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.”
Peter Leithart, Jeff Meyers, and I answer three questions sent in by listeners: 1. What does the Theopolis logo mean? 2. What are some good books on patristic hermenetics? 3. Why does Paul seemingly speak negatively about the Law, when other passages exalt the law? 4. What does baptism do for a person?