Restoration Ministries | home
by Jon Zens
_________________________________________________________________________________
When you boil down the many disagreements Christians have on various points of doctrine, it is obvious that certain hermeneutic assumptions account for the differences. Decisions that have already been made (presuppositions) will determine the direction of one*s interpretation.
It is imperative, therefore, that we realize the foundational character of our underlying assumptions. If our assumptions are wrong, or imbalanced, then our interpretations will be negatively affected.
It does not seem far-fetched, then, to conclude that the critical area of concentration must be our method of interpretation. What we bring to the text shapes our interpretation. J.C. Vos notes this phenomenon:
“Dr. Berkouwer shows that Roman Catholics and Protestants mutually misunderstand each other because each side uses its own presuppositions in examining the doctrine of the other side.” [1]
From this perspective, hermeneutics is everything!
Tremendous Ignorance
As Frederic Farrar looked back on centuries of Biblical interpretation, he had to conclude with “melancholy” that for the most part “past methods of interpretation were erroneous.“ [2]
Today, in spite of all the alleged Christianity that surrounds us, “our problem is not a Church immersed in the Scriptures and indifferent to current events, it is rather a Church largely ignorant of the Scriptures, allowing events to determine its message.“[3]
Using the Bible As A Wax Nose
The fact that professing Christians are able to make Scripture say whatever suits their fancy ought to be warning enough to us to be cautious in our handling of truth. Here are a few incredible, but common examples of using the Bible like a wax nose.
"'Victory,’ it is said, ‘will not come through the military.’ Statements like these simply are not consistent or based upon Biblical truth. Jesus Himself made it very plain, ‘No man can enter into a strong man*s house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man.’ (Mark 3:27) A strong military to maintain order and defend a country is an absolute essential to freedom.” (Carl McIntire in Christian Beacon, 4/29/71)
|
“As the (Civil) war progressed and the Southern armies receded, the Northern churches entered sections of the South and took possession of many Southern churches.... The pretext which the Yankees gave for this invasion was that it was missionary work.... The protests of the Rebels were met with an appeal to Scripture: had not Jesus commanded his followers to go ‘into all the world and preach the gospel’?” (Ray Abrams, Preachers Present Arms, p. 6)
|
“During the past generation, heirs of the Reformation have paid their respects to textual preaching.... but we have also seen how familiar texts can serve to confirm people in their prejudices and previous behavior.” (Richard Luecke, Theology Today, 35:2, l978, p. 175)
|
“In the parable of the mustard seed Jesus foretells the rise of great, human denominations, the lost emphasis on New Testament soul-winning and their decline.... [the parable] is the story of decline and failure, the perversion of the gospel, the slow, gradual forsaking of a New Testament plan of soul-winning as the main thing, and the growth of modern denominationalism.” (John R. Rice in Sword of the Lord, 4/19/68)
|
“When a husband grew weary of wiping dishes each night after dinner — not a ‘man*s job,’ he said — his wife found a verse to keep him next to the sink. It was 2 Kings 21:3 — “And I will wipe Jerusalem as a man wipes a dish.’” (Ralph Woodrow, Right & Wrong Ways to Use the Bible, 1972, p. 2)
|
The Free Enterprise Seminar brochure highlighted 2 Corinthians 3:17, ‘where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty’ with reference to civil freedom in America. However, this text in its setting has nothing to do with civil liberty (which can be lost), but has to do with gospel liberty (which cannot be taken away).
|
After wading through an intricate Dispensational argument about how the Jews would be established again in their land 2,52O years after the Babylonian captivity (based on a collation of Daniel 5:25; 7:25; Hosea 6:1-2; 2 Peter 3:8), Sakae Kubo observes, “It is all so arbitrary, the book follows no guidelines in the interpretation of the Scriptures. One can do anything he or she wants with the Bible.... It looks like the cart comes before the horse. You decide what you want to believe, and then you interpret the Scriptures to fit it.” (The Open Rapture, pp 16-17)
|
“As Scriptural justification to coerce people into ‘the faith’ by means of threats and torture, the Roman Catholic Church appealed to Luke 22:38, ‘Lord, here are two swords,*and Luke 14:23, ‘constrain them to come in* (Latin, compelle intrare).Old TestamentOld Testament The Reformers fared no better as they dipped into the Old Testament to justify the liquidation of ‘heretics* (Leonard Verduin, The Reformers & Their Stepchildren, pp. 42, 54, 65)
|
From such examples — and many others you know of — we can learn “to what astounding lengths do theologians sometimes go in their ambition to find Biblical warrant for their own ideas.“ [4] Great harm has been done to Christ*s cause by the “atrocious hermeneutics” of those who claim to be His representatives. [5]
But more importantly, to use the Bible arbitrarily and for one*s own ends is to incur the guilt of slander, not against another man, but against God. An aspect of slander is to report that a man said something that in fact he did not say. [6]
“Principles” Are Not Enough
Although isolating what seem to be “principles” of Biblical interpretation can yield some helpful facts, it is clear that books filled with good “principles” are not enough. Books and booklets containing “pointers” for understanding the Bible are legion, and some are much better than others. [7]
The majority of Bible-believers could theoretically agree on most of the critical “principles” on interpretation found in books. But such agreement obviously does not result in unanimity of interpretation. This drives us back to the centrality of presuppositions, for it is how principles are applied to the Bible that is critical.
Inerrancy Is Not Enough
Not only are “principles” not enough, but also it is not enough to cry “inerrancy.“ Inerrancy as a confession is worthless unless it is backed by obedience to Scripture. [An assembly] must come to the Scriptures having previously made the commitment to obey and follow as literally and completely as possible whatever leading may be discovered therein. (Searching Together, Spring, 1983)
The “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy” (1979) provides aOld Testament helpful foundation, but does not resolve critical hermeneutical issues. Many boldly say, “we believe the Bible from cover to cover,” but that does not answer how the Bible is to be interpreted.
“[For the Reformers] doctrine and discipline must be based on Scripture alone. The solution was to argue that the Bible was to be its own interpreter.” [8]
But this “solution” resolves little, for the Bible cannot be interpreted unless there are interpreters, and that is where the “problems” begin.
“HOW CAN I UNDERSTAND UNLESS SOMEONE GUIDES ME?”
Hermeneutics is Practical
“Hermeneutics” comes from the Greek word, hermeneuo. It means “to interpret,” “to expound,” or “to explain.“[9] Translated as ‘‘interpret,” it is used in John 1:38, 42, 9:7, 1 Corinthians 12:10, 14:26, and Hebrews 7:2. Another form, diermeneuo, is used in Luke 24:27, Acts 9;36, 1 Corinthians 12:30, 14:5, 13, 28.
Of special interest is Luke 24:27. Here, the risen Savior “explains the things concerning Himself” out of the Old Testament. The hermeneutic activity of Christ performed a clearing function for the listeners. [10] Jesus ‘‘interpreted” the Old Testament in a Messiah-centered way. “Hermeneutics,” then, must above all be Christ-centered.
This is further confirmed in Acts 8:30-35. The eunuch was reading Isaiah, but lacked understanding. Philip asks him, “Do you understand what you are reading?” The eunuch replies, “How can I unless someone explains it to me?” The verb used here is hodegeo. A person who is an hodegos is a “leader” or a “guide” (Matthew 15:14, 23:16, 24). The eunuch needed someone to guide him hermeneutically, to “show him the way.“ Philip, then, beginning with the Isaiah passage “preached Jesus to him” (Acts 8:35).
In this context, hermeneutic activity takes place in an evangelistic setting. God has promised to use “beautiful feet” to ‘‘guide” the lost into an understanding of the gospel (Romans 10:15). In Luke 24:27 and in the Corinthian passages, hermeneutics (“interpretation”) is related to the edification of the body.
All of this highlights the fact that the Holy Spirit*s work in hermeneutic activity is to exalt Christ (John 16:13-14), that the goal of hermeneutics is to help people find the kingdom and grow in it by means of “explaining” the Word (Acts 8:35), and that hermeneutic activity is necessary in order for the Word to be understood (2 Timothy 2:15). Frankly, much that goes on in the name of “hermeneutics” in academia is far removed from the practical, Christ-centered concept of “interpretation” in the New Testament.
____________________________________________________________________
Notes, “Hermeneutics is Everything”
[1] Review of “The Sacraments,” Westminster Theological Journal, 32:2, 1970, p. 217.
[2] History of Interpretation, 1886, pp. 8-9.
[3] F. Earle Ellis, “What Good Are Hebrew & Greek?,” Christianity Today, 5/26/72, p. 9.
[4] Verduin, Reformers, p 215.
[5] Verduin, p. 54. Cf. John Fry, The Great Apostolic Blunder Machine, Harper & Row, 1978, pp. 21-33, where eight (contradictory) types of preaching are listed that all claim to be “Bible (preaching).”
[6] Haddon Robinson, “Homiletics & Hermeneutics,” I.C.B.I. 1982, p. 156.
[7] Here are some recommended works on hermeneutics and interpretation:
– A.W. Pink, Interpretation of Scripture, Baker, 1979, very helpful.
– D.A. Carson, ed. Scripture & Truth, Zondervan.
– Louis Berkhof, Principles of Biblical Interpretation, Baker, 1952 dry principles.
– Gordon Fee & D. Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, Zondervan, 1982, excellent, perhaps the best available.
– Richard DeHaan, How to Better Understand the Bible, hermeneutics shaped by Dispensationalism.
– Cedric B. Johnson, The Psychology of Biblical Interpretation, Zondervan, 1983, outstanding study focuses on factors influencing interpreters.
– Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation, Baker, 1979 sober, helpful.
– James Sire, Old Testament Scripture Twisting: 20 Ways the Cults Misread the Bible, IVP, 1980, very helpful, should be applied to Bible-believers first, then to the cults.
– R.C. Sproul, Knowing Scripture, IVP, 1977.
– Willard Swartley, Slavery, Sabbath, War & Women Case Issues in Biblical Interpretation, Herald Press, 1983, heavy-duty but rewarding study, this is the book to read if you wish to be confronted with your own prejudices.
– Milton Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, Wipf & Stock Publishers, dated, a mass of information.
– Henry Virkler, Hermeneutics Principles & Processes of Biblical Interpretation, Baker, 1981, the chapter on “Historical-Cultural & Contextual Analysis” is especially helpful.
[8] WaIter Kaiser, Jr , “Meanings from God*s Message Matters for interpretation,” Christianity Today, 10/5/79, p. 32.
[9] J. Behm, Hermeneuo, et.al., T.D.N.T., II:661 ff.
[10] I am indebted to Richard Gaffin*s opening lectures on “New Testament Exegesis” (Westminster Seminary) for the thoughts in this section.
________________________________________________________