Talk:Hermeneutics: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Joe Quick |
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz (Trinitarian monotheism, to say nothing of Marianic additions) |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
:I agree that a broader perspective would be interesting. In fact, I hope to get around to starting an article on the [[Popul Vuh]] someday, which will necessarily include a section on the study of the text for the purposes of divination. The purpose of my comment above was simply to point out that there probably aren't a whole lot of people who could guess the "three monotheistic faiths" and there are some people who could name more than three. :-) --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 14:10, 16 July 2008 (CDT) | :I agree that a broader perspective would be interesting. In fact, I hope to get around to starting an article on the [[Popul Vuh]] someday, which will necessarily include a section on the study of the text for the purposes of divination. The purpose of my comment above was simply to point out that there probably aren't a whole lot of people who could guess the "three monotheistic faiths" and there are some people who could name more than three. :-) --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 14:10, 16 July 2008 (CDT) | ||
::And, of course, one is monotheistic and trinitarian. (signed) "Brother Cattle Prod of Looking at All Sides of the Question" (see http://whump.com/dropbox/other/ujname.html) [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 14:25, 16 July 2008 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 13:25, 16 July 2008
comment
The first paragraph includes a reference to "all three of the monotheistic faiths". Those are Judaism, Christianity and Islam, I presume. If so, it would be more accurate to say "Abrahamic religions" and provide a wikilink. If not, it should be stated which faiths are being discussed. --Joe Quick 08:30, 16 July 2008 (CDT)
- Abrahamic religions does sound better. Within those religions, would the following be comsidered techniques of hermeneutics?
- Judaism: Talmudic pilpul (maybe subschools), interpretation by a Hasidic rebbe, Kabala?
- Christianity: not quite where to start, and there's the literalism argument with guaranteed accurate translation. Still, do the existence of the Douay and King James bibles count?
- Islam: A lot of interesting issues here. I don't think the Sunni-Shi'a split has much to do with text, but two or three areas need to be considered, I think: Ijtihad, both individual and by trained scholars; the Hadithic schools, and a blurry line between fatwa and new territory. For example, Hassan al-Turabi in Sudan has held that participating in lesser jihad is an adequate substitute for the Hajj. Howard C. Berkowitz 11:15, 16 July 2008 (CDT)
Yep, substituting "Abrahamic" seems appropriate, although it'd be interesting to know what in the way of non-Abrahamic hermeneutic strategies (etc.) there are. --Tom Morris 13:13, 16 July 2008 (CDT)
- I agree that a broader perspective would be interesting. In fact, I hope to get around to starting an article on the Popul Vuh someday, which will necessarily include a section on the study of the text for the purposes of divination. The purpose of my comment above was simply to point out that there probably aren't a whole lot of people who could guess the "three monotheistic faiths" and there are some people who could name more than three. :-) --Joe Quick 14:10, 16 July 2008 (CDT)
- And, of course, one is monotheistic and trinitarian. (signed) "Brother Cattle Prod of Looking at All Sides of the Question" (see http://whump.com/dropbox/other/ujname.html) Howard C. Berkowitz 14:25, 16 July 2008 (CDT)