SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

AN INTRODUCTION TO HERMENEUTICS OUTLINE OF STUDIES 1. WHY HERMENEUTICS? The word hermeneutics is from the Greek hermeneuo [ ] to explain, interpret, translate. The noun hermeneia [] occurs in 1 Cor.1 !1" and 1#! $. The answer to the %uestion &h' hermeneutics( is strai)htforward e*er' communication en)a)ed in re%uires interpretation. +ea*e aside the discipline of theolo)' for a moment. Communication at e*er' le*el and in e*er' discipline re%uires interpretation. ,essa)es come to us in written form [words, s'm-ols, patterns], in oral form [words, includin) intonation and emphasis], and in acted form [)estures, actions and reactions etc.]. The essence of communication is that such messa)es from the sender are intelli)i-le to the recei*er. This appears at first fairl' strai)htforward, -ut when one considers this in detail, one -ecomes aware of its )reat complexit'. .-*ious complications in communication include different lan)ua)es and dialects, differences in *oca-ular', the nature of relationship -etween sender and recei*er, cultural di*ersit', and man' more features of human relationships which are potential -arriers to clear and )ood communication. Consider the followin)! /*er' person interprets indi*iduall' and differentl' from others [uni%uel'] 0nterpretation is in*ol*ed in e*er' means of communication words, )esture, tone etc. How a messa)e is expressed is part of all communication1 how it is written, said, indicated &ritten communication ma' -e formal or informal1 conciliator' or confrontational etc. 2o piece of writin) interprets itself with complete precision1 words ha*e a ran)e of meanin) 3cripture is Gods word to us in written form 0t is a-solutel' imperati*e therefore that we interpret it correctl' so that we o-e' ri)htl' &hene*er we read or hear Gods word read to us we must interpret in order to recei*e Gods messa)e to us 4esus hi)hli)hted misinterpretation of the 3criptures! ,att. ! 51 4ohn 6!789#"

0t is recorded that one :frican tri-e took the in;unction of <hil.7! literall' =eware of do)s> and -anished the animals from their li*es. The' did not interpret the command in its context, for the next phrase explains what <aul meant do)s was a fi)urati*e term for the false teachers who threatened their spiritual health? Why do we need su h !"#n #$%es o& '#(%# )% In*e"$"e*)*#on?

JB/2008

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

0f it is important how we understand each other in our man9to9man communication, it is of the utmost importance that we understand accuratel' and correctl' the God9to9man communication in 3cripture. This is the aim of hermeneutics to esta-lish and appl' )ood and sound principles of interpretation to 3cripture, Gods word, so that we ma' -oth know the truth and do the truth. )+ 'e )use o& *he o,$%e-#*#es o& S "#$*u"e The =i-le is not one -ook -ut $$ -ooks 0t comes to us as translation from the ori)inal lan)ua)es which is an immediate complication 0t was written down -' man' authors [c.#"] o*er a lon) period of time [c.16"" 'ears] +an)ua)e, culture, institutions chan)ed si)nificantl' o*er that period of time There are man' st'les and forms of writin) in 3cripture poetr', prose, histor', pro*er-, para-le, prophec' all callin) for appropriate understandin) and interpretation The messa)e of the =i-le writers to their da' calls for careful interpretation if it is to -e applied meanin)full' and correctl' to our da' (+ 'e )use o& *he we).nesses o& hu,)n n)*u"e ,an is finite, limited in knowled)e and understandin) cannot )rasp the scope of di*ine re*elation ,an is fallen, so that his mind and thou)ht processes are warped -' sin @e comes to wron) conclusions -ecause of his fault' thinkin) @e comes to 3cripture with his own whims and pre;udices not a -lank slate @e reads into passa)es thin)s that are not contained in it eise)esis not exe)esis @e reads -ack into 3cripture what -elon)s to a later period or era disre)ards the pro)ress of 3criptural re*elation @e reads forward and imposes later fulfilment which was hidden from the first readers @e spiritualiAes what is meant to -e literal and literaliAes what is meant to -e spiritual

Befinin) correct principles of interpretation, and appl'in) these to the stud' of 3cripture, helps to counteract the effects of mans finitude and sin in misinterpretin) and misappl'in) 3cripture truth. + 'e )use o& *he o,$%e-#*#es o& %)n/u)/e #*se%& ,ost -elie*ers read and use translations of the ori)inal Translation is an extremel' complex -usiness -ecause no word in one lan)ua)e has exactl' the same ran)e of meanin) as the e%ui*alent word in another lan)ua)e.

JB/2008

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

+an)ua)e is used in a *ariet' of wa's literall', fi)urati*el', s'm-olicall', alle)oricall' etc. +an)ua)e is a li*in) thin) constantl' de*elopin) and chan)in) [e.). let, pre*ent] There are man' instances when written words, sentences and para)raphs are open to different interpretations

0. TRANSLATION AND INTER!RETATION &hat God )a*e to men in special re*elation the' wrote down. &e do not ha*e the ori)inal mss or auto)raphs as the' are called. &hat we possess is the result of *er' careful cop'in) down throu)h the centuries, and also translation into man' lan)ua)es. The task of the =i-le scholar, teacher and preacher, and indeed e*er' Christian is to disco*er first of all the meanin) of a passa)e for the one who wrote it down, and for those for whom it was first written. This is a fundamental principle, and it underlies all that we do in the discipline of hermeneutics. The text must -e understood in the li)ht of its ori)inal context -efore an' further application can le)itimatel' -e made. The difficult' alread' pinpointed re)ardin) workin) from translations is intensified when we realiAe that to some extent translators are also interpreters. 0n referenced editions of the =i-le there are footnotes indicatin) that in some places a word or phrase is uncertain. There ma' -e *arious reasons for this *ariant readin)s1 peculiar words or terms which scholars cannot identif' etc. :t such points translators must decide what the' offer as a translation. 0f the termCsD themsel*es are uncertain then meanin) must -e sou)ht from the context [historical, )eo)raphical, cultural, theolo)ical], from other occurrences of the term, and with a *iew to makin) the -est sense of the whole passa)e. The translator can onl' function as he interprets meanin), and then attempts to con*e' that in the lan)ua)e in which he is workin). @e must attempt to think himself into the writers thou)hts, and write so that the reader recei*es the messa)e as accuratel' as possi-le. Translators use a num-er of different methods to tr' to achie*e this. :lthou)h different translations ma;or on one of these methods, in fact all three are used, and indeed must -e used, if sensi-le translation is to -e achie*ed. )+ L#*e")% wo"d1&o"1wo"d *")ns%)*#on This can onl' take place as far as the words in their order make sense in the lan)ua)e to which translation is made. Complete word9for9word translation is impossi-le, as an' elementar' stud' of lan)ua)e immediatel' shows. &ord order in German, for example, with its split *er-s, could not -e translated sensi-l' into /n)lish. 3imilarl' with Erench, and its ha-it of placin) ad;ecti*es after the noun, instead of -efore in /n)lish. Eurthermore all lan)ua)es in*ol*e the fi)urati*e use of words
JB/2008

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

and phrases, and these make little or no sense in translation. There are also fi)ures of speech which are peculiar to particular lan)ua)es, and whose meanin) is culturall' controlled. (+ Dyn),# E2u#3)%en e The aim of this approach is to put the ori)inal thou)hts and ideas into a *ital [d'namic] form of the lan)ua)e, takin) into account modern meanin) and word usa)e etc. :nti%uated words, or words ;ud)ed to -e used in an o-scure or anti%uated manner, are not translated literall', -ut d'namicall' i.e. )i*in) the percei*ed meanin) of the term in its context, rather than )i*in) its literal meanin). [/.). in 20F! 1 <et 1! #! sarx [lit. flesh] is translated men Gal.6!15! same word translated the sinful nature.] Bifficult to )i*e examples of this in a lan)ua)e 0 do not know. + !)")$h")se This is re)arded -' some as not strictl' translation since the emphasis is on con*e'in) meanin) without fixed connection to the actual words or )rammatical structure used. 0t is sometimes called free paraphrasin) and that indicates that it connects much more loosel' to the actual form of the text than do the other two methods. 0n this approach the translatorGparaphraser -ecomes much more of an interpreter. :lread' with these thin)s in mind we -e)in to see that the interpretation and explanation of =i-le passa)es is not as strai)htforward as it mi)ht at first seem. =ut there are further complexities which ha*e to do with the wa' in which lan)ua)e is used. ,eanin) is si)nificantl' determined -' the kind of literature the technical term is )enre in which the words appear. This is one of the most important of what mi)ht -e called the focii of the interpreter the thin)s he must of necessit' take into consideration in attemptin) an accurate interpretation of an' passa)e. =ut -efore we come to handlin) the text, let us examine another of the focii of hermeneutics the interpreter himself. 4. THE FOCII 5A6 1 THE INTER!RETER 2u)%#&# )*#ons )nd $e"s$e *#3e There are a num-er of %ualities and characteristics which are imperati*e in the child of God who desires to understand andGor to teach the 3criptures correctl'. )+ F)#*h 3ince the =i-le is Gods re*elation to his people, therefore for a true understandin) of it we must ha*e a relationship with the .ne who re*eals himself. True communication is -ased on relationship. The =i-le speaks of faith as the ke' to this relationship. .nl' the one who -elie*es and trusts in God can trul' understand what he sa's in his word. @ow can an' understandin) of the =i-le -e possi-le for someone who denies the existence of God, or re;ects the God of the

JB/2008

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

=i-le, or chooses to construct a )od of their own, takin) or lea*in) from the =i-le what suits their ima)e( Certainl' some understandin) of the =i-le is possi-le for un-elie*ers, -ut it is clear that true understandin) full understandin) as far as that is possi-le for creatures is onl' possi-le throu)h the lens of faith. <aul underlines this in 1 Cor. !1#! The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for the are foo!ishness to him and he cannot understand them, "ecause the are spiritua!! discerned# /xcellence in academic a-ilit', in methodolo)', in lin)uistic skills ma' allow un-elie*ers to produce technicall' accurate commentar' on a passa)e, -ut the spiritual si)nificance of that passa)e is closed to such, -ecause the' are in spiritual darkness. Eaith is foundational for a full comprehension of the 3criptures [H, =, I @ p.J ]. 0t is not the onl' %ualification, nor does it )uarantee correct interpretation, -ut it is the foundation of true interpretation. &ithout faith it is impossi-le to appreciate the =i-les messa)e as Gods word to me. There are man' theolo)ians writin) toda' who do not accept the =i-le as the &ord of God. The' den' the concepts of re*elation and inspiration as claimed -' 3cripture for itself, and therefore treat the =i-le as an' other -ook. The' re;ect miracle, assert that man' of the stories in the =i-le are m'ths or fa-les, and remo*e it from its place of ultimate authorit' for direction in spiritual truth and Christian li*in). 3uch an uns'mpathetic and unaccepta-le approach to 3cripture produces interpretation which is distorted, fault', and often profoundl' erroneous. (+ I%%u,#n)*#on =efore 4esus left his disciples he promised them the Comforter -etter translated Counsellor the @ol' 3pirit. The terms which 4esus used, and the wa' in which he descri-ed the work of the @ol' 3pirit are si)nificant and important 4ohn 1$!6916. @e will come alon)side the followers of 4esus to teach them and )uide them into all truth. .ther aspects of his di*ine acti*it' are descri-ed in this passa)e, -ut at the heart of his work is the re*elation of the truth to the apostles, and the illumination of that truth to e*er' -elie*ers heart and mind. The 3pirit takes what is Christs and re*eals it to Christs disciples. This follows on naturall' from the =i-les teachin) a-out the @ol' 3pirits work in sal*ation. @e con*icts of sin1 he points and leads to Christ1 he indwells the -elie*er and seals him until the comin) a)ain of Christ. =ut the @ol' 3pirit is constantl' at work in the life of the -elie*er, transformin) him into the likeness of Christ, and he does that throu)h the re*ealed word of God.

JB/2008

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

+ O(7e *#3#*y 2o indi*idual is a -lank slate as he or she undertakes the task of interpretation. :ll come with presuppositions, con*ictions, and a personal world9*iew. The challen)e of o-;ecti*it' therefore is not an eas' one to meet. Knderstandin) of a text or a passa)e can -e so easil' distorted if the interpreter fails to handle his own personal perspecti*e ade%uatel'. This is one of the reasons wh' the principles of hermeneutics are so *itall' important. :dherence to them will help towards o-;ecti*it', and will insist that all e*idence -e wei)hed and e*aluated as a necessar' part of decidin) on a particular understandin) of a text and therefore of its translation. .-;ecti*it' is aided -' our accounta-ilit' see -elow. 4ust as no 3cripture e*er cam -' pri*ate interpretation, as <eter teaches, so we cannot -e permitted to impose our personal or pri*ate perspecti*es upon it. The @ol' 3pirit mo*ed men to record Gods &ord, and we must -e under the authorit' of the 3pirit as we interpret it and preach it. The mind of the 3pirit is not re*ealed to us in isolation, -ut as mem-ers of Christs -od'. @ow are we to deal with our presuppositions, or preunderstandin)s, which we -rin) with us to the task of interpretation( Boes the presence of these mean that we cannot arri*e at an o-;ecti*e and accurate understandin) of the text( .r does it mean ine*ita-l' a *ariet' of possi-le meanin)s with no one ha*in) more accurac' than another( The short answer to these %uestions is 2o if the interpreter is aware of and correctl' handles his preunderstandin)s. 0n fact these are necessar', and ma' actuall' -e positi*e and helpful. Certain -ack)round knowled)e is desira-le and helpful1 some is essential. 3o is experience of life and experience of Christian li*in). The ke' is to ensure that our preunderstandin)s are put under the =i-lical text. 0n other words, the' must -e tested -' the -i-lical data, and must -e open to ad;ustment if the' are found to -e in contradiction of 3criptures teachin). Take the Ear /astern student who had ne*er seen snow fallin), and whose assumption that somehow it came up from under the )round had to -e ad;usted when she found herself in her first &estern snowfall? @er presuppositions had to -e chan)ed in the li)ht of the e*idence. 3o too, the -elie*er comes to the =i-le with firm presuppositions, -ut these do not constitute -lind faith or unthinkin) acceptance. The' are the clearest and -est explanations of life as we know and experience it. =ut the' must -e open to re9examination and re9testin) in the li)ht of our stud' of 3cripture. @owe*er, our commitment to a hi)h *iew of 3cripture as -ein) the *er' word of God to us, is an irreduci-le. This pro*ides the -oundaries within which our -eliefs and con*ictions will rest. .ur commitment to and -elief in the =i-le as Gods re*elation to us, alwa's )uides and informs our understandin) of it. 0t is a part of our preunderstandin) which is not open to

JB/2008

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

ad;ustment or chan)e. :)ain it is not -lind or unthinkin) acceptance, -ut -elief -ased on the compellin) internal e*idence of 3cripture that it is di*inel' inspired.

d+ Hones*y )nd #n*e/"#*y This has -een also descri-ed as o-edience the willin)ness to put oneself under the text, to su-mit to what it sa's. 0t is distressin) to see those who profess to ha*e a hi)h *iew of 3cripture, imposin) meanin) upon a text or passa)e, rather than allowin) the text to speak for itself. 3uch treatment of the =i-le is dishonest. :nd whate*er else the interpreter, and the preacher and =i-le teacher needs, he must displa' honest' in handlin) 3cripture. inte)rit', and show inte)rit' himself in his treatment of it. There are common pitfalls e*ident in the handlin) of 3cripture -' e*an)elical preachers and teachers. There are also man' errors in the wa' in which li-eral scholars treat 3cripture, -ut that is not our concern in these lectures our concern is for correct interpretation -' those who hold a hi)h *iew of 3cripture. :mon) the pitfalls are the followin). E#se/es#s readin) into a text or passa)e meanin) which is not sustained -' the content of the passa)e. This ma' result from! 1. attemptin) to make the passa)e fit a prepared homiletical framework . expressin) a personal opinion or emphasis which the interpreter -elie*es ou)ht to -e there 7. mouldin) the passa)e to fit an alread' fixed theolo)ical or doctrinal *iewpoint !)"*#)% o" #n o,$%e*e *"e)*,en* the a*oidance of difficult words, phrases, or expressions. :)ain there are *arious reasons for this! e+ A the difficult' or complexit' of the lan)ua)e, concept, or ar)ument the unwillin)ness to deal with sections which apparentl' contradict the interpreters doctrinal position the choice of too lar)e or too complex a passa)e so that ma;or issues are omitted oun*)(#%#*y @e must respect 3criptures

This ma' seem at first a stran)e issue to raise, -ut it is a necessar' one, and its importance is seen in the li)ht of the kind of difficulties and pitfalls alread' descri-ed. The Christian interpreter, teacher, or preacher is and cannot -e an island. @e is part of a communit' of -elie*in) people, and his mem-ership of the -od' of Christ, the Church, impin)es )reatl' upon his work. There is toda' a stron) current of indi*idualism in societ' at lar)e, and sadl' also, in the church. Eor example, church mem-ers feel no compulsion to sta' and commit themsel*es when thin)s are not done the wa' the' would like in church life. There is on the part of man', a resentment when
JB/2008

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

pastor, elders, or ;ust -urdened fellow9mem-ers attempt to ad*ise, )uide or correct, e*en from a =i-lical perspecti*e. &e are inclined to feel that we are responsi-le to no9one else on earth -ut oursel*es, and perhaps our -lood families. @owe*er, as mem-ers of Christs =od', we are inextrica-l' linked to and related to the whole -elie*in) -od', and in particular to the local churches to which we -elon). That mem-ership of the Church must affect the task of interpretation. $e re%uire the enrichment, endea&ours, and assistance of our fe!!ow'"e!ie&ers to chec( our perceptions and to affirm their &a!idit ) The *hurch) offers the arena in which we can formu!ate our interpretation# accounta"i!it guards against ma&eric( and indi&idua!istic interpretations# +,, B - H p#8./ &+ Co""e * /o)%s 0t ma' seem unnecessar' to underline this point, -ut it does need re9statin). The )oal of hermeneutics is effecti*e communication of the truth. 0t is not an end in itself. 0t is not a merel' academic discipline desi)ned to exercise human minds, or spiritual )ift to adorn the life of the Christian scholar. 0t has at its heart communication. 0n this respect it is linked to all other The stud' of -i-lical disciplines of Christian scholarship and stud'. @omiletics the stud' of preachin) and preachin) methods is to make more effecti*e communicators of the Gospel. lan)ua)es is to help and effect true communication. /*en church histor' is to ena-le us to learn lessons, positi*e and ne)ati*e, from the past, in order to li*e and witness more effecti*el' in our da'. @andlin) 3cripture, and in particular the discipline of exe)esis )ettin) at the meanin) of the passa)e demands hard work. :ll too often preachers are content to skim the surface of a 3cripture passa)e, and are not prepared for the concentrated effort that is necessar' to )et to the heart of a passa)e, and then to understand how its teachin) and principles appl' toda'. The )oal therefore is correct interpretation to ena-le effecti*e communication, and rele*ant application of 3cripture to the li*es of -elie*ers and un-elie*ers in our respecti*e cultures and communities. THE FOCII 5'6 THE LITERATURE 8en"es o& *he O%d )nd New Tes*),en*s THE OLD TESTAMENT The 75 -ooks of the .ld Testament contain a considera-le *ariet' of t'pe or )enre of literature. These are usuall' reco)niAed as!
JB/2008

Such

<rose or 2arrati*e +aw

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

<oetr' &isdom <rophec' 3ome of these are chronolo)icall'

&ithin each of these )enres there are further *ariations.

related, that is to sa', the passa)e of time has -rou)ht its own *ariation [cf. the fact that poetr' of the 1Jthc in the /n)lish speakin) world is *er' different from that of the " thc. 3ome are due to the su-;ect matter a lo*e son) or poem is *er' different from a war son). There are different t'pes of law and le)al material. <rose narrati*e ma' co*er famil' histor', clan or national histor', reports, personal memories and accounts. There are different t'pes of prophetic and wisdom material also. The *ariations seem endless and are complex, -ut it is *ital that we reco)nise at least the ma;or cate)ories and their main features. THE NEW TESTAMENT +ikewise the 2ew Testament includes a *ariet' of approaches and t'pes of writin), some of which is in fact uni%ue to the 2T. aD Gospels -D @istor' cD +etters dD <rophec' and :pocal'ptic &ithin each of these cate)ories there are also su-9)roups and a *ariet' of forms of writin), all of which demand careful attention when the' are the o-;ect of our attempts at interpretation. &e will return to these in more detail as we examine the principles of interpretation for each )enre. THE FOCII 5C6 THE AUDIENCE u%*u"e9 () ./"ound9 )**#*ude The purpose of the discipline of hermeneutics is at root, effecti*e communication? The need to communicate the word of God accuratel' and truthfull' is paramount for the Christian preacher and teacher. That communication must take into account the audience those who listen and hear. 0t has -een pointed out that communication takes place throu)h a num-er of filters. There is text itself, and then the person who wrote it, with all his cultural, reli)ious and social -ack)round and up-rin)in). There is the filter of the translator who is not a -lank slate, -ut who comes to the text with his own world9*iew1 there is the preacherGteacher1 and there is also the audience. The' come to listen with preconcei*ed ideas, some )ood and accurate, others perhaps not so? The word of God must -e communicated to them in terms which they understand -ut which at the same time reflect trul' the written record.

JB/2008

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

Take a)ain the example of <aul at :thens. /*en the -asic concept of )od was one which needed correction and clarification in the minds of the :thenians. &hat the' concei*ed of as di*ine and what <aul -elie*ed were diametricall' opposed, so in <auls address he aimed at correctin) their mistaken notions he knew he could not simpl' declare that )od did or said this or that, for their pa)an concept of the di*ine would immediatel' ha*e distorted what he was tr'in) to teach them. The concept of ,essiah to the 4ews of 4esus da' was *er' different from that of 4esus himself. 0t was necessar' for 4esus to clarif' his role as ,essiah in contrast to the mostl' political expectations of contemporar' 4ews. @is claims appeared to the 4ews preposterous -ecause the' flew in the face of their preconcei*ed ideas. 0nterpretation was necessar' therefore, takin) into account the erroneous ideas of those to whom 4esus spoke. 0n the same wa' 4ohn the =aptist was a-le to use 4ewish reli)ious concepts and understandin) to make clear and positi*e statements a-out 4esus and his role as 3a*iour. &hen he declared! +ook? The +am- of God who takes awa' the sin of the world he was -uildin) on the 4ews knowled)e of the sacrificial s'stem and its s'm-olism. The writer to the @e-rews presumed knowled)e of the same sacrificial s'stem as he wrote to scattered 4ewish Christian -elie*ers. Cultural and reli)ious herita)e can -e a help also in interpretation and communication. This will -ecome clear as we examine specific principles which ou)ht to )o*ern our interpretation of 3cripture in its *arious forms. :. THE IM!ORTANCE OF CONTE;T The common complaint of pu-lic fi)ures that their remarks ha*e -een taken out of context. The confusin) andGor de*astatin) effects of such a practice, -ecause context will often determine not merel' the meanin) of a sentence -ut the meanin) of a word. 0n normal con*ersation we usuall' understand immediatel' what is -ein) said, without a )reat deal of thou)ht, -ecause we are part of the whole context of that con*ersation, and we pick up other si)nals and cues which ha*e to do not merel' with what is said, -ut with how it is said strictl' speakin) what we mi)ht call non9*er-al communication. &ords, as we ha*e noticed -efore ha*e a Lran)eM of meanin), technicall' a semantic ran)e. 3emantics is that part of philolo)' which has to do with the stud' of word meanin)s. 3o the same word used in different contexts can ha*e widel' differin) meanin)s. Hlein, =lom-er) I @u--ard cite a *i*id example of this the short sentence! LThat was the lar)est trunk 0 e*er saw?M Befine the word LtrunkM in this sentence. To what does it refer( &hat does it descri-e(
JB/2008

: piece of lu))a)e(

10

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

: part of an animal( : dimension of a tree( : part of an :merican car(

The exact meanin) of the word will -e clear when the context of the sentence is clear. [cf. in Nussian the same word can -e translated le) or foot.] Choose an' word 'ou like and see if 'ou can find a Lran)eM of meanin) for it. <ut it into different contexts and see how its meanin) chan)es. This is ;ust one dimension of context, what is termed Lliterar' contextM as distinct from historical, cultural, )eo)raphical, reli)ious contexts. Hlein etc. hi)hli)ht three *ital functions of literar' context. )+ Con*e-* $"o3#des &%ow o& *hou/h* =' Lflow of thou)htM is meant that series of sentences -' which a speaker or writer makes a *alid, lo)ical point, ar)ument or description. :n' meanin)ful con*ersation or piece of literature will ha*e a LflowM a direction, a lo)ical pro)ression. .ne statement prepares the wa' for what comes after it, and flows out of what comes -efore. : random collection of statements strun) to)ether can add up to complete nonsense. Grammaticall' the indi*idual sentences ma' -e perfectl' correct, -ut if there is no link or LflowM then the' are illo)ical and meanin)less. [@ence the stress on )ettin) the core meanin) or the L-i) ideaM of a 3cripture passa)e?] (+ Con*e-* $"o3#des ) u")*e ,e)n#n/ o& wo"ds

&e ha*e alread' seen somethin) of this and its importance. : word or phrase in isolation ma' -' its *a)ueness demand that we )i*e it precise thou)ht, or ask for clearer definition. =ut heard or communicated in its lar)er context, it will -e assimilated usuall' without an' difficult' whatsoe*er. 0t is important to realise that interpreters are not free to choose an' meanin) the' like from a ran)e of meanin) of the words which the' handle1 each must -e understood in the context of and in consistenc' with the other ideas expressed in the con*ersation or piece of literature. 0f this does not happen, then meanin)ful communication is impossi-le. + Con*e-* de%#ne)*es o""e * "e%)*#onsh#$s ),on/ un#*s &ith reference to 3cripture we are all aware that =i-lical -ooks were written and preser*ed as complete documents, notwithstandin) the so9called assured results of source, redaction, and other kinds of criticism. =i-lical writers penned sentences and para)raphs as parts of lar)er documents. =i-le *erses are not isolated, independent units the' are part of somethin) -i))er, and must -e understood in their relationship to the whole. This is true e*en of -ooks of the -i-le in which there are collections of sa'in)s etc. e.). <ro*er-s. Hlein etc. writes!

JB/2008

11

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

L/*en here [in <ro*er-s] where the immediate literar' context -efore and after a )i*en pro*er- ma' )i*e little help in understandin) the meanin), the context of the whole -ook -ecomes particularl' important -ecause the writer scattered man' pro*er-s on the same topic throu)hout the -ook. Thus the com-ined teachin) of the -ook on each theme -ecomes the ke' to understandin) the indi*idual wisdom sa'in).M [p.165] :s we stru))le in our work of exe)esis to delineate *alid pericopes or sections in -ooks and letters, we are often not helped -' the chapter and *erse di*isions of our modern =i-les. 0t must -e remem-ered that these were not part of the ori)inal auto)raphs, and that the' not onl' interrupt unnecessaril' the flow of an ar)ument at times, -ut ma' contri-ute to a dan)erous mindset in the reader, where-' indi*idual *erses are ele*ated to the status of indi*idual units of thou)ht, thus destro'in) the authors intended flow9of9thou)ht. d+ Th"ee 3#*)% $"#n #$%es "e%)*#n/ *o on*e-* 0. Knderstand and interpret each statement accordin) to its natural meanin) in the literar' context in which it is found. Texts are part of lar)er passa)es1 and passa)es are part of the whole. The interpreter must keep in mind the literar' work as a whole in order that indi*idual words, phrases and sentences can -e plainl' understood. 00. : text without a context is a pretext. This is related to and follows on from a-o*e. There is a )reat dan)er in proof9textin) i.e. pullin) a text out of its context in order to pro*e a truth or a doctrine. &ith such practice one could make the =i-le sa' an'thin) e*en to the point of atheism There is no God? The immediate context has -een i)nored The fool has said in his heart LThere is no GodM resultin) in a totall' false and ridiculous outcome. This pretext o-scures and in fact contradicts the truth. 000. The smaller the periscope [3cripture portion] the )reater the scope for error. : short phrase or sentence contains in itself *er' little information a-out the )eneral theme of a passa)e or -ook. 3o there is less corro-oratin) e*idence for an' proposed interpretation1 less of a self9 check as it mi)ht -e called. 3urroundin) context pro*ides details and a line of ar)ument and thou)ht a)ainst which a proposed interpretation can -e set and checked. The procedure of contextual stud' can -e illustrated -' a series of concentric circles.

JB/2008

12

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

Wo"d=Te-*

'oo.

Co"$us o& W"#*#n/s

O%d o" New Tes*),en*

<. WORDS AND THEIR MEANIN8 :t this point we must pause to consider the whole issue of words and their meanin). +an)ua)e is a li*in) thin) i.e. it is not static -ut is in a constant state of flux. +an)ua)e chan)es and de*elops. 2ew words are coined, and old words are used in new wa's. &ords chan)e their meanin), e*en to the extent of takin) on an opposite or contradictor' meanin). 0n /n)lish we ha*e se*eral examples of that [let O hinder P let O allow1 pre*ent O )o -efore P pre*ent O stop]. &ithin the last few )enerations a whole new computer lan)ua)e has e*ol*ed. This has also expanded the meanin) of existin) words like disc dri*e etc. :nd that opens up another difficult issue the pro-lem of the ran)e of meanin) of words. +et us examine the complex issues in a little more detail. &hat are words( 0t ma' seem a simple enou)h %uestion to answer. .n one le*el the' are ;ust a com-ination of letters spoken or written. .f course the' must -e coherent, so we )o one step further and sa' that the' are a com-ination of letters which con*e' meanin). =e'ond this thin)s )et more complex. &h' do certain com-inations of letters [as words] con*e' certain meanin)( Eor example the com-ination of pain in /n)lish has certain meanin)s and connotations1 the same com-ination in Erench has completel' unrelated meanin).
JB/2008

13

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

0t is clear then that words are what ha*e -een termed ar-itrar' si)ns i.e. a com-ination of s'm-ols [letters] or sounds which, in a )i*en lan)ua)e represent an idea or concept. : word means what it means in an' lan)ua)e -' con*ention thats ;ust the wa' it is? &ords mean what the' mean -ecause we use them in certain accepted wa's, and perhaps, as lan)ua)e de*elops, in other wa's as well. The implications of this ar-itrar' dimension to words and their meanin) are profound for the tasks of translation and interpretation. 0t is not our task to explore all these implications -ut it is important to see that words in an' lan)ua)e therefore take on a ran)e of meanin) a fact which makes -oth translation and interpretation *er' difficult at times. 0n /n)lish there are as man' examples of this as there are words? Chair somethin) to sit on1 a uni*ersit' professorship1 to conduct a -usiness meetin) etc. Hand part of human -od'1 part of a clock1 cards held -' a pla'er in a card )ame etc. Fly an insect1 what a -ird [or aeroplane] does1 Aip on trousers1 fl'9-'9ni)ht CidiomD 0n Nussian the word for foot and le) are the same so it is the context which will determine meanin) as in so man' other instances. This is true of e*er' lan)ua)e, -ecause all lan)ua)es and all cultures ha*e their idioms and s'm-ols, and these will affect what is expressed and how it is expressed. 0t is also true of the =i-lical lan)ua)es and there are a num-er of strai)htforward examples which can -e )i*en. &orldGpeople 4ohn 7!1$1 flesh 4ohn 7!$, ,ark 17! " cf. Nom.J!61 messen)ersGan)els +uke 8! # >. !RINCI!LES OF INTER!RETATION =ecause the *ariet' and the complexit' of the t'pes or )enres of literature in the =i-le, rules or principles of interpretation will -e presented for each )enre separatel'. )+ INTER!RETATION OF !ROSE OR NARRATI?E 0t )oes without sa'in) that the writers of 3cripture wanted their readers to understand Gods messa)e to them. :lthou)h the' used s'm-olic lan)ua)e, para-les, e*en riddles at times, the' were not writin) in code. The' aimed to communicate clearl' the truths -' which the' wanted their readers to li*e. There are se*eral -asic principles relatin) to the historical9cultural -ack)round, which must )o*ern all interpretation, not onl' of prose, -ut of other =i-le )enres also. iD The passa)e must -e understood in a wa' which is consistent with its historical9cultural -ack)round. &hat were the circumstances of the ori)inal writin) and readin) of this passa)e( &hat was its ori)inal settin)( 3killed historical research, the disco*eries of archaeolo)', and a )rowin) -od' of knowled)e of the past ha*e -een crucial in
JB/2008

14

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

ena-lin) =i-lical scholars to ascertain with a de)ree of certaint', the ancient world and its -eliefs and customs. =i-le interpreters can see how that world was different from ours, and how it was in some wa's similar. The similarities allow us access to the meanin). The differences make us stop and ask serious %uestions, and help pre*ent misunderstandin) and misapplication of the 3criptures. There are man' helps a*aila-le to ena-le us to clarif' the =i-lical settin) of a passa)e. 0nterpreters must stud' the -ack)round of the -ook, determinin) its datin) and historical circumstances as accuratel' as possi-le. The identit' of the author [or editor etc.] is important [where possi-le] for his personal circumstances, spiritual experience, and culture pla' a part in his record, and ma' )i*e us insi)ht into his intentions and aims in writin). The audience or tar)et people for whom the writin) was intended is also a *ital part of understandin) a -ook and a particular passa)e. &ho is this writin) for( &hat are their circumstances, needs, difficulties( &hat is their ethnic, cultural, reli)ious -ack)round( :re there )eo)raphical or )eoph'sical features which ha*e a -earin) upon the passa)e( E-),#ne Re3.4@1:100. &hat does 4esus mean when he sa's that it would -e -etter that the +aodiceans were either cold or hot( Boes cold indicate that outri)ht opposition to the Gospel is -etter than apath'Glukewarmness( 2o? The hot sprin)s there were near a cold stream =.T@ of which were useful and positi*e in their own wa'. 0t is the in9-etween tepidness which is sickenin)? 3o cold here is 2.T to -e confused with opposition to the truth or coldness of heart. iiD The ori)inal impact and meanin) of the passa)e must -e understood if we are to interpret it and appl' it accuratel' for our da'. @ow would the ori)inal recipients ha*e recei*ed and reacted to this writin)( This is not alwa's eas' or e*en possi-le to determine with certaint', -ut historical9cultural research is imperati*e if the interpreter is intent on -ein) honest in his handlin) of 3cripture. The implications and application of a passa)e can often onl' -e appreciated -' -elie*ers toda', if the' understand the mindset of those to whom it was first written. &hat did the passa)e mean for them( This is a ke' %uestion. E-),#ne A,os hs.110@ @ere God pronounces ;ud)ements upon the nations

surroundin) the people of the northern kin)dom of 0srael. There was proud deli)ht in their minds as the nations, and especiall' the southern kin)dom of 4udah, come under Gods ;ud)ement. The explosi*e impact and full force of :moss words when he turns upon them, and declares Gods ;ud)ement a)ainst them for their wickedness, are onl'
JB/2008

15

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

)ained -' an understandin) of the political, reli)ious and )eo)raphical -ack)round to the writin) and the proud and self9ri)hteous mindset of the 4ews to whom :mos was sent. iiiD The truth disco*ered must then -e expressed in our lan)ua)e, and in our context, in a wa' which does not distort or contradict its true meanin). 0n some wa's this is the most complex and difficult part of the discipline of interpretation, -ecause one wrestles with word meanin)s, idiomatic expressions, )rammatical constructions etc. in order to put down accuratel' words which will con*e' the impact which the ori)inal readers felt. 0deall' what the translator and then the interpreterGpreacher is aimin) for is to ena-le -elie*ers toda' to feel the same impact of the passa)e upon their li*es as it did upon the first recipients in their time and context. There are dan)ers and difficulties in this process. :ttempts to express the truth in a wa' which is culturall' rele*ant and meanin)ful ha*e sometimes resulted in translation and interpretation which is loose and not as closel' ali)ned with the actual wordin) of the text as is desira-le. The de)ree of what is called d'namic e%ui*alence in translation is a matter of some de-ate in e*an)elical circles. 0n this area of research and stud', translation and interpretation are closel' intertwined. (+ INTER!RETATION OF OT !OETRY ,ost read the =i-le in translation, and relati*el' few in the ori)inal lan)ua)es. 0n so doin) the' miss somethin) of the ori)inal format and presentation of the truth, and at times are e*en i)norant of the )enre of writin) under consideration. There is a )reat deal of poetic presentation and writin) in the .ld Testament. =ut, unknown to man', the 2T also has man' poetic features, althou)h these are not in the form of lon) sections of poetr' which can -e found in the .T. There is no -ook of the =i-le which does not contain poetic features of one sort or another. :-out one third of the =i-lical text is presented in poetic form. Therefore poetr' is the second most common literar' feature of the =i-le, and the preacher must -e aware and -e a-le to interpret these features accuratel'. 3ome =i-le poetr' is o-*ious, for example, the <salms, and most reco)niAe the poetic nature of this part of the =i-le, e*en thou)h the' ma' not appreciate man' of the *er' fine and su-tle nuances of the st'le or presentation. 3ome of these will -e examined later. .ther =i-le poetr' is not so o-*ious, and ma' not -e identified easil', althou)h modern *ersions of the =i-le tend to present poetr' -' indentin) on the pa)e, and keepin) the lines of poetr' as the' appear in the ori)inal.

JB/2008

16

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

Wh)* #s $oe*"y? Fer' difficult to define closel', -ut it is written composition which is intense in meanin), compact or a--re*iated in expression, and usuall' with a de)ree of rh'thm in its structure. 0t is paintin) pictures in words, -ut in a manner which is much more succinct or terse than normal prose. .ften concrete ima)es are used to con*e' concepts or a-stract ideas1 s'm-olism is common, and there ma' -e in some poetr' a de)ree of rh'me. <rose and poetr' are not totall' distinct. 3ome prose is marked -' poetic elements, and is hi)hl' s'm-olic and intense. &hat distin)uishes poetr' from prose at times is *er' difficult to identif' and descri-e, -ut the root of it is the dense and restricted form of lan)ua)e and expression. There is what we call poetic licence, where the poet uses lan)ua)e in unusual wa's to appeal to the ima)ination, rather than to descri-e accuratel' a scene or set of circumstances. <oets use words in stran)e wa's1 the' alter word order1 the' ;oin words to)ether which do not normall' -elon)1 the' structure their lines and sentences differentl' so as to achie*e rh'thm or emphasis or dramatic effect. The %uestion is! @ow does the poetr' of the =i-le compare to this attempt at definition( Eirst of all it ma' -e said that rh'me in the sense of line endin)s, is rare in @e-rew poetr', althou)h rh'min) sounds are emplo'ed at times. 3ound and rh'thm are its distincti*e features alon) with structure and presentation which pla' an important part. @ere are se*eral examples of one of the hidden features of parts of =i-lical poetr'. Acrostic forms <salm 115 is arran)ed in a *er' uniform wa'. /ach section of the <salm -e)ins with a letter of the @e-rew alpha-et 9 *s 19J all -e)in with aleph1 591$ with -eth etc. This can -e seen clearl' in the @e-rew -ut is entirel' hidden in /n)lish and other translations. 3ome *ersions of the =i-le indicate this feature -' puttin) the @e-rew letter as a headin) to each appropriate section. Eirst four chaps of +amentations ha*e special features which are hidden in translation. Chaps.1, ,# each ha*e *erses and each *erse -e)ins with different @e-rew letters. Chap.7 has $$ *erses, arran)ed in threes, and these triplets of *erses all -e)in with the same letter1 i.e. *s l97 -e)in with aleph1 *s #9$ with -eth etc.

JB/2008

17

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

THE STRUCTURE OF HE'REW !OETRY Parallelism The same truth stated or point made in two wa's, one followin) the other -ut with a de)ree of de*elopment and intensification of the point made. : common misunderstandin) of parallelism puts a simple O si)n -etween the two lines. @owe*er this is not accurate and does not do ;ustice to the concept of parallelism. The actual situation is more su-tle and more complex. <arallelism does not merel' mean the re9statin) of a truth, -ut the stren)thenin), reinforcin), and de*elopin) of the point in some wa'. That re9statin) is sometimes done -' contrast, -ut more often -' intensif'in) or de*elopin) the thou)ht further. /xamination of some examples will help to clarif' and explain this feature. The first two mi)ht -e called e-$)ns#3e $)")%%e%#s, 1 the' expand or de*elop the truth stated. Isa 1:10 Hear the word of the LORD you rulers of Sodom Listen to the law of our God you people of Gomorrah There are strikin) similarities in these two lines. Grammatical construction is the same an imperati*e *er- [command]1 an o-;ect, and a *ocati*e [those who are commanded]. There are o-*ious relationships -etween words and phrases! hear and listen1 the word and the law1 +.NB and God1 rulers of 3odom and people of Gomorrah. =ut the two phrases are not entirel' e%ual. 0n =i-lical terms, the word of the +ord was related to the ministr' of the prophet, whereas the +aw was associated with the priest. 2ot onl' the rulers are to pa' attention -ut all the people. 3odom and Gomorrah are separate cities 'et to)ether in =i-lical expression the' stand for re-ellion and sin. The +ord and ou" God point to the same .ne, -ut 0saiah stresses 4udahs relationship with God in the second, a relationship[ forei)n to 3odom and Gomorrah. The second line does not merel' repeat the first -ut de*elops it in some measure. Isa !":# $ll we li%e sheep ha&e 'one astray (e ha&e turned e&eryone to his own way @ere a)ain a central point or truth is -ein) expressed the sinfulness of men and women. :ll and e*er'one are similar1 as are )one astra' and turned to his own wa'. =ut the second line emphasiAes indi*idual responsi-ilit' for actions, and the self9centredness of those actions [his own wa']. The sheep of the first line are reflected in the use of the word turnin) in the second line. The next are examples of $)")%%e%s o& on*")s*@ )ro& 1*:"* Ri'hteousness e+alts a nation ,ut sin is a dis'ra-e to any people

JB/2008

18

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

0n this example we ha*e the use of contrast, -ut it is plain that the contrast de*elops the primar' thou)ht. Ni)hteousness and sin are opposites1 and the' ha*e opposite effects [exalts *ersus dis)race] -ut the truth applies to all nation and people? )ro& 11:.0 /he Lord detests men of per&erse heart ,ut he deli'hts in those whose ways are 0lameless This is another example of a contrast. This time the su-;ect in -oth lines is the same the +ord, -ut the actions are totall' opposed detests *ersus deli)hts1 and the o-;ects are opposites too per*erse *ersus -lameless. : third t'pe of parallelism is that of o,$)"#son. 0n /n)lish these often -e)in with the word as. )sa 10":1" $s a father has -ompassion upon his -hildren So the Lord has -ompassion on those who fear him This is a common feature of much poetr', where comparisons are made, or when an action or e*ent is descri-ed as -ein) %#.e somethin) else. @ere the +ords compassion is -ein) descri-ed -' comparison with the compassion or feelin) of a father for his children. 2otice a)ain that there is de*elopment we mo*e from an earthl' father to the +ord, with the implication that he has a fatherl' care of his children. :nd there is a description of the essence of that relationship[ -etween the +ord and his children the' fear him i.e. the' ha*e a re*erential lo*e and respect for him. )sa 1.!:. $s the mountains surround 1erusalem So the Lord surrounds his people 0oth now and for e&ermore 3et in parallel here are the mountains and the +ord mountains often in 3cripture s'm-oliAe steadfastness and endurance or permanence. 2othin) and no9one is more permanent than the +ord @imself. =oth are said to surround the link here is protection, and the mountains are used as a concrete example of protection. 4erusalem and his people are o-*iousl' linked. Then the <salmist adds -oth now and for e*ermore emphasiAin) the eternal nature of Gods protection of his people. .ther t'pes and classes of parallelism ha*e -een identified, man' of them complex and technical, and demandin) an ad*anced knowled)e of the ori)inal lan)ua)es. the context in which it occurs. @owe*er it is at least necessar' to -e aware of this common characteristic of @e-rew poetr', and to treat it accuratel' in @elp is alwa's a*aila-le in anal'tical commentaries, where )uidance is )i*en on the treatment of such passa)es. &hat the preacher must not do is to make these passa)es sa' somethin) which the' do not. The )reatest pitfall is when the preacher makes two or more points from a text in which onl' one main point is -ein) made.

JB/2008

19

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

THE LAN8UA8E OF !OETRY Similes These are common in poetr' of e*er' kind, and the' are common in e*er'da' speech as well. : simile is a fi)ure of speech which makes a comparison in order to explain or descri-e an o-;ect, a concept or an action. $mos .:1" 2ow then I will -rush you as a -art -rushes when loaded with 'rain

This is a simile which descri-es an action. Gods action in ;ud)ement is descri-ed in terms which were familiar to the 4ews. The' knew the pressure a loaded cart could exert, and the pain of Gods ;ud)ement is )raphicall' communicated throu)h this picture. Son' of Sol #:# 3our teeth are li%e a flo-% of sheep -omin' up from the washin'4 5a-h has its twin6 not one of them is alone @ere the simile descri-es a feature of 3olomons -elo*ed her teeth. : stran)e simile to us, -ut not in an a)ricultural context, where the flocks were priAed. The idea of twin lam-s reflectin) uniform and lo*el' teeth is indeed )raphic and attracti*e. )salm 1:" He is li%e a tree planted 0y streams of water whi-h yields its fruit in season6 and whose leaf does not wither (hate&er he does prospers The simile here communicates a concept that of the true prosperit' of the ri)hteous man. The e*er)reen speaks of continual freshness and *italit' a picture of spiritual health. The man who li*es for God experiences continual renewal and -lessin), and continuall' produces fruit in his life which )lorifies God. Metaphors These are like similes, -ut the' draw the comparison in a much more direct or -lunt manner. The words as or like do not appear, -ut somethin) is said to -e somethin) else. :)ain this is -est understood -' examinin) a few illustrations. )sa 117:10! 3our word is a lamp to my feet and a li'ht for my path

Gods word is said to (e a lamp and a li)ht. 2ow we know that literall' that is not true, -ut fi)urati*el' it is accurate and it is the experience of the -elie*er. 8eph ":" Her offi-ials are roarin' lions6 her rulers are e&enin' wol&es who lea&e nothin' for the mornin' The prophet is writin) here a-out 4erusalem [cit' of oppressors] and its spiritual corruption. Eirst note that it is the people in *iew in this passa)e, not literall' the cit', so the context is metaphorical.

JB/2008

20

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

=ut the leaders are said to (e lions and wol*es a *er' stark description of how the' were -eha*in)? :t times metaphors are extended that is, drawn out in some detail to )i*e a full picture. There is a )raphic example of this in /Aekiel 5!796 where /)'pt is descri-ed as a water monster, pro-a-l' a crocodile. @er attitude and what will happen to her under Gods ;ud)ement is descri-ed in ri*er terms, i.e. in the context of a crocodiles life and existence. C%)sswo". /xamine the followin) two passa)es from /Aekiel and write a short para)raph on each, explainin) the extended metaphor used and its meanin) 04@4014:@ Ae"us)%e,Bs 7ud/e,en* )s ) &u%% u$ 0C@0<14>@ Ty"e )s ) sh#$w"e .

There is a special cate)or' of metaphor which is known -' the term D)n*h"o$o,o"$h#s,B that is the attri-utin) to God of human features, while knowin) that literall' this is not the case. 3o we ha*e references to the e'e of the +ord, the arm of the +ord, the face of the +ord, the ear of the +ord etc. These are concrete expressions of attri-utes of God which are a-stract Gods power1 his omniscience1 his openness to our pra'ers etc. e.). !s)%, 4:@1<11>E Is)#)h :F@1F. Hyperbole 0n a )eneral sense we ma' define this as exa))eration, -ut it is exa))eration with a purpose. The purpose is not to decei*e or mislead for that would -e dishonourin) and unscriptural, -ut it is to make a point, to emphasiAe, or to intensif' the meanin). 0t is a literar' de*ice to make the reader or the listener sit up and take notice. 0t is deli-erate o*erstatement in order to draw attention to what is -ein) said or tau)ht. The word comes from the Greek [h'per-allein QRSTUVWWSXY] and it means literall' to throw or cast o*er or -e'ond to o*ershoot. CLASSWORG There are man' examples of this in -oth .T and 2T. /xamine the followin) and write a sentence on each one explainin) what is meant. )salm ..:1* 1eremiah !:1#619

JB/2008

21

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

$mos !:" :al 1:"4 Rom 7:1" :att !:.76"0 :att 17:.* Lu%e 1*:.# 0t is crucial that the interpreter reco)niAes this literar' form, or he will make serious errors in understandin) and in application. @'per-ole is common in poetr' in e*er' lan)ua)e. 0t is a *er' strikin) wa' of makin) a point, so that people will remem-er. [0 wandered lonel' as a cloud>] The interpreter must )et to the point of the fi)ure of speech. &hat is so important that it has to -e stated and emphasiAed in this wa'( Personification This is the literar' de*ice which attri-utes human characteristics to somethin) which is not a li*in) creature or not human. There are man' examples of this. 1 ;hrn 1#:".6"" Let the sea resound and all that is in it4 let the fields 0e <u0ilant and e&erythin' in them /hen the trees of the forest will sin'6 they will sin' for <oy 0efore the Lord Isa !!:1. /he mountains and hills will 0urst into son' 0efore you and all the trees of the field will -lap their hands There is one *er' si)nificant e-*ended $e"son#&# )*#on in the -ook of <ro*er-s, where it is essential the interpreter )ets it ri)ht, or else he ma' make a *er' serious doctrinal error. !"o3e"(s hs.H I J. @ere we ha*e the personification of &isdom. &isdom is presented as a woman callin) out to humanit' to pa' attention to her if the' would desire a fruitful and prosperous life. The fruits of wisdom are more precious than an'thin) else [J!1"] and to -e desired more than sil*er or )old, ru-ies or precious stones. 3he is said to lo*e those who lo*e her, )rantin) a full and ;o'ful life to all who follow her. 2ow man' commentators see in this passa)e a t'pe or a foreshadowin) of Christ, who is of course the &isdom of God, -ut this must -e treated carefull' for <ro*.J! " makes it clear that wisdom is created the +ord -rou)ht me forth as the first of his works. Christ as the 3on of God and the /ternal &ord, did not ha*e a -e)innin). : careless or inaccurate treatment of this chapter would
JB/2008

22

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

lead to heres' i.e. if &isdom and Christ are e%uated here. The most we can sa' is that Christ is to some extent prefi)ured in these chapters, -ut the personification must not -e pushed too far, or the deit' of Christ is attacked. Irony .n a num-er of occasions in 3cripture we witness the writer usin) iron' to make his point. 3ometimes he writes one thin) in order to sa' the contrar', or sa's the opposite of what he means or desires. :t other times he is o-*iousl' writin) in mockin) terms. 1 =in's 1>:.9 $t noon 5li<ah 0e'an to taunt them ?Shout louder@A he said6 ?Surely he is a 'od@ )erhaps he is deep in thou'ht6 or 0usy or tra&ellin'B /li;ah mocks the trou-led prophets of =aal as the' *ainl' tr' to call down fire on the sacrifice. @is purpose is to show to 0srael the foolishness and the *anit' of =aalism, and to call 0srael -ack to the true worship of the true God. $mos *:* Go to ,ethel and sin4 'o to Gil'al and sin yet more ,rin' your sa-rifi-es e&ery mornin'B

=ethel and Gil)al were the places where the 0sraelites had corrupted true worship and true sacrifice. The spiritual state of the nation was so corrupt and depra*ed that the' were actuall' committin) further sin in the place of worship. Their sacrifices were a mocker' and onl' added to their condemnation for the' had turned =ethel into a pa)an shrine. &hat :mos wanted was that 0srael would 2.T )o and commit sin at =ethel or Gil)al, -ut would repent and turn to the true God once more. :mos sa's the opposite of what he means. Con %us#on 0nterpretin) =i-lical poetr' confronts us with man' challen)es, so the interpreter must carefull' follow some *ital steps in order to ascertain meanin). 0dentif' the fi)ure of speech or literar' de*ice used 0nterpret it, anal'Ain) its literal meanin) in order to )rasp its fi)urati*e meanin) Neco)niAe the function of this fi)ure of speech in its context wh' did the author use this particular method( :ppl' the truth in the li)ht of the meanin) of the text.

+ INTER!RETATION OF !RO!HECY &e must -e)in a)ain with definition. &hat is =i-lical prophec'( :n understandin) of the nature of prophec' is essential for accurate interpretation. The role of the =i-lical prophet was to deli*er Gods messa)e or Gods word to men. There was a dimension of ur)enc' in the prophetic task, for what the' had to deli*er was important. 0t was important for the spiritual health of the nation1 it was important for their understandin) of what was
JB/2008

23

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

happenin) in the world around them1 and it was important for their future well9-ein). The essence of prophec' therefore, is the communication of Gods word to mankind. 0t is important to note this prophec' was meant to communicate and re*eal, not confuse or hide the truth? 0t was for this reason that the writin)s of the prophets were *alued and handed on. ,en -elie*ed that these thin)s had rele*ance for )enerations to come. The content of prophec' is )enerall' descri-ed in terms of D&o"*h1*e%%#n/B and D&o"e1*e%%#n/B. :t one le*el prophec' almost e%uates to preachin), except that it is important to remem-er that the prophets recei*ed their messa)es directl' from God, not indirectl' throu)h a written record as preachers toda' do. 0t is settin) out or presentin) Gods word for particular people in particular circumstances. This is forth9tellin) and there are numerous examples of prophets -ein) sent to address contemporar' issues and pro-lems in the life of Gods people. The Jth centur' prophets attacked the a-uses of their da'. 4ewish leaders were li*in) in la*ish luxur', achie*ed throu)h the oppression and cheatin) of the poor, and God was an)r' with them. A,os :@1E <@11114E O()d#)h 1@1F110E M# )h >@J110 e* . The contemporar' situation, with all its dishonest' and h'pocris', was the o-;ect of much of the prophets attention as the' deli*ered Gods word a)ainst a re-ellious people. The prophets task in such a situation was to -rin) Gods *erdict on their -eha*iour, without fear of man or the conse%uences of their words to men. 0n order to understand the prophets and their messa)es then, it is essential that the interpreter in*esti)ates and disco*ers the -ack)round to them. Context a)ain is crucial, and this includes )eo)raphical, historical, political, cultural and reli)ious aspects. ,uch hard work must -e done in order to accuratel' set the prophets in their context, and then extract from their teachin) the endurin) principles which appl' to our era and our cultures. <rophec' in the sense of forth9tellin) is -' far the most common in the .ld Testament. .*er 5"Z of prophetic material in the .T is not concerned with prediction or foretellin) the future. Therefore the meanin) of most of the material must -e )rounded in the context in which and to which it was written, and the endurin) principles extracted and applied to the contemporar' situation. @a*in) said that, prophec' in the sense of fore9tellin) the future is what most readil' comes to mind when the term is used. &e speak of predicti*e prophec' that which is concerned not so much with the contemporar' scene, -ut with future e*ents what is 'et to take place. :)ain note that *er' little .T prophec' is predicti*e. 0t has -een calculated that less than Z of .T prophec' is messianic1 less than 6Z specificall' relates to the 2ew Co*enant a)e1 and less than 1Z concerns last thin)s, i.e. after the 2T period the distant future. 3o it is *er' unwise, and not in -alance with the =i-lical presentation to attempt to read into .T prophec' the unfoldin) histor' of our times, especiall' that which takes place in the ,iddle /ast.
JB/2008

24

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

So,e 8ene")% Ch)") *e"#s*# s o& !"o$he y )+ The *e%es o$# $e"s$e *#3e &hen one looks with the ph'sical e'e at distant o-;ects, one ma' fail to )ain a true perspecti*e, for what ma' seem close to)ether ma' in fact -e %uite far apart. mountains from a distance. The -est example is *iewin) The different peaks appear to -e in a strai)ht line, -ut as one

approaches one disco*ers that some peaks lie far -ehind others, and what appear to -e in a strai)ht line to)ether, is an'thin) -ut it. 0n the same wa', as Gods spokesmen looked forward and declared what God would do in the future, the' saw these as a succession of e*ents without -ein) aware of the sometimes lar)e )aps of time -etween them. Is).J@>1C is a clear example of telescopin) in prophec'. The first comin) of Christ is set immediatel' alon)side the eternal rei)n of the 3on of Ba*id. &e know that the so9 called church a)e comes -etween these e*ents, -ut in the prophec' the' appear to -e close to)ether telescoped? Nelated to this characteristic is the fact that the prophets did not alwa's clearl' distin)uish -etween what the' saw as the two ma;or periods of histor' the present a)e and the a)e to come. <hrases such as the da's are comin) or in that da' or in the last da's are not alwa's strai)htforward in their meanin), since the 2T calls the period from the first comin) of 4esus, the last da's. The .T prophets saw this a)e to come as a unit, whereas the 2T indicates a num-er of phases in the last da's. Christians differ as to the order and timin) of these e*ents, -ut all a)ree that there is an a)e to come after the present church a)e. &hen interpretin) .T prophec' we must -e careful to fit them into the lar)er and fuller picture )i*en -' the 2T. (+ Mu%*#$%e &u%&#%,en* Ksuall' this would -e a dou-le fulfilment one in or near the prophets own time and ministr', and one -e'ond his time, sometimes far in the future. : classic example of this is in 3amuel 8!1 91$ where God sa's that 3olomon will succeed Ba*id as kin). This was fulfilled in the immediate sense in 1 Hin)s 19 . 3olomon was indeed crowned kin) as God had promised. =ut the 2T has a further and deeper fulfilment of this prophec' in @e-rews 1!6 where as the ultimate fulfilment. There is an on)oin) de-ate amon) theolo)ians a-out the prophec' in 0saiah 8!1#f. which is clearl' ,essianic and speaks in terms which are une%ui*ocal a-out the di*ine nature of this ,essiah 0mmanuel God with us. &as there some immediate si)n also to :haA of Gods impendin) ;ud)ement( 2o conclusi*e answer has -een )i*en, -ut this passa)e indicates a lookin) throu)h contemporar' e*ents to see what will come at a later time. 3am.8!1# is applied to Christ

JB/2008

25

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

0saiah $!J917 also presents us with an interestin) example. God announces his ;ud)ement upon a stu--orn people, -ut promises also that a stump or a remnant will sur*i*e the hol' seed will -e the stump in the land. The thing a"out the "oo( of 0saiah is that it 1de!i"erate! 2 (eeps wor(ing with mu!tip!e fu!fi!ments ' it wor(s on a num"er of different !e&e!s, which is its great g!or , "ut a!so wh it can a!so "e a !itt!e hard to get a grip on# 0n fact, the first time &erses 33'32 is fu!fi!!ed is ear!ier than the Ba" !onian e4i!e ' it5s in the Ass rian crisis descri"ed in chapters 6.'68, where the who!e !and of Judah was de&astated e4cept for the capita!, Jerusa!em, and He7e(iah was forced to re! on God a!one# God did preser&e the cit of Jerusa!em at that time, "ut on! after the nation had "een a!most comp!ete! wiped out# This happened in 803 B* 1or perhaps .88 B*2# 0t5s descri"ed in chapter 29, as a time when God ma(es his peop!e "!ind and du!! 129:9'3;2# And in 0saiah 6<:<, there is the promise that in the future, the e es of the "!ind wi!! "e opened, and the redeemed of the Lord wi!! return to Jerusa!em# Howe&er, the Ba" !onian e4i!e 1which happened in stages from .0.'<88 B*2 is a!so on &iew 10saiah 69:.'82# The Ba" !onian crisis ' where the who!e nation is comp!ete! de&astated ' introduces the "ac(ground to the second ha!f of the "oo(, chapters ;0'.., which are written to the returned or soon'to'"e'returned e4i!es# So in chapter ;2, God spea(s of a ser&ant, who wi!! open the "!ind e es and "ring the e4i!es "ac( from Ba" !on 10saiah ;2:82, e&en though 0srae! had "een "!inded 1;2:3.'382# 0f ou read 0saiah ;2:3.'2< ou5!! see this a!! wor(ed out# B=T ) the Ba" !onian e4i!e isn5t the fina! fu!fi!ment of this prophec # >or e&en as the e4i!e finishes, God promises an e&en greater wor( for the future# ?art of the tension of the @!d Testament comes from the fact that, whi!e the ph sica! e4i!e was o&er, the g!or of 0srae! was ne&er rea!! restored to the wa the prophets predicted# ?eop!e were !oo(ing forward to a rea! end of the e4i!e, a time when God5s g!or wou!d "e proper! re&ea!ed in 0srae!# And God, in 0saiah, predicts that this wi!! happen ' "ut again in a wa that human wisdom and human power can5t comprehend# There wi!! come a ser&ant, a suffering ser&ant# This ser&ant wi!! disp!a God5s wisdom, his ama7ing sa!&ation 1<2:362# But it won5t "e understood " the peop!e, "ecause the are sti!! "!inded to God5s wa s 1<2:3;'3<2# He wi!! "e despised and reAected, a man of sorrows 1<6:62# But his suffering and reAection " God5s "!inded and du!!ed peop!e wi!! actua!! mean sa!&ation, "ecause he wi!! suffer for the sins of the wor!d ' he wi!! Austif man " his wisdom 1<6:332# This is the c!imactic fu!fi!ment of this prophec ' and as the "oo( of 0saiah ends, it sti!! seems to "e something that wi!! happen in the future# +Lione! $indsor B Bi"!og/ 0t is *ital that in an' handlin) of prophec', the preacher does not read into the text what is not there. 3olid -i-lical )rounds for discernin) dou-le or multiple fulfilment of prophec' must exist, otherwise 3cripture text is open to all kinds of corruption and misinterpretation. + Cond#*#on)% n)*u"e o& so,e $"o$he y 0t is often for)otten that some predicti*e prophec' carries with it conditional elements. That is, certain thin)s are said to -e )oin) to take place if specified conditions are not met, or if actions or attitudes are not chan)ed etc. The case of 2ine*ah as descri-ed in the -ook of 4onah illustrates this. God announced throu)h the prophet that his ;ud)ement would fall in #" da's, -ut the people immediatel' repented, fearin) Gods punishment. The explanation of this is to -e found in 4eremiah 1J!891", where God sets out a *ital principle in his dealin)s with men. 0f men heed his warnin)s and his word, then he will withdraw punishment, and *ice *ersa, if the' re;ect his word, then he will withhold the )ood he promised and -rin) ;ud)ement.
JB/2008

26

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

The cit' of 4erusalem is a case in point! 4er. $!19$1 7$!198. @ere God specificall' promises that if the people of 4erusalem repent then he will not -rin) disaster upon them. 3adl', the 4ews re;ected Gods word, and ;ud)ement did e*entuall' come. The interpreter therefore must -e careful in handlin) such prophecies. @e must not -e cate)orical where God lea*es room for ad;ustment in response to mans repentance or o-edience. @e must tr' to discern if there are conditions, explicit or implicit, attached to an' prophec', and then explain and interpret in the li)ht of these. The possi-ilities of error are real 4onah is a prime example, in that e*en when God had for)i*en and withheld his ;ud)ement, he was still waitin) for the fire to fall on the cit'? d+ Sy,(o%# %)n/u)/e =i-lical passa)es of predicti*e prophec' contain s'm-olic and fi)urati*e lan)ua)e. The challen)e for the interpreter is to understand such lan)ua)e ari)ht, keepin) from an unwarranted literalism 'et at the same time )uardin) the truths which are -ein) con*e'ed. The lan)ua)e used, for example, to speak of hea*en, is hi)hl' fi)urati*e and s'm-olic. 0n

Re3e%)*#on 01@J&. we ha*e a )lorious picture of hea*en, -ut ri)ht from the start the lan)ua)e is deepl' s'm-olic. @ea*en is called the new 4erusalem. &hat does this mean( 0t indicates the dwellin) place of the people of God. 0t is said to ha*e a hi)h wall and twel*e )ates, twel*e )uardin) an)els, twel*e foundations etc. 0t is -edecked with ;ewels and precious stones. @ow are we to understand this( Clearl' it speaks of the completed and perfected people of God, li*in) in prepared, perfect and )lorious surroundin)s, with the )lor' of God and the +am- fillin) the li*es and the hearts of his people. The s'm-olism of prophets like Baniel and /Aekiel must -e carefull' examined, and the ,e)n#n/ of these s'm-ols explained. applied. 0nterpretation of =i-lical prophec' is frau)ht with dan)er. 0n this area of teachin), perhaps more than an' other, the principle of explainin) the dark thin)s of the =i-le -' what is plain and strai)htforward is of *ital importance. 0nterpret 3cripture -' 3cripture. That must alwa's -e the approach, and what is difficult and o-scure must -e explained -' what is clearl' and plainl' set out in the =i-le. 3imilarl' in 2T predicti*e prophec' an' fi)urati*e or s'm-olic lan)ua)e must -e reco)niAed as such and the meanin) which underlies them presented and

JB/2008

27

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

d+ INTER!RETATION OF THE 8OS!ELS The Gospels are uni%ue as a literar' form. There is no e%ui*alent in ancient writin)s, the nearest -ein) the idea of a -io)raph'. @owe*er, when the -asic characteristics of a -io)raph' are descri-ed, it is clear that the Gospels do not fit into that cate)or' of writin). : -io)raph' or auto-io)raph' will detail the famil' and home -ack)round of the indi*idual, will descri-e closel' the formati*e 'ears of childhood and adolescence, and will concern itself with details of friendships and social interaction. 3uch detail is lar)el' missin) from the Gospel accounts indeed 4ohn does not e*en mention details of the -irth of 4esus. The onl' hint we ha*e of 4esus )rowin) up was the incident in the Temple when he was 1 'ears of a)e, a fascinatin) incident, -ut onl' the merest )limpse of the maturin) 4esus. The Gospels concentrate on the three 'ears of 4esus pu-lic ministr', and not so much on 4esus social interaction as on his ministr' to the need'. Granted that there are times when 4esus draws aside with his disciples, and times when he en;o'ed the hospitalit' of ,artha, ,ar', +aAarus and others, -ut details of these e*ents are sparse. 4esus teachin), and healin), and meetin)s with the need' take up most of the space and most of the attention. Eurthermore it is a fact that somewhere -etween a half and a third of the Gospel accounts is concentrated into the last week of 4esus life on earth. 4ohn follows the pattern of the 3'noptics here, and so the clear impression is )i*en that the Crucifixion and Nesurrection are the climax of the stor'. The Gospels are mo*in) forward alwa's to the sal*ation e*ent. Eor that reason, the' are un-alanced in the amount of space )i*en to the final da's of 4esus life on earth. This )eneral comment on the characteristics of the Gospels must -e -orne in mind in an' approach to interpret. The' were written for a purpose not merel' for interests sake, or e*en for historical purposes, -ut for the purpose of -rin)in) men and women into the kin)dom of God. 4ohn is forthri)ht in his declaration of his aim in writin). 0F@4F941@ /hese are written that you may 0elie&e that 1esus is the ;hrist6 the Son of God6 and that 0y 0elie&in' you may ha&e life in his name 2othin) could -e plainer. The Gospels ha*e an e*an)elistic purpose. The' are records of the life, teachin), death and resurrection of 4esus written to on3#n e men and women of the truth, and to draw them in discipleship after 4esus. 0n preachin) throu)h the Gospels then, we must -ear in mind this o*er9ridin) aim. These are not entertainin) stories or e*en historical records, -ut the account of a uni%ue life, the presentation of 4esus the 3a*iour in a wa' which is meant to con*ince readers and hearers of the truth of the Gospel, and of their need of a personal relationship with him. 4esus presents the conditions for enterin) his kin)dom1 he spells out the characteristics of those who are his people, and calls on them to follow him, and li*e out the *alues of this eternal kin)dom in a world of darkness and sin.
JB/2008

28

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

e+ INTER!RETATION OF THE LETTERS : num-er of -asic thin)s must -e stated here. Eirst of all, what is a letter( 0t is a direct, personal means of communication, addressed to a particular person or people in specific circumstances. 0t is rele*ant to their needs, in%uiries, instruction, or direction etc. written to a real9life situation, not a-stract or theoretical. These -asic characteristics of a letter are often for)otten when the 2T is -ein) read or studied. Nemem-er too that most of the 2T letters were written to churches or )roups of -elie*ers rather than indi*iduals. This will ha*e some effect upon interpretation and application. There are some )uidin) principles in approachin) the 2T letters. 0. /sta-lish author, date and recipients where possi-le. 00. 0n*esti)ate the political, cultural and reli)ious context in which the readers were li*in) 000. Bisco*er the main aim or aims of the letter its purpose 0F. &hat are the main issues addressed the main themes of the letter( F. &hat are the lastin) truths or principles which can -e extracted from the letter and applied to the contemporar' situation( 0n a word, C.2T/[T a)ain is of *ital importance. 3o careful homework, in*esti)atin) the

-ack)round to the letters, is essential. 0n such a personal t'pe of communication there are -ound to -e cultural issues, traditions, ha-its, which are not part of our culture or time. :n understandin) of these is necessar' so that unchan)in) principles can -e discerned and applied. Take for example the issue of the eatin) of meat offered to idols. 0t ma' appear to -e totall' unrelated and irrele*ant to contemporar' societ', 'et the de-ate carries with it important principles for li*in). 0t is all too eas' to compromise our Gospel messa)e -' -eha*iour which -lurs the distinction -etween -elie*er and un-elie*er. 0t is also so eas' for us to set a wron) example, or create a stum-lin)9 -lock for 'oun)er or weaker -elie*ers. These are important matters which are addressed in the contro*ers' o*er meat offered to idols. :t all times it must -e remem-ered that the writers of the letters were addressin) specific and particular circumstances. .ne must not superficiall' or thou)htlessl' treat e*er' detail of the letters as if there is no difference -etween ancient 2T cultures and the world in which we li*e in the 1st centur'. Chronolo)ical, cultural, )eo)raphical and other *ariations must -e considered when interpretin) the letters for our da'. .ne outstandin) example illustratin) the need to understand author, context, and hearers is the alle)ed discrepanc' -etween <aul and 4ames o*er )ood works. pro-lems of interpretation. Knless one examines and understands the -ack)round to each and to their recipients, one will -e confronted with difficult

JB/2008

29

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

&+ INTER!RETATION OF !ARA'LES =i-lical para-les present some particular challen)es to the interpreter, and the histor' of interpretation shows *er' clearl' that man' ha*e adopted a fault' approach to this t'pe of -i-lical literature, resultin) in wron), and sometimes e*en -iAarre interpretation. Two extremes ha*e -een in e*idence! /xtreme alle)oriAation which was pre*alent for man' centuries until the " th c. where e*er' detail of a para-le was held to ha*e a second deeper spiritual meanin) and si)nificance. The difficult' was that interpretations of the same para-le *aried enormousl' and were contradictor'? The potential for eise)esis was endless, and the result was interpretations which were at times ludicrous. :s a reaction to this approach :dolf 4ulicher ridiculed the ridiculous len)ths to which man' had )one in their treatment of the para-les and proposed that all para-les had onl' one point to make. 2o detail was held to stand for an'thin) else, and the' were said to teach rather )eneral truths a-out spiritual realities. The details were merel' to )i*e richness and -ack)round to the stor'. 0f the first approach led to interpretations which were fanciful and ar-itrar' in the extreme, the second led to -land moralisation from which an' depth of theolo)ical or doctrinal truth was a-sent. 0t is o-*ious that the para-les are related directl' and intimatel' to Christs preachin) of the Hin)dom of God or the Hin)dom of @ea*en. There is su-stantial theolo)ical and doctrinal content, and an' approach to interpretation of the para-les must reflect and expose this content. 0t is also o-*ious that in some para-les there are alle)orical features, and in se*eral cases 4esus himself indicated a deeper meanin) to some of the details he included [e.). the <ara-le of the 3ower]. Hlein et al make the further point! 0t is hard to an' sense of 4esus stor' of the <rodi)al without assumin) that the father in some sense represents God Cor e*en ChristD1 that the <rodi)al stands for all the wa'ward and re-ellious Clike the tax9collectors and sinners of 16!1D1 and that the older -rother represents the self9ri)hteous h'pocrite Clike the <harisees and scri-es of 16! D. Interpretation p.778 Bespite these o-ser*ations, admitted -' most, there has -een a )eneral reluctance to a-andon the one point per para-le approach, possi-l' the result of fear of returnin) to the foll' of unrestrained alle)oriAation. =ut one is then faced with difficult %uestions of interpretation of man' para-les. Eor example! is the main point of the <rodi)al the possi-ilit' of for)i*eness for e*en the most
JB/2008

Intro to Biblical

30

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

re-ellious( .r is it the unconditional lo*e of the father and the fulsomeness of his for)i*eness( .r is it a re-uke to the self9ri)hteousness of the <harisees as represented -' the older -rother( Hlein et al point out that in man' of the para-les [a-out G7rds] there is a triad of characters

formin) the core of the stor' the -ride)room and two different sets of *ir)insG-ridesmaids1 the shepherd with his safe 55 sheep and his one lost sheep etc. 3ome ha*e two main characters C<harisee and tax9collector1 wise and foolish -uilderD, and a few ha*e a solitar' character or motif Cmustard seed, lea*en etc.D The' su))est that the lessons of the para-les re*ol*e around the main characters of the stor'. Neaders should consider each para-le from the perspecti*e of each of the main characters. 0n this wa' the' are )uided to *alid lessons from the para-le, and kept from unwarranted eise)esis or in*alid interpretation. [3ee Hlein et al p.77J] There ma' or ma' not -e a wa' of com-inin) the two or three strands of teachin) in one summarisin) sentence. That is not important. &hat is important is that we should extract from the para-les all the lessons that 4esus would teach, and no more! : further example of this approach and its *alidit' is presented -' Hlein with re)ard to the Good 3amaritan! Neli)ious status or le)alistic casuistr' does not excuse lo*elessness priestG+e*ite &e must show compassion to those in need 9 3amaritan /*en an enem' is a nei)h-our *ictim.

3trict adherence to the idea of one point per para-le is therefore not re%uired or correct in e*er' case. @owe*er the alle)oriAin) approach, where e*er' detail of a stor' is )i*en a spiritual si)nificance, is misleadin) and mistaken. 0t results in ridiculous and fanciful interpretation which is ar-itrar' and without -i-lical foundation. TOOLS FOR THE HERMENEUTICAL TASG There are man' helps a*aila-le for the preacher and =i-le teacher who wants to ensure true and accurate interpretation. These should -e part of his li-rar'. Con o"d)n e This lists the occurrence of all the ke' words of 3cripture. 3ome are exhausti*e, that is, the' )i*e e*er' occurrence of these words. .thers are more selecti*e )i*in) onl' the ma;or references to or use of these words. 3ome concordances are anal'tical. That means that the' show the different @e-rew or Greek words -ehind the translation into other lan)ua)es. Eor example, the word lo*e in the /n)lish 2T ma' -e a translation of an' of four Greek words. The anal'tical concordance will show these references under their different Greek ori)ins.

JB/2008

31

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

: concordance is in*alua-le for comparin) 3cripture with 3cripture1 for followin) themes or words throu)h the =i-le1 for locatin) *erses or passa)es of 3cripture related to certain themes or truths, and for )i*in) statistics for the use of words. '#(%e A*%)s='#(%e H)nd(oo. Fital for -ack)round stud' of -ooks, themes, passa)es of 3cripture. Geo)raphical locations are often si)nificant in the =i-le stor', and the knowled)e of where one territor' links with another, and how the' are related )eo)raphicall' helps understandin). /.). :mos, where the prophet -rin)s Gods accusations a)ainst each pa)an nation in turn, -efore accusin) the nation of 0srael itself of re-ellion a)ainst God. Betails of the mo*ements of 4esus durin) his earthl' ministr' can -e traced, as can the missionar' ;ourne's of <aul. 3o a =i-le :tlas is *alua-le. =i-le @and-ooks )i*e details of -ack)round material necessar' to understand =i-lical narrati*es. Culture, customs, places, characters etc. are listed in alpha-etical order to allow eas' access to facts which help our understandin) of the =i-le passa)e. '#(%e D# *#on)"y=Le-# ons=Wo"d S*ud#es 3trictl' speakin) these deal with the text words, phrases, expressions which are found in the -i-lical text. @owe*er there is o*erlap -etween =i-le @and-ooks and =i-le Bictionaries to some extent. +exicons are in*alua-le for those who can work in one or -oth -i-lical lan)ua)es. These list the occurrences of words in the ori)inal lan)ua)es, a)ain in alpha-etical order of either the @e-rew or the Greek lan)ua)e. Kse of a lexicon re*eals where the same word in the ori)inal has -een used or translated in different wa's1 the more exhausti*e lexicons re*eal the root of each word and )i*e details of )rammatical construction, moods, tenses etc. &ord studies trace the use of words not onl' in the =i-lical text -ut in e*er'da', secular use also. The' throw li)ht on et'molo)' [the ori)in of words]1 the' indicate pictures%ue lan)ua)e1 the' help to show wh' certain words are used in certain contexts. Co,,en*)"#es These are the -asic tool of the interpreter and the preacherG=i-le teacher. The' comment on the -i-le text. There are different kinds of commentar'. 3ome are at a fairl' simple le*el, and their aim is to help -elie*ers in their de*otional li*es. The' aim at practical application of the principles of 3cripture for e*er'da' life.

JB/2008

32

SGA Lectures

Hermeneutics

3ome are termed critical commentaries, not -ecause the' are critical of 3cripture -ut -ecause the' are detailed explanations of the text of 3cripture usuall' -' trained scholars skilled in exe)esis at the hi)hest le*el. 2ote howe*er that there are man' modernistic and li-eral theolo)ians who DO treat 3cripture in an unworth' wa', and whose work is detrimental to =i-lical truth. 3tudents need to -e discernin) in their use of commentaries, so that the authorit' of Gods word is not diminished. @owe*er here 0 make reference to the writin)s of e*an)elical and =i-le9-elie*in) commentaries. 0n these there is detailed critical anal'sis of the text to unco*er the true meanin). The aim is accurac' of translation and understandin) of the text. : critical commentar' will take into account cultural, )eo)raphical, literar' and lin)uistic considerations, as well as theolo)' in the wa' that it treats a 3cripture text or passa)e. 3ome critical commentaries will lea*e the application of the principles unco*ered to the preacher it will not attempt a de*otional application. .thers include application with exe)esis, -ut the emphasis will -e on exe)esis. Be*otional commentaries will emphasiAe application of =i-lical principles to e*er'da' li*in) and often the' rel' or depend upon this detailed exe)esis in order to present these lessons of 3cripture in a clear -ut simple wa'. 0t is wise for the preacherG=i-le teacher to ha*e -oth critical and de*otional commentaries in his li-rar', and an attempt should -e made o*er the 'ears to -uild up and supplement the selection of commentaries in ones stud'. CONCLUSION The task of correctl' interpretin) the 3criptures is of paramount importance. <rinciples and rules are necessar' otherwise it is possi-le to make the =i-le sa' an'thin) one desires. There is a widespread attack toda' upon the concept of o-;ecti*e meanin). <ostmodern philosophers maintain that meanin) is ar-itrar'1 that indi*iduals impose meanin) upon a text or infuse a text with meanin), rather than draw o-;ecti*e truth from a text. This is in direct contradiction to the -i-le and to 4esus words in particular when he said! \ou will know the truth and the truth will make 'ou free. Truth is o-;ecti*e, real, and ma' -e expressed propositionall', that is, in words -ut to disco*er it there must -e adherence to the principles outlined alread'. @onest', inte)rit', and transparenc' are the hallmarks of the true interpreter of the word of God. The hermeneutical task is also a lifelon) one. 2ew disco*eries, further research in the realm of lan)ua)e, and in the cultures and reli)ions of the ancient world, will necessitate re9examination of portions of 3cripture to affirm or ad;ust understandin) of a text or passa)e. Truth does not chan)e -ut our understandin) of the context and content of the truth must -e ad;usted in the li)ht of new disco*eries and pro)ress. 4esus said! Hea&en and earth will pass away 0ut my words will ne&er pass away 0t is our task to pass on that truth undiminished and undiluted, to the )lor' of God.
JB/2008

33