wednesdays with waltke: chapter 12

The twelfth chapter of Dr. Waltke’s An Old Testament Theology is entitled “The Gift of the Abrahamic Covenant: The Chosen Seed” which focus on the how the patriarchal narratives, within their ANE context as well as their canonical, covenantal context, speak to the both the unity and continuity of the people of God.

In the introduction Waltke notes that “the Bible is all about the irrupting kingdom of God, and Genesis is all about the elect “seed,” a metaphor for the people of God who will constitute that kingdom” (305). The way the “seed” is organized in Genesis is by the structure of 10 toledot (”these are the generations of…) which focus on the growth of God’s people throughout Genesis. After a short summary of the 10 toledot in Genesis, Waltke moves on to the relationship between the primeval history (Genesis 1-11) and the patriarchal narratives (Genesis 12-50).

There are interesting connections between the Creation narratives and the Noahic narrative, which anyone familiar with Waltke’s Genesis commentary will find familiar. There are connections between Creation and Re-Creation between the creation narratives and the Noahic narrative and connections between the spread of sin/spread of grace in the narratives that make up Genesis 1-11. Waltke notes that there are “four key alternating elements in the stories” (308 ) of Adam and Eve, Cain and Able, Noah and the Flood, and the Tower of Babel. These four elements are (in order): 1) rule, 2) rebellion, 3) judgment, and 4) mitigation. Waltke then traces these four elements through each narrative. One interesting point that Waltke makes is “that the primeval history (toledot 105) does not draw to conclusion with a single act of divine mitigation to the judgment at the Tower of Babel. In its stead, the entire patriarchal narratives, God’s election of Abraham and his seed (toledot 6-10), fulfill that function” (308). I found this connection very interesting as it is a connection that would most likely be missed without focusing on the literary form of these narratives 

Waltke then moves on to the structure of Genesis 12-50 and finds concentric structures in the Abraham cycle (11.27-22.24), the Jacob cycle (25.19-35.22), and the Twelve sons cycle (37.2-50.16). Waltke sees a difference between the first two cycles and the final cycle in that “all twelve sons of Jacob are part of the supernatural seed and become the patriarchs or eponymous ancestors of the twelve tribes that will constitute the nation of Israel” (314), whereas the first two cycles focus on who will be the chosen seed (Isaac or Ishmael; Jacob or Esau). 

The key to salvation history, as Waltke sees it, is present in Genesis 12.1-3: first God calls the individual (12.1), then he calls the nation (12.2), then he extends his salvation to all families (12.3). As Waltke notes, “the flow of God’s saving acts in history moves from blessing a particular, faithful individual and his family to blessing all peoples” (316). 

The next section focuses on God’s promises, covenants, and oaths. He first gives three expanding promises to Abraham and then “later refreshes, expands, and clarifies those promises by two covenants and an oath” (317). First is the land covenant (15.1-21) in which God promises Abraham the land of Israel. Readers will be familiar with this scene, as God passes through the center of carcasses as a smoking firepot. Waltke connects the ANE background with this scene:

“According to extant ancient Near Eastern texts, passing between the slain animals is a ritual that invokes a curse on the participants if they break the covenant. To walk between the carcasses is to submit oneself to the fate of the slaughtered animals as a penalty for covenant breaking. Not that only God walks between the carcasses, signifying that the covenant is not conditioned upon Abraham’s future action, but based on Abraham’s past faithfulness” (319).

It is here that I would want to add something that I’m sure Dr. Waltke would agree with: it is not simply based on Abraham’s past faithfulness, but also, perhaps even primarily, on the righteousness and grace of God. It is based on his righteousness because God cannot contradict himself; he is a covenant keeping God who has, in the Counsel of Peace, made a covenant to redeem a people for himself. It is based on his grace because there was nothing inherently special about Abraham which caused God to choose him as the father of God’s people; Abraham did have faith, but that faith must be viewed as a gift from God, which is also based on God’s grace. Again, I’m sure that Dr. Waltke agrees with this, I just wanted to add some theological clarity to this statement so that it is not misinterpreted.

The next covenant is the everlasting covenant (17.1-27) in which God promises Abraham to become the father of the nations, even though he was old and his wife was barren. This is an everlasting covenant because, as we see in the NT, Abraham is the father of all those who have faith (i.e. the true Israel). Waltke here, rightly, connects circumcision in the OT with baptism in the NT, as both function as “signs and seals of justification by faith that precedes them, and both represent the inward work of the Spirit to circumcise the heart and to place us in Christ’s crucified and resurrected body” (320). The “oath” of which Waltke speaks is closely connected with this everlasting covenant. After the binding of Isaac, which proved to be a test of Abraham’s faith (22.1-19), God makes an oath to make Abraham’s descendants “as numerous as the starts in the sky and as the sand on the seashore” (321). 

Waltke then turns to the identification of the chosen seed, which includes an excursus on the unity of God’s people in the OT and NT. He introduces this by explaining the metaphor of “seed” throughout Scripture and then focuses on its use in Genesis 1-11 and Romans 11.1-36. He spends more time on his explanation of Romans 11, as this proves to be a controverted passage between Reformed theologians and dispensationalists.

The one question I had, and perhaps I am not reading Dr. Waltke correctly, is in regards to his explanation of “all Israel” in Romans 11.26. Admittedly, I am neither a NT scholar nor a systematician, but I did not understand why Waltke followed Douglas Moo in his NIDNT commentary on Romans on this point. Waltke writes: “”All Israel” (i.e. the people seen as a corporate solidarity, not as each and every individual [cf. Mark 1.5]) refers to ethnic Israel at their future time of acceptance leading to the resurrection from the dead” (331) and closes the section with this statement: “because in the hopefully not-too-distant future, I AM will again deal with all Israel in mercy and bring them to repentance and acceptance of Jesus Christ” (332). I’m unsure as to Dr. Waltke’s eschatological views, but this statement would seem to imply that there might be some type of millennium in the future in which Israel would repent. I do not agree, as an amillennialist, but am curious as to if the implications for this statement necessarily lead to some type of millenarianism. If one were to believe in some type of future for the nation of Israel, wouldn’t that lead to some altered form of dispensationalism, or at least millenarianism? In other words, wouldn’t that lead to the conclusion that the flow of redemptive history takes a step backward, back to a focus on ethnicity. Instead of the flow of redemptive history being individual -> nation -> all nations, it seems to imply that the flow would take a step backwards, being individual -> nation -> all nations -> nation. Perhaps I am reading too much into this statement. I know that Dr. Waltke is a Reformed scholar, so I’m curious to understand how this statement squares with Reformed theology.

Waltke then turns to the spiritual character of the people of God and connects Abraham, the icon of faith (333), with all those who follow him having been given the gift of justifying faith. This justifying faith will necessarily lead to loyal obedience (334-36) as well as radical obedience (336-37). The example of Isaac is then explored as a warning against sensuality, which was displayed by Isaac in his favoring of Esau because of the food that Esau provided for him (337-42). Waltke breaks up the life of Isaac into two sections: the triumphant Isaac and the tragic Isaac. To end the chapter, Waltke explores the life of Jacob as an icon of prayer (342-45) in which four oxymorons capture Jacob’s transformation: 1) when we are most alone, we are never alone (as see in his wrestling with the angel), 2) the horizontal axis points to the vertical axis (as seen in Jacob’s struggles with humans reflecting his struggle with God), 3) God prevails through severe mercy (as seen, ironically, in God breaking Jacob’s hip which “saves him from his conflicted nature” (345)), and that 4) his vice is his virtue (in his stubbornness to cling onto the angel until he gets a blessing). 

All in all, this chapter was a very helpful exploration of the 10 toledot of Genesis with a particular focus on the issue of “seed.” The connections Dr. Waltke made between Genesis and the NT were very helpful for readers to get the “big picture” of the drama of redemption.