Here is a copy of the final paper I wrote for my Hermeneutics course. It was originally footnoted, but that doesn't translate to the blog. The prompt asked the student briefly address the source and purpose of language, basic principles for interpretation, and the role of the Holy Spirit in interpretation. Enjoy!
There is a strange intruder dwelling within the human heart which one sage called “eternity” (Ecclesiastes 3:11). While most of us can agree that there is something “out there,” it is rather more complicated to agree on what exactly it is and what precisely it has to do with us. The Christian solution to this problem has historically been the belief that the Bible is the descriptive and prescriptive message of the One True God to all humanity. In light of this text-centered solution, the field of hermeneutics takes on special importance for the Church. A textually-directed community is a hermeneutically-designed community. Therefore, we employ a distinctly Christian hermeneutic that acknowledges God as the original speaker, builds an interpretive framework around the twin pillars of fidelity and creativity, and interacts with the Holy Spirit as Illuminator.
The foundation of hermeneutics is a theory of language that explains where language comes from and what it does. From the very beginning of the Bible (Gen 1:3), it is clear that language is part of the very nature of God. Without explanation or question, the Creator is a speaker and the creation hears with obedience. Thus the creative act is realized by authoritative speaking, as a master magician changes the world by uttering an incantation. The origin story of God’s “visible representation” in the physical realm clarifies the purpose of language in terms of dominion, obviating that God speaking the world into being is not merely a display of his original power but also of the derivative power of words.
In the creation of humanity, God first declares that they will be members of a certain community that the rest of the earth will not, then creates them, then speaks a blessing to them that bestows on them the privileges and responsibilities of the image-marked community. Unlike the rest of creation, Adam talks, and his talking shows the reader that language is for organizing, relating, and creating. The first words attributed to Adam are names (Gen. 2:19), revealing language as “a means of realizing, recognizing, expressing and celebrating God’s order.” In the very next scene, as God and the new woman stand before him, Adam speaks (Gen. 2:23), employing language as a communicative or relational tool. And yet, the editorial comment Moses makes about Adam’s statement (Gen. 2:24) reveals that it created a brand new entity, as language did throughout Genesis 1.
An understanding of the source and purpose of language is the foundation for interpretive success, but it is indeed only a foundation. Atop this foundation, the reader must build some sort of framework that will shape and guide the interpretive endeavor. A good interpretive scheme will marry Kevin Vanhoozer’s idea of “creative fidelity” with Grant Osborne’s distinction between exegesis and contextualization to give birth to fidelity in exegesis and creativity in contextualization.
The beginning of successful interpretation is faithful exegesis that sufficiently uncovers the author’s intended meaning. According to this ideal, the author created a text in order to convey meaning, so the faithful reader is obligated to discover that meaning. Any other goals in reading are at best secondary and at worst illegitimate. The best system for exegesis today is the grammatical-historical method, which is a “ two-pronged approach, bringing together the study of language and history to identify meaning in the text.” According to this exegetical strategy, the goal of the interpreter is neither to reconstruct a historical event (whether that which produced the text or that which is described by the text) nor the ancient mind of the author. Such pursuits do not give the necessary respect to the language of the text. Conversely, the interpreter must resist the diachronic tendencies that plague close linguistic investigation, for such fancies fail to recognize the text as a thoroughly historical artifact that can be rendered meaningless by decontextualization. Recently, the grammatical-historical method has been pleasantly complemented by the explorations of speech act theory. Most importantly, speech act has taught us that the “literal sense is the sense of the literary act.” In other words, a satisfactory explanation of the intended meaning of a text must include a description of what was done in the saying, rather than only what was said.
An exegetical method that tethers the interpreter to authorial intent ironically liberates the reader unto radically creative contextualization. The one who has encountered the author as a genuine other in the text is able to dialogue with an author who has been resurrected into a new context in the miracle of reading. Contrary to what literalism may teach, the interpreter is not finished until the text speaks into the world the author did not see with the same content, force, and direction as it spoke into the world that she did.
Creative contextualization and faithful exegesis are effective guiding principles in all reading, and yet they will prove insufficient for reading the Spirit-inspired Scriptures (2 Tim. 3:16), whose meaning is shrouded by the effects of sin. Sin so hardens our hearts and darkens our understandings (Eph. 4:18) that we require the regeneration of the Spirit to apprehend and obey (Rom. 8:7) the pervasive biblical message, which is the glory of God in salvation through judgement. The same Spirit that regenerates the believer also accompanies them as they repeatedly return to the Bible, illuminating the deep things of God and the response that those deep things require (Psalm 119:18).
As people of the divine-human book, Christians are bound to a proper theory of language, creative fidelity in the task of interpretation, and a radical dependence on the Holy Spirit. As the Western world descends into the confusion that is the inevitable progeny of hermeneutical non-realism, the Church has a golden opportunity to realize its destiny as a luminescent hill-city (Matt. 5:14), unmistakably preferable to the shadowy wilderness it rises above. It will attract attention from the hostile forces of darkness, and yet it is an echo from the inevitable future.
Bibliography
“Explaining Hermeneutics: A Commentary on the Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics.” International Council on Biblical Inerrancy, 1983.
Goldingay, John. Old Testament Theology: Israel’s Gospel. Vol. 1. IVP Academic, 2003.
Hamilton, Jr., James M. God’s Glory in Salvation through Judgment: A Biblical Theology. Crossway, 2010.
Jensen, Peter. The Revelation of God. Edited by Gerald Bray. Contours of Christian Theology. InterVarsity Press, 2002.
Jones, R.M. “Language in God’s Economy: A Welsh and International Perspective.” Themelios 21, no. 3 (n.d.): 10–14.
Kidner, Derek. Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary. Vol. 1. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. InterVarsity Press, 1967.
Osborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Rev. and Expanded, 2nd ed. InterVarsity Press, 2006.
Packer, J.I. “Hermeneutics and Biblical Authority.” Themelios 1, no. 1 (1975): 3–12.
Poythress, Vern S. “Canon and Speech: Limitations in Speech-Act Theory, with Implications for a Putative Theory of Canonical Speech Acts.” WTJ 70 (2008): 337–54.
Silva, Moisés. God, Language and Scripture. Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan Academic, 1991.
Social & Historical Approaches to the Bible. Vol. 3. Lexham Methods Series. Lexham Press, 2016.
Vanhoozer, Kevin J. Is There a Meaning in This Text?: The Bible, the Reader, and the Morality of Literary Knowledge. 10th Anniversary edition. Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan Academic, 2009.
Warfield, Benjamin B. The Works of Benjamin B. Warfield: Revelation and Inspiration. Vol. 1. Logos Bible Software, 2008.
Comments
Post a Comment