By Dean LuskI'm not sure how many of you are familiar with the word "hermeneutics." From
BibleStudyTools.com comes this brief origin and definition of the word:
The word "hermeneutics" is ultimately derived from Hermes the Greek god who brought the messages of the gods to the mortals, and was the god of science, invention, eloquence, speech, writing, and art. As a theological discipline [Biblical] hermeneutics is the science of the correct interpretation of the Bible.
With that we'll kick off a multi-part series! I anticipate that it will be five posts. Our house church group has begun to go over a basic outline of Scripture Interpretation that I put together and called "
A Crash Course In Hermeneutics." In preparing to teach, I found that there are very few available resources geared for small group discussion and teaching of fundamental Biblical hermeneutics. That's crazy because it's such an important area --
one in which every believer needs to grounded. It isn't just for "professional" Christians.
I used R. C. Sproul's book
Knowing Scripture (Second Edition, InterVarsity Press, © 2009 by R. C. Sproul) as a foundation because it's quite solid, easy to read, and there's a section that gives
11 general "rules" that are a great starting point.
These guidelines don't cover everything, don't make the mistake of thinking they do. But they'll get us well on our way. I'm not sure if I'll lay out one or two "rules" in each post after this. Just one today, though, because I've already written so much, and the first one will sound controversial.
Feel free to chime in with your comments!
Rule #1: Read the Bible like any other book.
"Whoa there, Dean! The Bible isn't just 'any other book!'" Of course it isn't. I'm not saying it is. I stand behind what
2 Timothy 3:16-17 says; the Bible is divinely inspired -- God-breathed. I believe it is infallible.
But the upshot of this rule is that in the Bible, a noun is a noun, a verb is a verb, etc. The Bible doesn’t take on some special magic that changes basic patterns of literary interpretation. There's a Latin phrase,
sensus literalis, that means "literal sense." "The literal sense is
the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning which the writer expressed." (from Article 15 of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics).
Questions in Scripture do not suddenly become exclamations just because we want to read them that way,
historical narratives don't become allegories or parables. Read the Bible with that knowledge. Sounds obvious, but it's a big "rule" that is violated regularly.
So there we have it; one "rule" down, ten to go!
Recommend
Comments (35)
WretchedRadio.com offers an audio series of lessons on hermenuetics. It is part of the "Drive by" series. Haven't listened to it, but it sounds like good stuff.
I'd suggest the first rule of Hermeneutics is prayer. Seeking the guidance of the One who "breathed" the Bible seems to me the wisest of first steps.
A few simple rules I try to remember. First, know the genre of the book, there's poetry, journal entries, mythological stories, visions, and chronological accounts. Second, read entire passages, or books together to get the general gist of what the author is saying. Don't take single verses out of contexts.
Also, it's worth noting that people have interpreted the Bible differently throughout the ages. Ignatius and Origin, both who were extremely intelligent, famous in church history, saw scripture as allegory. One needed to study scripture, pray over it to find it's hidden meaning. This was long before a historical study of the Bible which we tend to do now.
I took Hermeneutics in college and it sure helped me know how to better approach the Bible.
i took classes on religious vs. academic Biblical interpretation. obviously, i prefer the latter.
I don't think hermeneutics can even begin to address the divisions in the Church due to different interpretations of Scripture.
Dogma is what drives religious factionalism not the search for truth or meaning.
@homealivein45@xanga - But dogma is a part of a healthy Christian faith. We know there are many things that are incontrovertibly true. Of course, questions that are rooted in doubt need to be stated and explored in order that they be worked out. I'm fanatical in my love for others and for Jesus. Laying your life down for Christ and for others is extreme.
I think I understand what you are saying though. strapping bombs on yourself and blowing other people up, or bombing abortion clinics come from an evil heart and are usually rooted in terrible hermeneutics. These are the more extreme cases of course.
@Held_in_wings_of_light@xanga - Christianity is sundered into a million pieces because of differing dogma. Most people gain their understanding of scripture and interpret its meaning through the lens of dogma.
Change the dogma, change the understanding.
Most people simply haven't developed the ability to use reason in religious discussion. All they are able to do is spout dogma and scripture in response to religious and ethical questions.
Only by thinking things through in a reasonable fashionable can meaning be shared with others in a rational way. And there must also exist an ultimate authority to judge the rightness or wrongness of dogma. Otherwise unity is impossible.
@homealivein45@xanga - "Most people gain their understanding of scripture and interpret its meaning through the lens of dogma." That lens should always start with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, followed by wisdom gained through previous study of the Word, then by experience related to the subject.
You can argue with someone reasonably but the wisdom of God is not usually seen as reasonable by the world. It's okay to have division when it clearly shows who are of God and who are not of God. I look at John 17:6-19 as a good example of this when Jesus prays that his disciples be in the world but separated in consecration from it.
Fortunately there is ultimate authority to judge the rightness or wrongness of dogma and that is the Holy Spirit and the Word. Small differences in opinion are going to happen, but there are fundamental truths that are incontrovertibly true and these are what separate different opinions in the world church and what separates the sheep from the goats. I think a lot of the "Christianity" that people see in the modern USA that they totally dislike is the "Christianity" that is so tied into politics and modern American culture and not that which is tied in with the Kingdom of God. Though there are plenty of people who see Christ as He is and still deny Him.
John 16:13
But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever Hehears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.
@Held_in_wings_of_light@xanga - If the Holy Spirit were really at work the way you describe, then everyone would read scripture and attain the same understanding.
Since there are 1000s of Christian doctrines all claiming to be inspired by the Holy Spirit it is reasonable to surmise that all but one of the 1000s of doctrines is simply man made.
There can only be one truth.
If hermeneutics helps us discover that one truth then all the people who believe in all the other false truths are not going to pay attention. That's because they are dogma driven not truth driven, which means that they actually refuse to be influenced by the Holy Spirit.
"As a theological discipline [Biblical] hermeneutics is the science of the correct interpretation of the Bible."
By "correct" here, do you mean how to interpret so that your interpretation fits the pre-existing result favoured by one's Church tradition. or indeed, so that it fits one's personal preconceived notions os a given text? I suspect that is the usual practice whatever the theory.
That given, at this point I have to agree with one of the commentators here @homealivein45 when they say dogma drives division, not the search for truth or meaning. Rabbinical and Christian scriptural hermeneutics do have a level of similar interpretation but they have very different traditional approaches and end conclusions in major sections of the same text.
Who is to say which is the "correct interpretation" of a text, especially when a variety of interpretation has been on offer since at least the time of Augustine?
If one begins a study of a text with preconcieved notions of what it is saying, then that is dogma and the exercise would appear to be a waste of valuable time. If the exercise is to persuade the student that the already held notions are supported - without offering alternative conclusions, then that is not independent study but just indoctrination hidden under a cloak of academia.
"Rule #1: Read the Bible like any other book. ... the upshot of this rule is that in the Bible, a noun is a noun, a verb is a verb, etc."
" ... The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning which the writer expressed." (from Article 15 of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics).
"... historical narratives don't become allegories or parables. ... "
The statement you mean was put out by an evangelical meeting of those defending biblical inerrancy. Does that meant for example, they would dismiss any notion that the six "days" of creation were other than actual days, 24 hours long?
I suspect I may be misreading what you wrote here, but how do you know what the meaning was that "the writer expressed?" Just because they were ancient scribes, that does not mean they were incapable of including "allegories or parables" within a supposed historical text. Seemingly "historical" narratives can already be allegories or parables, let alone be interpreted as such by later generations.
Even if the original scribes meant such narratives to be taken as historical events, that does not therefore exclude allegorical interpretation at a later date. For example, although some insist on the six days of creation being six actual days, the present and preceding Popes have openly supported the scientific age of the universe and the earth as well as evolution.
If the study of "nouns and verbs" is the ultimate reason for hermeneutics, then that does not touch of necessity what was meant by the original scribe. Did he mean the talking snake in the Garden to be a fable putting across a moral point, or a literal talking snake which had limbs before God punished him by removing them? Does it matter what the scribe meant or believed? Is it not more important what inspiration and moral understanding we can derive from the tale?
I suggest that the correct use of hermeneutics is to search out all possible interpretations, regardless as to whether they are held by the tradition one is a part of. Otherwise, as I said, it is just indoctrination by other means. One can then of course, accept a particular interpretation as the correct one or allow that all or most interpretations have there place, but one has to know of all the possibilities before accepting or rejecting any of them.
@FearofGodandPerfectLove@xanga - As we see through the life of Jesus and the trials and travails of the Hebrews, God's guidance happens so we can examine it with our own human minds.
For example, to be able to benefit from the Bible someone has to learn how to read it first. Reading is a skill acquired through activities of human intellect that have nothing to do with Holy Scripture.
And then to understand what the Bible is actually saying takes are great deal more education and maturity. A 5 year old will only be able to understand a small portion of Biblical teachings.
And people who are raised Lutheran will acquire a different understanding of Scripture than a Southern Baptist or Catholic.
Consequently, I don't think a crash course in understanding the Word is possible.
@homealivein45@xanga - There are many things that are not so vital that they must be absolutely agreed upon for there to be unity between believers. But the fundamental truths of the universe, as set by God, are universally binding. The Holy Spirit does indeed work the way that I have suggested, but consider the hearts of those seeking the counsel of the Holy Spirit....if they are even indeed seeking it or if they are just fulfilling a job as a pastor or if they are trying to "win" a debate with another person, etc.
The path is narrow that leads to destruction, so is the path narrow for those whom truly seek God and listen for His voice. There are times when I, admittedly, do not listen for the Lord's voice but just choose to seek the answer on my own and it usually leads to a false understanding of the world and of the nature of God. It is those times when I humble myself that I find true wisdom in the Word of God, through the revelation of the Holy Spirit.
Now, I do use commentaries and the like because the Lord has been speaking to persons who have a lot more time and experience listening to the Lord than I do. And I benefit from the wisdom that Jesus has imparted to them. It isn't wrong to reason those things in the Word out, far from it, but our mind for reason and our reason for presenting it to others must come from a pure place or we will run into those thousands of divisons that you see before you.
You say dogma as if it's a bad word, and i suppose in the modern western culture it has become one, but dogma at it's roots is not an inherently a bad thing. One can argue with truth until one has wasted one's life but it doesn't begin to make a difference. That truth is still true, that law is still law. Dogma should be fed to us by God and not contrived from false motives. It certainly is a gentle process that requires devotion and faith.
@Held_in_wings_of_light@xanga - The difference between Catholics and Protestants is profound, for example. The differences are so great that we don't even use the same Bible.
And if other differences weren't also profound then there would be no need for different denominations. But as we can see, there are different denominations because of profound differences in doctrine.
This lack of unity is killing Christianity.
Also, Jesus taught unity. Consequently there is no way to gloss over a religion that professes to teach the Gospel of Jesus, but defies his teachings as a matter of doctrine.
@homealivein45@xanga - Even an uneducated person can receive the Spirit, through which when he
hearsthe Word, he too, can understand it. I'm not denying the human mind is involved in natural processes- what I am denying is the methods currently taught in academics to understanding the Word of God.
Which, btw, is contrary to the teachings of the Bible itself.
So what I meant was (in response to the title of the post), if you want a "Crash course" in understanding the Bible, look to the Holy Spirit.
@FearofGodandPerfectLove@xanga - It is true that even an uneducated person can receive the Spirit. But an uneducated person cannot read the Bible. That's one reason why Western Civilization values formal education.
Both priests and preachers the world over spend years of formal study of Scripture. This means that human beings must apply their mind to Scripture, just like anything else, if they want to become experts.
@homealivein45@xanga - "This lack of unity is killing Christianity. " This is, unfortunately, the fallen nature of men. Fortunately, our salvation is not in Christianity.
"Also, Jesus taught unity. Consequently there is no way to gloss over a religion that professes to teach the Gospel of Jesus, but defies his teachings as a matter of doctrine."
Everyone who wishes to worship Jesus is welcome to come and worship with me and those at my local church. Jesus taught a lot of things that people of faith do not follow. It is the reason that we continue to need His grace while we are even believers. I am not perfect, nor do I expect others to be, in understanding and in matters of the heart. What I require of other believers is to Love God with all your heart, mind and soul and to love others. Moving towards Christ is a life long pursuit and people often stray off course. The church will not be in a perfected state until Jesus comes back and claims us.
I'm really not concerned with what the "other guys" are doing or professing. I am only responsible for myself and for the people that God puts into my life. What I have to offer others is what I have been given by God, truth, life, love, and freedom everlasting. I have no worries of constantly being on rice paper for the things that I believe. It is the freedom given to me by God because I know that should something be amiss or if there is something that I need to know, that God is faithful to teach me through the Holy Spirit (that comes in so many forms, personal revelation, God speaking through others, God speaking through his creation) or through the study of His word.
@homealivein45@xanga - This is Held in wings of light. I switched sites so you can reply to this one. Sorry for the switch, but I am just getting started here and was experimenting.
@Held_in_wings_of_light@xanga - Jesus told us to go and baptize men of all nations.
That means he want's the entire world to be Christian.
How can that be done if Christians can't even decide the content and meaning of their own religion?
@homealivein45@xanga - You receive a calling from God, you go, and you submit yourself before Him. It's really that simple. God ill needs us to do His work, He just chooses to do so. I am a prime example of this as I am a missionary in Japan. I was called here by God and I came. The church I started with was one that I had worked with before, but things did not work out. They didn't find a place for me within their body to work and so the Lord moved me to a different place to work there. I didn't agree with how my previous church went about evangelizing, but I do not question their faith nor do I criticize them for what they do, because I don't need to. I think a lot of the divisions we have comes from paying too much attention to what other people are doing and not enough attention to what God is doing.
If a church denied the divinity of Jesus, the inerrancy of the Word, or worshiped other gods along with the Lord, etc. I would know that they are certainly not following the Lord's ways and it would not be a place that I would fellowship.
But if a church said that we do not allow guitars in our worship service because they are the devil's tool of rock and roll etc., while I wouldn't agree in the least and think it's a really narrow and legalistic backed viewpoint, I could accept them as a member of the church.
@Winged_Paladin@xanga - Any self righteous sanctimonious blow hard can say he was called by God.
Self appointing for the anointing is a call from self, not from God.
According to the Bible, the Apostles hand picked their helpers and successors. Men of God didn't pick themselves.
So you see, even on this one simple thing that is in the Bible plain as day, you and I see things differently because we believe in different dogma.
@homealivein45@xanga - But one can peer into the life of a person and see if they were indeed called by God or if they are self appointed. You will know a tree by it's fruit. It is a lesson that one get's from the simple teaching of Jesus. Check a person actions to the Word's description of a believer and you will soon see who that person serves. Unless you are against doing those things, we see eye to eye on that dogma.
I'm going to hit the hay for the night and will be in Toyko Disneyland for the whole day tomorrow so my reply to more of our discussion may be delayed.
@Winged_Paladin@xanga - None of the Apostles had any inkling of what they would become before Christ chose them.
Saint Francis and Saint Ignatius Loyola led lives of decadence before becoming men of God.
@homealivein45@xanga - I think you seem to be misunderstanding me; I don't deny that you must study. Even devote your life to the Word: for the Lord said that we are sanctified by the Truth. All I'm saying is that the Holy Spirit is the difference between understanding what you're reading and not. It's interesting that you seem to have a problem with the Holy Spirit.