Articles
 Translation Breakdown
 Translation Consequences
 Translation Limitations
 A Translation Mandate
 A Translation Issue
 Vulnerability Defined
 A Vulnerability
 So what does that mean?
 The Consequent Difference of John
 So What is John?

Series [All]
 Administration
 Confessions of a Jewish Skeptic (4)
 Exploring Translation Theories (25)
 Leaving the Jewish Fold (3)
 Memory and Identity
 Religion and Cultural Memory (51)
 The Creative Word (19)
 The Cross-Cultural Process (7)
 The Oral Gospel Tradition (4)
 We the People (8)

Archive
 

Monday, 15 February 2016
Incarnational Approach

Seeing Judaism Anew: Christianity's Sacred Obligation,
Ed. Mary C. Boys, Rowman and Littlefield, 2002
Chapter 13, "Covenant and Conversion" (pp. 151-162), page 153

Here's the second of Dr Cunningham's four approaches to the Bible:

Other Christians emphasise that the Bible is G-d's word expressed in human speech. They highlight the role played by humans in composing the text while not denying divine inspiration. Thus they believe it is essential to read the Bible in its literary and historical contexts in order to avoid misunderstanding it or projecting modern prejudices onto the text. Such Christians tend to come from churches that see the Bible as the preeminent, but not exclusive, authority that must dialogue with the faith experiences and histories of today's faith communities. They also understand that the Bible must be 'actualised' or brought to life in today's social and cultural conditions, which are very different from the scripture's originating circumstances. I call this perspective the 'ncarnational' approach, since it holds G-d's word to be incarnated in human language and history.

This sounds a little like the historical-critical method and through 'dialogue' allows a certain liberalism, while still maintaining a veneer of conservative inspiration.

Posted By Jonathan, 9:11am Comment Comments: 0