12W4

Here are some ideas for the essay on hermeneutics (which is now due on the 29th April). The title is:

“Hermeneutics is the art of avoiding misunderstanding” (Schleiermacher). Discuss with reference to interpretation of the Bible.

Things to talk about:

• Exegesis and Eisegesis - What’s the difference between “reading out” and “reading in”?
• Genre - why does the genre of a piece of literature affect interpretation
• Authorial intention - is it possible to work out what the author was trying to say?
• The Hermeneutical Circle (Schleiermacher) - What’s the relationship between the parts of a text and its whole?
• Hermeneutics of Suspicion (Ricoeur) - Should we be “suspicious” of an author’s agenda?
• The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy - What does it mean for the Bible to be “inerrant” or “infallible”?
• Demythologising (Bultmann) - we haven’t discussed this yet, but will do so after Easter

The key question in hermeneutics is what makes a “good” interpretation, so the question is really asking you to talk about the best way of avoiding misunderstanding when interpreting a text (in this case, the Bible).

Inerrancy

For someone who believes in inerrancy, “God, who is Himself Truth and speaks truth only, has inspired Holy Scripture in order thereby to reveal Himself to lost mankind” (Chicago Statement). If God is truth, then what God says is truth. Therefore the Bible is true in all it says: “in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit” (Article 12) and that “Scripture, having been given by divine inspiration, is infallible, so that, far from misleading us, it is true and reliable in all the matters it addresses” (Article 11). Therefore, nothing can over-rule the Bible (”We deny that scientific hypotheses about earth history may properly be used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood.” [Article 12]).

In this case, the Bible is supreme and is authoritative. The concept of “Scripture interpreting Scripture” is used, so that, in terms of hermeneutics, interpretations of the Bible are tested against other parts of the Bible. If you claim that one bit of the Bible says one thing, this is tested against what the Bible says elsewhere. If the Bible contradicts what you claim somewhere else then your interpretation must be wrong.

Other hermeneutics

Other ways of looking at the Bible emphasise the human dimensions a little more. They point to the human authors and suggest that all human beings have personal interests and agendas, and so it is important to try to look beneath these. Thus, interpreters look at genre, historical context and other things to try to make sense of the text.

Some argue that texts can mean different things to different people. Therefore there is no definitive “right” interpretation of any text - the text takes its meaning from the way the reader understands it. This is a very “post-modern” way of looking at interpretation; recognising that everthing looks different depending on where you look at it from. Some ways of looking at things might be more helpful than others, but one must at least recognise the influence the readers own position has on their interpretation.

Advice on writing the essay

The question is an invitation for you to reflect on the various ways of interpreting the Bible. Try to present the various options as fairly as you can, and offer a few strengths and weaknesses. You don’t have to leave your opinion out of it though - if one way of interpreting the Bible particularly appeals to you then explain why. What do you think makes it a better way of interpreting than the others?

Please use all the other information on the blog: look here. There is an article on early church hermeneutics which might give you some different ideas, and a few pages on the importance of genre.

If you have questions please email me and I’ll get back to you ASAP.

After Easter we’ll have a quick look at Bultmann and his concept of “demythologising”.

Good luck!

This essay on hermeneutics is due the first Wednesday back after Easter (29th April - note changed date) so you have almost a month to do it. I will write some full guidance notes later this week so please check back for them…

The title is:

“Hermeneutics is the art of avoiding misunderstanding” (Schleiermacher). Discuss with reference to the interpretation of the Bible.

For information check out all the posts on hermeneutics

I’ve marked the 12 essays I received and they were mostly pretty good! Well done, lots of you have shown good understanding!

Some common points:

• There is a distinction between sin (in the sense of specific things that people do wrong) and sinfulness (the general nature of something as likely to do things wrong). It is important to note that Hodge refers to sinfulness so he is not saying that everyone does the same things wrong, but that everyone is similarly inclined to sin. He is saying that it is in everyone’s nature to be sinful, and that original sin explains this inclination. If you don’t make this distinction then you’re on tricky ground.
• All of you argued against Hodge. That’s fine, but if you are arguing against someone then it’s quite easy to knock them down but it’s another thing all together to suggest an alternative. Hodge is suggesting that original sin is the “only rational solution” to the “universal sinfulness” of human beings. If you disagree with this then there are two ways of arguing:
  1. There is another rational solution to the universal sinfulness of human beings. You agree that everyone is sinful, but think there is another explanation. Lots of you started to do this by arguing that free will explains it but you need to be clear. Why should free will mean that I choose to do wrong? If I have free will and have the choice to do good or ill, why should I choose to do ill?
  2. Human beings aren’t universally sinful, in which case you deny that human beings have a natural inclination to do wrong. Could you give an example? Remember to explain why you dispute this!
• Quoting - if you refer to something someone else has written that is fine (even encouraged). However, you must put it in quotes and say where the quote has come from. If you quote something without declaring where it is from you are plagarising which is considered by examiners to be cheating. Universities take this very seriously and lots of people are kicked out every year for doing this. It is only polite to say where you get your information from, this allows whoever is reading your essay to look up the information for themselves if they wish to investigate further. You may like to use footnotes!

I haven’t given grades as grade boundaries do move from year to year but if you want to know roughly how well you are doing the grade boundaries are something like:

• A: 28 or above
• B: 25 or above
• C: 21 or above
• D: 18 or above
• E: 14 or above

Well done to all of you who handed something in. I enjoyed marking them…

Faye, Rosie, Alex, Sophie and Dani - I expect them handed in before the end of the week.

Thanks to those of you who have handed in essays. I will mark them over the weekend and get them back to you on Wednesday. They are marked out of 35, and for each 5 marks you get I’ll award a raffle ticket and we’ll hold a prize draw on Wednesday, with a prize involving chocolate. Everyone who got the essay to me on time gets a bonus of 3 tickets…

Good luck!

Neither Miss Duffy nor I will be in the lesson this Wednesday (25th Feb). Please use the time constructively to plan your essays (due for next week, 4th March). If you can write an essay plan for me and leave it on Miss Duffy’s desk I will have a look over it and get it back to you with comments.

Remember to look at the guidance notes for advice.

The essay title is:

“Original sin is the only rational solution of the undeniable fact of the deep, universal and early manifested sinfulness of men in all ages, of every class, and in every part of the world” (Charles Hodge). Discuss

Due Wednesday 4th March. I expect the essay to be two or more sides of A4 long, if you want to do the topic justice.

Guidance:

Here are some hints on writing your essay… Charles Hodge is claiming that “Original Sin” is the only way of explaining the prevalence of sinfulness in the world. Your essay needs to respond to this: do you agree or disagree with this idea? Whether you do or not, you’ll need to explain what “original sin” is, and something of how it works. You’ll also need to think of some arguments for and against it.

If you agree then you need to explain why you agree. What makes “original sin” the best explanation for universal sinfulness? Why does it explain why human beings have that inbuilt love of doing things wrong? Other people might have different ideas about why people are so bad. You need to explain why they are wrong. Some people might say that human beings aren’t as universally bad as Augustine makes out. Why are they wrong?

If you disagree then you need to say why. Why does original sin not solve the problem? Perhaps you don’t agree that human beings are as sinful as Augustine makes out. If you think this then why do you think it? What other explanations can you give for the state of humanity? Why are your reasons better than Augustine’s?

For either of these you don’t have to answer all the questions, but you do need to be persuasive. As with all of these things there are arguments on either side - your job is to persuade me that your argument is better than the other arguments.

Suggested outline:

• Introduction: Explain in brief what your argument is. Are you going to agree or disagree? You don’t have to explain why just yet, but it helps to be clear from the start which way you are arguing…
• Original sin: Explain Augustine’s ideas about original sin. Even if you’re disagreeing with him try to give as fair an explanation as possible here. It’s no good arguing against something that isn’t a fair representation of what he is trying to say…
• Argument: Spend a few paragraphs making your case. Explain what you are saying and why. Discuss other points of view. In each paragraph try to explain why your view is better than the other possible views and link it back to what you have said you are going to do in the introduction.
• Conclusion: Tie up everything you’ve argued and explain why it means that what you said in your introduction was right. Your conclusion is not your chance to say what you think; it must relate to the rest of the essay. By all means you can say what you think, but your whole essay should reflect this. An essay is not a case of saying “some people think this”, “some people think that” and then in the conclusion ignoring “this” and “that” and saying “but I think the other”… You’re entitled to your opinion but you must back it up.

Good luck! If you have any question feel free to leave a comment (click the comments link). That way I’ll be able to respond to your question in such a way that everyone will be able see and use the information…