What differences would you highlight when comparing the Theopolitan Hermeneutic and a traditional grammatical-historical approach? Also, would you make any significant distinctions between the Theopolitan Hermeneutic and Iain Provan’s “Seriously Literal” interpretive rubric that he lays out in his latest book The Reformation and the Right Reading of Scripture? He states that his Seriously Literal approach is “to read [Scripture] in accord with its various, apparent communicative intentions as a collection of texts from the past now integrated into one Great Story, doing justice to such realities as literary convention, idiom, metaphor, and typology or figuration.”
This is the second of my talks on reading the Bible, which I recently delivered in Twin Cities area. You can listen to the first here.
You can follow the Theopolis podcast on Soundcloud, iTunes, and on most podcast apps. You can read show notes over on the Theopolis podcast website. You can also see past episodes I have contributed to by clicking the ‘Theopolis Podcast’ link in the bar above. If you would like to leave a question for us to answer, please do so on our Curious Cat page.
I recently had the privilege of spending a few days in the Twin Cities area, where I delivered a series of talks on the subject of reading the Bible. The following is the first evening’s talks and subsequent questions and answers.
What’s the difference between symbolism and allegory?