Modern Exegesis Research Articles

The Dynamism of the Social Literary and Hermeneutical Streams in Qurʾanic Classical and Modern Exegesis Studies

The Dynamism of the Social Literary and Hermeneutical Streams in Qurʾanic Classical and Modern Exegesis Studies

Speaking “Mouth to Mouth” (Num 12:8)

Abstract The phrase פה אל פה אדבר בו in Num 12:8a is generally taken to mean to speak with Moses “face to face.” However, commentators have noted that this understanding presents grammatical difficulties. In this study I propose a new understanding of the idiom and argue that it refers to oral transmission, from one speaking agent to the next in a linear chain. This idiomatic use of the phrase “mouth to mouth” is found in ancient Egyptian texts and widely across many cultures. This understanding of the idiom פה אל פה is animated further by a re-examination of four pieces of textual data: a) the meaning of the phrase בכל ביתי נאמן הוא in Num 12:7, and specifically an interpretation widespread in rabbinic commentary, but absent from modern exegesis; b) the meanings and diffusion of the prepositional verb דבר ב; c) the morphologies of various פה-פה expressions found in 2 Kings, Jeremiah, and Ezra; d) the structural and thematic similarities of Num 11 and Num 12.

Peaceful Families: American Muslim Efforts against Domestic Violence

Peaceful Families: American Muslim Efforts against Domestic Violence

Klasik ve Modern Kaynaklarda İlk Cinayet Kıssası (Maide 5/27-31): Tefsir Metodolojisi Açısından Mukayeseli Bir İnceleme

Bu makalede, Mâide suresinde yer alan “İlk cinayet kıssası” (27-31. âyetler) klasik tefsir kaynakları ve modern çalışmalar ekseninde metodolojik açıdan ele alınmıştır. Kıssanın en önemli iki unsuru “Âdem’in iki oğlu” lafzıyla kimlerin kastedildiği ve karganın yapmış olduğu rehberliğin ne ifade ettiğidir. Müfessirler genel anlamda, bahsi geçen “Âdem”in Hz. Âdem olduğu kanaatindedir. Gönderilen karga ise cesedin nasıl defnedileceğini göstermiştir. Çünkü işlenen cinayet yeryüzündeki ilk cinayettir ve ölü bir bedenin ne yapılması gerektiği bilinmemektedir. Bu genel kanaatte lafzî delillerin ve metin içi bağlam unsurlarının yanı sıra tefsirde aslî unsur olan sahîh hadîsler, ardından sahâbe ve tâbiûndan intikal eden rivâyetler esas alınmıştır. Diğer hadîslerle birlikte; özellikle Mesrûk b. el-Ecdaʻ’ın, üstâdı Abdullah b. Mesʻûd’dan naklettiği ve neredeyse bütün sahîh kaynaklarda yer alan “Zulmen öldürülen hiç kimse yoktur ki, onun kanından Âdem’in ilk oğluna da bir hisse çıkmasın. Çünkü öldürme (cinayet) yolunu ilk açan odur.” hadîsinin cerhi mümkün görünmemektedir. Buna sahâbe ve tâbiûn görüşleri ile ümmetin ittifakı da eklenince kâtil ve maktûlün kimler olduğu konusu netlik kazanmıştır. Ayrıca cesedin nasıl örtüleceğini göstermesi için gönderilen karga da bu kanaati teyit etmektedir. Yirminci asra gelininceye kadar bir iki istisna haricinde müfessirlerin tamamının bu konuda ittifak halinde olduğu görülmektedir. Hasan el-Basrî ve Dahhâk gibi zâtlara atfedilen görüş, kıssada bahsedilen iki kişinin İsrâiloğulları’ndan iki kişi olduğu şeklindedir. Ancak bu görüşün Hz. Âdem ve eşinin ilk insan çifti olmadığı şeklindeki bir düşünceyle ilgisinin olmadığı yine bu zâtlardan gelen başka rivâyetlerle sâbittir. Dolayısıyla herkesçe müsellem bir Âdem anlayışı söz konusudur. Müfessirlerin yapmış oldukları izâhlarda konuyla ilgili farklı âyetler de göz önüne alınmıştır. Öte yandan âyetlerin zâhiri esas tutulmuş ve herhangi bir tereddüt yahut işkâl durumu söz konusu olmadığı için te’vile gerek duyulmamıştır. Bütün bunlar aynı zamanda klasik tefsirlerde izlenen metodun temel unsurlarını oluşturmaktadır.Buna karşın evrimci bakış açısına göre ilk iki insanın ilk çocukları diye bir olgu söz konusu değildir. Zira evrimde ilk iki insan diye bir şeyden bahsedilmesi mümkün değildir. Modern tefsir anlayışını şekillendiren başat unsurlardan biri bu yaklaşım tarzıdır. Kıssaların sembolik olduğu iddiasına göre ise âyet lafızları zaten önem arz etmemektedir. Bu minvâlde kıssanın bir gerçekliğinin olmadığı ve Tevrat’a atfen zikredildiği öne sürülmektedir. Oysaki benzeri bir anlatının asıl itibariyle semâvî olan Tevrat’ta geçmesi, bir hakikat olarak Kur’ân’da da yer almasına aykırı değildir. Nitekim Kur’ân-ı Kerîm, Tevrat ve İncil metinleri/hükümleri üzerinde mübeddil ve musahhih olduğu gibi bazen de mütemmim ve musaddık olmuştur. Ayrıca Tekvin’deki Hâbil-Kâyin kıssasında kargadan bahsedilmemektedir. Sembolikçi anlayışa göre Kur’ân hayal ürünü olduğu iddia edilen bir kıssayı aktarmakta ve bu aktarım esnasında ona asılsız yeni bir unsur daha eklemektedir. Bu ise vehimden ibaret olup herhangi bir delile dayanmamaktadır. İlmi her şeyi ihâta eden ve Kur’ân’da anlatılanları mükerreren “Hakk” diye niteleyen Yüce Allah’ın irşad için hayali bir hikâyeyi anlatmaya muhtaç olmadığı muhakkaktır. Dahası, kıssa eğer sembolikse, Peygamber (s.a.s.) ve sahabe de dahil bütün ümmet on dört asırdır bunu anlamamış demektir ki bundan söz edilmesi bile abestir. Aynı tutarsız durum evrimci yorumlar için de geçerlidir.Sonuç itibariyle iki kardeşten biri diğerini katletmiş; daha sonra maktulün ortada kalan cesedini ne yapacağını bilememiş ve nihâyet onun defnedilmesi gerektiğini bir kargadan öğrenmiştir. Âyetin sarih ifadesi bu iki kişi için “Âdem’in iki oğlu” demektedir ve geçerli bir karine/delil olmadığı müddetçe bu konuda yapılacak te’vîl ikna edicilikten uzaktır. Tefsir metodolojisi açısından modern zamanların ürünü olan her iki yaklaşımın da sağlam birer ilmî temele dayanmadığı ve problem çözmekten ziyade farklı çelişkilere kapı araladığı görülmektedir.

Padlina i sępy. Czy logion Q 17,37 jest biblijnym cytatem (illud dictum), przysłowiem (proverbium) czy znakiem (signum)? Analiza egzegetyczno-teologiczna

Artykuł proponuje szczegółową analizę syntaktyczno-semantyczną Mt 24,28 i Łk 17,37c w celu hipotetycznego odtworzenia semickiej (hebrajskiej i aramejskiej) frazy logionu Jezusa Q 17,37. Następnie zestawia trzy różne możliwości jego zrozumienia w kontekście kanonicznym NT, jako biblijny cytat/parafraza z Hi 39,30, jako przysłowie i jako znak. Zestawienie pozwala zrozumieć, że Q 17,37 pasuje wyjątkowo dobrze do swojego literackiego i teologicznego kontekstu w tych trzech znaczeniach, co z jednej strony wskazuje na jego dużą semantyczną i akomodacyjną elastyczność, z drugiej zaś utrudnia ustalenie jego pierwotnego znaczenia w źródle Q. Jednak autor artykułu uważa, że semicka fraza Q 17,37 z wielkim prawdopodobieństwem funkcjonowała zarówno w Q jak i w kanonicznym kontekście NT jako cytat/parafraza z Hi 39,30 lub jako znak (w taki sam sposób jak znak drzewa figowego w Mt 24,32-33; Łk 21,29-31), bardziej niż jako przysłowie. W ten sposób artykuł podważa klasyczną interpretację, jaka utrwaliła się we współczesnej egzegezie Mt 24,28; Łk 17,37c.

"Spirit and Power": Modernity on Miracles, Biblical Studies and the Leap of Faith

Modern interpretation of the Holy Scripture, especially historicocritical exegesis must crash with the classical dogmatic approach. The case in which this crash is unavoidable is the historicity of Jesus Christ and his miraculous deeds. For contemporary mentality miracles are definitely strange so it is not surprising that such kind of interpretation of the Gospels, in which miracles taken literally are excluded, has been occurring for few ages now. Today, we see a debate between exegetes who are deeply engaged in modern rationalistic paradigm and the ones who try to be faithful to the Church testimony in the first place. This article argues that modern exegesis must lead to the leap of faith. Only faith can affirm the truth of the Gospel, taking aside the question of historical character of Jesus’ miracles. Ultimately, the case of Jesus is mainly about faith, not only about historical research.

Romans 2:13 and Future Justification

Abstract Given that Paul’s letter to the Romans is a touchstone for the distinctively Protestant confessional teaching concerning justification by faith alone, Romans 2:13 poses a challenge. Following the pattern of Philip Melanchthon, Protestant expositors have typically met this challenge by interpreting it as a ‘legal’ justification that no sinner can attain. This article illustrates the dominant ‘Melanchthonian’ trajectory in early modern Protestant exegesis, while also drawing attention to a minority alternative that reads it as a future justification of Christians according to works (the ‘Bucerian’ alternative). Many modern Protestant exegetes now prefer something like the Bucerian alternative, begging the question as to how this squares coherently with any confessional commitment to a once-for-all justification that is by faith alone. Noting this, this article sets forth an early modern Protestant model of cogent dogmatic harmonization on this score. The chosen case study is Petrus van Mastricht and his magisterial Theoretico-Practica Theologia.

“Sword Handling: The Early Christian Reception of Matthew 10:34”

AbstractThe saying of Jesus in Matt 10:34 that he has “not come to bring peace, but a sword,” seems at odds with the general tenor of his life and teachings. Some proponents of a revolutionary Jesus have seized upon this saying as evidence that he was sympathetic to, and perhaps even supportive of, violent revolution. This article surveys patristic commentary on this verse from the first few centuries to see how this “hard saying” was understood and handled. Although a small number of writers expressed unease about the imagery and the perceived contradiction with other texts of scripture, the general trend was to construe the “sword” metaphorically, usually by appealing to a variety of passages containing the same word. No patristic writer understood the saying as an endorsement of violence, even those whose socio-political context might have justified it. Finally, although some of the hermeneutical strategies of the Fathers may not be embraced by modern exegesis, they often produced readings that were culturally and religiously sensitive as well as rhetorically insightful.

Metode Tafsir Muhammad Abduh dan Muhammad Rasyid Ridha dalam Tafsîr Al-Manâr

Tafsîr al-Manar is one of the most popular exegesis of the Qur`anic studies. Al-Manar magazine, which contains this interpretation periodically, namely in the early 20th century, is widespread throughout the Islamic world and has an important role in enlightening thoughts and religious counseling. The influence of Sheikh Muhammad Abduh, along with his student, Sayyid Muhammad Rasyîd Ridhâ, on the development of religious thought in the Islamic world, thus, cannot be underestimated.This article is a result of a previous study of the Qur’an exegesis method of the two prominent Muslim scholars, Muhammad Abduh and Muhammad Rashid Ridha. The study reveals two main conclusions, they are (1) personally both Muhammad Abduh and Muhammad Rashid Ridha are independent who have extensive, well-known, and versatile insight and knowledge, have personality traits that are steady, honest, brave, passionate, intelligent, determined, and a number of other advantages, like other leading commentator (2) Al-manâr book, with its superiorities, is well recognized as a monumental work that broadly contributes to the development of Islamic thought, particularly in modern exegesis field. In regard to exegesis of Qur’anic legal verses, though it is not a special legal book, Al-manâr is able to explain deeply and comprehensively the Qur’anic legal verses just like the other legal exegesis works.

Reinterpretasi Asbāb Al-Nuzūl bagi Penafsiran Alquran

Asbāb al-nuzūl are socio-historical events surrounding the revelation of the Qur’an and they are important aspects to understand the meaning of the Qur’an. Unfortunately, in many tafsir that written either in classical or modern exegesis many exegetes seem to ignore the important messages of these socio-historical aspects of the Qur’an. Many exegetes only focus on the texts and produce the textual-doctrinal understanding of the Qur’an that detached from its context. This article based on the claim of universality of the messages of the Qur’an to all human beings across time and space. This article employs interpretative-analysis method to analyze the use of Asbāb al-nuzūl in kitab tafsir – classic and modern - and to seek a new understanding in both: the theory a well as the use of Asbāb al-nuzūl for Qur’anic interpretation. This article shows that the study of Asbāb al-nuzūl should be concerned not only with the specific events of the revelations but also with the spirit of the time when the events occurred in order to understand the basic meaning intended by the texts revealed in various occasions. Therefore, the meaning of the Qur'an should be derived not only from the general meaning of the texts but also from the contexts of the revelations (al-ibrat bi umum al-lafzh ma’a mura’at khusus al-sabab). Interpreting the Qur’an by paying attention to socio-historical approach will lead us to a more dynamic and dialogical interpretation with the cultural contexts without ignoring the ethical principles of the Qur’an.

Γυνὴ τοῦ Πατρός: Analytic Kin Circumlocution and the Case for Corinthian Adultery

Modern exegesis of 1 Cor 5 has functioned under two assumptions: first, Paul’s phrase γυνὴ τοῦ πατρός echoes similar locutions found in Leviticus or Deuteronomy, and, second, sexual liaisons between sons and their stepmothers were considered incestuous in Greco-Roman antiquity. By examining the use of analytic kin circumlocution, this article argues that Paul’s periphrasis not only is a standard circumlocution for μητρυιά (“stepmother”) but also is constructed to highlight the particularly egregious nature of this affair: it is an inner-οἶκος adultery. Roman, Greek, and Second Temple Jewish data indicate that son–stepmother trysts, while especially offensive, were considered adulterous. By removing this perceived pentateuchal anchor, this article opens new possibilities for reading 1 Cor 5 as a test case in Paul’s homonoia argument in 1 Cor 1–4 and suggests marriage and the οἶκος as a new latticework for holding together the disparate elements of 1 Cor 5–7.

Aquinas on Paul’s Use of the Old Testament: The Implications of Participation

Aquinas on Paul’s Use of the Old TestamentThe Implications of Participation Charles Raith II (bio) Is the attempt to understand Paul’s use of the Old Testament a metaphysically neutral inquiry? Or are interpretations affected by one’s metaphysical commitments? Within contemporary New Testament scholarship, Paul’s use of the Old Testament has become a topic of study in its own right with numerous methodological options now being offered.1 When the scholarship is analyzed, we find that those who adhere strongly to a historical-critical approach to Scripture continue to assume an objective stance to the raw data of the text that yields various scientific results.2 For some, right method and adequate literary skills alone are thought to yield an accurate analysis of how Paul uses the Old Testament.3 In the main, whether the approach is of a conservative or progressive bent, metaphysical considerations are at best secondary issues to be explored only after the particular method has yielded its results. The problem with this situation is that approaches to Paul’s use of the Old Testament are in fact deeply affected by prior philosophical and theological judgments—judgments that are intrinsic to the approach itself.4 The topic of Paul’s use of the Old Testament is uniquely interesting because any scholar who explores this will also indirectly reveal his [End Page 66] or her convictions and assumptions, sometimes stated but more often left unstated, pertaining to the doctrine of inspiration, the metaphysical involvement of God in history, the locus of authorial intent, the Christological linking (or lack thereof) of the canonical writings, and the metaphysics (and not merely literary qualities) underlying the doctrine of the different senses of Scripture.5 Not surprisingly, the burgeoning scholarship on Paul’s use of the Old Testament has largely avoided premodern accounts; if premodern accounts do appear, they do so often only to highlight the superiority of modern exegetical methods.6 But premodern engagements with Paul’s use of the Old Testament help reveal the metaphysical and theological commitments implicit (and often undetected) in modern approaches—commitments that are simply assumed by most scholars and readers. And recovering some of the participatory dimensions of premodern approaches can aid contemporary exegesis in exploring the full depth of Paul’s engagement with the Old Testament. In what follows, I focus on the basic “fundamental commitments” (to use Steve Moyise’s term7) about Scripture that inform Aquinas’s approach to Paul’s use of the Old Testament, most of which revolves around his theology of participation.8 A participatory approach to biblical exegesis understands the order of creation not only as the linear unfolding of individual moments—the approach taken by modern historical-critical methods—but also as an ongoing participation in God’s active providence, both metaphysically (i.e., in the order of creation) and Christologically-pneumatologically (i.e., in the order of grace). The biblical texts and their authors, then, “are already historically caught up in a participatory relationship, however obscure, with the trans-temporal realities of faith.”9 A participatory approach to Paul’s use of the Old Testament calls into question the naturalist assumptions of most critical scholarship, in which “not only the empirical findings of science have been conflated with metaphysical naturalism, but also . . . historical-critical textual criticism has uncritically assumed naturalism as a dogma rather than as a merely abstractive methodological assumption of scientific inquiry.”10 [End Page 67] Insensitivity to the metaphysical differences between much of modern exegesis and Aquinas’s exegesis has led, as we shall see, to the erroneous claim that Aquinas is a forerunner to modern (and sometimes postmodern) methods of exegesis due to his emphasis on the literal sense and the role that virtue formation plays in his theory of cognition. But Aquinas’s emphasis on the literal sense and the role of virtue for proper interpretation presupposes a participatory ontology in which the world is guided through its participation in God’s providential activity in a way often bracketed by modern (and postmodern) approaches to Scripture. The following is an exploration into Aquinas’s participatory approach to Paul’s use of the Old Testament in conversation...

Patristic Exegetical Theory and Practice in De Lubac and Congar

AbstractThis article examines the retrieval of patristic exegesis in two major figure in Catholic Ressourcement theology: Henri de Lubac and Yves Congar. Henri de Lubac's driving concern in his biblical writings is not so much to chronicle the history of interpretation as it is to explicate the great theological synthesis, which underlies the doctrine of the fourfold sense of Scripture. For de Lubac, this synthesis, wherein the totality of Christian doctrine and practice is centered in Christ and grounded in the reading of Scripture, is an essential component of Christianity. De Lubac encourages the integration of this theological vision with modern biblical studies, but he does not offer much as to what such an integration might look like in practice. Congar, building upon de Lubac's work, goes beyond de Lubac in making concrete efforts to integrate some of the theory and practice of patristic interpretation with modern exegesis. Important here is Congar's notion of “typological tradition” whereby the divine mystery concealed and revealed in the realities presented by the biblical text, unfold in the tradition, doctrine, and practice of the Church.

The Rise and Fall of Biblical Perspicuity: Remonstrants and the Transition toward Modern Exegesis

The purpose of this article is to examine the biblical exegesis of two seventeenth-century Dutch Remonstrant theologians, Simon Episcopius (1583–1643) and Étienne de Courcelles (1586–1659). Their hermeneutic was characterized by an emphasis on the perspicuity, or clarity, of scripture through the use of reason, combined with the marginalization of spiritual meanings in favor of the literal-grammatical sense alone. In both of these emphases, they went beyond their theological forebear, Jacob Arminius (1559–1609), and adumbrated the methods of later Enlightenment thinkers. The stress on perspicuity and authorial intention led to increasing fascination with text criticism, linguistic analysis, and historical contextualization, highly rarefied disciplines that became prerequisites for correct, scholarly biblical interpretation. This development also pushed the question of biblical fallibility closer to the center of the doctrine of scripture. As a consequence of the philological, scientific study of the Bible, biblical interpretation was relegated to the field of scholarship and doctrinal formulation to the church. The original ideal of biblical perspicuity resulted in biblical obscurity.

The Christian Laws in Paul: Reading the Apostle with Early Greek Interpreters. By MIKAEL SUNDKVIST.

In this Ph.D. thesis, Mikael Sundkvist elicits the help of Greek Church Fathers to determine the meaning of four elusive passages in Paul—Gal. 6:2, 1 Cor. 9:21, and Rom. 3:27 and 8:2—which he groups together as the ‘Christian laws’. Though not every section ultimately proves valuable in advancing beyond contemporary exegetical impasses, Sundkvist’s overview does produce compelling readings for each of these difficult texts, providing validation for his methodology as potentially constructive for modern exegesis. In Part I, Sundkvist introduces the problem of contemporary division on the meaning of Paul’s ‘Christian laws’, and offers an apology for reading the apostle alongside his early Greek interpreters: as Paul himself was a Hellenistic Jew, his subsequent readers often shared similar cultural and conceptual worlds, and faced similar challenges from Jews regarding non-observance of the Law. Turning to methodology, Sundkvist makes a case for examining early exegesis as a heuristic tool, as interests like historical background are shared by early readers—particularly Antiochenes—and moderns alike.

Romans 8.29–30 and the Question of the Ordo Salutis

‭This essay addresses recent criticisms of the doctrine of the ordo salutis (order of salvation) in early modern Reformed theology by (1) surveying recent criticisms, (2) explaining early modern Reformed expressions of the ordo salutis, particularly as they employ the concept of the sorites, a Greco-Roman form of rhetorical argument found in the apostle Paul’s letters, but especially Rom 8.29–30, (3) arguing for the validity and correctness of the early modern exegesis and exposition of Rom 8.29–30, (4) exploring the systematic-theological implications of Paul’s use of a sorites in Rom 8.29–30.‬

Augustine and the Primeval Language in Early Modern Exegesis and Philology

In his influential work City of God — De civitate Dei — Augustine identifies Hebrew as the original, or primeval, language of mankind, and more accurately as the language that survived the confusion of languages at Babel in the house or family of Heber, a descendant of Noah in the fifth generation. This article surveys (1) how this claim is related to ideas about this topic in ancient Jewish and Christian sources before and after Augustine, (2) demonstrates how Augustine’s interpretation of biblical primeval history and his concept of history is interconnected with his view on the primordial language, and (3) explores how early modern exegesis and philology adopted this specific Augustinian model with regard to the topic in question. This study is both descriptive and analytical. It is based on primary sources which modern scholarship of the history of linguistic thought hitherto to a great extent has either failed to pay attention to or misrepresented.

Henri de Lubac's Genealogy of Modern Exegesis and Nicholas of Lyra's Literal Sense of Scripture

AbstractAccording to Henri de Lubac's history of medieval exegesis, the fourteenth century marked the tipping point for the disintegration of history and allegory. The Postilla super totam bibliam of the Franciscan Nicholas of Lyra (1270–1349) plays a prominent role in this declension narrative by ceding the “spirit” of interpretation to the separate discipline of theology, and opening the space for critical biblical studies to attain autonomy. But what if Nicholas of Lyra was on the other side of this history? Arguing from the layout of early Postilla manuscripts and the institutional and manuscript culture of the fourteenth century, this article proposes that Nicholas's Postilla represents a vigorous and largely successful attempt to reintegrate Biblical text, historical scholarship, and theological exegesis. Nicholas's approach to the exegetical crises of his own day helps us to reassess the challenges and possibilities of theological exegesis today.

The curse of Ham in the early modern era: the Bible and the justifications for slavery

Contents: Preface The Bible and slavery The sons of Noah and the estates of Man Gods, giants, and kings Losing Canaan: early modern exegesis of Genesis 9 This heavy curse: popularizing the Curse of Ham Cursed be Ham the Father of Canaan: from myth to reality The self-interpreting Bible Bibliography Index

Introducing Premodern Scriptural Exegesis

Abstract This article introduces the following three essays in this volume of the Journal of Theological Interpretation, which seek to point out the elements that make patristic exegesis different from our own. The articles illustrate how, in contrast to our own biblical studies, patristic exegesis can seem foreign and off-putting but at the same time stimulating, adventurous, and useful to the life of the church. Patristic exegetes assume (without making a case for it) that Holy Scripture is the voice of the Triune Living God. Reading Scripture is therefore an act of faith and obedience, almost even a sacramental act. Patristic exegesis of Scripture holds as its goal the formation of its reader in the love of God and the love of neighbor. Reading Scripture is therefore a school from which we never graduate, because in this world love of God and love of neighbor are always imperfectly practiced. The authoritative context for the exegesis of the Fathers is ecclesial; it is neither academic (as is modern exegesis) nor individualistic (as is much of popular American Christianity's biblical interpretation).