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.
Lectio Divina has been likened to "feasting on the Word": first, the taking of a bite (lectio); then chewing on it (meditatio); savouring its essence (oratio) and, finally, "digesting" it and making it a part of the body (contemplatio).
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
Father, I love this, and will be reading your book soon. I have one big question I have been wrestling with for some time and I would love some wisdom or resources that you could point me to. Here it is: what is the place of modern biblical scholarship and understandings of the text that come from a position of lack of faith? I have listened to Bart Ehrman on podcasts and some of what he says makes sense, but other things he says I write it off because it doesn't come from a place of faith. Where does scholarship like his come into play in a Christian's life, if at all?
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.
Lectio Divina has been likened to "feasting on the Word": first, the taking of a bite (lectio); then chewing on it (meditatio); savouring its essence (oratio) and, finally, "digesting" it and making it a part of the body (contemplatio).
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
Father, I love this, and will be reading your book soon. I have one big question I have been wrestling with for some time and I would love some wisdom or resources that you could point me to. Here it is: what is the place of modern biblical scholarship and understandings of the text that come from a position of lack of faith? I have listened to Bart Ehrman on podcasts and some of what he says makes sense, but other things he says I write it off because it doesn't come from a place of faith. Where does scholarship like his come into play in a Christian's life, if at all?
Many thanks for this, Father, and for your extremely valuable book on the subject.