Posted by Pastoral Musings on June 9th, 2011
Joel and I agree that the literal sense is the literary sense.
I hold to a more literal view of some passages than Joel does. I take the Genesis Creation account to be a literal description of what happened in the creation. Joel does not.
I think both of us believe that we take it literally. I, because I believe it is a historical narrative. Joel, because he believes that it is another genre.
I think that it is obvious that the term “literal” in reference to either of these hermeneutics is not the best term. Many use the term grammatical-historical. I understand the reasoning behind that. The grammatical structure, including genre, determines our interpretation of a passage of Scripture. We should also keep it in its historical context.
I have a feeling that Joel agrees with me, though I do not know if he would claim to hold to the grammatical-historical view.
My question is this, is grammatical-historical a good term to use in regard to a literal hermeneutic?