Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
1.1 Introduction
1.2.1 Reformers
"While the Bible has been read theologically since its formation, biblical theology as a discipline has its roots in the Protestant Reformation. The Reformers' emphasis on Scripture as the sole source and norm for all matters of faith provided the soil from which biblical theology sprang. While the term itself was not used by the Reformers to designate a distinct discipline, it is clear that for them biblical theology meant a systematic theology which was biblical in character, that is, for which the Bible was the primary, if not the sole, source and norm. Insofar as the Reformers self-consciously sought to differentiate their theology from Roman Catholic dogma, in which tradition played a major role, one may note a polemic
1.2.1 Reformers
dimension in the birth of biblical theology. One could go on to observe that while the target of the polemic changed periodically, the polemic dimension has been a constant feature of biblical theology throughout its history, in the sense that it had to fight repeatedly for an unbiased hearing of the theological witness of Scripture."
[Lemke, Werner E., "Theology (Old Testament)," The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Freedman, David Noel, ed., (New York: Doubleday) 1997, 1992]
1.2.1 Reformers
"The Protestant principle of "sola scriptura," which became the battle cry of the Reformation against scholastic theology and ecclesiastical tradition, provides with its call for the self-interpretation of Scripture (sui ipsius interpres) the source for the subsequent development of Biblical theology. The Reformers did not create the phrase "Biblical theology" nor did they engage in Biblical theology as a discipline as subsequently understood. . . .
1.2.1 Reformers
Luther's hermeneutic of "sola scriptura" and his principle "was Christum treibet" together with the "letter-spirit" dualism prevented him from developing a Biblical theology. . . . "
[Hasel, Old Testament Theology]
1.2.2.2 "Proof-texts"
". . . the Bible was regarded as uniformly authoritative and that any notions of the dissimilarity between the Old and New Testaments were completely nonexistent." "Old Testament theology thus described may be taken to mean the use of Israels canonical writings for the purpose of demonstrating the soundness of Protestant doctrine on the basis of certain passages selected for their suitability as proof-texts. Since all of Scripture was deemed to be of equal value, such passages could and were chosen from all sections of the Old Testament, the only requirement being that the texts could be interpreted to agree with whatever doctrine was being considered."
1.2.2.2 "Proof-texts"
"Under these circumstances, the method of discussion was an extremely simple one, involving only three steps. It began with the authoritative definition and elucidation of an individual doctrine. It then moved on to choose passages from the Old Testament which might be thought to support that formulation. Finally, it entailed the detailed exposition of those texts in order to show how they actually did provide such support."
1.2.2.2 "Proof-texts"
"The order of the subject matter came bodily from the doctrinal systems themselves. In this respect Schmidt was only following the practice current among the Protestant theologians of his day." [Hayes & Prussner, Old Testament Theology: it history & development ]
1.3.1 Introduction
1.3.1.1 "The more attentively Scripture was read and studied during the course of the 17th century, the more it became apparent that the biblical documents did not really contain a theological system of doctrines at all. Rather, Scripture was cast into the form of a historical narrative. It told the story of God's unfolding relationship with humanity through a sequence of temporal events (oeconomia temporum)." [Lemke, "Theology (Old Testament)," ABD]
1.3.2.1 Pietism
nourished through a life of prayer, personal devotion, Bible reading, and moral living. Pietism's emphasis on the reading and study of Scripture by all brought about a greater familiarity with the contents of the Bible. It also brought about an increasing awareness of the differences between biblical and dogmatic theology." [Lemke, "Theology (Old Testament)," ABD]
1.3.2.1 Pietism
"The back-to-the-Bible emphasis of German Pietism brought about a changing direction for Biblical theology. In Pietism Biblical theology became a tool in the reaction against arid Protestant Orthodoxy. Philipp Jacob Spener (16351705), a founding father of Pietism, opposed Protestant scholasticism with Biblical theology. The influence of Pietism is reflected in the works of Carl Haymann (1708), J. Deutschmann (1710), and J. C. Weidner (1722), which oppose orthodox systems of doctrine with "Biblical theology."
1.3.2.1 Pietism
"As early as 1745 Biblical theology is clearly separated from dogmatic (systematic) theology and the former is conceived of as being the foundation of the latter. This means that Biblical theology is emancipated from a role merely subsidiary to dogmatics. Inherent in this new development is the possibility that Biblical theology can become the rival of dogmatics and turn into a completely separate and independent discipline. These possibilities realized themselves under the influence of rationalism in the age of Enlightenment." [Hasel, Old Testament Theology]
Enlightenment
Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night: God said, Let Newton be! and all was light!
Alexander Pope
1.3.2.2 Enlightenment
"The increasing differentiation of biblical theology from dogmatic theology was also greatly aided by the Enlightenment which swept across Europe during the 18th century. Rationalism's aversion to dogmatic religion, its belief in the powers of the human intellect to ascertain truth through observation and inductive reasoning, as well as its belief in the existence of universal natural religion which was in conformity with the demands of reason, exerted a powerful influence on biblical studies and widened the gulf between biblical and dogmatic theology. Increasingly the Bible came to be subjected to the same kind of critical and rational study as any other human document of antiquity."
[Lemke, "Theology (Old Testament)," ABD]
1.3.2.2 Enlightenment
"In the age of Enlightenment (Aufklrung) a totally new approach for the study of the Bible was developed under several influences. First and foremost was rationalisms reaction against any form of supernaturalism. Human reason was set up as the final criterion and chief source of knowledge, which meant that the authority of the Bible as the infallible record of divine revelation was rejected. The second major contribution of the period of the Enlightenment was the development of a new hermeneutic, the historical-critical methods which holds sway to the present day in liberalism and beyond. Third, there is the application of radical literary criticism to the Bible by J. B. Witter, J. Astruc, and others. Finally, rationalism by its very nature was led to abandon the orthodox view of the inspiration of the Bible so that ultimately the Bible became simply one of the ancient documents, to be studied as any other ancient document."
[Hasel, Old Testament Theology]
1.3.2.2 Enlightenment
Enlightenment as it Impinged on Christian Theology: Historical Science matured which produced a by-product of historical skepticism Literary Criticism was the subject ot intense occupation The enthronement of reason Sciences, i.e., physics, astronomy, etc. General religious skepticism Period of toleration Humanitarianism
1.3.2.2 Enlightenment
Omnicompetence of Criticism Utilitarianism Pervasive Moralism
1.3.3 Scholars
Johann Solomo Semler (1725-1791)
". . . claimed that the Word of God and Holy Scripture are not at all identical. This implied that not all parts of the Bible were inspired and that the Bible is a purely historical document which as any other such document is to be investigated with a purely historical and thus critical methodology. As a result Biblical theology can be nothing else but a historical discipline which stands in antithesis to traditional dogmatics." [Hasel, Old Testament Theology]
1.3.3 Scholars
Gotthilf Traugott Zachari (1729-1777)
Under the influence of the new orientation in dogmatics and hermeneutics he attempted to build a system of theological teachings based upon careful exegetical work. Each book of Scripture has its own time, place, and intention. But Zacharia held to the inspiration of the Bible, as did J. A. Ernesti (1707-l781) whose Biblicalexegetical method he followed. Historical exegesis and canonical understanding of Scripture do not collide in Zacharias thought because the historical aspect is a matter of secondary importance in theology. On this basis there is no need to distinguish between the Testaments; they stand in reciprocal relationship to each other. Most basically Zacharias interest was still in the dogmatic system, which he wished to cleanse from impurities." [Hasel, Old Testament Theology]
Gabler took the ideas that were present in the 18th century and presented them in an orderly fashion. "Concerning the Proper Distinction between Biblical and Dogmatic Theology and the Appropriate Definition of the Respective Goals of Both"
1.3.3.1 Johann Philipp Gabler (1753-1826) A three-stage approach to examining biblical theology:
First, interpreters must gather data on "each of the periods in the Old and New Testaments, each of the authors, and each of the manners of speaking which each used as a reflection of time and place." Second, having gathered this historical material theologians must undertake "a careful and sober comparison of the various parts attributed to each testament." Biblical authors ideas should be compared until "it is clearly revealed wherein the separate authors agree in a friendly fashion, or differ among themselves."
". . . the task of OT theology was to trace the religious ideas of the Hebrews in their historical development and against the background of other ANE religions with whom the Hebrews came into contact. Already the influence of comparative religion was beginning to make itself felt here in this first OT theology. Bauer's rationalistic orientation manifested itself in the manner in which he judged the religious content of the OT. Miraculous and mythological elements in the Bible were dismissed by him as superstitions of a primitive race."
G. F. Oehler
Oehler reacted both against the Marcionite strain introduced by F. Schleiermacher with the depreciation of the OT and the total uniformity of OT and NT as maintained by Hengstenberg. But he himself does not give up the unity of the Testaments. There is unity in diversity. Oehler accepts the division of OT and NT theology, but OT theology can function properly only within the larger