Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

22

“If their approach was the same I assume they would come to the same theological conclusions” Texts that aren't dense legalese, e.g. books like the Bible which contain stories, parables, philosophies and statues, are necessarily rich with ambiguity and mystery. There is no way that a book like the Bible could unambiguously inform any ...


11

The basic difference is Jesus Christ. That may sound trite or rude, but it needn't be. A Christian hermeneutic that is faithful to itself will base its reading of the Old Testament on the way Jesus and the Apostles used the Old Testament. This hermeneutic was rather shocking even to Jesus' disciples (i.e. Christians) even at that time (and I assume Jewish ...


10

Hillel's seven were later expanded by Rabbi Yishmael ben Elisha into thirteen, dropping one. I'll be drawing this list from the list on Wikipedia. I'll be drawing some examples from this answer on Mi Yodeya about R. Yishmael's list that in turn quotes from the Artscroll prayer book.1 Kal v'chomer: if a lenient case has a stringency, then surely a ...


7

Jews and Christians both consider the Tanakh to be important scripture (usually seen as of divine origin, though individual denominations/movements may vary). They differ in how they derive meaning from that text, however. In this answer I'm going to describe some approaches used by each group, but it's important to note that there isn't much that's ...


6

This will be a partial answer, intended primarily as a supplement to this answer, since she mentioned that she is an expert in Jewish approaches but not in Christian approaches. (I can't add anything to her answer on Jewish approaches, so I won't bother trying to cover that material!) There are a variety of Christian approaches to the TaNaKh (i.e. the ...


3

The key general differences between Jewish and Christian thought concerning the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) lie not so much in their respective methodologies of interpretation (which are very similar), but the precedent and priority each gives to the respective biblical covenants (Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and New Covenants). For example, according to the New ...


3

The phrase here, as in many places in Exodus through Deuteronomy where God gives commands, is בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. Literally this is "sons of Israel", though some translations say "children of Israel" instead. In Hebrew all nouns have gender (there is no neuter), so a masculine plural like בְּנֵי means either an all-male group or a mixed group. (You only ...


2

At the seminary I graduated from, we were taught the rules in Dr. Hernanado's Hermeneutics class as part of the history of interpretation. In Dr. Nunnally's Jewish backgrounds to the NT class, we were drilled in them again. They both showed us places in the New Testament where the writers used the rules in their own interpretation. However, we were not ...


2

Didn't see a reference to this great passage anywhere, so I thought I'd tack it on for any future readers. "Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He [Jesus] explained to them [the disciples] the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures," (NASB, Luke 24:27). Spoken after Jesus's resurrection, but before his ascension, this ...


2

Jewish scholars use the method of Pardes which is an acronym for Pashat, Remez, Drash, Sod. Pashat is the literal interpretation. Christians have learned much from Jewish expositors in this. Rabbinic exposition of the literal meaning is not much different than Christian. Remez looks at hints and follows their lead. For instance, Jesus's quotes of OT ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible