A decade long itch I will finally ask a.k.a. a potentially impolite question
Warning: this question does have a distinctive viewpoint which is not evangelical. It should be clear from my decades on the forums that I am fascinated by the variety of translation/interpretation/hermeneutics/exegesis methods available in Logos. I can assure you that my library reflects this interest. I have learned that the historical-grammatical method is a popular critical method as least among the evangelical forum users. But at the same time, I have been concerned about Logos' claims of original language study for lay people who have never studied the original languages. So the question I've never quite asked is what background in the "grammatical" portion of "historical-grammatical" does the average Bible College/Seminary require? [I love it. I accidentally typed George's "Cemetery" rather than seminary.]
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
Comments
-
I'm not sure what 'evangelical' connects to? In another time and place, it was what we now call 'old line protestant'. A century has simply produced automation of methods. But the nit-picking of the text, as Logos thrills to, is like over-loading the dissonent frequencies of synths.
As much as the recent 'academic' claims are made vs Logos, modern Bible software barely rises above morphs and vocabulary and frequency diagrams. The tools are not there, for phrasing, author matching, usage trending, etc. (but available beyond the hallowed Logosian walls).
I always felt George had become bored with grammatical, critical, historical, anything? A cemetary of spirituality.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
I cannot speak of other seminaries, but at Asbury I was required to take two semesters of Greek which did not count towards my degree, not even as an elective. In addition to that, I took additional courses in Greek exegesis on top of the required language courses. I also took a few courses in Greek exegesis. In the exegesis of the Greek text, we were required to be able to translate and to deal with the grammar of the Greek text without using any aids of reference books.
I also took some courses in Hebrew. One day in Hebrew class, while translating before the class, I infamously landed Noah's on the moon. It was Genesis 8:4. And I forgot that the Hebrew word for "moon" and "month" were the same. Up until day, we had only had the word in our vocabulary for "moon", and I didn't do my homework the night before.
But I understand that they are not quite as strict on these matters as they were in the late 1970's. I understand that students no longer walk two miles from housing to the classes, uphill both ways any more.
"In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church," John Wesley0 -
Mike Childs said:
I understand that students no longer walk two miles from housing to the classes, uphill both ways any more.
I remember my parents being annoyed when their favorite Bible college built dorms with computer wiring (pre-internet) in each room. They thought it would make the students to soft for real life missions and churches.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
DMB said:
I always felt George had become bored with grammatical, critical, historical, anything?
Let's just say that while I've not made a thing about it in the forums, I find pre-digested morphology as distasteful as George found interlinears. That is not to say that I don't love the powerful searches they make possible.
DMB said:I'm not sure what 'evangelical' connects to?
It is primarily, but not exclusively, from evangelical sources that I learned to associate the historical-grammatical method with evangelical scholarship. Give me the evidence and I'll readily change my mind. I've just ordered How to Read the Bible: Cox, Harvey: 9780062343161: Amazon.com: Books for a mid-to-late 20th century view for an integrated narrative-historical-activist method.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
-
Here is the table of contents for the first book in the list.
Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach
Chapter I
Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation
—Alberto R. Timm
Chapter II
Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics
—John T. Baldwin
Chapter III
Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture
—Frank M. Hasel
Chapter IV
Revelation and Inspiration
—Fernando Canale
Chapter V
The Authority of Scripture
—Peter M. van Bemmelen
Chapter VI
The Text and Canon of Scripture
—Gerald A. Klingbeil
Chapter VII
Guidelines for the Interpretation of Scripture
—Ekkehardt Müller
Chapter VIII
Innerbiblical Interpretation: Reading the Scriptures Intertextually
—Ganoune Diop
Chapter IX
Interpreting Old Testament Historical Narrative
—Greg A. King
Chapter X
Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature
—Gerhard Pfandl and Ángel M. Rodríguez
Chapter XI
Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy
—Richard M. Davidson
Chapter XII
Interpretation of the Gospels and Epistles
—George E. Rice
Chapter XIII
Interpretation of Biblical Types, Parables, and Allegories
—Tom Shepherd
Chapter XIV
The Hermeneutics of Biblical Apocalyptic
—Jon K. Paulien
Chapter XV
Hermeneutics and Culture
—Lael O. Caesar
Chapter XVI
Interpreting and Applying Biblical Ethics
—Ron du Preez
Chapter XVII
Ellen G. White and Hermeneutics
—Gerhard Pfandl
Appendix A
Methods of Bible Study
Appendix B
The Use of the Modified Version of the Historical-Critical Approach by Adventist Scholars
—Ángel M. Rodríguez
Reid, George W., ed. 2006. Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach. Vol. 1. Biblical Research Institute Studies. Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute.
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
I see I am not getting responses like Introduction to Linguistics or Introduction to Grammar or something similar. Because of the preceding period when philology was a significant part of Bible interpretation/exegesis, I expected a bit more.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Introduction to Greek and Intermediate Greek. Now students have to take Hebrew.
Basic hermeneutic is Look at the original language and translate/interpret in the historical context of the time the text was written.
Mission: To serve God as He desires.
0 -
preaching schools I know of.... All require minimum of 2 semesters of Greek and Hebrew. Some require 4 semesters.
xn = Christan man=man -- Acts 11:26 "....and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch".
Barney Fife is my hero! He only uses an abacus with 14 rows!
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
So the question I've never quite asked is what background in the "grammatical" portion of "historical-grammatical" does the average Bible College/Seminary require?
Very little at Undergrad and not much at graduate. I did my studies at Liberty University, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Faulkner University and Evangel University
(1) One can misinterpret Bible truths, (2) or one can misinterpret one's situation and apply the incorrect Biblical cure, even if the principles themselves are valid and come from God's Word. With (1), you have a cultist who believes the Bible teaches salvation by works, which has a variety of bad consequences. I a currently reading Jens Zimmerman's Recovering Theological Hermeneutics: An Incarnational-Trinitarian Theory of Interpretation. And unlike T. F. Torrance's book Divine Meaning: Studies in Patristic Hermeneutics (which I thoroughly benefited from, of course, especially in serving the purpose of providing a general theory of hermeneutics that, indeed, seeks to present a truly principled christocentric hermeneutic. Zimmerman's book, and brief development of Luther has helped to affirm the analysis. I had a professor once who said we should simply say “normative logical interpretation” since we read and interpret the Bible using language the way we normally do in every day life. I think you would benefit from this source. https://derekzrishmawy.com/2012/08/09/g-k-beale-on-the-difference-between-a-literal-and-a-biblical-hermeneutic-of-old-testament-prophecies/ Tim Keller advocates “to preach the gospel every time is to preach Christ every time, from every passage.”
MJ. Smith said:I see I am not getting responses like Introduction to Linguistics or Introduction to Grammar or something similar. Because of the preceding period when philology was a significant part of Bible interpretation/exegesis, I expected a bit more.
I wish that waa te case. I had friends in Bible college take some of these classes.
0
