Hermaneutical Interpretation or Generalization

Which of these methods do you feel is the most reliable approach for reading scripture? Anyone???

Hummm. I suppose I should ask if anyone even knows the difference between interpretation and biblical generalization .

Hummm. I suppose I should ask if anyone even knows the difference between interpretation and biblical generalization .

I find it best to define terms. Even when you think everyone understands what you are saying lots of people define your words much differently than you do.

Now I have to go look up the definition of hermaneutics...

LOL. Well, I thought I might wait on that and just let people offer up their many opinions and then ask that question Buuut, I thought better of it.

Which of these methods do you feel is the most reliable approach for reading scripture? Anyone???

Tell me what those big words mean and i'll tell you!

Which of these methods do you feel is the most reliable approach for reading scripture? Anyone???

Tell me what those big words mean and i'll tell you!

Let me begin by explaining exegetical hermeneutics. Simply stated, hermeneutics is a human philosophy and method of textual interpretation. Here is how this is employed in the act of Bible reading. Hermeneutics is an inexact science that attempts to bring the accumulation of all human knowledge to bear on a given text. For some reason, we feel that in order to understand scripture, we must know what the scientist, the medical community, the historian, the clergy, the farmer, the educational system, the legal apparatus and others have to say about the text. This is called intertextuality and it regards scripture as only one of many authoritative texts. This is nothing but an attempt to subordinate scripture to human analysis based on all other texts. This will not work because the Bible is a stand-alone document that stands over and above all the accumulated lexicon of human knowledge and reason. Its meaning is not contingent upon what the various sciences have to say about its contents.

Interpretation is the act of supplying meaning to the text based on human analysis of the world and human experiences. When we read scripture, we have an unfailing habit of trying to interpret the text based on this method. For some reason, we feel this is the only way we can supply meaning to the text. The problem with interpretation is that it always starts with human reason being force onto the text rather than allowing the language of the test to supply its own meaning. This typically results in the straining of the text to change the meaning of the language. I am sure you recognize the fact that the interpretation of any text is as varied as the number of people who read it. This is why I call it an inexact science. Interpretation is always the product of human intelligence operating on the test. Peter says that we do not have the right to approach scripture in this way, 2 Pet. 1:20. "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation," So, the question is this. What other way is there to approach scripture that will allow the language of the text to supply its own meaning.

What we must learn to do is generalize from the text. When you learn how to do this you will find no end to the things you will discover in scripture. Unlike interpretation, biblical generalization will never contradict another generalization, and it will always hold true across the entire spectrum of scripture. Let me give you one brief example of what I mean by generalizing from a text. When you read the story of Abraham and Sariah you discover that because of certain biological circumstances, they are unable to have children. They are too old and Sariah is too baron. In spite of this, God gives them Isaac. There are many generalizations one can glean from this one example but let me just give you two that are immediately apparent. One immediate generalization from this story is that circumstances do not dictate outcome. Circumstances are never determinate. Only God is determinate. Another good generalization is that God stands over and above time, physics, and physiology. These are truths that emerge from the text itself but are not directly stated in the text. Nowhere in the text does not say that God alone is determinate or that he stands over and above time, physics, and physiology. These are truths that are self-evident in the text.

In order to learn how to use Generalization, it is imperative that we understand that the grammatical structure of the biblical text is not a human contribution. The grammatical structure of revelation is the unique work of the Holy Spirit who ALONE supplies meaning to the text by the way he constructs the language. There are two hard and fast principles of communication that must be honored. 1. Words have meaning. 2. All grammar, no matter what language is represented, has rules that must be adhered to in order for communication to be successful. When these rules are disregarded, then the meaning of the text becomes distorted and unrecognizable. There is a popular saying that "You can make the Bible say anything you want it to." This is patently absurd. Scripture is not the product of the human mind. It is an exclusively divine document and its contents are completely devoid of ANY human contribution. This being true, one cannot make scripture say whatever one wants it to say. It will only say what God intended for it to say. Anything else is a perversion.

Here is how I understand "hermeneutics":

Hermeneutics is looking at a text of Scripture and analyzing what it says - or better - what the author who wrote it meant when he wrote it. The biggest "problem" with the world of hermeneutical interpretation in our day is that men interpret the Bible from the standpoint of human wisdom and the Holy Spirit does not enter into the interpretation at all. I think that is what OlddHermit is saying by his definition of "hermeneutics". And from that viewpoint I would agree that "hermeneutics" is the wrong approach.

I would say that true hermeneutics will be hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit to properly interpret what the human author meant when he wrote the passage under the inspiration of the Spirit. (The Spirit wrote the word and He must interpret it).

OldHermit's description of Generalization if close to what I would call Application of Scripture.

Let me begin by explaining exegetical hermeneutics. Simply stated, hermeneutics is a human philosophy and method of textual interpretation. Here is how this is employed in the act of Bible reading. Hermeneutics is an inexact science that attempts to bring the accumulation of all human knowledge to bear on a given text. For some reason, we feel that in order to understand scripture, we must know what the scientist, the medical community, the historian, the clergy, the farmer, the educational system, the legal apparatus and others have to say about the text. This is called intertextuality and it regards scripture as only one of many authoritative texts. This is nothing but an attempt to subordinate scripture to human analysis based on all other texts. This will not work because the Bible is a stand-alone document that stands over and above all the accumulated lexicon of human knowledge and reason. Its meaning is not contingent upon what the various sciences have to say about its contents.

Interpretation is the act of supplying meaning to the text based on human analysis of the world and human experiences. When we read scripture, we have an unfailing habit of trying to interpret the text based on this method. For some reason, we feel this is the only way we can supply meaning to the text. The problem with interpretation is that it always starts with human reason being force onto the text rather than allowing the language of the test to supply its own meaning. This typically results in the straining of the text to change the meaning of the language. I am sure you recognize the fact that the interpretation of any text is as varied as the number of people who read it. This is why I call it an inexact science. Interpretation is always the product of human intelligence operating on the test. Peter says that we do not have the right to approach scripture in this way, 2 Pet. 1:20. "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation," So, the question is this. What other way is there to approach scripture that will allow the language of the text to supply its own meaning.

What we must learn to do is generalize from the text. When you learn how to do this you will find no end to the things you will discover in scripture. Unlike interpretation, biblical generalization will never contradict another generalization, and it will always hold true across the entire spectrum of scripture. Let me give you one brief example of what I mean by generalizing from a text. When you read the story of Abraham and Sariah you discover that because of certain biological circumstances, they are unable to have children. They are too old and Sariah is too baron. In spite of this, God gives them Isaac. There are many generalizations one can glean from this one example but let me just give you two that are immediately apparent. One immediate generalization from this story is that circumstances do not dictate outcome. Circumstances are never determinate. Only God is determinate. Another good generalization is that God stands over and above time, physics, and physiology. These are truths that emerge from the text itself but are not directly stated in the text. Nowhere in the text does not say that God alone is determinate or that he stands over and above time, physics, and physiology. These are truths that are self-evident in the text.

In order to learn how to use Generalization, it is imperative that we understand that the grammatical structure of the biblical text is not a human contribution. The grammatical structure of revelation is the unique work of the Holy Spirit who ALONE supplies meaning to the text by the way he constructs the language. There are two hard and fast principles of communication that must be honored. 1. Words have meaning. 2. All grammar, no matter what language is represented, has rules that must be adhered to in order for communication to be successful. When these rules are disregarded, then the meaning of the text becomes distorted and unrecognizable. There is a popular saying that "You can make the Bible say anything you want it to." This is patently absurd. Scripture is not the product of the human mind. It is an exclusively divine document and its contents are completely devoid of ANY human contribution. This being true, one cannot make scripture say whatever one wants it to say. It will only say what God intended for it to say. Anything else is a perversion.

Whatever one's definition of hermeneutics may be we all understand how this process works. It invariably involves an appeal time, history and culture to give meaning to a given text. This is the approach I am talking about. this is what we call exegetical hermeneutics and everyone does it. What I am doing is questioning the legitimacy of this approach.