Critical Analysis
Kaufman’s article is an attempt to discover how the Bible fits into modern culture. He argues that people no longer view the Bible as their abiding normative standard, nor do they believe its metanarrative about God, the universe, and mankind. Instead, the Bible has been relegated to the status of an important ancient book that informed humanity’s history. Kaufman cites the modern idea of autonomy as the primary force behind the rejection of the Bible and its morals. In the modern day, people have the core belief that they must think and decide for themselves rather than letting any hegemonic book or organization make decisions for them.
Thus, Kaufman’s approach to rekindling a place for the Bible starts with man’s autonomy. Presuppositionally, he argues that people must create their “own criteria for interpreting” the Bible, and that those criteria must come from mankind’s understanding of the world and its own experience. Along these lines, he asserts that the Bible must be viewed as a historical book first and foremost. Second, he argues that the common conception of God must be redefined as well. Rather than viewing God as a being or entity that must be proven or discovered through empirical means, Kaufman asserts that God is a personal being and a historical agent. Thus, the proper mode of investigation to discover God’s nature is historical investigation.
Additionally, Kaufman argues that the Bible should be given preeminent status and authority over understanding the nature and character of God, because it is the only book that directly records the acts of the personal God in history. With these presuppositions in hand, Kaufman disarms the two most popular objections. By asserting the personality of the Christian God, Kaufman negates the need to prove God. Whether God is a literary contrivance or ontologically real is of little importance. It only matters that there is a record of this “God” in history for people to examine. Second, he overcomes the need to consult other religions as the Christian God is the only one who is both personal and claims to have interacted directly with humanity in known history.
With the groundwork established, Kaufman restructures how people should approach hermeneutics. He argues for a full critical-historical assessment of the Bible, treating it as though it has no unique authority. Biblical interpretation should not concern itself with discovering what the text says, but rather it should attempt to get at the truth of history behind the text. With that data in hand, one could conceivably assert or deny that God was actually present (as a historical agent) in a historical event and proceed to develop one’s knowledge of God. In carrying out this method, he argues that the Old Testament’s view of God is ambiguous, contradictory, and confusing. In contrast, he argues that the New Testament’s version of God as seen in Jesus clears up a lot of the moral ambiguity of the Old Testament.
Kaufman then uses his analysis of God to address the real question of the article: What are the requirements of God for mankind? Kaufman regularly points out that Israel’s history and the Church’s history are fraught with moral and ethical blemishes that have resulted from taking the Bible as God’s Word. By disregarding the Bible as revelation and taking it as a historical book, Kaufman argues that all of the moral issues plaguing the church would eventually fall away. He believes that by taking this historical esoteric understanding of God, people could once again make intellectual room for God in their lives. Out of this core understanding, churches and synagogues could once again go about the practice of totally reforming culture and the lives of the individuals that they influence. Regardless of the reality of God, Kaufman asserts that to believe in God requires the complete “reordering of our whole existence” and without recovering the Bible, belief in God will be impossible (112).
Critical Evaluation
Kaufman is to be commended for attempting to find a way to carve out a place for the Bible in modern society; however, his methodology and presuppositions have left his theology bereft of any ability to actually bring about the type of change he thinks it could have. In his final paragraphs he states that Bible could once again be the book that changes all of humanity and that belief in God demands a total life change. However, by ascribing to historical-critical methodology, removing any divine authority from Scripture, and making individualistic hermeneutics the basis for knowledge of God, he has effectively created a Christianity with (1) no trustworthy and stable source of spiritual data, (2) no binding and enforceable moral power, and (3) no clear way to ascertain whether one’s view of god is correct. He tried to build a method to approach the Bible from an anthropocentric standpoint. Unfortunately for his theory, the Bible is theocentric at its core and actively resists all attempts to treat it otherwise.
Comments