Interpreting Scripture/Interpreting Law

Scholars have frequently noted the similarities between interpreting scripture and interpreting law, especially interpreting a constitution. There are, of course, significant differences as well. The field of "biblical" hermeneutics-theories of interpretation-has a long history, as does the field of legal hermeneutics. Moreover, much has been written on the relationship between religious interpretation and legal interpretation.This Essay is not meant to provide even a basic overview of these rich and diverse fields of inquiry. Rather, the focus is on some of the vexing problems facing those who utilize what this Essay refers to as "dogmatic" approaches to interpreting religion or law. The focus here will be on biblical interpretation and constitutional interpretation. Specifically, I will compare biblical literalism with textualism and originalism. As will be seen, these approaches suffer from problems of translation both figuratively and literally (in the case of biblical literalism in the United States).