Yet I Loved Jacob: Reclaiming the Biblical Concept of Election (review)

Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 336 Reviews Flame of Yahweh masterfully integrates disparate ancient texts and decades of contemporary scholarship into a single ethical-theological vision of human sexuality. However, it is unable to acknowledge the differences in the biblical passages themselves as well as the differences between the text and contemporary mores; even simple analyses bend the Bible to the author’s own ethical agenda. Jennifer L. Koosed Albright College Reading, Pennsylvania 19612 jkoosed@alb.edu YET I LOVED JACOB: RECLAIMING THE BIBLICAL CONCEPT OF ELECTION. By Joel S. Kaminsky. Pp. xii + 242. Nashville: Tenn.: Abingdon, 2007. Paper, $28.00. This is, as far as I know, the only full study of the theme of election available in English that is written by a biblical scholar. That last qualifier is important, for the argument throughout rests on careful exegesis, based on a sound understanding of biblical poetics; especially this is evidenced in the treatment of Genesis narratives that constitutes the first lengthy section— over a third of the book. The result is that the whole study reflects the complexity , the unresolved tensions and questions characteristic of biblical narrative. Kaminsky’s detailed exegesis of the ancestral narratives may be an especially useful corrective for Christian readers, who might otherwise be inclined to think that Paul’s stark typological reading of the stories of Sarah and Hagar and their sons in Galatians (4:21–26) constitutes all that needs to be said about election within the Christian Bible. Further, the exegetical focus means that this is not a study of “the doctrine of election,” considered in the abstract, but rather of how the biblical writers wrestle with a matter that is of persistent and central concern to them. By beginning with Cain and Abel, Kaminsky establishes the fact that already in the fourth chapter of the Bible, even before Israel’s particular ancestors enter the biblical story, the reader is confronted with the theological conundrum that some are favored over others, and for no apparent reason. The essential insight of the book is that the biblical writers do not dwell on the particular problem with election that troubles so many of us, namely the suspicion of divine unfairness. Much more are they concerned with inappropriate human responses to election, whether on the part of the elect or the non-elect. The elect may “misuse or fail to accept their special status and the responsibilities it entails” (p. 17)—one instance being the young Joseph, Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 337 Reviews the original insufferable pipsqueak. Equally, beginning with Cain and continuing through to Haman, those who are less favored may act viciously toward the special recipients of God’s favor. Here I highlight three important and indeed, theologically profound aspects of Kaminsky’s argument; then, drawing on his points, I point to where further theological work might be done by both Jews and Christians. First, I am struck by his suggestion that the notion of “undeserved chosenness” may itself be “one of the greatest achievements of the Israelite religious mind.” Kaminsky explains: “The ability to sense one’s chosenness and also to see one’s character flaws … creates a sense of ultimate meaning for one’s nation, but it does so in ways that mitigate movement toward an unfettered imperialism and triumphalism” (p. 77). Second, Kaminsky helpfully identifies three categories in the Hebrew Scriptures that pertain to election. These are: 1) the elect; 2) the small category of the “anti-elect,” those who as a people refuse reconciliation with Israel and must be destroyed: the Canaanites, Amalekites, and Midianites (p. 112); and 3) the “non-elect,” who may nonetheless experience divine favor to the extent that they are reconciled with the elect (p. 57). There is both beauty and exegetical accuracy to his claim (based on a reading of the Joseph tale) that “election reaches its fruition in a humble, yet exalted, divine service that benefits the elect and the non-elect alike” (p. 78). Christian readers, who tend to be self-righteous in their criticism of the Deuteronomic position on Canaanites, may well be instructed by his illuminating comparison between, on the one hand, this three-fold scheme in the Hebrew Scriptures...