The first three readings (and I’d say all the readings for today) invite us to reflect more deeply and differently about issues and biblical texts. Our readings demand us to be critical of the interpretative frameworks, presuppositions, and historical-socio-cultural location not only of biblical authors but also examine overall “interpretative tendencies” that lie behind ancient and modern interpreters. Before us are various ways of thinking, looking, experiencing and interpreting the text. How do we differ from ancient readers? And in what ways could we possibly have in common? Given the abundance and variety of voices, it is important for us to be self-aware of our “interpretative tendencies”, interpretative frameworks, presuppositions, and of our own social-cultural-scientific-psychological present location. We bring to our interpretations our own subjectivity. Thus, when we do biblical theology it is important to help readers understand where we locate ourselves since our contributions to scholarship are “product of historically bound assumptions” (Lambert, 4). It is important to be critically self-aware since we are all product of our own time and context. …show more content…
However, his target audience is broader, not limited to scholars, but more focused to lay people or ordinary students of scripture for Smith speaks in a simple language that is understandable by non-scholars. Smith points out that the ancients’ view of God were influenced by their worldview. Smith invites us his readers to reflect: to “think” and “feel” –to “think from the heart” in a more profound and different way of conceiving God. Smith describes our own sense of God as an “open-ended
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:
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
Harris, Stephen. Understanding The Bible. 6 ed. New York City: McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages, 2002. Print.
Trible, P. (1973). ‘Depatriarchalizing in Biblical Interpretation’. Journal of the American Academy of Religion. 41 (1), pp.30-48.
"EXPLORING THEOLOGY 1 & 2." EXPLORING THEOLOGY 1 2. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 May 2014.
The term Wesleyan Quadrilateral is a theological method used to study scripture. It was believed that theologian John Wesley studied scriptures in the Bible using three lenses, hence where the Wesleyan Quadrilateral gets its name. These three lenses are tradition, reason, and experience. While quad means four and tradition, reason, and experience are only three terms, they each communicate a way that scripture can be studied, therefore the term scripture completes the quadrilateral. It is important to study scripture using the Wesleyan Quadrilateral because Wesley was known as being a relevant theologian and his views on scripture have lasted over two centuries. The Wesleyan quadrilateral is still relevant today as it provides a method for discovering the things of God, ourselves, and lets us know who God really is. For the purposes of this reflection paper I would like to summarize the four components of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral and then reflect personally upon each term as how it relates to the Christian theologian.
The New Interpreter's Study Bible: New Revised Standard Version with the Apocrypha. Nashville: Abingdon Press, ©2003.
...pse." In Current Issues in New Testament Interpretation, edited by W. Klaasen and G.F. Snyder, 23-37. New York, NY: Harper and Row, 1962.
We cannot over simplify human behavior and the power of belief. Belief being the structure humans have created to understand one’s existence. Equally important, beliefs reassure a sense of balance and control in a world where we may feel powerless or helpless despite scientific developments. Nevertheless, science is the reality tested. Bultmann, points out blind acceptance of the New Testament’s written word would be irrational, and “a sacrifice of the intellect which could have only one result – a curious form of schizophrenia and insincerity” . Nevertheless, there remains a confusion that pervades modern ideas of the universe and our existence. Bultmann did acknowledge the truths a shallow enlightenment had failed to perceive are later rediscovered in ancient myths. Therefore, the task of dissecting the written words and structure of the New Testament is important for clarification and
Exegesis and hermeneutics are the two main processes of studying the Bible as well as all of its content not only academically but philosophically as well. Exegesis is the study of the bible with the emphasis on the actual text. On the other hand, Hermeneutics is philosophical and reasoning study of the Bible focusing on the process of interpretation. However, this chapter stated that multiple approaches are used simultaneously. We need to be very cautious when we use other people’s hermeneutical assumptions and not a...
The film, ‘The Gods Must Be Crazy’ gives an interesting look at the juxtaposition of two cultures. The first is one of serene simplicity, that of the Bushmen (referred to hereafter in the more correct form, San); and the second is that of the western civilization, characterized by extreme busyness and stress. The two worlds of course collide in this 1980s South African comedy. The film took much flak however, from those who thought its depictions of the San were incorrect and even racist. Nevertheless, the film was an international hit, especially in America were it grossed $51,200,000 in 1980 (IMDB). In this paper, I will attempt to gauge the veracity of the claims of racism in this film against the intent of the film maker to decide if they
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.
Edited by Buttrick, George A.. The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. New York: Abingdon Press, 1962. p.782-786
One of the major points stressed by Hodge in this essay is that the scriptures are infallible because they were written by the inspiration of God and the Holy Ghost. Hodge begins to describe the attri...