Kindle Notes & Highlights
Read between
December 14 - December 26, 2019
Exegesis may be defined as the careful historical, literary, and theological analysis of a text.
A more modest and appropriate primary goal would be to achieve a credible and coherent understanding of the text on its own terms and in its own context.
three basic approaches to exegesis today. We will call them synchronic, diachronic, and existential.
This approach looks only at the final form of the text, the text as it stands in the Bible as we have it. It is not interested in the “long view” or “prehistory” of the text—any oral traditions, earlier versions, or possible written sources (such as the hypothetical sources called J, E, D, and P in the Pentateuch or Q in the gospels4).
Rather, the synchronic approach uses methods designed to analyze the text itself and the text in relation to the world in which it first existed as a text.
The second approach to exegesis is the diachronic (meaning “across time”) approach, and it focuses on the origin and development of a text, employing methods designed to uncover these aspects of it.
The focus of investigation in both the diachronic and the synchronic approaches to the text is twofold: the world of or within the text and the world behind the text.
Proponents of the existential approach to reading the Bible are primarily interested not in the text per se—whether understood in terms of its formation (diachronically) or its final form (synchronically)—but in the text as something to be engaged.
Those who approach the text fundamentally to encounter God through the mediation of the text may refer to this approach as theological and transformative.
More generally, we may describe this approach to exegesis as self-involving;15 readers do not treat the text as a historical or literary artifact but as something to engage experientially—something that could or should affect their lives.
The seven elements of the method are: • survey—preparation and overview, or introduction • contextual analysis—consideration of the historical and literary contexts of the text • formal analysis—of the form, structure, and movement of the text • detailed analysis—of the various parts of the text • synthesis—of the text as a whole • reflection—on the text today • expansion and refinement—of the initial exegesis
Before reaching for the secondary sources, such as the commentaries, one should try to formulate a provisional analysis of the text.
The seven elements of exegesis, and the steps in writing an exegesis paper, are: (1) survey (preparation for reading, or introduction); (2) contextual analysis (of the text’s historical and literary contexts); (3) formal analysis (of the text’s form, structure, and movement); (4) detailed analysis; (5) synthesis; (6) reflection; and (7) expansion and refinement of the exegesis.
The notion that one translation is preferable to another because, on the surface, it is “easier to understand” or seems to “make more sense” is a mistaken one.
For example, the presence of an injunction to brotherly/sisterly love does not necessarily mean that the community being addressed is full of friction or hatred.
Your assignment in exegesis is to engage the text, not to review the academic debates about the book in which your text is located. Do not turn the first part (or any part) of your exegesis paper merely into a list of possible scholarly positions.
“What are the key facts and issues related to this passage (and the book in which it is found) that will help me interpret it?”
“Why this and why here? If I am the hearer/reader, what do I sense this text trying to do to me?”
What is the subject of the paragraph or two immediately preceding this passage? How does this material lead into the passage at hand? • Does the material following the passage connect directly to it or help explain it? • Does this passage work in connection with its immediate context to achieve a particular rhetorical goal?
Where does this passage occur in the structure of the book? Of what major section is it a part? What significance does this position have?
What has “happened” (whether in narrative, argument, etc.) in the book so far, and what will happen later? • What appears to be the text’s function in the section and in the book as a whole? How does this passage appear to serve the agenda of the entire work?
In fact, one might argue that for Paul love is the principal solution to the entire array of issues in Corinth.
What role (if any) does this text, and/or its primary theme(s) and character(s), play in the rest of Scripture?
What, specifically, is the relationship (if any) between this text and texts in the other Testament (Old or New)?
With which other biblical texts or themes does your text stand in...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
With which other biblical texts or themes does your text stand in tension? Can or should...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
In an exegesis paper, it is helpful to writer and reader alike if the paper includes a brief phrase outline that indicates the basic content of each of the parts that a student discerns in the text.9 (See the examples above of the fictional prophetic text and the Lord’s Prayer.) The outline should be followed by a short statement of the movement of the text.
“What do these details mean in the big picture, and how does the big picture affect the meaning of the details?” At the same time, he or she will ask, “How do the details give shape to the big picture?” This is the hermeneutical circle at work.
A “biblical” word, therefore, should not be treated as an unchanging, homogeneous unit of meaning.
Similarly, the word salvation has different meanings among the various biblical writers: political deliverance, forgiveness of sins, and wholeness, to name a few possibilities. It probably does not mean exactly
the same thing for Isaiah that it does for Matthew, even when Matthew is quoting Isaiah.
A biblical word, then, does not mean the same thing in every place it occurs. Neither does a word ever mean everything it could possibly mean at one time. The erroneous notion that a word in a particular context means the sum total of all (or even some) of its possible meanings is called illegitimate totality transfer, a term coined by the British biblical scholar James Barr.5 Illegitimate totality transfer occurs when, for example, a significant biblical
For example, the contemporary usage of the word enthusiasm has nothing to do with “being in God,” despite its roots in the Greek words for “in” (en) and “God” (theos). This common misinterpretation of words is called the etymological fallacy.
Interpreting a Word in Context
Looking for implicit contrasting relationships in a text can generate very significant insights.
What aspects of setting are presented in the story and why? • What elements of the story explicitly or implicitly depict characters and their interrelationships? • What is the conflict in the story, and what is the literary and theological significance of that conflict? • What words, phrases, and sentences convey the mood of the story and its central motif or apparent purpose? • How do the characters and actions within this narrative relate to other parts of the larger narrative of which this story or section is a part?
When you have a sense for the text as a whole, write it down in one good (even if complex) sentence, trying to use the key terms or images of the text itself as much as possible while also analyzing the way the key parts interrelate and constitute the whole.
Another way of describing theological exegesis is to reflect on the kinds of questions the reader seeks to answer. In summary form, we may describe those questions as the following:11 • What does the text urge us to believe? (faith) • What does the text urge us to hope for? (hope) • What does the text urge us to do? (love)
This God calls the people of God assembled in the name of Christ—who was the incarnation of the divine mission—to participate in this missio Dei, to discern what God is up to in the world, and to join in.
Mission is not a part of the church’s life (represented locally by a small line item in the budget) but the whole, the essence of the church’s existence; mission is comprehensive.
Mission is not an extension of Western (or any other) power, culture, and values; rather, it is specifically participation in the coming of the kingdom of God.
For Christians in the West, it is crucial that they recognize the failure of Christendom as a positive development, and that they see the church appropriately and biblically as a distinctive subculture within a larger, non-Christian culture. Mission is theo- and Christocentric.
Mission must become the governing framework within which all biblical interpretation takes place; mission is hermeneutical.
However, because mission is about discerning God’s mission in the world, a missional hermeneutic will naturally pay attention to narratives, since the ways of God and God’s people are recounted in them, and it will appreciate synchronic readings of the final form of the text that utilize various forms of narrative analysis.
missional hermeneutic therefore needs to be culturally sensitive, and it benefits from hearing the questions and perspectives on scriptural texts from people of diverse cultures.
Some scholars therefore distinguish between exegesis and reflection, between textual meaning and textual (contemporary) significance, between “what it meant” and “what it means.”28
Premature assimilation takes place when readers jump into the application of a text without sufficient thought and without respect for the distance between the two horizons, between then and now.
Specifically, in light of the discussion of theological interpretation above, what does this text affirm about: • God, including Father/Creator, Son, and Spirit • the people of God • sacred, or salvation, history • the mission of God in the world, the missio Dei (see the more specific questions above) • salvation, or human redemption by God: past, present, and/or future • the fruits of salvation: the theological virtues of faith, hope, and love • the love of God: human commitment to God and participation in the divine mission • the love of neighbor: ethical imperatives • daily life, worship,
...more
In a word, what claims about God, and about God’s claim on us, does the text make?
If there is conflict between the text and your perspective, how might you resolve that conflict? Will you • ignore the text? • challenge the text? • look for a means of reconciliation? • review and revise your exegesis? • alter your beliefs and/or behavior? • consult with others?
