After completing the brief series on existentialism and hermeneutics (pt 1, pt 2, pt 3), I noticed a few related discussion around the way worth mentioning:
1. Rod Decker interacted with the reader-response approach which Richard Hays seemed to suggest in Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (1989).
2. Ken Schenck shares an introduction to a paper he is writing in which he will attempt to build a bridge “across the ugly ditch between historical-contextual interpretations of individual biblical books and a holistic Christian perspective on Scripture as a whole.”
3. Ben Byerly interacts briefly with Schenck, most interestingly suggesting that coherence in a reader-centered approach must mean “internal coherence.” (I have a few thoughts on ‘coherence’, perhaps for another time).
I would love to see more discussion related to the problem (from my perspective) of multiple meanings (cf. previous post).
I hope you do take up the topic of “coherence.” I was fumbling around; maybe “perceived coherence” would be . I’ll take a look at your earlier posts.
Great. Briefly, my interest in ‘coherence’ is that it can be an exegetical key used in both a grammatical-historical method and a reader-response method (i.e., internal coherence of a text or internal coherence of a reader’s interpretation).
I’ll look forward to hearing more.
yeah i’m looking forward to your thoughts on coherence as well. gurus miss that stuff like that plague