This post was first published on Peter Enns’s blog, Rethinking Biblical Christianity, on July 29, 2013.
* * *
When Christians run up against interpretive challenges in the Old Testament – like killing Canaanites to take their land or the meaning of the Adam story vis-à-vis science – a common way of handling these challenges is to make an appeal like:
“Yes, but we can’t just look at these passages on their own terms. We have to keep the whole Christian canon in mind and see how the Gospel affects our understanding of this Old Testament passage.”
I agree, pretty strongly in fact, that Christians now read the Old Testament in light of the entire story, which finds it climax in Christ. I’ve written a bit about that, and my two commentaries (Ecclesiastes and Exodus) are attempts to flesh this out in detail.
But we need to remember what we’re doing when we read the Old Testament in light of Christ – what we are committing ourselves to, hermeneutically speaking.
The very declaration “We need to read the Old Testament story in light of Christ” is an implicit acknowledgement that the Gospel-lens through which we read the Old Testament changes what we see; changes what is “there” on the plain-sense level. The Gospel drives Old Testament interpretation beyond what it means when understood in terms of its ancient tribal parameters.
In biblical studies, “midrash” is the word often used to describe the transformation of the meaning of biblical texts by later communities of faith. Midrash (a Hebrew word) is tricky to define. Generally, I define midrash as an approach to the text that goes beyond and beneath the “plain meaning” of the text for the purpose of addressing some difficulty in the text or bring that past text into conversation with present circumstances.
Handling biblical texts this way was a staple of Jewish biblical interpreters beginning after the exile – beginning already within the Bible in 1 and 2 Chronicles, which utterly reinterprets Israel’s history in light of the exile and failure to reestablish independence as before.
The Persians were now running the show – followed by the Greeks and then the Romans (with a relatively brief period of Jewish independence in between).The older biblical traditions – which presumed an Israel that was settled in the land, with king, temple, and sacrifice – needed to be brought into a troubling and challenging present.
Here is the irony: respect for the texts of the past was expressed in terms of transforming them to speak to present realities.
Continue reading “Pete Enns on Christians and the Old Testament”








