Hermeneutics

The Science and Art of Biblical Interpretation

By Drue Freeman, Pastor

Trinity Bible Church, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Preface

This Bible study course is designed to ac-quaint the serious student of the Word of Godwith equipment that will help in the interpreta-tion of the Scriptures.

We are going to begin with an introduction tothe various schools of hermeneutical thoughtand then proceed to the various principles thatare used in the Protestant system of Biblicalinterpretation.

The approach that will be used is based on thepersonal belief of the author that the Scrip-tures are totally and completely inspired byGod and that He communicates to His peoplethat which He desires them to know.

We will not only explore the basic principlesof interpretation, but will also consider somespecialized areas such as symbols, types, pa-rables and prophecy.

Please begin and end this course with prayer,praying as you go. Seek to know God's Wordfor He has promised that you can (Matt 7:7-8;James 1:5), but more than just knowing God'sWord, seek to know Him (Phil. 3:10) in amore personal and intimate way for manyhave known His Word, but did not reallyknow the Father (John 5:39-45).

All Scripture quotations are taken from theNew American Standard Bible published bythe Lockman Foundation.

This study course was derived from classnotes gleaned from Dr. Dale Carnagey of Tul-sa Seminary of Biblical Languages in the fallof 1978, our textbook, Protestant Biblical In-

terpretation, by Bernard Ramm (Baker BookHouse, 1970), and my personal teaching notes.

Table Of Contents

Lesson 1-Introduction.

Lesson 2-Historical Schools-Allegorists.

Lesson 3-Historical Schools-Literalists.

Lesson 4-Historical Schools-Liberals.

Lesson 5-The Protestant Method Of Herme-neutics-Introduction.

Lesson 6-Theological Perspectives.

Lesson 7-Grammatical Perspectives.

Lesson 8-The Doctrinal Use Of The Bible.

Lesson 9-The Devotional Use Of The Bible.

Lesson 10-Inerrancy And Secular Science.

Lesson 11-Types, Symbols And Parables.

Lesson 12-Interpretation Of Prophecy.

Lesson 13-Use Of The Old Testament In TheNew Testament.

Lesson 14-The Use Of Logic.

Hermeneutics 2

Lesson 1

Introduction

Hermeneutics is the science and art of Biblicalinterpretation. It is a science because it isguided by rules. The art is in the applicationof the rules.

The primary need of hermeneutics is to deter-mine the meaning of the Word of God. Sinceall doctrine rests upon interpretation, we musthave correct interpretation to develop correctdoctrine.

Hermeneutics seeks to bridge the gap betweenour minds and the minds of the Biblical writ-ers. The best way to accomplish this bridge isthrough a thorough knowledge of the originallanguages, ancient history and comparison ofScripture with Scripture. An extensive know-ledge of geography and culture is also invalu-able.

The step of faith that we must make is the in-spiration of Scripture (2 Tim 3:16). This es-tablishes the boundaries for correct under-standing of the Word.

We also must seek to determine the true text.This discipline is called textual criticism.Lower criticism seeks to determine the authorand date of the writing. So called “HigherCriticism” is a liberal approach to Scripturethat does not accept complete inspiration ofthe Bible.

There is a need for intellectual honesty andeducation. One may have the rules memo-rized, but may not be able to apply them, ormay seek to apply them in a biased manner.The objective of the interpreter is to read outof the text (exegesis) not to read one’s ownviewpoints in to the text (eisegesis). One wayto become as objective as possible is prayer-fully and thoughtfully consider any and allalternatives in a given passage.

Interpreters should approach the text in humil-ity, meaning that the interpreter must beteachable and realize that he should never stoplearning. Interpreters must also recognize thatinspiration (which comes from God) is infalli-ble, but personal illumination is not.

The Qualifications of an Interpreter:

1. One must be a Believer because correctinterpretation requires the work of the Ho-ly Spirit. 1 Cor 2:14-16

2. One must be filled with the Holy Spirit.Eph 5:18

3. One must possess a desire to know. Matt7:7-8

4. One must be seeking to correctly interpretGod’s Word. 2 Tim 2:15

5. One should have some spiritual educationover a period of time. 1 Tim 3:6

For Personal Study

1. Why is the study of Hermeneutics both ascience and an art?

2. What is the primary need of Hermeneu-tics?

3. What is the best way to bridge the gap be-tween my mind and the mind of the writ-er?

4. What is the "step of faith" that I must taketo begin to interpret the Scripture?

5. Is my interpretation infallible? Explain.

6. Do I fit the qualifications for an interpre-ter? If not, why?

Hermeneutics 3

Lesson 2

Historical Schools-Allegorists

General

An “Allegory” is a symbolic representation.There were schools of interpretation that tookthe literal words of Scripture and assumed thatthey were symbolic of deeper spiritual truths.While there are some obvious symbols in theWord of God such as in Ezekiel 1, it would bea human assumption to claim that all of Scrip-ture is symbolic and that the literal has no sig-nificant meaning.

Greek Allegorical Schools:

The Greek Allegorical Schools were con-cerned only with their own writings, but theirmethod of interpretation was adopted by bothJews and Christians. Their philosophical andhistorical traditions which were stated byThucydides and Herodatus were always atodds with their religious traditions which werestated by Homer and Hesiod. They relievedthe tension by allegorizing the religious.

Jewish Allegorical Schools:

The major writers for the Jewish AllegoricalSchool were Aristobulus (160 BC) and Philo(20 BC - 54 AD). Philo tried to reconcile theHebrew faith with Greek philosophy. Theseallegorists claimed that the literal was for theimmature.

The Jewish Allegorists developed Canons (aregulation or standard) for allegorical interpre-tation that told them when they were to interp-ret in this manner. If they found a statementthat was “unworthy” of God, or statementsthat either seemed to contradict or in any waypresented a difficulty, they felt free to interp-ret allegorically. Also, if the record itself wasallegorical in nature or they ran into grammat-ical peculiarities or symbols they turned toallegory.

Christian and Patristic Allegorists:

The Christian and Patristic Allegorists be-lieved that the Old Testament was a Christiandocument but considered it to be full of pa-rables, enigmas, and riddles. They also ig-nored the historical connections of scriptureand believed that Greek philosophy was to befound in the Old Testament.

One of the major writers was Clement ofAlexandria (c.150 A.D.) who claimed thatthere were five possible meanings. The His-torical meaning which concerned the actualevent; The Doctrinal meaning which includedmoral and theological teachings; The Prophet-ic meaning which was concerned with predic-tions and types; the Philosophical meaningwhich sees meaning in objects and historicalpersons; and the Mystical meaning which in-volved deeper moral, spiritual or religioustruth found via symbols.

Origen was a student of Clement who soughtto escape the crudities of lay people by takingeverything symbolically. He tried to makescripture acceptable to philosophers. Origen’sapproach was threefold in that the Literalmeaning was the Body of Scripture, the Moralsense was the Soul of Scripture, and the Alle-gorical sense was the Spirit of Scripture. Hebelieved that true exegesis was Spiritual (alle-gorical) exegesis.

Jerome (347-420) translated the Bible intoLatin and that translation is called the Vulgate.It has been the only official Bible of the Ro-man Catholic Church since the Council ofTrent in 1545. Jerome suggested that theApocrypha be put in Bible.

Augustine sought to develop a theory ofsigns. A sign is a thing apart from the impres-sion that it presents to the senses and whichcauses of itself some other thing to enter ourthoughts. He based his position on 2 Cor 3:6which says “who also made us adequate asservants of a new covenant, not of the letter,but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but theSpirit gives life.” Augustine’s requirements

Hermeneutics 4

for proper interpretation were: 1) an interpre-ter must be a believer; 2) the literal meaningand historical setting must be held in high re-gard; 3) Scripture has a double meaning,therefore the Allegorical method is proper; 4)recognize that there is significance in num-bers; and 5) the Old Testament was a Chris-tian document and Christ should be soughtthere. Augustine believed that true exegesishad to consult the meaning of the writer, thenthe “analogy of faith” which is found in thetrue orthodox creed and add love, which isspiritual intuition.

Some of Augustine’s other teachings were: 1)that one had to pay attention to the context; 2)if the interpreter is insecure in his basic be-liefs, he can’t be part of the orthodox faith; 3)that one must not try and make the Holy Spirita substitute for the tools; 4) that the obscurepassage must yield to clear; and 5) that onemust also note progressive revelation withinits historical context (some say that he failedto apply this point himself).

Roman Catholic School:

The Allegorism of Roman Catholicism em-ployed a “spiritual” or “mystical” interpreta-tion of the Word. In general, the RomanCatholics combined Typology and Allegoryand sought the Moral Interpretation. They be-lieved that the literal and historical interpreta-tion is the foundation of the study of the Bible,but that the “spiritual” or “mystical” meaning,which is beyond the literal, is what we shouldreally seek.

The Roman Catholics use the Latin Vulgate (aLatin translation by Jerome from the Hebrewand Greek) as though it were the original text.The Catholic interpreter accepts what TheChurch has said about various matters as une-quivocal truth. They believe that The Churchis the official interpreter since The Bible is notgiven to the world but deposited with theChurch. Also at the heart of their beliefs isthat the Christian Deposit of Faith is in the

Catholic Church. Therefore, no passage ofScripture can be validly interpreted in a man-ner that conflicts with the Roman CatholicDoctrinal system. Their view of the “analogyof faith” is to compare a particular interpreta-tion with Church Dogma.

The Roman Catholic “Guide to Interpretation”is that interpretation:

must be solely about faith and morals.

is not bound by national or scientific mat-ters.

must bear witness to Catholic tradition.

must have a unanimous witness by theChurch Fathers.

is to be explained by unwritten traditionwhen the passage is obscure.

follows the “Principle of Development”meaning the doctrines of the New Testa-ment were ‘seeds’ and not complete unitsin themselves.

also follows the “Principle of Implication”which is called “Epigenesis” meaning thatdoctrines grow, develop and change.

For Personal Study

1. What is an allegory?

2. What is the major assumption of the Alle-gorical School of thought?

3. From which Allegorical School did boththe Jews and Christians get their founda-tion?

4. How did the Jewish Allegorical Schooloriginate?

5. How do Allegorists view Literalists?

6. What were the five possible meanings ofScripture according to Clement of Alexan-dria?

7. What were the body, soul and spirit ofScripture according to Origen?

8. Evaluate the basic teachings of Augustine.

Hermeneutics 5

9. Discuss the basic hermeneutical system ofRoman Catholicism.

Lesson 3

Historical Schools-Literalists

General:

The literal method of interpreting the Bible isto accept as basic the literal rendering of thesentences unless by virtue of the nature of thesentence or phrase this is not possible. Thisallows for figures of speech, fables and allego-ries. When reasons exist for somethingbeyond the literal meaning, there must besome type of control.

Jewish Literal School

Ezra founded this school when he translatedthe Hebrew to Aramaic for the Jews who werecoming out of captivity (Neh 8:1-8). The Jew-ish Canons of interpretation were that:

the Word is to be understood in terms ofsentence and the sentence by its context.

one should compare similar topics ofscripture and give the clear passages prefe-rence over the obscure.

one must pay close attention to spelling,grammar, and figures of speech.

Logic is be used to apply scripture to lifein circumstances where the Bible is silent.

The Literal school recognizes the Divine ac-commodation of Revelation to men.

Some Problems in the Literal School:

The “hyperliteralists” who are also called“letterists” took things to the extreme andwere constantly looking for hidden meaningslying “under” the surface of the text.

The Cabbalists (Kabbalists) often allegorizedthe letters. They used notarikon where eachletter stood for another word. They also useda method called gemetria which assigned nu-merical values to words, and then compared

numbers and a system called termura whichchanged the letters of words to form newwords.

Syrian School of Antioch

The Syrian School of Antioch avoided letter-ism and allegories. Lucian and Dorotheuswere founders, around 325 A.D. Arius andEusebius studied at this school. Diodorus whowas the first presbyter of Antioch until 378AD, then the Bishop of Tarsus, also was partof the school at Antioch. There exist manyextant writings from the students of this an-cient school.

Theodore of Mopsuestia was a student of Dio-dorus who was intellectual and dogmatic. Hedenied the inspiration of some books of theBible, but he also denied Allegory.

John Chrysostom who was also called “thegolden-mouthed” was a talented exegete andcommunicator who recognized inspiration andtotality of the Canon.

This School debated Origen’s Allegoricalschool.

The Syrian School:

recognized a plain-literal and a figurative-literal sense of Scripture.

were not “letterists.”

avoided the authoritarian exegesis of theRoman Catholics.

insisted on historicity of Old Testamentevents.

related the Old Testament and New Tes-tament Typologically, not Allegorically.

recognized Progressive Revelation.

held that the bond between the Old Testa-ment and New Testament is prophecy.

This is the line of descent passed through bythe writer of this course.

Hermeneutics 6

The Victorines:

The major representatives of The Victorineswere Hugo of St. Victor, Richard of St. Vic-tor, and Andrew of St. Victor. They noted theimportance of history and geography, which isthe natural background for literal exegesis.They emphasized syntax, grammar and exege-sis and did not get involved in letterism.

The Reformers:

The Reformers based their approach on thephilosophical system of Occam. This systemfirst separated Grace and Nature and said eve-rything we know about God is via Divine Re-velation. The second factor involved a re-newed study of Hebrew and Greek. Erasmuspublished the first Greek New Testament in1516.

The Reformer Martin Luther held the follow-ing hermeneutical principles:

The Psychological Principle which recog-nized faith and illumination.

The Authority Principle which held thatthe Bible is the supreme authority and isabove church authority.

The Literal Principle, which rejected alle-gory as, used by the Catholics. (Theywere not adverse though if the contextwere Christ and not something about thepapacy). They accepted the primacy ofthe original languages and paid attentionto grammar, time frame, circumstances,conditions, and context.

The Sufficiency Principle, which indicatesthat the Bible is a clear book and a devoutstudent, can understand it. This includesthe fact that Scripture interprets scripture,so one must let the clear interpret the ob-scure. They also employed the "Analogyof Faith" which was believed to be thetheological unity of the Bible and not therecognized dogma of an institution.

The Christological Principle states that thefunction of all interpreters is to find Christ.

(The Roman Catholics seek to do this withAllegory)

The Law-Gospel Principle which recog-nizes that the Law is not necessary for sal-vation.

In the Post-Reformation Era Ernesti publishedInstitutio Interpretis in 1761 which stated thatgrammatical exegesis had authority over dog-matic exegesis which was the Roman Catholicmethod.

Devotional Schools:

This group emphasizes the edifying aspects ofScripture as per 2 Tim 3:16. The MedievalMystics who used the Scriptures to promotethe mystical experience led this school. TheVictorines fell into this category.

Pietists

This was started by Philip Spener (1635-1705and August Francke (1663-1727) who at-tempted to recover the Bible as spiritual withthe intended use of edification. It was a reac-tion against those who read the Bible only totear down others. Bengel was the chief expo-nent. The Pietists emphasized grammaticaland historical interpretation seeking to apply itto life.

The Pietists influenced the Moravians. Thisevangelical movement can be traced to Mora-via and Bohemia (Czechoslovakia). Countvon Zinzendorf (1700 - 1760), the leader ofthe Bohemian Brethren was a part of the De-votional School. The Pietists also influencedthe Puritans including John Wesley, JonathanEdwards, Mathew Henry, and the Quakers.

The problem they faced was one of havingonly pious reflections of Scripture withoutclear explanations. The Modern DevotionalSchool claims devotions are absolutely neces-sary as Christians need applications to live by.The weaknesses of this school are that it can

Hermeneutics 7

easily fall prey to Allegory, and often, piousreflections are substituted for valid exegesis.

For Personal Study

1. Describe the Literal approach to God'sWord.

2. What were some of the problems in theLiteral School and why would they beproblems?

3. Which Literal School debated Origen'sAllegorical School and who were some ofits famous students?

4. Discuss the principles held by the SyrianSchool.

5. Discuss Luther's principles of hermeneu-tics.

6. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses ofthe Pietists.

Lesson 4

Historical Schools-Liberals

The Liberal School of interpretation grewprimarily out of the debate between rational-ism and authoritarianism. Whatever was notin harmony with ‘educated’ morality was re-jected.

The Liberal system of hermeneutics is that:

The Modern Mentality was to governone’s approach to scripture.

The Bible is just another book.

Miracles are not to be accepted becausethey are not scientific.

Hell, sin, and depravity are rejected be-cause they offend moral sensitivities.

The text may be rearranged.

They reject all forms of Inspiration.

Revelation is redefined to mean humaninsight into religious truth.

Doctrinal and theological content are notbinding.

They believe that religious experience isfundamental and that theology is an after-thought.

The Liberal School applied Evolution to thereligion of Israel. Thus they held that Jesuswas a good man of the highest prophetic orderand was transmuted by theological speculationand Greek metaphysics into the God-man ofthe creeds.

They believe that the writers of the Bible ac-commodated their recipients and hence theBible is not binding on us. Liberalism alsorejects typology and prophecy. They place ahigh value on philosophy and use a syntheticsystem that comes from beginning with a the-sis and adding to it an antithesis thus forminga synthesis.

Some of the different names Liberalism ap-pears under are:

Neo-Orthodoxy which seeks to recover theinsights of the Reformers. Karl Barth wasthe chief representative of this movement.

Neo-Supernaturalism which reinstates cat-egory of transcendental.

Logotheism which seeks a new theologyof the Word of God.

Neo-Evangelicalism which seeks to recov-er the Christian gospel in contrast to socialgospel.

Neo-Liberalism which has not really bro-ken with liberalism.

Biblical Realism which is a new effort todiscover theological interpretation of theBible.

Neo-Orthodoxy:

The approach of Neo-Orthodoxy to the inter-pretation of the Bible:

denies the infallibility, inerrancy, and Di-vine revelation of Scripture.

Hermeneutics 8

says that only God can speak for God andthus revelation only comes when Godspeaks.

claims that His speech is His personalpresence, not mere words.

views the Bible as a witness and record torevelation, but is not revelation.

believes only that which witnesses to Chr-ist is binding.

believes we cannot interpret the particularsor specifics of Scripture.

interprets mythologically the Creation ac-counts, the fall of man, and the SecondAdvent.

believes you can read the Bible withoutany attempt to understand it (Existential).

recognizes paradoxes.

“Holy History” School:

Another part of the Liberal School believed ina Heilsgeschichtliche, which is German mean-ing “Holy History” or “Salvation History.”Von Hoffman who tried a new system basedon the experience of regeneration, history, thefact of the Church and Scripture started it.They accepted “Higher Criticism” which be-lieved the books in the Bible to be written byseveral authors over the period of several hun-dred years.

The approach of the “Holy History” was thatan historical event had roots in the past, mean-ing in the present, and was a preview of thefuture. It was also called the “Organic” viewand when applied meant that interpretationwas to be dynamic (ever-changing). Thisschool turned applications into interpretationsand believed that the Bible is the Bible if youmake it your Bible.

Their Hermeneutics involve:

The “Quest for Life” movement of docu-ment which is an attempt to discover unity

of the book, to determine to whom it waswritten and find the flow of ideas

comprehending the Bible’s message incontext of the author’s view of life and re-ality as seen by the rational mind.

determining the relationship, which existsbetween the ideas of the documents andthe ideas of our own mind, namely readinginto The Word our viewpoints which is,called eisegesis.

critically studying the Bible since criticismestablishes authenticity.

The New Hermeneutics:

Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976) introduced theGerman Hermeneutical Principle also calledthe “New Hermeneutics.” Its principles arethat:

all matters of fact are settled by scienceand thus rejects miracles. (Scientific)

the historical setting of a concept becomesmore important than the strict interpreta-tion of that concept. (Critical)

the 1st Century church expressed faith my-thologically. (Mythological)

the modern person must strip away themyths. (Demythological)

faith lives only by decision and does notneed to be objective or have historicalsupport. (Dialectical)

scriptures are a witness that revelationdoes occur, but it is not directly the Wordof God. (Revelational)

there is no Old Testament predictions ofthe New Testament events. (The Law)

They are on a quest for the “historical Jesus”speaking of the person apart from what theyview as myth. The Liberal Hermeneutic isbased on how each person may see or under-stand his own world and experience. Theyview language as a “speech-event” and thus it

Hermeneutics 9

does not carry responsibility even if comingfrom God.

For Personal Study:

1. Where did the Liberal School of interpre-tation come from?

2. What philosophical theory did the Liberalsapply to Scripture?

3. Discuss their basic positions.

4. What is my overall evaluation of the liber-al hermeneutical system?

Lesson 5

The Protestant System Of Hermeneutics

Introduction

The Divine Inspiration of Scripture is thefoundation from which we begin, for “AllScripture is inspired by God and profitable forteaching, for reproof, for correction, for train-ing in righteousness; that the man of God maybe adequate, equipped for every good work.(2Tim 3:16-17). The Protestant Approach toHermeneutics recognizes that the Bible mustbe understood as absolute truth including allthe miracles. This adds new depth to commonwords such faith, love, redemption and salva-tion because not only are concepts presentedbut facts are given to validate the concepts.

Also at the core of “How to Study the Bible”is acceptance of the fact that the Bible hasbeen inspired by God in its entirety. This iscalled verbal-plenary inspiration indicatingthat every part of the Bible has been inspiredby God.

To correctly interpret God’s Word first re-quires that the individual is a Believer in theLord Jesus Christ because, “a natural mandoes not accept the things of the Spirit of God;for they are foolishness to him, and he cannotunderstand them, because they are spirituallyappraised. But he who is spiritual appraisesall things, yet he himself is appraised by no

man. For who has known the mind of theLord, that he should instruct Him? But wehave the mind of Christ (1 Cor 2:14-16).” Thesecond requirement for correct interpretationof God’s Word is directly related to one’s re-lationship with the Holy Spirit, because it isHis function to “guide us into all truth (John16:13).” The third requirement is an intellec-tual honesty that consistently and eagerly usesthe tools that God has given us to learn HisWord. We are instructed to, “Be diligent topresent yourself approved to God as a work-man who does not need to be ashamed, han-dling accurately the word of truth (2 Tim2:15).”

The goal of interpretation is always to be love.All goals in life are supposed to revolvearound what the Lord Jesus Christ Himselfcalled the “Two Greatest Commandments.”In Mark 12:28-31, the text reports, “And oneof the scribes came and heard them arguing,and recognizing that He had answered themwell, asked Him, “What commandment is theforemost of all?” Jesus answered, “The fore-most is, ‘Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God isone Lord; and you shall love the Lord yourGod with all your heart, and with all yoursoul, and with all your mind, and with all yourstrength.’ “The second is this, ‘You shall loveyour neighbor as yourself.’ There is no othercommandment greater than these.” The Apos-tle Paul gave his teaching objective in 1 Tim1:5 which says, “the goal of our instruction islove from a pure heart and a good conscienceand a sincere faith.”

The intent of this love-guided teaching shouldbe to promote the Spiritual growth of the Be-liever in the Lord Jesus. This principle isclearly taught in Ephesians 4:11-16, that says,“And He gave some as apostles, and some asprophets, and some as evangelists, and someas pastors and teachers, for the equipping ofthe saints for the work of service, to the build-ing up of the body of Christ; until we all attain

Hermeneutics 10

to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledgeof the Son of God, to a mature man, to themeasure of the stature which belongs to thefullness of Christ. As a result, we are nolonger to be children, tossed here and there bywaves, and carried about by every wind ofdoctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftinessin deceitful scheming; but speaking the truthin love, we are to grow up in all aspects intoHim, who is the head, even Christ, fromwhom the whole body, being fitted and heldtogether by that which every joint supplies,according to the proper working of each indi-vidual part, causes the growth of the body forthe building up of itself in love.”

Interpretation must be tested with the words ofthe Lord Jesus Christ. In 1 Timothy 6:3-5,Paul says, “If anyone advocates a differentdoctrine, and does not agree with soundwords, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, andwith the doctrine conforming to godliness, heis conceited and understands nothing; but hehas a morbid interest in controversial ques-tions and disputes about words, out of whicharise envy, strife, abusive language, evil sus-picions, and constant friction between men ofdepraved mind and deprived of the truth, whosuppose that godliness is a means of gain.”

For Personal Study

1. What is the foundation of the Protes-tant system of Hermeneutics? Why?

2. What are three personal requirementsfor the interpretation of Scripture?

3. What should be the objective of all in-terpretation and why?

4. What should our teaching promote andwhy?

5. What is the standard we are to use totest interpretation?

Lesson 6

The Protestant System Of Hermeneutics:

Theological Perspectives

There are certain theological perspectives thatour method of Bible study must include in or-der for us to approach the text and interpretScripture properly.

The first principle involves the Clarity ofScripture, which is clearly taught in 2 Pet1:20-21 and 1Cor 14:33. The passage in 2Peter says, "But know this first of all, that noprophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's owninterpretation, for no prophecy was ever madeby an act of human will, but men moved bythe Holy Spirit spoke from God." Scripture isclear because it is inspired by the Holy Spirit.We must remember that although Scripture is"clear" there still may be parts that are diffi-cult to understand.

One of our basic guiding principles though isthat "God said what He meant and meant whatHe said." We must seek to know His Word asHe intended. We also know that, "God is nota God of confusion but of peace (1 Cor14:33)," so where there is confusion it is onour part and not God's. Therefore, "problempassages" come from our lack of knowledge,our perspective or desire to "do His will (John7:17). The use of the original languages underthe ministry of the Holy Spirit will clarifymany of these problems.

The second principle is that Revelation is Ac-commodated, which means that it was origi-nally communicated in language to be unders-tood by the initial recipients. The Scriptureoften uses analogies to inescapable realitiesthat fit the time frame in which it was written.The application of this principle requires someknowledge and understanding of the historyand culture of the people to which the portionof the Word was addressed.

Hermeneutics 11

The third theological principle is that Revela-tion is Progressive. This refers to the fact thatvarious precepts are initially presented in asummary form and then enlarged. A wonder-ful example is found in the "promised seed ofthe woman" found in Genesis 3:15. More in-formation about the Messiah is foundthroughout the Old Testament, especially inthe types and symbols that are used to give avivid picture of the Messiah who was to come.The New Testament is documentation of thereality that Messiah has come. While this isthe clearest example of Progressive Revela-tion, there are many concepts that are initiallypresented and then developed.

The fourth principle is that Scripture interpretsScripture meaning that the obscure passageshould give way to the clear. This principlerealizes that essential truths are not hidden.We should look for detailed passages on agiven subject and let them be the guide in theinterpretation of the passages with less detail.An illustration of this principle is found in thecomparison of Matthew 24:40 with Matthew13:49.

In Matthew 24, the phrase "one will be taken,and one will be left" could refer either to therighteous being taken at the Rapture of thechurch or the wicked being taken at theSecond Advent of Jesus Christ. The passagein Matthew 13 which is also found in a con-text dealing with the "last days" says that itwill be the "wicked who will be taken outfrom the righteous." Thus, we are able to in-terpret the Matthew 24 passage as referring tothe Second Advent and not the Rapture be-cause Scripture has interpreted Scripture.

The fifth principle is the Analogy of Faith.This principle means that there is only onesystem of truth in Scripture. There are nottwo or more theological systems. The practic-al application of this is that all doctrines andconceptual studies must be in harmony withone another. The interpretation of particular

passages of Scripture must not contradict thetotal teaching of Scripture on a given subject.For example, eternal salvation is either bygrace through faith, or by works, but not both.God's Word does not have two different sys-tems or means to eternal salvation, but ratherit has one (Eph 2:8-9). Therefore, passagesthat relate our "works" done in this body toeternity must be understood in view the pas-sages that clearly specify that our eternal sal-vation is by grace.

The sixth theological principle is the Unity ofMeaning of the Scripture. This is why believ-ers develop a systematic theology that seeks tounderstand and explain how various passagesand concepts fit together. This principle seeksto understand and communicate how God hasput His Word together. Man's tendencythough is to "read into" God's Word what hewants to find (eisegesis). When man desires(either intentionally or not) to impose his sys-tem upon God's Word he is prone to presump-tive allegories and distortions of the Scrip-tures. Knowing what God says and desiresshould always be the first priority of the stu-dent of His Word.

For Personal Study

1. Explain in your own words the principle ofthe Clarity of Scripture.

2. Explain in your own words the principlethat Revelation is Accommodated.

3. Explain in your own words the principlethat Revelation is Progressive.

4. What is the significance and importance ofthe principle that Scripture interpretsScripture?

5. What is the Analogy of Faith?

6. What is the value of the principle regard-ing the Unity of Meaning?

Hermeneutics 12

Lesson 7

The Protestant System Of Hermeneutics

Grammatical Perspectives

Philology is a technical term meaning a"friend of words." It refers to a love of learn-ing and desire to study the disciplines of lan-guage. Since the Bible is made up of words,there is need for the technical and comparativestudy of the words that are used in the Bible.The student of the Word of God must paycareful attention to the specific words and thecontext in which the Holy Spirit placed theminto the Scripture. While it is possible to gainsome tremendous insights into God's Wordfrom a study of the words used in varioustranslations, one must be very careful of tryingto develop a theology from anything otherthan the original languages. The disciple withno training in the original languages will needto rely on the work of others in many of theseareas.

The first principle we will consider is that weshould approach the Scriptures believing thatGod's Word is Basically Literal. The LiteralApproach to Scripture recognizes the naturalor usual speech constructions and implicationsof a particular writing or expression. It fol-lows the ordinary and apparent sense of thewords that are used in their historical context.This is not letterist approach that reads mean-ing into letters but instead is the usual methodof interpretation of any literature. We ap-proach God's Word literally because we findthat the statements and descriptions He givesof the Messiah had literal fulfillment in JesusChrist. If there are spiritual meanings thatcome from signs, symbols, parables and thelike they still depend on the literal strata of alanguage. Only in a literal approach is thereany control against abuse of the interpretationof the Scriptures. The Literal Approach doesnot overlook figures of speech, symbols,types, and the like.

The practice of the literal is done by the Studyof Words which is our second principle.Words establish the context of a body of lite-rature. In the study of words, you will findthat some are technical or very specific intheir meaning while others are non-technicalor general in their meanings. It makes sensethat the non-technical words should be inter-preted in view of the technical words that sur-round them. This is actually a specific appli-cation of letting Scripture interpret Scriptureand the clear passage interpret the obscure.

As we study the words we look at the waythey were formed which is called "etymolo-gy." This type of study can give tremendousinsight into the meaning of the word. For ex-ample, the Greek word PARAKALEO isformed from the word PARA meaning "along-side" and KALEO meaning "to call." Theword itself then means to "call alongside." Itis a word variously translated as "comfort,""encourage," or "exhort." It implies though acall to another person into a relationship thatis "arm-in-arm" with you. There are manygood lexicons available that explain the waythe words were formed.

We also must study words comparatively re-ferring to how they relate to other words. Thiswill involve Concordance studies. An exhaus-tive Concordance will show every place a giv-en word is used. Many also have numbercodes that tell which Greek or Hebrew wordshave been translated by that particular word.Strong's Concordance is probably the best forthe beginning student. It is also valuable forthe advanced student. The Comparative Studyof words also considers synonyms (wordswith similar or identical meanings) and anto-nyms which are words with opposite mean-ings. There are very few pure synonyms, sothe careful student will find beautiful subtle-ties of meaning that can greatly enhance hisunderstanding of the Word.

Hermeneutics 13

It is also important to study words culturallymeaning their significance to the culture thatused them in the era in which they were used.There is a trap of not applying a correct Bibli-cal chronology to the study of the words. Wemust realize that words change meanings overthe course of time. The meanings also tend togo from specific to general. This principlewas espoused by Martin Luther and John Cal-vin and sought to determine the original de-signation of a particular word. In Latin it isknown as the usus loquendi.

When possible, the serious student may alsoconsider cognate languages, which are lan-guages of the same linguistic family. Howev-er, one must beware of placing too much em-phasis on this study.

The Literal Approach to Scripture is also prac-ticed by considering the grammatical structureof sentences because words form sentences.Sentences are units of thought. The researchis the same as for the study of words. Onemust consider the Context in which the sen-tence is found. The immediate context con-siders the sentences and paragraphs in closestproximity to the one under consideration. Theintermediate context considers the book inwhich the sentence is placed and the remotecontext considers the rest of the Bible.

In our study of sentences we must also knowwhat type of language is under consideration.It may be "Analytic" which depends on theword order to communicate the meaning. He-brew and English are examples of "Analytic"languages. It may also be"Agglutinative"which is considered a "synthetic" languagewhere case endings are primarily used to con-vey the intended meaning.

The study of parallel passages is also impor-tant to the Literal Approach to the Scripture.Just because one finds wording similar to thatfound in another passage, the passages stillmay not be parallel. The issue should not beforced.

One should also look at similar concepts. Anexample of this would be to study the "Resur-rection of the Dead" as found in 1Corinthians15 and Revelation 20.

The Literal Approach also considers the Lite-rary Genre of the passage under consideration.A genre is a standardized pattern of writing,such as poetry and prose. The Literary Genremakes us consider various figures of speech,such as in Revelation 5:5 where the Lord iscalled the "lion" of Judah. Jesus Christ is nota literal "lion," so the figure of speechrepresents a trait that He literally possesses.Scripture also uses Parables and even an Alle-gory (Gal 4:24). Recognizing the LiteraryGenre does not touch the literal hermeneuticalprinciples, but instead clearly identifies figura-tive language and literally interprets. Song ofSolomon is clearly loaded with figurative lan-guage, but its interpretation must be first con-sidered literally.

It is extremely important that the interpreter ofScripture have some knowledge of Biblicalhistory and chronology in particular. This isimportant in understanding the Biblical culturecustoms and rituals. Revelation comes in andthrough a cultural form and in some cases theprinciples taught are transcultural. It is an artdetermining when.

The student of God's word must come to theScriptures with some basic questions. As weapproach any passage we must seek to answerthe "Who, what, when, where, why and how."After those questions are answered, there aresome secondary questions we would ask suchas, "How does this apply to me or the ones Iam to teach?" and "Are there any conditionsto these principles such as special circums-tances?"

The student of God's Word must approach HisWord with Intellectual Honesty, seeking toknow what God has said. There are manyhindrances to correct interpretation includingthe desire for the applause of men, vanity, flat-

Hermeneutics 14

tery, fear, and inconsistent or unbalancedstudy (like only studying topics and not study-ing through a book). Every time we go intothe Word we should submit our biases to theabsolute standard of truth, the Word of God,because only His Word is Truth (John 17:17).We also must seek to learn from Him in orderto do His will (John 7:17) and not simply asan academic exercise. The Pharisees demon-strate what happens when we leave the desirefor a relationship with the Living God out ofour study of His Word (also read John 5:39-47). Let us pray, pray and pray.

The Sequence Of Interpretation

The first step is to analyze the words realizingthat the technical or specific words set thecontext and that the non-technical or generalwords are interpreted by the context.

The next step is to analyze the grammar re-cognizing the word functions that are forcedby the words themselves or the grammaticalconstruction. These set the context and serveas the basis to interpret the words that canhave optional grammatical functions. In otherwords we are letting the clear interpret thequestionable.

We must also interpret based on the contexts,looking first at the immediate context in whichwe find the word, namely within the sentenceor paragraph, then at the intermediate contextwhich refers to its location within the book inwhich it is found and then at the remote con-text which considers the rest of the Scripture.Correct interpretation will not violate any ofthese contexts.

For Personal Study

1. Why would we accept a principle that sayswe would first consider words to be basi-cally literal in their meaning?

2. How do we establish the literal meaning?

3. What value can there be in the study ofhow words are formed?

4. What is the value of comparing words?

5. Why would we want to study the gram-matical structure of sentences?

6. Why would the context be important in theinterpretation of the word?

7. Why would we want to study parallel pas-sages and similar concepts?

8. Why would history and culture also im-pact our study?

9. What are some hindrances to the correctinterpretation of Scripture?

Lesson 8:

The Doctrinal Use Of The Bible

The Theological or Doctrinal Interpretationextends the study of the grammar to its fullsignificance. It is a Synoptic or Comparativeview of all the Biblical data on a given sub-ject. Theology must be built upon generalhermeneutical principles.

Principles Of Doctrinal Studies

The Theologian is a redeemed man standing inthe midst of Divine Revelation. Thus he mustbe committed to understanding the Word ofGod. This should not be a dry, abstract, orimpersonal investigation, but one must seek toset personal biases aside.

The main themes of the Bible are God, man,Jesus Christ and the Christian life. At theheart of the Bible is Jesus Christ and Salva-tion. The Bible is often mistreated whenpeople try and make it a handbook for politics.

Theology must rest on the Literal Interpreta-tion, which does not overlook figurative lan-guage. The Main Burden of Theology musttotally include the theology of the New Tes-tament. Determining what God's Word has tosay through exegesis (reading out) must beprior to any system of theology. The Systemhas to be built up exegetically, brick by brick.Of necessity, one will have to use the rules of

Hermeneutics 15

logic within this system, but the theologianmust be careful to not extend his doctrinesbeyond the Scriptural evidence because hisevidence is Scripture itself.

The Theologian is striving for a system, whichis a group of interrelated assertions. There-fore, there must be a systematic gathering ofdata from the entire Bible before it is interre-lated into a coherent system. It is helpful toknow the history of philosophy and the historyof theological development. Liberal theolo-gians claim there any many systems of theolo-gy found within the Bible, yet such would beconfusing which is not a characteristic of God(1 Cor 14:33). Conservative scholars believethat there is one interpretation of a given pas-sage while there may be many applications.

Proper Theological development of necessitymust have proof texts given that are the resultof the correct understanding of the Scriptures.This means that the exegesis "reading out"must be done according to basic principles ofinterpretation that properly recognize the con-text. Liberal theologians do not believe oneneeds a proof text to establish theology, butthey even use a proof text to try and prove thatwe shouldn't use them (2Cor 3:6 Letter kills,but the Spirit gives life).

What is not a matter of clearcut revelationshould not be made a matter of creed or faith.This leads to making moral judgments withoutthe benefit of Scripture, in effect defining sin.In Romans 5:13, it says, "sin is not imputedwhere there is no law." Thus, when man startsdefining law apart from God's Word, he isplaying God. What is specifically spelled outas sin, we can and should learn and apply.

The Theologian must also keep the practicalnature of the Word in mind. There is plenty ofinformation on living the Christian Life. TheScriptures do not deal specifically with everylittle thing or circumstance we will deal within life, but they will touch upon every aspectof our lives by means of principles.

The Theologian must also recognize his re-sponsibility to the Universal Church. Therehas clearly been enough division within Chr-ist's Body through the centuries over so-called"doctrinal" issues to last us for eternity. Forthe Theologian to present information to theChurch that is not based upon sound principlesof hermeneutics is irresponsible and denotes alack of love.

For Personal Study

1. What is the doctrinal study of the Bibledesigned to do?

2. What is the Theologian?

3. What are the main themes of the Bible?

4. What must theology rest on?

5. What is the Theologian striving for? Howis it built?

6. What is a requirement for a proper theo-logical system?

7. Consider how legalism occurs when onegoes beyond the Word.

8. What should not be made a matter of creedor faith? Why?

9. Why should we keep in mind the question,"How then should we live?"

10. Why should the Theologian not presentprinciples to the Church that are not firmlygrounded in Scripture?

Lesson 9

The Devotional And Practical Use Of TheBible

All practical lessons, applications, and devo-tional uses of the Bible should be governed bygeneral hermeneutical principles. This meansthat sound interpretation must precede anyapplications that are made. The Bible doesnot justify using any means to derive a per-sonal application. Some people have beenknown to use the Bible in ways that approach

Hermeneutics 16

divination and sorcery rather than as the re-vealed Word of God. If one closes his eyes,opens the Bible and then blindly points to apassage looking for direction for the day, thatdisgraces God's Word. In an emergency, ourloving God may choose to help out in an un-usual way, but for the day-to-day living oflife, that approach simply is not satisfactory.At times people take passages and then distortthem for "devotional" purposes. That is reallynot devotion to God but self. If it is done forthose one is attempting to teach, it is manipu-lation and a lack of reliance on the truth ofGod's Word to change lives.

The Bible is more a book of principles than acatalog of specific directions. Principles arenecessary to cover all contingencies. A set ofspecifics would indirectly foster hypocrisy andartificial spirituality. True principles that aremisapplied can also lead to hypocrisy andpseudo-spirituality. The Bible emphasizes the"Inner Spirit" much more than the outwardreligious cloak as is spelled out clearly in 1Samuel 15:22 which says, "And Samuel said,"Has the LORD as much delight in burnt of-ferings and sacrifices As in obeying the voiceof the LORD? Behold, to obey is better thansacrifice, And to heed than the fat of rams.

The Old Testament taught right and wrong ona material level so that hopefully it would bediscerned on the more subtle, spiritual level.Morality and Spirituality were lifted to a high-er level by being inward and spiritual. Neithermorality nor spirituality was to be based solelyon the overt (Heb 10:5). The importance ofthe Mental Attitude, even in the Old Testa-ment is clear.

In some instances the Spirit of the statement isclearly to be our guide. In Matthew 5:29-30,the Word says, "And if your right eye makesyou stumble, tear it out, and throw it fromyou; for it is better for you that one of theparts of your body perish, than for your wholebody to be thrown into hell. "And if your right

hand makes you stumble, cut it off, and throwit from you; for it is better for you that one ofthe parts of your body perish, than for yourwhole body to go into hell." The "spirit" ofthe statement involves causes for stumblingover the gospel of Jesus Christ. These "stum-bling blocks" should be removed at all costs.Hopefully, without loss of an eye or a hand.

We must also translate commands given in thecontext of one culture into our culture. In Ex-odus 23:19; 34:26 and Deuteronomy 14:21,there is a command to "not boil a baby goat inits mother's milk." This command is difficultto even understand in most of today's cultures.This action refers to one of the Canaanite fer-tility rituals. The principle taught is to notembrace the pagan practices of other cultures,which has meaning for today in any culture.

We may also receive guidance from examplesthat the Bible records. We must however,make a distinction between what the Biblerecords and what it approves. The Inspirationof Scripture extends only to truthfulness of therecording. We may make direct applicationfrom incidents that the Bible directly censuresor approves.

Specific commands to individuals are not theWill of God for us. For example, Abrahamwas commanded to offer up Isaac as a pictureor type of the sacrifice and resurrection of theLord Jesus Christ (Gen 22 cf. Heb 11:17-19).There are principles to be learned from thatincident and applied to our lives, but the spe-cific requirement for us is not there. It is bestto seek to determine the outstanding SpiritualPrinciple in the lives of people in Scripturethat cross all time frames and cultures andthen apply that principle to our life.

The application in our lives does not need aliteral reproduction of the Biblical situation.For example, water Baptism does not need tobe done in the Jordan River and the Lord'sTable does not need to be done in an "upper

Hermeneutics 17

room" to honor and glorify our Lord by fulfil-ling His commands.

The Practical and Devotional use of the Bibleprobably concerns itself with the Promises ofGod more than any other thing. There havebeen many disappointed and angry peoplethroughout the centuries who have taken a"promise" out of context and then "claimed" itas being from God. We must remember thatpractical application must be drawn from cor-rect interpretation. At times we may think thatGod has reneged on His Word, when the realproblem is in our understanding. Just becauseGod made a promise to Abraham does notmean that He has made the same promise toyou. We must seek to determine if the prom-ise was to a specific individual or nation.

When we study God's Promises we must firstdetermine whether or not they are universal orpersonal in nature. For example, John 3:16says "whosoever believes in Him shall haveeternal life." That is an example of a universalpromise that is open to anyone who believesin the Lord Jesus Christ. A personal promisewould be found in the Abrahamic Covenant.The promise was given to Abraham. If we"go forth from the land of our relatives," itdoes not mean that God will make a new co-venant with us.

We must also determine if a promise is condi-tional or unconditional. Are there require-ments that we are to meet before a promise isfulfilled?

We must also determine if the promise is forour time frame or it involves a specific timeframe. We know that the wolf and lamb willdwell together and that the leopard will liedown with the goat (Isa 11:6; 65:25), but thosepassages refer to the Millennial Kingdom ofJesus Christ.

The communicator of God's Word must re-member that he is bound to it in his preachingand teaching. His primary job is to communi-

cate God's Word to those "allotted to hischarge (1 Pet 5:2)" accurately and in an un-derstandable manner. The use of vocabularythat the hearers cannot understand is tanta-mount to "speaking in tongues with no inter-preter (1 Cor 14:27-28). The test of the com-munication is whether or not the hearers growin love (1 Tim 1:5) and grace (2 Pet 3:18).

Some common problems involve pullingverses out of context and then "sermonizing"or "allegorizing" them, seeking to impart ameaning that does not come from that verse.

What is wonderful is that in spite of our in-adequacies and mistakes, we serve a God whois gracious and will use us to further His plan.

For Personal Study

1. What must govern all practical uses of theBible? Why?

2. Discuss the statement, "the Bible is more abook of principles than a catalog of specif-ic directions."

3. How did the Old Testament teach moraltruth?

4. Why should we look for the "spirit" ofstatements without allegorizing them?

5. Why is it important to look for the culturalsignificance before making practical ap-plications?

6. What are important things we should lookfor in determining God's promises.

7. What is the test of a communicator?

Hermeneutics 18

Lesson 10

Inerrancy And Secular Sciencethe Issue OfInfallibility And Inerrancy

Infallibility concerns faith and morals whileinerrancy is concerned with historical and fac-tual matters. The Bible claims inerrancy in allmatters of history pertaining to faith and mor-als. This recognizes the common usage of thewords and figures of speech.

Inerrancy does not demand lucidity as a clearinterpretation of every passage may not bepossible due to our lack of knowledge. Weshould expect some passages to be difficult tounderstand. The Bible does not reveal every-thing on a given subject in one place, so it ispossible to miss something that may clarifythe passage under consideration.

Belief in inerrancy leads us to affirm that thereare no contradictions. Logic involves the prin-ciples of non-contradiction. Thus, many partsof the Word will be clearly logical. Theremay be parts of the Word that appear to not belogical, but we must remember that man's log-ic may not be God's. When things appear il-logical, it is because we are missing the God-factor in our understanding.

As we pursue our belief in inerrancy we mustbe sure that we have the correct text. We mustalso realize that inerrancy does not meancompleteness of detail. That which is re-vealed though is literal.

Inerrancy does not demand that we possess theoriginal manuscripts nor have a perfect text.What we do have has so few textual variantsthat there is no cause for alarm.

The "Problem" of Science

The Bible makes no assertion of being done ina scientific language. The language of the Bi-ble is phenomenal which means it is descrip-tive. For example, snails would be called,

"crawling things," along with any number ofother creatures that crawl along the ground.

The Bible is a culturally conditioned revela-tion meaning that it was written to communi-cate to people with terms that they understood.Therefore, we don’t need to seek modernscientific theories. Science though can at-tempt to fill in what is found in outline form.

God will often use natural phenomena to bringabout super-scientific events, such as the Ge-nesis Flood. In Genesis 7:11, the verb in thephrase "all the fountains of the great deepburst open" is in a passive voice and is moreaccurately translated "were burst open" indi-cating that it was done by an outside force. Inthe 1990's, the theory has been advanced byscience that a meteor or comet hit the earthand caused the extinction of the dinosaurs,"millions and millions" of years ago. DonaldWesley Patten wrote a book in 1966 calledThe Biblical Flood and the Ice Epoch that de-scribes in detail a model for just such anevent. Patten's scientific model fits the Bibli-cal description. Where the Bible touches onscience, we are assured accuracy.

Since God is eternal and Creation is temporal,it should be clear that space, time energy, mat-ter, the material and the immaterial are allsubordinate to God (Col 1:17). God is notbound by any law higher than Himself (Heb6:13).

Science can only generalize how God worksin some places at some times (2Pet3:4).

Any scientific law only talks about how Goddid act at certain times and places, not how Hemust act at all times and places. Any scientif-ic law doesn’t find God and is not a law forGod but only a normal expression of man forthat condition. If God reveals that He acted insome way at some time at some point contraryto how He usually acts, this supersedes anyscientific law

Hermeneutics 19

Although science can be trusted in most cases(and should be), whenever we have outsideauthoritative revelation from God we arebound to trust the Word of God instead ofman's beliefs.

For Personal Study

1. Describe the difference between infallibili-ty and inerrancy.

2. What does belief in inerrancy lead us toaffirm?

3. Seek to explain how the Theologianshould view science.

Lesson 11

Types, Symbols And Parables

Introduction

There is a clear cut justification for typologyeven though the critics claim it is forced ex-egesis or interpretation. Typology shows therelationship of the Old Testament with theNew Testament. The prophetic elements ofScripture may be verbally predictive or thefuture may be displayed in types.

Typological interpretation is based on unity ofthe two Testaments. The Lord’s use of OldTestament invites us to find Him in the pagesof the ancient Scriptures.

There is a distinct vocabulary found in theNew Testament that references the Old Tes-tament. The Greek word HUPODEIGMAmeans that which is shown privately as an ex-ample or pattern. TUPOS is an impressionthat is left from the blow of a hammer. SKIAis a shadow or the outline cast by a real object.PARABOL8 means to place side-by-side as acomparison. An EIKWN refers to an imagelike found on a coin. An ANTITUPON is acounterpart like an echo. An ALL8GOREWis the speaking of another thing (only in Gal4:24).

Schools Of Typological Interpretation

The early church fathers sought to strengthenNew Testament truth and they used types fromthe Old Testament. Many claim they wereguilty of too much typology. Still others be-lieved that all typology is forced interpretationand hence they believed there was no typolo-gy.

Some, such as Bishop Marsh, believed thatone could only consider something as a type ifit was designated as a type in the New Testa-ment.

The Moderate School of interpretation thoughbelieved that both innate and inferred typesexisted. Solomon Glassius led this school. Hedefined the "innate" types as though that werespecifically declared as such in the New Tes-tament and the inferred types as those thatwere justified by the nature of the New Tes-tament.

An Evaluation Of The Methods

Bishop Marsh’s view becomes too limited, asit is mechanical and artificial. This is the "saf-est" route to pursue but as one studies therichness of Scripture it becomes apparent thatnot everything must be specifically declared tobe a type for it to exist.

The school that believed there were no typescame from a reaction to the allegorists and toliberals, who wanted to give everything a"deeper" meaning.

The Book of Hebrews, while explaining manytypes only points out a small part of the signi-ficance. If the whole is a type then so are itsparts. When the writer of Hebrews points tothe earthly Tabernacle being a type in chapter9:23-25, or the Law being a "shadow" in 10:1,he is clearly inferring that the parts have signi-ficance as well. Too much typology can beavoided by diligent and careful study of theScriptures under the ministry of the Holy Spi-rit.

Typological interpretation differs greatly fromallegorical interpretation in that Allegorical

Hermeneutics 20

interpretation introduces something foreigninto the meaning, whereas Typological inter-pretation has limits that are set by the natureof the type.

The Nature And Interpretation Of Types

The interpretation of a type depends on thenature of the type. A type is a preordainedrepresentative relationship that certain per-sons, events and institutions of the Old Testa-ment bear to corresponding persons, eventsand institutions in the New Testament. Theremust be a genuine resemblance in form or ideabetween the Old Testament and the New Tes-tament. The resemblance must either be des-ignated innately or have a clear inference.Dissimilarity is to be expected, but the truth isfound at the point of similarity. One must de-termine how the New Testament treats thesubject.

Types are inherently prophetic by their verynature as they point to the reality. Some of themistakes of the Christian Allegorists couldhave been avoided had they not gone beyondsimple common sense. An important principleis to not attempt to prove any doctrine or posi-tion from types unless there is clear New Tes-tament authority. Types are illustrations ofwhat would come.

There are several different kinds of types.Types of Persons would include such peopleas Adam because Jesus Christ is called the"last Adam (1 Cor 15:45)." InstitutionalTypes would include the Sacrifices, Feasts,and Promised Land. Types concerning Offic-es would include Moses as the Lawgiver andProphet, Aaron as a type of the High Priestand Melchizedek as a picture of the newpriesthood of Jesus Christ. Events such as theCrossing of the Red Sea and the WildernessWanderings are pictures for us to learn from(1 Cor 10:6). Actions can also be types suchas the lifting up of brazen serpent (Nu 21:9 cf.John 3:14) and Things such as the Tabernacle(Heb 9:23-25).

The Interpretation Of Symbols

A symbol may represent a thing either past,present or future whereas a type inherentlyrepresents the future. A symbol has no inhe-rent reference to time, but it often can be de-termined by the context. The names of sym-bols have to be understood literally first.Symbols always denote something essentiallydifferent from themselves and yet some re-semblance must be traceable.

There are two elements in a symbol, the men-tal image it represents and the image thatrepresents it. Numerals, metals and colorsmay all be symbols, depending on the contextin which they are found. While all of thesemay have significance within the scope of astudy of the Tabernacle or Temple, they prob-ably have no significance if they are found inan undesignated type. For example, the goldused in the Tabernacle represents Deity, butthe gold that used as a medium of exchange ina simple historical transaction would probablyhave no such significance.

Symbols are usually explained somewhere inScripture, so uninterpreted symbols need to beapproached with caution. The approach is thesame as for the interpretation of types. Spe-cial consideration must also be given to thecontext. Cross-references need to be diligent-ly checked. The nature of the symbol must beconsidered, such as the "Lion" of the Tribe ofJudah. There will be similarities and dissimi-larities. Truth is found in the similarities.

We must be especially careful of readingmeanings from our culture into the symbols.If the symbol is in a prophetic context, thenthe symbol may indeed be referring to some-thing from that prophetic culture, but again,caution must be exercised and doctrine mustnot be built on the interpretation of symbols.Doctrines should be built on hard evidencefrom the Word of God and not from the opi-nions of man.

Hermeneutics 21

In the study of symbols we should be aware of"Double Imagery," where a symbol has morethan one meaning. Jesus Christ is a "Lion"(Rev 5:5) and Satan is "like a lion (1 Pet 5:8)."We must guide ourselves by the General Prin-ciples of Interpretation. One entity may berepresented by more than one symbol as isevident in the many symbols that are used todescribe the Lord Jesus Christ, such as the"Lion" of the Tribe of Judah of Revelation 5:5and the "Bright Morning Star" of Revelation22:16.

We should also recognize that there is somesymbolism in numbers, but this is easilyabused. Let General Hermeneutics again bethe guide.

Realize that each symbol has only one signifi-cant meaning and always has the same funda-mental meaning.

The symbols represented in Scripture are abasis for further studies.

The Interpretation Of Parables

A Parable is a narrative that is constructed forthe sake of conveying important truth. It isinherently figurative language that draws anillustration from life to teach spiritual truth.

When studying parables we should seek todetermine the central truth of the parable. Partof doing this is to look for contextual clues tohelp in the interpretation, namely, look to seeif the Lord states the central principle that Hewanted to communicate and then uses a para-ble to illustrate the principle. We should alsolook carefully to determine how much of theparable Christ interpreted Himself, separatingthe essential from what is only attendant to thetheme.

We also note the time period for which theLord designed the parable. Parables shouldnot be made the primary or sole source for adoctrine. There should be a solid backingfrom elsewhere in Scripture.

For Personal Study

1. Why do we recognize Typological inter-pretation?

2. Consider the different schools of interpre-tation of types and tell why you wouldhold the position you do.

3. What is at the core of the interpretation oftypes?

4. Even though types are inherently propheticby their very nature, what must we becareful of?

5. List and consider the different kinds oftypes.

6. Explain the difference between types andsymbols.

7. What are the two main elements of a sym-bol?

8. Explain the importance of culture on theinterpretation of symbols.

9. Explain what is meant by "double im-agery."

10. What is a parable designed to do?

11. What is the main thing we are to look forin parables?

12. What cautions would you give to thoseinterpreting parables?

Lesson 12

The Interpretation Of Prophecy

Prophecy predicts by the Word while Typolo-gy predicts by the institution, act or person.Prophecy foretells an event while typologyprefigures it.

The interpretation of prophecy is one of themost difficult areas of Scripture. Prophecy isoften clothed in highly symbolic and typologi-cal vocabulary. There are principles to follow,but no formulas. Interpreting prophecy is likeputting together a puzzle. Each piece is im-portant and the lack of some pieces can give a

Hermeneutics 22

distorted picture. The vocabulary is not easy.The historical setting is often difficult to find.Sometimes, key words in Hebrew, Aramaic orGreek are used only once in all of Scriptureand their meanings are open to question. Anincorrectly interpreted type or symbol, or onedistorted for the personal fame of the studentcan distort the entire picture. We in effectmust look for the chronological control versesand then seek to fill in the blanks. The bulkof information is overwhelming. Just add upthe number of chapters in the prophetic booksand compare that to the 1,189 chapters inScripture. Even if we do not include otherprophetic references, we can easily see thatalmost 25% of the Scriptures are prophetic innature. It is also amazing to realize that oftenwe must look at prophecy that has been ful-filled in order to see how the original prophe-cy was intended. The study of prophecy is noteasy, but it is rewarding (Rev 1:3).

The principles of the interpretation of Biblicalprophecy must recognize the literal fulfillmentof the Word of God, paying careful attentionto the grammar and the historical setting. Allother prophecies in the Bible, especially thoseconcerning the cross of Jesus Christ had a lit-eral fulfillment, so why should we expect any-thing different for the balance of prophecy yetto be fulfilled? The Lord Jesus Christ Himselfsaid that "Heaven and earth will pass away,but My words will not pass away (Mark13:31)." This carries a clearcut implicationthat the Lord's words will be literally fulfilled,even though it may be cloaked in highly figur-ative language. Often times there is confusionin the terminology that is used. The "Literal"School of Interpretation recognizes types andsymbols and means that the predicted eventswill be literally fulfilled. Some would arguethat this is not being truly literal. A simplereading of the Song of Solomon though shouldlet one realize that symbolic language is clear-ly employed in the Scriptures. We must becareful of allegorizing passages that are clear-

ly prophetic in nature. We do not want to readour thoughts and viewpoints into the passage,but instead determine what God wants us toknow.

We should seek to determine the exact mean-ings of the words that are used from the origi-nal languages. Many problems are cleared upwhen we take the simplest meaning of thewords and avoid trying to read things intothem. We must recognize the use of figurativelanguage in the revelation of prophecy. Eventhough there is figurative language, onceagain, it will still have a literal fulfillment,since the figurative is a "shadow" of the reali-ty it represents (Heb 10:1-14).

In seeking to interpret literally we must paycareful attention to the historical setting inwhich the prophecy was given. It is thereforeextremely important to know chronology andthe specified time frames of history. Literalinterpretation means that the prophecy willhave a literal fulfillment. Thus, when theLord says that He will "come again," it refersto a literal return-not just "in the hearts ofmen."

We must realize that there is a harmony inprophecy as God is not a God of confusion (1Cor 14:33). Where harmony does not existbetween various passages, we must have thehumility to shift our understanding and see the"picture" from a different perspective, by al-lowing our picture to include those pieces.Prophecy does not shift with our ideas, pers-pectives or desires. It is from God. We mustbe the ones willing to make the changes. Sad-ly, history is full of examples of people whodeveloped a system and then held on to it atall costs-in spite of overwhelming evidence tothe contrary. Just consider the Pharisees.

The harmony of prophecy inherently involvesthe comparison of Scripture with Scripture. Aspecific event may be described in many dif-ferent places in the Bible. For example, theend-time entity of Babylon (Rev 17-18) is also

Hermeneutics 23

discussed in detail in Isaiah 13 and 47 and Je-remiah 50-51. Many people try to go to aprophetic book and interpret it as a finished,complete unit. While major points may begiven in that book, there are frequently manyother passages that fill in the details. Wetherefore must be very careful of what we de-velop and hold up as "doctrine." Jesus Christsaid that He will return (John 14:1-3). That isdoctrine. Whether it is Pre-Tribulational,Mid-Tribulational, Post-Tribulational, Pre-wrath or whatever other position may be pre-sented, these are conclusions that are drawnby men based on how they see the evidence.The author, for example, holds very strongconvictions that the Rapture of the Churchwill occur before the Tribulation, and firmlybelieves that that is what the evidence teaches,but because I or you hold a certain positiondoes not mean that it is provable beyond anydoubt.

Since the entirety of God's Word revolvesaround His Son, Jesus Christ, it is essential tointerpret Christologically (1 Pet 1:10-1). Thismeans that we should realize that Jesus Christis at the center of all theology and all history.We are told that, "His testimony is the spirit ofprophecy (Rev 19:10." History is indeed "HisStory" and is the unveiling of the Lord JesusChrist. Prophecy is focused on that fact. If wecannot explain His relationship to the positionwe have taken, then the position needs to bereconsidered.

Prophecy must also recognize the fact thatGod has ordained different time frames calledDispensations, in which certain methods aredifferent. For example, in the second andthird chapters of Revelation, there are letterswritten to seven different churches. Begin-ning with Chapter 4 all the way through Chap-ter 18, the church is not mentioned. Factssuch as these must be considered when inter-preting those chapters.

Another very important factor in the interpre-tation of prophecy is that we must determine ifa given prophecy is fulfilled in the part, thewhole or not at all. If it is totally fulfilled, itneed not be repeated. If it is partially fulfilled,then it makes sense that the Lord will bringabout similar circumstances so that the bal-ance of the prophecy might be completed.After all, God is truth (Isa 65:16) and HisWords are truth (2 Sam 7:28), so what He hashad written must be literally true. If theprophecy is not yet fulfilled, then it will be.

Also widely recognized by those who diligent-ly study prophecy is the principle of DoubleReference. This involves two events that arewidely separated in time and may be broughttogether in a single reference. The Lord Him-self pointed this out when He read from Isaiahand said that today "this Scripture has beenfulfilled in your hearing (Luke 4:21)." He isquoting from Isaiah 61:1-2, but if you will no-tice that He did not say the next phrase inIsaiah had been fulfilled. It says, "and the dayof vengeance of our God," which is a refer-ence to His Second Coming. God is notbound by time and sees the "end from the be-ginning (Rev 21:6; 22:13)," so it is not a prob-lem for Him to include two events in oneprophecy.

A final point to recognize in the interpretationof the prophetic word is that we must not onlylook for similarities in events, but for differ-ences. The differences may often lead us toconclude that there are two events in view andnot one. The return of the Lord is a good ex-ample. We are told in one passage that thesaints will "meet Him in the air (1 Thes 4:13-18)." In another passage, we are told that,"His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives,"and it will split in two and He will go forththen to fight (Zech 14:1-5). In putting togeth-er the puzzle of the prophetic word, we mustconsider the differences.

Hermeneutics 24

For Personal Study

1. What are some of the factors that make theinterpretation of prophecy one of the mostdifficult areas in the Scriptures?

2. What reasons lead us to expect a literalfulfillment of prophecy?

3. What is essential in finding the harmonyof prophecy?

4. Who should we find at the center of theprophetic word?

5. What role does "Dispensations" play in thestudy of prophecy?

6. Why is it important to determine the de-gree of fulfillment if a given prophecy?

7. Why is it important to look for differencesin prophetic events?

Lesson 13

The Use Of The Old Testament In The NewTestament

The Use Of The Law In The New Testament

There exists a correct use of the Mosaic Lawin the Church Age even though we are not un-der the Law. In First Timothy we are told that"we know the Law is good, if one uses it law-fully, realizing the fact that law is not madefor a righteous man, but for those who arelawless and rebellious, for the ungodly andsinners, for the unholy and profane, for thosewho kill their fathers or mothers, for murder-ers and immoral men and homosexuals andkidnappers and liars and perjurers, and what-ever else is contrary to sound teaching (1Tim1:8-10)." We are also told in Romans 6:14-15that, "sin shall not be master over you, for youare not under law, but under grace. Whatthen? Shall we sin because we are not underlaw but under grace? May it never be!" Wemust seek how to lawfully use The MosaicLaw.

The Law was designed to show our need forthe grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and to proc-laim Him (John 5:39-47). The Law was alsodesigned to teach us so that we may be led toChrist and be justified by faith (Gal 3:24-25).

The entirety of the Law and the Prophets weredesigned to get mankind to fulfill the TwoGreatest Commandments, to love God withevery part of their being and to love theirneighbor as themselves (Matt 22:36-40). Theprinciples gleaned can teach us about fulfillingthese commandments. In Galatians 5:14 weare told that, "the whole Law is fulfilled in oneword, in the {statement}, "You shall love yourneighbor as yourself," and in Matthew 7:12we are instructed that, "however you wantpeople to treat you, so treat them, for this isthe Law and the Prophets." It is quite clearthat the Law has value, but it is also quiteclear that we are no longer under the specificsof it.

There are several categories of the Law thatare found in the word including the Sacrifices,the Feasts, the Dietary Code, the HygieneCode, the Social Code, the National Code, theTabernacle Code and the Ten Command-ments.

Several of these categories have been directlyand specifically removed. For example, theSacrificial system is no longer to be observedbecause Jesus Christ offered the "one sacrificefor all time (Heb 10:8-13)." The obser-vance of Feasts was also removed as law be-cause they were "but a mere shadow of JesusChrist (Col 2:16-17)." Jesus Himself declaredthat all foods were now clean in Mark 7:19,thus removing the Dietary Code (see also Acts11:1-9 and Col 2:20-23). The Hygiene Codewith all of its specific instructions is also gone(Col 2:16-23) as well as the Tabernacle Code.When Jesus Christ entered into the true hea-venly tabernacle, there was no longer a needfor the earthly one which was but a type of thereality (Heb 9:24).

Hermeneutics 25

Categories of the Law that are not specificallydeleted are still gone under the fact that theywere fulfilled in Jesus Christ. There are prin-ciples to be learned from the Social Codewhich includes "loving your neighbor as your-self (Gal 5:14)," but they are part of the "newcommandment (John 13:34-35)" that shouldbe done out of love for our master, not be-cause they are law.

The National Code teaches principles of righ-teous government and thus much can belearned. The principles of the Ten Com-mandments with the exception of the Sabbathday (Col 2:16) are all retained in the New Tes-tament. This is an excellent exercise for thestudent of the Word of God to go through.

The "lawful use of the Law" means that itmust be used in accordance with its design. Itwas never designed to eternally save the soulfrom death, but was in fact designed to teachus that we need a Savior (Gal 3:24). The Lawalso taught us about sin and actually definedsin, because "where there is no law, sin is notimputed (Rom 5:13)." The Law was neverdesigned to be the foundation or that whichmotivates the righteous man. Love is to be thefoundation of our life (John 14:15,21,23).

No ritual or punishment has been retained inthe Church Age. This does not give us a "li-cense to sin," but instead a "license to serve(Gal 5:13)." When we walk according to theHoly Spirit we are fulfilling the Law. This ismade clear in Romans 8:2-4, which declares,"For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesushas set you free from the law of sin and ofdeath. For what the Law could not do, weakas it was through the flesh, God did: sendingHis own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh andas an offering for sin, He condemned sin inthe flesh, in order that the requirement of theLaw might be fulfilled in us, who do not walkaccording to the flesh, but according to theSpirit."

Hermeneutics Of Old Testament Quotations

The first thing that we must determine in anexamination of an Old Testament quotationfound in the New Testament is whether or notit is an exact quotation from the Old Testa-ment or if it is quoted from the Septuagint(The Greek translation of the Hebrew OldTestament, also seen as the "LXX"). We mustalso realize that the quotation could be a pa-raphrase. In short, this means we must deter-mine if there are any differences in the NewTestament quotation from the original OldTestament Scripture.

The next step we must take is to note the con-text of the cited passage. From this we candetermine whether the New Testament quota-tion interprets the Old Testament passage, isan application of the passage or simply an il-lustration.

If the Septuagint is quoted, Inspiration guaran-tees that the Septuagint translation is correctfor the quoted portion of Scripture, but it doesnot mean the Septuagint was inspired at thatpoint.

Paraphrases refer to legitimate applications ofthe Old Testament passage and may or maynot be the interpretation of it.

For Personal Study

1. What New Testament Passage Tells UsThat There Is A "Lawful" Use Of TheLaw?

2. Why Was The Law Designed And WhatAre The Proof Texts?

3. Find The Ten Commandments In TheNew Testament.

4. What Is The "Lawful Use Of The Law."

5. What May We Find In A New TestamentQuotation Of An Old Testament Passage?

Hermeneutics 26

Lesson 14

The Hermeneutics Of Logic

Logic is by definition the rules of non-contradiction and correct reasoning. Eventhough attempts to use logic throughout thehistory of the church have gotten people intotrouble and caused divisions, nevertheless, itis a valuable tool for our understanding.

Deductive Reasoning occurs when a necessaryconclusion is drawn from one or more state-ments. For the conclusion to be correct, bothof the statements have to be correct. For ex-ample, from the statements, "All life requireswater," and "There is no water on the moon,"one can deduct that, "there is no life on themoon." The truth of the deductive conclusiondepends on the truth of the statements fromwhich it is drawn. A deduction can prove on-ly that if certain things are true, then certainthings will follow.

Inductive Reasoning involves the observanceof all possible cases and then assumes it is truein the other cases that have not been tested.Needless to say, this type of reasoning is muchless certain than deductive reasoning. For ex-ample, the observation that heat expands iron,gold and platinum might lead one to believethat heat expands all metals. Each metal mustbe tested though in order to be certain.

The expression of a logical argument in aformal way is called a "Syllogism." Logic isdivided into Concepts, Propositions and Ar-guments.

Defined words are used to define a concept.Concepts are derived by words that are used toform further definitions. Propositions declarewhat we intend to prove or disprove. They arestatements that our concepts exist in a certainway. Propositions must be stated in terms oftrue or false. Commands, exclamations andquestions do not and cannot express proposi-tions. Propositions are concerned with the

relationship between concepts. They can bewrong either by designation or they can as-cribe to the subject what does not belong tothe subject. For example, to say that, "WorldWar II killed 300 million people," and then tryand to make a deduction from a comparisonwith the statement that, "Noah took two ofeach animal into the ark," will not be fruitful.Both statements may be correct but have noconnection to each other. We can comparepropositions only when they contain the samewords.

Any inferences that we draw from a proposi-tion can be valid only if the proposition istrue. If we consider the proposition, "Allsnakes are poisonous," there are other infe-rences we can consider such as, "No snakesare poisonous," "Some snakes are poisonous,"and, "Some snakes are not poisonous." Whenthe proposition is false though, the truth of thecomparable propositions or inferences is notdeterminable. When we know the truth andfalsity of a given proposition, we can deter-mine the truth and falsity of the inferences

Contradictions are those comparisons thatcommunicate when one thing is true thenanother is false. For example, if it is true thatwe are saved by grace through faith, notworks, then for one to say that we are savedby works is a contradiction to truth. If onestatement is indeed true then then other isfalse. Both cannot be true.

A Superimplication exists when one statementis true and another statement implied from it isalso true. From the universal you can validlyinfer the specific but from the specific youcannot validly infer the universal. For exam-ple if "whoever believes in Jesus Christ shallbe saved (John 3:16), is true (and thank God itis), then since I have believed in Jesus Christit is validly inferred that I am saved.

A Complementary Statement occurs when wesay the same thing in a different way. If wesay that, "very well-educated student of histo-

Hermeneutics 27

ry studies Greek," we can also validly say that,"no well-educated student of history fails tostudy Greek." The statements do not contra-dict but are simply restated.

The reasons that are given for one's deduc-tions and the validity of those deductions arecalled, "Arguments." Conclusions are reachedusing reasoning. They are found throughoutGod's word and they are introduced by manydifferent words such as therefore, so, as a re-sult and the like.

The "most important term" of an argument iscalled the "Predicate." The "minor term" ofthe argument is called the "Subject" and whatappears in both arguments is called the "mid-dle term." For example, take the statements.

Whatever is constitutional is just.

Whatever is decided by the Supreme Courtis constitutional.

The conclusion would be, "Therefore, what-ever is decided by the Supreme Court is just."

In this example, "Whatever is just" is the pre-dicate. ‘Whatever is constitutional is the mid-dle term which does not appear in the conclu-sion and, "Decisions reached" is the subject.The Conclusion is a mediate inference, whichis drawn around the major and minor termsbased on their relationship to the middle term.

For Personal Study

1. What is Logic?

2. Why is it important?

3. What is the difference between deductiveand inductive reasoning?

4. Which one is inherently the most accu-rate?

5. When drawing a conclusion from twopropositions what is imperative for theconclusion to indeed be truth?

Grace Notes is a ministry of Village MissionsInternational, Fredericksburg, Texas

For an index of topics, or information aboutregular Bible studies, write to:

Warren DoudGrace Notes1705 Aggie LaneAustin, Texas 78757E-Mail: wdoud@bga.comURL: http://www.realtime.net/~wdoud/

There is no charge for Grace Notes materials.The work is supported by Christians who prayfor the ministry and share in the expenses.