Updated on 28-01-2002

IMMANUEL BAPTIST BIBLE COLLEGE

Biblical Hermeneutics

Lesson 1 Lesson 2 Lesson 3

Lesson 1

A GENERAL INTRODUCTION:

There he goes a flash across the heavens - Mercury the messaengers of the gods.
Also known as the god of science, invention, eloquence, speech, writing and art.
His Greek name is Hermes. Now look in Luke chapter 24:27

"And beginning with Moses and all the prophets. he EXPLAINED to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself." (Luke 24:27)

Explained (NIV) Interpreted (AV) the Greek word is DIERMENEUO. DIA means through,
give a rough breathing to "E" and we have the exact word from which our English word HERMENEUTICS is derived HERMENEUO. A word used by Plato. Sacred Hermeneutics is the science and art of Biblical Interpretation.

HERMENEUTICS IS:-

    1. A science because it is guided by rules within a system.
    2. An art because of the application of the rules.
    3. By skill and not mechanical imitation.

HERMENEUTICS is usually studied with a view to the interpretation of literature produced in the past. The special task is to remove the distance and differences between the author and the reader.
In the study of the Bible, it is not sufficient that we understand the meaning of Secondary authors. Moses, Isaiah, Paul, John etc. We must learn the mind of the Holy Spirit.

1] THE PRIMARY NEED.

    1. That God has spoken in Holy Scripture is the very heart of our faith - without this certainty we are left with that very dubious thing called HUMAN KNOWLEDGE God has spoken! But what has He said? This is the primary and basic need of hermeneutics to discover what God has said in scripture; to determine the meaning of the Word of God. It is of no profit to us if God has spoken and we do not know what He has said!
    2. We need a correct method of interpretation so as not to confuse the VOICE OF GOD with the VOICE OF MAN. Because Scripture has not been properly interpreted many strange things have crept into the church and cults.

2] THE SECONDARY NEED.

We need to bridge the gap between our minds and the minds of the Biblical writers.

    1. LANGUAGE. Bible was written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. The English language is analytic in structure. The sense of the sentence depends largely on word order "the rat ate the cheese". Greek is an agglutinative language. You can move the words about and not change the meaning for meaning is not dependent on word order but on word endings, hence "the cheese ate the rat". You cannot have a word for word meaning of the NT.
    2. CULTURE GAP. Until we can recreate and understand the cultural patterns of the various Biblical periods we will be handicapped. Knowledge of marriage customs, economic practice, military systems, legal systems, agriculture all help.
    3. GEOGRAPHY. We need to know about the difference of Israel to Egypt. Towns, rivers, mountains, lakes, the fertile crescent etc.
    4. HISTORY. History is the plot of scripture. We need to know about the 400 years between the gospels to begin to understand the gospels. The PAX ROMANA (Roman Peace). The provinces of Asia have a history that helps us to understand Paul's travels (see Paul Treveller and Roman Citizen by Sir William Ramsey)

A SPECIFIC INTRODUCTION.

1] Assumptions.

We come to the text believing in its divine inspiration. This involved UNDERSTANDING the CANON OF SCRIPTURE. The textual critic is not adding or taking away but determining what was the original wording. This is a very complicated and difficult task.

2] Definitions.

Hermeneutics applies to the general science of linguistics and meaning. Seeks to formulate particular rules. Stands in the same relationship as a rule book does to a game. The rules are NOT THE GAME but the game is meaningless without the rules.

3] Qualifications.

"In order to appreciate and use the Bible, the reader of it must himself have the the same spirit which enabled its writers to understand their revelation of God and to record it. The Bible is a record, but it is not a dead record of dead persons and events, but a record inspired by the living Spirit who uses it to speak to men now... It is the medium through which the living God now makes himself known. But to find in it the Spirit of God the reader must himself have that Spirit" - Marcus Dods.

    1. The reader must be born again John 3
    2. The reader must have a passion for Gods Word and to know Gods Word.
    3. There must be a deep reverence for God. Meekness, humility and patience are prime virtues for understanding the Word.
    4. Utter dependence on the Holy Spirit to guide and direct. 'To pray well is to study well.'

NOTE: Do not confuse inspiration with illumination. The Spirit does not communicate to the mind of even a teachable, obedient and devout Christian any doctrine or meaning of Scripture which is not contained already in Scripture itself. He makes men wise up to what is is written - NOT BEYOND IT.

4] Equipment.

    1. Hebrew and Greek text (latest editions)
    2. Standard grammars, lexicons of Hebrew and Greek.
    3. Concordances.
    4. Commentaries.
    5. Bible dictionaries and encyclopaedias.
    6. Bible atlas.

HISTORY AND PROTESTANT SYSTEM.

    1. DEFINITION OF HISTORY OF HERMENEUTICS. We must distinguish between the history of hermeneutics as a science and the history of hermeneutical principles. Science began in 1567 AD when FLACIOUS ILLYRICUS made the first attempt at a scientific treatment. The principles go back to EZRA.

We look for the answer to 3 questions.

    1. What was the prevailing view respecting scripture?
    2. What was the main method of interpretation?
    3. What qualifications were regarded as essential in an interpreter of the Bible?
    1. TWO COMMON MISTAKES.
    1. Provincialism = believing that the system in which one has been trained is the only system.
    2. Traditionalism = assumes that certain traditional or familiar interpretations are the only adequate interpretations.

*NOTES

The majority of the material in these notes are taken from `Protestant Biblical Interpretation' by Bernard Ramm. Published by W.A. Wilde Company (1956). `Principles of Biblical Interpretation ' by Louis Berkhof. Published by Baker Book House (1980). `Interpretation of the Scriptures' by Arthur W,. Pink. Published by Baker Book House (1977) `Interpretating the Bible by Wilfred Kuhrt. Published by Grace Publications Trust (1983). `Postcard from Palestine' by Andrew Reid. Published by St. Matthias Press (1989)

Lesson 2

[1] BASIC SCHOOLS OF INTERPRETATION.

There are many schools of interpretation but I have chosen five which I think are the most popular today and easy to understand.

    1. ALLEGORISM. This believes that beneath the LETTER (RHETE) or the obvious (PHANERA) is the REAL meaning (HYPONIA) of the passage. Allegory = extended metaphor. There is literal allegory which is intentional constructed by the author to tell a message under historical forms. Writers normally give a clue e.g. Pilgrims Progress. But we presume the document has a secret meaning (HYPONIA) and there are no clues then interpretation is very difficult.
    2. LITERALISM. This method accepts as basic the literal meaning of the sentence unless by virtue of the nature of the sentence or phrase or clause within the sentence that it is not possible e.g. Figures of speech, fables, allegories do not admit to literal interpretation. The spirit of literal interpretation is that we should be satisfied with the literal meaning of a text unless very substantial reasons can be given for advancing beyond literal meaning.
    3. DEVOTIONALISM. This places emphasis on the edifying aspects of Scripture, and interpretation with the intention of developing the spiritual life - SPIRITUALISM. Gives way to mystical experience was very popular in medieval period. Some are called PIETISTS. Not wrong to say average Christian reads the Bible in the devo- tional tradition i.e. for his or her own blessing and spiritual food.

      Two weaknesses
      a) Falls pray to allegorisation especially OT where the Primary meaning of the passage is obscured.
      b) Devotional interpretations may be a substitute for the req- uisite exegetical and doctrinal studies of the Bible.

    4. LIBERALISM. Rationalism in Biblical studies boils down to the fundamental assertion that whatever is not in harmony with educated mentality is rejected. reached its full tide in 19th Cent. Now most theological colleges have accepted this in full for part.
    5. NEO-ORTHODOXY. Neo = adding to. This was ushered in by Karl Barth at the end of World War 1. Brings together all kinds of bits and pieces. Part of this is EXISTENTIALISM = an anti-intellectualism, a philosophy of life based on the assumption that reality can only be lived but can never become the object of thought.


[2] THE PROTESTANT SYSTEM.

    1. Inspiration - The Foundation. With the Jews Protestants accept the inspiration of the OT. With the R.C.'s and Eastern Orthodox Church we accept the inspiration of the NT. We differ from the Orthodox groups in rejecting the Apocrypha. We differ from the classicists in that they have no inspired MSS.

Inspired documents give a new dimension.

    1. It has a moral or spiritual aspect.
    2. It is supernatural.
    3. It is a revelation - in accepting the full inspiration of scripture we sever company with all rationalism.
    1. Edification - The Goal. Along with inspiration we take the great purpose of the Bible. To produce a spiritual effect in the lives of those who read it. St. Augustine. "The Guide of interpretation was love. Love to God and love to man."

The Bible is not an end it is a means.

    1. It makes us wise to salvation.
    2. It benefits our Christian lives 2 Tim 3:15-17.

THE GOAL OF INTERPRETATION IS SPIRITUAL RESULTS IN THE LISTENERS

Lesson 3

THE HISTORIC PROTESTANT SYSTEM.

    1. LITERAL
    2. CULTURAL
    3. CRITICAL.

What does LITERAL mean?

IT IS NOT.

    1. Letterism = the exaggerated importance of the insignificant elements of grammar and spelling.
    2. Metaphysical or Philosophical = belief that words signify things directly and to express a given thought one and only one set of words may be used.
    3. Drab or flat in relation to the meaning of the Bible.

Think how do children learn to speak? We can create our own individual designation if we want to - we could say to someone "I must check my elephant to see if it is correct." Your friends would wonder if you were right in the head. You can call your watch an elephant if you want to but you immediately have problems commuicating with other. So -

The customary socially-acknowledged designation of a word is the literal meaning of that word.

So to interpret literally (in this sense) is nothing more or less than interpreting words and sentences in their normal, usual, customary, proper designation.
The major issue is not between a narrow, unimaginative, wooden literalism or a fanciful imaginative allegorical system. The basic issue is whether the Biblical documents are to be approached in the normal customary usual way in which people talk, write and think, or whether that level is only primary or preliminary to a second deeper level.

DEFENCE OF A LITERAL APPROACH.

    1. The literal method of interpretation is the usual practice in the interpretation of literature. We do this when we read any other book. Despite any deeper meaning we start to interpret literally.
    2. All secondary meanings of documents depend upon the previous meaning of these documents, namely upon their literal interpretation. Sowers do benefit from knowing something about farming. The Lion (in figurative use a symbol of strength) is derived from real lions. Incence (in figurative use a symbol of prayer - see Revelation 5:8) is derived from a sweet aroma that goes heavenwards.
    3. A large part of the Bible makes adequate and significant sense when literally interpreted. Great doctrines rest on literal understanding. Historical books make sense as history. Apart from parts of Revelation we should take all the Bible literally. It is important to stress that the literal interpretation of Scripture does not blindly rule out figures of speech, symbols, allegories and types.
      The literal meaning of a figure of speech is its proper meaning.
      See Hosea 7:8 "Ephraim is a cake not turned" in other words Ephrain is half baked!. The literal meaning is the intention of the metaphor.
      "I am the true vine" John 15:1. The literal meaning here is the intention of the imagery employed.
    4. The literal method is the necessary check upon the imagination of men. Some church practices are based on an allegorical interpretation of passages in the Old Testament, that have nothing to do with New Testament church practice. Some spiritualise the Lord's teaching no one knows where they are.

Here then is a proven method of control to stop men taking the Bible and making it mean anything they wish.

CULTURAL MEANS = The total ways, methods, manners, tools and institutions with which a given people or tribe or nation carry on their existence - this also includes their history.
Some church groups say "An inspired book requires an infallible interpreter" thus saying only the church can interpret. As more light was shed on the Bible men came to realise they had the laws of the understanding of lanauge. Many modern groups do not accept this and want to divorce the lanauge of the New Testament (common Greek) from its culture.

The Interpreter must study.

    1. Biblical geography - to try to interpret the Bible without a basic geographical understanding of Bible lands is like trying to watch a play with no scenery. A Bible Atlas is a must for any student of the Bible.
    2. Biblical history - from clay tablets and monuments, from inscriptions and papyri fragments ancient history is re-constructed. History with geography sets the stage of Biblical interpretation.
    3. Biblical culture - Culture is generally divided into two parts Material and Social.
      Material are things, tools, objects, dwellings, weapons, garments etc.
      Social is customs, practices e.g. marriage rites, burial rites, etc. etc.

CRITICAL MEANS = Any interpretation of Scripture must have adequate justification. The grounds of interpretation must be made explicit. The truest interpretations are those with the best justification.
Here we can appeal to history, grammar, culture, geography.
We must be careful of church dogma that says one thing when Scripture clearly teaches another. Water in John 3:5 is a good illustration. Some says this is baptism. The text is now closed up and there is no more room for study.

The Critical approach is opposed to highly personal interpretations. You may have heard a speaker say "Now this is my earnest conviction that....."
"I know scholars differ but it seem clear to me"
"I put away all books of human origin and read the pure word and the Holy Spirit showed me."

We know that devout God fearing men said the Lord would come before 1940. C>H> Spurgeon said "the church cannot even specualte which century."
Here is a very important question "Does the Holy Spirit tell one - one thing and - another, another?" In some circles there can be distressing pressure that if a man is yielded to the Holy Spirit the interpretation must be correct.

Keep in Mind

    1. The Holy Spirit gives nobody an infallible interpretation.
    2. Piety is a help to interpretation but not a substitute for knowledge, study and intelligence.
    3. We are all human and subject to human limitations - it is easy to follow your favourite Bible teacher without really checking what they are teaching.

The truest interpretations are those with the best justification.

"Finally, the critical spirit of interpretation cuts short all imaginative, fanciful and far-fetched interpretations. Many sermons have been preached on losing Jesus in the Temple. Jesus as the interpretation goes is our Saviour; the Temple is the place of communion; we, the people in the pew, are Jesus' parents; that trip home is our daily life; the failure to see if Jesus is in the caravan is our sin of assuming that Jesus is always with us apart from the spiritual exercises of the soul. Although soul-touching sermons are preached following such interpretation the method is absurd from the perspective of a sensible hermeneutics. Such treatment of Scripture boarders on trifling." Ramm.

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1