Review Hans Frei the Eclipse of Biblical Narrative
The Eclipse of Biblical Narrative: A Study in Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Hermeneutics
This was a striking and important book. Frei's central thesis is that at the turn of the Enlightenment the unity between meaning and history in hermeneutics began to collapse, resulting in the electric current state of a modern dualism between the pietists on the i paw, and the rationalist on the other. Substantially, he argues, this shift began with Spinoza and separated typology from history, whereas before this point the two were one and the same. The structure and shape of the text were just causeless to present historical information near how real events took identify. With Spinoza, typology (or pregnant) and history broke free from 1 another, then that history no longer had any meaning in itself, and the text, having shape and meaning, couldn't possibly be construed as historical. The whole debate over Biblical history, and then, becomes a consequence of Modernity, not a natural reading of the text itself. Frei then traces this dichotemy between typology and history through European hermeneutics in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The book is scholarly, and sometimes quite the slog to get through, simply no pastor should go without having worked their fashion through it. It demonstrates the two types of preaching conducted today, pietist and rationalist, are a false pick, and the real solution is to preach typologically.
A very important book with a actually bad thesis. Argues that the narrative or the biblical story is self-containing. Stay in the story and don't expect information technology to be a window upon existent history. You take to ignore the Bible's own claims about "what our eyes have seen, what our hands have touched," etc. to swallow this. It'south of import b/c its all the same in print after all these years and critiques the Bultmaniacs. Every scholary discussion of hermeneutics begins ordinarily begins with this book even though almost every sentence is a convoluted mess. Frei is a High german trying to write in English language. It all the same needs a proficient translation!
Let me preface my comments by noting that I am aware this book is considered a seminal historical business relationship in the field of hermeneutics. I am sure its contributions are helpful. However, the volume is then thoroughly and consistently opaque as to forfeit most salutary value to even a trained reader. A chief irony to this effect is seen in how Frei at least twice chastens certain authors for their verbosity in cake quotes while vii-line sentences in his own text are plant on nearly every page. Technical terms are vaguely defined and the prose obscures the line betwixt the author's summary of the thought of others and that of his own conclusions. Possibly I am but too dense to grasp it, but I don't call up so. I recommend reading Thiselton's introduction to hermeneutics before this volume. But either way, strap in.
Frei investigates the breakdown betwixt story and reality, realistic and figural estimation. His Yale post-liberal presuppositions assist his analysing High german liberalism. They do non help him construct a coherent alternative. A realistic estimation is a strict correspondence between word and reality. There can but exist 1 meaning: that of the author. This is problematic when one approaches biblical prophecy: were the prophets' intended meanings the same as that of the New Testament readers? At this point the realistic paradigm breaks down. A figural reading is shut to Reformed typology: the narrated sequence contains its own significant (Frei 28). While Frei doesn't depict the explicit conclusion, if typology is true, then ane must have a narratival epistemology. One will note this is standard Protestant--especially Reformed covenantal--hermeneutics. So what happened in history, particularly in Germany? The blossoming liberal schools quite correctly saw that if typology is true, then the bible has a coherent unity. If the bible has a coherent unity, then it forces a narratival epistemology. If that is true, and then dualisms of a Platonic or Kantian sort are ruled out. "What if Plato were a High german Liberal?" The development of hermeneutics didn't accept place in a vacuum. Scholars were interacting with contemporary philosophical shfits. The liberal schools would not accept a realistic hermeneutics because it was obvious (for them) that miracles and resurrection were not part of "reality." They could not accept a typological reading because typology is at war with internalized, spiritual pious gush. Schleiermacher's comments are appropriate at this point. His denial of the Resurrection and the miraculous is well-known, but perhaps not his reasons why. They are several: if the truth of the story is in the result, then it stands or falls apart from my internalized spiritualization of the text. Farther, if the goal of Jesus (on the liberal gloss) is his coming-to-realization of God-conciousness, and so the Resurrection makes such reading pointless. Indeed, the cross is an anti-climax. Lessons to be learned: A Conclusion of sorts Information technology'south not clear if Frei himself avoids all of the criticisms of liberal theology. His stardom between factuality and factuality-similar probably won't agree upwards under scrutiny (which is why few liberals adopted it). His understanding of narrative theology is bright, but narrative theology but works if the narrative is...well..real. Did information technology actually happen? If we practice non have eschatology equally the corresponding pole to history, equally none of the liberals did, so it is hard to avoid Strauss's criticisms. If the goal of hermeneutics is eternal, timeless truths (ironically shared by both modern Evangelicals and Schleiermacher), then Lessing's ditch is insurmountable. If truth is Ideal and necessary and eternal, necessary because information technology is eternal, and so why bother with historical contingencies like narratives? If this is the case, Lessing is absolutely correct.
This is an incredible volume. Now I know why it has had such a longstanding impact on the discipline of hermeneutics. However, almost every single conclusion Frei comes to --if and when he does--is dubious for Evangelicals. So, if you read Frei starting with the presupposition that Christ really has acted in history, then Frei will frustrate yous. And, BTW, you should starting time with that presupposition if you are going to sympathise the NT authors on their terms--non to mention the fact that Christ truly has acted in History and really is the manner Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John depict him. That said, Frei was seeking to recover the interpreters right to read the Bible narrativally--and for that he should exist commended, read, and read charitably.
The third time was the charm. I picked upwardly this book to read at least twice in the past but never got far into it before giving it upwardly for something of more immediate interest. Afterall, a report in 18th and 19th-century hermeneutics does not exactly hope to be much of a page-turner. As information technology turns out, this book is considered something of a classic in terms of the history of biblical hermeneutics. Nevertheless, this is a topic for specialists and as such requires a skilful deal of background understanding to fully capeesh. The author maintains that both liberal and fundamentalist interpreters of scripture accept taken something of a wrong plough when they decided no longer to read the Bible every bit a realistic narrative telling the true story of the whole world. This is the and so-called eclipse of the biblical narrative. This new reading of scripture has pb to a number of issues on both the correct and the left. The author's assay of this change in hermeneutics has served as the foundation for what has since come to be known as narrative or post-liberal theology. Great and detailed analysis. Rather hard going.
Hands one of my favorite books! Non a history person except when it is history of estimation, which is this book! All the of import thinkers of Western thought in the 18th and 19th century and their views about hermeneutics. Volition be reading again before the end of this year.
At this signal, I can't comment much more than pointing out Frei's thesis: a realistic reading of the history-similar narrative that forms an unbroken continuity between two Testaments in the Bible was passed over in the 18th century for ii poles of interpretation: the hyper-literal ostensive reading at one end and the mythophile at the other finish. For Frei, this doesn't seem to be a good movement in hermenuetics and Biblical estimation. I tend to concord with him. Unfortunately, Frei doesn't offer much in terms of evaluation here. It is truly a historical report. For the modern practice of a realistic narrative interpretation of the Bible one has to turn to his "The Identity of Jesus Christ" and fifty-fifty there nosotros but get preliminary sketches.
This is a poorly written book. Frei uses these long sentences and then adds further thoughts with a comma separating them from the primary mini-novel. Its very hard to follow. I'd detest to have this as a textbook. His volume is essentially well-nigh what the German Enlightenment did to the Bible and he seemed to non take any involvement in the rest of Christian thought at the time, as if the Germans were the only ones talking about the Bible. Still, it might make a expert reference work.
Want to Read
December 29, 2007the 16 page introduction expresses the overall project pretty well
Displaying 1 - x of 15 reviews
Source: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/402568.The_Eclipse_of_Biblical_Narrative
0 Response to "Review Hans Frei the Eclipse of Biblical Narrative"
Post a Comment