MetaCatholic

There’s such a thing as following your teachers too slavishly. And there are two fine examples on the blogs today. In alphabetical order, first Chris Tilling:

After all, Moses himself prophesied (in the last few chapter [sic] of Deuteronomy), that Israel would not inherit the promised blessing through the Law, but rather its curse, i.e. exile. Standing in the first century, Paul’s world was shaped by the clear fulfilment of these Mosaic prophecies. So how could a first century Jew, who knew all about the exile first of Israel, then of Judah, and later oppression under Roman rule, think anything else? Of course Paul speaks of ‘the curse of the law’. It was historical fact.

Now Wright has regularly asserted that pretty much all Jews of Paul’s day believed that the nation was in exile, and there are unquestionably some metaphorical uses of both Egypt and Exile language in Paul and elsewhere. However, I fail to find it anywhere near as pervasive or dominating as Wright does. So calling Wright’s interpretation of how first century Jews interpreted both the Scriptures and their current Roman situation historical fact is to go about a dozen steps too far, with every other step missing. Roman oversight might be a fact, but neither exile nor curse are anything more than a scholarly (and disputed) conjecture.

Well, Tom Wright seems to exude the same kind of reality distortion field that Steve Jobs manages to throw round every Apple fanboy, so perhaps Tilling’s got an excuse. But what can I say about Jim West? (I leave aside all the minimalist-maximalist hoohaa.) Here is Jim’s naked Bultmannianism (naked in the sense that the Emperor’s wearing no clothes):

The never ending quest for proof is simply the quest for evidence upon which faith can be based and hence a denial of the place and function of faith in a person’s relationship with God.

This dogmatic insistence that once there’s any evidence, there’s no place for faith is heuristically contradicted every time knowledge is advanced by an observation based hypothesis. It’s theological and epistemological nonsense shared only by Bultmannians and fundamentalists. “You ask me how I know he lives, he lives within my heart!” So much for 1 Corinthians 15! Well, I call it Bultmannianism, but perhaps I should call it Bultmania, a strange illness that affects the thought processes of devotees. Now I need a good name for a slavish following of Wright: Tom-foolery, perhaps.

(Finishes post and runs for cover!)