Thanks for the review. Seems like my reading list is longer than my years, and a few of the books on it have come from this blog. Appreciate this review as I really want to read something good and definitive on Hermeneutics. Keeping this book in mind.

Thanks Tim and Merry Christmas to you and your family.

i’m sure Robert Thomas’s other chapters are better in other areas, but my quick reading of his chapter on Dynamic Equivalence smacks of his lack of understanding of (or unwillingness to grapple with) the issues presented in translation that came thru his journal articles in MSJ.

it wld probably be more helpful to take a look at assessments by D.A. Carson or Mark Strauss, who r no less linguistically erudite or hermeneutically conservative than Thomas, when it comes to the area of Dynamic Equivalence n translational theory n practice in general.

Brakelsmith quotes: “Surely there must be other conservative approaches to the art and science of hermeneutics. Any suggestions?”

I really enjoyed this review as this is a topic that I really want to understand better. But Tim, if you struggled with understanding the full import of the book, what hope can I possibly have for myself?I have a March birthday (I can’t believe it, I’m actually older than you by a few months) and I already have a list of books a km long. (However long a km is, I’m still working on that one and I’v been driving in CA for almost 5 years.):)

Merry Christmas Tim and family!

Does this book deal with the evangelical hermeneutic regarding the slavery passages? This certainly has changed over the last half century.

RE: Dynamic EquivalenceI have found Leland Ryken’s “The Word of God in English” (Crossway, 2002) to be most helpful in dealing with hermeneutical issues. Dr. Ryken is an English professor at Wheaton and he served as a literary stylist for the English Standard Version (ESV). Dr. Ryken is very helpful in many of the areas mentioned by previous comments.

Scott,

I’m willing to take a stab at the single meaning thingy…:)

In your example of a prophet who is given knowledge of an event, but one in which the event has an application for the future, I do not see a double meaning. The event is the fulfillment, or partial fulfillment, of the prophesy; but because others draw understanding from it, does not give it a double meaning. It simply means that the value of the prophetic vision is not limited to the specific event in question.

If the prophetic vision does deal with a near event that has meaning in the future, then the intention of the vision or prophesy was two-fold to begin with, thus a single, but far reaching intention underlies its purpose.

I hope I have not just confused you further. Perhaps someone else might be able to explain it more clearly?

Have a good one….:)

Hmmmm, I suppose a different way of looking at it would be to say that all of scripture falls within the two-fold intention. If you think about it, the letters of the NT are not written to us, but to specific peoples or churches of the first century, yet we are still enriched by what those churches were told. The OT is a series of histories concering events, peoples, and happenings that are thousands of years gone, yet we still learn of God and how He dealt with those people, His attitudes and more. We were given these scriptures with that two-fold intention in mind.

Does the prophecies of the OT deepen this or add a third wrinkle to the question? I would say, no. Since we are seeing the events in question much like you might watch a TV show…only your reading it. The scriptures are windows in time, and with the exception of prophecies that include us, but have yet to be fulfilled; such as the Lord’s return; then prophesies of the OT are static as well. They are done, and we learn from them…as was intended.

Perhaps that might bring it a bit more clear. Lord willin and the creek don’t rise….:)

Ann,

Thanks for the post. That article opens a whole new arena. For both you and Scott, I appologise if I gave the impression that I believe in single meaning scriptures. Let me see if I can clarifiy myself into a muddy hole…HA!

Specifically, I was responding to Scott’s question. And in a heroically goofy way, I answered the question, but neglected to expound on the other aspects of this debateable subject. In #11 you’ll note that I said people attempt to bring their understanding, and apply hermeneutics to their study, in an attempt to draw their pre-conceived notions from scripture.

This very thing is the difficulty in studying scripture. I also find it is one of Satan’s biggest traps into leading us away from Christ, instead of to a more intense understanding of God’s plan for us during our time here. As Ann’s link stated there are many times where a scripture says something that means more than it said. Where it alludes to something else. This is found in the many times where Christ spoke to us in parables. Stories that were intended to hide their meanings from those who the Spirit had not enabled to see. As Christ said…in seeing they may not see, and in hearing they may not hear…”

In my answer to Scott, both times, I was attempting to express what some people believe of scripture. As Ann’s post stated, there are often times when every meaning of a statement that is made, is the intention of the statement, and was stated specifically for that purpose. Most things like that will be found in the NT, and vastly fewer in the OT. Jesus often spoke with many layers of meaning that do not become clear except through extensive study, and to further deepen the experience, the maturity of the individual makes a difference, then we add that the Spirit teaches other things, things that we mortals understand and know, but I doubt we can ever put our finger on why, or how….because it is something revealed to us from God. The latter statement is more of a deepening relationship with God, rather than saying some new scripture pops into your head….but it might mean that a scripture you’ve known suddenly becomes deeper, your understanding expands and you see it more clearly.

To further explain the word used for desire, as in “desire the knowledge of God” is ‘epithumia’. A Greek word that means: desire, upon desire, upon desire….an ever growing need to know more. I believe that unless that type of attitude is there, and seen by God in you, then your growth is stunted. But part of that is because we do not seek what is below what is printed. The word for love in english scripture is four different words in Greek. Depending on how they are used in the sentence makes it different for us. But the word for ‘kononia’ is translated into four different words in english, words that we place different meanings on, but which God sees as one and the same thing. Its translated into “fellowship, communion, distribution, and contribution.

In understanding hermeneutics…it is important to note that it is a human method of study and subject to our frailties and failings. For myself, I pray before I study, I read the context of what I am reading, consider who is speaking, who is being spoken to, and why…from there I try to see what, what was said applies to me, my life, or the subject at hand. I pray again. That is my basic method…not everything, but the basics. I hope I have clarified myself a bit better. And I hope that Tim will forgive the length of the post…..