BIBLICAL TYPOLOGY AS A WORK OF HERMENEUTIC SITUATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS

Annotation

The article attempts to consider the method of biblical typology as one of the possible ways to implement the hermeneutic situation of consciousness (HSС). In addition to the inductive path of studying the figurative interpretation, which is based on data from the history of culture and theology, it is proposed to use the deductive path of its analysis, which is designed to understand the essence of other- speaking way of extracting meanings. For this, such a property of consciousness as ergotopy is postulated, which implies the existence of any contents of consciousness as a place, a situation and an object of consciousness, and their reciprocal conversion. The following examines the composition of the HSС and those acts of consciousness that turn the noema into the subject of other- speaking interpretation. Then, the consequences for the HSС, obtained in a deductive way, are combined with an inductive study of the empirical history of biblical typology, as a result of which the characteristic signs of a figurative interpretation are determined, which form the “noetic loading” of this method. Among such features were figurative translation, christocentrism, tiered interpretation and a special form of “extending” chronotope.

Keywords

allegoresis, biblical typology, hermeneuma, hermeneutic situation of consciousness, hermeneuton, phenomenology of text, ergotopy of consciousness

Literature

1. Bahtin, M. M. (1986). Problema teksta v lingvistike, filologii i drugih gumanitarnyh
naukah. Opyt filosofskogo analiza [The problem of text in linguistics, philology, and other
humanities. Experience in philosophical analysis]. In: Bahtin, M. M. Estetika slovesnogo
tvorchestva. Moscow, Iskusstvo Publ., pp. 297–325 (i n Russian).
2. Danielu, Zh. (2013). Tainstvo budushchego: Issledovaniya o proiskhozhdenii biblejskoj
tipologii [Sacrament of the Future: Research on the Origins of Biblical Typology]. Moscow,
Moskovskaoy Patriarhii Russkoj Pravoslavnoj Cerkvi Publ., 448 s. (in Russian).
3. Dann, Dzh. (2015). Edinstvo i mnogoobrazie v Novom Zavete: issledovanie prirody
pervonachal’nogo hristianstva [Unity and Diversity in the New Testament: Exploring the Nature
of Original Christianity]. Moscow, Izdatel’stvo BBI, 523 s. (in Russian).
4. Irinej Lionskij (2010). Protiv eresej. Dokazatel’stvo apostol’skoj propovedi [Against
heresies. Proof of Apostolic Preaching]. Saint Petersburg, Oleg Abyshko Publ., 640 s. (in Russian).
5. Korsunskij, I. N. (1885). Novozavetnoe tolkovanie Vethogo Zaveta [New Testament’s
interpretation of the Old Testament]. M., Snegiryov Publ., 327 s. (in Russian).
6. Lotman, Yu. M. (2010) Vnutri myslyashchih mirov [Inside the thinking worlds]. In:
Lotman YU. M. Semiosfera. Saint Petersburg, Iskusstvo- SPb Publ., pp. 150–390 (in Russian).
7. Nesterova, O. E. (2006). Allegoria Pro Typologia. Origen i sud’ba inoskazatel’nyh
metodov interpretacii Svyashchennogo Pisaniya v rannepatristicheskuyu epohu [Allegoria Pro
Typologia. Origen and the fate of allegorical methods of interpreting scripture in the early
patristic era]. Moscow, IMLI RAN Publ., 297 s. (in Russian).
8. Savrej, V. Ya. (2011). Aleksandrijskaya shkola v istorii filosofsko- bogoslovskoj mysli
[Alexandrian school in the history of philosophical and theological thought]. Moscow,
KomKniga Publ., 1008 s. (in Russian).
9. Sidorov, A. I. (2008). Osnovnye tendencii razvitiya i harakternye cherty drevne khristianskoj i rannevizantijskoj ekzegezy (II — nachalo III vулщм) [The main development trends
and characteristic features of the ancient Christian and early Byzantine exegesis (II — beginning
of III centuries)]. In: Rannekhristianskaya i vizantijskaya ekzegetika. Moscow, IMLI RAN Publ.,
pp. 3–25 (in Russian).
10. Tisel’ton, E. (2011) Germenevtika [Hermeneutics]. Cherkassy, Kollokvium Publ,
430 р. (in Russian).
11. Shcherbakov, F. B. Vtoroj povorot Linkeeva oka: prolegomeny k fenomenologii antichnoj
filosofskoj allegorezy [The second turn of Linkeev’s eye: prolegomena to the phenomenology of
ancient philosophical allegoresis]. In: Platonovskie issledovaniya, 2022, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 51–76
(in Russian).
12. Shcherbakov, F. B. (2024). Mif kak situaciya soznaniya (nekotorye predvaritel’nye
soobrazheniya) [Myth as a situation of consciousness (some preliminary considerations)].
In: Vostok–Zapad: puti kul’turnogo dialoga: sbornik materialov Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoprakticheskoj konferencii, 17 aprelya 2024. Saint Petersburg, Politech Publ., pp. 243–248
(in Russian).
13. Shcherbakov, F. B. (2024). Filosofskaya allegoreza kak deyatel’nost’ i situaciya soznaniya
[Philosophical allegoresis as an activity and a situation of consciousness]. In: Vir hermeneuticus:
Sbornik statej k 60-letiyu professora R. V. Svetlova. Saint- Petersburg, pp. 155–178 (in Russian).
14. Boyarin, D. (2010). Origen as theorist of allegory: Alexandrian context. In: The
Cambridge Companion to Allegory. Ed. by R. Copeland and P. T. Struck. Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, pp. 39–56 (i n English).
15. Crouzel, H. La distinction de la “typologie” et de l’allegorie. In: Bulletin de Literature
Ecclesiastique. Touloze, 1964, no. 65 (i n French).
16. Louth, A. (1983). Discovering the Mystery: An Essay on the Nature of Theology. Oxford,
Clarendon, 154 p. (in English).
17. Lubac H. de. «Typologie» et “allegorisme”. In: Recherches de sciences religieuse. Paris,
1947, iss. 34, pp. 180–226 (in French).
18. Hanson, R. P. (1959). Allegory and Event: a Study on the Sources of Origen’s Interpretation
of Scripture . London, SCMm, 400 p. (in English).
19. Pepin, J. (1976). Mythe et allegorie. Les origins grecques et les contestations judeochretiennes. Paris, Etudes Augustiniennes, 587 p. (in French).
20. Smart, J. (1961). The Interpretation of Scripture. London, SCM, 317 p. (in English).

The research was carried out at the Immanuil Kant Baltic Federal University at the expense
of a grant from the Russian Science Foundation No. 22–18–00214