ClaytonB
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2011
- Messages
- 10,796
Or, "What is hermeneutics?"
Yes, the title is clickbait. I'm pretty shameless with the clickbait titles on topics like this...
The following video is by a Roman Catholic (I'm not Roman Catholic), but it's pretty good. It gets the viewer started on debunking the popular usage of the term "literal". Atheists, skeptics and other critics of the faith like to use the shame-question, "You don't take the Bible literally, do you?" as a way to sow the seeds of doubt in people's minds. And while there is some definite criticism behind this question, the vast majority of people never pierce through to that actual criticism. Rather, they have a pure strawman conception of what it means to take the Bible "literally":
Another way to say it is this: the Bible is true. All of it. Every single word. Other terms like "inerrant", "infallible", "literal", and so on, can lead to all kinds of confusing rabbit-trails. While those are important discussions, especially if you're thinking of going into seminary, etc. the fact is that almost all the words that people utter on these topics are a waste of breath. When I say, "I believe the Bible, it is God's Word", that simply means the Bible is true. There is no need to make it "extra" true by saying it's "literally" true. It's just true, in the ordinary sense that any true thing is true. It is true that the sky is blue. It is true that rocks are hard. It is true that water is wet. Perhaps you can even think of weird exceptions to these truths, or raise abstruse philosophical questions. But those aren't the kinds of things that we have in mind when we make simple, basic claims like "the sky is blue". And neither are these abstruse philosophical quandaries in view when we claim "the Bible is true (all of it, every word)". Rather, we just mean it in the simple, straightforward sense that the things it says are true, as such. And while there are passages in the Bible where subtle questions of philosophy are relevant, the vast bulk of the Bible just means what it says and even an 8th-grader can probably understand what it's saying, that is, the meaning of the vast bulk of the Bible is apparent on its face. It means what it says, and what it says is true. We don't need to strengthen that into saying it's "literally" true... it's just true, full-stop.
OK, now that we have asserted that the whole Bible is literally true (or, just true), let's debunk the modernist concept of "literal" entirely. In this video, Pageau tackles the modern conception of literalism, what he calls "forensic truth", and explains why this kind of truth just isn't relevant to much in the Bible. This modern way of thinking about the world just isn't relevant to much, if anything, that the Bible speaks about. That doesn't mean that there is no connection whatsoever -- obviously, scientific/forensic truth is part of God's creation, and so it is connected to the Bible through God's creative act. But beyond that, it's just not relevant and the modern obsession with this kind of forensic truth would have been considered childish or even evidence of a mental handicap, by those who wrote and first read the Bible.
These considerations are a subject of study in theology called hermeneutics. Hermeneutics is the systematic study of how to understand what the Bible says. It is a specialization in its own right, but we can summarize most of it down to a few simple principles:
- The Bible is God's holy word and is unlike any other book. It is really and truly miraculous even though it was written/collected by mere men.
- The Bible is meant to be understood by people and God wants everyone to read the Bible. In other words, the characterization of the Bible as something that can only be understood by scholars or priests is really just Gnosticism (heresy).
- The Bible just means what it says, it always speaks honestly and forthrightly. It is true. All of it is true, every word.
- The Bible tells one story and has just one message. Almost all apparent conflicts in the text are easily resolved. There are some hard cases and most of these are resolved with moderate effort. There are, of course, open technical debates among theologians, in addition to the large-scale debates within the church which has resulted in branches in the communion of the church over time. But all branches of the church, until modernity, agree that the Bible tells one story and has one message, even if there has not yet been universal unity on every single detail of that message. Those closest to the witnesses and sources agree most unanimously. Doubt, division, skepticism, and so on, only emerged later, far removed from the original witnesses and sources. This says a lot, by itself, about the reliability of those doubts.
- The primary ("literal") meaning of any given text is always to be preferred unless there is some reason why it cannot be read that way. When the text demands that we read it figuratively, we do so, and this figurative sense is what the text just means. As the first video explains, "the arm of the Lord" is a clear figure-of-speech, and what that figure-of-speech signifies is the literal or plain meaning of the text, even though "arm of the Lord" signifies something that when read in the "proper literal" sense, does not exist because God, being spirit, does not have a physical arm.
- All of Scripture is non-literal in the sense that the primary meaning never exhausts the actual significance of the text, since all Scripture speaks of Jesus (John 5:39b). Thus, all Scripture is figurative, even when its primary meaning is the preferred reading. That is, even though "Abijah went into battle" is clearly not a figure-of-speech, it necessarily reveals Jesus to us because all of Scripture reveals Jesus to us. Thus, the primary meaning never exhausts the text, and all Scripture must be read in light of how it reveals Jesus to us if we intend to understand the Scriptures as fully as we can.
- While we may not fully understand a text after studying it, that is, we may have some issues understanding a particular passage of Scripture, when we are done studying we must still believe the text because it is the Word of God. Thus, whatever issues we may have with understanding the Bible, we must not have an issue with the Bible itself. In this way, we avoid the problem of "contingent faith", that is, "I'll believe it once I understand it." That's not how faith works. "I understand enough to believe and I believe." That is faith. We add more understanding to faith over time, but faith itself cannot be contingent on understanding, otherwise, we would never believe. (h/t Doug Wilson)
Yes, the title is clickbait. I'm pretty shameless with the clickbait titles on topics like this...
The following video is by a Roman Catholic (I'm not Roman Catholic), but it's pretty good. It gets the viewer started on debunking the popular usage of the term "literal". Atheists, skeptics and other critics of the faith like to use the shame-question, "You don't take the Bible literally, do you?" as a way to sow the seeds of doubt in people's minds. And while there is some definite criticism behind this question, the vast majority of people never pierce through to that actual criticism. Rather, they have a pure strawman conception of what it means to take the Bible "literally":
Another way to say it is this: the Bible is true. All of it. Every single word. Other terms like "inerrant", "infallible", "literal", and so on, can lead to all kinds of confusing rabbit-trails. While those are important discussions, especially if you're thinking of going into seminary, etc. the fact is that almost all the words that people utter on these topics are a waste of breath. When I say, "I believe the Bible, it is God's Word", that simply means the Bible is true. There is no need to make it "extra" true by saying it's "literally" true. It's just true, in the ordinary sense that any true thing is true. It is true that the sky is blue. It is true that rocks are hard. It is true that water is wet. Perhaps you can even think of weird exceptions to these truths, or raise abstruse philosophical questions. But those aren't the kinds of things that we have in mind when we make simple, basic claims like "the sky is blue". And neither are these abstruse philosophical quandaries in view when we claim "the Bible is true (all of it, every word)". Rather, we just mean it in the simple, straightforward sense that the things it says are true, as such. And while there are passages in the Bible where subtle questions of philosophy are relevant, the vast bulk of the Bible just means what it says and even an 8th-grader can probably understand what it's saying, that is, the meaning of the vast bulk of the Bible is apparent on its face. It means what it says, and what it says is true. We don't need to strengthen that into saying it's "literally" true... it's just true, full-stop.
OK, now that we have asserted that the whole Bible is literally true (or, just true), let's debunk the modernist concept of "literal" entirely. In this video, Pageau tackles the modern conception of literalism, what he calls "forensic truth", and explains why this kind of truth just isn't relevant to much in the Bible. This modern way of thinking about the world just isn't relevant to much, if anything, that the Bible speaks about. That doesn't mean that there is no connection whatsoever -- obviously, scientific/forensic truth is part of God's creation, and so it is connected to the Bible through God's creative act. But beyond that, it's just not relevant and the modern obsession with this kind of forensic truth would have been considered childish or even evidence of a mental handicap, by those who wrote and first read the Bible.
These considerations are a subject of study in theology called hermeneutics. Hermeneutics is the systematic study of how to understand what the Bible says. It is a specialization in its own right, but we can summarize most of it down to a few simple principles:
- The Bible is God's holy word and is unlike any other book. It is really and truly miraculous even though it was written/collected by mere men.
- The Bible is meant to be understood by people and God wants everyone to read the Bible. In other words, the characterization of the Bible as something that can only be understood by scholars or priests is really just Gnosticism (heresy).
- The Bible just means what it says, it always speaks honestly and forthrightly. It is true. All of it is true, every word.
- The Bible tells one story and has just one message. Almost all apparent conflicts in the text are easily resolved. There are some hard cases and most of these are resolved with moderate effort. There are, of course, open technical debates among theologians, in addition to the large-scale debates within the church which has resulted in branches in the communion of the church over time. But all branches of the church, until modernity, agree that the Bible tells one story and has one message, even if there has not yet been universal unity on every single detail of that message. Those closest to the witnesses and sources agree most unanimously. Doubt, division, skepticism, and so on, only emerged later, far removed from the original witnesses and sources. This says a lot, by itself, about the reliability of those doubts.
- The primary ("literal") meaning of any given text is always to be preferred unless there is some reason why it cannot be read that way. When the text demands that we read it figuratively, we do so, and this figurative sense is what the text just means. As the first video explains, "the arm of the Lord" is a clear figure-of-speech, and what that figure-of-speech signifies is the literal or plain meaning of the text, even though "arm of the Lord" signifies something that when read in the "proper literal" sense, does not exist because God, being spirit, does not have a physical arm.
- All of Scripture is non-literal in the sense that the primary meaning never exhausts the actual significance of the text, since all Scripture speaks of Jesus (John 5:39b). Thus, all Scripture is figurative, even when its primary meaning is the preferred reading. That is, even though "Abijah went into battle" is clearly not a figure-of-speech, it necessarily reveals Jesus to us because all of Scripture reveals Jesus to us. Thus, the primary meaning never exhausts the text, and all Scripture must be read in light of how it reveals Jesus to us if we intend to understand the Scriptures as fully as we can.
- While we may not fully understand a text after studying it, that is, we may have some issues understanding a particular passage of Scripture, when we are done studying we must still believe the text because it is the Word of God. Thus, whatever issues we may have with understanding the Bible, we must not have an issue with the Bible itself. In this way, we avoid the problem of "contingent faith", that is, "I'll believe it once I understand it." That's not how faith works. "I understand enough to believe and I believe." That is faith. We add more understanding to faith over time, but faith itself cannot be contingent on understanding, otherwise, we would never believe. (h/t Doug Wilson)
Last edited:
