Understanding Scripture An Adventist Approach

.biblical,

Understanding Scripture An Adventist Approach George W. Reid, Editor

Biblical Research Institute Studies, vol. 1

Biblical Research Institute Studies, vol. 1 BS 5 2 0 . R45 U53 eng 2006 v . 1 c.3 R e i d , George W. Understanding Scripture / George W. R e i d

Understanding Scripture An Adventist Approach George W. Reid, Editor

Biblical Research Institute General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Silver Spring, MD 20904 2005

Copyright © 2006, by the Biblical Research Institute General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Silver Spring, MD 20904 Scriptures credited to CJB are from the Complete Jewish Bible, copyright © 1998 by David H. Stern. Published by Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc. P.O. Box 615, Clarksville, Maryland 21029, USA. Used by permission. Scripture quotations credited to ESV are from The Holy Bible, English Stan¬ dard Version, copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. A l l rights reserved. Scripture texts credited to NAB are from The New American Bible, copyright © 1970, by the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington, D.C., and are used by permission o f copyright owner. A l l rights reserved. Scripture quotations marked NASB are from the New American Standard Bible®, © Copyright 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by the Lockman Foundation. Used by permission. Scriptures credited to NCV are from The Holy Bible, New Century Version, copyright © 1987, 1988, 1991 by Word Publishing, Dallas, Texas 75039. Used by permission. Texts credited to NEB are from The New English Bible, copyright © The Delegates of the Oxford University Press and the Syndics of the Cambridge Uni¬ versity Press 1961, 1970. Reprinted by permission. Quotations designated NET are from the Holy Bible: The NET Bible ® {New English Translation ™). Copyright © 2001 by Biblical Studies Press, L.L.C. www.netbible.com. A l l rights reserved. Quoted by permission. Texts credited to N I V are from the Holy Bible, New International Version, copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Bible Publishers. Texts credited to NKJV are from The New King James Version, copyright © 1979, 1980, 1982, Thomas Nelson, Inc., Publishers. Used by permission. A l l rights reserved. Scriptures quoted from NLV are from The New Life Version, copyright © 1969, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986. Used by permission. Texts credited to REB are from The Revised English Bible, copyright © Ox¬ ford University Press and Cambridge University Press, 1989. Reprinted by per¬ mission.

Printed in the U.S.A. by the Review and Herald Publishing Association Hagerstown, M D 21740

ISBN 978-0-925675-17-0

Editor George W. Reid

Associate Editor Gerhard Pfandl

B R I C O M Members 2000-2005 Niels-Erik Andreasen John T. Baldwin Matthew A. Bediako Ivan T. Blazen Keith Burton Lael O. Caesar Jaime Castrejon Gordon E. Christo JoAnn M . Davidson Richard M . Davidson Ganoune Diop Ron duPreez Larry R. Evans Francisco Gayoba Daniel Heinz Eugene Hsu Greg A. King Miroslav M . Kis

George R. Knight Robert E. Lemon John K. McVay Ekkehardt Miiller Daegeuk Nam James R. Nix Brempong Owusu-Antwi Jon K. Paulien Jan Paulsen Paul B. Petersen Roberto Pereyra Gerhard Pfandl George W. Reid Ângel M . Rodriguez ArturA. Stele Ted N . C. Wilson Randall W. Younker E. Edward Zinke

Contributors John Τ. Baldwin, Ph.D. Lael O. Caesar, Ph.D. Fernando L. Canale, Ph.D.

Richard M . Davidson, Ph.D. Ganoune Diop, Ph.D. Ron du Preez, D.Min. Th.D. Frank M . Hasel, Ph.D. Greg A. King, Ph.D. Gerald A. Klingbeil, D.Litt.

Ekkehardt Muller, D.Min. Th.D. Jon K. Paulien, Ph.D.

Gerhard Pfandl, Ph.D. George W. Reid, Th.D. George E. Rice, Ph.D. Ângel Μ. Rodriguez, Th.D. Tom Shepherd, Dr.Ph.H., Ph.D. Alberto R. Timm, Ph.D.

Peter M . van Bemmelen, Th.D.

Professor of Theology, Theological Seminary, Andrews University Professor of Old Testament, Andrews University Professor of Theology and Philosophy. Theological Seminary, Andrews University Professor of Old Testament, Theological Seminary, Andrews University Professor of Old and New Testament, Oakwood College Pastor, Michigan Conference, North American Division Professor of Theology, Bogenhofen Seminary Professor of Old Testament, Southern Adventist University Professor of Old Testament and Ancient Near Eastern Studies, River Plate Adventist University Associate Director, Biblical Research Institute Professor of New Testament, Theological Seminary, Andrews University Associate Director, Biblical Research Institute FormerDirector,BiblicalResearchInstitute Pastor, Chesapeake Conference, North American Division Director, Biblical Research Institute Professor of Religion, Union College Professor of Church History and Historical Theology, Brazil Adventist University Emeritus Professor of Theology, Theological Seminary, Andrews University IV

Dedication

It is an honor and a pleasure to dedicate this book to RAOULDEDEREN In appreciation for his many years o f superior service as a member o f the Biblical Research Institute Committee. In recognition o f his exemplary Christian character and the depth o f his thought that have made h i m one o f the most important and influential theologians i n Seventh-day Adventist history. In gratitude for his theological contributions i n the classroom and i n his writings i n the area o f the biblical doctrine o f revelation and inspiration. The members o f the Biblical Research Institute Committee

Contents Contributors Dedication Foreword Preface Abbreviations Chapter I Historical Background o f Adventist Biblical Interpretation —Alberto R. Timm Chapter I I Faith, Reason, and the H o l y Spirit i n Hermeneutics —John T. Baldwin Chapter I I I Presuppositions in the Interpretation o f Scripture —Frank

M. Hasel

Chapter I V Revelation and Inspiration —Fernando Canale Chapter V The Authority o f Scripture —Peter M. van Bemmelen Chapter V I The Text and Canon o f Scripture —Gerald A. Klingbeil Chapter V I I Guidelines for the Interpretation o f Scripture —Ekkehardt Muller Chapter V I I I Innerbiblical Interpretation: Reading the Scriptures Intertextually —Ganoune Diop

Vll

Chapter I X Interpreting O l d Testament Historical Narrative —Greg A. King

1

5

3

Chapter X Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature —Gerhard Pfandl and Ângel M. Rodriguez

1

6

3

Chapter X I Interpreting O l d Testament Prophecy —Richard M. Davidson

1

8

3

Chapter X I I Interpretation o f the Gospels and Epistles —George E. Rice

2

0

5

Chapter X I I I Interpretation o f Biblical Types, Parables, and Allegories —Tom Shepherd

2

2

3

Chapter X I V The Hermeneutics o f Biblical Apocalyptic —Jon K. Paulien

2

4

5

Chapter X V Hermeneutics and Culture —Lael O. Caesar

2

7

1

Chapter X V I Interpreting and A p p l y i n g Biblical Ethics —Ron du Preez

2

8

5

Chapter X V I I Ellen G. White and Hermeneutics —Gerhard Pfandl

3

0

9

Appendix A Methods o f Bible Study

3

2

9

Appendix Β

3

3

9

Foreword Seventh-day Adventists are a community o f believers shaped by the Scriptures in their doctrinal convictions and practices, as w e l l as in their daily interaction w i t h others. The reading and the study o f the Bible, ac¬ companied by prayer, is a central spiritual discipline in the life o f the church. This spiritual discipline should be exemplified and promoted by church leaders, teachers, pastors, and church elders throughout the world. The Biblical Research Institute o f the General Conference has always been very interested in the vital role o f the Bible in nurturing the commu¬ nity o f believers. Consequently, it has sought to provide materials for study that w i l l deepen the church members' understanding o f the Bible and w i l l train them i n how to study it by themselves. This new volume, produced under the auspices o f the Biblical Research Institute and the scholars o f the Biblical Research Institute Committee, addresses the question o f how to interpret the Scriptures. Its fundamental purpose is to stimulate the study o f the Scriptures, using basic principles o f interpretation that w i l l minimize, and, i f possible, eliminate, arbitrary interpretations o f the Word o f God.

The Use o f the Modified Version o f the Historical-Critical Approach by Adventist Scholars —Ângel M. Rodriguez Scripture Index

3

53

Index o f Authors

3

^7

Subject Index

3

viii

5

9

This volume introduces the readers to a series o f principles o f biblical interpretation that is compatible with the Adventist high view o f the Bible as the Word o f God. B y including chapters dealing with the nature o f rev¬ elation, inspiration, and the authority o f the Bible, it reveals the scriptural presuppositions that Seventh-day Adventists bring to the text as they seek to obtain a better understanding o f the Bible and o f their own presuppositions. The Biblical Research Institute is particularly grateful to George W. Reid for accepting the task as editor o f this volume. His 18 years as Di¬ rector o f the Institute qualified h i m in a special way to edit this impor¬ tant book. We are also grateful to Gerhard Pfandl, associate editor, and to Marlene Bacchus, desktop publishing specialist, for the many hours they spent w i t h George Reid i n preparing this book for publication. The church at large, and i n particular the community o f Adventist Bible teachers, w i l l always remain indebted to them for the excellent job done. M a y the church be continually blessed through the pages o f this book. Â n g e l Μ . Rodriguez Director Biblical Research Institute IX

Preface Seventh-day Adventist faith and praxis rest on the Scriptures as final authority, evidenced by the fact that a statement on the Bible heads the official statement o f church beliefs. We are a people o f the Book i n which God has spoken to humanity i n terms intelligible to all, yet transmitted w i t h i n our language and experience. The Scriptures unveil an astonishing panorama o f insights that address¬ es every element o f the human need to know. There God reveals Himself, His character, purposes, historic acts, and w i l l . He traces the elements o f the cosmos, including humanity's origins, redemption i n Christ, and the prom¬ ise o f an ultimate destiny i n His kingdom. This sweeping world view stands absolutely without peer, flooding our intellect and emotions with ultimate meaning. Without the Word o f God, our understanding would be reduced to conjectural guesswork, built on a shifting analysis o f our environment. Given the Word's supreme manifestation i n Christ Jesus, i n whom "the w o r d was made flesh and dwelt among us," we see His person expressed i n human terms. But its written form must be, and w i l l be, interpreted anew by each generation. This is the task o f hermeneutics and the prime reason this book was written. The first Biblical Research Institute book on hermeneutics appeared i n 1974. Since then, however, great changes have taken place i n our world, exerting a heavy impact on biblical studies and on interpretation. Instant communication has erased the former isolation found i n many parts o f the world. I n such a setting this new publication comes to aid pastors and laypersons who seek a sound approach to God's Word. Today we face issues that demand attention and simply must be ad¬ dressed. Postmodern trends reach beyond historically based studies to the way i n which religious meaning arises w i t h i n the person to become the controlling force i n interpretation. Contemporary thinking largely aban¬ dons the idea that the central purpose o f the Scriptures is to communicate messages objectively from the sovereign God. As far as possible, this book seeks to uncover modes o f interpretation that arise from the Scriptures themselves, which requires affirmation o f the universality o f final truth, w i t h God as its ultimate source. Why is all this important? The very work o f the church i n fulfilling the work that Jesus gave it rests for both message and mission on what χ

xi

we conceive His commission to include. H o w we interpret Scripture is o f huge importance. W i l l the Scriptures speak with authority in the sense o f providing a model, transcendent and applicable to all cultures and to all people, or are they simply a pool o f ideas from which the religiously inclined may draw to craft their personal conceptions o f what really mat¬ ters? Sound interpretation leads to understanding, and that which we un¬ derstand controls our actions. So this book addresses the very foundation stones from which the Bible i n the Christian life holds a commanding position. As a reader y o u w i l l find here a series o f specialized chapters, each written w i t h a prayerful concern open to the guidance o f the Spirit. A l l the authors are highly qualified Adventist scholars, committed in stewardship to the L o r d Jesus, writing for the purpose o f helping every reader o f the Scriptures recover the intent incorporated i n God's Word. While its giving was couched in human settings, beyond them we seek the eternal truths that reveal God's character and purposes. The writers o f these chapters come originally from many countries and cultures yet share a common commitment to Christ and to the written Word. They constitute a living example o f how the Scriptures reach out to express the universal message o f God. We extend our gratitude to the authors for their w o r k and for their patience with an editorial process that often abridged their work by as much as fifty percent to keep the final product w i t h i n a reasonable length. Especially, we are obliged to the staff o f the Biblical Research Institute, under whose auspices we present this book to all who sincerely seek to understand God and to put into living practice the treasures o f His Word. George W. Reid Director Biblical Research Institute 1984-2001

Xll

Abbreviations

Ellen G . White Works AA CD CH COL CSW CT CW DA Ed EGW'88 Ev EW FE GC LDE LS MB MCP MH MR MYP PC PP SC SG PM SM SP SSW Τ TM UL

The Acts of the Apostles Counsels on Diet and Foods Counsels on Health Christ's Object Lessons Counsels on Sabbath School Work Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students Counsels to Writers and Editors The Desire of Ages Education Ellen G. White 1888 General Conference Materials Evangelism Early Writings Fundamentals o f Christian Education The Great Controversy Last Day Events Life Sketches of Ellen G. White Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing Mind, Character, and Personality (2 vols.) The Ministry of Healing Manuscript Release Messages to Young People Paulson Collection Patriarchs and Prophets Steps to Christ Spiritual Gifts (4 vols.) Publishing Ministry Selected Messages (3 vols.) The Spirit of Prophecy (4 vols.) Sabbath School Worker Testimonies for the Church (9 vols.) Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers The Upward Look

xiii

Zeph Hag Zech Mai Matt Mark Luke John Acts Rom 1-2 Cor Gal Eph

Other References AR BC CJB ESV GCB JATS LCC LW LXX MS NAB NASB NCV NEB NET NIV NKJV NLV NT OT REB RH RI ST

Adventist Review The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary Complete Jewish Bible English Standard Version General Conference Bulletin Journal of Adventist Theology Library of Christian Classics Luther's Works Septuagint Manuscript New American Bible New American Standard Bible New Century Version New English Bible New English Translation New International Version New King James Version New Life Version New Testament Old Testament Revised English Bible Review and Herald Revelation-Inspiration Signs of the Times

Biblical Books Gen Exod Lev Num Deut Josh Judg Ruth 1-2 Sam 1-2 Kgs 1-2 Chron Ezra Neh Esth Job Ps(s)

Prov Eccl Song Isa Jer Lam Ezek Dan Hos Joel Amos Obad Jonah Mic Nah Hab

Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth 1-2 Samuel 1-2 Kings 1-2 Chronicles Ezra Nehemiah Esther Job Psalms xiv

Proverbs Ecclesiastes Song of Solomon Isaiah Jeremiah Lamentations Ezekiel Daniel Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah Micah Nahum Habakkuk

Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Malachi Matthew Mark Luke John Acts Romans 1 -2 Corinthians Galatians Ephesians

Phil Col 1-2 Thess 1-2 Tim Titus Phlm Heb Jas 1-2 Pet 1-2-3 John Jude Rev

Hebrew Alphabet ‫א‬ ‫ב‬

‫י‬

= b

‫ח‬

Philippians Colossians 1 -2 Thessalonians 1 -2 Timothy Titus Philemon Hebrew James 1-2 Peter 1-2-3 John Jude Revelation

Masoretic Vowel Pointings

= h

‫פ‬

= Ρ

= a

‫ = ט‬ţ

‫פ‬

= Ε

= ă

‫ר‬

= δ

a

‫ב‬

= b

‫י‬

= y

‫צ‬

= ş

‫ג‬

= g

‫כ‬

= k

‫ק‬

= q

‫ג‬

= g

‫כ‬

= k

‫ר‬

= r

‫ד‬

= d

‫ל‬

= l

'‫ = ש‬s

‫י‬... ‫י‬.. = έ

‫ד‬

= d

‫מ‬

= m

‫ = ש‬s

= i

‫ה‬

= h

‫נ‬

= η

‫ = רנ‬t

‫ו‬

= w

‫ס‬

= s

‫ת‬

‫ז‬

= ζ

‫ע‬

=

ο

‫ו‬ ..

= î

= e

= δ = u

‫ו‬

= ύ

= t

‫׳‬

Greek Alphabet

a

= a

c

= ζ

λ

= /

π

= Ρ

Φ = ph

β

= b

η

= e

μ

= m

Ρ

= r

χ

γ

= g

θ

= th

ν

= η

σ,ς= s

Ψ = ps

δ

= d

ι

= i

ξ

= χ

τ

= t

ω = δ

€

= e

κ

= k

0

= 0

υ

= y

‫׳‬

XV

= ch

= h

CHAPTER I

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF ADVENTIST BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION Alberto R. T i m m

Introduction The Christian church was originally built upon the hermeneutical plat¬ form o f the Bible as its o w n interpreter. Soon after the apostolic period, however, the church began to move from that platform by accepting certain nonbiblical hermeneutical alternatives. The Scriptures came to be reinter¬ preted i n many Christian circles from perspectives drawn from surrounding pagan cultures, cultural traditions, ecclesiastical authority, human reason, and even personal experiences. Major struggles and tensions arose between those who subscribed to such hermeneutical alternatives and those who tried to reorient the church back to its original hermeneutical platform. In brief, this historical overview highlights some o f the major hermeneutical turning points w i t h i n the Christian church that provide the larger background for the development o f the Seventh-day Adventist interpreta¬ tion o f Scripture.

1. F r o m Judaism to Modern Christianity Jewish Background A defining historical landmark o f the Jewish religion was the BabyIonian captivity o f Judah i n the sixth century B.C. Prior to that event, the Israelites were strongly tempted to forsake the precepts o f the law and the warnings o f the prophets and to embrace the pagan components of the sur¬ rounding Canaanite culture. Realizing that they and their forefathers were taken captive because o f their transgressions o f the law and o f the Sabbath (Jer 17:19-27; 2 Chron 36:15-21), post-exilic Jews moved increasingly toward a more rigid obedience o f the law and the Sabbath as defined by tradition. These extra-biblical rules tended to overload and overshadow some basic teachings o f the Scriptures (Matt 15:5-9). XVI

1

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation

But geographical, cultural, and religious factors within Judaism helped to develop three major distinctive approaches to Scripture, all o f which flourished in the first century A . D . Rabbinic Judaism was centered in Jerusalem and Judea, promoting obedience to the Mosaic Law and to the Hebrew Scriptures in order to protect Jewish tradition and identity from being diluted by the Greco-Roman culture. Hellenistic Judaism, on the other hand, while widely dispersed, manifested itself particularly in the large Jewish community o f Alexandria, Egypt. Strongly influenced by Philo, this branch adopted allegorical interpretations o f Scripture to accommodate its beliefs to the Platonic expression o f Greek philosophy. The ascetic Qumran community, on the northwestern shore o f the Dead Sea, assumed a strong eschatological tenor, trying to show how contem¬ porary events relating to their own community fulfilled OT prophecies. 1

2

3

Christianity actually was born w i t h i n the context o f Rabbinic Judaism and expanded itself later into the realms o f Hellenistic Judaism before facing the greater challenges o f paganism that characterized most o f the Roman Empire. Ancient and Medieval C h u r c h

B y itself, the allegorical method w o u l d have carried the Christian church into a pluralistic interpretation o f the Scriptures that would have distorted its religious identity. However, uncertainty created by interpret¬ ing the Word through various allegorical parallels left many dissatisfied, leading them to seek a single authoritative voice. This role the church hierarchy, particularly the Bishop o f Rome, stepped i n to fill, thereby ad¬ vancing the church's claim to be the only true interpreter o f Scripture. Ecclesiastical interests began to overrule true faithfulness to the Word o f God, building a strong nonbiblical hermeneutical tradition. Biblical interpretation in the Middle Ages was dominated by Origen's allegorical method, which viewed every Bible passage as having four sens¬ es: "literal (or historical), allegorical (or doctrinal), moral (or (Topological), and anagogical (or eschatological)." W i t h such a variety o f interpretative options and under the influence o f Irenaeus's elevation o f tradition above the Scriptures, the Medieval church could easily claim biblical support for many o f its nonbiblical teachings. B y elevating ecclesiastical tradition to the same level o f authority as the Bible, the church was able to transfer many o f the salvific prerogatives from Christ and the Scriptures to herself and her sacramental system. 4

Not all Bible interpreters accepted the allegorical method. Already in the fourth century A . D . , the Christian catechetical school o f Antioch i n Syr¬ ia was teaching "the historical-grammatical understanding o f Scripture: that every passage has one plain, simple meaning conveyed by its grammar and words." During the Middle Ages, pre-Reformers, such as John Wycliffe, John Huss, Jerome o f Prague, and the Waldenses, tried to restore the author¬ ity o f the Scriptures above ecclesiastical decisions. The Dutch "Devotio Moderna," or Brethren o f the Common Life (founded by Gerard Groote in the 14th century A . D . ) , were deeply concerned w i t h their own spiritual life and their personal understanding o f Scripture. However, it was only i n the first half o f the sixteenth century A . D . that a more widespread hermeneutical reformation reinstalled the normative authority o f the Scriptures.

Christ and His apostles broke w i t h the hermeneutic limits o f current Judaism by emphasizing the exclusive authority o f Scripture over all other sources o f religious knowledge (Matt 5:18). The high value they gave to Scripture and their balanced interpretation o f its content are evident not only i n the way Christ and the N T writers interpreted the Hebrew Scriptares but also in the way they faced certain hermeneutical distortions i n the Judaism o f their time. Christ condemned several Rabbinic traditions and external rituals as traditions that "invalidated the w o r d o f God" (Matt 15:6, N A S B ; cf. 23:1-38). He also opposed any cultural accommodation o f the Word o f God that would nullify its sanctifying power (John 17:6-23), as the Hellenistic Jews did with their own beliefs. Against a highly ascetic form o f religion, as practiced i n the Qumran community, Christ sent out His fol¬ lowers to preach the gospel to " a l l nations" (Matt 28:19).

Reformation and Post-Reformation

I n John 17 Christ prayed that His followers should fulfill their mission in the w o r l d without being of the w o r l d (vss. 9-19). But, like Hellenistic Judaism, post-Apostolic Christianity also lost much o f its original bibli¬ cal identity by accommodating Greco-Roman culture. Even prominent leaders, such as Irenaeus, Origen, and Augustine, give evidence i n their writings o f such changes. M a n y Christian interpreters found i n the Alex¬ andrian allegorical method enough latitude for their syncretistic accom¬ modation o f Scripture to popular culture.

The Reformation o f the sixteenth century was first and foremost a hermeneutical Reformation. I t was able to shake the authority o f the Ro¬ man Catholic Church and generate an enduring ecclesiastical Reforma¬ tion. Martin Luther broke w i t h many medieval extra-biblical traditions and w i t h the Roman Catholic hermeneutical hegemony, thereby allowing the Bible to speak directly to every believer. The Bible was restored to its central place through the principles o f sola scriptura (the exclusiveness

2

3

5

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation

o f Scripture) and tota scriptura (the totality o f Scripture). Once more the Scriptures were allowed to interpret themselves through the histori¬ cal-grammatical method; and their prophetic-apocalyptic elements began to explain the ongoing history o f the Christian church using the historicist approach. Except for salvation by grace through faith (Eph 2:8-10), the Magisterial Reformers, such as Luther, Calvin, and Z w i n g l i , did not go far toward restoring several other major Bible doctrines that had become ob¬ scured following the apostolic period. But they placed on track renewed hermeneutic principles that eventually w o u l d lead to such a restoration. 6

The w o r k o f Luther and other sixteenth century Reformers such as Z w i n g l i , Bullinger, Calvin, Beza, and certain o f the radical reformers, earned a far-reaching influence. Despite its inability to move Roman Catholicism beyond the minimal adjustments o f the Council o f Trent (1545-1564), the Reformation launched the Protestant movement w i t h its various branches and denominations. W i t h the intention o f keeping their own identity, those branches and denominations expressed their respec¬ tive beliefs i n parallel creeds and confessions o f faith. Useful as such statements could be for maintaining doctrinal unity, they eventually led to fixed traditions that limited further search for Bible truths. Such traditions remained more or less stabilized i n their teachings until the Enlightenment during which rationalistic philosophy and naturalistic science openly be¬ gan to challenge the trustworthiness o f Scripture.

that history can be understood without taking into consideration a super¬ natural intervention. When applied to the Bible, the historical-critical method led many to reinterpret its references to miracles and to supernatu¬ ral interventions as human rhetorical devices and its message as obsolete in the modern scientific setting. Beginning with the early nineteenth century, many traditional Protes¬ tant denominations began to face increasing polarization between those who continued to uphold the Protestant historical-grammatical under¬ standing o f Scripture and those who subscribed to the modernistic histori¬ cal-critical re-reading o f the Bible. Historical criticism remained domi¬ nant in the scholarly work o f biblical interpreters until the second half o f the twentieth century during which it began to lose influence due to the emergence o f Postmodernism. 8

Yet, at the same time that rationalistic philosophy and naturalistic sci¬ ence began to erode the normative authority o f Scripture, the developing science o f biblical archeology came on the scene supporting, in some in¬ stances, the historicity o f biblical accounts. 9

2. Interpretation F r o m William Miller to Seventh-day Adventists William Miller

Modern Christianity The latter half o f the eighteenth century and the first half o f the nine¬ teenth century brought a radical paradigm shift to Western culture. M a n y o f the thought leaders o f the time began to replace belief in supernatural revelation w i t h naturalistic methods. H o w to understand the Bible became the core o f a strong debate among those who tried to defend its supernatu¬ ral origin and its normative authority; those who chose to regard it as sim¬ ply a product o f ancient cultures; and those who sought to reread it from the perspective o f modern rationalistic culture.

The late eighteenth, and early nineteenth, centuries witnessed an un¬ precedented worldwide revival o f interest i n the biblical teachings on the second coming o f Christ. M a n y Protestant interpreters were convinced by their study o f biblical prophecies that Christ w o u l d come i n their o w n time. W i l l i a m M i l l e r (1782-1849) o f L o w Hampton, N e w York, a Bap¬ tist, provided one o f the most developed chronological calculations o f the 2300 days o f Daniel 8:14 and other end-time prophecies o f Scripture, concluding that the impending fulfillment o f that event would occur about A . D . 1843. Later, Samuel S. Snow calculated more precisely that the 2300 days would be fulfilled i n the autumn o f 1844 (i.e., on October 22, 1844).

While Hellenistic Jews and medieval Christians employed the alle¬ gorical method to accommodate the Bible toward the respective cultures in which they lived, modern rationalists developed the historical-critical method to accommodate the Bible backwards to the ancient cultures i n which it was produced. Historical criticism relies on literary analysis to study documents from the perspective o f their indebtedness to the par¬ ticular socio-cultural milieu i n which they were produced. The method developed out o f the Enlightenment assumption (or basic presupposition)

M i l l e r studied the Scriptures w i t h i n the hermeneutical framework pro¬ vided by (1) the Protestant principle o f taking the Bible as its own inter¬ preter (sola scriptura), (2) the Protestant grammatical-historical method, and (3) the branch o f the historicist-premillennial Protestant school o f pro¬ phetic interpretation that d i d not accept the dispensational theory o f the restoration o f the Jews to Palestine as a fulfillment o f prophecy. But the

4

5

7

10

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation Millerite use o f this hermeneutical framework was largely restricted to the end-time prophecies o f Scripture, for M i l l e r did not hesitate to urge his fellow believers not to "enter upon the discussion o f questions foreign to that o f the Advent." The fact that Christ did not come on the expected date (October 22, 1844) generated a severe disappointment, fragmenting the Millerite move¬ ment into many different branches. A m o n g them was a small group o f Sabbatarian Adventists who eventually w o u l d organize themselves into the Seventh-day Adventist Church. 11

E a r l y Seventh-day Adventists Sabbatarian Adventists continued, i n general, w i t h the basic prophetic hermeneutics o f M i l l e r but went further by applying his hermeneutics to Scripture as a whole. I n brief, both Millerites and Sabbatarian Adventists subscribed to the sola scriptura principle, but Sabbatarians were far more consistent than other Millerites i n their commitment to tota scriptura. That commitment developed, to a large extent, from two historical realities. Negatively, the disruptive effect o f the October-1844 Disappoint¬ ment seriously damaged the belief system o f the Millerites. Positively, it challenged them to find a convincing explanation for the failure. Most non-Sabbatarian Adventists who did not abandon their hope in the Second Coming assumed that the Disappointment was the result o f a chronologi¬ cal error based on choosing too early a date to end the 2300 days. For them, no further search o f Scripture for such an answer was needed, for the Disappointment dilemma would be solved by waiting for the right fu¬ ture date to arrive. B y contrast, the founders o f Sabbatarian Adventism believed that October 22, 1844, was indeed the right date for the end o f the 2300 days but searched for a more convincing biblical understanding o f the event to take place at the end o f that period. B y studying the Bible they not only found such an answer but also discovered several other abid¬ ing biblical teachings overlooked by Christianity i n general. This led the Sabbatarians to revise and expand the Millerite system o f prophetic inter¬ pretation.

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation cleansing o f the sanctuary o f Daniel 8:14 and the three angels' messag¬ es o f Revelation 14:6-12. The doctrinal components o f that system o f "present truth" comprised both those "eschatological doctrines derived from the historical and/or supra-historical fulfillment o f specific end-time prophecies o f Scripture" and those "historical doctrines o f Scripture that had been overlooked and disregarded by the larger Christian church, but which would be restored at the end o f time." 12

13

Foundational to the development o f the doctrinal system were the hermeneutical principles o f typology and analogy o f Scripture. Believing that the relationship between the O l d and the N e w Testaments was one o f ty¬ pological interrelationship rather than opposition, the Sabbatarians applied the analogy-of-Scripture principle consistently to the whole content o f the Bible. The sanctuary in the OT was treated as a typical shadow o f the sac¬ rifice and o f the priestly ministry o f Christ in the N T (see Heb 7:1-10:18). This all-encompassing typological interrelationship provided a solid over¬ all pattern o f consistency to the understanding o f Scripture. D o n F. Neufeld's study o f Sabbatarian Adventist literature shows that such doctrinal developments were controlled by the seven "general hermeneutical principles": (1) "sola scriptura"; (2) "the unity o f Scrip¬ ture"; (3) " Scripture explains scripture"; (4) "the words o f the Bible must be given their proper meaning"; (5) "attention to context and historical backgrounds"; (6) "the Bible must be interpreted according to the plain, obvious, and literal import unless a figure is employed"; and (7) "the typo¬ logical principle." Neufeld suggests that Seventh-day Adventists subse¬ quently have made only "little change in these principles." 14

C. M e r v y n Maxwell notes that although Sabbatarian Adventists claimed the sola scriptura principle o f the sixteenth-century Reformation, they developed beyond the Reformers i n regard to the fuller restoration o f biblical truth. According to M a x w e l l this was due to the fact that the Sab¬ batarians (1) used a more extensive typology; (2) diminished the impor¬ tance o f tradition more extensively; (3) showed "a keener appreciation for the authority o f the entire Bible"; (4) used the "fulfillment o f prophecy in [the] Advent Movement as a hermeneutical tool"; and (5) "held end-time spiritual gifts i n especially high regard, particularly as manifested i n the ministry o f Ellen G. W h i t e . "

Sabbatarian Adventists significantly moved beyond the Millerite systern o f prophetic interpretation. As noted previously, the Millerite mes¬ sage was focused quite exclusively on the end-time prophecies o f Scrip¬ ture, w i t h special emphasis on the impending fulfillment o f the 2300 days o f Daniel 8:14. The Sabbatarians retained this end-time eschatological emphasis i n the basic hermeneutical framework for the development o f a unique and broader doctrinal system, incorporating the concept o f the

Nevertheless, until the mid-1880s Seventh-day Adventists focused their study o f Scripture more on the Adventist biblical components o f their own message than on those Evangelical biblical doctrines shared by other Chris¬ tians. It was only in the post-1888 emphasis on salvation by grace through faith, stimulated by the Minneapolis General Conference Session (1888), that a true overall doctrinal balance was reached. This means that from

6

7

15

16

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation 1844 to 1888 Seventh-day Adventists went beyond the sixteenth-century Reformers by applying the tota scriptura principle in the process o f restoring overlooked Bible-doctrines but fell short by neglecting the biblical doctrine o f righteousness by faith restored much earlier by the Reformers. Hence, since the 1880s, Seventh-day Adventists have allowed the tota scriptura principle to play a more far-reaching role in biblical interpretation. M u c h o f the Adventist commitment to the sola scriptura and tota scriptura principles was stimulated over the years by Ellen White's ef¬ forts to lead Adventists closer to the Bible (5T 663-668; Ev 256-257). I n a time when cultural rereadings o f the Bible were w i p i n g out the original identity o f many Christian denominations, Ellen White's prophetic voice helped Seventh-day Adventists retain the universal principles o f Scrip¬ ture. While encouraging personal investigation o f the Bible, she also played a major stabilizing influence by identifying both fanatical inter¬ pretations that w o u l d not allow the Bible to speak clearly to the modern m i n d and cultural accommodations that could erode the full identity o f its original message. Aware o f how the historical-critical method (then k n o w n as "higher criticism") was undermining the authority o f the Bible i n some non-Adventist Protestant circles, Ellen White warned in 1903 that "the work o f 'higher criticism,' i n dissecting, conjecturing, reconstructing, is destroying faith in the Bible as a divine revelation; it is robbing God's w o r d o f power to control, uplift, and inspire human lives" (Ed 227). 1919 Bible Conference A t a Bible conference held July 1-19, 1919, several divisive issues surfaced. R. W. Schwarz grasped w e l l the general tenor o f the confer¬ ence i n characterizing it as preoccupied w i t h "debates over nonessentials." Even a superficial review o f the conference records reveals that much discussion and debate took place over such peripheral issues as the identification o f the "daily" (Dan 8:11-12), the interpretation o f the "sev¬ en trumpets" (Rev 8-10), and the identification o f the " k i n g o f the N o r t h " (Daniel 11). But the conference, unfortunately, brought little hermeneutical agreement to Seventh-day Adventist academic circles in addressing those issues. 17

18

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation minimal impact on the church during the next few decades, for the records o f the 1919 Bible Conference and Bible and History Teachers' Council were archived and not brought to public attention until the 1970s. His views were not reflected i n the content o f several subsequent books and pamphlets or i n the Sabbath School quarterlies published during the 1920s and 1930s i n defense o f the Bible as the Word o f God. 19

1952 Bible Conference I n sharp contrast to the 1919 Bible Conference, w i t h its debates on minor issues, the 1952 Bible Conference focused quite exclusively on the basic components o f the Seventh-day Adventist faith. A m o n g the topics addressed at the 1952 Conference were the ways in which archaeology confirmed the Bible, Christ-centered preaching, the Spirit o f Prophecy, the doctrine o f the sanctuary, the atonement at the cross, the covenants and the law, the Three Angels' Messages, Christ's second coming, the health message, and the Great Controversy. The vari¬ ous conference lectures were published subsequently by the Review and Herald i n the two-volume set titled Our Firm Foundation (1953). These volumes gave a permanent form and wide circulation to the content o f the conference. 20

21

Also during the 1950s a team o f thirty-seven Adventist scholars pro¬ duced the seven volumes o f the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (1953-1957). The hermeneutical significance o f the commentary is due largely to the fact that the commentary represented for the first time an ex¬ position o f the entire Bible from a Seventh-day Adventist perspective. It not only integrated into a single work the views o f its different contributors but also provided for different interpretations o f certain Biblical passages. While many Adventist scholars regarded such hermeneutical openness as the best way to avoid dogmatic conclusions and controversies, to others it seemed the first Seventh-day Adventist move towards a more pluralistic reading o f the Scriptures.

More significant was the Bible and History Teachers' Council that was held in conjunction w i t h the 1919 Bible Conference. There, Arthur G. Daniells, president o f the General Conference, criticized openly the concepts o f "verbal inspiration" and "infallibility" o f prophetic writings, producing strong reactions from the audience. But Daniells's views had

To the late 1960s, Seventh-day Adventist scholars concerned them¬ selves w i t h the more practical exegetical task o f interpreting correctly the various passages o f the Scriptures, using hermeneutical principles already defined i n the early days o f the movement. However, beginning w i t h the early 1970s, some Adventist scholars began to express publicly their pref¬ erence for alternative hermeneutical methodologies (specially the histori¬ cal-critical method) i n place o f the historical-grammatical method. The escalation o f this methodological tension demonstrated the need for a new discussion o f the hermeneutical method.

8

9

22

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation 1974 Bible Conferences Consequently, i n 1974, Bible Conferences were held i n three loca¬ tions: Southern Missionary College ( M a y 13-21), Andrews University (June 3-11), and Pacific U n i o n College (June 17-25). Sponsored and organized by the Biblical Research Committee o f the General Confer¬ ence, the eight-day conferences dealt specifically w i t h the topic o f bibli¬ cal hermeneutics from a grammatical-historical perspective. A volume titled A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics and a notebook titled North American Bible Conference 1974 were published for use o f the 2,000 delegates who attended. 11

With the contributions o f several leading Adventist scholars, the Sym¬ posium on Biblical Hermeneutics comprises 14 chapters, classified under five major sections. U n t i l the publication o f the present volume it was the main and most influential Seventh-day Adventist hermeneutical exposit i o n . Although helpful for the Adventist Church, the 1974 Bible Con¬ ferences were unable to settle completely the methodological discussions w i t h i n the denomination. 24

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation 2. Another hermeneutical controversy was precipitated by the intro¬ duction o f the so-called apotelesmatic principle o f prophetic interpreta¬ tion, which provided a hermeneutical shelter for preteristic interpretations o f the little horn as Antiochus Epiphanes. Scholarly responses to this in¬ terpretation o f Daniel 8:14 were provided not only by the Glacier View Sanctuary Review Committee (1980) but also by the Daniel and Revela¬ tion Committee (1982-1992). 26

3. A third hermeneutical challenge developed around certain futuris¬ tic prophetic interpretations based on literal readings o f the three prophetic periods i n Daniel chapter 12 and recurring references i n Revelation 11. Insightful material has been published i n response to such futuristic attempts. 27

4. I n addition to the discussions related to the historical-critical method, the apotelesmatic principle, and futurism, since the 1990s, Sev¬ enth-day Adventist hermeneutics is confronted w i t h elements o f postmod¬ ernism w i t h its "reader-oriented criticism" o f the Scriptures. Such hermeneutical questions have provided opportunity for conţinuing refinement o f methodology i n Adventist circles.

F o u r Contemporary Challenges Summary and Conclusions 1. During the 1980s and 90s, Adventists faced several hermeneutical challenges. One was related to the acceptance by some o f modified versions o f the historical-critical method. The question o f whether the method is adequate for the study o f "inspired" writings divided Seventhday Adventist scholars eventually into three groups: (1) those who accept the method w i t h its basic presuppositions, (2) those who believe that a modified version o f the method can be used apart from its basic presup¬ positions, and (3) those who hold that the method is unacceptable because it cannot be isolated from its basic presuppositions.

This historical overview has highlighted some o f the major hermeneutical turning points within the Christian church that provide the larger background for the development o f the Seventh-day Adventist interpreta¬ tion o f Scripture. The allegorical method used by Hellenistic Jews and by post-apostolic Christians allowed many teachings o f the Scriptures to be accommodated to the Greco-Roman culture. Numerous nonbiblical tradi¬ tions were later officially treated as canonical by the medieval church. But the sixteenth-century Reformation restored basic hermeneutical principles that would allow a more complete recovery o f Bible doctrines. Such doctrinal restoration took place over time among Seventh-day Adventists through adoption o f both the Protestant grammatical-historical method o f Biblical interpretation and the Protestant historicist school o f prophetic interpretation.

The 1986 Annual Council o f the General Conference, convened i n Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, voted an official document titled "Methods o f Bible Study," in which Adventist Bible students were urged "to avoid relying on the use o f the presuppositions and the resultant deductions associated w i t h the Historical-critical Method." Under the assumption that "human reason is subject to the Bible, not equal to or above i t , " the document stat¬ ed that "even a modified use" o f the historical-critical method "that retains the principle o f criticism which subordinates the Bible to human reason is unacceptable to Adventists." Despite its official nature, "Methods o f Bible Study" did not convince all Adventist scholars to avoid using the histori¬ cal-critical method.

Since the early 1970s a small number o f scholars has tried more open¬ ly to introduce a more contemporary appeal by selectively adopting hermeneutical tools, such as elements from the historical-critical method, and revised methods i n prophetic interpretation that incorporate preterist, fitturist, and postmodern components. This has generated tensions between the disruptive effects o f these new hermeneutical methodologies and the

10

11

25

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation main Adventist doctrinal teachings based on the sola scriptura

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation and tota

scriptura principles. Church history exhibits numerous instances i n which Christian de¬ nominations have allowed the authority o f the Scriptures to be overshad¬ owed by human traditions, reason, personal experience, and contempo¬ rary culture. Adventists are convinced God has raised up the Seventh-day Adventist Church, w i t h i n the challenges o f the "last days" (2 T i m 3:1), to restore and uplift the authority o f His Word and to promote a system o f biblical interpretation derived from the Scripture itself.

References 1. Important Rabbinic rules of that period can be found in Richard Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period (Grand Rapids, M I : Wm B. Eerdmans, 1975), pp. 19-50. 2. Jewish writer (first century A.D.). He blended OT monotheism with Greek philosophy and used the allegorical method in the interpretation of Scripture. Many early Christian interpreters of Scripture followed his lead, e.g., Ambrose and Origen. 3. William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Dallas, TX: Word, 1993), pp. 21-28. 4. Ibid., p. 38. 5. Ibid., p. 35. 6. The historicist school of prophetic interpretation holds that each apocalyptic prophecy of the Bible has a specific historical fulfillment between the time it was given and the final establishment of God's everlasting kingdom. Prophetic time periods are interpreted on the basis of the year-day principle. For a comprehensive history of the development of historicism, see LeRoy E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers: The Historical Development of Prophetic Interpretation, 4 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1946¬ 1954). 7. See Edgar Krentz, The Historical-Critical Method (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1975), pp. 35-54. Gerhard Maier, Biblical Hermeneutics (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1994), pp. 209-306. 8. For expositions of postmodern biblical hermeneutics, see e.g., Edgar V. McKnight, Postmodern Use of the Bible: The Emergence of Reader-oriented Criticism (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1988); Anthony C. Thiselton, New Horizons in Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids, M I : Zondervan, 1992); George Aichele, et al., The Postmodern Bible: The Bible and Culture Collective (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995). 9. Insightful expositions on how Archeology has confirmed the Bible are provided, for example, by Alfred J. Hoerth, Archaeology and the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, M I : Baker Books, 1998); Kenneth Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, M I : Wm B. Eerdmans, 2003). John McRay, 12

Archaeology and the New Testament (Grand Rapids, M I : Baker Book House, 1991). 10. For critical studies of Miller's hermeneutical principles, see Steen R. Rasmussen, "Roots of the Prophetic Hermeneutic of William Miller" (M.A. thesis, Newbold College, 1983); Kai Arasola, The End of Historicism: Millerite Hermeneutic of Time Prophecies in the Old Testament (Uppsala: [University of Uppsala], 1990). 11. W[illia]m Miller, "Letter from Mr. Miller," Midnight Cry, May 23, 1844, p. 355. 12. See Alberto R. Timm, The Sanctuary and the Three Angels' Messages: Integrating Factors in the Development of Seventh-day Adventist Doctrines. Adventist Theological Society Dissertation Series, vol. 5 (Berrien Springs, M I : Adventist Theological Society Publications, 1995). 13. Ibid., p. 185 (italics supplied). 14. Don Ε Neufeld, "Biblical Interpretation in the Advent Movement," in A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics, ed. Gordon M . Hyde (Washington, D.C.: Biblical Research Committee, 1974), pp. 117-122. 15. C. Mervyn Maxwell, " A B r i e f History of Adventist Hermeneutics,"/^Γ5 4, no. 2 (Autumn 1993): 212-217. 16. See George R. Knight, Angry Saints: Tensions and Possibilities in the Adventist Struggle over Righteousness by Faith (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1989). 17. See Arthur G. Daniells, "The Bible Conference," RH, Aug. 21, 1919, pp. 3-4; R. W. Schwarz, Light Bearers to the Remnant (Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1979), pp. 393-407. 18. Schwarz, p. 393. 19. The records of the 1919 Bible Conference and Bible and History Teachers' Council were misplaced until December 1974, when curator F. Donald Yost discovered them in the General Conference archives. M . Couperus, "The Bible Conference of 1919," Spectrum 10 (May 1979): 23-57. 20. See F. D. N[ichol], "The Bible Conference," 2-part series in RH, Aug. 28, 1952, pp. 1, 13-14; Sept. 4, 1952, pp. 13-14; Frederick Lee, "Historic Bible Conference Convenes,"RH, Sept. 25,1952, pp. 1, 8-10; W. H. Branson, "Objectives of the Bible Conference," RH, Sept. 25, 1952, pp. 3-4. 21. These volumes should not be confused with the magazine also titled Our Firm Foundation, published more recently by a North-American independent ministry called Hope International. 22. Alberto R. Timm, "A History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on Biblical and Prophetic Inspiration (1844-2000)," JATSIQ (1999): 513-524. 23. See footnote 14. 24. For other valuable contributions to Adventist biblical interpretation see Gerhard F. Hasel, Understanding the Living Word of God (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1980); Lee J. Gugliotto, Handbookfor Bible Study (Hagerstown, M D : Review and Herald, 1995); and Richard M . Davidson, "Biblical Interpretation" in Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist Theology, ed. Raoul Dederen (Hagerstown, 13

Historical Background of Adventist Biblical Interpretation M D : Review and Herald, 2000), pp. 58-104. 25. See appendix A "Methods of Bible Study." Cf. AR, Jan. 22, 1987, pp. 18¬ 20; Ministry, April 1987, pp. 22-24. 26. See "Special Sanctuary Issue" of Ministry, Oct. 1980; William H. Shea, Selected Studies on Prophetic Interpretation, Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, vol. 1 (Washington, D.C.: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1982); and the remaining six volumes of the Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, edited by Frank B. Holbrook. 27. Helpful responses to futuristic interpretation of the 1260, 1290, and 1335 days are provided in Victor Michaelson, Delayed Time-Setting Heresies Exposed (Payson, AZ: Leaves-of-Autumn, 1985); William H. Shea, "Time Prophecies of Daniel 12 and Revelations 12-13," in Symposium on Revelation, Book 1, Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, ed. Frank B. Holbrook, (Silver Spring, M D : Biblical Research Institute, 1992), pp. 327-360; idem, Daniel 7-12: Prophecies of the End Time, Abundant Life Bible Amplifier (Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1996), pp. 217-223; Gerhard Pfandl, Time Prophecies in Daniel 12, Biblical Research Institute Releases, no. 5 (Silver Spring, M D : Biblical Research Institute, 2005). Selected Bibliography Bray, Gerald. Biblical Interpretation: Past & Present. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1996. Burrows, Mark, and Paul Rorem, eds. Biblical Hermeneutics in Historical Per¬ spective: Studies in Honor of Karlfried Froehlich on His Sixtieth Birthday. Grand Rapids, M I : Eerdmans, 1991. Dockery, David S. Biblical Interpretation Then and Now: Contemporary Hermeneutics in the Light of the Early Church. Grand Rapids, M I : Baker, 1992. Froom, LeRoy E. The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers: The Historical Develop¬ ment of Prophetic Interpretation. 4 vols. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1946-1954. Grant, Robert M . A Short History of the Interpretation of the Bible. Rev.ed. New York: Macmillan, 1963. Hyde, Gordon M . , ed. A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics. Washington, D . C : Biblical Research Committee, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1974. Maxwell, C. Mervyn. " A Brief History of Adventist Hermeneutics." Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 4, no. 2 (Autumn 1993): 209-226. Timm, Alberto R. "A History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on Biblical and Prophetic Inspiration (1844-2000)." Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 10 (1999): 486-542. White, Ellen G. The Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan. Washington, D.C: Review and Herald, 1911.

14

CHAPTER II

FAITH, REASON, AND THE HOLY SPIRIT IN HERMENEUTICS John T. B a l d w i n

Introduction Interpreting the Scriptures properly is both a privilege and a humbling responsibility. The special focus o f this chapter is to discover biblical and theological principles that relate to the place o f faith, reason, spiritual powers, and the H o l y Spirit i n the hermeneutical process. The following approach rests upon the unity and clarity o f the Scriptures as a whole and upon the concept that the entire Bible is the prepositional, infallible Word o f God. I t assumes that what the text meant originally is, i n principle, what the text means for us today.

1. Faith and Reason in Hermeneutics Faith and Reason in Dialog Hermeneutics involves a rational process that utilizes the reasoning pow¬ ers o f the human intellect, thereby assigning a central role to human reason in the interpretation o f Scripture. However, a series o f questions addresses reason and faith as related to hermeneutics. Are the truths open to discovery by reason commensurable with the truths o f faith? Is discourse between the two realms possible? Moreover, is reason—understood as the human power to think, to deliberate, to solve problems, to distinguish, to judge, and to choose freely-—either a fully trustworthy power or the sole factor i n the interpretation o f the written Word o f God? What effect might sin have upon human reason? Moreover, can reason be influenced either positively or neg¬ atively by supernatural powers perhaps even unknown to the interpreter? On the other hand, does faith—understood as a divinely inspired trust in, and commitment to, God and to the canonical Scripture as the authorita¬ tive Written Word o f God—play a role in hermeneutics as well? I f so, what is its role and how does this kind o f faith relate to reason i n hermeneutics? 15

Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics Moreover, are there limits to human reason in hermeneutics? I f so, what are they, and upon what are they grounded? I f faith and reason seem to clash regarding a particular interpretation o f Scripture, how shall the tension be resolved? Should either faith or reason have the final authority in such instances? I f so, on what basis could either be granted final author¬ ity? These issues are so basic that they have received major attention throughout the Christian era and continue to be vigorously discussed. Faith, Reason, and Evidence On the one hand, i n discussing faith and reason there is a sense that, in some fashion, it is good to take account o f criticism through rational analysis. Peter urges believers to be prepared to present a "reason" or a "defense" to anyone who asks questions regarding some Christian position (1 Pet 3:15). This implies the importance o f evidence i n relation to belief and, hence, seems to endorse, i n some fashion, what has been called "war¬ ranted Christian belief." While the Christian may not have demonstrable proof as warrants for beliefs, the existence o f sufficient evidence may be expected. Ellen White has described the relationship between evidence and faith as follows: 1

God never asks us to believe, without giving sufficient evidence upon which to base our faith. His existence, His character, the truthfulness of His word, are all established by testimony that appeals to our reason; and this testimony is abundant. Yet God has never removed the possibility of doubt. Our faith must rest upon evidence, not demonstration. Those who wish to doubt will have opportunity; while those who really desire to know the truth will find plenty of evidence on which to rest their faith (SC105).

Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics Unregenerate Reason Versus Sanctified Reason in Hermeneutics According to the biblical worldview the human rational power, rea¬ son, or m i n d consistently is characterized as impacted by sin. Describing the natural rational power as the "heart," Jeremiah claims that it is "more deceitful than all else and desperately sick" (Jer 17:9, N E B ) . Can this "sick" natural reason that, according to the Word o f God, loves "uncleanness, covetousness" and "foolish talking and jesting" (Eph 5:3-4, N K J V ) and other works o f "darkness" (Eph 5:8) interpret the Bible correctly? Paul responds as follows to this question: "The natural man, [unchanged reason, or rationality] receiveth not the things o f the Spirit o f God: for they are foolishness unto h i m : neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor 2:14, K J V ) . Paul admonishes his listeners to "be transformed b y the renewing o f your mind, that y o u may prove what the w i l l o f God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect" (Rom 12:2). This passage seems to suggest that a renewed reason is required for a person to understand properly the w i l l o f God. Paul equates the renewing o f the m i n d w i t h the "regenera¬ tion by the H o l y Spirit" (Titus 3:5). Ellen G. White concurs: "The grace o f Christ is needed to refine and purify the m i n d " ( R H , Sept. 23, 1884, p. 609). This raises the question o f whether faith or reason should hold priority in hermeneutics when apparent conflicts arise between these two contrast¬ ing ways o f knowing. The Priority of Faith Over Reason in Hermeneutics The N T , i n particular, addresses this issue. Using military metaphori¬ cal language, Paul admonishes his hearers to bring "every thought into captivity to the obedience o f Christ" (2 Cor 10:5, N K J V ) . The implication is that the teachings o f Christ, as found i n the Scriptures, are to be elevated in authority over competing claims o f human reason. I n other words, all thoughts, whether geological, philosophical, or theological, w i l l resonate with, and thus be "captive t o " the teaching o f Christ.

On the other hand, i n discussions o f faith and o f reason, we also rec¬ ognize the value o f personal faith, experiencing the self-authenticating power o f the H o l y Spirit upon the mind. The question arises: What is the relationship between reason, faith, and the H o l y Spirit? Could the answer be that these elements are related functionally? The H o l y Spirit draws us through the evidence. This amplifies the importance o f the reasoning powers respecting evidence, particularly textual evidence. I t also endors¬ es the necessary contemporary w o r k o f God as leading to truth through the evidence. However, are the human reasoning powers always and fully dependable? This question introduces us to the following discussion o f the distinction between unregenerate and regenerate human reason.

Placing faith above reason i n this fashion prepares the Christian to be w i l l i n g to deny the evidences o f the human senses i f empirical phenomena appear to dispute some teachings o f Scripture, e.g., Jesus predicted coun¬ terfeit comings o f future false Christs (Matt 24:24-27). I n view o f this, Ellen White asks, " A r e the people o f God now so firmly established upon His word that they would not yield to the evidence o f their senses? Would they, in such a crisis, cling to the Bible and the Bible only?" (GC 625).

16

17

Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics

Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics While it is important i n instances o f apparent conflict to place faith i n the Bible and its claims above those o f secular human reasoning, we may need to confess temporarily and freely our current level o f ignorance i n finding methods o f resolving certain issues. However, we also may rest by faith on the assurance that when God finally reveals all things i n the new earth, genuine harmony w i l l be seen i n matters that now appear dissonant and irreconcilable. We turn now to a discussion o f spiritual hermeneutical influences. 2

2. The Cosmic Conflict and Hermeneutics In addition to the impact o f sin upon human reason, accepting a literal interpretation o f Scripture highlights reasons w h y it is difficult, i f not im¬ possible, for the natural mind to interpret the Bible correctly. Fallen spiri¬ tual powers, Satan and his angels, can influence the exegete. This is partic¬ ularly true when the biblical inteipreter denies that these fallen supernatural powers exist as real beings, able to influence the mind, and allegorizes them into mere symbols o f evil. The attempts o f Satan and evil angels to redi¬ rect interpretations of the Bible cannot be dismissed. We must also consider the positive hermeneutical role o f the holy angels upon humans. While the effect o f these forces is easily overemphasized, i n hermeneutics we need to be sensitive to the influence o f both holy and unholy angels. 3

The Positive Hermeneutical Influence of Holy Angels In some biblical passages angels are commissioned to work w i t h spe¬ cific individuals i n understanding the Word o f God. A classic example is recorded i n Daniel 8 i n which Gabriel is sent to "give this man [Daniel] understanding o f the vision"(Dan 8:16). I n the following chapter Daniel asks for further assistance and receives it; Gabriel tells him, " I have now come forth to give you insight w i t h understanding. . . . give heed to the message and gain understanding o f the vision" (Dan 9:22-23).

o f the Scriptures i n humility, with earnest prayer for guidance, angels o f God w i l l open to you its living realities" (ST, Sept. 18, 1893, p. 6). More specifically, she states that, "Angels are round about those who are w i l l i n g to be taught in divine things; and i n the time o f great necessity they w i l l bring to their remembrance the very truths which are needed" (GC 599). Ellen White also shares remarkable insights o f the hermeneutical influ¬ ence o f heavenly angels i n post-apostolic times. When Luther discovered a whole Latin Bible i n the library o f the university, she states: "Angels o f heaven were by his side, and rays o f light from the throne o f God revealed the treasures o f truth to his understanding" (GC 122). Concerning William M i l l e r we are told that "God sent His angel to move upon the heart o f a farmer who had not believed the Bible, to lead h i m to search the prophe¬ cies. Angels o f God repeatedly visited that chosen one, to guide his mind and open to his understanding prophecies which had ever been dark to God's people" (EW 229). The Negative Hermeneutical Influence of Fallen Angelic Powers Using warfare imagery, Paul offers a broad comment regarding the impact upon humans o f which Satan is capable: "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the w o r l d forces o f this darkness, against the spiritual forces o f wicked¬ ness in the heavenly places" (Eph 6:12). Later, Paul unpacks some o f the specific consequences o f the warfare: " B u t the Spirit explicitly says, that i n later times some w i l l fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines o f demons" (1 T i m 4:1). This statement indicates that fallen angels have the power to seduce human reason, and implies that they have power to originate doctrines ultimately contrary to the Word o f God. Commenting on this theme and passage, M e r r i l l Unger, whose doctoral dissertation examined biblical demonology, states: "Paul traces error to its real source i n satanic and demonic activity, rather than in the human agent." 4

to impress human minds? M r s . White wrote, " I f y o u come to the study

Satan himself plays a role i n human misinterpretation o f the Word o f God. Paul seems to infer this conclusion i n the following passage: " A n d even i f our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, in whose case the god o f this w o r l d has blinded the minds o f the unbeliev¬ ing, that they might not see the light o f the gospel o f the glory o f Christ" (2 Cor 4:3-4). Satan possesses fatal hermeneutical capabilities respecting the reasoning power o f the biblical interpreter. This truth should strike a note o f caution i n the mind o f an interpreter o f the Word o f God. I n this same context, Ellen White's comment is revealing:

18

19

Angelic assistance i n hermeneutics appears also i n the N T . Speaking to Mary and to the other women at the empty tomb, an angel says, "Re¬ member how He spoke to y o u . . . that the Son o f Man m u s t . . . be crucified and the third day rise again" (Luke 24:6-7). Here an angel not only helps them remember the words o f Jesus but assists them to understand the true meaning o f Christ's words. Do angels give the same kind o f assistance today through their ability

Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics When the word of God is opened without reverence and without prayer; when the thoughts and affections are not fixed upon God or in harmony with His will, the mind is clouded with doubt: and in the very study of the Bible, skepticism strengthens. The enemy takes control of the thoughts, and he suggests interpretations that are not correct (GC 704-705). Demonic supernatural ability to stir up human minds in order to produce improper expositions o f the Word o f God represents a challenge indeed. I f both good and evil angels can influence human minds (but their identity is not revealed), how can one be sure about the validity o f a resulting scriptural interpretation? I n response, the following statement by Ellen White pro¬ vides important clues: "Those who turn from the plain teaching o f Scripture and the convicting power o f God's H o l y Spirit are inviting the control o f demons" ( D A 258). Expanding upon this theme, Ellen White offers the key to distinguishing the source o f the supernatural hermeneutical influence: We should not engage in the study of the Bible with that self-reliance with which so many enter the domains of science, but with a prayerful depen¬ dence upon God, and a sincere desire to learn his will. We must come with a humble and teachable spirit to obtain knowledge from the great I A M . Otherwise, evil angels will so blind our minds and harden our hearts that we shall not be impressed by the truth (4SP 417). The quotation implies that rational beings may exercise their free w i l l to adopt a humble, teachable, and prayerful spirit, w h o l l y dependent upon God, and so avoid demonic hermeneutical influence. White develops this encouraging truth as follows: The spirit in which you come to the investigation of the Scriptures will de¬ termine the character of the assistant at your side. Angels from the world of light will be with those who in humility of heart seek for divine guid¬ ance. But i f the Bible is opened with irreverence, with a feeling of selfsufficiency, i f the heart is filled with prejudice, Satan is beside you, and he will set the plain statements of God's word in a perverted light (TM 108).

3. T h e Role of the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics The Holy Spirit Guides the Hermeneutical Process The He w i l l in basic promise

familiar words o f Jesus that "when He, the Spirit o f truth, comes, guide y o u into all the truth" (John 16:13) place the H o l y Spirit charge o f the hermeneutical process. Moreover, His words also that the interpreter w i l l be rewarded w i t h the understanding o f the 20

Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics truth sought. I f one is to discover truth, the ultimate cause w i l l be the ac¬ tion o f the H o l y Spirit. In addition, the guidance is common to all because the word "you" in this text is plural. This suggests the value o f community checks and bal¬ ances regarding the nature and discovery o f truth. I n other words, the Spirit o f truth guides a community o f believers into complementary, not contra¬ dictory, understandings o f a particular truth. This can guard against the un¬ warranted absolutization o f a charismatic individual i n hermeneutics. Biblical searching through regenerate reason, as displayed by the Bereans, indicates that hermeneutical work involves a process character¬ ized as "examining the Scripture . . . whether these things were so" (Acts 17:11). This suggests a thematic comparative investigation o f various bib¬ lical passages in order to discover biblical teaching regarding a specific point in question. One text sheds light upon another, suggesting not only the unity o f Scripture but that the Scripture is its o w n interpreter. Conse¬ quently, Scripture is not to be subjected to an alleged higher authority such as human tradition or human reason. It is precisely in the searching process o f comparing one scripture w i t h another that the H o l y Spirit plays an important role outlined by Ellen G. White: " I t is the H o l y Spirit's office to direct this search and to reward i t " (1888 Materials, 4:1538). This being the case, it means that the most intense human endeavors to interpret the Scriptures properly w i l l , in the words o f Ellen White, "prove an entire failure unless the L o r d Himself should by His divine power combine w i t h the human agency. 'Not by might, nor by power, but by M y Spirit, saith the L o r d o f hosts' [Zech 4 : 6 ] " (4MR 310). This shows that the human process o f comparing scripture w i t h scripture should be guided by the H o l y Spirit. The Transformed Mind and the Mind of Christ The biblical interpreter must become a child o f the Spirit to understand the things o f the Spirit. In Paul's words, "we have r e c e i v e d . . . the S p i r i t . . . that we might know the things freely given to us by G o d " (1 Cor 2:12). I n other words, the biblical interpreter needs to "be born o f the Spirit" (John 3:6), otherwise the "things o f the Spirit" w i l l forever remain, hermeneutically, foolishness to the natural, sinful m i n d (1 Cor 2:14). This means that it is through the work o f the Spirit that God prepares one's mind for biblical interpretation. Having the Mind of Christ. Paul's words, "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body" (1 Cor 12:13), may indicate that the concept o f being "born o f the Spirit" (John 3:8) can be qualitatively compared to 21

Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics

Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics the concept o f being "baptized w i t h the H o l y Spirit" (Acts 1:5). I f so, the biblical interpreter would do well to ask in faith and to receive the baptism o f the H o l y Spirit, thereby to be prepared intellectually, morally, and emo¬ tionally to interpret the Word o f God. This preparation by the H o l y Spirit is described by Paul as the transformation o f the interpreter's m i n d from a "fleshly m i n d " to the " m i n d o f Christ." A core hermeneutical passage i n the whole o f Scripture is found in Philippians 2:5. Here Paul urges individuals to "Let this mind be in y o u which was also in Christ Jesus" ( K J V ) . I n this passage the word for " m i n d " in the Greek is phroneo, meaning, "to think, reflect," or "set one's m i n d . " Paul indicates that he has "the m i n d o f Christ" (1 Cor 2:16). What is hermeneutically significant about having the mind o f Christ? In North America a well-known and relevant bit o f fishing wisdom goes like this: " I f you want to catch a fish, you need to think like a fish." When the necessary adjustments are made, this advice is perfectly fitting for bib¬ lical hermeneutics. I f one wishes to catch the real meaning o f the Word o f God or to interpret the Word o f God properly, the person needs to think like God. I n order to think like God one needs to have the m i n d o f God. Is this feasible? Reaching out to this stunning goal is precisely the actual human possibility that Paul addresses i n the Philippian passage. Elsewhere, Paul contrasts the m i n d o f Christ i n human beings with a haughty "fleshly m i n d " (Col 2:18), also described as a "carnal mind," or one "set on the flesh" (Rom 8:7). Paul indicates that both o f these minds are at enmity w i t h God and his law (Rom 8:7) and that these types o f minds can¬ not understand the things o f the Spirit (1 Cor 2:14). I n other words, having a "fleshly mind," or a "carnal mind," is death to sound hermeneutics. Given the need for the biblical interpreter to have the m i n d o f Christ in hermeneutics, how is the unregenerate, natural, human "fleshly m i n d " changed into the " m i n d o f Christ"? Again, Paul opens the way for our thinking on this matter. We should not be conformed to this world, but we ought to be "transformed by the renewing" o f our m i n d (Rom 12:2). How does this renewing transformation occur? I n answering this ques¬ tion, Paul appeals to the w o r k o f the H o l y Spirit i n His new covenant blessing (2 Cor 3:3). According to Paul, the H o l y Spirit w i l l , upon request by any individual, and through the study o f the Scriptures, create the m i n d o f Christ i n the believer. 5

hardened; for until this very day at the reading o f the o l d covenant [ i n the minds o f Jews i n Paul's day] the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ" (2 Cor 3:14). What caused the change i n the understanding o f Christ from temporal king to Christ as crucified? Paul answers this question: " B u t whenever a man turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. N o w the L o r d is the Spirit, and where the Spirit o f the L o r d is, there is liberty" (2 Cor 3:16-17). This passage attributes the new interpretation squarely to the mighty w o r k o f the Third Person o f the Godhead. Thus, Paul seems to be suggesting that it is by the work o f the H o l y Spirit that the sinful, spiritually blind interpreter is enabled to understand the O T as pointing forward to Christ crucified. The Holy Spirit Illuminates the Interpreter Jesus offers a remarkable and encouraging promise regarding the hermeneutical power o f the H o l y Spirit: "But the Helper, the H o l y S p i r i t , . . . w i l l . . . bring to your remembrance all that I said to y o u " (John 14:26). What hermeneutical possibilities might these words carry? I n light o f this passage, the Spirit can bring to the m i n d o f the biblical interpreter explana¬ tory teachings o f Jesus found, for instance, in the Sermon on the Mount and in the parables o f Jesus. Moreover, i f that which the H o l y Spirit brings to the mind o f a bibli¬ cal interpreter can be extended to cover the entire corpus o f God's written Word, the H o l y Spirit has the full range o f the O l d and o f the N e w Testa¬ ments from which to draw material to assist the interpreter. The key insight is that the biblical exegete can know that, upon request, the H o l y Spirit w i l l bring to m i n d passages and biblical images that otherwise might not be present. This is a significant, helpful hermeneutical promise showing the need for faith in the Holy Spirit. I t helps to show the spiritual rationale undergirding the truthfulness o f the following hermeneutical claim: "We need greater faith i f we would have better knowledge o f the W o r d " (11MR 3).

Summary

Veiling of the Natural Mind. Paul's discussion o f the blinding veil (2 Cor 3:14-18) has prompted much scholarly comment. For our purpos¬ es we note that the basic point is that the contemporary biblical interpreter also faces the challenge o f this darkening veil. Paul describes its effect on the Jews o f his day, saying, "But their minds [ancient Israelites] were

Reason as a Tool. We have seen that the God-given gift o f reason is to be endorsed strongly and engaged rigorously in the hermeneutical process. Careful, circumscribed deep thinking and reflection is essential to sound biblical interpretation. Reliance on the H o l y Spirit must not replace the continuing effort o f human rational powers. These two realities are

22

23

6

Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics

Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics

complementary, not mutually exclusive. Although human reason is fallen,

References

it can be sanctified by the H o l y Spirit and become thereby fitted to search

Unless otherwise indicated, biblical quotations are from the New American Standard Bible.

humbly, willingly, and inductively all o f the relevant Scriptures regarding a biblical matter. This kind o f research aids in reducing misinterpretations o f Scripture. Faith the Basis. The Bible supports the posture o f faith seeking u n ‫־‬ derstanding as the proper approach to the relationship o f faith and rea¬ son. While reason and faith ideally are complementary in hermeneutics, at times they appear to clash. I n such instances the interpreter through faith w i l l elevate the teachings o f Scripture above the claims o f reason. Spiritual Powers. A great controversy rages over the interpretation o f Scripture. I n our enlightened age the hermeneutical influence o f spiritual powers needs to be acknowledged. Unfallen angels and the H o l y Spirit seek to influence the m i n d o f the interpreter o f Scripture while, at the same time, evil angels and Satan work to counter the heavenly influence. The Spirit and Interpretation. The role o f the H o l y Spirit i n hermeneutics is multidimensional in four ways: (1) The H o l y Spirit guides the hermeneutical process; (2) by the baptism o f the H o l y Spirit, the biblical interpreter is equipped w i t h the m i n d o f Christ and is prepared for the hermeneutical task w i t h a softened, unveiled mind, thereby made responsive to the guidance o f the Spirit; (3) the H o l y Spirit brings biblical truths and images to the m i n d o f the interpreter; (4) He illuminates the m i n d o f the interpreter w i t h fresh meaning. Divine Guidance. Without the supernatural assistance o f the H o l y Spirit and heavenly angels, there can be no proper interpretation o f the truths o f Scripture, no matter how hard one engages the rational powers. The Spirit who inspired the Bible is needed for its proper interpretation. This conclusion underscores the interpreter's need to commune con¬ stantly w i t h the Holy Spirit, requesting divine illumination and the influ¬ ence o f holy angels in order to understand and to apply properly the trea¬ sures in the O l d and i n the N e w Testaments (Luke 11:13). Again, above all, hermeneutics cannot be done alone. A n interpreter o f the Scriptures who, like Paul, has the m i n d o f Christ and humbly fol¬ lows a hermeneutical process involving sanctified reason, is subject to the influence o f holy angels and the illuminating guidance o f the H o l y Spirit. For such an interpreter the rewards are rich indeed.

24

1. See Alvin Plantinga's massive influential work entitled, Warranted Chris¬ tian Belief (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000). 2. Cf. Jon Paulien, "The Final Deception: An Evil, Counterfeit Trinity Is Now Making Ready for War,".Adventist Review, Oct. 29, 1998, p. 10. 3. See Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, vol. I l l , part 3: The Doctrine ofCreation (Edinburgh, Τ. & T. Clark, 1960), pp. 519-531; Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1951-1957), 1:134, 2:27; Rudolf Bultmann, "New Testament and Mythology," in Kerygma and Myth: A Theological Debate, ed. Hans Werner Bartsch, trans. Reginald H. Fuller (London• S.P.C.K., 1957), pp. 4-5. 4. Merrill F. Unger, Biblical Demonology (Wheaton, I L : Van Kampen Press, Inc., 1953), p. 166. 5. The hermeneutical implications of the biblical teaching regarding the "natural" human mind and the regenerate mind receive insightful treatment in the following article: Frank Hasel, "Theology and the Role of Reason," Journal of the Adventist Theological Society A, no. 2 (Autumn 1993): 72-198. 6. See Philip E. Hughes, Paul's Second Epistle to the Corinthians; the Eng¬ lish Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes, The New International Com¬ mentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, M I : Eerdmans, 1962), pp 110¬ 121.

Selected Bibliography Davidson, Richard M . "Biblical Interpretation." In Handbook of Seventh-day Ad¬ ventist Theology, ed. Raoul Dederen, pp. 58-104. Hagerstown, M D : Review & Herald Publishing Association, 2000. Dorman, Ted M . "Holy Spirit, History, Hermeneutics and Theology: Toward an Evangelical/Catholic Consensus." Journal of the Evangelical Theological SocietyAl (1998): 427-438. Erickson, Millard J. Evangelical Interpretation: Perspectives on Hermeneutical Issues. Grand Rapids, M I : Baker Books, 1993. Fuller, Daniel P. "The Holy Spirit's Role in Biblical Interpretation." In Scripture, Tradition, and Interpretation, ed. W. Ward Gasque and William Sanford LaSor, pp. 189-198. Grand Rapids, M I : Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1978. Hart, Larry. "Hermeneutics, Theology, and the Holy Spirit." Perspectives in Reli¬ gious Studies 14 (1987): 53-64. Klooster, Fred H. "The Role of the Holy Spirit in the Hermeneutic Process: The Relationship of the Spirit's Illumination to Biblical Interpretation." In Hermeneutics, Inerrancy, and the Bible, ed. Earl D. Radmacher and Robert D. Preus, pp. 449-492. Grand Rapids, M I : Academie Books, 1984. 25

Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics Koranteng-Pipim, Samuel. "The Role of the Holy Spirit in Biblical Interpretation: A Study in the Writings of James I . Packer" (Ph.D. dissertation, Andrews University, 1998). Pinnock, Clark H. "The Role of the Spirit in Interpretation." Journal of the Evan¬ gelical Theological Society 36 (1993): 491-497. Richardson, Peter. "Spirit and Letter: A Foundation for Hermeneutics." Evangeli¬ cal Quarterly 45 (1973): 208-218. Young. William G. "The Holy Spirit and the Word of God." Scottish Journal of Theology 14(1961): 34-59. Zuck, Roy B. "The Role of the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics." Bibliotheca Sacra 141 (1984): 120-130.

CHAPTER HI

PRESUPPOSITIONS IN THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE Frank M . Hasel

Introduction The notion o f presupposition(s) plays an important role in biblical in¬ terpretation. We all hold a number o f beliefs that we presuppose or accept when we come to the task o f interpreting Scripture. N o one is able to ap¬ proach the biblical text w i t h a blank mind. Presuppositions delimit the boundaries w i t h i n w h i c h biblical interpre¬ tation can and should properly function. They also determine the method and, through the method, also influence, to a considerable degree, the out¬ come o f our interpretation. I n other words, they directly affect our theol¬ ogy and the authority that Scripture has for our life and for doctrine. In turn, our theology influences spiritual and theological identity and, finally, also the mission o f the Seventh-day Adventist Church. A n acceptance o f biblical Christian presuppositions w i l l lead to very different conclusions from, for example, a commitment to naturalistic, and even atheistic, presuppositions. Since the method o f interpretation is insep¬ arable from its presuppositions, the respective presuppositions invariably influence the outcome. I f the method o f interpretation rules out supernatu¬ ral interventions, Scripture w i l l not be read and understood as true and as reliable reports but interpreted differently. Thus, to some extent at least, the conclusion may be implicit within the methodology. The great issue is that of the correct and proper method. Everything else follows in due course. I n this chapter, without claiming to be exhaustive, we w i l l point out the basic presuppositions o f an authentic Adventist biblical hermeneutic and describe some general hermeneutical principles to be derived from them.

1. The Hermeneutical Challenge Interpreters o f the Bible cannot divest themselves from their own past, their experiences, resident ideas, and preconceived notions and opinions. 26

27

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture It is an accepted truism that total neutrality, or absolute objectivity, cannot be achieved i n the act o f interpretation. Exegesis and theological reflection always take place against the background o f fundamental presuppositions about the nature o f the w o r l d and the nature o f God. Inevitably there is a pre-understanding toward which the interpreter w i l l slant his investiga¬ tion. Even the so-called objective or hard-science researchers now recog¬ nize the influence o f values. The Hermeneutical Spiral We acknowledge that the object under investigation should be allowed some influence i n determining the appropriate approach. A God-centered theology demands a God-centered methodology. A n y pre-understanding, such as evolution, that questions or denies the supernatural dimension clearly testified to i n Scripture is alien to the Bible and w i l l not come to grips w i t h the subject matter o f God's Word. Our presuppositions and pre-understandings must be modified and reshaped by the text o f H o l y Scripture and remain under the control o f the Bible itself. The biblical text must have priority over the interpreter. I f we deal w i t h the Bible, then i t should be the Bible that is allowed to determine our presuppositions and methodology rather than physics, mathematics, or biology. The biblical interpreter has to realize that an understanding o f the Bible increases through the reshaping o f the m i n d and o f the heart by reading Scripture. The successive exposure to God's Word, through which the interpreter is able to bring his or her pre-understanding i n ever closer alignment w i t h biblical truth, can be likened to a hermeneutical spiral. The Bible must be given room to teach us its own essential categories. This enables the biblical interpreter to think increasingly with the biblical text rather than just to think about the text o f the Bible. Thus " G o d H i m s e l f through the Bible and the H o l y Spirit creates i n the interpreter the necessary presuppositions and the essential perspective for the understanding o f Scripture." The Bible consistently demonstrates that people are not so captive to their pre-understanding that they cannot be transformed. A t Thessalonica, for example, Paul "reasoned w i t h them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead" (Acts 17:2-3). As a result "some o f the Jews were persuaded and j o i n e d Paul and Silas, as d i d a large number o f God-fearing Greeks and not a few prominent w o m e n " (vs. 4). 1

2. Biblical Presuppositions A Personal G o d Who Speaks and Acts Nowhere i n Scripture do the biblical writers attempt to prove the exis¬ tence o f God. Instead, it is simply asserted from the very beginning (Gen 1:1). I n the N T the message is similar: Those who w o u l d come to God "must believe that he exists" (Heb 11:6). Our source o f information about God is His o w n personal revelation (Heb 1:1-3), faithfully recorded i n Scripture (Rom 16:26). Although it is impossible to k n o w God complete¬ ly and exhaustively, the Bible provides us w i t h enough true knowledge to enable us to enter into a saving and loving relationship w i t h H i m . The self-testimony o f Scripture is o f decisive importance. When we speak o f the "living God" we mean that God is essentially per¬ sonal and that He made Himself known i n a highly personal manner, particu¬ larly in Christ's incarnation. As the living God He is a personal God who speaks and acts. One o f His communicative acts can be seen in His revelation. The things that God has revealed for us are for us to know (Amos 3:7; Deut 29:29). Divine revelation generates Scripture (cf. 2 Pet 1:19-21). I n originat¬ ing "Holy Scripture" (Rom 1:2), God utilized human instrumentalities. God did not eliminate their individualities nor did He suppress their personalities. And yet the Holy Spirit carried the biblical writers along, guiding their minds and thoughts i n selecting what to speak and assisting them i n what to write so that they faithfully committed to trustworthy and apt words the things divinely revealed to them. Thus, Seventh-day Adventists affirm that "all Scripture is an indivisible, indistinguishable union o f the divine and the human." 2

Humanity Created for Fellowship With G o d A d a m and Eve, created i n the divine image, were capable o f respond¬ ing to God and o f entering into a meaningful fellowship w i t h their Cre¬ ator. God, who created human beings w i t h the ability to speak and think, is depicted i n Scripture as using human language to communicate w i t h humans (cf. Gen 1:28; 3:9; Exod 4:11-12, 15-16; 1 Sam 3:21). Humans are portrayed as being created w i t h the ability to understand God correctly. Hence, they are accountable to God their Creator. The Disruptive Power of Sin The entrance o f sin, however, has radically altered, ruptured, and fractared this initially pure and holy relationship w i t h God. Whereas sin has

28

29

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture marred and distorted the image o f God in man, it has not completely destrayed it. Otherwise human reasoning and creativity would be difficult to fathom, and genuine instances o f love and sacrifice for others would be 3

enigmatic. While the origin o f sin remains a mystery that cannot be unraveled fully, it is clear that pride, dissatisfaction w i t h status, and a desire to be like God were the sins that caused Lucifer and the fallen angels to revolt against God (cf. Isa 14:12-14; Ezek 28:11-19). Sin is a desire to cross the bound¬ aries o f creaturehood in the attempt to become like God, a rupture o f the essential Creator-creature relationship, and a desire to live an independent, egocentric, self-sufficient life without God. This separation from God has affected our human nature and has corrupted every aspect and dimension o f our existence, including our reasoning powers and our capabilities o f understanding. The Effects of Sin on the Interpretation of Scripture. It is rare in hermeneutical discussions to find a description o f the effects o f sin on the task o f biblical interpretation. Yet several inner predispositions addressed in Scripture are obstacles for reaching a deeper and correct understanding of biblical truth. It is not just that our human thought processes are employed for sinful ends; our mind and thoughts have become corrupted and thereby closed to God's truth. Pride. Perhaps the chief characteristic o f this corruption is pride. Ac¬ cording to the Bible, pride is at the very root and the essence o f sin. W h y were the Pharisees in Jesus' time unable to recognize Jesus Christ as the Messiah? Jesus calls them spiritually blind, because their proud claim that "they can see" was a hindrance to recognizing God's self-revelation in Jesus (John 9:39-41; 12:43). I n 2 Timothy 3:2-3 pride occurs in a list describing the characteristics o f the godless men i n the last days. It leads to wrong teachings and sinful deeds (2 T i m 4:3-4; cf. 1 T i m 6:3-4). Pride is an attitude toward God and His W ord i n which the proud per¬ son is characterized by an arrogant mind-set that elevates oneself over God and His Word and thus loses any balance that might grow out o f a recognition o f one's true position in relation to God and to His Word. God, "opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble" (1 Pet 5:5). Pride leads the interpreter to overemphasize human reason or existential concerns as the final arbiter o f what one should know, believe, and obey, and, at the same time, diminishes the divine authority and the inspiration o f Scripture. I t is not without reason that Ellen G. White wrote "The sin that is most nearly hopeless and incurable is pride o f opinion, self-conceit. This stands i n the way o f all growth" (7T 199-200). 4

r

5

Self-deception. o f self-deception.

Connected w i t h the obstacle o f pride is the problem Sin has affected all aspects o f our human existence, 30

including our thinking and our desiring. As sinners we are prone to listen only to those ideas that seem attractive to us but do not necessarily corres¬ pond to God's revealed w i l l . Self-deception is a real danger, because "the heart is deceitful above all things" (Jer 17: 9). God has warned about the danger o f self-deception that leads to a wrong understanding o f our situa¬ tion (Rev 3:17). Self-deception also affects the proper understanding o f God's writ¬ ten Word (2 T i m 4:3-4; cf. 3:13). The apostle Paul instructs Timothy and all believers not to fall prey to this self-deception. They are to preach the Word and to live a consistent lifestyle modeled after the instruction found in God's Word (2 T i m 4:2, 5). I t is the written Word o f God that is a lamp to our feet and a light for our path (Ps 119:105). I t is the H o l y Spirit work¬ ing in our hearts through the Word o f God who clears up our self-decep¬ tion and enlightens the darkness o f our understanding. Doubt. Doubt is a painful experience. To doubt means "to waver in one's opinion"; it means "to be undecided about the truth o f something" and "to question the veracity o f an idea"; the one who doubts is "inclined not to believe the truth o f an assertion." Doubt as part o f a critical meth¬ odology dampens the certainty o f God's Word and diminishes the convic¬ tion o f faith. A n approach characterized by doubt is "never able by itself to come to a saving and sanctifying knowledge o f God's truth. Just as faith is the condition for knowledge (2 Cor 4:13), so doubt or skepticism is the condition for remaining i n ignorance o f the truth." 6

7

Uncertainty only deepens when a doubting person is confronted with the verbal or written testimony o f truth (cf. John 5:46-47), "for such a declaration demands the transfer o f authority from one's o w n reason as final arbiter to the witness declared to be true." It has been pointed out that the source for this problem "lies not in the kind o f evidence presented to reason, but in autonomous reason's skeptical stance i n the face o f all evidence. When one starts w i t h doubt, evaluation o f the text w i l l never lead to certainty." The interpreter who doubts the statements o f Scripture judges God's Word and thereby elevates himself to a position i n which he thinks to know what is acceptable and what not. God, however, does not call for an attitude o f "criticism" and "doubt" to gain an understanding o f His Word but requires faith. While Scripture admonishes us "to be mercifill to those who doubt" (Jude 22), Jesus rejects complacent doubt (cf. Matt 16:1-4). 8

9

Distance and Distortion. The nature and consequence o f human sin is described in Isaiah 59:2 as "a separation" between humanity and God that hides His face from us. This was the experience o f A d a m and Eve in the garden o f Eden. While God still seeks contact and communica31

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture tion w i t h humankind, the distance that sin creates leads to a distortion o f our knowledge o f God. A n attitude o f critically dissecting Scripture, thus fragmenting and distorting its God-given unity, is sharpened and stimu¬ lated by exercise. I n the words o f Ellen G. White: Those who think to make the supposed difficulties of Scripture plain, in measuring by their finite rule that which is inspired and that which is not inspired, had better cover their faces. . . . When men, in theirfinitejudg¬ ment, find it necessary to go into an examination of scriptures to define that which is inspired and that which is not, they have stepped before Jesus to show Him a better way than He has led u s . . . . Brethren, let not a mind or hand be engaged in criticizing the Bible. It is a work that Satan delights to have any of you do, but it is not the work the Lord has pointed out for you to do. Men should let God take care of His own Book, His living oracles, as He has done for ages. They begin to question some parts of revelation, and pick flaws in the apparent inconsistencies of this statement and that state¬ ment. Beginning at Genesis, they give up that which they deem question¬ able, and their minds lead on, for Satan will lead to any length they may follow in their criticism, and they see something to doubt in the whole Scriptures. Their faculties of criticism become sharpened by exercise, and they can rest on nothing with a certainty (ISM 17-18, emphasis sup¬ plied). Rather than being able to see a unity in Scripture, the Bible and its mes¬ sage are fragmented when fallen human reason applies foreign and hostile presuppositions to the task o f interpreting Scripture, resulting in a loss o f biblical authority. I n such a case, authority is shifted to the interpreter, who chooses which voice he or she w i l l listen to among the plurality o f voices. Furthermore, fallen human reason also can introduce distortion through the reinterpretation o f Scripture by means o f "fine-sounding arguments" (Col 2:4; cf. 2 T i m 4:3-4; 2 Pet 3:16) that, nevertheless, deceive. For instance, "The contention that one cannot know absolute truth leads to distortion, mean¬ ing the truth o f Scripture w i l l be interpreted as personal rather than as factual information that corresponds to reality." Distortion also can take place when the current concerns o f the interpreter do not correspond with the concerns o f the text and the interpreter asks questions the text cannot answer or the text is giving answers the interpreter is not prepared to accept. [Scripture tells us that sin blinds us to God's truth (Rom 1; 1 Cor 1-2). This means that sin keeps the interpreter from acknowledging warranted conclusions. 10

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture tive barrier to knowing God's truth (Ps 66:18). B y refusing to admit that we need to learn new things from God's Word, we resist spiritual truths and become insensitive to them. A persistent opposition to, and rejection of, God's revealed truth leads to a point i n which the disobedient person is unable to hear properly and understand the Word o f God. Necessary Attitudes and Presuppositions for the Interpretation of Scripture. Precisely because God meets us i n Scripture and meets us there for a specific purpose, the approach to the study o f Scripture on any other terms than those delineated in God's Word is to come to God w i t h a wrong attitude.[We need a disposition o f m i n d and o f heart that leads to understand¬ ing. This is not simply gained through certain exegetical techniques^ Openness and Honesty. One o f the foundational attitudes necessary for an adequate understanding o f the biblical message is an open mind-set imbued w i t h a willingness to learn, a mind-set receptive to the message and content being studied. In the words o f Ellen G. White: iln your study of the word, lay at the door o f investigation your precon¬ ceived opinions and your hereditary and cultivated ideas. You will never reach the truth i f you study the Scriptures to vindicate your own ideas. I f as you read, conviction comes, and you see that your cherished opinions are not in harmony with the word, do not try to make the word fit these opinions. Make your opinions fit the word (MYP 260). Without such honesty and openness, no change or correction is pos¬ sible i n terms o f one's pre-understanding. Honesty aims at the motives w i t h which the interpreter approaches the biblical text and also includes an openness to use the proper methods for interpretation. The ideal starting point is an open mind, not an empty mind. No one comes to Scripture w i t h an empty head. But the interpreter has to ap¬ proach the biblical text with a willingness to open his fundamental convic¬ tions to the transforming power o f God's H o l y Spirit, who is working w i t h and through the written Word. Consciously, one has to allow the Bible to shape and transform one's pre-understanding?‫ ־‬God tests the heart and is "pleased w i t h integrity" (1 Chron 29:17; Prov"2:7, N A B ) .

Disobedience. Disobedience, the unwillingness to follow God's re¬ vealed w i l l , also negatively affects our abilitiy to understand Scripture cor¬ rectly. Disobedience goes w i t h pride and is sin. Deliberate sin is an effec-

The promise is given i n Scripture that anyone w i l l i n g to do God's w i l l shall k n o w whether the teachings come from God or not (John 7:17). This honesty opens up the possibility o f overcoming the subjectivity o f man by letting God speak to the interpreter i n and through the text o f Scripture.

32

33

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture

This willingness to learn from God's Word enables the interpreter to en¬ ter a process o f understanding that can be likened to a hermeneutical spiral. It leads first from a recognition o f biblical ideas to an acceptance o f those ideas, then to a closer and more adequate perception o f the subject matter o f the Bible, leading to a new investigation and deeper understanding. Thus, the biblical interpreter who is w i l l i n g to ascribe to the word o f Scripture the fundamental primacy for the proper meaning o f the biblical message is able to grow continually i n his or her understanding o f that message. 11

Faith. Without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb 11:6). A l ¬ ready the apostle Paul affirmed that a true understanding o f H o l y Scripture is possible only through the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 2:14), who enlightens our understanding i n order that we may know (Eph 1:18). I t is faith that opens up the spiritual truths o f God's Word to the reader. _While Scripture can be read just like any other book, it cannot be understood correctly i n the biblical sense without faith, for the subject matter o f the Bible, God, is available only to the believer. K n o w i n g and understanding i n the biblical sense involve much more than just an intellectual recognition. They also encompass a relational and communicative dimension that includes the involvement o f the whole person i n the act o f knowing. Faith is the place from which knowing is possible. The person who tries to read the Bible just like any other book does not do justice to its divine-human nature. The interpretation o f Scripture does not reach its goal i n examining only its human dimension. A reading o f H o l y Scripture has to aim at an interpretation i n which God, the author o f Scripture, is being acknowledged and heard. A n d this is possible only from an attitude o f faith. Without faith no growth i n human knowledge is pos¬ sible.

to be led and to be taught by the H o l y Spirit. For "God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble" (Jas 4:6). H u m i l i t y expresses the unas¬ suming insight that God and His Word are greater than our human reason and greater than our current understanding. There is always more light to break forth from God's Word. This subordination o f human reason to the higher authority o f God's Word is expressed i n these words: ,God desires man to exercise his reasoning powers . . . yet we are to be¬ ware of deifying reason, which is subject to the infirmity of humanity.... When we come to the Bible, reason must acknowledge an authority su¬ perior to itself, and heart and intellect must bow to the great I A M (SC 109-110)7 Whoever wants to understand the Bible, and through the Bible, even God, the world,• and oneself has to allow Scripture to be given normative priority over one's own experiences and assessments. Obedience. Obedience is the path to deeper understanding. It reflects a biblical principle that as we respond to the light we have more light is given (cf. Ps 119:100; Acts 5:32; 1 John 2:3). I n interpreting Scripture "it is not enough to have mastered an eight-step exegetical technique; it is equally a matter o f one's spirituality. ^Biblical interpreters have to be w i l l i n g apprentices, students who are w i l l i n g to live as well as to look 'along the text,' according to the Scriptures." For the true end o f our hermeneutical task is a devoted life._ Biblical understanding is never ab¬ stract and theoretical. I t is understanding the w i l l and w o r k o f the living God, who constantly seeks to change us more fully into His likeness. Thus biblical understanding ultimately involves God's claim on, and purpose for, our lives i n light o f all that He has revealed to us. It means knowing and doing God's truth; such understanding is a gift o f God (Eph 3:16-19; Phil 3:15-16). 12

Jesus Himself displayed complete trust i n Scripture (John 10:35). He accepted the O T canon (Luke 24:44) and acknowledged Scripture as the authoritative norm for our lives (Matt 4:4). He did not doubt Scripture; instead He relied on Scripture as a trustworthy word to defeat Satan (Matt 4:6-7). After His resurrection, Jesus chided the disciples on the road to Emmaus for being foolish and "slow o f heart to believe all that the proph¬ ets have spoken!" (Luke 24:25).; Lack o f faith leads to a deficient under¬ standing o f Scripture^ Humility. One o f the most important presuppositions for the knowl¬ edge o f truth is humility. The attitude o f humility expresses the^ willing¬ ness and modesty to submit one's beliefs to a higher authority. Through humility the highest and deepest knowledge o f God is gained, namely an awareness that one is dependent upon God to gain true knowledge, that man is not the final measure o f everything. Instead, the interpreter is open

Prayer. LLast but not least, prayer leads the interpreter to explore the Bible from a different perspective. When Daniel prayed, he was granted understanding and insight (Dan 2:18-19; 6:10). I n Psalm 119:18 we read, "Open m y eyes that I may see wonderful things i n your law." B y praying, we acknowledge the need for God's H o l y Spirit to help us understand what He has inspired.

34

35

Love. _The supreme requirement for understanding the biblical mes¬ sage is sympathy with its subject matter. It is an undisputed fact that to really know and appreciate something you need to love it] I t is the virtue o f love, faith, and obedience that w i l l open up the treasure house o f God's Word to the reader. One cannot love God wholeheartedly and criticize His revelation from a distance.

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture

3. Hermeneutical Principles We can never hope to understand God's written Word correctly i f we treat it like any other book. The principles o f our Bible study must then be consistent w i t h the principles that govern our whole relationship w i t h God. This means that our study o f Scripture should be both academic and devotional, involving m i n d and heart i n the search to uncover the true meaning o f the text. 13

By Scripture Alone—Sola

Scriptura

From their very beginning Adventist believers have considered them¬ selves as people o f the Book, literally as Bible-believing Christians in the full tradition o f the Reformers o f the sixteenth century. Seventh-day A d ventists acknowledge that for a correct interpretation o f Scripture the Scrip¬ ture itself is foundational (1 Cor 4:6). Hence, they affirm the scriptural prin¬ ciple summarized in the Reformation slogan: sola scriptura—by Scripture alone. This appeal acknowledges the unique authority o f Scripture. 14

[Scripture alone is the ruling norm (norma normans). Other authori¬ ties such as religious experience, human reason, and tradition are ruled by Scripture (they are ruled norms, norma normată). I n fact, the sola scrip¬ tura principle was intended to safeguard the authority o f Scripture from dependence upon other sources, such as the church, and precluded the possibility that the standard o f its interpretation could come from outside.

Neither does the principle o f scripture interpreting scripture negate the community o f faith or human reason. When Luther maintained the principle o f sola scriptura, he was not suggesting that the tradition o f the church was without value. Rather, he was arguing a case o f relative clarity and weight. I n other words, i f a conflict arises in the interpretation o f faith, then Scripture carries the authority that transcends and judges any o f the church's traditions. On the road to Emmaus, Jesus upheld the principle that Scripture is its own interpreter. "Beginning w i t h Moses and all the Prophets, He ex¬ plained to His disciples what was said i n all the Scriptures concerning h i m s e l f (Luke 24:27). Later that night, Jesus again pointed to Scripture when He made it clear to the disciples that everything written about H i m " i n the L a w o f Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms" (Luke 24:44) must be fulfilled. For Jesus, Scripture was the authoritative source whereby we can discriminate between right and wrong. The Sufficiency of Scripture. To speak o f Scripture as its own inter¬ preter implies the corollary o f the sufficiency o f Scripture. Scripture is sufficient as the unerring guide to divine truth. I t is sufficient to make one wise unto salvation (2 T i m 3:15). It is the sole standard by which all doc¬ trine and experience must be tested (Isa 8:20; John 17:17; Heb 4:12). To know God and His w i l l we need no other source save Scripture alone. The intrinsic authority o f Scripture as the source o f its o w n exposition rests in its character as the inspired Word o f God. However, this divine authority is recognized for what it is only as the H o l y Spirit illumines the mind.

Scripture Interprets Scripture. One hermeneutical characteristic o f the sola scriptura principle is its self-interpretation. It is not tradition, human reason, or religious experience, culture, or the verdict o f scholars and leaders that is the source and norm for interpreting Scripture. Scripture alone is the key that unlocks Scripture. To understand sola scriptura, in this sense, does not exclude the real¬ ity o f cultural influences or the reality o f religious experience. To maintain that scripture interprets scripture does not negate the insight from other fields o f study, such as biblical archaeology, anthropology, sociology, or history, which may illumine some biblical aspects and the background o f scriptural passages, contributing to a better understanding o f the mean¬ ing o f the biblical text. N o r does it exclude the help o f other resources in the task o f interpretation, such as biblical lexicons, dictionaries, con¬ cordances, and other books and commentaries. ^However, i n the proper interpretation o f the Bible, the text o f Scripture has priority over all other aspects, sciences, and secondary helps. Other viewpoints have to be care¬ fully evaluated from the standpoint o f Scripture as a whole.

Only on the basis o f its unity can Scripture function as its o w n inter¬ preter. Only then is it possible to come up w i t h a harmony in doctrine and teaching. I f there is no overarching unity i n Scripture one looks i n vain for a normative teaching o f Scripture on any given issue. Without the unity o f Scripture the church has no means to distinguish truth from error and to repudiate heresy. It has no basis to apply disciplinary measures or to cor-

36

37

The Unity of Scripture Another foundational principle o f biblical interpretation included in the sola scriptura principle is the analogy o f faith, or the analogy (or harmony) o f Scripture. The Scripture itself claims that "all Scripture is God-breathed" (2 T i m 3:16), that "no prophecy o f Scripture came about by the prophet's o w n interpretation," and that "men spoke from God as they were carried along by the H o l y Spirit" (2 Pet 1:20-21). W i t h God as its ultimate author and being inspired by the H o l y Spirit, we can assume a fundamental unity and harmony among its various parts. 15

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture rect deviations from God's truth. Scripture would lose its convincing and liberating power. The N T writers, however, testify to a high view o f Scripture and as¬ sume its unity. This becomes obvious when they support their point by quoting several O T sources as o f equal and harmonious weight. This in¬ dicates that different Bible writers provide different emphases on the same event or topic, thus contributing to a rich and multifaceted expression o f divine truth i n which all the doctrines o f the Bible w i l l cohere to one other. God never contradicts Himself. Tota Scriptura—All of Scripture. The unity o f Scripture includes the concept o f tota scriptura (all o f Scripture). I n order to learn what Scripture has to say on any given subject we must consider all that is stated by Scripture. To gain a comprehensive, complete understanding o f what God wants to say i n the Bible it is not enough to pick out one statement to the neglect o f other statements on the same question. This means that "the two Testaments have a reciprocal relationship i n w h i c h they mutually illuminate each other. . . . Neither Testament is supersed¬ ed by the other, although the later revelation is tested by the former." The best example for this trust i n Scripture appears among the Berean Christians, w h o "were o f more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message w i t h great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see i f what Paul said was true" (Acts 17:11). I n a similar manner Jesus pointed out how the OT sheds light on the N T . "These are the Scriptures that testify about me" (John 5:39). From pas¬ sages such as 1 Timothy 5:18, i n w h i c h Paul juxtaposes a statement o f Jesus w i t h a quotation from the O T or 2 Peter 3:15-16, i n which Peter appears to recognize Paul's letters as Scripture, it is clear that already in N T times the apostolic writings were being accepted as being part o f H o l y Scripture, together w i t h the O T .

with an appropriate Bible translation faithful to the meaning contained i n the original Hebrew and Greek. The Clarity of Scripture

16

17

18

The appeal to Scripture alone makes little sense i f the texts are un¬ clear as to their meaning. The message o f the Bible is sufficiently clear to be understood by children and by adults alike. A n d yet, the content o f Scripture gives even the most learned person ample opportunity to grow in knowledge and to deepen an understanding o f God and His revealed w i l l . The truth o f the clarity o f Scripture has been recognized by many Christians i n the Reformation tradition. The Bible repeatedly reminds us of its o w n clarity. Scripture can be understood not only by theologians, scholars, or priests, but by all believers. The biblical testimony encour¬ ages readers to study the Bible for themselves because they are able to understand God's message to them (cf. Deut 6:6-7; Ps 19:7; 119:130; Isa 34:16; Luke 1:3-4; Acts 17:11; R o m 10:17; Rev 1:3). The consistent example o f the Bible writers shows that the Scriptures are to be taken i n their plain, normal, literal sense, unless a clear and obvi¬ ous figure is intended or a symbolic passage is employed. [The clarity o f Scripture assumes the priesthood o f all believers rather than restricting the interpretation o f Scripture to a select few, the clerical priesthood, or the "community" o f trained scholars. This means that the study o f Scripture itself, rather than secondary sources and commentaries about Scripture, is to hold priority, ί 20

The Clarity of Scripture and of Bible Translations. The clarity o f Scripture pertains to the language, sense, and words o f Scripture. One hermeneutical consequence o f this can be seen i n the value o f mastering the original languages o f Scripture (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek), wherever possible, i n order to grasp more fully the meaning o f the original biblical words. While it is possible to study the Bible by comparing scripture w i t h scripture, i n translations many biblical idioms or figures o f speech can be lost easily i n the process o f translation.

The Context of a Biblical Passage. Furthermore, to use Scripture as its o w n interpreter does not mean indiscriminately stringing together vari¬ ous passages o f Scripture i n a loose "proof-text" fashion without regard for the context o f each passage. Rather, "since the Scriptures ultimately have a single divine Author, it is crucial to gather all that is written on a par¬ ticular topic i n order to be able to consider all the contours o f the topic," taking into consideration the literary, as w e l l as the historical, context o f a passage, fk careful interpreter w i l l take into consideration the immediate context before and after the passage under investigation; the context o f the biblical book i n which the passage is found, as w e l l as the larger context o f all the Bible^ I n comparing scripture w i t h scripture it is important to study the Bible thoroughly, i f possible i n its original languages or at least

i n order to find out how a word or concept is used i n Scripture and what connotations are associated w i t h this word or concept it is indispensable to compare carefully scripture with scripture. This can be done best i n the orig¬ inal languages. I f a translation needs to be used, a formal translation is to be preferred to a dynamic translation or paraphrase. ^ This does not mean that all Bible translations should be quite literal, for even dynamic translations or paraphrases may be suitable for different needs and situations. However, there is certainly an important place for more literal translations that do less

38

39

19

21

2

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture

interpretation for the readers and thereby enable them to do more interpreta¬ tion for themselves, thus making them less dependent on the translator. The Clarity of Scripture and Difficult Passages. While there are mysteries o f faith in the Scriptures that can be understood sufficiently to be accepted by faith, this does not mean that we w i l l understand every¬ thing exhaustively and completely. Furthermore, to speak o f the clarity o f Scripture does not mean that there are no passages that w i l l be difficult to understand for the reader (2 Pet 3:16). Often we do not have sufficient knowledge o f all the facts involved to gain a clear understanding o f some passages o f Scripture. Sometimes the difficulty o f correctly understand¬ ing is perhaps not so much a matter o f a "darkness" o f Scripture but o f a darkening o f our sinful and distorted mind. The enlightened student o f God's Word w i l l carefully compare one pas¬ sage o f Scripture with other passages, moving from clear and unambiguous statements to those that are more difficult to understand. One important hermeneutical principle derived from the clarity o f Scripture is that difficult pas¬ sages are not to be the starting point in any interpretation^ One has to start from the larger context o f clear scriptural statements o f truth. Fortunately, Scripture enlightens our mind and understanding (Ps 119:105). While even unbelievers can read and intellectually understand the literal and historical sense o f Scripture (the sensus literae), the illumi¬ nating H o l y Spirit must be present so that the message w i l l be perceived as true. Even the regenerate interpreter o f Scripture needs the continual aid and enlightenment o f the Spirit. Thus, the true significance o f the message o f Scripture can be understood only by minds enlightened by the H o l y Spirit. Only in accepting the biblical message as true and following it obediently does true and full understanding take place.

famous preface to the Epistle o f James comes to m i n d i n which he claims that whatever does not point to Christ or draws out Christ is not apostolic, even though Peter or Paul would teach it. On the other hand, whatever "drives home" Christ is apostolic, even i f it comes from Judas, Annas, Pilate, or Herod. Therefore, for Luther the content o f Scripture is Christ, and, from this fact, he seems repeatedly to assign its authority. A l l Scripture revolves around H i m as its authentic center. This "Christological concentration" can be seen as the decisive element in Luther's interpretation and use o f Scripture. Thus, Luther actually con¬ tended not "for the primacy o f Scripture i n the strict sense, but for the primacy o f the gospel to w h i c h Scripture attests and hence for the pri¬ macy o f Scripture as the attestation to the gospel." Thus, Luther valued the Bible, "because it is the cradle that holds Christ. For this reason, the gospel o f justification by grace through faith served as Luther's hermeneutical key to Scripture." 24

25

26

According to Luther, Scripture must be understood in favor o f Christ, not against H i m . This means, as has been pointed out, that i f a passage o f Scripture seems to be in conflict w i t h Luther's Christ-centered interpreta¬ tion, his interpretation becomes "gospel-centered criticism o f Scripture." Christ and Scripture can be set over against each other, because Luther ultimately ranked the personal Word (Christ), the spoken Word (Gospel), and the written Word (Scripture). This distinction and ranking leads to a canon w i t h i n the canon, in which Christ becomes the hermeneutical key to the proper understanding o f Scripture. O f course, this compromises the strength o f the Scripture principle, in which Scripture is the sole source o f its own exposition. For " i f Scripture is interpreted either by a doctrinal center or by a tradition it is no longer Scripture that is interpreting it¬ self—rather it is we who are interpreting Scripture by means o f a doctrine or tradition, to which Scripture is, in practice, being subjected." Thus, it is not surprising that Luther's Christological method is "sharpened into a tool o f theological criticism" i n which the interpreter becomes the judge and stands above Scripture. 27

28

4. The Christological Principle of Bible Interpretation

29

It was Martin Luther, who, while affirming the authority o f Scripture and heralding the sola scriptura principle, also proposed another hermeneutical principle that can be termed the "Christological principle." This Christological principle has become responsible for a subtle, yet sig¬ nificant, shift in understanding the authority and the hermeneutics o f the Bible. Luther's position on authority was closely connected to his under¬ standing o f the gospel. Apparently, for Luther it was Christ and the gospel o f justification by faith alone to which Scripture attests that constituted the center o f Scripture and ultimately its final authority. Here, Luther's

23

40

Ellen G. White did not mean to separate Christ from the Scriptures when she wrote ['the sacrifice o f Christ as an atonement for sin is the great truth around which all other truths cluster. I n order to be rightly understood and appreciated, every truth in the Word o f God, from Genesis to Revelation, must be studied in the light that streams from the cross o f Calvary" (Ev 190)‫ל‬ She was not proposing a theological center to function as a tool for t h e o l o g f cal criticism, a canon within the canon. Rather, "every truth in the Word of God, from Genesis to Revelation, is to be studied in the light that streams from the cross o f Calvary" (Ev 190, emphasis supplied). 41

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture Thus Ellen G. White could affirm the centrality o f certain biblical themes without denigrating other parts o f Scripture as unimportant. For no man has the right to judge Scripture by selecting those passages that are deemed more important than others. A l l Scripture is given by inspiration and is therefore profitable to make us wise unto salvation (2 T i m 3:16). 30

5. The Relationship Between Christ and Scripture H o w are we then to see the relationship between Christ and Scrip¬ ture? The living and speaking God o f Scripture has chosen to reveal Him¬

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture The Spirit o f Christ who indwells Christians never leads them to doubt, criticize, go beyond, or fall short o f Bible teachings. Instead, the Holy Spirit makes us appreciate the divine authority o f Scripture. Sola scriptura without Christ is empty, but Christ without Scripture—whose son is He? Without Scripture we would not know Jesus as the Messianic Christ, and He could not be our Savior. Thus, our loyalty to the Bible is part o f our loyalty to Christ. What is needed is not our human criticism o f Scripture—not even in the name o f Christ—but the critical examination o f ourselves, the church, and all other areas by Scripture for which the bibli¬ cal text alone is divinely fitted. Through this the Scriptures are allowed to be the controlling principle and final authority for theology, faith, and prac¬ tice.

self through the Word. God also has seen fit to commit His spoken w o r d through the biblical authors to the medium o f writing, thus generating the Bible, the written Word o f God. It seems that one needs to believe Scripture before one can believe the Christ o f Scripture. The Word-incarnate (Jesus Christ) cannot be sepa¬ rated from the Word-inscripturated (Holy Scripture). I n fact, there exists a very close and intimate relationship between Christ and the Scriptures. It is undoubtedly true that Christ is central in the Scriptures. Christ Him¬ self showed the disciples how Scripture pointed to H i m (Luke 24:25¬ 27). Scripture testifies about Christ (John 5:39). However, we have to distinguish carefully between a central theme or person i n Scripture and postulating a theological center whereby other portions and statements o f Scripture are relegated to a secondary or inferior status. A theological center that functions as a hermeneutical key leads only to a canon w i t h i n the canon that does not do justice to the fullness, richness, and breadth o f divine truth as we find it i n all o f Scripture. 31

We need to allow Scripture i n its entirety (tota scriptura),

in all its

multifaceted voices and genres, to reveal the richness and depth o f God's wisdom to us. Only such a symphonic reading o f the Bible, under the uni¬ fying guidance o f the H o l y Spirit, w i l l be able to do justice to the multiplex

Sola Scriptura or Prima

Scriptura?

To affirm that Scripture is the sole final source for its own exposition is more than to uphold the primacy o f Scripture. This is affirmed even by the Roman Catholic Church. However, in Roman Catholic dogma it is the church, and the church only, w i t h its tradition, that claims the right to interpret Scripture authentically and authoritatively. Thus Scripture, even though it is the primary source for theology, is domesticated by the hermeneutical spectacles o f the church and its tradition. This is what the Protestant Reformers protested against when they affirmed sola scriptura. 33

34

To opt merely for the primacy o f Scripture, rather than for Scripture alone as the final norm and ultimate authority for faith and practice, is to part ways w i t h the Protestant principle that Scripture alone is the final norm for theology and the sole source o f its o w n interpretation. Protes¬ tantism claimed more than the superiority o f Scripture over against other sources, or even its priority. It claimed that Scripture alone is the sole source o f its own exposition. Otherwise Scripture no longer can be the final authority in theology nor can it be the place i n which theological reflection originates and reaches its conclusions.

phenomena o f Scripture. God sends the Holy Spirit to lead us to the L i v i n g Word (Jesus Christ) through the written Word (Holy Scripture). Scripture is central to our faith and devotion, because there is no other explicit witness to Jesus Christ. We have no other Christ than the one the biblical writers present to us. The Bi¬ ble is the place i n which God has told us about Himself. " B o w i n g to the liv¬ ing Lord entails submitting mind and heart to the written Word. Disciples individually and churches corporately stand under the authority o f Scripture because they stand under the lordship o f Christ, who rules by Scripture. This is not bibliolatry but Christianity i n its most authentic f o r m . "

2. Richard M . Davidson, "Biblical Interpretation," in Handbook of Seventhday Adventist Theology, ed. Raoul Dederen (Hagerstown, M D : Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2000), p. 62. On the biblical teaching of revelation and

42

43

32

References Unless otherwise indicated, biblical quotations are from the New Interna¬ tional Version. 1. Gerhard F. Hasel, Understanding the Living Word of God (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1980), pp. 77-78.

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture inspiration, see also the balanced article by Peter M . van Bemmelen, "Revelation and Inspiration," in Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist Theology, pp. 22-57. 3. John M . Fowler, "Sin," in Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist Theology, p. 236. 4. A notable exception is the discussion in William J. Larkin, Jr., Culture and Biblical Hermeneutics: Interpreting and Applying the Authoritative Word in a Relativistic Age (Grand Rapids, M I : Baker Book House, 1988), pp. 293-304. I am also grateful to Jens Schwenger to have made available his research on this issue and for stimulating discussions that have pointed me to some of these im¬ portant aspects in biblical hermeneutics. Yet, I take responsibility for the content and conclusions reached in this study. 5. On the role of human reason in theology see Frank M . Hasel, "Theology and the Role of Reason," Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 4, no. 2 (1993): 172-198. 6. Peter A. Angeles, "Doubt," in Dictionary of Philosophy (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1981), pp. 65-66. 7. Larkin, p. 295. 8. Ibid. 9. Ibid., p. 296. 10. Ibid., p. 298. 11. Helge Stadelmann, Grundlinien eines bibeltreuen Schriftverstăndnisses, (Wuppertal: R. Brockhaus Verlag, 1985), p. 94. 12. Kevin Vanhoozer, "The Voice and the Actor: A Dramatic Proposal about the Ministry and Minstrelsy of Theology," in Evangelical Futures: A Conver¬ sation on Theological Method, ed. John G. Stockhouse, Jr. (Grand Rapids, M I : Baker Book House, 2000), p. 85. 13. David Cupples, The Devotional Life of a Theological Student (Leicester, England: Religious and Theological Studies Fellowship, 1987), p. 10. 14. In 1847, several years before the Seventh-day Adventist church was for¬ mally organized in 1863, James White felt it necessaiy to state publicly his al¬ legiance to the historic Protestant principle on religious authority when he wrote: "The Bible is a perfect, and complete revelation. It is our only rule of faith and practice" (James White, A Word to the Little Flock, 1847), p. 13. In similar fash¬ ion Ellen G. White has stated that "In our time . . . there is need of a return to the great Protestant principle—the Bible, and the Bible only, as the rule of faith and duty" (GC [1888] 204-205, emphasis supplied). 15. Davidson, p. 64. 16. Davidson has pointed out that "for example, in Romans 3:10-18 we have scriptural citations from Ecclesiastes (7:20), Psalms (14:2, 3; 5:10; 10:7). and Isaiah (59:7-8). Scripture is regarded as an inseparable, coherent whole" (Davidson, p. 64). 17. Ibid. 18. Peter M . van Bemmelen, p. 37. 19. Davidson, p. 65. 20. Ibid. This also applies to parables. They are stories that illustrate spiritual truths. Even though the details regarding people, events, times, and places in the 44

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture parables may not be actually historical, the spiritual truths they convey are literal and real. 21. A standard work on this topic is still E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (Grand Rapids, M I : Baker Book House, 1995, [originally 1898]; also Walter Buhlmann and Karl Scherer, Sprachliche Stilfiguren der Bibel: Von Assonanz bis Zahlenspruch (Giessen: Brunnen Verlag, 1994). 22. Cf. Gerhard F. Hasel, pp. 100-105, on the differences of those translations. 23. It is Luther's courage to emphasize Scripture alone as the authoritative norm by which every doctrine of the church is to be tested that seems to be what most impressed Ellen G. White about the great Protestant reformer. Ellen G. White clearly did not approve everything Martin Luther said or taught (cf. The Great Controversy, chapters 7 and 8, pp. 120-170; esp. pp. 139, 148-149. 24. Cf. Frank M . Hasel, Script ure in the Theologies of W. Pannenberg and D. G. Bloesch: An Investigation and Assessment of Its Origin, Nature, and Use (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1996), pp. 44-46. 25. Stanley J. Grenz, Renewing the Center: Evangelical Theology in a PostTheological Era (Grand Rapids, M I : Baker Book House, 2000), pp. 57-58. 26. Ibid., p. 58. 27. Paul Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther trans. Robert C. Schultz (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966), p. 81. 28. Brian Gaybba, The Tradition: An Ecumenical Breakthrough? (Rome: Herder, 1971), p. 221. 29. Werner Georg Kiimmel, The New Testament: The History of the Investiga¬ tion of Its Problems, trans. S. McLean Gilmour and Howard C. Kee (Nashville: Abingdon, 1972), p. 24. 30. "Do not let any living man come to you and begin to dissect God's Word, telling what is revelation, what is inspiration and what is not, without a rebuke. . . . We want no one to say, 'This I will reject, and this will I receive,' but we want to have implicit faith in the Bible as a whole and as it is" (Ellen G. White, 7BC 919, emphasis supplied, cf. COL 39; I S M 17, 42, 245; 5T ‫־‬700-701 8T319). 31. The definitive study on Jesus' understanding and use of Scripture is John Wenham, Christ and the Bible (Grand Rapids, M I : Baker Books, 1994). 32. James I . Packer, Truth and Power: The Place of Scripture in the Christian Life (Wheaton, IL: Harold Shaw Publishers, 1996), p. 40. The term "Bibliolatry" implies that the Bible is being turned into an idol. As Protestants we do not wor¬ ship the paper and ink and the leather cover that goes to make up a Bible. We love this Book because of its message. Its very words are treasured in our hearts because we believe that God wanted to communicate His message through these words and that it is through these words that our sinful hearts are brought closer to the Lord Jesus Christ. 33. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church (Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994) pp. 26-38. 34. '"The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, wheth¬ er m its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living, 45

Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture teaching office of the church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.' [DV 10 § 2] This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, p. 27). "It is clear therefore that, in the supremely wise arrangement o f God, sacred Tradition, Sacred Scrip¬ ture, and the Magisterium of the church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others" [DV 10 § 3] (ibid, p. 29).

CHAPTER IV

REVELATION AND INSPIRATION Fernando Canale

Selected Bibliography Davidson, Richard M . "Biblical Interpretation." In Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist Theology, ed. Raoul Dederen, pp. 58-104. Hagerstown, M D : Re¬ view and Herald Publishing Association, 2000. Grudem, Wayne A. "Scripture's Self-Attestation and the Problem of Formulating a Doctrine of Scripture." In Scripture and Truth, eds. D. A. Carson and John Woodbridge, pp. 19-59, 359-368. Grand Rapids, M I : Zondervan, 1982. Hasel, Frank M . Scripture in the Theologies ofW. Pannenberg andD. G. Bloesch: An Investigation and Assessment of its Origin, Nature and Use. Frankfurt/ Main: Peter Lang Verlag, 1996. . "Theology and the Role of Reason" Journal ofthe Adventist Theological Society 4, no. 2 (1993): 172-198. Hasel, Gerhard F. Biblical Interpretation Today. Washington, D . C : Biblical Re¬ search Institute, 1985. Larkin, William J , Jr. Culture and Biblical Hermeneutics: Interpreting and Applying the Authoritative Word in a Relativistic Age. Grand Rapids, M I : Baker Book House, 1988. Maier, Gerhard. Biblical Hermeneutics. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1994. Satterthwaite, Philip E. and David F. Wright, eds. A Pathway into the Holy Scripture. Grand Rapids, M I : Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1994. Schnabel, Eckhard. Inspiration und Offenbarung: Die Lehre vom Ursprung und Wesen der Bibel. Wuppertal: R. Brockhaus Verlag, 1997. van Bemmelen, Peter M . "Revelation and Inspiration." In Handbook of Seventhday Adventist Theology, ed. Raoul Dederen, pp. 22-57. Hagerstown, MD: Re¬ view and Herald, 2000. Weeks, Noel. The Sufficiency of Scripture. Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1988. Zinke, E. Edward. " A Conservative Approach to Theology," Supplement to Ministry 50/10 (1977): 24A-24P.

Introduction We know about God only by way o f His revelation, and Christians have generally recognized Scripture as the public and specific revelation o f divine thought and w i l l to us. Besides God's special revelation i n Scripture (2 T i m 3:16), theologians also speak about a general revelation through na¬ ture by which all people have some knowledge o f a supreme Being. God has specifically presented us w i t h such a thought in Scripture (e.g., Rom 1:18-20). This chapter w i l l discuss the biblical evidence for the inspiration o f Scripture and for the various models used to articulate it. I t w i l l suggest a new understanding o f the evidence based on biblical presuppositions and a careful listening to the entire range o f the biblical evidence.

1. Revelation, Scripture, and Interpretation With the arrival o f the modern and postmodern ages, many Christians have concluded that the existence o f a special cognitive revelation from God is impossible. Unfortunately, these theologians attempt to interpret Scripture from the assumption that it was written only by human beings. They are dogmatically persuaded that God cannot communicate knowledge to hu¬ man beings. Scripture and theology, then, are the product o f ever-changing human imaginations. Thus, these theologians deny Peter's conviction that in Scripture we do not find myths but truths (2 Pet 1:16). Author and Interpretation Whenever we read a text, we correctly assume that someone has writ¬ ten it. We do not always need to k n o w the author o f a text to understand its meaning, but such knowledge may add depth to the meaning. The same dynamic takes place when we read Scripture. Most o f the time we understand the face-value meaning o f texts. I f we are convinced that God

46

47

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration is the author o f what we read i n Scripture, our theological understanding o f it w i l l differ considerably from a reader who is persuaded that Scripture was written by well-intentioned religious persons describing their own experi¬ ences. Thus, the understanding of who the author or authors o f Scripture are becomes a pivotal presupposition from which believers and theologians ap¬ proach their interpretation o f Scripture, formulate Christian teachings, and experience its transforming power i n everyday life. I n short, our understand¬ ing o f Revelation-Inspiration (R-I) becomes a necessary assumption for our hermeneutics o f Scripture and its theology. 1

2. Biblical Evidence We k n o w that someone is the author o f Scripture. Yet, how do we know who the person or persons were? I n answering this question, we begin by paying close attention to what biblical authors have to say about the origin o f Scripture. Extensive O l d and N e w Testament evidence tells us that biblical authors considered God to be the author o f Scripture. The classical passages used i n the formulation o f the biblical doctrine o f Scrip¬ ture are 2 Timothy 3:15-17 and 2 Peter 1:20-21. Paul's "theopneustos" Paul's statement on the origin o f Scripture is brief and general: " A l l Scripture is inspired by God [pasa graphe theopneustosT (2 T i m 3:16, N A B ) . While our w o r d "inspiration" comes from the Latin equivalent, "divinitus inspirata" Paul uses the word "theopneustos" which literally means "God-breathed." We have no idea about what a "divine breathing" could mean when literally applied to the generation o f Scripture, yet we may attempt to understand it metaphorically. Thus understood, the text is saying that God is directly involved i n the origin o f Scripture, although it does not explain the mode and particulars o f divine operation. Peter's

^pheromenoF

Peter's remarks on the origin o f Scripture are more nuanced, ana¬ lytic, and specific. B y stating that "men spoke from God being led [pheromenoi,"being moved"] by the H o l y Spirit" (2 Pet 1:21), Peter ex¬ plicitly underlines the fact that human beings have written Scripture under the leading o f the H o l y Spirit. I n short, both God and human beings were involved in the generation o f Scripture.

Yet Peter carefully and forcefully qualified the intervention o f h u m a n agents. " K n o w i n g this first: every prophecy o f Scripture does not come into being [ginetai] from [one's] o w n interpretation [epiluseds]" (2 Pet 1:20). Given the context in which he uses the Greek word epilusis, Peter may be arguing that even when human beings were involved i n w r i t i n g Scripture they did not originate the explanations, expositions, or interpre¬ tations o f the various subject matters presented there. In a follow-up sentence Peter explains that "not by the w i l l o f man was ever a prophecy brought about/derived [fromphero], but men spoke from God, being led [pheromenoi] by the Holy Spirit" (2 Pet 1:21). Peter again denies the human origin o f Scripture by excluding the w i l l o f human beings. What d i d human beings do? They spoke (elalesan), proclaimed, and communicated the explanations, expositions, and interpretations that originated in God as author. Speech and writing are expressions o f thought. Thus, God's direction accom¬ panied the writers o f Scripture not only when they wrote but also when they spoke. What they said was the manifestation o f God's thoughts and actions. The Problem Behind Revelation-Inspiration Notably, while Peter and Paul unequivocally affirm God's direct in¬ volvement i n the generation o f Scripture, neither explains the concrete ways i n which the divine and human agencies interfaced, nor details their specific modus operandi. Scripture nowhere addresses this problem. To provide answers o f our o w n is to embark on a theological task, for theol¬ ogy searches for understanding. The statements o f Paul and Peter teach rather significantly that G o d is the author o f Scripture, o f all Scripture (2 T i m 3:16; 2 Pet 1:20-21). Theologians should find a way to understand how this took place, and, at the same time, account for the human side that appears in the w a y i n w h i c h Scripture was conceived and written. The various answers given to this question throughout history have become leading hermeneutical presuppositions. They decidedly influence the entire task o f exegetical and theological research, even to the p o i n t o f dividing Christianity into two distinctive schools o f thought across de¬ nominational lines.

3. Method and Models Before briefly considering some leading models o f interpretation o f R-I, we make a methodological "rest stop." We need (1) to ascertain w i t h 49

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration is the author o f what we read in Scripture, our theological understanding o f it w i l l differ considerably from a reader who is persuaded that Scripture was written by well-intentioned religious persons describing their own experi¬ ences. Thus, the understanding of who the author or authors o f Scripture are becomes a pivotal presupposition from which believers and theologians ap¬ proach their interpretation o f Scripture, formulate Christian teachings, and experience its transforming power in everyday life. In short, our understand¬ ing o f Revelation-Inspiration (R-I) becomes a necessary assumption for our hermeneutics o f Scripture and its theology. 1

2. Biblical Evidence We know that someone is the author o f Scripture. Yet, how do we know who the person or persons were? I n answering this question, we begin by paying close attention to what biblical authors have to say about the origin o f Scripture. Extensive O l d and N e w Testament evidence tells us that biblical authors considered God to be the author o f Scripture. The classical passages used i n the formulation o f the biblical doctrine o f Scrip¬ ture are 2 Timothy 3:15-17 and 2 Peter 1:20-21. Paul's "theopneustos" Paul's statement on the origin o f Scripture is brief and general: " A l l Scripture is inspired by God [pasa graphe theopneustos}" (2 T i m 3:16, N A B ) . While our word "inspiration" comes from the Latin equivalent, "divinitus inspirata" Paul uses the w o r d "theopneustos," which literally means "God-breathed." We have no idea about what a "divine breathing" could mean when literally applied to the generation o f Scripture, yet we may attempt to understand it metaphorically. Thus understood, the text is saying that God is directly involved i n the origin o f Scripture, although it does not explain the mode and particulars o f divine operation. Peter's

"pheromenoV

Yet Peter carefully and forcefully qualified the intervention o f human agents. " K n o w i n g this first: every prophecy o f Scripture does not come into being [ginetai] from [one's] o w n interpretation [epiluseds]" (2 Pet 1:20). Given the context in which he uses the Greek w o r d epilusis, Peter may be arguing that even when human beings were involved in writing Scripture they did not originate the explanations, expositions, or interpre¬ tations o f the various subject matters presented there. In a follow-up sentence Peter explains that "not by the w i l l o f man was ever a prophecy brought about/derived [fromphero], but men spoke from God, being led [pheromenoi] by the Holy Spirit" (2 Pet 1:21). Peter again denies the human origin o f Scripture by excluding the w i l l o f human beings. What did human beings do? They spoke (elalesan), proclaimed, and communicated the explanations, expositions, and interpretations that originated in God as author. Speech and writing are expressions o f thought. Thus, God's direction accom¬ panied the writers o f Scripture not only when they wrote but also when they spoke. What they said was the manifestation o f God's thoughts and actions. The Problem Behind Revelation-Inspiration Notably, while Peter and Paul unequivocally affirm God's direct in¬ volvement i n the generation o f Scripture, neither explains the concrete ways i n which the divine and human agencies interfaced, nor details their specific modus operandi. Scripture nowhere addresses this problem. To provide answers o f our o w n is to embark on a theological task, for theol¬ ogy searches for understanding. The statements o f Paul and Peter teach rather significantly that God is the author o f Scripture, o f all Scripture (2 T i m 3:16; 2 Pet 1:20-21). Theologians should find a way to understand how this took place, and, at the same time, account for the human side that appears i n the way in which Scripture was conceived and written. The various answers given to this question throughout history have become leading hermeneutical presuppositions. They decidedly influence the entire task o f exegetical and theological research, even to the point o f dividing Christianity into two distinctive schools o f thought across de¬ nominational lines.

Peter's remarks on the origin o f Scripture are more nuanced, ana¬ lytic, and specific. B y stating that "men spoke from God being led [pheromenoi "being moved"] by the H o l y Spirit" (2 Pet 1:21), Peter ex¬ plicitly underlines the fact that human beings have written Scripture under the leading o f the H o l y Spirit. I n short, both God and human beings were involved in the generation o f Scripture.

Before briefly considering some leading models o f interpretation o f R-I, we make a methodological "rest stop." We need (1) to ascertain w i t h

48

49

3. Method and Models

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration

precision the technical meaning o f R-I, (2) determine on what evidence theologians build their understanding o f R-I, and (3) note from what hermeneutical presuppositions they work out their views. This w i l l help us understand what others have said on this issue and what we should bear in m i n d i n our o w n interpretation o f it.

Scripture" involves theological analysis, access to the "phenomena" o f Scripture takes place through historical and literary analysis. The first line of evidence underlines the role o f the divine agency i n R - I while the sec¬ ond uncovers the role o f human agencies. Failure to integrate both lines o f evidence adequately leads respectively to either fundamentalist or liberal interpretations o f R-I.

Working Definition of Revelation-Inspiration Hermeneutics and Revelation-Inspiration When theologians deal w i t h the R - I doctrine, they use the words "rev¬ elation" and "inspiration" i n a technical sense. "Revelation" broadly re¬ fers to the process through which the contents o f Scripture emerged i n the m i n d o f prophets and apostles. "Inspiration," broadly speaking, refers to the process through which the contents i n the mind o f prophets and apostles were communicated i n oral or i n written forms. Thus, revelation is a cognitive process while inspiration is mainly a linguistic one. A w o r d o f caution is necessary to avoid confusion. Biblical writers did not use the w o r d "inspiration." Moreover, neither the biblical authors nor Ellen G. White used the notions o f "revelation" and "inspiration" i n the technical analytical sense i n w h i c h we are using them i n this chapter. They used them interchangeably. According to the context, they may refer to the origin o f contents i n the m i n d o f prophets and apostles, to the process o f communicating them i n a written format, or to both. N o t surprisingly, a large number o f Adventist and Evangelical theologians do the same. A proper understanding o f the origination o f Scripture, how¬ ever, requires a careful analysis o f the cognitive and literary processes involved. The Evidence On what evidence do theologians build their understandings o f R-I? Since one does not directly observe R - I i n process today, theologians work from the results o f R - I ; namely, from Scripture. Theologians have come to recognize two lines o f evidence i n Scripture. They are the doctrine o f Scripture and the phenomena o f Scripture. Since we have already dealt w i t h the biblical doctrine o f Scripture i n this section we w i l l briefly intro¬ duce the notion o f the "phenomena" o f Scripture.

It is evident that "the time has come for Seventh-day Adventists to move beyond apologetic concerns into the task o f developing a more con¬ structive theology o f inspiration." But how do we develop an understand¬ ing o f a subject matter that Scripture addresses indirectly? What is required is nothing short o f a constructive, pioneering task i n systematic theology. Since all theological construction is based on presuppositions, the formula¬ tion o f an Adventist understanding o f R-I could benefit from analyzing the way other interpretations have been conceived. 2

The systematic theological task envisaged here must take into consid¬ eration three different levels o f hermeneutics: (1) the hermeneutics o f the text, (2) the hermeneutics o f theological issues, and (3) the hermeneutics of philosophical principles. The interpretation o f biblical texts and theo¬ logical issues is conditioned by the doctrine o f R-I, which i n turn depends on the philosophical principles presupposed by the exegete. So, what are the presuppositions i n v o l v e d i n the understanding o f R-I? W h o decides w h i c h presuppositions should be used? Let us be¬ gin w i t h the latter question. Since b i b l i c a l evidence shows that the R - I phenomenon always involves divine and human actions, theologians unavoidably bring their o w n conceptions o f divine and human natures to play i n their doctrines o f R - I . These are hermeneutical philosophi¬ cal principles, because they are assumed as principles i n biblical and theological hermeneutics. God's nature and actions, as w e l l as human nature and actions, have been variously interpreted b y Christian theo¬ logians. Different views o f God and human nature have produced dif¬ ferent interpretations o f R - I . Let us review our discussion i n this methodological section. First, we decided to use the words "revelation" and "inspiration" in the technical sense to foster clarity. Second, we realized that a proper understanding o f R-I must start by listening to what biblical writers say about the origin o f Scripture and consider the actual work they produced (phenomena o f Scripture).

The Scriptural Phenomena. When theologians talk about the "phe¬ nomena" o f Scripture, they are not usually referring to biblical teachings in Scripture but to the characteristics o f Scripture as a written work and its entire contents. Consequently, while access to the biblical "doctrine o f

Third, we learned that doctrines o f R - I are interpretations involving not only biblical data but also presuppositions. A n y doctrine o f R-I is an

50

51

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration interpretation that hinges on the way i n which theologians understand the natures and actions o f God and o f human beings. W i t h these methodologi¬ cal clarifications in mind, we turn to the history o f interpretations o f R - I . Models of Revelation-Inspiration Theologians have interpreted R - I i n many ways, yet, most explana¬ tions fall into two main models o f interpretation, namely, the classical and modern models. We need to acquaint ourselves w i t h these models, because they have influenced the development o f Adventist thought on R-I. Verbal Inspiration. During the first eighteen centuries following the death o f Christ the doctrine o f R - I was not a disputed matter. Following Christ's example, His followers took the biblical teaching about its inspira¬ tion at face value. Briefly put, they assumed God, through human instru¬ mentality, wrote the Bible. As classical theologians maximized the role o f divine activity i n RI , they were minimizing the role o f human agencies, seeing prophets and apostles merely as instruments God used to write the very words o f Scrip¬ ture. Because God was believed to have written the words o f Scripture, this notion, which led to a high view o f biblical authority, came to be known as the "verbal" theory o f inspiration. The words o f the Bible are the words o f God. This view builds on an extrabiblical philosophical understanding o f hermeneutics. The replacement o f the biblical notion o f God w i t h the Greek idea o f a timeless God made the idea o f divine sovereign providence an overpowering, all-encompassing causal phenomenon. B y the fifth century A . D , Augustine already was using these ideas, linking the notion o f divine w i l l and activity w i t h the timeless nature o f God. Centuries later, it came to shape Luther's understanding o f the gospel, as well as the understanding o f the verbal inspiration o f Scripture. Consequently, the biblical affirmation that the H o l y Spirit led the prophets' writing was understood on the assump¬ tion that God operated as an irresistible sovereign influence, overruling any initiative originating in human freedom. On this assumption, God becomes not only the author o f Scripture but also the writer. 3

tation, spoke o f inspiration as divine superintendence i n the confluence o f the divine and human agencies. The sculptor-chisel-sculpture analogy helps to visualize the way in which the verbal theory o f inspiration conceives the manner i n which the divine and human agencies operate when generating the writings o f the Bible. As the sculptor, and not the chisel, is the author o f the work o f art, so God, and not the human writer, is the author o f Scripture. Human writers, as the chisel, play only an instrumental role. The most noticeable hermeneutical effects o f the verbal theory are recontextualization and inerrancy. (1) I n claiming that a timeless God is the author and writer o f Scripture, verbal inspiration places the origin o f biblical thought in the nonhistorical realm o f the supernatural. Historical contexts and contents are bypassed i n favor o f timeless divine truths. This nonhistorical recontextualization has assumed various forms. They spread from the classical depreciation o f the historical literal meaning o f bib¬ lical texts to allegorical spiritual meanings and to the fundamentalist reading of Scripture in which each biblical statement is an objective communication of supernatural absolute truth. (2) We are more familiar with the notion o f inerrancy, according to which every biblical statement is absolute truth. Encounter Revelation. Modern times generated a radically new un¬ derstanding o f R - I , based on complex philosophical arguments. Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834), the father o f modern theology, proposed a blueprint that later proponents o f encounter revelation w o u l d follow. Briefly put, revelation is a divine-human encounter devoid o f the impartation o f knowledge. "Thus, the content o f revelation is regarded no longer as knowledge about God, not even information from God, but God H i m self." Consequently, not a single word or thought that we find i n Scripture comes from God. Encounter revelation is the opposite o f verbal inspiration. 4

I f the contents o f Scripture do not come from God, then from where? The answer is simple: from the historically conditioned response o f human beings to the personal non-cognitive encounter w i t h God. The Bible is a human book like any other book. The study o f how the contents o f Scrip¬ ture originated is left to historical investigation. Assuming that God did not contribute to the contents o f Scripture, his¬ torical critics see Scripture as the product o f a long process o f cultural evo¬ lution. Human imagination, community, and tradition become the grounds from which the all-human books o f Scripture arise.

In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Evangelical theologians used the verbal inspiration theory to fight modernism w i t h its challenge to traditional Christian theology. Working from the philosophical hermeneutical perspective o f divine sovereign providence, Archibald A . Hodge (1823-1886) and Benjamin B . Warfield (1851-1921), while denying die-

Consequently, some exegetes believe that inspiration operates not on individuals but on the entire community. According to this view, "inspi¬ ration" did not reach the personal level o f prophetic thoughts or words

52

53

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration

directly but influenced the social level o f the community w i t h i n which the authors o f Scripture lived and wrote. Not surprisingly, Scripture's contents remain human, not divine. The foregoing change on how inspiration is viewed is a direct result o f the application o f Immanuel Kant's (1724-1804) restriction o f reason's capabilities to the realm o f time and space. Modern theologians found themselves assuming that God is timeless and that human reason cannot reach timeless objects. Within these param¬ eters, there can be no cognitive communication between God and human beings. B u t Christianity revolves around the notion that God relates to hu¬ man beings. Encounter revelation suggests that the divine-human relation (encounter) takes place not at the cognitive but at an "existential" or inner "personal" level, through the soul. Thus, revelation is a divine-human encounter, real and objective, but involving absolutely no communication from God. The most noticeable hermeneutical effects o f the encounter theory o f inspiration can be summed up in two words, recontextualization and criti¬ cism. (1) A s the verbal theory o f inspiration led to recontextualization so does the encounter theory o f revelation. While verbal inspiration assumes that Scripture reveals objective timeless truths, encounter revelation as¬ sumes that Scripture is a pointer to an existential, non-cognitive, divinehuman encounter. Scripture then has no revelatory contents but is simply a pointer or witness to revelation. (2) Since the content o f Scripture originat¬ ed (contrary to the views o f Paul and Peter) from the impulse and wisdom o f human beings, we must subject it to scientific criticism and use them for religious purposes only metaphorically. (3) Due to the human origination o f the biblical contents, the interpreter assumes Scripture contains errors not only i n historical details but also i n all that it expressly teaches, even teachings about God and His salvation.

Verbal Inspiration Early in the history o f our church Adventists used verbal inspiration as an apologetic argument against Deism. This trend intensified after the death o f Ellen G. White when Adventists faced modernism. During the first half o f the twentieth century, Carlyle B . Haynes, for ex¬ ample, addressed the issue in two chapters o f his God's Book. His implicit adoption o f the verbal theory o f inspiration appears when he affirms that "revelation is wholly supernatural, and altogether controlled by God." "Whether dealing either w i t h revelation or w i t h facts within his knowl¬ edge," explains Haynes, "the Bible writer required inspiration to produce a record preserved from all error and mistake." Absolute inerrancy follows total control o f the human agent by the H o l y Spirit; God is totally in control of the process o f writing, and the human agent is a very passive instrument. This concept may still be the default understanding o f R - I held by most Adventists who have not yet explicitly considered the issue. 6

1

8

9

10

Unknowingly, then, the verbal inspiration theory, embraced by con¬ servative Adventist theologians, draws from the Augustinian-Calvinistic understanding o f philosophical hermeneutical presuppositions derived from a particular Greek view o f reality. W h i l e the verbal theory affirms a high view o f Scripture, de facto it denies its revelatory supremacy (the sola scriptura principle) i n the task o f practicing Christian theology, since the theory itself is not built on biblical foundations. Thought Inspiration

H o w do these ideas affect Adventists today? Perhaps Edward Heppenstall properly described the general way i n which most Adven¬ tist writers approach the study o f R - I by saying that "this church has no clearly defined and developed doctrine o f revelation and inspiration. We have aligned ourselves w i t h the evangelical or traditional position."

Ellen G. White strongly influenced Adventist thought on R-I. B y her ex¬ ample and teachings, she pointed away from both verbal inspiration and en¬ counter revelation. This did not discourage some Adventists, however, past and present, from adopting such views. Attempting to understand R-I by tak¬ ing clues from Ellen G. White's teachings and prophetic experience, many Adventists have adopted the idea called "thought inspiration," convinced that their representation o f this view properly reflects her views on inspiration. Thus, by "thought inspiration" we mean, specifically, the theological reflec¬ tion o f some Adventist scholars on R - I , supposedly based on the views o f Ellen G. White on inspiration. These comments, therefore, not only affirm that the thoughts o f the prophets were inspired but that i n a very particular way, in the words o f Ellen G. White, the "men" themselves were inspired.

In this section our aim continues to be very modest, attempting only to describe from an overall perspective the main models o f R - I that Adventist theologians have adopted.

One o f the earliest expressions o f thought inspiration among Adventists took place i n 1883. I t affirmed "We [Adventists] believe the light given by God to his servants is by the enlightenment o f the mind, thus i m -

54

55

4. The Recent Adventist Discussion

5

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration parting the thought, and not (except in rare cases) the very words in which the ideas should be expressed."" On the basis that inspiration acts on biblical writers' thoughts, not on their words, this marks a clear departure from verbal inspiration. This initial statement was a sign along the way, not a theory. Eighty-seven years later, Edward Heppenstall articulated this insight w i t h i n a broad theoretical profile. Heppenstall's w o r k came as both an alternative to encounter revelation and a departure from verbal inspira¬ tion. Correctly rejecting the non-cognitive basis o f encounter revelation, Heppenstall proposed that divine revelation took place at the level o f the biblical writer's ideas, concepts, and teachings i n the m i n d o f the writer. Unfortunately he did not specify the means through which such conceptu¬ al revelation was formed. Also inspiration, says Heppenstall, took place in the m i n d o f the writer. He suggested that i n inspiration the H o l y Spirit took control o f the m i n d o f the human writer i n order to guarantee "the accura¬ cy o f that which is revealed." "Inspiration is co-extensive w i t h the scope o f what is revealed and assures us that the truths revealed correspond to what God had i n m i n d . " I n both revelation and inspiration God operates on thought, not on words. Through revelation ideas are generated i n the m i n d o f the prophet and through inspiration those ideas are faithfully com¬ municated. However, uncertainty is introduced on the basis that "one o f the unknown factors i n inspiration is the degree o f the H o l y Spirit's control over the minds o f the Bible writers." Heppenstall's position implied that divine inspiration does not reach to the words o f Scripture. Consequently, he advances to what could be called "thought inerrancy." Only biblical thoughts, not words, are inerrant. 12

13

14

15

Very conveniently, for the sake o f apologetics against biblical and scientific criticisms o f scriptural contents, the believer can argue that er¬ rors and inconsistencies are due to imperfect language, not to imperfect thought or truth. I n brief, according to thought inspiration, divine R - I op¬ erates in the truth behind the words but falls short o f affecting the words. Hence, in Scripture we have infallible truth presented i n fallible language. Scripture, therefore, contains errors i n matters o f detail which do not affect the revealed thought.

o f detail at the level o f words. Scripture's salvific message, however, re¬ mains inerrant. In 1991, coming precisely from the perspective o f biblical studies, Alden Thompson elevated the issue o f biblical inspiration to the forefront o f Adventist discussion. A year later, a group o f Adventist theologians published a critical response to his proposal. 16

17

Thompson distinguishes between revelation and inspiration. Revela¬ tion is the supernatural communication o f thoughts and truth to prophets, "some k i n d o f special input from God, a message from H i m to His crea¬ tures on earth." Divine thought is communicated by means o f supernatu¬ ral interventions, such as visions, dreams, a voice from heaven, miracles, words written on stone, and Jesus Christ. Inspiration, however, becomes a very fuzzy and subjective "fire in their bones" that moves prophets and apostles to write and to speak from the presence o f the H o l y Spirit. Far from claiming that inspiration transforms the words o f the prophets into the words o f God, Thompson thinks inspiration means, "God stays close enough to the writers so that the point comes through clear enough." Note that through inspiration God works on neither the prophet's thoughts nor his words. Inspiration is a divine presence that the prophet senses in the bones, not i n the mind. 18

19

20

The question is, who is originator o f the point that comes through "clear enough" in the words o f Scripture? A t this point another feature o f Thompson's view on R - I comes into view. While the entire Scripture is inspired (the divine presence felt in the bones o f the writer) only some por¬ tions are revealed (that is coming from divine thought, propositions and miraculous actions). Thompson argues this point by asserting, incorrectly, that "the Bible does not say that all Scripture was given by revelation." Reacting against this notion, Raoul Dederen concludes that "to hold that all is inspired but only part—i.e., a small part—is revealed and on that basis address and attempt to solve the apparently contradictory statements in Scripture remains unsatisfactory." 21

22

Working from Ellen G. White's classical statement on thought in¬ spiration, some scholars have concluded that thought inspiration works on the thinking process o f biblical writers but stops short o f reaching their words. They also assume a dichotomy between thought and words. Thoughts are independent from words. I n Scripture, then, we have perfeet truths or thoughts conveyed in imperfect fallible words. On this basis they suggest that Scripture presents a limited verbal errancy i n matters

I n fact, because Scripture does not assume the technical distinction between revelation and inspiration that we use to probe into the under¬ standing o f the origins o f Scripture, Paul claims that the entire contents o f Scripture originated i n God. Thus, according to Scripture, the entire Bible is both revealed and inspired. From where then, according to Thompson, do other portions o f Scrip¬ ture come? He correctly argues that many portions o f Scripture originate from research and experience. Such contents, however being o f human origin, can hold only authority when based on inspiration. Yet, i f biblical writers experienced inspiration neither cognitively nor linguistically but

56

57

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration subjectively as a fire in their bones, we are left w i t h the unavoidable conelusion that large portions o f Scripture present fallible human ideas. Thompson's use o f thought inspiration for exegetical purposes shows how the historical-critical method may be used in Adventist theology, namely, by circumscribing the biblical materials that fall outside the reach o f thought inspiration. Advantages and Difficulties of Thought Inspiration. Thought inspi¬ ration, as reflected by Adventist theologians noted above, involves posi¬ tive and negative points. On the positive side, for instance, it provides a middle way between modernistic non-cognitive encounter revelation and absolutely inerrant classical verbal inspiration. Thought inspiration also has the positive effect o f directing the interpreter's attention to the weight¬ ier matters discussed in Scripture and away from minutiae. Finally, this view o f inspiration has the obvious advantage o f accounting for biblical phenomena that do not fit w i t h i n the verbal inspiration theory. However, those reflections on thought inspiration have certain disad¬ vantages. The thought-words dichotomy leads to the claim that inspira¬ tion does not reach the words o f Scripture. Unfortunately, this claim and the thought-words dichotomy are not supported by Scripture, Ellen G. White, or philosophical analysis. A l t h o u g h thought inspiration accounts better for the phenomena o f Scripture and Ellen G. White's experience i n w r i t i n g her books than does verbal inspiration, a radical understanding o f it fails to account for the clear biblical claim that inspiration reaches the words (2 T i m 3:16). Moreover, a detailed study o f Ellen G. White's thought on inspiration seems to suggest that, according to her, divine inspiration does reach the words and assures the "total trustworthiness o f the biblical record." The classical Ellen G. White quotation that Adventist proponents o f thought inspiration use to persuade others o f their view reads: " I t is not the words o f the Bible that are inspired, but the men that were inspired. Inspira¬ tion acts not on the man's words or his expressions but on the man him¬ self, who, under the influence o f the H o l y Ghost, is imbued w i t h thoughts. Nevertheless, the words receive the impress o f the individual mind. The divine m i n d is diffused. The divine mind and w i l l is combined w i t h the human mind and w i l l ; thus the utterances o f the man are the w o r d o f G o d " (1SM 21). Unfortunately, they leave out the last sentence o f the paragraph in which Ellen G. White clearly says that inspiration reaches the words o f the prophets. Ellen G. White clearly says that divine inspiration—which includes our technical revelation and inspiration—works not on the words (as the verbal theory affirms) but in the formation o f the writer's thought. 23

58

Nevertheless inspiration reaches the words o f the prophets, which "are the words o f God." I n numerous passages, Ellen G. White refers to Scripture as "the inspired word," or "words" o f God (Ev 269; I S M 17; SC 108), and "words o f inspiration" (LS 198; 2T 605). I t seems clear that Ellen G. White would not support "thought" inspiration as many understand it at the beginning o f the twenty-first century. Consequently, it appears mis¬ leading to use one aspect o f her complex view on inspiration to give au¬ thority to a theory she would not approve. Although as Adventists we do not believe that the words o f Scripture were inspired, i.e., they were neither dictated nor do they represent the divine language per se, the process o f R - I nevertheless reaches the words of the prophets. I n other words, the H o l y Spirit guided the prophets in the w r i t i n g process, ensuring that the prophets' o w n words expressed the message they received i n a trustworthy and reliable form. Sometimes Ellen G. White did not k n o w how best to express what she was shown; "as m y pen hesitates a moment," she wrote "the appropriate words" came to her m i n d ( l M C P 3 1 8 ; 2 M R 156-157). Philosophical reflection suggests that "language and thinking about things are so bound together that it is an abstraction to conceive o f the sys¬ tem o f truths as a pregiven system o f possibilities o f being [thoughts] for which the signifying subject [biblical writer] selects corresponding signs [words]." Thought and words belong together. A thought w i t h no word or words to be communicated perishes i n the mind o f the thinker. 24

Another problem is that, for all practical purposes, thought inspiration as defined above reduces inspiration to revelation. We should explain. Technically, revelation deals w i t h the formation o f ideas in the mind o f biblical writers and inspiration as part o f the process o f communicating revelation i n written or in oral formats. When thought inspiration claims that divine assistance to the prophet does not reach the words it is thereby limiting divine intervention to revelation. The practical problem w i t h this view is that we have no access to prophetic thought, which died w i t h the prophets leaving only their fallible, human words. Finally, a thought-word dichotomy creates a disjunction between history and salvation that finds its ground not i n biblical but Platonic thinking. Since theological content is not tied strictly to the words o f Scripture, exegetes and theologians end up using their imagination and presenting i t as the theological content o f the text. N o t surprisingly, some Seventh-day Adventist theologians and scientists, trying to accom¬ modate the biblical account o f creation to evolutionary scientific teach¬ ings, use thought inspiration i n the form discussed above to justify their approach. 59

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration But i f the separation between thought and words makes room for small errors, w h y should it not also make room for substantial errors in theologi¬ cal teachings?

itly or i m p l i c i t l y involved in the conception and in the formulation o f each model o f R - I . Moving Beyond Encounter Revelation, Verbal Inspiration, and Thought Inspiration

Encounter Revelation N T scholar Herold Weiss' well-argued article, published in 1975, repre¬ sents another way o f making room for the use o f the historical-critical method in Adventist theology. Weiss believes revelation takes place as a non-cogni¬ tive divine human encounter. " I do not understand revelation," he explains,

Raoul Dederen approaches an understanding o f R-I b y using a differ¬ ent methodology. Instead o f embracing available interpretations for apolo¬ getic or hermeneutical purposes, Dederen subjects current interpretative patterns to criticism based on attentive listening to what biblical authors and Ellen G. White have to say on this issue. O n this basis, he finds the encounter revelation and thought inspiration alternatives wanting. 26

"to be essentially the communication of divine information given by the Spirit to the writers of the Bible; nor do I consider faith to be the acceptance of this information. Revelation, rather, is first of all, a divine disclosure that creates a community in which life expresses this revelation in symbols of action, imagination and thought under the guidance of prophets." 25

What, then, is the source o f the concepts and words o f Scripture? N o t God, but the prophets and apostles. This v i e w produces a dichotomy be¬ tween faith and belief. While belief belongs to the realm o f history and is verifiable, faith belongs to the realm o f the divine transcendence and is not verifiable. Scripture as a written work represents the thoughts and words o f the prophets, not o f God. The goal o f this exercise is not to find truth but to delineate the nonhistorical, non-cognitive mystical experience w i t h God i n order to inspire our o w n life experiences. Summing up these points, we can say that presently Adventist scholars work by assuming three different interpretations o f R-I. The differences re¬ veal different theological schools and paradigms. They decidedly influence the entire task o f exegetical and theological research even to the point o f dividing Adventists into distinctive schools o f thought across the world.

Dederen recognizes that revelation is not merely an intellectual phe¬ nomenon but a personal encounter o f the prophet w i t h God. Yet according to Scripture, he argues, in the encounter o f revelation, God communicates, though partially, knowledge about Himself and His w i l l . Moreover, the disjunction between divine act and human w o r d on w h i c h encounter rev¬ elation builds its case has no biblical support. This position can be argued only on a scientific and philosophical basis. 27

Proceeding on the same biblical basis, Dederen implicitly dismisses thought inspiration as discussed above. He argues that i n the Scriptures word and thought belong together. Consequently, "words are intrinsic to the revelation-inspiration process." Also correctly, he argues that after re¬ viewing Ellen G. White's writing on R - I "everything points to the fact that God who imbued the prophets' mind w i t h thoughts and inspired them in the fulfillment o f their task also watched over them in their attempts to express 'infinite ideas' and embody them in 'finite vehicles' o f human language." Scriptures are " i n the highest and truest sense God's creation." Finally, Dederen feels i l l at ease with the notion that Scripture is only partially revealed, but totally inspired, and encourages the church to find "other solutions." 28

29

30

31

5. Toward a Biblical Understanding of Revelation-Inspiration

This succinct evaluation disqualifies the three views o f R-I presently operative in Adventist theology. Because each view works from philo¬ sophical definitions o f hermeneutical presuppositions, no amount o f re¬ flection w i l l make them responsive to the entire range o f biblical evidence. Therefore, we must develop a new understanding by using biblical defini¬ tions o f the hermeneutical presuppositions involved i n R - I .

Should we choose one interpretation over the others? Alternatively, should we seek a new understanding? To answer these questions we must begin by evaluating present theories on R - I . H o w do we evaluate them? We assess them by carefully listening to all the evidence. Our understanding, then, without distortion, should account for tensions or contradictions found i n the full range o f Scripture's self-testimony and i n other phenomena o f Scripture. Moreover, we should look at the origin and content o f the philosophical hermeneutical presuppositions explic-

However, nothing is really new. I n our search for another model o f in¬ terpretation, we should recognize the strength and contributions o f present

60

61

Building F r o m Scripture

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration models on R-I. From "encounter" revelation we should retain the biblical conviction that God's work o f R - I takes place w i t h i n a personal histori¬ cal I-Thou relationship (e.g., Deut 34:10). From "thought" inspiration we should retain the biblical teaching that God's work o f R-I focuses on the thought-process level o f biblical writers (2 Pet 1:21). From "verbal" in¬ spiration we should retain the biblical teaching that the divine work o f R-I also reaches the level o f the words (2 T i m 3:16). Finally, because i n Scripture God has incarnated His thoughts i n human thought and writing, the human and divine elements are inseparable. Consequently, we should never attempt to distinguish between divine and human contributions i n the conception and i n the writing o f Scripture.

divine history to take place w i t h i n human history. I t is not the prophet, but God who translates His ideas into our cognitive and linguistic patterns. The idea that God acts historically i n time, which is assumed by the biblical writers and Ellen G. White and which lies at the foundation o f the Great Controversy theme, requires a reinteipretation o f the philosophical hermeneutical presuppositions that underlie encounter revelation, verbal inspiration, and thought inspiration, understood as a radical dichotomy between words and thoughts.

From this starting point we should consider the many ways i n w h i c h God and the biblical writers interacted i n the process o f conceiving the ideas and o f gathering the information we find i n Scripture. We should ask the same regarding the process through w h i c h these ideas and in¬ formation were put into w r i t i n g (Heb 1:1). I t is true that God acts i n ways hidden from our sight. Yet, Scripture and Ellen G. White give us abundant evidence on which to b u i l d our understanding. The evidence we find i n them includes both the self-testimony and the phenomena o f Scripture.

I n contrast to the classical, evangelical, and modern idea that God used only one pattern o f divine operation i n R - I , Scripture speaks about a variety o f divine patterns. The introduction to the Epistle to the Hebrews affirms that " i n the past God spoke to our forefathers through the proph¬ ets at various times (polumeros) and i n various ways (polutropos), but i n these last days he has spoken to us by his Son" (Heb 1:1).

I n our search for a biblical understanding o f R - I we w i l l take two steps. First, we w i l l consider carefully the hermeneutical presuppositions involved i n our interpretation o f the human and the divine agents involved in R - I . Second, we w i l l attempt to formulate i n a succinct manner a bibli¬ cal understanding o f R-I by using the notions obtained i n the first step to understand the general statements o f Paul and Peter on inspiration (2 T i m 3:16; 2 Pet 1:20^21). Foundational Hermeneutical Presuppositions The key to any interpretation lies i n applying the appropriate hermeneutical principles. Basic scientific procedure requires that we derive our hermeneutical presuppositions from the thing we want to understand. Since i n our case we are trying to understand the origin o f Scripture, we not only must listen to what biblical authors say about R - I but also take note o f the hermeneutical presuppositions they used, rather than adopting them from human philosophy and science. Fundamentally, we presuppose a God who personally acts w i t h i n the flow o f human history.

Revelation

Some Adventists have begun to recognize this variety and have sug¬ gested that to the generally accepted "prophetic" model we should add the "research model" o f revelation. Other suggestions include the "witness," "counselor," "epistolary," and "literary" patterns o f revelation. Additional analytical work needs to be done i n order to discover, as far as possible, in what ways divine and human agencies contributed to the generation o f biblical thought and information. It seems clear that, i n the origination o f Scripture, divine and human agencies interacted i n at least the following patterns: Theophanic (Exod 3:1-5), prophetic (Rev 1:1-3), verbal (Exod 31:18), historical (Luke 1:1-3), wisdom (Eccl 1:1, 12-14; 12:9-11), and existential (Lam 3:1). Analyzing these patterns and their hermeneutical presuppositions w i l l allow us to un¬ derstand better how the entire Bible resulted from revelation and from in¬ spiration and w i l l enable us to overcome the radical thought-versus-words disjunction implicit i n thought inspiration. Inspiration

Dederen affirms, "revelation takes place and unfolds w i t h i n history." B y adapting His infinite thoughts, ideas, and actions to our creaturely level, to our limited, imperfect thought patterns and words, God enables

The prophets have not left us much information about the ways i n which divine interventions operated while they were communicating their messages i n oral or i n written forms. Yet, from the information available, we are entitled to draw some working conclusions. It seems the biblical writers received ideas and information before they sat down to write. The role o f the H o l y Spirit i n inspiration, therefore,

62

63

32

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration was not primarily to generate thoughts but to assure the trustworthy com¬ munication o f the information received. When God sent Moses to liberate Israel from Egyptian bondage, the Moses-Aaron team worked i n ways like the God-prophet team. Moses represented God i n "putting words" into Aaron's mouth. Meanwhile, Aar¬ on, speaking for Moses to the people, played the role o f the prophet. The act o f "putting words i n the mouth" o f someone meant that the re¬ cipient became a subservient representative o f another; the representative, however, had freedom to represent. He or she had, so to speak, power o f attorney. Verbatim representation makes no sense. Aaron had strong verbal skills, and God called h i m to use his gift. I n the same way, prophets and apostles, as representatives o f God, were subservient to His thoughts but expressed them according their understanding and manner o f expression.

self and His w o r d to us. In Scripture, then, we find God's truth expressed in an imperfect human mode o f communication. God wanted it to be this way, because it is the best way to reveal Himself and His salvific truths to us.

33

D i d divine inspiration always erase or overrule the imperfections o f the human mode o f thinking and o f writing? Contrary to the claims o f "verbal" inspirationists, the phenomena o f Scripture clearly shows that it did not. God used our imperfect means o f communication to reveal H i m -

The goal o f inspiration is not to upgrade the human mode o f thinking or o f writing but to ensure that writers do not replace God's truth w i t h their o w n interpretations. The H o l y Spirit's guidance d i d not overrule the thinking and the writing process o f biblical writers but supervised the process o f writing i n order to maximize clarity o f ideas and to prevent, i f necessary, the distortion o f revelation, or changing divine truth into a lie. In other words, we should not conceive o f the continuous guidance o f the Holy Spirit i n the process o f writing as continuous divine intervention, causing the choice o f every thought and w o r d i n Scripture. Instead, we should consider â less intrusive pattern o f inspiration, one more consistent with the freedom o f human writers. Ellen G. White's comments on her o w n writing experience provide us w i t h examples o f the many remedial-corrective patterns o f direct in¬ tervention that the H o l y Spirit used during the process o f inspiration. For instance, we note enhancing the memory (2SG 292-293; I S M 36-37), helping find a "fit w o r d " ( 2 M R 156-157; 1MCP 318), and giving new rev¬ elation ( 3 S M 36, 110). From these examples we can see that God is not causing the words by overruling the normal function o f the human agency. On the contrary, we see the thinking and the writing processes freely taking place i n the human agency under the careful guidance o f the H o l y Spirit. Finally, Scripture presents an example o f an occasional divine inter¬ vention pattern also used by the H o l y Spirit to guide biblical writers. We note Balaam's prophecies ( N u m 22:1-24:25). The biblical text and Ellen G. White's comments make it clear that Balaam's freedom was overridden by the H o l y Spirit ( N u m 22:18, 20, 28-31; PP 439, 443, 448-449). This pattern is not the usual pattern o f divine inspiration, as the verbal theory suggests. Obviously, we cannot apply Balaam's pattern o f divine operation to the biblical prophets. This incident helps us to see that God w i l l not allow Himself to be misrepresented by recognized prophets who, because o f self-interest, are w i l l i n g to change God's truth into a lie. The Spirit made sure that chosen prophets d i d not change divine truths into human imagination. On the forgoing basis we can affirm the total reliability o f Scripture within the parameters o f the normal human limitations o f the thought and the linguistic process. Since the whole Bible is revealed and inspired within the level o f human thought and language, it does not represent divine per¬ fection; yet, its words reliably disclose God's thoughts and w i l l to us.

64

65

A t this point, we must bear i n mind that, i n revelation, divine thought adapted itself to the limitations and imperfections o f human-thought pro¬ cesses. W i t h inspiration, divine thought, already adapted to the human mode o f thinking, adjusts itself to human-writing patterns. The mode o f thinking and w r i t i n g we find i n Scripture, then, is not divine, but human. Therefore, Ellen G. White tells us "the Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode o f thought and expression. I t is that o f humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented. M e n w i l l often say such an expression is not like God. However, God has not put Himself i n words, i n logic, i n rhetoric, on trial i n the Bible. The writers o f the Bible were God's penmen, not His pen" ( I S M 2 1 , italics supplied). This does not mean that the content o f Scripture is unreliable. It means only that we must not expect i n Scripture divine absolute perfection to the minutest detail, as i f God would have used His perfect mode o f thinking and writing. The true content generated by revelation becomes expressed in the imperfect mode o f human thought and writing. For instance, biblical writers did not have perfect memories; they forgot things as we do. They did not possess perfect sensory perception. They were not able to grasp all the richness o f divine thoughts and ideas revealed to them. Moreover, our words may have several, even contra¬ dictory, meanings. Our syntax allows for arranging sentences i n different ways w i t h different meanings, and so on. A l l this is part o f the human mode o f thinking and writing that God used i n revealing and i n inspiring Scripture.

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration This view o f inspiration explains why certain discrepancies and the lack o f absolute precision in matters o f detail that we find in the phenomena o f Scripture do not affect the trustworthy communication o f revealed contents.

6. The H o l y Spirit's "guidance" or " m o v i n g " harnessed the freedom and literary skills o f human agencies i n their historical and spiritual devel¬ opment. Divine overruling o f the human agency was not the main pattern of divine "guidance" or " m o v i n g " but a possible last resort to avoid human misrepresentation.

6. A Biblical Model of Revelation-Inspiration

7. Because the guidance o f the Holy Spirit respected human modes o f thinking and writing, we should not expect to find in Scripture the absolute perfection that belongs only to the inner life o f the Trinity. On the contrary, we should not be surprised to find in Scripture imperfections and limitations that essentially belong to human modes o f knowing and writing. 8. Although the divine "guiding" and " m o v i n g " operated on human agencies, through them it reached the words o f Scripture. I n this sense the Biblical Model o f R - I is "verbal." 9. Divine "guidance" i n the process o f writing did not assure absolute divine perfection, but i n their entirety the Scriptures truthfully and trustworthily represent God's teachings, w i l l , and works. In short, God, not the human writers, is the author o f Scripture i n the sense that He is the source o f content, action, and interpretation.

I n this section, we bring together our analysis o f biblical evidence gathered thus far. H o w do the biblical understanding o f God, the diversity o f His operations i n the process o f creating the contents o f Scripture (rev¬ elation), and the communication o f it i n oral and written ways (inspiration) shape our understanding o f R-I? We shall seek to describe what can be designated a Biblical Model. Earlier we discovered that the classical statements o f Paul and Peter on inspiration (2 T i m 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20-21) set the general parameters w i t h i n which we have attempted to understand the H o l y Spirit's "guid¬ ance" and " m o v i n g " o f human agencies involved i n the process o f writing Scripture. Since those statements d i d not distinguish technically between the processes o f origination o f contents and o f writing, we should under¬ stand their statements on "inspiration" as applying to both, which we tech¬ nically analyzed i n the sections on "revelation" and "inspiration." Summary: We must understand the divine inspiration o f Scripture, o f which Paul, Peter, and Ellen White spoke, as including at least the follow¬ ing points: 1. Divine "guidance" or " m o v i n g " acted directly on the human agen¬ cy in the R - I process. 2. The divine "guiding" or " m o v i n g " o f human agencies followed the various ways o f divine providence working w i t h i n the flux o f historical events, not as God's timeless, absolute sovereign power working by way o f eternal decrees and overruling the freedom o f biblical writers. 3. God guided the reception o f information and the formation o f ideas in the biblical writers by means o f a historical process o f divine cognitive revelations given to them i n a diversity o f patterns.

Differences F r o m Other Models The Biblical Model o f R - I differs from the encounter, thought, and verbal theories o f inspiration i n significant ways. The Biblical Model and the encounter theory o f inspiration share a personal existential element, but the latter denies any communication o f truth i n the encounter. W i t h regards to the nature o f information generated i n revelation, the Biblical M o d e l envisages concrete, historical, spatio-temporal truths, whereas the "thought" revelation theory generates timeless, nonhistorical truths. W h i l e for some "thought" inspiration stops short o f affirming divine guidance i n the w r i t i n g o f Scripture, the B i b l i c a l M o d e l affirms it.

5. The whole o f Scripture was both revealed and inspired. I n this sense the Biblical Model o f R - I is plenary, for it embraces the entirety o f Scripture.

I n common w i t h the "verbal" theory o f inspiration, the Biblical Model affirms that the H o l y Spirit guided biblical writers not only while receiv¬ ing information and revealed ideas but also i n the process o f writing Scrip¬ ture i n its entirety. However, the two models depart at the grounding level of the foundational hermeneutical presuppositions that determine the way in which we understand God's supernatural contributions to the formation o f Scripture. The "verbal" theory assumes God acts timelessly and sover¬ eignly, overruling the human freedom o f biblical writers. I n contrast, the Biblical M o d e l assumes that God's providence acts w i t h i n the spatio-tem¬ poral flux o f concrete human freedom and history.

66

67

4. The divine "guidance" and " m o v i n g " o f human agencies embraced multiple patterns o f divine operations, both in the revelation and inspira¬ tion processes (Heb 1:1) w i t h strong emphasis on the former. That empha¬ sis allows for the inclusion o f the dynamics o f "thought" inspiration i n the Biblical M o d e l .

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration

Finally, we must not forget that we are dealing with a mystery that we know and understand only i n part. Therefore our model o f interpreta¬ tion should be understood as a first step rather than the final word. As a first step, it leads us i n a quite different theological path from current models operating within present Adventist and Christian theologies. The importance o f a correct, though partial, understanding o f R-I centers on its hermeneutical role in the task o f doing Christian theology. We need to turn our attention now to the hermeneutical role o f the Biblical Model o f R-I outlined i n this chapter.

7. Hermeneutical Effects In what ways does the understanding o f R - I just outlined impact our interpretation o f Scripture and the task o f doing theology? It influences these tasks through the hermeneutical principles that derive from it. I f so, what are the major derivative principles? F u l l Incarnation of Divine Thought in Human Words According to the Biblical Model o f R-I, God revealed Himself i n many ways by condescending to human patterns o f thought and writing. The entire Bible is revealed. The words o f the prophets have become the words o f God. When doing exegesis and theology, then, we should not distinguish between divine thought and human words or between portions o f Scripture. We have access to divine teachings and revelation only through words. Consequently, the entire text o f Scripture, from Genesis to Revelation, be¬ comes the most specific, sufficient, and only reliable source o f data and hermeneutical principles that we have for knowing God and His w i l l for us.

of the historical times in which each prophet lived and wrote. Guided by the Holy Spirit, prophets used culture critically and selectively. Divine revelation is not historically conditioned. Cultural aspects i n sacred history are dated, but they form part o f divine actions and revela¬ tion. The Adventist interpreter w i l l therefore assume that the biblical text, in toto, is the result o f divine revelation i n history, received, understood, and composed by prophets and apostles. Awareness o f the historical situ¬ ations i n which divine revelation and the prophetic writing took place be¬ comes a necessary step to a proper understanding o f divinely revealed thoughts and teachings. Multifarious Nature of Divine Truths Because the Biblical M o d e l o f R - I flows from w i t h i n the flux o f hu¬ man history, i t understands the purpose o f the Scriptures to reveal truths not only about God but also about everything God has created i n nature and done i n history. Biblical truths, then, cannot be confined to God or salvation, as other models seem to suggest, but embrace the astonishing diversity o f interconnected truths about God and H i s works. Exegetes and theologians must take special care not to quench this richness by unilaterally deciding that only certain salvific truths are relevant, dis¬ carding the rest. To do so sets theologians on a reductive and distortive pursuit o f the "essence" o f the Christian message, discarding the great majority o f biblical teachings as culturally conditioned and, therefore, disposable. Limitations of Revealed Knowledge According to the Biblical M o d e l o f R - I , divine revelation is limited by all the characteristics o f our human modes o f knowing and o f writing. Interpreters should always bear i n m i n d that not even biblical writers can present completely a single truth i n human language ( c f . John 21:25). Even human truths are always greater and fuller than what our language can express. Consequently, interpreters dealing w i t h divine mysteries w i l l beware o f the hermeneutical error o f assuming that the interpretation o f a passage stands for the whole truth on that subject. 34

Historical Composition of Scripture According to the Biblical Model o f R-I, God reveals Himself within the historical process (Exod 25:8; John 1:1-14). I n other words, revelation is his¬ torical, primarily because God executes His plan o f redemption historically from within the spatio-temporal flow o f human history. However, this divine condescension does not mean that biblical teachings are the outgrowth of cul¬ tural trends. It simply means that God's transcendent truths appear not only within the limitations o f humanity, in general, but also within the limitations 68

Moreover, revealed knowledge is limited by the imperfection o f hu¬ man syntax. The interpreter is forced to make choices based on assump¬ tions; hence the great importance o f a clear understanding o f the hermeneutical presuppositions and o f the Biblical Model o f R-I involved i n the interpretation o f Scripture. 69

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration

Reliability of Scripture

understand Scripture from hermeneutical presuppositions based on human sciences and philosophies. Scripture interprets itself. One may apply a hermeneutic o f suspicion to scientific and philosophical studies but never to Scripture. Finally, the authority o f Scripture and its inspiration is confirmed by the truthfulness o f its teachings (John 17:17). This confirmation, however, depends on accepting the Biblical Model o f R - I . Otherwise, interpreters applying the hermeneutic o f suspicion to Scripture never w i l l understand its truths, and, therefore, never w i l l be capable o f verifying them.

The Biblical Model o f R-I assures us that divine revelation is reliably communicated in the words o f Scripture. Therefore, i n Scripture we do not find the understanding or philosophy o f its human authors, but •of God. R-I is the process used by the Holy Spirit to communicate God's views on nature, history, our human plight, and His dynamic, salvific involvement in them. Scripture reveals God's views and operations i n nature and history. Moreover, there is no dichotomy between history and salvation, because salvation takes place as a historical process i n which God is personally involved. Scripture gives us the broad picture necessary for our life i n this w o r l d and in the w o r l d to come. I n this broad and all-inclusive sense, Scripture does not err and is the ultimate reliable source o f divine knowl¬ edge available this side o f eternity. According to the Biblical Model, R - I takes place within the historicaltemporal continuum. Thus the Scriptures include many indispensable histori¬ cal and natural data that belong essentially to God's revelations and actions. Biblical revelation, however, does not seek to provide us with an exhaustive, accurate account o f historical and scientific data, but rather with a reliable synthesis o f God's multifarious wisdom, w i l l , and activities within the spa¬ tio-temporal realm o f creation. Facts in Scripture always are incorporated as required by God's all-inclusive salvific activities within the flow o f human history. The interpreter, therefore, should read Scripture not as science but as a philosophy o f history. He or she should search for the meaning o f bibli¬ cal revelation at the all-inclusive theological level without expecting to find the kind o f accuracy regarding historical and natural facts that one anticipates i n scientific studies. Lack o f precision in factual details should be considered as evidence o f the full incarnation o f divine thinking from w i t h i n the everyday flow o f human history. Authority of Scripture

Conclusion During the past fifty years a large segment o f Adventist scholars has adopted some version o f thought inspiration. Others have felt satisfied by working w i t h i n a verbal view o f inspiration. Some theologians have ventured into the land o f modernistic encounter revelation. Behind these positions, we find very little serious theological and philosophical reflec¬ tion. I n general, Adventists have "solved" the issue o f revelation practi¬ cally; that is, they simply adopted a ready-to-use interpretation o f R-I in order to preempt interpretive and practical problems. As a result, by the beginning o f the twenty-first century thought inspi¬ ration seems to hold the loyalties o f a broad spectrum o f Adventist theo¬ logians. Their argument against verbal inspiration and i n favor o f thought inspiration rests on a few selected statements by Ellen G. White on RI . Theologians have used the wedge between thought and word, which is characteristic o f thought inspiration, for diverse purposes. They range from explanations o f literary and historical inconsistencies to an accom¬ modation to scientific and to philosophical theories, such as the histori¬ cal-critical method and evolution. While the former does not affect the Seventh-day Adventist understanding o f Scripture w i t h i n the framework of the Great Controversy motif, an accommodation to scientific and philo¬ sophical theories implies its abandonment and replacement.

The Biblical Model o f R-I grounds the authority o f Scripture in God. Authority means that Scripture is the reliable source o f information about God, His actions, His teachings, and His salvific w i l l for us. Since i n Scrip¬ ture God explicitly reveals His thoughts and His actions about everything, Scripture is to judge every thought and to be judged by nobody (1 Cor 2:15; 2 Cor 10:5). Certain consequences follow from Scripture's authority. I n exegetical and theological studies, for instance, the interpreter never w i l l attempt to

One thing is clear. Adventists are not united i n their understanding o f the fundamental issue of R-I. Moreover, the three views circulating among them have been conceived and formulated by Christian philosophers and theologians who worked from hermeneutical principles derived from hu¬ man philosophy. These principles are not only extra-biblical i n origin but contrary to biblical thinking in content. Moreover, none o f the three op¬ tions satisfactorily integrates all the evidence; hence, the need for a new model o f understanding comes clearly into view.

70

71

Revelation and Inspiration

Revelation and Inspiration

Some Adventists have searched for a better way o f understanding R - I by attentively listening to Scripture (teachings and phenomena) and Ellen G. White. B u i l d i n g on their w o r k , we have suggested i n this chap¬ ter a new model o f understanding R - I . It is a Biblical M o d e l , because it builds on biblical foundational hermeneutical presuppositions and care¬ fully listens to the entire range o f biblical evidence (doctrine and phe¬ nomena). We need to continue searching for a better and deeper under¬ standing o f the Biblical M o d e l o f R - I . I n so doing we must w o r k from the biblical understanding o f the foundational hermeneutical presupposi¬ tions involved i n our interpretation o f R - I . Only on such a basis can we overcome the deficiencies o f verbal inspiration, thought inspiration, and encounter revelation. We must account for, and integrate, i n detail all the evidence we find in the teachings and phenomena o f Scripture relating to R - I . I n this way, we w i l l further understand how God revealed knowledge and information to us in a reliable written account, a love letter intended for our salvation. We should continue to surrender all theological authority to God's written revelation i n the entire text o f Scripture, in spite o f minor inconsistencies in historical detail. From such a strong and rich source o f revelatory data, Adventist theologians w i l l be able to probe further into the astonishing richness o f divine revelation, reaching for its inner historical logic, cen¬ tered i n God's continuous involvement i n the Great Controversy. They also w i l l be able to explain their views vis-â-vis any and all schools o f theologies that built on the quicksand o f human philosophies and scientific convictions.

References Biblical quotations are the Author's own translation. 1. The words Revelation-Inspiration are hyphenated to indicate they are in¬ separable aspects of the same process. To save space I will use the abbreviation "R-I." 2. Alberto Timm, "A History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on Biblical and Prophetic Inspiration (1844-2000)," Journal of the Adventist Theological So¬ ciety 10, (1999): 542 (emphasis author's). 3. Augustine Co nfess ions, 12.15.18. 4. Raoul Dederen, "The Revelation-Inspiration Phenomenon According to the Bible Writers," in Frank Holbrook and Leo Van Dolson, eds. Issues in Rev¬ elation and Inspiration, Adventist Theological Society Occasional papers, vol. 1 (Berrien Springs, M I ; Adventist Theological Society Publications, 1992), p. 11. 5. Edward Heppenstall, "Doctrine of Revelation and Inspiration (part 1)," Ministry, July 1970, p. 16. 72

6. Timm, pp. 487-509. 7. Carlyle B. Haynes, God's Book (Nashville, TN: Southern Publishing As¬ sociation, 1935). 8. I b i d , p. 144 (emphasis supplied). 9. I b i d , p. 136 (emphasis author's). 10. Samuel Koranteng-Pipim offers a recent explicit example of this trend; see his Receiving the Word: How New Approaches to the Bible Impact our Bibli¬ cal Faith and Lifestyle (Berrien Springs, M I : Berean Books, 1996). As with Alden Thompson, who will be discussed later, Pipim does not explicitly deal with the doctrine of Revelation-Inspiration but assumes the evangelical verbal theory, as many Adventists have done in the past (ibid. 51). As with Haynes, Pipim's ap¬ proach is apologetic against the inroads of Modernism and the Historical Criti¬ cal method of exegesis in Adventist theology. Pipim distances himself from the evangelical verbal theory of inspiration when he emphasizes the "trustworthi¬ ness" of Scripture rather than its "inerrancy" (pp. 54-55). Yet, he comes near when explaining that while "no distortions came from the hand of the original Bible writers, some alterations and minor distortions have crept into the Word during the process of transmission and translation" (p. 227). 11. "General Conference Proceedings," Review and Herald, November 27, 1883, pp. 741-742. 12. Edward Heppenstall, part 1, p. 16. 13. Ibid. 14. Ibid. 15. Idem, "Doctrine of Revelation and Inspiration (conclusion)," Ministry, August 1970, p. 29. 16. Alden Thompson, Inspiration: Hard Questions, Honest Answers (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1991). 17. Holbrook and Van Dolson, eds. Issues in Revelation and Inspiration. 18. Thompson, p. 47. 19. I b i d , p. 53. 20. Ibid. 21. Ibid, p. 48 (emphasis author's). 22. Raoul Dederen, "On Inspiration and Biblical Authority," in Issues in Rev¬ elation and Inspiration, p. 101. 23. Gerard P. Damsteegt, "The Inspiration of Scripture in the Writings of Ellen G. White," Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 5, no. 1 (1994): 162. 24. Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method, 2d rev. ed, trans. Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall (New York: Continuum, 1989), p. 417. 25. Herold Weiss, "Revelation and the Bible: Beyond Verbal Inspiration," Spectrum 7, no. 3 (1975): 52. 26. Raoul Dederen, "Toward a Seventh-day Adventist Theology of Revela¬ tion-Inspiration," in North American Bible Conference (North American Divi¬ sion: unpublished paper, 1974), 10. 27. This switch at the scientific-philosophical level of hermeneutics seems to undergird Fritz Guy's methodological proposal for Adventist theology in his 73

Revelation and Inspiration Thinking Theologically: Adventist Christianity and the Interpretation of Faith (Berrien Springs, M I : Andrews University Press, 1999). CHAPTER V

28. Dederen, "Toward a Seventh-day Adventist Theology of Revelation-In¬ spiration," p. 16. 29. I b i d , p. 13. 30. I b i d , p. 10. 31. Idem, "On Inspiration and Biblical Authority," pp. 101 and 97. 32. Idem, "Toward a Seventh-day Adventist Theology of Revelation-Inspira¬ tion," p. 6. 33. "The Lord gave His Word in just the way He wanted it to come. He gave it through different writers, each having his own individuality, though going over the same history" (PM 2). 34. Ellen G. White explains, "It is impossible for any human mind to exhaust even one truth or promise of the Bible" (Ed 171). Selected Bibliography van Bemmelen, Peter Maarten. "Revelation and Inspiration." In Handbook of Seventh-dav Adventist Theology, ed. Raoul Dederen, 22-57. Hagerstown, M D : Review and Herald, 2000. Canale, Fernando. Back to Revelation-Inspiration: Searching for the Cognitive Foundations of Christian Theology in a Postmodern World. Lanham, M D : University Press of America, 2001. Dockery, David S. Christian Scripture: An Evangelical Perspective on Inspira¬ tion, Authority and Interpretation. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1995. Holbrook, Frank and Leo Van Dolson, eds. Issues in Revelation and Inspiration, Adventist Theological Society Occasional Papers. Berrien Springs, M I : Ad¬ ventist Theological Society Publications, 1992. Gulley, Norman R. Systematic Theology: Prolegomena. Berrien Springs, M I : An¬ drews University Press, 2003. Rice, George. Luke, a Plagiarist? Is a Writer Who Copied From Others Inspired? Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1983. Timm, Alberto. " A History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on Biblical and Pro¬ phetic Inspiration (1844-2000)." Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 10 (1999): 486-542. Thompson, Alden. Inspiration: Hard Questions, Honest Answers. M D : Review and Herald, 1991.

THE AUTHORITY OF SCRIPTURE Peter M . van Bemmelen

Introduction The authority o f the Bible as the Word o f God has been a major issue in Chrisjtianity, as w e l l as i n the Seventh-day Adventist Church, over the last few decades. Should the Bible be the final authority on all mat¬ ters o f belief and o f lifestyle, or should scientific and socio-cultural forces be allowed to influence what we permit the Bible to mean? As i n other Christian churches that hold to a high view o f Scripture, historic biblical positions are under attack i n the Adventist church, either outright rejected by some or modified almost beyond recognition. This chapter deals w i t h the nature of, and the evidence for, the authority o f God and the Bible and with the repercussions this has on biblical hermeneutics.

1. The Authority of Jesus Christ and the Authority of the Scriptures For more than three thousand years, Jews have received the writings o f Moses and o f the Prophets as Holy Scriptures and, i n addition to that, Chris¬ tians have accepted the Gospels and the other books o f the N T as deserving the same sacred designation. Scripture is God's w o r d written. The apostle Paul, writing to Jewish and Gentile Christians i n Rome, raised the question, "What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit o f circumcision?" His answer: " M u c h in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles o f God" (Rom 3:1-2). The Scriptures are the oracles o f God. That was the conviction o f the apostle Paul and has been the belief of untold millions o f Jews and Christians through the ages; and it still is today. The Scriptures as Authority The expressions "the Scriptures," " H o l y Scriptures," or, simply, "Scripture" occur more than fifty times i n the NT. The Hebrew Scriptures,

74

75

The Authority of Scripture

The Authority of Scripture

by Christians commonly called the OT, were a well-defined body o f books consisting o f three major sections: the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings (Luke 24:44). Careful study o f the way i n which Jesus used the terms "The Scriptures," "Scripture," " I t is written," and similar expressions demonstrates clearly that He attributed to the Hebrew Scriptures ultimate and unquestionable authority. For H i m Scripture was the Word o f God that cannot be broken (John 10:35). He repudiated the temptations o f the devil w i t h a decisive " I t is written" (Matt 4:4, 7, 10). He frequently appealed to the Scriptures as forecasting His Messianic ministry (Luke 4:17-21; John 5:39-47), and, after His resurrection, He explained from all the Scriptures to His disciples the things concerning Himself (Luke 24:27). Despite persistent denials by some modern scholars, there can be no serious doubt that the evidence presented in the four Gospels justifies John Wenham's conclusion that "to Christ the O T was true, authoritative, inspired. To h i m the God o f the OT was the living God, and the teaching o f the OT was the teaching o f the liv¬ ing God. To h i m what Scripture said, God said." 1

2

Jesus as Authority

evidence itself derived from the Scriptures. The self-evident fact is that divine authority can be affirmed only by God's o w n witness, b y His o w n Word. As God swore by H i m s e l f to Abraham when He made a promise "because He could swear by no one greater" (Heb 6:13), even so, God testifies to the authority o f His Word by His o w n testimony, because there is no higher source than God Himself. I t is the H o l y Spirit, Himself God, who moved prophets and apostles to write the Scriptures to testify of Christ (2 Pet 1:19-21; 1 Pet 1:10-12; John 16:13 -15). A n d i t is Christ, of w h o m the Spirit-given Scriptures testify, who puts the seal o f His di¬ vine authority upon the God-breathed Scriptures. The Nature of the Authority of G o d and of the Bible Because the Scriptures come to us as the oracles o f God, they speak w i t h divine authority. But what does this mean? I n this w o r l d , author¬ ity generally is based on position, function, wealth, power, education, beauty, certain skills, or some other asset that sets a person or a group apart. Religious traditions and customs often are vested w i t h significant authority similar to the standing o f the traditions o f the elders, or fathers, among the Jews i n the time o f Jesus and o f the apostles (Matt 15:2; Gal 1:14). A l l forms o f human authority, however, are derived, and, i n this world, temporary. B y contrast, the authority o f God is underived and eternal, because He himself is underived (Exod 3:14) and eternal (Ps 90:2). Because He is the Creator, God's authority stands supreme over all His creatures, and all creaturely authority is subordinate to the au¬ thority o f the Creator.

The Gospels record that Jesus Christ claimed for H i m s e l f divine au¬ thority. He could say, "For as the Father has life i n Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life i n Himself, and has given H i m authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son o f M a n " (John 5:26¬ 27); " A l l authority has been given to M e i n heaven and on earth" (Matt 28:18). The w o r d "authority"is translated from the Greek w o r d exousia, which has a fairly wide range o f meanings, such as freedom o f choice; the right to act or to decide; the ability to do something; authority; the power exer¬ cised by rulers by virtue o f their office; even absolute power. I n the texts cited earlier, Jesus refers boldly to His absolute authority as the eternal Son o f God, who i n His incarnation also becomes the Son o f Man, the Son o f David, the Messiah. I n view o f His claims to supreme authority, it is significant that Jesus still directed the minds o f all, whether followers or enemies, to the Scriptures as the Word o f God. There, His Messianic claims were to be confirmed, issues o f doctrine and life settled, and, by them, all would be judged (John 5:39-46; Luke 16:29-31; Matt 22:29-32; Luke 24:44-47). He did not come to do away w i t h the Scriptures but to fulfill them, so confirming their authority (Matt 5:17-19). Some may object that it is a circular argument to derive the author¬ ity o f Scripture from the supreme authority o f Christ while relying on

Divine authority rests primarily not on supreme force or perfect knowl¬ edge, although both are divine attributes. Here is a sharp contrast between the divine government, based on love, and human government, based on principles o f force and o f self-exaltation.

76

77

While God's authority is eternal and supreme, it is very different in character from that generally understood as authority i n human practice. Jesus explained this difference to His disciples i n the midst o f a dispute among them concerning who should be considered the greatest. He said, "The kings o f the Gentiles exercise lordship over them and those who ex¬ ercise authority over them are called 'benefactors.' But not so among you; on the contrary, he who is greatest among you, let h i m be as the younger, and he who governs as he who serves" (Luke 22:25-26). Then, referring to Himself, w h o m they recognized as Lord, He said, " I am among y o u as the One who serves" (vs. 27). Divine authority is rooted i n love and exer¬ cised i n service and i n self-denial.

The Authority of Scripture

The Authority of Scripture When asked by Pilate whether He was K i n g o f the Jews, Jesus an¬ swered, " M y kingdom is not o f this world. I f M y kingdom were o f this world, M y servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now M y kingdom is not from here" (John 18:36). When Pilate asked again, "Are You a king then?" Jesus made it clear that His author¬ i t y — H i s kingship—was defined by truth. He answered, " Y o u say rightly that I am a king. For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is o f the truth hears M y voice" (John 18:37). Just as Christ's authority is based primarily on divine love and defined by truth, so the Scriptures speak to us with that same authority. It has long been recognized that there is a profound parallel between Christ, the Word made flesh, and Scripture, the Word o f God, expressed i n human language. The words o f prophets and o f apostles are not human words merely but the Word o f God i n human form. Paul thanked God that the Christian believers i n Thessalonica "received the word o f God which you heard from u s . . . not as the w o r d o f men, but as it is i n truth, the word o f God" (1 Thess 2:13). It is really the Spirit o f Christ that speaks to us i n the words o f the prophets and the apostles (1 Pet 1:10-12). Ellen G . W h i t e draws attention to this parallel between Christ and the Bible: The union of the divine and the human, manifest in Christ, exists also in the Bible. The truths revealed are all "given by inspiration of God;" yet they are expressed in the words of men and are adapted to human needs. Thus it may be said of the Book of God, as it was of Christ, that "the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us." And this fact, so far from being an argument against the Bible, should strengthen faith in it as the word of God (5T 747).

2. Biblical Evidence Affirming the Supreme Authority of the Scriptures as the Word of God The Scriptures come to us as the Word o f God. They address us with divine authority, the authority o f the one true God. The words o f the Shema, "Hear, O Israel: The L o r d our God, the L o r d is one!" (Deut 6:4), express the uniqueness o f Yahweh, the God o f Israel. The entire Scrip¬ tures, both O l d and New Testament, recognize only one God. His author¬ ity is supreme above all other authority. Although His authority is based on love, it tolerates no rivals. He is the Creator o f heaven and o f earth, and no other beings can claim the same prerogative (Isa 40:25-28; 45:18). He also is the only One who can save (Isa 43:10-12). Likewise, while the words o f God in Scripture reach us i n a servant form, they nevertheless speak w i t h supreme authority. Through Moses, God made clear to His people that nothing was to be added to the word and to the commandments that He had given through His servant and that nothing was to be taken from it (Deut 4:2; 12:32). The principle that noth¬ ing is to be added to, or detracted from, the Word o f God was repeated by other inspired writers. We read i n Proverbs 30:6, " D o not add to His words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar." A n even stronger warning is found i n Revelation 22:18-19. Some argue that these warnings deal only w i t h specific portions o f Scripture; however, i t is evident that the Scriptures assert that no prophetic revelations, traditions, or writings are to be accepted as carrying divine authority other than those that have come to us through the divinely ordained prophets and apostles. Moses warned against false prophets; their words, even i f spoken i n the name o f the Lord, were to be rejected as presumptuous (Deut 13:1-5; 18:20¬ 22). On the other hand, the rejection o f the words o f the true prophets o f the Lord was tantamount to a rejection o f the authority o f God, which ultimately would have fatal consequences (Deut 18:15-19). To a large extent, the his¬ tory o f Israel shows that acceptance or rejection o f the Word o f God through His chosen messengers determined the destiny o f individuals and nations (2 Chron 36:15-16; Neh 9:26-31). Only the revelation given through Moses and the words o f God's true messengers were to be received as the Word of the Lord. Isaiah stated the principle o f the exclusive authority o f God's Word succinctly, "To the law and to the testimony! I f they do not speak ac¬ cording to this word, it is because there is no light i n them" (Isa 8:20).

The parallel often has been expressed in terms o f the servant form o f both Christ and the Bible. Bernard Ramm notes, "Both the divine Savior and the divine Scriptures bear the form of a servant even though both con¬ tain w i t h i n themselves the divine glory." While limitations to the parallei exist, it is appropriate to apply to the Scriptures what was said o f the words o f Jesus, "No man ever spoke like this M a n ! " (John 7:46), and also, "He taught as one having authority" (Matt 7:29). While Christ "made himself nothing, taking the very nature o f a servant, being made i n human likeness" (Phil 2:7, N I V ) , yet He spoke w i t h divine authority. Likewise, while the Scriptures are given in the weakness and i n the imperfection o f human language, nevertheless, "every w o r d o f God is pure" (Prov 30:5), "is truth" (John 17:17), "is living and powerful" (Heb 4:12), "cannot be broken" (John 10:35), and "stands forever" (Isa 40:8).

We have seen how, i n the N T , the principle o f the unique authority o f the Scriptures receives confirmation i n the ministry and i n the teachings o f Jesus. He strongly warned against false prophets and false messiahs, who would seek to claim divine authority for their messages, while turning away

78

79

3

4

The Authority of Scripture

The Authority of Scripture from the Word o f G o d (Matt 7:15-23; 24:5, 11,24). He also condemned the traditions superimposed upon the Scriptures, with their effect o f nullifying the Scriptures' supreme authority (Matt 15:1-9; Mark 7:1-13). The apostles issued similar warnings against false teachers, false prophets, false apostles, and their teachings (Acts 20:29-30; 2 T i m 4:3-4; 2 Pet 2:1;. 1 John 4:1). A n y exaltation o f human commandments or ecclesiastical traditions above the teachings o f the Scriptures undermines the supreme authority o f God's Word.

for? The more we reject it, the more we become satisfied with men's books and human teachers. 6

This emphasis on "Scripture alone" (sola scriptura) Luther main¬ tained for the remainder o f his life. Appearing before the emperor Charles V at the Diet o f Worms, Luther said, " M y conscience is captive to the Word o f God." For Luther, the authority o f the Scriptures was based on the belief that only they proclaimed the true gospel o f Christ and that they were the words o f the Holy Spirit. Repeatedly, he appealed to Scripture alone as the sole authority for faith and doctrine. This principle became embodied i n the definitive statement o f the Lutheran faith, The Formula of Concord: 7

8

3. The Protestant Reformers and Biblical Authority The supreme authority o f the H o l y Scriptures, upheld by the L o r d and His apostles, came under challenge i n succeeding centuries. Numerous heretics arose, twisting the Word o f God and bringing i n false teachings. In dealing w i t h these dissidents, the response became an undue emphasis on ecclesiastical authority, allowing tradition gradually to overshadow the authority o f the Scriptures. Although the church fathers o f the early cen¬ turies often affirmed scriptural authority, it diminished before the growing influence o f church councils and, even more so, i n claims to authority by the bishops, especially i n Rome. The authority o f the Scriptures also was diluted by allegorical interpretations, scholastic philosophy, and the addi¬ tion o f the Apocrypha to the canon o f the OT. While forerunners o f the Protestant Reformers, such as John Wycliffe (c. 1329-1384), already had appealed to the Scriptures as the only stan¬ dard o f faith and doctrine, it was M a r t i n Luther (1483-1546), Augustinian monk and professor o f biblical theology at the University o f Witten¬ berg, who clearly enunciated the sole and the supreme authority o f the Bible. When nailing his famous Ninety-five Theses against indulgences on the door o f the castle church i n Wittenberg, he d i d not yet recognize the conflict between the authority o f the Church and the authority o f the Scriptures, implied by his teachings. Two years later, i n a debate w i t h Johann Eck (1486-1542), Luther was forced to appeal to the authority o f the Scriptures as supreme above the authority o f church councils and papal decrees. When forty-one o f Luther's teachings were condemned i n a pa¬ pal bull i n June, 1520, and he was accused o f rejecting all the holy teachers o f the church, he wrote an extensive defense o f his position:

We believe, teach, and confess that the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testaments are the only rule and norm according to which all doctrines and teachers alike must be appraised and judged, as it is written in Ps 119:105, "Thy word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path." 9

Luther and other Protestant Reformers were well aware that the is¬ sue o f the sole authority o f Scripture involved other issues, such as the interpretation o f Scripture; the clarity, or perspicuity, o f Scripture; and the sufficiency, or perfection, o f Scripture. The Roman Catholic Church claimed that believers needed the church to provide them w i t h the correct interpretation o f the Scriptures, for much i n the sacred books was obscure. The faithful, therefore, needed to adhere to the interpretation given by the Catholic Church. Over against this the Reformers upheld the clarity, or the perspicuity, o f Scripture. I n August 1522, U l r i c h Z w i n g l i (1484-1531), the Swiss Reformer at Zurich, preached a sermon published the next month under the title " O f the Clarity and Certainty o f the Word o f G o d " in which he illustrated the certainty and the clarity o f the Scriptures w i t h many examples from the O l d and the N e w Testament. After answering a number o f objections, he stated i n the conclusion o f the sermon, "For the Word o f God is certain and can never fail. It is clear and w i l l never leave us i n darkness. I t teaches its o w n truth. I t arises and irradiates the soul o f man w i t h full salvation and grace." 10

11

Scripture alone is the true lord and master of all writings and doctrine on earth [emphasis supplied]. I f that is not granted, what is Scripture good

Both Luther and Z w i n g l i held that Scripture can exercise its authority and its transforming power only through the working and the illumina¬ tion o f the H o l y Spirit. John Calvin (1509-1564) especially stressed the conviction that the authority o f Scripture was established i n the heart o f the believers, not by the determination o f the church but through the in¬ ward testimony o f the Holy Spirit. The claim "that Scripture has only so much weight as is conceded to it by the consent o f the church," he con-

80

81

5

The Authority of Scripture

The Authority of Scripture

sidered to be "a most pernicious error." He pointed out that the Christian church was "founded upon the writings o f the prophets and the preaching o f the apostles," therefore, the Scriptures "must certainly have preceded the church." "Let this point therefore stand," wrote Calvin, "that those w h o m the H o l y Spirit has inwardly taught truly rest upon Scripture, and that Scripture indeed is self-authenticated"; consequently, "the certainty it deserves w i t h us, it attains by the testimony o f the Spirit." Calvin pre¬ sented many proofs to establish the divine origin and the authority o f the Scriptures, such as the majesty o f their content; their truthfulness; the ful¬ filment o f their prophetic predictions; their marvelous preservation; their simplicity; and the consistent testimony o f the church, through all ages, to their divinity. But he cautioned that 12

13

of themselves these [reasons or proofs] are not strong enough to pro¬ vide a firm faith, until our Heavenly Father, revealing his majesty there, lifts reverence for Scripture beyond the realm of controversy. Therefore Scripture will ultimately suffice for a saving knowledge of God only when its certainty is founded upon the inward persuasion of the Holy Spirit. 14

4. The Scope and the Sufficiency of Scriptural Authority By stressing the sola scriptura principle, the Reformers broke the ecclesiastical stranglehold by the Roman Catholic Church on the Scrip¬ tures' authority and interpretation. N o longer was the clear, historical and grammatical meaning o f the Bible attenuated by allegorical interpretation. No longer were patristic tradition; scholastic philosophy; or conciliar, or papal, authority allowed to supercede biblical authority. N o longer was the Apocrypha added to the canonical Scriptures as having the same divine unction and authority. The Reformers did not foresee developments i n succeeding centuries that would undermine confidence and faith in the truthfulness and in the authority o f the Scriptures. A premonition o f this process lies i n the haunt¬ ing question o f Jesus, "When the Son o f M a n comes, w i l l He really find faith on the earth?" (Luke 18:8). Faith i n the divine origin and i n the au¬ thority o f the Bible is challenged by criticism of the Scriptures in countless ways. Geoffrey Bromiley observes:

doctrinal and ethical absolutes. On the other side Roman Catholicism embraced a doctrine of papal infallibility which, along with the concept of dogmatic development, permitted the weakening o f biblical authority by addition or expansion. 15

In particular, modern biblical criticism i n its myriad forms has led even many sincere Christian believers to a l i m i t i n g o f the authority o f Scripture, reducing it to some core essentials o f Christian faith and mo¬ rality. Whatever Scripture has to say about matters o f a historical or sci¬ entific nature is subjected to the criteria o f rigorous historical criticism and a naturalistic philosophy o f science that a priori excludes super¬ natural causality i n the realm o f nature and i n the flow o f history. Such approaches generally tend to ignore, distort, or deny the express claims of the biblical writers i n regard to the divine origin, authority, and truth¬ fulness o f their writings. Another important element i n the modern debate about biblical au¬ thority is the issue o f the scope or purpose o f Scripture. The primary pur¬ pose o f the H o l y Scriptures is to make us "wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus," stated in the words o f Paul (2 T i m 3:15), or, to speak w i t h the apostle John, "these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son o f God, and that believing you may have life i n His name" (John 20:31). Christ Himself, speaking o f the O T Scriptures, criticized the contemporary Jewish religious leaders for their tragic failure in grasping this primary purpose, saying, " Y o u search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify o f Me. But you are not w i l l i n g to come to M e that you may have life" (John 5:39-40). The question i n the debate about the scope o f the authority o f the Bi¬ ble is not about the purpose o f Scripture. Rather, the primary question is whether the authority o f Scripture extends to the entire content o f the Bible. For twenty-first century Christians, the issue is not only the sola scriptura principle but also its correlate principle, tota scriptura. The is¬ sue is not only whether we add to the authority o f the Word o f God but also whether we take away from it. I n the hearts and i n the minds o f many Christians, criticism o f the Bible has reduced the authority o f Scripture to a bare m i n i m u m or nullified it altogether. Ellen G. White addressed this issue in reference to ministers:

The modern period brought new threats to biblical authority. On the one side liberal scholars engaged in literary and historical research that ques¬ tioned traditional authorships, challenged factual reliability, rejected or refashioned divine inspiration, and promoted a relativism destructive to

Many professed ministers of the gospel do not accept the whole Bible as the inspired word. One wise man rejects one portion; another questions another part. They set up their judgment as superior to the word; and the Scripture which they do teach rests upon their own authority. Its divine authenticity is destroyed (COL 39, emphasis supplied).

82

83

The Authority of Scripture

The Authority of Scripture The principle is that all the Scriptures are to be received as the Word o f God, speaking with divine authority. This is expressed in many ways by the biblical writers. Moses included it in his final address to the people o f Israel: "The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words o f this law" (Deut 29:29). His earlier admonition is that "man lives by every w o r d that proceeds from the mouth o f the L o r d " (Deut 8:3). The same emphasis on believing and on obeying all words that come from God recurs in the N T . Jesus cited it in response to the temptation to deliver Himself from starvation through a miracle o f divine power. He repeated Moses' words that humankind shall live "by every word that proceeds from the mouth o f God" (Matt 4:4). The Gospel narratives give evidence that Jesus not only had an unparalleled knowledge and under¬ standing o f the Scriptures but that He accepted all o f Scripture as the au¬ thoritative Word o f God. Following the resurrection, He gently chided two o f His disciples for their slowness o f heart to believe in " a l l that the prophets have spoken" (Luke 24:25). Likewise, the apostles manifested the same faith in the entire Scrip¬ tures as the Word o f God. Paul, before the Roman governor Felix, con¬ fessed that, "according to the way w h i c h they call a sect, so I worship the God o f m y fathers, believing all things which are written i n the L a w and in the Prophets" (Acts 24:14). To the elders o f the church at Ephesus, he testified that he had not failed "to declare to y o u the whole counsel o f G o d " (Acts 20:27). Later, i n his Epistle to the Ephesians, he reminded the entire church that they were built "on the foundation o f the apostles and prophets—Jesus Christ H i m s e l f being the chief cornerstone" (Eph 2:20). I n his second letter written from Rome, sent shortly before his martyrdom, Peter urged believers "to be mindful o f the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and o f the commandment o f us, the apostles o f the L o r d and Savior" (2 Pet 3:2). W r i t i n g i n his fi¬ nal Epistle to Timothy, Paul reaffirmed the principle o f tota scriptura in clear and concise fashion: " A l l Scripture is given by inspiration o f God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction i n righteousness" (2 T i m 3:16).

16

life? . · · Does the Bible explicitly limit the range o f its own authority?" His clear-cut answer to these questions is that there are no such limita¬ tions in Scripture. He argues that Scripture not only focuses on Christ as Redeemer but also on Christ as Creator and as L o r d o f creation and o f the whole history o f the world. Therefore, no area o f knowledge is excluded from the authority o f Christ and His Word, the Scriptures. Some claim that since the Bible is not a textbook o f science or history it should not be used as authoritative i n these areas o f knowledge. While this claim is true in a technical sense, it becomes a frontal attack on the authority o f the Bible i f the truthfulness o f its clear record o f the creation and its historical narratives is rejected or reinterpreted along lines o f sci¬ entific theories or historical research. Neither Jesus nor any o f the inspired prophets and ,-apostles ever questioned the historical truth o f the Genesis record or o f any other part o f the Scriptures. To the contrary, they affirmed the truthfulness and the divine authority o f them all. The Reformers upheld the principle o f the sufficiency o f Scripture, primarily, though not exclusively, i n reference to the doctrine o f salvation, which centers i n the person o f Christ as Redeemer. B u t that same principle must be upheld i n regard to the doctrine o f creation, w h i c h centers i n the person o f Christ as Creator. The Scriptures inform us not only that God, through Christ, created this w o r l d but also how this was accomplished. The t w i n principles o f sola scriptura and tota scriptura apply as much to the origin o f this world and the human race as to their redemption and their ultimate restoration. The application o f the sola scriptura principle to the doctrine o f ereation is stressed in Ellen G. White's writings. She wrote, " I t is the w o r d o f God alone that gives us an authentic account o f the creation o f our w o r l d " (FE 536). She applies the tota scriptura principle to Christ as Creator and as Redeemer i n these specific words, "The whole Bible is a revelation; for all revelation to men comes through Christ, and all centers in H i m . God has spoken unto us by His Son, whose we are by creation and by redemp¬ tion" (7BC 953).

Although it is undoubtedly true that the primary focus o f the tota scriptura principle is the authority o f the Scriptures i n the spiritual realm, we cannot limit that authority arbitrarily by excluding from it any area o f human knowledge, such as history or natural science. I n a penetrating study o f the sufficiency o f Scripture, Noel Weeks raises crucial questions, such as, "Does the Bible have a restriction to its authority imposed by its focus on salvation? Is it irrelevant to other major subjects or areas o f

Ellen G. White was deeply concerned that many Christians, under the in¬ fluence o f scientific theories, rejected the biblical account o f a six-day creation in its plain, literal sense. She considered this a substitution o f the authority of human reasoning " i n opposition to plain Scripture facts" (PP 113). She observed that God never revealed to men the exact process by which He ac¬ complished the work of creation; hence, "human science cannot search out the secrets o f the Most High" (PP113). I n view o f this, she stated categorically, "There should be a settled belief in the divine authority o f God's Holy Word. The Bible is not to be tested by men's ideas o f science" (PP 114).

84

85

The Authority of Scripture

The Authority of Scripture

5. Divine Authority, H u m a n Response, and Biblical Hermeneutics Although God's authority is supreme, He does not force the w i l l o f His moral creatures. Humans, created i n the image o f God, were endowed w i t h the power o f choice. God respects that power, even i n fallen human beings. Divine authority, based on love and on truth, elicits from us a re¬ sponse o f faith, trust, obedience, and love. However, i f we choose to reject His authority, we are separating ourselves from H i m who is the source o f our existence. Moses expressed this basic truth i n these words: I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live; that you may love the Lord your God, that you may obey His voice, and that you may cling to Him, for He is your life and the length of your days (Deut 30:19-20). Jesus applied the same truth to His o w n teaching. Anyone who hears His words and does them is a wise man who builds his house on the rock, and that house withstands stormwind and flood. Anyone who rejects His words He compares to a foolish man who builds his house on the sand, and the w i n d and flood sweep that house away (Matt 7:24-27). Acceptance o f God's authority as expressed i n His Word leads to life, eternal life; re¬ jection o f the authority o f His Word, whether spoken or written, leads to eternal death (Ps 1:1-6; Prov 8:32-36; Rev 22:18-19). God cannot, and w i l l never, abrogate or surrender His divine au¬ thority. The same is true o f the supreme authority o f the H o l y Scrip¬ tures, for they are God's Word. The p r i m a r y response to that authority by humans should be a response o f faith, issuing i n w i l l i n g obedience. The W o r d o f God addresses humans i n their totality: m i n d , heart, and soul ( M a t t 22:37). Through His Word, the L o r d not only invites us to reason together (Isa 1:18); He also urges us to give H i m our hearts (Prov 23:26). The Protestant Reformers understood that it is the privilege and the duty o f all to read and to study the Bible for themselves. This conviction motivated Wycliffe, Luther, Tyndale, and others to translate the Bible into a language that common people could read and understand. I n modern times the same conviction has led to the translation o f the Bible, or por¬ tions o f the Bible, into more than two thousand languages. Ellen G. White shared that position. I n an article entitled, "The Bible to Be Understood by A l l , " she wrote, "The Bible has been addressed to everyone,—to every class o f society, to those o f every clime and age. The duty o f every intelli86

gent person is to search the Scriptures. Each one should know for himself the conditions upon which salvation is provided" (ST, Aug. 20, 1894). From a human standpoint, to hold the Scriptures i n highest respect brings w i t h it a valuable cluster o f distinct benefits. Ours is an environ¬ ment marked by an instability that, at times, plunges us into actual peril. How we cope w i t h such situations has much to do w i t h the quality o f life and w i t h personal satisfaction, to say nothing o f our eternal destiny. When honored as an authoritative message from God, this Book, al¬ though written many centuries ago, remains an immovable point o f contact with our Creator. Through written communication w i t h His human sons and daughters, He provides a source o f ultimate stabilization that brings meaning. The God who made us remains active, not only i n His sweeping universe but perpetually i n our daily lives. In large part, the Scriptures are a written record o f His personal in¬ tervention and o f His guidance i n human affairs. For superficial readers, this human side is often misinterpreted i n ways that reduce the Bible to a remote, or even insignificant, role i n their lives. I n this, they miss the benefits that could be theirs. The Scriptures provide an authentic basis for understanding ourselves. Who are we? Are we really persons o f worth or but passing shadows across the face o f time and place? The Scriptures assure us that beyond mere skill i n competition w i t h others our personal worth rests on an intrin¬ sic value, creation and redemption by Christ. I n this light, our value as persons is as secure as the written Word that brings us this truth. We witness the unifying power o f the Scriptures. Beyond all the di¬ verse peoples and cultures that are spread across our planet stands one Word o f God, reaching out to every person, transcending i n power and authority every cultivated practice or opinion. I n this, it is the great unifier. In a centrifugal world, often brutally at odds w i t h itself, genuine adherence to God's Word brings peace and respect for every person. The authoritative Word alone enables us to understand our destiny. Only there is a genuine account o f our Creator's character and how He brought us into existence. O n l y i n His Word do we find something that raw nature never could tell us: God is benevolent, seeking earnestly to restore us to intimate fellowship w i t h H i m s e l f i n the near future, a l l o f which is made possible through the ministry, the atoning death, and the resurrection o f the Son.

87

The Authority of Scripture

The Authority of Scripture References

Selected Bibliography

Unless otherwise indicated, biblical quotations are from the New King James Version.

Retz Otto. "Exousia." In The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. 3 vols. Edited by Colin Brown. Grand Rapids, M I : Zondervan PublishingHouse, 1975-1978. 2:606-611. Bromiley, Geoffrey W. "Authority." In The International Standard Bible Encyclo¬ pedia. rev. ed.. 4 vols. Edited by G. W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids, M I : William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1979-1988. 1:364-371. . "Scripture, Authority of." In The International Standard Bible Ency'dapedia, rev. ed, 4 vols. Edited by G. W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids, M I : Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1979-1988. 4:362-363. Geldenhuys, J. Norval. Supreme Authority: The Authority of the Lord, His Aposties and the New Testament. Foreword by Ned B. Stonehouse. Grand Rapids, M I : Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing C o , 1953. Maier, Gerhard. Biblical Hermeneutics. Trans. Robert W. Yarbrough. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1994. Miller, Donald G. The Authority of the Bible. Grand Rapids, M I : Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1972. Ramm, Bernard. The Pattern of Religious Authority. Grand Rapids, M I : Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1968; reprint of The Pattern of Authority, 1957. Warfield, Benjamin Breckinridge. The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible. Ed¬ ited by Samuel G. Craig, Introduction by Cornelius Van Til. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing C o , 1948; reprint, Grand Rapids, M I : Baker Book House, 1967. Weeks, Noel. The Sufficiency of Scripture. Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1988. Wenham, John. Christ and the Bible. 3d edition. Grand Rapids, M I : Baker Books, 1994.

1. See John Wenham, Christ and the Bible, 3d ed. (Grand.Rapids, M I : Baker Books, 1994), pp. 16-44. 2. I b i d , p. 17. 3. Bernard Ramm, Special Revelation and the Word of God (Grand Rapids, M I : Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing C o , 1961), p. 34. 4. Ellen G. White makes this comparison, "The Bible is not given to us in grand superhuman language. Jesus, in order to reach man where he is, took hu¬ manity. The Bible must be given in the language of men. Everything that is hu¬ man is imperfect" ( I S M 20). 5. Harold Grimm in the introduction to his translation of Luther's "Disputa¬ tion and Defense of Brother Martin Luther against the Accusations of Dr. Johann Eck," observes that "The Leipzig debate is of great significance in Luther's devel¬ opment as a reformer because he on that occasion publicly states his evangelical conception of the church in unmistakable terms and showed that in the last analy¬ sis his sole authority in matters of faith was the Word of God. Therefore he could state without reservations that not only the papacy but also church councils could err." Harold J. Grimm, ed, Luther s Works, (hereafter LW) 55 vols. (Philadelphia; Fortress Pess, 1957), 31:311. 6. I b i d , 32:11-12. 7. The text of Luther's famous final answer before the Imperial Diet at Worms can be found in LW 21:112-113. 8. This is evident from two of his writings produced during his ten months' exile in the Wartburg Castle: "Against Latomus," LW 32:133-260, and one of his model sermons in the so-called "Church Postii" entitled, "The Gospel for the Festival of the Epiphany, Matthew 2[:1-12]," LW 52:159-286, esp. 171-183. 9. Theodore G. Tappert, trans, and ed. The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), p. 464. 10. An English translation of this sermon can be found in Zwingli and Bullinger, trans, and ed. G. W. Bromiley, vol. 24 in the Library of Christian Classics (hereafter LCC). (Philadelphia: Westminister Press, 1953), pp. 49-95. 11. LCC 24:93. 12. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1:7:1, ed. John T. Mc¬ Neill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, LCC, vol. 20 (Philadelphia: Westminister Press, 1960), pp. 75-76. 13. I b i d , p. 80. 14. I b i d , p. 92. 15. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, "Scripture, Authority of," International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, rev. ed, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids, M I : Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1979-1988), 4:363. 16. Noel Weeks, The Sufficiency of Scripture (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1988), p. 85. 88

89

CHAPTER VI

THE TEXT AND THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE Gerald A . Klingbeil

Introduction Communication requires a medium and a channel to be effective; therefore, to "hear" God, a medium and a transmission channel are need¬ ed. The only way to transmit God's message throughout the ages has been the faithful copying and re-copying o f the revealed Word. Because revelation and Scripture are concerned w i t h textual data, to "hear" God in Scripture i n the twenty-first century requires that the text and its lim¬ its must first be established and then interpreted. This chapter seeks to understand the limitations o f what should, and should not, be included in Scripture. I n addition, it looks at the inspired, canonical text itself, its transmission process, and the manuscripts and translations by w h i c h we have access to the text today.

1. The Canon of Scripture The canon o f Scripture cannot be disconnected from questions o f authority and normativity, which, i n turn, relate to our understanding o f revelation and inspiration. What makes one ancient text more authorita¬ tive than another for a religious community (whether Jewish or Chris¬ tian)? As a point o f departure, it seems clear that the O T and the N T books were self-authenticating. Their authority rests not upon the fact that someone, whether an important individual or an ecclesiastical au¬ thority, included them i n the canon but that they were recognized by their religious community as having authority because o f their divine origin, and, as a result, were included i n the canon. Space limitations w i l l re¬ quire us to paint rough outline strokes o f the picture, paying attention to the major issues and the questions, without necessarily covering every specific problem or issue.

90

91

The Text and the Canon of Scripture

The Text and the Canon of Scripture Underlying Concepts and Definitions The English w o r d "canon" is derived from the Greek term kanon, meaning a reed, measuring rod, or even curtain rod, which, i n turn, is connected to the Hebrew noun qăneh, "reed, r o d " (1 Kings 14:15; Job 40:21). I n a derived sense, a canon is a body o f texts that "has been measured" and found w o r t h y o f inclusion i n a collection o f texts w i t h binding authority for a religious community. Thus, canon must be con¬ nected to the concept o f Scripture, as well as inspiration. A canonical text is one that is accorded authority i n a given religious community and is considered to be "inspired" by God (2 T i m 3:16). However, Scripture presents a wider concept than the more limited canon. We have refer¬ ences to inspired writings, mentioned in the O T and written by authors regarded as inspired whose writings have not been included in the OT canon (1 Chron 29:29). I n the O T there exists a close connection be¬ tween God's speaking (as authoritative) and the dissemination o f this revelation—in either spoken or written form (Exod 17:14; 24:4). Writ¬ ing down the instructions received from God was a logical consequence, since it provided continuity and future adherence (Deut 31:9-13). Deu¬ teronomy 31:26 indicates the "testimony/function" o f this "book o f the Law." A l s o , i n other places i n the OT, the Hebrew term ed, "testimony," is often connected w i t h verification according to a set standard. (Deut 31:19, 2 1 ; Joshua 22:27, 28, 34). On three specific historical occasions we find the concept o f an au¬ thoritative written source that needed to be followed: (1) Exodus 24:7 in which the people declare their commitment to the book o f the law revealed to Moses on Sinai; (2) 2 Kings 23:3 and 2 Chronicles 34:32 in which the people o f Judah accepted the words o f the book o f the law found i n the temple by H i l k i a h i n the time o f king Josiah; (3) Nehemiah 8:9 in which Ezra read the law to the exiles who had returned from Babylon to Jerusa¬ lem. As they listened, the people wept, and Nehemiah 8:11 indicates that they had understood the meaning o f the reading and o f their responsibility. A l l three events took place during covenant making, or covenant renewal, ceremonies. Therefore, it seems valid to conclude that the covenant rela¬ tionship between God and His people was determined by their adherence to the "Word o f the L o r d . "

The term kanon was well k n o w n and utilized i n Hellenistic Greek. I n fact, the ancient world was full o f canons (or models/regulations) guiding different aspects o f human activity. I n Galatians 6:16, Paul utilizes the term in the sense o f a measure o f Christian conduct that can be verified. However, in Scripture it is not used to designate the biblical canon. A t the end o f the first century A . D , Clement o f Rome utilizes the term i n reference to the Christian "tradition" . Nearly a century later, Clement of Alexandria refers to the canon o f faith. From the middle o f the fourth century onward, kanon was used also o f the collection o f sacred writings of both the OT and the NT. 1

2

3

Eusebius usually is credited as the first to use the term i n reference to the binding collection o f Christian Scriptures. However, this does not mean that the concept was not present in N T times. Jesus complied w i t h OT regulations (feasts [John 2:23; 4:45], Sabbath observance, temple ser¬ vices [Luke 21:1], temple tax [Matt 17:24]) and thus indicated their bind¬ ing character. He refers to O T commands, promises, or other stories i n the context o f " i t is written" (Matt 4:4, 7, 10; 11:10; M a r k 7:6; and others), which always appears as a conclusive argument i n His discussions. 4

The early church seems to reflect this attitude concerning the bind¬ ing authority o f the OT, as w e l l . The Bereans check the O T Scriptures daily to verify Paul's teachings (Acts 17:11). Paul utilizes the strength of the OT i n his arguments for financial support o f the fledgling ministry (1 Cor 9:9-10, 14), on vengeance being the sole prerogative o f God (Rom 12:19-20), and i n the case o f the universal nature o f sin ( R o m 3: lOff). Peter argues for a lifestyle o f holiness on the basis o f the O T (1 Pet 2:4¬ 6). Such evidence suggests the existence o f the concept o f an authorita¬ tive body o f texts, utilized to define the limits o f rightful living, both in the OT and i n the NT. So far, both the O T and the N T demonstrate the concept o f canonical writings, i.e., writings that carry authority. This authority is not the result o f individual or organizational decisions but rests upon the authority o f the written (or spoken) Word itself, w h i c h was God-breathed.

Logically, this concept required the existence o f an authoritative col¬ lection o f this "Word" o f the Lord. Clearly, this collection was not consid¬ ered a human collection nor a collection based upon the preferences o f a specific religious leader or religious tradition. The O T (and N T ) authorita¬ tive collection (canon) was based upon God's self-revelation.

However, not all inspired writings came to be included i n the canon. This process o f canonization, a determination o f what to include and o f what to exclude, needs to be understood. While definite answers may not be that easy to come by, a historical review can provide the necessary data, which, in turn, needs to be explained in the light o f the authority claim of Scripture, based upon the doctrine o f revelation. Before undertaking a conceptual explanation o f the process o f canonization, the following two questions need to be addressed: First, which books/texts were included in this canon, and second, when was the biblical canon closed?

92

93

The Text and the Canon of Scripture

The Text and the Canon of Scripture History of the O T Canon Traditionally, the Jewish O T has been divided into three main divi¬ sions: Law, Prophets, and Writings (see Table 1): e

Law (Heb. torah)

Prophets (Heb.

n bî'îm)

Genesis

Joshua

Writings (Heb.

Exodus

Judges

Proverbs

Leviticus

1-2 Samuel

Job

kftăbîm)

Psalms

Numbers

1-2 K i n g s

Song o f Songs

Deuteronomy

Isaiah

Ruth

Jeremiah

Lamentations

Ezekiel

Ecclesiastes

The Twelve Prophets (Hosea. Joel,

Esther

A m o s , Obadiah, Jonah, M i c a h .

Daniel

N a h u m , Habakkuk, Zephaniah,

Ezra

Haggai, Zechariah, M a l a c h i )

Nehemiah 1-2 Chronicles

Table 1: The canon o f the Hebrew Bible according to Jewish divisions This threefold division is important for the reconstruction o f the can¬ onization process. The earliest datable extrabiblical reference to its exis¬ tence is found in the prolog o f the apocryphal book o f Jesus Ben Sirach, which dates to 132 B.C. Other sources, such as Second Maccabees, Philo, and Josephus, cite similar divisions. The earliest complete codices (i.e. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) both date from the fourth century A . D . and include some apocryphal books. This canon has also been called the Alexandrian canon. However, it is not clear when the apocryphal books were included, and the current evidence sug¬ gests a late date for the inclusion o f these extra-canonical works. There¬ fore, it appears to be reasonable to argue that these monumental codices (which only came into use from the third century A . D . onwards) exhibit influences prevalent in the early Christian church, which struggled to de¬ fine its identity against the background o f Rabbinic Judaism.

Tobit, Judith, 1-4 Maccabees, Wisdom o f Solomon, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) and Baruch, as well as additions to the books o f Esther and additional material i n the book o f Daniel (Susanna and Bel and the Dragon), books not found i n the Hebrew canon. These differences may have been due to the emerging tensions between Judaism and Christianity. I t must be noted that primitive Christianity did not always accept the additional material as authoritative. Athanasius, as well as Jerome, in the fourth century A . D , both mention apocryphal books but clearly distinguish them from the ca¬ nonical works. The evidence from Qumran is very informative and important. Com¬ plete scrolls and fragments o f all the books i n the Hebrew canon except Esther have been found at Qumran. This is significant, since most o f the scrolls are to ,be dated between the first century B.C. ( w i t h some as early as the second century B.C.) and A . D . 73. Therefore, virtually all books gen¬ erally connected to the Jewish canon o f the OT, already existed as copies in the second/first century B.C. Secondly, the Qumran community seems to have been also familiar w i t h the threefold division already mentioned i n the prolog o f Jesus Ben Sirach i n the second century B . C . This classifica¬ tion is also shared in different N T texts, such as Luke 24:44, and Matthew 23:35 (with its parallel text i n Luke 11:51). 5

Written around A . D . 100, the apocryphal book 2 Esdras (14:45) refers to the OT canon as containing 24 books (plus another 70 "hidden" books). Around A . D . 170, Melito, bishop o f Sardis, published his famous list o f books belonging to the OT, which includes all books, except possibly Es¬ ther. The crucial question that divides modern scholarship is whether the OT had already stabilized by the time o f Jesus (or before) or whether this only occurred in the first century A . D . or perhaps even later i n the second century A . D .

Significant differences exist between the Hebrew Jewish canon and the canon preserved in the oldest codices o f the L X X . The latter include

M u c h controversy surrounds the so-called "council o f Jamnia." Most discussions o f the canon suggest that the rabbis determined the canonicity o f the O T writings. Jamnia, on the Mediterranean coast o f Palestine, had both a rabbinical school (Beth ha-Midrash) and a legal court (Beth D i n , Sanhedrin) during the period A . D . 70-135. The extent o f the sacred Scrip¬ ture was one o f many topics discussed there. However, such discussions were not extraordinary, for rabbis argued about them at least once i n the previous generation and also several times long after the Jamnia period. It is clear that these rabbinical discussions (and many more) played an important role for orthodox Judaism, since they were later included i n the Babylonian Talmud, but they were not formative for the O T canon. A t most, they simply confirmed what had long been established and generally accepted.

94

95

The issue o f the canon o f the L X X must be understood i n the light o f the heightened confrontation and competition between Judaism and the rapidly growing Christian church. Although the L X X originated as a Jewish enterprise, its rapid adoption and authority i n the Christian com¬ munity as an important tool for the evangelization o f the Roman w o r l d led to a definite rejection o f the L X X (including its canon) by Judaism at the beginning o f the second century A . D .

The Text and the Canon of Scripture

The Text and the Canon of Scripture P h u r c h Father

History of the N T Canon The history o f the N T canon is not as complex as its O T counter¬ part—partly due to the existence o f codices, which represented a tremen¬ dous innovation i n terms o f practicality. When discussing the emergence o f a canon o f the N T church, the primary evidence needs to come from the N T itself. Jesus himself builds his message solidly upon O T law, as can be seen i n the famous phrase " y o u have heard that it was said . . but I say" (Matt 5:33-34, 38-39, 43-44). I n John 10:35 Jesus goes even further, stating that Scripture (graphe) cannot be "broken" (RSV, N I V , N K J V ) , w h i c h logically w o u l d require its binding authority. Other early Christian writings utilize Jesus' commands to argue for the permanence ofthe marital b o n d ( l Cor 7:10-11). Specific teachings are based upon the command o f Jesus (1 Cor 9:14 [gospel-worker sustenance]; 1 Cor 11:17, 23 [Lord's Supper]; and 1 T i m 5:17-18 [remuneration o f elders]). Paul develops the concept o f the inspiration o f Scripture further, i n eluding not only the k n o w n and established O T canon but also the texts o f t h e new Christian church (2 T i m 3:16; Heb 1:1-2). It is clear that, for the N T writers, the canonicity (binding authority) o f their written works is rooted i n their inspiration. Second Peter 1:21 emphasizes the process not as "man-made" but rather as "God-moved." However, most refer¬ ences allude directly to the spoken word, not necessarily to the written record. Luke's introduction to his Gospel (Luke 1:1-4) refers to the per¬ ceived need to have an authoritative written record o f t h e acts, sayings, and message o f Jesus to witness i n an environment that quickly spurned apocryphal " h o l y " writings. Beside the authoritative historical record o f Jesus' life, death, and resurrection (the Gospels), the early church soon included other writings as trustworthy. I n 2 Peter 3:15-16 the apostle includes the writings o f Paul (without being specific) as those inspired by the wisdom that God gave h i m , thus giving them credibility. Evidence i n the early church fathers suggests that by the close o f t h e first, and the beginning o f the second, century A . D , there existed a col¬ lection o f written Christian documents that enjoyed authoritative status. Table 2 illustrates the use o f N T canonical writings i n the early church fathers. Church Father

Date

Canonical N T Writings

Clement ot Rome

c. 60-100

Acts (?), Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Titus, Hebrews, 1 Peter

96

al denotes Boaz; the N I V translates this as "kinsman-redeemer." I n keeping w i t h the foregoing paragraph, perhaps we need to add the phrase "prevenient providence" to our theological lexicon. Some already are acquainted w i t h the concept o f prevenient grace, though probably not everyone (one o f m y dictionaries does not even have an entry for the ad¬ jective "prevenient"). It refers to the divine grace already working on a person's heart prior to that person's turning to God. Although theologians seldom speak o f prevenient providence, the book o f Ruth establishes the validity ofthe concept. Simply by introducing Boaz, the agent o f redemp¬ tion and by alluding to his abundant resources, the author is suggesting that God already is at work and has a plan to accomplish His purposes. A l ¬ though tear-stained eyes, whether o f Naomi and o f Ruth in ancient times or o f our o w n in modern times, are often oblivious to the fact, God already is working to redeem and to restore. But what should Ruth and Naomi do, in the meantime, before God's plan comes to fruition? To do nothing was to starve, so Ruth suggested a plan. I n accord w i t h the stipulation permitting the poor to gather grain left by the harvesters (Lev 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut 24:19-22), she proposed finding a field in which she would be allowed to glean. So she headed out, and "as it happened" (Ruth 2:3, N R S V ) , or so the Bible says, she came to the field o f Boaz.

o u s significance as the plot ofthe book unfolds, is simply a coincidence, stroke o f good luck that she gleaned i n his field instead o f someone else's? N o t at all! Although it may appear to the reader that Ruth stum¬ bled on the field o f Boaz by accident, this "labeling o f Ruth's meeting w i t h Boaz as 'chance' is nothing more than the author's way o f saying that no human intent was involved. For Ruth and Boaz it was an accident, but not for God." A study ofthe Hebrew verbal root used here (qarah) buttresses this point, for "Yahweh often lurks i n contexts where qrh occurs."

m

a

8

9

Here, the author is attempting to make a point about divine providence. Divine providence means God's care for His children, His general supervi¬ sion over them, and His ordering and working out o f events so as to fulfill His plan i n their lives. Providence i n the book o f Ruth is not ofthe spec¬ tacular, miraculous, "fireworks-in-the-sky" variety. To the contrary, much of God's activity "is very much that o f one i n the shadows, the one whose manifestation is not by intervention but by a lightly exercised providential control." But it is there all the same, and the events that occur subsequent to Ruth's encounter w i t h Boaz all have the feel o f being part ofthe divine plan to redeem and to restore Ruth and Naomi. Boaz' interest in, and kind¬ ness to, Ruth; her corresponding attraction to him; the outcome of his deal¬ ings w i t h the other kinsman; their marriage union; and production o f an offspring, who ultimately redeems N a o m i (4:14-15), seem meant to be. 10

But what about the present? Dare we affirm God's providential leading of His children today? Dare we proclaim divine involvement in our own lives? I n light ofthe teaching o f Scripture, not only in the book o f Ruth but in all sixty-six books, dare we not? The Ruths and the Naomis o f today, worried and hopeless, need desperately to hear the message that the same God who knows when a sparrow falls (Matt 10:29) cares deeply about them, that He is interested and involved in their lives. They need to be reminded ofthe gift o f redemption that He has provided and the ultimate restoration that He promises. I n fact, this redemption and restoration was provided i n a climactic way by none other than the great redeemer par excellence, the one w h o m Boaz foreshadowed i n several respects, Jesus Christ. Like Boaz, Jesus claims kinship with those w h o m He redeems (Heb 2:11), and like Boaz, He is w i l l i n g to redeem, even though redemption comes at a cost.

"As it happened." What is the meaning o f this phrase? Is the author suggesting that Ruth's encounter w i t h Boaz, an event that takes on enor-

But today redemption and restoration are not always immediately evi¬ dent i n the lives o f God's children. The L o r d does not wave a magic wand and, "Voila" the difficulties and problems immediately disappear. For example, when the passage under consideration here concludes (2:1-13), Ruth and N a o m i still face the problems o f poverty, hunger, and the threat o f family extinction. I t is true that Ruth has met the wealthy and friendly Boaz, but the small cache o f food she has gathered w i l l be devoured quick-

158

159

Interpreting Old Testament Historical Narrative

Interpreting Old Testament Historical Narrative ly, and she and Naomi must still deal w i t h the same problematic situation In one sense, nothing has changed. But in another sense, everything has changed, for Ruth has encountered the agent o f redemption! Redemp¬ tion and restoration are on the march and, ultimately, w i l l be visible i the lives o f these two widows. The positive outcome is not in doubt. To the contrary, it is as certain as the promises o f God. A n d so it is with us. Our status as the redeemed o f God, our future in His kingdom, while not always apparent now, is as sure as tomorrow's sunrise. n

Something more should be said about one ofthe objects o f redemption and restoration, Ruth. She deserves special mention, because her Moabite ancestry w o u l d seem to preclude her acceptance by the people o f God and would make her an unlikely candidate for such a work o f grace. It would seem to make her a permanent outsider (Deut 23:3). Not only in the passage under consideration here, but throughout the book, the author delights i n calling attention to the fact that Ruth is a foreigner. Some ofthe references, such as the dual one in Ruth 2:6, are clearly superfluous. Ev¬ ery opportunity is taken to remind the reader o f her Moabite heritage (1:4, 22; 2:2, 6, 2 1 ; 4:5, 10). I n light o f this alien status, Ruth considers herself undeserving o f any kindness (2:10). She has no covenant claims on the mercies o f God or on those o f His people. Or so she believes, perhaps, reflecting the views o f her Israelite contemporaries. However, this emphasis on her foreignness serves only to highlight and to dramatize the effect when Ruth's status as an outsider is reversed, a reversal anticipated by Boaz' comment i n chapter 2:12. This reversal comes to a climax in the last chapter ofthe book in which Ruth is portrayed as blessed by the L o r d and honored in Israel (4:11-22). This foreigner, whose Moabite ancestry w o u l d seem to place her outside the orbit o f such blessings, is revealed as the great-grandmother o f David, the Israelite par excellence, and the one through whose line Jesus Christ would later come (Matt 1:1-17). N o greater honor could be bestowed i n Israel! Thus, we have i n Ruth a striking witness to the biblical truth implied in the Genesis genealogies and later revealed anew to Peter, "God does not show favoritism but accepts men from every nation who fear h i m and do what is right" (Acts 10:34-35). This truth needs to be proclaimed loudly and often in our day i n which, sadly, ugly terms such as "ethnic cleansing" are alive and well. The fact that redemption and restoration are bestowed on this seeming outsider serves to highlight for us the equal status and value o f all people in God's eyes. The riches o f t h e divine kingdom are available to all who call upon the Lord's name (Rom 10:13).

References Unless otherwise indicated, biblical quotations are from the New Interna¬ tional Version. 1 The term "historical narrative" is perhaps the best term for the type of litera¬ ture most prevalent in the Bible, keeping in mind that history includes the following: (1) relatms what occurred, (2) sharing the narrator's viewpoint on what occurred, 3) placing it all in a meaningfol arrangement so that it conveys a message. (Wal¬ ter C Kaiser and Moises Silva. An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994], p. 83) Since selectivity and the bias ofthe historian are always involved in writing history, the nineteenth century idea of history as a completely objective and unbiased statement of past events is unrealistic. Though some prefer the word "story" for the genre under discussion here, for many people "story" implies, something that may not be true, so it is not the best term. In the term "historical narrative," the adjective "historical" indicates that the literature is relating a past event and the noun "narrative" suggests the literary form in which it comes. 2. Kaiser and Silva, p. 69. 3. Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982), p. 73. 4. Although the biblical examples discussed are mostly my own, some have been selected and adapted from Fee and Stuart, p. 78 ff. 5. The succeding paragraphs are adapted from J. Scott Duval and J. Daniel Hays, Grasping God's Word (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), p. 299 ff. 6. Ibid., p. 294. 7. Fee and Stuart, pp. 74-75. 8. Ronald M . Hals, The Theology ofthe Book of Ruth (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969), p. 12. 9. Robert L. Hubbard, Jr., The Book of Ruth, NICOT. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B.Eerdman's, 1988), p. 141. 10. Edward R. Campbell, Jr., Ruth, Anchor Bible (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1975) p. 29. Select Bibliography Campbell, Edward R., Jr. Ruth. Anchor Bible. Garden City: Doubleday, 1975. Fee, Gordon D. and Douglas Stuart. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. Grand Rapids, M I : Zondervan, 1982. Hals, Ronald M . The Theology of the Book of Ruth. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969. Hubbard, Jr., Robert L. The Book of Ruth. NICOT. Grand Rapids, M I : Eerdmans, 1988.

160

Kaiser, Walter C. and Moises Silva. An Introduction to Biblical Grand Rapids, M I : Zondervan, 1994. 161

Hermeneutics.

CHAPTERΧ

READING PSALMS AND THE WISDOM LITERATURE Gerhard Pfandl and  n g e l Μ . Rodriguez

Introduction The book o f the Psalms contains some o f the most inspiring subject matter in Scripture. It is more often quoted i n the N T than any other book and is revered by Christians up to the present time. Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes focus on the Hebrew concept o f wisdom (hokmăh), a word indicating both the intellectual and moral traditions o f ancient Israel. Be¬ cause Israel's wisdom belonged to the larger context o f the ancient Near East, we find i n the biblical wisdom literature some parallels to the sayings of Egyptian and Mesopotamian sages. The book o f Psalms and the wisdom literature i n the Bible are the work o f a number o f authors; the whole collection was probably brought together i n its final form in the time o f Ezra and o f Nehemiah. Since these books were written i n poetic form, the interpreter needs to take note ofthe characteristics o f Hebrew poetry.

1. The Book of Psalms The book o f Psalms is a collection o f inspired Hebrew prayers and hymns, seventy-three o f which are ascribed to K i n g David. While the psalms primarily contain words spoken to God or about God, they are, at the same, time God's words to His people; they focus on the relation¬ ship between God and His children. Psalms, therefore, contains hymns o f praise for God's great deeds; laments i n which people pour out their hearts in times o f trouble; and prayers for God's guidance and help i n the journey o f life. They reflect the faith experience o f the people o f God prior to the first coming o f Christ, but they are not time-bound. A l l the psalms were, and still are, used i n private devotions and i n public worship. They played an important part i n the temple service down to its destruction in A . D . 70. 163

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature Because there are very few clues to their historical setting, they are, in a sense, universal. They speak to, and for, typical human situations and, therefore, have the capacity to speak to human beings in any age. Because the psalms are poems—musical poems, they require special care when interpreted. Their poetic character is not obvious in transla¬ tion, because, in contrast to western poetry, Hebrew poetry has no rhyme. Much o f the language i n the psalms is intentionally emotive; the inter¬ preter, therefore, needs to be careful not to search for special meanings in every word or phrase in which the author has intended none. Furthermore, because the language o f the psalms is largely metaphorical, the interpreter must look for the intent o f the metaphors and not stop at their literal mean¬ ing. Mountains do not really skip like rams (Ps 114:4); nor should God's people be or act like sheep (Ps 23).

L o w t h distinguished between three basic types o f parallelism: synony¬ mous, antithetic, and synthetic, a division still i n use today. Synonymous

Parallelism—The

thought ofthe first line is repeated in

the second line i n different words: Prov 1:20

Wisdom calls aloud outside; She raises her voice i n the open square.

Isa 2:17

The loftiness o f man shall be bowed down, A n d the haughtiness o f men shall be brought low.

Antithetic Parallelism—The

second line contrasts, or negates, the

thought and the meaning o f the first line. Frequently, the second line is introduced w i t h "but." 2. Hebrew Poetry More than one-third o f the O T is poetry. Most o f it appears in the book o f Psalms, in the wisdom literature (Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes), and in the prophetic books. Isaiah is written almost entirely i n poetic form. A number o f poetic sections are also found in the historical books, e.g., Gen¬ esis 49 and Numbers 23 and 24. Only seven O T books have no poetry at all (Leviticus, Ruth, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Haggai, and Malachi). Thus, it is important to understand Hebrew poetry in order to interpret large por¬ tions o f the O T correctly. The modern study o f Hebrew poetry began i n 1753 with the publica¬ tion o f Bishop Robert Lowth's book De Sacra Poesi Hebraeorum. He be¬ lieved that Hebrew poetry had a real meter, but that it was difficult to rec¬ ognize because knowledge o f how classical Hebrew was spoken had died out. Therefore, he focused on the chief characteristic o f Hebrew poetry, which he labeled parallelismus membrorum (parallelism o f members).

Prov 14:30 A sound heart is life to the body, But envy is rottenness to the bones. Prov 16:25 There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way o f death. Synthetic or Formal Parallelism—This of the first line. Ps28:6

Bishop L o w t h explained parallelism as follows: The correspondence of one verse or line with another, I call parallel¬ ism. When a proposition is delivered, and a second is subjoined to it, or drawn under it, equivalent, or contrasted with it in sense, or similar to it in the form of grammatical construction, these I call parallel lines; and the words or phrases, answering one to another in corresponding lines, parallel terms. 1

164

Blessed be the Lord, Because he has heard the voice o f m y supplications!

Here the first line makes a statement, and the second line provides the reason. Ps 119:9

Parallelism

parallelism is not as clear as

the other two. Basically, the second line develops or completes the thought

H o w can a young man cleanse his way? B y taking heed according to Your word.

The first line asks a question; the second line provides the answer. Since Lowth's work on Hebrew parallelism, additional types o f paral¬ lelism have been identified. For example, i n Emblematic Parallelism,

one

line uses a metaphor or simile, while the balancing line makes a factual statement: Ps 42:1

As the deer pants for the water brooks, 165

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature So pants m y soul for You, O God. Climactic or Stairlike Parallelism repeats and advances the message in successive steps. The thought appears to ascend in three or more steps: Ps 29:1 -2

Give unto the L O R D , O you mighty ones, Give unto the L O R D glory and strength. Give unto the L O R D the glory due to His name; Worship the L O R D in the beauty o f holiness. 2

Chiastic Parallelism inverts the words or thoughts in successive lines. Thus, what was first i n the first line appears last in the second line: Ps 30:8

I cried out to you, O L O R D ; A n d to the L O R D I made supplication:

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature Metaphor—In a metaphor the writer describes one thing i n terms o f another. The comparison is merely implied. Psalm 18:2 "The L O R D is m y rock and m y fortress and m y deliverer; M y God, m y strength, i n w h o m I w i l l trust; M y shield and the horn o f m y salvation, m y stronghold." God was to D a v i d as the strength ofthe rock and the cover o f a shield providing him w i t h protection from his enemies. Parable—An extended simile becomes a parable. I t is a short story that teaches a lesson by comparison. God's parable i n Isaiah 5:1-5 de¬ scribes God's disappointment w i t h the vineyard that brought forth only w i l d or sour grapes. The main point o f comparison is recognized at the end ofthe story, "For the vineyard o f the L o r d o f hosts is the house o f Israel." Allegory—An extended metaphor becomes an allegory. I n the allego¬ ry o f Proverbs 5:15-23, the main point is marital fidelity. "The comparison that is drawn there is between the practice o f drinking water from one's own w e l l and the need for being faithful in the conjugal responsibilities and privileges o f marriage." 4

Acrostic

2. Several psalms are composed in an acrostic pattern in which the initial letter o f each verse or set o f verses follows the order ofthe Hebrew alpha¬ bet. Thus, i n Psalm 34 the first verse begins w i t h the Hebrew letter aleph, the second w i t h the letter beth, the third with the letter gimmel, etc. I n Lamentations 3 not one but three lines are assigned to each letter, i.e., the first three verses all begin w i t h aleph, the next three verses all begin w i t h beth, the next three w i t h gimmel, etc. I n Psalm 119, eight verses always begin with the same Hebrew letter, and since the number o f Hebrew letters is 22, the psalm has 176 verses. The acrostic form may have been an aid for memorization. Figures of Speech Hebrew poetry is rich i n the use o f imagery and figures o f speech, but it is also very elliptic; i.e., it drops out nouns and verbs in parallel lines and rarely uses conjunctions (and, but), temporal indicators (when, then), or logical connectors (thus, therefore).

Figures of Fullness of Expression Paronomasia—Paronomasia is a w o r d play i n w h i c h words w i t h sim¬ ilar sound but not necessarily similar meaning are repeated. For example, Proverbs 11:18 says, "The wicked man does deceptive (săqer) work, But he who sows righteousness will have a sure reward (seker). The sounds o f the w o r d "deceptive" and "reward" (săqer and seker) are similar but their meaning is not. See also the similarity o f the words for "trouble" (şărăh) and "small" (sar) i n Proverbs 24:10. This literary effect is usually lost i n translation. Hyperbole—-This is a conscious exaggeration or overstatement, e.g., Psalm 78:27, "He also rained meat on them like the dust, Feathered fowl like the sand ofthe seas." This text is part o f a graphic poetic account ofthe miracle ofthe quails. To emphasize the showers o f God's blessings, the num¬ ber o f quails is compared to the sand o f the sea. 3.

Figures of Association Metonymy—In this figure o f speech an idea is evoked or named by

3

means o f a w o r d that refers to some associated notion. Psalm 47:8, "God reigns over the nations; God sits on His holy throne." God's throne stands

1.

Figures of

Comparison

for His reign.

Simile—A figure o f speech in which two essentially unlike things are compared by the use o f an introductory " l i k e " or "as." Psalm 42:1 "As the deer pants for the water brooks, so pants m y soul for You, O God." A simile is the most easily recognizable figure o f speech.

a part or a part for the whole. Psalm 26:10, " I n whose hands is a sinister

166

167

Synecdoche—A

figure

o f speech in which the whole can be put for

scheme, and whose right hand is full o f bribes." The right hand as part o f the body stands for the whole person.

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature When dealing with figures o f comparison, association, or fullness, the interpreter must be careful not to press them beyond what the author had originally intended. "Figures o f speech are not as precise in their meanings as prose is. What these figures lack in precision, however, is surely made up for in their increased ability to draw pictures for us and to give a vividness that ordinary prose cannot." 5

Types of Hebrew Poetry

6

Hebrew poetry had its origin i n the life o f the people. However, it was not recreational but functional. I t played an important role i n the life o f the nation o f Israel, particularly i n its relationship w i t h God. Therefore, the prophetic messages were frequently given i n poetic form. N o t only were they more easily remembered, but they were also more emotive and powerful in their message. War Songs—War songs were one o f the earliest forms o f poetry (Judg 7:18, 20). The best k n o w n are the victory songs o f Moses (Ex 15:1-18) and Deborah (Judg 5). They usually dwell rapturously on the power o f God, who defeated the enemy. Love Songs—The most famous love song in Scripture is the book Song o f Solomon. Another poetic expression o f human love is found in Ruth 1:16-17, in which Ruth utters some o f the most memorable words in all o f Scripture. Laments—The lament, an anguished cry to God, is the most common poetic form i n the psalms. M o r e than sixty psalms are either individual (Ps 3) or corporate laments (Ps 9). Generally, a lament has several, or all o f the following, elements: (a) The address to God: Psalm 22:1, " M y God, M y G o d . " (b) A description o f distress: Psalm 57:4, " M y soul is among lions; I lie among the sons o f men who are set on fire, whose teeth are spears and arrows." (c) A plea for deliverance: Psalm 3:7, "Arise, O L O R D ; Save me, O m y God!" (d) A statement o f trust i n God: Psalm 28:7, "The L O R D is m y strength and m y shield; M y heart trusted i n H i m . " (e) A confession o f sin: Psalm 51:4, "Against You, You only, have I sinned, A n d done this evil i n Your sight." (f) A v o w to do certain things: Psalm 61:5, "For You, O God, have heard m y vows." (g) A conclusion, w h i c h may be i n the form o f praise or thanks: Psalm 30:12, "O L O R D my God, I w i l l give thanks to You forever.'

tion, there are thanksgiving hymns that express gratitude to God for His answer to specific prayers (Pss 18, 30, 32, 65, 67). Imprecatoiy Psalms—These are usually lament psalms i n which the writer's desire for vindication, based on the principle o f retribution, the lex talionis, are especially prominent (Pss 12, 35, 52, 58-59, 69, 70, 83, 109, 137). Frequently, statements in these psalms are shocking to modern ears, "Happy the one who takes and dashes your little ones against the rock!" (Ps 137:9). However, it needs to be remembered that the thought behind the desire for vengeance is biblical (Deut 32:35, "Vengeance is Mine,"); how it is expressed is human. "Some o f the language comes from the cov¬ enant curses.... I n other cases concepts and phraseology seem to be taken from or point to some divine punitive activity w i t h i n history against sinners." Hyperbolic language is common i n such emotional passages. 8

Guidelines for the Interpretation of Hebrew Poetry Poetry calls for a different hermeneutical approach from that used in narrative. Narrative brings information and teaches by illustration; poetry makes room for a freer expression o f inspiration. Here are some basic guidelines to interpret Hebrew poetry. 1. Take Note of the Pattern of the Poem or of the Hymn—The pri¬ mary element o f Hebrew poetry is the pattern o f parallel lines as indicated above. 2. Group Parallel Lines—Since the poet is using very emotive, color¬ ful language, the interpreter must walk a fine line between reading too much into individual lines and assuming synonymity whenever the thoughts are sim¬ ilar. The context must indicate whether or not the clauses are synonymous. 3. Study the Metaphorical Language—In Hebrew poetry, figurative language is predominant and more difficult to understand than prose. Job 38 and Psalm 19 are not meant to teach Hebrew cosmology; nor does the statement " I w i l l lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help" (Ps 121:1, K J V ) mean that God lives on the hills. Nevertheless, the background to such imagery adds richness and depth to the understanding o f these passages.

Hymns—Hymns, or praise songs, were used i n the worship o f God. Scholars have identified three specific types o f hymns in which God is praised as: (a) Creator (Pss 8, 19, 104, 148), (b) Protector o f Israel ( 66, 100, 111, 114), and (c) L o r d o f history (33, 103, 105-106, 135). I n addi-

4. Where Possible, Note the Historical Background to the Text—In the book o f Psalms, the titles o f fourteen psalms (3, 7, 18, 30, 34, 5 1 , 52, 54, 56, 57, 59, 60, 63, 142) provide some historical references. While scholars have debated the authenticity o f these titles, there is little reason to doubt the basic trustworthiness o f the titles, though they are not neces¬ sarily inspired. Commentaries and dictionaries are helpful i n illuminating the background to these psalms.

168

169

5

7

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature

5. Study the Poetic Texts in Terms of Their Type and Basic Stance— A n imprecatory psalm needs to be studied differently from a praise psalm. Statements about God's relationship to people i n Proverbs and Ecclesiastes differ from type to type (proverbs, didactic or experiential sayings, etc.), and the applicability to present circumstances changes accordingly. 9

6. Study Poetic Passages as a Whole Before Drawing Conclu¬ sions—After noting the basic structure o f a poem and studying the details, the interpreter needs to take note o f the whole passage before explaining its meaning. 7. Study Messianic Psalms in Terms of Their Historical Signifi¬ cance—From the perspective o f the N T writers, many psalms were in¬ terpreted as Messianic psalms; their words were quoted w i t h specific reference to Jesus (Pss 2, 22, 110). However, i n ancient Israel, w i t h the exception o f Psalm 110, these psalms were not viewed as referring directly to the Messiah; they had a historical meaning at the time they were written. These psalms, therefore, must first be studied to determine the author's original intended meaning before they are applied to the Messiah. Yet, beyond the historical meaning they "provide verbal indicators that identify the typological nature o f these psalms." I n Psalm 22, for example, many features far transcend the actual experiences o f David. They can be under¬ stood fully only i n the context o f Jesus' suffering. 10

I n the interpretation o f the poetic portions o f Scripture, the final word should not be technical but devotional, presenting to the hearers the won¬ ders o f God's ways w i t h man and His grace i n the plan o f redemption.

3. Hebrew Wisdom Literature In addition to the guidelines for the interpretation o f Hebrew poetry, an understanding o f the special characteristics o f Hebrew wisdom litera¬ ture w i l l be o f benefit. The title "Wisdom Literature" is used by biblical scholars to designate the books o f Proverbs, Job, and Ecclesiastes. Catholie scholarship includes the apocryphal books Ecclesiasticus (Ben Sirach) and the Wisdom of Solomon. Some scholars also include some psalms, usually called Wisdom Psalms (Pss 1; 32; 34; 37; 49; 73; 112; 127; 128; and 133) under the wisdom genre. W i t h respect to the Song o f Solomon, there are different opinions, but many biblical students would argue that even though the book is, or seems to be, a collection o f love poems, it probably was preserved by the Israelite sages.

a few general remarks that hopefully w i l l encourage the reader to study the books themselves to gain a better understanding o f the intellectual w o r l d of the wisdom thinkers. Biblical wisdom is interested i n the relationship between nature and humans and in the social life o f human beings. Wis¬ dom literature illustrates the Hebrew interest i n nature and i n the use o f the human mind to study it (1 Kgs 4:33). The wise persons also examined human conduct and learned from those observations how to enjoy life. They discovered the value o f proper language i n social interaction, the importance o f work, and the risks and the dangers involved i n improper social relationships. The motivation and the purpose for the study o f nature and human beings was significantly different from that o f modern scientific research. The Israelites presupposed that the L o r d was their Creator and that the natural w o r l d was also the result o f God's creative activity. The goal o f ex¬ ploring nature was not to uncover the origin o f its existence but to observe and understand the power and wisdom o f the Creator. The Israelites believed that the wisdom o f their Creator and Redeemer was mediated to them, not just through the words o f the prophets but also through creation. The wise persons, therefore, spent time exploring God's creation in order to apprehend that wisdom. But wisdom was at the same time a gift from God: "For the L O R D gives wisdom; From his mouth come knowledge and understanding" (Prov 2:6). The acquisition o f wisdom was preceded by the "fear [reverence] o f the L O R D " (Prov 1:7). This did not mean that fear/reverence was the main element i n the acquisition o f wisdom. I t meant that the fear o f the Lord was the sphere within which it was possible to obtain wisdom. Once that presupposition was accepted, the wise person went out i n search for wisdom. H o w was this done? B y using basically the same principles we use today. They observed the natural w o r l d and the social interaction o f human beings, analyzed what they observed, and drew conclusions that impacted the quality o f their lives (Prov 24:30-34). I n other words, they used the rational abilities that God had given them and obeyed His com¬ mand to explore the intelligibility o f the created world. I n the process o f analysis, they also discovered the limitations o f wisdom. What we find i n the wisdom books o f the OT is the result o f that search for wisdom. Interpreting the Book of Proverbs

In interpretating the wisdom literature, it is important to have a basic understanding o f the biblical approach to wisdom. Here we can make only

What is a proverb? The term proverb is difficult to define. The He¬ brew term măsăl ("saying," "song,") has a broad range o f meanings, mak¬ ing it somewhat imprecise for a valid definition. The Hebrew verbal root

170

171

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature "seems to indicate comparison, a meaning that is illustrated, implicitly or explicitly, in very many o f the sayings o f t h e book." We perhaps could say that a proverb compares, contrasts, points to similar or dissimilar el¬ ements, expressing ideas in popular sayings that contain an explicit or implicit teaching. Such proverbs were very much a part o f daily life as 1 Samuel 10:12 and 24:13 indicate. In general the book o f Proverbs has a very high view o f the role and o f the importance o f wisdom in human existence, without denying some o f its limitations. Widsom, a divine char¬ acteristic, is personified i n the book as a being who interacts w i t h human beings. I n 1:20-33; 8:1-3; 9:1-6, 13-18, she (wisdom) is set in opposition to a "foolish woman." I n other places, wisdom's activities closely parallel those o f Y a h w e h . B o t h pour out the Spirit (Prov 1:23; Isa 44:3); both called Israel, but i t refused to answer (Prov 1:24; Isa 66:4); both pro¬ mote justice (Prov 8:15; Isa 11:4, 5); etc. W i s d o m is the essence o f the being o f God.

25:2-29:27

M a i n Text

11

Proverbs is written in poetic form; therefore, the principles used in the interpretation o f poetry also apply to the study o f this book. Apart from that, the interpretation o f Proverbs could be facilitated by taking into con¬ sideration the following suggestions: First, one should become acquainted w i t h the structure o f the book. It is formed by several collections o f proverbs from different individuals, written at different historical periods. 1:1-9:18 1:1-7 1:8-9:18 10:1 - 2 2 .16 ‫־‬ 10:1 10:2-22:16

Proverbs

of Solomon Title and Introduction M a i n Text

Proverbs of Solomon Title M a i n Text

22:17-24:22 Words ofthe Wise Men 22:17-21 Introduction 22:22-24:22 M a i n Text 24:23-34 More Words of the Wise Men 24:23a Title 23:23b-34 M a i n Text 25:1-29:27 25:1

Proverbs

of Solomon Copied by the Men ofHezekiah Title 172

30:1-33 30:1 30:3-33

Words of Agur Title M a i n Text

31:1-9 31:1 31:2-9

Words of

31:10-31

Acrostic Poem to the "Good Wife "

Lemuel Title M a i n Text

This outline is useful i f one is interested i n comparing the contribution of each collection to a particular subject. It is intriguing to find two collec¬ tions o f proverbs from individuals who may not have been Israelites (Agur and Lemuel). H o w did their proverbs find a place i n the book? The most logical suggestion is that the L o r d guided the prophet i n the selection o f that material, because it contained truths compatible w i t h God's revealed w i l l for Israel. Second, most o f the proverbs are single units o f meaning without an immediate context that could help us to interpret them. I n many cases, the meaning o f the proverb is clear, but, i n other cases, it is difficult to ascer¬ tain its significance. However, it is useful to get acquainted w i t h the cul¬ tural context o f the writer in order to be able to gain a better understanding of the images used i n phrasing the proverbs. Third, since the purpose o f the book o f Proverbs is clearly given, the in¬ terpreter should pay particular attention to it and use it as a hermeneutical key. I n the prolog o f the book, Solomon lists a series o f goals that he is try¬ ing to achieve through the collection (1:2-6). But the ultimate purpose ofthe search for wisdom is summarized i n 8:33-36. Wisdom is so important, be¬ cause "whoever finds me finds life . . . , all those who hate me love death." The fundamental issue is one o f life and death. The centrality o f that aspect is such that wisdom is described as "a tree o f life" (3:18). This insight, together with the prolog should guide the interpreter i n the reading o f the book. Fourth, knowing a little about the different literary forms used in Prov¬ erbs w i l l be o f help to the interpreter. As the title suggests, the most com¬ mon form is the proverb or saying pattern. Proverbs usually are a descrip¬ tion or statement about something w i t h a particular wisdom twist (e.g., 12:5; 26:1). We have many different types o f sayings, among them numer¬ ical sayings to indicate that a list o f items is not complete (e.g., 30:7, 15); better-than sayings, to reveal the superior value o f a particular situation or 173

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature conduct over the other option (e.g., 12:9; 16:8); and the comparative say¬ ing, employed to discourage a particular action (26:8). Another literary form are the admonitions. They can contain a com¬ mand to do something (e.g., 3:1; 6:6) or a prohibition not to do something (e.g., 22:24; 23:6), and, in some cases, the two are combined into one (e.g., 1:8). We also find autobiographical accounts that contain moral lessons or teachings (e.g., 4:3-9; 24:30-34). Being aware o f what the biblical writer is doing w i l l help the interpreter to understand what is being said. Fifth, the book o f Proverbs can be studied by using different approach¬ es. One can study passages in which there is a group o f proverbs address¬ ing the same issue. That facilitates the study o f a particular topic (e.g., the value o f wisdom [2:1-4:27; 8:1-9:18]; poverty [24:30-34]). But in most cases, proverbs dealing w i t h the same subject are found in different places throughout the book. I n those cases, it is better to group the passages for careful study i n order to find out what the book teaches about a particular topic. This can be done by subject areas, such as prayer, hatred, wicked¬ ness, righteousness, etc., or by studying the characters mentioned i n the book (e.g., the righteous, the wicked, the wise, the fool, the scoffer, the sluggard, the seductress). Interpreting the Book of Job The book o f Job is considered by some to be one o f the greatest literary works o f humanity. The events it describes belong to pre-Mosaic days, but according to an early Jewish tradition, they were written down by Moses. The beauty o f the language, its literary style, and its theological content single it out as a unique book within the Bible itself. Surprisingly, as far as we know, none o f the protagonists are Israelites, even though they worship the Lord (e.g., 12:9). It is a wisdom book in the form o f a narrative, making its reading more interesting. It is a discussion o f human suffering as it is be¬ ing experienced by Job, the main character o f the book. I n the discussion the most disturbing question concerns the role o f God i n the experience o f Job. It is there that the issue o f the value and o f the role o f wisdom poignantly surfaces. Does wisdom provide an answer to the suffering o f the innocent? W i t h the exception o f the prolog and the epilog, the rest o f the book is written i n poetry. I n addition to the principles for the interpretation o f poetry discussed above, the following suggestions should be helpful i n the interpretation o f the book: First, the book primarily consists o f dialogs between Job and his friends and between God and Job. This dialogical nature o f the document w i l l assist the reader in following the flow o f ideas and i n determining 174

whether or not there is progression i n the arguments leading to a resolution ofthe theological plot. Second, the dialog is formed by the following three cycles introduced by a speech o f Job (chapter 3): First Cycle Eliphaz's Speech Job's Response Bildad's Speech Job's Response Zophar's Speech Job's Response

Job Job Job Job Job Job

4-5 6-7 8 9-10 11 12-14

Job Job Job Job Job Job

15 16-17 18 19 20 21

Job Job Job Job

22 23-24 25 26-27

Second Cycle Eliphaz's Speech Job's Response Bildad's Speech Job's Response Zophar's Speech Job's Response T h i r d Cycle Eliphaz's Speech Job's Response Bildad's Speech Job's Response

This organization is useful to the interpreter i n at least two ways: (a) By reading all the speeches o f each o f Job's friends i n one sitting, one is able to understand their arguments better. Reading all o f Job's responses in the same way w i l l also facilitate the comprehension o f what he is saying, as well as the intensity of his psychological, theological, and spiritual pain, (b) I f the speeches are read i n the order given i n the text one w i l l be able to establish more clearly the areas o f agreements and o f disagreements between Job and his friends. Third, the interpretation o f Job 29:1-31:40 is important for the under¬ standing o f the book. This monolog seems to precipitate the "resolution" o f the plot i n the book. I n chapter 3 1 , Job appears to pronounce an oath o f 175

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature innocence. I f this is correct, it means that Job is demanding that God pres¬ ent the evidence He has against h i m or otherwise exonerate h i m from any charges. This is the climax o f Job's defense; from that point on he remains silent, waiting for God to speak. Fourth, trying to establish the purpose o f the speech by the young man Elihu may be a difficult task, but one worth pursuing. A l l other speeches have ended; Job is silent, waiting for the Lord to intervene, and unexpect¬ edly Elihu speaks up. What does this mean? Is he speaking for God? Is he defending Him? Fifth, it is useful to observe that the last part o f the book is another dialog, this time between God and Job: God's first speech (Job 38:1-40:2); Job's response (40:3-5); God's second speech (40:6-41:34); Job's response (42:1-6). This is one o f the most challenging and interesting sections o f the book. Does God answer all the questions or even some o f the questions raised i n the dialogs between Job and his friends? W h y is God's creative and sustaining power emphasized so much? Is that God's way o f dealing w i t h Job's claim o f innocence? What is the purpose o f the description o f the behemoth and the leviathan? Is there a progression o f ideas in Job's responses to the divine speeches? Sixth, the prolog and the epilog constitute the proper theological perspective for the understanding o f some o f the basic issues raised in the book. The interpreter should pay close attention to their content. The mystery o f suffering is not totally solved, but, by placing it i n a cosmic perspective, certain new insights are provided, and the limits o f human wisdom are revealed. Interpreting the Book of Ecclesiastes In Ecclesiastes 1:1, the author identifies himself as the son o f David, king i n Jerusalem. The traditional view, therefore, accepted by Jewish and Christian scholars alike, has been that Solomon wrote the book i n its entirety. While the book sounds rather pessimistic i n places, it needs to be remembered that the basic purpose o f the book is to demonstrate that, apart from God, life lacks any ultimate meaning and amounts to no more than vanity.

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature thor o f the book is not a true agnostic i n that he makes specific affirmations about God, but he rejects the possibility o f gaining a true understanding o f human existence. The book Ecclesiastes is indeed difficult to interpret. There are ele¬ ments o f pessimism, skepticism, and even some aspects o f agnosticism in the book. The following suggestions w i l l be useful i n interpreting the book. First, the primary purpose o f the book is mentioned i n 12:9: "Not only was the teacher wise, but also he imparted knowledge to the people" ( N I V ) . The book has a pedagogical or didactic function. Like all wisdom books, i t attempts to summarize the findings o f the wise person in order to instruct others and to make them wise. This means that the book is not a rejection o f the value o f wisdom for human existence. I t may question the ultimate value o f human wisdom, but it does not promote folly. Second, one should place the book w i t h i n the Israelite wisdom theol¬ ogy. I n other words, it must not be interpret i n isolation from the other wisdom books. They provide the proper context for its interpretation. Third, although scholars have not been able to agree on the outline o f the literary structure o f the book, it is clear that some sections are grouped thematically. This is helpful for the interpreter. For example, i n 1:4-11, the cosmos is studied and the conclusion is drawn that there is nothing new under the sun. I n chapter 2, we find autobiographical materials describing the wise person's search for meaning i n joy, work, wisdom, and toil. The conclusion o f the section is that all is meaningless. Fourth, particular attention needs to be paid to subjects that are ad¬ dressed several times i n the book. For example, the expression "Vanity o f vanities" or "Meaningless! Meaningless! . . . Everything is meaningless" ( N I V ) appears at the beginning and at the end o f the book (1:2; 12:8). I n the Hebrew language, repetition was used to express the superlative—"ab¬ solute vanity!" Anything human beings may seek i n place o f God is abso¬ lute vanity, according to the Preacher.

The history o f the interpretation o f Ecclesiastes reveals a diversity o f views concerning its message. M a n y consider the book to contain a very pessimistic view o f life that usually leads one to consider humans as vietims o f events out o f their control. Others have concluded that the book is fundamentally agnostic—that it promotes the idea that it is impossible to understand what takes place under the sun. Most would argue that the au-

Fifth, i n order to place the book i n its proper theological perspective the reader should pay particular attention to the epilog (12:9-14). The voice that we hear there is the voice o f the narrator summarizing the fundamental message o f the book for the reader. That is precisely what makes the epilog so important for the interpreter. I t makes clear that pes¬ simism is not the ultimate message o f the book. Certainly "everything is meaningless," but there is more to life than simply trying to find its present significance. The interpreter should carefully explore the contri¬ bution o f the epilog to the message and to the theology ofthe book: What is that contribution? In what sense does it set limits to the content o f the

176

177

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature

rest o f the book? What is its significance for a Christian reading o f the book? Interpreting the Song of Solomon The history o f the interpretation o f this book, which in the opening verse is attributed to king Solomon, reveals a great deal o f confusion that should alert the reader to the complexity o f the interpretational task. The most common approach has been to treat it as an allegory (see chapter 13). Primarily, because the book appears to be quite secular, even erotic. The allegorical approach looks for meanings i n a text beyond the literal sense o f t h e language. I n the case o f the book Song o f Solomon, it is un¬ derstood to be nonhistorical but containing deep spiritual truths. Using the allegorical method, Jewish interpreters concluded that the male figure in the poems was the Lord and the Shulamite girl was Israel. Others saw in the experience o f the man and the woman the way that wisdom and the student o f wisdom should relate to each other. A m o n g Christians, the book has been read as a description o f the relationship between Christ and the church. That is, its spiritual value has been decoded through the allegorical approach. This raises the question whether the text itself is suggesting this approach and whether, in spite o f the apparent secular dimension o f the text, there is a theological concern, or message, i n the book. There is no indication in Scripture that the book is an allegory. Neither Jesus nor any o f the N T writers ever referred to it; but this does not mean that this love song does not have some spiritual value. Scripture repeatedly illustrates the union between God and His people by the relationship o f a husband to his bride (Isa 54:4, 5; Jer 3:14; 2 Cor 11:2), and Ellen G. White, on occasion, used passages from the book to illustrate spiritual truths ; but this does not mean that she considered the book to be an allegory or that she used the allegorical method to interpret it. 12

H o w should the book be interpreted? First, the book should be read many times. One o f the most obvious things that the interpreter w i l l realize is the fact that we are dealing here w i t h love poetry. Second, the poems are primarily spoken by two individuals, namely a woman (e.g., Song 1:2) and a man (e.g., 4:1-2). There are references to the daughters o f Jerusalem, but they do not seem to play any active role i n the book (e.g., 1:5). Third, the book is characterized by dialogs (e.g., 1:7-8; 15-16; 8:13-14) and monologs (e.g., 3:1-5; 6:4-10). Their study is useful in understanding the nature ofthe poems.

they were written. This means the interpreter should have access to com¬ mentaries or biblical dictionaries that w i l l provide that information. Using a concordance is probably the best way to understand the particular terminol¬ ogy used i n the book. Sometimes it is difficult to understand the point being made through a comparison. For instance, the man says, "Your two breasts are like two fawns, twins o f a gazelle which feed among the lilies" (Song 4:5, N A S B ) . A possible interpretation o f this comparison sees the gazelles as "symbols o f life and renewal." The fawns add to the image elements o f softness and playfulness. O. Keel says, "Hebrew literature does not attach notions o f form to the term 'breasts' but notions o f blessing (Gen 49:25), o f kindness, nourishment, and trust building (Ps 22:9; Job 3:12), o f softness, warm security . . . in short, notions o f foil participation in life and o f life's renewal." This means that "both breasts and fawns o f a gazelle symbolize the warmth o f life, an inspiring and victorious counterforce to death." 13

14

15

Fifth, notice should be taken o f the freedom w i t h which the biblical writer speaks about sexual matters. This reveals to the interpreter the way in which the Bible looks at sex and sexual relations. Sixth, the fundamen¬ tal intention or message o f the poems needs to be investigated. This can be done by paying particular attention to what is emphasized i n the book through repetitions. Such repeated ideas as love, marriage, longing for the other, and the references to the garden w i l l be helpful i n the formulation and in the development o f the theology ofthe book.

Conclusion In the interpretation o f Psalms and o f the wisdom literature i n Scrip¬ ture, we need to use the same principles we use in other parts o f Scripture —linguistic and contextual analysis and background studies concerning the text or passage. I n addition, it w i l l be o f help i f the interpreter has a good grasp o f the special characteristics o f Hebrew poetry and o f the con¬ cept o f wisdom in the OT. When reading the wisdom literature we need to remember that it teaches rational living, which, at the same time, is good and godly liv¬ ing. A n d it teaches how when troubles come the wise can bear it. Hence, common sense and sound judgment w i l l help the interpreter to understand what God is saying through these poetic portions o f Scripture.

Fourth, particular attention needs to be paid to the language that is used so that the poems can be interpreted within the cultural context i n which 178

179

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature

Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literature References Unless otherwise noted, biblical quotations are from the New King James version. 1. Robert Lowth, De sacra poesi Hebraeorum praelectiones academicae (Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrew) (Oxford: Clarendon, 1753), quot¬ ed in Walter Kaiser and Moises Silva, An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids, M I : Zondervan, 1994), p. 88. 2. Named after the Greek letter chi (X). It refers to the inversion of related elements within parallel constructions. 3. Kaiser and Silva, p. 91. 4. Ibid., p. 94. 5. Ibid., p. 98. 6. The next two sections are indebted to material found in Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral (Downers Grove, I L : InterVarsity Press, 1991), pp. 181-185, 187-190. 7. Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (Grand Rapids, M I : Zondervan, 1981), 176-177. 8. Ângel Μ. Rodriguez, "Inspiration and the Imprecatory Psalms," J ATS 5.1 (1994): 57. 9. See Rodriguez, 57-58. 10. Richard M . Davidson, "New Testament Use ofthe Old Testament," J ATS 5.1 (1994): 23. 11. Roland E. Murphy, Proverbs (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1998), xxii. 12. In the book Education (p. 261) Ellen G. White illustrates the need for a personal relationship with Jesus by quoting Song of Solomon 2:3-4; and repeat¬ edly she refers to Jesus as "the 'the chiefest among ten thousand,' the One 'alto¬ gether lovely.' Song of Solomon 5:10, 16." (6T 175; Ev 186). 13. Othmar Keel, Song of Songs (Minneapolis, M N : Fortress Press, 1994), p. 150. 14. Ibid. 15. Ibid.

Murphy, Roland E. The Tree of Life: An Exploration of Biblical Wisdom Litera¬ ture. Grand Rapids, M I : Eerdmans, 1996. . Proverbs. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1998. Osborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1991. Weiser, Artur. The Psalms. The Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962.

Selected Bibliography Clements, Ronald E. Wisdom Theology!. Grand Rapids, M I : Eerdmans, 1992. Hartley, John E. The Book of Job. Grand Rapids, M I : Eerdmans, 1988. Kaiser, Walter and Silva, Moises. An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids, M I : Zondervan, 1994. Keel, Othmar. Song of Songs. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1994. Kidner, Derek. An Introduction to Wisdom Literature: The Wisdom of Proverbs, Job and Ecclesiastes. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1985. Longman, Tremper, III. The Book of Ecclesiastes. Grand Rapids, M I : Eerdmans, 1998. 180

181

CHAPTER XI

INTERPRETING OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY Richard M . Davidson

Introduction This chapter focuses upon the interpretation o f prophecy i n the OT, ex¬ cept for the apocalyptic prophecies o f Daniel, which are discussed in chapter fourteen. The messages o f the OT prophets included both "forth-telling," (non-predictive messages) as well as "fore-telling" (divine predictions). Here attention is directed toward the "foretelling," the numerous predictive prophecies estimated to comprise nearly thirty percent o f the OT. These are found not only in the books o f the major and minor prophets but also in the Pentateuch, the historical books, and the hymnic/wisdom literature. 1

1. General Observations I n studying the predictive prophecies o f the O l d Testament, several general and preliminary observations that arise from the biblical selftestimony are foundational. First, the Bible specifically claims that God is able to predict the near and distant future (Deut 18:22; Isa 46:10), and the interpreter must not be influenced by modern critical presuppositions that reject the concept o f future prediction and divine foreknowledge. Second, predictive prophecy was not given simply to satisfy curios¬ ity about future events but for moral purposes, such as the establishment o f faith i n God (Isa 45:21; 46:9-11; cf. John 14:29) and motivation to holy l i v i n g (Gen 17:7-8; E x o d 19:4-6). Third, the same basic steps o f careful analysis followed i n interpret¬ ing any biblical passage must be taken when interpreting a predictive prophecy, including attention to the historical setting, literary structure and other literary features, grammatical and syntactical elements, mean¬ ings o f words w i t h i n the immediate context, and theological messages (see chap. 7 for elaboration o f these general principles). 183

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy Fourth we must recognize that within the O T there are two different genres or types o f predictive prophecy: apocalyptic (e.g., the visions o f Daniel) and non-apocalyptic (often called "classical" or "general" proph¬ ecy). Both classical and apocalyptic prophecy involve specific hermeneutical rules o f interpretation that arise out o f an examination o f the biblical evidence. Principles o f interpretation for apocalyptic prophecy are dis¬ cussed in chapter 14. Some o f the major differences between classical and apocalyptic prophecy may be summarized i n the following chart: Two Genres of Predictive Prophecy in the Old Testament General (Classical) Prophecy

Apocalyptic Prophecy

1. Primary focus: local/national, contemporary

1. Primary focus: universal sweep o f history, w i t h emphasis on the end time

2. Eschatology: w i t h i n history (national, geopolitical, ethnic)

2. Eschatology: comes from out¬ side o f history (final, universal)

3. Some contrasts

3. Striking contrasts (dualism): • temporal (this age/age to come) • spatial (earthly/heavenly) • ethical (righteous/wicked)

4. L i m i t e d symbolism with trueto-life imagery

4. Profuse, composite symbolism

Two Genres of Predictive Prophecy in the O l d Testament (Contd.) General (Classical) Prophecy

Apocalyptic Prophecy

7. Prophetic "telescoping"; the prophet frequently jumps from the local, contemporary crisis to the eschatological Day o f the L o r d (e.g., Joel 2-3), or from one peak o f the predictive fulfillment to another, without reference to the valley i n between them.

7. Visions give the full sweep o f history from the time o f the prophet to the end o f time, w i t h no gap be¬ tween the local setting and the final end or between the different stages o f the prophetic fulfillment.

As a fifth general observation, there are several different predictive forms i n the OT. The most common form is the spoken oracle (introduced by "The w o r d o f the Lord came unto me . . ." or similar phraseology), which may be recorded in prose or poetry and may utilize highly figura¬ tive language, as well as straightforward, literal declarations. Predictions also may be symbolically acted out as i n the lives o f Jeremiah (13:1; 19:1; 27:2) and Ezekiel (2:8-3:3; 4:1-17; 5:1-17), although these sign-actions are usually accompanied by a verbal divine interpretation o f their mean¬ ing. Typology is also a species o f predictive prophecy, since the divinelyordained O T type (a person, event, or institution) points forward to its antitypical eschatological fulfillment i n Jesus Christ and the gospel reali¬ ties brought about by H i m . The type itself is usually "mute" concerning its predictive nature. Yet, as w i t h the sign-actions, there is regularly some verbal indicator accompanying the type (or, at least, appearing somewhere in the O T in advance o f the N T fulfillment) that announces its predictive character. 2

5. Basis: " w o r d o f the L o r d " (plus some visions)

5. Basis: visions/dreams, interpreter

6. Conditionality (two possible scenarios are delineated for the prophet's o w n generation: the way o f blessing or curse, dependent on the covenant response o f the peopie), although an ultimate fulfill¬ ment o f the covenant promises to God's people is certain.

6. Determinism (the actual course o f human events, as shaped by the divine hand i n history and recog¬ nized by divine foreknowledge o f human choices, is set forth, and sealed up, to be revealed to the endtime generation), w i t h an ultimate positive outcome for God's people.

184

angel

As a sixth observation, one must always be cautious w i t h regard to spe¬ cific unfulfilled prophecies o f the OT, especially i f the N T does not deal di¬ rectly w i t h these passages. Jesus' counsel regarding prophecy is pertinent: I t is given so that when it comes to pass, we may believe (John 14:29). Before it comes to pass, we may not understand every detail o f the OT predictions, even though the basic outline o f events and o f issues is clear. Finally, there are three major categories o f predictive prophecies i n the OT (outside o f Daniel): (1) Messianic prophecies; (2) oracles against the foreign nations; (3) and covenant-centered kingdom promises/prophe¬ cies given to Israel as a geopolitical entity, including end-time prophecies involving the final worldwide showdown between Israel and her enemies. I n the pages that follow, we w i l l discuss each o f these categories i n turn. 185

Interpreting Old Testament Proph,

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy 2. Messianic Prophecies Scores o f specific prophecies concerning the Messiah appear through¬ out the various parts o f the OT. We can sample only a few here. Predic¬ tions that the Messiah assuredly w o u l d come and perform His saving work, which do not depend upon human choice, are unconditional i n the clas¬ sical prophecies, although descriptions o f the results o f His work among His covenant people and the rest o f the w o r l d depend upon human choice. They are dealt with in succeeding sections o f this chapter. The First Promise of the Messiah—Genesis 3:15 This passage contains the first Messianic promise o f Scripture. The entire third chapter o f Genesis is arranged in a chiastic structure and, ex¬ actly in the center, at the apex o f the chiasm, in verses 14-15, is found the first gospel promise. The last part o f Genesis 3:15 goes to the heart o f this promise and shows that it is centered in a Person. God tells the seipent: "He shall crush your head, and you shall crush His heel." I n this verse the conflict narrows from many descendants (a collective "seed") in the second line ofthe verse to a masculine singular pronoun in the last part ofthe verse—"He"—fight¬ ing against the serpent. Throughout Scripture, whenever the pronouns re¬ lated to the Hebrew term zera "seed, offspring" are singular, it is always a single individual, not a collective o f many descendants, that is in view. 3

c

4

Thus, here, God promises victory centered in a single Person: "He" the ultimate representative Seed o f the woman, later to be revealed as the Mes¬ siah—"shall bruise/crush your head [Satan]," "and you shall bruise/crush His heel." According to the poignant portrait underlying Genesis 3:15, the Prom¬ ised Seed w i l l bare His heel and step voluntarily on a venomous viper. Here is a powerful prophetic picture o f Christ voluntarily giving up His life to slay "that ancient serpent, called the devil and Satan" (Rev 12:9). Already, here is implied the substitutionary sacrifice o f Christ on behalf o f the fallen human race. Genesis 3:15 also predicts the windup ofthe cos¬ mic conflict, the end o f evil and o f the serpent at the close o f earth's his¬ tory. The heel o f the Representative, the Messianic Seed, w i l l be bruised/ crushed, but it is only a wound to the heel. Later, biblical revelation makes clear that, although Christ dies, He comes back to life on the third day. But the serpent, Satan, is crushed in the head, a mortal wound w i t h no hope o f recovery. The great conflict w i l l not continue forever. I n Romans 16:20, Paul alludes to this text: "The God o f peace w i l l soon crush Satan under 186

your feet" (RSV). Satan's head is mortally wounded by the Messiah at Calvary and w i l l receive the final crushing at the end o f time. It is important to notice that i n this passage, as w i t h most other Mes¬ sianic prophecies ofthe OT, there is no clear separation between events o f the first and second and even third (post-millennial) advents o f the Mes¬ siah; between His suffering and His glory and final eradication o f evil. The events ofthe "last days" are merged together i n what has been called "pro¬ phetic telescoping," i n the same way that several mighty mountains, w i t h great valleys between them, when seen from a distance, often appear as a single mountain. It remains for the N T fulfillment to make clear the distinc¬ tion between the Messiah's kingdom o f grace and His kingdom o f glory. The Messiah as King—Psalm 2 I n Psalm 2, written by D a v i d (Acts 4:25), we find striking evidence that the anointed Davidic k i n g ofthe O T is to be regarded as a propheticpredictive type pointing forward to the future Messiah. Psalm 2 moves from the local level o f t h e earthly "anointed one" (Heb. masîah, vs. 2), installed i n Jerusalem as the Davidic k i n g and Yahweh's "son" (vss. 6-7), to the cosmic level o f t h e divine Son, the Messiah. The final verse (vs. 12) indicates this movement: "Kiss the Son, lest He [the Son] be angry, and y o u perish i n the way, when His [the Son's] wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all those who put their trust i n H i m [the Son]." The word for "son" is the Aramaic bar, used elsewhere i n Scripture for royal sons. B u t i n this passage, as i n the reference to "Messiah" i n Daniel 9:26, there is no article "the"; therefore, the noun should be taken i n an absolute, unqualified sense o f a divine title, "Son" ( w i t h caps i n Eng¬ lish): "Kiss [the ultimate] Son!" To confirm this interpretation o f "Son," the phrase "trust i n H i m , " used some two dozen times elsewhere i n the Psalms, is always reserved for the deity, and, therefore, use o f this phrase for the "Son" in verse 12, indicates that this Son is none other than the divine Son o f God. I n light o f the final verse o f the psalm, the entire psalm is to be taken not only as describing the inauguration and the rule and the victory o f the OT Davidic k i n g but as typologically pointing forward to the royal mission o f t h e Messiah. The internal typological indicators i n Psalm 2 set the tone for the re¬ mainder o f t h e Davidic psalter: I n other Davidic psalms, such as Psalms 16, 22, and 69, the language moves beyond what is applicable to the O T David and points beyond h i m to the new David, the Messiah. The N T writers recognize the fulfillment o f Psalm 2 i n Jesus' death (Acts 4:25-26), His resurrection (Acts 13:33), His inauguration as H i g h Priest after His 187

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

5

ascension (Heb 5:5), and i n His destruction o f t h e wicked at His second coming (Rev 2:26-28; 19:15; cf. 12:5). The Messiah as Suffering Servant—Isaiah 53 In Isaiah 42-53, there is a frequent alternation between references to the corporate servant (national Israel) and to the individual Servant (the Messiah), using the same expressions for both, thus indicating that the Messianic Servant w i l l represent and recapitulate the experience o f OT Israel. A t the same time, it is clear from the context that the individual Servant presented in these chapters is not synonymous w i t h corporate Is¬ rael, for the Messianic Servant is said to bring salvation to the people o f Israel, as well as to the Gentiles (Isa 49:5-6). Isaiah 42-53 contains four "Servant Songs" that predict the coming ofthe Messiah and delineate various phases o f His work: (1) Isaiah 42:1 (His call), (2) Isaiah 49:2-13 (His commission), (3) Isaiah 50:4-11 (His commitment), and (4) Isaiah 52:13-53:12 (His career). While the Messiah's suffering is alluded to throughout the first three Servant Songs, this theme forms the very heart o f the final Song. Isaiah 53, perhaps the most poignant portrait o f the Messiah in the OT, makes clear that the Servant's suffering and death are not due to His own sins but that He takes upon Himself the guilt, covenant curses, and punishment " o f us a l l , " as Sin Bearer, providing a substitutionary atonement (see esp. vss. 4-6, 8, 10-12). This fourth Servant Song also depicts the Messiah's resurrection, high-priestly intercessory ministry and royal exaltation (52:13; 53:11 -12). Isaiah 53 (along w i t h the other Semmt Songs o f Isa 42-53) is often cited in the N T as fulfilled in Christ (e g Matt 8:17; John 12:38; 1 Pet 2:20-25). Beyond exact quotations, Isaiah 53 forms the conceptual backdrop to much ofthe N T teaching on Christ's atoning work.

the appearance and the work o f the Messiah i n the last days. For ex¬ ample, each ofthe large narrative blocks o f the Pentateuch is climaxed by a lengthy poetic passage that recaps what has gone before and explicitly links this past history w i t h a prediction o f the coming o f t h e Messiah m "the last days" (Gen 49 [esp. vss. 1, 10-12, 22-26]; Exodus 15 [esp. vss. !6-17]; Numbers 23-24 [esp. 23: 22 and 24:8-17]; and Deut 32-33 [esp. 33:8-10, 13-17]). Again, at the precise chiastic center and climax o f the Levitical laws and ofthe entire Pentateuch, one finds Leviticus 16, point¬ ing to the antitypical work o f Christ as H i g h Priest on the eschatological Dav o f Atonement. " As an indication ofthe Messianic thrust o f the entire OT, the prophet (probably Ezra) who, under inspiration, arranged the Hebrew order ofthe canon into three major sections—Torah (Pentateuch), Prophets, and Writ¬ ings—placed at the introduction and conclusion o f each o f these sections a prophetic passage that points toward the coming o f t h e Messiah i n the last days. So, at the beginning and at the end o f the Torah are Genesis 3:15 and Deuteronomy 33, respectively (noted above); at the beginning ofthe Prophets is Joshua (who is presented as a type o f t h e Messiah); at the end ofthe Prophets is Malachi 3 (English versions divide this into two chapters, 3-4, which predict the coming o f the Messianic "Messenger o f the Covenant" at the time ofthe "great and terrible day ofthe Lord); at the beginning ofthe Writings are Psalms 1 and 2 (the two-part introduction to the Psalter, which, as noted above, predicts the coming o f t h e Messianic King); and, at the end o f t h e Writings is 2 Chronicles 36 (which predicts the coming o f Cyrus, who is presented as a type o f the Messiah). This pattern o f eschatological Messianic passages, placed at the "stitching" or "seams" ofthe Hebrew canon, makes apparent the overarching Messianic casting o f t h e entire OT. Jesus w e l l summarized the message o f t h e OT Scriptures: " Y o u search the [ O T ] Scriptures . . . and these are they which testify o f M e " (John 5:39)!

The Messianic Thrust ofthe Entire O l d Testament We could examine numerous other specific Messianic prophecies in the OT, but beyond these individual passages are biblical indications that the entire O T is Messianic i n its outlook. Jesus hints at this i n His Resur¬ rection Sunday dialog w i t h the disciples on the way to Emmaus‫ " ־‬A n d beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them i n all the Scriptures the things concerning H i m s e l f " (Luke 24:27). This statement is not simply hyperbole.

3. Prophecies About Foreign Nations The Bible has much to say about other nations besides Israel, includ¬ ing many promises/predictions regarding their future status. I n order to understand these prophecies and interpret them properly, we need to grasp the larger biblical picture o f Yahweh's relationship w i t h the foreign na¬ tions. According to the OT, Yahweh, "creator/possessor o f heaven and earth

A close examination o f the literary structure o f the Pentateuch and o f t h e OT, as a whole, reveals that the entire OT is indeed centered upon

(Gen 14:19, 22), is Sovereign over the whole world. He is K i n g over all

188

189

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

nations (Ps 47:2-8). He has "made" them (Ps 86:9), assigning and control¬ ling their territories and boundaries (Deut 32:8; cf. 2:5, 9. 19), directing their migration (Amos 9:7), raising them up and putting them down ( J 1:10; Dan 2:21). The nations o f the world are all part o f one family (Gen 10), and God desires their welfare and salvation. Abraham and his de¬ scendants are called to be a blessing to the nations (Gen 12:2-3; 22:18· 26:4). A t Sinai, Israel is constituted as "a holy priesthood" to mediate God's blessings to the other nations ofthe w o r l d (Exod 19:5-6), and those among the other nations who accept the worship o f Yahweh are welcomed into the covenant community (e.g., Josh 6:22-25; Isa 56:3-8). A special work ofthe Messianic Servant is to be a "light to the Gentiles" (Isa 42:6; 49:6), bringing Yahweh's "salvation to the ends ofthe earth" (Isa 49:6; c f 42:1; 51:4-5). These foreign nations are sometimes used by God as His agents o f judgment against His special covenant people o f Israel (Isa 10:5; Jer 51:7, 20; cf. Hab 1:5-11) or as agents o f salvation to deliver His peonle (Isa 4 4 : 2 8 ^ 5 : 1 - 7 ) . e r

A t the same time, as Ruler over the whole world, Yahweh holds all nations accountable for their actions. The entire earth is regarded by God as under an "everlasting covenant" (Isa 24:5), an international law or code o f human standards (Amos 1-2), i n which all nations have ethical duties o f civility and humaneness. Yahweh i n His universal sovereignty is the Guar¬ antor o f justice and decency among the nations i n their treatment o f one another. Those nations who violate the universal norms o f proper behav¬ ior receive divine sanctions for their crimes. Numerous oracles concernmg foreign nations address their crimes and the divine sanctions against them ( N u m 24:17-24; Isa 13-24; Jer 46-51; Ezek 25-32; Amos 1-2). I n some cases, whole books o f the Bible have their focus upon the sins and the punishment o f foreign nations (e.g., Assyria i n the books o f Jonah and Nahum and Edom i n the book o f Obadiah). Although the non-Israelite nations are the "mission field" to which Israel is called to bring the mes¬ sage o f salvation, nonetheless, these nations, especially as they exercise a hostile attitude toward Israel and Israel's God, are considered as wicked and as enemies (Exod 15:9; Ps 9:5 [Heb 6 ] ; 59:5 [ 6 ] ; 106:41-42). Some have argued that two contradictory, and even irreconcilable, attitudes toward the foreign nations are represented in the biblical pre¬ dictions regarding them: on the one hand, a universalism and conditional prophecies, revealing God's compassion and willingness to forgive and accept foreign nations i f they repent (as portrayed in the book o f Jonah); on the other hand, a nationalism and divine sovereignty, expressing a fierce divine hatred toward foreign powers w i t h no opportunity extended for repentance and forgiveness (as in Nahum). While these two perspec190

tives may have been regarded as irreconcilable by some individuals in Israel (see the prophet Jonah's own personal struggles over this issue), the inspired prophetic utterances are not contradictory when viewed in the set¬ ting ofthe larger picture. God's dealings with the Amorites i n Canaan are instructive i n coming to arips w i t h the interplay o f conditionality and divine sovereignty in prophe¬ cies against foreign nations. God predicted to Abraham that his descendants would be strangers in a land not theirs and afflicted 400 years before they would be given possession o f Canaan; the reason given for the delay is that "the iniquity ofthe Amorites is not yet complete" (Gen 15:16). T h e A m o r i tes were given an extended period o f probation, during which time Abraham himself witnessed to them, and other true worshipers ofthe Most High God lent their influence for the truth (e.g., Gen 14:18-24). But when the A m o r i tes had filled up their cup o f iniquity and become totally given over to evil (Lev 18:24-28), their probation was closed, and God dispossessed them and gave their land to the people o f Israel (Exod 13:5; Deut 7:1-5, 16-26). The predictions concerning the nations during the probationary phase of their national history, should be seen i n the light o f the general principle of conditionality, stated in Jeremiah 18:7-10: I f at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, and i f that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. And i f at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, and i f it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it (NIV). Jonah's prediction, "Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown" (Jonah 3:4), is a clear example o f a conditional prophecy, although the principle o f Jeremiah 18 is not explicitly stated. Indeed, this is the way the people o f Nineveh regarded it; they repented o f their evil, and God relented from His purpose o f destroying the city (Jonah 3:5-10). On the other hand, when nations had filled up their cup o f iniquity, no longer responding to the divine entreaties to repent, the threatened judg¬ ment surely came to pass. W i t h regard to Nineveh, the prophet Nahum wrote about a century later than the time o f Jonah, at a time when Nineveh and the nation o f Assyria had returned to their evil ways o f brutality, arro¬ gance, and idolatry. The nation's cup o f iniquity was full. There was noth¬ ing left for Nahum to do but denounce their heinous sins and announce the Sovereign Lord's irrevocable sentence o f their national doom. It is not always possible to determine whether the divine oracles against the foreign nations come at a time when probation still lingers for a given 191

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy nation and, thus, the threat o f judgment is conditional or whether that na¬ tion has passed the bounds o f divine forbearance and their fate has already been sealed. I n Amos 1-2, the oracles against each nation begin w i t h the phrase "For three transgressions o f [nation x ] and for four, I w i l l not turn away its punishment" (Amos 1:3,6,9, 11, 13; 2:1). The use o f the formula 3 + 4 [ = 7] probably denotes completeness or fullness o f transgression, and the statement that the L o r d w i l l not turn away seems to indicate that these judgments are certain, i.e., unconditional.

in our chart contrasting with apocalyptic prophecy, classical prophecy does not give a detailed and an unbroken sweep o f history. Rather, its "prophetic telescoping" often jumps from the local immediate crisis (such as the locust plague in Joel 2) to the eschatological Day o f the Lord (Joel 3 [Hebrew, 4]), without filling in all the historical details in between.

However, these certain divine judgments may not always involve to¬ tal or permanent or immediate destruction o f the nation that is punished. While Amos 1-2 predicts destruction and/or captivity for the political powers surrounding Israel and Judah (Syria, Philistia, Tyre, Edom, A m mon, and Moab), Jeremiah indicates that, at least i n the case o f A m m o n and Moab, God would eventually "bring back the captives" o f these people (Jer 48:47; 49:6). To other nations, such as Edom and Egypt, the prophet predicts that the nation i n question w i l l become a relatively insignificant power i n w o r l d politics i n the future (Jer 49:15; Ezek 29:14-16). Com¬ plete and permanent destruction is predicted for Tyre (Ezek 26:1-14) and for Babylon (Isa 13:20-22; Jer 50:3, 13).

To the nation's founding father, Abraham, God specified Israel's uni¬ versal mission from the outset: " I w i l l make y o u a great nation, I w i l l bless you, and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing In y o u all the families o f t h e earth shall be blessed" (Gen 12:2-3). When Israel was formally constituted as a nation at M t . Sinai, God reiterated the plan by promising to make His people a "kingdom o f priests" (Exod 19:6), mediat¬ ing the covenant blessings to the world. On the borders o f Canaan, Moses received, and transmitted to his suecessor, Joshua, a detailed divine blueprint o f God's mission for Israel as a nation. Upon entering Canaan, the Angel o f the Lord would go before them and send the hornets to drive out the inhabitants o f the land (Deut 7:17¬ 20; cf. Exod 23:23, 28). Israel was to dispossess these nations now totally given over to evil (Deut 9:4; cf. Gen 15:16), but individuals who were still responsive to God's mighty acts were to be spared and united to His people (Josh 6:22-25). As long as Israel remained loyally obedient to God in the Promised Land, the covenant blessings would be showered upon them (Deut 28:1-14; cf. Lev 26:1-13). They would be such healthy (Deut 7:15; cf. Exod 15:26), happy (Deut 28:2-8), holy (28:9), wise (4:6, 7), morally enlightened (4:8) and prosperous (28:6, 7; cf. Lev 26:4, 5, 10) people that they would become the head and not the tail (Deut 28:13) above all the nations ofthe earth " i n praise, in name, and in honor" (Deut 26:19). A l l the people o f other nations would see that they were called by the name ofthe L o r d (28:10).

Several passages in the O T refer to the final judgment o f all the nations o f the world, i n connection w i t h the eschatological deliverance o f Israel (Isa 24-27; Ezek 38-39; Zech 9-14). These apocalyptic-like passages w i l l be discussed i n connection w i t h God's original plan and purpose for Israel to which we now turn.

4. Kingdom Promises/Prophecies Concerning Israel Some have insisted that the covenant promises made to Israel are not ac¬ tually predictive prophecies but only expressions ofthe two alternative ways available to Israel (depicted foundationally in Lev 26 and Deut 27-28): the way o f covenant loyalty leading to prosperity (the covenant blessings) and the way o f covenant disloyalty leading to disaster (the covenant curses). While this may be true in the technical sense, at the same time God, does predict the detailed outcome i f Israel would wholeheartedly participate in His mission to use them as agents o f salvation for the whole world. Since specific predic¬ tions are involved and since this divine mission for Israel encompasses so much o f OT Scripture, it is appropriate to include these covenant promises as part o f our discussion o f OT prophecy. While the following outline sets forth the basic contours o f God's plan for Israel, one cannot be completely certain ofthe precise sequence o f divinely intended events, because, as noted above 192

The Divine Mission for Israel

During the United Monarchy this divine plan for Israel came into sharper spiritual focus. K i n g David's first appointment o f praise to God in the sanctuary called for a declaration o f God's glory among all peoples (1 Chr 16:24 = Ps 96:3). Other psalms envisioned God's praise and way and saving power as being proclaimed to, or reaching, all the nations, even to the ends ofthe earth (Ps 48:10; 57:9; 66:4). What the Levitical choirs intoned was echoed in Solomon's prayer o f dedication for the Jerusalem Temple (1 Kgs 8:41-43), and seemed on the verge o f fulfillment in the ca¬ reer o f David's son, as "the whole earth sought the presence o f Solomon to hear his wisdom, which God had put into his m i n d " (1 Kgs 10:24, RSV), and the wealth ofthe world poured into his expanding empire (vss. 14-29). 193

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy The O T prophets (most notably the gospel prophet Isaiah) intensified the vision o f God's sweeping program for a repentant and faithful Israel after the Babylonian exile. It is a glorious plan! As the people o f Israel are gathered back to the Promised Land, God pardons and cleanses them from their sins and gives them a new heart, puts His Spirit w i t h i n them, and causes them to walk in His statutes (Ezek 36:24-28; cf. Jer 31:31-34). The ruined cities are rebuilt and the land o f Israel is renewed like Eden (Isa 44:24-28; Ezek 36:33-35), causing the other nations to know that Yahweh has done this for them (Ezek 36:22, 36). As Israel loyally serves God and receives the concomitant covenant blessings, all the nations see her righteousness and glory and call her blessed (Isa 61:9; M a i 3:12); Jerusa¬ lem becomes a praise and a glory before all nations (Jer 33:9). As a result, nations come to the light (Isa 60:3)! They are gathered, they flow, yes, they run to Jerusalem (Isa 66:18-20; cf. 2:2) to seek the L o r d (Zech 8:20-23) and j o i n themselves to H i m (Isa 56:7-8; Zech 2:11). Nation after nation goes up to the house o f the L o r d — w h i c h is called "a house o f prayer for all nations" (Isa 56:7)—to seek instruction i n His ways and to serve H i m "shoulder to shoulder" (Isa 2:3 = M i c 4:2). The gates o f Jerusalem are open continually to receive the wealth o f other nations, con¬ tributed to bring about the conversion o f still other nations (Isa 60:1-11; cf. 45:14; Hag 2:7). Eventually " a l l nations" are gathered to Jerusalem and call it "the throne o f the L o r d " (Jer 3:17). Those aliens from other nations who " j o i n themselves to the L o r d , " i.e., give their allegiance to Yahweh and hold fast to His covenant w i t h Israel, are considered to be fully part o f the covenant community o f Israel (Isa 56:1-8; Ezek 47:22-23). Thus Israel, i n cooperation w i t h the powers o f heaven, prepares the way for the coming o f the Messiah. The Messiah comes, and as the Rep¬ resentative Israelite (Isa 42-53), recapitulates the history o f Israel in His own life (Matt 1-5), bringing salvation. He generally is accepted as the Messiah by the people o f Israel. While He is still betrayed by some o f His supposed friends (Zech 13:6) and is delivered to die for the sins ofthe w o r l d (see, e.g., Isa 53), the majority o f Israel, including its leadership, accept H i m ; and after His resurrection (immediately or eventually after a break i n time, He returns to heaven. The timing is not clear), He takes the throne o f David and reigns over a reunited kingdom o f Israel forever (Ezek 37:22-25; Isa 9:6-7). The sanctuary and city o f Jerusalem, now re¬ built, also remain forever (Jer 17:24-25; Ezek 37:26). As nations accept the L o r d and His Messiah, Israel extends its borders (Amos 9:12), until its dominion embraces the w o r l d (Isa 27:6; Zech 9:10). Thus, the "Promised Land" for Israel is expanded beyond the borders o f Canaan to include the entire earth. 194

Several OT passages describe the divinely predicted eschatological windup o f this earth's history i n the final showdown between Israel and her enemies (Isa 24-27; Ezek 38-39; Zech 9-14). These passages have been classified by some as apocalyptic prophecies on a par w i t h Daniel, since they describe God's final, universal intervention from outside o f history. However, inasmuch as these apocalyptic-like prophecies deal primarily with the deliverance o f Israel as a national, geo-political entity, I find it better to consider these as the climax ofthe kingdom promises/prophecies made to Israel and not fully apocalyptic i n nature. According to the universalistic, end-time scenario predicted by these passages, remnants o f opposition against Israel and Israel's God from the other nations o f the world launch a final attack against Jerusalem. During the siege o f Jerusalem, the reprobate Israelites are slain by their enemies (Zech 13:8; 14:2). Then God calls the rebellious nations into judgment, and they are eliminated by the L o r d i n the final eschatological battle (Zech 14; Ezek 38-39). God raises the righteous dead and puts the finishing touches o f immortality upon the living (Isa 25:8; 26:19). The wicked are also raised, judged, and (and after a period o f time [the millennium?], Isa 24:22) punished, ending i n everlasting destruction (Isa 24:20-23). God then recreates new heavens and a new earth, and He re-creates "Jerusalem as a rejoicing, and her people a j o y " (Isa 65:17-18). The world becomes Eden restored, and the Lord's universal and eternal kingdom is ushered in (Zech 14; Isa 24-27; 35; 51:3). ' " A n d it shall come to pass that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, all flesh shall come to worship before M e , ' says the L o r d " (Isa 66:23). Sin and sinners are to¬ tally vanquished, and evil w i l l never arise again (Isa 66:24; cf. Nah 1:9). The Eschatological Fulfillment ofthe Divine Promise/Plan for O l d Testament Israel One o f the most pressing questions o f this study concerns the fulfill¬ ment (or non-fulfillment) ofthe numerous OT classical prophecies predict¬ ing the glorious eschatological future o f Israel. F r o m our vantage point, more than two millennia after the OT era, it becomes apparent that many prophecies concerning the future o f Israel as a nation did not come about as predicted i n the OT. Have these prophecies concerning Israel failed? W i l l they never be fulfilled? Or are they still part o f the divine plan for the future? I f they w i l l yet be fulfilled, what is the nature o f this eschatological fulfillment? Very different answers have been given to these questions. Dispensationalists maintain that the Bible presents two distinct salvation programs 195

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy for humanity, one for the ethnic, national (geo-political) entity o f Israel and one for the Gentiles (the church). The divine predictions to the pa¬ triarchs concerning the geo-political aspects o f Israel's history, as well as the spiritual blessings, are seen to be unconditional, based upon irrevo¬ cable divine promises (Gen 12:1-7; 17:8; 26:3-5; cf. 2 Sam 7:12-17; etc.). While OT Israel experienced the covenant curses o f destruction and exile (as described i n Lev 26:14-39 and Deut 28:15-68), at the same time, i n fulfillment o f these same passages, Israel never w i l l be cast off totally and destroyed but, i n the last days, w i l l be gathered together as a geo-political entity and restored to their land again (Lev 26:40-45; Deut 30:1-10). According to this scenario, we are now living in the dispensation o f the church, which constitutes a chronological gap in the overarching plan o f God for Israel, brought about by Israel's initial rejection o f Christ. A l ¬ though some (progressive) dispensationalists allow for a partial, spiritual fulfillment o f O T covenant promises to Israel by the church, all o f them agree that the complete and literal fulfillment w i l l take place through a revived national state o f Israel. The establishment ofthe state o f Israel i n 1948 is viewed as pivotal i n the completion o f God's divine plan for Israel as a geo-political entity, and the consummation o f that plan is regarded as imminent, occurring literally as predicted in the O T kingdom prophecies. Christian covenant theologians, on the other hand, argue that the promises/predictions made regarding Israel as a nation were conditional upon their faithfulness to the covenant. Since, according to this view, the Jewish nation proved disloyal to the covenant i n their rejection o f the Messiah, O T Israel received the curses o f Deuteronomy 28, instead o f the blessings, and has been permanently replaced by the church to w h o m belongs the fulfillment o f the O T covenant promises o f a spiritual nature. The passages depicting a glorious future for the nation o f Israel, promised upon condition o f covenant faithfulness, no longer apply but are superceded by a spiritual and universal fulfillment to spiritual Israel, the church.

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy judgment i f Israel does not repent. I n this respect, the kingdom prophecies ofthe classical prophets may be seen as conditional i n nature. In regard to the covenant, we need to remember the following points: First, on the most basic level, all the divine covenants o f Scripture are part o f one unconditional promise o f God to w o r k out salvation for the human race, stated first i n Genesis 3:15, and elaborated i n each succeed¬ ing development o f this one unified covenant (see, e.g., the promises of Gen 12, later incorporated into the Abrahamic covenant o f Gen 15 and 17). Thus, as we have noted i n the first section o f this chapter, the coming o f the Messiah to fulfill God's redemptive covenant promise, is unconditional, totally independent o f human choice. However, the actualization o f t h e divine promise i n the lives o f humans is conditional upon the response o f each individual in accepting the Messiah's gift o f salvation. A second feature o f OT covenants, particularly the Abrahamic and Da6

vidic covenants, parallels ancient Near Eastern royal covenants o f grant, in which a king grants land or position to one o f his subjects and to his descen¬ dants, in perpetuity, in recognition o f the servant's loyalty. So God promised to Abraham and his descendants a grant o f land in perpetuity, based upon the covenant loyalty of Abraham (Gen 17:8; 26:3-5; etc.). To David, God gave the additional promise o f a never-ending kingdom (2 Sam 7:12-16; Ps 89:34¬ 37).

Many ofthe prophecies made by the O T classical prophets are indeed couched w i t h i n the framework o f a covenant relationship in which God's people are always free to remain faithful to the covenant and to reap the covenant blessings or to persist in unfaithfulness and to receive the cove¬ nant curses. Thus, as we have already noted, the classical prophets present two different options: God's plan for blessing Israel i f they heed the pro¬ phetic call to remain faithful to His covenant but also the certainty o f puni¬ tive judgment and o f the reception o f the covenant curses i f Israel persists in covenant unfaithfulness. Within classical prophecy, there are repeated calls to repentance so that God can pour out His blessings and warnings o f

A third feature o f biblical covenants also parallels the ancient Near Eastern covenants o f grant, i n which only those o f the grantee's descen¬ dants who remain loyal to the crown actually share i n the perpetual grant. Generation after generation o f descendants might forfeit their right to the royal grant but, eventually, that which was granted w i l l be restored to loy¬ al descendants. So i n Scripture, God bequeaths i n perpetuity the land o f promise to Abraham and to his line o f descendants and the royal throne and kingdom o f Israel to David and to his sons (2 Sam 7:12-16). Though generations have passed in which the divine grant, w i t h its national fea¬ tures, has been forfeited, yet in the future all that was promised under the divine grant w i l l be restored to Abraham's descendants who are loyal to the "everlasting covenant" made w i t h h i m (Gen 17:7, 13, 19). This brings us to the last and, I believe, most crucial feature o f the OT covenants. Who comprised the covenant people who were to receive the kingdom promises made to Abraham? Was Israel comprised only o f the direct, ethnic, descendants o f Abraham, traced through his son Isaac and Isaac's son Jacob? The answer to this question is a resounding " N o " ! Throughout the OT, as we have seen above, God's plan was for Israel to reach out to those peoples and nations around them, inviting them to be-

196

197

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

come part o f God's covenant people. O T Israel was composed o f direct physical descendants o f Jacob, plus a multitude o f others from various nations who accepted Israel's God Yahweh and chose to become part o f the covenant community (for example, the multitude o f the Egyptians at the time o f the Exodus [Exod 12:38], Zipporah the Midian/Cushite [Exod 2:16, 21], Rahab the Canaanite and her family [Josh 6:22-25], Ruth the Moabitess [Ruth 1:16,17], Uriah the Hittite [2 Sam 11 ] , and the many Per¬ sians who joined Israel [Esth 9:27]). They were all called "Israel"; none were to be considered second-class citizens in the nation o f Israel (Isa 56:1-8; Ezek 47:22-23). There were not two plans for two different groups o f God-fearing people in the OT; all were called to j o i n biblical Israel, the one people o f God. A n d w i t h i n the nation o f Israel, there was always the "spiritual" remnant o f those who not only took the name o f "Israelite" but also gave evidence o f true covenant loyalty to the God o f Israel (e.g., Isa 10:22-23; Jer 23:3; M i c 2:12; Zeph 3:3). 7

Now, i n light o f these aspects o f O T covenants, further to be in¬ formed by N T data, let us see how the kingdom promises made to Israel find a three-stage eschatological fulfillment—in connection w i t h Jesus' first advent, i n connection w i t h the church throughout the N T era, and at the end o f time. We noted above how already i n O T times the king¬ dom promises began to be fulfilled i n the time o f Solomon and, again, upon Israel's return from the Babylonian exile. These promises were to climax i n the first advent o f the Messiah i n "the last days" (Heb 1:2). When the Messiah, Israel's ultimate K i n g and Representative Israelite, came to earth, He brought about a basic fulfillment, i n principle, o f all these k i n g d o m promises i n H i m s e l f (Matt 12:28; 2 Cor 1:20). Through His life, death and resurrection, He inaugurated the "rule" or "reign" o f God on earth ("the kingdom o f grace" that Jesus called "the k i n g d o m o f God").

Thus, the N T does not present a picture o f two separate programs o f salvation for two separate peoples o f God. Rather, there is one single olive tree, representing the true people o f God, comprised o f Jews, the natural branches (believing Jews, the spiritual 'remnant according to the election of grace,' R o m 11:5), and ingrafted Gentiles ( R o m 9-11; esp. 11:17,24), as in OT times. Although at the time o f Jesus' first advent many o f the Olive branches were broken off, yet, Paul anticipated an eschatological grafting in o f Jews prior to Jesus' second coming, and, i n this way, " a l l " o f true Israel (both Jews and Gentiles) w i l l be saved (Rom 11:26). W i t h the divorce o f the nation o f Israel from the theocracy, brought about by the Jewish leaders' rejection o f Christ, the national (geo-political) features o f the covenant promises could no longer be fulfilled literally by the Jewish nation as God had originally intended. Throughout the period of the Christian era, the spiritual blessings o f the covenant have been en¬ joyed by God's covenant people, comprised both o f Jews and o f Gentiles, and proclaimed to the world. Spiritual Israel, the church, as the body o f Christ, receives the fulfillment o f all the kingdom promises (Gal 3:29), but it is only a spiritual fulfillment; and the national language takes on a spiritual, universal, and/or heavenly meaning. So, for example, M t . Zion is used spiritually o f the universal church ( R o m 9:33; 1 Pet 2:6), which now is the "royal priesthood and holy nation" (1 Pet 2:9; cf. Exod 19:6) or refers to the heavenly city o f Jerusalem to which the earthly believers are spiritually gathered (Gal 4:26; Heb 12:22-24). However, the literal features o f the covenant promises are not annulled permanently . A t the end o f time, "eschatological Israel," comprised o f all the faithful people o f God throughout all ages, including both Jews and Gentiles, w i l l be resurrected or translated to experience the ultimate, universal, glorious, literal fulfillment o f the O T covenant promises! I n heaven, during the millennium, they w i l l reign w i t h Christ i n the New Jerusalem and after the millennium w i l l finally receive their eternal in¬ heritance i n the earth made new (Rev 20-22). While the cultural-specific aspects o f the O T geo-political covenant promises w i l l be universalized, a final literal fulfillment is nonetheless certain.

A t Christ's first advent, the people o f Israel, i n general, "heard H i m gladly" (Mark 12:37) and, although many misunderstood His mission to be that o f a political deliverer o f Israel from Roman occupation, they widely hailed H i m as the Messiah (Matt 21:1-11). On the day o f His resurrection, the disciples, traveling on the way to Emmaus, could state that Jesus "was a Prophet mighty i n deed and w o r d before God and all the people" (Luke 24:19). On the day o f Pentecost ten days after His ascension, thousands o f Jews were converted i n a single day (Acts 2:41), and the steadily grow¬ ing N T covenant community, in continuity w i t h the one in the OT, was comprised primarily o f Jews—a multitude o f them—to w h o m were added another multitude o f Gentiles, who responded to the preaching o f the fol¬ lowers o f the Way (Acts 2:47; 4:4; 5:14; 6:1, 7; etc.).

The book o f Revelation confirms this final, universal-literal fulfill¬ ment o f the O T end-time prophecies as i t portrays the post-millennial battle against the forces o f evil in the language o f Ezekiel 38-39. "Gog and Magog"—now referring to all o f the enemies o f God throughout the ages—are repulsed in their attack against God's holy city and His people and consumed in the lake o f fire (Rev 20:8-9). Likewise, the N e w Jerusa¬ lem, eternal home o f the saints i n the earth made new, is largely depicted in the language o f Ezekiel 40-48, and the experience o f Isaiah 25:8 is

198

199

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy fulfilled as "God w i l l wipe away every tear from their eyes" (Rev 21:4). The seed o f Abraham w i l l inherit the Promised Land, which, already in the OT, was expanded to include the entire earth. The meek finally "inherit the earth" (Ps 37:11; cf. Matt 5:5)! To summarize, the O T kingdom prophecies o f classical prophecy have one eschatological (last-day) fulfillment w i t h three stages: (1) in¬ augurated eschatology: the basic fulfillment o f the OT eschatological hopes, climaxing i n the earthly life and work o f Jesus, the Representa¬ tive Israelite, at His first advent; (2) appropriated eschatology: the de¬ rived spiritual aspects o f fulfillment by the church (made up both o f Jews and o f Gentiles), the body o f Christ i n the time between Christ's first and second coming but lacking the national aspects o f fulfillment; and (3) consummated eschatology: the aspect o f final universal fulfill¬ ment by the eschatological Israel (all the redeemed, including both Jews and Gentiles) i n connection w i t h ushering i n the age to come at the sec¬ ond advent o f Christ and beyond, w h i c h includes not only the spiritual but also the literal dimensions o f fulfillment. 8

The mode o f fulfillment in each o f these aspects o f fulfillment is dif¬ ferentiated according to the physical and/or spiritual presence o f Christ the K i n g w i t h regard to His kingdom. First, in Christ's earthly ministry when, as the Representative Israelite, He was physically present, the fulfillment was literal and local, centered in H i m . So, for example, the "gathering" prophecies (Deut 30; Ezek 36-37; etc.) received an initial fulfillment as He literally gathered the twelve disciples to Himself (Matt 5:1; John 10:14-16; 11:52). Second, during the time o f the Church in w h i c h Christ is universally but only spiritually present (that is, through His Spirit), the fulfillment is spiritual and universal. During this period, for example, the O T "gather¬ ing prophecies" are fulfilled as the people o f God are gathered spiritu¬ ally (not physically) and universally by faith to Christ (Matt 18:20; Heb 12:22). Finally, at the time o f the second advent o f Christ i n w h i c h He physi¬ cally returns and, literally reuniting the people o f God to Himself, re¬ unites the K i n g w i t h His kingdom, the fulfillment is gloriously literal and universal. So, w i t h regard to the O T "gathering prophecies," at the Second Advent, and again, after the millennium and for eternity, Christ literally and gloriously gathers all His people to H i m s e l f (Matt 24:31; 2 Thess 2 : 1 ; Rev 21-22). I n the book o f Revelation, the various OT de¬ pictions o f t h e end-time scenario meet and find glorious literal, universal fulfillment, centered i n Christ, the Conquering K i n g , and His people, the eschatological Israel. 200

5. Practical Steps for Interpretation As a practical guide for the interpretation o f predictive prophecy in OT Scripture, the following suggested steps may be helpful: 1. Determine the historical setting that calls forth the prophecy: Who wrote the prophecy, When, and under What circumstances. Recognize instances i n which the book may j u m p from an immediate local crisis as described in the book or specific passage to the eschatological "Day ofthe L o r d " at the end o f time (for example, Joel's description o f the local locust plague, then j u m p i n g to the eschatological "Day ofthe Lord"). 2. Analyze the literary structure o f the book and the immediate pas¬ sage under consideration, determining where this passage comes and what part it plays i n the overall structure o f the chapter or o f t h e book (for ex¬ ample, Gen 3:15 coming at the chiastic center o f Gen 3.) 3. Look closely at the natural grammatical flow ofthe passage—words, phrases, clauses, sentences—to understand what specifically is predicted (for example, the movement i n Gen 3:15 from a collective "seed" [Eve's spiritual descendents] to a singular "Seed" [the Messiah], a movement also occurs in Gen 22:17-18, as recognized by Paul i n Gal 3:6, 16). 4. Note any obvious symbols or any figurative language employed and determine the meaning o f each symbol or figure i n light ofthe imme¬ diate context and use o f this language elsewhere i n Scripture (for example, the many sign-actions o f Ezekiel). 5. Determine what type o f prophetic prediction is involved: Messi¬ anic, oracle against a foreign nation, or a kingdom promise to theocratic Israel. I f Messianic prophecy, note which aspects o f these prophecies are not dependent upon human choice and are, therefore, unconditional and which are describing effects o f the Messiah's advent that are conditional upon Israel's response. Note also whether the prediction is directly Mes¬ sianic (as in Ps 110), or indirectly (typologically) Messianic (as i n Ps 2). I f typologically Messianic, look for indicators w i t h i n the passage that the language goes beyond what is applicable to the O T person, event, or insti¬ tution and points forward to the Messiah. Use a concordance or marginal notes to trace connections between the OT prophecy and the life o f Christ recorded i n the Gospel accounts. 6. I f it is a kingdom prophecy, regarding the future o f Israel, analyze the specific promises or prophecies that are given and check marginal notes to discover where similar or related prophecies are given elsewhere in the OT. Visualize the original divine plan for the people o f Israel as they remained faithful to God, as well as the covenant curses that are threatened in case o f continued covenant unfaithfulness, which would disrupt the divine plan. 201

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy

7. I n understanding the N T fulfillment o f these kingdom promises, remember that Jesus as the Representative Israelite brought about the ba¬ sic, initial (inaugurated), literal fulfillment o f the kingdom prophecies in Himself. (For example, the "gathering" prophecies received an initial ful¬ fillment, in principle, as He gathered the twelve disciples to H i m s e l f ) 8. Recognize that these same covenant promises/prophecies find spiritual fulfillment i n the church, the body o f Christ. (For example, the church is spiritually gathered by faith to Christ.) 9. Note that these kingdom prophecies find their consummated, uni¬ versal, and literal fulfillment at the Second Advent and beyond. (For ex¬ ample, Christ universally and literally gathers all His people to Himself at the Second Advent and again after the millennium.) 10. W i t h regard to the national/geo-political terminology or imagery for Israel, found i n the kingdom prophecies, recognize that this language (Jerusalem, M t . Zion, Israel, etc.) is often universalized in the N T as it re¬ fers to Christian Israel, to heavenly realities, or to the New Jerusalem after the millennium. 11. K i n g d o m prophecies describing Israel's enemies likewise are to be interpreted in the N T w i t h reference to Christ (as i n steps 7-9 above): literal, local enemies o f Christ at His first advent (e.g., John 13:18); spiri¬ tual, universal enemies o f the church during the Christian era (Rev 12:13¬ 16); and the literal, universal enemies at the Second Advent and beyond (Rev 20:8, 9). 12. Apocalyptic-like OT kingdom prophecies, referring specifically to the final eschatological battle between Israel and her enemies (Ezek 38¬ 39; Zech 12-14; Joel 3; Isa 24-27), must also be interpreted i n harmony w i t h the Christ-centered principles highlighted above. The consummated fulfillment is literal (e.g., the enemies o f God literally march against Jeru¬ salem, and the M o u n t o f Olives divides i n two [Zech 12:1-9; 14:4; cf. Rev 20:9]), but the references to Israel and her enemies is universalized: Israel refers to the true people o f God in all ages; Gog and Magog refer to all o f their enemies (Ezekiel 38-39; cf. Rev 20:8).

2. For discussion of biblical typology, see chapter 13 and Richard M . Davidson, Typology in Scripture: A Study of Hermeneutical Typos Structures (Andrews Univer¬ sity Dissertation Series, 2; Berrien Springs, M I : Andrews University Press, 1981). 3. The author's translation. 4. See Jack Collins, " A Syntactical Note (Genesis 3:15): Is the Woman's Seed Singular or Plural?" Tyndale Bulletin 48 (1997): 139-148: and Afolarin O. Ojewole, "The Seed in Genesis 3:15: An Exegetical and Intertexual Study" (Ph.D. Dissertation, Andrews University, 2002), 190-207. 5. For more complete discussion and substantiation, see Richard M . David¬ son, "The Eschatological Literary Structure of the Old Testament," in Creation, Life, and Hope: Essays in Honor of Jacques B. Doukhan, ed. Jiri Moskala (Berrien Springs, M I : Old Testament Department, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University, 2000), 349-366; cf. John H. Sailhamer, "The Mes¬ siah and the Hebrew Bible," JETS 44 (2001): 5-23. 6. See Moshe Weinfeld, "The Covenants of Grant in the Old Testament and the Ancient Near East," JAOS 90 (1976): 184-203. 7. See Gerhard F. Hasel, Hie Remnant: The Histoiy and Theology of the Remnant Idea From Genesis to Isaiah (Berrien Springs, M I : Andrews Univer¬ sity Press, 1972); and Kenneth Mulzac, "The Remnant Motif in the Context of Judgment and Salvation in the Book of Jeremiah" (Ph.D. dissertation, Andrews University, 1995). 8. For further elaboration of these principles, see Davidson, "Sanctuary Ty¬ pology," in Symposium on Revelation—Book I , Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, vol. 6, ed. Frank B. Holbrook (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Insti¬ tute, 1992), pp. 99-111, and Hans K. LaRondelle, 772e Israel of God in Prophecy: Principles of Prophetic Interpretation (Berrien Springs, M I : Andrews University Press, 1983).

Selected Bibliography

Unless otherwise indicated all other Scripture quotations are from the New King James Version.

Davidson, Richard M . "The Eschatological Literary Structure of the Old Testa¬ ment," in Creation, Life, and Hope: Essays in Honor of Jacques B. Doukhan. Edited by Jiri Moskala. Berrien Springs, M I : Old Testament Department, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University, 2000. Doukhan, Jacques B. The Mysteiy of Israel. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Heraid, 2004. Hasel, Gerhard F. 77Î