Phenomenal Biblical Theology

When I talk about Biblical Theology I usually intend an approach to Scripture that envelopes many things. Like ordering a car and understanding that it will come with a lot of parts already put together… hopefully. Some of my friends prefer kits. Biblical Theology’s  subject is specific. It’s attitude singular. It’s principles basic. It’s methodology seemingly intuitive.

1. The subject of biblical theology is the text of Scripture as we have received it from the ancients. This does not exclude text criticism (comparing contradictory manuscripts in order to ascertain the correct reading) but it does exclude using reconstructions of supposed sources as the seat of meaning. It also excludes mental reconstructions of “the event” as opposed to an observation of the text as an inspired interpretation of that event. The text is the subject… the text is not merely a window through which one sees or attempts to reach the subject.
2. The attitude is PHENOMENOLOGICAL.[1]  Sorry for that word, but that’s what it’s called. I will, as an outsider to the religious experiences and convictions of the biblical authors, seek to understand their religious experiences and convictions from their perspective before, though not necessarily to the exclusion of, playing the part of theologian or judge.  In short, I will, for the sake of understanding, suspend disbelief  and listen to each text as if wholly convinced by the presuppositions, world view, cultural values and opinions of the author once I have discovered them… as opposed to imagining what they must be, given that they are ancient, stupid, and misogynistic.
3. The principles are found within Historical Grammatical Literary Hermeneutics.  Long Live HAGALAH!!! Basically, this means that I set my self to discover the author’s intended meaning as expressed within his or her own historical context, language context, document context and genre context, i.e. the rules for each type of literature at the time of the author. Many struggle with figuring out if meaning is determined by the author, the text, or the reader. The answer is author. Without a communicator texts are just ambiguous signs whose meaning changes and diversifies depending to which system, time and place I attach it. Without attachment symbols have no meaning at all. As a reader, it is not for me to say what symbols mean; my job is to discover what they mean. Anything less is not communication.
4. The methodology, i.e. the actual processes used to discover an author’s meaning in a text is INDUCTIVE. One comes to the text stripping away as many preconceived ideas as possible, dedicating his or her energies to a keen observation of terms, grammar, literary relationships, and emotional energy. He or she interrogates the text with a careful scheme of questions designed to force it to give up its secrets under a thorough investigation of the answers to those questions. The investigation of answers focuses on proper sources like the larger context of the document itself, Bible Dictionaries, word study tools, commentaries, and books & articles by people who generally know what they are talking about.

So when I attempt to discern the biblical theology of a unit of Scripture, I approach the present form of the text with an open heart ready to listen without judgment, giving the author the benefit of the doubt. I look carefully at the words and grammar and literary relationships and consider their meaning within the author’s historical, linguistic, and genre context as expressed within the document as a whole. I want to know what the author of each text was attempting to communicate in each text as he wrote to those he envisioned as his audience. We all have questions about the world. Christians often seek answers to those questions from Scripture. Before we attempt to get those answers from a text of Scripture, we must understand what the text was intended to say; if the passage has relevance to our questions in one way or another, good. If not; we shouldn’t force it.