Diachronic and Synchronic Readings: Toward a Complementary Methodology Clint Heacock, PhD www.preachersforum.com Introduction Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) pioneered the terms “synchronic” and “diachronic” in the field of linguistics, and his work “marked the shift from traditional philology to modern linguistics.” 1 This shift within linguistics led to these concepts being applied to biblical studies, appropriated by biblical scholars in a transferred or metaphorical sense. 2 Within the discipline of biblical studies, the two categories of diachronic and synchronic approaches have often been constructed as existing in a state of binary opposition to one another. 3 This study will explore first of all the nature of both approaches and second, as a case study, will examine their impact upon Ezekiel studies. Finally the paper will conclude by advancing a complementary method, drawing upon both disciplines and allowing the biblical scholar to make use of elements of both approaches. Elements from both sides of the issue have fostered this dichotomy. On the one hand, Saussure’s original concept that one should ignore how a state (or text in the case of biblical studies) came to be and instead focus on that state in its final form without the intervention of history has led some biblical scholars to downplay the role of historical-critical diachronic methods. For example Barry holds that it is widely held that 1 Joyce, “Synchronic and Diachronic Perspectives,” 115. 2 Clines, “Beyond Synchronic/Diachronic,” 78. 3 Ibid., 68. Saussure’s own approach may have helped aid this polarity, contrasting the two approaches by comparing the development of language to a chess match. He states, “In a game of chess any particular position has the unique characteristic of being freed from all antecedent positions; the route used in arriving there makes absolutely no difference; one who has followed the entire match has no advantage over the curious party who comes up a critical moment to inspect the state of the game; to describe this arrangement, it is perfectly useless to recall what had just happened ten seconds previously. All this is equally applicable to language and sharpens the radical distinction between diachrony and synchrony” (de Saussure, A Course in General Linguistics, 8).