2.3.1 Insights from Kristeva and Schleiermacher
The ideas of Kristeva and Schleiermacher provide valuable insights as we review Hays’ framework for analysing the intertextual connections between the Old Testament and the New. Under the current framework, the focus has been on the
108 Ibid., 83. 109 Ibid., 87. 110 Ibid. 111 Ibid., 90.
42
word-to-word identification of the verbal connections. Given what has just been discussed, this understanding of the intertextual connection between the OT and the letters of Paul is too narrow. When an author writes, he is drawing from the linguistic and ideational resources that are shared between him and his readers. These resources may be derived originally from significant social or cultural texts, but may have become so much a part of the language-system of the community that the author or the reader may use them without any reference to, or even awareness of, their exact originating sources. This is illustrated by means of the diagram below (see Figure 3).
Figure 3: Cultural Texts and the Written Letter
In the diagram, solid arrows represent communication taking place in a given Setting (also known as the communicative situation), in the form of a Letter that is written by its Author and sent to his Readers (R0, R1, R2, R3, etc.). However, the process of encoding the Letter (by Author) as well as its subsequent decoding (by Readers) are filtered through the Cultural Texts that function as a language-system which they share. These Cultural Texts, by definition, are but an abstraction (or subset) of the totality of the language-system (langue) which the Author and his Readers have in common. However, in any intertextual analysis, these texts are delineated and treated as a proxy of the langue for pragmatic reasons.
With this model, the intertextual analysis transcends the search for citations, allusions and echoes, and examines the broader connotations of an author’s
43
words in the light of the language-system (i.e. cultural texts) that he and his readers may share. Therefore, whereas Hays’ approach places an onus on the degree to which the author deliberately makes an intertextual connection to a specific text, the insight derived from Schleiermacher suggests that the relationship between the text and its prior corpus of texts may be more incidental than that, and can go beyond any conscious intention to make a reference to a particular text.112 In the context of this study, it is possible to treat the Septuagint as a language-system which Paul and his reader use as a collection of ideational resources.
2.3.2 The Use of Septuagint as an Ideational Resource
In the writings of the apostle Paul, the Septuagint—an authoritative text among the Jewish Diaspora in the centuries immediately prior to the coming of the gospel—is one aspect of this language-system that facilitates the communication between Paul and his readers. Here, the term ‘language-system’ should be understood in its broad sense, to refer to the linguistic and ideational resources that are partially found in the Septuagint and shared between Paul and his readers. While the LXX is not the complete language-system in itself (far from it, it is but a minute segment of the commonality that Paul has with his readers), it is nonetheless significant enough to be the representative of that language-system (or sub-system), which Paul presupposes and draws upon to write his letters.
112 It is important for us to distinguish among the different kinds of author’s ‘intention’ or ‘consciousness’ here. All communication has the element of authorial intentionality to it. Whatever an author wishes to communicate, there is a certain authorial intention to his words, but the expressions that are used to do it may be drawn from resources that are presupposed in the language that is shared between him and his readers, without any intention of referring to specific texts where these linguistic resources may be found. Thus, when an author says something using the language of the Old Testament, while the act of speaking (or writing) is an intentional act in itself, expressing that idea in a particular way or using a particular language may take place instinctively. He has intention to communicate an idea, but at the same time may use the language codes unconsciously and without intentional reference to originating sources.
44
Seen in that light, is it not possible that, on top of the citations, allusions and echoes that are derived from the Septuagint, Paul’s writings may also encode linguistic, cultural and thematic significations that are drawn from this authoritative text in even more indirect and subtle ways? The Septuagint is such a significant part of the language-system which Paul shares with his readers that, when he writes, he may be using the cultural codes that are drawn from it without even being deliberate or conscious about their specific originating contexts. Thus, in the article on the role of Isaiah 53 LXX in shaping Paul’s language of the atonement of Christ that I cited earlier, Watson says,
A scriptural text can serve as a lexical and semantic resource or reservoir from which terms, phrases, or concepts can be freely drawn and adapted to new uses. Fully embedded in their new contexts, they do not draw attention to their scriptural origin; and yet the scriptural impact on the new context may be at least as profound here as in the case of citations and allusions.113
This statement, on the use of Scripture as a lexical and semantic resource, is relevant to the present discussion on the use of Scripture as an ideational resource as well. In other words, the Septuagint, for Paul and his readers, is essentially a collection of shared ideational resources that is assumed in their communication. This is, perhaps, a slightly different mode of intertextuality compared to those that are currently used in biblical studies, but it deserves our consideration nevertheless.114 Under this formulation, the diagram presented earlier may be amended to indicate the place of the Septuagint (LXX) in the model that is used for our intertextual analysis (see Figure 4).
113 Watson, "Mistranslation," 234.
114 See, for example, Steve Moyise, "Intertextuality and the Study of the Old Testament in the New Testament," in The Old Testament in the New Testament: Essays in Honour of J.
45
Figure 4: The Septuagint and Paul's Letters
The only significant changes that I have made to the diagram are to substitute the Septuagint (‘LXX’) for what was ‘Cultural Texts’ in the previous version, and to name Paul as the author of the letters that he writes. Under this model, the Septuagint functions like a language-system (or sub-system, since it is a subset of the language-system as a whole) from which the ideational resources are drawn in the process of Paul’s epistolary discourse. This role of the Septuagint is in addition to the more conscious use of Scripture by Paul.
Therefore, when there is a conscious intention to make an intertextual reference to specific texts, the author uses citations, allusions or echoes (which Hays’ framework emphasises), or he may summarise portions of the Old Testament as he makes mention of it (as would be seen, later, in our analysis of Paul’s use of the Narrative Summary). The common feature of these literary devices is the verbal or textual correspondences that are often seen between the specific texts where the connection is made. But in the case where the idea or imagery is simply a part of the language-system that Paul shares with his readers, and not necessarily referenced to any specific prior texts, the exact verbal correspondences may be missing. When I speak of an intertextuality in such a sense, I am using a broader understanding of what is meant by the word, ‘text’. A ‘text’ is not just words, but also ideas, symbols, images, postures, traditions or even the shared experiences as the prior texts are being read.
46
At this point I should also clarify the relationship among the LXX, the ‘cultural text’ (which I also call the cultural code, langue or language-system in this discussion) and the letters of Paul in the model, since the relationship is actually more complex than what I have intimated thus far.
The LXX, of course, is but an abstraction of the ‘cultural text’ as a whole. Nonetheless, while the LXX is a reflection of its cultural milieu, it is also an influential collection of writings that shapes the cultural code of those who come under its influence in return. Thus, there is a two-way relationship between the LXX and the cultural text—the LXX is a product of its cultural code and is therefore a subset of it; it also influences the cultural code at the same time. Consequently, when we examine the relationship between the LXX and the NT (i.e. the Pauline letters), the question may arise as to whether the connection is more to the LXX or to the cultural milieu which both the LXX and the Pauline letters are located.
In the new model, however, although the LXX is a sub-set of the language-system as a whole, it is taken to be the proxy for the cultural code. Therefore, whether the LXX is a product of that cultural code or a producer of it, it is deemed to be the textual representation of the two collectively, and this is in turn placed alongside the Pauline letters for analysis. When I examine the use of this ‘cultural code’ in the letters of Paul, I am looking for this ‘code’ as represented in the LXX, not just textually, but also ideationally.
2.3.3 The Proposed Approach
Turning to Hays’ framework, my proposal is not so much to replace, but to extend the model by repositioning our idea of biblical intertextuality. Under such an approach, not only would we pay heed to the citations, allusions and echoes; we would also look for the cultural codes that are drawn from the Septuagint and embedded in the apostle’s letters, without reference to any specific text within
47
the corpus of the Septuagint. In addition to looking for direct verbal correspondences, we should look for motifs, patterns, postures, word pictures, sentiments, attitudes, and so on, that are drawn from the Old Testament and used in the Pauline epistles. This may sometimes involve the use of the same words (verbal correspondences); but at other times it only involves the use of synonymous expressions which may escape notice under the old framework, and whose only connections may be at the level of theme or motifs, and the like. This does not mean, however, that we are engaged in the kind of parallelomania which Samuel Sandmel warns us against in his famous 1962 article, criticising some scholars for making too much out of the superficial parallels between some rabbinic texts or Dead Sea Scrolls on the one hand, and the writings of the New Testament on the other.115 Sandmel’s warning is directed at those who look at the superficial parallels between two texts (especially by using excerpts from the texts instead of looking at the whole contexts) and infer from them that there is a direct source-and-influence relationship. It is exactly the kind of intertextuality which I try to transcend in my current proposal, since this source-and-influence relationship is what Hays’ framework essentially covers. By positing the use of a shared language-system that is encapsulated in part in the LXX, it is less about a direct source-influence relationship between the texts, and more about a common cultural code that is evident and presupposed in both texts. Even if this cultural code is the result of an influence that is exerted by one of these texts that is highly authoritative and influential, that influence comes without any individually traceable textual source.
48
CHAPTER 2
SCRIPTURE AS IDEATIONAL RESOURCE IN ROMANS 9:1-3
1 Introduction
Thus far, I have outlined my approach to examining the broader intertextual connections between the Old Testament and the letters of Paul and proposed that, instead of looking only at the word-for-word correspondences, we should also investigate instances where Paul’s discourse may have special significance in the light of the cultural code which he and his readers share. This cultural code, as I have argued, resides in part in the Septuagint, which is the authoritative text for Paul and his readers.116 In this chapter, I shall demonstrate the value of this approach by using the text of Rom 9:1-3.
Scholars like F. W. Beare and C. H. Dodd note the abrupt change in mood between Romans 8 and 9 (especially between Rom 8:31-39 and 9:1-5), and conclude that there is a disjunction in Paul’s thought between these two chapters.117 Like other recent scholars, however, I think the climatic ending in Romans 8 does not necessarily mean that there is an absolute discontinuity in Paul’s discourse.118 While Paul pauses to praise God for the inseparable love between Christ and the people of God at the end of Romans 8, it is only an interlude in his presentation; the arguments that he puts forth in relation to the gospel of Christ would only be half-baked, if these were not brought to bear on
116 We cannot presume that all of Paul’s readers would subscribe to the authority of the Old Testament (hence, the Septuagint) with equal conviction, nor that all are equally familiar with the Scriptures. Our starting point, however, is Paul’s own assumption that the OT texts are authoritative for him and his readers, as seen in the use of these texts in his letters. As would be evident in the course of this dissertation, Paul further assumes that his readers are more-or-less familiar with the texts that are used.
117 Francis W. Beare, St. Paul and His Letters (London: A & C Black, 1962), 103-04; C. H. Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans (London: Fontana Books, 1959), 213-14. See also Heinrich Schlier, Der Römerbrief (Freiburg; Basel; Wien: Herder, 1977), 282.
118 Peter Stuhlmacher, Der Brief an die Römer, 14th ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989), 131; Otto Michel, Der Brief an die Römer, 14th ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966), 288-89.
49
the issue of Israel.
The Israelites have been promised unconditional blessings in the covenant through the line of their forefathers (namely, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob). If God’s plan of salvation entails putting their faith in his Son Jesus Christ, questions may now arise, not only with regards to what would happen to Israel as a nation— since many Jews have not believed in Christ—but also with regards to the faithfulness of God in keeping to his covenant promises.119 The answers given to these questions would naturally go back to validate (or invalidate) the gospel that Paul is preaching in Romans 1–8. Furthermore, at the end of Romans 8 Paul declares that, to those who love God, all things will work for good because the love of Christ can never be separated from them. How is this relevant if, even though they have been given God’s promises in the past, the Jews are not even responding positively to the gospel in the present?120 Seen in that light, there is a logical continuity in Paul’s discourse from Romans 1–8 to 9–11.
Nonetheless, Rom 9:1-3 has been rarely referenced in our discussion of Paul’s attitude towards the Jews. In his article on Paul’s view of Israel in the light of the gospel, for example, Gaston reviews the Pauline passages to determine the ones that are deemed to be relevant for the discussion, and Rom 9:1-3 is not one of the texts that are mentioned.121 Furthermore, Gaston goes on to say that Paul says ‘nothing whatsoever which is critical of Israel’ in Romans 9.122
A careful intertextual analysis of this passage, however, will reveal a certain disposition that Paul is assuming as he frames this next stage of his discourse, to explain the situation of the Jews in the light of God’s plan of salvation through the
119 Dunn, Romans 9-16, 518-19; Ulrich Wilckens, Der Brief an die Römer, vol. 2 (Zürich; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Benziger Verlag; Neukirchener Verlag, 1980), 182-83; Stuhlmacher,
Römer, 131.
120 See Hans Wilhelm Schmidt, Der Brief des Paulus an die Römer, 2nd ed. (Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1966), 159; Hays, Echoes, 63.
121 Lloyd Gaston, "Israel's Misstep in the Eyes of Paul," in The Romans Debate, ed. Karl P. Donfried, (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1991).
50
gospel of Jesus Christ. What the ensuing discussion will show is that, in turning to the question of God’s plan for his people, Paul adopts a distinctly prophetic posture which is drawn from the ideational resources provided by the Old Testament (particularly, the book of Jeremiah), and which are evoked by his words in Rom 9:1-3. He certainly does not see himself as an apostate Jew,123 but as the true prophet who speaks the truth. Furthermore, it also reveals something about his opinion of what may be ‘wrong’ with his people, in the light of the gospel.
Indeed, there is another way in which this prophetic perspective is evident in Romans 9–11: Just as the prophetic texts in the Old Testament generally begin with a message of divine judgement and end with a message of divine comfort and hope, we see the same patterning in Romans 9–11. Paul’s message of grief and anguish in Rom 9:1-5 turns into a message of eschatological hope for his own people in Romans 11, when he reveals that, eventually, all Israel will be saved (v. 26) because of God’s mercy (vv. 30-32).
Having said that, Abasciano’s treatment of Rom 9:1-3 also compels us to ruminate on the extent to which our model of biblical intertextuality should control the interpretation of the text. In discussing the intertextual connection between Rom 9:3 (where Paul prays or wishes that he himself would be anathema and be cut off from Christ) and Ex 32:32 (where Moses asks to be blotted out from the book that is written), Abasciano advances the view that, instead of a substitutionary sacrifice for the sake of his fellow Jews, Paul prays that he would perish along with them.124
Abasciano sees only one significant ‘allusion’ between the Old Testament and Rom 9:1-5, namely, Ex 32:32,125 which controls his exegesis of the text. Consequently, it becomes an important case study as we discuss the intertextual
123 Cf. Michel, Römer, 289.
124 Abasciano, Romans 9:1-9, 45-146. 125 Ibid., 45.
51
relationship between the Old Testament and the New, and the use of that understanding in our reading of the letters of Paul.
As we approach the text of Rom 9:1-3, another question also comes into view. Why is Paul emphatic (v. 1) that he is telling the truth (not lying) regarding his anguish and pain over the Israelites (v. 2)? Some think that, in connection with the particular situation in Rome, Paul feels the need to defend himself against any accusation (potential or on-going) that, somehow, he has forsaken his own people or his own Jewish heritage, in deference to the gospel that he has been preaching to the Gentiles.126 An analysis of the intertextual connections to the Old Testament suggests that Paul is in fact indirectly asserting that he, as a prophetic messenger, is authentic, and that the gospel which he preaches (not just his feelings for his fellow countrymen) is the truth.
In the sub-sections relating to each verse (i.e. Rom 9:1-3) below, I shall proceed