Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 62:2 (Jun 2019)
Article: Problems With The Comparative Method In Old Testament Studies
Author: Noel K. Weeks

JETS 62:2 (June 2019) p. 287

Problems With The Comparative Method
In Old Testament Studies

Noel Weeks*

* Noel Weeks is an honorary associate of the Department of Classics and Ancient History of the University of Sydney. His mailing address is 1/92 Toronto Pde, Sutherland, NSW 2232. He may be contacted at [email protected].

Abstract: The “comparative method” in Old Testament studies uses ancient Near Eastern texts to address historical and exegetical issues raised by the biblical text, often without addressing the historical and methodological problems of such usage. A comparison of two works, each of which uses the method extensively, illustrates the problems: Kitchen and Lawrence, Treaty, Law and Covenant in the Ancient Near East and Walton and Walton, The Lost World of the Israelite Conquest. The argument of one depends upon uniformity through a vast expanse of time and space. The argument of the other depends on lack of uniformity. There can be a failure to face the problems of gaps in the ancient Near Eastern textual evidence and an ignoring of the range of scholarly opinion about the evidence. While the connections between the biblical text and its environment are real, making definite conclusions is very difficult.

Key Words: comparative method, John H. Walton, J. Harvey Walton, Kenneth A. Kitchen, Paul J. N. Lawrence, Israelite conquest, biblical law, covenant and treaty, use of ancient Near Eastern sources

In any intellectual discipline the relationship between argument and conclusion is complex. In the realm of biblical studies it is particularly fraught because many implications, which extend beyond the merely intellectual, flow from the conclusion. If the argument is weak or invalid, is the conclusion disproved or is it only that particular path to the conclusion? Particular problems arise where the argument uses esoteric factors, making it very difficult for the reader to judge and raising the danger that acceptance depends completely on the whether the conclusion is liked. Interpretation of the OT via the “comparative method” raises these problems. At some point in the argument an extrabiblical source will be introduced, directly or by implication, as crucial evidence. Whether that evidence is used validly or invalidly is difficult for a reader to judge without detailed knowledge of the extrabiblical discipline involved. It is this author’s opinion that examination of various flawed applications of the comparative method provides useful lessons.

The crucial background to this study is the lack of agreement over the methodology to be applied when exegeting the biblical text by means of external parallels. Sometimes similarity between something biblical and something extrabiblical is noted and a conclusi...