Mês: outubro 2006

Neste dia, em 1901, nascia Gerhard von Rad, um dos mais brilhantes biblistas do século XX.

Gerhard von Rad

1. Leben und Werk

Gerhard von Rad ist einer der bedeutendsten Alttestamentler des 20. Jahrhunderts. Er wurde am 21.10.1901 in Nürnberg in eine großbürgerliche Familie geboren (sein Vater war Medizin-Professor) und ist weitgehend dort aufgewachsen – die Mittel- und Oberstufe verbrachte er auf einem Internat in Coburg. Von 1921-1925 studierte er in Erlangen und Tübingen Theologie. Danach absolvierte er ein Vikariat und verschiedene Einsätze als Pfarrvikar. Er promovierte 1928 in Erlangen bei Otto Procksch mit einer textimmanenten Untersuchung über Das Gottesvolk im Deuteronomium (BWANT 47, Stuttgart 1929). 1930 habilitierte er sich bei → Albrecht Alt in Leipzig mit einer dezidiert theologischen Studie über Das Geschichtsbild des chronistischen Geschichtswerks (BWANT 54, Stuttgart 1930). In der Zeit als Alts Assistent von 1930 bis 1934 entstand Die Priesterschrift im Hexateuch. Literarisch untersucht und theologisch gewertet (BWANT 65, Stuttgart 1934).

1934 wurde er als Ordinarius nach Jena berufen. Hier durchlebte er die schwierigsten Jahre der deutschen Geschichte, wobei er manche Freunde fand, u.a. die Dichterin Ricarda Huch, sich aber auch gegen vielerlei Anfeindungen wider seinen Gegenstand – das Alte Testament – zu behaupten hatte. Durch den Kirchenkampf wurde er als Mitglied der Bekennenden Kirche genötigt, die Bedeutung des Alten Testaments gegen die Deutschen Christen zu begründen, was er in mehreren kleinen Schriften und mutigen Aufsätzen tat: z.B. (gemeinsam mit Albrecht Alt und Joachim Begrich) Führung zum Christentum durch das Alte Testament (Leipzig, 1934); Das Alte Testament – Gottes Wort für die Deutschen (Klares Ziel 1, Berlin 1937); Die bleibende Bedeutung des Alten Testaments (1937); Fragen der Schriftauslegung im Alten Testament (Theologia militans 20, Leipzig 1938); Warum unterrichtet die Kirche im Alten Testament? (1939); Moses (Wege in die Bibel, Göttingen 1940).

Andererseits musste er auch in der Bekennenden Kirche das Alte Testament gegen eine völlige christologische Vereinnahmung verteidigen und die Bedeutung der historisch-kritischen Arbeit festhalten, die er kontinuierlich weiter betrieb. Das formgeschichtliche Problem des Hexateuch (BWANT 78, Stuttgart 1938) war nach seinem eigenen Urteil sein wichtigster exegetischer Beitrag, in welchem er den barocken Bau des Hexateuchs als Entfaltung des (vermeintlich) sehr alten „kleinen heilsgeschichtlichen Credos“ in Dtn 26,5ff, zu verstehen lehrte. Von Rad wendet hier die formgeschichtliche Methode, mit der → Hermann Gunkel sog. kleine Einheiten, z.B. die Einzeltexte der Genesis, untersucht hat, erstmal auf einen größeren literarischen Zusammenhang an, den Hexateuch, die Bücher Genesis bis Josua. Er kommt dabei zu dem Ergebnis, dass der Hexateuch aus zwei Gattungen, zwei literarischen Komplexen besteht, die ursprünglich nichts miteinander zu tun hatten, nämlich dem Komplex Väter / Exodus / Landnahme auf der einen und der in Dtn 26 fehlenden Sinaierzählung auf der anderen Seite. Der erste Komplex soll seinen Sitz im Leben auf dem Wochenfest in Gilgal, der zweite auf dem Bundeserneuerungsfest in Sichem gehabt haben. Erst mit der Vereinigung der beiden Trägerkreise sind auch die beiden Überlieferungskomplexe zusammengewachsen, so dass die im Alten Testament überlieferte Erzählfolge nicht einem historischen Ablauf entspricht, sondern als literarisches Konstrukt zu verstehen ist. Diesen Ansatz hat → Martin Noth in seiner Überlieferungsgeschichte des Pentateuch (1948) weitergeführt.

Nach kurzem Militärdienst und amerikanischer Gefangenschaft begann er Ende 1945 in Göttingen neu. Hier arbeitete er die Deuteronomium-Studien aus (FRLANT 58, Göttingen 1947 / 2. Aufl. 1948). 1949 wurde er nach Heidelberg berufen, wo er bis an sein Lebensende lebte und wirkte. In der weltoffenen Atmosphäre dieser Stadt am Neckar verfasste er seine wichtigsten Werke: Das erste Buch Mose. Genesis (ATD 2-4, Göttingen 1949-53, 12. Aufl. 1987); Der Heilige Krieg im alten Israel (AThANT 20, Zürich 1951, 5. Aufl. Göttingen 1968); die heilsgeschichtlich aufgebaute Theologie des Alten Testaments (Band I, München 1958 / Band II München 1960, 10. Aufl. 1992); Das fünfte Buch Mose (ATD 8, Göttingen 1964, 4. Aufl. 1983); Weisheit in Israel (Neukirchen 1970, 4. Aufl. 1992). Seine letzte Monographie befasste sich mit dem abgründigen Text Gen 22: Das Opfer des Abraham (Kaiser-Traktate 6, München 1971; 2. Aufl. 1976).

In seinen Auslegungen will von Rad die Ergebnisse historisch-kritischer Forschung (→ historisch-kritische Bibelauslegung) ernst nehmen, zugleich aber die Bedeutung der Texte für den christlichen Glauben herausarbeiten. Dabei ist für ihn die typologische Exegese von besonderer Bedeutung, die Analogien zwischen dem Alten und dem Neuen Testament aufzeigt (Typologische Auslegung des Alten Testaments, EvTh 12, 1952/53, 17-34, auch in: Gesammelte Studien II, 272-288). „Wenn es seine Richtigkeit hat, daß beide Testamente ein auf Geschichtstatsachen rekurrierendes Zeugnis entfalten, dann liegt die Frage nahe genug, ob sich nicht auch im Einzelnen bei diesen Zeugnissen Entsprechungen zeigen. Die Frage nach der Analogie, nach dem Typischen ist auch dem Profanhistoriker geläufig. Hier wäre freilich nicht nach der Analogie der äußeren Abläufe zu fragen, sondern nach der Analogie der Credenda, die auch bei völliger Unvergleichlichkeit der äußeren Ereignisse vorhanden sein kann.“ (Theologie II, 392).

Das Hauptwerk von Rads, seine zweibändige Theologie des Alten Testaments (1958 / 1960), will die Theologie der geschichtlichen und prophetischen Überlieferungen in ihrer Vielfalt darstellen. Sie rückt nicht ein bestimmtes Thema – etwa den Bund – ins Zentrum, sondern die Geschichte in ihren Entwicklungen und Umbrüchen. Gemeint ist nicht die kritisch rekonstruierte Historie, sondern die Geschichte, wie Israel sie unmittelbar erfuhr und in seinem Glauben darstellte (vgl. Vorwort zur 4. Aufl.). „So ist die Geschichte des Jahweglaubens charakterisiert durch immer neue Zäsuren, durch immer neue Einbrüche von göttlichen Setzungen, durch Neubeginne, die in traditionsgeschichtlicher Hinsicht neue Perioden einleiten. Aber kaum, nachdem sich Israel darauf eingerichtet hat, wird es durch den Hinweis auf neue Taten aufgeschreckt und aus Vorstellungen, in denen es sich gerade eingelebt hatte, wieder herausgeführt.“ (II, 340). Die Prophetie nimmt die alten Traditionen Israels auf, führt sie aber charismatisch zu Neuem weiter. „Diese gesamte Vergegenwärtigung alter Überlieferungen in den Weissagungen der Propheten, diese Anknüpfung an das Alte, dieses Durchtragen des Alten bis ins Neue hinein und andererseits das damit ebenso verbundene meist stillschweigende Übergehen dessen, was wirklich alt und in den Augen der Propheten abgetan war, kann nur als ein von Grund auf charismatischer Vorgang verstanden werden, genauer gesagt: als ein charismatisch-eklektischer Vorgang.“ (II, 345).

Gerhard von Rad verstarb kurz nach seinem 70. Geburtstag am Reformationstag, dem 31.10.1971. Von den drei Sammlungen seiner zahlreichen Aufsätze erlebte er nur die Publikation des ersten Bandes Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament I (ThB 8, München 1958, 4. Aufl. 1971); postum erschienen Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament II (ThB 48, München 1973, hrsg. von R. Smend) und Gottes Wirken in Israel. Vorträge zum Alten Testament (Neukirchen 1974, hrsg. von O.H. Steck).

Von Rad war Herausgeber der „Wissenschaftlichen Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament“, des „Biblischen Kommentars“ und der Zeitschriften „Verkündigung und Forschung“ sowie „Kerygma und Dogma“.

Zur Person Gerhard von Rads gehörte untrennbar sein Wirken in der Kirche. Seine gesammelten Predigtmeditationen erschienen 1972 in München. Seine Tochter Ursula von Rad hat seine Predigten herausgegeben (München 1972, 2. Aufl. 1978, 3. Aufl. Heidelberg 2001).

2. Wirkung

Gerhard von Rads außergewöhnlich starke Wirkung beschränkt sich keineswegs allein auf seine Fachdisziplin, die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, sondern sein sprachästhetisch eindrucksvolles, primär theologisch ausgerichtetes Werk strahlte und strahlt in alle Disziplinen der Theologie aus, vor allem auch in den Bereich der Systematischen Theologie. Aber auch außerhalb der Theologie fand von Rad etwa in den Feldern der Geschichtsphilosophie oder der Alten Geschichte ein großes Echo. Seine Saat hat nicht nur im Protestantismus, sondern in allen Konfessionen, nicht nur in Deutschland, sondern weltweit reiche Früchte getragen. Die Freundschaft mit dem damaligen Bundespräsidenten Gustav Heinemann, der das Vorwort zu seiner Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag verfasste (H.W. Wolff [Hg.], Probleme Biblischer Theologie, München 1971, 11f.), mag als Indiz für diese Weite seiner Wirkung in die Kultur der Gegenwart gelten.

Seine Arbeiten haben bis heute anhaltende intensive Debatten ausgelöst. Trotz vielfacher Angriffe und Kritiken (z.B. F. Hesse, Kerygma oder geschichtliche Wirklichkeit? Kritische Fragen zu Gerhard von Rads „Theologie des Alten Testaments, I. Teil“, ZThK 57, 1960, 17-26) hat sein Lebenswerk höchste Anerkennung gefunden: So haben ihm die Universitäten von Leipzig, Glasgow, Lund, Wales und Utrecht einen Ehrendoktor verliehen; so wurde er 1955 zum Mitglied der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften berufen, so war er seit 1963 Mitglied der Friedensklasse des Ordre pour le mérite (die letzten protestantischen Theologen, denen vor ihm diese Ehre zuteil wurde, waren Adolf von Harnack und Rudolf Bultmann). Zwei gewichtige Festschriften (1961 und 1971) spiegeln etwas von seiner außergewöhnlichen wissenschaftlichen Bedeutung und internationalen Ausstrahlung. Zu seinem 100. Geburtstag veranstalteten M. Oeming, K. Schmid und M. Welker im Auftrag der Theologischen Fakultät der Universität Heidelberg einen großen Kongress: „Das Alte Testament und die Kultur der Moderne“, dessen Beiträge in einer neunbändigen Festschrift erschienen sind (cont.)

Fonte: Manfred Oeming – Wibilex: Jan. 2007

 

Como eu disse em uma entrevista, von Rad influenciou muito os meus estudos de Bíblia: A [minha] opção pelos estudos acadêmicos de Bíblia, porém, ocorreu, de maneira mais imediata, em Roma. Eu diria que fui influenciado especialmente por brilhantes colegas brasileiros que estudavam no PIB, e com os quais eu convivi no Colégio Pio Brasileiro, e por alguns professores da Gregoriana que me fizeram gostar de Bíblia, como G. Bernini de quem, se dizia, dormia com os livros de G. Von Rad debaixo do travesseiro…

Faleceu no dia 14, sábado passado, James Barr, um dos grandes biblistas do século XX.

 

James Barr

Radical academic whose incisive critiques challenged the orthodoxies of biblical theology

Professor James Barr, who has died aged 82, was one of those few academics to whom it is given to write a book that changes the way a whole discipline is pursued. The fact that the discipline was biblical theology and that the book was only the first of many brings the scale of his achievements into even sharper focus.

In the middle of the 20th century the biblical theology movement was at its height. Alongside its insistence that God revealed himself uniquely in the history of Israel, it also developed a substructure for its work on the nature of biblical language, whereby a major word, such as “holiness” or “justification”, gathered more and more allusions as it was used in different contexts until it became the bearer of a whole theological concept. A major dictionary could take many pages to unpack such a word, the whole made more complicated by the fact that it moved from the Hebrew of the Old Testament to the Greek of the New.

Barr’s book The Semantics of Biblical Language brought that whole juggernaut to a halt. Published in 1961, it came like a bolt out of the blue. In it he exposed the fallacy of thinking that a people’s mentality can be read straight off from their language, that the meaning of words is more determined by their ancient etymology than their current usage, and that peculiarities of use in one context can somehow be transferred to all uses everywhere thereafter.

This critique bore all the hallmarks of Barr’s later work – a devastatingly incisive exposure of faulty method with pertinent examples that sometimes caused great hurt to the individuals involved, focus on a linguistic topic of great importance for the proper interpretation of the Bible, and a concentration on analysing and correcting how people did things rather than a concern to show the results of proper method.

Born in Glasgow into a relatively conservative church family, Barr was educated at Daniel Stewart’s College in Edinburgh and then at the city’s university. His studies were interrupted by war service in the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy, piloting torpedo bombers and participating in air-sea rescue missions. Following ordination, he served for two years as a Church of Scotland minister in Tiberias, Israel. His first academic post was as professor of New Testament in Montreal (1953-55), but he returned after that both to Edinburgh and to the Old Testament until 1961, the year in which The Semantics of Biblical Language was published. With hindsight, it is not surprising that he should have left for Princeton Theological Seminary in that same year. Not only were some of his closest colleagues on the receiving end of his criticisms, but by now he had become disaffected with the type of theology, inspired by Karl Barth, that then held sway there.

Returning to the UK in 1965 as professor of Semitic languages and literature in Manchester, he produced another major book, Comparative Philology and the Text of the Old Testament (1969), which was almost as influential as his first. For decades it had been popular to propose new meanings for Hebrew words on the basis of their cognates in related Semitic languages. A method that in itself could be fruitful had gone to seed, and this was just the sort of topic that Barr could analyse and for which he could suggest tighter methods and controls.

From Manchester, Barr moved to Oxford, first briefly to the Oriel chair (basically Old Testament) from 1976 to 1978, and then across to the Regius chair of Hebrew with a studentship at Christ Church (1978-89). By now his reputation was assured, and he travelled extensively, giving many named lecture series, and collecting more honorary degrees and fellowships than some colleagues considered decent. He continued to write influentially on a range of linguistic, biblical and theological topics, including fundamentalism, the nature of the early translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, the variable spelling conventions of classical Hebrew, the role of biblical narrative as story rather than mere history in theological construction, and more.

His interest in biblical theology continued unabated. After initially seeing hope of a sound replacement for the older approach in the developing ideas of canonical criticism, he then turned on its originators in Holy Scripture: Canon, Authority, Criticism (1983), again causing no little distress.

So much pioneering research and travel had its costs. Although he is remembered as an inspiring lecturer, undergraduate students were left too much to their own devices. Moreover, for a scholar of his eminence, he trained very few doctoral students. The chair in Manchester was discontinued after his departure, while in Oxford posts in Hebrew were cut drastically in the 1980s and the subject came close to being dropped. There is no doubt that Barr enjoyed Oxford, and many in Oxford enjoyed him. Contrary to the image one might gain from his writings, he is remembered at Christ Church as the most convivial of company. It was thus something of a surprise when he took (slightly) early retirement to move to Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, where he taught from 1989 to 1998.

Of the several further books from this period, note may be taken of two in particular, in which Barr worked in a refreshingly positive manner: The Garden of Eden and the Hope of Immortality (1990) includes much interesting exegesis of the opening chapters of Genesis with far from conventional results, and Biblical Faith and Natural Theology (1993), based on his Gifford lectures, puts the case that the Bible includes full acknowledgement of the value of natural theology; this necessarily included a return to a renewed attack in vintage style on the theology of Barth.

Other late works dealt with the problem of writing biblical theology (stronger on critique than constructive proposal), and then, as something of a swan song, came a brief work in which the radical Barr suddenly appeared to be more conservative as he sought to take stock of where Old Testament studies had moved to during his career. This includes the remarkable confession that he could not accept a radical historical conclusion on theological grounds; such a confession would not have passed muster in 1961.

He died in California, where he and Jane, his devoted wife of more than 50 years, had settled in retirement. She survives him, as do their two sons and one daughter.

· James Barr, theologian, born March 20 1924; died October 14 2006

Fonte: HGM Williamson – The Guardian: 8 Nov 2006

 

The Rev Professor James Barr

Semitist whose technical approach to the Hebrew Bible changed the methods of biblical exegesis

James Barr, Semitist, biblical scholar, theologian and minister of the church: born Edinburgh 20 March 1924; ordained 1951 minister of the Church of Scotland; Professor of New Testament Literature and Exegesis, Presbyterian College, Montreal 1953-55; Professor of Old Testament Language, Literature and Theology, Edinburgh University 1956-61; Professor of Old Testament Literature and Theology, Princeton Theological Seminary 1961-65; Professor of Semitic Languages and Literatures, Manchester University 1965-76; Oriel Professor of the Interpretation of Holy Scripture, Oxford University 1976-78, Regius Professor of Hebrew 1978-89 (Emeritus); Fellow, Oriel College, Oxford 1976-78, Honorary Fellow 1980-2006; Student of Christ Church, Oxford 1978-89; Professor of Hebrew Bible, Vanderbilt University 1989-98, Distinguished Professor 1994-98 (Emeritus); married 1950 Jane Hepburn (two sons, one daughter); died Claremont, California 14 October 2006.

When James Barr’s The Semantics of Biblical Language was published in 1961, a new epoch began for all those who wished to study the languages of the Bible. That book came to be regarded as one of the leading publications in the field of biblical scholarship for the rest of the 20th century. It was often translated, but not only into Western languages – visitors to Barr’s home would sometimes be shown copies rendered into Indonesian or another exotic tongue.

The Semantics of Biblical Language appeared just as Barr was moving on from the Chair of Old Testament, Language and Theology at his Alma Mater, Edinburgh. He went on to become Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University and ended his career as Distinguished University Professor at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee.

He traced the relevance of his arguments for theology in his semi-popular Biblical Words for Time (1962). He then took some of his insights significantly further in 1968 with Comparative Philology and the Text of the Old Testament, in which he demonstrated an impressive competence in all the languages of the Semitic family, as well as expertise in correcting false procedures in linguistic argument. From that time onwards, a sounder methodological approach to biblical comparative lexicography and semantics had been established.

The breadth of Barr’s scholarship was remarkable, but he distinguished himself also with meticulous observations about the textual tradition of the Bible itself, in works like The Typology of Literalism in Ancient Translations (1979) and The Variable Spellings of the Hebrew Bible (1986). He was ranked among the foremost of Septuagint and Masoretic scholars.

Barr’s brilliance in Semitic linguistics and his technical approach to the Hebrew Bible and the Septuagint led to his penetrating critique of so-called canonical criticism, as for example in his Holy Scripture: canon, authority, criticism (1983). But this expertise advanced side by side with a series of books concerned with the wider world of theology. It is hard to think of any other scholar in this field who could combine vast erudition with profound insight and an exemplary and lucid style of English. Barr was deeply concerned with the role of the Bible in modern society, and he had the rare privilege of seeing several of his books become bestsellers.

After returning from one of his many research visits to North America, Barr felt constrained to launch into an intellectual debate with some of the standard arguments formulated by writers whom the British public labelled “conservative evangelical”. The appearance of Fundamentalism (1977), which was later to be followed by Escaping from Fundamentalism (1984), was misunderstood by some as a dispassionate attack against the grounds of their faith.

In fact, those who knew Barr (such as F.F. Bruce, a friend and colleague in Barr’s years as Professor of Semitic Languages and Literatures at Manchester University, 1965-76) knew that the impetus for the book was to set a conservative faith in an acceptable context for an intellectual enquirer. He had felt persuaded in this aim by some of his conversations with many younger biblical scholars who had found serious difficulties in this regard. When Barr debated the matter openly with his opponents one evening in Oxford at All Saints’ Church, not surprisingly the meeting was well attended.

At Oxford University, Barr was first appointed in 1976 to the Oriel Professorship but a little while later, in 1978, was invited to move to the Regius Chair of Hebrew. During those years he spent much time with a team of other scholars on preparing material for a new dictionary of the Hebrew Bible. He had inherited this task from some of his predecessors and progress had been unacceptably slow. Although the project after prolonged discussion was aborted by Oxford University Press, the files were handed over to the team in charge of the Revised English Bible, and so some of his work will have been embodied there.

Barr was born in Edinburgh in 1924, the son of the Rev Professor Allan Barr, Professor of New Testament at the Joint Congregational and United Free Church College in Edinburgh. Following studies in Classics and Theology, interrupted by Second World War service when he piloted torpedo bombers in the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy, James Barr graduated from Edinburgh University in 1951. Ordained by the Presbytery of Dunfermline and Kinross in 1951, he served as Church of Scotland minister in Tiberias, Israel, for almost three years; then, after two years at Presbyterian College in Montreal, he was appointed in 1955 as Professor of Old Testament Literature and Theology at Edinburgh University.

There were those who regarded Barr as aloof, but in fact this was simply a natural Scottish reserve. He was a warm friend and a good colleague. Those who took time to get to know him well realised that what meant more to him than all his academic honours was his family. He held numerous honorary degrees and visiting professorships, and was elected to fellowship of the British Academy (1969), the Göttingen Academy of Science (1976), the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters (1977), the Royal Society of Sciences, Uppsala (1991), the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (1993) and the American Philosophical Society (1993). But, as his elder son, Allan, said at his memorial service held in Claremont, California,

Probably none of his honorary degrees gave him as much happiness as his drives up the Delaware River valley to visit his daughter, his strolls through the streets of Claremont with his first grandchild, or his journeys to London to check on his seemingly endless proliferation of grandsons.

Even so, Barr showed himself devoted to scholarship in the last years of his life. As he approached the “three score and ten” time-line he published Biblical Faith and Natural Theology (1993), an important work that supports the idea of “natural theology” and argues that the concept is found in the Bible itself. This was followed by The Concept of Biblical Theology (1999), a massive overview of the progress of the important and ongoing debate about “Biblical Theology” in the 20th century. As if that were not enough, one year later we could read History and Ideology in the Old Testament (2000). Here, Barr demonstrates that he is well-read in the recent history debate, and he points to some of the weaknesses of the arguments used in the discussions.

During the last difficult months of his life Barr had to cope with the after-effects of a very serious fall suffered while attending a conference in Philadelphia. But it is typical of him that to the very end he was looking for new projects. Left on his desk was the beginning of a major work about prophecy.

Fonte: Hans M. Barstad – The Independent: 11 November 2006