TIP OF THE DAY 100: Ambiguity in discourse analysis part 2

MJ. Smith
MJ. Smith MVP Posts: 53,407

I am adding these posts to the previous tip list L/V 10 Tip of the Day 

QUESTION: With respect to discourse analysis of scripture, provide examples of temporal ambiguity.

ANSWER: From Perplexity

Temporal ambiguity is a significant aspect of discourse analysis in New Testament studies, particularly in narrative texts. This ambiguity often serves to create depth in the narrative, invite reader engagement, and allow for multiple interpretations. Here are some examples of temporal ambiguity in the New Testament:

Ambiguous Temporal Sequences

One common form of temporal ambiguity occurs when the order of events in the narrative is not clearly specified:

In Genesis 2:19, the creation of animals appears to occur after the creation of man, seemingly contradicting the order presented in Genesis 1. This has led to debates about the temporal sequence of creation events.

The Gospels often present events in different orders, creating ambiguity about the exact chronology of Jesus' ministry. For instance, the cleansing of the temple occurs at different points in Jesus' ministry in John's Gospel compared to the Synoptics.

Narrative Time vs. Chronological Time

Biblical narratives frequently employ non-linear storytelling techniques, creating temporal ambiguity:

The book of Acts uses a technique called "telescoping," where events that occurred over a longer period are compressed into a shorter narrative timeframe, creating ambiguity about the exact duration of events.

In the Gospel of Mark, the author often uses the phrase "immediately" (εὐθύς), which doesn't always indicate immediate temporal succession but can serve as a narrative device to create urgency or emphasis.

Prophetic Time

Prophetic texts in both the Old and New Testaments often exhibit temporal ambiguity:

In the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21), Jesus' prophecies about the destruction of Jerusalem and the end times are intertwined, creating ambiguity about which events are near-future and which are eschatological.

The book of Revelation frequently shifts between present, past, and future tenses, creating a complex temporal landscape that has led to various interpretations of its chronology.

Verb Tense Ambiguity

The Greek verbal system in the New Testament can create temporal ambiguity:

The use of the historical present tense in narrative sections can blur the lines between past and present, creating a sense of immediacy but also temporal ambiguity.

The perfect tense in Greek can indicate a past action with ongoing results, creating ambiguity about whether the focus is on the past event or its present consequences.

Temporal Markers

Sometimes, temporal markers in the text can be ambiguous:

The phrase "in those days" (ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις) is often used as a vague temporal marker, creating ambiguity about the exact timeframe being referenced.

In the Gospels, phrases like "after these things" (μετὰ ταῦτα) can be ambiguous, not specifying how much time has elapsed between events.

Conclusion

These examples of temporal ambiguity in the New Testament demonstrate the complexity of biblical narratives and the challenges they present for discourse analysis. As Chad Ashby notes, "The Bible is not interested in disinterested readers. The Author wants to suck you in". This temporal ambiguity invites readers to engage deeply with the text, consider multiple perspectives, and grapple with the complexities of biblical chronology and narrative structure.1

QUESTION: With respect to discourse analysis of scripture, provide examples of logical ambiguity.

ANSWER: From Perplexity

Logical ambiguity in New Testament discourse analysis refers to instances where the logical structure or reasoning in a passage can be interpreted in multiple ways. Here are some examples of logical ambiguity in the New Testament:

Conditional Statements

Conditional statements in the New Testament can sometimes be logically ambiguous:

In 1 Corinthians 15:14, Paul states: "And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain." This could be interpreted as a simple conditional (if A, then B) or as part of a more complex argument structure, leading to different logical implications.

Causal Relationships

Ambiguity can arise in determining causal relationships between statements:

In Romans 5:12, Paul writes: "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned." The logical relationship between sin, death, and human sinfulness is not immediately clear, leading to various interpretations of the causal chain.

Syllogisms and Enthymemes

Incomplete or implied syllogisms (enthymemes) can create logical ambiguity:

In Galatians 3:27-28, Paul states: "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." The logical connection between baptism, putting on Christ, and the erasure of social distinctions is not explicitly laid out, allowing for multiple interpretations of the underlying logic.

Paradoxes

Paradoxical statements in the New Testament can create logical ambiguity:

Jesus' statement in Matthew 10:39, "Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it," presents a logical paradox that invites multiple interpretations.

Quantifiers and Scope

Ambiguity can arise from unclear quantifiers or scope:

In 1 Timothy 2:4, it states that God "desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." The scope of "all" here is logically ambiguous - does it mean every individual without exception, or all types of people?

Temporal Logic

The relationship between time and logical sequence can be ambiguous:

In John 8:58, Jesus says, "Before Abraham was, I am." This statement creates a logical ambiguity in terms of temporal sequence and existence.

Conclusion

These examples of logical ambiguity in the New Testament demonstrate the complexity of biblical discourse and the challenges they present for interpretation. As Chad Ashby notes, "The Bible is not interested in disinterested readers. The Author wants to suck you in". This logical ambiguity invites readers to engage deeply with the text, consider multiple perspectives, and grapple with the complexities of biblical reasoning and argumentation.

Such ambiguities have led to centuries of theological debate and interpretation, highlighting the richness and depth of New Testament texts. They also underscore the importance of careful discourse analysis in biblical studies, as scholars and readers alike seek to understand the logical structures and implications of these ancient texts.2

QUESTION: With respect to discourse analysis of scripture, provide examples of pragmatic ambiguity.

ANSWER: From Perplexity

Pragmatic ambiguity in New Testament discourse analysis refers to instances where the intended meaning or function of a statement is unclear or open to multiple interpretations based on context, speaker intention, or cultural factors. Here are some examples of pragmatic ambiguity in the New Testament:

Speech Acts

The intended function of certain speech acts can be ambiguous:

In Matthew 16:18, Jesus says to Peter, "And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church." The pragmatic function of this statement is ambiguous - is it a promise, a prophecy, or a commissioning?

Irony and Sarcasm

Instances of irony or sarcasm can create pragmatic ambiguity:

In 1 Corinthians 4:8, Paul writes, "Already you have all you want! Already you have become rich! You have begun to reign—and that without us!" The pragmatic intent here is ambiguous - is Paul genuinely praising the Corinthians, or is he using irony to criticize their spiritual pride?

Cultural References

Ambiguity can arise from cultural references that may not be immediately clear to all readers:

In Matthew 12:40, Jesus refers to "the sign of Jonah." The pragmatic function of this reference is ambiguous without understanding the cultural context and Old Testament allusion.

Rhetorical Questions

The intended function of rhetorical questions can be ambiguous:

In Romans 6:1, Paul asks, "What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase?" The pragmatic intent of this question is ambiguous - is Paul genuinely considering this as an option, or is he using the question to set up his argument?

Indirect Speech Acts

Indirect speech acts can create pragmatic ambiguity:

In John 2:4, Jesus responds to his mother's implicit request with, "Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come." The pragmatic function of this response is ambiguous - is it a refusal, a rebuke, or something else?

Metaphorical Language

The pragmatic intent of metaphorical language can be ambiguous:

In Matthew 16:6, Jesus warns his disciples, "Watch and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees." The pragmatic function of this metaphor is initially ambiguous to the disciples, who interpret it literally.

Conclusion

These examples of pragmatic ambiguity in the New Testament demonstrate the complexity of interpreting biblical discourse. As Chad Ashby notes, "The Bible is not interested in disinterested readers. The Author wants to suck you in". This pragmatic ambiguity invites readers to engage deeply with the text, consider multiple perspectives, and grapple with the complexities of biblical communication.

Such ambiguities highlight the importance of considering cultural, historical, and literary contexts when interpreting New Testament texts. They also underscore the richness of biblical discourse, where a single statement can carry multiple layers of meaning and function. As Jerome H. Neyrey observes, "Matthew's gospel contains numerous instances of deception, lying, secrecy, hypocrisy and ambiguity," which contribute to the complex narrative world of the text.

Understanding these pragmatic ambiguities is crucial for discourse analysis of the New Testament, as it helps readers and scholars alike to appreciate the nuanced ways in which biblical authors communicated their messages and engaged their audiences.3

1 and https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2013/10/30/textual-ambiguity-and-textual-variants-in-acts/ and and https://www3.nd.edu/~jneyrey1/deception-matthew.htm and

2 and https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2013/10/30/textual-ambiguity-and-textual-variants-in-acts/ and and https://equip.sbts.edu/article/biblical-narrative-ambiguous-thats-good-thing/ and

3 and https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/bible-narratives-gloriously-ambiguous/ and https://answersresearchjournal.org/temporal-reasoning-genesis-2738/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6120463/ https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/bible-narratives-gloriously-ambiguous/ https://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5598 https://www3.nd.edu/~jneyrey1/deception-matthew.htm https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/bible-narratives-gloriously-ambiguous/ https://www3.nd.edu/~jneyrey1/deception-matthew.htm https://equip.sbts.edu/article/biblical-narrative-ambiguous-thats-good-thing/

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

  • MJ. Smith
    MJ. Smith MVP Posts: 53,407

    QUESTION: Fallacies to avoid

    ANSWER: From Perplexity

    Based on my knowledge and research, there are indeed several interpretative issues in Biblical studies that have catchy names or labels. Here are some examples:

    1. Illegitimate Totality Transfer: This refers to the fallacy of reading all possible meanings of a word into its use in a specific context.

    2. Etymological Fallacy: Assuming that the meaning of a word is determined by its etymology or original meaning, rather than its current usage.

    3. Anachronistic Fallacy: Reading later concepts or ideas back into earlier texts where they don't belong.

    4. Parallelomania: The tendency to see parallels or connections between texts or traditions where none actually exist or are justified.

    5. Eisegesis: Reading one's own ideas or preconceptions into the text, rather than drawing meaning out of the text (exegesis).

    6. Prooftexting: Using isolated, out-of-context quotations from a document to establish a proposition.

    7. Concordance Mentality: Assuming that a word always means the same thing in every context it appears in Scripture.

    8. Semantic Anachronism: Reading a more recent meaning of a word back into its use in an ancient text.

    9. Root Fallacy: Assuming that the meaning of a word is bound to the "root" from which it is derived.

    10. Overload Fallacy: Assuming that all the various meanings of a word are present every time the word is used.

    11. Word-Concept Fallacy: Assuming that the absence of a word means the absence of the concept, or vice versa.

    12. Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness: Treating abstract concepts as if they were concrete realities.

    These terms, like "squinty modifiers," are used by Biblical scholars and interpreters to identify and avoid common pitfalls in interpretation. They help in maintaining a rigorous and accurate approach to understanding Biblical texts.1

    1 and https://seminary.grace.edu/what-is-biblical-hermeneutics/ and and https://jewishstudies.rutgers.edu/docman/rendsburg/791-word-play-an-eclectic-collection/file and https://www.biblestudywithrandy.com/2015/11/wordplay-in-the-old-testament/ https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/scholars-study/wordplay-in-genesis/ https://credohouse.org/blog/seven-common-fallacies-of-biblical-interpretation

    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."