up vote 7 down vote favorite

Our current title, "Biblical Hermeneutics", has a lot going for it:

  1. Covers many of the questions we ask if you take hermeneutics to mean "applied hermeneutics".
  2. Quietly excludes people who don't have some inkling what hermeneutics might consist of and includes people who know all about this somewhat obscure term.
  3. Includes the word "Bible".
  4. Conveys a technical sense, which is what we are striving for.

But it's not ideal. Unless you have a properly trained spell-checker, you will likely misplace an e or two and the thing certainly doesn't roll off my tongue. And in no way is the title clever or evocative as are "Ask Different" or "Seasoned Advice" or even "StackOverflow".

What's worse, we do a lot of things that aren't really Hermeneutics, such as exegesis, translation, and criticism. Really, we are focused on all sorts of analysis of the Biblical texts.

So can you think of a better title?

share
Related question from earlier on – Jack Douglas♦ Nov 8 '11 at 9:48
Similar question about the url – Jack Douglas♦ Nov 8 '11 at 9:49
17 months later, I don't think the title is working the way this question says it is. (It probably was then; we've changed.) On the specific points: 1. Most of our questions are about exegesis (as noted in the question), and I don't know if people will get from "herm" to "applied herm". 2. It does quietly exclude those people, but it also quietly excludes some people we actually want (many non-C experts don't know the word). I'm here only because I saw it on Area 51 and Googled the word; others on Mi Yodeya shrugged. 3. No comment. :-) 4. Because 1 isn't working this can't either, IMO. – Monica Cellio Apr 10 at 13:53

8 Answers

up vote 5 down vote

Biblical Studies

A site is defined by an area of expertise, and in my estimation, the area we are trying to target is referred to as Biblical Studies. The Wikipedia definition of Biblical Studies matches nicely with our purported aim of welcoming "Jewish, Christian, Atheist and other viewpoints." Moreover, the term is diverse enough to include the various parts of this site from textual criticism, to exegesis, to philosophy of hermeneutic, philology, history, etc...

share
I can't make up my mind how to vote on this—it's a good name, but the weakness is that it does not have 3 of the 4 positives of BH mentioned in the question (to varying degrees perhaps) – Jack Douglas♦ Apr 10 at 8:04
1  
@JackDouglas true, but the current title has the same weakness. – Monica Cellio Apr 10 at 12:47
1  
"Biblical Studies" to me screams "theology"... which is clearly not the main focus of the site. – Kazark Apr 22 at 20:38
@Kazark in academia, "Biblical Studies" is generally the opposite of theology in many schools. So much so that a Harvard Ph.D. wrote a book entitled "The Death of Scripture and the Rise of Biblical Studies." – Dan O'Day Apr 22 at 20:40
@DanO'Day It depends on your background. At my school, a degree in Biblical Studies was the theology degree. – Kazark Apr 22 at 20:41
I'm referring to secular academia. But yes, I see your point. – Dan O'Day Apr 22 at 20:42
@Kazark Can you think of any other titles that would convey that we strictly study the bible academically, as devoid of doctrine as possible? Or am I indulging a pipe dream? :P – Dan O'Day Apr 22 at 20:56
@DanO'Day You ought to know by now that I'm not the correct person to ask that question as I don't actually conform to that ideal myself... ;) – Kazark Apr 22 at 21:01
@Kazark In my personal life I also don't approach the text that way. I actually employ allegorical exegesis through the lens of church history. But here I like having a place to get objective (as much as possible) information on the text. Everywhere you turn someone has an agenda to teach a specific doctrine. I like it when the only agenda is to present the best possible reading and translation. – Dan O'Day Apr 22 at 21:08
up vote 4 down vote

Biblical Hermeneutics


I don't think the name needs changing. The benefits you list are significant and easily outweigh the spelling difficulty.

Also, textual criticism really is part of the field of hermeneutics, the bits of translation we do depend on our hermeneutical expertise and the exegesis is just applied hermeneutics. In short, I think it's the best banner we can come under.

share
3  
I agree that this seems to fit the bill. Admittedly, it doesn't completely cover everything, but it's short and simple and let's people know that this is about the Bible and a place for Scholars. – Richard Nov 8 '11 at 11:43
up vote 1 down vote

Biblical Hermeneutics and Exegesis

Biblical Hermeneutics really only encompasses part (in fact, the smaller portion) of our site's scope. Most of the questions on this site fall under the category of exegesis.

It has been argued that exegesis is no more than applied hermeneutics. I would say rather that hermeneutics is the study of how we exegete and methods to use in exegesis, but I would stop short of saying that exegesis is "field hermeneutics" or "applied hermeneutics". To use an analogy, I would liken this to referring to thinking as "applied psychology" or baseball as "applied anatomy".

It is true that a few edge cases remain that are not entirely covered by the title. Translation and Biblical Criticism (higher and lower) are two areas that have been identified as being in scope. That said, we are discussing a title, not a scope document, so if we can at least capture the majority of cases, I think we will have accomplished our goal.

share
2  
I like this because it is still a technical name, but short; it's still a scholarly name, but covers most of our questions. – Richard Nov 8 '11 at 11:45
I tipped my hand in the question: I'd like something shorter if possible, not longer. And I think of it more like the Philosophy site, which mostly uses the tools of Philosophy. Few questions evaluate or create new Philosophy as we don't (or shouldn't) break new ground in Hermeneutics. We are an unusual field to have separate names for theory and for practice. – Jon Ericson♦ Nov 8 '11 at 16:56
I spent a while not understanding what this site meant by hermeneutics because of all the exegesis questions. hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/q/36/208 includes answers that suggest that hermeneutics is very narrow (maybe not viable?). So if we mean exegesis too, it would help to say so. (Note: I'm not anything like an expert, so I may not be your target audience.) – Monica Cellio Nov 10 '11 at 15:27
@MonicaCellio I agree with you completely. However, I have to wonder how many "experts" will really know the difference between hermeneutics and exegesis. Also, would they be uninterested in the site if it only has "hermeneutics"? Or will we really draw more people by including "exegesis"? I don't really know either. I think people will come to this site because of the questions, not really because of the title. – Richard Nov 11 '11 at 13:37
@Richard, good question, and maybe we should try to ask the experts we do have here (in some place more visible than this comment thread). As a non-expert I'm way more interested in practical applications (exegesis) than theory for theory's sake, and have sometimes Googled exegesis but never hermeneutics, but I don't know how typical that is. – Monica Cellio Nov 11 '11 at 15:32
I would like to remove the upvote I cast for this in November 2011 in light of (a) how the site played out and (b) a better, later suggestion. – Monica Cellio Apr 8 at 1:21
Monica, I agree--I've upvoted Biblical Studies myself – Ray♦ Apr 8 at 1:50
up vote 0 down vote

Biblical Texts

One suggested URL is biblicaltexts.stackexchange.com, which suggests the title Biblical Texts. It's shorter and more comprehensive, but not very clever.1 And it's possible we'll lose the distinctive technical suggestion we get from using "hermeneutics".

In some ways, focusing on the texts themselves better helps us avoid doctrine than Hermeneutics does. If someone asked a question based on, say, the New World Translation2, answers could focus on the advisability of using that particular text, its flaws (and features), and the issue of translator bias. I think the odds of getting these sorts of questions might slightly increase if we changed the title, but there also a chance other (more likely to be welcomed) questions will also be asked.

Footnotes:

  1. Maybe it's better in Latin: Textus Biblicus.
  2. I had to look it up: it's published by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society and distributed by Jehovah's Witnesses. Critics point out that it has a doctrinal bias, but also represents much good scholarship.
share
2  
What distinguishes this from doctrine? Particularly if we get some people asking about doctrine created by the New World Translation? – Richard Nov 8 '11 at 11:46
I like the Biblical is at least a bit more "experty" than Bible, and this very concisely covers the scope that this site deals with. We are dealing with biblical texts, including critical questions, interpretation, etc., and not doctrine. You captured this is a word. – Ray♦ Nov 8 '11 at 14:22
3  
@Richard - doctrine follows (partly?) from text. So as long as the discussion starts from and focuses on the text, isn't that the point of the site? – GalacticCowboy Nov 8 '11 at 15:33
@Richard: I agree with GalacticCowboy and I updated the answer so you can change your vote. ;-) – Jon Ericson♦ Nov 8 '11 at 17:17
@GalacticCowboy Doctrine comes from text, yes. But doctrine is strictly off-topic for this site. Having said that, how much doctrine we allow is still an open question, in my mind. – Richard Nov 8 '11 at 17:36
@Richard - That was actually my point. Even in the discussion of NWT, as Jon ninja edited ;) in the post, it's on topic for this site if the discussion is about the text and not about their doctrine. – GalacticCowboy Nov 8 '11 at 17:39
@GalacticCowboy Aah, OK. I misunderstood. Yeah, re-reading it, it makes a lot of sense and I agree. – Richard Nov 8 '11 at 17:41
This my #2 pick, after "Biblical Studies" – Dan O'Day Apr 22 at 20:41
up vote -3 down vote

Sola Scriptura

Latin for "Scripture Alone". This captures our focus on Biblical Texts, and minimizes doctrine.

The one major downside is that there is a doctrine by this name, and it can be viewed as a slant against groups who do not allow that scripture is a sufficient source of knowledge.

share
3  
Yeah. That was on top of my list, but I think the doctrine entailed in the name is too big a hurdle. I'm afraid us Protestants (and especially Reformed Theology/Calvinists) have used this term as an ax against our fellow believers too long for it to be a neutral title. Otherwise, it's perfect. ;-) – Jon Ericson♦ Nov 8 '11 at 18:12
A slight variation might avoid the doctrine problem: Solum Biblica. (But I'd really like a Latin expert better than Google translate if we decide on a Latin site name.) – Jon Ericson♦ Nov 9 '11 at 17:10
up vote -4 down vote

Canonical Questions

Is this clever or just confusing?

I notice that even the "clever" names don't show up in the canonical list of sites. So we have Cooking and Apple there, but Seasoned Advice and Ask Different in the banners once you get to the sites. I can't even tell if there are more "clever" titles out there without clicking and loading each of the sites I'm not already familiar with.

Perhaps we can go that route with one name on the master list and another in the banner?

So: definitely confusing. ;-)

share
4  
One word: Ubuntu. – Caleb♦ Nov 8 '11 at 7:33
6  
It's clever and confusing :) – Jack Douglas♦ Nov 8 '11 at 9:35
It wasn't until the 8th (or so) reading that I realized you were suggesting "Canonical Questions" as a title... thought you were commenting on "the use of canonical questions in meta". So clearly I was confused. Although it is very clever! I suppose in the context of a site title some of the confusion would be mitigated. – Ray♦ Nov 8 '11 at 14:18
I have to +1 because I like the idea of a clever title, like several of the other sites have (server fault, seasoned advice, ask different...) – Ray♦ Nov 8 '11 at 14:18
I'm glad to know I at least can do clever once in a while. ;-) – Jon Ericson♦ Nov 8 '11 at 17:18
up vote -5 down vote

Hermeneutics and Exegesis of Biblical Texts

share
up vote -8 down vote

Biblical Hermeneutics, Exegesis, Translation and Criticism

share
the kitchen sink proposal :) – Jack Douglas♦ Nov 8 '11 at 9:54
I agree that these are the four areas we have seen. I'm curious if there are any other areas that we aren't thinking of, though. (historical interpretation?) – Richard Nov 8 '11 at 11:44
@Richard Historical interpretation neatly falls under hermeneutics proper. Many hermeneutical approaches specifically look at historical interpretations as part of the discernment process. – Caleb♦ Nov 8 '11 at 13:39
@Caleb Oh, I agree. It just seems like there's always some group of topics that's overlooked. – Richard Nov 8 '11 at 14:03

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged