Biblical Hermeneutics
Spring, 2010
Professor: Dalen C. Jackson, Ph.D.
Phone: Office: (859) 455-8191 Home:
(859) 373-0848
Email: dalen.jackson@bsky.org
Course
Description: An exploration of
biblical interpretation. The course will
introduce the study of the history of interpretation and theories of
interpretation, as well as surveying some contemporary modes of interpretation.
Course
Objectives:
Successful
students will
- be able to identify major types of
biblical interpretation that have been employed by Christians throughout
the history of the church;
- develop familiarity with
contemporary insights on language and meaning that have a bearing on the
interpretation of the Bible;
- be able to identify a diversity of
modern approaches to interpreting the Bible;
- be able to articulate a personal
philosophy of biblical interpretation.
Texts:
Books
Levison, John R. and Priscilla
Pope-Levison, eds. Return to
(Various Authors.) Methods
of Biblical Interpretation.
Westphal, Merold. Whose
Community? Which Interpretation?: Philosophical Hermeneutics for the Church.
Yarchin, William. History
of Biblical Interpretation: A Reader.
Article:
Adam,
A.K.M. “Integral and Differential Hermeneutics.” Online at:
http://akma.disseminary.org/06Adam.pdf
Class Procedures
The class
will be taught with the expectation that discussion will be the primary focus
of each class period. This will require
that all students read the assigned readings before coming to class in order
for us to have a basis for informed discussion.
Assessment
Exams: 2 exams, a
mid-term and a final, based on the terms and questions found below in the
schedule of topics to be covered.
Interpretive Event* Analysis Papers (½-2 pages, to be submitted weekly):
*Interpretive Event: When someone
offers an interpretation of a particular passage (or passages) of scripture
(“This verse/passage/text means that…”) or makes a claim for scripture as a
whole (“The Bible/Jesus/Paul says/tells us/commands/prohibits/etc…”).
Students should submit weekly analyses of interpretive events observed in:
-secular or religious press reports or internet postings
(e.g., blogs), or
-situations you encounter at church or in other public
discourse, or
-Bible study literature from Sunday School, Bible School,
etc., or
-popular or scholarly books on Christianity or
-your reflection on traditions of interpretation you have
encountered.
Each paper should briefly summarize the interpretive event and offer some
analysis of the event and some of the tensions and underlying issues
involved. Clearly connect the event you are analyzing to issues or questions
discussed in class or in assigned texts.
Address such issues as (but not limited to):
·
how the event illustrates popular understandings of
interpretation;
·
what kinds of interpretive strategies are being employed;
·
what assumptions about interpretation are evident in the
participants;
·
how conflicting understandings of interpretation might be
addressed;
·
how other approaches to interpretation might be employed;
·
what the implications are for the kind of interpretation
observed; etc.
Students should submit at least one paper per class
period. Students will be encouraged to
revise entries in light of feedback from the instructor. Grade will be based on the average of your
best 7 grades on these papers.
Personal Position Paper on Biblical Interpretation (minimum of 5 pages, due April 19). Write a statement on biblical
interpretation, including (but not limited to) articles on biblical inspiration
and biblical authority, that represents
your own positions. Other topics to
consider might be the role of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, the nature of the
truth of Scripture, whether biblical meanings are singular or not, the
universality or cultural contingency of biblical meaning, the significance of
the literary forms of scripture, translation issues, historicity, literality in
interpretation, the unity or diversity of Scripture, the role of the biblical
writers, science and Scripture, academic scholarship and interpretation,
etc. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics and relevant sections of
the Windsor Report 2004 and Dei Verbum may provide some various
models as to how such a statement might be composed. This paper should show an awareness of the
diverse viewpoints advocated on these issues and deliberate choice of
particular options, along with reasoning for those choices.
Cumulative grade point averages are computed on a
quality point system. The interpretation
of the letter grades and their quality point value is as follows:
Quality
Pts. Per Credit Hr.
A Exceptional mastery of the course
4.0 100%-93%
A/B More than required mastery of
course essentials
3.5 92%-89%
B Required mastery of course
essentials
3.0 88%-82%
B/C Slightly more that course
essentials
2.5 81%-78%
C Course essentials
2.0 77%-70%
D Minimal comprehension of course
essentials
1.0 69%-65%
F Inadequate comprehension of
course essentials 0 Below 65%
I Incomplete
AU Audit
W Withdrawal
Grading Interpretive
Event Analysis Papers
40%
Personal
Position Paper on Biblical Interpretation 10%
Mid-term
Exam
25%
Final
Exam
25%
TENTATIVE CLASS SCHEDULE
Readings
for each day should be completed by class time on those days. Identification questions on the exams will
come directly from the Terms for Study
listed on this schedule. All other exam
questions will come from the Study
Questions.
Monday, February 1
Overview of class, assignments, etc.
Summary of How the
Bible Works, by Brian Malley
Study
Questions:
-Define
“biblicism” and describe how the Protestant Reformation and the
Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy have contributed to modern American
Biblicism.
-Explain
the difference between an interpretive
tradition and a hermeneutic tradition
(Malley), and discuss how understanding this distinction offers a corrective to
the “folk hermeneutic theory” that assumes that biblical texts have meanings
and that people read the texts to get at those meanings.
Monday, February 8
Reading
Assignment:
Westphal,
Merold. Whose Community? Which
Interpretation?: Philosophical
Hermeneutics for the Church, 13-68.
Gnuse, R. “Authority of the Bible,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
209-214.
Klassen, W. “Inspiration of the Bible,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
237-239.
Study
Questions:
-Describe
the “hermeneutical circle.”
-Describe
the basic idea of the “relativist hermeneutics” Westphal advocates.
-Describe
Wolterstorff’s concept of a “double hermeneutic” necessary when interpreting
the Bible.
-Summarize
Westphal’s critique of E.D.Hirsch.
-Discuss
the following statement from Westphal:
“The death of the absolute author is not the absolute death of the
author.”
-Describe the range of differing
views held by Christians on the nature of biblical inspiration.
-Explain what it means to say that
the Bible is authoritative, and
describe some various ways of thinking about the Bible as authoritative.
Terms
for Study:
-Realism,
psychologism, objectivism, speech act theory, polysemy, verbal
inspiration, inspiration, propositional, salvation history, existentialism,
Christocentric, plenary inspiration, inerrancy
Monday, February 15
Reading Assignments:
Westphal,
Merold. Whose Community? Which
Interpretation?: Philosophical
Hermeneutics for the Church, 69-118.
Osborne, G.R. “Evangelical Biblical Interpretation,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
221-226.
Welborn, L.L. “Euro-American Biblical Interpretation,” in
Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
317-321.
Study
Questions:
-Describe
the “double role” tradition plays, according to Westphal.
-Summarize
Westphal’s assertions about the authority and fallibility of tradition.
-List
and briefly describe the 5 models of interpretation offered by Westphal (115).
-Describe
the 5 “fundamental” points developed by the Niagara Conference in 1895.
-Describe
the characteristics that distinguish evangelicalism from fundamentalism.
-Compare
the evangelical tradition of biblical interpretation to the dominant scholarly model
of interpretation in
Terms
for study:
-
interpretive tradition, plenary inspiration, verbal inspiration, The Fundamentals, Bible Institute
movement, Scottish common sense realism, prooftexting, fundamentalists,
evangelicalism, infallibility, historical criticism, source criticism, form
criticism, redaction criticism, history-of-religions method
Monday, February 22
Reading
Assignment:
Westphal,
Merold. Whose Community? Which
Interpretation?: Philosophical
Hermeneutics for the Church, 119-156.
Yarchin, xi-xxx, “Introduction: The History of Biblical Interpretation”
Yarchin, 2-28,
Prerabbinic Jewish Interpretation
Yarchin, 31-40, “Christian Fulfillment of Prophecy: Justin Martyr”
Yarchin, 41-50, “Penetrating the Inner Meaning of
Scripture: Origen”
Yarchin, 51-60, “Principles for Typological Interpretation:
Tyconius”
Study
Questions:
-Summarize
Westphal’s position on how the two models of political liberalism and
communitarianism might each be applied most appropriately to the church.-
-Discuss
the strengths and weaknesses of reading portions of the Old Testament as
prophecies fulfilled by the coming of Jesus in the New Testament. Is the meaning
of these passages shaped by the reader’s perspective (Jewish or Christian, for
example), or is it inherent in the text?
What does this say about the nature of the meaning of any text?
Terms for Study:
-political
liberalism, communitarianism, Dead Sea Scrolls, pesher, allegory, logos, apology, allegory, “body” and
“soul” of a passage, Donatism, typology, oracle
Monday, March 1
Reading
Assignment:
Yarchin, 60-75, “Figurative, Literal, and Christian Meanings
from Scripture: Augustine”
Yarchin, 76-85, “Anchoring the Text
in History: Early Syrian Biblical
Interpretation”
Yarchin, 86-92, “Spiritual Application of the Bible: Gregory the Great”
Yarchin, 93-96, “How Can a Text Bear Multiple meanings? Thomas Aquinas”
Yarchin, 97-108, “Medieval Recognition of the Literal
Sense: Nicholas of Lyra....
Yarchin, 111-120, “An Overview of the Classical Jewish
Interpretive Tradition”
Sarason, R.S. “Midrash,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
71-72.
Terms
for Study:
- Neoplatonism
(philosophical framework), principle of double love, Syriac, Peshitta,
Antiochene School, Alexandrian School, philosophical schools, rhetorical
schools, “history,” literal, allegorical, tropological, gloss, Rashi, rabbinic
interpretation, Oral Torah, halakah, hagadah, Mishnah, Talmuds, midrash, middot of Hillel (see Yarchin, pp.
113-114, note 5) , Tannaim, Amoraim, Akiva
Monday, March 8
Reading
Assignment:
Yarchin, 171-183, “Renaissance Scholarship: Psalm 23 in Critici sacri”
Yarchin, 184-194, “Allegory, Authorial Intent, and Christian
Doctrine: John Calvin”
Yarchin, 195-207, “Enlightenment Rationality for Understanding
Scripture; Baruch Spinoza”
Yarchin, 218-235, “Historical Criticism Rigorously Applied to
the Gospels: David Friedrich Strauss”
Yarchin, 236-248, “Recognizing Genres in Scripture: Hermann Gunkel”
Yarchin, 249-259, “Searching for the Origins of the Jesus
Tradition: Rudolph Bultmann”
Yarchin, 260-275, “Archaeology and Biblical
Interpretation: William F. Albright”
Terms
for Study:
-Renaissance,
Vulgate, polyglot-Bible, philology, authorial intent, sola scriptura, myth, historical criticism, form criticism, Sitz im Leben, history-of-religions,
“demythologization,” biblical archaeology, biblical-theology movement
Monday, March 22
Mid-term Exam
Class Meeting?
Monday, March 29
Reading Assignment:
Steinberg, N. “Social-Scientific Criticism,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
275-279.
Priest, J.F. “Sociology and Hebrew Bible Studies,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
281-287.
Schmeller, T. “Sociology and New Testament Studies,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
289-296.
Mobley, G. “Folklore in Hebrew Bible
Interpretation,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation, 83-89.
Beal, T.K., D.A. Keefer, and T. Linafelt, “Literary
Theory, Literary Criticism, and the Bible,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation, 159-167.
Yarchin, 276-289, “Disconnection between Ancient and Modern
Worldviews: Langdon Gilkey”
Yarchin, 290-304, “Salvation History and Modern
Historiography: Christian Hartlich”
Study Questions:
-Should modern worldviews be taken
into consideration in interpreting scripture, or should the church work to
adopt the worldview of the ancient world?
How do we determine where to draw the line between interpreting in light of modern culture and accommodating the biblical message to
modern culture?
-Describe the difference between
seeing the Bible as having a propositional essence that must be identified and
retained and seeing it as a dynamic text that calls for imaginative engagement. What differences in the way Christians use
the Bible result from these different ways of seeing the Bible? What intermediate positions may exist between
these two extremes?
Terms
for Study:
-Vladimir
Propp, “New Criticism”, Ferdinand de Saussure, structuralism,
poststructuralism, hermeneutical circle, reader-response criticism, Jacque
Derrida, deconstruction, narrative criticism, secular, salvation-history (Heilsgeschicte), theological liberalism,
biblical theology movement, neo-orthodoxy
Monday, April 5
Reading
Assignment:
Porter, S.E. “Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation,”
in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
35-40.
Fitzgerald, J.T. “Lexicography Theory and Biblical
Interpretation,” in Methods of Biblical
Interpretation, 49-53.
Bratcher, R.G. “Translation,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation, 55-59.
Yarchin, 307-319, “Canonical Interpretation: Brevard Childs”
Yarchin, 320-332, “The Wisdom of the Fathers: David C. Steinmetz”
Yarchin, 351-360, “The Illusion of Objective Biblical
Interpretation: Walter Wink”
Yarchin, 361-374, “Rhetorical Interpretation of the Bible’s
Literature: Phyllis Trible”
Yarchin, 375-382, “Nonobjective Validity in Literary Biblical
Interpretation: Edgar V. McKnight”
Study
Questions:
-How does modern linguistics differ from classical
philology?
-Describe the 3-fold task of the biblical translator.
-Discuss the “instability” of language, beginning with
the issues involved in determining the meaning of individual words.
Terms
for Study:
-diachronic,
synchronic, etymologizing, morphology, syntax, “semantic field theory,”
lexicon, gloss, lexicography, canonical interpretation, pre-critical, fourfold
sense of scripture, eisegesis, objectivism, reader-response, truth
Monday, April 12
Reading
Assignment:
Adam, A.K.M. “Postmodern Biblical
Interpretation,” in Methods of Biblical
Interpretation, 173-178.
McKnight, E.V. “Reader-Response
Criticism,” in Methods of Biblical
Interpretation, 179-183.
Tylianopoulos, T.S. “Orthodox
Biblical Interpretation,” in Methods of
Biblical Interpretation, 241-245.
Adam,
A.K.M. “Integral and Differential
Study
Questions:
-Explain
the distinction Adam makes between “integral” and “differential”
hermeneutics. What would the adoption of
a differential approach to hermeneutics mean for Baptist churches,
associations, and individuals? What
roles might the community and the individual play in determining differential
meaning in light of the traditional teaching of the priesthood of all
believers?
Terms for Study:
-postmodern biblical criticism, metanarratives, modern
biblical interpretation, reader-response
criticism, gaps,
performance criticism
Monday, April 19 (Personal Position Paper on Biblical Interpretation Due)
Reading
Assignment:
Yarchin, 383-397, “Unmasking Ideologies in Biblical
Interpretation: Elisabeth Schüssler
Fiorenza”
Yarchin, 398-414, “Biblical Rhetoric and Revelation: Dale Patrick”
Yarchin, 415-429, “The Multiple Voices of Postmodern Biblical
Interpretation: Fernando F. Segovia”
Klemm, D.E. “
Felder, C.H. “Afrocentric Biblical
Interpretation,” in Methods of Biblical
Interpretation, 297-301.
Kuan, J. “Asian Biblical
Interpretation,” in Methods of Biblical
Interpretation, 303-311.
Sugirtharajah, R.S. “Cross-Cultural
Biblical Interpretation,” in Methods of
Biblical Interpretation, 313-316.
Segovia, F.F. “Hispanic American
Biblical Interpretation,” in Methods of
Biblical Interpretation, 323-327.
Isasi-Díaz, A.M. “Mujerista Biblical
Interpretation,” in Methods of Biblical
Interpretation, 333-334.
Terms for Study:
-advocative interpretation, natural theology, special
revelation, speech-act theory (J.L. Austin), locution, illocution, perlocution
(cf. prelocution), performatives, cultural criticism, minjung, dalit
Written Assignment:
- Personal Position Paper on Biblical
Interpretation due.
Monday, April 26
Reading
Assignment:
Levison,
John R. and Priscilla Pope-Levison, eds.
Return to
Martin, C.J. “Womanist Biblical Interpretation,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
335-340.
A. Smith, “Cultural Studies,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation, 341-344.
Yee, G.A. “Ideological Criticism,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
345-348.
Schmeller, T. “Liberation Theologies,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
349-359.
Terms
for Study:
-womanist, ideology
Monday, May 3
Reading
Assignment:
Levison,
John R. and Priscilla Pope-Levison, eds.
Return to
Shomanah, M.W. Dube. “Postcolonial Biblical Interpretations,”
in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
361-366.
Stone, K. “Gay/Lesbian Interpretation,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
367-369.
Phillips, V.C. “Feminist Interpretation,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
371-384.
Rashkow, I.N. “Psychoanalytic Interpretation,” in Methods of Biblical Interpretation,
395-397.
Study Questions:
-Identify what Phillips claims to be the “core feminist
conviction” within the diversity of feminist biblical interpretation. How does your community of faith respond to
these claims, and how does that response influence biblical interpretation
within that community?
Terms
for Study:
-postcolonial literary theory, queer theory, hermeneutics of suspicion
Monday, May 10
Final
Exam