re: #571 Guanxi88

What it amounts to is the attempt to read the text as the text wishes to be read, as it has been read and understood by its primary users and guardians, and, in general, to extend to the “fact” of revelation the same courtesy and consideration the anthropologists extend to the “facts” of mana, totem, and taboo.

What makes you think a textual approach can’t do that? Any textual approach obviously includes an appreciation of the audience and circumstances under which it was written. And, see my post immediately above yours.