Theology and the Historical-Critical Study of the Bible

2011 ◽  
Vol 104 (4) ◽  
pp. 459-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul E. Capetz
Keyword(s):  
Family Resemblance ◽  
Biblical Studies ◽  
Critical Study ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Theological Interpretation ◽  
Historical Criticism ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Salient Characteristic ◽  
Critical Interpretation ◽  
Biblical Scholar

One salient characteristic of our current situation is the emergence of a growing consensus among theologians and biblical scholars alike that the time has come to “dethrone” historical criticism as the reigning paradigm of scriptural exegesis for the sake of recovering a theological interpretation of the Bible on behalf of the church.1 To illustrate this new development, I have chosen to focus on the arguments of three prominent biblical scholars, each of whom has made a sustained case about the negative effects of historical criticism upon theological exegesis: They are Brevard S. Childs, Christopher R. Seitz, and Dale B. Martin. All three scholars have close ties to Yale and, not surprisingly, they bear a sort of family resemblance to one another inasmuch as their work partakes of theological themes and concerns that have been prominent at that school in recent decades. Notwithstanding their antagonistic posture toward historical criticism, all three are gifted practitioners of the very method whose dominance they seek to overturn. Since I am not a biblical scholar, I must enter into discussion with them as a theologian who is equally concerned about the relations between biblical studies and theology. At the outset, however, it is necessary to clarify that my own theological orientation prevents me from embracing their call to depose historical criticism. As a liberal Protestant for whom historical-critical interpretation of both the biblical and the post-biblical tradition is constitutive of theology's proper task, their initial premise that historical criticism is somehow inimical to a theological treatment of the Bible strikes me as false and misleading. Contrary to the impression given by their explicit formulations, it appears that the real target of their polemics is not historical scholarship per se but, rather, the normative uses to which it is put in theologies informed by it.

Moral Injury and Biblical Studies: An Early Sampling of Research and Emerging Trends

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-144
Author(s):  
Brad E. Kelle
Keyword(s):  
Biblical Studies ◽  
Moral Injury ◽  
Critical Study ◽  
Moral Beliefs ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Biblical Scholarship ◽  
Emerging Trends ◽  
New Meanings ◽  
The World ◽  
Biblical Texts

Moral injury emerged within clinical psychology and related fields to refer to a non-physical wound (psychological and emotional pain and its effects) that results from the violation (by oneself or others) of a person’s deepest moral beliefs (about oneself, others, or the world). Originally conceived in the context of warfare, the notion has now expanded to include the morally damaging impact of various non-war-related experiences and circumstances. Since its inception, moral injury has been an intersectional and cross-disciplinary term and significant work has appeared in psychology, philosophy, medicine, spiritual/pastoral care, chaplaincy, and theology. Since 2015, biblical scholarship has engaged moral injury along two primary trajectories: 1) creative re-readings of biblical stories and characters informed by insights from moral injury; and 2) explorations of the postwar rituals and symbolic practices found in biblical texts and how they might connect to the felt needs of morally injured persons. These trajectories suggest that the engagement between the Bible and moral injury generates a two-way conversation in which moral injury can serve as a heuristic that brings new meanings out of biblical texts, and the critical study of biblical texts can contribute to the attempts to understand, identify, and heal moral injury.

scholarly journals Biblical studies as a modern humanitarian discipline and its connection with theology

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 502-527
Author(s):  
Mikhail G. Seleznev ◽  
◽  
Alexander I. Kyrlezhev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Internal Structure ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Scientific Discipline ◽  
Biblical Studies ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Biblical Exegesis ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Current State ◽  
Biblical Scholar ◽  
Church Tradition

A conversation with the famous Russian biblical scholar Mikhail Seleznev is devoted to the modern humanitarian discipline of biblical studies. The conversation examines the origins of this scientific discipline, its formation and development, internal structure, its connection with other humanitarian disciplines, as well as with theology understood as a reflection of believers on the foundations of their faith. Examples of the achievements in biblical studies in the 19th and 20th centuries are provided, which as a result have changed our understanding of the origin of biblical texts and the context in which they were created. The article analyzes the attitude towards scientific study of the Bible in various Christian confessions, in particular, the perception of biblical studies in the Orthodox community and the related problems of modern church consciousness. The current state and the prospects of development of biblical studies in Russia are reported on in the article. The issue of the so-called “intertestamental studies” and its significance for comprehending early Christianity is discussed, as well as that of biblical exegesis from the point of view of its understanding in modern science and church tradition. Bibliographic recommendations are provided for those who wish to begin a more detailed acquaintance with modern biblical studies.

Israelite Religion

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard S. Hess
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Biblical Theology ◽  
Historical Criticism ◽  
Near Eastern ◽  
Gender Culture ◽  
Israelite Religion ◽  
Hebrew Scriptures ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Critical Interpretation ◽  
The One

Emerging from the academic study of the Old Testament or Hebrew Scriptures during the Enlightenment and Reformation, Israelite religion became a topic of study in terms of the presentation in the Bible of Israel’s worship of its God. Gradually this separated into a synthesis of biblical teachings on worship and its prescribed practices, on the one hand, and a study of the history of biblical Israel in terms of beliefs and practices toward one or more deities, on the other. The former branch evolved into biblical theology, while the latter developed into the topic of Israelite religion. Beginning in the nineteenth century, archaeological excavations and the interpretation of ancient Near Eastern texts preceding and contemporaneous with the period of the Bible broadened the picture. Comparing and contrasting archaeological and textual sources with the application of anthropological models derived from comparative religious studies led to modern syntheses of the subject. Initially these were heavily based upon the biblical text, often with the application of theories of literary and historical criticism. Since the 1980s, however, a focus on texts from the same time and region, as well as interpretation of artifacts with religious significance, has challenged older models of Israelite religion. Influences and the interactions of believers and their deities appear increasingly complex. No longer is there an understanding of a mere one or two religions in Israel (e.g., worshippers of Yahweh and worshippers of Baal). It now seems clear that various religious practices and texts attest to the presence of multiple religions followed by people in the region of ancient Israel, sometimes reflecting differences in gender, culture, ethnicity, and other factors. While a form of worship as described in biblical accounts may have been followed, there were other forms which, in various ways, syncretized Yahweh with other goddesses and gods. This has led scholars to question the factors that led to, and the time of emergence of, belief in a single deity in Israel, as well as to question the nature of that deity. Answers and models remain in a state of flux; evidence remains to be reviewed and interpretations demand critical interpretation.

Introduction

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Thomas H. McCall
Keyword(s):  
Biblical Studies ◽  
Appropriate Use ◽  
Theological Interpretation ◽  
Constructive Theology ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Biblical Scholarship ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Theological Discourse

Recent years have seen the flowering of something called the “theological interpretation of Scripture.” This is, very roughly, what happens when biblical scholars and theologians alike read the Bible to see what it tells us about God. For several centuries, the discipline of biblical studies has been not only distinguished but also separated from theological discourse. There have been many notable exceptions, of course, but the all-too-common results have been these: biblical scholars often interpret the texts with other aims in mind (sometimes reading with a theological lens has been discouraged as unscholarly and thus improper), and theologians often do their work of constructive theology without serious engagement with biblical scholarship or even with the Christian Scriptures. Recent years have also seen the rise (or perhaps re-birth) of something now called “analytic theology.” Analytic theology is, very roughly, what happens when philosophers who are interested in doctrine and theologians who think that there is (or might be) value in the appropriate use of philosophical tools get together. It is now a burgeoning movement, and analytic theologians are making contributions on a wide range of issues and topics, and from a variety of perspectives and approaches. We have not, however, witnessed a great deal of interaction between those who engage in the theological interpretation of Scripture and those who practice analytic theology....

The Bible as a Document of the Church: A Personal View

2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (6) ◽  
pp. 276-285
Author(s):  
George G. Nicol
Keyword(s):  
Biblical Interpretation ◽  
Biblical Studies ◽  
Theological Interpretation ◽  
Personal View ◽  
Church Of Scotland ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Biblical Texts ◽  
The Church

Following some general remarks on recent significant trends in biblical studies, I note that these will exacerbate the gulf between church and academy with respect to biblical interpretation. A brief introduction to the official documents of the Church of Scotland shows that they provide little indication of how the Bible should be interpreted as a document of the church. In view of the ideological nature of many of the biblical texts an argument against too ready recourse to theological interpretation is outlined.

Brevard Childs and the treasures of darkness

2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Collin Cornell
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Biblical Studies ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Theological Interpretation ◽  
The Bible ◽  
1 Kings

AbstractContemporary biblical studies is populated by ‘comparativists’ and ‘theological interpreters’: scholars who read the Bible in the context of ancient artefacts, and scholars who read it in the context of Christian theology, respectively. These camps relate to one another mostly by feuding – or by mutual avoidance. The Old Testament theologian Brevard Childs is usually taken as a champion in the cause of theological interpretation, and so also as reinforcing one side of the disciplinary division. But under certain conditions, Childs also authorised the use of ancient artefacts (‘the treasures of darkness’) for reading scripture theologically. This article reactivates the latter possibility within Childs’ interpretive programme, especially through two cases studies: the first by Childs himself, when he uses the Sargon Legend to interpret Exodus 2; and the second a reprise of Childs’ procedure, using the Mesha Inscription to interpret 1 Kings 22.

scholarly journals Echt gebeurd? Verhalen of feiten? Over historische en literaire bijbelkritiek en de zeggenschap van de bijbel

2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 345-371
Author(s):  
HM Vroom
Keyword(s):  
Research Methods ◽  
Biblical Studies ◽  
Christian Faith ◽  
Historical Criticism ◽  
The Real ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Biblical History

A serious objection against Christian  faith is that the Bible is not trustworthy because the history it relates does not correspond to the facts of history. In theology this problem is “solved” by some biblical scholars by an acceptance of the research methods that are used for all literature alike while others accept the historical critique by understanding the biblical history  as a faithful but a-historical revelation. Fundamentalists reject  the historical-critical objections and stress the inerrancy of Scripture. In this contribution these three “answers” are rejected: biblical studies shall take the (real) facts serious indeed (pace inerrancy), nor jump into an a-historical revelatory history next to historical criticism (pace strong Barthian views in the “Amsterdam School”), but neither read religious scriptures all in the same way “as all literature” — but apply academic methods as is appropriate for the Hebrew and Greek Bible. 

Modernity, History and the Theological Interpretation of the Bible

2001 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 308-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel B. Green
Keyword(s):  
Biblical Studies ◽  
Systematic Theology ◽  
Theological Interpretation ◽  
Constructive Theology ◽  
Human Culture ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Internal Relations

One of the more noticeable features of the landscape of theological studies, broadly conceived, is the trouble-some relationship between biblical studies and systematic or constructive theology. Following the programmatic comments of Colin Gunton, by ‘systematic theology’, I refer to that theology which is concerned (1) to elucidate in coherent fashion the internal relations of one aspect of belief to other potentially related beliefs; (2) to demonstrate an understanding of the relation between the content of theology and ‘the sources specific to the faith’; and (3) to evince an awareness of the relation between the content of theology and general claims for truth in human culture, not least those of philosophy and science. It is with this enterprise, the doing of systematic theology, that biblical studies has come in the last two centuries to have increasingly poor relations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document