The Superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis

Abstract

“The medieval theory of levels of meaning in the biblical text, with all its undoubted defects, flourished because it is true, while the modern theory of a single meaning, with all its demonstrable virtues, is false. Until the historical-critical method becomes critical of its own theoretical foundations and develops a hermeneutical theory adequate to the nature of the text which it is interpreting, it will remain restricted—as it deserves to be—to the guild and the academy, where the question of truth can endlessly be deferred.”

The Canonical Sense of Scripture: Trinitarian or Christocentric?

“…19 While I may not go as far as David Steinmetz, who argued for the ''superiority'' of pre-critical exegesis, there are serious limitations to the historical-critical method. 20 In his wonderful historical overview of the allegorical interpretation of Scripture, Henri de Lubac also provides a kind of apologia for the continuation of a spiritual sense today. 21 Surely he is right about this need.…”

History of Exegesis as a Hermeneutical Tool

“…Second, there is the widespread dissatisfaction conceming the adequacy of the historical-critical methodology applied to the Bible, expressed by both biblicists (e.g., Wink; Stuhlmacher; Brown: 23-44) and historians (Smith; Steinmetz 1980). The situation is not as dire as some have claimed.…”