Website design By BotEap.comTHE INTERNAL IMPOSSIBILITY OF THE CONCEPT

Website design By BotEap.comIn its actual application, Maier dismisses the historical-critical method as an impenetrable screen that simply no longer allows certain statements simply because it is not malicious intent but rather the powerlessness that a falsely selected method gets into. The method is seen as an instrument in the hands of exegesis with the help of which they have promoted a truly dictatorial regime in theology. Commenting on its nature, the writer is of the opinion that the revolutionary thrust of the method, naturally, was not historically, nor was it given a major emphasis. A determined use of a purely historical method would not have brought about a revolution in theological thought in the field of exegesis. Opposing the method, Maier observes, among other things, that it is impossible to discover the Canon within the Canon, the Bible does not allow itself to separate into divine writing and human writing, a revelation is more than a theme. matter, the conclusion is established prior to interpretation, the implications of poor practicability, and that criticism is not the appropriate response to revelation, Maier argues strongly that the historical-critical method is inadequate or at least inadequate in the eyes of the church because its results lack viability. Perhaps a more important one that basically upholds human arbitrariness and its standards in opposition to the demands of revelation. Consequently, since the method is not suitable for the subject, it must be rejected.

Website design By BotEap.comTHE REAL END OF THE HISTORICAL PERIOD

Website design By BotEap.comThe text, Das Neve Testament als Kanon (The New Testament as Canon) in which Ernst Kaesemann compiled essays by fifteen authors from the period 1941-70, is briefly highlighted, as the book is of unusual significance to the subject of Maier’s text. In this chapter, Maier examines exegetes, systematists, and two church historians with claims. In discussing the exegetes’ failed search for a canon in the canon, Maier presents Strathman’s position that one should reject early biblical proof which he assumes can prove the Christian legitimacy of a dogmatic statement by citing isolated biblical verses. After examination of the exegetes has shown that none of them was able to delimit or even discover a convincing canon in the canon, the author discusses the answer that systematists find to the exegetical challenge.

Website design By BotEap.comHermann Diern, for example, answers in two ways. He admits that a unit of the canon cannot be historically-exegetically claimed and rejects an attempt at harmonization according to the method of concordance. Furthermore, he refuses to allow exegetes to impose any canon of the canon on him. This rejection is manifested by concern that the Scriptures will lose the freedom to speak for themselves. Church historians are seen as a more neutral set of observers and advisers insofar as the extension of the historical tradition removes them from too compulsory participation. His advice is tied to his systematic position. It is evident that they too cannot escape the tension between the different poles: the spiritual experience of the congregation on the one hand and modern critical exegesis on the other? between the royal canon created from many factors operating in the spiritual life and the methodologically absolute and exclusive canon in the canon. Kaesemann’s collection presents a cross section of contemporary German exegesis and systematics that was acquired from authorized exponents of the historical-critical method. Exegetes can no longer conceive of the New Testament as a unit, but rather as a collection of various testimonies that are contradictory and have varying degrees of validity. For them, it is an established fact that the formal canon is equated with the Word of God.

Website design By BotEap.comExegetes and systematists have failed in their search for more than two thousand years for the canon of the canon, that is, the binding word of divine authority.

Website design By BotEap.comTHE NEED FOR A HISTORICAL-BIBLICAL METHOD

Website design By BotEap.comMaier comments on the immense task that follows the empirical end of the higher critical method which consists in developing an exegetical method that is in accord with revelation in the form of Holy Scripture. This includes overcoming the philosophical division between Scripture and the Word of God presented by Semier and his colleagues. This involves nothing less than overcoming English deism, French skepticism, and German enlightenment in the domain of theology. The proposed procedure is known as the biblical-historical method.

Website design By BotEap.comIn discussing the problem of biblical authority, the writer asserts that it is therefore appropriate to focus on Scripture as a particular procedure in the revelation process after the general presuppositions of the method have been established. It is argued that only Scripture itself can say in a binding way what authority it affirms and has if one is to remain faithful to the principles of the methodology. Furthermore, if the authority of Scripture is at the base of the complicated problem of the methodological struggle in theology, then the questions and decisions related to the authority of Scripture are all tied to the doctrine of inspiration. In evaluating the scope of the canon, the writer notes that the canonical selection was limited to the oldest and most reliable manuscripts.

Website design By BotEap.comThe relationship between the ” Word of God ” and the ” Word of man ” in the Scriptures is discussed and it is affirmed that justice can be done if by following the revelation itself, everything that has been revealed is seen as inspired , that is to say, everything that we find in the Scriptures that in practice demands divine inspiration. We cannot ignore the mystery of the mixing of the word of God and the word of man. The attempt to inquisitively unravel this mixture and finally divide it into qualitatively definable entities was the grave mistake of the higher critical method. Commenting on the problem of “contradiction” and “scientific errors” and the infallibility of Scripture, Maier asserts that Scripture must be explained by Scripture. The trend of the argument is the same.

Website design By BotEap.comAfter discussing scripture and revelation elsewhere that closely describe scripture and tradition, scripture and revelation elsewhere portray scripture and tradition, scripture and history, and the relationship of scripture to others religions, the writer repeats that all exegesis must be based on Scripture, since there is no certainty outside of Scripture. Maier systematically analyzes the procedural steps of the biblical-historical method. Finding the text is very important as there are literally countless variants. Once the text has been established, it must be translated exactly and as accurately as possible. Any effort to neglect biblical languages ​​must be vehemently resisted. This is still illuminated by the contemporary historical background.

Website design By BotEap.comThe writer also analyzes the literary and previous criticisms. It considers that the exegete can carry out a deep and balanced analysis, faithful to the text, once the previously commented procedural steps have been experienced. Commenting on the context and all of Scripture, Maier observes that the exegete cannot always interpret only individual passages of Scripture. Rather, he establishes for himself a more or less conscious total impression of Scripture that must come true when he interprets individual portions. The main purpose of Scripture is to free man from evil and ultimately bring him into fellowship with God. Scripture bears witness and carries out the history of salvation (Heilsgeschichte). Every interpreter comes to a joyful center of Scripture. Maier argues with brutal truth that the more we value all Scripture, the more glorious Christ will become.

Website design By BotEap.comGENERAL EVALUATION

Website design By BotEap.comIt is indisputable that the text is an invaluable contribution to theologians and to all who seek a guide to combat rationalism in the approach to theology. Although torrents of controversial ink still flow over the Bible, Maier generally sees it as the anvil on which several hammers have been broken. The text is valuable for study because it highlights many good observations on the historical-critical method. While we gratefully accept what is good, our path to correct conclusions regarding the Bible should not be hampered. It helps the reader to realize that there is a turning point in Scripture that cannot be overlooked, which marks everything clearly as before or after.