In my last two posts I briefly described what I believe to be an appropriate hermeneutical scheme for proper biblical interpretation. Or, at least, a scheme that makes sense to me. Hermeneutics as it has oft been said is both an art and a science, and this is indeed true. One of the advantages of a literary/covenant-historical/typological hermeneutic is that is preserves this art and science of interpretation. (Science here should be read as "rules.") Hermenuetics is a science insofar as things like Hebrew and Greek grammar and syntax are understood, and the basic facts of history, e.g., there actually was a Pharoah named Ramses. It is an art insofar as the Bible's literary aspects are taken into account and perceived by the reader. There are no hard and fast rules for things like themes, puns, humor, and even typology.

One further advantage of the proposed scheme, which is hardly a novel idea, is the Trinitarian framework that it suggests. The literary aspect would seem to correspond to the Son, who is the Word; the typological aspect would seem to correspond to the Spirit, who made the Word flesh. Remember we said that typology is both literary and covenant-historical and seems to be what moves from one to the other, hence the Word becoming "historical/incarnate" by the power of the Holy Spirit. Lastly, the covenant-historical aspect would seem to correspond to the Father, who speaks the Word throught the breath of the Spirit and tells His-story.

This also has implications for how biblical study works and is made profitable for us.