Very often we tend to treat the bible as if it is a mechanical and polished document to be put under a microscope and examined at its every joint and coupling, yet fail to step back and realize that it is, in many of its parts, very human letters sent to other very human recipients. One wonders if a philologist, linguist, exegete, interpreter, whatever cookie from the tin, would apply the same rigorous methodology to a letter from grandma, or their child? Probably not. You’d probably just read it. And in reading it, you would hear the tone, inflections, nuances, and, well, the person behind it—the voice behind the words. I think we’ve somehow lost that with the study of Scripture, and there seems to be no guidance, emphasis, or influence on a “hermeneutic of hearing.”
Indeed the Scripture was written for us, and not to us (Walton), but a large majority of the Scriptures were indeed written to be read aloud for those who received it, and we have somewhat continued that tradition every Sunday for almost two millennia now. It is a well-placed fear that we may actually miss the original substance and form, relegating the texts to mere parts and data units to be individually analyzed. I am sure textual criticism, bless its heart, hasn’t really helped, nor general skepticism over how far up the tree of validity the Scripture climbs, but if we are to seek to analyze, for the sake of objectivity and the soundest of exegesis, the Scriptures in their authentic form then, well, we may as well focus on actually reading them.
This doesn’t preclude the need and value for exegesis, nor does it actually make the two mutually exclusive. Martin M. Culy recently published an article with a rather hyperbolic, as he acknowledges, title: If You Can’t Read, You Can’t Exegete.[1] In the article he points out a significant amount of observations in some test-case passages which speak to this matter, though we’ll save that for another day, or you can just go read it. There is much to an actual reading hermeneutic and, as Culy remarks, “those with reading skills will quickly see things in the text that exegetes may only eventually discover.”[2] Another quick point I will add, however, is that given Paul often utilized “modified”[3] forms of Greco-Roman rhetoric, his letters simply assume that its audience is reading (i.e. hearing) them, with every change in tone, embellishment, oral ornamentation, etc. coloring in the lines (and curves) of the text. Numerous scholars have pointed this out. In fact (a final quick point) we are quite sure that reading aloud was the practice in antiquity, which explains why Phillip knew what the eunuch was reading in Acts 8:26-40. Again, the New Testament was meant to be heard, not just read. We need a “hermeneutic of hearing.”
Another detail, which is my actual focus here, is the use of assonance, consonance, and other rhythmic devices found in the Greek. Often these are used for exegetical purposes, which Sunday [4] is counted as a recent example of the value therein, but sometimes we get to find moments of just literary beauty and significance. During church this past Sunday, as the pastor was reading through Matthew 7:7-11 I was reading along with my GNT. Verse seven is obviously a new section from that which precedes it and transitions (v. 12, οὖν) into the Golden Rule closing of the inclusio from 5:17, and though we have no particular marker of a new section it is a wonderful example of ekthesis and is clearly a topical/focus shift. Anywho, I noticed something really beautiful which speaks to the importance of reading, and not just for exegesis, but revealing the beauty of Scripture.
First, let’s read it in the ESV.
Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened (Matt. 7:7-8)
Now, let’s read it in the Greek.
Αἰτεῖτε, καὶ δοθήσεται ὑμῖν, ζητεῖτε, καὶ εὑρήσετε· κρούετε, καὶ ἀνοιγήσεται ὑμῖν· πᾶς γὰρ ὁ αἰτῶν λαμβάνει καὶ ὁ ζητῶν εὑρίσκει καὶ τῷ κρούοντι ἀνοιγήσεται
Do you hear it? Let’s transliterate it for those who cannot read.
Aiteite kai dothēsetai umin, zēteite, kai eurēsete. Krouete, kai anoignēsetai umin. Pas gar o aitōn lambanei kai o zētōn euriskei kai tō krouonti anoignēsetai [5]
What the original audience would hear is ending each word is, with the conjunctions: eite… ai… etai… in… eite… ai… ete… ete… ai… ai… etai… in… as… ar… ōn… ei… ai… ōn… ei… ai… ti… etai.
Let’s put it side by side with a pronunciation.
Ask, and it will be given to you.
aiteite kai dothēsetai umin
Seek, and you will find.
zēteite, kai eurēsete
Knock, and it will be opened to you.
krouete, kai anoignēsetai umin
Then, for v.8:
For everyone who asks receives,
pas gar o aitōn lambanei
And the one who seeks finds,
kai o zētōn euriskei
And to the one who knocks it will be opened.
kai tō krouonti anoignēsetai
Really we could highlight all of this, but I’d encourage everyone to read it out, even out loud, ornamenting and embellishing along with how Jesus would have said it. And that there is the beauty! There is no hidden message or highly intentional, contrary to normal convention, practice being employed by Jesus, but it is a mixture of how Greek can sound and how Jesus—Who is, after all, Deity—can purposefully, and probably did, choose a way to say something a certain way. But what there is, for sure, is a glimpse into what it would have been like to hear Him saying this to you, me, and all those around Him. Here we find in many ways intentional consonance, and it weaves together not only the passages themselves but the result verbs, emphasizing the importance of what He is saying. This isn’t the best example, but its just what I experienced at church this Sunday, and it reminded me of the importance in many ways of connecting to the text in its most authentic form: how it was heard.
There is a special significance to be found in texts that were and are meant to be read, and we find this scattered all throughout the bible. Again, this may not be the best or most profound and implicatory example,[6] but it does subtly speak to the importance of what we are called “a hermeneutic of hearing.” And it speaks to other literary phenomena in the bible like wordplay, figures of speech, and such devices which do have significant exegetical implications and insight. The importance of this approach has been fleshed out well in Lee and Scott’s Sound Mapping the New Testament, which in checking I was delighted to see that they noticed and briefly write on Matthew 7:7 too![7]
Perhaps it is time we further cultivate hermeneutics which encourage, and show the beauty of, a truly organic reading of the Scripture, and not merely a methodical and mechanical analysis of it. Language is, after all, expressing meaning. And meaning is hardly a mechanical thing in and of itself, but one which is elusive and demands the reader, and listener, to be immersed in what is being said to fully understand it. This also may speak to the serious problem we have with “concordance reading,” where many in the church fail to appreciate the need to understand the languages rather than just going to a Strong’s Concordance. They say there’s nothing more dangerous than a first year Greek student, but I rebut and raise with there is nothing more dangerous than someone on social media with a Strong’s! But that is an entirely different problem, and not our focus! Again: “a hermeneutic of hearing.”
Shalom!
[1] “If You Can’t Read, You Can’t Exegete: The Importance of Reading Skills for Greek Exegesis.” BAGL 11 (2022-2023): 101-129. I mean, hyperbolic or not, he isn’t really wrong, is he?
[2] “If You Can’t Read,” 106.
[3] This, too, is a discussion which does not belong in this meager little blog post! By “modified” I simply mean that the apostle shows some resemblance to contemporary Greco-Roman rhetorical conventions but this does not either (a) suggest Paul was a (trained or intentional) rhetorician or (b) that he sticks to these conventions perfectly. Bonus option: (c) or that all first-century rhetorical conventions were monolithic!
[4]J ohn Sunday Adimula, Pneuma: From the Spiritual Condition of Christ to the Holy Spirit-Agent: A Dialectic of Flesh-Spirit at the Root of New Testament Pneumatology (Etudes Bibliques 85. Leuven: Peeters, 2021).
[5] I do not follow classical Erasmian pronunciation.
[6] A better, though negative (!), example is Paul’s use of assonance in his vice lists in 1 Tim. 1:9-10, which I have discussed in relation to Gal. 5.20-21 with various implications for both (NCNU, 570-572).
[7] Margaret Ellen Lee and Bernard Brandon Scott, Sound Mapping the New Testament (Salem, OR: Polebridge Press, 2009), 315-317.