ABSTRACT This paper starts from the evident impact made by James Barr’s 1961 book The Semantics of Biblical Language on biblical interpretation generally. It then rehearses the main elements of Barr’s account, suggesting that three in particular are core concerns: the linking of the structure of language and thought to whatever degree; the rejection of the significance of etymology (or root meanings); and the rejection of the confusion between word and concept. A taxonomy is then offered of five different levels of how to assess the significance or otherwise of these concerns: in terms of specific examples, linguistic theory, relevance to texts, theological hermeneutics, and the subject matter of scripture. Granting some measure of success of Barr’s book on the first level (specific examples, though their limited range is noteworthy), the remaining levels are then explored, and in each case it is suggested that Barr’s achievement is limited to the criticism of poor examples of interpretation, rather than the clarification of principles of general applicability to the interpretation of scripture. It is suggested in conclusion that there is no rationale for continued deference to The Semantics of Biblical Language as any kind of gatekeeper to the pursuit of biblical interpretation today.
Richard S. Briggs (Tue,) studied this question.