Tim Stephenson
- 2 minutes read - 399 wordsMorrow
Self styled objectivity blind to own biases and produced
Not to deny many gains from modern historical criticism
Unwittingly take sides in battle between throne and altar
Three periods 1. from Muslim polemics to medieval Christian theology 2. renaissance, reformation, wars of religion 3. enlightenment and 19C historical criticism
#
Ibn Hazm’s polemic against Judaism cause at least in part by personal sense of being slighted by Jews Attacked Moses authorship of Pentateuch in order to undermine the idea of divine authorship No attempt to be balanced but solely searching for insupportable [in his view] ideas. Attacked allegorical interpretation which was adopted by medieval Christianity by the likes of marsilus of Padua and William of Ockham. Disdain for allegorical interpretation accompanied by emphasis on sensus literalis Both received patronage from ludvig of Bavaria who was in conflict with the papacy. Thus their criticism of allegory and preference for historical interpretation of scripture supported ludvigs desire to overturn the pope’s temporal authority in Italy
reformation
Lorenzo Valla, and niccolo Machiavelli in 15c continued the focus on history of texts that would influence Hobbes and Spinoza in the 17th
In between the reformation cry of sola scriptura further undermined patristic interpretation.
Isaac La Peyrere’s prae-adamitae was an attempt to argue ot to be nothing more than the history off the Jewish people and not divine revelation
Thomas Hobbes experience of the 30 years war and his flight from England’s civil war undoubtedly influenced his theory that an absolute ruler was necessary to constrain the violence and that this sovereign must be head of both state and church.
Spinoza set out a definition of this hermeneutic that required total understanding of the text before any theological interpretation could begin, effectively deferring it indefinitely.
In all these cases, historical criticism is aligned with denial of revelation in the ot and set against earlier allegorical interpretation which was seen as supportive of transnational papal authority. In other words there is no small political component to this exegesis. Despite this, it held a growing influence over Christians interpretation of the ot. Finally in the 18th century it had become such a tool of the state that this form of studing the ot morphed into philology, severing all links with theology.
Fascinating fact: as late as 1829, the bishops of 555 of the 646 dioceses spread across the globe were appointed by heads of state.