An Evaluation of William Wrede’s Hermeneutics: A Radical Historical Criticism

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 개혁신학회
· 수록지 정보 : 개혁논총 / 18권 / 181 ~ 213페이지
· 저자명 : 이강택

초록

This paper aims to scrutinize Wrede’s hermeneutical concerns and principles in his own hermeneutical milieu and to evaluate his contributions and limitations. I suggest that the hermeneutics of Wrede should be understood as an outcome of the hermeneutical milieu, the History-of-Religions School. The main characteristic of the History-of-Religions School was to interpret primitive Christianity within the framework of the religions of the time. In doing so, Wrede claims that there is no historical justification for distinguishing a 'canon' of Scripture from other early Christian writings. In discussing the task and methods of the historical study of early Christian thought, Wrede argues New Testament theology "must be considered and done as a purely historical discipline."Based on his hermeneutical presupposition and his own hermeneutical program on New Testament theology, Wrede wrote a book on Mark's Gospel entitled Das Messiasgeheimnis (The Messianic Secret). In seeking to explain Mark's presentation of Jesus' reticence about his messiahship, his commands either of various people to silence about his miracles or of his disciples about his messiahship, Wrede argues that the whole thing was a clever fabrication by the author of Mark (and the early church) designed to mask the fact that Jesus never actually claimed to be the Messiah at all. By applying his drastic historical-critical method, Wrede tried to show us another direction for the study of New Testament theology. In doing so, he emphasized the importance of historical study for the Scripture and consequently opened up an avenue to the exploration of religions and early Christian documents for the better understanding of the Scripture.
We need to consider the possible positive aspects of Wrede’s emphasis on the humanness of the biblical texts with caution. Since Wrede exclusively emphasizes the humanness of the Bible, his understanding of the Scriptures necessarily entails distortion of it. In other words, to focus on a human side of the biblical texts from the standpoint of view is one thing and to say that it only matters is another. These two are totally different. The former could be a multi-perspectival approach and the latter is supposed to necessitate distorting proper biblical understanding. We cannot ignore the humanness of the biblical texts. However, this humanness must be understood in the light and guidance of divineness of the Bible. Under this condition true humanness of biblical texts is properly conceived.
With this kind of caution in mind, we can think of some insights into the historically and socially conditioned character of biblical texts. Since the New Testament is a genuine work of both human and divine author, our intentional focus on human side could be multi-perspectival. This multi-perspectival approach can provide a window into the biblical authors’ use of both culture and language common to their contemporaries. Since the Scripture was written by human authors, sensitivity to the historical and social concerns is both necessary and beneficial for the better understanding of the Scripture.

참고자료

· 없음