A deconstructive hermeneutic anyone?
2007-03-20 09:53:35 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Hmmm, hermeneutic of what ? A translation of a translation of a translation of an unknown original text, that was probably a translation of a translation....etc etc etc
When the text was rendered into Greek the core concepts were Deus, 'god' , and 'logos', word . The Habiru ( hebrew ) transliterations produced in Babylon, 6th century b.c, meant that attaching too much significance to exact meaning would be hazardous to say the best. To try to ( literally ) roast errant sinners based on the 'Word of God' was reckless to say the least..........."Which word ?" I hear them scream from amid the flaming people barbies.
Anyway, the kicker is that even those texts have changed....again, oops, sorry Jeanne, et al.
Most modern texts, including the 'New International Version', which, funnily enough was sent to me by a Rabbi friend in Israel, and the more recent prints of the 'Gideons Bible', don't even keep to the 'Logos' thing.
The 'Word' has left the building.
I defy anyone to much more deconstructive than that.
2007-03-20 14:24:38 · answer #1 · answered by cosmicvoyager 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a statement not a question. Why would there be a question mark?
And by the way why deconstructive hermeneutic rather than exploratory hermeneutics?
2007-03-21 05:10:15 · answer #2 · answered by ♫Silvi♪ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can't deconstruct that passage because it is the truth.
It is a key proof text for not only the doctrine of the Holy Trinity but also for the divinity of Christ (i.e. "the Word was God")
To apply deconstructive hermeneutics would be absurd and illogical because the passage is not only divinely inspired but also clear as a bell.
2007-03-20 10:48:56 · answer #3 · answered by Veritas 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Creative use of the past tense. The Logos (the word or concept) is without limit. It can reach back into and comprehend the past.
God comes from the future (kingcom come) and time-travels to be present before the beginning of the universe.
2007-03-21 03:04:27 · answer #4 · answered by Recumbentman 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
saying "in the biginning" is a mistake for there was no biginning ,otherwise we should admit that there was a time where god did not exist.there was no biginning there will be no end . the universe is a process of a chain reaction where things happen cyclikly in a way that rotate from a big bang to a universal black hole that will generate a new big bang etc.
2007-03-20 12:01:35 · answer #5 · answered by fayssal1932 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This here is talking about Jesus Christ His Son, Jesus is referred to as The Word, so in that verse, you can substitute Jesus' name with The Word.
2007-03-20 10:05:24 · answer #6 · answered by Light Bringer 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nice to see that Christianity has moved from being a religion to being a philosophy.
2007-03-20 11:28:55 · answer #7 · answered by tony n 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
and the Word was God.
2007-03-20 11:43:17 · answer #8 · answered by irisheyes 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
and the word was God.
2007-03-20 10:03:40 · answer #9 · answered by dieturtledie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes there is no question about that the word has always been with god and always will.
2007-03-20 09:58:42 · answer #10 · answered by Dylan P 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋