Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
125 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Hermeneutics
|
The study of methods of interpretation of texts
|
|
|
Historical-critical hermeneutics (=source, form, redaction, literary criticism)
|
"Historical-critical hermeneutics: an attempt to develop a method to ""get behind"" the text, to figure out the histories and beliefs of the original writers and readers.
Source criticism: seeks to discover the literary relationship between biblical texts (e.g. Gospels) Form criticism: seeks to recover the period of oral transmission (before the texts were written down) Redaction criticism: seeks to discover the theological contributions of the author, redactor, and/or community (btw ""redactor"" = ""editor"") Literary criticism: seeks to analyze the Bible on aesthetic grounds and ignore the historical aspect" |
|
|
Principles of the historical-critical method
|
"1. Methodological doubt. Start by doubting—assume things are false until they are proved otherwise.
2. Correlation. Assume that things happen in the universe in a cause-and-effect way. This is not exactly the same as naturalism, since the worldview is deistic. 3. Analogy. If you're not sure if something could ever happen, ask yourself if you've ever seen it, e.g., ""Have I ever seen a man rise from the dead?"" |
|
|
Extra-textual vs. intratextual reading of Scripture
|
"Extra-textual: reading the Bible through an unbiblical interpretive ""grid""
Intratextual: reading the Bible on its own terms" |
|
|
Modernism and postmodernism
|
"Modernism: 1800–1960's. Outcome of the Enlightenment, which had the basic view: ""I understand in order to believe"" (the opposite of the Reformation motto, ""I believe in order to understand"").
Postmodernism: 1960's–today. Basic view: meaning is not *in* texts, but in the aims, perspectives, and categories readers bring to it." |
|
|
‘New’ hermeneutic
|
"As opposed to ""normal"" hermenuetics, which is the study of interpretation, the ""new hermeneutic"" focuses on the interpreter or reader and his response to a text."
|
|
|
Reader-response hermeneutics
|
"Hermeneutics based on the idea that ""a text only means what it means to me.""
|
|
|
Relation of theology to hermeneutics
|
I see Wellum has a point here in the outline under 1.c.iii.2, but I don't have any content for that point. Anyone else have anything? Sorry. –Jack
|
|
|
Three horizons of reading Scripture
|
"Textual (the passage itself and its immediate context, the whole book)
Epochal (history right up until the text) Canonical (the rest of the Bible after the text)" |
|
|
Metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics as applied to hermeneutics and texts
|
"Metaphysics: prompts us to ask, ""is there something *there* in the text when I read it?""
Epistemology: prompts us to ask, ""if there is meaning in the text, how do I know it?"" Ethics: prompts us to ask, ""are there any obligations on the reader of Scripture or of any text?"" |
|
|
Alexandrian vs. Antiochian school
|
"Alexandrian: famous for its allegorical interpretation of Scripture
Antiochian: famous for its literal interpretation of Scripture Way to remember the difference: the ANTIochians were ""anti""-allegory!" |
|
|
Allegorical vs. literal interpretation
|
"Allegorical: ""this text means something *other* than what it apparently says""
Literal: ""this text means what it plainly says*" |
|
|
3 levels of meaning in allegorical interpretation
|
"(According to Origen)
Corporeal (bodily): literal reference Soulish: moral reference Spiritual: reference to salvation or Christ" |
|
|
Motivation for allegorical interpretation
|
"1. It could be used to change the meanings of texts so they would be more palatable to skeptics.
2. Due to the influence of Platonic philosophy, people thought of ""literal meaning"" as inferior to secret ""spiritual meaning"" 3. The early church associated literal interpretation with the failure of Jews to see Jesus in the OT 4. Interpreters wanted to meet Christ (a good aim, but a bad method! says Wellum)" |
|
|
Antiochian principles for biblical interpretation
|
"[I am pulling these from Wellum's notes on Theodore of Mopsuestia. Hope that's what he wants.]
1. MEANING. No text means something different than what they clearly say. 2. HISTORY. God's revelation was in history, so we should choose the method of interpretation that points us to history. Literal interpretation does; allegorical doesn't (allegorical sends us away from history in to the ideal world of symbolic truths). 3. UNITY. The Bible a history of salvation (not a system of intellectual truths), it must be unified and actually rooted in history, not merely philosophical. 4. REALITY. Allegory can't be true, because it deprives biblical history of its reality." |
|
|
Typology
|
symbolism with a prospective reference to fulfillment in a later epoch of biblical history
|
|
|
Sensus literalis
|
literal sense—what a text actually says
|
|
|
Sensus plenoir
|
fuller sense—the fuller meaning of a text when the rest of the Bible is taken into account
|
|
|
The Western School’s 4-fold sense of Scripture
|
"Literal
Allegorical (spiritual matters) Tropological (moral guidance) Anagogical (Christian hope)" |
|
|
Formal principle and material principle of Scripture
|
"Each of these principles is half of the answer to the ""crisis of authority"" issue in the Reformation.
Formal principle: SCRIPTURE alone. Material principle: FAITH alone." |
|
|
Sola Scriptura
|
Scripture alone. A battle-cry of the Reformation. Means that only Scripture (not church tradition!) is authoritative for us.
|
|
|
‘Analogy of faith’
|
"A Reformation principle – ‘analogy of faith’ means ‘Scripture interprets Scripture.’ The appeal to ‘analogy of faith’ though helpful must be exercised with some caution. As used in Reformation thought, this appeal argues that, if any passage is ambiguous, it should be interpreted in line with the great ‘givens’ of biblical Christianity; it should never be interpreted in such a way as to jeopardize those givens. On the one hand, this is good advice, since God’s authority ultimately stands behind all of Scripture. However, on the other hand, there are several dangers inherent in a thoughtless application of it:
(a) 1st: The interpreter may succumb to anachronism. (b) 2nd: The interpreter’s theological grasp (=systematic theology) may be faulty at points, and thus distort the interpretation. (c) 3rd: Many people develop favorite texts of Scripture and they use these as a ‘canon within the canon.’ " |
|
|
Hermeneutical realism vs. hermeneutical non-realism
|
"• Hermeneutical realism’ states the proper goal of interpretation was to read texts in order to discover the ‘author’s intent,’ that there is objective meaning in the text which our reading discovers.
• Hermeneutical non-realism: meaning is not ‘in’ the text, but what one finds in a text depends on what aims, perspective, categories one brings to it. This view is the contemporary view (=postmodernism). But note: It is tied to a whole worldview claim associated with non-realism. Implications: i. There is no commonly agreed way of interpreting reality. The distinctions that make up the ‘natural order’ are not ‘natural’ or ‘given’ but artificial, man-made. ii. Thus, in the end, there is no absolute, God’s-eye point of view on reality, only a number of finite and fallible human perspectives. There is no ‘authorized version’ of reality. Language and thought alike are always relative to some finite perspective or another. iii. There can be no ‘literal’ reading of texts since this assumes a ‘context’ by which texts are read, tied to authors, which says, this is what it means. " |
|
|
Classic foundationalism
|
"• Tied to epistemology of Enlightenment – ‘classic foundationalism.’ Two main schools of philosophical thought during this period of time: (1) Continental rationalism [René Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz]; (2) British empiricism [John Locke, Bishop George Berkeley, David Hume]. Both of these schools are ‘foundationalist.’ Foundationalists agree that most reasonable beliefs need to be supported by reasons, they deny that this is the case for all beliefs. Some beliefs, according to Foundationalists, can be reasonable without having any reasons supporting them. Such beliefs are called “basic beliefs”.
" |
|
|
Deconstructionism
|
"• Deconstruction sees its task as undoing metaphysics, to demonstrate that there are no fixed points. For how can there be fixed points of view if the objects in the world are themselves unstable?
• Deconstruction is the process of undoing claims to have reached some non-linguistic presence. Nothing is natural; everything is conventional. The rhetoric of the ‘proper’ or the ‘natural’ reflects not the nature of things-as-they-are-in-themselves but rather the strategies of repression and exclusion exercised by differential systems. • Deconstruction seeks to attack ‘logocentrism.’ Logocentrism is the belief that there is some stable point outside language from which we can ensure that one’s words correspond to the world. It is this point that Derrida is seeking to deconstruct, namely the link between language and reality – the belief that language can be used to map the world, the belief that reason can get us at objective truth. " |
|
|
Biblical theology
|
"• With the rise of the Enlightenment, BT came to be viewed apart from systematic theology (ST). ST was identified more with ‘dogmatic’ concerns. With the rise of historical consciousness, many were trying to understand the text apart from systematic theology, thus attempting to relate various sources together, etc.
• ‘The Biblical Theology Movement’ (=20th century) began after the fallout of Classical liberal theology (=19th century). Its goal was to overcome the historical-critical method and allow the biblical text to come alive for the contemporary world. • (evangelical BT)Scripture as God’s revelation involves historical progression. The task of BT is to trace the historical unfolding of redemptive history and the focal point of BT, then, is not only the historical unfolding of God’s self-revelation, but also the organically related, and expanding movement of that revelation pressing on toward its consummation in Jesus Christ" |
|
|
Progressive revelation
|
"• Argues that we must read the prophets ‘inter-textually’ and ‘canonical.’ Later prophecies often add details to earlier ones, and the fulfillment is greater than the sum total of the preceding promises (=see typology). Often the prophets use ideas, themes, terms from Israel’s past history to predict the future.
" |
|
|
Word-Act revelation
|
"• Scripture as a Word-Act revelation unpacks God’s redemptive plan in history. This is tied to the previous point. We see this in that God’s promises are declared in Scripture and followed up on as you move through the canon. The first promise is found in Gen 3:15. Then that promise is developed throughout.
" |
|
|
Canon within a canon
|
"• For some an interpretation is right and others is wrong. Spirit speaks through the text. Illumination is confused with inspiration. We know what is right through community of the believers, which means the message changes as time passes.
" |
|
|
Propositional revelation
|
"This is not to say that all Scripture is propositional in nature. Rather it emphasizes that God reveals himself verbally, cognitively, and truthfully in Scripture. Scripture gives us ‘knowledge’ (=objective, justified true beliefs) of God – knowledge from the God who has taken the initiative to disclose himself to us. The emphasis is on God’s self-communication through the revealed truths formulated in the canon.
• This view does not deny that God reveals himself in other kinds of ‘speech acts.’ • This view does not deny that Scripture is a collection of diverse literary texts (=genres) – e.g. prophetic writings, psalms, proverbs, gospels, narratives, letters. " |
|
|
Verbal-plenary inspiration of Scripture
|
"This means that the Bible is the very Word of God itself. All (=plenary) of Scripture is inspired of God, right down to the very words of the text (=verbal). There is an identity between the human words of Scripture and the Word of God. What Scripture says, God says. B. B. Warfield explains it this way: “Inspiration is that extraordinary, supernatural influence (or, passively, the result of it), exerted by the Holy Ghost on the writers of our Sacred Books, by which their words were rendered also the words of God, and, therefore, perfectly infallible” (The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, 420).
1. This does not mean that verbal inspiration necessitates a dictation theory. Many critics of the Received View have wrongly attributed that theory to it (see Carl F. H. Henry, GRA: Vol 4, 138-42). 2. Instead, this view adopts a concursive theory of inspiration which means that God so superintended the process of composing the Scriptures that the end result manifests his divine intention, and this without overriding the human authors and their intentions. " |
|
|
Infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture
|
"• Verbal-plenary inspiration: This means that the Bible is the very Word of God itself. All (=plenary) of Scripture is inspired of God, right down to the very words of the text (=verbal). There is an identity between the human words of Scripture and the Word of God. What Scripture says, God says.
• This does not mean that verbal inspiration necessitates a dictation theory. Many critics of the Received View have wrongly attributed that theory to it • Instead, this view adopts a concursive theory of inspiration which means that God so superintended the process of composing the Scriptures that the end result manifests his divine intention, and this without overriding the human authors and their intentions " |
|
|
Concursive theory of inspiration
|
"• Means that God so superintended the process of composing the Scriptures that the end result manifests his divine intention, and this without overriding the human authors and their intentions.
" |
|
|
The self-attestation of Scripture
|
"• If Scripture does not claim to be God’s Word, then we cannot make it so. Only God is adequate to witness to himself. Ultimately, only God can identify his Word (cf. Heb 6:13). As with any doctrine of the Christian faith, including our doctrine of Scripture, we must substantiate it by an appeal to Scripture
" |
|
|
Grammatical-historical method of interpretation
|
"• Grammatical-historical exegesis; Genre analysis – ‘literal sense.’ Place the text in its historical, geographical, and cultural setting
" |
|
|
Genre
|
"• Scripture is a collection of diverse literary texts (=genres) – e.g. prophetic writings, psalms, proverbs, gospels, narratives, letters. Each literary form must be appreciated for what it is – e.g. narratives as ‘witness’ to God’s mighty actions in redemptive history along with an interpretation of those actions, etc. This will be very important in regard to interpretation.
" |
|
|
Relation of the divine author and the human authors of Scripture
|
"• ‘Inspiration’ puts the accent on God’s supernatural action by the Holy Spirit through the agency of human authors. The definition speaks of God’s action, by his Spirit, upon the human author and of the nature of the resulting text. This double emphasis is an attempt to capture 2 elements present in the Bible’s view of itself:
• 1st: God’s action by the Spirit in the human author (2 Peter 1:20-21). • 2nd: God’s action by the Spirit resulting in a God-breathed text – 2 Tim 3:15-16. The emphasis is on the resulting text which is ‘breathed-out.’ " |
|
|
Phenomenological language
|
"• Scripture can be inerrant and still speak in the ordinary language of everyday speech – phenomenological language. This is especially true in ‘scientific’ or ‘historical’ descriptions.
" |
|
|
Ipsissima verba vs. ipsissima vox
|
"• Ipsissima verba (exact words) of Jesus vs. Ipsissima vox (exact voice). This is important because we don't actually have the exact words of Jesus in Scripture, but the exact voice, since the disciples wrote in Greek what Jesus said in Aramaic. This should not alarm us because we realize that what matters is that the Holy Spirit has preserved what Christ would/does intend for us to understand about himself and the Scripture.
" |
|
|
The canon of Scripture
|
"• It has come to refer to the books which are God’s inspired Word – the closed collection of documents that constitute authoritative Scripture. Before the term ‘canon’ was invented, a variety of names were already used by Jews and Christians for the collection of Scripture, namely, ‘Holy Scriptures’ (Rom 1:2; 2 Tim 3:15; Philo; Josephus), ‘the Holy Books,’ and ‘Law and the Prophets’ (1 Macc 12:9; 2 Macc 15:9). The terms OT and NT began to be applied by Christian writers to collections of Scriptures in the 2nd-early 3rd centuries.
• The ‘canon’ of Scripture tied to the doctrine of inspiration (=verbal-plenary) allows us to affirm a unified revelation of God and it drives us to read and apply Scripture in terms of ‘parts’ to ‘whole’ in light of the progressive of revelation and the completion of the closing of the canon. " |
|
|
Historical vs. theological issue surrounding the canon of Scripture
|
"• Crucial hermeneutical issue. The ‘canon’ of Scripture tied to the doctrine of inspiration (=verbal-plenary) allows us to affirm a unified revelation of God and it drives us to read and apply Scripture in terms of ‘parts’ to ‘whole’ in light of the progressive of revelation and the completion of the closing of the canon. See the discussion of ‘h’ – i.e. Scripture interprets Scripture – tied to the larger issue of sola Scriptura.
" |
|
|
The importance of the canon of Scripture for hermeneutics
|
"• We need to know where God has spoken
• Issue of on-going revelation – cults, Islam " |
|
|
Apocrypha and reasons why the Apocrypha is rejected as Scripture
|
"The Apocrypha is: the set of fifteen books written in the intertestamental period, which the Roman Catholic Church has accepted as canon of Scripture, but Protestants have rejected as a Divine authority. “During the Council of Trent in 1546 the Apocryphal books were included in the Roman Catholic canon.”
Why reject as Scripture? -The Apocrypha contains a number of false teachings. -They are not cited as authoritative by any prophetic book written after them -1 Macc. 9:27; 14:41 acknowledges that there were no prophets in Israel during the time these books were written. -Apocrypha doesn’t claim for itself the same kind of authority as the OT. -The Jewish people did not regard the Apocrypha as God’s words. -The Apocrypha was not considered to be Scripture by Jesus and the NT authors. The NT never quotes these books as Scripture and the earliest Christian OT lists and biblical manuscripts contain few or none of them. -The Apocrypha contains teachings inconsistent with the rest of Scripture. -The acceptance of the Apocrypha was a Christian phenomenon, of a slow, irregular, and unfortunate development." |
|
|
Reasons for acceptance of the OT and NT canon
|
"OT:
1. The Septuagint is an early witness to an OT canon. 2. Early writers seem to make reference to the Hebrew canon (Philo, book of 2 Esdras, Josephus, Origen, Melito, Jerome). 3. Jesus makes reference to what seems like the Hebrew list of canon books (w/o the Apocrypha) [see p. 109 in notes for how] NT: 1. The church did not make books authoritative, but recognized which books were divinely inspired. 2. ""The Muratorian Canon"" fragment, see question 46, below. 3. Early recognition of books as authoritative (such as by Ignatius and Polycarp (both 1st/2nd century)), Justin Martyr, Origen, Eusebius,...) See Criteria below for why specific books were accepted or not." |
|
|
Criteria of canonicity, especially related to the NT canon
|
"OT:
1. no contradictions. 2. Written by a prophet or recognized authority. 3. Inspired by God. 4. Accepted by Jews as authoritative material. NT: 1. Is it written by an apostle or recognized authority? (most important) 2. Did it agree with the canon of truth (rule of faith) 3. Did it enjoy universal acceptance? 4. Does it have a self-authenticating divine nature?" |
|
|
Muratorian canon
|
The Muratorian Canon is an ancient list of canonical books (discovered by Cadinal L.A. Muratori), dated 190. (Missing: Hebrews, James, 1&2 Peter, 3 John; includes Wisdom of Solomon and Apocalypse of Peter). This fragment also included how books came to be written, thus what we base our “criteria of NT canonicity” on.
|
|
|
Tanakh
|
"The Tanakh refers to the Jewish Scriptures (our OT). The name is an acrostic using the first letter from each of the three sections of the OT: The Torah (""Law” or “Teaching,” the Five Books of Moses), Nevi'im (""Prophets"") and Ketuvim (""Writings"")—hence TaNaKh. "
|
|
|
The Law, prophets, and writings
|
"Summary: A way of referring to the Old Testament.
Law: The five books of Moses - Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. The Pentateuch. “Sets forth the requirements for becoming the people of God.” Prophets: Former prophets: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings. // Latter Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve. Labeled prophetic, because, for Israel, they “served as a guide for future generations.” (2nd largest part of Hebrew Scriptures). Writings: Poetry (Job-Proverbs); Five Scrolls (Songs, Ruth, Lament., Eccl., Esth.); and History (Dan., Chron., and Ezra-Nehemiah). " |
|
|
Gnostic writings
|
(Ex. The Gospel of Thomas). They were rejected in the Moratorian List. // Taught the created world was evil and separate from the spirit world. // one Gnostic writing helps us to know that most of Paul’s writings were viewed as authoritative by the end of the first century (p. 137 of book).
|
|
|
Codex Vaticanus vs. Codex Sinaiticus vs. Codex Alexandrinus
|
"The Codex Vaticanus (designated “B”): is a fourth century manuscript of the Septuagint. It originally included “all the books of the Bible, but today, portions are missing” (parts of Gen. 2 Sam Maccabees, Hebrews,…). It was designated “the neutral text” by Westcott and Hort publishers of the New Testament, because they believed it to be the closest to the original Greek text. It has “better workmanship” than the Sinaiticus, according to the book.
Codex Sinaiticus (designated א) or ""Sinai Bible"": A fourth century uncial manuscript of the Septuagint in perfect condition. It includes part of the OT and Apochrypha, as well as all the NT. It was “carelessly written,” therefore, poor workmanship. Only parts of it were found because the rest of it was burned in a monastery furnace. Codex Alexandrinus (designated A) The first great uncial manuscript of the Septuagint made accessible to scholars dated to the fifth century. " |
|
|
The understanding of the phrase ‘Scripture interprets Scripture.’
|
Same thing as “analogy of faith.” Scripture is read in light of entire canon. If any passage is ambiguous, the interpretation is light of the rest of Scripture is best.
|
|
|
Inter-textual reading of Scripture
|
We must approach the Bible in terms of its own categories. We believe the Bible is true, so we read it on its own terms.
|
|
|
The Perspicuity of Scripture
|
The “clarity” of Scripture. “Scripture is written in such a way that its teachings are able to be understood by ordinary believers.” // “difficult to understand, but not impossible.”
|
|
|
Protestant vs. Catholic views on the perspicuity and sufficiency of Scripture
|
"“No church officers, priests, etc. (RCC) have an infallible interpretation. Only Scripture itself is fully authoritative. “
Scripture is written to ordinary believers. Scripture’s clarity and sufficiency remind us that teachers are “Gifts to help the church, NOT New Covenant mediators.” " |
|
|
Internal testimony of the Spirit
|
“The Spirit enables the ‘hearers’ and ‘readers’ of Scripture savingly to appropriate Scripture and understand it.” The Spirit “illumines” the text.
|
|
|
Issues related the Word-Spirit relationship
|
"1. “The Holy Spirit does not create new meaning.”
2. The HS bears witness to the singular intent rooted in the text. 3. The HS illumines Scripture by impressing its meaning on the reader. 4. The HW illumines our minds, which is dependent on our prior heart change. Sanctification is important to interpretation." |
|
|
The illumination of the Holy Spirit
|
The Holy Spirit impresses the meaning of Scripture on the reader. The HW illumines our minds.
|
|
|
Meaning vs. Significance
|
We have the literal sense: meanings of the human author and the spiritual sense: meanings unknown to the human authors, put there by God as He guided their writing. This second sense (the spiritual sense of a text) is viewed as the “significance,” which God has given to sacred history.
|
|
|
Role of Church Tradition in hermeneutics
|
"""The broader Christian community is a valuable check against the misuse of the Bible.""
""We need to know the collective wisdom of the body (see Eph 4:7ff). It is in the context of the church where we have help for understanding Scripture. Church is not the authority, but it helps."" " |
|
|
Semiotics
|
"“How words work.” (per notes).
Language uses sounds and verbal markings as signs in the symbolic sense. These symbols function by virtue of community-enforced rules. " |
|
|
Semantics
|
"“How words are put together in sentences” (per notes).
“The basic unit of meaning is NOT the word, but the sentence; words are ambiguous until put into concrete discourse.” Authors use speech (and sentences) to accomplish something." |
|
|
Langue vs. Parole
|
"Langue: (Language): “Sign system” (such as English, Japanese, Spanish,…) “
Parole: (Language in actual use): “Speakers and writers using the sign system to communicate.”" |
|
|
Sense vs. reference
|
"I had trouble finding this in the notes, the following is my interpretation of somethings he said on page 6, 8, and 66 of the notes.
Sense: The way in which a text is read. For example: literal, or analogical. Reference: That to which the text refers. Note: The literal sense of a text is not its reference, but may determine what the reference is. For example: Jerusalem can refer to the geographical city or to the people of God depending on context and the sense in which the text is read. " |
|
|
Speech-act theory (=discuss the difference between locution, illocution, perlocution)
|
"Locution-words
Illocution- what authors do with their words Perlocution – what we bring about or achieve by saying something such as convincing, persuading, ect. " |
|
|
Role of literary forms in speech-act theory
|
Scripture is a collection of diverse literary texts (=genres) – e.g. prophetic writings, psalms, proverbs, gospels, narratives, letters. Each literary form must be appreciated for what it is – e.g. narratives as ‘witness’ to God’s mighty actions in redemptive history along with an interpretation of those actions, etc. This will be very important in regard to interpretation.
|
|
|
Synchronic vs. diachronic reading of Scripture
|
"Synchronic – “with time”
Diachronic – “through time” " |
|
|
Promise-fulfillment theme in the NT
|
Promise-fulfillment refers to the way His promise will unfold across the canon to Christ. According to this approach the two testaments are linked by promises given by God in the OT that have been fulfilled in the NT.
|
|
|
Difference between typology and allegory
|
Allegory –interprets the text to say something other than it’s literal meaning. Typology – person, event or thing in the OT foreshadows something in the NT. Ex: Adam as a type of Christ. Typology is rooted in historical realities (=contra allegory). Allegory is grounded in a linguistic system of ‘signs’ and presupposes parallels between ideas that are dependent upon extra-textual grid or key. Wellum said: the problem with allegory is that there is no real or textual relationship between A and B while typology provide a pattern.
|
|
|
Presupposition
|
Presupposition is crucial to interpretation: A proper hermeneutic will stem from a proper presupposition (approach to Scripture). Poor hermeneutics stem from a worldview that does not approach the Bible on its on terms.
|
|
|
Phenomenal vs. noumenal world in Kant’s philosophy
|
"Phenomenal- reality as it appears
Noumenal – reality as it really is " |
|
|
Credo ut intelligam
|
“I believe that I might understand.” – Anselm of Canterbury
|
|
|
Redemptive-historical reading and understanding of Scripture
|
Tracing the progressive revelation of Christ in Scripture.
|
|
|
Christocentric focus of Scripture
|
Jesus is viewed as God’s last and final word. Jesus is the fulfillment of all that has preceded, the final revelation of God.
|
|
|
Hermeneutical spiral
|
Describes the process of understanding a text in light of the whole canon and understanding the whole canon in light of the individual texts.
|
|
|
General vs. Special revelation
|
"General revelation revelation is the unveiling of God, the knowledge of God’s being and will which is given to all people everywhere, at all times, through the ordinary experience of being alive in God’s world.
Special revelation is God making himself known through the imparting of truth by particular act and words, especially in the Word of the Lord (scripture) and the Lord of the Word (Jesus). " |
|
|
Authorial intent
|
The reformation tied meaning of scripture to authorial intent. In interpretation, the Reformers sought the author’s intent. The more the interpreter wanders from the author’s mind, the more he deviates from the author’s purpose. For Calvin, the natural interpretation of a passage was one that did justice to the intention of the author. That is why in traditional hermeneutics the author is crucial.
|
|
|
Structuralism and post-structuralism in philosophy of language
|
"Not too sure (couldn't find in notes or book), however, here is my best guess based on the Internet.
Structuralism assumes a structure to language such that you can determine the meaning of a text, and post-structuralism says that humans are so complex that meaning is not determined in the text (thus, meaning is more relativistic/flexible; no structure inherent)" |
|
|
Exegesis of 2 Pet 1:20-21 and 2 Tim 3:15-16 as applied to the doctrine of Scripture
|
"These passages are key in regards to inspiration. Neither passage gives us the exact nature of inspiration. They present two elements of the Bible’s view of itself
1. 2 Pet 1:20-21 – God’s action by the Spirit in the human author 2. 2 Tim 3:15-16 – God’s action in the Spirit resulting in a God-breathed text. " |
|
|
Synoptic problem
|
Refers to the issue scholars have with trying to determine the interrelationships of the Synoptic Gospels: Math, Mark, Luke). In simple terms, it is an attempt to explain the remarkable similarities with which the Evangelists report the sayings of Jesus and the events of his life which sill accounting for important differences.
|
|
|
Markan priority vs. Augustinian theory in the Gospels
|
"The Markan priority argues that Mark was written first and that both Matthew and Luke independently used this Gospel to compose their own. Markan priority is supported by most synoptic scholars.
The Augustinian theory proposes that in the parallel accounts of Mark and Matthew, Mark abbreviates Matthew’s material rather than Matthew amplifying Marks. Luke then used both Matthew and Mark to compose his gospel.Problems with Augustinian view: Generally Matthew and Mark have material in common, Mark’s account is fuller than Matthews, not abridged. It appears that Matthew more often abbreviates Mark and not the other way around. " |
|
|
Council of Jamnia
|
It has been argued that at the Council of Jamnia (around AD 90) they reached the last stage of the canonization of the OT. However it is increasingly recognized that at the Council of Jamnia they did nothing more than review the books in the writings (Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes). After the destruction of Jerusalem Jamnia became known as an important city for the study of Scripture. From time to time discussions have occurred regarding the authority and legitimacy of certain books.
|
|
|
Pseudepigrapha and pseudonymity
|
"Pseudepigrapha – A body of works produced by Jewish writers. Believed to have been written by Jewish writers and later expanded or rewritten by Christians. Never seriously considered canonical. Their chief importance is to provide information concerning the thoughts and ideas circulating in the Jewish nation from 200BC – Ad200. The term is derived from the plural from of the Greek word meaning “false writings”.
Pseudonymity – Some of the apocryphal works are pseudonymous (false name) or falsely claim to be written by well known people in the OT In this view it is either intentionally falsified in order to gain acceptance or written in a known literary genre common to the time and not intended to deceive. " |
|
|
Nag Hammadi Books
|
A group of 12 papyrus codices plus 8 leaves written in Coptic (language of Egyptian Christians) that were found in Nag Hammadi, located in upper Egypt, in December 1945. The majority of the writings contain Gnostic ideas. One of the works that received the most publicity is the Gospel of Thomas, a compilation of 114 sayings of Jesus. Some of the sayings are not authentic, but others are consistent with the character and teachings of Jesus.
|
|
|
Dead Sea Scrolls
|
"Manuscripts found in11 caves in the Judean desert on the west side of the Dead Sea. The manuscripts are of all the biblical books (usually many copies) except Ester and Nehemiah. The dates range from about 250 bc to AD 50.
Significance of the DSS: until then the oldest complete Hebrew manuscript of the OT was the Codex Leningradenis. The DSS dates about one thousand years earlier. Their impact was explosive on the field of textual criticism. The study of the DSS has helped confirm that our Hebrew text is very accurate. They also show the diversity of the OT text. " |
|
|
Masoretic Text
|
The Masoretic Text is the authoritative Hebrew text of the Jewish Bible that defines the books of the Jewish canon, precise letter-text of these biblical books, and their vocalization and accentuation known as the Masorah. The MT is also widely used as the basis for translations, and textually confirmed by the older Dead Sea Scrolls.
|
|
|
Textual criticism
|
"Concerned with 1) rescension: identification of the best manuscripts after examining available material and 2) Emendation: removal of transcription errors in the texts of manuscripts by adhering to the rules or “canons"" of TC."
|
|
|
Septuagint
|
" ""LXX"", or ""Greek Old Testament"", is an ancient translation of the Hebrew Bible and Apocrypha into Koine Greek as early as the late 2nd century BCE. It is quoted by New Testament authors, and also by the Apostolic Fathers and later Greek Church Fathers. It continues to serve as the Eastern Orthodox Old Testament."
|
|
|
Hexapla
|
"Greek for ""sixfold"" is the term for an edition of the OT in six versions compiled by Origen of Alexandria in six columns. When placed side by side:1.Hebrew 2.Secunda – Hebrew transliterated into Greek characters 3.Aquila of Sinope 4.Symmachus the Ebionite5.A recension of the Septuagint, with (1) interpolations to indicate where the Hebrew is not represented in the Septuagint—these are taken mainly from Theodotion's text and marked with asterisks, and (2) indications, using signs called obeloi (singular: obelus), of where words, phrases, or occasionally larger sections in the Septuagint do not reflect any underlying Hebrew. 6.Theodotion"
|
|
|
Targums
|
Spoken paraphrases, explanations, and expansions of the Jewish scriptures (aka Midrash)given by a Rabbi in Aramaic for the purpose of making the text clearer. Primary examples are Targum Onkelos and Targum Jonathan.
|
|
|
Autographs
|
Refers to the original text written by the Biblical author or the author’s amanuensis.
|
|
|
Eclectic vs. Single Text
|
Distinctions within TC regarding method used for reaching the original. Eclectic method regards all manuscripts as equal and uses the canons of TC to determine which variant was original. Single text theory holds to a single tradition, such as the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus, and seeks to edit the text within that tradition (KJV only types). Reasoned eclecticism is the method used by most text critics.
|
|
|
Vulgate
|
" Latin translation of the Bible by St. Jerome in 382 who made a revision of the old Latin translations which were difficult to read. Versio vulgata means ""commonly used translation"", and is the definitive and official latin text of the RCC.
" |
|
|
The Geneva Bible
|
Based off of the English translation of William Tyndale who was the first to translate the Bible into English out of the original languages. Preceding the KJV by 51 years, it was the primary Bible of 16th century Protestantism. Was the first a mechanically printed, mass-produced Bible made available directly to the public with study notes.
|
|
|
Douai-Rheims Bible
|
Translation of the Bible from the Latin Vulgate into English made by members of the English College Douai. The NT was published in Reims, France, in 1582, in one volume with extensive commentary and notes. The OT was published in two volumes by 1610 by the University of Douai.
|
|
|
Authorized Version of the Bible
|
Known as the King James Version, is an English translation of the Bible by the Church of England in 1611. In 1604, a new English version was conceived in response to the perceived problems of the earlier translations done by the Puritans. James instructed the translators to conform to the theology of the C of E
|
|
|
New World Translation of the Bible
|
A translation of the Bible published by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society in 1961 by Jehovah's Witnesses. Their first translation of the original languages.
|
|
|
The Jerusalem Bible
|
English translation of the Bible in 1966 by RCC, it includes the deuterocanonical books along with the 66 others included in Protestant Bibles. Used in the Lectionary for Mass.
|
|
|
Literal vs. Dynamic Equivalence Translation of the Bible
|
Literal translations seek to convey word-for-word the underlying original while sometimes sacrificing clarity. Dynamic equivalence seeks to convey the intention and sense behind the original while sometimes sacrificing grammatical elements intended by the original author.
|
|
|
Arguments for and against the priority of the Textus Receptus
|
"Latin: ""received text"" is the printed Greek texts of the New Testament which constituted the translation base for most Reformation-era New Testament translations. Published by Desiderius Erasmus in 1516, it was the first printed Greek New Testament. Based on only six manuscripts containing not quite the whole of the New Testament based mainly on late manuscripts of the Byzantine text-type. Arguments for: it is the most attested text type and thus has the most textual evidence. Those who hold to single-text theory are sympathetic to this. Arguments against: it is based off of a more erroneous and later textual tradition, and is only the most well-attested by evidence because Byzantine Christianity still wrote in Greek for some time and thus made many copies. The Western Church wrote in Latin and did not produce as many Greek mss. It contradicts the earlier and more reliable text traditions in certain places, and shows grammatical “updating” in various places. Finally the TR of the KJV and other translations does not contain the whole NT."
|
|
|
Translation vs. Paraphrase of the Bible
|
Translations start with a language other than the target language, namely the original Hebrew and Greek. A paraphrase starts with an older or more difficult translation and updates that text in the same language to enhance readability.
|
|
|
Philo
|
Jewish philosopher who advocated allegorical method by applying his hermeneutical grid of Greek philosophy to the Old Testemant so that he could convince the intellectuals of his day of the veracity of the OT.
|
|
|
Titus Flavius Clement
|
Greatest student was Origen. Sought to convince pagan intellectuals that Christianity was reasonable by using Greek Philosophy to get at the deeper meaning beyond the literal. He did hold that scripture never contradicted itself.
|
|
|
Origen
|
one of the greatest biblical scholars of the early church,allegorical method for interpating the bible
|
|
|
Theodore of Mopsuestia
|
Antiochian school of interperation d. 428, said that some old testament books were not canonical
|
|
|
Augustine
|
western school of biblical interpataion( mixture of the other two schools of thought, De Doctrina Christiana( on christian doctine). 'I believe in order to understand'
|
|
|
Justin Martyr
|
declared revelation was written by john ,100-165, aware of at least 12-13 books of the NT clearly knew of the book of hebrews
|
|
|
Athanasius
|
easter letter 367, first to include all 27 books of the bible.
|
|
|
Irenaeus
|
bishop of lyon, Gau trained by Polycarp, 'Against Heresies'
|
|
|
Jerome
|
only jewish canon was authaoritative, one of the most qualified latin scholars, translated the latin vulgate
|
|
|
Thomas Aquinas
|
held to fourfold exegetical method, priority given to 'literal' sence wrote Summa Theologica,
|
|
|
Martin Luther
|
translated bible onto german from origianls, rejected fourfold interpretation, literal meaning, sola Scriptura, all scripture is about christ, scripture can only be apprehended spiritually and experientially
|
|
|
John Calvin
|
"The Institutes, ""the knowledge of the self and of God are Intimately related', Revelational foundationalism, argued for historical, literal sence. slow to find reference to Christ unless NT gives warrant for it. let the author say what he does say' "
|
|
|
Karl Barth
|
neo-orthodox scripture is not Gods word but points to it.
|
|
|
Jacques Derrida
|
associated with the radical postmodernism, deconstruction
|
|
|
Marcion
|
heretic, rejected the OT and used only luke and 10 of paul's letters,
|
|
|
Ludwig Wittgenstein
|
philosophy affects our perspectives on things that have gone unexamined simply b/c they have always been there brfore our eyes
|
|
|
Geerhardus Vos
|
evangelical biblical theology, full athunouthy of the bible. brought over fron holland by b.b. warfield
|
|
|
E. D. Hirsch
|
a modern and conservative adovate of authorial intent.
|
|
|
Ernst Troeltsch
|
Historical and Dogmatic Method in Theology' 1898
|
|
|
B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort
|
published the text of the greek NT
|
|
|
Erasmus
|
published first greek new testament in 1516
|
|
|
John Wycliffe
|
first english bible translated from latin, 1380
|
|
|
William Tyndale
|
first english bible translated from the orginal langaues, only got part of the bible translated,all of NT parts of OT
|
|
|
Kenneth Taylor
|
the living bible ( paraphrase), new living translation
|
|
|
Eugene Peterson
|
the Message
|
