Biblical hermenuetics is more than trying to slap a Jewish hat on and trying to read through "Jewish eyes" (as not all of Jewish tradition or interpretation is automatically correct, according to the Tanakh and the NT) nor is there a such thing as a Greek paradigm (not properly designated Aristolean, BTW) that is formed out of a vacuum and unique to the Greeks. Let's be frank, Jewish interpretive method is heavily Hellenized and vice-versa. There is no "pure" interpretive tool when it comes to historical schools of interpretation.
While we can certainly say that there is a Socratic logic and a rather different Talmudic logic, that is less than helpful in hermenuetics as the question will always remain as to the role of human logic in heremuetics to begin with. Logic both Socratic and Talmudic is usually the culprit in heresy and error.
While I would agree that there is an internally mostly consistant logic in the Bible, I would not agree that one needs to try to put a "Jewish" spin on one's interpretation.
Why? Simply because the internally consistant logic of the Bible is satisfactory within itself. It's internally consistant. That's why one compares scripture to scripture, using a simple passage to clarify a difficult one. While some here might erroneously think that's "Greek" thinking, that simply could not be true if the Bible has a consistant logic and author within itself. In fact, it's a process demonstrated in the Talmud as well as in the Church!
So we can say that there is a "distinctly Jewish logic in the Bible" (not necessarily in the Talmud though!) in doing so we are merely recognizing the consistant internal message of the one author.
So here's the bottom line. The Bible is perhaps not merely to be understood as a Jewish text, but rather the revelation that made Judaism. We can and must try to understand the authors and their culture and try to interpret it in a "Jewish" light....but that's a very Western and contemporary way to look at it. Irony anyone?
Very astute points as it concerns the complexity of the matter
I'd add onto that even outside of the Jewish thought and the Greek thought BOTH being present within the scripture, you also had ideologies from other cultures that were present - Babylonian thought being present when it came to the era of Daniel, Persian thought when it came to how Jews and others understood the concept of laws/kingship (as with Esther and Mordecai with the King in being unable to reverse decrees) and others.
We can see the same dynamic of different forms of logic present in Judaism as it concerns Cannanite thought when seeing what was present even in the Mosaic Law in light of Hammurabi's code.
One can go no further to see evidence of God's revelation of common knowledge in mankind than in the examination of the
Code of Hammurabi ( )?
Of the several law codes surviving from the ancient Middle East, the most famous after the Hebraic Torah is the Code of Hammurabi, who was the sixth king of the Amorite Dynasty of Old Babylon. It is best known from a beautifully engraved diorite stela now in the Louvre Museum which also depicts the king receiving the law from Shamash, the god of justice.
This copy was made long after Hammurabi's time, and it is clear that his was a long-lasting contribution to Mesopotamian civilization. It encodes many laws which had probably evolved over a long period of time, but is interesting to the general reader because of what it tells us about the attitudes and daily lives of the ancient Babylonians. While the precise date of Hammurabi's Code of Laws is disputed by scholars, it is generally believed to have been written between the second year of his reign, circa 1727 BCE, and the end of his reign, circa 1680 BCE, predating the Hebrew "Ten Commandments" by about 500 years. Because of this, it has often been debated on whether or not the 10 Commandments were "stolen" by Moses.....and of course, this is not necessarily true. But the fact that COMMON revelation would be seen in another culture outside of a Jewish one is something to consider.
Again, though It pre-dated MOSAIC Law by centuries, it cannot be ignored that many of the things in the Mosaic Code are identical to what Hammurabi was able to write down/recognize as basic standards of morality.
For more information, one can
go here or here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FanQabF_rf8
The knowledge of God and His ways have always been there from the beginning, thus not unique to Israel and not unusual to see it reflected in different manners within any pagan society.
And even going further than the era of Moses, there are others who've noted the ways that even the Book of Job was not always seen as a JEWISH text. In fact, it was seen at one point as a reflection of Arabic literature - which would be connected in many ways to Hebrew culture since both Hebrews and Arabs are Semitic groups in their background (as well as blood brothers via Ishmael and Isaac). But the distinctly Arabic feels to the poetry within the text have been something that many have wondered on for some time.
For more reference, one can investigate “Job and Early Arab Monotheism" or the book entitled
Arabs in the Shadow of Israel: The Unfolding of God's Prophetic .... In the book by Dr. Tony Maalouf, I appreciated his noting how “in the East” and Arabia refers to the location of the descendants of Abraham through Hagar and Keturah...and that in the book of Job, Job is described as “the greatest man among all the people of the East.” The author did amazing documentation on how Job was likely is a descendant of Esau and Basma, daughter of Ishmael (Genesis 36:9-33).
And outside of Job (as it concerns logic), we also have to deal with how
Proverbs 30 and 31 were written by the Arab sages, Agur and Lemuel - Ishmael's culture and the logic they brought with them was incorporated into Judaic culture and thus we cannot say that the Jews didn't rely on the logical systems of others when it came to being Israel. Despite the fact the God gave Solomon wisdom, Solomon seemed to be a student of Philosophy/General Revelation He has given to all----saved or NOT (such as with the sciences, medicine, and other things)....& many of the things he wrote down in Proverbs which people turn to DAILY for wisdom may not be directly from Believers in GOD/EXPLICITLY Jewish concepts
Regarding the book of Proverbs, which contains many practical expressions of general truth rooted in God, there were many points where He did not author information but simply collected/compiled the information for what it was and didn’t hesitate to place the information out before others because the authors may not have been explicitly FOLLOWERS of the Lord. Again, one can see
Proverbs 22:17 through
Proverb 24:34, in which he collected/shared 77 proverbs, and godly principles most likely spoken by simple wise men).
And the words of Agur,
Proverbs 30:1-33, which are a collection of proverbs written by an unknown sage. Though there's no mention of him being EXPLICITLY A believer (for even those not saved can have GENERAL REVELATIOn about GOD), it was enough that he was a simple student of wisdom/knowledge at the time of SOLOMON (
I Kings 4:30-31..
Much of the wisdom in Proverbs 22:17 to 24:34 bears close affinities to Egyptian wisdom documented from other sources..
So focusing on distinctly Jewish logic as if it's superior to all others or not already present in other forms of logic outside of Jewish culture, we're not really dealing with logic as the Tanak sees it.
