The following is an outline of an exegetical procedure recommended in this course. It will give you a guideline to follow in your work for this course, and especially for the exegetical paper. Five introductory comments are needed:

1. Exegetical method is a servant of the text, not its master. The questions that we ask always run the risk of pushing a text to provide answers which the text was not constructed to give. In the following outline, some questions will be more useful with some texts than with others. Though there is some logic to the order of these investigations, you may find that a different order "flows" better for you.

2. It is understood that in ministry settings, there may not be time for all of these steps in preparation for a sermon or a lesson. There are times when all the steps may not be necessary. You read some texts and their import seems obvious. In those cases, it may be sufficient to consider a few of the more basic aspects of the following process (ALWAYS including translation, outline, & context) to confirm, deepen, and fine tune your grasp of what this text says. There are other times, however, when the text may seem to offer you nothing, or when your first impressions are challenged by the initial study. In such cases, following more of the exegetical process may help you hear more clearly what this text is saying and doing, and reveal new possibilities for preaching and teaching. In your class work, you should pay attention to all of the steps involved. Exegetical method is a tool which must be learned and mastered. It may seem cumbersome at first, but practice and hard work will be rewarded by the ability to use a helpful tool when faced with the task of teaching or preaching scripture.

3. It is very important to recognize the exegetical methodology as a process, not simply as a collection of isolated tasks. What is discovered in one step should serve as the reason and foundation for what you do in following steps. The exegesis done through this process should "hang together" as a whole.An exegetical paper does not need to be divided up into separate sections for each of the steps listed below (in fact a more "narrative" description may be a helpful goal) and does not necessarily need to include something in each of these "slots" (please, don’t include information that makes no difference), but all of these aspects of the text should be considered in your study.

4. Exegesis is a discipline by which the interpreter is held accountable, and to provide for the text some protection from our privatistic views and rampant (and often self-serving) subjectivism. When we get to the end, we should be able to answer: "How did I get that idea from this text? Can I demonstrate to someone else why this is an appropriate interpretation of this text?"

5.Exegesis is ministry done for the sake of the church. It is a disciplined way of lingering with the text, of letting the text hold you, challenge you, and transform you. Such exegesis is done so that through your teaching and preaching, the community of faith may hear God's word more faithfully and more clearly, and so be transformed. It is for the sake of this ministry of exegesis that you are asked to practice and learn the art of interpretation.  Such an encounter with the texts is exciting, because it is done in the freedom of discovery, knowing that although our understandings are flawed and partial, God’s faithfulness is not. Such an encounter with the texts is risky, because the Holy Spirit may work repentance even within interpreters. And finally, such an encounter with the text calls for nothing less than the best of our tools and our efforts.

Note that under each section, you will find a link to a set of notes which provide an example of the kind of information you are looking for, using 2 Corinthians 4:7-15 as the text. These examples are not intended to be exhaustive for this text, but illustrative.

From each set of notes, there will be a link or set of links which will take you
to the section in the sample exegetical paper where that particular information is incorporated. To return to the "notes" from the sample paper, use you "Back" button.

In order to read the Greek included in some of the notes and in the sample paper, you will need to have the font "SP Ionic" added to the fonts on your computer. You can download either the Windows or the Mac version by clicking here.  Download and install font SPIONIC_.TTF. 

A. TRANSLATE the text. Identify the grammatical forms and functions of the words (especially of verb tenses, participles, genitives and datives). On difficult or ambiguous constructions, check a good reference grammar.
Go to notes

B. Are there any TEXTUAL VARIANTS that need attention? Even if you decide that the text itself should not be changed, the places where variants appear can often alert you to tensions or difficulties in the text that caused those variant readings to appear. You do not need to discuss all the variants; only those that make a difference because (1) some English translations adopt the "variant"; or (2) it helps to highlight a problem, ambiguity, or tension within the text.

Click here to find information and helpful websites dealing with textual criticism

Go to notes

C. COMPARE your translation with NRSV and a few other translations. Where are there significant differences? Are those differences caused by ambiguities in the text itself, different interpretations of words or grammatical constructions, attempts to convey different aspects of the Greek text? Do these differences highlight words or constructions that will need more attention (which may lead to "Key Concepts" below)?
Go to notes

A. What are the FORM and STYLE of this text? "Form" may be part of the typical "outline" of a hellenistic letter (e.g., "thanksgiving"), a rhetorical description (e.g., "forensic," "peroratio"), or another common form (here, see examples & resources on "Epistolary Forms" sheet). Then ask what the function of this form is; what is it supposed to accomplish? Is it to inform, rebuke, encourage, bless/curse, instruct? Are there first-century settings and uses of this form that affect how the text was heard? "Style" asks about how the purpose is embodied in the way the text is written; is it confrontational? Ironic? Conciliatory? What in the text lets you make that identification? Is there a recognizable structure (i.e., inclusio, parallelism, chiasmus, inferential chain, assonance, alliteration)? Does the author draw on "ethos" (his own character and authority), or "pathos" (the emotional response of the hearers), or "logos" (logical, scriptural, theological argumentation)? Given this form and style, how does the writer expect or want the hearers to respond (rhetorical criticism)? What has the author done with language, pace, rhythm which make this text likely (or unlikely) to work in that way? Here, whatever you might use to analyze literature or a speech can be used.
Go to notes

B. OUTLINE the text. The outline should not simply repeat the words of the text, but clarify the movement within the text. Pay attention not only to content, but to dramatic flow and tension. Where is the turning point or climax of the text? Are there dramatic tensions present (life/death, light/darkness)? Are there structuring words, phrases or constructions that give this text its shape and flow? With epistle texts, it may be necessary to clarify logical connections: premise, conclusions, reasons, supporting arguments, illustrations. How can you show these aspects in an outline? Can you reflect the "forms" and "style" you uncovered through the previous step within the outline? The outline should usually have 2-4 main headings, with appropriate subheadings under those. Do NOT rearrange the order of the verses for this! Your goal is to visually show what Paul’s churches would have heard as the structure and flow of the text.
Go to notes

C. While you work to outline the text, you should also consider whether the text assigned (by the instructor or by the lectionary) seems to be a single, complete PERICOPE to consider? Do the beginning and ending points of the assigned text seem logical? Is the designated text too short, excluding an vital part? Is it too long, spilling over into what should be considered as a different unit? If the unit is not appropriate, adjust it and exegete what you believe is the appropriate unit.
Go to notes

A. What is the literary CONTEXT for understanding this text? What happens immediately before and after this text (several verses) that may help us understand what this particular text is trying to accomplish (pay particular attention to connective words at the beginning and end of the unit)? How does this text fit into the larger story or argument (a few chapters), and connect what Paul has said earlier to what he will say after it? Where does it fit within the whole letter?
Go to notes

B. Are there KEY CONCEPTS that lie at the heart of this text (perhaps playing a pivotal role in the outline) which require further investigation? Are there polarities which provide the basic structure for the text? Which terms seem to be "loaded," and what kind of "freight" might they be carrying with them? Use a concordance to examine how (not simply where) these words are used in this letter or book (most important), and in other parts of the NT and hellenistic literature (perhaps important). In other words, do a "WORD STUDY."
Go to notes

C. Consider PARALLEL PASSAGES when they exist. Look at cross-references in your Greek NT or English Bible; look at Pauline Parallels. Where are (1) similar forms or (2) similar discussions found in the work of this writer? How is the use here related to what we find in the rest of the NT? The OT? Intertestamental and other hellenistic literature? Is there anything distinctive in this text that sets it apart from the parallels and that would indicate a particular emphasis or purpose? Are the commonalities due to consistent theology, similar context, similar goals? Note that if the "parallels" are based on form, this step may be closely tied to "Form and Style;" if the parallels are based on similar content, this step may be closely tied to "Key Concepts."
Go to notes

D. Are there aspects in the HISTORY and SOCIETY in which this text was produced which impact the meaning of the text? What assumptions are made by the writer and the readers which may no longer be a part of our "default" expectations? What can we know about the author and the first readers? What historical setting gave rise to this text? Are the other writings (investigate primary sources!) from the Roman world which help us understand the context for the text?
Go to notes

E. Has the author used any previously composed SOURCES, either from church tradition, from the OT, from intertestamental or other hellenistic literature? What has the author done with those sources? Is there any particular emphasis apparent in how the author has interpreted those sources?
Go to notes

F. Consult dependable COMMENTARIES. This is not only a way to fill in information you may have overlooked or been unable to find on your own, but also a way to remember that you are a part of the encounter of the whole church with this text; engage in the struggle along with your brothers and sisters. However, DO NOT consult commentaries before this point — it may cause you to conclude falsely that you're headed down the wrong road, and thus cut off fruitful and creative avenues of exploration. Remember also that no commentary should be read uncritically; reasonable commentators will disagree with one another. Your task is to discern and argue for which interpretation best accounts for the aspects of the text uncovered by your exegesis. When writing an exegetical paper, you should NOT have a separate section for "commentaries." Whatever help you find from these fellow students of the text will appear at appropriate points throughout your paper.

A. What would you identify as the PRIMARY IMPACT of this text? The statement of the primary impact should be no longer than one or two sentences, with a minimum of dependent clauses. It is not a summary of the content, but a statement of what your exegesis has shown to be at the heart of this passage. It should not be so general that it could apply to any Christian text ("God loves us" is probably too general to be useful here). It should be specific enough to express the particular concern of this text.
Go to notes

B. Where does the central thrust of this text INTERSECT with the life situations of your hearers? How is the meeting of human need and divine action in the text reflected in your setting? In what ways is the movement or response intended by the author needed today? Are there, within the lives and thoughts of your hearers, barriers to hearing the text? Where does this text appear in the lectionary? How has it been used/misused in the life and theology of the church? How will you teach/preach this text so that your hearers may experience its intent?
Go to notes