HQ

While the truth of the scripture is guaranteed by its author, not all truths are found in scripture. I might know that Jesus is God because the Bible tells me, but I am pretty sure the Bible tells me nothing about algebra or the chemical composition of water. This is an important fact because a hermeneutic is developed partly prior to reading the Bible. A hermeneutic is a method of interpretation. We all develop a hermeneutic based on our intellectual faculties, background information, and skills. And we do so  whether we are conscious of it or not. A good hermeneutic will enable us to get the right interpretation of the texts we study. And most of us, at least initially, develop our hermeneutic without the Bible. In fact, some people don't read the Bible until later in life. They have already worked out how to interpret the world almost entirely without reference to the Bible. But, and here's the problem, if our hermeneutic is developed before reading the Bible, how do w...

In a recent post I argued that sentences carry single meanings and that meaning is determined by the intentions of the author. However, there is a further problem. Just because it is true that texts carry primary meanings intended by their authors, this does not entail that it is possible for a reader—especially a reader so removed chronologically, linguistically and culturally from the author—to understand the meaning of the text. In recent decades a “New Hermeneutic” has been proposed that assumes that any intended meaning is very difficult, if not impossible, to get at. [12]  Given such a gulf between the author and reader, how could we possibly know what the author meant? To refute this claim we need to show that it is possible for interpreters to understand the primary meanings sentences. The trouble with the New Hermeneutic is that, on their view, there is no principled reason to suppose that there is any cultural distance between author and reader that would not preclude...

A declarative sentence is said to express a proposition. Propositions have truth-values: they are either true or false. [4]  Furthermore, the truth-value of a proposition is objective. It is true or false whether or not it is believed by anyone. The alternative to thinking that propositions have objective truth-value is self-refuting. This is clear from the following dilemma: Either propositions have objective truth values or the proposition expressed by the statement, “no propositions have objective truth values,” has no objective truth value.  Clearly, the proposition expressed by the statement "no propositions have objective truth values," has an objective truth value. It cannot be both true and false, something in between or neither true or false. [5]  Therefore, propositions have objective truth values. Sentences in natural languages are said to express propositions. Propositions, then, are the primary meanings of sentences. Things get complicated at this p...

Is it possible for a human being to be objective? Is there any such thing as objective truth? For Christians, the denial of such a possibility would leave a hermeneutic hole. If there is no possibility of objective truth then reading scripture would not yield what we have hoped for. We would also leave behind many other possibilities such as truths obtained in science and logic. Many deny objectivity outright. And those still holding to such an idea are often called modernists (now a slur in present academic circles) Part of the trouble is that “objective” and “objectivity” have multiple meanings and are thought about in multiple contexts. John Feinberg, in his book, Can you Believe it’s True? , provides five options. "Objective" and "objectivity" can mean i) fair and unbiased ii) disconnected or dispassionate iii) true outside our minds iv) as it is apart from any knowing subject v) things not persons. In this post I will argue that one does not have to hold t...

"Science merely reports the facts and innocently develops theories to explain phenomena. Theology, on the other hand, is only a matter of interpretation. You can read the Bible how you want and interpret it according to your presuppositions. Science can get to the "facts" but theology only gets to someone's opinion." A stereotypical statement perhaps, and not one many actual scientists make, but a common enough accusation made in conversations about theology's relationship with the natural sciences.