The First Interpreter of Scripture?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aureole
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Aureole

Guest
I came across a curious question the other day made by a fellow student, who was the first person to interpret Scripture? The answer provided by the teacher was quite unsatisfactory, but I was caught unaware at the time and didn’t come out with a more “positive” answer until much later.

After some thought I decided that it would either be St. Paul or St. Peter. I originally thought of St. Paul because some of his epistles were the first documents written which were included in Scripture, thus providing documentation of it. But after more thought I figured St. Peter would be the first with documentation by virtue of Acts, which covers his speech to the people on Pentecost.

Now, I haven’t gone through with an extensive search of Scripture yet, but I’m curious to know who the first person to interpret Scripture was? They could very well be Jewish. I’m not sure, I’m no expert on the Old Testament. If they are Jewish, who would be the first person after the old covenant to interpret Scripture?
 
Its a rather vague question in my opinion. We’d need to clarify and define “scripture”, “interpret” and even “first” really. The new Testment was merely letters before they were added to the canon. Many people read the letters or heard the letters read and would have deduced what meaning they could take from them (thus interpreting?). The OT is certainly included in Scripture, and the Jews read and taught from those scrolls long before the time of Jesus. And there was a time before that when what was later written on scrolls was merely verbal teaching handed down verbally, but also surely considered the Word of God.

See what I mean?

My response to the question would be “Why do you ask that question?” We need to know what the person is getting at to satisfy the question (in my opinion).
 
Well,. it would not have been anybody before Moses… he started it all…so I guess he would have been the first.

As for his authority to do so, Jesus does refer to the “chair of Moses” even though that concept does not appear in the OT. Guess it was known and accepted through ***Tradition ***:hmmm: .
 
40.png
MrS:
Well,. it would not have been anybody before Moses… he started it all…so I guess he would have been the first.

As for his authority to do so, Jesus does refer to the “chair of Moses” even though that concept does not appear in the OT. Guess it was known and accepted through Tradition :hmmm: .
Click to expand...
That’s an interesting thought. Were the 10 Commandments the beginning of the Scripture though? I would think they’d already have been passing down the book of Genesis by then (not in book form of course 😃 ).

That’s why I say we’d need some real clear definition of terms before we could attempt to answer the question.
 
Jesus Christ explained the whole of scripture and how it prophesied and led up to the events of his birth, life, passion death and resurrection to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus. The subsequent interpretation by the Church has handed on and expanded his exigesis.
 
40.png
Aureole:
I came across a curious question the other day made by a fellow student, who was the first person to interpret Scripture? The answer provided by the teacher was quite unsatisfactory, but I was caught unaware at the time and didn’t come out with a more “positive” answer until much later.

After some thought I decided that it would either be St. Paul or St. Peter. I originally thought of St. Paul because some of his epistles were the first documents written which were included in Scripture, thus providing documentation of it. But after more thought I figured St. Peter would be the first with documentation by virtue of Acts, which covers his speech to the people on Pentecost.

Now, I haven’t gone through with an extensive search of Scripture yet, but I’m curious to know who the first person to interpret Scripture was? They could very well be Jewish. I’m not sure, I’m no expert on the Old Testament. If they are Jewish, who would be the first person after the old covenant to interpret Scripture?
Click to expand...

That is impossible to answer​

 
Chris W:
Its a rather vague question in my opinion. We’d need to clarify and define “scripture”, “interpret” and even “first” really.
Click to expand...
It is somewhat vague. To give a definition on the words:

Scripture: the inspired books of the Bible, written or otherwise.
Interpret: I think the dictionary (Or Answers.com) would do nicely here.
First: the first person known to, in other words: documented.
40.png
puzzleannie:
Jesus Christ explained the whole of scripture and how it prophesied and led up to the events of his birth, life, passion death and resurrection to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus. The subsequent interpretation by the Church has handed on and expanded his exigesis.
Click to expand...
Thank you, but Jesus would be fairly obvious. I guess it would be absolutely correct though, seeing as He taught the disciples on the road to Emmaus… So, aside from our Lord, who would be the first disciple of His to interpret Scripture. I think it would be St. Peter.
 
Gottle of Geer said:
## That is impossible to answer ##
Click to expand...

Why would it be impossible? I’m only looking for the first documented person. I apologize for the vagueness of the original question.
 
40.png
Aureole:
Scripture: the inspired books of the Bible, written or otherwise.
Click to expand...
Inspired according to whom? The Jews? Catholics? Protestants? And whomever would have answered that question would first have had to interpret the passages to find them worthy of belief wouldn’t they? So which came first, the chicken or the egg?
40.png
Aureole:
Interpret: I think the dictionary (Or Answers.com) would do nicely here.
Click to expand...
That’s somewhat condescending. Interpret correctly or giving any possible interpretation? A scholarly interpretation, or an interpretation from casual reading? Interpret in an official authoritative manner or merely arriving at any potentially erroneous human opinion?
40.png
Aureole:
First: the first person known to, in other words: documented.
Click to expand...
What significance does it have if it is documented? Would the mere record of such an event give some reason to consider it? Would documentation mean it necessarily was the first documented case (as opposed to merely being the earliest case for which one can* find* documentation)?

I’m not trying to be diffcult, but the question is quite unusual, and would be much easier answered if the one who asked it disclosed the reason for the question (surely there must be a reason to have asked it). Otherwise really it is like asking who the first person to have read the Scriptures might have been…an impossible question to answer.
 
Chris W:
That’s an interesting thought. Were the 10 Commandments the beginning of the Scripture though? I would think they’d already have been passing down the book of Genesis by then (not in book form of course 😃 ).
.
Click to expand...
When Moses came down from the mountain he saw the first attempt at “liturgy in the round” and smashed the stones… we see that form of litergy attempted even today.😉

But “Doctor” Moses again gave us the 10 Suggestions, I mean Commandments, telling the people to “…take one tablet and call me in the morning…” I think it would have been for further instruction.:whacky:
 
Chris W:
Inspired according to whom? The Jews? Catholics? Protestants? And whomever would have answered that question would first have had to interpret the passages to find them worthy of belief wouldn’t they? So which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Click to expand...
Inspired according to the Church. The current canon of Scripture. And yes, they would have had to interpret the passages, hence the question.
Chris W:
That’s somewhat condescending. Interpret correctly or giving any possible interpretation? A scholarly interpretation, or an interpretation from casual reading? Interpret in an official authoritative manner or merely arriving at any potentially erroneous human opinion?
What significance does it have if it is documented? Would the mere record of such an event give some reason to consider it? Would documentation mean it necessarily was the first documented case (as opposed to merely being the earliest case for which one can* find* documentation)?
Click to expand...
I apologize, I didn’t mean for it to be condescending at all.

I would say to interpret in an official, authoritative manner. That would make the most sense since it would be a correct interpretation.

The earliest case for which we can find documentation. Documentation would give us evidence of that person interpreting the Scriptures. It would provide proof that they were, indeed, interpreting and not just saying random things and connecting it to Scripture.
Chris W:
I’m not trying to be diffcult, but the question is quite unusual, and would be much easier answered if the one who asked it disclosed the reason for the question (surely there must be a reason to have asked it). Otherwise really it is like asking who the first person to have read the Scriptures might have been…an impossible question to answer.
Click to expand...
I think they were merely curious to know who the first person was that interpreted Scripture instead of taking only the literal writing on the page. I’m not 100% sure since I’m not them, but I can give the situation that the question arose in: We were watching a video on Galileo Galilei and saw a part where he argued that one must interpret certain passages of Scripture that do not correspond to science. So the student asked who the first person to interpret Scripture would be.
 
40.png
Aureole:
Inspired according to the Church. The current canon of Scripture. And yes, they would have had to interpret the passages, hence the question.

…I would say to interpret in an official, authoritative manner.

…The earliest case for which we can find documentation…
Click to expand...
Ahh. Now we’re getting somewhere I think. I’m short on time at the moment but I’ll give it some thought. Off hand I would say at the least, the Church would have had to interpret Matt 16 merely to have the audacity to declare authoritatively what was and what was not the inspired Word of God by producing a canon at all. In fact, without such a mindset, there would perhaps have been argument over the merit of the individual documents from the time of the writing of the letters to the present day.

But you’re saying once the canon was established and the Word of God existed complete in written form, who offered the first interpretaion? Hmmm. That’s a hard one. My first guess would be to look into the first heresy to be condemned by the Church after the development of the canon (in the third century or so), or else perhaps the earliest creed following the establishment of the canon.

Still a tough question to answer. :o
 
Genesis 3:1-5 gives us a picture of the first two interpreters of God’s words: the Serpent, and the Woman - who both misinterpret and misapply the Lord’s command in Genesis 2:16-17.
The Serpent: Did God really say that? Why did He say that?
The Woman: God said this - but then she proceeds interpretively to add to what the Lord actually said.
The Serpent: Well, God didn’t really mean that, when He said it. Here’s what He really meant, but didn’t want to tell you in those words.

Thus, the Original Sin, by which the Human Race fell from God’s grace, and by which we all come into this world in a state of enmity with God, came about through the gratuitous interpretation of God’s words. (One might say also, through protestantistic “individual interpretation”.)
And today, as then, woman “bible scholars” are collaborating with the Enemy in misinterpreting and misapplying the Word of God…
 
40.png
tjmiller:
Genesis 3:1-5 gives us a picture of the first two interpreters of God’s words: the Serpent, and the Woman - who both misinterpret and misapply the Lord’s command in Genesis 2:16-17.
The Serpent: Did God really say that? Why did He say that?
The Woman: God said this - but then she proceeds interpretively to add to what the Lord actually said.
The Serpent: Well, God didn’t really mean that, when He said it. Here’s what He really meant, but didn’t want to tell you in those words.

Thus, the Original Sin, by which the Human Race fell from God’s grace, and by which we all come into this world in a state of enmity with God, came about through the gratuitous interpretation of God’s words. (One might say also, through protestantistic “individual interpretation”.)
And today, as then, woman “bible scholars” are collaborating with the Enemy in misinterpreting and misapplying the Word of God…
Click to expand...
Thanks, I knew about this but it must have slipped my mind. That and I didn’t really consider angels into the equation when I phrased the question “who was the first person to interpret Scripture”. A better question would have been who the first human to interpret Scripture was… This has all been very interesting, I’ll make note to phrase future inquiries better.
 
To know who was the first “human interpreter” of Scripture, we would have to know when God’s word was first committed to writing.
The Bible does not tell us - nor does Tradition.
Based upon extensive biblical and historical studies, I personally believe that the first human being to write down Divine Revelation was probably Abraham, ca. 1800 BC.
The first “interpreters” of Abraham’s written word of God would therefore have been Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top