Die Provokation Israels: Die paradoxe Funktion von Jes 6,9-10 bei Markus und Lukas: Ein textpragmatischer Versuch im Kontext gegenwartiger Rezeptionsasthetik und Lesetheorie

Abstract

Die Provokation Israels: Die paradoxe Funktion von Jes 6,9-10 bei Markus and Lukas: Ein textpragmatischer Versuch im Kontext gegenwartiger Rezeptionsasthetik and Lesetheorie, by Volker A. Lehnert. Neukirchener Theologische Dissertationen and Habilitationen 25. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1999. Pp. xi + 337. EUR35.00. Lehnert's book is a slightly revised version of his 1998 dissertation accepted by the Kirchlichen Hochschule in Wuppertal; what has been revised or added is mainly an update of the literature that appeared at the end of the dissertation stage and before publication. In this book Lehnert utilizes various pragmatic approaches to reexamining the reception and interpretation of Isa 6:9-10 in Mark and Luke-Acts (i.e., Mark 4:10-13; Luke 8:9-10; and Acts 28:25-27). Reader-response criticism (especially Wolfgang Iser's model of reception theory: Rezeptionsdsthetik), rhetorical criticism, and speech act theory are all called on to demonstrate how these texts paradoxically intend the opposite of what they say. In Isa 6:9-10, God tells the prophet to command his people to listen but not comprehend, look but not understand, in order that they do not repent and be healed. This command to obduracy, like others in the book of Isaiah, is remarkable in that it is directed to God's own people at large, and not to foreigners or to specific unrepentant individuals. In the NT, the Isaiah text is quoted, paraphrased, or alluded to in several places, and its use in these new contexts is still provocative. Is the goal of the obduracy command to pronounce judgment or to encourage repentance? If, in Isaiah, it is directed to the people of Israel, to whom is such a command directed and to what purpose when it is placed in the mouth of Jesus or Paul? Is it, for example, still directed to Israel, that is, to Jewish non-Christians? Lehnert's methodology permits some new perspectives on these familiar questions. Particularly interesting are his concept of paradoxical intervention, which he sees as a common ancient rhetorical strategy, and his proposal that Luke's theology concerning Israel is not as pessimistic as has sometimes been thought. Lehnert begins with a brief look at previous works on the problem of obduracy in the Bible (section A), up to and including those of C. A. Evans (To See and Not Perceive [JSOTSup 64; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989), R. Kuhschelm (Verstockung, Gericht und Heil [BBB 76; Bonn: Hain, 1990), G. Rohser (Pradestination and Verstockung [TANZ 14; Tubingen/Basel: Francke, 1994]), and R. B. Chisholm, Jr. (Divine Hardening in the Old Testament, BSac 153 [1996]: 410-34). His next section (B) turns to the exegetical problems of the individual texts in Isaiah, Mark, Luke, and Acts. In regard to his examination of the Hebrew text of Isa 6:9-10, one might note that Lehnert does not include all of the variant readings from lQIsa(a), nor does he remark on the fact that some commentators, such as W. H. Brownlee (The Meaning of the Qumran Scrolls [New York, 1964]) and Evans (above), have suggested that those variants are deliberate scribal alterations intended to soften the meaning of the text, making it a warning to the righteous rather than a judgment condemning them to obduracy. This is a peculiar omission, since the task of Lehnert is to look for indications of how the obduracy motif was received and interpreted by various audiences; and indeed, a discussion of lQIsa(a) would have fit well in his section, 'Wirkungsgeschichthches, which deals with the interpretation of Isa 6:9-10 in later chapters of Isaiah and pre-NT texts. Lehnert next defines aspects of text pragmatics and his own methodology (sections C and D-I). He most prefers Wolfgang Iser's model of reception theory (Rezeptionsasthetik, aesthetic response) for describing the interaction between text and reader, text levels, and the Wirkung of the text as the reading process unfolds. He enlists the help of speech act theory and rhetorical criticism to demonstrate that the illocutionary act of a text often includes using indirect speech forms such as irony, parody, or satire to signal to the implied reader that it is the opposite of a locution that is really meant. …