tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6547653347296107692.post3684683028968058790..comments2024-01-09T12:59:32.666+01:00Comments on Narrative and Ontology: Von Rad was a BarthianPhil Sumpterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16491514886782881340noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6547653347296107692.post-18333428034060459632009-03-21T18:27:00.000+01:002009-03-21T18:27:00.000+01:00Hi Scott,glad to be of help. I assume their is a ...Hi Scott,<BR/><BR/>glad to be of help. <BR/><BR/><EM> I assume their is a strong connection between Barth and the Biblical theology concept of extra-textual divine self-revelation</EM><BR/><BR/>I would have thought so.<BR/><BR/><EM> I also assume that the Barth-Bib. Theol. connection is visible, in the area of theological exegesis</EM><BR/><BR/>I'm not sure this is the case. There is a lot out there selling itself as "theological exegesis" which doesn't necessarily go along with this. I consider Brueggemann to be an example. Read the final chapter of his recent <EM>Introduction to the Old Testament</EM>, where he quotes Barth but in a different direction. For Brueggemann, it's all about the cultural construction of reality.Phil Sumpterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16491514886782881340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6547653347296107692.post-58500803976878037082009-03-19T18:51:00.000+01:002009-03-19T18:51:00.000+01:00Phil, the last quote you supplied (recited below) ...Phil, the last quote you supplied (recited below) was especially helpful for me in locating Von Rad with Barth. I will now read Von Rad with enthusiasm given his Barthian angle.<BR/><BR/>Also, I assume their is a strong connection between Barth and the Biblical theology concept of extra-textual divine self-revelation. I also assume that the Barth-Bib. Theol. connection is visible, in the area of theological exegesis, in which I have read next to nothing. <BR/><BR/>Thanks for the explanation.<BR/><BR/>Sincerely, Scott<BR/><BR/>"Because Israel, in its historical witnesses, did not refer to its own faith but rather to Jahwe himself, in other words, because faith was not the "object," rather the "bearer, mouth" of its witness, the revelation of Jahwe in history in words and deeds becomes the object of a theology of the Old Testament"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6547653347296107692.post-44056669932641163982009-03-19T10:30:00.000+01:002009-03-19T10:30:00.000+01:00Sorry, I overlooked the second half!Schmidt goes o...Sorry, I overlooked the second half!<BR/><BR/>Schmidt goes on to say that by holding these things together von Rad was able to practice "theology as exegesis" as well as bring exegesis into theology without overlooking the nuances of the particular texts. The text in bold reads:<BR/><BR/>"Because Israel, in its historical witnesses, did not refer to its own faith but rather to Jahwe himself, in other words, because faith was not the "object," rather the "bearer, mouth" of its witness, the revelation of Jahwe in history in words and deeds becomes the object of a theology of the Old Testament."Phil Sumpterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16491514886782881340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6547653347296107692.post-14993851676642826292009-03-19T10:16:00.000+01:002009-03-19T10:16:00.000+01:00Hi Scott,thank you for your kind words. There is a...Hi Scott,<BR/><BR/>thank you for your kind words. There is actually an English translation of this book, <EM>The Faith of the Old Testament</EM> (I believe). You can read this excerpt in the opening chapter. Schmidt does not draw any direct connection to Barth himself, but as far as I can see there are strong similarities. I remember reading on <EM><A HREF="http://faith-theology.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow">Faith and Theology</A></EM> that von Rad was influenced by Barth and this confirms it for me. Interestingly, Schmidt goes on to relativise this statement by citing Bultmann.<BR/><BR/>In short, von Rad tries to hold 4 things together that historical-criticism threatens to separate.: <BR/><BR/>1) The confessional witness of the text and the historically particular intentionality of the text. The Bible, in its particularity, is kerygmatic.<BR/><BR/>2) The interelation between the facts of history and their interpretation (I'm not too sure what Schmidt was saying here).<BR/><BR/>3) God himself as the living object of the Bible's witness and the human witness to this. <BR/><BR/>4) God's deeds and his word.Phil Sumpterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16491514886782881340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6547653347296107692.post-53458735035026766042009-03-18T20:09:00.000+01:002009-03-18T20:09:00.000+01:00Phil, Thanks for maintaining this excellent blog. ...Phil, Thanks for maintaining this excellent blog. You are helping to keep Biblical theology especially interesting for newbies and amatures like myself.<BR/><BR/>I recently discovered Barth through Torrance and Kevin Diller and am consequently fascinated by the Von Rad - Barth connection. Since I am linguistically challenged, would you be so kind as to provide a short synopsis of this post in English?<BR/><BR/>Thanks,<BR/><BR/>ScottAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6547653347296107692.post-67695682813517379702009-03-16T20:45:00.000+01:002009-03-16T20:45:00.000+01:00Why thank you John. Though it's not quite as innov...Why thank you John. Though it's not quite as innovative as yours!Phil Sumpterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16491514886782881340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6547653347296107692.post-68258171294826479662009-03-16T20:24:00.000+01:002009-03-16T20:24:00.000+01:00I like the new color!And your blog, of course!I like the new color!<BR/><BR/>And your blog, of course!John Robersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12250225216058559780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6547653347296107692.post-74786113437343427112009-03-16T19:25:00.000+01:002009-03-16T19:25:00.000+01:00Steph,a number of people have complained about it ...Steph,<BR/><BR/>a number of people have complained about it (in fact the first was called Steph, about a year ago, a Brueggemann fan, is that you ...?) so I decided to go ahead with it. At first I didn't like it but it's somehow grown on me. Thanks for the feedback!<BR/><BR/>Josh,<BR/><BR/>a while back a commentator said I could consider my blog to be a kind of "minsitry" for Childs. I quite like the idea, so I'm delighted that I may be encouraging other people to get into him! <BR/><BR/>Seitz is really your best bet. Besides him I'm not too sure. In my opinion the similarities with Rendtorff cover up some significant discrepancies. The best article on the canonical approach ever,without question, is Seitz's essay in <EM><A HREF="" REL="nofollow">Canon and Biblical Interpretation</A></EM>. This is an excellent defence of Childs against his detractors and in my humble opinion ought to be a must read for anyone dealing with the subject. Another good book by Seitz is his collection of essays in <EM>Figured Out</EM> and of course <EM>Prophecy and Hermeneutics</EM>, which I'm in the process of reviewing/analysing (overview <A HREF="http://narrativeandontology.blogspot.com/2009/01/seitzs-prophecy-and-hermeneutics.html" REL="nofollow">here</A>). There is also a helpful bunch of online essays in the <A HREF="http://www.princetontheologicalreview.org/issues_pdf/38.pdf" REL="nofollow">Princeton Theological Review</A> which are worth reading. Beyond that, I'm not too sure ... in my opinion Childs is incredibly misunderstood. I'd just keep reading him and read a bunch of Seitz too!Phil Sumpterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16491514886782881340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6547653347296107692.post-10754953175467310852009-03-16T07:28:00.000+01:002009-03-16T07:28:00.000+01:00Hi!I'm new to Childs and have been reading all ove...Hi!<BR/><BR/>I'm new to Childs and have been reading all over your site the past few weeks. I've gotten through his Biblical Theology and OT as Scripture and was wondering if there were any other books (besides Childs) that you might recommend--books that might aid in understanding him as well as his context. I also recently finished Word Without End by Christohper Seitz (you recommended it somewhere on this site). I enjoyed all three books so far--it's really fascinating stuff--but I wish I had more basic knowledge.<BR/><BR/>Any help would be appreciated!hangulmalmotayohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12620964062046608155noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6547653347296107692.post-22080244941631114792009-03-15T11:17:00.000+01:002009-03-15T11:17:00.000+01:00I really like this colour change. It's much easie...I really like this colour change. It's much easier on the eyes - and it doesn't even take as long to download. I don't think dial up liked all that heavy darkness. :-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com