Description
Book SynopsisIn the study of American law, originalism is primarily a theory about the meaning of the Constitution—that its meaning can only change when its words change. Originalism also appears in biblical theology as a theory on the meaning of the Bible—that its meaning is that intended by the original authors. Originalism in Theology and Law: Comparing Perspectives on the Bible and the Constitution offers a study of originalism in both the Bible and the Constitution. While there are significant connections between originalism as a theory of biblical interpretation and as Constitutional interpretation, there are also differences in the type of text as well as its purpose, function, origins, or authority, which may affect which nuanced version of originalism best fits a particular text, or the best method of interpreting it.
Trade ReviewI didn’t know how much I needed Originalism in Theology and Law until I read it. Even in biblical hermeneutics, I find from this book that my so-called expertise is built upon unexamined presuppositions in need of philosophical reengineering. Theology and constitutional law both need a book which forces us to think through definitions, follow logical progressions of thought, examine evidence, and creatively apply ideas to authoritative texts like the American Constitution and the divine Word of God. How I wish that people of all positions, both legal and theological, could read this book and learn to think through their views more carefully.
-- Robert K. Wetmore, Forman Christian College
The authority of both Holy Scripture and our Constitution depend on their conveying discernible truths which can be known through acts of interpretation. Originalists argue that these truths are bound up with the intentions of the authors of these works – God, in the case of Scripture, and the Framers, in the case of the Constitution. The essays in this masterful volume defend originalism and explore the similarities and differences between constitutional and Biblical originalism. A must read for anyone interested in the challenges to the originalist project.
-- John Hill, Indiana University
