Reclaiming the Bible for the Church

by Carl E. Braaten

Book Overview

Front-ranking theologians speak out on the crisis of biblical authority and interpretation in the church, focusing in particular on the adequacy of the historical-critical method of hermeneutics. The... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0802808980
• ISBN13: 9780802808981
• Release Date: August 1995
• Publisher: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company
• Length: 152 Pages
• Weight: 0.50 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.4" x 6.0" x 9.0"

Customer Reviews

Needed Corrective (or, " what is scholarship?")

In the listed review of this book, the reviewer states that this book is, "Interesting as a non-fundamentalist criticism of modern biblical scholarship [and that] the collection may provoke useful thought on the possibility of critical space amid institutions (academic, religious, and otherwise) more inclined to be self-reproducing than to cultivate critical reflection." Elsewhere he writes, "Biblical interpretation, they agree, is a theological matter, a matter of faith rather than of academic criticism."In my reading of the book, the given reviewer both misses that point and proves the book's point. The authors, all well respected scholars of international standing, take issue with the current trend in many seminaries and universities of approaching the scriptures from the starting point that they cannot possibly be true in any real way. This is why the previous review misses the point. The authors are not against using their brains or modern scholarship, but they ask, "What exactly is scholarship?" I would ask the reviewer if he has ever actually read what Spong or the Jesus Seminar put out. If that is honest scholarship, then the academic community is serious trouble.Donfried's essay, along with the others, takes issue with the politicization of scriptural interpretation. Is it honest scholarship to have an agenda that clearly is not based upon the text and then to read the bias into the meaning of the text only to act surprised that, in fact, the scriptures claim Jesus was just a pale Galilean who, had he lived just a bit more, would have seen things differently? It is actually more of an act of faith to do so than to take the gospels as they have been taken throughout the ages since it requires the "scholar" to go against every notion of both common sense and acceptable exegetical methods. So much for intellectual honesty and rigor!A note about orthodox Christian scholarship being "self-reproducing": The authors of this book take issue with the current trend, for over 20 years now, of publish or perish. That is, unless an author comes up with some very odd or controversial thesis, the paper or book will not get published and the university will start asking them, "So, where's the papers and books you need to write to keep us happy?" Ask any professor in the humanities. The temptation to write wacky articles with only shreds of documentation is very powerful. This is especially true in the religious studies departments. Unfortunately, scandal and controversy sell while orthodoxy comes across as boring "self-reproduction". It would be funny to imagine a conversation between those who say that orthodoxy is unoriginal and the early Christians who were up against the philosophical and religious trends of their time with the idea that God could actually become incarnate and die! Unoriginal? Hardly. On a lighter note, Aidan Kavanagh's essay on the relationship between scriptural interpretation and worship is very needed and useful. Following the m