Диалог. Карнавал. Хронотоп, 1995, № 3
  91
Dialogue. Carnival. Chronotope, 1995, № 3

---

Thomas K. Johnson (International Institute for Christian Studies/ European Humanities University, Minsk)

Walter L. Reed. «Dialogues of the Word:
The Bible as Literature Accordinq to Bakhtin». Oxford University Press, 1993, 223 p.

Reed has produced a fascinating study by applying parts of Bakhtin's literary theory to that greatest of anthologies, the Bible. Not being a Bakhtin scholar, I cannot comment on Reed's relation to Bakhtin; I can only try to appraise Reed's use of some ideas inspired by Bakhtin.

Reed sees all language as dialogue, and in this dialogue one sees both centripedal and centrifugal tendencies. This leads him to see the Bible as a body of literature in dialogue with itself and its surrounding culture. This dialogue includes the whole process of writing, compiling, and redacting that occurred over some centuries. Of course the major theme of this dialogue is itself a dialogue, that between God and his people.

Reed suggests that this literary reading of the Bible stands between two traditional ways of reading the Bible, theological interpretation and historical analysis. And, of course, theological interpretation of the Bible is generally centripedal, concerned with the unity of the message of the Bible, while historical criticism is centrifugal, concerned with the historical uniqueness of each part.

One of Reed's most interesting suggestions is that the three parts of the canon of the Hebrew Bible, law, prophets, and wisdom, represent three paradigms of divine-human dialogue. In the law God speaks directly in a way to cultically constitute the people of Yahweh. In the prophets God spoke through the marginal figure of the prophets to demand the reformation of Israel as a political nation In wisdom the focus in on God's ordering of creation in such a way that leads to domestic preservation. These three paradigms stand in dialogue or even struggle with each other. Each of the three paradigms led to a different type of religious community. Rabbinic Judaism was primarily in dialogue with the law, the

---

ОБЗОРЫ И РЕЦЕНЗИИ   Thomas K. Johnson
Walter L. Reed, Dialogues of the Word…

Диалог. Карнавал. Хронотоп, 1995, № 3
92  
Dialogue. Carnival. Chronotope, 1995, № 3

---

Qumran community with the prophets, and Alexandrian Judaism with wisdom literature. These three communities are in dialogue or tension with each other in a way that reflects the dialogue of the canon.

Within the New Testament one can see different parts as standing in dialogue with different parts of the Hebrew canon. The gospel of John interacts with wisdom literature, whereas Luke interacts more with the prophets. Some NT writings, such as Matthew and Revelation, dialogue with several parts of the Hebrew canon.

This is insightful, penetrating analysis. I am indebted to Reed for what I learned. It could be improved, I think, by greater candor in regard to basic assumptions. For example, while Reed postulates a complete distinction between historical-critical and theological studies of the Bible, G.E. Ladd's history of biblical criticism clearly shows that, «all criticism is conducted from the perspective of certain philosophical and theological presuppositions.» In other words, all historical analysis also contains a theological interpretation of a text, whether that theology be Christian, Jewish, Hegelian, Deist, Marxist, or whatever. Though common, it may be a bit naive epistemologically to think that the interpretation of a religious text will not include theological, philosophical, historical, and literary dimensions. Any study of the Bible will include historical, literary, and theological elements, including Reed's. At times Reed seems to sense this, when, e.g., he calls the documentary hypothesis the «Source Myth,» (p. 39) pointing out that this supposedly historical theory is itself a religious myth. His work would be better if he did this consistently.

In a similar manner, in homage to certain recent literary theorists, in the Preface Reed says: «The contemporary sense that I make in this book is of course a meaningfulness of my own construction» (p. viii). This almost sounds nihilistic, as if there is no objective or true meaning of a literary text, not only that it is hard to find. And yet Reed writes as if the dialogue he describes really has gone on over the centuries among real people, not as if this dialogue is only of his own construction. This is a tension.

I had to wonder if Reed's basic assumptions might have been in transition while he prepared this book, as if Someone unexpected might have engaged him in the dialogue in such a way to change some of his thinking. I suppose that is the danger of writing a book about dialogue with Yahweh.

---

ОБЗОРЫ И РЕЦЕНЗИИ   Thomas K. Johnson
Walter L. Reed, Dialogues of the Word…