Thursday, March 09, 2006

Many moons ago, I had a series of posts on the Epistle to Diognetus. At the end of that series, there was a poll on which text I should blog about next.

Not too many people responded, but those who did specified that the Didache would be a good one to look into. So I will.

But first, some thoughts.

Should examination of non-canonical text (text that isn't Scripture) be different from examination of Scripture? I think it should be as the non-canonical text does not have the same underlying authority that Scripture has. But I'm not sure what that means. [Note: I'm thinking more about application of the text in the life of a Christian here than general examination/exegetical practices. Apologies for the confusion.]

Most editions of non-canonical text I've seen are just that: editions. They have the text and translation. They identify parallels in canonical and non-canonical documents. They discuss language, grammar, syntax, authorship, etc. They have brief notes, usually relating to the definition of a word or two.

That is much different than most commentary on Biblical texts, which seem to center on application or perhaps more homiletical purposes. I have not yet examined the Hermeneia volume on the Didache; a friend has that volume and I hope to borrow it from him shortly. Perhaps that will help me out.

Until then, my basic question is: What should commentary on non-canonical text consist of? What should it look like? What methods should it use?

Currently, my thought is to go very slowly through the text and comment on the Greek as it relates to similar words or grammatical/syntactic structures as they are found in the New Testament. That is, major on the language and minor on the exegesis. But if one was to do exegesis, what would that end up looking like? And would it be valuable? And would it be useful?

Just runnin' at the fingers here. If you have any thoughts, please email, leave some comments, or write away with your own thoughts on your own blog and I'll link to you from here (assuming I find it or you tell me, of course).

Thanks!

Post Author: rico
Friday, March 10, 2006 1:46:12 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]
Friday, March 10, 2006 2:03:39 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
I am more inclined to respect an method of examining ancient Christian works that treats canonical and non-canonical works alike.
What difference does the authority of a text make to understanding it?
Ken Penner
Friday, March 10, 2006 2:51:02 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)
Hi Ken.

Good point. I guess I was thinking more of application when I wrote that as opposed to simply examining the text to understand it.

Thanks!
Comments are closed.