Hermeneutics

The Reformed Baptist Seminary

Mark Chanski

1
2
 THE REFORMED BAPTIST SEMINARY

Syllabus for HERMENEUTICS

Instructor - Mark Chanski

I. Hermeneutics - Introduction and Definition
R. 1-22 B. 11-13 M. 3-19

II. The History of Hermeneutics

R. 23-92 B. 14-39 M. 20-53

III. The Foundational Presupositions of Reformed Hermeneutics

R. 93-113, 195-214 B. 40-66 M. 80-98

IV. Grammatical Interpretation

R. 113-148 B. 67-112 M. 99-113 (skim 114-158)

V. Historical Interpretation
R. 149-162 B. 113-132 M. 159-177

VI. Theological Interpretation

R. 163-184 B. 133-140, 157-166

VII. Special Hermeneutics

A. Typology
R. 215-240 B. 140-148 M. 236-279

B. Parables
R. 276-288 M. 199-235

C. Prophecy
R. 241-275 B. 148-157 M. 280-305

D. Narrative

E. Poetry and Wisdom

M. 323-337

VIII. Miscellaneous Hermeneutical Issues

A. Application
M. 356-368 R. 185-200

B. Hermeneutics and Science

R. 201-214

C. Textual Criticism
(Handout)

D. Tools
R. 19-22 (Handout)

E. Good Habits
M. 375-382
Readings - Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation (R) *Read 500 Total Pages
Berkhof, Principles of Biblical Interpretation (B)
Mickelsen, Interpreting the Bible (M)

3
Reformed Baptist Seminary - Hermeneutics – October 2008
Notes assembled and delivered by Mark Chanski

I. Introduction and Definition

Introduction - See Syllabus - Discuss Requirements and Grading - Reading 10%; Exam 90%
*Lectures – content and interaction (percolation)

I. What is Hermeneutics? - Definition

A. Its Basic Meaning (SW)
1. Etymology - Closely related to Name 'Ermos - The God of Speech (Acts14:12) - Barnabas (Zeus), Paul (Hermes) “gods come dn”
- Original Root? - eraw - to speak

2. New Testament Usage - Related Words

a. "Translation" Theme (Bulk)
1. Jn1:38 - Rabbi (which "translated" means teacher)
2. Jn1:42 - Cephas (which is "translated" Peter)
3. Jn9:7 - Siloam (which is "translated", Sent)
4. Acts9:36 - Tabitha (which "translated" is called Dorcas)

b. "Interpretive" Connotation - TDNT - "express in words"

1. Heb7:2 - Melchizedek by the translation, King of Righteousness
2. 1Cor14:5,13,16,26-28 - Interpretation of Tongues; 12:30 same
3. Clearest instance of Interpretive explanation vs Translation - Lk24:27:
"And beginning w/ Moses and all the Prophets, He explained to them (diermneuw) the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures."
*Our Model Text - see Lk 24:32 - so "open" dihnoigen “explain” the Scriptures (by HS) - Our hearers experience their hearts
burning within. – kindling of truth, set aflame by HS

B. Its Functional Description

1. Definition - The science of establishing the principles, methods, and rules needed in the interpretation of written texts.
- The science of Interpretation - any document Modern or Ancient – Sports Page, Constitution, Plato, DSS, Note from Teacher
th
- Principles unto a meaningful conclusion – 5 amendment “no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property” -> Abortion!
2. Clarification - Hermeneutics has to do with "interpretation" or "exegesis". It is not however the practice of exegesis, but the principles of exegesis
which are its focus.
a. Terry p19 - Science of Interpretation - "Exegesis is related to Hermeneutics as Preaching is to Homiletics or in general as practice to theory."
- Hermeneutics is theory.
b. Illustrate - Driver's Ed Manual vs Dntown drive; Med School Theory vs Bleeding + Groaning Emergency Rm Patient
- Chess Instruction Regulations vs Plan (Theory vs Practice)
3. Exhortation - Ramm p1:
"Hermeneutics is the science and art of Biblical interpretation. It is a science because it is guided by rules within a system; and it is an art
because the application of the rules is by skill, and not by mechanical imitation."
a. Manual of Principles - not make you skilled Exegete (Chess – Son Nathan) - Experience + Agility
b. Some Ways - better "caught" than "taught" - Our congregations + Diet of sound Preaching vs Hermeneutics Class
- Development of skill and discernment - as child learns to speak - observation vs grammar book (rote)

C. Its Position in the Theological Encyclopedia

1. Major Divisions - Pyramid - *drawing
e. Practical Theology - Homiletics, Ethics, Pastoral Theology Carnal Christian – Savior vs Lord
d. Systematic Theology Antinomianism
c. Historical Theology J. N. Darby
b. Biblical Theology Dispensationalism
a. Exegetical Theology Romans 6:14
2. Exegetical Divisions – Abraham Kuyper

4
 a. The Books of the Bible
1. Canonic – what books rightly constitute Bible
2. Isagogics - Bible Intro, Prolegomena, Author, Date, etc.
b. The Text of the Bible
1. Biblical Philology- Language (Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic)
2. Textual Criticism - (MT, TR, Eclectic) - Majority, Critical – Hebrew, Greek
3. HERMENEUTICS
4. Exegesis
c. The Contents of the Bible
1. Biblical Archaeology – Ur, Sodom & Gomorrah, Jericho Walls
2. Biblical History – Corinth cosmopolitan seaport
3. Biblical Theology – progressive development during redemptive history
3. Perspective - Focus on Hermeneutics will overlap - Related Disciplines (surrounding)
a. Read Ramm p10, para#2
"The study of the canon determines the inspired books; the study of the text determines the wording of the books; the
study of historical criticism gives us the framework of the books; HERMENEUTICS gives us the rules for the
interpretation of the books; exegesis is the application of these rules to the books; and Biblical Theology is the result."
b. Continual Interraction - Greek Grammars - ever refining - vs NT Koine Greek(special heavenly language)
- secular papyri, receipts, sales ledgers
- Interplay between Text + Principles - Exegesis + Hermeneutics
- Not impose foreign Hermeneutics on Text – Inductive (how s scripture interprets itself) + Deductive approach

II. Why is the Study of Hermeneutics Important?

*Significance - issue of burning Relevance in every age - our age in particular!
- Topic of Hermeneutics - never Top Christian BestSeller List - Tedious Minutia, Abstract chalk - little heart for study?
- Attempt to Picque Interest, Whet Appetite – 4 Reasons why Herm important (A-D)

A. Because the Authority of the Scriptures is Nullified if their Real Meaning is Missed
1. Poor Hermeneutics makes crucial issues of Inerrancy + Authority void of any practical relevance.
a. Often - Man, Institution - Banner for Inerrancy, Authority - Nontoleration any trace of question - firm + solid
- yet Interpretation - nonsense, careless - Butcher Text - Result->no different than Errantist - Deletes Passage!
b. Summer Vacation, IA - Jn15:1-10 Exposition on fruit bearing - Good+Desireable - Never presented as necessary+mandatory
- Holiness is Optional - eternal stakes of 2a, 6, 8b - ignored + glossed
- Authority of Word of God - undermined - by Erratic Hermeneutic - Perspicuous yet Muzzled
2. Ramm p2 "There is no profit to us if God has spoken and we do not know what He has said. . . we need to know the correct
method of Biblical interpretation so that we do not confuse the voice of God with the voice of man." – Easy Believism
- See examples - Ramm pp2-3
"Because Scripture has not been properly interpreted the following has been urged as the voice of God; in that the
patriarchs practiced polygamy we may practice it; in that the OT sanctioned the divine right of the king of Israel, we may
sanction the divine right of kings everywhere; because the OT sanctioned the death of witches, we too may put them to
death; because the OT declared that some plagues were from God, we may not use methods of sanitation, for that we would
be thwarting the purposes of God; because the OT forbade usury in the agrarian commonwealth of Israel we may not
employ it in our economic system; because the Scripture makes certain remarks about the suffering of women in childbirth
we may not approve any method of easing the pain; . . ."
3. Crisis in Modern US Constitutional Law - Ceased to be Authority - evolves w/ deteriorating Morals of Society
- Originalist and Strict Interpretation v Living and Flexible and Dynamic and Evolutionist – Abortion, right to privacy
- Source of Authority Disintigrated - As Violin(any musician plays whatever music he pleasis) vs Player Piano!

B. Because The Sacred Scriptures are Vulnerable to Countless Distortions

- Examples (Extention of Above) - Crisis
1. Treated as Pliable Putty - Bible Study Scenario - Jn14:2 "In my Father's house are many rooms..."
a. Accurate - Death, Res, Asc - Purchase Et Dwelling, Presence of Fr, Forever Blessed - Basis of work of Christ
b. To Me - Housewife - Reproof Domestic Sloppiness!
- To Me - Diverse Dwellings - Cath, Prot, Morm, Hindu, Musl, JW, Jewish - All seeking God accepted under same roof!
- To Me - Jesus' Philosophy of Death - All headed to better place - mild reproof to Hellfire + Brimstone error!
c. Rock->Putty - Hands Interpreter - ball, log, pancake
- *David Friedrich Strauss (1806-1874) - See Hoch NT3 Notes
- Redefined orthodox Biblical and Theological Terms - with novel and unorthodox meanings (redemption, revelation) Justification

5
 - Subtle Today! - Creep of Higher Critical Views - DeMythologizing

2. Expounded at a First Glance - Prima Facie

a. Col2:16 - Judge, Sabbath Day, new moon, festival
b. 1Thess5:21 - KJV - any "appearance" of evil, abstain from – NAS “form” of evil – children on sports teams!?
c. Mt13:24 - Wheat+Tares - v38 – no church discipline - world vs church
d. Rom10:4 - JC is the end (telos) of the law
e. Gal3:12 - the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, . . .
3. Viewed Myopically - Tunnel Vision vs Whole Counsel of God
a. 6th Command + Mt5:39 Turn Cheek -> AntiWar Pacifism - vs Gen9; Rom13, etc
b. Psalm127:3 - Children heritage of Lord -> Conclusion: Birth Control is always sin, Sem speaker, bortion mentality
- vs 1Pet3:7; Eph6:4, 1Tim5:8, Pr13:22(inheritance) - Crotchets+Obcessions.
4. Quoted Carelesly or Deceitfully
a. Rev1:13 - Conservative Dress(P Dean) - "Clothed in a robe reaching to the feet" (Gothard)
- also hair white as wool, golden girdle - Correct such individuals' hermeneutic and they'll claim you're not submissive
to authority of the Bible.
b. Mt4 - Temptation of Christ - Method of Satan - Fr of Lies - Misquote - Birth of countless heresies!
c. JW's - No Blood Transfusions
- Lev17:10 "As for anyman...who eats any sort of blood, I shall certainly set my face against the soul who is eating bl"
- Acts15:20,29 - abstain from blood -> *We are saved by Christ's blood vs by Transfusions
- Acts20:26 "I am free from the Blood of all men, not held back. . .
*Sire, Scripture Twisting - p87, para#2
"A slightly eccentric reading of one text of Scripture is linked with another slightly eccentric reading of another text,
a few noneccentric readings are added and, as a traditional Christian we find ourselves in an odd forest of trees that
look a bit like elms and oaks and pines and aspen but upon examination aren't really elms and oaks and pines and aspen
but vegetation belonging to another planet circling another sun." -> Gothard Conference! -> Centaurs, Griffins – Emergent Writings!
5. Manipulated in order to Accommodate - in vogue Concept
a. Gary Smalley, John Trent - The Blessing - My Impression - Psychological importance of Parental Approval
Jacket: "Brian spent a lifetime seeking his father's approval. His father weanted him to be the best and brightest,
and Brian tried--how he desperately tried! And when his father lay dying, Brian flew across the country to be by his
bedside and plead one last time, 'Please say you love me, please!'"

Page 17: ". . .When Esau lost his blessing from his fatner, he was devastated. In fact, when he discovered that Jacob
had stolen the blessing, Esau cried out, 'Do you have only one blessing, my father? Bless me, even me also, O my
Father'(Gen27:38). For a father in biblical times, once a blessing was spoken, it was irretrievable. In response to his
pitiful cries, Esau did receive a blessing of sorts from his father (Gen27:39-40), but it was not the words of value and
acceptance that he had longed to hear."

"Can you feel the anguish in the cry, "Bless me, even me also, O my father'? This same painful cry and unfulfilled
longing is being echoed today by many people who are searching for their family's blessing, men and women whose
parents, for whatever reason, have failed to bless them with words of love and acceptance. . . . Perhaps even you."

**Sold birthright for salty stew! – Immediate Gratification – Heb9:14, 16-17, 29 – Issue is Hell, not psychotherapy.

b. Mk9:23; Mt17:20 - All Possible for Him who believes; Mustard Seed Faith move Mts
-> Possibility Thinking(Schuler); Power of Positive Thinking (Peale) – Psycho Cybernetics (Putt, Archery)
*Ramm p3, para#3 Erratic Hermeneutic
"The result of an erratic hermeneutic is that the Bible has been made the source of confusion rather than light. 'There is no
folly, no God-dishonouring theology, no iniquity, no sacerdotal puerility,' writes Edward White, 'for which chapter and verse
may not be cited by an enslaved intelligence. And under these circumstances it is impossible to express in adequate terms the
importance of a correct estimate and exposition of The Bible(Inspiration, p153). In Bassannio's mouth Shakespeare puts these
words; 'In religion, what damned error but some sober brow will bless it, and approve it with a text hiding the grossness
with fair ornament' (The Merchant of Venice, Act III, scene 2)."
*Only Adequate defense - Acquisition of a Sound Hermeneutic - Handle Word of Truth w/ Integrity!

C. Because Accurate Interpretation is a Flesh Withering and Complicated Labor - Complex Enterprise!
1. Naivete - If spirit open, right w/God - as easy as talking w/own father - making task too difficult - Illumination w/o sweat
a. See Carson, Exegetical Fallacies p13, footnote

6
 "Almost 20 yrs ago I rode in a car w/ a fellow believer who relayed to me what the Lord had 'told' him that morning in
his quiet time. He had been reading the KJV of Matthew; and I perceived that not only had he misunderstood the archaic
English, but also that the KJV at that place had unwittingly misrepresented the Greek text. I gently suggested there
might be another way to understand the passage and summarized what I thought the passage was saying. The brother
dismissed my view as impossible on the grounds that the HS, who does not lie, had told him the truth on this matter.
Being young and bold, I pressed on with my explanation of grammar, context, and translation, but was brushed off by a
reference to 1Cor2:10b-14: spiritual things must be spiritually discerned--which left little doubt about my status.
Genuinely intrigued, I asked this brother what he would say if I put forward my interpretation, not on the basis of
grammar and text, but on the basis that the Lord himself had given me the interpretation I was advancing. He was
silent a long time, and then concluded, "I guess that would mean the Spirit says the Bible means different things to
different people."
b. 2Pet3:15-16 "Paul's letters . . . some things hard to understand . . . unstable distort . . . as other scriptures"
c. Prov2:4 (Wisdom+Understanding) "Seek her as silver, search for her as for hidden treasure”
- As if riches of truth - hidden where only the "earnest" will find!
- National Geographic - Valuable bird's nests in cave - fashioned of saliva, Oriental delicacy (careful here, mystical int)
2. Sinful Heart of Man - propensity to self serving, self justifying interpretation
a. R. P. Martin - Convinced source - Paedo Baptism - Men do not want to face reality of state of their children.
b. Restrictions of a sound Hermeneutical Harness - not able to escape hard truths!
3. Curse and Its Effects
a. Creation - Gen1+2 - Man in Image - Language - Cool of Day - Perfect + Easy understanding
b. Fall - Man's depravity - obscures clarity (Internal Problem)
- Confusion of Tongues - Babel Gen11 (External Problem) *Combination - necessity of painful, thorny+thistlie Hermeneutics
*Now - Diligent Study + Labor - only by sweat of our face shall we eat our (spiritual) bread - Gen3:19

D. Because we Need to Bridge the Yawning Gap between Ourselves and the Biblical Writers
*Task in a Nutshell - Discover the Meaning of Text for Author + Original Hearers, thereupon transmit that meaning to the
modern hearers. See Mickelson p5 para#2

"From the first century AD thru the Middle Ages, the gulf between the NT world and later generations was not great.
From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century, however, the gulf widened, and today modern man can scarcely
appreciate many features of the ancient world and its outlook which are simply assumed by biblical authors."

- *When speaking to o/a we assume so much (His Watergate, Sarah Palin Troopergate – Chinaman, TeenAger) – China footbinding girls

1. Language Gap - Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek - Enormous Gulf

2. Geographical Gap - Distances + Closeness; Climate, Impressions - "Wilderness" Mk1
- R. P. Martin: eye opening trip to Palestine
4. Historical Gap - Especially NT - Need to Study Intertestamental History - understand what happened since OT - Pharisees
- Also - 1st cent history - contemporary Issues - Caesar, Rome - Current Events – Pilate’s Passion week pressures
- Parables of Jesus(allusions, Samaritan); Journeys of Paul (Epicureans + Stoics)
5. Thought Gap - Oriental, Eastern Mind in different categories - metaphor, figures of speech
– Gen23:15 Ephron the Hittite to Abraham re cave price: “400 shekels of sliver, but what is that between you and me”
- Progressive Revelation + Understanding - We know more now - NT Completed - Christ come!
6. Cultural Gap - Agrarian + Rural vs Industrial and Urban - 1Ki13 Lion, Donkey, Corpse - striking! – miraculous combination vs tear + eat

III. Who is Able to Do Sound Hermeneutics? - The Practitioners of, Necessary Qualifications
*Every Christian - 1Cor2:13 "taught by the Spirit" - mysteries of God revealed through the Spirit
- Regeneration + Illumination - Rom8:7 "Carnal mind is enmity against God"
*Yet, Peculiarly addressing Men - Public Heralds - RBS Prospectus:
"RBS exists primarily for the purpose of training men for the gospel ministry.” – 1Tim3:2 “able to teach”

A. A God Fearing Man - Terrified at thought of Misrepresenting the Living God, of speaking apart from His Word, Distortion
1. Pr1:7 - "The Fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge"
2. Is8:20 - "To the Law and to the Testimony . . ." - publicly teach - "Thus sayeth the Lord"
3. Jn4:23-24 - Hr is coming, true worshipers worship in Spirit and in truth - If directed not according to Word - in God's eyes:
- A Calf Fashioning Aaron, Strange Fire Offering Nadab + Abihu (Consumed) - Dare not bear false witness.
4. Jer23:16, 23 - False Prophets - "They are leading you into futility; they speak a vision of their own imagination, not from
the mouth of the Lord. . . if they had stood in My council, they they would have announced My words to My people." - Woe!

7
 5. 1Ki22:14 - Micaiah to Ahab, "As the Lord lives, what the Lord says to me, that I will speak." - Our pledge - even Balaam made such!
6. Jas3:1 - "Let not many of you become teachers . . . we shall incur a stricter judgment." - Holy fear of Accounting day
- Answer to His face regarding our handling of His Word! - Seek pure Biblical truth.

B. A Bible Revering Man - Conviction - this volume - Deposit of Word of God vs Merely men writing about God
1. Convinced - Inspiration, Authority, Inerrancy - Verbal + Plenary - Jot + Tiddle - 2Tim3:16 "All Scr God-breathed. . ."
- Mt5:18 “smallest letter or stroke shall not pass away
2. Else - skim over general concepts - sloppy + careless vs fastidious + meticulous
-> sweat over nuance of word meaning, tense of verb, shade of preposition
3. If in Doubt, Stay away! - Set in mind - handling Precious, Sacred Words of God!
- Br Dave’s Ordination – like Biden or Palin sending sons to Iraq – return decorated w/ medals or sealed up in body bag
- Dt4:2 - "You shall not add to the word . . . nor take away from it."
- Rev22:18-19 - "I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book; if anyone adds to them, God
shall add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of this book of
this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city,which are written in this book."
4. Fearful thing to publicly handle this sacred Book - Revere it! - May such a fear make and keep you capable.

C. A Hard Working Man - Sweat of Brow, Diligent, Disciplined

1. Fear of God + Reverence for Bible - not automatically make you able to know correct meaning of each passage.
- No Mystical Illumination - see Ramm p14 para#3
"It is necessary to complete this truth by adding that the Spirit of God 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 written, not beyond it."

- Labor! - 2Tim2:2, 6, 15 “faithful men…hard working farmer…workman” - Tedious Application of sound principles of Hermeneutics
- See Calvin Comment, p313-4
"Dividing aright. This is a fine metaphor which accurately explains the main purpose of teaching. For since we should
be satisfied only with God's Word, what purpose is there in having daily sermons and even in the office of pastor itself?
Does not everybody have a chance to read the Scriptures for himself? But Paul assigns to teachers the duty of carving
or dividing the Word, like a father dividing the bread into small pieces to feed his children. He advises Timothy to
'divide aright' lest, like men w/o skill, he succeeds only in cutting the surface and leaves the inmost pith and marrow
untouched . . . a judicious dispensing of the Word which is adapted to the profit of those that hear it . . . a manner of
exposition adapted to edify."
2. Lifelong Labor - Cursory Reading (Daily) - think God's thoughts after Him
- Recognize + Understand His voice vs 1 Week of Intensity prior to preaching or teaching, crash course dangerous
- Systematic Theology - See whole in order to Comprehend the Part - Avoid Myopia
3. A Man w/ Fervent Drive - Ezra7:6 “a scribe skilled in the law of Moses”; 7:10 “Ezra had set his heart to study, practice, teach the law”
- Poole: "He had set his mind and affections on it, and made it his chief design and business."

D. A Practically Holy Man - Practically applies principles found in Word vs Hypocritically teaches them alone
1. Ezra7:10 "For Ezra had set his heart to study the law of the Lord, and to practice it, and to teach His statutes and ordinances in Israel."
- Studies not for mere ostentation or self aggrandizement (consider Balshazzar Dan5) – misused holy articles, weighed, found wanting
- rather - to personally "practice it" - Integrity before God and Man - Leverage w/ Hearers(heavy) vs Undermining Truth(cynicism)
2. Mt23:2-3 “do not do accd to their deeds”, 5-7 “deeds for men” - Woe! - MH: "Pulling down in their practice what they build up in their preaching."

E. A Humbly Dependent Man

1. Your Hermeneutics + Library - Make you a brilliant + edifying teacher? - As Profound Historian so Profound Biblician? – Think again.
- Ichabod (gl of Lord departed) Ministry - Stones all in place, Sp of Lord absent
- Beware Cocky arrogance, chip on shoulder(hermeneutics), slice up preachers - Humility + Dependence (Seminarians)
2. Men of Prayer - Illumination is no substitution for hard work. Hard work no substitution for Illumination of HS!
- Must be taught by Him - Proverb: "To pray well is to study well."
- A. N. Martin - Every time you reach for a trusted guide on shelf, pray, "God use this ink to open my eyes."
3. Mt16:17 "Blessed are you, Simon Barjonah, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father who is in H."
4. Mt11:25 "I praise Thee, O Fr, Lord of H and E, that Thou didst hide these things from the wise and intelligent and didst reveal them to babes."
5. Divine and Human Effort
- Pr21:31 "The Horse is prepared for the day of battle, but victory belongs to the Lord."
- Ps44:6,8 "For I will not trust in my bow, nor will my sword save me. . . In God we have boasted all day long."

8
 F. An Adequately Educated Man
1. Not contending - principle truths of Bible are shut up to the Academic Elite - Owen would've given up all his books and learning if he could only
preach like Bunyan the Tinker!
2. General Rule - RPM "The most useful interpreters of the scriptures have been men who have taken pains to educate themselves."
- Not always formally, self taught.
3. Avoid Idealism - Perfect Mastery of Every Discipline: Language, History, Archaeology, etc. - yet familiar w/ fundamentals in each
- Liberal Arts of Old: Philosophy, Literature, Rhetoric, Mathematics (systematic thinking, problem solving, pumping cerebral iron)
- Languages - Greek, Hebrew - Working Knowledge
4. Acts 4:13 - Center of Sanhedrin - Fishermen! - Filled w/ HS - Fearlessly + Adequately refuting elite gainsayers!
a. “Uneducated + Untrained men - marveled - recognized had been w/ Jesus” - Pastoral Education for 3 yrs! – Master of Divinity!
b. Also - Recognize - Miraculous Times, Today's Great Gaps, Educated Society.

G. An Intellectually Gifted Man

1. 1Tim3:2 "Able to teach"; Rom12:3 "not to think more highly of himself . . . sound judgment, as God has allotted to each"
- Rom12:7 "in his teaching"
a. Capable of Deep enough level of Cognition - able to handle - abstract concepts, metaphysics
- RPM - Different mental requirements for a teaching ministry than a bricklayer! - *peculiar package of gifts
2. Own Weaknesses Recognized (all know inadequacies, insecurities) - Like physical muscle, can be developed - Sweat+Pain (sumo wrestler)
a. Some - 3 to 4 times labor as others to accomplish same task - but if wholesomely driven - approved workman!
b. Some - Years before able to adequately instruct congregation - never full time - sober assessment - Ro12:3
3. Milton Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics
a. Defective Mental Powers disqualify (p151)
"1st of all, the interpreter of Scripture, and, indeed, of any other book, should have a sound, well balanced mind. For
dullness of apprehension, defective judgment, and an extravagant fancy will pervert one's reason, and lead to many
vain and foolish notions. The faculties of the mind are capable of discipline, and may be trained to a very high degree of
perfection; but some men inherit peculiar tendencies of intellect. Some are gifted with rare powers of imagination, but
are utterly wanting in the critical faculty. A lifetime of discipline will scarcely restrain their exuberant fancy.
Others are naturally given .. form hasty judgments, and will rush to the wildest extremes. In others, peculiar tastes
and passions warp the judgment, and some seem to be constitutionally destitute of common sense. Any and all such
mental defects disqualify one for the interpretation of the word of God."
b. Acuteness of Intellect - "He must be quick to see what a passage does not teach as well as comprehend its real import."
(p152)
c. Imagination - Intuition of nature + human life - transport back + return to present to hearers - (p152)
"The strong intellect will not be destitute of imaginative powers. Many things in narrative description must be left to
be supplied, and many of the finest passages of Holy Writ cannot be appreciated by an unimaginative mind. The true
interpreter must often transport himself into the past, and picture in his soul the scenes of ancient time. He must have
an intuition of nature and of human life by which to put himself in the place of the biblical writers and see and feel as
they did." *Yet beware of placing conjecture and speculation in place of valid exegesis!

*2Tim2:24 - Lord's bond servant must not be quarrelsome...able to teach...

H. A Librarically Equipped Man - Capable Interpreter needs tools!

1. Mechanic Useless w/o Tools - Carpenter Impotent - Hoch: Must accumulate a library, fill your tool box!
a. Lexicons; Greek&Hebrew Texts, Grammars; Bible Dictionaries, Commentaries, etc. - Acquire!
b. Or - Access to adequate library - Habitually used
c. Computer Tools – Bible Works, etc
2. Shrewd - Purchases - Marksman Rifle shots - Buy not necessarily Much, but buy Well - Best Works vs Most Works
a. Small but Adequate - more than mere devotional!

**The History of Hermeneutics (The Ancient Jewish Period)

I. The History of Hermeneutics

*Introduction
1. Aim - Trace Different Methods of Interpretation utilized in history
2. Purpose
A. Generally Stated - Milton Terry, p603 - quest of seeking sound principles

9
 "A knowledge of the history of biblical interpretation is of inestimable value to the student of the Holy Scriptures. It
serves to guard against errors and exhibits the activity and efforts of the human mind in its search after truth in relation
to noblest themes. It shows what influences have led to the misunderstanding of God's word, and how acute minds, carried
away by a misconception of nature of the Bible, have sought mystic and manifold meanings in its contents."
B. Specifically Stated
1. To Provide a Survey of Alternative Methodologies
2. To Provide a "Verdict of History" on Alternatives - places us in enviable Cat Bird's Seat
- learn from triumphs + failures of others
a. As w/ Systematic Theology - History Develops through HS (SW)
b. So Too Hermeneutics - honed, sanded, polished - enables us to stand on the shoulders of the wise, stay off foolish!
- Prohibition in US – corruption spread like wildfire – heresy wildfire too
- We avoid same pitfalls, errors, pendulum swinging tendencies - sober position + method
- Model ourselves after the eminent - though ever improving
- To whom much is given, much is required – Calvin’s Position! – Gen4 Cain’s Sacrif - no excuse for duplicating discredited errors
3. To Provide us w/ an Awareness of Hermeneutical Problems + Issues which need confronting and solving.

*No Irrelevant Detour - Necessary Prerequisite - trust you'll be soon convinced of Burning Relevance
- We do not do exegesis in a vacuum.

A. The Ancient Jewish Period

1. Ezra the Scribe - Approx 400 BC
*Ezra7:10 - Set his hrt on study of law, practice, teach to Israel - Dates beginning of Formal Exposition of Scriptures
- Climate - Loss of Temple, Throne, Splendor - Hrts turned to Words of YHWH - Logocentric
a. The Need for Interpretation - Historical Circumstances - Linguistic + Cultural gulfs to be bridged
1. Babylonian Exile - Uprooted from land, new Language(Aramaic) New Culture(Babyl+Persian) - note consequence of sin (Babel)
2. Neh8:8 - They read from the Book, from the Law of God, translating to give the sense, so that they understood the reading.
(Read; Translated - aloud in Aramaic, Common Language of Palestine; Explained "give the understanding" - "set forth the meaning")
b. The Appropriateness of Interpretation - Ezra 7:9-10 - 9b: "The good hand of the Lord was upon him”
- Divinely Appointed - fit for worship - Neh8 - Holy Day - Goal to worship God - Precedent!
c. The Beginnings of Interpretation - Stage set for development
1. Likely - OT Canon collected at this point
2. Establishment - Category of man – “Scribes” - given to study of law - class of learned men
3. Safety Measures - Insure Systematic Reading + Exposition - put a hedge about the Law - preserve It and Nation!
- Godly Intent + Strictness - Distorted later into Legalism of Pharisees
- Scribes Copied Books, Counted very letters - each numbered, guarded against interpolations + changes

2. Early Rabbinic Exegesis - Surely much good, remnant - some awaiting Consolation of Israel (Simeon Lk2)
- yet following centuries marked by Declension from Ezra -> perverting of Scriptures
*While Hedging up Law - also gathered up traditional Interpretations ->Oral Law - in time equal Authority as Scriptures

a. Halachah - "To Walk" - Focus on Pentateuch + Legal Code - Complicated deductions + legal codes
1. Extrapolations of Principles from Specifics
2. Tradition of Casuistic Decisions - Authoritative rules (spit + covering = plowing on sabbath) - Mk2 heads of grain
3. Legalistic Tendency - 613 pieces of specific legislaltion - derived from 10 Words - Hedge up Law

b. Hagadah - "Narrative" Aramaic - Illustration + Application of OT Narrative, Torah

1. Terry p608 "New legends, secret meanings, hidden wisdom + allegorized expositions were added by one great
teacher after another." - Quote Rabbi after Rabbi -> We must beware, not stray from text to men!
2. Note 1Tim1:3-7 - "myths, endless genealogies, speculation. .." - see also 4:6-7
3. Example - Eliezer(Abr's servant 15:2) letters = number value = 318 = number of Abr's trained men (Gen14:14)
- Meaning - Eliezer alone was worth a host of servants!
*Harold Camping 1994 - Acts 27, 276 people aboard saved(special #) = 12x23 - Tribulation will last 23 yrs!
- as Acts 27 voyage is an allegory of the Tribulation Period!
4. Superstitious Tendency - LXX witnesses(Terry 610) - Fictiitious Legends - Admitted among sacred writings
- all 70 translated Heb into Greek, exact same manuscripts, down to the jot + tiddle.
- Apocrypha: Bel+The Dragon, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus (Greek Philosophy)

*Tit1:14 - Warning against both tendencies "Pay no attention to Jewish myths(Hag) and commandments of men(Hal)

10
 a. Halakah - Legalistic - Salvation thru law vs by grace thru faith (hermeneutics)
b. Hagadah - Speculative curiosity vs practical godliness + salvation of souls -> Both contrary to Apostolic Doctr

c. Qumran - Reaction Interpretation - recognized bankruptcy of establishment

1. Withdrawal from Corrupt Religion - Fanatic Jewish Monastics (Essenes) - Wilderness near Dead Sea
2. Scriptures copied, Commentaries written (Habakkuk, Micah, Psalms, Nahum) - Interpreted Eschatalogically – in end times!
- Disregarding original contexts - but apply directly to Qumran Community
- Nahum 3:1 "Woe to the bloody city . . . " + Harlotry -> Jerusalem (vs ancient Nineveh's Fall) - to be devastated! – Direct Prophecy!
*Errors see today:
a. Disregarding importance of original context - what conveyed to 1st readers - not immediately to present
(Moscow, Baghdad, Washington) – may say godless world civilization to be crushed – not Tsunami, Bird Flu, Stock Market Collapse
b. Only upon Appreciation of Original Context - see principles in common w/ original hearers - draw application!
- (Mickelsen p23) "Qumran interpreters forgot this in their haste to apply the Scriptures to themselves and their own times."
- Gen 18:10 “by this time next year, your wife will have a son” – Bob?!

3. Hellenization and Allegory

*Allegorical Interpretation - Assumes that the text to be interpreted says or intends to say something other than its
literal wording suggests. Consider Pilgrim's Progress. It draws out a deeper, mystical meaning other than the
words themselves. Often mystical symbols. The original intent typically is ignored. The interpreter's ideas are
superimposed on the passage.
A. The Greeks – secular literature - Mickelsen p28 - In ancient times, men allegorized for 2 primary reasons:
1. "First, they wanted to keep the poets from being ridiculed or ignored." - Anchors in Tradition
2. "Second, serious thinkers found that by means of allegory they could use past literature to promulgate their own
ideas and outlook. By allegorizing they could maintain continuity with the past w/o getting too involved with
undesirable elements in its literature. The Homeric gods and the entire Greek pantheon could be allegorized in whole
or in part. If one wanted to keep certain 'values' of the gods, he could allegorize the accounts of their
immoralities." *Embarrassment and Reverence combined in resorting to allegory.

B. The Jews - Diaspora - Into Hellenized world - Greek Philosophy in vogue - OT Judaism embarrassing + obsolete
- i. e. Circumcision + Ceremonial Laws (bloody) - Gymnasium + Debate Hall
- Yet desired to preserve (reverence for) - OT Monotheism, Morality, National Patriotism
1. Aristobulus - 160 BC
- Asserted that Gr Philosophy borrowed from OT, especially Moral Law of Moses (2Macc1:10) Aristobulus mentioned
- Behold - Greek Philosophy was found in Moses via Allegory! - *Imposed Grk Philosophy on Scriptures.
2. Philo - 20BC to 54AD
a. Love for Plato and Scriptures - Alexandrian amalgamation of the 2
b. Inspiration - Dictation Theory and Passivity of the Prophet - High regard for Scriptures
c. Ramm p27 "By a most elaborate system of allegorizing, he was able to reconcile for himself his loyalty to his
Hebrew faith and his love for Greek philosophy." - Generally fantastic and absurd
d. Example - "Abraham's trek to Palestine is really the story of a Stoic Philosopher who leaves Chaldea (sensual
understanding) and stops at Haran, which means 'holes,' and signifies the emptiness of knowing things by the
holes, that is the senses. When he becomes Abraham he becomes a truly enlightened philosopher. To marry
Sarah is to marry abstract wisdom."
*The literal level supposedly represents an immature level of understanding
e. Farrar explains Plato’s Rules of interpretation - see Mickelsen p29 - We get a feel for this hermeneutic:
1. The rules by which the literal sense is excluded are chiefly stoic.
2. It is excluded when the statement is unworthy of God.
3. Words may be explained apart from their punctuation.
4. Plays on words are admissable to educe a deeper sense.
5. Particles, adverbs, prepositions may be forced into the service of allegory.

*Influential Treatment of Scriptures

1. Allegory became a permanent dimension of Alexandrian Thought.
- Alexandria eventually became the hub of Patristic Thought!
2. Allegorism - profound effect on Christian Church Fathers - strongly influenced the exegesis until Reformation
3. Long History of Jewish Exegesis - continues to present date - yet no longer heavily influences Christian hermeneutics.
a. Midrash - Running Commentaries on OT - Legal, Homiletical, Devotional
b. Mishnah - Topical Arrangement + Discussion of biblical material + its interpretation

11
 (seeds, festivals, women, injuries, holy + clean things)
c. Talmud - AD 10-550 - Anthology of interpretations of interpreters (Farrar p92, Terry p617)
- Delitzsch: "A vast debating club in which there hum confusedly the myriad of voices of at least 5 centuries."
d. Targums - Best Aramaic Translations or Interpretations of Pentateuch + Prophets - paraphrases interwoven w/ Jewish opinion -
Examples of Jewish Exegesis
e. Tosefta - Amplification of Mishnah, citation of biblical passages as basis
4. Environmental Stewardship in the Judeo-Christian Tradition (Acton Institute, 2007), ch2 “Torah Based Approach to the Environment”
*Dealing with the Theme of overpopulation:
“How exactly does raising the right kind of people help to solve the problem of too many people? The Talmud relates that during the
pilgrimage festivals, the Jerusalem Temple was so crowded that people barely had room to stand. However, during the period of the service that called
for worshippers to prostrate themselves upon their knees on the floor, there was mysteriously sufficient room. This is, indeed, a mysterious account
since everyone knows that people on their knees require more floor space than people standing erect. During the part of the service when people were
on their knees, conditions should have been more, not less, crowded than when the people were standing. The traditional explanation is that standing
erect is a metaphor for a condition of arrogant self-absorption. Prostration is a metaphor for humility and awareness of others. Finally, the temple itself
is depicted in the Torah as an almost mathematical model of the world. It is not hard to grasp the truth of this message: If a population consists of
humble people constantly aware of one another, it never feels crowded.” (p19).

4. Reflections - Rabbinic Exegesis and its development - Reflection of Christian Church History
*This period manifests fundamental problems - rear ugly heads throughout Church history - even today:
a. Legalism – Extrapolation – Nasty Nine
b. Neglect of Context
c. Allegorism - Imposition of Interpreters Preconceptions -> Trent & Smalley
d. Imagination - Hyper
e. Superstition - Numerology - Camping Handout (T. Longman) - segment

**The History of Hermeneutics (The Early Christian Period)

I. The History of Hermeneutics

A. The Ancient Jewish Period

B. The Early Christian Period (Patristic Era) - 1st to 5th Centuries

1. The 1st Century
a. Sound Hermeneutics - Cornerstone of Christianity - Distinctive System of Interpretation - Foundation of NT
1. OT Scriptures - Interpreted by Christ + Apostles - clashed w/, radically at odds w/ Rabbinic Interpretation
*Proto-Reformation - absorbed violent attacks by Establishment (Rabbis and Pharisees)
2. Sam Waldron (p10 notes) "The validity of Christianity rests on its claim to be the fulfillment of OT Scriptures and
religion. The validity of this claim rests in turn on a distinctive system of interpreting the OT." - *Hermeneutics Revolution!
3. Inspired Hermeneutics of Christ + Apostles - Our Pattern - Cut thru fog of error
a. Christ's Coming - fulfilled OT Scriptures - Mt5:17-20 ". . . to fulfill";
- Lk24:27 "explained . . . concerning himself in all the Scriptures"; Jn1:17 Law thru Moses, grace + truth JC
- 1Cor15:3-5 "died. . . buried . . . raised . . . according to the Scriptures"
b. Christ's Hermeneutic - Accurately Exegeted OT Scriptures
- Mt4:1-10 - Satan's Temptations - Verbal+Plenary Viewpoint - "It is written. . ."
- Mt15:1-9 - Pharisees+Scribes, handwashings, Corban, precepts of men! - Trashed the Halakah
- Mt22:29 - Sadducees, Woman's 7 husbands, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures, or the power of God."
- Rebuked Antisupernatural Liberalism
- Mk9:13 - Interpreted Elijah's coming as figuratively in John vs literally.
c. Paul - Defends the Cross - w/ OT Presuppositions - Rom3: all sin; Rom4: Abraham, David, Circumcision;
- Rom5: Adam; *multiple OT quotations throughout
- Timothy + Titus - Diametrically opposed - superstitions + rules of men - Tit1:14;
- Gal1:13-14 - Paul's proficiency in Judaism – “advancing beyond my contemporaries” – hermeneutical “rubbish”?
d. Hebrews - Author - sees Christ as fulfillment of Types + Shadows - vs Allegory -> Typology
e. Peter - Acts 2:25-31 “not let David’s body see decay”; Acts15 “David’s tabernacle” - Solid hermeneutic of soberminded Typology
b. Conclusion - Principles of Christian Exegesis
1. Christological Interpretation of OT
2. Unity of OT + NT - vs Marcionite Heresy 140 AD (OT God Brutal + Unpredictable vs NT Jesus + God of Love) - Classic Dispensational

12
 3. Avoidance of: fantastic Allegory, rigid Literalism, human Tradition

2. The 2nd Century

a. Canon Recognition - Apostolicity + Self Authenticating Divinity of Scriptures - Collection began
1. Greek Septuagint - Some Christians therefore highly regarded the Apocrypha
2. Marcionite Heresy - Only Luke's Gospel modified and Paul's Letters - forced formal list of Orthodoxy
3. Montanism - Prophetic Mouthpieces, New Revelations - threatened Scriptural Authority (172 AD Turkey)
- Modern Charismania (women high profile, Priscilla & Maximilla)
b. Important Characters
1. Clement of Rome - Relatively Sober, not fanciful - Scripture Reinforced to faithfulness + service.
2. Ignatius - Letters approaching martyrdom - "Avoids allegorizing and strained interpretations." Christocentric
3. Justin Martyr - Mickelsen p31 "He is so taken up with teaching about Christ, that he rarely notes what the prophet
is saying to his contemporaries." - Arbitrary, artificial exegesis
4. Irenaeus - Jousted w/ heretics + demanded sound hermeneutics (sharpening influence), Sound historical perspective,
but not free from arbitrary procedures. (Farrar)

3. The 3rd to 5th Centuries - ***Crucial Developments in Hermeneutics – 3 Major Schools - Map
a. The Allegorism of Alexandria
*Philo - Harmonized religion + contemporary philosophy w/ Allegorical Interpretation
*Famous Catechetical School of Alexandria - came under the spell of this method
1. Clement (155-215 AD) - 1st to Allegorize NT: "All Scripture must be understood Allegorically." Furnishes true knowledge.
2. Origen (185-254 AD) - Clement's Disciple - High view of Scripture
a. Hexapla - 1st attempt at Textual Criticism (OT: Greek, Hebrew, Grk Translations, Greek Transliteration)
b. Genius, Ascetic, Castrated self, Eunuch for Kdom (Mt5:29-30; 19:12)
c. Threefold Sense of Script: Literal, Moral, Mystical; Must transcend + pass beyond literal sense, worthy of God
d. Gen24 - Rebecca's drawing water for Abr's servant + cattle -> We must come to the wells of Scripture to meet Christ (the seed, Isaac)
e. Magnetic Personality, Multitudes drawn, Zeal for God overshadowed his heresies - including:
New Probation after Death; Preexistence of Souls

b. The Literalism of Antioch

1. John Chrysostom (354-407) - "The Golden Mouthed" for his splendor in eloquence, pulpit orator, preacher
2. Theodore of Mopsuestia (386-458) - Scholarly Exegete - Liberal view of Bible, Denied inspiration of some scriptural books.
3. Contribution and Emphasis - "Literal Interpretation"
a. Not wooden - customarily acknowledged meaning of an expression in a given context - soberminded recognition of
Typology and Metaphor.
b. Berkhof p21 "Went far towards developing true scientific exegesis, recognizing as they did, the necessity of
determining the original sense of the Bible." -> Grammatico-Historical Interpretation!
*Banished Allegory; Limited Symbolic + Typical Exegesis
c. Lost Credibility - Nestorian Controversy (Human + Divine Nature of Christ, 2 distinct persons) - Antioch School charged w/ parting
from Orthodoxy - Also, the historical split arising between the East and West resulted in the reduced influence of Antioch. The
Allegory of Alexandria prevailed.

c. The Traditionalism of the West - Western Church

1. Jerome (347-419) - Translated Vulgate - Bible Scholar (Rome)
- Farrar, p233 "He flatters himself that he succeeded in steering safely between the Scylla of Allegory and the Charybdis of literalism,
where as in reality his 'multiple senses' and 'whole forests of spiritual meanings' are not worth one verse of the original." *Sound
in theory, .. in practice, lacking.
2. Ambrose (374-397) - Bishop of Milan - Fanciful Allegorizer
- "The Letter kills, but the spirit makes alive." - Slogan for Allegorical Interpretation
3. Augustine (354-430) - Theological Genius, Tractates are a true gift to the Church, Hermeneutical Example is poor
a. De Doctrina Christiana - Influential book, lays down sensible rules for Biblical Interpretation, but he himself fails to observe them
-> Grammatical, Historical, Love for God
b. Psalm 3:5 - Lay down and sleep, awake -> Death and Resurrection of Christ
c. Fourfold sense of Scriptures -> see Middle Ages
“Manichees pointed out that there were many scandals recorded in the Old Testament about the lives of the patriarchs. Hence,
those men should not be venerated unless the stories are untrue. If the stories are untrue, then the men who wrote them were
liars. In this case also the book should not be held in esteem. Augustine responded by appealing to the fourfold sense of
Scripture.” (Augustine and African Manichaeism, Ligon Duncan)

13
 4. Contribution and Emphasis:
a. New Element - The Authority of Tradition + of the Church in the interpretation of the Bible
- Allegory and Tradition beautifully mesh - Quality Control of the Church vs Sound Hermeneutics!
b. Primacy of Love - Goal of Revelation and Interpretation

**3rd to 5th Century Assessments:

1. Naturally, favor School of Antioch vs abritrariness of the Allegorical.
2. Yet, Antioch Associated w/ Heresy - Lucian, teacher of Arius; Theodore admired by Nestorians
- Tendency to interpret part w/o the whole -> vulnerable to heresy! need to see the Organic Whole!
3. Allegory - High Doctrine of Inspiration - Passages manifest Organic Unity - Systematics!
- Positive - One passage may have more than one meaning. i.e. Applications -> "which is true" (SW)
- 2Sam7:14 "son" (Solomon & Jesus); Isaiah 7:14 “a virgin shall be w/ child” (Maher-shalal-hash-baz & Jesus) - Typological
4. Tradition of the Church - safeguard against wild interpretation - sound concept - HS unfolding - teaching office of Church
-> Eph4:11f “gave some as teachers…equipping…no longer tossed”; 1Cor12 “one body”; Rom12:4f “all not same function”
- Sound concept - when checked by Sound Hermeneutics - avoids each teacher's "reinventing the wheel"

C. The Medieval Period (500-1500 AD) - Middle Ages

*Monastaries - seats of learning - Vast desert for Biblical Interpretation
- Scriptures viewed supersitiously - as Urim + Thummin - Clovis against the Goths in Spain - w/ prayer Ps18:40:
"Thou hast made my enemies turn their backs on me, and I destroyed those who hated me." - Did triumph!
- Prov24:6 “For by wise counsel you will wage war, And in abundance of counselors there is victory.”

1. Fourfold Interpretation - Hidden Meanings - if we have eyes and ears, any passage will tell us of all 4 (Mickelsen p35):
a. The Letter shows us what God and our Fathers did; Letter - plain + evident
b. The Allegory shows us where our faith is hid; Allegory - what we believe
c. The Moral meaning gives us rules of daily life; Moral - how to live
d. The Anagogy shows us where we end our strife. Anagogy - Christian's hope

*Example - 2Sam16:15 – “Absalom…entered Jerusalem, and Ahithophel with him”

1. Literal - Palestine 3. Moral - Human soul, Diabolonian-like, sin remains for a time, snuffed out
2. Allegorical - Church + Diotrophes 4. Anagogical - Cel City, Satan reigns on earth for a time, soon dethroned, NH+E
*Edifying - but certainly not all ideas expressed by original writer!
1. Careful: Type vs Allegory; Principle vs Fancy; Illustrative vs Interpretive (This is what passage is teaching!)
- True - Jerusalem a profound theme, thru theological explanation above applications may be relevant.
- Some texts do open up pregnant themes for application, but should be buttressed with appropriate texts:
- Diotrophes (3Jn); Remaining Sin (Rom7); NH+E (Rev21)
- Avoid the Reductionism of Modern Commentaries – conclusionless+applicationless! - 2Tim3:16-17"teach, repr, corr, training"
2. Allegory held a choke hold on the Scriptures!

2. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) - In Theory regarded the Literal sense as the Necessary Foundation for all Exposition of Scr.
a. Contended - only Literal should be used in proving Doctrine - Profoundly influenced Luther -> Reformation
b. Practice - Aquinas unable to extricate himself from the status quo - writings riddled w/ the Multiple Sense.

3. Literature -
a. The Glossa Ordinaria
- Exegetical Anthologies - Quotations from the Fathers - According to Topics + Passages - often contradictory + mutually exclusive
- Augustine, Jerome, Ambrose, Bede, etc. - cited
b. The Catenae
- Commentaries on Books or Portions of Bible - Traditional Interpretations strung together like a chain
- Little fresh thought, direct exegetical interraction in approaching the Scriptures - Stagnation
4. Summary - between Allegorizing + Ecclesiastical Tradition - Truth buried under rubble - same pitfall->Rabbinic Exegesis
- Way was prepared for Hermeneutical reaction and revolution - The Reformation!

D. The Reformation Period (16th Century)

1. Its Renaissance Roots - Rebirth of Humanistic learning - called attention the importance of returning to the original.
a. The Printing Press - Moveable Type (Gutenberg) - made work of Textual Criticism Possible - Polyglots + Tools
- explosion of knowledge

14
 b. "The Two Eyes of Europe" - Men who urged Original Language study - Many Doctors of Divinity who had never read Bible
1. John Reuchlin - Published Hebrew Grammar + Lexicon
2. Erasmus - Edited 1st Critical Edition of Greek NT
c. The Gradual Revolution - 4fold sense abandoned, single sense adopted

2. Its Primary Players

a. Martin Luther (1483-1546) - Independent Study + Lectures on Romans + Psalms
1. Criticized Allegorizing + Traditionalism - such hermeneutics "monkey tricks" - not entirely steered clear himself
2. Justification by Faith - Focused on Major Teaching of OT + NT - North Star! - Christocentric!
3. Private Interpretation - Each Believer vs Exclusively the Church - Translated into German Vernacular
4. Illumination of Holy Spirit - 1Cor2 "taught by the Spirit" - blessing of sp understanding – Luther’s own experience!

b. Philip Melanchthon (1497-1560) - Luther's Rt Hand, Superior in Learning - Held Reigns of Reformation
- Hebrew + Greek Scholar
1. Scriptures must be Understood Grammatically before Theologically.
2. Scriptures must have One Certain Sense.

c. John Calvin (1509-1564) - Luther and Calvin engineered a Hermeneutical Revolution!

1. Stuhlmacher p34: "The one as pioneer the other as theoretician and brilliant executor of Reformation Exegesis."
2. Luther - in theory rejected Allegory - Calvin carried this principle out even more consistently
- Remarkable Commentaries
3. Berkhof p27: "Calvin was, by common consent, the greatest exegete of the Reformation. His expositions cover nearly all the books of
the Bible, and their value is still recognized. The fundamental principles of Luther and Melanchthon were also his, and he surpassed
them in making his practice square with his theory. In the allegorical method he saw a contrivance of Satan to obscure the sense of
Scripture. He firmly believed in the typical significance of much that is found in the OT, but did not share the opinion of Luther that
Christ should be found everywhere in Scripture. Moreover, he reduced the number of Psalms that could be recognized as Messianic.
He insisted on it that the prophets should be interpreted in the light of historical circumstances. As he saw it, the chief excellency of an
expositor consisted in lucid brevity. Moreover, he regarded it as the first business of an interpreter to let his author say what he does
say, instead of attributing to him what we think he ought to say."

d. The Roman Catholics – The Counter-Reformation - The Council of Trent (Response) - 1545 to 1563 - Major Conclusions:
1. Church Authority must be maintained - main issue vs Allegory
2. Personal Interpretation - Must bow to the Church and the Fathers.
3. Latin Vulgate Reigns - inspired textual foundation

3. Its Major Themes

a. The Doctrine of the Word - Sola Scriptura
1. Ecclesiastical Authority + Allegory - traded for - Personal Interpretation and Literal Meaning - *Comman Man vs Clergy only!
- Obscurity of Word (needing authoritative interpretation) -> Perspicuity of Word (ordinary + common sense interp)
2. The Sufficiency of Scripture - extends to its ability to clearly communicate Faith(salvation) and Practice(life).
b. The Doctrine of the Spirit - Testimonium Spiritu Sanctu
- Indispensible sp qualification for Biblical Interpretation - Sovereign quality control over His people
- Defense against Catholic charge of Hopeless Subjectivity + Differences
c. The Christological Principle - Christ is the unifying center of Biblical Revelation - Distinguishing Law + Gospel
d. The Analogical Principle - Analogy of Faith - Scripture interprets Scripture (SW)
1. Another Passage could provide the Key to unlock the Passage at hand.
2. No Passage might be so interpreted as to contradict over the overall teaching of the Bible.
3. Clear Passages must dominate over more difficult passages in the formulation of doctrine and teaching.

*c. + d. bring the whole counsel of God to bear upon the interpretation of a single text.

E. The Post Reformation Period (Late 1500's - 1700's) - Characteristics

1. Explosion of Biblical Studies - Continued
a. Scriptures translated into different languages
b. Philology Studies - Grammars, Lexicons, Historical Backgrounds, Masoretic Text + Vowel Points added

2. Rise of Confessionalism - Response to Trent's anathematizing the Protestants

15
 *Mickelsen p41 "Theological Statements forged in the heat of controversy often lacked the balance that comes from comprehensive
exegetical study based on a dispassionate study of the Scriptures."
a. Systematic Expressions - Biblical Conclusions - Wholesome Intentions
1. Lutheran: Luther's Small & Large Catechism (1529); Augsburg Confession (1530)
2. Reformed: Heidelberg Catechism (1563); Westminster Standards (1640's); Savoy Declaration of Faith (1658)
3. Baptist: 1st London (1644); 2nd London (1689)

b. Criticisms - Surprisingly Disparaging

1. Mickelsen p42 para #1: "Reason, systems, and abstract formulations ruled in theology. Theology often controlled exegesis, in opposition
to the correct order in which exegesis controls theology. Men looked for texts to prove their theology and explained away evidence
that seemed to be contrary to their particular view."

2. Ramm p60 para#3: "The post-Reformation was a period of theological dogmatism. It was a period of heresy hunting and rigid, creedal
Protestantism. Farrar's account of it although perhaps extreme is nevertheless depressing. He says it was characterized by a three-
fold curse: 'The curse of tyrannous confessionalism; the curse of exorbitant systems; the curse of contentious bitterness.' Speaking of
bitterness among theologians, he writes; "They read the Bible by the unnatural glare of theological hatred.'"

3. Berkhof p28-9: "During the period following the Reformation, it became evident that Protestants had not altogether
purged out the old leaven. Theoretically, they retained the sound principles: Scriptura Scripturae interpres. But
while they refused to subject their exegesis to the domination of tradition and of the doctrine of the Church as
formulated by councils and popes, they were in danger of leading it into bondage to the Confessional Standards of the
Church. It was preeminently the age of Confessions. 'At one time almost every important city or principality had
its own favorite creed'(Farrar). Moreover, it was a controversial period. Protestantism was woefully divided into
several factions. The militant spirit of the age found expression in hundreds of polemical writings. Each sought to
defend his own opinion with an appeal to Scripture. Exegesis became the handmaid of dogmatics, and degenerated
into a mere search for proof-texts. The Scriptures were studied in order to find there the truths that were
embodied in the confessions. This is particularly true of Lutheran, but in a measure also of Reformed theologians."
nd
- Cursory Examination - even Westminster & 1689 – at times inferior prooftexts, yet 2 look often theologically profound!
- "particularly Lutheran" - from Germany sprang Rationalistic Liberalism (later)

c. Evaluation
1. Beware an Anti-Creedalism Mentality - See R. P. Martin, Introduction to SW's Modern Exposition of the 1689, p9-10
“The enthusiasm, however, which many have for the great reformed confessions is not shared by everyone. Sadly we live in a
non-creedal, even an anti-credal, age marked by existential relativism, anti-authoritarianism and historical isolationism. Many
professing Christians regard creeds and confessions of faith as man-made traditions, the precepts of men, mere religious
opinions. Speaking of his day, Horatious Bonar said, ‘Every new utterance of skepticism, especially on religious subjects, and by
so-called “religious” men, is cheered as another howl of that storm that is to send all creeds to the bottom of the sea; the flowing
or receding tide is watched, not for the appearance of truth above the waters but for the submergence of dogma.”

a. In many ways - the Era of Confessionalism was very bright - forging of Orthodox Theology, emphasizing the need of Theological
Interpretation (each passage is a part of a harmonious organic whole).
b. Remember, even Hermeneutics books are written with personal opinions - critical readers!
- In most circles today, theological interpretation is out of favor. Exposition is praised. Doctrine is often disdained.
c. Is it time for additions to be made to ancient confessions in order to address modern controversies?
New Perspective on Justification, Gender Issues, Emergent Themes, etc.

2. Recognize the Danger of Misusing the Analogical Principle – avoid extremes, hold tensions:
a. S Waldron, 1689 p19 "There is but one step between the responsible interpretation of the Bible which believing in its
theological unity, refuses to so interpret any text as to transgress that unity; and on the other hand, the
dogmatic interpretation of the Bible which assuming its system to be biblical, refuses to allow the Bible to speak.
This latter method gags the Bible under the pretense of the analogy of faith."
3. Sense the Delicate Interplay between Exegesis, Systematics, and Tradition - each text:
a. Exegesis - Grammatical + Historical Analysis
b. Systematics - Organic Theological Web of Harmonious Truth - noncontradictory
c. Tradition - recognition of Spirit's sovereign guidance throughout Church History
*Consider Each Angle! - J. A. Turretin - Berkhof commends as a man of fine balance in this period.

3. Reactions to Confessionalism

16
 a. Rationalism - Broke Confessional Yoke - Bible must be interpreted in harmony w/ reason. (Hobbes, Spinoza)
1. Jettisoned: Doctrine of Trinity, Providence, Two Natures of Christ
2. Favored Human Reflection vs Divine Revelation

b. Pietism - Effort to Recover the Bible as spiritual food + nourishment - personal edification
1. Emphasis - Grammatical-Historical interpretation and Application of Scripture to the Personal Life.
2. Influence Felt - Moravians, Zinzendorf, Mennonites -> Also (Ramm) Puritans, Wesley, Edwards, Mt Henry, Quakers
3. Read Berkhof p30-31 – Evaluation of Pietists:
"Weary of the strife among Protestants, they were bent on promoting true piety of life. On the whole, they
represented a healthy reaction against dogmatic interpretations of their day. They insisted on studying the Bible in
the original languages, and under the enlightening influence of the HS. But the fact that, in their exposition, they
aimed primarily at edification, it gradually led to a contempt of science. In their estimation, the grammatical,
historical, and analytical study of the Word of God merely fostered knowledge of the external husk of the divine
thoughts, while the porismatic (drawing inferences for reproof, etc.) and practical (praying and sighing) study
penetrated to the kernel of the truth. . . . The mystical tendencies of these interpreters led them to find special
emphases where none existed." - Bengel, the best of this school.

- Us! - Balanced! - Application - Ever careful to have it! But only w/ sound Hermeneutical moorings!
- Concentrated Effort + Labor - vs viewing as Irrelevant "or" Mystical
- Ever seek to minister on razor's edge of truth!

**The History of Hermeneutics (Continued)

*Review:
A. The Ancient Jewish Period (450 BC)
B. The Early Christian Period (1st century thru 400's AD)
C. The Medieval Period (500's thru 1400's AD)
D. The Reformation Period (1500's)
E. The Post Reformation Period (late 1500s - 1700s)
F. The Modern Period (1800's thru 1900's)
*Important - not only aware of past errors, Interract w/ Literature and Proponents of error and truth in the present.
- Cultivate an awareness of raging debates of our own times - detect danger, side w/ truth.
- *Polio Shot – immunization injects an infectious agent stimulating an immune response, learned ability to fend off disease.
- Literature laced w/ fatal doses – Reimarus Fragments, etc
- Emergent Church – “nothing new under the sun”

F. The Modern Period (1800's thru 1900's) - 3 Phases:

*Preface - Will emphasize dangerous errors - yet a remnant of Integrity + Advancement may be traced in spite of hostile forces
1. Monumental Exegetical Commentaries (Mickelsen, p47)
a. E. W. Hengstenberg g. Henry Alford
b. Carl F. Keil h. C. J. Ellicott
c. Franz Delitszch i. J. B. LIghtfoot
d. H. A. W. Meyer j. Wescott & Hort
e. J. P. Lange k. Charles Hodge
f. F. Godet l. J. A. Broadus
*Princeton -> Westminster (Machen) -> Warfield, Wilson, Hodge, etc.
*Carefully blended Grammar, Lexicography, Historical Background w/ Message of a particular book
- some reservations + disagreement - yet Radical Contrast to Rationalism of their Day!

2. Advancement in Biblical Theology - 20th Century - focus on progressiveness of Biblical Revelation - Geerhardus Vos
- Insists on understanding Biblical authors in terms of their own thinking and historical position they occupy in the
unfolding of Redemptive history.

3. Enlightenment Roots - Downe Grade - offspring - Marriage of Rationalism + Religiosity

a. Age of Reason - Descarte, Spinoza, Kant - Man's coming of age (18th Century)
b. Deism - God created a universe ideally adjusted to the reasoning powers of man, then strictly left it alone(clock).

17
 - Therefore, the constant and mechanical laws of the universe (both physical and moral) can be discovered by
the human mind. (open up the clock)
c. Cornerstone - Systematic Denial of the Supernatural in History - no miraculous, transcendent disruptions of history
- The law of Cause + Effect is absolute! - Scientific Empirical Knowledge.
d. Motto: You must have the courage to use your own understanding!
- Be liberated from superstitious medieval shackles.
e. Emergence from Immaturity - no longer need to rely on such External Authorities as Bible, Church, State
- vs their telling you what to do -> Deism, Rationalism, Empiricism - French and American Revolution
- Myths and Fables of Creation -> Evolution
*Important - we must joust w/ its many offspring - literature - catch the scent of it
– **Small Shot of Poison, better fight it off

1. 19th Century Liberalism (Ramm p63f) - 7 Perspectives:

*Pith Debate - Authoritarianism vs Rationalism
1. Authoritarianism - God has spoken, and the human mind must submit to the voice of God. Yet God's truth
and submission to it is not anti-intellectual!
2. Rationalism - Whatever is not in Harmony w/ the Educated Mentality, must be Rejected. (Humanism)
- creation, resurrection – no evidence, thus impossible!
th
- *Result - Radically Critical treatment of the Scriptures -> Infected 20 + 21st Century Seminaries!

A. The "Modern Mentality" must Govern Hermeneutics - Humanism

1. Bible - The Bible must be treated as any other Human Document - No special exception - Cindarella (pumpkin + mice) tale or hist?
2. Science - presumes uniformity of Nature - Miracles are unacceptable - Resurrection(Christ of Saints); Elijah taken up,
Bread Multiplied, etc.
3. Doctrines - Sin, Depravity, Hell - Philosophically Offensive - Dubious + Primitive Concepts – unsophisticated to accept
4. Redaction - If the Bible seems "patched" (quilted), it may be rearranged according to reason. - Moffat, Gospel of John
- We can find the seams. This will help us distinguish between truth and error. Separate wheat from chaff.

B. The Redefinition of Inspiration

1. Genuine Inspiration Rejected - (in all forms verbal, plenary, dynamic) - Result = no infallible, inerrant, authoritative
2. Revelation = Human Insight into Religious truth, human discovery of Religious truths
Fosdick: "The under side of the process is man's discovery; the upper side is God's revelation." (no special rev, all as general)
3. "Spirit of Jesus" - standard for Binding+Normative interpretation - below this ethical level jettisoned - no authority
Bewer: "To the Christian the only . . .standard is the spirit revealed in Jesus. . .all in OT . . . contrary . . .no authority."
4. Doctrinal + Theological Content - not binding - such is the mere afterthought of religious experience
- "abiding experience" and not "mental frameworks" are permanent in Christianity - rephrasing for next generation

C. The Redefinition of the Supernatural

1. Standard - Extraordinary, Miraculous, Oracular, Attainable only by a power or knowledge beyond human nature – Now rejected
2. Redefined – Supernatural = that which is above the material order - prayer, ethics, pure thought, immortality (Accepted)
3. Bible must receive no Special Treatment vs Classics - E. C. Colwell: “When reports in the scriptures of miracles
violate scientific good sense, treat them as folklore, mythology, or poetic elaboration.” - with a message or lesson! (myth)

D. The Evolution Concept is Applied to Biblical Religion

1. Traceable Development - from Israel's Crude and Primitive Infancy - to its Progressively Elevated Maturity in NT (adulthood)
- yet more clearly understood by post-Enlightenment modern man - Able to trace back to childlike origins.
2. Wellhausen Theory of OT - JEDP (Pentateuch) - *Soundly refuted by Albright + Bright
- Jahwist(850 BC) + Elohist(750) + Deuteronomic (621) + Priestly Code(450)
- Sown together by a Redactor around 400 BC
- Interpreter's Task - sift + find + discover enduring principles, if any, with permanent validity!
3. New Testament Studies - Jesus was a Good man, Highest Prophetic Order -> Evolved into the Strange God/Man of the Creeds
- Paul Bunyan, Hercules, Ho Ee the Chinese Archer
- NT Interpreter must be a Critical Investigator, Expert Archaeologist + Geologist - Uncover layers of Extrapolation
- Jesus(Parables) + Oral Tradition(few accounts) -> Gospels (the creation of the NT Community fr their sp needs)
*i.e. - Mk5 - J calms storm - church in boat! -> Not so much the life of Christ as life of early church!
- Interpreter's Task - must sift with Redaction Criticism, Form Criticism – How + why did Biblical authors edit fragments as they did?
- Literary development of literary Legends and Myths – Quest for the Historical Jesus!

18
 E. The Accommodation Notion of the Bible
1. Theological Statements of the Bible are undermined, as often they are communicated in the perishable and transitory
mold suited to the Ancient Mind. We must modernize them, if they are to be relevant!
2. Example - Paul's Doctrine of Atonement (Rom3, Heb7-9) - Terms of Bloody Jewish Sacrifices
- Paul simply Accommodated himself to the Jews! - (Don Richardson, Peace Child, Irian Jaya)
- A. Becker(Liberal German Pastor br-in-law) - "You still believe in a blood thirsty God?"
3. So Too Jesus accommodated himself to his hearer's 1st century level of understanding
- Historicity of Adam + Eve, Jonah, Davidic Authorship of Psalms - we know better!
- We must strip off concepts + images of primitive OT Cultures - C. J. Ellicott refutes soundly.

F. The Fixation upon the Historical - "The Bible is interpreted historically--w/ a vengeance"
1. Reductionistic - so stresses the meaning of the passage to Original Hearers - amidst shifting cultures+developments
- nearly impossible to pin down any enduring truth
-> Suzerain/Vassal Arrangement of Covenant - relevant to Moses' contemporaries (keep in line), their cultural expectation
- not relevant to 20th century man, independent, rugged individualist who detests authority
2. Repudiates Predictive Element of Prophecy - Only Significance to Original Hearers
- Isaiah 53 - Suffering Servant - Nation of Israel, or King alone! - beyond is fanciful! – Typological Shadow concept is nonsense.

G. The Influence of Philosophy

1. Hegel - Dialectical Theology - ideas are clarified in 3 terms or stages: Thesis->Antithesis->Synthesis
*Pauline Thesis -> Petrine Antithesis -> Lukan Synthesis (Harmonized + made compatible the 2
2. Kant - Theological + Doctrinal Interpretation is irrelevant - morals + ethics are everything
- Jefferson Bible - Penknife version - thru gospels picking out moral+ethical elements, rejecting theological issues!

F. The Modern Era

1. 19th Century Liberalism (above) - 7 Perspectives (A-G)

2. 20th Century Neo-Orthodoxy - 6 Perspectives:

*Preliminary:
1. Purpose - Study will provide a fine backdrop for Foundational Presuppositions of Reformed Hermeneutics
2. History - 19th Century Liberalism crumbled
a. Its radical + elaborate restructuring of Bible's origins - unable to be defended.
b. Evolutionary Optimism of Liberalism - shattered by WW's I & II - nobility of man an optimistic myth!
- nothing to say to war torn world vs DMLJ - Swiss Pr Karl Barth - seeks truth for himself and his people
c. Names of New Movement:
1. Barthianism - stemmed from the original thought of Barth
2. Neo-Orthodoxy - seeks to recover the insights of the Reformers, affinity w/ them w/ qualifications
3. Neo-Liberalism - never really broken w/ fundamental tenets of 19th century liberalism
d. Other major Characters - Brunner, Niebuhr, Kierkegaard

A. The Nature of Revelation

1. Traditional, Orthodox conception of Revelation is denied - There is no:
a. Organic Unity of Scriptures - full of conflicting systems + ethics
b. Inerrancy - blatant errors in science, anthropology, history, geology - science has proven
c. Inspiration - verbal or plenary, such would be mechanical bibliolatry - nonsense
d. Propositional Revelation - truth is not propositional – not able to be clothed in words

2. Diagrams - (SW p27)

a. Orthodoxy - Divine Monologue - Authoritarianism

(Infallible) Meaning (fallible)

Bible ----------------------------------> Interpreter
Revelation (propositional)
Truth Accurately + Adequately clothed in Words
Genesis 1+2 language (logos)

19
 b. Liberalism - Human Monologue - Rationalism

(Fallible) Meaning (Infallible)

Bible <---------------------------------- Interpreter

*Human Reason stands over + dictates to the Bible. No Revelation, except common sense - modern mentality!

c. Neo-Orthodoxy - Dialogue - Rationalism + Irrationalism

I
Meaning (while interacting)
I
(Fallible) V (Fallible)
Bible ----------------------------------> Interpreter
<----------------------------------

*Hermeneutics = Dialogue between the Text and the Interpreter

- This Dialogue - provides a Framework in which Revelation "may" occur" - "zap" strike (Mt16 Thou art the Christ…)
- “Lightning struck here before. Maybe if I stand here again, it will strike again.”
- Kirk Vr (Bapt College - break up w/ Becky) - Mall Parking Lot - struck w/ reality of God's love!
"That night I vowed I'd ever be an Existential Theologian."
- Made Possible by the Irrationalism of Existentialism – Subjective Experience is the only reality: when gripped by a conviction.
- not something that can be grasped by simply hearing or memorizing a passage (Jn3:16 “God so loved the world…”)
- SW: "This is akin to two ships in a shoreless sea waiting for the lightning bolt of meaning to strike as they discuss their
predicament."

3. God's Speech - is not words, but His personal presence

*Revelation is both - God Speaking to me of grace + forgiveness in JC
and - my Response of Faith to this personal address - Both components are necessare for Revelation
*Bible ≠ Revelation - but - Bible = A Fallible Record + Witness to Revelation (in the past to others)
Shared with the Hope, that in strolling over the same spot, lightning will strike again! (Rev!)
- *Sterile Reenactment – Civil War Battle w/o Powder – in hopes that spectator will catch the fever!

B. The Christological Principle

1. Only that in the Bible which witnesses Christ is binding - OT incidents not in harmony w/ Christ - not valid witness!
2. Arbitrary + Subjective - who decides what is in keeping w/ Christ!
- Mt. Sinai Law (vs love); Elijah at Carmel (Baal Prophets); Hosea - yes & no (6:1-2 vs 6:5) *Read
- Lake of Fire? (Rev20) - Barth a Universalist - Stormy seas of life - actually waste deep! (Victor Matthews)
3. This principle is partially true - Mt5:17 plhrow law and prophets - orient whole Bible - yet not discount any of it.

C. The Totality Principle

1. A Doctrine cannot be proven by citation of one or even many Scriptures,
- Rather, the teaching of the Bible must be determined by the Totality of its Teaching - Else Crass Literalism
2. Sounds Soberminded - Analogy of Faith - direct to Orthodox Doctrine
- yet - Totality of Teaching - Back to Christological Principle
- i. e. - Capital Punishment - Gen9:6; Ex21:12, Rom13; Mt26:52 "he who takes up sword shall die by sword"
- not in harmony w/ Jesus Christ - Turn other cheek, love vs hate enemies.

D. The Mythological Principle

1. Crux Passages - Creation of Universe; Creation of Man; Innocence of Man; Fall of Man; 2nd Coming of Christ
a. Liberal - outright Rejection
b. Orthodox - Literal Realities
c. Neo-Orthodox - Mythological Interpretation - form of Theological Communication
- Truth robed in Pseudo-Historical Dress - SW, Analysis of Van Til's 4th Day - package stuffing discarded, figurine kept

2. Examples - supposed Myths:

20
 a. Gen1 Creation - Not actually how, but highlights man's Creaturehood, man's Limitation thru scientific investigation:
"Creation really means that eventually science comes to the end of the line in its explanation of
the universe and must there surrender to truth of another dimension."(Ramm p74)
b. 2nd Coming - Happiness is never meant to be found in an exclusively Historical Existence. Look for an intrusion from another realm.
c. Fall of Man - Every Man inevitably corrupts His moral nature.
d. Incarnation & Cross - Solutions to man's guilt are only found beyond himself thru the Grace of God. Legends
3. Serious and Important Myths - convey meaningful truth - yet not anchored in history, not literally true events.
a. Why relevant? Who cares if historical or not? If Jesus raised or not? If Pink Elephant is real or not? Death is no Pink Elephant.
- 1Cor15:1-4 “…saved if you hold fast to the word I preached…”; 15:17 “if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless”

E. The Existential Principle - Kierkegaard - initial formulation

1. Grammatical, Lexical, Historical study of Bible Necessary, but Preliminary to True reading of the Bible.
2. Ramm, p75:
"To read the Bible as God's word, one must read it with his heart in his mouth, on tip-toe, w/ eager expectancy,
in conversation with God. To read the Bible thoughtlessly or academically or professionally is not to read the Bible
as God's word. As one reads it as a love letter is read, then one reads it as the word of God. The Bible is not God's
word to the soul until one reads it as one ought to read the word of God. 'He who is not alone with God's Word is not
reading God's Word,' pens Kierkegaard."
"Kierkegaard gives the illustration of a boy who stuffs the seat of his pants with napkins to soften the blows of
the licking he is expecting. So the scholar stuffs his academic britches with his grammars, lexicons, and
commentaries and thus the Bible as God's word never reaches his soul."

3. Brock (Ramm, p76) on the Existential Situation:

"Existenz is an attitude of the individual to himself, which is called forth by such concrete situations as the
necessity for choice of profession or a conflict in love, a catastrophic change in social conditions, or the imminence
of one's own death. It leads immediately to Sublime Moments in which a man gathers his whole strength to make a
decision which is taken afterwards as binding upon his future life." It creates resolutions for the future which are
taken to be absolutely binding.

4. Kirk the Abandoned Suitor - Struck w/ reality of own lostness + reality of God's gracious love in Christ!
- MC - Dianne's Rejection + Peter's Denial; Father’s Dead Body; Children's Births, Geoff Thomas Sermon IN
- Profound experiences? Yes! Yet not equated with revelation – Preaching + Devotional Reading!

5. Evaluation:
a. Commendable - godly view of Scripture:
Owen: "Pray as you think. Consciously embrace w/ your heart every gleam of light and truth that comes to
your mind. Thank God for and pray about everything that strikes you powerfully."
Manton: "To hear and not to meditate is unfruitful. We may hear and hear, but it is like putting a thing into a bag
with holes."
b. Dangerous - Fraught w/ arbitrary subjectivism, winds of emotion, disregard of objective truth as personally binding unless personally
"gripped". Consider 1Cor9:27 "buffet my body. . ." – though not swept away, grab soul by lapels
- I feel that. . . Election? Sanctification? Justification?
- Cuts Christianity loose from its historic anchors - Unhistoric Salvation
- vs 1Cor15:1-3 (gospel, saved, if hold fast); Rom10:9 (believe God raised from dead, saved)

F. The Paradoxical Principle - Kierkegaard challenges Hegel

1. Man - a limited + sinful creature ---> God - Whole Other, Transcendent
*Truth of God - Appears to man as Paradoxical (Absurd, Irrational)
2. Examples
- Prayer + Absolute Sovereignty & Predestination Therefore:
- Man is responsible for his sins, but they are inevitable Truths of Religious Experience can never be
- Man must lose his life to save it precisely or rationally defined.
- God is One yet Three Tensions in faith are irrational and are
incapable of rational explication.
- The Cross is both Foolishness and Wisdom
3. Critique
a. False Neo Orthodox Conclusion - No Absolute and Objective Truth, Absurd to attempt to Define it
b. True Christian Theism - see Defense of the Faith, Van Til, p43-46

21
 - Perceived Contradictions are only Apparent -> Divine Sovereignty + Human Responsibility (braided)
x x o x x x x x
x x x x x x x o *My knowledge of the Internet is Partial, yet objective and real.
x x x o x x x x 1Cor13:12 “now I know in part”

- In God there exists an Absolute + Comprehensive System of Knowledge. In Revelation, therefore, our
knowledge is absolute and true, though it may not be comprehensive.
- Revealed knowledge is rational, reasonable, able to be defined, articulated, explicated!

3. Bultmann and the New Hermeneutic (Final phenomenon of Modern Period) - Rudolph
*1950's in Germany, extension of Neo-Orthodoxy, shared perspectives w/ unique twists
A. The Scientific Principle
1. All matters of fact are settled by the Scientific Method - verifiable by ordinary procedures
2. Walk on Water? - Contrary to science, sacrifices our intellects, dangerous step says RB.
3. Bultmann:
"The historical method includes the presupposition that history is a unit in the sense of a closed continuum of
effects in which individual events are connected by the succession of cause and effect. . . . This closedness means
that the continuum of historical happenings cannot be rent by the interference of supernatural transcendent powers
and that, therefore, there is no 'miracle' in this sense of the word." (Mickelsen p7)

4. Francis Schaeffer, The Universe and Two Chairs – 2 Men in a isolated room – Materialist & Theist
Suppose that on the wall of their room there is a large clock. All of a sudden it stops. And these two men turn around and
say, "What a pity! The clock has stopped." The materialist says, "That will never do, and because there are only you and I in this
universe, one of us must clamber up the wall and start the clock. There’s nobody else to do it." The Christian replies, "Now wait a
moment. Yes, it’s possible for one of us to climb up and start the clock, but there is another possibility. I may talk to the one who
made this universe (one who is not in the universe in the sense of it merely being an extension of his essence) and he can start the
clock."
Here is a tremendous difference in attitude. You can imagine the materialist’s reaction. "Now I know you’re crazy. You’re
talking about someone we can’t see starting a material clock." Anyone who has been doing modern twentieth-century thinking will
realize the relevance of this. And I also think we may here see why so many Christians have no reality. They are not certain that it is
possible for the God who made the universe to start the clock when a Christian talks to Him.

4. Mickelsen's Critique (p8)

"There is no neutral ground in this controversy. If God did break through into history as the Bible records, then He
is not only active in history, but he acts freely and purposefully above and beyond history. He then becomes the
Cause of all other causes and effects, and at the same time he may act in, with, alongside of, and apart from any
secondary causes or effects. Instead of Bultmann's closed continuum, such an interpreter would have a controlled
continuum. Nothing is haphazard or errataic. God has established laws, but he is not a prisoner of his own laws.
Bultmann has a universe with a lid on. Unfortunately one gets the uncomfortable feeling that not only is man shut up
to existence under this lid, but God also."

B. The Critical Principle

1. Neo-Orthodox + Barth - believed in Content wrapped up in Myth + Form - Kernel of Message
- Once Unwrapped - Must be Embraced - Barth did not Criticize the Actual Kernel Content – taught we are honor bound to believe it
2. Bultman - Criticism extends to Conclusions (content) -> We may be forced to conclude by exegesis that the NT teaches the
virgin birth. However, we are not obligated to believe the virgin birth. Man is the final court.

C. The DeMythological-Existential Principle - Duties of the Interpreter:

1. Recognize Mythological character of a passage - i. e. Obsolete world view (must be scrapped)
- weather patterns, earthquakes (jet stream, shifting continental plates vs breath and fingers of God)
2. Find out the Message (content) of the Myth - Demythologize - Unmask the Myth
3. Recover the Original Existential Meaning of the myth - As NT grew out of Existential Encounters
- Yet, even then Skepticism may remain concerning this content!
- Example: Thunder, Smoke, Fire, Voice from Sinai -> 1. Storm + Volcano 2. God's Character is being described
3. God is a righteous Judge whose wrath is to be feared - yet, the NT God of love nullifies this content!
*RPM - Bultmann was an edifying preacher - used familiar terms - yet twisted their sense.

G. PostModern Era - Emergent Church – Crisis of Hermeneutics – Case Study Field Trip – We don’t do hermeneutics in a vacuum.
1. Scott Pagitt – Solomon’s Porch – Video Clip

22
 2. The Emerging Church parts 1-3 – by Gary E. Gilley – Think on These Things Articles (www.swchapel.org)
- Extra Handout – See Appendix
3. Note: DeMythologizing, Neo-Orthodox view of revelation, “Words are lame. Experience rules.”
4. No Certainty!

*Summary - Lessons + Issues arising from The History of Hermeneutics - (SW p28-9)
1. PreReformation Orthodoxy
A. Hermeneutical Conviction - Unity + Authority of the Bible
B. Hermeneutical Approaches
1. Allegory (Rampant Elasticity w/ no quality control)
2. Literal - sound control - This School ran aground in heresy *Allegory + Tradition ruled thru Medieval
3. Tradition - church authority controlled allegorical fancies
2. Reformation Orthodoxy
A. Grammatical & Historical Interpretation - vs Allegory
B. Private Interpretation - vs Tradition
C. Analogical Interpretation - vs Heresy
*Resulting Tensions - ever pulling on every Passage

Analogical (Systematics) Literal (Gramm-Hist Exegesis) Ecclesiastical (Church History)

\ I /
\ I /
Hermeneutics
(continual check and balance)

3. Post Reformation Heterodoxy - Rejection of Biblical Authority + Infallibility - unable to separate truth from error
*Loss of Biblical Authority - Derailed from the possibility of Certainty!

**Hermeneutics

I. Hermeneutics - Introduction and Definition

II. The History of Hermeneutics

III. The Foundational Presuppositions of Reformed Hermeneutics

*Preface:
1. Set against the Backdrop of The Foundational Errors of Modern Hermeneutics - helpful backdrop + foil, essentials Ref herm.
- As a backdrop of blue enhances a diamond's beauty + worth in the eye of the beholder,
So " error " the truth's " " " " .
- Reformed Orthodoxy - Built upon Rock of Biblical Authority - provide here solid footers -> Presuppositions
- Foundational Framework for the whole Hermeneutical Endeavor

2. Admission - Foundational Perspectives themselves grow out of a Framework of the Bible itself!
"The Content of the Bible teaches us how to interpret the Content of the Bible."
a. Assumed Starting Point - The Christian posseses a fundamental ability to properly interpret the Bible. (G's word, image) – Language Gen 1
- Reciprocal Process - continual honing, maturing, improving, correcting of the Interpreter
*Child's learning of language via language?!
b. Circular Reasoning? - Assume Authority of Bible w/o Proof? Yes!
- Everyone assumes authority w/o Proof: Rationalist (authority of reason); Christian (authority of Bible)
- God Has Spoken (Packer) – Child believes Father – we our perfect Heavenly Father, cannot lie, yea+amen, no shifting shadows.
- Full justification for this - Apologetics + Epistemology - **Our Presupposition in Hermeneutics
*Rationalistic Hermeneutics of Liberalism + Neo-Orthodoxy - no common ground w/ Christian Hermeneutics
3. Presuppositions - Convey Concepts thru Framework of 5 Thesis Statements:

23
A. Creation Endowed Man w/ the Ability to Properly Interpret God's Word (SW p30)
*Moses Stuart (Terry p173-4) "An interpreter, well skilled in his art, will glory in it, that it is an art which has its foundation in the laws of our
intellectual and rational nature, and is coeval and connate with this nature." – It (interpretation) is originally an innate ability.

1. The Biblical Exposition - Creation Narrative, Gen 1&2

a. Language is Originally Divine - Gen1:3,6,9,22,14,etc.
- God spoke before man existed. Speech is not unique to man. It is not merely an activity of finite humanity. It is originally Divine. The
God of the Bible speaks.
b. Man is made in the Image of God (Gen1:26-7)
1. Man speaks + interprets as Image of God - Language is not man's independent invention
- rather man is imitating, emulating, copying God.
2. Gaffin - Speaking is 1st of all and intrinsically an activity of God. Therefore man in His linguistic function (especially and pointedly so) is
understood as the creature who is God's image. This uniquely sets us apart from all other creatures.
3. Image = God-like - Possibility for Revelation from God to man; Ability to understand + respond to this Rev
a. As Image-bearer - endowed w/ ability to communicate on linguistic medium, wavelength
b. Unlike whales (non-image) - yips + moans (crude communication) nonLinguistic Wavelength - we can't Decifer
c. We are partaker's of God's language skills - He locked us into His frequency - Creation Endowment!
c. Eden Manifested Meaningful God-Man Communication - Presupposing + Validating implanted Ability
1. God speaks to man (inevitable corrollary is that man understood) - Gen2:16-17; 3:13 (even post fall!)
2. Man speaks in presence of God + Woman (implication - to them) - 2:20, 23 - "Intelligent" response to God's words + deeds.

2. The Hermeneutical Application

a. Proper Interpretation of God's Words is Possible for Man (PostFall)
1. Contrary to the Rationalist's tangled + complex problems – Immanent(near in nature)+Transcendent(beyond compreh); Finite+Infinite
- Revelation is understandable Monologue.
2. The Bible casually assumes man's capacity to comprehend - Displayed in the effortless activity of Adam.
- **Here are the roots of the possibility of proper hermeneutics
b. Language is a Capable Vehicle for Meaningful God-man Communication
1. SW: "The Divine Origin of Language must relieve us of the idea that communication in Human languages must mean
inevitable distortion of meaning." Language is able to convey infallible truth!
2. Neo-Orthodoxy - Skeptical of Crude Finite language to convey Divine Infinite Truth
- Like Reading Shakespeare thru a kazoo: "To be or not to be. . ." Distorts (Neo-Orth)
- Like U.S. Sprint - Hear a pin drop - crystal clarity (Reformed)
c. Man as Image can know God + have knowledge of God
1. Not comprehensive but limited knowledge, Infinite knowledge accommodated to man's finite capacity
- yet w/o any distortion of meaning.
2. Sovereignty of God in creation - insures clarity even though accommodation - vs Neo-Orthodoxy quagmire
SW: "Accommodation does not necessitate distortion of meaning. This is so because God in creating man
accommodated man's being to himself, before accommodating his revelation to man." - perfect vs crude fit!
- vs the Impotent and Incompetent god of Neo-Orthodoxy
d. God is Both Transcendent and Immanent
1. Transcendent - Neo-Orthodox - infinitely beyond the world order (They conclude absurd to know)
2. Immanent - Liberal - finitely rational w/in the world order (They conclude all can be known.)
3. He is Both - Beyond indeed! Yet knowable in part - Accurately!

B. The Fall imposed upon Man the Necessity for the Hermeneutical Study of God's Word
*Thesis - Adam's Prelapse Effortless Reception is no more - Fall brings Complex of sin, curse, rebellion, judgment (man)
- Qualification - Certainly the mysteries of the Unfathomable and Infinite God pondered by Innocent Man's Finite Mind may have accounted
for even PreFall difficulty, yet it is only the "sinful" mind which is capable of twisting truth into error. Thus the Fall necessitates "sweat
of the brow" hermeneutics.

1. Biblical Exposition - Effects of the Fall on God-Man communication

a. Internal Attitude Problems - Rebellion, Debilitating man's capacity to communicate w/ God
1. Gen3:4-6 - Rebellion of Unbelief - undercuts man's capacity to interpret - “You’ll surely not die…God knows…delight…took and ate”
2. Gen3:8 - Result - Aversion to receive communication from God (bushes) - Fear vs Harmony hampers interpretation
3. Gen3:11-12 - Distortion, as man introduces new thoughts which obscure clarity (“the woman Thou gavest”)
*Ethical Deterioration - Cripples man's interpretive ability
a. Reticence or Refusal to listen at all

24
 b. Selective Listening, Misunderstanding to one's own advantage, creative excuses
c. Rejection of Portions of God's Word - distasteful to the sinner.

b. External Circumstantial Problems - Judgment on Men, Curse + its Effects

1. Death - Gen3:19 - return to dust
- now Original Recipients cut off (Prophets + Apostles) - unable to shed light on meaning - loss of quality control!
- now Loss of Contact w/ original Historical + Cultural setting of Revelation
(no enslaved Israelites left, no 1st century Thessalonians left - for us to consult with)
2. Alienation - Gen3:23-24 - driven from garden, flaming sword
- now God's Nurturing and Corrective contact (cool of day) is lost - fallen man aimlessly gropes for meaning
3. Confusion of Tongues - Gen11:1-9 - effect of judgment
- now Linguistic Problems - Cross Lingual - Heb, Grk, Aramaic;
Evolving language thru Centuries (Chaucer, KJV, NAS -> Koine vs Modern Grk; Hebrew)
4. Presence of a Deceiver – Gen 3; Mt 4

*Diagrammed:
Sin --> Curse (External Problems + Internal Problems) ---> Necessity for Hermeneutics

2. Hermeneutical Application - Sin + Curse

a. The Problems necessitate careful, tedious, diligent Study of God's Word
1. Redemption does not immediately overcome the difficulties - resulting in effortless reception.
2. Bible was given under Cursed Conditions, thru Foreign Language + Culture, and is read by yet Imperfectly Redeemed
Christians.
b. The Problems Necessitate a Special Class of Men who give themselves wholly to this diligent study of Scriptures.
1. Validation - Acts6:4; 1Cor12 teachers part of body; Eph4 pastor teachers; 2Tim2 faithful men, approved workmen
2. Qualifications - 1Tim3; Tit1:
a. Ethical - "blameless" - to overcome Internal Problems
b. Intellectual - "able to teach" - to overcome External Problems
3. Facilitation - of Private Interpretation of Individuals - not nullify it - Bereans (Acts17:10) *individual responsibility

C. Redemption Restores Man's Created Ability to Properly Interpret God's Word

1. God's Redemptive Provision in General - As related to Hermeneutics - parallels w/ grace in general
a. It is designed to Restore Man's Originally Created Interpretative Ability
1. Son came - Generally - Purpose: "that He might destroy the works of the Devil"(1Jn3:8)
- to reverse effects of the Fall + Curse
2. Hemeneutical Realm - to restore Image-bearer's ability to Meaningfully understand God's Word (Gen1+2)
- cool of day, out from bushes, illumine darkened minds (Rom 1)
b. It is distributed according to the principle of Election
1. Puzzling Question - Why do some continually fail in Hermeneutical Endeavor? - Liberal, Neo, Bultmann, JW's, . . . ?
2. False Conclusion - Because Revelation is garbled, obscure, flawed! - So say many - Unbelieving skepticism
3. Sound Answer - Due to Sin + NonElection -> Widespread misinterpretation + failure - manifestation of Double Predestination (Rom9
Potter): Most are not furnished w/ spiritual provision to rightly decode + interpret Word! – 1Cor2 “spiritually discerned”
-> Widespread failure + diversity
c. It is applied with Guaranteed Efficacy
1. As with Grace - No mere Possibility of Success - certainly Applied - Regeneration!
2. So " Hermeneutics - " " " " " - " " - Comprehension! - in herm endeavors
- Guaranteed Success vs Outside Chance - emboldens the Christian w/ a measure of well founded Confidence!
- Different set of dynamics - than when attempting to comprehend IRS tax forms, camera instructions - inadequacy + pessimism

2. God's Subjective Provision in Particular - The Work of the Holy Spirit in producing Faith
*Illumination or Enlightenment - Acts9 encounter - scales fall - Recognize + Convinced of Truth->already present – Jesus-centered vs law
a. Classic Passages - Spirit's Illuminating
1. 2Cor2:3-6 - veiled gospel, blinded, spoke light into darkness - *Stressing Inability
2. Rom1:21 - "suppress the truth in unrighteousness" - *Inability
3. Mt11:25 - "hide from the wise + intelligent . . . to babes" - *Stressing Sovgn Election
4. Mt16:17 - Simon BarJonah, not revealed by flesh + blood but by Fr in Heaven - *Sovgn Election
5. 1Cor2:1-16 - foolishness to the natural man . . . lest taught by the Spirit - *Stressing eye opening work of Spirit

25
 6. 1 Jn2:20,27 "you have an annointing from the Holy One, and you all know . . . abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach
you. . ." *Stress on Universality+Sufficiency of Sp's work for all Christians(vs Gnosticism) – secret knowledge of elites
- Warrant for Private Interpretation - vs Elite Gnosticism (Allegorico-Ecclesiastical Hermeneutics)

b. Important Clarifications - Spirit's Illuminating

1. Recognition vs Impartation - Wising Us Up to that which is already present in Scriptural Revelation vs Imparting to Us New Content
beyond the Scriptures
- **Job offer, (Hovingh Busin Machines) – Dt17:18 King, “copy of law” -> Copy Machine – bordering on New Revelation!
- vs Lord’s Day, Salary 1Tim5:8, Truth (sales integrity), Future (inheritance), Counsel
- Packer: "By working in our minds and hearts, the HS enables us to grasp and rightly apply divine instruction effectively."
2. Ethical vs Magical
a. The Primary Function of the HS in illuminating the believer is the Removal of Ethical Hindrances unto the proper interpretation of
Scriptures.
b. The Spirit gives faith + submission to a previously Rebellions Mind. A desire, willingness to hear the Word of God is restored.
Internal Opposition created by sin(unbelief) is replaced by an Internal Submission created by Redemption (faith).
c. 1Thess1:5: "for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; . . ."
2:13: ". . . you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God,"
*New Subjective Disposition -> Believing Submission vs Unbelieving Rebellion
- 7th Commandment previously scoffed at - now revered! – **enlightened couple living together, sleep in separate rooms!
d. The Subjective Disposition of the Scholar weighs heavily upon him in his Exposition (Submission or Rebellion?)
*Liberal Rationalist - contends that he has Objective Neutrality - Rather Internal Belligerence + Opposition (Germ Pastor, bloody)
- see Rom1:18 “suppress truth”; 1:21 “futile speculations…professing to be wise, became fools” - old subjective disposition
3. Essential vs Optional - Able Interpreter - not mere pietism
a. Believers may possess the Spirit in variable measures -> quenchable(1Th5:19), grievable(Eph4:30)
1. You may have all State of Art scientific Tools - unable to crack a text or enter into its truth - w/o Spirit (Is59:2 iniq separation)
2. Study - doldrums, sails hang limp ->rushing wind, fill to bursting - Intangible!
- not mere Physiology + Psychology - measure of Sp Annointing (not new Rev) Illuminating+Quickening Mind
b. Ramm, Hermeneutics, Edited p19-20
"The intangibility of the work of the Spirit might be far more real than all the scientific procedures applied to the
text. Because it is believed that the great fathers of the church were Spirit-gifted men, some theologians trust
more to patristic exegesis than they do to modern scientific exegesis. Others think that Luther and Calvin were
such men of the Spirit that they are better guides to the real substance of the NT than men of our day with all
their aids to exegesis."
c. Pursue it - vs merely Await it - Jacob's wrestling, Joshua's scouring (Achan)
d. No Substitute - for tedious sweat + toil - Dovetail together - Moses on Mt in Prayer + Joshua w/ steel + sweat in the valley below!

D. Inspiration Provides Man with an Objective Record of God's Word - work of HS in producing the Bible
1. Process of Inspiration
A. Referenced
1. 2Tim3:16 - qeopneustos - "breathed out by God" - Hapax Legomena
- Warfield - "In a word, what is declared by this fundamental passage is simply that the scriptures are a divine product, without any
indication of how God has operated in producing them."
- The term is not unpacked for us, yet manifests the most potent conceiveable imagery to convince us that Scripture is a product of
specifically Divine Operation.
2. 2Pet1:20-21 - ". . .men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." -> Conclusions about Scripture:
(John Murray, vol 4, p46f)
a. Not the Product of individual reflection or imagination
b. Not owe its origin to human initiative, volition, or determination
c. Is conveyed through human instrumentality
d. Is taken up by the agency of the Spirit of God - resulting in accomplishment of the purposed goal - Product is the Word of God
- see Jn10:34-35 “your law…to whom the word of God came’ (quotation from Ps82:6 identified by Jesus as "the word of God".
B. Defined - Inspiration, as it relates to Scripture, is a process whereby a person has been so guided by the Spirit of God in his speaking or
writing that its result is the Word of God.
- Berkhof, p41 "By inspiration we understand that supernatural influence exerted on the sacred writers by the HS, by virtue of which their
writings are given divine truthfulness, and constitute an infallible and sufficient rule of faith and practice."
C. Expanded - Addition of Significant Details
1. Inspiration's Mode - Divine/Human CoAuthorship (delicate interplay - concursory ) vs Mechanical, Dictation theory (secretary)
a. Confluent - Human and Divine factors flow confluently and harmoniously.

26
 b. Organic - "The HS acted on the writers of the Bible in an organic way, in harmony with the laws of their own
inner being, using them just as they were, with their character and temperament, their gifts and talents, their
education and culture, their vocabulary and style." (Berkhof, Summary of Christian Doctrine, p20)
- Victor in China – injected own personality + cultural mindset into his translation
c. John Murray: "Because the inscripturated Word is the word of man in every part + element, it intelligibly comes home
to our hearts. Because it is the Word of God in every part + element, it authoritatively stands as our constant law + guide.”
2. Inspiration's Extent
a. Verbal - Down to each component linguistic part (Mt5:18 jot + tiddle) – superintends each syllable (sovereignty + responsibility)
Prov16:33 “lot cast into lap, every decision of the Lord”
b. Plenary - Unto the comprehensive entirety of its canon (2Tim3:16 all Scripture)

2. The Product of Inspiration - God's Word, The Bible

*Given to men - 1. In a Redemptive Context (vs Creation + Fall alone)
2. With a Redemptive Purpose (imparting revelation unto salvation)
- Consider 6 Attributes of Scripture (A->E) accompanied by 6 related Hermeneutical Principles (1->6)

A. Authoritative - Since it is God's Word, it demands our obedience and submission

1. Revelation occurs as a Monologue from God to man - not as a dialogue between man + God
2. vs Neo-Orthodox - Dialogue betw 2 Fallible Parties - groping for truth
3. Bible is the Inspired + Inerrant Word of God.

B. Mysterious - Since it is God's Word, it is certainly mysterious.

1. God is ultimately incomprehensible to us. Dimensions of His Word will also be incomprehensible to us.
- It will teach things that transcend our reason. – **Trinity, Predestination, Eternity of God “I AM”
2. Infinite God - Omniscient, Omnipresent, Eternal - beyond our "cup full of gray matter"
- It is absurd to demand full comprehension before we approve its veracity - unfathomable mysteries.

1. Principle of Monological Interpretation - In a unique sense, the Bible must not be treated as any other book!
a. Reason must apprehend + collate its teachings, but never evaluate them - i. e. judge or appraise content as if on trial!
b. SW, p40 "In Fact, the very divinity of the Bible assures us that mysteries + truths will be encountered which human
reason must reject if it is regarded as the measure of all things." – **Resurrection, Parousia
c. Example - reject miraculous in Greek Epics - Illiad, Odyssey(mermaids) - but not in Bible(angels)
d. Submissively listen to Word - w/o Interrupting to engage in a critical dialogue w/ It
- the more submissive we are, the better our comprehension - vs Neo-Orthodox approach

C. Harmonious - Organically United, NonContradictory in its parts

1. Supra-Rational ≠ Irrational - Trinity
2. Though it may appear to man as paradoxical, we can be assured that in God there exists an Absolute + Comprehensive system of
knowledge. The pieces do rationally fit together - in His Mind! – Harmonious!
- Rubix Cube (54 squares) - To me, it's impossible, can’t be done - In Mind of God, falls into place! – Sovereignty & Resp[onsiblity

2. Principle of Analogical Interpretation - No self contradiction

a. Analogy of faith is Valid - One Part of Bible must harmonize w/ the Whole - Scripture interprets Scripture
b. We interpret w/ the assumption that there will be a rational harmony of various parts.
- We are obligated to seek a harmony in exegetical conclusions vs judge error upon apparent discrepancies.
- I am Short (Calvin College); I am Tall (China)
- See Schoenhoeven, Scripture, Tradition, and Interpretation - p105, Hebrews 6:4-6; 10:38: - Tension in Warning Passages
"Although the 'analogy of faith' devotee may assert that whatever these texts say they cannot teach that a 'saved'
person could be forever lost so as never again to be able to experience repentance, this is precisely what is taught
here. (MC: No!) These statements must not be interpreted in the context of other teachings; they must be interpreted in the
context of Hebrews and from the perspective of this writer. Such strong words should not be distorted by some
sort of 'illumination' from other passages. They must stand as they are, and in so standing give more profound
understanding of an emphasis to the enormous evil of relying on anything other than God. By doing this one
forthrightly tells God that neither he nor his sacrifice in Christ can be trusted. One who does this calls God a liar.
There is no greater sin. And if persisted in, this brings one into such spiritual ruin that there can be no repentance.
(Heb 6:4-6)"
- Amen! Tension! Yet condescendingly patronizes, as if true exegetical integrity does not get caught up in the
theologizing or harmonizing net.

27
 - Systematics denigrated by many Exegetes – Turf Wars (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines) – all curcial for strong military
– Exegetical, Historical, Biblical, Systematics – all crucial for accurate Interpretation

3. Principle of Theological Interpretation - Authority, mystery, unity of Bible - requires us to go beyond Gramm-Hist Int!
a. Grammatical-Historical Interpretation - is liable to forget - God is the Author - Exclusively deals w/ human aspects
b. There is a Unity + Sufficiency present in the Bible beyond that which is standard on the human level.
c. All the Breath of Living God - Supernatural, Mysterious, Authoritative Harmony vs Cacophany of voices.
- not throw out the Highs + Lows - keep the average message!
d. G-H Interpretation is Nearsighted w/o the Spectacles of Theological Interpretation - Only in this context, sitz em leben
1. Focus by seeing the Organic Whole - each book an integral part of the Whole Counsel of God
2. Focus by appreciating - Type, Antitype, Symbolism, Prophecy, Germ Development
- example - organic unity of the covenants (Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, New) - *cornstalk
3. Focus by Recognizing Logical Deductions - Good + Necessary Inference
- Calvinism – says the G-H scholar - Doctrines of Grace - Theologizing vs Exegeting the Text - Derogatory
- Contemporary Lit (seminaries) - subtle belittling of Systematics
- The Exegete and not the Systematician is the man of true Integrity -> He's not dogmatic in his conclusions
because he understands other texts which bring a tension in another direction - thus boasts in his
inconclusiveness! -> Limited Atonement -> 2Pet2:1 "Denying the Master who bought them"
e. Dr. James Grier - Beware of 2 Extremes
1. Antlike Exegete - ever storing away material, building nothing - text after text exegeted, but never knit together
2. Spiderlike Systematician - spinning webs from self manufactured threads
- Own Ideas + Imaginations imposed -> proof texting
- or Manufactured by Church Tradition - Church of Rome, Protestant Confessions
*Berkhof, p66 "It goes w/o saying that every interpreter ought to take account of the exegetical labors of
former ages that crystallized in the creeds, and should not lightly depart from what became a communis opinio.
But he may never permit that which is the fruit of exegesis to become its norm (standard). He cannot, consistently and
legitimately, allow the Church to dominate in matters of interpretation." – Do exegesis, listen to Word vs to Mt Henry!
f. Goal - To be Exegetical Systematicians
1. Theological Jigsaw Puzzlers (masterpiece of Logical Truth in the perfect Mind of God)
- we possess pieces + clusters of truth - ever examining + connecting
- not rejecting sections put together by our forefathers (of course check the fit!) - that we might more clearly
comprehend the original.
2. In Glory - we'll see more clearly (vs now dimly 1Cor13) - yet even then our finite minds will not be able to grasp
the whole picture of truth! (finite minds, infinite wisdom) – Rom 11:33 “O the depth....unsearchable”

D. LIteral - Plain, Common sense, Straightforward speech

1. In order to reveal the Way of Salvation (purpose of redemption!), the Bible must speak in the ordinary language of men.
- vs Mysterious language
2. Words, Phrases, Sentences - Therefore - must convey their ordinary, grammatical, historical meanings.
- 1Cor15:3-6 - death, resurrection, appearances - common words, no legend or myth - straightforward talk
- Jn19:33-35 - Jesus is dead, spear, blood+wter, bear true witness, that might believe - Dead, historical context!
- vs Allegory Myth - cleanse sins(water); give life to souls(blood) - illustration OK(clarify that)
3. Allegory is not Revelation in Character
- Assumes previous knowledge - and - does not Reveal knowledge - as Philo imposed philosophy on texts.

4. Principle of Grammatical Interpretation

*As immediately above - in this sense (Literal) - The Bible must be interpreted "as any other book."
* Appalling? – Mr. Stevens @ GRBC – v hidden meanings, not a magical book (superstition) -> eventually precious (2Tim3)

E. Practical - Provision of God to Man out the Way of Salvation (Redemptive Purpose)
1. 2 Tim3:15-17 "Sacred writings . . . give you wisdom that leads to salvation . . . profitable . . . every good work."

5. Principle of Applicatory Interpretation - Accomplish that goal

1. Endeavors to find Soteriological, Christological Doctrines & Ethical, Moral Instruction
2. We have a warrant for such a search. We have a hope for such success.
3. No snipe hunt, or overestimation of Scriptures!

F. Perspicuous - Demanded + Defined by Redemptive Purpose (As sufficient for 2 Tim3:15-17 wise for salv, equip work)

28
 1. Definition - Clear + Understandable enough to accomplish this purpose.
2. Qualification - Such clarity:
a. Not Demand the absence of Hermeneutical Difficulties in every text
- only perspicuity of that truth necessary to accomplish its purpose (2Tim3), not of every verse of the Bible
- but perspicutiy of the whole message of the Bible - as required (above) -clear verses precedence over obscure
b. Not EquallyClear to all - Westminster Confession of Faith - I, 7
"All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all: yet those things which are
necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded, and opened in some
place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may
attain unto a sufficient understanding of them."
*Ps119:105 "Thy Word is a lamp to my feet, And a light to my path."
130 "The unfolding of Thy Words gives light. It gives understanding to the simple."
3. Extension - Including God's Special Providences
a. Preservation of the Bible together with adequate linguistic + cultural data for understanding it! (Josiah find 2Chron34, Ezra)
b. Provision of gifts given to the church by her Lord - Pastors, Teachers (Eph4)

6. Principle of Private Interpretation - Justified Here

a. 1Jn2:20 "all" an annointing from the Holy One - Universal among God's people
- grounded in Perspicuity + Sufficiency
b. Not abstracted from - teaching gifts given by Christ, but not denied in interest of Church's teaching office – Bereans (Acts17)
- study Scriptures to see if true – 1Pet2:9 royal priesthood
c. Berkhof p65
"In distinction from the Church of Rome, the Churches of the Reformation accepted the important principle that
every individual has the right to investigate and to interpret the Word of God for himself. It is true, they also held
that the Church, in virtue of her potestas doctrinae, was entrusted w/ the important task of preserving,
interpreting, and defending the Word of God, and was qualified for this paramount duty by the HS. But they
repudiated the idea that any ecclesiastical interpretation is per se infallible and binding on the conscience. The
interpretations of the Church have divine authority only insofar as they are in harmony with the teachings of the
Bible as a whole. And every individual must judge of this for himself. Protestants deny that God ever constituted the
Church, in her appointed organs, as the special interpreter of the divine Word, and maintain the prerogative of
every Christian to study and interpret Scripture."
d. Goal - 2Tim3:15 = "salvation through faith" - demands personal conviction; this requires Private Interpretation!

*Review:
III. The Foundational Presuppositions of Reformed Hermeneutics (4 Pillars)

A. Creation endowed man with the ability to properly interpret God's Word.

B. The Fall imposed upon man the necessity for the Hermeneutical Study of God's Word.

C. Redemption Restores Man's Created Ability to Properly Interpret God's Word.

D. Inspiration Provides Man with an Objective Record of God's Word.

E. Sound Interpretation demands that men acknowledge the "Theanthropic" Nature of God's Inscripturated Word.
*This will provide a nice Transition into upcoming study on Methodology (IV, V, VI on Syllabus)

1. The Bible is a Unique Document:

a. It is both like and unlike every other piece of literature.
b. Therefore - this necessitates a Unique Hermeneutics - Distinct set of principles for its interpretation - to govern the project
- because it is unlike any other document!
*Berkhof p40: "Special Hermeneutics must always adapt itself to the class of literature to which it is applied."

2. The Bible is a "Theanthropic" Document

*Analogy to the Person of Christ is Helpful - Jn1:14: "and the word (logos) became flesh and dwelt among us."
a. Person - Known as the Word of God - Jesus Christ
- Fully and Thoroghly Human, while simultaneously Fully and Thoroughly Divine.
b. Book - Known as the Word of God - The Bible

29
 - Fully and Thoroughly Human Book, while simultaneously Fully and Thoroughly Divine Book.
*As in Christology:
1. The Bible is not Human at the expense of its Divinity, nor Divine at the expense of its Humanity.
2. We must embrace the truth of both Extremes vs Mediating position or one Extreme - In Christology -> Heresy!
- As Christological "Tertium Quid" Heresy (fabrication of a being neither fully Divine nor fully Human)
- so Bibliological Heresy is Possible

Human Document (Rationalist Liberal) Divine Document (Heavenly Language Allegorist)

Partially Divine & Partially Human Document

(Contemporary NeoEvangelical)

3. The Bible's Hermeneutic Must Encompass both its Divinity and its Humanity. (Practical Upshot)
a. Its Humanity - Grammatical-Historical Interpretation - As any other Book - Dissect as any document
IV. V.

1. Grammatical - Literal - Natural, proper, normal reading - recognizing even highly figurative elements
- careful respecting of Linguistic Components and Interconnections.
2. Historical - Original Context + Culture consulted to comprehend a passage's initial purpose, meaning, significance.
b. Its Divinity - Theological Interpretation - As Divine Product - Assume it is marked by Certain Excellent Qualities
VI.

1. Qualities - 6 Above: Authoritative(providing certainty, infallibility, inerrancy), Mysterious, Harmonious, Literally

Precise, Practical, Perspicuous
2. Gives us an eye - to the Loftiness of the Bible's Content!
*Sound Hermeneutics incorporates both of these 2 perspectives.

4. The Bible's Hermeneutic must avoid Imbalanced Pitfalls (Cautions)

a. Neglecting of Divinity
1. The Humanity of Bible - It does not mean errancy or sinfulness of Bible.
2. The stopping short at Grammatical-Historical approach
b. Neglecting of Humanity
1. Violation of Language Principles - i.e. Hebrew & Greek -> Divine Hebrew & HS Greek
vs Vernacular Shepherd's Hebrew & Koine Marketplace Greek
2. Allegorical Interpretation - based on profound reverence for Scripture - manifold senses + hidden meanings
- yet no longer comprehensible to the "normal" human mind!

**Hermeneutics

IV. Grammatical Interpretation – consult Syllabus, regain bearings

*Introduction:
1. Focus on the Humanity of Scripture - Grammatical-Historical Interpretation
2. Grammatical - near synonym = Literal Interpretation - also Philological, Critical Interpretation
a. Contrasted - w/ Allegorical, Mystical methods - 4fold sense, etc.
b. Task - draw meaning out of Scriptures vs Pouring Meaning into Scriptures (case of Absalom entering Jerusalem “never saw that!”)
c. Requirement - Impartial + Objective study of the Text
Ramm, p116 "Calvin said that Holy Scripture is not a tennis ball that we may bounce around at will."
3. Literal - Natural, Proper, Obvious, Normal meaning of the Language.
a. Recognition - Lingusitic components + interconnections
b. Contrasted - w/ wooden + crass Literalism - fails to appreciate often highly figurative elements in scripture (Mk8:15f leaven Pharisees)
c. Overlooks Not - Figures of Speech, Symbols, Types, even Allegories in Scripture
- Allegories: Ezk16 unwashed child; Ezk17 eagle, seed, vine; Judges9 olive tree, fig tree, vine, bramble – Jotham v Abimelech)
4. Quest - seek to recover the Original Meaning + Intent of the Written Text - discover what it means + says
-> Below are the Crucial Considerations - Grammatical Methodology:

A. The Original Languages

30
 1. Fundamental Premise - RPM: "All Truly Trustworthy, Reliable, Faithful, Authoritative exegesis is done w/ the original languages."
- verbal + plenary inspiration taken seriously - inerrancy
- Aggressively pursue a working knowledge of Grk + Heb - vs Modern preparation mentality (optional in some seminaries)

2. Translations - Even the best (NAS) most literal (ASV 1901) leave you alienated from original - yet at a distance
- Analogy - Exegeting from English Bible, once man is familiar w/ originals, like a wrestler attempting to grip + pin his opponent while that
opponent is wearing a down filled snow suit! The insulation padding makes a firm grasp difficult.
- or it is easy to violate sportsmanship by grasping the insulation vs the body!
- Though the general outline is clear - the precise original is somewhat obscured!

3. Aspiring Pastors - Laboring Full Time - most appropriate - technical language study
a. Provide people w/ a quality of food they can't harvest for themselves.
b. Leverage in Preaching - feet planted not in Murray, Owen, Hendriksen, Calvin, ASV
- but in Heb word, Grk tense, idiomatic phrase - inspired word in the Inerrant Originals (Languages)
c. Professional Plumber - Copper+Lead vs Plastic Pipe; Professional Surgeon - no mere paramedic approach (helpful, you patient?)
d. Take seriously Language studies - vs cork tossed by every wind + wave of the Commentaries!

4. Realism - not undercut above, but supplement

a. English Bible - Rich Mine - not outclass Linguistically untrained Teachers - Bunyan!
- faithful ministry English Bible alone - Rich Pasteurage (whole counsel) vs Sawdust (Scholarly trained!)
- Chinese Pastors, Mandarin Bibles, Undershepherds! – Lk12:48 “much given, much required” - Acts3 “What I have I give”
b. Absolute Mastery is Unnecessary (mastery=relative term) - pick up + read testaments w/o helps - out of reach, most
- Pursue - working vocabulary, rudiments of grammar
- Access to overflowing Box of Tools - be not deceived - to responsibly use - need a working knowledge of languages
RPM: "A little Greek and Hebrew is a dangerous thing in a pulpit." -
Nothing worse - let loose student - Intro to Psych - so too - Naive use of Tools - do damage to text (DSgg)
- Proverbs 26:9 Like a thorn which falls into the hand of a drunkard, So is a proverb in the mouth of fools.
c. Maintenance - Don't lose it - Review Vocabulary Books (Watts, Metzger), Introductory Grammars(Greenberg, Machen)
- Morphology Charts - Noun Declensions, Verb Conjugations(tenses, moods)
- RPM - don't let it slip - most important tools!
- In Pastorate - *A Faithful Expository Ministry is the best program for maintenance!

5. Working Knowledge - Presupposition of Following Considerations

- For some of you - it will inspire you to Undertake the discipline - For others - to Maintain the discipline (Me).

B. The Individual Words - Most basic unit of Communication, Revelation - What a given word means!
1. Etymology - The Study of the Roots or Primitive forms from which words are derived - Origin of Words
a. Examples
1. Kopher, kippurim, kapporeth (Heb) - respectively translated -> ransom, atonement, mercy seat
- all derived - root - kaphar = "to cover" (Berkhof p68)
2. Kurios - root -"swell, be strong"(pumped up muscles) -> Power - Authority, Important One! (Bromiley)
3. 'eteroglossas - compound - 1Cor14:21 = 'eteros(other) + glossa(tongue, speech) = strange tongue, foreign language
4. KDSH (Heb) - Holy -> cut off, separate - God's transcendence(infinitely beyond us - typically highlighting power)
- also concept of God's purity - unable to dwell w/ sinners.
*Method exercised - because this logically precedes all other meanings - yet not always trustworthy!

b. Pitfalls - This method may lead the interpreter down Rabbit Trails -> wrong, fanciful conclusions, fallacies
1. Nice - latin root (nescius = ignorant) - irrelevant to current meaning - "You have been a 'nice' date."
- she'll slap you in face, if she's using an etymological dictionary! - so too in biblical exegesis
2. Butterfly - ? - led astray in trying to net this specimen!
3. Carson, Exegetical Fallacies, p27 -1 Cor 4:1
- Paul, Cephas, Apollos "servants" of Christ "'uphretas" entrusted w/ the secret things of Christ
- Trench - popularized - eressw "to row" -> 'upo eressw - "under rower"
-> Wm Barclay - "a rower on the lower bank of a trireme" i.e. all in unison – No Rivalry!
- imagination vs realism, far astray from orig meaning - NT simply means servant as diakons

4. Mickelsen, p121 - ekklhsia = ek + - kalew seemingly to call out - "called out ones"
- Preach on election + predestination, or "those who respond to the gospel"

31
 - rather - Barr - qahal (Heb root) - voice(qol) -> assembly (responds w/one voice) vs NT Soteriology
- "Correct biblical ideas are often falsely ascribed to erroneous etymological connections. . . because the idea may
be true, people fail to notice how erroneous was the procedure used to derive it."
5. "Adventurous Ingenuity" - Interpreter is given much freedom of selection - temptation to invent or side with a
concept which fits a striking application or theological persuasion vs which corresponds to Sound Etymology.
- Etymology studies - may give a "ring" of exegetical authority - while really imposing (as allegorist) meaning on the text! - Beware!

c. Danger - SW p47 - To place too much emphasis on Etymology - recognize not meanings + significance of word change.
1. Wednesday (Woden's Day), Thursday (Thor's Day) - maintain nuance of Roman + Norse Mythology
- conclude the author is a pagan polytheist!
2. "Prevent" - originally "go before, prepare, assist the way" - now means "intercept" or "obstruct".
3. Etymological Meaning - may be Irrelevant, if not blatantly Erroneous - as it relates to Current or Biblical Usage.
4. Berkhof p67: As a rule, it is not advisable that the interpreter should indulge very much in etymological
investigation. This work is extremely difficult, and can, ordinarily best be left to the specialists." - then enlist!
*Be very suspicious of your uncovering a new etymological meaning of your own!

2. Usage (Usus Loquendi)

a. Principle - Necessity to determine the current use of words as prevalent in a particular age or employed by a particular writer.
- Simply: Establish the Current meaning.
1. Usage determines meaning! - Dictionaries + Lexicons are subject to usage - vs Other way around!
- Mickelsen p122-3
"Lexicographers or editors of a lexicon are not infallible. Their classifying of a passage under one particular
meaning does not automatically exclude all other possibilities. The listing of passages after any one particular
meaning obviously represents the opinion of the editor. His opinion should be respected. Bauer devoted forty yrs
of his life to revising and developing a Greek lexicon. Such study naturally develops a feel for words and their
meaning in particular contexts that only constant experience can create. "
- See alhqeia in BAG, p35-36, shades
Truth – 1. moral uprightness 2. absence of falsehood 3. reality as opposed to deceiving appearance
2. Purpose + Method of Lexicons - fallible - perceiving vs dictating meaning!
3. Importance of Concordance Studies! - examine a word comparatively - get a feel for a word in given contexts!

b. Particular Period - language drifts + takes sharp turns - growth + change in language - Get the right period!
1. Drift - "Board" = timber, plank -> Table(food provision) ->plank for ships (on board) ->Table (Decision Making Body->Board)
2. Radical Change - "Ejaculation" - abrupt ejection
- Puritan era: "Heavenward Exclamation"; Modern era: "semen discharge"! - Frustration in reading old sermon!
*Bad = On the basketball court "He's bad" - "lousy player" when I was young; vs now "a star" (Hot)
3. OT Hebrew + Aramaic - stretch well over 1000 yrs (Job 2000) - Dead Sea Scrolls shed light on late Heb + Aramaic
usage.
4. Greek - Koine (322 BC - 529 AD) vs Classical (earlier) - Papyri - common documents, vernacular usage
Moulton + Milligan! (Bible Works)

c. Particular Author - Often unique nuance of meaning (but no unique theology)

* Righteousness - dikaiosunh - Paul, Romans 3 -> Forensic Standing before God(Justification)
- Matthew 5:20 "righteousness surpass that of the Pharisees . . . " - Behavioral Performance (Sanctification)
- distinction of great importance - interpreting these passages!

d. Particular Context - Directs to Accurate Meaning - again Concordance Study - gives a feel for the word - usage!
*pneuma - Multiple Meanings
1. Jn3:8 - wind; Rev11:11 vital breath; Gal6:1 disposition or temper; Mt10:1 unclean demons; Rom8:9-11 Holy Spirit of God!
2. Simple attention to the context - determines usage!

e. Septuagint Usage
1. As we make Verbal Allusions to KJV - trigger profound ideas, texts, themes w/ single word:
- "flesh lusts after"(Gal5:22); "Quit yourselves"(1Cor16:13); "whosoever"(Jn3:16)
- As KJV may be our bible and its unique terminology directs our usage
- So what may be KJV terminology to a modern man - was LXX terminology to the 1st century Hearers - trigger
2. Upshot - We need to be aware of LXX - use of particular Word - Hatch + Redpath Concordance to LXX (Baker, Bible Works)
3. Mickelsen - p125-126 - Crucial

32
 "The Bible for the Hellenists was the Septuagint. During Paul's missionary journeys when the Gentiles came into the
Church in large numbers, the LXX became even more important. Hence the NT writings were originally written to a
people who for the most part knew of the OT thru the reading of the LXX.
Paul, although he knew Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic, made most of his quotations either from the LXX or from a
Greek version not too far removed from it. Earl Ellis points out that 51 of Paul's 93 OT texts 'are in absolute or
virtual agreement w/ the LXX' Paul's style and vocabulary show definite affinities w/ the LXX."
4. Recommended Tools - Own a copy of the LXX - Rahlf's or Triglot; Hatch + Redpath! – Bible Works

f. Synonyms - Words w/ same meaning used interchangeably - (small & little)

1. Synonyms may highlight the emphasis of a word, may display a distinct nuance
- yet must be careful - avoid reading in too much into distinctions - Category of synomyms ->Theological Categories
i.e. - Kingdom of Heaven vs Kingdom of God - Dispensational Fallacies -> Matthew vs Mark distinctions.
2. agapaw vs filew -- - God's Love vs Human Love???
- agapaw - Lk6:32 "sinners love those that love them" Jn3:19 "men loved darkness rather than light"
- filew - Jn16:27: "the Father loves the Son" ; "the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Him"
*Reality - agapaw - more general term - as "run" encompasses (trot, sprint, jog)

3. Lexicography - Tools + Procedures

a. SW - "Sell your bed and buy a book." This imperative is true in 5 cases!
1. Bible in Original Tongues
2. Hebrew Lexicon (Brown, Driver, Briggs)
3. Hebrew Concordance (Mendelkern, Sailheimer, Wigram)
4. Greek Lexicon ( Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich)
5. Greek Concordance (Computer Concordance, Moulton & Geden, Englishman's)
b. See in Texts:
1. Mickelsen p117-120
2. Berkhof p110-112
3. Ramm p19-22, "A Suggested Minimum Bibliography for Exegetical Work" - *Take time to note!

c. *See Lexicography Notes + Exercise - Carl B. Hoch Jr. -> ****See Special Handouts (Lexicography Packet)
1. Realism - not every word! - some steps, not all
2. Order - Concordance work before Lexical - understand subjectivity of Lexicographer
3. Lab Study - arcitektwn - 1 Cor3:10 (Exodus 31, 35-36)
- emphasis on Semantic Fields - Surrounding Territory

d. More Tools to Explain:

1. Waltke - OT Word Study
2. Gesenius, Holladay
3. Eihspahr
4. TDOT, TDNT
5. etc.

*Review
IV. Grammatical Interpretation
A. The Original Languages

B. The Individual Words

C. The Structural Syntax - The Relationship of Words, one to another

*Introduction
1. Words - Component parts, Words are Units of Language
2. Syntax - Verbal Interconnections, Sentences are Units of Thought
- The Study of thought relations -> words, phrases, clauses, sentences.
3. Any conscious reader grasps some thought w/o intense analysis of syntax - we seek Analytical Precision!
- Admittedly best left for language studies - yet provide here an Introductory alert, taste, + reminder.

33
1. Verbs - Complex subject - Greek in particular - synthetic language
- complicated inflection, modifications w/ prefix, suffix - See privately Mickelsen p131-157 - Basic Elements:
a. Tense - kind of action vs time alone - present, imperfect, aorist, pluperfect, future; durative, punctiliar (Rom7:14 v Rom 7:13)
b. Mood - Indicative (actuality); Subjunctive (potentiality); Optative (desire); Imperative (command)
c. Voice - Active (I beat Earl); Passive (I was beaten by Earl); Middle (I myself beat Earl)
- Example Mt11:12 - NAS "the Kdom of Heaven suffers violence" - i.e. is receiving the action of persecution (passive)
- NIV "the Kdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing" - i.e. is performing the action of progressing (middle)*
- Same spelling could be interpreted either way* - context important! - enlightened grammatical understanding!
d. Number + Person - 1st, 2nd, 3rd Person; Singular, Plural
e. Infinitives - verbal noun - To run is exhilirating.
f. Participles - verbal adjectives - "Having seen the star, they rejoiced w/ great joy." - very complex
- May Express: Condition "if", Time "when", Reason "because", Attendant Circumstance, "saw and..", Command; etc

*View - Dana & Mantey Chart - structure - concept of complexity + precision

- Hebrew - tense, stem, mood, voice, person, number, inf, part
- Analyticals - not ideal to depend on, yet very helpful, difficult cases!

2. Nouns - Basic Elements

a. Case - Nominitive (subject), Vocative (address), Genitive (ablative, possession, etc), Dative (Instrumental, Locative, Indirect Object)
- or 8 cases vs 5 case system
b. Declension - multiple families of nouns - charts
c. Singular or Plural - Titus 1:5 "appoint elders in every city"
d. Adjectives, Pronouns, Articles - match w/ appropriate noun, etc. - or misinterpretation

3. Clauses - in possession of a subject and a predicate - Basic Elements:

a. Relative - who, which, whoever (adjectival)
b. Causal - because (Reason)
c. Comparative - Eph5:25 "as Christ loved the Church"
d. Local - Jn8:21 "Where I am going, you cannot come. .."
e. Temporal - Gal4:4 "when the fullness of time came, . . . "
f. Result - 2 Cor3:7-8 - ministry of the letter came w/ glory, "so that the sons of Isr could not look intently at the face of Moses"
g. Purpose - "in order that" - Ro1:11 - "I long to see you in order that I may impart some sp gift"
h. Conditional - "if, then" - 1Cor15:14 "if Christ has not been raised from the dead, then our preaching is in vain . . ."
i. Concessive - 2 Cor 4:16 "though our outward man is wasting away . . ."
j. Indirect Discourse - you say that I cast out demons . . .

4. Diagramming - Depiction of Grammatical Relationships in visual formats

a. English - *see example handout
b. Greek - see example handout
c. Exegetical Layout - **see example handout - Mk3 (consider possibilities w/ computer technology)

5. Tools - see also Mickelsen p130-31

a. Grammars - summarize grammatical phenomenon - categorized, indexed - particular verse
*some men actually read through vs references only!
1. Blass-DeBrunner - A Greek grammar of the NT + other Early Christian literature
2. Dana & Mantey; Brookes & Winberry; Chamberlain - Intermediate Grammars
3. Mark Hanna - Collection of Relevant Grammatical Domments - an abbreviated summary of the grammars!
4. Analyticals - OT, NT
5. Interlinears - limited knowledge
6. Burton - Moods + Tenses
b. 1901 American Standard Version - precisely literal translation - preservation of grammatical structure

c. Commentaries - Philosophy in Consulting

1. Mickelsen p158 "Consult good commentaries that treat syntax in an adequate manner. Beware of commentaries that
habitually give only one syntactical possibility. Sometimes the context overwhelmingly supports one use.
Unfortunately, where different doctrinal emphasies are made, the context may be the main reason for possibilities!
In using commentaries every interpreter must evaluate the evidence for himself. Do not assume that any particular
commentary must be right. Infallibility eludes the grasp of all present-day commentators!"

34
 2. Berkhof p111-12 - good counsel:
a. "In seeking to explain a passage, the interpreter should not immediately resort to the use of commentaries, since
this would nip all originality in the bud, involve a great deal of unnecessary labor, and be apt to result in
hopeless confusion. He should endeavor 1st of all to interpret the passage independently, w/ the aid of whatever
internal helps are available, and of such external helps as Grammars, Concordances and Lexicons.

b. "If, after making some original study of the passage, he feels the need of consulting one or more commentaries,
he ought to avoid the so-called practical commentaries, however good they may be in themselves, for they aim
at edification rather than at scientific interpretation. (Calvin, excellent blend)

c. “Approach the commentaries w/ definite questions. This is only possible after preliminary original study. This is
a great time saver! This approach will better prepare you to choose between the conflicting opinions you may
encounter.” (else a tossed cork, unanchored)

d. "Should he succeed in giving an apparently satisfactory explanation w/o the aid of commentaries, it will be
advisable to compare his interpretation w/ that given by others. And if he discovers that he goes contrary to
the general opinion on some particular point, it will be to the part of wisdom for him to go over the ground
carefully once more to see whether he has taken all the data into consideration, and whether his inferences are
correct in every particular. He may detect some mistake that will compel him to revise his opinion. but if he
finds that every step he took wass well warranted, then he should allow his interpretation tostand in spite of all
that the commentators may say." - *Extreme care here! – Luther Rom1:17, *MC Mt5:48 consistent complete(ly)

*Truism - Eccl 12:12 "the writing of many books is endless, and excessive devotion to books is wearying to the body."
- *start writing sermon earlier vs bound to search every book in library on that passage.
*Obligation - 2Tim2:15 "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed,
handling accurately the word of truth."

D. The Surrounding Context

1. Preliminary Remarks:
a. Natural Law of Communication - Language must be interpreted according to the context.
*SW - "pen" in the context of an office or a farm! - In which does it occur?
A broken "pen" may require different responses!
b. Crucial Importance - Thought is usually expressed in a series of related ideas - close logic, repetition
1. The meaning of any particular element is nearly always controlled by what precedes and follows it.
2. Usage of words - Concordance study -context vs etymology - determines meaning!
3. Context Reigns!
c. Common Fallacies - neglecting context -> twisting of Scriptures
1. Mickelsen p100 - Results in loss of credibility as an interpreter:
"When the interpreter projects his own ideas into the thought he is interpreting, he ceases being an honest
interpreter and becomes a personal propagandist under the guise of explaining the work of another."
2. Carl B. Hoch, Jr. - "Neglect of context is perhaps the most serious error made by Bible students. If the context is
neglected, then the Bible can be used to teach anything."
3. 1Th5:9 "But God has not destined us for wrath..." (pre-trib rapture!?) -> ". . . but for obtaining salvation through
our Lord Jesus Christ." - contextual contrast w/ damnation!
d. Topical vs Expositional Preaching? - lessens importance of context??
1. Legitimate Method - yet really demands even more exegesis - more passages + contexts that must be considered!
2. No escaping obligation of sweat + contextual exegesis!

2. Degrees of Context - 5 Levels:

*Levels of Proximity -> Concentric Circles: 1 Th 5:9
1. Immediate Passage - 1 Thess 5
2. Particular Writing, Book - 1 Thess
3. Particular Author - Paul
4. Particular Testament - New
5. Entire Bible

A. Immediate Passage - Logical flow of Thought

35
 1. Analyze what immediately precedes + follows any verse or passage being interpreted - 2,3 paragraphs away!
- Discover its meaning to the original readers, who did not plunge into the middle of the letter and pluck out a few
consecutive sentences to meditate on!
- Enter into the total train of thought.
2. Commonly Ignored Immediate Contexts - seek to penetrate the connection of thought:
a. Mt12:22-32 - Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit - not 12:31 alone - flagrant + recalcitrant scoffing at grace of Christ
b. Mt16:28-17:13 - Not taste death until see the Son of Man coming in the Kingdom
- immediate context - transfiguration irrelevant?? (also Res power, Pentecost, etc. foreshadowed in Transfig)
- vs Post Millennialist's 70AD Fall of Jerusalem??
c. 1 Cor 3:11-15 - Carnal Christian - saved as thru fire? vs Ministerial Builder!
d. 1 Cor 11:27 - Drinking Unworthily -> smitten conscience? or Flagrant disorder, mockery of Corinthians drunken,
selfish love feasts!
e. Gal 3:24 - "Law . . . our tutor to lead us to Christ" - Personal experience?
or Redemptive Historical Development! - see 3:17, 23
3. General Rules:
a. Immediate Context must be given Priority over Remote Context.
1. Eph2:15 - "one new man" - Regeneration(4:24)? or Redemptive Historical! see 2:11!
2. Eph3:5 - "prophets" - NT office of 4:11 and 2:20!! (direct Revelation) - vs Ro1:2; Heb1:1; Acts11:27f Agabus
b. Ignore modern chapter and verse divisions - A. T. Robertson: "The 1st step in interpretation."
1. Chapter Divisions - Stephen Langton (1228 AD); Verse Divsions - Robert Stephanus (1555 AD)
2. Mt 16:28 -> 17:1 - contextual connection (Transfiguration)
3. 1 Cor 11:1 - "be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ"
- Restrict your liberty of conscience - vs husband, wife relationship in church (Paul not married, 1Cor7, not urging celibacy)
c. Avoid being overbound to context - Overimposing a contextual theme
* Concluding Practical Instructions - 2Tim4:16 -> 4:11,19? (disappointed w/ all?? Even Luke deserted?? Prisca+Aqu?)
d. Recognize that some parts of Scripture are w/o a Logical Immediate Context
1. Proverbs - 20-21 - no matter how closely one studies, no essential connection of thought - any 2 verses
2. Parts of Book of Ecclesiastes - w/o intimate logical relation - proverbs, soliloquies, exhortations
3. James - Proverbial - New Covt Wisdom Lit - string of pearls vs logically connected puzzle

B. Particular Writing or Book

1. Understand Overall Theme - Makes sense of individual statements which may seem enigmatic.
a. Galatian Heresy - Legalism, anti-law statements
b. Colossian Heresy - Asceticism, touch, handle, taste not
c. James - Theme of Libertinism - faith w/o works - good thing Gal + James not delivered to wrong address!
d. Hebrews - Superiority of Christ - warning sections understood – tempted to go back to Temple

2. Know the Flow of Logic and Thought through a particular book.

a. OT Narrative, NT Gospels - Themes develop over large sections (Judges Cycles, Gospels - Mt5-7 teaching->8-9 power)
- Gospel of Mk - Builds to Identity at Cesarea Philippi, then Crescendo at Golgotha
b. Romans 1-3:9; 3:10-4; 5; 6-8; 9-11; 12f - capable bearings for a specific text
c. Know your English Bibles - Big picture! - Able to spontaneously think thru argument – Chinese better than nearsighted Gk scholar
- columns? repetitive reading enables to think thru w/ eyes closed? - quadrants
- Own Bible - carefully selected - etch it in mind - familiar with!
d. Bible Survey - John McNicol (Kregels); etc.; EJ Young OT Introduction; Machen NT Introduction; Commentaries!
e. Rev 1-3; then recapitulation of Apocalyptic prophecies, 4-7; 8-11; 12-14, 15-16, 20-22 (later discuss)

C. Particular Author - Human author, Style + Patterns of thinking traceable

1. SW p52 - "This principle is based in the fact that the HS in no sense suppressed the personalities of the Human
authors. Different men have different vocabularies + different peculiarities of syntax + structure. Vocabulary
may change while truth does not. Unity of theology does not mean unity of vocabulary." (John v Matthew; Victor vs Tom C)
2. Examples:
a. "Call" - Paul - Rom4:17 -> God's sovereign + efficacious call - "calls into being that which does not exist"
- Matthew - 22:14 - Simple Invitation - "For many are called but few are chosen"
- Theological Agreement, but verbal usage distinct
- *Don't pour Paul's definitions + concepts into Matthew's narrative words, unless warranted! – Rtsness Rom5; Mt5:20
b. "Two Age" theology - used by the Synoptic Gospels, Paul, Writer of Hebrews - not used by John
- John expresses the concept in his use of "world" - kosmos

36
 - Jn12:31 "Prince of this world is cast out" - Jn16:33 "In this world you have much tribulation."
c. Dating Factor - Periods of the Author's life - distinct or like style, like meanings
- 1 Thessalonians (early); Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon (parallel concepts, same imprisonment);
Pastorals (later)
- Avoid fallacious conclusion that different emphases and word nuance indicate different authors! (early v prison epistles)

3. Exception - Parallel Accounts of the same event - closely compare - cross references – shared vocab, etc
a. Parallel laws + events in the Pentateuch (Ex20, Dt5)
b. 1-2 Kings -> 1-2 Chronicles
c. Gospels -> 1Cor11:17f - Lord's Supper narrations
d. Synoptics - Closely compare - see Kurt Aland - 4 Columned Synopsis – Resurrection Narratives
- Share a common source? - Mark, Q – Lk1:1-4 searched out
- Consider context of these carefully - much shared! - may add very relevant details! – Why different nuances? Emphases?

D. Particular Testament
1. Notice parallels w/in the same testament - like historical context, mindset, place in redemptive history
2. Avoid imposing highly developed NT concepts upon OT Accounts - w/o careful Explanation - show transition
- Hannah (1Sam1:9f) -> Abba Father (Gal4:6) or Great Hi Priest (Heb4:14)
-True Hebrews 11 shows much continuity, typological fulfillment, yet must explain maturation + development! – v pour new into old
- don’t make Samson into a Paul
3. Carefully consider the Juncture in Redemptive History - context - progressive Revelation.

E. Entire Bible
1. OT + NT comparisons are far more profitable in interpretation than comparisons w/ Classical Greek literature.
- Papyri, Pseudopigrapha, Apocrypha, Intertestamental Literature, Apocalyptic - though useful!
2. OT concepts, phrases, words, syntax - have had much influence on the NT
- OT was their Bible (LXX as well) -> Hatch + Redpath Concordance to LXX a great treasure!
3. Marginal Cross References - displays where topic is discussed elsewhere, like terminology, allusions
- See UBS Greek NT - Bottom of pages - Mickelsen claims these are the best!
- See ASV 1901; NASB outstanding
4. Habitual Cursory Reading, Analysis, Meditation - Think God's thoughts after Him - need English vs Gk + Heb alone!
- Mickelsen p101 "The interpreter should know well the content of the whole Bible. How can he achieve this? And
if he does achieve such a knowledge, how does he retain it? Mastery of biblical materials is something like the
mastery of a musical instrument. Without consistent practice the musician loses his touch w/ his instrument.
The same is true regarding the biblical material. There is no substitute for constant study and review. . . By
persistence he can soon have the whole Bible summarized. By frequently scanning a well-marked Bible and by
reviewing the personal summaries, the interpreter will keep the contents fresh in his mind." – Abbie Piano rusty, days w/o practice
5. Bible for Life (Victor Matthews experience) - Seeing eye Dog - Know quadrants, etc
- Context of Bible becomes an organic unity - pulsates through w/ life - fluent cat vs bag of rocks!

*Review
IV. Grammatical Interpretation
A. The Original Languages

B. The Individual Words

C. The Structural Syntax

D. The Surrounding Context

E. The Literary Genre

*Introduction
1. French Word - way, style, fashion - method, type of communication - different types in Bible
2. Humanity - any section of Scripture possesses a Genre - yet, here - specific interest in Figurative or Symbolic
Language in the Bible - language which manifests the Bible's true humanity - There is no suppression of these
secondary aspects of human communication.

37
 - Sound Hermeneutics will recognize the contrasting presence of such genre + the accompanying necessity to interpret accordingly.
- Therefore, our focus here - How to interpret figurative language: symbolic, etc.
3. Controlling Principles
a. The Presumption that all Genre Analysis must be controlled by non-biblical aprioris (or predispositions) is to be
rejected. We must not be guided by such subjective factors:
1. Allegorizers - "Whatever is unworthy of God is to be Allegorized." - unbiblical philosophical compass!
2. AntiSupernaturalists - "Whatever does not correspond with scientific investigation is to be mythologized."
- Genesis 1-3; Genesis 6; Exodus 14; etc.
b. Figurative Language - Mickelsen, p179:
"The Representation of one concept in terms of another because the nature of the 2 things compared allows such an
analogy to be drawn." - "Imagery" - Domestic, Business, Agricultural, Religious
c. Figurative Language is neither second rate, less clear, nor less authoritative than more lilteral language. It is able to
communicate precisely, clearly, authoritatively.
1. "Spiritualizing the Text" - charge of woodenly literal dispensationalists - simply because we recognize the
figurative elements of scripture
2. Terry, p248 "Metaphors, allegories, parables, and symbols are divinely chosen in forms of setting forth the
oracles of God, and we must not suppose their meaning to be so vague + uncertain as to be past finding out."
d. Generally, Figurative Language is clearly discernible.
1. It is not as difficult to recognize + understand as some imagine.
2. Acquaintance w/ symbolic language elsewhere in the Bible, combined w/ Grammatical, historical, contextual
considerations will normally provide the necessary light.

1. Short Figures of Speech - a Selective Sampling

- see Mickelsen p179f, also Bullinger: Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, Baker
a. Figures Emphasizing Comparison
1. Simile - like, as - Lk10:3: "sending you as lambs among wolves"
2. Metaphor - Direct Assertion of Comparison - Lk12:3f "little flock, be not afraid"
- "arm of God" - anthropomorphism, anthropopathism "God repented" (Ex32:14)
- Mt5:13: "You are the salt of the earth." Mt26:26 "This is my body."

b. Figures involving Association

1. Metonymy - Using the name of one thing for another, since there is a close association between the 2
- Whitehouse said = President; Beijing said
- Lk24:27 - Moses and the Prophets->Scriptures, their writings; Jacob -> The nation of Israel
- Romans 3:27-30 - "law" -> Rabbinic system of works righteousness; *Law in Romans & Galatians
"faith" -> God's system of grace righteousness
- Heb7:9-10 - Levi was in Abraham's "loins" as seed - Provan, The Bible and Birth Control - murder!?
2. Synecdoche - Part is used for the whole of vice versa - The harbor is filled w/ sails. -> ships!
- Exodus 20:12 - Honor father and mother (all in authority) - Adultery (all sexual sin) - avoid wooden reductionism!
- Gen3:19 "By the sweat of your face you shall eat your bread." (obtain your sustenance)
- Gen6:12 "All flesh had corrupted their way" - all men, except Noah

c. Figures Stressing a Personal Dimension

1. Personification - Animation + personality is given to the inanimate + impersonal.
- Psalm 114:3-4f - Red Sea fled, Mountains skipped like rams, questioned why
- Lamentations 1 - City of Jerusalem = a ravaged maiden, weeping
- Rom8:19f - Creation anxiously longs, groans, in expectation.
- Mt6:3 - Let not your left hand know what your right hand is doing.
2. Apostrophe - Words addressed in an exclamatory tone to an inanimate object.
- 2 Sam 18:33 - David to Dead Absalom: "O my son, would I have died for you."
- Psalm 148:3-5 - Praise Him sun, moon, stars, heavens, waters.

d. Figures demanding Additions to complete thought - vs bad grammar or errors

1. Ellipsis - an idea is not fuly expressed grammatically - see Ro11:22 "otherwise (if you don't continue) you'll be cut"
2. Zuegma - improper words joined together - 1Cor3:2 "I gave you milk to drink, not solid food" (to drink? Mixed metaphor?)
3. Aposiopesis - conscious suppression of a part of a sentence for Rhetorical effect.
- Lk13:9 "If indeed it bears fruit next year (let it grow), otherwise (if it bears no fruit) you shall cut it down."

38
 e. Figures involving Understatement
1. Euphemism - avoid offensive + unnecessarily harsh words - Short=Vertically Challenged; Homosexual=Gay
- Acts1:25 - Judas went to "his own place"
- Lev18:6 "uncover nakedness" - sexual intercourse
- Gen9:22 "saw his father's nakedness" - homosexual activity - Hebrews knew exactly what he meant!

2. Litotes or Meiosis - Negative statement used to declare anaffirmative truth (belittling)

- "Daddy is not happy w/ you" -> Dad is grieved + angry!
- Heb13:17 - "this would be unprofitable for you" to despise your sp leaders - actually means disastrous!
- not merely a favorable option (advantageous alternative), rather solemn and mandatory obligation!

f. Figures involving an Intensification or Reversal of Meaning

1. Hyperbole - Conscious exaggeration to gain rhetorical effect.
- Mt5 - Rt eye gouge, hand cut off; Oaths; left cheek; coat also!
- Jn21:25 - All the books in the world could not contain other things Jesus did.
- Lk14:26 - come to me, must hate father and mother.

2. Irony - Denotes the exact opposite of what the language declares (seriousness vs rabid sarcasm)
- 2 Cor12:13 - "forgive me this wrong"
- 2Kings18:27 - maybe Baal is asleep, gone aside, on a journey. . .
- Mk2:17 - It's not the healthy who need a physician, but the sick
- 1 Cor4:8 - you are rich, filled, kings, I would reign w/ you!

g. Figures involving Fullness of Thought

1. Pleonasm - excessive repetition + redundancy making emphasis impossible to miss.
- Acts 2:30 - literally - "God took an oath with an oath"
- larger context - Ex39-40; Lev8-9 - "just as the Lord commanded Moses"
2. Expanadiplosis - important words are repeated for emphasis
- Rev4:8: Holy, Holy, Holy (Is6); Rev14:8 Fallen, Fallen is Babylon the great
3. Climax - a series or ascending list
- Ro5:3-5 - affliction->endurance->character->hope;
- 2Pet1 - faith->moral excellence->knowledge->self control->endurance->love

h. Interrogation - Rhetorical Question - answer is obvious and unnecessary

- Ro8:31-35 - If God is for us, who can be against us? Who shall separate us . . . ?
- Ro3:31 - Do we nullify the law?

*Such Short Figures - crucial to understand or. . .

. . . you'll not rightly handle the text (litotes)
. . . you'll butcher the text (hyperbole)
. . . you'll rape the text (personification)

**Beware of a wooden, crass, fundy Literalism - Scripture warns that it is characteristic of fallen human thinking to miss
figurative + internal meaning by interpreting symbolic language in a crassly literally fashion.
a. John 2:19-20 - Destroy this temple, I will rebuild it in 3 days - "46 years" objected the hypocrites
b. John 6:51-55 - Eat my flesh and drink my blood - "How can this man give us his flesh to eat" protested the hard hearted
c. John 3:4 - You must be born again - "Crawl back into my mother's womb?" queried the darkened Nicodemus
*Exercise much care!

2. Larger Scale Genre - Literary Mold

*Preface - 2 types
1. An Entire Passage - Allegory, Parable(will be discussed later), Fable, Riddle -
2. An Entire Book - Mark, Ezekiel, Judges
a. Examples of Large Genre - Each book is cast in some sort of Broad Literary Genre
1. Acts - Historical Narrative
2. Pslms - Poetry (will be discussed later)
3. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes - Wisdom Literature (will be discussed later)
4. John, James, Paul - Epistolatory Correspondence

39
 5. Daniel, Revelation - Apocalyptic (swarming symbolism)
6. Job - Dramatic Epic (Ramm) - thought provoking narrative + dialogue
*Yet Job is presented as a historical figure with historical roots to the plot and dialogue. (James 5:11)

b. Importance of Genre Determination

*Don't discard it as an attack on Scripture. There is no inherent harm in literary Genre studies!
1. It Enables the Interpreter to Apprehend the Human Author's Inspired Intention - sets the mood, stance
a. Apocalyptic - Understand Broad Themes! - or else u'll find tanks in Rev 9(locusts) or cars(lightninglike chariots) in Nahum 2 (RPM)
- often find description of General Themes vs Particular Events - miss meaning
*Ramm p146:
"Many modern books of theology indiscriminately judge all scholarship that in some broad sense is evangelical or
orthodox as 'wooden-headed literalism.' A number of things are meant by this charge but one of them is that
such scholarship has no real appreciation of literary genre and the manner in which its recognition governs the
way in which Scripture is interpreted. Their favorite target is the literalistic eschatology of the
Fundamentalists who take all the predictions of the events of the end-times in a strict, literal way. The most
absurd thing they usually point out is that future battles of the end-times are fought w/ the weapons of the
ancient world which means that regardless of modern development of guns, tanks, airplanes, rockets, etc.,
mankind will revert back to bows, arrows, and spears. It is the lack of any real appreciation of literary genre
that forces Fundamentalists to make such absurd assertions about future events." - vs A-Millennialism
b. Wisdom
1. Often displays the groping that takes place to correspond truth w/ experience (Job, Ecclesiastes)
2. Conclusions - often neither iron clad nor air tight as Epistolatory literature - true from certain angle, etc.
Prov22:6 "Train up a child in the way he should go, Even when he is old he will not depart from it."
*Poole: "But this, as many proverbs of like nature, are not to be understood as if this were universally and
necessarily true, which experience confutes, but because it is so for the most part, except some
extraordinary cause hinder it."
c. Song of Songs - genre determines interpretation - crucial
1. Allegory - Relation between God and Man; Christ and the Church; Jehovah & Israel
2. Drama - Origen, Delitzsch
3. Love Poetry - Celebrating the dignity + purity of human love (sexuality), yet 2ndary imaging - J. Murray
- Type – Eph5; Rev3:20, SoS 5:2

2. It Instructs the Interpreter to Hunt for Meaning in the Right Places

a. Gospels - Theological Narrative, History pregnant w/ Inspired and often Subtle Commentary
1. Teeming w/ Theological Assertions vs a mere Historical Chronicle - no Reductionistic approach
2. Linton "Not a word is wasted, not an episode lacks organic unity, not a gesture is without force."
- No simple Biographies! No Newspaper account - dripping w/ theology!
- see Mk4 Storm; Mk1 Leper; Mk2 Healing infirmities; Mk1 Baptism, numbered w/ transgressors
b. OT Short Story Narrative - Theological Drama packed w/ rich truths - subtle
1. Ruth - North Star theme is Sovereignty of God in behalf of His people.
- Canaf - wings of chapter 2:12 -> skirt of chapter 3:9
2. Jonah - profound details and plotline - vacabulary must be carefully examined else miss much.

c. Warnings concerning Genre Criticism

1. Many Scholars use Genre Categories to undermine the Authority and Trustworthiness of the Scriptures.
a. Introduced as legend, Saga, Myth (liberalism, Neo-Orthodox) - deny historicity!
b. Creation - possibly figurative elements (geocentric 1:15-16) - yet Howard Van Til's 4th Day: "A"Historical
c. Noah + Flood - Mere Allegory!?
d. Gospels - Merely Kerygma (preaching + teaching of the early church) clothed in narrative, expanded into legend.
- Quest for the Historical Jesus
- Yet Form, Redaction Critic - may hit a theological Bull's Eye - passage's theme
- More often - first class mess out of a book - Heresy - Cross, Resurrection, Adam, etc.

2. Read Critically and Defensively - Fully aware of Antisupernatural Bent, AntiAuthoritataive perspective.
a. Lion Prowling on every page - seeking to devour you, your soul, your flock's faith.
b. Form Criticism - Preliterary forms: myths, legends, folk tales, parables
c. Redaction Criticism - Editorial Composition: techniques, compiling, sewing together

40
*******Test #1************

Review - Hermeneutics - Historical Interpretation - Syllabus

I. Introduction and Definition
II. The History of Hermeneutics
III. The Foundational Presuppositions of Reformed Hermeneutics
IV. Grammatical Interpretation

V. Historical Interpretation
*Theanthropic Nature of Scriptures - Here, as w/ Grammatical Interpretation, Recognition of Human Element (anthropos)
- vs emphasis on Divine (Theos) -> VI. Theological Interpretation

A. An Introductory Explanation of Historical Interpretation

1. Its Definition - Survey the class. Summarize impressions.
a. Berkhof p113 - "Historical Interpretation denotes the study of Scripture in the light of those historical circumstances
that put their stamp on the different books of the Bible."
-> 1 Corinthians (knowledge of cosmopolitan port city, legion pagan religions, plant + early church life)
b. Likeness to Grammatical Interpretation - Laws of grammar + language are the result of the peculiar circumstances of
the author + the recipients. Each piece of literature possesses not only a linguistic context, but also a historical
context. An awareness of that original historical context throws us back into the circumstances of the original recipients.
c. Revelation is couched in a Particular Language. So too, Revelation is couched in a Particular Historical Context!
- As we must comprehend the Language accurately if we are to precisely apprehend truth,
- So we must comprehend the Historical Context accurately if we are to precisely apprehend truth!
d. Historical Interpretation - is closely interwoven w/ Grammatical - yet distinguishable!

2. Its Justification
a. Demanded by and Derived from the Humanity of the Bible - profoundly and thoroughly Human!
1. All human existence is historically conditioned - i.e. lived in a human a historical framework. The Bible can only be
accurately understood upon an appreciation of Historical Standpoint. The message through humans and to humans
compels us to understand the environment of those humans! -> Events, Culture, Mindsets – China!
2. Ramm p150 - The Hermeneutics of the Reformers was as much historical + cultural as it was grammatical.
- Interraction w/ the historical is mandatory - else the passage is opaque
(Mk2 - Levi the Tax Collector is called - Societal Dreg or Aristocrat?)
3. See Mk7:3-4 - Mark explains Jewish Custom (washing) for Gentile readers!
- also Mk12:18 - Sadducees (who say that there is no resurrection)
- also Mk7:11 - Corban (that is to say, given to God)
*Common knowledge to 1st century Palestinian -> w/o explanation for Roman Gentiles, left in the dark regarding
full significance - Mk compelled to shed light! - We imitate his assistance for our hearers(uninspired)!

b. Basic Assumptions - Berkhof p113-4

1. Word of God Originated in a Historical way, and therefore, can be understood only in light of History.
- The Contents of the Bible to a great extent find their explanation in History.
2. An Apprehension of the Human author's Original Intention is essential -> purposed message+theme in original context
- We must discover what the author intended to say!
- *The Full Meaning of the Bible may transcend the author's Intention, but cannot contradict it!
a. 1 Pet1:10-12 – Prophets, seeking to know the person or time the Spirit of Christ w/in them was indicating
b. Ezekiel 40-48 - Restored Temple - Ultimately fulfilled in New Heavens + Earth
- yet original comprehension was God perfectly dwelling w/ His people in an ideal setting -> matured!
3. An Understanding of the Proper Historical Background is essential in order to understand an author's words.
- A man is in a large measure a product of his Historical Environment (Author of Esther - Persian environment)
4. The Place, Time, Circumstances, and Prevailing View of the World + Life in General will naturally color the writings
that are produced under those conditions of time, place, and circumstances. (Consider Revelation 1-3 churches)
- Domitian, Persecution + Empire Politics

3. Its Limitations - Qualify + Caution

a. Historical Interpretation - does not mean the errancy of the Bible
- Naive World View, Immature Culture, Taint Message? - No!
b. Historical Interpretation - does not mean the purely Historical character of the Biblical message

41
 *Danger - Study of History + Culture as Background - tendency to supercede actual content - Preoccupation with Reconstruction or
original setting -> thus treating Scripture as Historical vs Revelational (Redaction Criticism)
1. View that the Canaanite circumstances pressured Moses into these Restrictive Laws.
2. View that the Colossian Heresy squeezed out an artificially High Christology.
3. View that the Galatian Heresy forced Paul to distance himself from the law, resulting in a spirit of liberty.

c. Historical Interpretation - does not mean that the Biblical Message is culturally bound or "conditioned".
-> No eternal truth for all ages!?
1. This does not deny that certain Divine ordinances were of a temporary Character (3 Feasts).
2. This recognizes that Biblical Culture is not per se Authoritative
-> Lk11:7 (in bed w/ family) Lk22:14 (recline at table)
3. But, all that the Bible intends to teach the church for its faith, and command the church for its practice is unqualifiedly authoritative
- and therefore is not culturally bound in any sense. (later to be fleshed out)

B. The Preacher's Task in Historical Interpretation

1. Recognize the Yawning Gap - Summary of Problem
a. Bible - a strange book to the modern, sophisticated, technology immersed, western mind - ancient->modern(vast gap)
- God's Revelation is given in another period of History, different culture, foreign geographical area!
b. Result - yawning Historical, Geographical, Cultural Gap
c. Crucial to Sound Interpretation - if neglected - Dangerous Course - Carl B. Hoch Jr.:
"It is fundamental to realize that God has given his revelation in + through history. The eternal God has entered
history to bring about His purpose. Any slighting of the Historical framework will result in some distortion of the
message and tend to cut the Bible loose from its historical moorings. A vast sea of uncertainty may be the inevitable result.
d. Anchor:
1. Galatians in Judaizing Legalism - Gal5:2 ". .. if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you."
- Circumcision will damn a man??? - You + I? – Spectrum Med Center?
2. 1 John in Proto Gnosticism - 2:27 - "You have no need for anyone to teach you."
3. Hebrews in Over the Shoulder looking Jews - 6:6 - "again crucify to themselves the Son of God."
4. Ruth in the Period of the Judges - not received as an allegory of Christ and the Church - What did it mean to them?

2. Apprehend the Original Circumstances - Time Capsule, take self back - appreciate Historical Context
a. Approach the Scriptures in the background in which they arose - in reader's sandals - how hear, how author write?
b. Seek to know every available detail, even the apparently insignificant. It may come into play later. Cultivate a sober imagination
so as to feel and think as did the ancients.
*Search out Introductory Matters: Original Readers; Occasion (catalyst issue?); Life Circumstances
(Farewell Pathos: 2 Timothy; Dt31-32; 2 Sam23)
c. Striking Example - 1Cor6:13f - sexual ethics not addressed in a vacuum
- in Corinth - as acceptable to see a temple prostitute to satisfy sex appetite - as acceptable as MacDonald's - Belly!
- practice + philosophy - carried over - sacramental fornication!
- if interpreter is to follow the logic of the text, he needs to be familiar with the local practice + mindset.
d. Such Empathy - enables the more precise "laying bare" the Eternal Principle + Truth at stake - message, pith of Rev to
be conveyed to the modern hearers.
- Ruth - Ancient widowhood, Boaz' skirt, Unsandalling, Significance of a boy child (China) - unwrap for the modern hearer!

3. Sieze Ahold of the Revealed Truth - Enduring

a. Ruth - Sovereign Subtle Providential Care for all of His people - Cov't relationship: prosperity, provision, shalom
- Man's skirts are Yahweh's wings - Human means
b. State it - show how found in original context + historical setting - originally received.

4. Deliver the Ancient Message into the Modern Context - Back into Time Capsule
a. Empathy + Appreciation for Modern Historical Situation - Current events, mindset, struggles, calamities, etc.
b. Despise not Mundane Conversation, Newspaper, Fox News, Internet, Trends, Fads, Politics, Stock Market crash 08, Sarah Palin
- Know the idiosyncracies of your own people (mailmen, chiropractors, self employed businessmen, military, architect)
- Know contemporary Religious Environment - Liberalism, Charismania, Evangelicalism, Emergent, Seeker, Cults - make proper emphasis!
*Have your finger on the pulse of the modern hearers!
c. Crucial to Modern Practical Application
- Not Necessarily a Godly Lifestyle: No TV, Cable, Radio, Newspaper, Internet, Facebook - Hermit - able to relate only to other recluses!

42
 - Note Lk13 - Tower of Siloam; Pilate mixing Galileans' blood; Paul: Corinth temples, Athens Agora, Cretan culture

5. Cross Cultural Minister - step #5 - Deliver Ancient Message into the Foreign Context. (Steve Hoffmaier->Philippines)
a. See Privately Mickelsen p171 Nida's Chart: (heart->liver Congo)
God --> Ancient Palestinian/Roman Context --> 21st Century American Context --> 21st Century China Context
b. This is the Preacher's task!

C. The Specific Elements of Historical Interpretation - We've seen the general task - now specific Disciplines, areas of attention.
*All unto Accurate Apprehension - Introductory Matters:
1. Geography - General Acquaintance w/ Location, Climate, Configuration - Special Background
a. Egypt, Sinai Peninsula, Moab, Aram, Edom, Tyre, Sidon, Assyria, Wilderness, Babylon, Ethiopia, Negev (Distances etc)
- Palestine the Crossroads of the Near East; Acts + Missionary Journeys; Rev 7 Churches (Asia Minor Circuit)
b. Mountains, Rivers, Lakes, Seas - Sea of Galilee, Jordan River, Temperature (Cloud by day, fire by night)
- Chariots in North, lack in south
c. Trees (Fig Tree - when in bloom Mk11), Flowers (scorched), Dew on Mt Herman(Ps133), Fig Tree Shaken (Rev6),
Animals (Mk7 SP woman kunarion), birds, vultures, vegetables, fruits, shrubs
- Mt13 Mustard Seed; Jn15 Vine; Mt7 Pearls to Pigs
*RPM - Highly recommends - Holy Land Visit - For Him, opened the lid of the biblical Accounts, if not travel->travelogue!
- like visit to campus of a friend from whom received many letters - into focus
- Bible Atlases - Baker Bible Atlas (C. Pfeiffer); Moody Atlas of Bible; Rand McNally Bible Atlas

2. Politics & History

a. Ruler, Leader mentioned by Name - Notorious?! - Josephus, Tacitus - Procurators who governed Palestine
b. Roman vs Jewish Tensions - 1st century - mutual irritation - to 70AD - war was inevitable - Passion Week Powder Keg
- Zealots
c. Paul's Appeal to Caesar; Pilate no friend of Caesar, Herod vs Pilate, Nehemiah + Ezra in relation to Persians, Daniel's
Metallic Man, 4 Beasts (flow of history); Herodians(Mk3, Mt22); Herod an Idumean; Sanhedrin Jurisdiction
d. Interrestamental Era - The NT Era (Reicke) 500BC-100AD; *Between the Testaments (Pfeiffer, Baker) much light!
e. Post Exilic Writers - Rebuilding Zion, Conflict w/ Gentile King
f. Romans 13 - era of Caligula, Nero, Domitian? -> Revelation Ramsay's Classic Letters to 7 Churches (pre or post 70AD?)
- what nature of persecution of 7 churches, expected judgment to come?; Exile on Patmos
g. Archaeological Digs - Tablets, Papyri
i. Diaspora Jews - synagogue in each major city (rich vein)
*Ramm p154, Rowley:
"A religion which is thus rooted + grounded in history cannot ignore history. Hence a historical understanding of the
Bible is not a superfluity which can be dispensed with in Biblical interpretation, leaving a body of ideas and principles
divorced from the process out of which they were born."

3. Religion - Religious life in Israel was not always on the same plane - each book into different conditions
(elevation->degradation->Revival->Degeneration) - Familiarity w/ cultic practices helpful
a. References:
1. Ex23:19 - Boil not kid in mother's milk (unkosher) -> pagan fertility rite!
2. Jer19:6 - Jeremiah's reference to Valley Hinnom - as valley of slaughter
3. 2Kings16:3; 21:6 - sons pass thru the fire
b. Messianic Fervor - 1st Century Palestine - impostors - Acts5 Gamaliel (Theudas)
c. NT - Grecian Polytheism, Areopagus Epicureanism, Corinthian Fertility Cults, Colossian Heresy (Asceticism, Spiritual
Heirarchy Angelic); 1Jn Gnosticism - not in the flesh, secret teaching; Emperor Worship - supreme authority,
Rev2,3 - Beast, False prophet. – China PSB (Thought Police)
d. Philosophy of the Day - Greco-Roman World - Stoicism, Epicureanism, etc.
e. Divisions among Judaism - 4 Major(Sadducees, Pharisees, Zealots, Essenes); Hillel & Shammai Rabbis

4. Biblical Theology - Where do we stand in the unfolding of Progressive Revelation - Redemptive History (Juncture?)
Moses David Jeremiah John the Bapist Stephen John *
*Recognize the End of the Apostolic Era!

5. Culture
a. Anthropological Sense Divided into 2 Main Categories
1. Material Culture - things used in Maintenance of life: tools, objects, dwellings, weapons, garments, transportation

43
 - Mk2 Paralytic (Roof); Mk14 (U-shaped Courtyard, Peter's denial)
- Ramm p156 "Some rather obvious examples in material culture are: upper rooms were large rooms and best
adapted for the meeting of a large group (Acts1:13); in the time of Christ people ate while reclining and not
sitting (Jn13:23f); the Jews purified their water (they let the silt sink to the bottom) by letting it stand in large
jugs (Jn2:6); bread was baked in thin sheets spread on top of small clay or earth ovens heated with grass
(Mt6:30); + ancient oil lamps at the time of Christ were very small so three or four could be held in the hand at
once. The virgins who took their lamps and not their oil jugs were foolish, because a marriage vigil could last as
long as 3 hours and so exhaust the supply of oil in the little lamp (Mt25:1f)."
2. Social Culture - Customs, Practices, Rites, etc - societal ongoing
- puberty, marriage, burial rites
- slavery, monetary system, methods of warfare, inheritance: bury my father(Lk9:59), multi-family households (Peter's mr-in-law)
b. Ramm p157 - Essential vs Nice
"Cultural studies give us the usus loquendi of a language and so enables us to know the original, literal, socially-
designated meaning of a word, a phrase, or a custom. Words, sentences, expressions are meaningful at the first level
in terms of the culture in which they are embedded. 'Literal interpretation' is crippled w/o the help of cultural studies.
Again like Biblical history, cultural matters are not niceties we may search out if we have the time but which we may
ignore under the pressure of time and circumstances. They are indispensable for the accurate understanding of Holy
Scripture."

D. Important Tools for Historical Interpretation

1. Internal Help - not all beyond Scriptures
a. Berkhof: "The principle resources for the historical interpretationof the Scriptures are found in the Bible itself."
- Information gleaned from this source is to be preferred above other sources.
"This reminder is not superfluous in view of the fact that many seem inclined to give more credence to the voices of
hoary antiquity that were made vocal by recent archaeological discoveries than to the infallible Word of God. The
believing and conscientious expositor will ask first of all: What does the Bible say?"
b. Examples
1. Passover Background - not 1st to Josephus - Rather to Ex12, Lev23, Num28, Dt16!
2. Nazirite in Judges 13:5 -> Numbers 6 explains!
3. Zephaniah - Judgment on them that swear by Milcham -> 1Kings11 God of Ammon, Lev18:21; 20:2f Human sacrif!
4. Samaritans of NT -> 2Kings17:24-41, Ezra4, Neh4!

2. External Help
a. Good Bible Encyclopedia - not just a dictionary
1. Zondervan's Pictorial (5volumes) RPM "Best buy you'll ever make."
2. Old ISBE, New ISBE - avoid the stubborn refusal to read newly published works. "The old is better."
Hoch:
"God has not left us w/o copious written materials and other sources with which to reconstruct the history. Each
year makes more artifacts, documents, and discoveries available to reconstruct the history. Each year makes more
artifacts, documents, and discoveries available to the Bible scholar to enable him to understand the ancient world
better. One should therefore consult all(reasonable) the external and internal evidence available to him that will
increase his awareness of the revelational milieu." *Avoid obscurantism, yet be cautious.
b. NT Era
1. Edersheim - Life & times of Jesus the Messiah
2. H. E. Dana - The NT World
3. F. F. Bruce - NT History, Books & Parchments
4. Merill Tenney - NT Times
5. J. Jeremias - Jerusalem in the time of Jesus (Fortress) - sift
6. Edward Lohse - NT Environment (RPM - good information on Grk mystery religions)
*OT Biblical Archaeology in Focus - Schoville - Sift
c. InterTestamental - Reicke, Pfeiffer
1. Josephus - Complete Works, Reference - Interesting Jewish Historian
- Eyewitness to 70AD Fall, Contemporary Culture - biased + at times fanciful!
2. Copy of Apocrypha - expecially 1 + 2 Macabees
3. Good Introduction to Dead Sea Scrolls - summarize finds
d. Introductions - NT - Guthrie (IVP); OT - RK Harrison (Eerdmans); Geisler&Nix
e. Commentaries - even liberals(or less than Reformed!) may help, but read expecting problems
- Yamauchi (Ezra/Neh) - Whole Expositors Bible Commentary; Tyndale OT Set

44
V. Historical Interpretation - Review A. Explanation B. Task C. Elements D. Tools

E. Some Thorny Difficulties Related to Historical Interpretation

1. In Determining the Original Historical Setting
a. Lack of Concensus - External + Internal Evidence may be unclear.
- Obadiah - Date anywhere - 800BC -> 300's BC
- Related to one of many assaults on Jerusalem - after a capture - gloating over enemies - unsure (848? 586?)
b. AntiSupernaturalist Apriori - Prophetic Foretelling an impossibility
1. Date books w/ Foretelling - after the fact - "another form of history" - Prophetic genre or device
2. Rationalism - God's disclosures to men may deal w/ the past or present, but not the future.
3. Late Dates - Daniel, Deutero/Trito Isaiah(Cyrus), Jeremiah's Fall Prophecies - late historical setting
*How explain River of OT Prophecies fulfilled in Christ!?? - Creation by Church?

2. In Distinguishing Authoritative Revelation from Circumstantial Ancient Culture

a. The Problem - Higher Critical Contention - that the Bible's Teaching is culturally bound to obsolete patterns of life.
1. Ramm p158
"This kind of criticism meant that large parts of the Holy Scripture reflected the culture of their times, and were
neither binding nor believable for Christian scholars. . . . We have, then, a radical turnabout in the matter of culture
and hermeneutics. In the older philological method the understanding of culture enabled the interpreter better to
understand God's revelation in Holy Scripture. Now it is asserted that because so much of Holy Scripture reflects
the culture of the time (which is just culture and not truth) most of Holy Scripture cannot be accepted as divine
revelation."
2. Complex Issue - what is Normative? Permanent? Cultural?

3. Examples of possible cultural limitations: (most below Hoch:)

a. Hospitality because of the character of inns in the first century (Rom12:13) – fleas, profligacy
b. The Church meeting in homes because of the unavailability of large buildings (Rom16:5)
c. The holy kiss because of the emotional nature of the oriental (Ro16:16; 1Cor16:20; 2Cor13:12; 1Thess5:26)
d. Fathers, daughters, and marriage because of the marriage practices of the times (1Cor7:36f)
e. The veiling of women (hair length) because of the stigma attached to unveiled(or short haired) women in the first
century (1Cor11)
f. Agape and the Lord's Table because of the connection with the Jewish PO feast and communal meals (1Cor11)
g. Silence of women because of the low estimate of women held by first century male chauvinists (1Cor14:34; 1Tim2:11-12)
h. Submission of wives to husbands because of Jewish male chauvinism (Eph5:22)
i. Washing of the saints' feet because of the nature of first century travel (1Tim5:10)
j. Use of wine for the stomach's sake because of lack of modern miracle drugs (1Tim5:23)
k. Public Reading of Scriptures because of the unavailability of literature in the first century (1Tim4:13) – now bibles?
l. Families in bed w/ their children (Lk11:7)
m. Robed to one's feet (Rev1:13)
n. Homosexuality forbidden because the "gay" chromosome was not yet identified by primitive men (Ro1, Eph5, 1Cor6)
o. Lawsuits because of the nature of jurisprudence in the 1st century (1Cor6).
p. Slavery because of a sinful participation in an abusive system (Col 3,4)

b. Approaches (3)
1. The Bible is almost totally Limited and Bound Culturally. (Extreme Left)
a. It's a strange book to modern man, no educated thinker can accept its world view.
b. It does contain valuable ancient maxims that are profitable, but the cultural Entanglements display that it is
clearly not timeless truth + revelation.
1. Slice Theory - Kant - acceptance that a certain "slice" thru Scripture is Theologically normative - rest is
culturally conditioned. Kant said this slice is ethics (vs doctrine) alone. – as w/ orange, can tear out w/ precision
2. Christological Theory - "the spirit of Jesus" is transcultural - only!
c. Examples of the culturally Irrelevant:
- Fathers & Daughters(1Cor7:36f) – modern feminism, Who gives this woman to this man?
- Women's Silence & Submission (1Cor11, 14; Eph5; Tim2) – Women Pastors!?
- Homosexuality (Lev18, 20; Ro1; 1Cor6; 1Tim1) – Jude 7 “strange flesh” promiscuous one night stand? – Gen19 inhospitable

45
 2. The Bible Reflects Few or No Cultural Anachronisms. (Extreme Right)
a. Modern Culture is out of step with the Bible and its Culture.
b. We must seek to reproduce the manifested culture as well as the Principles - reproduction of ancient lifestyle
- Amish, Hook & Eye Dutch, Mennonites, Plymouth Brethren
c. Children in Bed, House Churches, Recline at Table, Dresses to feet, Father dictates daughter's mate, wash feet,
wine for the stomach vs antibiotics, Extended families living under the same roof (Mk1:29-30), etc. – Biblical! Halakah!

3. The Bible discloses Eternally Binding Truth in and through a Cultural Form. (Wise Center)
a. Eternally binding principle must be drawn from and seen in its cultural conveyance. – separate wagon from cargo
b. Ramm p161
"Because Holy Scripture is given by divine revelation and by divine inspiration, it is in virtue of these 2
characteristics transcultural from its very inception. . . . Because Holy Scripture did come in Jewish culture it
does have a specific cultural impress so that the entire Scripture is not completely transcultural. There is no
easy solution to this problem and no simple formula which enables the interpreter to divide the transcultural
from the cultural. We must declare that we know this problem exists, that we must learn to live with it the best
we can, and that God in his grace, and wisdom, and his mystery can speak to us today his Word in, with, and
under its cultural impress." *no foolproof formula

c. Guidelines - Humbly submitted for the distinguishing between Binding Revelation and Cultural Form
1. Distinguish Authoritative Mandate or Precedent from Incidental Details.
a. Authoritative Mandate - Women silent (1Cor14, 1Tim2 - both footnoted: law, creation); Hospitality (1Pet4:9)
- *Titus 2:5 "workers at home" - headquarters, yet consider assumption of children
b. Authoritative Precedent - Prayer Meeting (Acts4:23-31); 1st Day Meeting (Acts20:7)
c. Incidental Details - kids in bed, house churches, footwashing

2. Submissively Embrace w/o Qualification or Adjustment all mandates given w/ Theological Anchoring:
a. 1 Cor 11 headcovering (hair length) - man created 1st; 1Cor14:34 - "as the Law also says"
b. 1Tim2 - Eve deceived, Woman saved thru childrearing

3. Assume every Prescription possesses an eternally binding intent and principle.

a. 1 Cor 7 - Fathers and Daughters -> Parental Authority + leadership ought to be exercised in marriage partner!
b. Holy Kiss - 1 Cor16:20 etc - Physical expression of affection + brotherhood!
c. Footwashing? - 1Tim5:10 - metaphor?, or like OT civil laws shell falls away(cicada), living principle endures
*As Dispensationalists penknife the Bible by Theological Scissoring, so Modernists by cultural scissoring!
SW - "I'm not willing to give up any of my bible."
d. Hospitality - Holiday Inn may be acceptable, even prudent - but we must still "put ourselves out" for one another!

4. Distinguish Cultural Adjustment from the Jettisoning of Principle.

a. Holy Kiss - not rejected - Adjusted - Physical expression as substitute - warm handshake, embrace
b. Like OT Civil Laws - Adjust, not Reject Principle - Dt22:8f: Parapet; Mixed seed, material, beasts
- also Consider Dt22:5 "abomination for man wear women's clothing" -> 22:30 "do not uncover your fr's skirt"
c. Slavery may be Jettisoned - but not authority heirarchies!
d. SW on Veiling, p49: "It may be maintained that in a society where women wear veils as an indication of their
feminine status veils are mandatory. Thus Paul's command might be culturally bound as to external
manifestation but not as to its governing principle (subordination). This could be problematic. It may be
maintained that Paul had no piece of clothing in mind. Certain evidence suggests that Paul merely had in mind
the "letting down" of a woman's long hair in vs 4-7 when he spoke of her being "uncovered". To 'take down' her
'done up' hair is to uncover her head. This hair is a substitute for a covering. A well-kempt hairdo may be a
matter of ethical importance. Certainly it would be preferable to maintain this, than to allow the mitigation of
Apostolic authority." What about 1Tim2:9-10(braided hair, gold, pearls)?
*Consider also length of hair as an interpretation.

5. If any Cultural-Principial Element is to be Rejected, it must be proven by the Bible, not by modern Culture.
a. Often we must be a Counter Culture - not dictated to by today's values + mentality
b. Public Education - Eph6 - Fathers, raise in fear + admonition . . . - still ours!
c. Feminism - not dump biblical heirarchy
d. Preaching & Reading vs Modern entertainment appetites (seminaries, etc) - 1Tim4, 2Tim4

46
 e. Tongue Speaking - Heb 1, 2; 1Cor13, Sign gifts - ended
f. Wine for Stomach vs Cultural Abuse in our day - abstaining is legitimate - but tend to body w/ available remedies

6. Implement the Principle of the Analogy of Faith.

a. Paul ministered the Gospel w/o Charge - 1Thess 2:9; 2Cor11:7 -> 1Cor9:9-18!

Review – Syllabus

VI. Theological Interpretation - see syllabus for Outline Bearings

*Introduction - The-Anthropic Document - God-Man Word - Here Focus on its Divinity!
1. Strong Emphasis of Reformed Hermeneutics vs Trend of our Day - even in Conservative circles - downplay! – Theology disdained!
2. Crucial to Comprehend + Embrace - if faithful Interpreter and useful Builder of Kdom (gift to Church)

A. General Perspectives of Sound Theological Interpretation

1. Its Identification - That Hermeneutical Discipline which recognizes the Sacred character of the canon of Scriptures (vs
simply an anthology or library of Diverse Authors) as a Harmonizeable Theological Context in which each document and
passage must be assessed. *Sleek + Athletic Cat
a. It seeks to reconcile + correspond a particular word, phrase, paragraph from God with the Whole Counsel of God!
b. It is "Doctrinal Interpretation" - synonym - seeks to grasp and formulate a comprehensive view of all biblical data on a
given subject - i.e. prayer, Holy Spirit, Miracles.
c. It assumes that there is a Coherent, Rational Blueprint - Pieces do fit together into an integrated whole (Puzzlers)
d. Elwell p566, FF Bruce - "Where as GH Exegesis may bring out the variety of viewpoint and emphasis represented in the
Bible, Theological Exegesis presupposes there is an overall unity in the light of which the diversity can be appreciated in
its proper perspective."

2. Its Emphasis - on the Bible's Divinity (TheAnthropic)

a. Focus on - character of Bible - beyond Human production.
b. Bible as Unity - Though many different human authors, many different times, places, circumstances
- yet only One Divine Author (2Tim3:16 - qewpneustos) - unity!
c. SW Chart p54 - TheAnthropic Document

Hermeneutics of Humanity Division Hermeneutics of Divinity

Grammatical-Historicsl Interpr Method Theologial Interpr

Many Human Authors Focus One Divine Author

Multiformity of the Bible Characteristic Unity of the Bible

3. Its Necessity - As a Complement to Gramm-Hist Interpretation

a. Post Reformation Centuries - Fixation on Humanity of Scriptures - Perverted-> Old LIberalism, NeoOrthodoxy
- such GH focus - tendency to neglect - Divinity!
b. Mickelsen - p375 - *No chapter given to Theological Interpretation - Crowning Italicized Statement:
". . . But all of these procedures have the same objective: to unfold what the passage meant to the human author (as he
was energized by God to convey a specific message and original readers and what the passage means to us today."
*Correct as far as it goes, yet truncated + inadequate!

c. Berkhof, p133 "Many writers on Hermeneutics are of the opinion that the grammataical and historical interpretation
meet all the requirements for the proper interpretation of the Bible. They have no eye for the special theoogical
character of this discipline. There are others, however, who are conscious of the necessity of recognizing a third
element in the interpretation of Scripture. Kuyper emphasizes the necessity of recognizing the mystical factor in the
interpretation of Scripture, and Bavinck insists that the Bible be read theologically. Klausen and Landerer speak of
theological, and Celerier and Sikkel, of a scriptural interpretation. They all agree in the desire to do justice ot the
special theological element of the Bible. and refuse to place it on a level w/ other books.

47
 Scripture contains a great deal that does not find its explanation in history, nor in the secondary authors, but only
in God as the Auctor Primarius."

d. SW - Evangelicalism drifting from sound Hermeneutics - losing sight of an Adequate view of Scripture

Mickelsen - ? View of Scripture --------------> Imbalanced Hermeneutic (Truncated)

Berkhof - Reformed View of Scripture (Theanthropic) --------> Reformed Hermeneutic (Comprehensive)

4. Its Position - As an extension of GH Interpretation

a. Some Exegete the Text w/ GH, then consider the work is done - deficient! - only begun!
b.Theological Interpretation - not separate from GH meaning - rather as an extension of that meaning
- Text may mean more than the original context + Intent, but any truth beyond must be directly traceable from its
original meaning - Extended vs New theme
c. Theological Pyramid - Work your way up it w/ each text!
d. Ramm p163
"Part of the task of hermeneutics is to determine the correct use of the Bible in theology and in personal life. The
doctrinal interpretation of the Bible is the work of the theologian. It is advancing beyond the grammatical and historical
sense to the fuller meaning of Scripture. Grammarians may differ over grammatical points in exegesis which may or
may not influence theology, but the differences among theologians are sharper and more profound because theologians
are dealing with the full implications of Biblical truth. A strictly grammatical and exegetical study may never discuss
the problem of the Trinity, but the problem is inescapable to the synoptic method of the theologian."
Theological interpretation is thus characterized by:
1. an extension of the grammatical meaning to discover its fuller theological significance, and
2. a synoptic view of all the Biblical data on a given subject."

e. RPM - Theological Interpretation seeks to discover the "fuller meaning" of the text
- typological, symbolic, doctrinal and practical implications.
f. Example - Mt7:7 Prayer: ask, seek, knock - examine all prayer texts, character of God, person of Christ
- we find no blank check, but a promise of wisdom for Kdom work, and the general truth that God will withold no good
thing from his children.

4. Its Justification - as it recognizes the Revelational content of the Bible

a. In Scriptures - we possess a knowledge of God that we may express as teaching (didace, didaskalia, 2Tim3:16)
- Revelational, Objective Knowledge of God vs NeoOrthodox - Religious speculation
b. Scriptures, Therefore - Capable of + Intended for Theological Interpretation - System of Truth - Deposit communicated
- Jesus claimed His doctrines from God (Jn7:16 - "my teaching is not Mine, but His who sent Me")
- Rom6:17 - "you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed"
- Pastorals - call to be careful to maintain soundness in doctrine - 12 times
- 2Tim3:16 - 1st profit of Scripture - "Profitable for teaching. . ." - doctrine!
c. Doctrine gives the Christian Faith its Substance + Form - from the divine disclosure, doctrine is deduced
- w/o divine disclosure, no doctrine is possible - thus we possess substantial content in doctrine!

6. Its Unavoidability
a. We must acknowledge + recognize our own Presuppositions, Preconceptions + Biases - that we bring to a given text.
- The fact that you're Reformed vs Arminian (determined by bending of mind according to Scriptures)
- such a pressure produces conclusions!
b. 1Jn2:2 - kosmos - "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." – 5:19 world, evil one
- GH - not conclude any meaning of kosmos -> TH does!
c. Smart: "Where is this scholar w/o presuppositions? He has never existed, and he never will. He is an abstraction."
- We must recognize our presuppositions, yet always reevaluating them according to the Whole Counsel.
d. Wholesome! - lest we attempt to Jettison all presuppositions - come to text - Abandon Theistic Framework?!?
- We end up as Rationalists!

B. The Cardinal Principles of Theological Interpretation

1. The Propriety of Logical Inferences
a. Inferences = Logical Consequence of a Particular Statement - Humans not always able to think fully through, may
unknowingly err in expressing themselves - i.e. Cultural Guidelines for Interpretation earlier

48
b. Example - Arminian, believes conditional Election - "God elected me because he foresaw my faith thru my free will."
- Charge (logical consequence, inference, deduction) - "So you believe in salvation by works?!" - Abhorrent to him.
- Problem - Men have limited knowledge, often we don't intend, or even understand the proper inferences of our words.

c. Divine Authorship of Bible - Totally different matter - Comprehensive Knowledge! - vs our inability to so explore! – *Video, Ball Girl Catch!
1. He knows + intends all the necessary deductions - drawn from His word - unity lends to such comparison!
2. Berkhof p157-59 -
"The Bible as the Word of God contains a fulness and wealth of thought that is unfathomable. This is evident not
only from its types and symbols and prophecies, but also from what it contains implicitly rather than by express
assertion. Even in the case of human compositions we distinguish between what is expressed and what is implied. In
writings of a superior order, it is often found that the language suggests and involves important truths that are
embodied in words. Great minds contain a wealth of knowledge, and whatever they communicate of it is related to
and suggestive of that vast store, so that it becomes quite possible to read between the lines. And if this is true of
the literary productions of men, it applies much more to the infallible Word of God.

There is important distinction, however. Man only knows in part, and is not always conscious of what he knows.
Moreover, he often fails to see the implications of what he says or writes. It is quite possible that his words
contain implications which he did not see and to which he would not subscribe. It may very well be what can fairly
be deduced from his explicit assertions, by means of logical inference of comparison, lies entirely outside of his
range of thought and is, in fact, the very opposite of what he means. Hence the rule, so often forgotten in practice,
but yet essential to all fair controversy, that 'it is not allowable to charge upon an author the consequences of his
statements when not expressly avowed or adopted, even although these consequences may be necessarily involved
in the statements.' He may not have contemplated nor evens een them, so that he is not responsible for them, but
only for the employment of language which unintentionally implies them. For the same reason it is not permissible
to infer a writer's opinion on a certain matter from incidental expressions, used by him when the matter in question
was not under consideration. As a rule it is unwarranted procedure, to ascribe to an author thoughts or sentiments
which he did not expressly utter in connection with the matter to which they pertain. He who does this is guilty of
consequensmacherie.

But in the case of the Word of God, these restrictions do not apply. The knowledge of God is all-comprehending
and is always conscious knowledge. In giving man his Word, He was not only perfectly aware of all that was said,
but also of all that this implied. He knew the inferences that are deduced from His written Word. Says Bannerman:

"The consequences that are deduced from Scripture by unavoidable inference, and more largely still the
consequences that are deduced from a comparison of the various Scripture statements among themselves, were
foreseen by infinite wisdom in the very act of supernaturally inspiring the record from which they are inferred: and
such consequences, but designed that they should do so' (Inspiration of the Scriptures, p585). Therefore not only
the express statements of Scripture, but its implications as well, must be regarded as the Word of God."

d. Biblical Corroboration – Examples of employment

1. Mt22:29-32 - Assertion: I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob.
Inference: The dead are raised!
- Jesus' Corroboration of Inference in Hermeneutics: "You do err, not knowing the Scripture."
2. Rom4:3f - Assertion - Abraham's faith was reckoned to Him as righteousness.
Inference - Abraham was justified by faith!
3. Heb4:5-9 - Assertion: Today, enter into my rest (David long after Joshua, promise)
Inference: There remains a sabbath rest for the people of God! (upcoming)

e. Confessional Conclusion: WCF, ch1, Art6

"The whole counsel of God . . . is either expressly set down in scripture, or by a good and necessary consequence may
be deduced from scripture."
*Foundation + Warrant for Systematic Theology - structuring + Inferring Doctrinal Relationships into a System!
- Doctrine of Trinity! (Bible no where explicitly declares 3 persons, 1 essence)
- Doctrine of Inspiration, Inerrancy! (Bible no where states the 27 NT books are inspired)
- Christian Sabbath - No direct Assertion - transfer from 7th to 1st day, Resurrection Day, Lord's Day!
*But no less authoritative!

f. Caution and Warning - Beware Logical Fallacies + Unsound Inferences - such are the seeds of heresy, poor hermeneutics

49
 1. Carson: "The fundamental 'laws' of logic such as the law of non contradiction and the law of the excluded middle are
universally true." If not acccording to sound logic, a fallacy!
2. Carson: Exegetical Fallacies p91-126 - "Logical Fallacies";
also James Sire, Scripture Twisting "Reasoning from Scripture" chapter.
a. False Disjunctions - Carson, p96-97 - Improper appeal to the logical law of the excluded middle:
1. Hosea 6:6 - "I desire mercy and not sacrifice."
- A shock device to make people see the imcompatibility of sacrifice along w/ bitterness, enmity, animosity!
- Not to conclude the abolition of sacrifices!
2. Zane Hodges - the Dangerous Assumed and Unformulated Disjunction:
- Hodges: "It is an interpretive mistake of the 1st magnitude to confuse the terms of discipleship w/ the offer
of eternal life as a free gift. 'And whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely'(Rev22:22), is
clearly an unconditional benefaction. 'If anyone comes to me and does not . . . he cannot be my disciple'
clearly expresses a relationship which is fully conditional. Not to recognize this simple distinction is to
invite confusion and error at the most fundamental level." --The Gospel Under Siege

- Carson: In fact, not only in this paragraph but also throughout the entire book Hodges has assumed that there
is disjunction between grace and demand. He never wrestles w/ the possibility (in my view, the dead
certainty) that in spiritual matters grace and demand are not necessarily mutually incompatible; everything
depends on their relations, purposes, functions. The result of this assumed disjunction in false thesis--that
the Bible teaches a person may be eternally saved even though there is not a scrap of evidence for it in his or
her life--but Also an array of exegetical and historical judgments that are extremely problematic."

b. Improperly Handled Syllogism, p101 - Douglas Moo vs JB Payne

"Payne argues that 1Tim2:11-15 (women quiet and not to teach a man) is directed toward local abuse, and
therefore its teaching should not be universally applied. The reasoning may be analyzed thus:
- Major Premise: Teaching occasioned by a local situation is not universally applicable.
- Minor Premise: The teaching in question (1Tim2:11-15) is occasioned by a local situation.
- Conclusion: Therefore the teaching in question is not universally applicable.
In this instance, the form of the argument is valid, but the first premise is too generalized to be believable. In
one sense, all the New Testament documents are 'occasional';"

c. Fallacies of Question Framing, p107-8

- Imposition of an unestablished assumption:
"When did you stop beating your wife?" or "Was Reconstruction of the South shamefully harsh or surprisingly lenient?"
- How many evangelical theologians (especially in North America) expend large amounts of energy asking
whether 1Thess4:13-18 teaches or presupposes a pretribulation or a posttribulation rapture, when on the face
of it Paul's interest in writing that pericope is far removed from such questions? – Certainty of Parousia, not Pre or Post

*Such Logical Fallacies we must be careful to avoid in our preaching and teaching.

1. The Propriety of Logical Inferences

2. The Unity of Biblical Books
a. 66 Books Compose an Organic Whole - 40+ Human Authors over span of nearly 2 millennia (Job)
- Special Breath + Providence - Assures us Unity + Sufficiency
- Terry p586 "We recognize the Spirit of God as the presiding and controlling wisdom which shaped these lively
oracles. He not only employed holy men in the accomplishment of his purpose but also the ministry of angels
(Acts7:53, etc.). A minute divine providence secured the embodiment of the entire revelation in the written form
in which we now possess it. The same God who spoke in the last days in the person of his Son spoke also in the older
revelations (Heb1:1), and we may search his word in confidence that divine order and wisdom will be found from
the beginning to the end."
b. Hermeneutical Questions:
1. Not only, what did the human author intend in this writing? - exhausts not the interpretive potential of each passage
2. Also - What did the Divine Author intend in this writing?
- How does this book, statement fit into the overarching divine purpose of the Bible?
3. Not only, what gap did the human author intend to fill in the contemporary circumstances?
4. Also - What gap did God intend to fill in the faith and life of His people throughout the ages? (SW)
*Examples:

50
 a. Messianic Psalms - Ps22:16 “pierced my hands and feet” - Expound beyond David's significance!
b. Perfect 4fold portrait of Christ in Gospels - complementary - no premeditated plan, engineered by HS!

3. The Harmony of the Bible's Message

a. The Entire Bible embodies a single, Definite Teaching, Doctrine, or Theology
1. Tit1:9 - "holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching (didachn) ) that he might be able to
exhort in sound doctrine (didaskalia) and refute those who contradict it."
2. Jude3 - "contend earnestly for the faith once for all delivered to the saints."
3. 2Tim1:13 - "Retain the standard of sound words."
4. Rom16:17 - "Keep an eye on those who cause dissensions . . . contrary to the teaching (didachn) you have learned."

b. Is there Unifying Theme + Purpose that gives adhesive sense? – *Artificial Christmas Tree Stem
1. SW - Shotgun to an ignorant man - "This thing don't make no sense." – launch a projectile vs throw as a spear
2. Evangelical in Theme and Purpose - "The salvation of man" - Salvation History is the Adhesive – Paul(Law->Christ)
Reformers - Justification by Faith - too narrow!
- Lk24:25-26, 44-47 Christ's Redemptive Work; 2Tim3:15-17 "able to make you wise unto salvation"
- Such texts validate that we are not to exclude all but the great themes of the Gospel, but that we are to preach
every theme displaying how it radiates from this central theme!
- Never duty divorced from grace!

c. Reformed Principles of Unification - Properly perceive the overall Theme of a given passage.
1. Progressive Principle of Revelaltion - RPM - "Distinguish the times + you will harmonize the Scriptures."
* The 2 testaments are not contradictory - the 1st is incomplete!
a. OT Law + Demand - not legalism - expose sin(Ro3,7); Show Need; Declare Duty(Rom8) – 3 Uses of Law
b. Doctrine of Redemption - Same in Old as New - Sacrifices, Washings, Exodus
c. Polygamy - permitted because of hardness of hearts!
2. Covenantal Principle of Revelation - Determines what covenant a passage is in, in order to interpret it properly.
a. Abraham's Seed in Old Covt -> Blood lines vs Faith lines - Rom4, Heb8
b. Civil Laws + Penalties - Adultery(death) -> 1Cor5, Church vs Theocracy - Excommunication
c. Abrahamic - No Priest -> Mosaic -> New!
d. Royal Psalms - King intimately associated w/ Rule of God -> New - Christ!
*Carefully Interpret Old + New in Old Covt, New Covt Framework (Relationships + Distinctions)
- Old contains the key in interpreting the new and vice versa!

4. The Analogy of Faith - Hermeneutical Implication of Doctrinal Unity (mentioned earlier)

a. Its Meaning
1. Negatively - Not in light of Authoritative creeds of the church - nor as used in Rom12:6 analogian ths pistews..
2. Positively - WCF 1:9 "The infallible rule of interpretation of scripture is scripture itself."
- Background - controversy w/ Rome - Scripture, not church is the infallible guide to interpreting the scriptures.

b. Its Boundaries - Analogy of Faith has been often abused in history!

1. In the quest for Intra Biblical Logical Consistency - Remember our Limitations
- Bible is Word of the Infinite + Transcendent God - truths do transcend Finite + Human Reason.
- Luther - "Theology of the Cross" - Thesis of the Bible is an "offense" to fallen human wisdom.
- Above Reason ≠ Against Reason - SupraRational ≠ Irrational
- The tops of the Redwoods of Divine truth are shrouded in impenetrable mystery.
2. Perversions
a. Modernism - sees inconsistencies + contradictions where there are none, thus deny, twist, truncate plain
meaning of Scripture. -> Christian Feminism - Gal3:28 - intrusion of Human wisdom.
b. HyperCalvinism - Twists + Obscures plain passages that teach a general saving will of God - unwilling to
incorporate the tensions.
-> Ezk33:11 Rendered: "I don't desire the death of the sinner (who is converted)." (P. R. Hoeksema)
c. Its Validity
1. Twin Pillars - 2 Realities
a. The Bible is Divinely Authored and cannot contradict itself.
b. The Bible, rightly divided, is a close knit doctrinal Unity.

2. Modern Theologian's Mentality - not outright deny the above, but. . .

51
 a. Believes the Interpreter should act as though the pillars are not true while approaching a particular passage.
b. When done, lo and behold, he will discover the rest of the bible teaches the same thing!
- D. P. Fuller, Gospel and Law, p61-62 OK
- Schoenhoeven on Hebrews (seen earlier)

3. Impossible to Do! - Need context of Scripture

4. Wrong to Do! - Schoenhoeven - Misrepresentation:

a. Objects to an Analogy of Faith - If it reduces warnings to a false notion of Eternal Security(loss of crowns)
*This is Good!
b. Asserts the Legitimacy of Perseverance + Necessity of "threat" as motivation unto godliness.
*This is Good!
c. Denies the Certainty of Perseverance. *This is the seeds of Heresy

5. Chart - The Exegesis and Undestanding of Scripture

Schoenhoeven's View (Modern) Reformed View

Exegesis ---> ---> Exegesis --->

------ I ^ I
------ v I v
^ --- Understanding <--- Understanding <---

*No Appreciation for Analogy of Faith *Applied Analogy of Faith (WCF 1:9)

6. Lifelong Process of Synthesis (Age Long Church)

a. Particular to General to Particular to General . . .
b. Ever called to sharpen previous conclusions (Revise, even drastically, if compelled by the text!)
- Arminian to Calvinist if necessary!

d. Its Implementation
1. No Passage may be so interpreted so as to contradict the clear teaching of the Word of God.
a. The Second Look Principle
1. Heb 6, 10 - seem to teach the apostasy of redeemed saints!?
- Discover - 6:9, 10:39 - author's confidence - presupposing perseverance
- also - 6:4-6 may in part refer to participation in Spirit's supernatural gifts (2:4)
2. Rom 7:14-25 - Saved or unsaved?
- see 7:25, 18 - how can this match with the mind of the depraved + lost sinner of 8:5-7?
- see also Ps 119:24, 77, 92, 174 - affectionate love for law.
- Conclude - In experience believer - both great love for good with remaining pull to evil!
*Berkhof, p166 "In cases where the analogy of Scripture leads to the establishment of 2 doctrines that appear
contradictory, both doctrines should be accepted as Scriptural in the confident belief that they resolve
themselves into a higher unity. Think of the doctrines of predestination and free will, of total depravity and
human responsibility." *Rubber Band Tension

2. Clear Passages must be given Relative Priority over Obscure Passages where apparent contradiction exists.
- WCF I:9 "place that speaks more clearly" - there search out matter - vs 1Cor15:29 starting pt for Baptism!
a. Didactic Assertion over Incidental References - 1Tim2:8-15 and 1Cor14:34(silent) over Gal3:28!
- in reference to women in the church!
b. Literal generally over Figurative - yet as Terry says (p593) - "We repudiate the notion, aserted by some that we
may not use figurative portions of scripture for the purpose of establishing or maintaining doctrine."
- Parables; 1Cor5:7 "Christ our Passover, was sacrificed"
c. Whole NT - over the Book of Revelation - in determining both Eschatology and Ecclesiology
- 2Thess1, 1Thess4 - provides framework for Interpreting Revelation; Pastorals over Rev1-3(Jezebel)

3. Parallel Treatments of a Given Theme will shed light on Difficult passages.

a. Example: 2Thess2:1-10 and Rev20:1-10 - Comparison broadens understanding to interpret both:

52
 1. Period of Satan's Restraint - time is now (2:7)
2. Removal of Restraint and Period of Satan's rampaging + deception. (20:7)
3. Divine Intervention + destruction of Satan (2:8)
*Buttresses A-Mill Interpretation of Rev20 and End of the Age Interpretation of 2Th2 (vs preTrib + PreMill)

4. The Analogy of Faith

5. The Authority of the Text - Sola Scriptura
a. Twist not a Passage, Sacrifice not sound Principles, merely to make the passage fit:
1. Your Preconceptions, Presuppositions regarding that passage - desire to preach it in a particular way.
2. Your Systematic Theology - may need refining - consider this possibility!
3. Your Favorite Commentator - intimidated to deprt from!
4. Your Creedal Statement - No Tyrrany of the Confession - though not easily depart, seek credible counsel
- but remember we must never sell off truth for our Position or Salary - PreTrib Seminarians - Us Too!
5. Your Philosophical World View - Socialism, Capitalism

b. Labor to ensure our integrity as expositors of the Sacred Scriptures - breathed by God!

c. Avoid the tendency to fit all the biblical data into an airtight neat package
1. 3 types of love
2. Tensionless Eternal Security
3. Joy=Spiritual delight; Happiness=Carnal delight

Review

IV. Theological Interpretation

A. The General Perspectives of Theological Interpretation

B. The Cardinal Principles of Theological Interpretaton

C. Some Miscellaneous Issues in Theological Interpretaion

1. Proof Texting - Citation of Scripture to support + verify a Theological Assertion
a. This is a legitimate application of "Footnoting", which is a standard scholarly procedure.
- Example: Scholar claims that Augustine held a certain viewpoint - he's expected to provide a reference or references
b. This Method is vulnerable to serious Malpractice, when not underwritten by sound exegetical work.
1. Ramm p177 "It is disconcerting to discover how many verses set down in a book of theology to prove a point, melt
away when each is examined from an exegetical standpoint."
- Often, there is no relevance - other times, the meaning is different from the theological application.
2. Older Theologies - often reflect little sense of progressive revelation, genre, etc
- (Westminster Standards - Song of Solomon cited for church life) - need for change!
3. Careful exegesis must underwrite every cited text or else we are guilty of a superficial treatment of Scripture.
- Be ever accumulating a quarry of texts for building of Doctrine
- Topical Preaching (much responsibility - references)
c. Greatness of Charles Hodge - as a Systematic Theologian -> a capable Expositor
- Calvin's Institutes manifest the same - see Commentaries!

2. The Theology of the Church

a. In Theological Conclusions, tremble at the thought of drawing conclusions contrary to the orthodox faith!
1. Variations in Periphery detail is to be expected, yet no man should dare shake a lamb's confidence in an orthodox
belief w/o understanding the full significance (theologically, practically).
*Arrogant Professors+Authors thrilled to rattle cages in pet shop.
2. James 3:1 - Not many teachers! - Incur stricter Judgment!
- The condemnation for the false or cavalier teacher who leads astray His flock is great. *Skull + Crossbones!
b. Ramm, p182 - Hodge on Theological Conclusions and the Church:
"It is not denied that the people, learned and unlearned, should not only compare Scripture w/ Scripture, and avail
themselves of all the means in their power to aid them in their search after the truth, but they should also pay the

53
 greatest deference to the faith of the Church. If the Scriptures be a plain book, and the Spirit performs the functions of
a teacher to all the children of God, it follows inevitably that they must agree in all essential matters in their
interpretation of the Bible. And from that fact it follows that for an individual Christian to dissent from the universal
Church (i.e. the body of true believers), is tantamount to dissenting from the Scriptures themselves."

3. Uncertain Textual Readings - No Doctrine should be constructed solely from such.

*Textual Criticism - raises substantial doubts - potentially the voice of man vs of God ->(Scribal Additions)
a. Jn7:53-8:11 - Woman Caught in Adultery
1. Precedent for erasing all Judicial, Ecclesiastical, social consequences for grievous sin?
2. Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, etc - undercutting clear 1Tim3, Tit1, 2Sam12f(David) - principles!
b. Mark 16:9-20 - Much discussion + debate (may discuss textual criticism later)
1. Unwise to build doctrines from this passage! Use solid texts from elsewhere!
2. Baptismal regeneration, speaking in tongues, casting out of demons, picking up serpents, drinking poison,
divine healing?

4. The Necessity of taking a Theological Stand

a. Theological Interpretation compels and enables definitive conclusions on tough passages.
b. Example: 1Jn2:2 "He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole
world." (kosmos)?
1. Lexicons Show Options - not necessarily categorized correctly! - See B.A.G, p445-447
2. Other Possibilities
a. Hyperbole - great number, majority
b. Inhabitants of the Roman Empire (Lk2:1)
c. Men w/o racial distinction (Jew+Gentile)
d. Wicked Order standing in opposition to God
e. All men universally
3. Decision! - Multiple Possibilities are legitimate - according to Gramm-Hist Interpretation!
a. Systematics is the Basis! - Arminian vs Reformed Calvinist - Men w/o Racial Distinction!!!
b. Crucial if to Preach - no agnostic luxury - must take a stand - Theological Position when evident!
- else congregation - tossed by every wind of doctrine -> congregation w/ backbone!

c. Alert: Be aware of the Theological System of any Commentator (upshot) - examine key passages (1Jn2:2, Heb6, etc)
1. Arminian? Dispensationalist? Post Millennial? Paedobaptist? PreMillennial? - Even Calvin, Hodge, Murray (PB's)
2. Such will have at least a subtle influence on His writing! - no mere GH Data!
d. Establish an Awareness of Proven and Trustworthy Commentators (close confidants), while aware of idiosyncracies!
e. On Occasion - Particular Texts - more obscure issues - Spirit purposefully made somewhat unclear? Or Unclear now!
1. Edifying to present both alternatives (w/ Analogy of Faith buttresssing) - drive home both!
2. James 4:5 "He jealously desires the Spirit which He has made to dwell in us."
a. Wholesome and of God - as 2nd Commandment?
b. Covetous and of Man - 10th Commandment? - see marginal reading.

5. Tools for Theological Interpretation

a. Biblical Theologies - Vos(Biblical and Pauline Theology), Guthrie(NT Theology), Ladd(NT Theology Presence of the
Future), H. Ridderbos(Outline of Pauline Theology, The Coming of the Kingdom), O. Palmer Robertson(Christ of the
Covenants); Kittel and Colin Brown - Theological WordBooks!
b. Systematic Theologies - Berkhof, Hodge, Dabney, Shedd, Dagg, Berkouwer, Calvin(Institutes), AH Strong, Waldron
1689, Owen's Works, Murray Works(vol 2 especially)
c. Creeds - Westminster Standards, Canons of Dortrecht, 1689
d. History of Christian Doctrine - Berkhof, Cunningham
e. Special Studies - Hoekema (Eschatology, Anthropology); Warfield (Inspiration, Christology), Murray (Imputation,
Redemption Accomplished and Applied)
f. Commentaries - Theologically Written (vs Ants!) - Calvin, Hodge, Murray, Geneva Series, Hendriksen, Lenski
g. Dictionaries - Baker's Theological (Elwell); IVP (Ferguson and Packer); Bible Dictionaries - Atonement, Redemption, etc

Review

VII. Special Hermeneutics

54
A. Typology
*Introduction
1. A. W. Pink - Gleanings in Genesis (one of his earlier works)
a. 16 Parallels between Noah + Christ, p96 - including:
1. Noah did his work alone (atonement of Christ)
2. Noah was the Great Food Provider (Christ as the Bread of life)
3. As every beast and person left the ark, none being lost (Christ lost none, Jn18:19: "of them thou gavest me, I
have lost none.")
b. 12 Parallels between Christ and the Ark, p103f - including:
1. Ark was made of Wood (Life from death, trees 1st needed to be cut down, so Christ in His death)
2. Ark had 3 Stories (3fold salvation of Christ - of our spirit, soul, body; also past penalty of, present power of,
future penalty of our sin Christ dealt with)
3. Ark had a Window (Col3:2 - "Set your mind on things above, not on the things that are on the earth")
4. Ark had "Rooms, Nests" (Read Pink #10, p107-8)
"The ark was furnished w/ rooms or nests "make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms (margin reads nests)
shalt thou make in the ark" (Gen6:14). In every other passage in the OT, where the Heb word "gen" occurs, it is
translated "nest". We hesitate to press the spiritual signification here; yet , since we have seen that the ark is
such a striking and comprehensive type of our salvation in Christ, we must believe that this detaiI in the picture
has some meaning, whether we are able to discern it or no. The thought which is suggested to us is, that in
Christ we have something more than a refuge. We have a resting place; we are like birds in their nests, the
objects of another's loving care. Oh, is it that the nests in the ark look forward to the many mansions in the
Father's house which our Lord has gone to prepare for us? It is rather curious that there is some uncertainty
about the precise meaning of the Greek word her translated "mansions": Wehmouth renders it , "In my fr's
house are many resting places!"
2. Bible Itself - 1Peter3:21 - Acknowledges the flood as a Type! But has Pink gone too far? If so, where do we draw the
line? How do we distinguish sound from unsound Typological Interpretation?
3. Address Typology - Multiple Subheadings:

1. The Presupposition of Typology

a. Divine Authorship of Scripture - Organic Unity of the Bible
1. As a single message + close knit Doctrinal unity is the result of a Single Author, so too is Typology the Result!
2. Nathaniel Hawthorne's Scarlet Letter - Masterful Story with profound symbolism + themes woven into the story line
from beginning to end - Climactic crescendo as all the trains return to the station in the story's finale!
3. Revelation 21-22 - the Finale!
b. A Simple Definition of a Type - Something in the Old Testament which points forward to something in the New.
1. Example - Wilderness wandering of Israel for 40 years -> Christian Pilgrimmage thru a sinful world (1Cor10:1-11)
2. This highlights the fact that Typology demands an omniscient and omnipotent Author who is ordering history and His
Word in order to foreshadow future events. He will surely bring it to pass.
c. So when we observe legitimate types - no hyper-imagination, chance coincidence, but Divine Revelation (sovereignly
intended and purposefully fashioned.)
d. Justification - not forced Exegesis, rather naturally arises from the Scriptures
1. Excesses do not invalidate Typological Method
2. Two Testaments linked together by a profound prophetic element
- Type = a Pictorial vs a Verbal Prophecy
3. Lord's Use of OT invites us to find Him in it
a. Lukek24:25-44 - "beginning w/ Moses and all the prophets. . .explained to them the things concerning Himself"
b. John5:39-44 "Scriptures. . . bear witness of Me"
c. Heb9:9-11- Tabernacle Elements: "a symbol for the present time" 9:23-24 "copies of the things in heaven"

2. The History of Typology - best summarized as a Swinging Pendulum:

a. Normative NT Writers - OT found fulfillment in Christ - OT and NT are a united, consistent whole.
b. Allegorical Interpretation - Early church era, few able to make a clear distinction between the Typological and Allegorical Method:
1. Motivated by such factors as - Need for Apologetics, Greek Philosophy, High View of Scripture
2. Epitomized - Alexandrian School
c. School of Antioch - Reaction - Return to Gramm-Hist Exegesis
- Christological Controversy (Nestorianism) - loss of Prestige - reversion back to Alexandrian Fathers!
d. Reformation - Return to more literal intepretation

55
 1. Luther - Reaction against Allegorism - Luther "monkey tricks" (Though he himself was a prankster at times!)
2. Conservative in their Typology - but this discipline was not intensely studied, so understanding remained unclear.
- This is manifested in some unclear, excessive, and extreme typological interpretatons.
e. 17th Century
1. Cocceius - Believed that every event in the OT History, which had a formal resemblance to something in
the NT, was to be regarded as typical.
- Rammp218-19 -"Regarded the OT as a larder richly stored w/ NT teachings . . . pressed typological
interpretation beyond its proper measure."
2. Simon Glassius (1623) - saw types of Scripture as 2fold:
a. Innate - specifically declared to be such in the NT
b. Inferred - Justified (though not specifically declared) by sound principles of Typology - often excessive!
f. Twofold Reaction:
1. Rationalistic Interpreters - Downplayed Divinity + Supernatural Character of the Scriptures by denying all types
- even the innate types - accommodations of NT Writers to the Prejudice + Ignorance of the Jewish People!
2. Orthodox Interpreters (Bishop Marsh)
a. Contrary to the Hutchinson School of England which said, "Every passage of the OT looked backward + forward
like light from the sun" - Overreaction against Rationalists!
b. Marsh rejected all Inferred Types - and allowed only Innate Types as legitimate.
g. Patrick Fairbairn - Typology of Scripture, accepted both Innate and Inferred; Objections to Marsh:
1. There is no warrant to conclude that explicit NT References exhaust biblical typology.
2. It is unfounded to assume that there is no other controlling basis to govern typology.
3. The New Testament Data implies that there are many more legitimate types that are not explicitly mentioned.
- Col2:16-17 (food, drink, festival, new moon, Sabbath, things of which are a mere shadow of what is to come)
- Heb9:5 (cherubim, mercy seat, but of these things we cannot now speak of in detail)
- Heb9:10b (food, drink, washings, regulations . . . imposed until a time of reformation)
4. The Hermeneutic of Christ and His Apostles contains certain discernible guiding principles which are able to direct us
in our discovery of legitimate types. This does not annul their authority. We model our typological approach after theirs!

h. Contemporary Schools - Observeable:

1. Rationalistic Aversion - subtle belittling
2. Fundamentalistic Enthusiasm - wild eyed, Pink in earlier days (RPM)
3. School of Marsh - strict, innate only
4. School of Fairbairn - The Typology of Scripture, also Davidson, Old Testament Prophecy, Typology in Sctipture
- biblical balance + freshness

*This historical study raises 2 Important Questions:

1. What are the governing principles of Typological Interpretation?
2. How does Typological Interpretation differ from Allegorical Interpretation?
*Answer in upcoming discussion.

3. The Identification of Typology

a. Summary Definition - Typology
1. Woolcombe - "The establishment of historical connections between certain events, persons, or things in the OT, and
similar events, persons or things in the NT."
2. R. P. Martin - "A Type is a divinely ordained prefiguration (not incidental or accidental), in which persons, events,
institutions, or things in the OT point forward to such in the NT."
3. Carl B. Hoch, Jr. - "A Type may be defined as any person, institution, office, event, action, or thing which has
reality and significance in the OT history but also was purposed and arranged by God to prefigure some person,
institution, office, event, action or thing in the NT with a view to illustrating some spiritual reality plainly
expressed in the NT. This definition is based on the assumption that there is a unity between the 2 testaments and
that the OT prepares the way for the NT through its shadows, figures, and events."

b. New Testament Typology in General (SW)

1. The Word Type - tupos - root meaning = visible impression, mark, print left by a stroke - 1Cor10:6,11; Ro5:14
- type left by a typewriter; print left by a hand in concrete or snow; a waffle!
2. The Word Antitype - antitupon - copy, antitype, representation; something which corresponds to something which
has gone before. - 1Pet3:21 "which water, an antitype, also now(nun) saves you as baptism"

56
 Type ---------->Antitype
Flood ---------> Baptism

a. Note the Eschatalogical "now" - nun

b. Note the Flood is seen as a Type.
c. Note Typology includes the area of judgment - as in 1Cor10:6 (death, example for us) vs Redemption only!

3. The Word Shadow - skia - shadow - Col2:16-17

a. The Regulations of the Old Covenant are seen as types of the order ushered in by Christ

Type----------->Antitype
Shadow--------> Body

b. The use of "shadow" is instructive

1. The continuity, unity, correspond between the shadow and the substance.
2. The discontinuity, diversity, between shadow and substance is clear. Shadow is inferior to substance. It is a
mere outline without color in the 2 dimensions of the living human face in three dimensions. substance exists
on a higher plane of thought.

Shadow ------> Substance (Continuity)

--> Body (Discontinuity) - Development of a higher Order; Multidimensional Reality
Shadow / vs Partial Representation

4. The Word Copy - 'upodeigma - example, model pattern; imitation

- 2Pet2:6 Sodom and Gomorrrah an "example" to the ungodly

c. Hebrews Typology in Particular (SW) - Typology prominent in Hebrews

1. Mention of 4 Words - Type(8:5); Copy(8:5; 9:23); Shadow(8:5; 10:1); Antitype(9:24)
2. Distinct use of Hebrews:
- NT (Type, Shadow --------> Reality, Antitype)
- Hebrews (Type = Heavenly Reality; Antitype = Earthly Shadow) thus Antitype -------> Type!
3. No Contradiction in Theology, merely in Terminology - concepts are the same, but Hebrews adds a new dimension.
- Geerhardus Vos Chart added to (New Dimension seen:)

Heavenly Reality
Archetype
Urbild
God's Rest (4:3-5) -> 11:10
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
(antitype) OT Shadow --------------foreshadows, prefigures-------------> NT Substance
Shadow Good things to Come
Vorbild Nachbild
Canaan's Rest (3:18-19) New Covenant Rest (4:1, 10-11; 11:10,16)

*The Old Covenant is the mere shadow of the heavenly reality. In the New covenant the heavenly reality breaks into history.

** Linear (1->2); Triangular (1->3->3); also Multi-Angular (1. PO Meal -> 2. Sinai Sprinkle -> 3. Last Supper -> 4. Lamb’s Supper)

d. Essential Elements (SW)

1. Typology has as its Theme Redemption and Redemptive History.
a. Not Philosophy or Mathematics or Psychology
b. Types of Deliverance, Judgment, Propitiation, Substitution, etc.

2. Typology has for its Framework the Two-Age Structure of Redemptive History.

57
 a. This age and the age to come; Promise and fulfillment; Old Covenant and New Covt; Old Creation and New Creation
- Heb1:1-2a - long ago, these last days in His Son
b. First Adam -> 2nd Adam (Christ) - Ro5:14f
c. Melchizedek -> Christ; Aaron -> Christ
d. Old Covt Sacrifice in Tabernacle -> New Covenant Sacrifice on Golgotha
e. Age of Promise (temporal, earthly realities) -> Age of Fulfillment (eternal, heavenly, eschatalogical realities)

3. Typology has for its Foundation Symbolism.

a. Types must be symbols if they are to be types.
b. The Tabernacle symbolizes the presence of God among his people
- thus the idea of Christ(Jn1:14) and the Church (1Cor3:16)
c. Sacrifice symbolizes the idea of Propitiation - the removal of the guilt of sin by the appeasing of divine wrath.
- thus a type of Christ's propitiating God by his sacrifice
d. Theme symbolized to OT People -> Same Theme picked up + more highly developed in NT Antitype
- God dwelling among his people - Tabernacle + Temple -> Christ -> HS in Church -> NH+E Rev21

4. The Distinctions Related to Typology (Hoch)

a. Typology Distinct from Prophecy (Foretelling)
1. A Type is a form of predictive prophecy
2. However distinguished from prophecy in general
a. Type is a prediction (subtle but intended) through institutions, events, and persons (Pictorial)
- 1 Sam16 Annointing of Lowly David in Bethlehem -> 1. Indirectly Predictive 2. Partial Correspondence
b. Prophecy is a prediction through straightforward Words (Verbal)
- Micah 5:2 - Bethlehem "Ruler shall come forth) -> 1. Directly Predictive 2. Complete Correspondence
3. Prophecy and Typology may be Intertwined.
- Gen3:15 - Seed of Woman will crush the head of the Serpent, bruised Heel -> Cross + Rev20
- Ezekiel 40-48 Prophecied beautiful Temple -> New Heavens and Earth (Rev21-22)
- Ezra+Neh -> Herod’s -> Church -> NH&E

b. Typology Distinct from Allegory

Typical Method Allegorical Method
1. Meaning Proceeds directly out of the GH explanation 1. Meaning arises alongside of or
Ezk40-48 independently from the GH explanation (Ark’s Window)
2. Purpose of God (Divine Intention) 2. Imagination of the Interpreter (Absalom into Jer)
3. Discovering a heightened application of the literal sense 3. Manufacturing a differrent sense
altogether; Depreciation of the literal
sense in looking for a wholly other sense
4. Recognition + Expansion of Resident Elements, Themes 4. Introduction of foreign, hidden, peculiar
elements, themes
5. Built upon Gramm-Hist Interpretation 5. Divorced from GH Interpretation

*Examples
1. Passover Lamb(Ex12)->Christ our Passover(1Cor5:7) 2. Herod's Bethlehem Slaughter
(Substitutionary Propitiation) Mickelsen p238-39
Chrysostom: "The fact that only the
children of 2 yrs old and under were murdered whild those of 3 presumably escaped is meant to teach us that those who
hold the Trinitarian faith will be saved whereas Binitarians and Unitarians will undoubtedly perish."

2. Abraham offers up Isaac on Mt Moriah 2. 3 Stories of Ark - Body, Soul, Spirit

(Gen22:1f -> 2Chron3:1 ->Heb11:17-19) Pink (Tripartate)

*Objection - What about Paul's Allegorizing in Gal 4:21-31? - did he not sanction the method here?
1. No mere Ad Hominem argument - Rather asserts Scriptures themselves contain a deeper significance.
2. Koine verb - allhgorew - not a technical term describing what we have come to know as "Allegory".
3. Explanation - SW, p69
"If we examine Paul's utilization of the OT with our distinction between typological and allegorical interpretation
in mind, it becomes clear that Paul is using the Scriptures typologically. Isaac, the child of promise, is the
typeof all whose sonship to Abraham is the product not of fleshly enterprise, but of divine promise and the

58
 power of the Spirit. Isaac's birth epitomizes the same truth which was at stake in the controversy with the
Judaizers. Cf. Paul's use of this same promise in Romans 4 and 9. Furthermore, there is no depreciation of
the truth of the literal sense of Gen 21. It is rather absolutely crucial for the validity of Paul's argument. See
Hanson p101, Romans 9:6-9."
4. Conclusion - Paul is using Typology! - GH themes in seed form in Gen21
- matured to full development in Christ, the Antitype of Isaac, the Type.

c. Typology Distinct from Symbolism - Typology does have its foundation in symbolism!
1. Ramm p232
"Types differ from symbols in that while a symbol may represent a thing past, present, or future, a type is
essentially a prefiguring of something future from itself . . . A symbol has in itself no essential reference to time."

2. Type = Species of Prophecy; Symbol = a Timeless figurative representation, representing abstract w/ concrete
*Yet many types are symbolic in character - Symbolic prophecy!
3. Examples of Symbols (not necessarily types)
a. Sea (humanity)
b. Lion (strength) - of the Tribe of Judah, also prowls about (1Pet5:8) - double imagery
c. Beasts (Political Leaders, Antagonism) - Daniel, Revelation
d. Incense (prayer)
e. Leaven (that which spreads and penetrates) - Good (Mt13); Evil (1Cor5:7) also in old Covt - Lev12
f. Holy Spirit - Wind, Water, Dove, Oil
g. Syrophoenician Woman (Mk7) - grace to be extended to the Gentiles (as Naaman - Typological)
h. Demonized Man (Mk5) - Stronghold of Satan (Strong Man's House - Mk3)
i. Leprous Man - Diseased w/ Sin and Curse (Miriam, Gehazi, Uzziah)

5. Examples of Typology (Ramm 231, Mickelsen 246f)

a. Persons - Adam+Christ (Ro5:14); Abr+Faith(Ro4); Elijah+John Baptist(Mk9); Joseph the Rejected Kinsman Savior;
David the Great King from Judah; Solomon the Chosen Son; Antiochus Epiphanes+AntiChrist; Zerubabbel (Head of
New Society)
b. Institutions - Sacrifices (cross); Creation+Promised Land(Salvation's Rest); Passover(Christ); OT Theocracy (Church,
Coming Kdom); Land of Canaan (New Heavens + Earth)
c. Offices - Moses the Prophet (Christ); Aaron + Melchizedek(Hi Priest of God Most High); Bezalel + Oholiab (NC ministers)
d. Events - Wilderness Wanderings (Christian life); Jonah in the Fish (Christ in Earth)
e. Actions - Brazen Serpent lifted up (Jn3:14f); High Priest's ministry on Day of Atonement (Christ)
f. Things - Babylon and Tyre (Satan's World Order in the End destroyed); Tabernacle(incarnation + church)
- incense + rent curtain - symbols, but also may be "typological" in the sense that they depict heavenly reality (urbild)

6. Interpretive Principles of Typology

*General, w/o mathematical precision, not comprehensive - like: Principles for Pastoral Oversite
a. Nothing is to be regarded as typical of Good things under the Gospel which was itself of a forbidden and sinful nature
under the Old Covenant. (Fairbairn, p141)
*Jacob's obtaining an inheritance by Esau's garments - us by Christ's righteousness
- This may be used as an illustration, but it was not divinely intended!

b. The Significance of Legitimate Types may extend far beyond the knowledge possesed by the OT Worshipers - as gospel
light furnishes enhancement in realization. (Fairbairn, 147f)
1. Abraham not fully aware (Isaac - Moriah - Seed of Promise - Death - Christ) - yet Heb11 Resurrection!
- Degree of disguise is left - in antitypical and remote import.
2. John the Baptist - Mt11:1-6 - Should we look for someone else? - exhibits limited light of OT believers

c. The Type has one radical meaning, yet the fundamental principle displayed in it may be capable of more than one application.
(Fairbairn, p154)
*Both Christ(incarnation) and the Church(establishment) fulfill the Symbolism of the Temple - also New Jer Rev 22:16
(God brought into fellowship w/ humanity - Jn1:14; 1Cor3:16f)

d. Due regard must be given to the essential difference between the nature of Type and Antitype. (Fairbairn, p158,161)
1. Sacrifice -> Eucharist (wooden literality); Priest OT -> Roman Catholic Mass;
2. Election - Jews as a racial seed (Paedobaptists)

59
 -> or Arminian concept of Corporate Election (all who will come to Christ as out of the nation - Remnant)
3. See the heightening development. Dissimilarities carefully separated from similarities. (Masking tape vs bride!)

e. Grammatical-Historical Exegesis should be used to determine the meaning of the event, person, or institution in the OT Period.
1. The Type must Dovetail with and be an extension of this GH Theme - (Brazen Serpent – healing death->sin) - Grows out of GH theme!
- not a foreign concept
2. Galatians 4:21-31 above.

f. Focus upon the broad Typical theme of a type and avoid entanglements in the incidental detail + minutia.
1. Ramm, p229-231:
"The NT deals w/ the great facts of Christ and redemption; with the great moral and spiritual truths of Christian
experience, when it touches on typology. It does not deal w/ minutiae, and with incidentals. We should then learn that
in typology we should restrict our efforts to major doctrines, central truths, key spiritual lessons and major moral
principles. A typology which becomes too fascinated with minutiae is alreadyout of step w/ the spirit of NT typology. .
"Locate in any one type the typical and the accidental. What is typical must be judged from the New Testament
considerations and the general hermeneutical skill of the interpreter. Hence a good exegete will restrain his imagination
when he discusses the Tabernacle. Much about the Tabernacle has no typical significance and this ought to be clearly
apprehended. Not all actions of the priests, nor all the elements of the sacrifices have precise NT counterparts. The
interpreter who presses beyond the typical into the accessories of the text, then brings forth what is not there by
designation.
"Temptations to be novel, clever, original or shocking should be resisted. Typology is not always appreciated as it
should be because some students of it have gone to extremes and thereby soured the subject to other students.
Certainly a teacher of the Bible should not boast of finding more types than other teachers because he is more spiritual
than they. To be spiritual minded is not a license to abuse the rules of hermeneutics."
2. Examples - Tent pegs; Pink earlier: window, wood, 3 levels (much like parables - focal theme vs bogged w/ details)
3. Issue of Urgent Pastoral Relevance
a. Personal Credibility - wild speculations will erode their confidence in you as a guide, though you may have given
many a "blessing". Carefully and conservatively show the Anchors of justification for the emphasis.
b. Congregational Maturity - Pastoral Teaching - a Modelling example for the flock
- SW: "They will have their bibles when they don't have us. They will have their bibles when they choose a new Pastor."
- Rightly handle the word of truth! - CHS and Metropolitan Tabernacle? - only ask the question!

g. There is a sense in which the NT events are a vorbild (shadow) for the age to come, another Nachbild (Antitype Fulfillment) - Carl Hoch.
Also building and development may be seen in typology! – MultiAngular! (1->2->3->4)
1. Jesus Christ the first fruits of the Resurrection of Believers
2. Christ among us in the Spirit - then face to face; Never leave nor forsake, yet ultimate in Parousia to come.
3. Passover -> Exodus 24 Eat+Drink on Sinai -> Lk22 Last Supper -> Lord's Table -> Wedding Feast!
4. Serpent-> Cain -> Saul -> Antiochus -> Herod -> AntiChrist *Also Ahithophel, Haman, Judas (Multiple)
5. Genesis 3:15 bruising of Heel -> Ahithophel (2Sam15-17) weeping Brook Kidron 15:23, crush -> Ps41:9 ->
- > John13:18 "He who eats my bread has lifted his heel against me"(13:2 Devil) -> Cross ->
-> Rev20 Final Assault + the Lake of fire!
*Sovereign Tapestry - Typological threads traced!

Review - Syllabus

VII. Special Hermeneutics

A. Typology

B. Parables

1. The Definition of a Parable

a. Etymologically - para + ballw = parable -> to put alongside, throw alongside
- placing one thing beside another.
b. Basically - Normally Defined - A comparison drawn from nature or daily life, and designed to illuminate some spiritual
truth on the assumption that what is valid in one sphere(natural, social, cultural) is valid also in another
sphere(spiritual). *Popular - An earthly story w/ a heavenly meaning!

60
 c. Descriptively - The story is usually true to the facts of every day experience. Where it is not, there is an element of
surprise. This twist may be the critical point of the parable.
- Examples - Mt20:9-10 - Laborers in the Marketplace (each received a denarius!) - generosity, last first!
- Mt25:12 - 10 Virgins (I do not know you!) - urgent need to be prepared!

2. The Purposes of Parables - Multiplex

a. To Stimulate Thinking
1. Presentation of truth abstractly seems dull, drab, colorless - storyline grabs attention, grips hearer
2. Example - Justification & Sanctification
a. Westminster Shorter Catechism
#33 Justification is an act of God's free grace, wherein he pardoneth allour sins, and accepteth us as righteous
in his sight, only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by faith alone.
#35 Sanctification is the work of God's free grace, whereby we are renewed in the whole man after the image of
God, and are enabled more and more to die unto sin, and live unto righteousness.
b. A. N. Martin - Parable - Automobile Accident
1. Problems - Legal Problems - telephone pole, guard rail, speeding, death, alcohol
- Personal Problems - fractured skull, broken leg, alcoholic, collapsed lung
2. Remedies - Legal - Guilt and Penalty taken care of in the Halls of Justice (Justification)
- Personal - Redemption and Restoration, new heart, healing life + soul (Sanctification)
3. Active vs Passive Learning - Cognitive Juices - Inventive Thinking + Concluding - Theological Story Problems!

b. To Enhance Understanding
1. Concrete Display of Abstract Truth - Typology - Lamb+Egypt Deliverance - Visual Learners!
- He is the best teacher who enables his audience to "see with their ears!"
2. To Reveal, Uncover, lay bare
3. Peasant - Working class - Heard our Lord w/ delight (Mt12:12; Mk12:37; Lk15:1f) - registered w/ Authority
- eye to eye attention of the common man!
c. To Aid in Memory
1. Gives meaningful associations - w/o such much is forgotten - will forget our outlines, but our sermon illustrations
will stick for a long time.
2. Spurgeon - Farmer's field, Burrs on cuffs of pants, example above!
d. To Evoke a Response (strike for a personal verdict)
1. Mk4, Mt13 - "He who has ears to hear, let him hear." (Mk4:23) - Do!
2. Comprehend?! - Take a stand, for or against, conviction - embrace by faith - live accordingly!
3. Exhortational Summons vs mere information -Lk15:28-30 - Elder Brother - To sting and call to repentance!
e. To Judicially Veil the Truth (Mt13:10-15) - Not exclusively!
1. Simultaneously - Merciful Revelation to one group -> Judicial blinding of another
- means of separation between believers and unbelievers - highlights sovereign discrimination!
2. Those who hardened their hearts - swinelike (no pearls) - enlightened heart is enriched by the gems of truth!
3. Many Parables - 2 Age structure - This age(secretive power) -> Age to Come(catastrophic power) evident to all!
- Hiddenness of the Kdom - Mt13 - Humbly + Lowly followers who now see humiliation - glorious and uplifted!

3. The History of Parabolic Interpretation (3 Major Views Represented)

a. Allegorical Approach
-----------------------
l l l l l l l l l
-----------------------

1. As the interpreting of Greek Myths - Philo->Church Fathers (Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen)

*See Augustine - Fantastic(Good Samaritan) Stein, Method and Message of Jesus, p47-48

"To arrive at the deeper spiritual sense, Origen allegorized the parable. The result was the following:

The man going down to Jericho = Adam

Jerusalem from which he was going = Paradise
Jericho = This World

61
 Robbers = Hostile influences and enemies of man
such as the thieves and murderers
mentioned by Jesus in Jn10:8
Wounds = Disobedience of sins
Priest = Law
Levite = Prophets
Good Samaritan = Christ
Beast = Body of Christ
Inn = Church
Two Denarii = Knowledge of the Father and the Son
Innkeeper = Angels in charge of the church
Return of the Good Samaritan = Second coming of Christ

"Later on, Augustine (354-430) allegorized the parable in an even more fantastic way. The results of his 'exegesis'
were as follows:

The man going down to Jericho = Adam

Jerusalem from which he was going = City of Heavenly Peace
Jericho = The moon which signifies our mortality
Robbers = Devil and his angels
Stripping him = Taking away his immortality
Beating him = Persuading him to sin
Leaving him half dead = Due to sin, he was dead spiritually, but
half alive, due to knowledge of God
Priest = Priesthood of the OT, Law
Levite = Ministry of the OT (Prophets)
Good Samaritan = Christ
Binding of wounds = Restraint of sin
Oil = Comfort of good hope
Wine = Exhortation to spirited work
Beast = Body of Christ
Inn = Church
Two Denarii = 2 commandments of love (not dogmatic)
Innkeeper = Apostle Paul
Return of Good Samaritan = Resurrection of Christ

*Mild in comparison to some renditions!

2. The Fathers - Significance rooted in every detail - purposefully implanted, assume it, discover it! - their standard.
3. Antioch - Theodore of Mopsuestia, Chrysostom - "In interpreting parables, be not overly concerned w/ the details."
- ignored by Roman, Western Church.
4. Reformation:
a. Luther: "Allegorizers were clerical jugglers doing monkey tricks, whose exegesis is more worthless than dirt."
b. Calvin: Comment on Unjust Steward (Lk16:1-9) - Stein, Method and Message of Jesus' Teachings, p50:

"Here it is obvious that if we were to attempt to find a meaning for every minute circumstance, we would act
absurdly. To make denotations out of what belongs to another man is an action which is very far from deserving
applause; and who would patiently endure that an unprincipled villain should rob him of his property, and give it
away according to his own fancy. It were indeed the grossest stupidity, if that may who beheld a portion of his
substance taken away, should commend the person who stole the remainder of it and bestowed it on others. But
Christ only meant what he adds a little afterwards, that ungodly and worldly men are more industrious and
skillful in conducting the affairs of this fading life, than the children of God are anxious to obtain the heavenly
and eternal life, or careful to make it the subject of their study and meditation."

5. Post Reformation - Unfortunately, its successors did not follow a sound hermeneutical lead.
- R. C. Trench (1841) - reverted back to an approach much like Origen and Luther.

b. Single Point Approach I

62
 I
-----------I-----------
I
I
1. Adolph Julicher (1888) - The Parables of Jesus (2 volumes), not all his invention, but a watershed work.
a. Parables and similitudes are not Allegories - argued only one point of comparison or likeness.
- The details are insignificant!
b. Example - Good Samaritan (Jn10:30f)
- Two denarii might just as well be 3 or 4; oil and wine void of significant meaning, only add color to story.
- Parable's single point: Who is my neighbor? (Lk10:29, 36).
c. Helpful Perspective - in right direction
- RPM - "Saving faith is like a man who sees a tight rope walker crossing Niagra Falls w/ a wheelbarrow!
It gets in! - may substitute a bicycle + handlebars - same pt - don't get bogged dn in details.

2. Weaknesses
a. Degenerated into teachings on General Moral Truths - Julicher - Liberal Theology
b. Beyond Moral Platitudes - J. Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus;
- Also C. H. Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom, 1935
c. Overreaction - against former emphasis - denied any allegorical elements
- As Jesus did include! - i. e. Parable of Sower - Solely Hiddenness of the Kingdom? Eschatalogical Harvest?
- Some say this alone!
- Miss or Scoff at themes of Rich Hearing and Perseverance inherent in details the details.

c. Extended Analogy Approach - depicted as 2 half circles touching at one point in arcs - points of analogy fan out each side

1. Philip Barton Payne - Metaphor as a model for Interpretation of Parables (Cambridge, 1975)
- Defines a parable as an Extended Metaphor - Main Point, Focal Point crucial to Discover
- Focal point is determined by Context and Original Setting - Sitz em Leben
*Same Method observed in some Puritans, Warfield, etc. - but such have received little press!
2. Once the Focal Point and Theme + Central Thrust is discovered, then
- details may have relevance - as they buttress and emanate from this main point - implications!
- details are part of the apparatus that conveys the central theme.
3. Notice the Method of Jesus (Own Hermeneutical Examples)
a. see Mk13:37-42 - Wheat and Tares -> the intermingled nature of the present kingdom! - allegorical elements!
b. See Mt13:17-23 - Sower -> Present + Partial success of the Word!
- details are significant - as they emanate from, and are rooted in the central theme!
- not an allegory of the Christian life -> brands of hearing, implantation to maturity (drawing with fanning lines)

4. The Principles for Interpreting Parables

a. Seek the One Main Point of the Parable
1. Often this is laid bare by the Context: Contextual Clues, also look for repeated words, surprise, end stress!
a. Good Samaritan - Lk10:29 - Lawyer: "Who is my Neighbor?" -> 10:26 "Who proved to be a neighbor?"
- Here we see the Lord's own interpretation!
b. Lost Sheep, Coin, Son - Lk15:1f - Grumbling Pharisees! - Contrasting Joy of God vs Self Righteous Hypocrites
- Elder Brother of 15:29 is a striking key (Pharisees' Grumbling) - Seek and save the Lost!
2. State it as briefly as Possible.
- Try to relate the details of the parable to the Focal Point in terms of how they support, fill out, expand, illustrate,
enhance the main point.
- Use sensible restraint!

63
 b. Understand the Story's Meaning for the 1st Century Hearers (Sitz em Leben)
1. Evoked what Response in the 1st Century? - Must be our response!
- Samaritan (dog) vs today, Christlike man of Compassion - Jn8:48 Samaritan + has a demon!
- Widow's Lost Coin (survival)
- Role of a Servant in a Household (Mt24 - administrator vs mopper of floors)
- Mustard Seed - large plant (vs monster for birds, not grotesque, this was normal)
- Unjust Judge - unlike our judicial system!
2. Never Conclude Modern Meaning until you've determined the Ancient Meaning.
- Mt25 - Talents! - What was a talent back then(linguistics) - an increment of weight vs an ability!
3. Soberly meditate on the Contemporary Significance of the Focal Point and of the Paradigmatic nature of the
surrounding elements.

c. Compare the Parable

1. Possible OT Association - Mk12:1f -> Isaiah 5:1,2f
2. Synoptic Parallel, Other Gospels - Context + Slight Differences (Mk4, Mt13)
- Lampstand in Mk4 possesses a different meaning than in Mt5!

d. Beware of Indiscriminately Making Parables Prooftexts for Doctrines.

1. Generally - Illustrate truths already stated elsewhere.
2. Example of Errors
a. Parable of Unmerciful Servant - Socinius Argued: No mediator needed between God and Man!
- Servant was directly forgiven at his personal request of the Master.
b. Wheat and Tares - Mat13 - No Church Discipline! - "World"
c. Two Sons (Mt21:28f) - life characterized by lipservice and disobedience -> Still a Son!
d. Vineyard Laborers (Mt20:1-16) - Paradigm -> It is ungodly to aggressively negotiate a labor contract.
- Trust in God, regardless of the wage. He'll provide!
e. Comprehend the Common Parabolic Theme - The Mystery of the Kingdom
"The Kingdom that is to come finally in apocalyptic power has in fact entered into the world in advance in a hidden form
to work secretly among men."
- See: Ladd, The Presence of the Future; Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom

5. Examples of the Misinterpretation of Parables - RPM (See 4/25/85)

Review

VII. Special Hermeneutics

A. Typology

B. Parables

C. Prophecy
*Introduction - Mastering Prophecy is like Mastering Golf - Clinical, Classroom study does not make you a capable player!
1. The Student must develop a feel, a sense - by "on the course" practice and experience
- so w/ prophecy, must spend one's time out on the Biblical Fairways.
2. Purpose here - fundamentals, work out general kinks.

1. Identification of Prophecy
a. Prophecy in General
1. Berkhof, p148: "Prophecy may simply be defined as the proclamation of that which God has revealed. The Prophet
received special revelations from God, and in turn, conveyed them to the people."
2. Dimensions
a. Forthtelling - moral and ethical exhortation
1. Explains the past - Hosea's prophetic lawsuit against Israel
2. Elucidates the Present - Jeremiah's critique of the Babylonian Crisis

64
 b. Foretelling - Predictive declaration
- Discloses the future - Daniel's Metallic Man
b. Predictive Prophecy in Particular
1. Definition - That mode of Divine Revelation whereby the Spirit of God so moves a man to predictively foretell the
coming of future events through the means of:
a. Oral Declaration - Is37 (Isaiah to Hezekiah about Assyria, "Hook in his nose";
- Jonah to Nineveh: "Yet 40 more days, and Nineveh will be overthrown."
b. Dramatic Presentation - Ezk4 (Jerusalem model); Jer19 (Smashed Poyttery); Jer13(ruined loin cloth)
c. Written Documentation - Rev1:11: "Write in a scroll what you see . . . '
2. Distinctions - As Related to History
a. Prophecy is not History written after the event.
- Naturalistic Rationalism and Presuppositions (i. e. Antisupernaturalism)
1. Isaiah 40-66 - statements of Cyrus by name, striking fulfillments - Surely written after the Restoration!
2. Daniel 7-12 - Detailed fulfillment in Grecian history - Surely written in the Maccabean Era!
b. Prophecy is not simply History written beforehand.
1. Prophecy does not give us a complete picture of an event as does an historian's account.
- Mickelsen's Chart: (p290)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Coming Historical Event:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x marks historical particulars
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x marks prophetic elements
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

*Example
- Known: LA -> Fires, Looting - Was this caused by an Earthquake?
- Unknown: Rodney King Trial, Racial Tensions

2. Often, Historical Elements are described in Figurative vs Literal Terms. x -> x

- Mt4:12-16 - see Isaiah 9:1-2 - Person of Christ vs Great Lamp

2. Selective Issues Related to Prophetic Interpretation

a. Literalizing vs Spiritualizing
1. Naive Catch Phrase to Discount Amillennialism (Spiritualizing the test)
- Dispensationalists who take the Scriptures literally!
- Contend that - Temple, Sacrifices, Judah and Israel are all to be literally restored!
2. Spiritualize - Ambiguous - Figurative, Mystical, Allegorical, Typological, Poetic, Deeper Meaning?
3. No One is a Strict Literalist - Fulfilled Examples:
a. Cyrus - Is44:28-45:1 named as a man -> 46:1 - "A bird of prey from the East"
b. Christ - Is11:1 "Shoot from stem of Jesse; a branch from his roots will bear fruit"
- Is9:1-2 above
- Is53:7 - as a sheep before the shearers, he did not open his mouth -> 7 words from the cross!
c. Mal4:5 - Elijah the prophet to be sent -> Mk9: Jesus identifies him as John the Baptist!
d. Ex3:8 - A land flowing w/ milk and honey (Canaan) - hyperbole!
4. Ramm, p244
"Further, some OT passages present idealized pictures. For example in Zech14 Jerusalem is exalted to the top of a
mountain, the surrounding mountainous country is made a plane, and two great rivers pour out of Jerusalem one
going east and the other west. A strict literal interpretation of this passage fails to catch the spirit and vision of it.
Prophecies involving horses or chariots or camels are dealing with transportation; prophecies speaking of
spears and shields are about armaments; and prophecies about surrounding nations are about God's enemies. A
strict literalism would hardly be appropriate in such matters and Davidson says that to call for the complete
restoration of these ancient peoples on the basis of strict literal interpretation 'may not unjustly be called the
insanity of literalism.'"
5. The question is not "if" figurative language is used in prophecy, rather "when" is it used.
-> determined by Hermeneutical and Theological Considerations
6. Consider Isaiah 65:20
"No longer will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days,
or an old man who does not live out his days;
For the youth will die at the age of one hundred

65
 And the one who does not reach the age of one hundred shall be thought accursed.

*Anthony Hoekema, The Bible and the Future, p202-3:

"What indication is there in the passage that Isaiah shifts from a description of the final state to a description of
the Millennium? Dispensationalists reply: look at verse 20 (above). Since death is mentioned in this verse,
dispensationalists say, this cannot be a description of the final new earth but must apply to the millennium.

We must admit that this is a difficult text to interpret. Is Isaiah telling us here that there will be death on the
new earth? In my judgment this cannot be his meaning, in light of what he has just said in verse 19: 'No more shall
be heard in it (the Jerusalem being described) the sound of weeping and the cry of distress.' Can one imagine a
death not accompanied by weeping? It is significant that in chapter 25:8 Isaiah clearly predicts that there will be no
death for the people of God in the final state, trying in this prediction with the promise that there will be no tears:
'He (the Lord of hosts) will swallow up death for ever, and the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces . . . '

In the light of the foregoing I conclude that Isaiah in verse 20 of chapter 65 is picturing in figurative terms the
fact that the inhabitants of the new earth will live incalculably long lives. In the first two clauses of the verse he
tells us that on this new earth there will be no infant mortality, and that older people will not die before they have
completed their life tasks (in other words, will not be snatched away prematurely, as is often the case on the
present earth). The third clause I would render as does the NIV, 'he who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere
youth.' Since the word translated 'sinner' in the last clause means someone who has missed the mark, I would again
prefer the NIV rendering, 'he who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.' It is not implied that there
will be anyone on the new earth who will fail to attain a hundred years. Supporting this interpretation of verse 20
are the words of verse 22; 'For like the days of a tree shall the days of my people be, and my chosen shall enjoy the
work of their hands.'"
-- This describes not the Millennium, but the Final State in the New Heavens and Earth

B. The Prophets often Clothed their Thoughts in forms Derived from the Dispensation to which they Belonged.
1. When forms of life have undergone Radical Changes, no more can be expected than
the future realization of the Central Idea!
a. Example - Ezk 38-39; (Rev20:8) -> Gog + Magog - horses(38:15); Swords(38:21); Bows&Arrows(39:3)
- Central Idea - Gruesome + Grizzly conflict leading up to final judgment (spiritual implications as well)
- vs reverting back to Pioneer days, Medieval tools of war
b. Example - Acts 15:15-17 -> Amos 9:11-12 - David's Fallen Tent
- Representative - People of God + their welfare + prosperity
*Influx of Gentiles Church vs Theocratic Nation
c. Example Ezekiel 40-48 - The Detailed Description of the Rebuilt Temple (Literal in a Millennial Age?)
*Anthony Hoekema, p204-5
"Ezekiel gives no indication in these chapters that he is describing something which is to happen during a
millennium preceding the final state. An interpretation of these chapters which is in agreement with New
Testament teaching, and which avoids the absurdity of positing the need for memorial animal sacrifices in the
millennium, understands Ezekiel to be describing here the glorious future of the people of God in the age to come
in terms which the Jews of that day would understand. Since their worship previous to their captivity had been
centered in the Jerusalem temple, it is understandable that Ezekiel describes their future blessedness by
picturing a temple and its sacrifices. The Details about temple and sacrifices are to be understood not literally
but figuratively. The closing chapters of the book of Revelation, in fact, echo Ezekiel's vision. In Revelation 22
we read about the counterpart of the river which Ezekiel saw issuing out of the temple, the leaves of which were
for healing (chap. 47:12); 'Then he showed me the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the
throne of God and of the Lamb through the middle of the street of the city; also, on either side of the river, the
tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit each month' and the leaves of the tree were for the
healing of the nations.' What we have in Ezekiel 40 to 48, therefore, is not a description of the millennium but a
picture of the final state on the hew earth, in terms of the religious symbolism with which Ezekiel and his
readers were familiar."

c. The Phenomenon of "Prophetic Foreshortening"

1. Explanation - Events far removed in time, and events in the near future are spoken of as if they were very close together."
- Hoekema - p148 - Like the impression one receives when looking at a distant Mountain Range:
Peaks which are actually many miles apart, may appear to be very close together to the naked eye.
2. Examples - Characteristic of OT Prophets:

66
 a. Joel 2:28-29 - Fulfilled at Pentecost (Acts2:30-31); and at the Parousia (Mt24:29) -> 2 Peaks
b. Isaiah 13 - Babylon to be destroyed
- 13:6-8, 17-22 - Literal Babylon -> Near
- 13:9-11 - Eschatalogical Babylon -> Far - See Rev18:12 (Fallen Babylon)
c. Zeph 1:14-15 - Near Judgment on Judah -> Far World Wide Catastrophe
d. Olivet Discourse of Mt24 - Intermingling:
Hoekema, p149-50
"In this discourse Jesus seems to be describing events associated with his Second coming in terms of the people
of Israel and of life in Judea. These details, however, should not be interpreted with strict literalness. Herman
Ridderbos has some helpful things to say about this:

. . . The prophet paints the future in the colors and with the lines that he borrows from the world known to him,
i.e., from his own environment. . . We see the prophets paint the future with the palette of their own experience
and project the picture within their own geographical horizon. This appears in the OT prophets in all kinds of
ways. And in our opinion, this is also the explanation of Jesus' description of the future. He follows the OT most
closely, and not only is the temporal perspective lacking at the end, but the geographical horizon within which
the eschatalogical events take place is also restricted in some places to the country of Judea or to the cities of
Israel.

Though the tribulation, persecution, suffering, and trials here predicted are described in terms which concern
Palestine and the Jews, they must not be interpreted as having to do only w/ the Jews. Jesus was describing
future events in terms which would be understandable to his hearers, in terms which had local ethnic and
geographic color. We are not warranted, however in applying these predictions only to the Jews, or in
restricting their occurrence only to Palestine.

d. OT Prophecies May have Multiple Fultillments.

1. Fulfilled by installments - each a pledge of what is to follow. (see Berkhof, p153)
- Though it be a mistake to speak of a double, treble sense of prophecy, it is perfectly correct to speakof a two or
threefold fulfillment!
2. ThreeFold Dimension - Isael's Restoration (To the Land)
a. Literally - Restoration ot Israel to its land
- Zerubabbel + Joshua in 536 BC; Ezra in 485 BC; Nehemiah
b. Figuratively - Council of Jerusalem - Acts 15:14-18 (David's fallen Tent rebuilt)
- Gentiles gain access into the community of God's People -> Gal6:16
c. Antitypically - New Hevens and Earth - Isaiah 60:10-11 - Yes 536 BC, but also dripping w/ Rev21-22 allusions!
- Israel, Israelites - simply typological, figurative "People of God"
3. Judgment & Destruction - Blending of Telexcopic Foreshortening & Multiple Fulfillments)
a. The Day of the Lord - 586 BC -----> 70 AD -----> Final Destruction

b. AntiChrist - Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan 11) -----> Emperors + Persecution (Rev1-3) -------> Final Figure (2Th2)
Nero, etc (beast, false propeht) Man of Lawlessness
Dan11:36f foreshortening

e. The Progressive Parallellism of the Book of Revelation (Recapitualtion)

*Perspectives: Preterist, Historicist, Futurist, Idealist
1. Admittedly more than a general principle - Hermeneutical conclusion
- yet Interpretive principle - large section of Prophecy -> Apocalyptic of Revelation
- important that you be familiar w/ it.
2. Crux Passage of Eschatology - Rev20:1-10
3. Stated: Progressive Parallelism
a. The Book of Revelation consists of 7 sections which run parallel to each other, each of which depicts the church
and the world from the time of Christ's first Coming to the time of His second Coming.
b. Contrast - Chronological Linear Order - Events of Chapters 4-22 - Historic Prophetic Timeline - sequential
4. Depicted:

67
 X Marks Historical Principles O Marks Prophetic Reference to the Principles
1. Christ in the Midst of the Lampstands (1-3)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
OOOOOOO O O 0 0 0 0 0
3:21
2. The Vision of Heaven + The Seals (4-7)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
O O OO O O O O 0 O OOO O OO O O O
7:16
3. The Seven Trumpets (8-11)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
O O 0 0 0 0
11:18
4. The Persecuting Dragon (12-14)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
O O O OO 0 0 0 0 0 0
14:19
5. The Seven Bowls (15-16)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
O O O O O O O
16:17f
6. The Fall of Babylon (17-19)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
O O O OOOOO OO OO O O
19:20
7. The Great Consummation (20-22)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
O 0 O OO 000000 0000000 0000
1st Coming 2nd Coming 22:14-15

*Contrast - Linear Approach

1st Coming 2nd Coming

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

5. Proponents of Progressive Parallellism:

a. L Berkhof
b. S. L. Morris
c. B. B. Warfield
d. Anthony Hoekema - The Bible and the Future
e. William Hendriksen - More than Conquerors, Commentary on Revelation

F. We must Determine and Consider the Historical Background of the Prophet and His Prophecy.
1. Berkhof, p149
"Prophecy is closely connected with history. In order to be understood, it must be seen in itshistorical setting. The
prophets had, first of all, a message for their contemporaries. They were watchmen on the walls of Zion, to guide
the destinies of ancient people of God, and to guard against the dangers of apostacy. It is a mistake, of frequent
occurrence in the pst, to regard the prophets as abstract personalities that were not in living contact with their

68
 environment. At present, the pendulum is swinging in the opposite direction, and it becomes necessary to warn
against the idea that history will explain everything in the prophets. The ancient seer often found historical
occasions transcending the limits of history."
2. Ramm, p248-9
"A further observation is that although history is necessary to understand the prophet, and that some historical
event occasioned the giving of the prophecy, prophecy isnot to be limited by purely historical considerations.
Radical criticism has tried to eviscerate the supernatural character of prophecy th means of historical
interpretation."
3. Incorporate the Historical Context - In Apprehending the Prophetic Theme -> Fuller Implications

*Initial Historic Significance (Fulfilled) Fullest Implications (Yet to Come)

Isaiah 53 (Israel the suffering Servant) Son of God on the Cross
*Theme of Humiliation before Restoration *Humiliation before Restoration!

Consider Isaiah 7:14 (child born) Matthew 1:23

*Deliverance from Threatening Enemy (Rezin&Pekah) *Deliverance from Enemy (Devil)

4. Applications of
a.Telescopic Foreshortening,
b. Multiple Fulfillment,
c. Providential Theme Recurring through out History

Course Conclusion:

"Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed,
handling accurately the word of truth."

--- 2 Timothy 2:15

May God help us!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendix – The Emergent Church

The Emerging Church parts 1-3 – by Gary E. Gilley – Think on These Things Articles (www.swchapel.org)

Dr. Gary E. Gilley

Southern View Chapel
Think on These Things Articles – April, May, June 2006
www.svchapel.org

69
The Emerging Church - Part 1
(April 2006 - Volume 12, Issue 4)

The emergent church is a rather slippery name for a rather slippery movement. By slippery, I mean that the movement is so new (originated in the
late 1990s), so fragmented, so varied, that nailing it down is like nailing the proverbial Jell-O to the wall. There are no official leaders[1] or
headquarters;[2] some have said that there are thousands of expressions yet only a few churches have sold out to the concept; and even those
claiming the name can’t agree on what is going on.[3] Brian McLaren, the closest thing to a spokesperson for the movement so far states:

Right now Emergent is a conversation, not a movement. We don’t have a program. We don’t have a model. I think we must begin as a conversation,
then grow as a friendship, and see if a movement comes of it.[4]

Having said this, there is still much common ground that can be identified. The name “emerging church” speaks of a church which is, guess what,
emerging from something. This means, it is coming out of the more traditional understanding of the church and emerging into a postmodern
expression. What it will actually become is still a matter of speculation, but its adherents see it as a postmodern church for a postmodern culture. Of
course, even this gets tricky because the prefix “post” has become all too trendy. We hear not only of post-modern, but also of post-Christian, post-
Protestant, post-analytical, post-liberal, post-conservative, post-everything. The problem with “post” is that it describes what you are not much
better than it describes what you are. If you are no longer modern or Christian or liberal or conservative, what are you? McLaren believes that
defining postmodern is premature[5] – we don’t yet know what form it will take, so defining the postmodern church is even more problematic.
Emergent church leaders do not all agree on where the church goes from here but they all believe that it must go somewhere, for they believe the
modern church cannot connect with the postmodern mind. How this fleshes out will be dealt with later in our study; for now we can say the emergent
church is a movement chasing a culture.

Dan Kimball, author of The Emerging Church, says this is necessary because “the basis of learning has shifted from logic and rational, systematic
thought to the realm of experience. People increasingly long for the mystical and the spiritual rather than the evidential and facts-based faith of the
modern soil.”[6] Kimball suggests that the seeker-sensitive church, the church that chased the last generation’s culture, is already out of date: “The
things that seeker-sensitive churches removed from their churches are the very things [postmodern] nonbelievers want to experience if they attend a
worship service.”[7] The postmodern wants to reconnect to the past. They want traditions and religious symbols rather than slick excellence,
polished performance and state-of-the art structures found in modernity. That translates into a very different look and feel. For example it is not
likely that you will find a sign along the highway pointing to the First Baptist Emergent Church. Names like Baptist and denominational ties are too
modern. Popular emergent church names are Solomon’s Porch, House of Mercy, The Rock, Jacob’s Ladder, Circle of Hope, Ikon, Vintage Faith,
New Beginnings and Mosaic. They sponsor websites like vintagefaith.com, emergentvillage.org, and theooze.com. The emerging church appears to
be the latest flavor of the day in a church age which allows itself to be defined by its culture rather than by Scripture. D. A. Carson reminds us:

What drove the Reformation was the conviction, among all its leaders, that the Roman Catholic Church had departed from Scripture and had
introduced theology and practices that were inimical to genuine Christian faith. In other words, they wanted things to change, not because they
perceived that new developments had taken place in the culture so that the church was called to adapt its approach to the new cultural profile, but
because they perceived that new theology and practices had developed in the church that contravened Scripture, and therefore that things needed to
be reformed by the Word of God. By contrast, although the emerging church movement challenges, on biblical grounds, some of the beliefs and
practices of evangelicalism, by and large it insists it is preserving traditional confessionalism by changing the emphases because the culture has
changed, and so inevitably those who are culturally sensitive see things in a fresh perspective. In other words, at the heart of the emerging
reformation lies a perception of a major change in culture.[8]

How does the Christian community go about chasing down the culture? Either through methods or message. The emerging church does both.
Beginning with methodology, the leaders of the movement view the under-thirty generation as profoundly spiritual. They are interested in religious
experiences and feelings. They want a sense of the supernatural. They are not interested in systematic theology, tightly woven apologetic arguments
or logical reasoning. But they are attracted to spiritual mystery. Kimball quotes Garrison Keillor, who makes no claim of being a Christian, as
saying, “If you can’t go to church and at least for a moment be given transcendence, if you can’t pass briefly from this life into the next, then I can’t
see why anyone would go. Just a brief moment of transcendence causes you to come out of the church a changed person.”[9] Despite the fact that
Keillor could not be more wrong if we are interested in true biblical transformation, the emergent leaders see this as the gateway to reaching the
postmodern generations.

The Baby Busters (born between 1965 and 1983) and Mosaics (born between 1984 and 2002) are tired of “church-lite,” consumer spirituality, church
buildings that look like warehouses or malls, CEO pastors, educational programs structured like community colleges and church services that are
reminiscent of a Broadway musical. They want the transcendent, as Keillor says. So the emergent church loads up on such things. There is a return
to what Kimball calls the “vintage church” which combines some excellent things such as singing of hymns, display of the cross and reading of
Scripture with (questionable at best) medieval ritual, prayer stations, labyrinths, candles, incense, icons, stained glass, contemplative prayer, mantras,
Benedictine chants, and darkness. Kimball makes the point that postmoderns want to experience God with all five senses – as the vintage church
did. It should be pointed out, however, that the vintage church to which Kimball refers is not a return to the New Testament church. The vintage
church has been waylaid by medieval Catholicism, which we must remember may have experienced the spiritual through the senses, but nevertheless
was an apostate religion. Simply providing an unbeliever with a religious experience, which they might interpret as an encounter with God, may do
them more harm than good. But just as the seeker-sensitive church saw felt-needs as the means of linking with unbelievers, so the emerging church

70
sees spiritual experience as that means. The philosophy is basically the same, just the methods have changed.

Emergent leader Leonard Sweet describes the emergent church with the acronym EPIC. “E” stands for experiential because postmoderns desire
more than listening and thinking. They want to enter into worship as an experience of the senses. This is why medieval rituals appeal to them. “P”
speaks of participants as opposed to observers. They want an active faith. Rather than a sermon they might hold a “conversation.” “I” relates to
image-based. Projected images, artwork, film and video are all attractive to this generation. They are sight-oriented. “C” means communal. They
desire a strong sense of community. They are “people” persons. Instead of going to church they want to be the church.[10] There are some good
things here but there are problems in the details, as we will see.

If this was the end of the story we might even find comfort in what is basically a reaction to the stripped-down model of Christianity that the seeker-
sensitive church has given us for the last few decades. But as Rob Bell is quick to inform us, “This is not just the same old message with new
methods. We’re rediscovering Christianity as an Eastern religion, as a way of life.”[11] This is something new in the cultural-identifying churches.
The seeker-sensitive church loudly proclaimed that they were fine-tuning the methodology but were not tampering with the message of the
evangelical church (even though they were). The emergent church is concerned about methods but they are even more concerned about the
message. They believe that conservative evangelical Christianity has it all wrong. From the Scriptures to essential doctrines to the gospel itself, the
church so far just doesn’t get it. And the emergent people include themselves in the same camp. As Brian McLaren states, “I don’t think we’ve got
the gospel right yet. What does it mean to be saved?... None of us have arrived at orthodoxy.”[12]

Emergent Philosophy

Before we jump into the doctrinal distinctives of the emerging church we must first detail the philosophy that undergirds the movement. What we
see, read and perceive is filtered, at least to some degree, through our presuppositions and worldview. The worldview of the emerging church is
decidedly postmodern. Attempting to combine postmodern philosophy with biblical theology is a tricky business, as one might imagine; we should
not be surprised that unanimity in the understanding of this attempted merger will not be found. Nevertheless, some common threads are evident
throughout the movement.

Truth Claims

Truth claims are held with suspicion within postmodernism and we find a precarious juggling act in emergent circles as they try to reach a wary
culture with the claims of Christ. The emerging church is concerned about presenting genuine Christianity in a way the postmodern culture
understands. Since the very heart of postmodernity is rejection of absolute authoritative truth, yet Christianity claims to be the proclamation of
absolute authoritative truth, a head-on collision is almost unavoidable. What is to be done? Something has to give and that something seems to be
truth. McLaren presents their view:

Ask me if Christianity (my version of it, yours, the Pope’s, whoever’s) is orthodox, meaning true, and here’s my honest answer: a little, but not yet.
Assuming by Christianity you mean the Christian understanding of the world and God, Christian opinions on soul, text, and culture…I’d have to say
that we probably have a couple of things right, but a lot of things wrong, and even more spreads before us unseen and unimagined. But at least our
eyes are open! To be a Christian in a generously orthodox way is not to claim to have the truth captured, stuffed, and mounted on the wall.[13]

This is almost a complete capitulation to postmodernity’s concept of truth. After 2000 years of the study of the completed Canon, we Christians find
ourselves in a position of having maybe a “couple” of things right – and I am sure that those couple of things would be up for grabs. This uncertainty
about the truth carries over to the Scriptures themselves, of course. Rob Bell and his wife Kristen, in an interview with Christianity Today, reflect
this view. They started questioning their assumptions about the Bible itself – “discovering the Bible as a human product.”[14] “I grew up thinking
that we’ve figured out the Bible,” Kristen says, “that we knew what it means. Now I have no idea what most of it means, and yet I feel like life is big
again – like life used to be black and white, and now it’s in color.”[15] To the postmodern mind it is more important to, as Rob Bell says, “embrace
mystery, rather than conquer it.”[16]

But how does a truly postmodern Christian live? How do they know what to believe? How do they deal with the issue of truth? How do they
assimilate the realities of life? By creating their own reality. McLaren, if he could have his emergent dream come true, would “help students
construct their own model of reality, their understanding of the universe and story we find ourselves in. And – this is SO important – we’d teach
them that their model isn’t reality; it’s just a model. It must be open to correction, adjustment, improvement, even revolution” (emphasis his).[17]
Experience, not Scripture, becomes the basis for truth. “People today,” Leonard Sweet writes, “are starved not for doctrines but for images and
relationships and stories.”[18]

There is no absolute truth or ultimate reality in the emergent agenda. Even Scripture is appreciated for its mystery, not its presentation of truth. Yet
one has to wonder what Jude had in mind when he wrote, “I find it necessary to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which
was once for all handed down to the saints” (verse 3). The emergent church leaders are asking us to embrace a faith without truth, a Bible which has
value due to its mystery, and a reality that is individual, subjective and changeable. This is touted as a new and improved version of Christian living.
I fail to see the attraction, not to mention that no such understanding of truth is supportable by the Scriptures.

Deconstruction

71
The scholar would define deconstruction as Carson does: “It has to do with a literary approach, that hunts down tensions and inconsistencies in a text
(those who deploy deconstruction insist that all texts have them) in order to set them at odds with each other and thus deconstruct the text, to generate
new insights that might actually contradict what a text ostensibly says.[19] At the other end of the spectrum, Humpty Dumpty gave his version,
“When I use a word, it means what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”[20] In everyday language deconstruction means that we can never
be certain that we have the right interpretation of words. What matters then is not what the author or speaker said, because that doubtfully can be
discerned; rather the important thing is what did the reader/listener experience. Deconstruction guts words of their meaning and redefines them
according to one’s own preference. This is obviously convoluted but it is a central piece in postmodern thought.

How does this work out in the postmodern church? In order to be consistent with absolute truth (or, better, lack of truth) the emergent thinkers must
dispose of dogmatic truth claims (i.e. doctrines). They must purge the church of an exclusive gospel,[21] an authoritative Bible and irritating
doctrines such as hell.[22] Also on the cutting floor is the doctrine of original sin. McLaren writes, “The church latched on to that old doctrine of
original sin like a dog to a stick, and before you knew it, the whole gospel got twisted around it. Instead of being God’s big message of saving love
for the whole world, the gospel became a little bit of secret information on how to solve the pesky legal problem of original sin.”[23] Before the
emergent church leaders are done all the essential teachings of the Bible have been deconstructed, redefined or dismissed. And what has been put in
their place? Oddly, but consistent with postmodern thinking, nothing but mystery and questions. Even McLaren admits, “What will appear beyond
the deconstruction remains to be seen. Perhaps something better will emerge – that is my hope and prayer, but the outcome is by no means certain
even now that I have finished writing this book.”[24]

Pluralistic Relativism

If nobody is right then everybody is right. This is the logical conclusion of the postmodern worldview. The emergent church thinkers are reluctantly
willing to accept this concept, at least for a time. McLaren states:

Because I and others, while we aren’t “for” pluralistic relativism, do see it as a kind of needed chemotherapy. We see modernity with its absolutisms
and colonialisms and totalitarianisms as a kind of static dream…. In Christian theology, this anti-emergent thinking is expressed in systematic
theologies that claim…to have final orthodoxy nailed down…. Emergent Christians see pluralistic relativism as a dangerous treatment for stage IV
absolutist/colonial/totalitarian modernity (to use language from cancer diagnosis), something that saves a life by nearly killing it.[25]

Since truth and Scripture have been deconstructed all that is left is relativism. Until we figure out where to go from here we will have to be content
with that. We may or may not arrive at a better place some day, but at least objective truth claims are being eradicated – and that is a good thing. So
says the emergent church leaders. More next time.

[1] Recognized, but not official leaders of the movement at this time include: Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, Dan Kimball, Doug Pagitt, Leonard Sweet,
the late Mike Yaconelli, Spencer Burke, Erwin McManus, Tommy Kyllonen (aka Urban D) and Donald Miller. Some see Richard Foster and Dallas
Willard as key mentors for the movement.

[2] Some of the promoters of the emerging church include Youth Specialties, The Ooze and The Emergent Village.

[3] See Andy Crouch, “The Emergent Mystique”, Christianity Today, November, 2004, pp. 36-41, This article described the excitement and chaos at
the 1994 Emergent Convention in Nashville.

[4] Ibid., p.39.

[5] Brian McLaren, A New Kind of Christian, ( San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001), pp.19-22. In many ways the emergent church can trace its birth to
the publication of this book.

[6] Dan Kimball, The Emerging Church, ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), p.60.

[7] Ibid., p.115.

[8] D. A. Carson, Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church, ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), p.42.

[9] Kimball, p.143.

[10] http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week846/interview.html

72
[11] Christianity Today, p.38.

[12] Ibid., p. 40.

[13] Brian McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004), p.293.

[14] Christianity Today, p.38.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid.

[17] McLaren, A New Kind of Christian, p 162.

[18] Leonard Sweet, Andy Crouch, et al., The Church in Emerging Culture: Five Perspectives, Leonard Sweet, ed., ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
2004), p.35.

[19] D. A. Carson, p.84.

[20] Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass (http://www.sabian.org/Alice/lgchap06.htm.).

[21] Kimball, p.175.

[22] McLaren’s book, The Last Word and the Word After That, is primarily a deconstruction of the doctrine of hell.

[23] Brian McLaren, The Last Word and the Word After That, ( San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2005), p.134.

[24] Ibid., p.XVIII.

[25] McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, pp.286-287.

The Emerging Church - Part 2

(May 2006 - Volume 12, Issue 5)

Our worldview will determine how we process information and in turn what we believe. In theory, at least, Christians should possess a biblical
worldview shaped by the study of Scripture. In actuality, too often our philosophy of living (worldview) is formed by other forces around us
including our culture. This is an accusation often cast at the evangelical church by the emerging church leaders. They say that evangelicalism has
been shaped by modernity – that what we believe is not drawn so much from Scripture as it is from the Enlightenment. This indictment should not be
cast aside too quickly; there is some truth to it. We must ever be careful that we trace our beliefs to Scripture and not take detours constructed by
men. But having read the specific allegations coming from the emerging camp, I find that most do not hold water and are thrown out more to put us
on the defensive and justify their beliefs than to accurately portray the teachings of the conservative church. When the smoke has cleared we
discover that our fundamental doctrines find their basis in Scripture after all. But the same cannot be said for emergent teachings. Their doctrines
have been more than tainted; they have been fashioned by postmodernity. Let’s take a look through the lens of emergent philosophy at some of the
major doctrines.

Emergent Doctrine

In General

Al Mohler, theologian and president of Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, provides this scathing comment:

The worldview of postmodernism – complete with an epistemology that denies the possibility of or need for propositional truth – affords the
movement an opportunity to hop, skip and jump throughout the Bible and the history of Christian thought in order to take whatever pieces they want
from one theology and attach them, like doctrinal post-it notes, to whatever picture they would want to draw.[1]

Most emergent church leaders claim fidelity to the Scriptures as well as the historic doctrines and even creeds of the church. Sounds good on the
surface – but then they force these things through the filter of postmodern deconstruction and what comes out are distorted and unrecognizable

73
understandings of theology. Dan Kimball says that the church must “deconstruct, reconstruct, and redefine biblical terms.”[2] Brian McLaren would
agree, saying that our old theological systems are flawed and something new is needed.

I meet people along the way who model for me, each in a different way, what a new kind of Christian might look like. They differ in many ways, but
they generally agree that the old show is over, the modern jig is up, and it’s time for something radically new…. Either Christianity itself is flawed,
failing, untrue, or our modern, Western, commercialized, industrial strength version is in need of a fresh look, a serious revision.[3]

Rob Bell chips in to make certain we understand that these men are talking about more than methodology, “By this I do not mean cosmetic,
superficial changes like better lights and music, sharper graphics, and new methods with easy-to-follow steps. I mean theology: the beliefs about
God, Jesus, the Bible, salvation, the future. We must keep reforming the way the Christian faith is defined, lived and explained.”[4]

How far is Bell willing to take all of this? Which doctrines can be changed, altered or even eliminated before we no longer have the Christian faith?
Apparently nothing is off limits. While personally claiming to affirm historic Christian theology, Bell writes that it would not bother him to discover
that we have been wrong all along concerning the basic elements of the faith. For example, if it could be proven “that Jesus had a real, earthly,
biological father named Larry… and that the virgin birth was just a bit of mythologizing the Gospel writers threw in…. Could you still be a
Christian?” [5] Bell doesn’t see a problem. As a matter of fact, if our faith depends on such doctrines “then it wasn’t that strong in the first place,
was it?”[6]

What doctrines does Bell regard as dispensable? In this brief statement alone he sees as superfluous the virgin birth, the incarnation, the hypostatic
union of Christ and the inspiration of Scripture (since the Gospel writers lied about the person of Christ). Of course, like dominos, as these doctrines
fall they take others with them, not the least of which would be the substitutionary atonement since a mere man could not die for our sins. In one
stroke of the pen Bell has undermined the whole Christian faith, but he sees it as a non-issue. To Bell, and other emergent leaders, Jesus is not the
way and the truth, if by that we mean He is the embodiment of truth and the only way to God. No, to these men the “way of Jesus is the best possible
way to live.”[7] We could continue to live the “Christian life” without the truth of Scripture. We could still love God and be a Christian, because
what we believe is not important. The only question is, “Is the way of Jesus still the best possible way to life?”[8] It is not about what we believe,
Bell would insist. “Perhaps a better question than who’s right, is who’s living rightly?”[9]

McLaren reinforces this major tenant of emergent “theology:” “We place less emphasis on whose lineage, rites, doctrines, structures, and
terminology are right and more emphasis on whose actions, service, outreach, kindness, and effectiveness are good.”[10] “A turn from doctrines to
practices”[11] is one of the four major legs that the emerging church stands on, according to McLaren. Being, rather than believing, is a major
component in the emergent philosophy. The New Testament, on the other hand, does not sacrifice one for the other. We are called in Scripture to
live godly lives, but first we must believe (John 1:12; Roman 10:9-10; Ephesians 2:8-9). Christlike living is a fruit of salvation, not the cause. We
can “be” moral and decent people and not be Christians, but we cannot deny or ignore the true historic, biblical person and work of Jesus Christ and
be saved. The emergent church has turned this truth on its head. Mark Oestreicher, president of Youth Specialties, makes these comments in The
Emerging Church which are not only dangerously close to a denial of the gospel itself but actually cross the line:

Does a little dose of Buddhism thrown into a belief system somehow kill off the Christian part? My Buddhist cousin, except for her unfortunate
inability to embrace Jesus, is a better “Christian” (based on Jesus’ descriptions of what a Christian does) than almost every Christian I know. If we
are using Matthew 26 as a guide, she’d be a sheep; and almost every Christian I know personally would be a goat.[12]

A Few Specifics

The doctrine of God: Even though Jesus has come to reveal and explain the Father (John 1:14, 18), “God,” McLaren insists, “can’t ever really be an
object to be studied.”[13] To emergent leaders theology is not a matter of knowing God but a quest for beauty and truth.

The doctrine of original sin: McLaren writes, “Many of us have grown uneasy with this understanding of ‘the fall’ (and with it an exaggerated
understanding of the doctrine of ‘original sin’). We are suspicious that it has become a kind of Western Neo-Platonic invasive species that ravages
the harmonious balance inherent in the enduring Jewish concepts of creation as God’s world.”[14]

The substitutionary atonement: One of the characters in McLaren’s book The Story We Find Ourselves In goes beyond questioning the purpose
and need of Christ’s death for us, or even the unfairness of one dying for others. “That just sounds like one more injustice in the cosmic equation. It
sounds like divine child abuse. You know?”[15]

The TULIP: You don’t have to be a Calvinist to find McLaren’s deconstruction of the famous TULIP ridiculous. The acronym has historically
stood for total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of the saints. McLaren says he too is a
Calvinist but he comes up with his own TULIP: Triune love, unselfish election, limitless reconciliation, inspiring grace and passionate, persistent
saints.[16]

When deconstructing and reconstructing takes place at this level it is not hard to understand the difficulty involved in communication. As Al Mohler
wrote recently on his blog,

McLaren claims to uphold “consistently, unequivocally and unapologetically” the historic creeds of the church, specifically the Apostles’ and Nicene

74
Creeds. At the same time, however, he denies that truth should be articulated in propositional form, and thus undercuts his own “unequivocal”
affirmation.[17]

The doctrine of hell

So odious is the doctrine of hell to the emergent community that McLaren devoted his latest book, The Last Word and the Word After That, to the
subject. McLaren introduces his subject with an exaggerated distortion of the evangelical position,

God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life, and if you don’t love God back and cooperate with God’s plans in exactly the prescribed way,
God will torture you with unimaginable abuse, forever – that sort of thing. Human parents who ‘love’ their children with these kinds of implied
ultimatums tend to produce the most dysfunctional families…[18] (emphasis his).

If the idea of hell is so ridiculous then why did Jesus teach it? McLaren concocts a fanciful view that the Jews during the intertestamental period
wove together the mythological views of the Mesopotamian, the Egyptian, the Zoroastrian and Persian religions and created hell. When Jesus came
on the scene the Pharisees were using hell as a club to keep the people in line. Through the threat of hell the Pharisees could motivate sinners to stop
sinning and then perhaps God would send the Messiah along with His kingdom. Jesus takes the Pharisees’ club and turns it on them. Jesus didn’t
really believe in or endorse hell, as we understand it; He just used it as a “truth-depicting model.”[19] Jesus used hell “to threaten those who
excluded sinners and other undesirables, showing that God’s righteousness was compassionate and merciful, that God’s kingdom welcomed the
undeserving, that for God there was no out-group.”[20]

This convoluted argumentation leads to there being “no out-group.” If there is no out-group, does that mean McLaren is a universalist? While he
flirts with this possibility stating, “Universalism is not as bankrupt of biblical support as some suggest,”[21] he never firmly lights on it.[22] But
without question McLaren does hold to the doctrine of inclusivism which teaches that while salvation has been made possible by Jesus Christ, it is
not necessary to know who Jesus is or the precise nature of what He has done.[23] Emergent church leaders follow the reasoning of missionary
theologian Lesslie Newbigin’s position concerning Christ and salvation which runs along these lines: Exclusive in the sense of affirming the unique
truth of the revelation of Jesus Christ, but not in the sense of denying the possibility of salvation to those outside the Christian faith; inclusive in the
sense of refusing to limit the saving grace of God to Christian, but not in the sense of viewing other religions as salvific.[24] In other words, salvation
is not exclusively found in the gospel, therefore there are saved Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists and so forth. Soon hell becomes a mute issue because
no one seems to be going there anyway.

The doctrine of salvation

The doctrine of hell is determined to a large degree by the all-important understanding of the gospel. The emergent leaders see a wide gate opening
to eternal life. “It bothers me to use exclusive and Jesus in the same sentence. Everything about Jesus’ life and message seemed to be about
inclusion, not exclusion,”[25] writes McLaren (emphasis his). He adds later in his discussion, “Maybe God’s plan is an opt-out plan, not an opt-in
one. If you want to stay out of the party, you can. But it’s hard for me to imagine somebody being more stubbornly ornery than God is
gracious.”[26] The clear implication is that we are all “in” unless we want “out.” But the next question is (and this is where it gets tricky) in or out
of what? The short answer is “the kingdom of God.” But the short answer leads to a long explanation that leaves us scratching our heads (which is
appropriate since the emergent people prize mystery over clarity).

The gospel, according to the emergent thinkers, is not about individual conversion. It is not about how to get people “in.” It is about “how the world
will be saved from human sin and all that goes with it...”[27] This sounds close to the mark until we examine more thoroughly what is meant by the
terminology. Their concept of “world” does not simply involve humans who don’t believe in Christ. The emergent gospel is not just bringing
unbelievers to the Savior for the forgiveness of sin and the imputation of God’s righteousness. There is more, as Rob Bell informs us,

Salvation is the entire universe being brought back into harmony with its maker. This has huge implications for how people present the message of
Jesus. Yes, Jesus can come into our hearts. But we can join a movement that is as wide and as big as the universe itself. Rocks and trees and birds
and swamps and ecosystems. God’s desire is to restore all of it.[28]

McLaren continues the thought: “Is getting individual souls into heaven the focal point of the gospel? I’d have to say no, for any number of reasons.
Don’t you think that God is concerned about saving the whole world?... It is the redemption of the world, the stars, the animals, the planets, the whole
show.”[29] You see, “The church exists for the world – to be God’s catalyst so that the world can receive and enter God’s kingdom more and
more.”[30] When asked to define the gospel, Neo (the main philosophical character in McLaren’s novels) replies that it could not be reduced to a
little formula, other than “the Kingdom of God is at hand.”[31] Narrowing this definition is not easy, but McLaren gives some insight when he
writes,

I am a Christian because I believe that, in all these ways, Jesus is saving the world. By the “world” I mean planet Earth and all life on it, because
left to ourselves, un-judged, un-forgiven, and un-taught, we will certainly destroy this planet and its residents.[32]

As we are discovering, the emerging church is very concerned with the planet, with the ecosystems, pollution and the environment; so much so that
apparently in some sense Christ died for the physical planet and it is the job of the follower of Christ to help restore and protect this world. He is also
troubled with injustice. McLaren asks, “And could our preoccupation with individual salvation from hell after death distract us from speaking

75
prophetically about injustice in our world today?”[33] Emergent leaders have a deep concern that if we are preoccupied with who is “in” and who is
“out,” who is going to heaven and who is not, we will ignore present physical needs of the planet and social issues like injustice, poverty and AIDS.

McLaren argues, “When Matthew, Mark, and Luke talk about the Kingdom of God, it’s always closely related to social justice…. The gospel of the
kingdom is about God’s will being done on earth for everybody, but we’re interested in getting away from earth entirely as individuals, and into
heaven instead.”[34] Martin Luther King is given by McLaren as an example of one who had the right gospel emphasis.[35] They fault the
evangelical church for being too wrapped up in eternity to care about what is happening right now on planet earth and with being too anxious over
who is saved from sin to notice who is suffering from man’s inhumanity to man.

It does not seem to be an option to the emergent church that both social injustices and eternal redemption can be and have been attended to by God’s
people. But, despite opinions to the contrary, the priority of Scripture is on man’s relationship to God. It is because men are alienated from God that
they mistreat one another. The spiritually redeemed and transformed person should and will care about social sins. But, again, the gospel is about
man’s alienation from God and what He has done through Christ to reconcile us to Himself (Romans 5:6-11), not about the ozone layer and
elimination of poverty. Neither Jesus nor the apostles made these latter things the focus of their ministries; it was the reconciliation of souls to God
that was at the heart of their message. Once we begin to draw our gospel from the culture, no matter what culture that might be, we have altered the
true gospel. Emergent leaders are not wrong to be concerned about the environment and social injustice; they are wrong to confuse it with the gospel
of Jesus Christ.

[1]Quoted by David Roach, “Leaders Call ‘Emerging Church Movement’ a Threat to Gospel,” BP News, March 23, 2005,
(www.ews.net/bpnews.asp?id=20420).

[2] Dan Kimball, The Emerging Church, ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), p. 178.

[3] Brian McLaren, A New Kind of Christian, ( San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001), pp. XIV-XV.

[4] Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis, ( Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 2005), p. 12.

[5] Ibid., p. 26.

[6] Ibid., p. 27.

[7] Ibid., p. 20 (cf. p. 21).

[8] Ibid., p. 27.

[9] Ibid., p. 21.

[10] Brian McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, ( Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 2004), p. 223.

[11] Ibid., p. 197.

[12] Kimball, p. 53.

[13] McLaren, A New Kind of Christian, p. 161.

[14] McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, p. 235.

[15] Brian McLaren, The Story We Find Ourselves In, ( San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003), p. 102.

[16] McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, pp. 195-197.

[17] Al Mohler, (www.crosswalk.com/news/weblogs/mohler/?adate=2/16/2005#1313087).

[18] Brian McLaren, The Last Word and the Word After That, ( San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003), p. XII.

76
[19] Ibid., pp. 61-64, 71-79.

[20] Ibid., p. 74.

[21] Ibid., pp. 103 (cf. pp. 182-183).

[22] McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, p. 37.

[23] McLaren, The Last Word and the Word After That, p. 182.

[24] Ibid., p. 183.

[25] Ibid., p. 35.

[26] Ibid., p. 138.

[27] Ibid., p. 69.

[28] Bell, pp. 109-110.

[29] McLaren, A New Kind of Christian, p. 129.

[30] Ibid., p. 84.

[31] Ibid., p. 106.

[32] McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, p. 97.

[33] McLaren, The Last Word and the Word After That, p. 84.

[34] Ibid., p. 149. McLaren has adopted N.T. Wright’s understanding of the gospel which is termed the New Perspective. The New Perspective says
that we have misunderstood the New Testament and that the real issue of such books as Romans is not to explain the gospel but how to bring Jews
and Gentile together in the Kingdom of God (see pp. 149-153).

[35] Ibid., p. 153.

The Emerging Church - Part 3

(June 2006 - Volume 12, Issue 6)

How those professing to be believers understand the message of the gospel will determine how they view their mission in this life. Since the
emergent church sees the gospel not merely as the redemption of lost souls but also as the restoration of the planet and salvation from man’s
inhumanity to man, they comprehend their task as Christians differently from that of most evangelicals. They call it “missional”.

Emergent Mission: Missional

Missional is a term that seems to be drawn from the writings of missiologist Lesslie Newbigin who pops up all over emergent literature. It is difficult
to pin down a good definition of missional, but it seems to mean that as Christians we exist to serve. We serve by loving and living in such a way
that we bless those around us. But more than that, we are to be engaged in changing and even creating culture as we bring the kingdom of God to
earth. Rather than calling people out of this world system and into “the kingdom of His beloved Son” (Colossians 1:13), we are to bring the kingdom
to them. It would appear that the goal of the missional Christian is to transform the “domain of darkness” (Colossians 1:13) into the kingdom of
God. McLaren tells us that his missional calling is summed up in these words, “Blessed in this life to be a blessing to everyone on earth.”[1] He
adds, “My mission isn’t to figure out who is already blessed, or not blessed, or unblessable. My calling is to be blessed so I can bless everyone.”[2]
Further,

From this understanding we place less emphasis on whose lineage, rites, doctrines, structures, and terminology are right and more emphasis on
whose actions, service, outreach, kindness, and effectiveness are good…. [In order] to help our world get back on the road to being truly and wholly
good again, the way God created it to be…. We’re here on a mission to join God in bringing blessing to our needy world. We hope to bring God’s

77
blessing to you, whoever you are and whatever you believe, and if you’d like to join us in this mission and the faith that creates and nourishes it,
you’re welcome.[3]

We get a better understanding of where McLaren is headed when he writes, “I hope that both they (people everywhere) and I will become better
people, transformed by God’s Spirit, more pleasing to God, more of a blessing to the world, so that God’s kingdom… comes on earth as in
heaven.”[4] And what kind of people will populate this kingdom? Apparently people from all faith and religions.

Although I don’t hope all Buddhists will become (cultural) Christians, I do hope all who feel so called will become Buddhist followers of Jesus; I
believe they should be given that opportunity and invitation. I don’t hope all Jews or Hindus will become members of the Christian religion. But I do
hope all who feel so called will become Jewish or Hindu followers of Jesus.[5]

It doesn’t take long to realize that the kingdom of the emergent community is not the kingdom of God, nor the church, as described in Scripture –
unless the missional mandate is to fill the kingdom with tares (Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43). But once this unbiblical view of God’s kingdom is
accepted, what is our mission—that is, how do we live missionally?

Rob Bell writes, “For Jesus, the question wasn’t how do I get into Heaven? but how do I bring heaven here?... The goal isn’t escaping this world but
making this world the kind of place God can come to. And God is remaking us into the kind of people who can do this kind of work.”[6] Dan
Kimball adds, “Our faith also includes kingdom living, part of which is the responsibility to fight locally and globally for social justice on behalf of
the poor and needy. Our example is Jesus, who spent His time among the lepers, the poor and the needy.”[7]

These quotes give good examples of half truths twisted into distorted vision. Did Jesus show compassion and minister to the poor? Certainly, but
did Jesus, or the apostles after Him, fight for social justice on behalf of the poor and needy? Not at all. While Jesus, through the transformation of
lives, began a process that would revolutionize much of the world in regard to injustice, He never made these things a central platform of His
ministry nor that of the church. Jesus said virtually nothing about the environment, political tyranny, eradication of poverty and illiteracy,
elimination of deadly disease or other social ills. This does not mean that these things are not important, but they are obviously not the heart of His
ministry which was to save us from our sins and enable us “to become the righteousness of God in Christ” (2 Corinthians 5:21). Jesus could have
started a social revolution without going to the cross, but without the cross we could not be redeemed from sin. Our mission is to call people “out of
darkness into His marvelous light” (1 Peter 2:9).

But the missional agenda is different. Here we are to bless people, for that is why God has chosen us – to be a blessing to others.[8] What does it
mean to be a blessing? Apparently it does not mean coming to saving faith in Christ, because Bell tells us that “God blesses everybody. People who
don’t believe in God. People who are opposed to God. People who do violent, evil things. God’s intention is to bless everybody.”[9] And how does
this blessing happen? It happens as the church gives up its efforts to convert people to Christ and simply serves them: “The most powerful things
happen when the church surrenders its desire to convert people and convince them to join. It is when the church gives itself away in radical acts of
service and compassion, expecting nothing in return, that the way of Jesus is most vividly put on display.”[10] In this way ( Bell tells us) the “gospel
is good news, especially for those who don’t believe it…. [As a matter of fact] if the gospel isn’t good news for everybody, then it isn’t good news
for anybody.” [11]

But is the gospel good news for everybody? It may very well be a blessing to have Christian people treat you with the love of Christ, but Jesus and
the Scriptures could not be more clear that those who do not know Christ are under the wrath of God (Romans 1:18ff), will perish (2 Thessalonians
2:9), are eternally doomed (Luke 12:46-48) and will spend eternity in the lake of fire (Revelation 20:11-15) – hardly good news to those who reject
Him.

Emergent Scripture

Many of the unusual positions held by the emergent leaders stem directly from their theology of the Scriptures as well as their hermeneutical
approach. First, insiders of the emerging church “conversation” are fond of expressing their excitement and fidelity to the Word of God, even as they
undermine it. McLaren says, “I want to affirm that my regard for Scripture is higher than ever.”[12] Bell tells us that for over ten years he has
oriented his life around studying, reading, and trying to understand the Bible.[13] One would have to wonder why Bell devotes so much time to the
understanding of the Bible since he apparently agrees with his wife who stated in a joint interview that she has “no idea what most of it means. And
yet life is big again.”[14]

In order to press home their views, the emergent leaders must perform some interesting gymnastics with the Scriptures. How can someone express
high regard for Scripture yet come up with such fanciful interpretations? First, they question inspiration. Wondering out loud about Paul’s epistles,
Bell writes, “A man named Paul is writing this, so is it his word or God’s Word?’[15] McLaren pulls out the old Jesus versus Paul card, “We retained
Jesus as Savior but promoted the apostle Paul (or someone else) to Lord and Teacher…. And/or decided that Jesus’ life and teachings were
completely interpreted by Paul.”[16] Bell, in complete ignorance of history and the doctrine of biblical preservation, informs his readers that the
canon came about as a result of a vote of the church fathers: “In reaction to abuses by the church, a group of believers during a time called the
Reformation claimed that we only need the authority of the Bible. But the problem is that we got the Bible from the church voting on what the Bible
even is.”[17]

Anyone still clinging tenaciously to the Word, after inspiration is denied, will further loosen his grip when he discovers that the Scriptures are not
inerrant, infallible nor authoritative. McLaren said these are words related to a philosophical belief system that he used to hold. But he no longer

78
believes the “Bible is absolutely equivalent to the phrase ‘the Word of God’ as used in the Bible. Although I do find the term inerrancy useful… I
would prefer to use the term inherency to describe my view of Scripture.”[18] By the use of inherency he is dusting off the neo-orthodox view of the
Scriptures, which taught that the Bible contains the “word of God” but is not the completed Word of God, for God’s Word can be found in anything
He “inspires.”

If you have any confidence left in Scripture at this point, McLaren and his friends can take care of that by telling you that you have been misreading
the Bible all along. “There is more than one way to ‘kill’ the Bible,” he says. “You can dissect it, analyze it, abstract it. You can read its ragged
stories and ragamuffin poetry, and from them you can derive neat abstractions, sterile propositions, and sharp-edged principles.”[19] To the emergent
people the Bible was never intended to be studied and analyzed; it was meant to be embraced as art, to be read as a story. The proof is that it is
written as narrative and poetry and story. Granted much of it is in this genre but, as D. A. Carson points out, much of it is also “law, lament,
instruction, wisdom, ethical injunction, warning, apocalyptic imagery, letters, promises, reports, propositions, ritual, and more. The easy appeal to the
overarching narrative proves immensely distortive.”[20] Regarding Scripture, Carson leaves us with a powerful warning: “At some juncture
churches have to decide whether they will, by God’s grace, try to live in submission to Scripture, or try to domesticate Scripture.” [21]

Emergent Hermeneutics

With such an understanding of the Scriptures how can the emerging church claim to be in any sense devoted to the Bible? By developing new
hermeneutics. Hermeneutics is the science of interpretation involving rules and principles that enable us to interpret anything we read, from the
newspaper to the Bible, although the word is used almost exclusively in reference to Scripture. The hermeneutic used by most of us all of the time in
extrabiblical literature could be called “normal” or “literal.” That is, we believe that words make sense, can be understood and can communicate a
message that the author wants to convey. When we read tax laws, as confusing as they might be, we approach them though normal hermeneutics
believing that we can and must understand what they say. When we turn to the sports page of a newspaper and read that such-and-such team just
won the championship, we naturally believe that a fact has been communicated (the team won) and that we can understand what the author of the
article has said, all because we use normal hermeneutics.

But when it comes to Scripture, many are not content to use normal hermeneutics (called grammatical-historical by theologians). Rather many
approaches to interpretation have been invented. We have allegorical and devotional hermeneutics which add supposed hidden meanings to words
and texts, liberal hermeneutics which deny the supernatural and anything that is not politically correct at the moment, and neo-orthodox hermeneutics
which say that anything that “inspires” us is the word of God to us.

More recently new hermeneutical approaches have been invented, each attempting, in my opinion, to circumvent the clear teaching of the Word. At
least three new hermeneutics are making the rounds in emergent circles:

1) Postmodern hermeneutics (or hermeneutics of suspicion): Since postmodernism is laced with deconstructionism, and since the emergent church
is the postmodern church, it is only natural that a postmodern hermeneutic of Scripture would be developed and employed in this movement.
McLaren explains it well, “The Bible requires human interpretation, which was [is] a problem…. How do “I” know the Bible is always right? And if
“I” am sophisticated enough to realize that I know nothing of the Bible without my own involvement via interpretation….What good is it, liberals
would ask conservatives, to have an inerrant Bible if you have no inerrant interpretations?…”[22]

I trust these abbreviated quotes express the postmodern approach to Scripture. Even if they feign belief in an inspired, inerrant Bible, it is of little
consequence because we lack inerrant interpreters. In the emerging church’s view, the Bible may very well be communication of truth from God to
man, but since we are incapable of interpreting the Scriptures “truthfully” it matters little.

Of course, employing postmodern hermeneutics renders the Scriptures impotent, and causes us to ask why God bothered at all trying to communicate
with mankind? And what did God mean in Psalm 19 when he tells us of the benefits and power of the Word? And why did Paul tell Timothy to
preach the Word (2 Timothy 4:2) if there is nothing in the Word that can be taught with confidence? While we will agree that infallible and inerrant
interpreters are nonexistent, it does not follow that the Bible cannot be understood, rather the vast majority of the Scriptures are clear and
comprehensible.

2) Rhetorical hermeneutics: McLaren defines this as,

An approach to Scripture that among other things tells us that we normally pay too much attention to what the writers are saying and not enough to
what they are doing. Rhetorical interpretation would ask, “What is Jesus trying to do by using the language of hell?…”[23]

In other words, since we can’t understand words, by postmodern necessity we are free to ignore words and try to interpret actions. This is hardly a
step in the right direction as anyone who tries to interpret body language could testify.

3) Redemptive Hermeneutics: This is a methodology invented by Dallas Theological Seminary graduate William Webb and endorsed by Dallas
professors such as Darrell L. Bock and Stephen R. Spencer, originally in order to provide some kind of justification of the egalitarian movement.
Unlike many egalitarians, Webb concedes that, if the Bible is read using normal hermeneutics, men and women are given different roles and
functions in the home and in the church. Webb’s solution is to move beyond the written words to the spirit of the words which will allow
accommodation for the views and attitudes of our age. “While Scripture had a positive influence in its time, we should take that redemptive spirit

79
and move to an even better, more fully-realized ethic today."[24] Why is this important? Because “Christians have to reevaluate their beliefs due to
changing attitudes toward women and toward homosexuals.”[25]

McLaren uses this hermeneutic to teach that the Holy Spirit will continue to lead us to new truth beyond the written word. “I can’t see church history
in any other way, except this: semper reformanda, continually being lead and taught and guided by the Spirit into new truth.”[26] Bell uses the same
hermeneutic to make this comment on Matthew 16:19 and 18:18, “[Jesus] is giving his followers the authority to make new interpretations of the
Bible” (emphasis his).[27] These new interpretations lead to a new church, “It is our turn to step up and take responsibility for who the church is
going to be for a new generation. It is our turn to redefine and reshape and dream it all up again.”[28] But they are wrong. It is not up to us to
redefine, reshape and dream up the church again; God has already settled this matter.

What these new hermeneutics have in common is the deliberate movement away from the words and message of Scripture to a new message beyond
the pages of the Word. In the process, the Bible becomes nothing more than a shell or perhaps a museum piece to be admired but ignored. Scripture
as handed down by God has been replaced with the imaginations of man in order to fit more succinctly with our culture. But if we have no
authoritative word from God, with what is the church left? Nothing but mystery and mysticism.

Mystery

The emerging church is not excited about truth (as a matter of fact staying true to their postmodern roots, they reject and are suspicious of truth
claims) but they are enamored with mystery. Donald Miller writes his book Blue Like Jazz to develop this very theme. He summarizes his thoughts,

At the end of the day, when I am lying in bed and I know the chances of any of our theology being exactly right are a million to one, I need to know
that God has things figured out, that if my math is wrong we are still going to be okay. And wonder is that feeling we get when we let go of our silly
answers, our mapped out rules that we want God to follow. I don’t think there is any better worship than wonder.[29]

When Rob Bell is faced with giving answers to the pertinent issues of life such as heaven, hell, suicide, the devil and God or love and rape, he has no
answers – just hugs. “Most of my responses were about how we need others to carry our burdens and how our real needs in life are not for more
information but for loving community with other people on the journey.”[30] But the classic answer belongs to McLaren, who virtually closes his
book A Generous Orthodoxy with this statement:

Consider for a minute what it would mean to get the glory of God finally and fully right in your thinking or to get a fully formed opinion of God’s
goodness or holiness. Then I think you’ll feel the irony: all these years of pursuing orthodoxy ended up like this – in front of all this glory
understanding nothing” (emphasis his).[31]

There we have it. Ultimately, we know nothing. Even though Jesus was clear that we worship God in spirit and in truth (John 4:23), in the emergent
church there is no truth, no theology, no understanding of God. However, this does not stop them from embracing the presence of God or so we are
told. How does such a “faith” survive? On the basis of mysticism.

Mysticism

Peter Rollins, emergent leader with Ikon in Northern Ireland , says, “We at Ikon are developing a theology which derives from the mystics, a
theology without theology to complement our religion without religion.”[32] Emergent leaders can say such things because of their overbearing
emphasis on experience. Kimble has it backwards when he asserts, “The old paradigm taught that if you had the right teaching, you will experience
God. The new paradigm says that if you experience God, you will have the right teaching.”[33] Carson is correct, “For almost everyone within the
movement, this works out in an emphasis on feeling and affections over against linear thought and rationality, on experience over against truth.”[34]
The emerging church is a movement in search of an experience, not the truth. They seem to have little realization that an experience based on
anything but truth is a mirage. The Scriptures never deny the proper place of experience, but our Lord says, “You will know the truth and the truth
will make you free” (John 8:32). The emergent church is a movement that is in bondage to its own imagination, not one held captive to the truth of
God.

[1] Brian McLaren , A Generous Orthodoxy ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004), p. 113.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid., p. 223, 234.

[4] Ibid., p. 263.

80
[5] Ibid., p. 264.

[6] Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), p. 147,150

[7] Dan Kimball, The Emerging Church ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), p. 224.

[8] Bell, p. 165.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid., p. 167.

[11] Ibid., p. 166, 167.

[12] Brian McLaren, The Last Word and the Word after That ( San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2005), p. 111.

[13] Bell, p. 41.

[14] Andy Crouch, “The Emergent Mystique,” Christianity Today, November, 2004, p 38.

[15] Bell, p. 42.

[16] McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, p. 86.

[17] Bell, p. 68.

[18] McLaren, The Last Word, p. 111.

[19] McLaren, A New Kind of Christian, p. 158.

[20] D. A. Carson, Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), p. 164.

[21] Ibid., p. 172.

[22] McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, pp. 133-134.

[23] McLaren, The Last Word, p. 81.

[24] William J. Webb, Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis ( Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2001),
p. 247.

[25] Ibid., p. 25.

[26] McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, p. 193.

[27] Bell, p. 50.

[28] Ibid., p. 164.

[29] Donald Miller, Blue Like Jazz ( Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2003), p. 206.

[30] Bell, p. 30.

[31] McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, p. 294.

[32] www.emergingchurch.info/stories/cafe/peterollins

81
[33] Kimball, p. 188.

[34] Carson, p. 29.

82