Hermeneutics, Part 1
Intro
Objectives
Definition
In its technical meaning, hermeneutics is often defined as the science and art of biblical interpretation. Hermeneutics is considered a science because it has rules, and these rules can be classified in an orderly system. It is considered an art because communication is flexible, and therefore a mechanical and rigid application of rules will sometimes distort the true meaning of a communication.21
Bible Usage
Common Usage
Why we Need Biblical Hermeneutics
Relation of Hermeneutics with Other Terms
The goal of Hermeneutics
The goal of a sound hermeneutic is to capture what has been described as a "pure biblical theology, which is an isolation and presentation of the unchanging biblical teachings which are valid for all of times."'
How Hermeneutics was done in ancient times
Since the Israelites had probably lost their understanding of Hebrew during the exilic period, most biblical scholars assume that Ezra and his helpers translated the Hebrew text and read it aloud in Aramaic, adding explanations to make the meaning clear. Thus began the science and art of biblical interpretation.481
Jewish methods of Interpretation
At the time of Christ, Jewish exegesis could be classified into four main types: literal, midrashic, pesher, and allegorical.503
The literal method of interpretation, referred to as peshat, apparently served as the basis for other types of interpretation. Richard Longenecker, citing Adolf Löwy, suggests that the reason for the relative infrequency of literalistic interpretations in Talmudic literature is “that this type of commentary was expected to be known by everyone; and since there were no disputations about it, it was not recorded.”514
Midrash comes from the Hebrew verb darash meaning to search. Midrash, then, speaks of an inquiry or an exposition. Midrashic interpretation included a variety of hermeneutical devices that had developed considerably by the time of Christ and continued to develop for several centuries thereafter. The primary goal of midrash was to highlight and explain the relevance of scriptural teaching in new and changing circumstances.
Pesher interpretation was practiced particularly among the Qumran community. This form borrowed extensively from midrashic practices but included a significant eschatological (end-time) focus. The community believed that everything the ancient prophets wrote had a veiled prophetic meaning that was to be imminently fulfilled through their covenant community.558
Allegorical exegesis was based on the idea that beneath the literal meaning of Scripture lay the true meaning.5710 Historically, allegory had been developed by the Greeks to resolve the tension between their mythological religious tradition and their philosophical heritage.5811 Because the religious myths contained much that was immoral or otherwise unacceptable, Greek philosophers allegorized these stories; that is, the myths were to be understood not literally but as stories whose real truth lay at a deeper level. At the time of Christ, Jews who wished to remain faithful to the Mosaic tradition and yet adopt Greek philosophy were faced with a similar tension. Some Jews resolved this by allegorizing the Mosaic tradition. Philo (ca. 20 BC–AD 50) is well known in this regard.
Biblical Interpretation in the early church history
Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150–215), believed that Scriptures hide their true meaning so that we might be inquisitive and because it is not suitable for everyone to understand. He theorized that Scripture has both a literal and a spiritual meaning, with the deepest riches available only to those who understand the deeper, spiritual sense.
Origen (185–254) was the noted successor of Clement. He believed that Scripture is one vast allegory in which every detail is symbolic,7730 and he made much of 1 Corinthians 2:6–7 (“We speak the wisdom of God in a mystery,” KJV).
A group of scholars at Antioch in Syria attempted to avoid both the letterism of the Jews and the allegorism of the Alexandrians.8033 They, and particularly one of their number, Theodore of Mopsuestia (ca. 350–428), staunchly defended the principle of grammatical-historical interpretation, that is, that a text should be interpreted according to the rules of grammar and the facts of history.
Augustine believed that Scripture had a fourfold sense: historical, etiological, analogical, allegorical. His view became the predominant view of the Middle Ages.8437 Thus Augustine’s influence on the development of a scientific exegesis was mixed: in theory he articulated many of the principles of sound exegesis, but in practice he often failed to apply those principles in his own biblical study, and he employed the “rule of faith,” a practice of interpretation that made Scripture yield to the authority of the church and established doctrines.
How the apostles and the early church practiced biblical interpretation
The apostles followed their Lord in regarding the Old Testament as the inspired Word of God (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:21). In at least fifty-six instances God is explicitly referred to as the author of the biblical text.6518 Like Christ, they accepted the historical accuracy of the Old Testament (e.g., Acts 7:9–50; 13:16–22; Heb. 11).
What method of interpretation should we adopt today
A normal reading of Scripture is synonymous with a consistent literal, grammatico-historical hermeneutic. When a literal hermeneutic is applied to the interpretation of Scripture, every word written in Scripture is given the normal meaning it would have in its normal usage. Proponents of a consistent, literal reading of Scripture prefer the phrase a normal reading of Scripture to establish the difference between literalism and letterism.