The Semantics of Scriptural Language: Rethinking the Impact of the Work of James Barr

ABSTRACT This paper starts from the evident impact made by James Barr’s 1961 book The Semantics of Biblical Language on biblical interpretation generally. It then rehearses the main elements of Barr’s account, suggesting that three in particular are core concerns: the linking of the structure of language and thought to whatever degree; the rejection of the significance of etymology (or root meanings); and the rejection of the confusion between word and concept. A taxonomy is then offered of five different levels of how to assess the significance or otherwise of these concerns: in terms of specific examples, linguistic theory, relevance to texts, theological hermeneutics, and the subject matter of scripture. Granting some measure of success of Barr’s book on the first level (specific examples, though their limited range is noteworthy), the remaining levels are then explored, and in each case it is suggested that Barr’s achievement is limited to the criticism of poor examples of interpretation, rather than the clarification of principles of general applicability to the interpretation of scripture. It is suggested in conclusion that there is no rationale for continued deference to The Semantics of Biblical Language as any kind of gatekeeper to the pursuit of biblical interpretation today.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Theological Studies
Published
2026-01-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/flag004
Primary Topic
Biblical Studies and Interpretation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Semantics of Scriptural Language: Rethinking the Impact of the Work of James Barr

Richard S. Briggs
The Journal of Theological Studies
Biblical Studies and Interpretation
article

The Semantics of Scriptural Language: Rethinking the Impact of the Work of James Barr

Richard S. Briggs
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper starts from the evident impact made by James Barr’s 1961 book The Semantics of Biblical Language on biblical interpretation generally. It then rehearses the main elements of Barr’s account, suggesting that three in particular are core concerns: the linking of the structure of language and thought to whatever degree; the rejection of the significance of etymology (or root meanings); and the rejection of the confusion between word and concept. A taxonomy is then offered of five different levels of how to assess the significance or otherwise of these concerns: in terms of specific examples, linguistic theory, relevance to texts, theological hermeneutics, and the subject matter of scripture. Granting some measure of success of Barr’s book on the first level (specific examples, though their limited range is noteworthy), the remaining levels are then explored, and in each case it is suggested that Barr’s achievement is limited to the criticism of poor examples of interpretation, rather than the clarification of principles of general applicability to the interpretation of scripture. It is suggested in conclusion that there is no rationale for continued deference to The Semantics of Biblical Language as any kind of gatekeeper to the pursuit of biblical interpretation today.

The Journal of Theological Studies
Durham College (CA)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
Biblical Studies and Interpretation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.