May 7, 2012 | Leave a comment Walter Kaiser is currently a Distinguished Professor of Old Testament and president of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Massachusetts. He was professor of Old Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School for many years. Kaiser has written numerous books, including Toward an Exegetical Theology, Toward an Old Testament Theology, Toward Old Testament Ethics and The Messiah in the Old Testament. In Toward an Exegetical Theology 1 Kaiser’s purpose is to repair what he sees as a breech between sermon preparation and delivery. This volume is intended to demonstrate how one moves “from analyzing the text over to constructing a sermon that accurately reflects that same analysis and is directly dependent on it” (8). Kaiser’s syntactical-theological methodology is the product of several decades of research and experience (9). While Kaiser hopes that this book will be helpful for pastors, his primary audience is those who are in seminary and their professors (22). This work is divided into four parts. In part one the “crisis in exegetical theology” (17) is presented. In part two, which makes up the bulk of the book, Kaiser presents his own syntactical-theological methodology. Part three deals with the special problems facing exegesis and preaching from prophecy, narrative and poetry. The final division of the book is a plea for the preacher to not forget the power of the Holy Spirit in his role of illuminating and providing God’s power during the preparation and proclamation of the sermon. Kaiser traces the crisis in exegesis to “. . . the hiatus between the biblical and practical departments in our theological seminaries” (21). He contends that the preacher “must exhibit in his own person the professional unity of the exegetical professor and the practical preacher” (22). He contends that this exegetical problem has actually grown out of the crisis of hermeneutics. Kaiser reviews how the hermeneutical presupposition that the author’s words could contain, and should be understood to contain, meaning fared with the contributions of William Ames, Johann Ernesti, Johann Aemler. He also shows how that, through the work of Friedrich Schleiermacher, the idea of authorial intention began to be unraveled and was finally completely so, in Hans Gadamer’s view that “ the recognition of an author’s meaning [became] an impossibility” (30). According to Kaiser, E.D. Hirsch Jr. and his distinction between meaning and significance was able to rewind authorial intention so that today’s exegete should unapologetically seek to determine the author’s intended meaning as a fundamental step in his exegetical process. From this discussion Kaiser buttresses his argument for the importance of seeking to determine the author’s original meaning. He accomplishes this by showing historically the chaos that has ensued when the author’s meaning has not been accepted or sought. Afterward he moves directly to encouraging the reader that, though “the exegetical route is not easy . . . in the end it is just as rewarding as it is awesome in its initial demands” (50). The second section contains the heart of this work. Here Kaiser reveals his own exegetical methodology. In truth he says the syntactical-theological approach which he champions should properly be named the “grammatical-contextual-historical-syntactical-theological-cultural exegesis” (90). Kaiser begins this section with a discussion of context. He is not just interested in the context sentences but is also interested in the connection between paragraphs and sections of books and entire books. Next he moves his discussion to the syntactical considerations of genre and the importance of features within the text, such as coordinating conjunctions, which are invaluable in revealing how the author structured and connected his argument. Here Kaiser presents the heart of his system, the “block diagram”(99), and makes the case that there is only one meaning in a biblical text, the author’s original intended meaning (108). Kaiser moves to discuss theological analysis. Here he makes one of his most controversial assertions, the analogy of antecedent scripture (134-146). His point is that, in order to give proper consideration of the progressive nature of revelation, the exegete should only consider the theological understanding that the author could have known from his time-bound perspective within God’s revelatory history. This is not to say, however, that Kaiser would leave his audience hanging with only a bronze-age theological understanding of the text of which he has been accused by some. He suggests that, in our summaries we should point out these later developments for the sake of updating and putting everything in its fullest context. However, in no case must that later teaching be used exegetically to unpack the meaning or to enhance the usability of the individual text which is the object of our study (140). Kaiser has a point here, and has not been properly been understood by some critics; however, he over-simplifies a complex problem and extends his argument beyond its useful application. He concludes this section with eight very useful illustrations of his block diagram method, four from the Old Testament and four from the New Testament. Kaiser’s third section deals with the special issues he considers important when preaching from the genres of prophecy, narrative and poetry. This section is incomplete because in it he does not deal with any New Testament genres, nor does he cite any New Testament example. While Kaiser is an Old Testament professor, this book is purported to have been written about exegetical theology and not about Old Testament exegetical theology. At least a chapter on the genres of gospel, epistle, or apocalyptic would have been in order. Kaiser concludes with a brief chapter on the power of God in exegesis. This is a welcome addition to this discussion. Kaiser has previously pointed to the “need for meditation and prayer” (159), but here he continues the thought stating, we must in all good conscience point to the presence and work of the Holy Spirit as the source of any confidence that we might have in our message even after we have acted most responsibly in the study and preparation of the text for proclamation (235). Kaiser reminds his reader that a part of the ministry of the Holy Spirit is to give knowledge and wisdom for the expounding of the word, as well as to give one “freedom of utterance” (239) as one delivers the sermon. He concludes this section with a survey of Spurgeon’s lecture to his students on the power of the Holy Spirit with a final plea to search for a single meaning in a text while seeking to allow its significance many and varied applications. One important strength of the work is the high priority it gives to the author’s original intended meaning. This view leads Kaiser to conclude that every sermon “must be derived from an honest exegesis of the text, and it must constantly be kept close to the text” (19). This desire to discover the intended meaning is the mark of “preaching that is totally Biblical . . .[because it] is guided by God’s Word in its origins, production, and proclamation” (19). In order to discover the original meaning, the exegete must engage in the mundane details of syntactical display and syntactical analysis. The reason grammar and syntax should receive the attention of the careful exegete is “the lives of men and women depend upon it”(10), because the author’s communication is bound in these forms and must be discovered so that his meaning can then be communicated today. Also a strength of this work is the realization of the disconnect between biblical studies and homiletics departments in theological education. Kaiser is correct in his assessment of theological education, and although much has changed in the twenty years following this book’s publication, there is still an aversion to practicality in preference for the theoretical in many seminary departments. This leads to graduates who, upon graduation, have to unlearn much of their seminary training in preference for what works in the pastorate. All too often this process leads to a weakened ministry. If more seminary professors had been or were pastors themselves, perhaps this disjunction, which Kaiser has rightly brought to light, between theory and praxis could be more adequately overcome. Another strength of this work is the final chapter in which Kaiser reminds the exegete that the Holy Spirit has a very important role both in our study and in our sermonizing. Pastoral exegesis would best be served with a discussion of the role of the Spirit in the life of the exegete as the beginning point for exegesis rather than it being reserved for concluding remarks. Kaiser still must be given credit for its inclusion while others neglect the discussion at all. There are two glaring weaknesses of this work. First is Kaiser’s out-of-hand dismissal of sensus plenior. He wrongly equates this idea of finding the fuller sense of the text with polyvalence (113). Here he is guilty of the logical fallacies of failure to recognize distinctions and cavalier dismissal. One who accepts the fuller sense of the Messianic psalms or the sign in Isaiah of a virgin being with child is not applying a method of multiple meaning such as the fourfold meaning of scripture, to the text. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous and does not well serve Kaiser’s purpose. Kaiser is so interested in accepting only what the author could have known that he has forgotten the Author who inspired the writing of the Scriptures was working out his redemptive plan throughout all stages of his revelation. This failure leads to Kaiser’s second major weakness. Kaiser goes alone against the tide of scholarship in his view of the analogy of antecedent Scripture. This weakness casts a shadow on his scholarship. His theory is absolutely impractical and could lead to taking the author’s intended meaning away from the author and placing it in the mind of the exegete who is making the determination of what Scripture is antecedent and what is not without any clear biblical marks by which to make such determinations. This book is definitely worth reading. It is important because of its author as well as its content. Anyone who is serious about exegesis, especially from the Old Testament, must be familiar with Walter Kaiser’s work. This book is also necessary for its argument. Everyone who is preparing to teach in a seminary needs to hear Kaiser’s critique of theological education. Finally this book is necessary because of the methodology of exegesis presented. Kaiser’s block diagram method and analysis of grammar and syntax alone make this book valuable for anyone who seeks to honestly and fairly interpret the biblical text. End Notes 1. Kaiser, Walter, C., Jr. Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Exegesis for Preaching and Teaching. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981.