蘇遠泰. / 論文 (哲學碩士)--香港中文大學, 1999. / 參考文獻 (leaves 127-135). / 附中英文摘要. / Su Yuantai. / Lun wen (zhe xue shuo shi) -- Xianggang Zhong wen da xue, 1999. / Can kao wen xian (leaves 127-135). / Fu Zhong Ying wen zhai yao. / 致謝 --- p.i / 撮要 --- p.ii / 目錄 --- p.iv / Chapter 第一章 --- 緒論 / Chapter 1.1 --- 前言 --- p.1 / Chapter 1.2 --- 福音派的興起 --- p.3 / Chapter 1.3 --- 詮釋學的發展 --- p.11 / Chapter 1.4 --- (後)現代詮釋學對聖經解釋的影響 --- p.14 / Chapter 1.5 --- 小結 --- p.20 / Chapter 第二章 --- p.22 / Chapter 2.1 --- 前言 --- p.22 / Chapter 2.2 --- 方法的交代 --- p.22 / Chapter 2.3 --- 福音派的聖經觀評論 --- p.25 / Chapter 2.3.1 --- 聖經的權威 --- p.25 / Chapter 2.3.2 --- 上帝所默示的聖經 --- p.26 / Chapter 2.3.3 --- 聖經無謬誤 --- p.30 / Chapter 2.4 --- 福音派釋經學評論 --- p.34 / Chapter 2.4.1 --- 福音派徒的釋經特色 --- p.34 / Chapter 2.4.2 --- 以經解經 --- p.35 / Chapter 2.4.3 --- 尋找原意和穩定意義 --- p.37 / Chapter 2.4.3.1 --- 尋找歷史作者的原意 --- p.37 / Chapter 2.4.3.2 --- 存在著客觀穩定的意義 --- p.39 / Chapter 2.4.3.3 --- 個案討論 --- p.42 / Chapter 2.4.4 --- 解經與應用的二分趨向 --- p.46 / Chapter 2.5 --- 總結--作者原意和穩定意義背後的思維結構 --- p.48 / Chapter 2.5.1 --- 現代主義的思維結構 --- p.49 / Chapter 2.5.2 --- 「在場」的思維結構 --- p.50 / Chapter 第三章 --- 福音派的聖經觀和釋經學與基要派的比較 --- p.52 / Chapter 3.1 --- 前言 --- p.52 / Chapter 3.2 --- 巴雅各評基要派 --- p.53 / Chapter 3.3 --- 巴雅各評基要派的聖經觀 --- p.55 / Chapter 3.4 --- 巴雅各評基要派的釋經 --- p.60 / Chapter 3.5 --- 比較香港福音派與英美基要派的聖經觀和釋經學 --- p.63 / Chapter 3.6 --- 結論 --- p.65 / Chapter 第四章 --- （後)現代詮釋學對福音派聖經解釋的挑戰 --- p.67 / Chapter 4.1 --- 前言 --- p.67 / Chapter 4.2 --- 作者已死 --- p.68 / Chapter 4.2.1 --- 一個重要的作者原意？ --- p.68 / Chapter 4.2.2 --- 上帝所默示的聖經 --- p.70 / Chapter 4.2.2.1 --- 距離 --- p.71 / Chapter 4.2.2.2 --- 語言 --- p.73 / Chapter 4.2.2.3 --- 被默示的聖經 --- p.74 / Chapter 4.2.3 --- 意義的產生 --- p.76 / Chapter 4.2.4 --- 小結 --- p.78 / Chapter 4.3 --- 播散的經文意義 --- p.79 / Chapter 4.3.1 --- 從現實看經文意義的播散性 --- p.80 / Chapter 4.3.2 --- 經文意義的播散與共識 --- p.82 / Chapter 4.3.2.1 --- 延異 --- p.82 / Chapter 4.3.2.2 --- 意義的播散與共識 --- p.84 / Chapter 4.4 --- 結論 --- p.87 / Chapter 第五章 --- 香港福音派解釋聖經的別個選擇一一特雷西的 談話模式 --- p.90 / Chapter 5.1 --- 前言--解決的問題 --- p.90 / Chapter 5.2 --- 特雷西論宗教經典 --- p.91 / Chapter 5.3 --- 特雷西的宗教經典詮釋模式 --- p.93 / Chapter 5.4 --- 對香港福音派釋經提一個建議 --- p.97 / Chapter 5.5 --- 結論 --- p.101 / Chapter 第六章 --- 總結 --- p.103 / Chapter 6.1 --- 本文的結論 --- p.103 / Chapter 6.2 --- 本文的不足與限制 --- p.104 / 附錄一：滕近輝牧師談聖經權威與釋經 --- p.107 / 附錄二 ：「華人福音派的釋經特色」訪問記錄 --- p.109 / 參考書目 --- p.127

This thesis explores and explicates the relationship between rhetoric and hermeneutics in two separate contexts: Jewish and Christian hermeneutic traditions, and secular philosophical hermeneutics. The impetus for this division is an analysis of Kierkegaard’s work, Fear and Trembling, which contains interpretations of the story of Genesis 22, the binding of Isaac; this event is referred to in the Jewish tradition as the Akedah. Kierkegaard’s own position as a Christian, philosopher and poet situate him on the dividing line between Christian and Jewish hermeneutics, as well as secular philosophical hermeneutic positions. To show these connections, the thesis undertakes two necessary literature reviews: a review of the current theoretical positions on the status of meaning, interpretation, and how rhetoric and hermeneutics intersect; and a review of the history of interpretations of the Akedah in Christian and Jewish traditions. Out of the first review come three separate and general categories of secular hermeneutics: intentionalist, phenomenological, and deconstructive. Within each of these positions is a different understanding and application of rhetoric. Similarly, the second review reveals differences between Jewish and Christian hermeneutics which contain separate understandings and applications of rhetoric. Kierkegaard’s own interpretation is situated within these contexts. Finally, modern Jewish responses to Kierkegaard are examined to further explicate the differences between Jewish and Christian hermeneutics as well as the separate philosophical positions. This is done through an analysis of Levinas’ and Derrida’s separate critiques and appropriations of Kierkegaard’s interpretation of the Akedah in Fear and Trembling. The conclusion drawn from these reviews and analyses is that intentionalist hermeneutics has the most comprehensive understanding and application of classical rhetoric, which in turn makes intentionalist hermeneutics the most capable of preserving the possibility of rhetorical agency.

This thesis explores and explicates the relationship between rhetoric and hermeneutics in two separate contexts: Jewish and Christian hermeneutic traditions, and secular philosophical hermeneutics. The impetus for this division is an analysis of Kierkegaard’s work, Fear and Trembling, which contains interpretations of the story of Genesis 22, the binding of Isaac; this event is referred to in the Jewish tradition as the Akedah. Kierkegaard’s own position as a Christian, philosopher and poet situate him on the dividing line between Christian and Jewish hermeneutics, as well as secular philosophical hermeneutic positions. To show these connections, the thesis undertakes two necessary literature reviews: a review of the current theoretical positions on the status of meaning, interpretation, and how rhetoric and hermeneutics intersect; and a review of the history of interpretations of the Akedah in Christian and Jewish traditions. Out of the first review come three separate and general categories of secular hermeneutics: intentionalist, phenomenological, and deconstructive. Within each of these positions is a different understanding and application of rhetoric. Similarly, the second review reveals differences between Jewish and Christian hermeneutics which contain separate understandings and applications of rhetoric. Kierkegaard’s own interpretation is situated within these contexts. Finally, modern Jewish responses to Kierkegaard are examined to further explicate the differences between Jewish and Christian hermeneutics as well as the separate philosophical positions. This is done through an analysis of Levinas’ and Derrida’s separate critiques and appropriations of Kierkegaard’s interpretation of the Akedah in Fear and Trembling. The conclusion drawn from these reviews and analyses is that intentionalist hermeneutics has the most comprehensive understanding and application of classical rhetoric, which in turn makes intentionalist hermeneutics the most capable of preserving the possibility of rhetorical agency.

In this thesis I examine the rectoral address of both Martin Heidegger and Hans-Georg Gadamer to articulate their vision of education as well as the role the university plays in this vision. As a student of Heidegger, Gadamer departs from a similar conceptual ground. However, Gadamer parts way with Heidegger when he emphasizes the role of prejudices in understanding. This subtle distinction equips Gadamer’s hermeneutical project to encounter the role of the American University flexibly. I argue that by viewing both of these addresses alongside their historical context we not only gain a nuanced understanding of Gadamer’s departure from Heidegger but we also gain an important turn in the hermeneutical project. Because Gadamer emphasizes prejudices as a condition of understanding, his hermeneutical project necessitates an inquiry into the historical circumstances that gave rise to the questions he sought to address. His emphasis on the historicity of understanding effectively allows us to test which aspects of the hermeneutical project are viable for the American university. I argue that while many aspects of Gadamer’s philosophy of education are broadly aligned with many American institutional goals, he does not address the issue of race in higher education. I conclude by arguing that if the hermeneutic project is to move beyond Gadamer’s historical circumstances, and apply viably to any American context, then it must deal with the problems of racism as an everyday occurrence.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 1994. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves [392]-401).

Thesis (Ph.D.) - University of Glasgow, 2008. / PhD thesis submitted to the Faculty of Arts, Dept. of Theology and Religious Studies, University of Glasgow, 2008. Includes bibliographical references. Print version also available.

Thesis--Heidelberg. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. i-x).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Logos Evangelical Seminary, 2008. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 157-164).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Aberdeen University, 2009. / Title from web page (viewed on Dec 2, 2009). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (D. Min.)--Logos Evangelical Seminary, 2008. / Vita. Description based on Microfiche version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 157-164).