| Summary: | This thesis ultimately seeks to present a coherent reading of 1 Kings 13 that is attentive to literary, historical and theological concerns. I begin by summarising and evaluating the overtly theological exposition of the chapter by Karl Barth, as set out in his Church Dogmatics, and then considering how this was received and critiqued by his academic peers (Martin Klopfenstein in particular), whose questions, priorities and methods were very different to those of Barth. In this way, as well as exposing substantive material in the text for further investigation, a range of hermeneutical issues that sometimes undergird exegetical work unseen are brought into the foreground. I then bring a wider scope of opinion into the conversation by reviewing the work of other scholars as well, whose methods and priorities also diverge from those of Barth or Klopfenstein. At the same time, I categorise these studies so as to simultaneously assess different views on what 1 Kings 13 is about, and divergent views on how it is deemed best to approach this subject matter. After considering four additional readings of 1 Kings 13 in some depth, I present a more theoretical discussion about some perceived dichotomies in biblical studies that tend to surface regularly in methodological debates. I then return to Barth’s exposition via the work of David Bosworth, who aims to advocate and develop elements of Barth’s proposal for wider acceptance. After evaluating his work, I conclude with my own reading of 1 Kings 13, drawing on many of the exegetical and methodological insights presented by scholars whose lines of inquiry are not always those I would myself have chosen. Ultimately, my proffered reading, which sees Josiah as a central figure in the narrative, leans on insights from Barth and one of his harshest critics, Martin Noth.
|
|---|
