The text's original meaning
Ian has asked me to ask this question for him:
The etymological fallacy is the fallacy of assuming that the original meaning of a word is its current meaning. But when we try to determine the meaning of a biblical author we are trying to determine not what the words originally meant but what the author meant by what he says. Of course, each text has more than one author, and it is the divine author's meaning that is more important. It may also be the case that the meaning of a text wasn't recognized (and maybe couldn't have been recognized) by the first readers. This is the case with some prophecies, I think.
Do we commit the etymological fallacy when we're trying to determine the original meaning of the biblical author? And if so, how should Christians view the etymological fallacy?This is my answer:
The etymological fallacy is the fallacy of assuming that the original meaning of a word is its current meaning. But when we try to determine the meaning of a biblical author we are trying to determine not what the words originally meant but what the author meant by what he says. Of course, each text has more than one author, and it is the divine author's meaning that is more important. It may also be the case that the meaning of a text wasn't recognized (and maybe couldn't have been recognized) by the first readers. This is the case with some prophecies, I think.
posted by Daniel Hill | 7/04/2006 07:07:00 pm
5 Comments:
.
Thank you for this, I wasn't able to make the distinction in my head for some reason. Seeing it in print has made a world of difference!
So the etymological fallacy is not committed when, say, trying to understand the Greek word "to justify" because our task as exegetes is to determine how the biblical writers used the word.
Now, here's another question that's somewhat related that I've honestly been wrestling with. How do we determine the usage of a word by the biblical author? Surely we compare its usage within the canonical writings. But should we also go outside of Scripture into the surrounding culture (ANE, Palestinian Judaism, etc)? And if we do, are we not undermining the analogy of faith or sola Scriptura?
Sorry, I've turned the tables on you somewhat! I'll shut up after this post and let you ask the questions!!
The question of the divine author + the human author is raised in this interesting article on dispensationalist hermeneutics.
Standard lexicon use a lot of non-Biblical sources in determining the use of a word (which you're better acquainted with than me). This is only right as we carrying out language translation. It's use in Scripture is paramount, but not exclusive. We'd never know the meaning of words unless real people (not the Bible) didn't tell us what they meant.
The use is the meaning, and sentences are more important than words... just a thought.
Post a Comment
<< Home