How do theologians of any religion work with their sacred texts? I'm looking for a convenient survey of approaches for graduate students, but more specific studies in religious philosophical hermeneutics and systematic theological approaches to texts are also very welcome.
Among many Christian systematic theologians (including myself), the starting point consists of texts describing the words and deeds of Jesus (the Gospels). Then one fans out to the book of Acts, the New Testament Epistles, and Revelation, reading them through the lenses formed by the words and deeds of Jesus (through Christocentric lenses). Finally one fans out to the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, also reading it Christocentrically.
From a specific Roman Catholic Point of view, you may find useful to read the Dogmatic Constitution "Dei Verbum" n. 12, of the Second Vatican Council. You will find it in http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html
The relationship between hermeneutics and exegesis is somewhat of a "chicken and egg" scenario. Does a person develop a hermeneutic through the application of Scripture or does one read Scripture through the prism of their hermeneutic? I would suggest that each person comes to the Scriptures with at least a proto-hermeneutic based upon their canonical presuppositions and develops a more cohesive hermeneutic over time. For instance, in many Protestant traditions (i.e. in Reformed circles), the presumption of a biblical meta-narrative will inform biblical exegesis a priori. In time, this proto-hermeneutic may develop into a more nuanced form (i.e. covenant theology as an example), but rarely will it contradict one's initial assumptions about the efficacy and/or authority of holy writ (although Bart Ehrman would be an obvious exception). In other traditions however, or in academic circles where (in theory) no such presumptions exist, exegesis will (again, in theory) be unencumbered by hermeneutics.
I would argue however, that neither theory is unassailable. The Reformed presumption of a biblical meta-narrative didn't happen in a vacuum, but is a a direct result of (prior) biblical exegesis. Similarly the academic position is itself a hermeneutic (hence the "chicken and egg" conundrum). In short, there is no escaping the "observer effect" when exploring the depths of Scripture and as long as one understands and accepts the limits of both exegesis and hermeneutics, typology is nothing more than a matter of personal preference.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology