Recherche – Detailansicht
Ausgabe: | 1963 |
Spalte: | 897-899 |
Kategorie: | Neues Testament |
Autor/Hrsg.: | Manson, Thomas W. |
Titel/Untertitel: | Studies in the gospels and epistles 1963 |
Rezensent: | Barrett, Charles K. |
Ansicht Scan: | |
Download Scan: |
897
Theologische Literaturzeitung 88. Jahrgang 1963 Nr. 12
898
Überarbeitung des Textes läßt kaum einen anderen Schluß zu.
Die der üblichen Auffassung der Kanonsgeschichte widerstreitende
These, daß der 2. Kor. um 100 in Rom und Kleinasien
noch nicht bekannt gewesen sei, ist nicht haltbar.
2) Der spannungsreiche Aufbau des 2. Kor. kann jedoch
nicht minder einleuchtend aus der spannungsreichen Abfassungssituation
erklärt werden. Die polemischen Ausführungen sind
auch nach der durch Titus herbeigeführten Wendung denkbar,
wenn die Gefährdung der Gemeinde grundsätzlicher Art war.
Es ist wohl die anfechtbarste Stelle in Bornkamms Hypothese,
wenn er unter Hinweis auf eine noch ungedruckte Heidelberger
Dissertation von D. Georgi voraussetzt, die Gegner seien
lediglich umherziehende Wanderpropheten nach Art eines Apol-
lonius von Tyana gewesen, die in die Gemeinde einfielen und
sie, als ihnen „der Boden zu heiß wurde", wieder verließen
(S. 14 ff.). Sicher gleichen sie in der Form ihres Auftretens in
manchem jenen antiken Wundermännern, aber ihr Sendungsbewußtsein
, dem Paulus 6ein Verständnis des Apostolats als
Ausdruck ßeiner Theologie entgegenstellt, ist damit noch nicht
erfaßt. Es ist durch ein eigentümliches Ineinander von jüdischen
und hellenistischen Elementen gekennzeichnet; das hat Schlatter,
der hier leider nicht erwähnt wird, grundlegend herausgearbeitet.
3) Wesentlich scheint mir schließlich folgendes zu sein:
Ob man der ersten oder der zweiten einleitungswissenschaftlichen
Erklärung der Spannungen im 2. Kor. folgt, beeinflußt die
exegetische, historische und theologische Auswertung des Briefes
nicht wesentlich; denn beide Erklärungen sind sich darin
einig, daß die Teile dieses Briefes sämtlich unter einer Thematik
, der Legitimität des paulinischen Apostolats, stehen und in
derselben Gesamtsituation, der Auseinandersetzung mit den
Pseudaposteln in Korinth, entstanden sind, so daß ihre Aussage
zu allen wichtigen Sachfragen von der Abfolge der Entstehung
der einzelnen Teile unabhängig ist. Diese Arbeitshypothese
für die Auswertung des 2. Kor. bedarf auch weiterhin
ständiger einleirungswisscnschaftlichcr Prüfung. Bornkamm
hat die Problematik mit seltener Vielseitigkeit bedacht und in
einer vorbildlich abgerundeten Hypothese eine abgewogene
Lösungsmöglichkeit entwickelt, die eine fruchtbare Grundlage
weiterer Diskussion bietet.
Hamburg Leonhard Goppel!
Man so n, T. W. : Studies in the Gospcls and Epistles, ed. by M.
Black. With a Memoir of T. W. Manson by H. H. R o w 1 e y.
Manchester: University Press [1962]. XVI, 293 S. 8°. Lw. 30 s.
This volume contains some of the late T. W. Manson's
most important contriburions to New Testament studie6. To
Manson's own work is prefixed a Memoir of the author by
Professor H. H. Rowley, which gives a good impression of
Manson's many-sided ability and will give special pleasure to
those who had the privilege of knowing him. All the chapters
of the book, except the first, were originally delivered as lec-
tures at the John Rylands Library in Manchester, and are
reprinted from the Bulletin of the Library. It is very convenient
to have the lectures in this form, and the publishers, and Professor
M. Black, who edited them, are to be thanked.
The book falls into two parts. Part One is headed,
Materials for a Life of Jesus, and contains the following chapters
: The Quest of the Historical Jesus — Continued (1); The
Available Materials (2); Mark, Luke, Matthew, John (3 — 6);
The Son of Man in Daniel, Enoch and the Gospels (7). Manson's
Point of view is expressed most clearly, though briefly and
with little of the visible apparatus of learning which aecom-
panies the otheT papers, in the first chapter.
Since Wrede and Schweitzer the outstanding developments in
gospel criticism have becn form criticism and realized eschatology;
and form criticism has its roots in Wrcde's work, whereas realized
eschatology is the "logical scquel" to Johannes Weiß and Albert
Schweitzer. Of form criticism Manson is sharply critical. Not that it
is impossiblc to analysc the gospel material on the basis of form; but
we are little bettcr off when the analysis has been done, and in fact
the formal analysis hos got itsclf mixed up with two other things —
K. L. Schmidt's attack on the Marcan outline, and the doctrine of the
Sitz im Leben. In Schmidt's hypothesis there is a very high degree
of a priori improbability, since it is likely that the outline of events,
as well as details would be remembered; and critics have been so
interested in the Sitz im Leben der alten Kirdie that they have over-
looked the Sitz im Leben Jesu, and the Sitz im Leben des jüdischen
Volkes. Turning to the eschatology of the gospels, Manson says that
"the thing that really matters in the Störy of Jesus is not the
eschatological theory but the ministerial practice" (9). Thus the
ministry is not the prelude to the kingdom of God; it is the kingdom
of God. This is why we are driven back to the historical study of
the historical Jesus; and in the gospels there is adequate material for
an outline aecount of the ministry as a whole.
These two lines of argument are not wholly convincing.
Form criticism is part of the study of the pre-literary gospel
tradition, and is therefore inevitably bound up with a study of
the Marcan outline, and of Sitz im Leben. To practise form
criticism is not to exclude oneself from literary criticism and
historical criticism. Parallel study of the three synoptic gospels
proves beyond doubt the introduetion by Matthew and Luke
of fresh interests and themes, and of interpretation, into the
Marcan material; who shall say that a process operating between
A.D. 70 and 100 cannot have operated between 30
and 7o? The a priori probability is that it did, and this a
Pnori has been confirmed over and over again by study of
Mark. Notwithstanding recent work published since Manson
wrote his paper (1949), it seems impossible to picture a historical
tradition existing in independence of kerygmatic, liturgical,
and ecclesiastical traditions. Precisely because the "life of
Jesus" was at the foundation of the existence of the primitive
Church we can see that life only as it is refracted through the
concerns and convictions of the primitive Church. Manson is
r'ght in insisting that the ministry of Jesus must not be
feglected in the interests of eschatology (it would incidentally
be unfair to suggest that Schweitzer did not do justice to the
Störy of Jesus — he claimed to be able to make sense of the
story as Wrede could not); but he has gone too far in his
Statement of the case. The 6eed parables (to cite only one
Piece of evidence) show that in the kingdom there are two
moments; and though sowing is indispensable the whole process
makes no sense until the harvest arrives. Manson himself
has shown elsewhere that Jesus did reckon with a speedy
harvest, and this fact was at the least one of the driving forces
of primitive Christianity.
Chapters 2 — 6 may be briefly passed over, though they
contain many observations that students of the gospels cannot
afford to neglect. Mark may have been written before A. D. 60;
Luke in Achaea about 70, to show that Christianity was not
mixed up with the rebellious Jews but was a message of universal
peace and goodwill; Matthew in the following decade.
Appended to the chapter on Matthew is a valuable detailed
discussion of the word Xoyin. The Johannine literature has
connections with Antioch as well as Ephesus, and contains
more sound history than has offen been allowed.
Chapter 7 is one of Manson's most important studies.
In Daniel the Son of man (like the Servant of Yahweh) Stands
for Israel, or the godly remnant within Israel — in fact for what
after the ministry of Jesus was the Church. There is no evidence that
the Son of man in Daniel was understood to be the Messiah, unless
evidence is to be found in 1 Enoch. In fact, 1 Enoch shows a "double
oscillation" between the individual and the corporate. The group
'dea finds expression in the elect and righteous ones — the Remnant.
The individual idea finds expression in two Personalities: at the be-
ginning, in Enoch, the nucleus of the Remnant, and at the end in the
Mes6iah, who vindicates the saints. From this Observation it is easy
to pass to the gospel«, though here "Son of man" is defined in terms
°f "Servant of the Lord".
This important discussion has too often been overlooked;
the subject however remains open to further investigation, for
example of the historical background of Daniel, of the relation
between the Son of man and the Servant of the Lord, and of
the non-appearance at Qumran of chapters 37—71 of 1 Enoch.
Part Two (The Epistles of Paul) consists of chapters on
(8) Philippians, (9) Galatians, (10,11) the Corinthian corre-
spondence, (12) Romans, (13) Hebrews, (14) 1 and 2 Thessa-
lonians.