In recent years, speech act theory has been applied to the problem
of divine violence with most i... more In recent years, speech act theory has been applied to the problem of divine violence with most interpreters employing it to expunge the text of divine assent to violence. Two common solutions are offered in this regard. The first is to differentiate between the illocutionary stance of the human author, who condones violence, and the illocutionary stance of the divine author, who condemns it. The second solution is to argue that later speech acts supervene upon earlier speech acts in such a way that the earlier speech acts are nullified. For example, the speech acts attending the crucifixion (i.e., God’s declaration of love and forgiveness) are offered as corrections to previous, divine affirmations of violence. In this paper, I will demonstrate that while speech act theory can be used to articulate the above solutions, it does not necessitate them. Solutions such as these, that place the human author in opposition to the divine author, or set biblical texts against one another, are not inherent to the theory and are only viable if one’s prior convictions regarding God’s relationship to the Scriptures allow such discord. Those wishing to affirm both the unity of Scripture and the inspiration of the entire canon should find these solutions unsatisfactory. Alternatively, I will argue that while the divine author may do more than the human author with any given text, He does, at the very least, affirm their stance.
The concept of interpersonal forgiveness has not received warranted attention in theological disc... more The concept of interpersonal forgiveness has not received warranted attention in theological discourse. This lacuna is unfortunate as one’s understanding of forgiveness has significant implications for counselling, pastoral ministry, and personal responses to violence and oppression. In this paper I employ speech act theory to explicate the anatomy of this complex, interpersonal activity. I suggest that forgiveness is an example of a “strong speech act”, and, as such, requires a particular context within which it can occur. In contrast to models that explain forgiveness as an unconditional, unilateral action, I suggest that forgiveness is both conditional and interpersonal. Moreover, I argue the portrait of divine forgiveness is paradigmatic and should inform our understanding of both the nature and function of interpersonal forgiveness. To add further nuance to this portrait, I interact with Miroslav Volf’s analogy of “gift” and briefly examine key texts alleged to support unconditional forgiveness (i.e., Matthew 18:21-22 and Luke 23:34). Finally, I discuss the often-underestimated relationship between forgiveness and justice, and offer implications for how one might respond to continued violence and oppression.
Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication, ... more Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication, a move which reconnects the academy with ecclesiological concerns. Those involved in theological hermeneutics have drawn upon advances in a wide range of disciplines in order to develop and defend their methodologies. From the fields of communication theory and pragmatics, speech act theory has been proffered by some as providing insightful analysis of the anatomy of communication and, in particular, authorial intention. Nicholas Wolterstorff's, Divine Discourse: Philosophical Reflections on the Claim that God Speaks is representative of such works. Drawing heavily upon speech act theory, Wolterstorff defends a model of interpretation that prioritises authorial intention. Furthermore, Wolterstorff's conviction that Scripture is both human and divine discourse leads him to a two-stage hermeneutic. This paper will offer an explanation and critique of Wolterstorff's move from the first to the second hermeneutic in his interpretation of Psalm 137. It will conclude that while Wolterstorff's method does account for the divine intention in part, it ultimately suffers from both a limited connection to speech act theory and a failure to appreciate the nature of communication at higher (especially generic) levels. In addressing these methodological deficiencies, the paper will present Psalm 137 as an authoritative canonical text by clarifying how it continues to function as divine discourse. TYNDALE BULLETIN 60.1 (2009) 2
The divine authorship of Scripture has been a much-debated topic throughout history, particularly... more The divine authorship of Scripture has been a much-debated topic throughout history, particularly in the modern and postmodern eras. Those who continue to hold to such a conviction have often wrestled with its hermeneutical implications. Hermeneutic realists who employ forms of authorial discourse interpretation have realized that their presuppositions regarding the divine authorship of Scripture pose significant hermeneutical challenges. In particular, it is often believed that the divine author may intend to communicate something different from what the human author of the text intended. This belief has led many to employ what became known as a sensus plenior hermeneutic, a hermeneutic that has generated criticism from both hermeneutic realists and non-realists alike. Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication. Those involved in theological hermeneutics have drawn upon advances in a wide range of disciplines in order to develop ...
Theological Education: Foundations, Practices and Future Directions, 2017
Our essential beliefs about what the Old Testament is should inform how we interpret it and teach... more Our essential beliefs about what the Old Testament is should inform how we interpret it and teach it. Thus, the fundamental conviction underlying this chapter is that ontology should determine praxis. While the advent of theological interpretation has helped to clarify the presuppositions and goals of evangelical hermeneutics, the practice of evangelical hermeneutics, particularly with respect to the Old Testament, is often at odds with such beliefs. Broadly, evangelical hermeneutics need to resist the influence of historical criticism and embrace a consistent and explicit application of our convictions within Old Testament interpretation and pedagogy. Speech act theory is proposed as a helpful means of achieving this objective.
The imprecatory psalms have been a continual source of confusion and debate. Readers have found i... more The imprecatory psalms have been a continual source of confusion and debate. Readers have found it difficult to understand how the psalmist could express such hatred, let alone explain how this hatred ‘fits’ within the Christian canon. It is the burden of this chapter to offer a theological interpretation of the imprecatory psalms by offering an explanation of how these psalms function as the Word of God. I will argue that such an interpretation supports their continuing use and demonstrates that an a priori rejection of imprecation is unjustified. To this end, I will first review various approaches to the imprecatory psalms; then consider the imprecatory psalms in the contexts of both the psalter and the broader canon; next, offer speech-act theory as a tool for understanding how the psalms function in these contexts – in particular, how they function as the Word of God. Finally, I will present a brief theological interpretation of Psalm 137.
Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication, ... more Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication, a move which reconnects the academy with ecclesiological concerns. Those involved in theological hermeneutics have drawn upon advances in a wide range of disciplines in order to develop and defend their methodologies. From the fields of communication theory and pragmatics, speech act theory has been proffered by some as providing insightful analysis of the anatomy of communication and, in particular, authorial intention. Nicholas Wolterstorff's, Divine Discourse: Philosophical Reflections on the Claim that God Speaks is representative of such works. Drawing heavily upon speech act theory, Wolterstorff defends a model of interpretation that prioritises authorial intention. Furthermore, Wolterstorff's conviction that Scripture is both human and divine discourse leads him to a two-stage hermeneutic. This paper will offer an explanation and critique of Wolterstorff's move from the first to the second hermeneutic in his interpretation of Psalm 137. It will conclude that while Wolterstorff's method does account for the divine intention in part, it ultimately suffers from both a limited connection to speech act theory and a failure to appreciate the nature of communication at higher (especially generic) levels. In addressing these methodological deficiencies, the paper will present Psalm 137 as an authoritative canonical text by clarifying how it continues to function as divine discourse. TYNDALE BULLETIN 60.1 (2009) 2
The divine authorship of Scripture has been a much-debated topic throughout history, particularly... more The divine authorship of Scripture has been a much-debated topic throughout history, particularly in the modern and postmodern eras. Those who continue to hold to such a conviction have often wrestled with its hermeneutical implications. Hermeneutic realists who employ forms of authorial discourse interpretation have realized that their presuppositions regarding the divine authorship of Scripture pose significant hermeneutical challenges. In particular, it is often believed that the divine author may intend to communicate something different from what the human author of the text intended. This belief has led many to employ what became known as a sensus plenior hermeneutic, a hermeneu-tic that has generated criticism from both hermeneutic realists and non-realists alike. Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication. Those involved in theological herme-neutics have drawn upon advances in a wide range of disciplines in order to develop and defend their methodologies. From the fields of communication theory and pragmatics, speech act theory has been proffered by some as providing an insightful analysis of the anatomy of communication and, in particular, authorial intention. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate how speech act theory highlights the problems related to a dual-authorship hermeneutic and with sensus plenior approaches in particular. At the same time, speech act theory is shown to be a valuable tool that can clarify interpretive goals and enable a greater appreciation of the divine authorship of Scripture at both canonical and intracanonical levels.
In recent years, speech act theory has been applied to the problem
of divine violence with most i... more In recent years, speech act theory has been applied to the problem of divine violence with most interpreters employing it to expunge the text of divine assent to violence. Two common solutions are offered in this regard. The first is to differentiate between the illocutionary stance of the human author, who condones violence, and the illocutionary stance of the divine author, who condemns it. The second solution is to argue that later speech acts supervene upon earlier speech acts in such a way that the earlier speech acts are nullified. For example, the speech acts attending the crucifixion (i.e., God’s declaration of love and forgiveness) are offered as corrections to previous, divine affirmations of violence. In this paper, I will demonstrate that while speech act theory can be used to articulate the above solutions, it does not necessitate them. Solutions such as these, that place the human author in opposition to the divine author, or set biblical texts against one another, are not inherent to the theory and are only viable if one’s prior convictions regarding God’s relationship to the Scriptures allow such discord. Those wishing to affirm both the unity of Scripture and the inspiration of the entire canon should find these solutions unsatisfactory. Alternatively, I will argue that while the divine author may do more than the human author with any given text, He does, at the very least, affirm their stance.
The concept of interpersonal forgiveness has not received warranted attention in theological disc... more The concept of interpersonal forgiveness has not received warranted attention in theological discourse. This lacuna is unfortunate as one’s understanding of forgiveness has significant implications for counselling, pastoral ministry, and personal responses to violence and oppression. In this paper I employ speech act theory to explicate the anatomy of this complex, interpersonal activity. I suggest that forgiveness is an example of a “strong speech act”, and, as such, requires a particular context within which it can occur. In contrast to models that explain forgiveness as an unconditional, unilateral action, I suggest that forgiveness is both conditional and interpersonal. Moreover, I argue the portrait of divine forgiveness is paradigmatic and should inform our understanding of both the nature and function of interpersonal forgiveness. To add further nuance to this portrait, I interact with Miroslav Volf’s analogy of “gift” and briefly examine key texts alleged to support unconditional forgiveness (i.e., Matthew 18:21-22 and Luke 23:34). Finally, I discuss the often-underestimated relationship between forgiveness and justice, and offer implications for how one might respond to continued violence and oppression.
Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication, ... more Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication, a move which reconnects the academy with ecclesiological concerns. Those involved in theological hermeneutics have drawn upon advances in a wide range of disciplines in order to develop and defend their methodologies. From the fields of communication theory and pragmatics, speech act theory has been proffered by some as providing insightful analysis of the anatomy of communication and, in particular, authorial intention. Nicholas Wolterstorff's, Divine Discourse: Philosophical Reflections on the Claim that God Speaks is representative of such works. Drawing heavily upon speech act theory, Wolterstorff defends a model of interpretation that prioritises authorial intention. Furthermore, Wolterstorff's conviction that Scripture is both human and divine discourse leads him to a two-stage hermeneutic. This paper will offer an explanation and critique of Wolterstorff's move from the first to the second hermeneutic in his interpretation of Psalm 137. It will conclude that while Wolterstorff's method does account for the divine intention in part, it ultimately suffers from both a limited connection to speech act theory and a failure to appreciate the nature of communication at higher (especially generic) levels. In addressing these methodological deficiencies, the paper will present Psalm 137 as an authoritative canonical text by clarifying how it continues to function as divine discourse. TYNDALE BULLETIN 60.1 (2009) 2
The divine authorship of Scripture has been a much-debated topic throughout history, particularly... more The divine authorship of Scripture has been a much-debated topic throughout history, particularly in the modern and postmodern eras. Those who continue to hold to such a conviction have often wrestled with its hermeneutical implications. Hermeneutic realists who employ forms of authorial discourse interpretation have realized that their presuppositions regarding the divine authorship of Scripture pose significant hermeneutical challenges. In particular, it is often believed that the divine author may intend to communicate something different from what the human author of the text intended. This belief has led many to employ what became known as a sensus plenior hermeneutic, a hermeneutic that has generated criticism from both hermeneutic realists and non-realists alike. Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication. Those involved in theological hermeneutics have drawn upon advances in a wide range of disciplines in order to develop ...
Theological Education: Foundations, Practices and Future Directions, 2017
Our essential beliefs about what the Old Testament is should inform how we interpret it and teach... more Our essential beliefs about what the Old Testament is should inform how we interpret it and teach it. Thus, the fundamental conviction underlying this chapter is that ontology should determine praxis. While the advent of theological interpretation has helped to clarify the presuppositions and goals of evangelical hermeneutics, the practice of evangelical hermeneutics, particularly with respect to the Old Testament, is often at odds with such beliefs. Broadly, evangelical hermeneutics need to resist the influence of historical criticism and embrace a consistent and explicit application of our convictions within Old Testament interpretation and pedagogy. Speech act theory is proposed as a helpful means of achieving this objective.
The imprecatory psalms have been a continual source of confusion and debate. Readers have found i... more The imprecatory psalms have been a continual source of confusion and debate. Readers have found it difficult to understand how the psalmist could express such hatred, let alone explain how this hatred ‘fits’ within the Christian canon. It is the burden of this chapter to offer a theological interpretation of the imprecatory psalms by offering an explanation of how these psalms function as the Word of God. I will argue that such an interpretation supports their continuing use and demonstrates that an a priori rejection of imprecation is unjustified. To this end, I will first review various approaches to the imprecatory psalms; then consider the imprecatory psalms in the contexts of both the psalter and the broader canon; next, offer speech-act theory as a tool for understanding how the psalms function in these contexts – in particular, how they function as the Word of God. Finally, I will present a brief theological interpretation of Psalm 137.
Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication, ... more Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication, a move which reconnects the academy with ecclesiological concerns. Those involved in theological hermeneutics have drawn upon advances in a wide range of disciplines in order to develop and defend their methodologies. From the fields of communication theory and pragmatics, speech act theory has been proffered by some as providing insightful analysis of the anatomy of communication and, in particular, authorial intention. Nicholas Wolterstorff's, Divine Discourse: Philosophical Reflections on the Claim that God Speaks is representative of such works. Drawing heavily upon speech act theory, Wolterstorff defends a model of interpretation that prioritises authorial intention. Furthermore, Wolterstorff's conviction that Scripture is both human and divine discourse leads him to a two-stage hermeneutic. This paper will offer an explanation and critique of Wolterstorff's move from the first to the second hermeneutic in his interpretation of Psalm 137. It will conclude that while Wolterstorff's method does account for the divine intention in part, it ultimately suffers from both a limited connection to speech act theory and a failure to appreciate the nature of communication at higher (especially generic) levels. In addressing these methodological deficiencies, the paper will present Psalm 137 as an authoritative canonical text by clarifying how it continues to function as divine discourse. TYNDALE BULLETIN 60.1 (2009) 2
The divine authorship of Scripture has been a much-debated topic throughout history, particularly... more The divine authorship of Scripture has been a much-debated topic throughout history, particularly in the modern and postmodern eras. Those who continue to hold to such a conviction have often wrestled with its hermeneutical implications. Hermeneutic realists who employ forms of authorial discourse interpretation have realized that their presuppositions regarding the divine authorship of Scripture pose significant hermeneutical challenges. In particular, it is often believed that the divine author may intend to communicate something different from what the human author of the text intended. This belief has led many to employ what became known as a sensus plenior hermeneutic, a hermeneu-tic that has generated criticism from both hermeneutic realists and non-realists alike. Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication. Those involved in theological herme-neutics have drawn upon advances in a wide range of disciplines in order to develop and defend their methodologies. From the fields of communication theory and pragmatics, speech act theory has been proffered by some as providing an insightful analysis of the anatomy of communication and, in particular, authorial intention. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate how speech act theory highlights the problems related to a dual-authorship hermeneutic and with sensus plenior approaches in particular. At the same time, speech act theory is shown to be a valuable tool that can clarify interpretive goals and enable a greater appreciation of the divine authorship of Scripture at both canonical and intracanonical levels.
Uploads
Papers by Kit Barker
of divine violence with most interpreters employing it to expunge the text of
divine assent to violence. Two common solutions are offered in this regard. The
first is to differentiate between the illocutionary stance of the human author, who
condones violence, and the illocutionary stance of the divine author, who
condemns it. The second solution is to argue that later speech acts supervene
upon earlier speech acts in such a way that the earlier speech acts are nullified.
For example, the speech acts attending the crucifixion (i.e., God’s declaration of
love and forgiveness) are offered as corrections to previous, divine affirmations
of violence.
In this paper, I will demonstrate that while speech act theory can be used to
articulate the above solutions, it does not necessitate them. Solutions such as
these, that place the human author in opposition to the divine author, or set
biblical texts against one another, are not inherent to the theory and are only
viable if one’s prior convictions regarding God’s relationship to the Scriptures
allow such discord. Those wishing to affirm both the unity of Scripture and the
inspiration of the entire canon should find these solutions unsatisfactory.
Alternatively, I will argue that while the divine author may do more than the
human author with any given text, He does, at the very least, affirm their stance.
Books by Kit Barker
of divine violence with most interpreters employing it to expunge the text of
divine assent to violence. Two common solutions are offered in this regard. The
first is to differentiate between the illocutionary stance of the human author, who
condones violence, and the illocutionary stance of the divine author, who
condemns it. The second solution is to argue that later speech acts supervene
upon earlier speech acts in such a way that the earlier speech acts are nullified.
For example, the speech acts attending the crucifixion (i.e., God’s declaration of
love and forgiveness) are offered as corrections to previous, divine affirmations
of violence.
In this paper, I will demonstrate that while speech act theory can be used to
articulate the above solutions, it does not necessitate them. Solutions such as
these, that place the human author in opposition to the divine author, or set
biblical texts against one another, are not inherent to the theory and are only
viable if one’s prior convictions regarding God’s relationship to the Scriptures
allow such discord. Those wishing to affirm both the unity of Scripture and the
inspiration of the entire canon should find these solutions unsatisfactory.
Alternatively, I will argue that while the divine author may do more than the
human author with any given text, He does, at the very least, affirm their stance.