This study has approached the broad problem of Old Testament theology: how can a modem interpreter appropriate writings as old, as foreign, as disparate as those of the Old Testament in a manner that is theologically relevant to a contemporary audience? This question has faced exegetes since the beginning of the traditionary process which produced the Old Testament, and the ages have proposed numerous answers. However, the twentieth century has posed its own particular constellation of factors influencing the solution to that problem. Only in this century has the discipline of historical criticism been faced with a sweeping revival of interest in the theological application of scripture.
In previous periods either historical criticism as we know it was non- existent or theological interest in the Old Testament was at a low ebb.
In the last few decades both have occupied positions of importance, and the situation has demanded a resolution to the conflict between the two disciplines.
We have chosen to investigate one of the most influential and successful attempts to resolve this conflict: the theological enterprise initiated by Gerhard von Rad. We have determined that his hermeneutical method centers in the device called actualization, which refers to the continual updating of religiously important traditions for each generation of Israel. While this method is not easily defined because of von Rad’s ambiguity and vagueness at key points, we isolated enough central characteristics to show that he envisioned a concept considerably different from the manner in which actualization is usually employed (either as cultic or literary contemporization). We labeled his formulation chronological actualization. The importance of this formulation lies in the unique sense of identity, time, and history which it provides for the Old Testament, the traditio-historical unity which it imposes on scripture, and the central place which it occupies in inner-Biblical exegesis. On the basis of these factors chronological actualization forms the overarching hermeneutical method for Biblical interpretation.
206 Actualization and Interpretation in the Old Testament
Other scholars accepted (and participated in the formulation of) von Rad’s basic premises. Actualization’s influence upon the study of the Old Testament was particularly strong in Germany, where it became the regnant Protestant hermeneutical method in the fifties and sixties. It played an important, although less dominant, role in England and America during the same period. These other scholars developed, adapted, and applied actualization to cover various aspects of Old Testament studies. While many of these studies proved useful, they also revealed some of the underlying weaknesses of the concept.
From an investigation of the internal logic of chronological actualization we concluded that it forms an inadequate hermeneutic for Old Testament theology. Apart from criticisms leveled by advocates of other systems of thought, the method collapses from the weight of its own inconsistencies. We may briefly summarize the major flaws as follows:
1. The special senses of identity, time, and history are unproven assumptions. The peculiarities of expression in the Old Testament which gave rise to these formulations may be better explained by other theories.
2. While actualization claims to provide an overarching unity for the whole Bible, it in fact fails to link the Old and New Testaments convincingly and neglects significant portions of the Old Testament. It is one inner-Biblical hermeneutical device among many.
3. It takes concepts based upon oral transmission which is still in a state of flux and applies them to written, canonized materials without considering the consequences of such a change.
4. Its reliance upon the historical-critical method leads actualization away from the Old Testament text because of the distortion caused by fragmentation, historical reconstruction, and historical specificity. While these techniques may be legitimate for historical inquiries, they form a questionable basis for theological investigation.
5. Despite its claim to use Biblical categories, chronological actualization introduces modem Protestant concepts as the basis for its theological program. This procedure results
Conclusions 207
in unresolved tensions in the theological-historical equation.
In the final analysis chronological actualization is a hypothetical category which fails to reconcile the opposites which von Rad wished to preserve: identity and an historical sense. One may speak legitimately of actualization in a cultic sense where the participants experience an identity with the event being celebrated. Likewise, one may speak of an aesthetic or literary actualization where the interpreter is conscious of the historical time gap and seeks to understand and communicate in spite of it. Von Rad tried to combine the best of each sense of actualization in order to demonstrate the uniqueness of the Biblical faith. This proved to be an impossible task. The uniqueness which he contrived, the bridge between the historical method and faith, foundered on the inconsistencies listed above.
Nevertheless, actualization exerted a powerful influence upon the theological interpretation of the Old Testament. More than any other theological-historical method emerging in this century, actualization responded to the needs of the times. While von Rad’s reliance upon an analogical relationship between the theological rubrics of the Bible and modem theological categories created strains in the method, it also lent his theological program a vitality and relevance absent in most other attempts. Thus, although flawed, his own charismatic, eclectic procedure resulted in an effective contemporary actualization.
Furthermore, his methodology rested upon a firmly based insight:
that the adaptation and application of older material is an important feature of the Old Testament traditionary process. This concept of the re-use of traditions proved particularly effective in understanding the development and internal relationships of the various historical materials and the growth of the prophetic corpus. Von Rad did not originate this concept: it was present and active in Gunkel’s work.
Rather, von Rad’s genius lay in his perceiving the theological nature of the reuse of tradition. Consequently, even though the particular connection which he drew between the historical-critical method and the theological dimension of the Old Testament was deeply flawed, it rested upon a valid insight into the theological nature of the Old Testament traditions. This basic insight, coupled with his sensitive, illuminating exegesis of particular passages or books of the Old Testament, enabled him to respond to the currents of his time more appropriately and sensitively than any other Biblical theologian of that day.
208 Actualization and Interpretation in the Old Testament
Growing out of this traditio-historical insight is the re-evaluation of the so-called secondary materials of the Old Testament. Von Rad opened the door to an appreciation of the interpretive value of the later reworkings of tradition. While in his work this value was limited to the historical and prophetic corpora, other scholars have demonstrated its applicability to virtually all areas of the Old Testament. Although he envisioned this re-use as a further layer of tradition added to the preceding ones, this initial step has opened the door to more thorough reappraisals of the value and the role of later additions, as we have suggested in the textual studies in chapter four.
As with most interpretive schemes, actualization presents some essential insights with contemporary applicability locked into a flawed and inconsistent method. Our study of actualization has enabled us to sort out both the strengths and weaknesses of the concept and given us a basis upon which to posit some corrective insights. These insights, suggestive rather than definitive in nature, can point the way toward a redefinition of actualization which is more in line with the Biblical material and more useful in changing theological contexts than the narrowly defined chronological actualization.
First, actualization may not be tied to any specific theological program. Its strong links to the confessional nature of Protestant neo- orthodoxy severely restricted the theological vision derived from the Old Testament. James Sanders has demonstrated that a different theological understanding can employ many of the insights of actualization, breaking away from the strict talk of confessions and credenda which governs von Rad’s work. Two precepts of actualization related to its theological program must also be jettisoned. These are the attempts to have actualization account for the uniqueness and the unity of the Bible.
We have found that the concept is inadequate to explain either one. The various types of actualization that one encounters in the Bible highlight its theological diversity instead. Therefore, a proper concept of Biblical actualization will open the Old Testament up to multivalent theological interpretations rather than tie it to one school of thought.
Second, actualization must not be tied exclusively to historical- critical procedures. While historical criticism has been essential in understanding and sorting out the different layers of tradition in the Old Testament, it has also distorted the interpretation of many passages.
Von Rad correctly discerned that the procedures governing the reconstruction of Israel’s religion were not always applicable in
Conclusions 209
theological interpretation, even though his application of this insight was somewhat limited. Our textual studies have suggested that actualization is frequently governed by such non-historical factors as changes in the semantic level of language, literary allusion and interaction, and the interpretation of literary wholes. Only when these factors are allowed their due will the full interpretive range of actualization in relation to the Old Testament be realized. Once again, this is a move away from the uniqueness of scripture to an acknowledgement of the connection between the Bible and other literature. Consequently, actualization must be viewed as a force binding the Old Testament to other literary traditions and procedures rather than setting it apart from them.
Third, we must acknowledge the religious dimension of actualization. Von Rad was correct in seeing a religious impulse behind every re-use of tradition. However, we must not connect a general religious impulse with a specific manifestation such as proclamation, as he did. The impulse to re-use traditions may assume many different forms: didactic, visionary, historiographic, among others. Acknowledgement of the multivalent forces at work allows us to connect actualization to the theological dimension, but with a much broader range than that present in chronological actualization. In this sense Biblical actualization is different from a general theory of literary actualization. The religious motive for the re-use of old traditions gives Biblical actualization an intensity and complexity lacking in most other applications of the general concept. To understand fully this aspect of the phenomenon, one would need to investigate the nature and function of religious language in the Old Testament, especially in relation to the use of language in other religious traditions and in relation to the phenomenon of canonization. Only in this way can the complex interaction of the literary and religious dimensions be studied in depth.
In summary, we may properly speak of the presence of actualization in the Bible, although in a different sense than the chronological actualization proposed by von Rad and others.
Actualization in the Old Testament centered upon the re-use of older material in a way that renders that material theologically relevant for a later time (whether that time be a single generation or all generations to come). While an acknowledgement of the religious nature of this actualization is essential, the religious aspect does not establish such actualization as a unique procedure. It is one method by which people
210 Actualization and Interpretation in the Old Testament
everywhere handle their past -- especially their religious past.
Consequently, Biblical actualization is both broader and narrower than von Rad acknowledged: broader because it is kin to the actualization practiced by many cultures and ages; narrower because it fails to encompass the hermeneutical complexities of the Old Testament.
Therefore, in any strict evaluation chronological actualization is a failure; it falls short of its own high standards of being an overarching interpretive device for Old Testament theology. The uniqueness of the Bible lies elsewhere than in its hermeneutical methods; the search must continue for any grand design which may enable a comprehensive linkage of the theological and historical enterprises in Old Testament studies. However, actualization redefined remains a valuable tool for Old Testament interpretation, offering insight into the traditionary process of the Bible and into both the faith of its people and the relevance of that faith for us today. As such, actualization functions as one element among many in reaching a theological evaluation of the Old Testament.