Go home!

RECENT ENTRIES
-Proverbs 23:4-12
-How far?
-Misunderestimating the opposition
-Subordinationism
-Manifest and Secret Jews
-Objectivity and suicide
-Cambridge Non-Events
-Infinite change
-Erastianism and invisible church
-Eucharistic meditation
-Baptismal meditation
-Exhortation
-Palin
-Biblical Studies and Classics
-Roman Panopticon?
-Tribal Rome
-Throngs
-Judas and Oedipus
-Gilgamesh and Genesis
-Plunder vessels
CATEGORY ARCHIVES
    • LINKS
    - Biblical Horizons
    - Covenant Worldview Institute
    - Theologia
    FEED

    CONTACT

    Comments:
    leithart@leithart.com

    Problems:
    webmaster@leithart.com





    « Previous Post | Next Post »
    « Previous post in category | Next post in category »

    Hermeneutics: Totality transfer

    [Print] | [Email]

    At least Thiselton gets James Barr right.  Asked about the meaning of ekklesia in the New Testament, “we might say (a) ‘the Church is the Body of Christ’ (b) ‘the Church is the first installment of the Kingdom of God’ (c) ‘the Church is the Bride of Christ, and other such statements.  In one sense Barr concedes, this is the ‘meaning of “church.”‘ But it is certainly not ‘the meaning of ‘church’ in Matt. 16.18.”

    Exactly: Totality transfer is a fallacy about word usage, not about concepts.  Barr agrees that one can properly compile all the uses of a term, and related terms, in the Bible, and come up with the total biblical concept.  The error comes when we assume that that total concept is the meaning of the word in every context where it is used.

    Grow the concept as big as you please, Barr says; just don’t try to stuff it into the small space occupied by the word in a particular passage.

    posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, July 19, 2008 at 4:54 pm