In preparing for my classes this semester, one of the classes I am looking forward to teaching is Biblical Interpretation. This is a class I have taught every fall since I have been here, but I have been unsatisfied with it each time. This is not to say that the students did not learn, but I have not felt that the class has ‘clicked’ the way I have wanted it to.

Part of this is due to the textbook I have been using, Gordon and Fee’s How To Read the Bible for All Its Worth. Due to the financial situation of our students here in Eastern Europe, we check out their text books to them at the beginning of the semester. This means that we have to keep a supply of textbooks on hand, so they get reused year after year. To keep our costs down, we can only afford to replace a certain percentage of these each year. When I arrived, this was the textbook that someone several years before had selected, so I was stuck with it. Unfortunately, it is a perfectly horrendous book for teaching exegesis.

This year, however, I have finally gotten the book replaced. I will be using Elements of Biblical Exegesis by Michael J. Gorman. It was recommended to me by another professor who had used it. Reading through it as I am preparing the course, I am impressed with both the simplicity and thoroughness with which the subject is covered.

Gorman begins with a methodological chapter talking about all the various approaches to the text. He divides them into three categories: synchronic, diachronic, and existential. Into this final he places approaches in which the text is to be engaged in order to affect life. In this, he includes such approaches as canonical criticism, theological exegesis, and liberation theology. Gorman, however, focuses primarily on synchronic approaches, although he does include some diachronic elements. This is in contrast to How To Read the Bible for All Its Worth, which taught one approach and viewed all others as flawed.

Gorman also notes repeatedly that interpretation is as much an art as it is a science. Again, this contrasts with How to Read . . . which seemed to tell students that if you follow their method you will automatically come out at the correct interpretation.

This has renewed my interest in teaching this class. I am much more optomistic about it this year than I have been in the past. That is a plus, because I felt bad that such an important subject was getting mediocre treatment at my hands.

Permalink