Theology 101
INTERPRETATION
CHRISTIANS CAN UNDERSTAND THE WORD OF GOD
Give me understanding, and I will keep your law and obey it with all my heart.
PSALM 119:34
All Christians have a right and duty not only to learn from the church’s heritage of faith but also to interpret Scripture for themselves. The church of Rome doubts this, alleging that individuals easily misinterpret the Scriptures. This is true; but the following rules, faithfully observed, will help prevent that from happening.
Every book of Scripture is a human composition, and though it should always be revered as the Word of God, interpretation of it must start from its human character. Allegorizing, therefore, which disregards the human writer’s expressed meaning is never appropriate.
Each book was written not in code but in a way that could be understood by the readership to which it was addressed. This is true even of the books that primarily use symbolism: Daniel, Zechariah, and Revelation. The main thrust is always clear, even if details are clouded. So when we understand the words used, the historical background, and the cultural conventions of the writer and his readers, we are well on the way to grasping the thoughts that are being conveyed. Spiritual understanding—that is, the discernment of the reality of God, his ways with humankind, his present will, and one’s own relationship to him now and for the future—will not however reach us from the text until the veil is removed from our hearts and we are able to share the writer’s own passion to know and please and honor God (2 Cor. 3:16; 1 Cor. 2:14). Prayer that God’s Spirit may generate this passion in us and show us God in the text is needed here. (See Ps. 119:18-19, 26-27, 33-34, 73, 125, 144, 169; Eph. 1:17-19; 3:16-19.)
Each book had its place in the progress of God’s revelation of grace, which began in Eden and reached its climax in Jesus Christ, Pentecost, and the apostolic New Testament. That place must be borne in mind when studying the text. The Psalms, for instance, model the godly heart in every age, but express its prayers and praises in terms of the typical realities (earthly kings, kingdoms, health, wealth, war, long life) that circumscribed the life of grace in the pre-Christian era.
Each book proceeded from the same divine mind, so the teaching of the Bible’s sixty-six books will be complementary and self-consistent. If we cannot yet see this, the fault is in us, not in Scripture. It is certain that Scripture nowhere contradicts Scripture; rather, one passage explains another. This sound principle of interpreting Scripture by Scripture is sometimes called the analogy of Scripture or the analogy of faith.
Each book exhibits unchanging truth about God, humanity, godliness, and ungodliness, applied to and illustrated by particular situations in which individuals and groups found themselves. The final stage in biblical interpretation is to reapply these truths to our own life-situations; this is the way to discern what God in Scripture is saying to us at this moment. Examples of such reapplication are Josiah’s realization of God’s wrath at Judah’s failure to observe his law (2 Kings 22:8-13), Jesus’ reasoning from Genesis 2:24 (Matt. 19:4-6), and Paul’s use of Genesis 15:6 and Psalm 32:1-2 to show the reality of present righteousness by faith (Rom. 4:1-8).
No meaning may be read into or imposed on Scripture that cannot with certainty be read out of Scripture—shown, that is, to be unambiguously expressed by one or more of the human writers.
Careful and prayerful observance of these rules is a mark of every Christian who “correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15).
Packer, J. I. (1995). Concise theology : A guide to historic Christian beliefs. Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House.
No responses yet?
Well, I’m probably the only person here who disagrees with any of it. (I agree with most of it.)
I don’t entirely agree with “…but also to interpret Scripture for themselves.”
But I’m not in an argumentative mood today. 🙂
“The final stage in biblical interpretation is to reapply these truths to our own life-situations; this is the way to discern what God in Scripture is saying to us at this moment.”
This is where the rubber meets the road and why I like Packer. He goes beyond his sectarian views and brings it home to the individual who has to stand before God naked only clothed with the righteousness He has provided them.
This issues to me aren’t, are we going to come up with the same doctrines, but how each of us are going to live out what God has recorded for us. But we can’t do such a thing unless we spend some time with Him and His recorded words.
Each book had its place in the progress of God’s revelation of grace, which began in Eden and reached its climax in Jesus Christ, Pentecost, and the apostolic New Testament. That place must be borne in mind when studying the text.
—————————————————————————————
Huge point by Packer. Just look at how often someone runs to Leviticus to justify their sinful behavior in the face of Scripture’s clear teachings.
Sometimes it is an accusation of noncompliance. (Well, do YOU avoid shellfish and clothing of mixed fibers?)
Sometimes it is to mock the punishment. (Oh, so I assume you want to kill all homosexuals and disobedient children).
Confusing the progressive nature of revelation (and dare I say it – the dispensations), leads to a lot of Biblical rejection by the world, and Biblical confusion as to application by some of the believers.
This would probably go better with the first class – but, what if archeology uncovered Paul’s real first letter to the Corinthians? Does it go into the canon?
If we can prove it’s Pauls…I say yes.
Michael,
So, the canon is not closed? btw, I do agree.
The canon is closed based on the assumption that there are no longer apostles in the original sense.
My guess is that we will never find any more apostolic writings because God delivered His word…but I would have to accept a verifiable apostolic letter as Scripture.
Great question… 🙂
MLD,
Does your question assume that everything written by an apostle, like Paul, would be inspired and thus worthy of inclusion?
I have never seen it that way, and thus I guess I never have ‘worried’ about any lost books.
Put another way, do we really think that James only wrote one letter in his life to another group of Christians? That Peter only wrote two? (I’m giving Peter credit for 2nd Peter too)
To back up my point (after hitting submit), it is significant that the SCRIPTURES are inspired, not the men.
Isn’t this thread about Interpretation?
I would have expected some to state biblical interpretation was not left to the lay people, it was the sole responsibility of the clergy.
Come on now, “where’s the beef!”
Bob, I did say that!