[faithandlife] EXEGETICAL RESEARCH LOTS OF QUESTIONS SHORT ON ANSWERS

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : January 2004 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: chasrscott@...
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:08:10 GMT

 
Brothers+

I forward the post below from the Johannine Literature email study group.  

Charles+

------------------------------
Subject:  [John_Lit] Romans, Jews and Fairy tales
Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:20:29 +0200 
   
    
Frides Lameris wrote on January 26, 04:

 "In the course of my study NT I found out almost al interpretational
problems arise from (great) differences in presuppositions."

When exegetical research is not based on any scientific methodology, the study of the New Testament is bound to remain a matter of personal opinion and theological speculation. I don't see how we can overcome this basic problem.

 Literary and historical criticism can identify the problems, raise
questions and suggest potential answers. Progress was thus made in our
knowledge of the Eastern Mediterranean world 2000 years ago. From Bultmann to the Jesus Movement a lot of questions were raised and our views have evolved in many ways. But if we cannot take literally what is reported in the Gospels about Jesus and if all our attempts at reconstructing the historical Jesus remain speculative, we are bound to rely on preconceived ideas and presuppositions. For the moment, there is no other way (and unfortunately not a better way) of dealing with the problem.

Exegetical research seems to have promised much more than it could deliver.  Many traditional theologians who specialize in doctrinal issues compare the modern exegetical venture to the mountain that gave birth to a mouse. We have raised a lot of questions, but we have remained very short on final answers. Our discussion group illustrates this point.

 Some of us think that "the historical Jesus did, indeed, believe himself to be the Davidic Christ, the rightful heir to David's throne, and, so, to be the true King of Israel." Others think otherwise. 

In the present state of affairs, we do not have the means to resolve this question. Literary and historical criticism has many limitations. It is good, as I said, for raising important questions and causing us to widen our research. We need to invent a different methodology and even create a new science capable of providing answers to the fundamental question as to who Jesus was in relation to the Easter faith of the disciples.

 The real NT research should therefore concentrate on a project of this
nature. Secondary and trivial questions should not be given the importance we sometimes give them.

  So long,

Joseph

Joseph Codsi
P.O.Box 116-2088
Beirut, Lebanon
Telephone (961) 1 242-545
joseph5@...