To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Bible. John - Criticism, interpretation.
Journal articles on the topic 'Bible. John - Criticism, interpretation'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Bible. John - Criticism, interpretation.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Moberly, R. W. L. "Biblical Criticism and Religious Belief." Journal of Theological Interpretation 2, no. 1 (2008): 71–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/26421447.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Moberly discusses John Barton's Nature of Biblical Criticism and takes issue with Barton's portrayal of theological interpretation as hostile to the values of biblical criticism. After showing how Barton misrepresents theological interpretation, not least because of a failure to do justice to the changing frames of reference of critical scholarship, Moberly extends the discussion to include the preunderstandings that interpreters inevitably bring to the Bible in ways analogous to how one reads a classic; the way in which appreciation of deep literature relates to personal maturity; and the way in which theological dogma, rightly understood, can make truer one's perception of reality.
2
Moberly, R. W. L. "Biblical Criticism and Religious Belief." Journal of Theological Interpretation 2, no. 1 (2008): 71–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/jtheointe.2.1.0071.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Moberly discusses John Barton's Nature of Biblical Criticism and takes issue with Barton's portrayal of theological interpretation as hostile to the values of biblical criticism. After showing how Barton misrepresents theological interpretation, not least because of a failure to do justice to the changing frames of reference of critical scholarship, Moberly extends the discussion to include the preunderstandings that interpreters inevitably bring to the Bible in ways analogous to how one reads a classic; the way in which appreciation of deep literature relates to personal maturity; and the way in which theological dogma, rightly understood, can make truer one's perception of reality.
3
Lernout, Geert. "Who Wrote What When: The Bible, Science and Criticism." European Review 20, no. 3 (May 2, 2012): 301–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1062798711000561.
Full textAbstract:
According to the traditional (or ‘whig’) interpretation of history, sometime in the seventeenth century science was born in the form that we know today, in a new spirit that can best be summed up by the motto of the Royal Society: nullius in verba, take nobody's word for it. In the next few centuries this new critical way of looking at reality was instrumental in the creation of a coherent view of the world, and of that world's history, which was found to be increasingly at odds with traditional claims, most famously in the case of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. By the end of the nineteenth century, the divide between science and religion was described by means of words such as ‘conflict’ and ‘warfare,’ the terms used by John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White in the titles of their respective books: History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874) and History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896).
4
Turalely, Edward Jakson, Olivia Joan Wairisal, and Fiktor Fadirsair. "Menggugat Eksklusivisme Umat Pilihan Allah: Tafsir Ideologi terhadap Ulangan 7: 1-11 dan Yohanes 14: 6 dalam Konteks Kemajemukan Masyarakat." ARUMBAE: Jurnal Ilmiah Teologi dan Studi Agama 4, no. 1 (July 28, 2022): 19–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.37429/arumbae.v4i1.719.
Full textAbstract:
Violence and conflict in the name of religion have increased in Indonesia, including Maluku. Social strife in Maluku provides evidence of the reality of an objectionable and properly managed society. Conflict in the name of religion has contributed to legitimization with bible texts, including Deuteronomy 7: 1-11 and John 14: 6. Therefore, this article is the result of re-interpretation utilizing ideological criticism of these biblical texts. Through the interpretation, the authors found that the exclusive narrative of Deuteronomy 7: 1-11 and John 14: 6 was influenced by the social, political, and economic situation. Thus, both texts need to be reinterpreted contextually regarding the plurality of Indonesian society. In the end, this article emphasizes that the concept of God's people cannot be interpreted exclusively but refers to all humankind universally.
5
Martens, John W. "Are Enslaved Children Called to Come to Jesus? Freeborn and Enslaved Children in John Chrysostom’s On Vainglory." Biblical Interpretation 28, no. 5 (November 30, 2020): 584–607. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685152-2805a004.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract John Chrysostom, circa 349–407 ce, wrote “On Vainglory, or The Right Way to Raise Children,” which purports to be about raising all Christian children. In fact, out of ninety chapters, only one deals with girls. Even more significant are the numerous overlooked children in the text, who are present but whose Christian education is never discussed because they are enslaved. This paper utilizes childist criticism to draw these enslaved children from hiddenness into plain sight. The paper is situated in the context of Jesus’ teaching about children because Chrysostom believes that the best way to raise children is by teaching them stories from the Bible, Hebrew Bible first, then New Testament, but instead of an openness to all children he discusses only freeborn, elite boys. Chrysostom’s treatise exposes the context of how few children in late antiquity could be shaped by biblical interpretation intended for all children. (147 words)
6
Lamoureux, Denis O. "The Bible & Ancient Science: Principles of Interpretation." Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 73, no. 3 (September 2021): 164–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.56315/pscf9-21lamoureux.
Full textAbstract:
THE BIBLE & ANCIENT SCIENCE: Principles of Interpretation by Denis O. Lamoureux. Tullahoma, TN: McGahan Publishing, 2020. 218 pages. Paperback; $15.99. ISBN: 9781951252052. *"Simply stated, I believe the literary genre of Genesis 1-3 is an ancient account of origins. Notably, it is deeply rooted in ancient science" (p. 195). *Denis O. Lamoureux is Professor of Science and Religion at St. Joseph's College at the University of Alberta. He possesses three earned doctorates (dentistry, theology, and biology) and tells of an intellectual and spiritual journey out of atheism, through fundamentalism, and to his current position. Consequently, if there was ever a model voice that displays the academic and personal experience necessary to speak formidably about the hermeneutical issues associated with Genesis 1-3 and the other creation texts of the Bible, it is Lamoureux. *The study begins with what seems like a simple question, "Is the Bible a book about science?" However, before the opening chapters are completed, the reader understands that the question is anything but simple. In fact, the difficulty of the conversation is poignantly displayed when he offers answers to his leading question from two giant figures within the evangelical tradition. Henry M. Morris answers in the affirmative, but Billy Graham answers negatively. Yet, to his credit, Lamoureux does not dwell on this disagreement. He quickly emphasizes that a proper answer to his question requires an entanglement with issues of hermeneutics, or principles of interpretation (p. 13). Consequently, the remainder of the book is a journey through the wild and woolly world of biblical hermeneutics on the way to answering the question of whether the Bible is a book about science. *Lamoureux guides the reader toward his answer by discussing twenty-two hermeneutical principles that range from the mundane topics of "literalism," "literary genre," and "historical criticism" to the more complex, such as "cognitive competence," "accommodation," and "concordism." Each chapter is devoted to one principle, and all the chapters are organized similarly. They discuss the principle and then specific applications to the creation texts. This approach produces manageable-sized chapters that can be pondered without a fear of being overwhelmed by complex arguments; however, presenting an argument by a series of propositional statements can obfuscate how each proposition interacts with the others and how they all cooperate. In Lamoureux's defense, however, he does well to minimize any dissonance. *Ultimately, Lamoureux finds himself landing between Morris and Graham when answering his leading question. According to Lamoureux, the Bible contains science, but it's ancient science. And that qualification makes all the difference. The biblical writers are indeed talking about the origins of the universe, but they are doing so in terms of an Iron Age worldview while using Iron Age concepts. Therefore, their "science" is incompatible with the scientific inquiry and discourse of today. This conviction implies that concordism neither does justice to the text and its message nor frames a useful conversation. *In pushing back against any simplistic appropriation of the Bible's message upon the demands of modern scientific discourse, Lamoureux offers a very nuanced proposal. But at its heart is a respect for the ancient worldview of the biblical authors with all its frustrating peculiarities. For example, Lamoureux emphasizes how things such as the rhetoric and ahistorical symbolism of parables must be respected. Simple enough; however, Lamoureux also recognizes that ancient Israel perceived the universe through a three-tiered concept, a reality that finds itself alongside flat-earth theories in the hall of fame of modern-day cosmological ludicrousness. Similarly, ancient Israel's botanical awareness was clearly ignorant of the data we have today. Therefore, Lamoureux's discussions eventually bring the reader to a crossroad. How can a reader respect the Bible if it is invoking principles of, say, botany or any other field of science, in ways that run counter to contemporary scientific discourse? Is the reader confronted with the terrible situation in which they must support the Bible's claims despite the contradictory scientific evidence? Are they forced to abandon any notion of inerrancy? *It is at this point that the integrity of Lamoureux's argument reaches a critical point. His argument cannot work without certain hermeneutical principles. First, the principle of accommodation argues that God accommodates himself to humanity--through language, culture, concepts, etc.--in order to ensure effective communication. So, in the example of Israel's botanical awareness, God is "using the botany-of-the-day" to ensure that the audience would understand the message. Similarly, this should also be applied to Israel's three-tiered universe and other cosmological concepts. Second, the message-incident principle argues that the mode of communication is incidental to the core message. To be clear, "Incidental has the meaning of that which happens to be alongside and happening in connection with something important" (p. 46). Therefore, applied to the creation texts, ancient science is incidental but important to delivering spiritual truths (p. 47). Third, Lamoureux champions incarnational inspiration. According to Lamoureux, the incarnation, as understood in Jesus, becomes the analogy par excellence for understanding the nature of scripture. It is fully divine and fully human. The Bible, like Jesus, transcends time and history. And God's perfect message comes through finite and imperfect humanity. *Many of Lamoureux's arguments echo similar arguments made by biblical scholars in recent memory. For example, Kenton Sparks, in God's Word in Human Words: An Evangelical Appropriation of Critical Biblical Scholarship (2008), emphasized accommodation in his attempt to balance a conviction that the Bible contains factual errors but is also inerrant. Peter Enns systematically argued for incarnational inspiration, as in Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament (2005). John Walton and Brent Sandy display affinities to Lamoureux's message-incident principle in their work The Lost World of Scripture: Ancient Literary Culture and Biblical Authority (2013). Consequently, the pitfalls that face these scholars face Lamoureux as well. If accommodation explains the scientific ignorance of the biblical writers, is inerrancy the best description of scripture? Or, because the incarnation is unique to the realities of Jesus, how appropriate is it to invoke it as an analogy for something else? At what point does it break down (cf. Ben Witherington, The Living Word of God [Waco: Baylor University Press, 2007], 35-49)? *I wholeheartedly agree with Lamoureux that it is paramount for the interpreter to dutifully consider the text on its own terms, particularly since I take seriously the notion that God used ancient Israel to communicate his redemptive plan. Thus, the interpreter should yield to Israel's concepts, conventions, and philosophies on the way to understanding the message before they move to appropriation for theological discourse. Nevertheless, several elements in The Bible and Ancient Science could be fine tuned. These include Lamoureux's framing of the discussion of translating Genesis 1:1 (pp. 75-81) as a text-critical issue, when it is more of a translation problem. Lamoureux also presents a generic, almost flat, portrait of the classic criticisms of biblical studies (e.g., textual criticism, literary criticism, historical criticism) that does not support a nuanced understanding of their results for the creation texts. *A little more significant is Lamoureux's understanding of Paul's typological argument in Romans 5. He struggles with the possibility that Paul's argument appears historical in nature. He states, *"As a consequence, Paul undoubtedly believed Adam was a historical person and that the events of Genesis 2-3 really happened. However, it must be emphasized that Paul's belief in the reality of Adam and the events in the Garden of Eden does not necessarily mean they are historical" (p. 175). *Thus, he is forced to wrestle with the implications of his argument as it confronts the semantics of the text. He may well have been influenced by Enns in how he tries to navigate this, but a difficult tension remains (Peter Enns, The Evolution of Adam: What the Bible Does and Doesn't Say about Human Origins [2012]). For Lamoureux, and Enns for that matter, it is difficult to advocate a framework-like typology which usually interprets historical figures in the context of history as, in this instance, functioning with a significant level of historical ignorance. *A deeper commitment to comparative investigations would also have enhanced Lamoureux's argument. He is certainly aware of non-Israelite texts and how they help us understand the concepts, conventions, and message of the biblical text, for he references them in his discussions of worldview and ancient conceptions of the universe. However, reading Genesis 1-2 in the shadow of texts such as the "Enuma Elish" and the "Memphite Theology" crystalizes the form and function of the genre as well as the Old Testament's theological emphases. *Nevertheless, overall Lamoureux gets far more right than wrong and this work is valuable. It makes potentially complicated concepts accessible and applies them to the very important debate about what "inerrant" means when describing the nature of scripture. *Reviewed by David B. Schreiner, Associate Dean and Associate Professor of Old Testament, Wesley Biblical Seminary, Ridgeland, MS 39157.
7
Westhaver, George. "Continuity and Development." Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 97, no. 1 (March 1, 2021): 161–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.7227/bjrl.97.1.11.
Full textAbstract:
This article compares the typological exegesis promoted by E. B. Pusey (1800–82) and his colleagues John Henry Newman and John Keble with that of their eighteenth-century Hutchinsonian predecessor William Jones of Nayland (1726–1800). Building on Peter Nockles’s argument that Jones’s emphasis on the figurative character of biblical language foreshadows the Tractarian application of the sacramental principle to exegesis, this article shows how this common approach differs from the more cautious one displayed by the High Church luminaries William Van Mildert and Herbert Marsh. At the same time, both Pusey’s criticism of the mainstream apologetics of his day and his more explicit application of the doctrine of the Incarnation to exegesis resulted in bolder interpretations and a greater emphasis on the necessity of figurative readings (of both the Bible and the natural world) than Jones generally proposed. A shared appreciation of the principle of reserve may explain both these differences and the Tractarian emphasis on a patristic, rather than a Hutchinsonian, inspiration for their approach.
8
Wicaksono, Arif. "Pandangan Kekristenan Tentang Higher Criticism." FIDEI: Jurnal Teologi Sistematika dan Praktika 1, no. 1 (June 23, 2018): 115–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.34081/fidei.v1i1.6.
Full textAbstract:
The interpretation of the Bible in the present continues to grow rapidly. This progress has both positive and negative effects in the realm of biblical interpretation. The positive impact that is with the progress of interpretation, it was found many truth values that were not understood and now start out one by one. The negative as the progress of biblical interpretation is the loss of boundaries. With the method of high-criticism interpretation makes the Bible originally believed to be the infallible Word, and now it is equated with another book of lesser value than the scriptures. The Bible is aligned with the ordinary book, even the authority of the Bible as God's Word is in doubt, denied and demeaned to an ordinary literary work.This is a challenge for Christianity today. It takes a firm stance in the face of the Higher Criticism interpretation movement. Christians need to determine a position to deflect any allegations that undermine the authority of the Bible and any allegations that cast doubt on the inspiration and revelation of the existing Scriptures. This paper is expected to give a little apologetic response to the Higher Criticism movement Keywords: Higher Criticism, Apologetic, Bible AbstrakPenafsiran Alkitab dalam masa kini terus mengalami perkembangan dengan pesat. Kemajuan ini memberikan dampak positif maupun negative dalam ranah dunia tafsir Alkitab. Positive karena dengan kemajuannya banak nilai-nilai kebenaran yang dul tidak dipahami mulai keluar satu persatu. Negatifnya saat kemajuan penafsiran Alkitab kehilangan batasan, dengan metode penafsiran higher Critism menjadikan Alkitab yang awalnya diyakini sebagai Firman yang tanpa salah, layaknya buku lain yang nilainya lebih rendah dari kitab suci. Aklitab disejajarkan dengan buku biasa. Bahkah otoritas Alkitab sebagai Firman Allah diragukan, disangkal dan direndahkan sebatas karya sastra biasa.Ini merupakan tantangan bagai kekristenan saat ini. Diperlukan sikap yang tegas dalam menghadapi pergerakan penafsiran Higher Critism. Orang Kristen perlu menentukan posisi dalam menangkis segala tuduhan yang merendahkan otoritas Alkitab. Segala tuduhan yang meragukan pengilhaman dan pewahyuan penulisan kitab Suci yang ada. Tulisan ini diharapkan memberikan sedikit sikap apologetika terhadap gerakan Higer Critism Kata Kunci: Higer Critism, Apologet, Alkitab
9
Wilken, Robert Louis. "Interpreting the Bible as Bible." Journal of Theological Interpretation 4, no. 1 (2010): 7–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/26421325.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Modern historical criticism has disengaged understanding of the Bible from the long Christian tradition of interpretation, severing the bond between text and reader, between Scripture and the living church tradition. As a consequence, patristic and medieval interpreters are dismissed as serious commentators on the Holy Scriptures. This essay offers examples from classical Christian exegetes that illustrate how reading the Scriptures from within rather than against tradition deepens our understanding of the Bible.
10
Wilken, Robert Louis. "Interpreting the Bible as Bible." Journal of Theological Interpretation 4, no. 1 (2010): 7–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/jtheointe.4.1.0007.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Modern historical criticism has disengaged understanding of the Bible from the long Christian tradition of interpretation, severing the bond between text and reader, between Scripture and the living church tradition. As a consequence, patristic and medieval interpreters are dismissed as serious commentators on the Holy Scriptures. This essay offers examples from classical Christian exegetes that illustrate how reading the Scriptures from within rather than against tradition deepens our understanding of the Bible.
11
CHEN, Zhongxiang. "Interpretation of the Women in the Biblical Literature." Review of Social Sciences 1, no. 6 (June 29, 2016): 09. http://dx.doi.org/10.18533/rss.v1i6.36.
Full textAbstract:
<p>Bible as literature and Bible as religion are comparative. It is without doubt that Bible, as a religious doctrine, has played a great role in Judaism and Christianity. It is meanwhile a whole literature collection of history, law, ethics, poems, proverbs, biography and legends. As the source of western literature, Bible has significant influence on the English language and culture, English writing and modeling of characters in the subsequent time. Interpreting the female characters in the Bible would affirm the value of women, view the feminist criticism in an objective way and agree the harmonious relationship between the men and the women. </p>
12
Slivka, Daniel. "Pontifical Encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu (1943) and Principle of Interpretation Bible." E-Theologos. Theological revue of Greek Catholic Theological Faculty 1, no. 1 (April 1, 2010): 106–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/v10154-010-0010-x.
Full textAbstract:
Pontifical Encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu (1943) and Principle of Interpretation Bible Divino Afflante Spiritu (Inspired by the Divine Spirit) is an encyclical letter issued by Pope Pius XII on September 30, 1943. It inaugurated the modern period of Roman Catholic Bible studies by permitting the limited use of modern methods of biblical criticism. The Catholic bible scholar Raymond E. Brown described it as a 'Magna Carta for biblical progress'. The first purpose of the encyclical was to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the issuing of Providentissimus Deus by Pope Leo XIII in 1893, which had condemned the use of higher criticism. In the encyclical, Pius XII noted that since then, advances had been made in archeology and historical research, making it advisable to further define the study of the Bible. In his encyclical the Pope stressed the importance of diligent study of these original languages and other cognate languages, so as to arrive at a deeper and fuller knowledge of the meaning of the sacred texts. Catholic translations of the Bible have been based directly on the texts found in manuscripts in the original languages, taking into account also the ancient translations that sometimes clarify what seem to be transcription errors in those manuscripts, although the Latin Vulgate remains the official Bible in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church. The Holy Scripture as a source of revelation was getting more often towards the believers at the beginning of last century. Interest in individual aspects of biblical text meant many difficulties for the Church. On the other end it brought great interest in Bible. Also new movements in Church and Magisterium explications helped it. Convocation of Second Vatican council vouched Catholics interest in positive changes in various Church ranges. It led to ratification the constitutions, edicts and declarations.
13
Capetz, Paul E. "Theology and the Historical-Critical Study of the Bible." Harvard Theological Review 104, no. 4 (October 2011): 459–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0017816011000411.
Full textAbstract:
One salient characteristic of our current situation is the emergence of a growing consensus among theologians and biblical scholars alike that the time has come to “dethrone” historical criticism as the reigning paradigm of scriptural exegesis for the sake of recovering a theological interpretation of the Bible on behalf of the church.1 To illustrate this new development, I have chosen to focus on the arguments of three prominent biblical scholars, each of whom has made a sustained case about the negative effects of historical criticism upon theological exegesis: They are Brevard S. Childs, Christopher R. Seitz, and Dale B. Martin. All three scholars have close ties to Yale and, not surprisingly, they bear a sort of family resemblance to one another inasmuch as their work partakes of theological themes and concerns that have been prominent at that school in recent decades. Notwithstanding their antagonistic posture toward historical criticism, all three are gifted practitioners of the very method whose dominance they seek to overturn. Since I am not a biblical scholar, I must enter into discussion with them as a theologian who is equally concerned about the relations between biblical studies and theology. At the outset, however, it is necessary to clarify that my own theological orientation prevents me from embracing their call to depose historical criticism. As a liberal Protestant for whom historical-critical interpretation of both the biblical and the post-biblical tradition is constitutive of theology's proper task, their initial premise that historical criticism is somehow inimical to a theological treatment of the Bible strikes me as false and misleading. Contrary to the impression given by their explicit formulations, it appears that the real target of their polemics is not historical scholarship per se but, rather, the normative uses to which it is put in theologies informed by it.
14
Quick, Laura. "Dream Accounts in the Hebrew Bible and Ancient Jewish Literature." Currents in Biblical Research 17, no. 1 (October 2018): 8–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1476993x17743116.
Full textAbstract:
The study of dreams and their interpretation in the literary remains from antiquity have become increasingly popular access points to the phenomenological study of religious experience in the ancient world, as well as of the literary forms in which this experience was couched. This article considers the phenomenon of dreaming in the Hebrew Bible and ancient Jewish literature. I consider treatments of these dream accounts, noting the development in the methodological means by which this material has been approached, moving from source criticism, to tradition history, and finally to form-critical methods. Ultimately, I will argue that form criticism in particular enables scholars to discern shifts and developments across diachronic perspectives. Study of dream accounts is thus illuminating not only for the understanding of dream phenomena, but also for the development of apocalyptic and the method and means of early Jewish biblical interpretation.
15
Olbricht, Thomas H. "Rhetorical Criticism in Biblical Commentaries." Currents in Biblical Research 7, no. 1 (October 2008): 11–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1476993x08094023.
Full textAbstract:
Biblical commentators through history have employed various methods to facilitate interpretation, including rhetorical criticism, with emphasis on classical rhetoric. Despite a resurgence of interest in rhetoric in the past two decades, only a few commentators in the New Interpreter's Bible and the Hermeneia series have undertaken in-depth rhetorical analysis. Most observations of these commentators are derived from the rhetorics of Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian and the Rhetorica ad Herennium. This essay sets forth and evaluates the various methods of rhetorical analysis and their employment in the two above-mentioned commentary series.
16
Riley, Paul C. J. "Translating Kyrios in the Gospel of John." Bible Translator 71, no. 2 (August 2020): 221–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2051677020917200.
Full textAbstract:
This article is a practical guide for translating kyrios in the Gospel of John. It considers the context of those translating into minority languages and vernaculars, especially when their language communities have access to a pre-existing translation in a language of wider communication. It takes into account the importance of textual criticism, semantics, acceptability, narrative, and paratext when trying to address challenges in Bible translation.
17
Braaten, Carl E. "Scripture, Church, and Dogma." Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology 50, no. 2 (April 1996): 142–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002096439605000204.
Full textAbstract:
The dominant thrust of the post-Enlightenment tradition of biblical criticism has been to emancipate itself from the church's faith and doctrine. Because there is no such thing as interpretation without presuppositions, critical interpretation of the Bible will be conducted on the basis of presuppositions that are either compatible with, or alien to, churchly doctrine.
18
Sarisky, Darren. "Biblical Interpretation and Analytic Reflection." Journal of Analytic Theology 6 (July 19, 2018): 162–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.12978/jat.2018-6.030013180024a.
Full textAbstract:
Analytic skill can contribute to a theology of the Bible and a theological hermeneutic in two ways, by refining the formulation of a doctrine of Scripture and a correlative hermeneutic, and by illuminating how problematic hermeneutical presuppositions have in some cases become part of exegetical practice. The contribution that the analytic style of reflection can make to the theological enterprise need not be vitiated by a common criticism of analytic modes of engaging with texts, namely, that they tend toward being ahistorical, though the objection deserves to be considered carefully.
19
Scheffler, Eben. "Jung, the Pentateuch and ethics." Verbum et Ecclesia 25, no. 2 (October 6, 2004): 653–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ve.v25i2.292.
Full textAbstract:
This article reflects on the contribution that can be made to the interpretation of the Bible by employing the analytical psychology of Carl Jung. After some relevant biographical considerations on Jung, his view of religion and the Bible is briefly considered, followed by a look into Genesis 1-3 in terms of his distinction of archetypes. It is suggested in the conclusion that Jungian psychological Biblical criticism can lead to a changed, but fresh view on the ‘authority’ or influence of the Bible in the lives of (post)modern human beings and their (ethical) behaviour.
20
Levenson, Jon D. "Religious Affirmation and Historical Criticism in Heschel's Biblical Interpretation." AJS Review 25, no. 1 (April 2001): 25–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s036400940001223x.
Full textAbstract:
Not least among the bittersweet gifts of modernity to the Jews is the complication of dealing with the Bible both as sacred scripture and as a document subject to the same canons of inquiry as any other historical, or putatively historical, record. The problem goes far beyond the familiar one posed by narratives that ancient historians find doubtful or quite impossible. For historical critical research into the Tanakh (as into all other scriptures) also uncovers the processes of development of the worldviews within the literature and thus puts a painful question to those who wish to affirm Judaism as a contemporary reality. How can a literature so variegated and contradictory speak with a normative voice today? It is no wonder that so many biblical scholars avoid the normative theological questions altogether and content themselves with historical and philological description (which, of course, presupposes norms of its own). It is also no wonder that so many religious practitioners neglect the historical issues and treat their scriptures as representing a static, uniform, and unvarying worldview—not surprisingly, the worldview of their own, postbiblical affirmation.
21
Somos, Mark. "Secularization in De Iure Praedae: from Bible Criticism to International Law." Grotiana 26, no. 1 (2007): 147–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/187607508x366571.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article shows that the conspicuous and consistent idiosyncrasy of Grotius's Biblical interpretation is an important part of his revolutionary effort to secularize natural law. In De iure praedae and related works, Grotius systematically deployed a range of exegetical techniques in order to demonstrate that the Bible, like all texts, is open to multiple interpretations and susceptible to hijacking by rival agendas. This strategy aimed to render the Bible inadmissible as evidence in legal disputes and political legitimacy claims. The consistent instrumentality of Grotius's use of the Bible in IPC cannot be dismissed as mere legalistic opportunism or described as an atheistic move. Rather, Grotius's exegetical strategy was motivated by pacifism and a desire to protect religion from politicization. The article positions this secularization strategy in the intellectual environment of the Leiden Circle, and shows how competing Catholic, Calvinist, and Mennonite political readings of the same key biblical passages during the Dutch-Iberian conflict provided the immediate occasion for writing IPC. In order to construct a natural law theory that was independent from, and therefore acceptable to, all religious sides, it was necessary to ensure that the Bible have no final word in law or politics, lest its invocation link disagreements to belief and thereby render them impossible to resolve.
22
Eskola, Timo. "Quran Criticism, the Historical-Critical Method, and the Secularization of Biblical Theology." Journal of Theological Interpretation 4, no. 2 (2010): 229–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/26421305.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The emergence of historical criticism of the Bible was partly influenced by medieval Quran criticism. This background was still well known in the 19th century but was later forgotten when emphasis was laid on Greek literature. Scholars such as Riccoldo da Monte di Croce had written critical works against the Quran. This tradition reemerged 200 years later in Germany when Martin Luther translated Riccoldo's Confutatio Alcorani. The special features in Riccoldo's work are the criteria he used hoping to prove that the Quran was not divine revelation. The famous Deist Hermann Reimarus later demanded that the Bible be read in the same way as other literature. His examples in Wolfenbüttel Fragments are mostly taken from the Quran. Reimarus adopted Riccoldo's criteria when interpreting the Bible. The purpose of his rationalistic criticism was to show that contradictions, inconsistencies, and lies prove that, as with the Quran, neither can the Bible be held as divine revelation. Reimarus, in his apology "for the Rational Reverers of God," stated that Christian doctrines are based on a fraud because the apostles created the whole Systema only after Jesus' death. Jesus' original proclamation was political. This dichotomy, confirmed later in David Strauss's biography on Reimarus, became the basis for the criterion of dissimilarity in NT interpretation. Rudolf Bultmann then gave this criterion its present formulation, and it is still used, for instance, by the Jesus Seminar.
23
Eskola, Timo. "Quran Criticism, the Historical-Critical Method, and the Secularization of Biblical Theology." Journal of Theological Interpretation 4, no. 2 (2010): 229–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/jtheointe.4.2.0229.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The emergence of historical criticism of the Bible was partly influenced by medieval Quran criticism. This background was still well known in the 19th century but was later forgotten when emphasis was laid on Greek literature. Scholars such as Riccoldo da Monte di Croce had written critical works against the Quran. This tradition reemerged 200 years later in Germany when Martin Luther translated Riccoldo's Confutatio Alcorani. The special features in Riccoldo's work are the criteria he used hoping to prove that the Quran was not divine revelation. The famous Deist Hermann Reimarus later demanded that the Bible be read in the same way as other literature. His examples in Wolfenbüttel Fragments are mostly taken from the Quran. Reimarus adopted Riccoldo's criteria when interpreting the Bible. The purpose of his rationalistic criticism was to show that contradictions, inconsistencies, and lies prove that, as with the Quran, neither can the Bible be held as divine revelation. Reimarus, in his apology "for the Rational Reverers of God," stated that Christian doctrines are based on a fraud because the apostles created the whole Systema only after Jesus' death. Jesus' original proclamation was political. This dichotomy, confirmed later in David Strauss's biography on Reimarus, became the basis for the criterion of dissimilarity in NT interpretation. Rudolf Bultmann then gave this criterion its present formulation, and it is still used, for instance, by the Jesus Seminar.
24
Yamada, Frank M. "The Bible after Babel: Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age - John J. Collins." Reviews in Religion & Theology 14, no. 1 (November 9, 2006): 9–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9418.2007.00322_2.x.
Full text
25
Awad, Najeeb George. "The influence of John Chrysostom's hermeneutics on John Calvin's exegetical approach to Paul's Epistle to the Romans." Scottish Journal of Theology 63, no. 4 (September 3, 2010): 414–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0036930610000499.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIn this article, I look at the possible impact of John Chrysostom's exegetical approach upon John Calvin's biblical interpretation. I detect the traces of Chrysostom's hermeneutical approach to Paul's Letter to the Romans in John Calvin's reading of the same epistle. Why Paul's literature? Because both Chrysostom and Calvin are very fond of Paul and his thinking and consider him the major voice in the Bible. Why the Epistle to the Romans specifically? Because they both believe that this epistle is valuable for the church at all times. According to them, it is the first door to the understanding of the Good News of God's salvation as proclaimed in the Bible. I make this comparison on the basis of the following foundational thesis. If the first Protestant reformers were reliant on the church's exegetical tradition, and if they believed in the affinity of their biblical reading to a long tradition of reading conducted before them, the impact of the church fathers' exegetical methodology on the reformers' biblical interpretation should be part and parcel of any scholarship we do on the Reformation's hermeneutics.
26
Khalifa Hasan, Muhammad. "The Qur'an's Contribution to Biblical Criticism." Journal of Qur'anic Studies 20, no. 2 (June 2018): 157–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/jqs.2018.0344.
Full textAbstract:
The Islamic science of Biblical Criticism is one of the earliest to emerge from the study of the Qur'an. It was developed by Muslim scholars specialising in the history of religions and reached its peak with the contributions of Ibn Ḥazm al-Andalūsī in the fifth/twelfth century. This ‘traditional’ Islamic science has more recently been complemented by the incorporation of Western Biblical Criticism Theory in the works of Raḥmat Allah al-Hindī, Ismāʿīl al-Fārūqī, Muḥammad Khalīfa Ḥasan, and others. This study will seek to determine the role of the Qur'an in the establishment of the Islamic science of Biblical Criticism and its centrality as a source for this discipline, through the elaboration of certain principles, such as the moderating position of the Qur'an between the Tanakh and Christian Bible, and the moderating position of Islam between Judaism and Christianity. Among these principles are the Qur'an's critical awareness and theories of taḥrīf and tabdīl, for example. The objectivity of the Qur'an is shown in the way it accepts previous revealed texts, and acknowledges them as a matter of belief, while seeking at the same time to conclusively clarify the revelation. In conclusion, this paper urges the usefulness of the Qur'an as a source of Biblical Criticism and Jewish and Christian interpretation and exegesis of the Tanakh and the Christian Bible.
27
Kapran, Svitlana B. "The Bible in the Works of I. Franko." Ukrainian Religious Studies, no. 39 (June 13, 2006): 67–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.32420/2006.39.1744.
Full textAbstract:
Many scholars have already considered the interpretation of the Bible in the works of I. Franko, including Vera Sulim, Larisa Bondar, Oksana Zabuzhko and others. However, these studies touch upon some aspects of Frank's vision of the Bible, or consider individual works of thinkers written on biblical subjects, such as "Moses," "The Death of Cain," "The Legend of Pilate," etc. Let us try here to show that the work of Ivan Franko demonstrates not only a deep philosophical understanding of the Bible, a new, not dogmatic reading of its ancient stories, but also an objective and scientific analysis of the knowledge about it that has accumulated in its time by world scientific criticism.
28
Brink, H. J. B. "’n Retoriese benadering tot die Nuwe Testament." Verbum et Ecclesia 14, no. 2 (July 19, 1993): 146–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ve.v14i2.1063.
Full textAbstract:
A rhetorical approach to the New TestamentAlthough a rhetorical approach to the New Testament implies careful attention to certain stylistic features of the text, it also entails a greater awareness of the social dimensions of the interpretation of the Bible. Attention is given to the gradual resurgence of rhetorical studies. The relevance of rhetorical criticism for New Testament studies is also discussed.
29
Houston, Walter J. "Prophecy and Religion Revisited: John Skinner and Evangelical Biblical Criticism." Religions 12, no. 11 (October 28, 2021): 935. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel12110935.
Full textAbstract:
The paper is an essay in the history of interpretation. Its subject is John Skinner’s book on the life of Jeremiah, Prophecy and Religion (1922). The main aim is to place the work in its historical, theological and cultural context, to explain Skinner’s conviction that Jeremiah’s life marks the emergence of personal religion in Israel and points towards Christianity. Attempts at such contextualization by J. Henderson and M.C. Callaway are studied and shown to be inadequate. Skinner’s religious context and theological education are then reviewed and are shown to be sufficient to account for his belief in the pivotal role of Jeremiah in the evolution of ‘religion’. The paper finally addresses the present-day significance of Skinner’s work and concludes that while Prophecy and Religion is of limited value for the interpretation of Jeremiah, Skinner’s life and work as a whole as an evangelical believer engaged in radical biblical criticism is a valuable model neglected over the last 100 years.
30
Burnett, Fred W. "The Bible after Babel: Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age - By John J. Collins." Religious Studies Review 33, no. 2 (September 14, 2007): 146–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0922.2007.00176_15.x.
Full text
31
Le Roux, J. H. "Sending en Pentateugkritiek." Verbum et Ecclesia 11, no. 2 (July 18, 1990): 187–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ve.v11i2.1020.
Full textAbstract:
Mission and criticism of the Pentateuch Criticism of the Pentateuch was looked at with scepticism by many during the nineteenth century in England. John William Colenso (1814—1883) was bishop of Natal and was of different opinion. His thorough investigation of the Pentateuch was sparked off by a question about the historical reliability of the Flood narrative. Colenso’s results about the nature and growth of the Pentateuch were diametrically opposed to the existing views. He was accused of heresy and viewed as a destroyer of the Bible. Colenso defended himself but it was of no avail.
32
Prothro, James B. "Inspiration and Textual Preservation: A Catholic Essay on the Bible." Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology 30, no. 2 (February 18, 2021): 141–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1063851221993913.
Full textAbstract:
The doctrine of inspiration grounds Christian use and interpretation of Scripture, making this doctrine at once theoretical and practical. Many theoretical accounts, however, restrict the “inspired” status of biblical texts to a single text-form, which introduces problems for the practical use of Scripture in view of the texts’ historical multiformity. This article argues that such restrictions of inspiration are theologically problematic and unnecessary. Contextualizing inspiration within the divine revelatory economy, this article argues that the Spirit’s same goals and varied activities in the texts’ composition obtain also in their preservation, so that we can consider multiple forms of a text to be inspired while acknowledging that not all forms are inspired to equal ends in the history and life of the church. The article concludes with hermeneutical reflections affirming that we, today, can read the “word of the Lord” while also affirming the place of textual criticism in theological interpretation.
33
Quitslund, Beth. "“A Second Bible”: Liturgy and Interpretation in the Expositions of John Boys." Reformation 23, no. 1 (January 2, 2018): 79–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13574175.2018.1468602.
Full text
34
Tabb Stewart, David. "LGBT/Queer Hermeneutics and the Hebrew Bible." Currents in Biblical Research 15, no. 3 (June 2017): 289–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1476993x16683331.
Full textAbstract:
LGBT and queer interpretive approaches have moved beyond the identitarian and apologetic stances of the 1970s–90s, when the first order of business was to respond to anti-gay voices and understand social location as an interpretive standpoint. The HIV/AIDS health crisis helped move some LGBT interpreters away from homosexuality as an object of study to placing themselves inside the text as subjects, lamenting with the Psalms or putting God in the dock like Job. Queer interpretation, anti-essentialist in spirit, moved away from identitarian concerns placing queer interpreters outside the text as interrogators. Queer biblical criticism resists heteronormativity as the default interpretive stance, but embraces the study of the body, gender performance, midrash-making and playfulness with biblical texts. The queer interpretive approach has begun to mature as it seeks intersections with minoritized criticisms, disability studies and the rising consciousness of intersex people, while criticizing itself as well.
35
Human, D. J. "Teologie kroniek: Skrifverstaan en die Nuwe Hervorming1 Theology Chronicle: Understanding of Scripture and the “New Reformation”." Verbum et Ecclesia 24, no. 1 (October 15, 2003): 260–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ve.v24i1.314.
Full textAbstract:
During the last decade a group of South African theologians have stirred a part of the Afrikaans ecclesiastical community with statements and arguments on several faith issues, including the interpretation of the Bible. Adherents of the movement call themselves the New Reformation (“Nuwe Hervorming”). This theology chronicle is an attempt to touch on some hermeneutical challenges for understanding Scripture. To the Church the Bible is the norm and source of faith. Paradigm shifts have been caused by the Enlightenment and influenced the understanding of Scripture. Historical Criticism, for example, has brought multiple perspectives to the reading of biblical texts. More approaches to biblical understanding originated. For the ordinary Bible reader and believer these approaches sometimes seem to be confusing. This explanation is an attempt to create better understanding for Bible reading in our times. It concludes with a short assessment of the current role the New Reformation movement plays in the hermeneutical debate.
36
Harun, Martin. "Steven L. McKenzie & John Kaltner, eds., New Meanings for Ancient Texts: Recent Approaches to Biblical Criticisms and their Applications, Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2013, xiii+181pp." DISKURSUS - JURNAL FILSAFAT DAN TEOLOGI STF DRIYARKARA 14, no. 1 (April 20, 2015): 144–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.36383/diskursus.v14i1.76.
Full textAbstract:
Beberapa puluh tahun yang lalu Steven McKenzie menjadi editor sebuah kumpulan karangan yang berjudul To Each Its Own Meaning: An Introduction to Biblical Criticism and their Application (1993). Dalam bunga rampai itu dibahas metode-metode penelitian lama yang berfokus pada latar belakang sejarah teks (penelitian sumber, sejarah tradisi, jenis sastra, peredaksian), cara-cara penelitian literer yang lebih baru (seperti penelitian strukturalis, pasca-strukturalis, naratif, atau reader’s respons) dan beberapa yang lain (penelitian ilmu sosial, kanonik, atau retorika). Dalam dua puluh tahun sejak terbitan itu banyak pendekatan baru berkembang, misalnya, dalam symposia pertemuan para pakar Alkitab nasional dan internasional, dan dalam banyak monograf, bunga rampaidan artikel Jurnal. Untuk membantu pembaca mengikuti perkembangan cepat itu, kini McKenzie & Kaltner menerbitkan New Meanings for Ancient Texts. Mereka memilih sembilan pendekatan yang makin berpengaruh dan meminta kepada pionir-pionir utama setiap pendekatan untuk memberi deskripsi pendekatannya yang jelas bagi non spesialis dan mengilustrasikannya dengan meneliti satu atau beberapa teks contoh.
Judul bab dari beberapa di antara kesembilan pendekatan itu barangkali segera ditanggap pembaca, karena sudah lebih lama dikenal. Misalnya, “Psychological Biblical Criticism” (D. Andrew Kille, pp. 137-154) dan “Ecological Criticism” (Norman Habel, pp. 39-58). Pendekatan-pendekatan ini agaknya dimuat di sini karena mengalami pergeseran paradigma dalam beberapa dasa warsa terakhir. Juga tidak baru di telinga pembaca akademis adalah “Postcolonial Biblical Criticism”(Warren Carter, pp. 97-116) dan “Postmodernism” (Hugh Pyper, pp. 117-136). Postmodernisme yang membongkar cerita-cerita besar seperti sejarah keselamatan Alkitab dan mau menyadarkan pembaca bahwa banyak jawaban kita selama ini sesungguhnya kurang pasti daripada dikira, meluas di dunia tafsir Barat; sedangkan penelitian Alkitab pascakolonial yang meneliti hubungan dominasi dan subordinasi dalam teksteks Alkitab dan dampaknya dalam sejarah kolonialisme dan lanjutannya dalam masa pasca-penjajahan, sekarang ini menjadi sangat aktual dalam distorsi relasi antara Selatan dan Utara. “New Historicism” (Gina Hens-Piazza, pp. 59-76) tidak lagi mencoba merekonstruksi realitas sejarah di belakang teks (seperti dilakukan oleh Historical Criticism), tetapi dengan cara yang multidisipliner meneliti teks sebagai representasi dari realitas kultural, sosial, politik, dan sebagainya, sambil melepaskan distingsi antara literatur dan sejarah, juga antara pengarang dan pembaca, antara arti dulu dan arti sekarang. Dekat tetapi berbeda dengan itu “Cultural-Historical Criticism of the Bible” (Timothy Beal, pp.1-20) meneliti bagaimana kata, kiasan, objek dan ide dalam Alkitab menerima bentuk dan artinya dalam konteks kebudayaan tertentu yang memproduksikannya atau mereproduksikannya. “The Bible and Popular Culture” (Linda Schearing and Valerie Ziegler, pp. 77-96) kurang berfokus pada Alkitab sendiri tetapi menganalisa bagaimana teks-teks tertentu berfungsi dalam ungkapan-ungkapan budaya rakyat, lelucon, iklan, komik, seni, film, dll., juga mengingat pergeseran yang kini terjadi dari budaya teks tertulis ke apropriasi visual. “Disability Studies and the Bible” (Nasya Junior and Jeremy Schipper, pp. 21-38) dan apa yang disebut “Queer Criticism” (Ken Stone, pp. 155-176) meneliti Alkitab dari situasi kelompok-kelompok tertentu, entah mereka orang-orangcacat yang banyak muncul dalam teks-teks Alkitab yang dapat dimengerti lebih baik dari dalam pengalaman invaliditas; atau mereka yang dari sudut seks dan jender berada dalam posisi yang tidak menguntungkan atau bahkan ditolak. Di sini a.l. tempatnya penelitian Alkitab komunitas gay and lesbian, dan lebih awal feminisme.
........................
Apakah bunga rampai tentang pelbagai pendekatan baru ini penting untuk seorang yang sudah cukup puas dengan metodenya selama ini atau yang menerima Alkitab sebagai buku yang mempunyai otoritas terhadap dirinya dan jemaatnya? Keberatan (kita) yang sudah lama diajukan terhadap pendekatan tersebut, pada akhir setiap karangan dengan jujur dikemukakan dan diberi tanggapan singkat. Membaca contoh-contoh penafsiran dalam bunga rampai ini, saya sering merasa diajak ke dalam suatu perjalanan yang berbelit-belit. Tetapi setelah beberapa tikungan muncul juga pemandangan menarik dan berharga yang belum pernah saya perhatikan selama ini. Selain itu, setiap artikel mulai dengan pengantar umum tentang, misalnya, fenomen postmodernisme, ilmu ekologi, atauqueer criticism yang sudah lebih lama dikembangkan di akademi umum, dan baru sekarang mulai dipakai juga untuk analisa teks-teks biblis. Pengantar-pengantar itu saja memberi gambaran menarik tentang masalah-masalah yang dewasa ini digumuli dalam komunitas global. Setuju atau tidak, mengetahuinya penting untuk keduanya. (Martin Harun, Guru Besar Ilmu Teologi Emeritus, Sekolah Tinggi Filsafat Driyarkara, Jakarta).
37
Aichele, George. "Review of John J. Collins,The Bible After Babel: Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age." Bible and Critical Theory 4, no. 2 (June 2008): 28.1–28.3. http://dx.doi.org/10.2104/bc080028.
Full text
38
KLINGBEIL, GERALD A. "Cultural Criticism and Biblical Hermeneutics: Definition, Origins, Benefits, and Challenges." Bulletin for Biblical Research 15, no. 2 (January 1, 2005): 261–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/26423899.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Over the past 30 years, methods of hermeneutics in the context of biblical studies have diversified impressively. Even for the specialist it is often challenging to stay up-to-date in the labyrinth of new methodologies and proposals for biblical interpretation. Over the past decade, cultural criticism has become an important critical tool and has gained significant recognition. In the present study I seek, first, to define this hermeneutical phenomenon and describe its origins in the larger context of humanities. This is followed, second, by a summary of the methods, hermeneutical presuppositions and applications of cultural criticism by some of its more important practitioners. Third, I seek to evaluate how evangelical scholarship has reacted to and interacted with cultural criticism. Finally, some of the possible challenges of and benefits to a Bible-based hermeneutic are presented, including its missiological repercussions.
39
KLINGBEIL, GERALD A. "Cultural Criticism and Biblical Hermeneutics: Definition, Origins, Benefits, and Challenges." Bulletin for Biblical Research 15, no. 2 (January 1, 2005): 261–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/bullbiblrese.15.2.0261.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Over the past 30 years, methods of hermeneutics in the context of biblical studies have diversified impressively. Even for the specialist it is often challenging to stay up-to-date in the labyrinth of new methodologies and proposals for biblical interpretation. Over the past decade, cultural criticism has become an important critical tool and has gained significant recognition. In the present study I seek, first, to define this hermeneutical phenomenon and describe its origins in the larger context of humanities. This is followed, second, by a summary of the methods, hermeneutical presuppositions and applications of cultural criticism by some of its more important practitioners. Third, I seek to evaluate how evangelical scholarship has reacted to and interacted with cultural criticism. Finally, some of the possible challenges of and benefits to a Bible-based hermeneutic are presented, including its missiological repercussions.
40
Fowl, Stephen. "Texts Don't have Ideologies." Biblical Interpretation 3, no. 1 (1995): 15–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156851595x00023.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractOver the past fifteen years "ideological criticism" of the Bible has grown to become an accepted practice within the academy. It has provided a site where feminists, Marxists, liberation theologians and other interested parties have been able to engage in discussion aimed largely at displaying the wide variety of competing interests operating in both the production and interpretation of the Bible. Unfortunately, it is common among ideological critics of the Bible to speak of biblical texts as having ideologies. The thrust of this article is to claim that this way of thinking confuses a wide range of issues concerning the relationships between texts and the social practices which both generated those texts and are sustained by interpretations of particular texts. This position is defended by an examination of the various ways in which the Abraham story was read from Genesis through Philo, Paul, and Justin Martyr.
41
RYOO, DAVID EUNG YUL. "LEARNING FROM CALVIN’S METHODOLOGY OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION." CALVIN AND THE LATER REFORMATION 3, no. 2 (October 1, 2017): 19–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.35285/ucc3.2.2017.art1.
Full textAbstract:
Most research on John Calvin focuses on theology and history. Yet Calvin viewed himself primarily as a minister and preacher: the Bible is the revelation of God and exposition the preacher’s ultimate mission. This article examines Calvin’s methodology of biblical interpretation in his sermons, his perspective on the word, and his conception of preaching. Calvin’s sermons reveal four characteristics: the goal of preaching is unfolding biblical texts, biblical interpretation communicates the intent of the original author, the absolute lordship and grace of God is centered upon Jesus Christ, and the text must be applied as well as explained.
42
Gaponenkov, Alexey A. "The Bible Word in the works of religious thinkers (S. L. Frank, G. P. Fedotov, N. S. Arseniev)." Izvestiya of Saratov University. Philology. Journalism 22, no. 1 (February 21, 2022): 43–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.18500/1817-7115-2022-22-1-43-49.
Full textAbstract:
During the years of the revolution and the Civil War S. L. Frank, G. P. Fedotov, N. S. Arseniev were professors at Saratov University, but this is not all that unites them. In emigration these religious thinkers taught at various research-training, cultural-educational and spiritual centers of Europe, both Russian and foreign. The article reveals their personal experience of referring to the Biblical Word, exegesis of biblical texts based on Orthodox theology and biblical criticism. Frank wrote about the Word that created the world and the incarnate Word. In the book Collapse of the Idols (1923) he appeals to his reader with quotations from the New Testament, expressing the eternal and absolute. In the Holy Scriptures, he finds a match for his “basic intuition” of being. He bases his book Light in the Darkness (1949) on The Gospel of John, expressing the Christian attitude towards evil and criticizing all kinds of Utopianism. Frank’s idea that a man is destined to suffer to obtain salvation is also derived by him from the New Testament. Fedotov’s programmatic proposal on biblical studies is the article Orthodoxy and Historical Criticism (1932). He posed “the question of the limits of criticism in biblical exegesis”. Fedotov goes to the “pure basis of the Holy Tradition”, combining criticism of the historical school, “dogmatic loyalty to Orthodoxy” and “warm attitude” to Western Christianity. In the book Spiritual Poems (1935) the thinker explores folk beliefs in spiritual verses considering how biblical images (the Mother of God as “suffering mother and intercessor,” Christ the Almighty) and eschatological prophecies transform in them.The spiritual experience of the apostles John and Paul, their mysticism is the central attraction of Arseniev’s exegetical interests. He reinterprets the pre-Christian concept of the Logos and comes to the Christian understanding of the Word of God: Logos of the Old Testament prepares the hearts of men for the incarnation of the Son of God.
43
Morgan, T. "The Edited Bible. The Curious History of the 'Editor' in Biblical Criticism. By JOHN VAN SETERS." Journal of Theological Studies 58, no. 2 (October 1, 2007): 557–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jts/flm030.
Full text
44
Roberts, Michael. "The Genesis of John Ray and his Successors." Evangelical Quarterly 74, no. 2 (April 16, 2002): 143–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/27725472-07402004.
Full textAbstract:
Most writers assume that, until geological findings forced them to modify their beliefs in the 19th Century, all Christians believed that the earth was created in 4004 BC on the basis of Ussher’s chronological calculations. By considering first John Ray and his contemporary theologians, poets and naturalists, it is clear that few followed Ussher even in the 17th Century. They favoured a Chaos-Restitution interpretation of Genesis One allowing a longer time. Most held this in the 18th Century but after the awareness of vast geological time the duration of Chaos was vastly extended to include all geological time. This preceded the Gap Theory of Chalmers in 1802. Until the 1850s this was the dominant interpretation, when Hugh Miller and Rorison rejected it. After that most conservative Christians rejected it, but it found new life in the Scofield Bible only to be rejected after the rise of Creationism in 1961.
45
Brisman, Leslie. "Studying the Bible in the “Post-Truth” Era." Religion and the Arts 25, no. 1-2 (March 24, 2021): 173–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685292-02501005.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract When Jesus tells Pilate “my kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36), he may be reassuring Pilate that Jesus and his followers pose no political threat. In our time, however, the secular idea of “alternate facts” has become something of a new religion and affects both our politics and our academic study. The difficult questions of what constitutes facts or credible critical interpretation of literary facts is particularly vexed when there is a question of citation. This article does not deal with questionable abbreviations of citation (such as “The Lord is merciful and compassionate” Exod. 34:6 without the deflected punishment clauses) or expanded citation (such as “You have heard it said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemies’ ” [Matt. 5:43]). It concerns rather some instances where a verse may or may not be a citation and where extra-biblical ideology can interfere with the interpretation of what is being quoted, if it is being quoted. “The poor you have always with you” (Mark 14:7, possibly citing Deut. 15:11) is one such example.
46
Busch, Austin. "Gnostic Biblical and Second Sophistic Homeric Interpretation." Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum / Journal of Ancient Christianity 22, no. 2 (September 3, 2018): 195–217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/zac-2018-0029.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Gnostic biblical interpretation closely resembles, from a formal perspective, Second Sophistic interpretation of Homeric Epic, which no less than the Bible constituted canonical scripture in late antiquity. This becomes apparent when one compares rewritings of Homer in Philostratus’ Heroicus and in Dio Chrysostom’s Trojan Oration to biblical revision in the Secret Book of John, the Nature of the Rulers, and On the Origin of the World. This essay accounts for this resemblance with reference to ancient rhetorical textbooks and model compositional exercises (progymnasmata), which treat a rhetorical tactic identified as ἀνασκευὴ (“refutation”). It also ponders the implications and interpretive possibilities of joint analysis of these two bodies of late antique scriptural revision.
47
Kirby, John T. "The Rhetorical Situations of Revelation 1–3." New Testament Studies 34, no. 2 (April 1988): 197–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0028688500019998.
Full textAbstract:
The publication of George Kennedy'sNew Testament Interpretation Through Rhetorical Criticismmarked the full realization of a growing trend in NT criticism, whereby scholars are beginning to look beyond the limitations of form- and source-criticism for another viable hermeneutical tool. Rhetorical criticism has its origins in the classical canons conceptualized and formulated by the principal rhetoricians of Greek and Roman antiquity, such as Aristotle and Quintilian. This methodology sprang from roots in the ancient world; rhetoric was ‘one of the constraints under which New Testament writers worked’. But it has a universality that transcends its own cultural boundaries, as well as an extraordinary practicality: ‘ … it does study a verbal reality, our text of the Bible, rather than the oral sources standing behind that text, the hypothetical stages of its composition, or the impersonal workings of social forces, and at its best it can reveal the power of those texts as unitary messages’’. Often, too, it is capable of slashing through exegetical Gordian knots that prove otherwise intractable. The ability of rhetorical criticism to evaluate even the more opaque or mystical portions of the NT is a measure of its effectiveness.
48
HOLOVASCHENKO, Sergii. "Development of Theological-Apologetical Discourse in Biblical Studies at Kiev Theological Academy of the late XIX - early XX centuries." Theological Reflections: Eastern European Journal of Theology, no. 21 (February 9, 2022): 43–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.29357/2521-179x.2018.21.3.
Full textAbstract:
The article highlights the development of hermeneutical strategies for the analysis and refutation of rationalist “negative” biblical criticism, represented by the works of leading theologians - professors of the Kiev Theological Academy of the late XIX - early XX centuries. In the conditions of secularization, the decline of church authority, the spread of political radicalism, the need for apologetic understanding of the biblical heritage increased. A systematic analysis of the signs, approaches and methods of rationalism in biblical studies has been heuristicly valuable, in particular: criticism of panlogism, abstract schematics, empirically groundless extrapolations and generalizations. At the same time, Kyiv Biblical scholars criticized the insolvent apologetic techniques: the literalistic view of the inspiration, the absolute authority of the tradition, the excessive spiritualization in the perception of the biblical prophecy. Their main goal was to prove the authenticity and authenticity of the content of biblical books and the very biblical hystory. The methodological impulse for the biblical apologetics was the intensification of supranaturalism, providentialism, and soteriology in the reading and interpretation of the Bible - just as the Holy Scriptures of the Church. The apologetic motive was to determine both scientific bibliological studies, and school teaching and study of the Bible, and private and public Biblical reading for religious and moral instruction.
49
Natar, Asnath Niwa. "Prostitute or First Apostle? Critical Feminist Interpretation of John 4: 1-42 Over the Figure of the Samaritan Woman at Jacob's Well." Walisongo: Jurnal Penelitian Sosial Keagamaan 27, no. 1 (July 30, 2019): 99–124. http://dx.doi.org/10.21580/ws.27.1.3891.
Full textAbstract:
The Bible is indeed written in a patriarchal culture and someone finds it desperate to search for the Bible texts that support equality as it provides insufficient passages of equality between men and women. Nonetheless, to use the feminist perspectives is pivotal in searching for equality in reading the Bible texts. It helps people to learn from the efforts made by women in the Bible in order to get out of their oppression and to not take for granted of their miserable situation. Thus in this paper, the author makes a reinterpretation effort on the text of John 4, 1- 42 which has been interpreted in gender bias. The interpretation uses the historical-critical method with a hermeneutic approach to investigation (suspicion) from a feminist perspective. Hermeneutic investigative approach is an approach that reads the text critically and with assumptions (initial suspicion) about the elements of power relations that exist in the text that are dominative and investigates the text. This new approach can result in a new understanding and appreciation of the figures and actions of the Samaritan woman who has been seen as a prostitute and a sinful woman.
50
Parina, Elena. "Textual Criticism and Text Reconstruction: Approaches to Early Russian and Welsh Poetry." Studia Celto-Slavica 5 (2010): 149–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.54586/iumu8654.
Full textAbstract:
The Tale of Igor’s Campaign and The Gododdin, two poetic texts crucially important for the history of Early Russian and Welsh literature respectively, have a very dark history. Both are preserved in only one reliable source and are supposed to be composed about 600 years before this edition or manuscript was created. Anna Dybo and John Koch however propose an attempt of reconstruction for the Ur-Text of these poetic masterpieces. In this article we compare the framework within which these reconstructions were created. Whereas Anna Dybo relies mainly on contemporary texts, John Koch in the absence of such monuments has to rely more on historical interpretation.