Paul and his interpreters : $b A critical historySchweitzer, Albert
Religion
Paul and his interpreters : $b A critical history
Schweitzer, Albert
Bible. Epistles of Paul -- Criticism, interpretation, etc. -- History; Paul, the Apostle, Saint
But Ernesti’s work suffices to show that the undogmatic philological
method did not in itself lead to any [pg 004] result. Its author is in
reality by no means free from dogmatic prepossessions, but he
skilfully avoids those questions which would bring him into conflict
with Church doctrine. In fact the use he makes of philology is more or
less formal. He does not venture to treat the books of the New
Testament without prepossession as witnesses from the literature of a
distant period, and to show the peculiar mould in which Christian
ideas are there cast in comparison with subsequent periods and with
the period for which he writes. He did not realise that the
undogmatic, philological method of exegesis must logically lead to a
method in which philology is the handmaid of historical criticism.
His great contemporary, Johann Salomo Semler, ventures to give
expression to this truth, and so becomes the creator of historical
theology. In his theoretical works on the Scriptures and on
exegesis—“Introduction to theological Hermeneutics”
(1760-1769),_(_7_)_ “Essay on the free Investigation of the Canon”
(1771-1775),_(_8_)_ “A new attempt to promote a generally profitable
Exposition and Application of the New Testament” (1786)_(_9_)_—the
Halle professor explains again and again what is to be understood by a
“historical” method of exegesis. He demands that the New Testament
shall be regarded as a temporally conditioned expression of Christian
thought, and examined with an unprejudiced eye. In making this claim
he does not speak as a [pg 005] disinterested representative of
historical science, but makes it in the name of religion. If religion
is to develop progressively and purify itself into an ethical belief,
the special embodiments which it has received in the past must not lay
the embargo of a false authority upon its progress. We must
acknowledge to ourselves that many conceptions and arguments, not only
of the Old Testament but also of the New, have not the same
significance for us as they had for the early days of Christianity. In
his work of 1786, Semler even demands that “for present day Christians
there should be made a generally useful selection from the discourses
of Jesus and the writings of the Apostles, in which the local
reference to contemporary readers shall be distinguished or
eliminated.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account