6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A good introduction for Exegetic, March 20, 2002
Professor Manlio Simonetti, as one of great theologians in our age, tries to give a distinction, first of all, some problematic terminologies(e.g. allegoria & allegorein, typology, tropology & Allegoria, etc.) which have caused so many theological problems and prejudices to theologians, especially, to protestant world's.And explains us the specific usages of exegetical methods by the Patristic exegesis on the Holy Bible under the prism of historical experience of the Church.It is not a complete research for the exegetic, however, readers can find a profound and penetrating academic theological approach of the author to the subject.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Brilliant summary on a topic which has been largely ignored, November 16, 2009
Simonetti has created an excellent piece on early Christian interpretation. He does an excellent job juxtaposing the major schools of interpretation (Antioch and Alexandria) as well as providing an insight on other significant places of thought (e.g. Western interpretation). He reveals the hermeneutic of all the major players including Origin, Chrysostom, Augustine, Clement, Clement of Rome, Jerome, Dionysius etc.
This book is great because it plainly states how the early church developed exegetically and textually without allowing the protagonist's reputation to usurp the truth. Simonetti also provides reasons as to why each protagonist exhibited their hermeneutic. Gnosticism amongst other heresies as well as Platonic and Jewish hermeneutics are also traced to give the reader a better understanding of how and why things unfolded exegetically.
Overall this is a great book for those studying or are interested in Biblical hermeneutic history. The book is not overly long and is full of examples. Overall this book is worthy of 5 stars!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
2 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Fascinating! How early Jews and Christians interpreted scripture, April 26, 2009
To understand scripture properly, it is important to know how those who wrote scripture interpreted it.
"The earliest Old Testament interpretation was predominatly oral, and only began to be fixed at a later stage" (p 3). The Dead Sea Scrolls have added to our knowledge of pesher. Philo stressed allegory,for example by seeing the "Temple in Jerusalem symbolises the world" (p 7).
Early Christianity would take much of the kinds of interpretation used by Second Temple Jews and expand them. Indeed, the epistles and gospels in the New Testament "show widespread signs of ...discussions centered on the interpretation of the messianic passages in the Old Testament" (p 9). Most of all, early Christianity relied on typology.
Stephen's speech in Acts, for example, shows that the entire history of the Jews is being reconsidered in light of the resurrection of Jesus. Paul also refines interpretation by "typos". "Paul's terminology...enjoyed immense success and became the authentic Christian way of reading the Old Testament--typology" (p 12). One clear example of this would be seeing Moses with his hands extended during battle an early typos of the cross. The battle could only be won when Moses, a typos of Christ, stood in the form of a cross.
When Irenaeus was confronted by Gnostic heresy he utilized typos, or allegory, even though he could see the twisted use the Gnostics made of the same kind of interpretation. As the Gnostic interpretation became ever more convoluted and odd, Irenaeus "resorted to the principle of authority: the authenticity and antiquity of the Catholic interpretation of Scripture" (p 24).
Clement believed scripture to be the word of God. He argued that there were four types of interpretation of the bible: the historical, legislative, religious ceremonial, and the highest, the epopteia. Clement, who was heavily influenced by Philo, would influence in his turn Origen.
Oddly, although Origen "whose name is a byword for the use of allegory, is also the same person who gave much more weight than ever before to the literal sense" (p 44). Soon after, Pophyry would begen the attack on Origen with what Pophyry believed was arbitrary allegorization.
By the 4th century the Antiochene school was antagonistic to allegory. Theodore of Mopsuestia would later use typoi of events and see "the liberation of the Jews from Egypt as a prefiguration of the death of Christ and liberation from sin, and explain that the events of the Old Testament are typoi of those in the New Testament if they have some similarity with them" (p 69).
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
