Few things are more
rewarding and few things are more dangerous than interpreting divine Scripture.
The Scripture itself informs us that those who misinterpret it do so to their
own destruction. (2 Peter 3:16) Paul commanded Timothy to be diligent to present
himself approved to God, accurately handling the word of truth. (2 Tim. 2:15)
The idea is that responsible biblical interpretation begins with an eagerness
to present oneself approved to God. Hence, the driving force behind biblical
interpretation is an eagerness for and a pursuit of biblical sanctification.
Additionally, the single greatest failure in the general ranks of the Church is
a lack of interpretive method. The lack of methodology in biblical
interpretation leads to a profound lack of discipline and focus and serves as
one of the greatest contributors to interpretive failure. This post offers what I believe is an excellent method for how every interpreter should approach the text of Scripture. Much of the content can be found in the book, Invitation to Biblical Interpretation.
The art and science
of biblical interpretation is not without challenges. The interpreter brings
four realities to the task of interpretation that represent serious peril. The
interpreter has a sin nature that at every turn is inclined to rebel against divine
truth. Any interpreter would be foolish not to recall the words of Jeremiah the
prophet, "The heart is more deceitful than all else and desperately sick;
who can understand it?" (Jer. 17:9) There is nothing more deceitful than
the human heart! My heart is the most deceitful of all deceiving things! I
cannot listen to my heart because my heart is not trustworthy. Second, the
interpreter must deal with the reality of salvation history. God has revealed
himself to humanity in real space and time. Failure to recognize the
distinctive characteristics of that revelation tends to lead to illegitimate
forms of criticism that impede the work of the Spirit in our hearts through the
text itself. In such circumstances, Scripture becomes little more than an
intellectual fascination. Additionally, the interpreter must deal with the
literary aspects of Scripture. Divine revelation comes to us via the written
text. This text contains foreign and ancient languages, genres, and devices
with which the interpreted must become familiar. Finally, the interpreter must
deal with the theological reality of the revelation that is divine Scripture.
God is communicating divine truth with eternal consequences and there is
nothing I can think of that is more significant than that. The interpreter, to
show themselves approved to God, must responsibly deal with these four
realities: sin, history, literature, and theology.
The reality of sin
The psalmist David
said, "Your word I have treasured in my heart so that I might not sin
against you. (Ps. 119:11) Sin has a profoundly blinding effect on the would be
interpreter. It is ever present and the interpreter must maintain the attitude
that the possibility of perversion is a constant threat, especially in handling
divine truth. A serious threat to responsible interpretation is the
interpreter's personal presuppositions. In many ways, sin is responsible for
numerous presuppositions. If the interpreter neglects to deal with their heart
biblically, and to take sin seriously, the presuppositions they carry to the
interpretive process will only make matters worse. The process for biblical
change begins with the confrontation of the Spirit and the Word. The Scripture
first threatens us, and specifically, threatens the sin we so dearly long to
keep. Hence, there is a built-in incentive for the interpreter to interpret
irresponsibly. This incentive is inescapably part of the sin nature. In summary
then, there is no shortcut in the preparation process for biblical
interpretation. The scholar has as much work to do here as the Sunday school
teacher. There is no difference. Responsible biblical interpretation begins
with the interpreter's process for dealing with their heart, for recognizing
the sin that is there, and proceeding with great caution and with great
anticipation for what God is speaking in the text.
The reality of
salvation history
The historical
dimension of divine revelation is one that has been over-emphasized by some
interpreters while others have managed to hardly give it a wink and a nod.
Interpreters that focus all their time on the historical aspects of Scripture
to the neglect of its literary or theological aspects often end up with little
more than a shell. Modern interpreters, ignoring their sinful presuppositions,
focusing on the historical aspects of Scripture and treating it like any other
book tend to purge it of its supernatural aspects. This approach diminishes the
idea of divine revelation, inspiration, and authority. In addition, it has the
regrettable effect of undermining the credibility and trustworthiness of the
biblical account.
The literary reality
of Scripture
The literary reality
of Scripture is one of its most demanding aspects in terms of intellectual
skill. Literary analysis is an art and a skill that requires a high degree of
focus and energy. However, literary acumen also presents a threat to the
message and purpose of Scripture not to mention its nature. A mere literary
approach to Scripture has led many to ignore the historical dimensions of the
text, and as such, has resulted in Scripture being treated like any other book.
Kevin Vanhoozer labels it "aesthetic theology." This results is more
knowledge about the text rather than knowledge of what the text is about. The
responsible interpreter seeks both, knowledge about the text, and knowledge of
what the text is about. The text is divine communicative action with
perlocutionary intent. It is not enough to acquire literary knowledge about the
text. One must also know what the text is about. This moves us in the direction
of authorial intent. God moved to the author but He also moved the author with
the intention of producing change in the audience. An overly literary approach
to Scripture has led many to Derrida's deconstructionism and the
reader-response approach to interpretation. The goal of finding the author's
meaning, divine or human, is replaced with the reader's own subjective idea of
what the text means to and for them. Adjudication of theological ideas and
interpretive methods dissolves, sinking into a sea of relativism.
The theological
reality of Scripture
"Thinking
biblically is a matter of reading Scripture along
the grain of the text. It is less a matter of "drawing out"
discrete theological propositions than of "drawing together"
scriptural material from across the canon." [Vanhoozer, Remythologizing
Theology, 189 quoting Reno, Biblical Theology & Theological Exegesis, 404]
Hence, the theological reality of the case is that divine revelation takes
place in real space and time, and is captured in real human language. The
interpreters failure to account for the historical and literary realities of
Scripture is no less damaging to the text than the aforementioned errors. When
theology ignores the historical reality of revelation, the resurrection can
easily be reduced to myth and regeneration can be "recast as the result of
an existential encounter with God occasioned by the reading of Scripture.
[Kostenberger/Patterson, Invitation To Biblical Interpretation, 78]
"The rank and
importance of Biblical Hermeneutics among the various studies embraced in
Theological Encyclopedia and Methodology is apparent from the fundamental
relation which it sustains to them all. For the Scripture revelation is itself
essentially the centre and substance of all theological science. It contains
the clearest and fullest exhibition of the person and character of God, and of
the spiritual needs and possibilities of man." [Terry, Milton. Biblical
Hermeneutics, 21]
All Scripture is
inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for
training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for
every good work. (2 Tim. 3:16)
No comments:
Post a Comment