History of Biblical Interpretation (Theology)

This work is concerned with some basic problems which historical criticism poses to biblical interpretation. The first chapter deals with historical criticism in relation to problems of the text’s historical distance and contemporary significance. Certain key figures from the field of philosophical hermeneutics are briefly introduced (Schleiermacher, Gadamer, Hirsch, Ricoeur), but attention is also paid to the ways how historical criticism was actually practiced (Wellhausen, Mowinckel). It is maintained that historical criticism is a tool in interpretation and does not impede possible appropriation of the text by those who read it with deep affection.

The second chapter faces historical criticism as a theological problem, which has become most apparent in the inerrantist milieu and which was more or less successfully answered by canonical approaches. A special attention is given to the canonical approach of Brevard Childs, which is understood against the backdrop of Barth’s doctrine of the Word of God and Frei’s view of biblical narratives. A special attention is given to distinction between approaches of Brevard Childs and James Sanders. It is maintained that Sanders’ canonical criticism provides better interpretive platform, because it wants to address the needs of contemporary interpretive communities through a self-aware historical critical enterprise.

The third chapter takes up the problem of violence in the book of Joshua and the problem of theological meaning of the exodus story. Biblical theological insights of James Sanders, James Barr, and Walter Brueggemann are applied. An eye is kept also on Pixley-Levenson debate and it is maintained that traditions of the exodus and conquest must be understood together as literary devices which invite communities of faith to freedom. As a result of the present research, historical criticism is presented as a hermeneutical tool which can help to rescue text’s significance for the contemporary communities of believers.

This study provides a new account of how the Song of Songs became one of the most popular biblical texts in medieval Western Christianity, through a close and detailed study of its interpretation by late antique Latin theologians. It has often been presumed that early Latin writers exercised little influence on the medieval interpretation of the poem, since there are so few extant commentaries from the period. But this is to overlook the hundreds of citations of and allusions to the Song in the writings of influential figures such as Cyprian, Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine as well as the lesser-known theologian Gregory of Elvira. Through a comprehensive analysis of these citations and allusions, it is argued that contrary to the expectations of many modern scholars, the Song of Songs was not a problematic text for early Christian theologians, but was a resource that they mined as they debated the nature of the church and of the virtuous life. The first part of the volume considers the use of the Song in the churches of Roman Africa and Spain, where bishops and theologians focused on images of enclosure and purity invoked in the poem. In the second part, the focus is late fourth-century Italy, where a new ascetic interpretation, concerned particularly with women’s piety, began to emerge. This erotic poem gradually became embedded in the discursive traditions of Latin Late Antiquity, which were bequeathed to the Christian communities of early medieval Europe.

From amazon.com:
""Whoever needs an act of faith to elucidate an event that can be explained by reason is a fool, and unworthy of reasonable thought." This line, spoken by the notorious 18th-century libertine Giacomo Casanova, illustrates a deeply entrenched perception of religion, as prevalent today as it was hundreds of years ago. It is the sentiment behind the narrative that Catholic beliefs were incompatible with the Enlightenment ideals. Catholics, many claim, are superstitious and traditional, opposed to democracy and gender equality, and hostile to science. It may come as a surprise, then, to learn that Casanova himself was a Catholic. In The Catholic Enlightenment, Ulrich Lehner points to such figures as representatives of a long-overlooked thread of a reform-minded Catholicism, which engaged Enlightenment ideals with as much fervor and intellectual gravity as anyone. Their story opens new pathways for understanding how faith and modernity can interact in our own time.

Lehner begins two hundred years before the Enlightenment, when the Protestant Reformation destroyed the hegemony Catholicism had enjoyed for centuries. During this time the Catholic Church instituted several reforms, such as better education for pastors, more liberal ideas about the roles of women, and an emphasis on human freedom as a critical feature of theology. These actions formed the foundation of the Enlightenment's belief in individual freedom. While giants like Spinoza, Locke, and Voltaire became some of the most influential voices of the time, Catholic Enlighteners were right alongside them. They denounced fanaticism, superstition, and prejudice as irreconcilable with the Enlightenment agenda.

In 1789, the French Revolution dealt a devastating blow to their cause, disillusioning many Catholics against the idea of modernization. Popes accumulated ever more power and the Catholic Enlightenment was snuffed out. It was not until the Second Vatican Council in 1962 that questions of Catholicism's compatibility with modernity would be broached again.

Ulrich Lehner tells, for the first time, the forgotten story of these reform-minded Catholics. As Pope Francis pushes the boundaries of Catholicism even further, and Catholics once again grapple with these questions, this book will prove to be required reading."

Amalek is traditionally perceived as Israel’s arch-enemy and rival. In
the Hebrew Bible, divine laws command the annihilation of the
Amalekites, and war narratives recount their execution. What is
the basis for this uncompromising judgement against Amalek?
What does it reveal about the national ethos, as well as about the
realpolitik of the ancient peoples, the Israelites and Amalekites? To
this day, commentators on the Hebrew Bible have endeavoured to
explain and justify the tradition about the destiny of Amalek, or to
deny and oppose it, thus reflecting their perplexity with the
tradition. This article will employ historical-literary (diachronic)
tools to shed further light upon the background, circumstances
and drives that formed the merciless tradition about the genocide
of the Amalekites.

Дослідженнями, на яких заснована ця монографія, зроблено перший внесок до цілісної реконструкції київської традиції православно-академічного вивчення та викладання Біблії ХІХ – початку ХХ ст. Показані її передумови, контекст появи та витоки; висвітлюється досвід педагогічної праці та науково-богословській творчості видатних представників Київській духовній академії. Бібліологічна освіта показана з точки зору становлення як академічного, так і популярного викладання. Основні напрями біблійних студій в КДА висвітлені на прикладі малодосліджених праць; частину документів вперше введено до наукового обігу.

Книгу адресовано історикам, філософам, культурологам, релігієзнавцям, біблеїстам: дослідникам, викладачам, аспірантам та студентам – а також усім, хто цікавиться історією вітчизняної релігійної культури.

Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2016, 350pp.
In the present day, there is widespread confusion regarding the theological achievements of the Catholic Enlightenment. This book outlines such contributions in the fields of biblical exegesis, church reform, liturgical renewal, and the move towards a more tolerant view of other churches and religions. Since some of the most important Catholic Enlighteners lived in Germany, this book concentrates on their endeavors, but also frequently points to other European players. Only an un-polemical historical assessment of the Catholic Enlightenment can help us to get out of the current gridlock of interpreting Vatican II: was there a break with tradition or was there continuity? By reviewing the historical debates that preceded Vatican II, the unknown, marginalized or deliberately forgotten roots of the conciliar debates come to light that can help us fine tune future hermeneutical endeavors. This history is hitherto unknown to most researchers. Indeed, it is possibly the most neglected field of modern literary history.

This book is about Roger Williams (ca. 1603-83), who was banished from the colony of Massachusetts Bay for advocating freedom of conscience, separation of church and state, Native American rights, and related matters.  He founded the town of Providence in what became Rhode Island on the basis of full liberty of conscience and complete separation of religion and government.  For additional information, see the uploaded PDF and links.

The book is available in paperback and Kindle e-book editions at Amazon websites throughout the world.  The paperback is also available at some other websites and bookstores.

See also my YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOlUZaehYk7WmwW8v9oBMzQ) about Roger Williams, including an interview (https://youtu.be/mGRl5lIbdYY) with me about this book.

For Errata and Supplemental Comments, see the separate document uploaded at https://www.academia.edu/13798228/Errata_and_Supplemental_Comments_to_The_First_American_Founder_Roger_Williams_and_Freedom_of_Conscience.

Alan E. Johnson

This is an article I wrote about the experience I had in Rome about the interfaith program called "Scriptural Reasoning."  Here is the citation:  Robert A. Harris, “Improving the Quality of Our Disagreements:  The Potential of ‘Scriptural Reasoning’ for Helping to Repair the World,” Journal of Scriptural Reasoning 15:2 (November 2016): Special Issue on Interreligious Reading after Vatican II.  http://jsr.shanti.virginia.edu/back-issues/volume-15-number-2-november-2016/

In Hebrew Bible/Old Testament scholarship, one encounters a variety of reductive perspectives on what exactly Yahweh as religious object is assumed to be. In this article, a clarification of the research problem is followed by an introductory overview of what is currently available on this topic as is attested in the context of various interpretative methodologies and their associated metalanguages. It is argued that any attempt to describe the actual metaphysical nature and ontological status of the religious object in the jargon of a particular interpretative approach is forever prone to committing the fallacy of reductionism. Even so, given the irreducible methodological perspectivism supervening on heuristic specificity, reductive accounts as such are unavoidable. If this is correct, then it follows a fortiori that a unified theory (of everything Yahweh can be said to be) and an ideal metalanguage (with which to perfectly reconstruct the religious object within second-order discourse) are a priori impossible.

This chapter introduces Hugh of St Victor's exegetical thought to new readers, while also offering a Trinitarian reading of his exegesis relevant to more advanced scholars of St Victor. First, I begin with a brief discussion of the Trinitarian assumptions that structure all of Hugh's thought. Second, I examine the larger spiritual programme in which the reading and exegesis of scripture plays a central role for Hugh. Third, after briefly explaning the assumptions of patristic and medieval Biblical interpretation, I give a detailed account of how Hugh himself interpreted the literal and spiritual senses of Scripture, highlighting such concerns as the role of liberal education, Hugh's Jewish influences, memorization, aspiratio, etc.). I conclude with a short comment on how this new recognition of the Trinitarian shape of Hugh's exegesis resolves criticisms of his model of interpretation levied against him by Henri de Lubac and Beryl Smalley.
The chapter includes an appendix introducing his exegetical works to new readers and a second appendix which translates a short letter (referenced by Smalley but not translated by her) which provides a concise summary of Hugh's exegesis from a 12th-century student of his.

ABSTRACT Amalek is traditionally perceived as Israel’s arch-enemy and rival. In the Hebrew Bible, divine laws command the annihilation of the Amalekites, and war narratives recount their execution. What is the basis for this uncompromising judgement against Amalek? What does it reveal about the national ethos, as well as about the realpolitik of the ancient peoples, the Israelites and Amalekites? To this day, commentators on the Hebrew Bible have endeavoured to explain and justify the tradition about the destiny of Amalek, or to deny and oppose it, thus reflecting their perplexity with the tradition. This article will employ historical-literary (diachronic) tools to shed further light upon the background, circumstances and drives that formed the merciless tradition about the genocide of the Amalekites.