<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: A Must Read
Review: There are some books I can read in an evening or two and feel like I have a good grasp of what the book is all about. There are others that I can pour over hour after hour and still feel like I am only scratching the surface of the book. Evangelical Hermeneutics falls into the latter category. Though not an easy read, this book is rewarding. Hermeneutics is one of the steps used in interpreting and studying the Bible. Specifically, the author defines it as "a set of principles for interpreting the Bible." Once a passage has been properly interpreted, meaning and application can be drawn from it. It stands to reason that if the principles of interpretation are wrong, the meaning and application are likely to be wrong as well. What the author seeks to show is how these principles have changed over the past decades and the effect that is having on Christianity today. The author's goal for this book is fourfold:
-To discuss the recent changes in recent hermeneutics
-To show new meanings being attached to grammatical-historical interpretation
-To compare traditional grammatical-historical interpretation with new evangelical hermeneutics
-To identify the dominant principles of new evangelical hermeneutics Robert Thomas believes strongly in the value of the traditional form of hermeneutics, known as the grammatical-historical method. Throughout the books he cites examples of modern theologians who have either wrongly applied grammatical-historical principles or have invented new methods of hermeneutics. More importantly, he shows the effects these people have had on the Christian world. He focuses specifically on several issues: feminism, open theism, missiology, theonomy and a few others. One of the more fascinating chapters deals with dynamic equivalence (which is a method of Bible translation) and how it is not as much a method of translation as a set of hermeneutical principles. Some of the other topics that caught my attention were preunderstanding and the New Testament use of the Old Testament. There are several applications to my life and my faith that I have taken from this book. First, it has solidified my understanding of the principle of single meaning, which states that each passage in the Bible has one and only one meaning. Second, it has helped me see the value of the grammatical-historical method. Though this is the system I have adhered to in the past, I am now more confident that it is the most Scriptural method. Third, I see the importance of removing all possible preunderstanding before I examine a text. What I mean by this, is if I am going to examine what the Bible says about the role of women in ministry, I need to look at the passages to determine what they mean, not what they say about women's roles. It is a subtle but important difference. Finally, I have come to understand more clearly the Holy Spirit's role in helping me understand the Bible. I can't deny that at times I felt lost in this book, primarily because the book presupposes a greater grasp of hermeneutics than I currently have. The other reason is that it spends a lot of time discussing the end-times and that is not a topic I have studied in great depth. The author also tends to use words without fully defining them. An example is the word "meaning" which he defines as "the author's truth intention." "Truth intention" is not a phrase I am familiar with, though perhaps if I was more familiar with hermeneutics I would be. I would recommend this book to anyone seeking to understand how Scripture is supposed to be used. Realize, though, that it does help to have a solid understanding of hermeneutics before reading it. I suspect I will be returning to this book often as I study the Word.
Rating:
Summary: A Must Read
Review: There are some books I can read in an evening or two and feel like I have a good grasp of what the book is all about. There are others that I can pour over hour after hour and still feel like I am only scratching the surface of the book. Evangelical Hermeneutics falls into the latter category. Though not an easy read, this book is rewarding. Hermeneutics is one of the steps used in interpreting and studying the Bible. Specifically, the author defines it as "a set of principles for interpreting the Bible." Once a passage has been properly interpreted, meaning and application can be drawn from it. It stands to reason that if the principles of interpretation are wrong, the meaning and application are likely to be wrong as well. What the author seeks to show is how these principles have changed over the past decades and the effect that is having on Christianity today. The author's goal for this book is fourfold:
-To discuss the recent changes in recent hermeneutics
-To show new meanings being attached to grammatical-historical interpretation
-To compare traditional grammatical-historical interpretation with new evangelical hermeneutics
-To identify the dominant principles of new evangelical hermeneutics Robert Thomas believes strongly in the value of the traditional form of hermeneutics, known as the grammatical-historical method. Throughout the books he cites examples of modern theologians who have either wrongly applied grammatical-historical principles or have invented new methods of hermeneutics. More importantly, he shows the effects these people have had on the Christian world. He focuses specifically on several issues: feminism, open theism, missiology, theonomy and a few others. One of the more fascinating chapters deals with dynamic equivalence (which is a method of Bible translation) and how it is not as much a method of translation as a set of hermeneutical principles. Some of the other topics that caught my attention were preunderstanding and the New Testament use of the Old Testament. There are several applications to my life and my faith that I have taken from this book. First, it has solidified my understanding of the principle of single meaning, which states that each passage in the Bible has one and only one meaning. Second, it has helped me see the value of the grammatical-historical method. Though this is the system I have adhered to in the past, I am now more confident that it is the most Scriptural method. Third, I see the importance of removing all possible preunderstanding before I examine a text. What I mean by this, is if I am going to examine what the Bible says about the role of women in ministry, I need to look at the passages to determine what they mean, not what they say about women's roles. It is a subtle but important difference. Finally, I have come to understand more clearly the Holy Spirit's role in helping me understand the Bible. I can't deny that at times I felt lost in this book, primarily because the book presupposes a greater grasp of hermeneutics than I currently have. The other reason is that it spends a lot of time discussing the end-times and that is not a topic I have studied in great depth. The author also tends to use words without fully defining them. An example is the word "meaning" which he defines as "the author's truth intention." "Truth intention" is not a phrase I am familiar with, though perhaps if I was more familiar with hermeneutics I would be. I would recommend this book to anyone seeking to understand how Scripture is supposed to be used. Realize, though, that it does help to have a solid understanding of hermeneutics before reading it. I suspect I will be returning to this book often as I study the Word.
Rating:
Summary: Crucial
Review: Great book! Every Christian should read this book and then read it again. Robert Thomas shines an abundance of much needed light on this extremely important issue.
Rating:
Summary: Must Read!
Review: Great book! Every Christian should read this book and then read it again. Robert Thomas shines an abundance of much needed light on this extremely important issue.
Rating:
Summary: Crucial
Review: I believe that this is the most important book written on hermeneutics in a generation. Thomas ably defends the grammatical-historical hermeneutic, and displays where other authors depart from same methodology while claiming not to. Every conservative seminarian should read this in hermeneutics class in company with Terry or Ramm.
Rating: 
Summary: Things are not as simple as they seem....
Review: This is a good book, but it is not without some major problems.
I gave the book three stars because it is quite a good read, but has many overstatements and makes conclusions that are a bit stretched. It has been a while since anyone has reacted to the broad changes in hermeneutics over the last 30 years or so from a conservative perspective. While hopefully not even Thomas expects everyone to agree with all of his conclusions, I believe that more works like this would be helpful in refining the boundaries of the grammatical-historical method. Thomas does not aim his sights at the historical-critical or experiential-expressivist camps, but rather on those who claim to be on his side--those who claim to still hold to a grammatical-historical (hereafter G-H) method of interpretation.
Supposedly, according to Thomas, this method was set in stone by the early twentieth century and since 1970 has headed down a slippery slope. He does not give enough attention to asking why things have changed over the years in the G-H camp. He attributes it to the overemphasis of preunderstanding and the meaningless definitions that scholars have thrown around for key hermeneutical terms. However, looking at what he discusses throughout the book, there are some difficult issues in interpreting the Bible, even when using the G-H method. Could it be for inductive reasons that people have had so many disagreements in the difficult task of hermeneutics? I agree with Thomas that we must emphasize God's ability to communicate truth to us through His Word, but can we simply discount disagreements in interpretation to subjective preunderstanding...instead of semper reformanda "always reforming" our interpretation if the data of the Bible warrants it in spite of our respective preunderstandings? Thomas argues that we got it right a long time ago and we can know that we have the single meaning through our methods (which of course when we use these perfect methods, we are in no way influenced by a supposed "preunderstanding" regarding our conclusions). This is somewhat naive, Thomas would have the reader choose between two camps: subjective-never-be-sure-what-the-bible-says-man-centered hermeneutics or objective-always-be-sure-what-the-bible-says-God-centered hermeneutics. But the rest of his book shows that when encountering the myriad of problems interpreters face when dealing with the complexities of Scripture, this side of eternity we still know in part.
Look at Thomas's own chapter regarding the use of the Old Testament in the New Testament a difficult topic indeed. His presentation is complex and seems to be rather eclectic (for instance why is Isa 7:14 and Matt 1:23 not an instance of an inspired sensus plenor application? Thomas says that this is not an example with little explanation and not even a reference to another work that may explain or defend his decision in light of the immediate context of Isa 7:14--could this be Thomas's preunderstanding determining his conclusions here?). I am not slighting his presentation with this extremely difficult issue in hermeneutics, but how can Thomas malign other honest attempts at explaining the data of the New Testament's use of the Old inductively, when his own method seems rather ad hoc some times? This is a difficult issue and the old hermeneutics that were set in stone in the early twentieth century, obviously did not deal sufficiently with this problem since Thomas introduces a new way of dealing with it...not an old one.
Two other weak chapters: Genre override in the gospels--anyone who has seen his interaction with NT scholars like Grant Osborne have seen the big debate between Markan priority and independent source theories. Thomas discounts those like Osborne who are honestly trying to deal with the data in the gospels and making sense of how the evangelists wrote and arranged them. This is no small task and Thomas's explanations of some specific synoptic problem passages leave much to be desired. I agree with Thomas that some attempts at explaining the Synoptic problem are horrible, but Thomas seems to discount all attempts (even those who hold to inerrancy) other than the one from his perspective.
Lastly, his attack on modern linguistic-theory is a little inconsistent. I agree that we should reject the magisterial use of modern linguistics in hermeneutics, but there are clear ministerial uses beyond what Thomas relegates it too (helps in missions and translation into modern languages). I disagree with Thomas that the synchronic use of a word is less important in understanding authorial intent, than diachronic use(s) of a word (I believe Thomas's notion to go against common sense here). I also cannot understand Thomas's claim that the original Biblical languages are unique. Unique in what way--besides the fact that they are the languages that God inspired the human authors of Scripture to write in? Thomas does not really expand on this much, but says that it's bad that modern linguistics claims that Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek are just like other languages...but in my experiences they are exactly that.
I could go on, but this would be too lengthy for an amazon review. However, I did really enjoy his chapter on genre override in Revelation (could this be my own biases coming into play here...haha, since I believe that the distinctions in interpretation here are not so much the product of data in the book, but theological preunderstandings and superimposed notions of genre...but others would accuse my interpretation of Revelation of doing the same things). All in all, this book has much value and I wish to see more like it hit the shelves soon.
<< 1 >>
| 
