Thanks! IMO, when Robert challenges us with good questions, we owe it to ourselves to respond.
If memory serves, my M.Div Hermenutics course used
"Protestant Biblical Interpretation: A Textbook of Hermeneutics, 3rd revised edition, Baker Book House, 1970." by Bernard Rammhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Ramm
In my world, before we can study theology or begin to theologize, we must 1st lay a sensible foundation.
Some of those prerequisites include Greek & Hebrew studies, Introduction to OT & NT (which should include a flood of historical & cultural data from diverse sources.), Hermenutics, for starters.
Thus, while Markan Priority has the best support currently among scholars of all types, we're only one archeological find of a older text that could upend all proposed Synoptic Solutions.
The piece I've never seen addressed by "lower" or "higher" criticism would be the testing of interpretative methods against other current & ancient literature. I mean, if these methods work on Scripture, shouldn't they also work on Homer, Shakespeare & the writings of Thomas Jefferson or Ayn Rand? So why don't we use the methods of understanding Eng. Lit in Seminary?
Count me eternally skeptical.
I also like to see student's presuppositions/prejudices/biases/world views identified before hand. Such things are not necessarily wrong but unexamined and unknown they inherently color our approach to any subject or dataset. I prefer "eyes wide open", all things being equal. Thus, a healthy discussion of "isogesis" seems quite in order as well as much of it occurs quite unwittingly, IMO, anyways.
Well, here's an intriguing article on the history of hermenutics from a clearly secular perspective. Fascinating!http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hermeneutics/
The Uni of Chicago offers this survey of modern hermenutics which dovetails the last citing:http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/files/forster/HERM.pdf
Unfortunately, there are excellent footnotes but no bibliography.
John Cobb offers a considerable body of literature from his ever evolving "Process" perspective. This article in particular would seem suited to intro theological studies in any school, IMO. Which is not to imply any level of agreement or endorsement, of course.http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=3361
Here's the broader list of his writings with which I assume theologs-in-training will need some familiarity.
Divinity School, U of C offers 2 courses this spring of note. I suspect the professors could be contacted for bibliographies.http://divinity.uchicago.edu/academics/courses/spring2011.shtml
BIBL 46300 The Four-Fold
Tue. 9:00-11:50 S208
This course will have two parts: 1. A descriptive-analytic overview and study of examples of the four-fold method of Jewish Biblical interpretation (known as Pardes); 2. A constructive inquiry into its use as a model for a contemporary Jewish philosophy of religion.
PQ: Some Hebrew recommended—consult instructor.
BIBL 54900 Seminar: Comparative Scriptural Interpretation
Mitchell, Margaret/Robinson, James
W 3:00-6:50 S403
Through selected readings in early Christian and medieval Jewish texts (in a variety of genres), the seminar will explore such issues as: what is a “text,” and how is a “scripture” constituted? What is (a) “commentary”? What are the various media of scriptural interpretation? What kinds of interpretive questions do various readers and communities generate, and why? What is the relationship between “theory” and “practice” in scriptural interpretation? What types of exegetical rules are developed and employed, from where do they come and how are they justified? Do such traditional labels as “literal” and “allegorical” interpretation work? Do different religious traditions and communities develop unique interpretive perspectives or predilections, or do we see largely the same approaches in play regardless of context?
PQ: language facility in Hebrew and/or Greek.
Both sound fascinating especially as I'm rather certain the profs are not of the, how shall I phrase it, German-Reformed/Calvinist/Charismatic persuasion.
Oddly, that makes them very attractive, at least to me.
Blessings! & Happy New Year!