Historical-grammatical method

Last updated

The historical-grammatical method is a modern Christian hermeneutical method that strives to discover the biblical authors' original intended meaning in the text. [1] According to the historical-grammatical method, if based on an analysis of the grammatical style of a passage (with consideration to its cultural, historical, and literary context), it appears that the author intended to convey an account of events that actually happened, then the text should be taken as representing history; passages should only be interpreted symbolically, poetically, or allegorically if to the best of our understanding, that is what the writer intended to convey to the original audience. [2] It is the primary method of interpretation for many conservative Protestant exegetes who reject the historical-critical method to various degrees (from the complete rejection of historical criticism of some fundamentalist Protestants to the moderated acceptance of it in the Roman Catholic tradition since the Divino afflante Spiritu encyclical letter), [3] in contrast to the overwhelming reliance on historical-critical interpretation in biblical studies at the academic level.

Contents

The historical-grammatical method arose in the context of the Enlightenment in the Western world. Prior to this, Medieval Christianity tended to emphasize the four senses of Scripture: the literal, allegorical, moral, and anagogical; however, interpretation is always subject to the Church's magisterium. The process for determining the original meaning of the text is through examination of the grammatical and syntactical aspects, the historical background, the literary genre as well as theological (canonical) considerations. [4] While there is not a common Eastern Orthodox Christian hermeneutic, Orthodox scholars tend to draw upon spiritual and allegorical readings of the Bible, in conversation with the Church Fathers and the Church's traditions. [5]

Historical development

The historical-grammatical method appeared in the eighteenth century when German scholars applied philological and the nascent scholarly historiographical methods to biblical studies, guided by the Enlightenment rationality. The founder of historical-grammatical method was the scholar Johann August Ernesti (1707-1781) who, while not rejecting the historical-critical method of his time, emphasized the perspicuity of Scripture, the principle that the Bible communicates through the normal use of words and grammar, making it understandable like any other book. [6] [7] Ernesti's set of interpretive principles and practices first received the name the historical-grammatical method or historical-grammatical method of interpretation in the book Elementa Hermeneutices Novi Testamenti (1811) by Karl Augustus Theophilos Keil (1754-1818). "In passing mention ought to be made of J. A Ernesti who so emphasized the grammatical meaning of the words that Holy Writ has no future meaning and is comparable to any other book; and also J. S. Semler, who, although he did not wish to be counted among the rationalists nevertheless advanced its cause and its prominence by his one-sided emphasis upon the historical method and by relying upon the accommodation theory, holding that Jesus adjusted himself to the views of His day." [8]

In reaction to the appropriation of the historical-critical method by rationalist and liberal Protestant scholars, the conservative theologian and journalist Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg (1802 - 1869) embraced the historical-grammatical method as a bulwark of orthodoxy in defense of the historicity of miracles and inspiration of the Scriptures. Based on this method, scholars Franz Delitzsch (1813–1890) and Johann Friedrich Karl Keil (1807 - 1888) wrote extensive biblical commentaries, consolidating the existence of the historical-grammatical method, independent from both the pietist reading and the historical-critical reading of the Bible, thus separating the interpretive methods born out of the Enlightenment modernity. The translation of Ernesti's works into English by Moses Stuart and its subsequent adoption as a textbook at the Andover Theological Seminary and the Princeton Theological Seminary made the method popular among English-speaking evangelicals. [9]

During polemics between science and religion in the Nineteenth century, the historical-critical method of biblical hermeneutics became associated with liberal theology while the "conservative" or "traditionalist" position was supposed to adopt the historical-grammatical method. However, an American pioneer of liberal theology, Hosea Ballou, employed the historical-grammatical method; while the traditional evangelical scholar, William Robertson Smith, adhered to the historical-critical methods. Amid these controversies, adherents of the historical-grammatical method embraced the liberal theologian Benjamin Jowett's concept of each biblical text having only one signification determined by the authorial intent. [10]

In the twentieth century, theologically conservative theologians claimed that their methods of exegesis were based on the historical-grammatical method. However, many exegetes who claim to use the historical-grammatical method selectively choose historical data or perform superficial lexical analysis, [11] as well as reject the cornerstone concept of this method: the perspicuity of the Scriptures, which does not require cosmovision presuppositions or a special illumination by the Holy Spirit to attain the "correct interpretation" of the Scriptures. [12]

Original meaning of texts

The aim of the historical-grammatical method is to discover the meaning of the passage as the original author would have intended and what the original hearers would have understood. The original passage is seen as having only a single meaning or sense. As Milton S. Terry said, "A fundamental principle in grammatico-historical exposition is that the words and sentences can have but one significance in one and the same connection. The moment we neglect this principle we drift out upon a sea of uncertainty and conjecture." [13]

Many practice the historical-grammatical method using the inductive method, a general three-fold approach to the text: observation, interpretation, and application. [14] [15] Each step builds upon the other, which follows in order. The first step of observation involves an examination of words, structure, structural relationships and literary forms. After observations are formed, then the second step of interpretation involves asking interpretative questions, formulating answers to those questions, integration and summarization of the passage. After the meaning is derived through interpretation, the third step of application involves determining both the theoretical and practical significance of the text and appropriately applying this significance to today's modern context. There is also a heavy emphasis on personal application that extends into all aspects of the practitioner's life. Theologian Robert Traina, in his 1952 Methodical Bible Study, wrote that "the applicatory step is that for which all else exists. It represents the final purpose of Bible study." [16]

Technically speaking, the historical-grammatical method of interpretation is distinct from the determination of the passage's significance in light of that interpretation. Together, interpretation of the passage and determining the meaning define the term "hermeneutics". [17]

Comparison with other methods of interpretations

Other literal methods

The historical-grammatical method is not the only method based on a literal reading of the Bible. Among other methods are the exegesis of the ancient School of Antioch, the approach of the Karaites, the Golden-age Spanish Jewish rationalism, some scholastics like the School of St. Victor, the philogical method of the Reformers, the Protestant scholasticism of the Puritans and Francis Turretin, the devotional reading of the Pietists, and the Biblical Reading method of the evangelical Victorians. What makes the Historical-grammatical method unique is its insistence on the possibility of attaining a single objective reading, based upon the Enlightenment's Cartesian rationalism or Common-Sense realism. [18]

Reader-response method

In the reader-response method, the focus is on how the book is perceived by the reader, not on the intention of the author. While the methods focused on the Aesthetics of reception the objective is how the book is perceived by the reader without worrying about the authorial intent or original audiences, the historical-grammatical method considers the reader-response irrelevant. Reader-centered methods are diverse, including canonical criticism, confessional hermeneutics, and contextual hermeneutics. Nevertheless, the historical-grammatical method shares with reader-centered methods the interest in understanding the text as it became received by the earliest interpretive communities and throughout the history of Bible interpretation. Moreover, neither approach rejects assumptions of orthodoxy nor belief in the supernatural. [19]

Historical-critical method

The historical-critical method is used by many academic Bible scholars in universities, including many Roman Catholic and Protestant institutions. The method uses different approaches, like source criticism, genre criticism, tradition criticism, and redaction criticism in an attempt to discover the sources and factors that contributed to the making of the text as well as to determine what it meant to the original audience. There also a systematic use of historical, sociological, archeological, linguistic, anthropological and comparative mythology data. Scholars who use the historical-critical method treat the Bible as they would any other text. [20] In contrast to the historical-grammatical method, historical-criticism does not aim to determine what a text means for people today nor to produce novel theological insights. For those reasons, some traditional scholars and conservative Christians tend to reject the method, even though many of them use aspects of it that naturally overlap with the historical-grammatical method, such as attempting to determine what was meant when a passage was written.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hermeneutics</span> Theory and methodology of text interpretation

Hermeneutics is the theory and methodology of interpretation, especially the interpretation of biblical texts, wisdom literature, as well as philosophical texts. As necessary, hermeneutics may include the art of understanding and communication.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Johann August Ernesti</span>

Johann August Ernesti was a German Rationalist theologian and philologist. Ernesti was the first who formally separated the hermeneutics of the Old Testament from those of the New.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Exegesis</span> Critical explanation or interpretation of a text

Exegesis is a critical explanation or interpretation of a text. The term is traditionally applied to the interpretation of Biblical works. In modern usage, exegesis can involve critical interpretations of virtually any text, including not just religious texts but also philosophy, literature, or virtually any other genre of writing. The phrase Biblical exegesis can be used to distinguish studies of the Bible from other critical textual explanations.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to Christian theology:

Biblical studies is the academic application of a set of diverse disciplines to the study of the Bible. For its theory and methods, the field draws on disciplines ranging from ancient history, historical criticism, philology, theology, textual criticism, literary criticism, historical backgrounds, mythology, and comparative religion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Biblical criticism</span> Scholarly study of biblical writings

Biblical criticism is the use of critical analysis to understand and explain the Bible. During the eighteenth century, when it began as historical-biblical criticism, it was based on two distinguishing characteristics: (1) the scientific concern to avoid dogma and bias by applying a neutral, non-sectarian, reason-based judgment to the study of the Bible, and (2) the belief that the reconstruction of the historical events behind the texts, as well as the history of how the texts themselves developed, would lead to a correct understanding of the Bible. This sets it apart from earlier, pre-critical methods; from the anti-critical methods of those who oppose criticism-based study; from the post-critical orientation of later scholarship; and from the multiple distinct schools of criticism into which it evolved in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries.

Biblical hermeneutics is the study of the principles of interpretation concerning the books of the Bible. It is part of the broader field of hermeneutics, which involves the study of principles of interpretation, both theory and methodology, for all forms of communication, nonverbal and verbal.

Postliberal theology is a Christian theological movement that focuses on a narrative presentation of the Christian faith as regulative for the development of a coherent systematic theology. Thus, Christianity is an overarching story, with its own embedded culture, grammar, and practices, which can be understood only with reference to Christianity's own internal logic.

In Christian communities, Bible study is the study of the Bible by people as a personal religious or spiritual practice. In many Christian traditions, Bible study, coupled with Christian prayer, is known as doing devotions or devotional acts. Many Christian churches schedule time to engage in Bible study collectively. The origin of Bible study groups has its origin in early Christianity, when Church Fathers such as Origen and Jerome taught the Bible extensively to disciple Christians. In Christianity, Bible study has the purpose of "be[ing] taught and nourished by the Word of God" and "being formed and animated by the inspirational power conveyed by Scripture".

Allegorical interpretation of the Bible is an interpretive method (exegesis) that assumes that the Bible has various levels of meaning and tends to focus on the spiritual sense, which includes the allegorical sense, the moral sense, and the anagogical sense, as opposed to the literal sense. It is sometimes referred to as the quadriga, a reference to the Roman chariot that was drawn by four horses.

Biblical literalism or biblicism is a term used differently by different authors concerning biblical interpretation. It can equate to the dictionary definition of literalism: "adherence to the exact letter or the literal sense", where literal means "in accordance with, involving, or being the primary or strict meaning of the word or words; not figurative or metaphorical".

Eisegesis is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases. It is commonly referred to as reading into the text. It is often done to "prove" a pre-held point of concern, and to provide confirmation bias corresponding with the pre-held interpretation and any agendas supported by it.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reformed fundamentalism</span> Fundamentalism in the Reformed tradition

Reformed fundamentalism arose in some conservative Presbyterian, Congregationalist, Reformed Anglican, Reformed Baptist, Non-denominational and other Reformed churches, which agrees with the motives and aims of broader evangelical Protestant fundamentalism. The movement was historically defined by a repudiation of liberal and modernist theology, the publication (1905–1915) entitled, The Fundamentals, and had the intent to progress and revitalise evangelical Protestantism in predominantly English-speaking Protestant countries, as well as to reform separated churches according to the Bible, historic expression of faith and the principles of the Reformation. The Fundamentalist–Modernist controversy, and the Downgrade controversy, kindled the growth and development of reformed fundamentalism in the United States and the United Kingdom. Reformed fundamentalists have laid greater emphasis on historic confessions of faith, such as the Westminster Confession of Faith. Sixteenth century Reformers such as John Calvin, Martin Luther, John Knox, Theodore Beza, Philip Melanchthon and Protestant ministers such as Matthew Henry, John Gill, John Bunyan, George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Spurgeon, J. C. Ryle, John Burgon, F. B. Meyer, Dwight L. Moody, George Müller and G. Campbell Morgan have shaped the leaders in this reformed tradition.

Psychological biblical criticism is a re-emerging field within biblical criticism that seeks to examine the psychological dimensions of scripture through the use of the behavioral sciences. The title itself involves a discussion about "the intersections of three fields: psychology, the Bible, and the tradition of rigorous, critical reading of the biblical text.". Known figures within biblical scholarship advocating this interdisciplinary field in the United States include Rev. D. Andrew Kille, J. Harold Ellens (2004), Wayne G. Rollins, and, in Europe, Eugen Drewermann, Gerd Theissen.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Biblical authority</span>

In Christianity, the term biblical authority refers to two complementary ideas:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Canonical criticism</span> Biblical interpretation that focuses on the text of the biblical canon itself

Canonical criticism, sometimes called canon criticism or the canonical approach, is a way of interpreting the Bible that focuses on the text of the biblical canon itself as a finished product.

Theological hermeneutics is a field of theology, broadly referring to the application of hermeneutics, the theory and methodology of interpretation, to theological texts with theological means, particularly to scripture.

Old Testament theology is the branch of Biblical theology that seeks theological insight within the Old Testament or Hebrew Bible. It explores past and present theological concepts as they pertain to God and God's relationship with creation. While the field started out as a Christian endeavor written mostly by men and aimed to provide an objective knowledge of early revelation, in the twentieth century it became informed by other voices and views, including those of feminist and Jewish scholars, which provided new insights and showed ways that the early work was bound by the perspectives of their authors.

Historical criticism, also known as the historical-critical method or higher criticism, is a branch of criticism that investigates the origins of ancient texts in order to understand "the world behind the text". While often discussed in terms of Jewish and Christian writings from ancient times, historical criticism has also been applied to other religious and secular writings from various parts of the world and periods of history.

The Catholic theology of Scripture has developed much since the Second Vatican Council of Catholic Bishops. This article explains the theology of scripture that has come to dominate in the Catholic Church today. It focuses on the Church's response to various areas of study into the original meaning of texts.

References

  1. Elwell, Walter A. (1984). Evangelical Dictionary of Theology . Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House. ISBN   0-8010-3413-2.
  2. "The grammatico-historical exegete, furnished with suitable qualifications, intellectual, educational, and moral, will accept the claims of the Bible without prejudice or adverse prepossession" (PDF). The Springfielder. Retrieved 20 April 2019.
  3. The Biblical Commission's Document "The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church" Text and Commentary; ed. Joseph A. Fitzmyer; Subsidia Biblica 18; Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Bibllico, 1995. See esp. p. 26, "The historical-critical method is the indispensable method for the scientific study of the meaning of ancient texts."
  4. Johnson, Elliott. Expository hermeneutics : an introduction. Grand Rapids Mich.: Academie Books. ISBN   978-0-310-34160-4.
  5. Stylianopoulos, Theodore G. (2008). "Scripture and Tradition in the Church". In Cunningham, Mary B.; Theokritoff, Elizabeth (eds.). The Cambridge Companion to Orthodox Christian Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 21–34.
  6. Warfield, Benjamin B. (1948). Inspiration and Authority of the Bible. Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing. p. 423.
  7. Baird, William (1992). Freedman, David Noel; Beck, Astrid B. (eds.). The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York, NY: Doubleday. p. 730.
  8. Van Til, Henry R. (1955). "The Definition and History of Biblical Hermeneutics". Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation: Science in Christian Perspective. 7. Retrieved 30 August 2022.
  9. Grant, Robert M.; Tracy, David (1984). A Short History of the Interpretation of the Bible. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press. p. 116.
  10. Jowett, Benjamin "On the Interpretation of Scripture". Essays and Reviews, London: 1859, pp. 330-433.
  11. Barr, James. The semantics of biblical language. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2004.
  12. Martínez, José M. Hermenéutica bíblica. Clie, 1987. pp.231-232
  13. Terry, Milton (1974). Biblical hermeneutics : a treatise on the interpretation of the Old and New Testaments. Grand Rapids Mich.: Zondervan Pub. House. page 205
  14. Traina, Robert (1952). Methodical Bible study : a new approach to hermeneutics. Ridgefield Park? N.J., New York: [distributed by] Biblical Seminary in New York.
  15. Hendricks, Howard G. (1991). Living by the Book. Chicago: Moody Press. p.  349. ISBN   0-8024-0743-9.
  16. Traina, Robert (1952). Methodical Bible Study: A New Approach to Hermeneutics. New York: [distributed by] Biblical Seminary in New York. p. 217.
  17. Elwell, Walter A. (1984). Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House. ISBN   0-8010-3413-2. p. 565
  18. Ellingsen, Mark.'Common Sense Realism: The Cutting Edge of Evangelical Iden-tity' Dialog 24 (Summer 1985), p. 199.
  19. Zabatiero, Júlio Paulo Tavares. Contextual Hermeneutics. Editorial Garimpo, 2017.
  20. Coogan, Michael D (2005). The Old Testament, a Historical and Literary Introduction to the Hebrew Scriptures. Oxford University Press. ISBN   0-19-513911-9.