Wandering Through Hebrews, Pt. 1 (And a Note on the Author’s Handling of the Tanakh)

image

This is the inaugural post of my series on the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Opening Points of Interest
Hebrews is an odd book for several reasons:  Lack of a set author, set audience, large and heavy usage of the Tanakh (Hebrew/Old Testament) in unfamiliar ways, High (yet nuanced) Christology, Exposition on the Israelite sacrificial system and the relevance for the New Covenant, Usage of the character Melchizedek, and other matters that are just simply not discussed enough on the general level of Christianity.  I’m not sure if I’ll hit on all these topics, but these are topics that make one scratch one’s head when reading Hebrews.  Illumination on these topics may help us understand the weight of the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Read More

Ask: Books on Biblical Hermeneutics


I recently received a question from wakedeadman asking to recommend a book or two on hermeneutics. 
I decided to do a small resource post for anyone interested!

Biblical hermeneutics (textual interpretation) is one of my favorite subjects.  I’ll post different “reading levels” for my followers. 

Note:  I do not fully endorse all the views of every book that I recommend, but they do hold great references.  These are books that I’ve personally read (though there is more to come)!

Introductory

How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth - Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart
Blue Parakeet - Scot McKnight
Scripture and the Authority of God - NT Wright
Scripture:  An Ecumenical Introduction - Michael J Gorman (Editor)

Intermediate

Biblical Hermeneutics:  5 Views - Stanley E. Porter (Editor), Beth M. Stovell (Editor)
The Evolution of Adam - Peter Enns [1]
Inspiration and Incarnation - Peter Enns
The Bible Made Impossible - Christian Smith
Scripture Between Identity and Creativity - Martinus Wisse

Advanced

The Two Horizons: New Testament Hermeneutics and Philosophical Description - Anthony Thiselton
The Hermeneutics of Charity:  Interpretation, Selfhood, and Postmodern Faith - James K. A. Smith (Editor), Henry Isaac Venema (Editor) [2]
The Heavenly Trumpet: John Chrysostom and the Art of Pauline Interpretation - Margaret M. Mitchell
Thiselton on Hermeneutics - Anthony Thiselton
Truth and Method - Hans-Georg Gadamer

________________
[1]  I know this seems like an odd suggestion, but a major part of this work is the interpretation between and of the Old and New Testament.
[2]  See especially the essays by Westphal and Middleton.

“Biblical” Interpretation - More Than One Meaning?

Have you ever read the New Testament’s use of Old Testament Scripture and became puzzled that the authors didn’t employ historical-grammatical exegesis on the text, but rather employed what looked like a metaphorical interpretation, mistranslation or an odd application of the Old Testament that disregarded the Old Testament context?  (Or is that just me?) 


Here are some examples of the issues I am referring to:
- How did Peter turn Psalm 16, a Psalm, when read contextually, about David’s relationship with God, into a Psalm about the resurrection of Christ?[1] 
- How did Paul come to the conclusion that Christ was “the Rock” in 1 Cor. 10:4 (referring to Exodus 17:6 and Numbers 20:11)? 
- Why do Paul and the Author of Hebrews prooftext a certain part of Psalm 8(v4-6) in 1 Cor. 15:27 and Hebrews 2:6-8 to make a certain Messianic point when the grammatical-historical point of the Psalm is about human domain over the natural world (Psalm 8:7-8)?
- In Matthew 2:14-15, the author quotes a part of Hosea 11:1 (“Out of Egypt I called My Son”) making the text out to be a future/prophetic text.  However, the text in its original context is recounting the history of Israel as a reprimand of their disobedience (Hosea 11:1-11).

In my previous post, I looked at two weaknesses of historical-grammatical exegesis.  In this post, I want to show how our interpretation methods aren’t always “biblical”.

Read More

“Biblical” Interpretation

imageIn my last post, the problem of using the word “biblical” in a world of pervasive interpretive pluralism (coined by Christian Smith) was brought up.  Example:  One person may endorse this a view as biblical and another endorses a conflicting view as biblical.  Logically, they cannot be reconciled.  So who decides what is “biblical” in a faith of 2,000 years?  In this post, I will analyze two popular interpretive methods.
Note:  This post may get a bit technical.

Read More

“Biblical” Issues

The biggest differences between denominations and the East/West divide in the church is doctrine.  After the translation of the Bible into modern languages and the invention of the Gutenberg printing press, interpreting the Bible for oneself became available to those who could read throughout the modern world.  Also, this has also left us with many different interpretations of the Bible and many denominations with different doctrines.  The cliche advice of “just do/believe what the Bible says” has left us with many people doing/believing differently.

Yet most individuals/denominations endorse their beliefs with this powerful word:  “Biblical”.  Whenever someone/a community/church leaders/bishops/papacy promote or adopt a view, (hopefully) one of the reasons is because they believe it is “biblical”.  Eventually, the issue arises that one person’s Christian theology is the total opposite of another’s - yet both spout their beliefs as “Biblical”.  How does this work?  Can everyone have a valid interpretation (which sounds postmodern)?  Or is there absolutely one clear interpretation (and how do we decide)?

Read More

Update 6/23/2012

I want to say a formal “Hello!” to all my new followers.  I hope to generate biblical inquiry, thought and action on this blog.  So please participate by commenting and sending your thoughts, questions and messages via my ask or mail box!  Also, two cool things happened this week.

[1]  I e-mailed NT Wright about hermeneutics and he e-mailed back and recommended me two books:  Two Horizons and New Horizons in Hermeneutics by AC Thiselton.  Wright said “they may be a little out of date now but still massively worth while”.  Note:  These will most likely be on an academic level.

[2]  Scot McKnight tweeted one of my blog posts:  The Gospel in Acts:  Peter’s Gospel in Acts 2.  Of course, it’s quite exciting to have one of America’s New Testament scholars tweet one of your blog posts.

The Bible

- Is not an instruction manual
What Instruction manual is filled with a bunch of narratives and has had multiple interpretations over thousands of years?
- Is not one book, it’s a collection of books
Each book has a theological emphasis and has many different authors with their own quirks.
- Is not originally in the English language
The meaning of the word is in the original word’s context, not the English definition of the translation.
- Was written in an ancient, pre-modern context 
So looking for post-Enlightenment, scientific answers in a collection of books where the authors understood the world to be made up of tiers/levels is missing the points of the literature.
- Was written in an eastern, Jewish context
So applying our western, medieval understandings of “Justice”, “Election” and “Predestination” to the text (I’m looking at you, Reformed Christians) isn’t correctly looking at the mindset of the ancient writers and audience.