F.	A more elaborate series of steps for interpretation

Do not make this outline a rigid framework.  The following is idealized.  When you gain experience, you will automatically integrate steps that are separated here for the sake of clarity.  And you will be able to judge when you can skip some steps because in your case they are not necessary.
Do the experiment where a student is asked to read aloud, then paraphrase.  Analyze the various things that are going on.

1.	Preliminary acquaintance with the text
0.  Memorize the passage (and some context)

		The value of memorization
(1)	
(2)	You have instant access to the other parts of the passage.
(3)	You can have the passage soak into your life before publicly expounding it.  People in our culture are weak on meditation, and this is one way to do it.
(4)	When the time with the concordance runs out, you must rely on memory.
(5)	Sometimes you will not have access to a Bible.
(6)	Hints on memorizing
(a)	
(b)	Use ESV
(c)	Review and review.  Perseverance is the hard part.
(d)	Realize that it is not going to be easy.
(e)	Do whole passages.
(f)	Start with a favorite book.  Ephesians is the Bible’s “Shorter Catechism.”

b.	Define the limits of the passage
c.	Pray for insight and for courage and humility to understand and present the passage faithfully.  Determine to apply it to yourself and to obey.

		You may confront the temptation to expound pet doctrines, to show cleverness in the depth of your insight.  You can get things out of a passage that no one else can.
Begin obeying as soon as you understand.  Don’t neglect the feeding of your own soul.  Scientific exegesis can become a snare, an excuse to defer obeying indefinitely.

d.	Read the book in which the passage occurs.  Try to understand the main purposes, setting, and themes of the book as a whole.  Read and re-read the chosen passage in the larger literary context of the book.
e.	Try to make connections.  View the whole of Scripture from the standpoint of this passage, and this passage from the standpoint of the whole of Scripture.  Strive for a maximum number of different perspectives.

		We will talk more about using perspectives later.

2.	Exegesis in the original setting (Observation and Interpretation in uniqueness)
a.	Learn as much as you can about the speaker, the audience, and the circumstances of the utterance.  (Historical background.)

		Otherwise, you are like someone listening to the middle of a conversation.
God was concerned for those people back then.
One of the afflictions of evangelicalism is an antiintellectual short-circuit of application that uses the Holy Spirit as an excuse for laziness about really understanding God or understanding other people at other times.

b.	Translate Greek or Hebrew of the passage, identifying the form and meaning of every word.
c.	Make a decision on any textual variants.
In NT, Nestle-Aland, 26th ed.
In OT, Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia.  Earlier Kittels are not as good.
d.	Check out difficulties with reference tools: Greek or Hebrew lexicons, grammars, Bible encyclopedias, and atlases.
(1)	Grammars
Greek grammar: Blass-Debrunner-Funk or Burton (Wallace secondary)
Hebrew grammar: Gesenius-Kautsch-Cowley
Aramaic grammar: Rosenthal
(2)	Lexicons
Greek: Bauer-Arndt-Gingrich
Hebrew-Aramaic: Brown-Driver-Briggs
(3)	Bible encyclopedia
New Bible Dictionary (best one volume)
or new International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (5 vols.)
(4)	Atlases: Beitzel, Moody Atlas
e.	Try to identify the genre (“form”) of the text and of larger sections in which it is embedded.
f.	Outline the passage using whatever forms of outlining are most promising.
3.	Interrelations with other passages  (Interpretation in relationship)
a.	Use cross references and other resources to locate passages most similar or most contrasting to the given passage.
ASV, NASV, RSV, NIV, or ESV cross reference Bible.  Nestle NT has very good cross references.
b.	Pick two to five key words and note their use through OT and NT.  Do the same for semantically similar Greek and Hebrew words.  You are looking for real, “conceptual” simiilarities rather than all uses of the same word.

NT: Moulton-Geden or Englishman’s
OT: Even-Shoshan or Englishman’s
LXX: Bagster.  Hatch-Redpath is definitive but expensive.

c.	Identify theological issues raised or solved.  Compare the passage with other passages dealing with similar issues.

d.	Reevaluate exegesis in the light of biblical canon already available to the original readers of the given passage.
e.	Summarize the message of the passage in a single declarative sentence.  Try to make the summary precise enough so that a person familiar with the Bible might gues the passage just from the summary.  Try to do this without using proper names (which often makes the task too easy).

			   This forces you to strive for unification.  Find the major point.  Sermons are often too diffuse.
 \m 
f.	Check exegetical commentaries, noting whether you have considered all the alternative interpretations or all the arguments for a given interpretation.

			   See bibliographies for recommendations.  For series, note ICC (NT only), NIC, New International Greek Testament Commentary, Word, Tyndale, Anchor, Hermeneia.
If you don’t have a fortune, try buying one or two for each book, the best on that book.

4.	Role of the passage in the history of redemption  (Interpretation in the dynamic unfolding of God’s purpose)
a.	Locate the passage in its epoch in the history of redemption, and determine its contribution to revelation at that point.

(1)	
(2)	If we are not sure, how is it appropriate across several epochs?

b.	Do a diachronic analysis of the earlier biblical sources and later biblical uses of this passage, and its application to various audiences.

			   Purpose: see the developing relevance of a passage. 
 \m 
c.	Brainstorm for further connections.  How does the passage proclaim Christ?
d.	Assess how differences in redemptive-historical epoch and/or cultural situation will affect current application.

			   Are we required not to sow a field with two kinds of seed?  To follow Jewish engagement practice?
 \m 
5.	Preparation of presentation (“Application”)
a.	In interaction with biblical theologies and systematic theologies, formulate three or four applications to our time, and to yourself.
b.	Depending on your circumstances, consult with other people about their circumstances, needs, and ways in which they see this passage as relevant to them.
c.	Crystalize the applications in a one-sentence summary, along the lines of 3.e., but now containing the word “you.”  (This forces you to think out the theme of the passage onthe level of application.)
d.	Think about your audience, and adapt the application to them.  What should they do differently because of this passage?  Give them “homework” if possible.
e.	Choose a principal application.  Then work back from the application to an outline of your speech, with the audience constantly in view.  Decide whether following the text consecutively or topically would be more effective.  Organize the outline so that each major section is an answer to a question your audience might well ask about the principal topic.  Try to let the audience know the purpose of each section before you are well into the section.
f.	Fill in the outline in detail.
(1)	Write whole sentences, not phrases.
(2)	Make applications of every major point and as many minor points as you can.
(3)	Include illustrations.
(4)	Prune ruthlesslly.  Mark but do not destroy material that will not be used.  Divide into several distinct sermons or speeches if appropriate.
g.	Let the outline sit for six months before speaking from it.  During that time collect further insights, illustrations, parallels, etc.
		Note: resist the temptation to go to commentaries before stage 3.f., unless you get into trouble with a special difficulty (e.g., 2.d.).  Otherwise, you will come to depend on the commentaries rather than wrestling with the text.  I do not recommend the use of homiletical commentaries at any stage.  After you are all done preparing, you can compare your presentation with a published sermon and learn something about differences in style.  But in general, it is better to read great preachers’ sermons on texts on which you are not speaking.  Then you see how it is done, without losing the important stage where you personally digest the text and wrestle with how to apply it in a fresh way to your audience.

Elaboration of some steps in grammatical exegesis

See Fee, New Testament Exegesis, 60-83,and Stuart, Old Testament Exegesis, for even more elaboration.

Under 2b and 2d above:

(1)  Identify Greek cases or Hebrew construct relations and determine their function.
(2)  Parse each verb and determine the function of each tense/aspect and mood (Greek) or stem (Hebrew).
(3)  Determine the force of each preposition, particle, and conjunctive word.
(4)  Determine whether a particular focus or emphasis is imparted through special word order.
(5)  Determine the function of relations between clauses (in Greek, function of participles, infinitives, and subordinate clauses beginning with a conjunction or relative pronoun; in Hebrew, function of infinitives, nonverbal clauses, clauses with the verb not in first position, waw-consecutive, relative clauses, clauses beginning with a conjunction).
(6)  Identify constructions that might have more than one possible meaning.  Using advanced grammars and lexicons, as necessary, make a decision as to which alternative is correct.

Under 2f above:
	Rhetorical analysis, as discussed in Part X of the course, usually yields the most insight.  But at times you may find that you profit from motific analysis, analogical analysis (Part X), a grammatically-focused analysis similar to sentence diagramming (see Kantenwein, Diagrammatical Analysis), or writing a “sentence flow” structure to indicate relationships of modification, repetition, parallelism, and other structural connections (see Fee, New Testament Exegesis, 60-76).  An analysis of still more intricate kind can be seen in Poythress, “Hierarchy in Discourse Analysis.”

(1)  Diagram the structure of each sentence.
	(a)  Identify subject, predicate, and object(s) in each clause, and put them into the main slots in a sentence diagram.
	(b)  Attach other material to these main slots to indicate relations of modification.
	(c)  Connect clauses together by lines indicating relations of modification.

(2)  Construct a “sentence-flow” analysis of the text in the original.
	(a)  Write out your text word by word, preserving the word order.
	(b)  Begin a new line with each new clause.  Draw a line to indicate relation of modification to preceding material.  If the clause is subordinate to a preceding clause, use indentation to indicate the relation.
	(c)  Begin a new line for each significant new phrase, and indicate any relation of modification to preceding material.  Indent beyond the level of the clause to which the phrase is attached.
	(d)  Indicate repeated words or ideas using underlining, color-coding, connecting lines, or other means of your devising.
	(e)  Watch for tail-head linkages (last part of one section linked to first part of following section), ring structures (opening similar to closing), parallelism, chiasm, shifts in time, place, and actors in narrative, special formulaic phrases.  Mark what you find.
	(f)  Group parallel and thematically unified material together using brackets or other notation that you prefer.
	(g)  Watch for any other structural connections, and add further notations to indicate what you find.

(3)  Construct a rhetorical analysis.