Theology and Reading
Southwestern Journal of Theology
Volume 52, No. 2 – Spring 2010
Managing Editor: Malcolm B. Yarnell III
By Richard M. Davidson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2007. 844 pages. $29.95 paper.
In this age of flaming language about sex, sexuality, gender studies, and its implications, Richard M. Davidson, J.N. Professor of Old Testament Interpretation at Andrews University, has written an ardent, authoritative survey of sexuality discovered in Old Testament Scriptures. Without losing the passion of presenting the foundational attributes of sexuality given as a “divine design” by our Creator in Genesis 1–3, Davidson tackles the difficult issues, a litany even Dante would have included in the Inferno, such as cultic sexuality, pagan practices, feminine imagery, homosexuality, marital foundations, polygamy, feminine leadership and submission, the priesthood, abuse of spouses, prostitution, premarital sex, adultery, divorce, intimacy, incest, illegitimate childbirth, reproduction birth control, abortion, rape, and others. Most Christians would shun these issues, but Richardson unveils their association with the biblical passages in which they arise and therefore “supports the view that biblical materials do not reflect a negative view of sexuality itself ” (8). Richardson explains well the view of seeing the whole body in relationship to sexual organs, a Hebrew mindset. He boldly asserts the teleological plan for sexuality from the Creator, traces the degeneration of sexuality after the Fall, and fortunately ends up on a positive note, verifying the beauty of sexuality as a holy union, using the metaphor, “The Flame of Yahweh” from the Song of Songs (Song 8:6), as the wholesome, holy beauty of sexuality.
The structure of the book consists of three parts. The first part analyzes the divine design of the Creator in creating Adam and Eve, or the “Edenic design.” The second section examines the development of sexuality “outside the garden.” The third major division constitutes a “return to Eden,” concentrating on the Song of Songs, the beauty and holiness and virtue of sexual love. An afterword incorporates how the study of Old Testament sexuality has implications for the New Testament. Throughout the book, each area has separate issues or topics in sexuality as well as references to the canonical development of the Pentateuch, Prophets, and Writings. Richardson’s last chapter reaches beyond the scope of the Old Testament by suggesting some implications for a New Testament theology of sexuality; certainly, a follow-up sequel to his study will follow and will be anticipated by readers interested in these issues. Finally, the bibliography offers an extensive selection of sources in the study as well as an index of ancient biblical references and sources.
Flame of Yahweh fulfills a great need in the history of Old Testament scholarship. Richardson attributes the lack of scholarship in sexuality in the last century and the renewed interest in the twenty-first century to the areas of the modern feminist movement, the new literary criticism, and the sexual research of social scientists. The existential liberation movements have been exaggerated and transformed into existentialism exaggerated: the postmodern turn. With this background, Richardson attempts a counterargument based upon biblical grounds—his project is a “wholistic theology of sexuality in the Old Testament” (1). Instead of focusing on the prevalent specializations in the literature, such as the role of women and the feminine dimension of divinity, Richardson desires a comprehensive theology with depth and breadth, beyond three major works he mentions: Phyllis Trible, God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1978); Samuel Terrien, Till the Heart Sings: A Biblical Theology of Manhood and Womanhood (Philadelphia: fortress, 1985); and David M. Carr, The Erotic Word: Sexuality, Spirituality, and the Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003). Unfortunately, he does not include, except in the bibliography, some excellent evangelical recent influences presenting a biblical insight into sexuality issues from a biblical view: Daniel Akin, God on Sex: The Creator’s Ideas about Love, Intimacy. and Marriage (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2003) and Wayne Grudem and John Piper, eds., Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism (Wheaton: Crossway, 1991).
Richardson does a magnificent job of surveying the Old Testament passages relevant to the sexuality issues; however, I would prefer that he uses exegesis on each passage rather than assuming “where necessary” in order to give ethos or credence to his scholarship. Many times he uses hermeneutic interpretative devices of language analysis in order to bias his viewpoint on the issue, criticizing some traditional values of Orthodox Christianity. In addition, more explanation needs to be developed in what he calls an “analysis of the canonical form of the Old Testament.” What definition of “canonical form” is he using in this context? He certainly does not mean the classical definition of the “canon,” since he “utilizes insights from such widely accepted synchronic methodologies as the new literary criticism and the new biblical theology which focus on the final form of the Old Testament text” (2–3). On the other hand, Richardson uses his own interpretations of Hebrew words in order to present his views on postmodern problems raised by feminism and the new literary criticism itself. It turns out that Richardson is trying to be all things to all people by incorporating both the conservative-evangelical and liberal-higher criticism approaches to biblical criticism, an admirable approach for reaching out to the postmodern feminist critique of the Holy Bible, but one that avoids a fundamental stand for classical biblical scholarship:
By focusing on the final form of the Old Testament text, I believe it is possible that the interests of both the liberal-critical and evangelical OT scholarship may merge in seeking to understand what constitutes the canonical theological message of the OT regarding human sexuality. Although I have profited enormously from feminist scholarship, this study does not employ the feminist hermeneutic of suspicion and resistance, but rather the hermeneutic of consent. In other words, I read not against but with the grain of the text in its final form (3).
Applying Paul Ricouer’s “hermeneutic of suspicion,” I suspect that even Richardson is biased in his presuppositions, using Hans Georg-Gadamer’s “ fusion of horizons,” in order to fuse the evangelical mind with the liberal critical scholars, an attempt, although noteworthy, has failed even in professional arenas like the Evangelical Theological Society. This Rogerian “win-win” approachcannot displace Toulmin’s logical analysis, or Aristotle’s deductive Rhetoric, nor alleviates D.A. Carson’s “exegetical fallacies” inductive scrutiny, approaches to understanding the text. Richardson insists his theology is “allowed to emerge from exegetical analysis of relevant passages; thus it is an “exegetical theology” (6). The key word here is “relevant.” Richardson’s premise is that “Genesis 1–3 has been situated as an introduction to the canon, and the whole rest of the canon regularly harks back to and builds upon this Edenic pattern” (3). His teleological approach is admirable as a foundational theme, but each biblical passage should undergo exegesis in order to prove his argument in context of the specific issue in sexuality. At least, Richardson’s voice can be heard in the academic marketplace of ideas: “I do not claim to have the final or exclusive word on sexual theology in the Old Testament. Hence, this work constitutes a (not the) theology of sexuality in the old Testament” (5). as a scholarly study, Richardson’s Flame of Yahweh ignited a desire for understanding more about the dynamics of sexuality as a gift from God, but it is still only a study, not the study on sexuality, and the best source is still the study of The Word of God.
