A Note On Interpretation, Especially of the Biblical Kind

image

There is a statement being discussed among some of my fellow bloggers:

“I’m gettin’ real tired of all this postmodernist-relativistic-thought-applied-to-Christianity b—-sh—. Knock. it. the. hell. off. You don’t get to interpret the Bible based on your *feelings* or things you think the Holy Spirit told you that don’t line up with what the Bible actually, clearly says. There’s such a thing as absolute truth and you don’t get to screw with it.”

There are a few statements here that need to be addressed in relation to interpretation.

What does the Bible actually, clearly say?
You have to interpret based on your “feelings” (prejudices, etc.)
Humans and Absolute Truth

Read More

Hebrews, Scripture: Wandering Through Hebrews 1:5

image
What is the author of Hebrews doing with Scripture?

For to which of the angels did God ever say,
“You are my Son;    
today I have begotten you”

Or again,

“I will be his Father,    
and he will be my Son?

- Hebrews 1:5, NRSV

In this post, we’ll explore some of the interpretive methods the author of Hebrews may be employing when interpreting the Tanakh (Old Testament).  It is one thing to say that the author is employing a form of midrash pesher, but explaining doesn’t always give a solid clue into what is going on.  Instead, I will isolate two texts the author cites from the Tanakh and
1)  I’ll give my (generally grammatical-historical) interpretation of these texts. 
2)  See how the Author of Hebrews uses these texts
3)  Compare mine with the author’s to illuminate some frustrations, differences, and similarities in interpretation.

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.

Do you ἀγαπάω or φιλέω?

In John 21:15-17, there is an odd dialogue between Jesus and Peter:  Jesus repeatedly asks Peter if he loves him. 

It’s quite the confusing scene:  Why does Jesus need this confirmation?  Isn’t one, even two answers, enough?  I’m no expert in Greek translation (aabyegrace is much more educated), but there is a little bit more going on than what most English translations let on to us.  The following is a little bit of information I’ve picked up through insightful conversations.

Read More

Jesus, Paul and “The Sword”

The Church’s relationship to government has been historically messy.  From the approved execution of Jesus by the Roman prefect Pontius Pilate, to the merging of Church and Government that lead to the violent Crusades and to the modern Christian struggle of political involvement in democracy, there have been differing views on what exactly is the “Biblical” relationship of the Church, Christians and government.  In this post, I will explore the idea of “The Sword” and things to consider in our modern discussion.

Read More

“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

Q:What are your thoughts on Sola Scriptura?

Anonymous

I’m a big fan of Sola Scriptura.
(For those who don’t know, Sola Scriptura is a latin phrase for Scripture alone, meaning that Scripture (the Christian Bible) is authoritative for the theological conclusions, traditions and practices of the Church/Christians.)

The issue with Sola Scriptura, however, is interpretation.  It has to be realistically noted that the Bible, though authoritative, has been - and will continue to be - interpreted in many different fashions throughout history.  This means that the same book that has the same authority has a different meanings to different people.  I’m not embracing postmodernism here, per se, but rather trying to be realistic that different interpretations do happen and people disagree.  So a Presbyterian and a Southern Baptist may both hold to Sola Scriptura, but they have a different interpretation on texts - and therefore - different practices (paedobaptism and believer’s baptism, different understandings of eschatology, how a local church should look and function, Can Christians Drink Alcohol/Get tattoos?, etc.). 

We also have to remember that as our research behind the biblical texts and our understanding of the world becomes clearer, that our understanding of the texts (and therefore interpretation) changes as well.  We are also prone to our own biases when reading the text.  In the early church, it was common for people to drop out of the military because their convictions of being a Christian did not line up with being a soldier.  In modern day America, the blending of nationalism/patriotism with Christianity is quite natural and usually unquestioned and therefore assumed as normal or even the two going hand in hand.  But which conviction is the biblical conviction?

This is not all to say that Sola Scriptura is flawed, but that we are human, all too human - and so are our interpretations.

Added:
And this is why I push so strongly (in my personal studies, whatever church classes I’m teaching and on this blog), for looking at the text within its context, historical-social-cultural-geographical-literary and otherwise.  Because if we really do believe that the Bible is authoritative, then we should strive to learn what it’s really saying.