Do you dare?

[2PhiloVoid]

It is a mischaracterization of the process to say "false" narrative. Do you view Job as a false narrative? Psalms? Parables?
They are not false but a genres of literature with their won logic, meaning and purpose. It is quite possible that the post exilic Jewish leaders made use of many preexisting images, motifs, legends, stories, etc and fashioned them with new ides and intentions to help solidify their national identity.

Akita, I understand that you're on the journey of exploring ideas and interpretations here, but what you haven't done yet is establish the justification for daring anyone else to engage the Minimalist Viewpoint on Israel's ancient literature and history.

Your dare, to be cogent, needs to be presented from within an epistemic view along with a working praxis as to "why" anyone should engage the Minimalist View. Moreover, your explanation for "why" needs to be presented in such a way as to be transparent enough for folks here, including myself, to comprehend what your educational goal is.

Otherwise, we're just left spinning our wheels wondering: "What's Akita really getting at?"

Personally, what I would like to know as a fellow traveler on the road of scholarly inquiry is: what theories and which exact sources have compelled you to present your OP? Thus far, you've made statements, but there's been very little in the way of your own academic support for your ideas or of evidence that you've applied equal measures of critical acumen to the spread of available theoretical positions about Israel's literature.

Have you been reading too much Israel Finkelstein or William Dever? Have you engaged some other set of scholars you're wanting folks here to hear about? Or, have you instead read something said by a more conservative scholar on the Historiography of Israel which put you off and made you irritated?

Do you see what I'm getting at in the matter of our shared, group interest in inquiry? This has to be an authentic moment of education. If it can't be delineated clearly in a focused way, then folks begin to think it's being presented instead as an insinuated "gotcha."

 

[AV1611VET]

Parables?

For the record, I don't see any reason why Jesus' parables were not real events.

 

[Derf]

It is a mischaracterization of the process to say "false" narrative.

Let's explore that statement. I'll start from the last word: narrative. Here's what it means:
"a story or a description of a series of events".

I think we both agree that Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings is as description of a series of events. If what is in those books is true, then it is a "true narrative". If what is in those books is not true (not a true description of the series of events), then it is a false narrative.

Do you view Job as a false narrative? Psalms? Parables?

This is what you said you wanted to talk about in your OP:

Would anyone here dare to see the Genesis Adam and Eve "fall"

Why, then, are you bringing up the books of Job, Psalms, and parables? Are you seeing something about Adam, Eve, and the fall in Job, Psalms, and some unnamed parables? If so, please give me some references in those books and tell me which parables you are referring to.

You also made a statement that:

they create a narrative

referring to the post-exilic Jews. When someone "creates a narrative", it can be a true description of true events, or it can be a false description of events, or it can be something that is NOT a narrative. Your use of the word "create" says that the words were put together by the post-exilic Jews. Your use of the word "narrative" says the the words give a description of events. If either the events never happened or the description is inaccurate, then you have a "false narrative".

They are not false

This is good. You are saying they are a TRUE description of events.

but a genres of literature with their won logic, meaning and purpose. It is quite possible that the post exilic Jewish leaders made use of many preexisting images, motifs, legends, stories, etc

You are saying that these events are actual events, right? That the Jews used information they had available to them to describe a series of events. Now, are you saying that what they wrote about those events was true, or was it false? (Please answer this question, even if you don't reply directly to any of the rest of my post. Thanks!)

and fashioned them with new ides and intentions to help solidify their national identity.

Please give an example of one or two of these "new ideas and intentions" to help me understand why this would not be possible with a true narrative of actual events.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Akita, I understand that you're on the journey of exploring ideas and interpretations here, but what you haven't done yet is establish the justification for daring anyone else to engage the Minimalist Viewpoint on Israel's ancient literature and history.

Your dare, to be cogent, needs to be presented from within an epistemic view along with a working praxis as to "why" anyone should engage the Minimalist View. Moreover, your explanation for "why" needs to be presented in such a way as to be transparent enough for folks here, including myself, to comprehend what your educational goal is.

Otherwise, we're just left spinning our wheels wondering: "What's Akita really getting at?"

Personally, what I would like to know as a fellow traveler on the road of scholarly inquiry is: what theories and which exact sources have compelled you to present your OP? Thus far, you've made statements, but there's been very little in the way of your own academic support for your ideas or of evidence that you've applied equal measures of critical acumen to the spread of available theoretical positions about Israel's literature.

Have you been reading too much Israel Finkelstein or William Dever? Have you engaged some other set of scholars you're wanting folks here to hear about? Or, have you instead read something said by a more conservative scholar on the Historiography of Israel which put you off and made you irritated?

Do you see what I'm getting at in the matter of our shared, group interest in inquiry? This has to be an authentic moment of education. If it can't be delineated clearly in a focused way, then folks begin to think it's being presented instead as an insinuated "gotcha."

That is a very good response, Philo and I thank you for it.

I have been reading a lot of David Tracy who refers to guys like Schleiermacher, Ricoeur, Barth, Bultmann, and now Hans Gadamer and Jacques Derrida. They do not deal directly with the Old Testament but rather with Hermeneutics an dialogue and in general.

But I think since Julius Westhausen opened the door with the Documentary Hypothesis and less traditional assumptions about how the Pentateuch came to be, we can certainly step away from a literal interpretation. While there is no consensus about the classical documentary hypothesis there is still plenty of reason to explore other theories.

I am not trying to persuade anyone to a minimalist viewpoint. At least not here and now. Rather, I am trying to gather like minded individuals who are interested in sharing their own ideas about what makes sense to them when approaching scripture that does not correlate with the world as we now know it.

So I am not very focused but also not interested in "gotcha." For some reason I have been deeply interested in hermeneutics lately, and it is new to me. I am reading a lot more than I am assimilating and so just bursting with the stuff and wondering how to apply it to my own scripture study.

Does that help?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Now, are you saying that what they wrote about those events was true, or was it false? (Please answer this question, even if you don't reply directly to any of the rest of my post. Thanks!)

I don't view it in such black and white alternatives. The creation narratives can convey truth without being literal 6 day chronology with talking snake and destiny changing fruit. Maybe you cannot accept that possibility. I am not trying to change your mind. I am looking for others who can and are interested in discussing it.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

That is a very good response, Philo and I thank you for it.

I have been reading a lot of David Tracy who refers to guys like Schleiermacher, Ricoeur, Barth, Bultmann, and now Hans Gadamer and Jacques Derrida. They do not deal directly with the Old Testament but rather with Hermeneutics an dialogue and in general.

But I think since Julius Westhausen opened the door with the Documentary Hypothesis and less traditional assumptions about how the Pentateuch came to be, we can certainly step away from a literal interpretation. While there is no consensus about the classical documentary hypothesis there is still plenty of reason to explore other theories.

I am not trying to persuade anyone to a minimalist viewpoint. At least not here and now. Rather, I am trying to gather like minded individuals who are interested in sharing their own ideas about what makes sense to them when approaching scripture that does not correlate with the world as we now know it.

So I am not very focused but also not interested in "gotcha." For some reason I have been deeply interested in hermeneutics lately, and it is new to me. I am reading a lot more than I am assimilating and so just bursting with the stuff and wondering how to apply it to my own scripture study.

Does that help?

Yes, that helps. And being that I've been familiar with every name you've mentioned in this post for quite some time, except for David Tracy, this gives me an idea about where you are out on the field of Hermeneutical inquiry.

So, what is one of David Tracy's common or strongest propositions in his particular angle on Hermeneutics that has you newly wondering about the Historiography of ancient Israel? I'm asking because I haven't looked him up yet, and I'm wondering what your understanding of him is before I do.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Yes, that helps. And being that I've been familiar with every name you've mentioned in this post for quite some time, except for David Tracy, this gives me an idea about where you are out on the field of Hermeneutical inquiry.

So, what is one of David Tracy's common or strongest propositions in his particular angle on Hermeneutics that has you newly wondering about the Historiography of ancient Israel? I'm asking because I haven't looked him up yet, and I'm wondering what your understanding of him is before I do.

I am so glad you asked. He does an amazing job of summarizing and sorting out everyone from Plato to Aristotle, Aquinas to Augustine then Heideggar to Sartre, with so many others in between. My main take away is that it is the job of theology to correlate our sacred texts with our lived experience. But that takes us down all kinds of rabbit holes regarding hermeneutics, phenomenology, and theology. Yet I am loving it.

This all started with me when I read an article on on a Narrative approach to Spiritual Care.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1542305019846846

A few years later that led me to Narrative Medicine

Division of Narrative Medicine

The Division of Narrative Medicine directs scholarship, leads research, and educates clinicians and students to fortify patient care with skills and knowledge from the humanities and the arts

www.mhe.cuimc.columbia.edu

Now I am back to theology and scripture. What are we to make of those ancient and wonderful writings?

 

[Clare73]

That is a very good response, Philo and I thank you for it.
I have been reading a lot of David Tracy who refers to guys like Schleiermacher, Ricoeur, Barth, Bultmann, and now Hans Gadamer and Jacques Derrida. They do not deal directly with the Old Testament but rather with Hermeneutics an dialogue and in general.
But I think since Julius Westhausen opened the door with the Documentary Hypothesis and less traditional assumptions about how the Pentateuch came to be, we can certainly step away from a literal interpretation. While there is no consensus about the classical documentary hypothesis there is still plenty of reason to explore other theories.
I am not trying to persuade anyone to a minimalist viewpoint. At least not here and now. Rather, I am trying to gather like minded individuals who are interested in sharing their own ideas about what makes sense to them when approaching scripture that does not correlate with the world as we now know it.

So I am not very focused but also not interested in "gotcha." For some reason I have been deeply interested in hermeneutics lately, and it is new to me. I am reading a lot more than I am assimilating and so just bursting with the stuff and wondering how to apply it to my own scripture study.

So glad I have Jesus for my pattern. . .post #44, following:

Jesus believed the OT was the "word of God" in every detail (Mt 15:6, Lk 5:1, Lk 11:28, Jn 10:35),
that it was the truth of God vested with the authority of God and backed by the power of God (Mt 5:17-19).
He treated arguments from Scripture as having clinching force. When he said, "It is written," that was final. There was no appeal against Scripture, for "the scripture cannot be broken." (Mt 4:5, Mt 4:7, Mt 4:10, Jn 10:35). God's word holds good forever.
He constantly scolded the Jews for their ignorance and neglect of Scripture: "Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures?". . ."Have you not read. . .?". . ."Go and learn what this means. . ." (Mk 12:24, Mt 12:3, Mt 12:5, Mt 19:4, Mt 21:16, Mt 21:42, Mt 9:13).

Likewise, Jesus himself submitted to the OT as the word of God:
he lived a life of obedience to Scripture (Lk 4:17-21, Mt 8:16-17, Mt 11:2-5),
and then he died in obedience to Scripture (Lk 18:31, Mk 8:31, Mk 9:31, Mk 10:33-34, Mt 26:24, Lk 22:37, Mt 26:53-56),
when he arose, he explained who he was by the Scriptures (Lk 24:44-47, Lk 24:27),
he presented himself to the Jews as the fulfiller of Scripture (Jn 5:39-40, Jn 5:46-47).

Belief in the authority and truth of the OT was the foundation of Jesus' whole ministry.

Why would anyone want to improve on Jesus?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I am so glad you asked. He does an amazing job of summarizing and sorting out everyone from Plato to Aristotle, Aquinas to Augustine then Heideggar to Sartre, with so many others in between. My main take away is that it is the job of theology to correlate our sacred texts with our lived experience. But that takes us down all kinds of rabbit holes regarding hermeneutics, phenomenology, and theology. Yet I am loving it.

Yes, the historical survey of Philosophy, in all of its environs, tends to lead us into all sorts of conceptual onions and pretzels, and rabbit holes. But as in everything, one must watch out for shadowy presence of 'The Jabberwock.'

This all started with me when I read an article on on a Narrative approach to Spiritual Care.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1542305019846846

A few years later that led me to Narrative Medicine

Division of Narrative Medicine

The Division of Narrative Medicine directs scholarship, leads research, and educates clinicians and students to fortify patient care with skills and knowledge from the humanities and the arts

www.mhe.cuimc.columbia.edu

Is this related to your own line of work, Akita? I'm just wondering. And I understand the need for the application of various forms of palliative care; we all need it sooner or later.

Now I am back to theology and scripture. What are we to make of those ancient and wonderful writings?

Well, if we're looking at understanding David Tracy's ideas and their applications [and possible benefits] for our spiritual lives, especially as those ideas and applications relate to our faith in Christ, I'm not clear on how there could be a palliative application of what is immanent in a Minimalist Interpretation of Biblical Archaeology and Biblical Historiography (as seems to be alluded to or hinted at in your OP).

Being someone who leans toward the MAXIMALIST position for the ancient biblical literature, I'm not yet clear on where are we going conceptually. I'm not sure how these ideas will connect. And usually, I like to see the roller-coasters I'm going to go on before I decide to stand in line to ride them. In the endeavor to take a peek, I've found the following two articles that I'm running through for the moment to see how David Tracy's thoughts might apply to how we could "DARE" to use a Minimalist View of the Bible for palliative spiritual care.

​

The Achievement of David Tracy

David Tracy's most recent work formulates a future for theology

divinity.uchicago.edu

​

Chapter 3: Analogy and Dialectic: God-Language by David Tracy – Religion Online

​

At this point, Akita, redirect me if I'm on the wrong track ....

[edit] P.S. I'm adding this additional article about David Tracy's general praxis so I have a better Idea about what his core methodology is, even if in a briefer form. This may also help others here better understand some of what David Tracy, as a Roman Catholic metaphysician, is attempting to do in his theological work:

Sanks, T. Howland. "David Tracy's theological project: An overview and some implications." Theological Studies 54, no. 4 (1993): 698-727.​

https://theologicalstudies.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/54.4.5.pdf

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Yes, the historical survey of Philosophy, in all of its environs, tends to lead us into all sorts of conceptual onions and pretzels, and rabbit holes. But as in everything, one must watch out for shadowy presence of 'The Jabberwock.'

Is this related to your own line of work, Akita? I'm just wondering. And I understand the need for the application of various forms of palliative care; we all need it sooner or later.


Well, if we're looking at understanding David Tracy's ideas and their applications [and possible benefits] for our spiritual lives, especially as those ideas and applications relate to our faith in Christ, I'm not clear on how there could be a palliative application of what is immanent in a Minimalist Interpretation of Biblical Archaeology and Biblical Historiography (as seems to be alluded to or hinted at in your OP).

Being someone who leans toward the MAXIMALIST position for the ancient biblical literature, I'm not yet clear on where are we going conceptually. I'm not sure how these ideas will connect. And usually, I like to see the roller-coasters I'm going to go on before I decide to stand in line to ride them. In the endeavor to take a peek, I've found the following two articles that I'm running through for the moment to see how David Tracy's thoughts might apply to how we could "DARE" to use a Minimalist View of the Bible for palliative spiritual care.

​

The Achievement of David Tracy

David Tracy's most recent work formulates a future for theology

divinity.uchicago.edu

​

Chapter 3: Analogy and Dialectic: God-Language by David Tracy – Religion Online

​

At this point, Akita, redirect me if I'm on the wrong track ....

[edit] P.S. I'm adding this additional article about David Tracy's general praxis so I have a better Idea about what his core methodology is, even if in a briefer form. This may also help others here better understand some of what David Tracy, as a Roman Catholic metaphysician, is attempting to do in his theological work:

Sanks, T. Howland. "David Tracy's theological project: An overview and some implications." Theological Studies 54, no. 4 (1993): 698-727.​

https://theologicalstudies.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/54.4.5.pdf

I am a hospital chaplain. I must be able to understand and appreciate people coming from all over the theological landscape. Also A Layman's Guide to Protestant Theology was helpful by William Hordern. Layman's Guide to Protestant Theology book by William E. Hordern

The second article you posted looked a lot like a summary of Blessed Rage for order with his Revisionist model of theology.

Thanks for taking an interest. I hope you find it all as fascinating as I currently do.

 

[AV1611VET]

So glad I have Jesus for my pattern. . .post #44, following:

Good testimony, Clare!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I am a hospital chaplain. I must be able to understand and appreciate people coming from all over the theological landscape.

Whoa! Ok, now. Hospital chaplain is an occupation with a big existential challenge, particularly as it sits positioned within a pluralistic culture.

I think I understand your reason for studying this a little better now. No wonder you're traveling over this particular epistemic path. You have a number of underlying ideological and theological tensions that are intrinsic to that work.

Thanks for taking an interest. I hope you find it all as fascinating as I currently do.

You're welcome. And I do find all of this fascinating. It always has been for me.

 

[Lukaris]

Would anyone here dare to see the Genesis Adam and Eve "fall" more as a post exilic warning to the surviving Jewish community to obey the religious elders and their teachings (God)? This would mean seeing it less as a literal historical eating forbidden fruit. I know that is impossible for some here. But scholars speculate an a post exilic date. What motives would the authors have and what points trying to make? There is a cause of our suffering? But also, "Listen to us"?

I believe it is our salvation that is first and foremost. God’s revelation to us is for our everlasting life. The Lord told the Samaritan woman Who God is and who has the message of salvation ( the Jews). See John 4:21-26.



I

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Whoa! Ok, now. Hospital chaplain is an occupation with a big existential challenge, particularly as it sits positioned within a pluralistic culture.

I think I understand your reason for studying this a little better now. No wonder you're traveling over this particular epistemic path. You have a number of underlying ideological and theological tensions that are intrinsic to that work.

You're welcome. And I do find all of this fascinating. It always has been for me.

And Narrative theory has kindled new and deeper interest in the patient stories I hear. Are they "True" or "false" narratives? I think sometimes even the patients may not know for sure. But they still have great meaning for that instant. And as a deep listener I must try to attend to all possible levels and meanings.

But what I have noticed is that all this heavy stuff changes me, gives me greater context to appreciate what I hear, I think gives me more fertile ground to let it all settle in. I certainly do not challenge anyone and do not intend that on this thread either. I can enter into the life, time and logic of the narrative as it is. But also consider other aspects.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

And Narrative theory has kindled new and deeper interest in the patient stories I hear. Are they "True" or "false" narratives? I think sometimes even the patients may not know for sure. But they still have great meaning for that instant. And as a deep listener I must try to attend to all possible levels and meanings.

Are they True or False narratives? Where stories from patients are concerned, I would speculate that it's a mixed bag of all kinds of qualities of storified relation. And I'm sure that in your practice as chaplin, you do indeed listen deeply to all levels and meanings that those who are suffering attempt to convey.

But, with that in mind, where the bible is concerned, we have to apply the more complex and complicated measures of the Modern Historians. It should go without saying, I think, that the qualities of a singular patient's narrative differ from those which are enmeshed in the narratives we find in the Bible.

But what I have noticed is that all this heavy stuff changes me, gives me greater context to appreciate what I hear, I think gives me more fertile ground to let it all settle in. I certainly do not challenge anyone and do not intend that on this thread either. I can enter into the life, time and logic of the narrative as it is. But also consider other aspects.

Yes, I imagine that you've gained quite a developed sense for contexts in your daily, existential, face-to-face moments with hospital patients. From what you've shared, I know that you engage the various hermeneutical challenges that come with all parts of life, and you do so in a more expansive way. I do too, but for different reasons.

Thanks for sharing some of the personal contexts involved in your OP. It clarifies things for me.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Are they True or False narratives? Where stories from patients are concerned, I would speculate that it's a mixed bag of all kinds of qualities of storified relation. And I'm sure that in your practice as chaplin, you do indeed listen deeply to all levels and meanings that those who are suffering attempt to convey.

But, with that in mine, I think that where the bible is concerned, we have to apply the more complex and complicated measures of the Modern Historians. It should go without saying, I think, that the qualities of a singular patient's narrative differs in quality (and purpose) from those enmeshed in the narratives (or accounts) we find in the Bible.


Yes, I imagine that you've gained quite a developed sense for contexts in your daily, existential, face-to-face moments with hospital patients. And I know that you engage the various hermeneutical challenges that come on all pats of life in a more expansive way. I do too, but for different reasons.

Thanks for sharing some personal contexts involved in your OP. It clarifies some things for me.

You are welcome. And yes, a patient's narrative, or my own narrative is a different, shall we say genre, than Biblical and especially Old Testament narratives. But the sources I had in a few pages back helped me to listen for themes and patterns, characters and plots. Again, a context. I find all that more important to me than whether something historically happened or not.

"Do you dare?" I guess that might have been too provocative. But there are two challenges . The first is re-evaluating one's own understanding of Biblical texts. The second is "coming out" with a non-traditional view most people do not share. At least not here.

BTW, so I found an email for David Tracy and sent a short note. Ya, I am the kind of guy to do something like that. I would like to zoom with him. Why not, he is retired. I meet with a few friends for coffee" One a retired surgeon studying for Episcopal diaconate, Another a retired philosophy professor who studied with Charles Hartshorne, and a retired communications professor. What a fun bunch we are. I get to pick their brains and they don't seem to mind. I should get continuing education credit.

 

[AV1611VET]

The second is "coming out" with a non-traditional view most people do not share. At least not here.

 

[Derf]

"Do you dare?" I guess that might have been too provocative.

Thank you for that admission.

But there are two challenges . The first is re-evaluating one's own understanding of Biblical texts.

Never a bad idea.

The second is "coming out" with a non-traditional view most people do not share. At least not here.

Why is this necessary? Is it because you have actually found a logically, historically consistent view of scripture? If so, then present it. Some may agree with it, and some won't. The biggest problem you're going to have is showing how it is internally consistent; that Jesus, God's son, agrees with you. And if you can't show that, you got nothing, no matter if you see things as black and white or not.

So get to it. Explain your position. Give us your evidence. Support your assertions. Let the rest of us judge how well you do.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Thank you for that admission.

Never a bad idea.

Why is this necessary? Is it because you have actually found a logically, historically consistent view of scripture? If so, then present it. Some may agree with it, and some won't. The biggest problem you're going to have is showing how it is internally consistent; that Jesus, God's son, agrees with you. And if you can't show that, you got nothing, no matter if you see things as black and white or not.

So get to it. Explain your position. Give us your evidence. Support your assertions. Let the rest of us judge how well you do.

Why rehash the last the last 300 years of scripture scholarship? It is there for all the world to see and decide.
And, as I said., I am not trying to convince anyone. I am looking for people desiring to share their alternate views.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Why rehash the last the last 300 years of scripture scholarship? It is there for all the world to see and decide.
And, as I said., I am not trying to convince anyone. I am looking for people desiring to share their alternate views.

Maybe, brother Akita, not many of us sally forth into, nor dally much within, the realm of Minimalist hermeneutical appraisals of the Biblical literature, or of its archaeology and historical development.

So, even though I'm dauntless and do sally forth into nearly all philosophical and hermeneutical terrain, even I---- who fearlessly engages Higher and Lower Criticism of the Bible----don't entertain the Minimalist view for the purpose of either spiritual solace or inspiration.

If anything, with Pascal's A.A.S.S. in hand as one of my leading axioms, I find the Minimalist view to be drab, dreary and devoid of anything capturing my devotion. There's not much there to appreciate, other than as an opportunity to learn and understand the hermeneutical methods of analysis that Minimalists employ in their respective academic fields.

Just sayin'

Now, as it stands, I'm not yet seeing anywhere in David Tracy's thought evidencing that he considers himself to be a "Minimalist." Are you seeing something different in his thought than I am?