Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Fr. Hans Boersma's avatar

Earl,

If you take the traditional fourfold "method" of interpretation (history, allegory, tropology, and eschatology), then modern biblical scholarship is typically limited to the first. That doesn't make it bad; it just means it's very limited. You may want to read Henri de Lubac, "Scripture in the Tradition" and perhaps my book "Five Things Theologians Wish Biblical Scholars Knew." What's more, a historian's presuppositions shape the way he understands history (and what he things is and isn't possible historically). Ehrman's presuppositions are quite limiting and problematic, which means I find this particular historian particularly unhelpful.

Expand full comment
Zack Gross's avatar

I’ve been reading with a contemporary lectio divina approach for the past week and it has brought new life and meaning to time with the Lord in such a sweet way

Expand full comment
3 more comments...

No posts