26-28
October 1978. ICBI
Summit 1 takes place.
http://www.alliancenet.org/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID307086_CHID750054_CIID2095160,01.html
THE
CHICAGO STATEMENT ON BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS
Written
by J.I. Packer
Summit I
of the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy took place in Chicago on
October 26-28, 1978 for the purpose of affirming afresh the doctrine of the
inerrancy of Scripture, making clear the understanding of it and warning
against its denial. In the seven years since Summit I, God has blessed that
effort in ways surpassing most anticipations. A gratifying show of helpful
literature on the doctrine of inerrancy as well as a growing commitment to its
value give cause to pour forth praise to our great God.
The work
of Summit I had hardly been completed when it became evident that there was yet
another major task to be tackled. While we recognize that belief in the
inerrancy of Scripture is basic to maintaining its authority, the values of
that commitment are only as real as one's understanding of the meaning of
Scripture. Thus, the need for Summit II. For two years plans were laid and
papers were written on themes relating to hermeneutical principles and
practices. The culmination of this effort has been a meeting in Chicago on
November 10-13, 1982 at which we, the undersigned, have participated.
In
similar fashion to the Chicago Statement of 1978, we herewith present these
affirmations and denials as an expression of the results of our labors to
clarify hermeneutical issues and principles. We do not claim completeness or
systematic treatment of the entire subject, but these affirmations and denials
represent a consensus of the approximately one hundred participants and
observers gathered at this conference. It has been a broadening experience to
engage in dialogue, and it is our prayer that God will use the product of our
diligent efforts to enable us and others to more correctly handle the word of
truth (2 Tim. 2:15).
ARTICLES
OF AFFIRMATION AND DENIAL
Article I
We affirm that the normative authority of Holy Scripture is the authority of God Himself, and is attested by Jesus Christ, the Lord of the Church.
We deny the legitimacy of separating the authority of Christ from the authority of Scripture, or of opposing the one to the other.
We affirm that the normative authority of Holy Scripture is the authority of God Himself, and is attested by Jesus Christ, the Lord of the Church.
We deny the legitimacy of separating the authority of Christ from the authority of Scripture, or of opposing the one to the other.
Article
II
We affirm that as Christ is God and Man in one Person, so Scripture is, indivisibly, God's Word in human language.
We deny that the humble, human form of Scripture entails errancy any more than the humanity of Christ, even in His humiliation, entails sin.
We affirm that as Christ is God and Man in one Person, so Scripture is, indivisibly, God's Word in human language.
We deny that the humble, human form of Scripture entails errancy any more than the humanity of Christ, even in His humiliation, entails sin.
Article
III
We affirm that the Person and work of Jesus Christ are the central focus of the entire Bible.
We deny that any method of interpretation which rejects or obscures the Christ-centeredness of Scripture is correct.
We affirm that the Person and work of Jesus Christ are the central focus of the entire Bible.
We deny that any method of interpretation which rejects or obscures the Christ-centeredness of Scripture is correct.
Article
IV
We affirm that the Holy Spirit who inspired Scripture acts through it today to work faith in its message.
We deny that the Holy Spirit ever teaches to anyone anything which is contrary to the teaching of Scripture.
We affirm that the Holy Spirit who inspired Scripture acts through it today to work faith in its message.
We deny that the Holy Spirit ever teaches to anyone anything which is contrary to the teaching of Scripture.
Article V
We affirm that the Holy Spirit enables believers to appropriate and apply Scripture to their lives.
We deny that the natural man is able to discern spiritually the biblical message apart from the Holy Spirit.
We affirm that the Holy Spirit enables believers to appropriate and apply Scripture to their lives.
We deny that the natural man is able to discern spiritually the biblical message apart from the Holy Spirit.
Article
VI
We affirm that the Bible expresses God's truth in propositional statements, and we declare that biblical truth is both objective and absolute. We further affirm that a statement is true if it represents matters as they actually are, but is an error if it misrepresents the facts.
We deny that, while Scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation, biblical truth should be defined in terms of this function. We further deny that error should be defined as that which willfully deceives.
We affirm that the Bible expresses God's truth in propositional statements, and we declare that biblical truth is both objective and absolute. We further affirm that a statement is true if it represents matters as they actually are, but is an error if it misrepresents the facts.
We deny that, while Scripture is able to make us wise unto salvation, biblical truth should be defined in terms of this function. We further deny that error should be defined as that which willfully deceives.
Article
VII
We affirm that the meaning expressed in each biblical text is single, definite and fixed.
We deny that the recognition of this single meaning eliminates the variety of its application.
We affirm that the meaning expressed in each biblical text is single, definite and fixed.
We deny that the recognition of this single meaning eliminates the variety of its application.
Article
VIII
We affirm that the Bible contains teachings and mandates which apply to all cultural and situational contexts and other mandates which the Bible itself shows apply only to particular situations.
We deny that the distinction between the universal and particular mandates of Scripture can be determined by cultural and situational factors. We further deny that universal mandates may ever be treated as culturally or situationally relative.
We affirm that the Bible contains teachings and mandates which apply to all cultural and situational contexts and other mandates which the Bible itself shows apply only to particular situations.
We deny that the distinction between the universal and particular mandates of Scripture can be determined by cultural and situational factors. We further deny that universal mandates may ever be treated as culturally or situationally relative.
Article
IX
We affirm that the term hermeneutics, which historically signified the rules of exegesis, may properly be extended to cover all that is involved in the process of perceiving what the biblical revelation means and how it bears on our lives.
We deny that the message of Scripture derives from, or is dictated by, the interpreter's understanding. Thus we deny that the "horizons" of the biblical writer and the interpreter may rightly "fuse" in such a way that what the text communicates to the interpreter is not ultimately controlled by the expressed meaning of the Scripture.
We affirm that the term hermeneutics, which historically signified the rules of exegesis, may properly be extended to cover all that is involved in the process of perceiving what the biblical revelation means and how it bears on our lives.
We deny that the message of Scripture derives from, or is dictated by, the interpreter's understanding. Thus we deny that the "horizons" of the biblical writer and the interpreter may rightly "fuse" in such a way that what the text communicates to the interpreter is not ultimately controlled by the expressed meaning of the Scripture.
Article X
We affirm that Scripture communicates God's truth to us verbally through a wide variety of literary forms.
We deny that any of the limits of human language render Scripture inadequate to convey God's message.
We affirm that Scripture communicates God's truth to us verbally through a wide variety of literary forms.
We deny that any of the limits of human language render Scripture inadequate to convey God's message.
Article
XI
We affirm that translations of the text of Scripture can communicate knowledge of God across all temporal and cultural boundaries.
We deny that the meaning of biblical texts is so tied to the culture out of which they came that understanding of the same meaning in other cultures is impossible.
We affirm that translations of the text of Scripture can communicate knowledge of God across all temporal and cultural boundaries.
We deny that the meaning of biblical texts is so tied to the culture out of which they came that understanding of the same meaning in other cultures is impossible.
Article
XII
We affirm that in the task of translating the Bible and teaching it in the context of each culture, only those functional equivalents which are faithful to the content of biblical teaching should be employed.
We deny the legitimacy of methods which either are insensitive to the demands of cross-cultural communication or distort biblical meaning in the process.
We affirm that in the task of translating the Bible and teaching it in the context of each culture, only those functional equivalents which are faithful to the content of biblical teaching should be employed.
We deny the legitimacy of methods which either are insensitive to the demands of cross-cultural communication or distort biblical meaning in the process.
Article
XIII
We affirm that awareness of the literary categories, formal and stylistic, of the various parts of Scripture is essential for proper exegesis, and hence we value genre criticism as one of the many disciplines of biblical study.
We deny that generic categories which negate historicity may rightly be imposed on biblical narratives which present themselves as factual.
We affirm that awareness of the literary categories, formal and stylistic, of the various parts of Scripture is essential for proper exegesis, and hence we value genre criticism as one of the many disciplines of biblical study.
We deny that generic categories which negate historicity may rightly be imposed on biblical narratives which present themselves as factual.
Article
XIV
We affirm that the biblical record of events, discourses and sayings, though presented in a variety of appropriate literary forms, corresponds to historical fact.
We deny that any event, discourse or saying reported in Scripture was invented by the biblical writers or by the traditions they incorporated.
We affirm that the biblical record of events, discourses and sayings, though presented in a variety of appropriate literary forms, corresponds to historical fact.
We deny that any event, discourse or saying reported in Scripture was invented by the biblical writers or by the traditions they incorporated.
Article
XV
We affirm the necessity of interpreting the Bible according to its literal, or normal, sense. The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning which the writer expressed. Interpretation according to the literal sense will take account of all figures of speech and literary forms found in the text.
We deny the legitimacy of any approach to Scripture that attributes to it meaning which the literal sense does not support.
We affirm the necessity of interpreting the Bible according to its literal, or normal, sense. The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning which the writer expressed. Interpretation according to the literal sense will take account of all figures of speech and literary forms found in the text.
We deny the legitimacy of any approach to Scripture that attributes to it meaning which the literal sense does not support.
Article
XVI
We affirm that legitimate critical techniques should be used in determining the canonical text and its meaning.
We deny the legitimacy of allowing any method of biblical criticism to question the truth or integrity of the writer's expressed meaning, or of any other scriptural teaching.
We affirm that legitimate critical techniques should be used in determining the canonical text and its meaning.
We deny the legitimacy of allowing any method of biblical criticism to question the truth or integrity of the writer's expressed meaning, or of any other scriptural teaching.
Article
XVII
We affirm the unity, harmony and consistency of Scripture and declare that it is its own best interpreter.
We deny that Scripture may be interpreted in such a way as to suggest that one passage corrects or militates against another. We deny that later writers of Scripture misinterpreted earlier passages of Scripture when quoting from or referring to them.
We affirm the unity, harmony and consistency of Scripture and declare that it is its own best interpreter.
We deny that Scripture may be interpreted in such a way as to suggest that one passage corrects or militates against another. We deny that later writers of Scripture misinterpreted earlier passages of Scripture when quoting from or referring to them.
Article
XVIII
We affirm that the Bible's own interpretation of itself is always correct, never deviating from, but rather elucidating, the single meaning of the inspired text. The single meaning of a prophet's words includes, but is not restricted to, the understanding of those words by the prophet and necessarily involves the intention of God evidenced in the fulfillment of those words.
We deny that the writers of Scripture always understood the full implications of their own words.
We affirm that the Bible's own interpretation of itself is always correct, never deviating from, but rather elucidating, the single meaning of the inspired text. The single meaning of a prophet's words includes, but is not restricted to, the understanding of those words by the prophet and necessarily involves the intention of God evidenced in the fulfillment of those words.
We deny that the writers of Scripture always understood the full implications of their own words.
Article XIX
We affirm that any preunderstandings which the interpreter brings to Scripture should be in harmony with scriptural teaching and subject to correction by it.
We deny that Scripture should be required to fit alien preunderstandings, inconsistent with itself; such as naturalism, evolutionism, scientism, secular humanism, and relativism.
We affirm that any preunderstandings which the interpreter brings to Scripture should be in harmony with scriptural teaching and subject to correction by it.
We deny that Scripture should be required to fit alien preunderstandings, inconsistent with itself; such as naturalism, evolutionism, scientism, secular humanism, and relativism.
Article
XX
We affirm that since God is the author of all truth, all truths, biblical and extrabiblical, are consistent and cohere, and that the Bible speaks truth when it touches on matters pertaining to nature, history, or anything else. We further affirm that in some cases extrabiblical data have value for clarifying what Scripture teaches, and for prompting correction of faulty interpretations.
We deny that extrabiblical views ever disprove the teaching of Scripture or hold priority over it.
We affirm that since God is the author of all truth, all truths, biblical and extrabiblical, are consistent and cohere, and that the Bible speaks truth when it touches on matters pertaining to nature, history, or anything else. We further affirm that in some cases extrabiblical data have value for clarifying what Scripture teaches, and for prompting correction of faulty interpretations.
We deny that extrabiblical views ever disprove the teaching of Scripture or hold priority over it.
Article
XXI
We affirm the harmony of special with general revelation and therefore of biblical teaching with the facts of nature.
We deny that any genuine scientific facts are inconsistent with the true meaning of any passage of Scripture.
We affirm the harmony of special with general revelation and therefore of biblical teaching with the facts of nature.
We deny that any genuine scientific facts are inconsistent with the true meaning of any passage of Scripture.
Article
XXII
We affirm that Genesis 1-11 is factual, as is the rest of the book.
We deny that the teachings of Genesis 1-11 are mythical and that scientific hypotheses about earth history or the origin of humanity may be invoked to overthrow what Scripture teaches about creation.
We affirm that Genesis 1-11 is factual, as is the rest of the book.
We deny that the teachings of Genesis 1-11 are mythical and that scientific hypotheses about earth history or the origin of humanity may be invoked to overthrow what Scripture teaches about creation.
Article
XXIII
We affirm the clarity of Scripture and specifically of its message about salvation from sin.
We deny that all passages of Scripture are equally clear or have equal bearing on the message of redemption.
We affirm the clarity of Scripture and specifically of its message about salvation from sin.
We deny that all passages of Scripture are equally clear or have equal bearing on the message of redemption.
Article
XXIV
We affirm that a person is not dependent for understanding of Scripture on the expertise of biblical scholars.
We deny that a person should ignore the fruits of the technical study of Scripture by biblical scholars.
We affirm that a person is not dependent for understanding of Scripture on the expertise of biblical scholars.
We deny that a person should ignore the fruits of the technical study of Scripture by biblical scholars.
Article
XXV
We affirm that the only type of preaching which sufficiently conveys the divine revelation and its proper application to life is that which faithfully expounds the text of Scripture as the Word of God.
We deny that the preacher has any message from God apart from the text of Scripture.
We affirm that the only type of preaching which sufficiently conveys the divine revelation and its proper application to life is that which faithfully expounds the text of Scripture as the Word of God.
We deny that the preacher has any message from God apart from the text of Scripture.
Exposition
The
following paragraphs outline the general theological understanding which the
Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics reflects. They were first drafted as
a stimulus toward that statement. They have now been revised in the light of it
and of many specific suggestions received during the scholars' conference at
which it was drawn up. Though the revision could not be completed in time to
present to the conference, there is every reason to regard its substance as
expressing with broad accuracy the common mind of the signatories of the
statement.
Standpoint
of the Exposition
The
living God, Creator and Redeemer, is a communicator, and the inspired and
inerrant Scriptures which set before us his saving revelation in history are
his means of communicating with us today. He who once spoke to the world
through Jesus Christ his Son speaks to us still in and through his written
Word. Publicly and privately, therefore, through preaching, personal study and
meditation, with prayer and in the fellowship of the body of Christ, Christian
people must continually labor to interpret the Scriptures so that their
normative divine message to us may be properly understood. To have formulated
the biblical concept of Scripture as authoritative revelation in writing, the
God-given rule of faith and life, will be of no profit where the message of
Scripture is not rightly grasped and applied. So it is of vital importance to
detect and dismiss defective ways of interpreting what is written and to
replace them with faithful interpretation of God's infallible Word.
That is
the purpose this exposition seeks to serve. What it offers is basic
perspectives on the hermeneutical task in the light of three convictions.
First, Scripture, being God's own instruction to us, is abidingly true and
utterly trustworthy. Second, hermeneutics is crucial to the battle for biblical
authority in the contemporary church. Third, as knowledge of the inerrancy of
Scripture must control interpretation, forbidding us to discount anything that
Scripture proves to affirm, so interpretation must clarify the scope and
significance of that inerrancy by determining what affirmations Scripture
actually makes.
The
Communion between God and Mankind
God has
made mankind in his own image, personal and rational, for eternal loving
fellowship with himself in a communion that rests on two-way communication: God
addressing to us words of revelation and we answering him in words of prayer
and praise. God's gift of language was given us partly to make possible these
interchanges and partly also that we might share our understanding of God with
others.
In
testifying to the historical process from Adam to Christ whereby God
re-established fellowship with our fallen race, Scripture depicts him as
constantly using his own gift of language to send men messages about what he
would do and what they should do. The God of the Bible uses many forms of
speech: he narrates, informs, instructs, warns, reasons, promises, commands,
explains, exclaims, entreats and encourages. The God who saves is also the God
who speaks in all these ways.
Biblical
writers, historians, prophets, poets and teachers alike, cite Scripture as
God's word of address to all its readers and hearers. To regard Scripture as
the Creator's present personal invitation to fellowship, setting standards for
faith and godliness not only for its own time but for all time, is integral to
biblical faith.
Though
God is revealed in the natural order, in the course of history and in the
deliverances of conscience, sin makes mankind impervious and unresponsive to
this general revelation. And general revelation is in any case only a
disclosure of the Creator as the world's good Lord and just Judge; it does not
tell of salvation through Jesus Christ. To know about the Christ of Scripture
is thus a necessity for that knowledge of God and communion with him to which
he calls sinners today. As the biblical message is heard, read, preached and
taught, the Holy Spirit works with and through it to open the eyes of the
spiritually blind and to instill this knowledge.
God has
caused Scripture so to be written, and the Spirit so ministers with it, that
all who read it, humbly seeking God's help, will be able to understand its
saving message.The Spirit's ministry does not make needless the discipline of
personal study but rather makes it effective.
To deny
the rational, verbal, cognitive character of God's communication to us, to
posit an antithesis as some do between revelation as personal and as
propositional, and to doubt the adequacy of language as we have it to bring us
God's authentic message are fundamental mistakes. The humble verbal form of
biblical language no more invalidates it as revelation of God's mind than the
humble servant-form of the Word made flesh invalidates the claim that Jesus
truly reveals the Father.
To deny
that God has made plain in Scripture as much as each human being needs to know
for his or her spiritual welfare would be a further mistake. Any obscurities we
find in Scripture are not intrinsic to it but reflect our own limitations of
information and insight. Scripture is clear and sufficient both as a source of
doctrine, binding the conscience, and as a guide to eternal life and godliness,
shaping our worship and service of the God who creates, loves and saves.
The
Authority of Scripture
Holy
Scripture is the self-revelation of God in and through the words of men. It is
both their witness to God and God's witness to himself. As the divine-human
record and interpretation of God's redemptive work in history, it is cognitive
revelation, truth addressed to our minds for understanding and response. God is
its source, and Jesus Christ, the Savior, is its center of reference and main
subject matter. Its absolute and abiding worth as an infallible directive for
faith and living follows from its God-givenness (cf. 2 Tim. 3:15-17). Being as
fully divine as it is human, it expresses God's wisdom in all its teaching and
speaks. reliably - that is, infallibly and inerrantly - in every informative
assertion it makes. It is a set of occasional writings, each with its own
specific character and content, which together constitute an organism of
universally relevant truth, namely, bad news about universal human sin and need
answered by good news about a particular first-century Jew who is shown to be
the Son of God and the world's only Savior. The volume which these constituent
books make is as broad as life and bears upon every human problem and aspect of
behavior. In setting before us the history of redemption - the law and the
gospel, God's commands, promises, threats, works and ways; and object-lessons
concerning faith and obedience and their opposites, with their respective
outcomes-Scripture shows us the entire panorama of human existence as God wills
us to see it.
The
authority of Holy Scripture is bound up with the authority of Jesus Christ,
whose recorded words express the principle that the teaching of Israel's
Scriptures (our Old Testament), together with his own teaching and the witness
of the apostles (our New Testament), constitute his appointed rule of faith and
conduct for his followers. He did not criticize his Bible, though he criticized
misinterpretations of it; on the contrary, he affirmed its binding authority
over him and all his disciples (cf. Matt. 5:17-19).To separate the authority of
Christ from that of Scripture and to oppose the one to the other are thus
mistakes. To oppose the authority of one apostle to that of another or the
teaching of an apostle at one time to that of his teaching at another time are
mistakes also.
The Holy
Spirit and the Scriptures
The Holy
Spirit of God, who moved the human authors to produce the biblical books, now
accompanies' them with his power. He led the church to discern their
inspiration in the canonizing process; he continually confirms this discernment
to individuals through the unique impact which he causes Scripture to make upon
them. He helps them as they study, pray, meditate and seek to learn in the church,
to understand and commit themselves to those things which the Bible teaches,
and to know the living triune God whom the Bible presents.
The
Spirit's illumination can only be expected where the biblical text is
diligently studied. Illumination does not yield new truth, over and above what
the Bible says; rather, it enables us to see what Scripture was showing us all
along. Illumination binds our consciences to Scripture as God's Word and brings
joy and worship as we find the Word yielding up to us its meaning. By contrast,
intellectual and emotional impulses to disregard or quarrel with the teaching
of Scripture come not from the Spirit of God but from some other source.
Demonstrable misunderstandings and misinterpretations of Scripture may not be ascribed
to the Spirit's leading.
The Idea
of Hermeneutics
Biblical
hermeneutics has traditionally been understood as the study of right principles
for understanding the biblical text. "Understanding" may stop short
at a theoretical and notional level, or it may advance via the assent and
commitment of faith to become experiential through personal acquaintance with
the God to whom the theories and notions refer. Theoretical understanding of
Scripture requires of us no more than is called for to comprehend any ancient
literature, that is, sufficient knowledge of the language and background and
sufficient empathy with the different cultural context. But there is no
experiential understanding of Scripture - no personal knowledge of the God to
whom it points - without the Spirit's illumination. Biblical hermeneutics
studies the way in which both levels of understanding are attained.'
The Scope
of Biblical Interpretation
The
interpreter's task in broadest definition is to understand both what Scripture
meant historically and what it means for us today, that is, how it bears on our
lives. This task involves three constant activities.
First
comes exegesis, this extracting from the text of what God by the human
writer was expressing to the latter's envisaged readers.
Second
comes integration, the correlating of what each exegetical venture has
yielded with whatever other biblical teaching bears on the matter in hand and
with the rest of biblical teaching as such. Only within this frame of reference
can the full meaning of the exegeted teaching be determined.
Third
comes application of the exegeted teaching, viewed explicitly as God's
teaching, for the correcting and directing of thought and action. Application
is based on the knowledge that God's character and will, man's nature and need,
the saving ministry of Jesus Christ, the experiential aspects of godliness
including the common life of the church and the many-sided relationship between
God and his world including his plan for its history are realities which do not
change with the passing years. It is with these matters that both testaments
constantly deal.
Interpretation
and application of Scripture take place most naturally in preaching, and all
preaching should be based on this threefold procedure. Otherwise, biblical
teaching will be misunderstood and misapplied, and confusion and ignorance
regarding God and his ways will result.
Formal
Rules of Biblical Interpretation
The
faithful use of reason in biblical interpretation is ministerial, not
magisterial; the believing interpreter will use his mind not to impose or
manufacture meaning but to grasp the meaning that is already there in the
material itself. The work of scholars who, though not themselves Christians,
have been able to understand biblical ideas accurately will be a valuable
resource in the theoretical part of the interpreter's task.
1.
Interpretation
should adhere to the literal sense, that is, the single literary meaning
which each passage carries. The initial quest is always for what God's penman
meant by what he wrote. The discipline of interpretation excludes all attempts
to go behind the text, just as it excludes all reading into passages of
meanings which cannot be read out of them and all pursuit of ideas sparked off
in us by the text which do not arise as part of the author's own - expressed
flow of thought. Symbols and figures of speech must be recognized for what they
are, and arbitrary allegorizing (as distinct from the drawing out of typology
which was demonstrably in the writer's mind) must be avoided.
2.
The
literal sense of each passage should be sought by the grammatical-historical
method, that is, by asking what is the linguistically natural way to
understand the text in its historical setting. Textual; historical, literary
and theological study, aided by linguistic skills - philological, semantic,
logical - is the way forward here. Passages should be exegeted in the context
of the book of which they are part, and the quest for the writer's own meaning,
as distinct from that of his known or supposed sources, must be constantly
pursued. The legitimate use of the various critical disciplines is not to call
into question the integrity or truth of the writer's meaning but simply to help
us determine it.
3.
Interpretation
should adhere to the principle of harmony in the biblical material.
Scripture exhibits a wide diversity of concepts and viewpoints within a common
faith and an advancing disclosure of divine truth within the biblical period.
These differences should not be minimized, but the unity which underlies the
diversity should not be lost sight of at any point. We should look to Scripture
to interpret Scripture and deny as a matter of method that particular texts,
all of which have the one Holy Spirit as their source, can be genuinely discrepant
with each other. Even when we cannot at present demonstrate their harmony in a
convincing way, we should proceed on the basis that they are in fact harmonious
and that fuller knowledge will show this.
4.
Interpretation
should be canonical, that is, the teaching of the Bible as a whole
should always be viewed as providing the framework within which our
understanding of each particular passage must finally be reached and into which
it must finally be fitted.
Valuable
as an aid in determining the literal meaning of biblical passages is the
discipline of genre criticism, which seeks to identify in terms of style, form
and content, the various literary categories to which the biblical books and
particular. passages within. them belong. The literary genre in which each
writer creates his text belongs in part at least to his own culture and will be
clarified through knowledge of that culture. Since mistakes about genre lead to
large-scale misunderstandings of biblical material, it is important that this
particular discipline not be neglected.
The
Centrality of Jesus Christ in the Biblical Message
Jesus
Christ and the saving grace of God in him are the central themes of the Bible.
Both Old and New Testaments bear witness to Christ, and the New Testament
interpretation of the Old Testament points to him consistently. Types and
prophecies in the Old Testament anticipated his coming, his atoning death, his
resurrection, his reign and his return. The office and ministry of priests,
prophets and kings, the divinely instituted ritual and sacrificial offerings,
and the patterns of redemptive action in Old Testament history, all had typical
significance as foreshadowings of Jesus. Old Testament believers looked forward
to his coming and lived and were saved by faith which had Christ and his
kingdom in view, just as Christians today are saved by faith in Christ, the
Savior, who died for our sins and who now lives and reigns and will one day
return. That the church and kingdom of Jesus Christ are central to the plan of
God which Scripture reveals is not open to question, though opinions divide as
to the precise way in which church and kingdom relate to each other. Any way of
interpreting Scripture which misses its consistent Christ-centeredness must be
judged erroneous.
Biblical
and Extra-biblical Knowledge
Since all
facts cohere, the truth about them must be coherent also; and since God, the
author of all Scripture, is also the Lord of all facts, there can in principle
be no contradiction between a right understanding of what Scripture says and a
right account of any reality or event in the created order. Any appearance of
contradiction here would argue misunderstanding or inadequate knowledge, either
of what Scripture really affirms or of what the extra-biblical facts really are.
Thus it would be a summons to reassessment and further scholarly inquiry.
Biblical
Statements and Natural Science
What the
Bible says about the facts of nature is as true and trustworthy as anything
else it says. However, it speaks of natural phenomena as they are spoken of in
ordinary language, not in the explanatory technical terms of modern science; it
accounts for natural events in terms of the action of God, not in terms of
causal links within the created order; and it oflen describes natural processes
figuratively and poetically, not analytically and prosaically as modern science
seeks to do. This being so, differences of opinion as to the correct scientific
account to give of natural facts and events which Scripture celebrates can
hardly be avoided.
It should
be remembered, however, that Scripture was given to reveal God, not to address
scientific issues in scientific terms, and that, as it does not use the
language of modern science, so it does not require scientific knowledge about
the internal processes of God's creation for the understanding of its essential
message about God and ourselves. Scripture interprets scientific knowledge by
relating it to the revealed purpose and work of God, thus establishing an
ultimate context for the study and reform of scientific ideas. It is not for
scientific theories to dictate what Scripture may and may not say, although
extra-biblical information will sometimes helpfully expose a misinterpretation
of Scripture
In fact,
interrogating biblical statements concerning nature in the light of scientific
knowledge about their subject matter may help toward attaining a more precise
exegesis of them. For though exegesis must be controlled by the text itself,
not shaped by extraneous considerations, the exegetical process is constantly
stimulated by questioning the text as to whether it means this or that.
Norm and
Culture in the Biblical Revelation
As we
find in Scripture unchanging truths about God and his will expressed in a
variety of verbal forms, so we find them applied in a variety of cultural and
situational contexts. Not all biblical teaching about conduct is normative for
behavior today. Some applications of moral principles are restricted to a
limited audience, the nature and extent of which Scripture itself specifies.
One task of exegesis is to distinguish these absolute and normative truths from
those aspects of their recorded application which are relative to changing
situations. Only when this distinction is drawn can we hope to see how the same
absolute truths apply to us in our own culture.
To fail
to see how a particular application of an absolute principle has been
culturally determined (for instance, as most would agree, Paul's command that
Christians greet each other with a kiss) and to treat a revealed absolute as
culturally relative (for instance, as again most would agree, God's prohibition
in the Pentateuch of homosexual activity) would both be mistakes. Though
cultural developments, including conventional values and latter-day social
change, may legitimately challenge traditional ways of applying biblical
principles, they may not be used either to modify those principles in
themselves or to evade their application altogether.
In
cross-cultural communication a further step must be taken, the Christian
teacher must re-apply revealed absolutes to persons living in a culture that is
not the teacher's own. The demands of this task highlight the importance of his
being clear on what is absolute in the biblical presentation of the will and
work of God and what is a culturally-relative application of it. Engaging in
the task may help him toward clarity at this point by making him more alert
than before to the presence in Scripture of culturally-conditioned applications
of truth, which have to be adjusted according to the cultural variable.
Encountering
God Through His Word
The
twentieth century has seen many attempts to assert the instrumentality of
Scripture in bringing to us God's Word while yet denying that that Word has
been set forth for all time in the words of the biblical text. These views
regard the text as the fallible human witness by means of which God fashions
and prompts those insights which he gives us through preaching and Bible study.
But for the most part these views include a denial that the Word of God is
cognitive communication, and thus they lapse inescapably into impressionistic
mysticism. Also, their denial that Scripture is the objectively given Word of
God makes the relation of that Word to the text indefinable and hence permanently
problematical. This is true of all current forms of neeorthodox and
existentialist theology, including the so-called "new hermeneutic,"
which is an extreme and incoherent version of the approach described.
The need
to appreciate the cultural differences between our world and that of the
biblical writers and to be ready to find that God through his Word is
challenging the presuppositions and limitations of our present outlook, are two
emphases currently associated with the "new hermeneutic." But both
really belong to the understanding of the interpretative task which this
exposition has set out.
The same
is true of the emphasis laid in theology of the existentialist type on the
reality of transforming encounter with God and his Son, Jesus Christ, through the
Scriptures. Certainly, the crowning glory of the Scriptures is that they do in
fact mediate life-giving fellowship with God incarnate, the living Christ of
whom they testify, the divine Savior whose words "are spirit and... are
life" (John6:63). But there is no Christ save the Christ of the Bible, and
only to the extent that the Bible's presentation of Jesus and of God's plan
centering upon him is trusted can genuine spiritual encounter with Jesus Christ
ever be expected to take place. It is by means of disciplined interpretation of
a trusted Bible that the Father and Son, through the Spirit, make themselves
known to sinful men. To such transforming encounters the hermeneutical
principles and procedures stated here both mark and guard the road.
The original
document is located in the Dallas Theological Seminary Archives
No comments:
Post a Comment