this evening, or tomorrow morning. My argument is not with Sailhamer as it is with ignorance, or the unwillingness to discuss a controversial issue without resorting to name calling, and holier than thou attitudes. I am not a liberal but I have friends that are, as well as a few Muslims and Hindus that like to ask questions. We should never dismiss an honest question with "because God says so, and it is right here in the Bible." Well, first of all, what is it that God said, and why did he say it? If He is a God of grace and mercy (which, I believe He is) then there must be some explanation for Him to act out of character. And, believe me, killing babies qualifies for that that inquiry—and we can not just brush it off with a flippant reply. Thanks again.

You must be a Christianity Today subscriber or have created a FREE registration to post comments
[Browse More Christianity Today]



Search
Search
Search
Scripture Search
Go Deeper

Books & Culture
Christianity Today
Church Law & Tax Report
Church Finance Today
Leadership Journal
Men of Integrity
Kyria.com
ChristianityTodayLibrary.com
PreachingToday.com