Parker’s Reviews > Covenant Continuity and Fidelity: A Study of Inner-Biblical Allusion and Exegesis in Malachi > Status Update

It’s also difficult in many cases to know which book precedes the other. Or there are complicated instances like the Twelve, where you have to ask if the author is the prophet, their contemporary scribe, and/or whoever shaped the collection. So then the object of study ceases being the texts but rather getting behind the texts into historical reconstruction of the text and its author. For those who want to follow the apostles’ hermeneutics , I think this approach has broken down

I think you and I are mostly agreed. I still think the "older" (read: newer) method has plenty of value (not least as an "extra layer" of epistemic certainty about divine authorial intent), so I don't know that I would say it's "broken down." And even in a number of uncertain cases, I doubt if historical reconstruction is impossible. But you're certainly right that it effectively breaks down in certain cases.

My particular musing here is mostly that I think a modern appropriation of apostolic/patristic exegesis may end up looking far more like a post-modern "reader-centered" hermeneutic than somebody like a DA Carson might prefer (but less than somebody like a James KA Smith might hope).