Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Jesus identity
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Jesus identity
. Introduction
The canonical text is the authoritative and unchangeable Word of God. Unlike the oral scriptures, the canonical books can be studied, tested, and read repeatedly. Because of its historical nature the “literal” meaning of the Word must be found within that historical setting. An accurate interpretation requires an understanding of both the present and historical setting. The Word is preached in public worship so that it may be explained, debated, and tested. As a result, its form may be altered as its meaning is tested against the canonical Word. In order to apply the Word to our present situations, we must understand the both situations, the differences as well as any parallels that exist between the two situations.
Jewish & Gentile – Interpretive Crisis
The Jewish and Gentile Christians used the Old Testament Scripture in various ways. In the first method, Judaizes taught that before coming to Christ Gentiles needed to become Jewish proselytes. Once converted, they were required to observe the 613 commandments. Additionally it was necessary for Gentiles to follow the Law of Moses to be saved. However, Acts 15 verses 6 through 11 settled the argument, it states
“The apostles and the elders met together to consider this matter. After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “My brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that I should be the one through whom the Gentiles would hear the message of the good news and become believers. And God, who knows the human heart, testified to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us; and in cleansing their hearts by faith he has made no distinction between them and us. Now therefore why are yo...
... middle of paper ...
...flection
In my Christian tradition, the interpretation of scripture is approached literally, historically and spiritually. My Pastor usually gives background history of the scripture before explaining the context. Similar to most of the ministers in my church he will mention that he received inspiration from God while studying a particular text. As a result, I believe God is the true interpreter of Scripture. Specifically no two individuals get the same meaning from the same scripture. I believe that Scriptural interpretation is inspired by God. Therefore, each person’s approach to interpretation is tailored by God to the individual’s needs. As I consider the early Christian and Medieval methods of interpretation, many of methods are in use today. I believe different methods of interpretation are necessary to accommodate individual approaches to God.
According to David M. Carr, the history of Scriptural interpretation indicates that religious texts are popular candidates for reinterpretation and, as such, are spaces wherein the personal identity of the reader frequently inscribes itself at length:
The Bible is read and interpreted by many people all over the world. Regardless, no one knows the absolute truth behind scripture. Walter Brueggemann, professor of Old Testament, wrote “Biblical Authority” to help people understand what he describes as six different parts that make up the foundation to ones understanding of scripture. He defines these six features as being: inherency, interpretation, imagination, ideology, inspiration, and importance. As Brueggemann explains each individual part, it is easy to see that they are all interconnected because no one can practice one facet without involuntarily practicing at least one other part.
For thousands of years there have been many transcriptions and changes to the words of God, For example, just in the last thousand years there has been three different transcriptions, The New Testament, Homer, and also Sophocles. For a person not to look for their own interpretation of the lord’s book is
With possibly fourteen of the twenty-seven books in the New Testament, and no less than seven attributed to him, the Apostle Paul of Tarsus undoubtedly altered and continues to alter the course of Christianity. Through his extensive mission work, preaching, and letter writing, Paul has left behind an immense legacy that few people in history can compare to. To this day, some two thousand years later, Paul and his writings are extensively researched, discussed, and debated across all of Christianity and much of the non-Christian world. For most practicing Christians, Paul’s teachings from his letters hold extreme weight and significance in their attempt to follow the teachings and life of Jesus in conjunction with the Bible. One such writing of Paul’s that was canonized into the Bible is his letter to the church at Philippi. This work will serve as an introduction to the Pauline epistle of Philippians.
N.T Wright (2008) stated that “When we read the scriptures as Christians, we read it precisely as people of the new covenant and of the new creation” (p.281). In this statement, the author reveals a paradigm of scriptural interpretation that exists for him as a Christian, theologian, and profession and Bishop. When one surveys the entirety of modern Christendom, one finds a variety of methods and perspectives on biblical interpretation, and indeed on the how one defines the meaning in the parables of Jesus. Capon (2002) and Snodgrass (2008) offer differing perspectives on how one should approach the scriptures and how the true sense of meaning should be extracted. This paper will serve as a brief examination of the methodologies presented by these two authors. Let us begin, with an
The editors certainly strive to share their passion for this method of understanding Scripture which seems to have been essentially lost to time. The student, formal or layman, is given clear examples of the various writings the editors feel are relevant to the various sections of
The New Interpreter's Study Bible: New Revised Standard Version with the Apocrypha. Nashville: Abingdon Press, ©2003.
For centuries, the canon narratives of the crucifixion and resurrection have been told through various Medias. The interpretations of these essential scriptures were influenced and shaped by the theological perspectives of the era they were formulated. The rendered expressions functioned as confessions of faith, teaching instruments, sources of devotion, expressions of individual piety and hermeneutical reflections.1
Authority of Scripture reconciles the community with God and can transform our lives. To participate in the fuller blessing of understanding, it is important to view Scripture with historical and literary sensitivity, interpret theocentrically, ecclesially, and contextually. I realize each of these can be overwhelming to the average person who is seeking direction for a specific concern in their life. Therefore, Migliore reminds us, interpreting Scripture is practical engagement in the living of Christian faith, love, and hope in a still redeemed world. When we listen carefully to the voices of the past, from a worldwide culture, and guided by the Holy Spirit, we will open ourselves to those transformational opportunities.
Holy Bible: Contemporary English Version. New York: American Bible Society, 1995. Print. (BS195 .C66 1995)
Thus, an effort is made to highlight how Bible interpretation – through its publication – has developed in the history of Christianity.
... for personal reasons you to are using exegetical approaches to the scriptures. We do this every time we read something or hear it spoken. The Bible is no different besides that you have to decipher it correctly. By reading other commentaries on that book or verse you can form your own exegetical hypothesis, but make sure it is a biblical one.
Answering these questions is the purpose of this essay. I begin by arguing that the Bible cannot be adequately understood independent of its historical context. I concede later that historical context alone however is insufficient, for the Bible is a living-breathing document as relevant to us today as it was the day it was scribed. I conclude we need both testimonies of God at work to fully appreciate how the Bible speaks to us.
During his sermon, those in the audience who were convicted of their sinful condition, cried out, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37) Although, Peter was glad to tell them about Jesus’ offer and how they could get into the ark of safety; the church, he did not say, “Accept Jesus as your personal Savior” nor did he tell them to pray a sinner’s prayer. As he was guided by the Holy Spirit, Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:38) Later, Peter wrote, “…in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water, there is also an antitype which now saves us---baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God) through the resurrection of Jesus Christ…” (I Peter 3:20-21)
A response to the interpretation of Acts 4:32–36 as an endorsement of a type of communal living as being normative for the Christian church.