Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:55:52.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Concept of Story and Theological Discourse1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2009

Hugh Jones
Hugh Jones
Affiliation:
6500 Mainz Faculty of Evangelical TheologyJohannes Gutenberg University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Biblical scholars and theologians have sometimes suggested that the concept of story or narration may be used to avoid or even resolve certain long-standing problems in theology. The context of such a suggestion appears to be not only the gradual filtering of ideas from the social sciences into theological awareness but also a much improved understanding of the nature and transmission of the biblical traditions. For instance, literary criticism had tried to tell the story of the making of the Bible as a story of writing and editing. With its analytic interest, form criticism penetrated deeper, concentrating on the crucial role of oral tradition and on the power of communities to shape certain forms. Depending on these prior analytical activities, tradition criticism (or ‘redaction criticism’ in New Testament studies) felt free to seek larger unities in the material before it. That is, whereas form criticism's interest lay in describing separately the variety of ‘;scenes’ that later took their respective places in the story, tradition criticism concentrated on telling the whole story of the making of the Bible.2

Type
Research Article
Information
Scottish Journal of Theology , Volume 29 , Issue 5 , October 1976 , pp. 415 - 433
Copyright
Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 415 note 2 See, e.g., the recent survey in Rast, Walter E., Tradition History and the Old Testament (Guides to Biblical Scholarship, Old Testament Series) (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972), pp. iii–x.Google Scholar

page 415 note 3 For example, Metz, J. B., ‘Erlösung und Emanzipation’, Stimmen der Zeit, 191 (1973). PP. 171–184Google Scholar and his discussion of theology as a ‘mystical biography’ in ‘Karl Rahner—ein theologisches Leben’, Stimmen der Zeit, 192 (1974), pp. 305–316Google Scholar. Basic for understanding the background of the present article would be Gressmann, H., Die älteste Geschichtsschreibung und Prophetie Israels (Gottingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1910)Google Scholar; von Rad, Gerhard, ‘Der Anfang der Geschichtsschreibung im alten Israel’, in Gesammelte Studien zum Allen Testament (Münich: Kaiser, 1958), pp. 148–188Google Scholar; E.T. in The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966)Google Scholar; von Rad, , Theologie des Allen Testaments (Münich: Kaiser, 1958, 1960)Google Scholar; E.T. Old Testament Theology (2 vols.), (New York: Harper & Row, 1962, 1965)Google Scholar; Buber, Martin, ‘Saga and History’, in The Writings of Martin Buber, ed. by Herberg, Will (New York: Meridian, 1956), pp. 149–156Google Scholar; von Rad, , Moses (New York: Association Press, 1960)Google Scholar; Ritschl, Dietrich, Memory and Hope: an Inquiry concerning the Presence of Christ (New York: Macmillan, 1967)Google Scholar. (Ritschl and the two authors discussed in the present article make up one group of theologians who have talked about the concept of story over a period of time.)

page 416 note 1 Barr, James, Old and New in Interpretation: a Study of the Two Testaments (London: S.C.M., 1966)Google Scholar. In the text, references to this work are indicated by the letter B.

page 417 note 1 Wharton, James, ‘The Occasion of the Word of God: an unguarded Essay on the Character of the Old Testament as the Memory of God's Story with Israel’, Austin Seminary Bulletin (Faculty Ed.), Sept. 1968Google Scholar. In the text, references to this work are indicated by the letter W.

page 417 note 2 Compare the similar but much more articulated distinctions made by Harvey, Van A., The Historian and the Believer: the Morality of Historical Knowledge and Christian Belief (London: S.C.M., 1967), pp. 265–268Google Scholar and Cupitt, Don, Christ and the Hiddenness of God (London: Lutterworth, 1971), pp. 102–137.Google Scholar

page 420 note 1 The same kind of argumentation appears in his more recent article, ‘The Secret of Yahweh: Story and Affirmation in Judges 13–16’, Interpretation, 27 (1973), pp. 48–66.

page 420 note 2 This is in response to Langdon Gilkey's sharp question concerning what God actually did in the Old Testament. See Gilkey, Langdon, ‘Cosmology, Ontology and the Travail of Biblical Language’, Journal of Religion, 41 (1961), 3, pp. 194ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a rather different and more philosophically aware response, see Kaufman, Gordon D., ‘On the Meaning of “Act of God”’, Harvard Theological Review, 61(1968), pp. 175–201 (now republished in his God the Problem (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972), pp. 119–47).Google Scholar

page 421 note 1 Lonergan, Bernard, Method in Theology (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1972), p. 140Google Scholar. A similar observation in relation to historiography and the philosophy of history is made by Gruner, Rolf, ‘Mandelbaum on Historical Narrative: a Discussion’, History and Theory, 8 (1969), p. 284.Google Scholar

page 422 note 1 Barr, James, ‘Common Sense and Biblical Language’, Biblica, 49 (1968), p. 383Google Scholar; see also his Biblical Words for Time, rev. ed. (London: S.C.M., 1969), pp. 194–199.Google Scholar

page 424 note 1 Danto, A. C., Analytical Philosophy of History (London: Cambridge University Press, 1965), p. 11; see also Ch. 8 on ‘narrative sentences’.Google Scholar

page 424 note 2 Gallie, W. B., Philosophy and the Historical Understanding (New York: Schocken Books, 1964), pp. 65–66.Google Scholar

page 424 note 3 Gallie's views have been outlined because, unlike Danto and Morton White (see the latter's Foundations of Historical Knowledge, (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1965)), he seems to be more ready to allow non-narrative factors to enter his account of historical writing. Some aspects of Gallie's account resemble Ebeling's hermeneutical theory; see Ebeling, Gerhard, Word and Faith (London: S.G.M., 1963), p. 318.Google Scholar

page 424 note 4 Gruner, , ‘Mandelbaum on Historical Narrative …’, pp. 285–287.Google Scholar

page 424 note 5 ibid., p. 287.

page 425 note 1 See Mandelbaum, Maurice, ‘A Note on History as Narrative’, History and Theory, 6 (1967), pp. 413–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also the works by Gallie, White and Danto mentioned above. The issue is, of course, complex and has been discussed in one form or another for many years. See, e.g., the collection of essays in Philosophical Analysis and History, ed. Dray, W. H. (New York: Harper & Row, 1966)Google Scholar; Mandelbaum, Maurice, ‘Historical Explanation: the Problem of “Covering Laws”’, History and Theory, 1 (1961), pp. 229–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ely, R. G., Gruner, Rolf and Dray, W. H., ‘Mandelbaum on Historical Narrative: a Discussion’, History and Theory, 8 (1969), pp. 275–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Skinner, Quentin, ‘The Limits of Historical Explanations’, Philosophy, XLI (1966), pp. 199–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Downing, F. G., The Church and Jesus: a Study in History, Philosophy and Theology (London: S.C.M., 1968)Google Scholar, Part 3, and his ‘Philosophy of History and Historical Research’, Philosophy, XLIV (1969), pp. 33–45; Arthur, C. J., ‘On the Historical Understanding’, History and Theory, 7 (1968), pp. 203–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Louch, A. R., ‘History as Narrative’, History and Theory, 8 (1969), pp. 54–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dray, W. H., ‘On the Nature and Role of Narrative in Historiography’, History and Theory, 10 (1971), pp. 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 426 note 1 Mandelbaum, , ‘A Note on History as Narrative’, pp. 416–418.Google Scholar

page 426 note 2 Arthur, , ‘On the Historical Understanding’, pp. 205–211.Google Scholar

page 427 note 1 In its ‘practical mood theism is still willing to talk mythically. It will tell a great story of the dealings of God with men, a story in which both God and men are actors … But in so far as the story is told successfully and convincingly it has made of God not God but a man. And so in its transcendent or prophetic mood theism is iconoclastic, it must negate its own symbolism… It must denounce the story…’, Don Cupitt, Christ and the Hiddenness of God, p. 202; see Ch. 13 for further elaboration.

page 429 note 1 ibid., Ch. 13.

page 429 note 2 Danto, , Analytical Philosophy of History, p. 142; see also Ch. 1.Google Scholar

page 429 note 3 ibid., p. 11.

page 430 note 1 ibid.

page 430 note 2 See Mundle, C. W. K., ‘Augustine's Pervasive Error concerning Time’, Philosophy, XLI (1966), pp. 165–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 430 note 3 ibid., p. 165. The relevant sections of Augustine's writings are to be found in Books 10–13 and 30 of the Confession.

page 431 note 1 ibid., p. 167; my italics.

page 431 note 2 ibid., p. 168

page 432 note 1 See Cupitt's criticisms of the ‘linguistic miracle’ view of the kerygma (Christ and the Hiddenness of God, p. 126).