Biblical Hebrew Forum

[CS Bartholomew <jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net>]

On 10/23/03 5:36 AM, "George Athas" <gathas AT hotkey.net.au> wrote:

> "midrash" and "pesher" ...  in 1Peter


George, 

Darrell L. Bock has a disucssion of this worth looking at, see:

http://www.beginningwithmoses.org/library/bockotnt2.htm

A quote:

"Much confusion exists with regard to the use of the terms pesher and
midrash. The definitions of these terms are not fixed even in the technical
literature. [16] Often when these terms are used, they are not clearly
defined. Longeneckers repeated use of the term pesher exegesis suffers from
this problem. Is he referring to an eschatologically fulfilled and presently
fulfilled text or to a technical style of exegesis? Also is he using pesher
in a descriptive-analogical sense (in which the New Testament use is
parallel to this Jewish technique but with important distinctions) or is he
using pesher to refer to a New Testament technique in which the technique
and the theological approach of the two systems are so identified that they
are treated as virtually synonymous hermeneutical systems? Much of the
reaction against this ancient hermeneutical terminology grows out of a sense
of excessive identification between the Jewish and New Testament approaches
in the writings of the progressive revelation school, without careful
qualification or without a strong enough stress on the differences between
the Jewish and Christian approaches to the Old Testament. More important
than the choice of descriptive terms is what is meant by their use. If the
terms are merely descriptive and analogical, then a problem does not seem to
exist with their use; but if an identification of hermeneutical approach is
asserted, then the distinctives of the New Testament perspective are
minimized."




greetings,
Clay Bartholomew