The publisher of Brescia, Paideia has just published a book translated and English exegete George Bradford Caird, language and imagery in Bible ( The Language and Imagery of the Bible ), originally published in 1980. A work that the author describes as "a textbook for elementary semantics exemplified by drawing the Old and New Testament" (p. 14).
Personally, I have got to read all, or even for the most part, neither in English nor Italian, and I do not think I can overcome this "missing" for a long time.
Nevertheless, for what concerns the main subject of this blog, the book Caird, even the figure of Caird, has an undeniable importance historiography.
begin with the figure: GB Caird, professor at the glorious University of Oxford ( "I listened to other students talking about Caird 'defending the walls of Oxford Against the German invasion'" , reports picturesquely MJ Borg in "A Temperate Case for a non-eschatological Jesus "Foundations & Facets Forum 2 (1986) 81-102), was the Doktorvater two Jesus Questers of the most popular in the last two decades: the time Anglican bishop NT Wright and his American buddy Marcus J. Borg, coordinating their doctoral dissertations on Paul and the politics of Jesus instead
Coming to the book, the last chapter, the 14th, is dedicated to "the language of eschatology." Well, this is a fundamental element for its direct and decisive influence that had in how his "godchildren" Wright and Borg have conceived the relationship between Jesus el'escatologia.
Here is clearly not possible to go into details of the matter, I prefer to leave the floor directly to the three scholars, bringing some significant citations.
Caird:
"My proposal can be illustrated in three propositions: (...) 1. The biblical authors believed the letter that the world had a beginning in the past and would have a purpose in the future. 2. They regularly use the language of the end of the world in a metaphorical sense to talk about what they knew well not be the end of the world. 3. As with all other uses of the metaphor, it must be remembered that it is probable in the sign of a misunderstanding by the literalness of the audience, and it is possible confusion of boundaries between vehicle and tenor by the speaker "(GB CAIRD, Op. cit. , p. 311).
BORG:
“The threat tradition of the synoptics thus contains two elements. On the one hand, decisions taken for or against the mission of Jesus would have eternal consequences (e.g. Mk 9:43-48; Lk 10:12-15 par., 11:31-32 par.; 12:8-9 par.; Mt 25,31-46). But this was not imminent, nor was this the primary source of urgency. [Si tratta del punto n. 1 di Caird]. What was imminent was the historical consequence of continuing to pursue the quest for holiness as separation (…): the threatened destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (..). That was the crisis Jesus announced to his contemporaries. (…) only the imagery of cosmic world disorder and Judgement Would Have Been Adequate to speak of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (...). The position maintained here, then, Is that the transcendent imagery (...) Which speaks of Imminent universal disorder, is consistent with the threat of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. Such language only Was Sufficient to express the Significance of the Destruction of Jerusalem [and this is the No 2 of Caird]. "
(MJ BORG, Conflict, Holiness and Politics in the Teaching of Jesus , 2nd ed., Trinity Press International, Harrisburg, 1998, pp. 227-229, 1st ed. 1984).
WRIGHT:
"Within the mainline Jewish writings of this period (…), there is virtually no evidence that Jews were expecting the end of the space-time universe. There is abundant evidence that they, like Jeremiah and others before them, knew a good metaphor when they saw one, and used cosmic imagery to bring out the full theological significance of cataclysmic socio-political events” (N.T. WRIGHT, The New Testament and the People of God , SPCK/Fortress, London/Minneapolis, 1992, p. 333).
“(…) the imagery of Mark 13,24-5, 27 can be easily understood. These verses, as Caird urged, are not ‘flat and literal prose’. They do not speak of the collapse or end of the space-time universe. They are (…) typical Jewish imagery for events within the present order that are felt and perceived as ‘cosmic’ or, as we should say, as ‘earth-shattering’. More particularly, they are regular Jewish imagery for events that bring the story of Israel to its appointed climax. (…) The result of ‘the vindication of the son of man’ is that exile will at last be over (…). The promises to Jerusalem, to Zion, are now transferred to Jesus and his people. Meanwhile Jerusalem herself has become the great enemy, the city whose destruction signals the liberation of the true people of God” (N.T. WRIGHT, Jesus and the Victory of God , SPCK/Fortress, London/Minneapolis, 1996, pp. 362-363).
[Wright absolutizes point No 2 of Caird, leaving completely drop the point No 1 - and introducing compensation - as is clearly seen - instead of "crass literalism" that he attributes to the traditional interpretation of eschatology, a no less "crass" and blatant apologetics reading, including well said Paula Fredriksen: "This hypothesis is parsimonious and Coherent, offering the Simplest explanation so far of the rise of Chrisitanity: Jesus created it" (P. Fredriksen, "What You See Is What You Get: Context and Content in Current Research on the Historical Jesus" Theology Today 52 (1995) 75-97, p. 89)].
the reader to judge the plausibility of the interpretation offered by the family of eschatology Bradford.
0 comments:
Post a Comment