On The Interpretations of The Bible

[Sundance]

Salve omnia! Greetings, everyone! Lately, I’ve been pondering the matter of hermeneutics and how they contribute to the ways in which Christians and those who sympathize with their religion understand their faith (e.g. the historical-grammatical method, the historical-critical, Dispensationalism, Christocentric).


Regarding the Tanakh, something sparks my curiosity: which methods of interpreting it are there among Jews, Noachides, or other sympathizers, and in what way does that method impact your understanding of Judaism?

 

[Harel13]

Jewish interpretations are traditionally divided into four types that form the acronym פרד"ס - PaRDeS, which is also the Hebrew word for a grove of trees. The four types are: Pshat - the simple understanding of the text. Remez - hints, i.e. a deeper understanding beyond the basic. Drash - understanding the meaning through comparison to other sources. Sod - the esoteric, Kabbalistic/mystical interpretation.

Of course, nowadays you'll find that people often understand Tanach through any combination of these.

 

[Kenny]

Jewish interpretations are traditionally divided into four types that form the acronym פרד"ס - PaRDeS, which is also the Hebrew word for a grove of trees. The four types are: Pshat - the simple understanding of the text. Remez - hints, i.e. a deeper understanding beyond the basic. Drash - understanding the meaning through comparison to other sources. Sod - the esoteric, Kabbalistic/mystical interpretation.

Of course, nowadays you'll find that people often understand Tanach through any combination of these.

Could you amplify "mystical interpretation" to give it meaning?

 

[Harel13]

Could you amplify "mystical interpretation" to give it meaning?

Well, Jewish mysticism deals with the happenings of spiritual realms parallel to our world. Things that happen in these realms are thought to influence our world and vice-versa. A mystical interpretation of Tanach is essentially explaining what was going on in one such realm during the events described in the Tanach and how either realm influenced the other.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Salve omnia! Greetings, everyone! Lately, I’ve been pondering the matter of hermeneutics and how they contribute to the ways in which Christians and those who sympathize with their religion understand their faith (e.g. the historical-grammatical method, the historical-critical, Dispensationalism, Christocentric).


Regarding the Tanakh, something sparks my curiosity: which methods of interpreting it are there among Jews, Noachides, or other sympathizers, and in what way does that method impact your understanding of Judaism?

I tend to shy away from the Latin, decry the Christocentric, and spurn eisegesis.

 

[pearl]

Salve omnia! Greetings, everyone! Lately, I’ve been pondering the matter of hermeneutics and how they contribute to the ways in which Christians and those who sympathize with their religion understand their faith (e.g. the historical-grammatical method, the historical-critical, Dispensationalism, Christocentric).

I prefer the historical critical method, properly understood.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I prefer the historical critical method, properly understood.

Absolutely, if only because it is so, so superior to the historical critical method, improperly understood.

 

[pearl]

I tend to shy away from the Latin, decry the Christocentric, and spurn eisegesis.

Absolutely, if only because it is so, so superior to the historical critical method, improperly understood.

I see the problem, you confuse eisegesis with exegesis.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I see the problem, you confuse eisegesis with exegesis.

Nonsense.

 

[Sundance]

Jewish interpretations are traditionally divided into four types that form the acronym פרד"ס - PaRDeS, which is also the Hebrew word for a grove of trees. The four types are: Pshat - the simple understanding of the text. Remez - hints, i.e. a deeper understanding beyond the basic. Drash - understanding the meaning through comparison to other sources. Sod - the esoteric, Kabbalistic/mystical interpretation.

Of course, nowadays you'll find that people often understand Tanach through any combination of these.

This sounds very interesting, @Harel13! Could you please give me an example?

 

[Sundance]

I tend to shy away from the Latin, decry the Christocentric, and spurn eisegesis.

I’m guessing this is a response to the Christocentric method of hermeneutics in general, Jay?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Pardes

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I’m guessing this is a response to the Christocentric method of hermeneutics in general, Jay?

I'm not a big fan of starting an investigation with an unwavering conclusion.

 

[Sundance]

I'm not a big fan of starting an investigation with an unwavering conclusion.

I can understand why. It tends to be an obstacle to discovering truth.