Review of John Sailhamer’s The Meaning of the Pentateuch

William Varner, The Master’s College

The Meaning of the Pentateuch by John Sailhamer (IVP, 2009, 632 pp.) is the most
stimulating and insightful book on the Bible that I read in the last decade.
Sailhamer boldly goes where some fear to tread in his proposal about the textual
composition of the Pentateuch and the entire Hebrew Bible - as well as their
implications for a theology of the OT. He argues for a two stage composition of the
Torah (styled Pentateuch and "Pentateuch 2.0"), with Moses the arranger/author of
the vast part and an unnamed prophet/author at the end of the OT period who
brings the Pentateuch into the realities of the time that had elapsed since Moses.
This author provided the “textual updating” needed for some anachronistic place
names ("Dan" in Gen. 14) but went further by the arranging key poems at
significant seams in the Torah (Gen. 49; Deut. 33) which explain previous poems
and make Messianic connections clear. Not only does Deut. 34 describe the end of
Moses' life, but the later author acknowledges that the promise of a Messianic
prophet in Deut.18:15-18 had not yet been fulfilled by the end of the "OT era"
(Deut. 34:10-12). Sailhamer is NOT advocating some higher critical multiple
authorship of the Pentateuch (a la JEPD).

Sailhamer argues that the three fold division of the Hebrew Bible into the Law, the
Prophets and the Writings (Torah/Nevi'im/Ketuvim) was theologically intentional
rather than simply reflecting a historic development. The author latched onto the
references to meditating on the Torah day and night in Josh. 1:8 and Ps. 1:2 as
appropriate locations in the seams between the first and second and between the
second and third divisions. Furthermore, all three sections end on a Messianic note
with the hope of a prophet unfulfilled in Deut. 34:10, the promise of the Messiah's
forerunner Elijah in Mal. 4:5 and the lack of a final fulfillment of Cyrus' decree in
2Chron. 36:23. Readers should remember that the Hebrew Bible ends with
Chronicles.

On the back cover, Eugene Merrill suggests that this is Sailhamer's magnum opus,
and I would agree. Merrill states that this book calls "for a reexamination of the
issue of the Pentateuch's antiquity and its deliberate compositional strategy." I am
not sure that higher critics will be convinced by Sailhamer's literary evidence for
Mosaic authorship, but his argument for an intentional compositional strategy by
the "author-maker" of Pentateuch 2.0 will challenge any evangelical to come up
with a better explanation of the textual phenomena.

Another of Sailhamer's contributions is his recognition of a creative intertextuality

between the authors of the Prophets (Nevi'im)/Writings (Ketuvim) and the
Pentatuech. He offers some very persuasive evidence that later Biblical authors
engaged in serious reflection on the Pentateuch in their prophetic books and
psalms. This is nothing new, but Sailhamer points out far more literary links than
we often have recognized. He also points out the many innertexual links within the
Pentateuch (some traced to Moses and others to that intentional later "author"). He
also uses the term intextuality to indicate the links within an extended passage (30,
336, 444, 492, 499). The intertextual connections that he discovers between
Balaam's poem (Num. 24) and Noah's poem (Gen. 9) leading to the Table of
Nations (Gen. 10) is simply a brilliant analysis (337-41). The same can be said for
his creative explanation of Matthew's (2:15) use of Hosea's (11:1) statement about
God calling his son out of Egypt. He settles for neither an "out of context"
explanation nor for a "typical" explanation, but defends the idea that Hosea
intended to convey what Matthew saw him conveying - a Messianic meaning in the
text. This is only one of Sailhamer's arguments for a thorough Messianic theology
that also drove the Biblical authors in "making" their books (Eccl. 12:12).

In this regard, I personally was also very pleased that Sailhamer expounds such
texts as Gen. 49:8-12; Num. 24:7-9; Psa. 2:2; 1Sam. 2:10, and Dan. 9:26 as
undoubtedly Messianic and not just "Davidic" as is often the case with many
modern evangelical scholars. Some study Bible notes authored by those who affirm
the possibility of predictive prophecy often ignore or deny the Messianic significance
of these passages. There is no hesitation in that regard with Sailhamer! He even
shows how these Messianic texts reveal a compositional "Messianic strategy" by the
authors.

Our author also stresses the priority of a textually based canonical reading of the
Pentateuch over a historically based reading. This is one area where he will be
misunderstood , but Sailhamer is not attempting to cast doubt on the historicity of
the underlying events in the text. He is rather calling for more attention to how the
Biblical author conveys that event, because that is what later authors are concerned
about. We should not be as concerned with the history behind the text as with how
the author conveys those events through his text. There are echoes here of
Brevard Childs' canonical criticism, but Sailhamer advances Childs' arguments with
an evangelical thrust. Sailhamer often identifies with pre-critical commentators in
this regard. Many current evangelicals have surrendered to a rationalist and
historicist methodology without their readers recognizing what was taking place!

It is Sailhamer's treatment of the role of the Mosaic law that will probably be his
most lasting contribution. Although hinted at early on and explained over and over,
he finally devotes an entire chapter (537-62) to this subject. He revives the view of
Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho that Trypho's ancestors brought upon
themselves the burden of the Mosaic law by their sin with the golden calf (Exo. 32).
God's intent at Sinai was not to impose a set of laws, but to covenant together with
His people on the basis of their Abrahamic faith (Gen. 15:6; Exo. 14:31; 19:8).
When they at first hesitated in fear before the mount and later apostatized, He
added the Book of the Law and the Law for the Tabernacle-Priests (Exo. 34 -
Lev.16). When they sacrificed to goat demons (Lev. 17:7), He added the Holiness
Code (Lev. 17-26). Deuteronomy actually anticipates the New Covenant. He makes
much of Deut. 29:1: "These are the words of the covenant which the LORD
commanded Moses to make with the sons of Israel in the land of Moab, besides the
covenant which He had made with them at Horeb." He finds justification for this
approach to the Mosaic Law in the theological thought of Justin, Irenaeus, John
Calvin and Johann Coccejus. But his Biblical argument is based on later passages in
the Prophets (Jer. 7:22-23 and Eze. 20:19-25) as well as in the NT, where he
points to Gal. 3:19 ("the law was added because of transgressions") and
Heb.12:18-25.

There is much more, especially some interesting comments on the significance of

the two versions of Jeremiah reflected in the Masoretic text and in the shorter
Hebrew vorlage of the LXX (162-71). Readers should also resonate with his
proposal that the "Big Idea" in the Pentateuch is living by faith and not obeying
codes of laws (563-601).

Meaning is so commendable that I am hesitant to mention my one big criticism. The

book is overlong, unbearably detailed, and highly repetitive. For example. 1. Six
times Sailhamer quotes the same exact passage from the Jamieson-Fausett-Brown
commentary (54-55, 196, 207, 280, 356, 464). 2. Twice he repeats the same long
paragraph, word for word (51, 203). 3. If he mentioned once that the Pentateuch
contains four long poems (Gen 49, Exodus 15, Numbers 24, Deuteronomy 33), he
repeated it at least twenty times. I know that repetition is great for learning, but
there is a danger of diminishing returns when an author repeats the same point
over and over. Such repetition is evidence that this book is a pastiche of
Sailhamer's numerous articles and books over the last twenty years. There is
nothing wrong with this practice, but good editors (where were you, IVP?) could
have smoothed out the tedious repetitions. Sadly this may discourage some readers
from profiting from what Sailhamer writes, because he does have something very
important to tell us. (I also found around a dozen examples of dittography, the
duplication of words and phrases).

But let me affirm that in The Meaning of the Pentateuch, John Sailhamer has
sounded a brilliant clarion call for a fresh approach not only to the Pentateuch but
to the entire Hebrew Bible. I recommend that you read a book that will make you
think and also re-think some traditional ideas about the Book. We will be better off
if we heed his call rather than reject it out of hand simply because it is different.