INTRODUCTION
Tradition is a historical critique of traditional approaches to biblical criticism. It can serve as the study of the process by which the oral and written traditions are being developed is defined by the current text of the Bible in its canonical form (see Jeppesen, Knud and Benedict 1984). The results of these methods, such as form criticism (the genre it belongs to the text to study historical narrative proverb, Psalm, the prophecy? The original approach to life orIn life ', the process by which the material was handed down), criticism of sources (a structural study on analysis of text), textual criticism (a rediscovery of the early stages of formulating this is text') and critical editorial (the discipline as reflected on the last editors or publishers of the Bible, not only in form but also the various sources available to me for their own purposes, to be paid is used to reach a comprehensive view in the historical traditionCritical, since they are all right with the way in which the composition of the Bible 'worried.
It is believed that "the tradition of historical criticism must be completed" (Carson, Moo and Morris, 1992, increasing the sensitivity of literature, 83). In other words, there should be a tool that should not, as an alternative to literary criticism, including an excellent location, but awards are just another step forward for the literary analysis (Fohrer 1965, 30). The Characteristics of the tradition of historical criticism might be through the realization of the importance of listening to understand the composition of a tradition werden 'and the transmission.
The observation that it is misleading as it suggested a method of Di Vito (1993) Note: "traditional, historical criticism focuses on the history of transmission of traditions and traditional complex individual who is to reconstruct, in the Old Testament" ( 91).'Tradition-historical criticism deals with the history of the Old Testament book and explores the gradual accumulation of traditions from pre-literary stages to its final form. Its objectives, therefore, is to reconstruct a history of the stages of a given situation.
Brief history of the development and application
Tradition of historical criticism, therefore, arose because of the stalemate because of the source of critical studies in the Pentateuch reached the endXIX. Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918), universally acknowledged as a classic of the Pentateuch der''Urkundenhypothese''had a limited view of the reliability of the Pentateuch as a story ", admits that when a shadowy figure he called Moses in some sense was the founder Israelite religion "(Bray 1996, 284). Hermann Gunkel (to close 1862-1932), after the documentary hypothesis, a theory of origin of the Pentateuch has been inadequate. He believed that everyThe four Dokumente''''hatte a history stretching back many centuries, in an ancient oral tradition of the faithful, many of the conditions of Babylon, about 2000BC. Using the form below to keep critical Gungel explores the limits of the written text that "a hypothetical could Tradition''beschreiben s whole story on the basis of tradition itself, its internal history" (Di Vito, 1993). E 'therefore appropriate to recognize him as the bossA pioneer of the tradition of historical criticism.
ASSESSMENT
Ivan Engnell (1907-64) wrote a detailed refutation of Wellhausen, borrowed from the tradition of historical criticism from the north. Rejected the idea that there was ample documentation, behind Genesis-Numbers. Albrecht Alt explores the distinctive character of patriarchal religion. Gerhard von Rud gefunden''Bekenntnisse''mit originating in the worship of Israel "is an ancient shrine in Gilgal. He said that these confessions were theBase of the structure of this Hexateuch. North notes that, after the oldest written sources J and E are already in a unified form with the five main themes of the Pentateuch.
Today there is widespread disagreement about the specific object of the tradition of historical research. Is the stage of oral tradition, are limited? It's all lies? Moreover, his methods are questioned. Taking into account that changes in the form / content of the traditionstransmission, Gunkel and his followers insisted on the process of transmission der''''Treue time-stretched. It 'obvious that the "field of recent studies ... to stress that the tradition of oral transmission is primarily through a process of recomposition, or leisure time, so that a text that will never be the same" (Di Vito 1993 , 98).
In addition, questions are raised about reconstructuring primitive stages of a tradition of a written document. Itargues that "have a form of criticism and the tradition of historical criticism in general, have shown that the tradition of the New Testament of the Church, between 30 and 125" (Fuller 1971, 198).
Despite the fact that traditional, historical criticism is a concept that deals with the whole course of history, a tradition that passes through, from the beginning as an independent unit for its final preparation and printing of the Bible, the researchers questioned 'sThe reliability of an approach based on oral tradition that has its weaknesses, will support the maiming more evident in transit. Remaining independent methods such as source and form criticism is also dangerous, because they contribute to constantly update their account limits.
REFERENCES
Bray, Gerald. 1996 Biblical Interpretation: Past and present. Downers Grove, Illinois: Inter-Varsity Press.
Carson, DA, Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris. 1992 An Introduction to the NewTestament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Apollo.
Di Vito, Robert. 1993 traditional historical criticism. In all its meaning: An introduction to biblical criticism and their application, 90-104.
Fohrer, George. 1965 Introduction to the Old Testament. Nashville: Abingdon Press.
Fuller, Reginald H. 1971. A Critical Introduction to the New Testament. London: Gerald Duckworth & Co.
Thanks To : Thaitripstoday.com thaidrive thai online korean food menu
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น