Bible Hermeneutics

[forester]

---

@The_Child: Allow me to offer my answer.

Your first question; my answer is NO. Before you can categorize a literature as "vague" or ambiguous, you need to interpret it in the first place. No direct knowledge is available to determine the ambiguity of a literary piece, we need to understand the intent of its author and many other things.

Your second question; my answer is NO. Hermeneutic standard says that in every objective portion, there is always a subjective part considering that only the letters have had access on the objectivity of terms while the intent of the writer remains subjective.

Your third question; the study of hermeneutics include the study of literary forensics and investigations. It means that when some literary claims are dubious, the more we need the science of interpretation which we call "hermeneutics".

Your fourth question; objective, clear and ambiguous are adjectives that require extensive hermeneutic studies. It mean that in the hermeneutic standards we cannot directly label a particular language or presentation without dissecting those employing the proper and reliable hermeneutic standards. What is proper standard? It depends on what subject category in which a literature may be classified. Example, in law - legal hermeneutics, in medicine - medical hermeneutics, in sociology - social hermeneutics, in science - scientific hermeneutics, etc....

Your fifth question; Yes, hermeneutics could also be used for the purpose of destruction, deconstruction, criticism, defend, justify, etc... THIS SHOWS how useful is hermeneutics in the world governed by language.

Your sixth question; Hermeneutics is absolutely useful in many ways. Did I use Schleiermacher's standard? No, I only use it when the subject is "intent of the 'inspired' writings".

[The_Child]

ok. i was quite confused when you mentioned WHEN THE INTENT AND THE LETTERS ARE CLEAR IN ITS IMPORT, THERE IS NO MORE ROOM FOR INTERPRETATION".
which drove me to ask on the standards of objectivity and ambiguity of a text. but since you cleared that up, heres a follow-up, i hope you dont mind. (my bad, never had the chance to take up hermeneutics)


but somehow we postulate a starting point in hermeneutics no?, some postulates or a general postulate, or does it also tinker with meta-language?

cheers! and thanx.

[forester]

The_Child:

My friend,
Gestures, human behaviours, facial expressions, theatric postures and other manner of conyeing ideas to the audience ARE MATTERS BEYOND the scope of hermeneutic studies.
I cannot ascertain what you mean by meta-language, however, I understood that hermeneutics cannot anymore gauge those that were not in the form of language.
I mean, beyond language is beyond hermeneutics. I hope I essentially answered your question.

[The_Child]

by meta-language i would refer to the likes of Symbolic logic ala Russell, Frege and Friends. Does hermeneutics have any place in here?


what is language? and what is not? anything expressed takes the form of language, and the only thing that i surmise that could not be expressed in language is clearly the ineffable, the realms of mysticism no? reminiscing wittgenstein's last proposition: "Whereof one cannot speak thereof one must pass in silence"


Cheers!!

thanx for the insight.

[forester]

THE FIRST CONSPIRACY: HERMENEUTIC ANALYSIS

Departamento de Filosofia, 1997, Camara de Pensador, Universidad de Madrid

The Honorable Magistrates, before this dignified institution, I submit the structure of my thesis anchored on the third chapter in the book of Genesis, focused on the Fall of Man, which says:

Genesis 3
The Fall of Man
1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’ “

4 “You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the LORD God called to the man, “Where are you?”

10 He answered, “I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.”

11 And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?”

12 The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”
The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

It is my stand, as could be inferred from the text, that the first great conspiracy took place in the Garden of Eden. I based this perspective on the following circumstances:

One, it is in the book of Genesis wherein Adam and Eve committed the first sin that engraved in human soul.

Two, the Garden of Eden was supposed to be a safe place designed by God for the prime pure human beings and their offsprings.

Three, the Garden of Eden is a paradise for Adam and Eve where God communicate directly to man.

Four, that God being the supreme being has absolute control over the paradise which is designed for the sinless being such as Adam and Eve.

Five, that Adam and Eve were totally innocent before they ate the fruit, having no knowledge of any foolishness nor of any sin of any kind.

Six, that the fruit of the tree of knowledge, when taken, shall give them the malice which capacitates them to discern what is right and what is wrong.

Seven, that prior to the taking of the fruit, Adam and Eve is essentially ignorant on the concept of good and evil, because their minds are supposed to be opened at the time they will be tempted to eat the fruit.

Based on these premises, Honorable Magistrates, I come to an honest yet logical perspectives, that:

One, God is not intending man to exercise their freedom because they have no freedom of choice between right and wrong considering their lack of knowledge on what is right and what is wrong. Adam and Eve were really destined to FALL because they cannot use their good judgment on the pretext of their innocence.

Two, the unfortunate fate of Adam and Eve was really God’s plan. God being the supreme being has an absolute control over the entire paradise, it is within his power to drive off and disperse the Serpent who made the temptation.

Three, with the preordained knowledge that the minds of Adam and Eve were NO MATCH to the shrewdness of the Serpent, yet God allowed the Serpent to occupy a particular place in the paradise and authorized it to communicate with Adam and Eve.

Four, by these virtue, it is my contention that the First Great Conspiracy in human history may have been taken place in the Garden of Eden; Adam and Eve being the victims of the whims and caprices of God and the Serpent, and God and the Serpent being the conspirators and partners of their game out of their own boredom.