Book Review: History and Hermeneutics

Murray A. Rae, History and Hermeneutics (T & T Clark, 2005), 168pp (with thanks to T & T Clark for a review copy)

In the last two hundred years the historicity of scripture has become much disputed - seen most prominently in the historical quest(s) for Jesus, especially the Jesus Seminar, who try and cherry-pick the gospels for what they determine to be authentic sayings of Jesus. This fantastic book from Murray Rae can be viewed as a response and refutation of the claims made by the Jesus Seminar and others. Rae argues for a theological account of history and that reading scripture doesn't mean we put historical questions to one side or we pick the bits we think seem historical.

Rae roots his account of theological history in the doctrine of creation (chapter 3). Attention to the doctrine of creation he argues allows us to recognise that creation has its own being and integrity distinct from God, that creation has a goal and so a history and is the work of the triune God who 'does not abandon the world to its own devices, nor withdraws his promise, but involves himself in bring creation to its goal' (54). History cannot be explained without reference to God, because God involves himself in creation, in the life of Israel and supremely in the incarnation.  What history is rethought of  the basis of theology.

Subsequent chapters seek to deal with other claims that pull scripture, theology and history apart. In chapter four Rae argues for the centrality of the resurrection in understanding the 'Jesus of history' and that if the resurrection is true this 'calls for a new conception of history and of God's involvement in the world' (84). Chapter five disputes the often made claim that 'seeing is believing', that is, only if one witnesses with their own eyes can something be believed. Rae argues that a much richer account of 'seeing' is required, that recognises that with seeing comes with it a need for interpretation of that which is seen. He goes on to argue that historical reality is, irreducibly, a hermeneutical activity' (95).  Every historian is selective and interpreter of events.  Rae claims that in the New Testament writers we have writers who select and represent the story of Jesus in order to help us see (that is, understand). Scripture enables us to see the world differently, there is a conversion taking place.  Chapter six deals with the question of testimony. The problem of Lessing and others is that the only way we can know Jesus is through testimony - scripture is fundamentally a testament - the Old Testament and New Testament. Rae argues for the indispensability of testimony and that the authority of scripture cannot be dismissed because it has the character of human testimony (111-112) - 'the news of God's presence and purpose for the world as it is proclaimed in the Bible cannot be discredited simply by virtue of the fact that it comes to us by way of testimony' (121).  The book's final chapter argues for an ecclesial reading of scripture, following the work of Stephen Fowl and against the likes of Philip Davies. For Rae, scripture belongs to the church and its the responsibility of the church to read scripture, in its unity, and that the church itself should be a 'hermeneutic of scripture' (151).

Rae ultimately wants us to see history and theology, not as to isolated disciplines, but that theology can and should inform history. History looks different from the position of those who read and indwell scripture. The theological historian will use categories like sinfulness and grace. The theological historian will see history as the place in which 'God is bringing about his purpose of reconciliation and new life' (155). This kind of book is theology at its best - readable, insightful and helpful. Well-worth reading.

Comments

[Catriona]

I've been reading this too (but only selected chapters). I agree with Andy, well worth reading.

[Catriona]

PS I paid for my copy, so my comments are automatically more authoritative as I don't have to please the publisher! ;-)