Finally, this semester has come to an end.  Only by the grace of God did I survive.  I wanted to see how far I could push myself and I found my limitations.  If my classes had not overlapped to a substantial degree, my proverbial battleship would have sunk.  My class schedule was:

  • Advanced Hermeneutics
  • New Testament Theology
  • Theology of Paul
  • Greek Exegesis of James
  • Hebrew Exegetical Method

The highlight of the semester was the Theology of Paul lecture given by Professor E. Earle Ellis.  I knew very little of Pauline theology before the class.  This was the second class that I had under Prof. Ellis (Theology of the Gospels).   It was beneficial to understand the continuity and discontinuity of Paul with the teachings of Jesus as well as Paul’s mission within the Greco-Roman society.  

Dr. Paul Wolfe’s NT Theology lecture placed what I had learned in Prof. Ellis’ class within the discipline of NT Theology.  Dr. Wolfe presented the history of the discipline in a very  manner.  For the proper methodology  of NT Theology, he argued for a confessional and canonical approach to theology.  The most intriguing book we read was Richard Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses.  In the book, Bauckham argues for the reliability of the eyewitnesses and how the Gospels use ancient literary techniques to identify their sources.  This is the most insightful book that i’ve read since i’ve been in seminary.  It was a real “page-turner.”  Two books that every student of the Gospels should have on their shelf are this book and Ellis’ The Making of the NT Documents.  

  

  The Exegesis of James by Dr. Mark Taylor was beneficial to understand how to hand the perceived tension between Paul and James.  When one understands the way that James and Paul handle similar vocabulary, the tension disappears.  Dr. Taylor has focused his professional studies on the structure of James.  The structure of James has gone from straw to constant summaries which run throughout the book.

In Advanced Hermeneutics, we read not a few postmodern writers: Derrida, Foucault, Fish, etc.  The main thing I took from the class was the myth of objectivity in hermeneutical practices; and in most of science for that matter.  Foucault in Madness and Civilization showed us that not even history is objective.  Rudolf Bultmann was correct when he said that presupposition-less interpretation is impossible.  All in all, I disagree with how the postmodern community approach texts in general, but they have pointed out many flaws from Enlightenment methodology, especially the historical-critical method.