Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 09-30-2010, 04:53 PM

Quote:

. . . .

In the decades surrounding the turn of the eighteenth century, the prestige of the Bible in the Western world was at an all-time low. Skeptics, rationalist critics, and proponents of the new science published widely and influentially on the state of its textual corruption, the unreliability of its historical narratives, the crudeness of its style, and, in some cases, the fanciful, even childish quality of its stories. It was, to many elites, a book no longer worth believing. Richard Popkin has argued persuasively that skepticism toward the Bible had its roots in an intellectual crisis provoked by prolonged, unresolved theological disputes about how to guarantee the truth of Catholic and Protestant hermeneutics.2 The harsh and violent realities of religious division in the centuries following the Reformation featured sharp criticisms of traditional belief, on the one hand, and intensification of confessional interpretation and polemical theology on the other. What developed in the mid-eighteenth century was not a new awareness of the “human” or “historical” character of the Bible. Rather, it was the realization that the Bible was no longer intelligible as scripture, that is, as a self-authorizing, unifying authority in European culture. Its only meanings were confessional meanings: Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed.

If the Bible were to find a place in a new political order committed to the unifying power of the state, it would have to do so as a common cultural inheritance. This was the great insight of German academics . . .

ed45 · 09-30-2010, 06:33 PM

Please consider the following summary of biblical and non-biblical historical methods:

http://ratioprimoris.blogspot.com/20...l-methods.html

spamandham · 09-30-2010, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ed45

Please consider the following summary of biblical and non-biblical historical methods:

http://ratioprimoris.blogspot.com/20...l-methods.html

Not too bad, but I was expecting to read a bit of some of the Bible-only methods that are applied; the criterion of embarrassment, etc.

Doug Shaver · 10-01-2010, 05:49 AM

Some very interesting comments there. Thanks, Toto.

And it turns out I can access an e-version of Legaspi's book through one of my university library subscriptions. I'll be reading it soon.

mountainman · 10-03-2010, 12:36 AM

Another quote from that article ...

Quote:

Academic Criticism Today

Modern biblical criticism is not a rival to the kind of religious faith once invested in confessional Bibles; it is a successor to it. Though we are in the unfortunate habit of equating biblical studies with “historical criticism,” a long view of the modern enterprise shows that its principal task was the post-confessional management of the Bible’s cultural authority—not the scientific analysis of its historical contexts.

09-30-2010, 06:33 PM	#2
ed45 Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: NC, USA Posts: 24	A Simple View of Biblical Historical Methods Please consider the following summary of biblical and non-biblical historical methods: http://ratioprimoris.blogspot.com/20...l-methods.html

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-01-2010, 05:49 AM	#4
Doug Shaver Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: San Bernardino, Calif. Posts: 5,435	Some very interesting comments there. Thanks, Toto. And it turns out I can access an e-version of Legaspi's book through one of my university library subscriptions. I'll be reading it soon.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.