Reading the Bible after Auschwitz

  • Jacques B. Doukhan
Chapter

Abstract

Can we still read the Bible after Auschwitz?1 The very fact that the event took place in the heart of the most biblically literate country of the world, a country where the reading of the Bible was promoted for the first time in history in Christian civilization, a country with the largest quota of biblical scholars, and a country with the most developed biblical scholarship, justifies this arrogant question.2 That the Holocaust was produced in a civilization characterized by an intense reading of the Bible may suggest, indeed, that the reading of the Bible played some role in the origination of the event. And this observation leads to a subsequent question even more troubling than the first: why did the reading of the Bible lead to Auschwitz? It will not be easy to answer this question. Is it because of what the Bible is, or what it says, or is it because of the way it was perceived, (mis)understood and (mis)applied? Whatever answer one is tempted to offer to that question, the fact remains that the reading of the Bible appears to be a significant factor in the production of Auschwitz. And if reading the Bible had an impact on Auschwitz, then Auschwitz should have an impact on the reading of the Bible. Even if the reading of the Bible had no effect on Auschwitz, the ‘unique’ nature of the event, and the magnitude of the crime, would affect the reading of the Bible. For after Auschwitz, nothing can be the same, including the reading of the Bible. Indeed, for the first time since the Inquisition and Voltaire, the traditional reference to the Bible has once again been shaken. Expressions used to describe the impact of the Holocaust, such as ‘new Revelation’4 or ‘new Sinai’,5 implicitly bear witness to the force of the Holocaust in relation to the Bible. This revolution has taken place not only in secular circles, where the Bible was already discarded and barely read, but also among the theologians and religious thinkers, where a new Bible criticism and a new hermeneutic has emerged out of Holocaust awareness.

Keywords

Expense Smoke Stein Egypt Defend 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Auschwitz (the German name of the Polish Oswiecim) was one of the six ‘killing centres’ with large-scale gassing facilities operated by the German National Socialist state. More than half of the slaughter of the Jews (about 3.5 million out of the six million) was perpetrated there. Auschwitz has therefore become a symbol of the Nazi programme of Jewish genocide (on these statistics, see Lucy S. Dawidowicz, ‘Thinking about the Six Million: Facts, Figures, Perspectives’, in Holocaust: Religious and Philosophical Implications, ed. John K. Roth and Michael Berenbaum (New York: Paragon House, 1989), pp.51 ff.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    For the moral implications of this geographical location, see Alan T. Davis, Antisemitism and the Christian Mind (New York: Herder and Herder, 1969), p.37.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    On the uniqueness of the Holocaust, see Michael Berenbaum, ‘The Uniqueness and Universality of the Holocaust’, American Journal of Theology and Philosophy 2/3 (September 1981): 85–96.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    See James F. Moore, Christian Theology After the Shoah, Studies in the Shoah, no. 7, ed. Zev Garber (New York/Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1993), p.2.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Michael Berenbaum, The Vision of the Void: Theological Reflections on the Works of Elie Wiesel (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1979), p.78.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    On the definition and scope of (post)-Holocaust theology, see Stephen R. Haynes, Prospects for Post-Holocaust Theology (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1991), pp.6ffGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clark M. Williamson, A Guest in the House of Israel: Post-Holocaust Church Theology (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993), p. 140.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    See especially Marcion’s Antithesis, for a summary of Marcion’s views, see Justo L. Gonzalez, A History of Christian Thought, vol. 1 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1970), pp.140–144.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    For a summary of the history of the supersessionist doctrine see John Pawlikowski, Jesus and the Theology of Israel (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1989), pp. 10–11.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    On the murderous mechanism of supersessionist thinking, see Darrel J. Fasching (ed.), The Jewish People in Christian Preaching, Symposium Series, 10 (New York: Edwin Mellen, 1984), p.x.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    James A. Sanders, Canon and Community: A Guide to Canonical Criticism (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1984), p.xv.Google Scholar
  12. 15.
    See also Gaston Lloyd; Albert A. van Ruler, The Christian Church and the Old Testament, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1971).Google Scholar
  13. 19.
    Clark Williamson, ‘The Authority of Scripture After the Shoah’ in Faith and Creativity: Essays in Honor of Eugene H, Peters, eds. George Nordgulen and George W. Shields (St. Louis, MO: CBP Press, 1987), p. 125.Google Scholar
  14. 21.
    See Clark M. Williamson, A Guest in the House of Israel, Rosemary R. Ruether, Faith and Fratricide: The Theological Roots of Anti-Semitism (Minneapolis: Seabury Press, 1974);Google Scholar
  15. Gregory Baum, Theology After Auschwitz (London: Council of Christians and Jews, 1976); and James F. Moore.Google Scholar
  16. 22.
    Emil L. Fackenheim, The Jewish Bible after the Holocaust: A Re-reading (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1990), pp.vii–viii.Google Scholar
  17. 27.
    On the issue of the relation between what the text ‘meant’ and what it ‘means’ today, see Krister Stendahl, ‘Biblical Theology, Contemporary’, in The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, vol. A-D (New York: Abingdon Press, 1962), pp.419–420.Google Scholar
  18. 28.
    Fredrick C. Holmgren, The Old Testament and the Significance of Jesus: Embracing Change-Maintaining Christian Identity (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999), p.10.Google Scholar
  19. 29.
    See, for instance, C.J. Cuming, for whom the word ‘Jesus’ means Judaen as opposed to Galilean, quoted in Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1975), p.131.Google Scholar
  20. 30.
    George G. Beasley-Murray, John, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 36 (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1987), p.lxxxix.Google Scholar
  21. 31.
    David P. Efroymson, ‘Let Ioudaioi Be Ioudaioi: When Less is Better’, Explorations 11/2 (1997): 5.Google Scholar
  22. 32.
    In recent years, a call to read the biblical texts as canonical Scripture has been vigorously advocated from a variety of perspectives. Terms like ‘canonical criticism’, ‘canonical hermeneutic’, etc., were used. See James A. Sanders, and also Brevard S. Childs, Old Testament Theology in A Canonical Context (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1985).Google Scholar
  23. 35.
    J.G. Gammie, ‘Theology of Retribution in the Book of Deuteronomy’, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 32 (1970): 1–12.Google Scholar
  24. 36.
    R.N. Gordon, ‘Motivation in Proverbs’, Biblical Theology 25/3 (October 1975): 49–56.Google Scholar
  25. 38.
    Donald A. Hagner, Matthew, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 33A (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1993), p.827.Google Scholar
  26. 39.
    See Jules Isaac, Jesus and Israel, ed. Claire H. Bishop, trans. Sally Gran (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1971), pp.274–284.Google Scholar
  27. 40.
    See Karl H. Schelkle, ‘Die “Selbstverfluchung” Israels nach Matthaus 27, 23–25’, in Antijudaismus im Neuen Testament?, ed. W.P. Eckert, et al. (Munich: Kaiser, 1967), pp.148–156;Google Scholar
  28. and W. Sanders, ‘Das Blut Jesu und die Juden: Gedanken zu Matt. 27, 25’, Una Sancta 27 (1972): 168–171.Google Scholar
  29. 42.
    See R.H. Smith, ‘Matthew 27:25: The Hardest Verse in Matthew’s Gospel’, Currents in Theology and Mission 17 (1990): 421–428;Google Scholar
  30. cf. T.B. Cargal, ‘“His Blood Be upon Us and upon Our Children”: A Matthean Double Entendre?’, New Testament Studies 37 (1991): 101–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 44.
    See John E. Hartley, The Book of Job, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988), p.221;Google Scholar
  32. cf. Richard Jacobsen, ‘Satanic Semiotics, Jobian Jurisprudence’, in The Book of Job and Ricoeur’s Hermeneutics, Semeia 19, ed. John D. Crossan (Chico: Scholars Press, 1981), pp.67–68.Google Scholar
  33. Cf. W.B. Stevenson, The Poem of Job: A Literary Study, with a New Translation (London: Pub. for the British Academy by Oxford University Press, 1947); NEB, etc.Google Scholar
  34. 45.
    André Neher, L’Exil de la parole: Du silence biblique au silence dAuschwitz (Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1970), p.215 (translation from the French is ours).Google Scholar
  35. 49.
    See Jacques Doukhan, ‘The Center of the Aqedah: A Study of the Literary Structure of Genesis 22:1–19’, Andrews University Seminary Studies 31 (Spring 1993): 17–28.Google Scholar
  36. 50.
    See especially André Neher, ‘Job: the Biblical Man’, Judaism 13 (1964): 37–47;Google Scholar
  37. Richard L. Rubenstein, ‘Job and Auschwitz’, Union Seminary Quarterly Review 25 (1969–70): 421–437;Google Scholar
  38. P. Watte, ‘Job à Auschwitz: Deux constats de la pensee juive’, Revue théologique de Louvain 4 (1973): 173–190;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Margarete Susman, Das Buck Hiob und das Schicksal des judischen Volkes, 2d ed. (Basel: Herder, 1968);Google Scholar
  40. R. Dedmon, ‘Job as Holocaust Survivor’, St, Luke’s Journal of Theology 26 (1982–83): 165–185.Google Scholar
  41. 51.
    Eliezer Berkovits, Faith after the Holocaust (New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1973), p.69.Google Scholar
  42. 55.
    On theodicy in the Old Testament see, among other works, James L. Crenshaw (ed.), Theodicy in the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983);Google Scholar
  43. see also Byron L. Sherwin, Toward a Jewish Theology: Methods, Problems, and Possibilities (Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1991), pp.63–77.Google Scholar
  44. 56.
    See Bernard Anderson, ‘The Place of the Book of Esther in the Christian Bible’, Journal of Religion 30 (1950): 32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 58.
    Schalom Ben Chorin, Kritik des Estherbuches (Jerusalem: Heatid, 1938).Google Scholar
  46. 60.
    See Andre Neher, L’exil de la parole, p.27; Angel M. Rodriguez, Esther: A Theological Approach (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1995), p.96.Google Scholar
  47. 61.
    See Yehezkel Kaufmann, History of the Religion of Israel, vol. 4 (New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1977), p.519.Google Scholar
  48. 62.
    See Abraham D. Cohen, ‘ “Hu Ha-goral”: The Religious Significance of Esther’, Judaism 23 (Winter 1974): 87–94.Google Scholar
  49. 76.
    See Robert McAfee Brown, Elie Wiesel: Messenger to All Humanity (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1983), pp. 167–168.Google Scholar
  50. 77.
    Elie Wiesel, Nighty American edn., trans. Stella Rodway (New York: Hill and Wang, 1960), p.71. Cf Eliezer Berkovits, p. 126.Google Scholar
  51. 78.
    Jürgen Moltmann, The Crucified God: The Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology (London: SCM Press, 1974), p.273.Google Scholar
  52. 80.
    Paul M. Van Buren, A Theology of the Jewish-Christian Reality, Part 3: Christ in Context (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1988), p. 166.Google Scholar
  53. 83.
    Norman Young, Creator, Creation and Faith (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976), p. 17.Google Scholar
  54. 84.
    See his radio broadcast entitled ‘The Idea of Leader in the New Germany’ (quoted in Norman Young, p.200, n. 7); cf. Gerhard von Rad, The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays, trans. E.W. Trueman Dicken (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966), p.142ff.Google Scholar
  55. 85.
    See Paul M. Van Buren, A Theology of the Jewish-Christian Reality, Part 2: A Christian Theology of the People of Israel (New York: Seabury Press, 1983), pp.62 ff.;Google Scholar
  56. see also Jon D. Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1988), p.141; and Clark M. Williamson, A Guest in the House of Israel, p.220.Google Scholar
  57. 86.
    See Douglas A. Knight, ‘Cosmogony and Order in the Hebrew Tradition’, in Cosmogony and Ethical Order, ed. Robin W. Lovin and Frank E. Reynolds (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1985), p. 142;Google Scholar
  58. Paul Ricoeur, The Symbolism of Evil (Boston: Beacon, 1969), p.203.Google Scholar
  59. 90.
    See Klaus Koch, The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic: A Polemical Work on a Neglected Area of Biblical Studies and its Damaging Effects on Theology and Philosophy, Studies in Biblical Theology, Second Series, no. 22 (London: SCM Press, 1972), p. 13.Google Scholar
  60. 94.
    See Darrell J. Fasching, The Ethical Challenge of Auschwitz and Hiroshima: Apocalypse or Utopia? (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1993), pp.28 ff.Google Scholar
  61. 97.
    See Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society (New York: Random House, Vintage Books, 1964).Google Scholar
  62. 98.
    See Jean-François Steiner, Treblinka, trans. Helen Weaver (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1967), pp.23, 169.Google Scholar
  63. 101.
    See, for instance, Marcia Sachs Littell and Sharon Weissman Gutman, eds., Liturgies on the Holocaust: An Interfaith Anthology, new and rev. ed. (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1996).Google Scholar
  64. 102.
    See, for instance, Fredrick C. Holmgren and Herman E. Schaalman, eds., Preaching Biblical Texts: Expositions by Jewish and Christian Scholars, forewords by Elie Wiesel and Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, intro. by David Tracy (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995).Google Scholar
  65. 106.
    Quoted in Hans Kung, Judaism, trans. John Bowden (London: SCM Press, 1992), p.605.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jacques B. Doukhan

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations