Principles of Interpretation - Hermeneutics

[Guest shiloh357]

28 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

We can also just read a part of God`s word and not relate it to the whole, and thus be in error also.

 

The problem is that you don't really know how to do that.

[Marilyn C]

Just now, shiloh357 said:

The problem is that you don't really know how to do that.

Well bro, when we discuss a topic together then you can point that out, specifically, to me, and if it is true then I can learn.

Marilyn.

[Guest shiloh357]

3 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Shiloh,

When studying literature or scripture we both agree that we need to use what is called - hermeneutics. This we know is the study of principles and methods of interpretation.

Now we also both know that God`s word is different from just literature in the sense that the 66 books, although written by different people, all have God as the author, he inspired them to write what He desired. Thus throughout the 66 books there is one mind revealing His thoughts. Plus we know that God being omniscient, was able to write of things to come. Thus we see in the books of Moses the foreshadowing of Christ, with a variety of symbols, types and shadows, then in the historic books, the foreseeing of Christ, the philosophic section, the foreknowing of Christ and then in the prophetic section, the foretelling of Christ. Each part is connected to the whole.  

None of that changes the fact that the Bible obeys the rules of literature and that it contains numerous genres that we can readily identify and we study it out using the same rules of hermeneutics that govern how we read a newspaper vs. reading a fictional novel, or a cookbook. 

The Bible is literature.   It is divinely authored, but that doesn't circumvent literary analysis.  In fact, the Bible uses history, culture, poetry, prose, etc.  as vehicles for communicating truth, so we can study the Bible as literature just like any other piece of literature.  And this actually becomes even more important when we study it in light of the ancient literary works that were contemporary with the Biblical authors.
 

Quote

 

However if we had 66 books from literature from different authors there would not be one mind behind them. One part would not necessarily have to line up with the other books.

Thus to interpret God word correctly we need to keep utmost in mind what the author - God, has intended. And this is -

`...having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself, that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth - in Christ.` (Eph. 1: 9 & 10)

God revealed that to the Apostle Paul, and in turn we come to know God`s purposes also - by reading His word using correct interpretation methods, (hermeneutics) plus have the knowledge of WHY God wrote His Word. That is not an after thought but needs to be utmost in the mind as the focus from which all else is directed.

Marilyn.

 

Employing the rules of hermeneutics does not at all diminish the supernatural character of the book, at all.   The purpose in hermeneutics is to get to the intended meaning of a particular passage.  That's all.   The problem, as I see it, is that you want your own custom, homespun hermeneutics principles to suit your purposes, rather than to correctly interpret Scripture.

[Guest shiloh357]

2 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Well bro, when we discuss a topic together then you can point that out, specifically, to me, and if it is true then I can learn.

Marilyn.

I have already pointed to that in this thread earlier this morning, several hours ago.

[Marilyn C]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

None of that changes the fact that the Bible obeys the rules of literature and that it contains numerous genres that we can readily identify and we study it out using the same rules of hermeneutics that govern how we read a newspaper vs. reading a fictional novel, or a cookbook. 

The Bible is literature.   It is divinely authored, but that doesn't circumvent literary analysis.  In fact, the Bible uses history, culture, poetry, prose, etc.  as vehicles for communicating truth, so we can study the Bible as literature just like any other piece of literature.  And this actually becomes even more important when we study it in light of the ancient literary works that were contemporary with the Biblical authors.
 

 

I agree with you.

[Marilyn C]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

 

Employing the rules of hermeneutics does not at all diminish the supernatural character of the book, at all.   The purpose in hermeneutics is to get to the intended meaning of a particular passage.  That's all.   The problem, as I see it, is that you want your own custom, homespun hermeneutics principles to suit your purposes, rather than to correctly interpret Scripture.

Well bro, then that is your problem, not mine.

[Marilyn C]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

I have already pointed to that in this thread earlier this morning, several hours ago.

Yes, but I did not agree with you. So we`ll have to wait for another topic to discuss ay.

[Guest shiloh357]

12 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Well bro, then that is your problem, not mine.

No, that is your problem.   You want your own set of "scriptural" hermeneutics in deference to the actual rules of literary analysis.

11 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Yes, but I did not agree with you. So we`ll have to wait for another topic to discuss ay.

But I was right.   You portrayed Jesus as actually affirming their teaching while the rest of Scripture shows Jesus disagreeing with them at every turn.  So you were not applying to Matt. 23:3 to the whole of Scripture.

[Marilyn C]

26 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

No, that is your problem.   You want your own set of "scriptural" hermeneutics in deference to the actual rules of literary analysis.

But I was right.   You portrayed Jesus as actually affirming their teaching while the rest of Scripture shows Jesus disagreeing with them at every turn.  So you were not applying to Matt. 23:3 to the whole of Scripture.

Shiloh, bro,

As I`ve said before, there is a focus, which you yourself have said, - The 66 books of the Bible have Jesus as their singular focus… These are your words, and that is what I am pointing out, this focus that all interpretation of God`s word aligns with.

As to the Pharisees - I just wrote what the Lord said, `Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works, for they say and do not do.` (Matt. 23: 3) And what the Pharisees would tell the people, was in part scripture - the Sabbath, tithing, etc, but they only read it, as you said for their own benefit, and as I pointed out not with God`s heart.

Marilyn.

[Guest shiloh357]

7 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Shiloh, bro,

As I`ve said before, there is a focus, which you yourself have said, - The 66 books of the Bible have Jesus as their singular focus… These are your words, and that is what I am pointing out, this focus that all interpretation of God`s word aligns with.

That is true.  I said that and it is a true statement, but it is not a hermeneutical principle.   It is a homiletical application of Scripture.

Hermeneutics when done properly, will not contradict that truth.

The problem you have, as I have noted many times in the past is that you don't know how to compare Scripture with Scripture.   You don't understand the principles of hermeneutics.