Global Hermeneutics? - International Voices in Biblical Studies ...

JONKER 51
textual reception in the time of origin of the Old Testament should not be seen as
separate processes. Certain contexts of origin brought forth textual traditions that
were transmitted to subsequent generations. The reception of these traditions by the
subsequent generations in their changed circumstances often sparked off further
processes of textual production. Textual reception therefore gave rise to renewed
textual production. In this process we observe the courage to reinterpret and to
adapt. We see biblical writers prepared to take from the past, but also to
differentiate from the past.
The Books of Chronicles are probably prime examples of this hermeneutic. 11
The processes of interpretation during the Chronicler’s age were certainly not
merely a repetition of the past. They rather reflect the deep hermeneutical
presupposition that understanding is never finished. The re-appropriation of their
older historical and cultic traditions stood in the service of identity formation in
changed and changing circumstances. I have indicated elsewhere 12 that “(t)his
observation warns against the type of interpretation that remains oriented to the
past, without giving account for the circumstances of the present.” To make this
applicable for our discussion on global hermeneutics: a global hermeneutics should
be able to include not only those interpretations and approaches that emphasise the
pre-stages of the Old Testament texts and the world behind those texts, but also
those approaches that want to relate those biblical traditions to present-day realities
and contexts. I have furthermore argued that the opposite position is certainly also
D. G. Lawrie, Fishing for Jonah (anew). Various approaches to biblical interpretation
(Stellenbosch: African Sun Media, 2005).
11 See L. C. Jonker, Reflections of King Josiah in Chronicles. Late stages of the Josiah
Reception in 2 Chr 34f (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlag, 2003); idem, “The rhetorics of
finding a new identity in a multi-cultural and multi-religious society,” Verbum et Ecclesia
24/2 (2003), 396–416; idem, “The Cushites in the Chronicler’s version of Asa’s Reign: A
Secondary Audience in Chronicles?”, OTE 19/3 (2006), 863–881; idem, “Reforming history:
The hermeneutical significance of the Books of Chronicles,” VT 57/1 (2007), 21–44; idem,
“Refocusing the battle accounts of the kings: Identity formation in the Books of Chronicles,”
in Behutsames Lesen. Alttestamentliche Exegese im Gespräch mit Literaturwissenschaft und
Kulturwissenschaften (eds. S. Lubs et al.; Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2007), 245–
274; idem, “Who constitutes society? Yehud’s self-understanding in the Late Persian Era as
reflected in the Books of Chronicles,” JBL 127/4 (2008), 707–728; idem, “The disappearing
Nehushtan: The Chronicler’s reinterpretation of Hezekiah’s reformation measures,” in From
Ebla to Stellenbosch (eds. I. Cornelius and L. C. Jonker; ADPV 37; Wiesbaden:
Harrassowitz, 2008), 116–140; idem, “The Chronicler’s Portrayal of Solomon as the King of
Peace within the Context of the International Peace Discourses of the Persian era”, OTE 21/3
(2008), 653–669; idem, “The Chronicler and the prophets. Who were his authoritative
sources?”, SJOT 22/2 (2008), 271–292; idem, “Textual Identities in the Books of Chronicles:
The Case of Jehoram’s History,” in Community Identity in Judean Historiography. Biblical
and Comparative Perspectives (eds. G. N. Knoppers and K. A. Ristau; Winona Lake, ID.:
Eisenbrauns), 197–217.
12 See idem, “Reforming history,” 37.