Eisegese
Eisegesis describes a textual interpretation in which something is interpreted into the text that is not in it or was not intended. In German one speaks of "reading into", "pointing into" or "interpreting into".
Origin of the word
"Eisegese" is a new formation of the term exegesis (text interpretation). The word is made up of the Greek prefix εἰς ( ice , 'into'), the verb ἡγεῖσθαι ( hegeisthai , 'lead, guide') and the ending -σἰς for the verbal noun (nomen actionis) . One can understand it as corrupting it , in that the prefix “ex-” (out-) is replaced by the prefix “eis-” (in-).
use
In practice, the term "Eisegese" is mostly used for a failed interpretation of a Bible text. “Eisegetical” behavior is in contradiction to serious hermeneutics (science of text interpretation or text interpretation). Since an Eisegesis always represents a misinterpretation and further conclusions based on Eisegesis are untenable, the term is consistently used polemically or disparagingly.
Formation of Eisegesen
Eisegese usually appear unintentionally, be it due to a lack of critical distance or historical knowledge or due to the ambiguity of linguistic expressions. There may also be unintentional Eisegesis if an impermissible method is used.
Eisegesen can be intended, however. Intentional Eisegese serve ideological purposes (political agitation) or the maintenance of a view or doctrine. For example, the deliberate misinterpretation of statistics is a form of Eisegesis that serves to disinformation in political or social disputes . It is naturally difficult to impossible to see an intention unless it is admitted.
Examples of unintended Eisegesis
Example from the Old Testament
From the sentence in the book of Joshua : "Sun, stand still by Gibeon, and moon, in the valley of Ajalon!" ( Jos 10,12 LUT ) Luther is said to have concluded that Copernicus' view of the heavenly movements must be wrong. Because "the Holy Scriptures tell us that Joshua called the sun to stand still, and not the earth." The Eisegesis here consists in the implicit assumption that the text says something about the movement of heavenly bodies in space , that is, about astronomical relationships. However, Joshua used everyday phenomenal language .
From today's perspective, it says something about the position of the sun in relation to the earthly observer (unless one understands history symbolically and not as a historical event). Despite our astronomical knowledge, we continue to say that the sun rises or sets.
Example from the New Testament
In Revelation 3 : 15-16, the Laodicean church is reprimanded with the words:
“I know your works that you are neither cold nor hot. Oh, that you were cold or hot! But because you are lukewarm and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth. "
The usual interpretation is: It would be better to be indifferent, distant (“cold”) towards Christ or fiery, committed (“hot”) to Christ. Many interpreters are irritated that Christ prefers cold-hearted action by a church to half-hearted ("lukewarm") action, but they ignore it. The historical context - together with the image of spitting out of the mouth - suggests another interpretation: the wealthy Laodicea lacked its own water. The water required was fed into the city via an aqueduct from Kolossai , where it was lukewarm and rich in bacteria and vermin. It was disgusting and needed to be cooked. Being hot may also refer to the hot springs at Hierapolis , which had healing properties.
So what the church did ("your works") was apparently like the real water supplied to it: neither refreshing and beneficial (clean) nor purified by heat or naturally hot and healing; it made you sick.
The Eisegesis takes place here with the usual interpretation of the words "cold" and "hot" according to the metaphor of modern languages, detached from the circumstances of the time.
Eisegese as a battle term
If Eisegesis is proven, the author in question loses overall credibility. Therefore, in ideological or religious disputes, people like to work with the assumption of misinterpretations or Eisegese. So threw z. For example, the psychoanalyst and theologian Joachim Scharfenberg suggested to his colleague Eugen Drewermann to reinterpret the concept of sin in terms of depth psychology .
The theologian Martin Hengel accused Rudolf Bultmann of deliberately misinterpreting the expression “to know Christ after the flesh” in 2 Cor. 5:16 in order to be able to maintain his own doctrine that Paul - according to Bultmann - did not support the historical Jesus or interested in his earth life. "Here a text is made submissive to one's own dogmatic prejudice." Because although Bultmann admitted "that the adverbial meaning is 'more probable', [he] then blurs this clear meaning by a nonsensical inversion."
See also
Web links
Exegesis or Eisegesis? Archdiocese of Vienna on February 27, 2003, accessed on July 17, 2011
Individual evidence
- ↑ Martin Luther: Tischreden IV, No. 4638, 1539 (Tischreden: compilation of notes from his students)
- ↑ Andreas Köstenberger (Ed.): Whatever Happened to Truth? Weathon 2005, p. 117.
- ↑ ZB David H. Stern: Commentary on the Jewish New Testament , Volume 3, Hänssler Verlag: Holzgerlingen 1996, pp. 213-214.
- ^ William Barclay: Letters to the Seven Churches , Edinburgh 1957 (reprint 2001).
- ^ SE Porter: Why the Laodiceans Received Lukewarm Water , in: Tyndale Bulletin 38, 1987, pp. 143-149.
- ↑ Gregory K. Beale: The Book of Revelation: a commentary on the Greek text , Eerdmans: Grand Rapids 1999, p. 303. ISBN 978-0-8028-2174-4
- ↑ Joachim Scharfenberg: . .. and the Bible is right - this time psychologically? On Eugen Drewermann's concept of sin as a “neurosis before God” , in: Ways to People 31 (1979), pp. 297-302.
- ↑ Martin Hengel: Jesus witnesses outside the Gospels, in: Testimony and Interpretation: Early Christology in Its Judeo-Hellenistic Milieu, London / New York 2004, p. 146.