HERMENEUTICS
The Evangelical Reformed Fellowship is engaged both in apologetic works (addressed to those outside the Christian faith) and polemic works (addressed to those within the Church). While any apologetic debate that hinges on biblical argumentation must first establish the veracity of the Scriptural text, such should not be the case for discussions within the Christian community. Other believers, while holding to differing interpretations, nevertheless (in theory) hold the same high estimation of the Word of God. Yet in many of our theological discussions, we are met with resistance - not because of the content, per se, but because of the very nature of the presentation.
Theology (the word) has become vilified. Theology (the discipline) has been abandoned in favor of a disconnected practice of isolated exegesis (though that term,exegesis, is not typically employed).[1] A specious dichotomy is created between theological studies and exegetical analysis. The belief is that exegesis is a separate and superior practice when measured against theology. Or, to put it another way, a narrowly focused analysis of an isolated scriptural text (exegesis) will somehow miraculously produce ‘The Truth’, even when disconnected from any doctrine or dogma (also bad words); in other words, theology.
I will readily concede that bad exegesis results – without exception – in bad theology. The antithesis, however, is also true: proper exegesis will – again without exception – result in sound, biblical theology. This spurious tension between exegesis and theology is really nothing more than the product of a poor hermeneutic, and that poorly applied.
Hermeneutics (the study and interpretation of Scripture) involves both exegesis and theology. Exegesis is the careful examination of the biblical text (in the original languages, whenever possible) with an aim to accurately represent the author’s original intent as well as the Holy Spirit’s ultimate design. Evangelicals who hold strongly to the belief in biblical authority (sola Scriptura) are correct in saying that the biblical texts are to be reverently held, fervently examined, and faithfully applied. Applied to what end, however?
Hermeneutics is the science of utilizing the end product of careful exegesis and assigning relevance in light of the whole counsel of God. The process includes, however, more than strict linguistic/grammatical word-for-word translation.[2] Lexical, literary, and even aspects of philosophical inquiry also play a significant role. The ultimate aim is to garner the fullest understanding of the text while always submitting to the principle typically termed the Analogy of Scripture (or, alternately, theAnalogy of Faith). This basic principle simply states that Scripture interprets itself with neither contradiction nor error. This does not mean, though, that a text can always be taken at face value without understanding the context in which it is situated, the type of text (e.g., narrative, didactic, poetry, metaphor, etc.), and, ultimately, the way in which the text fits into the greater whole of the totality of revelation contained in the Bible. This, and nothing more, is theology.[3]
The danger inherent in the approach common to much of the modern evangelical community is that certain teachings are “discovered” a posteriori – that is, reasoned inductively from effects to causes (or from presumed teaching to text), rather than a priori – that is, reasoned deductively from the cause (text) to the effect (doctrine).[4] Thus, a number of fallacious doctrines blossom from a ‘proof-text’ that stands in marked contrast to the clear teaching of Scripture in another passage. There is an old maxim that states the matter plainly: “A text without a context is a pretext for a proof-text.” This is why theological hermeneutics has adopted several rules that are consistent with the analogy of Scripture and are designed to prevent the development of erroneous doctrine. Among these are:
Consequently, any serious study of theology presupposes an acceptance of established hermeneutic principles. Any disagreement at this juncture renders the debate futile and, quite likely, harmful. Those who are prepared to sacrifice a reasoned approach to proper hermeneutics will find themselves frustrated by (and frustrating to) the individual who confines the argument to biblical interpretation and established rules of logic. The reader who accepts the validity of these principles will likely see the concordant harmony of the Reformed theological doctrines. The reader who, alas, denies that there are any principles whatsoever other than the presumed interpretation of a text – with no regard for its context – will likely remain unconvinced. It is our sincere hope, however, that God will use the ministry of the Evangelical Reformed Fellowship to bring a fresh and reverent consideration of His grace, for His glory.
[1] By isolated exegesis, I am referring to the application of a narrow interpretive technique to truncated biblical texts without subjecting them to the unified structure of the Scriptures as a whole to determine their place in the whole counsel of God (i.e., the analogy of Scripture defined herein).
[2] Such a strict word-for-word translation (or, formal equivalent) is certainly appropriate, however, and most useful in an overall translation of the Bible for a version in a language other than the original.
[3] There are several sub-disciplines within the larger family of theological studies (e.g., systematic, biblical, and historical theologies). However, all are concerned with the hermeneutic principles in this discussion and thus the general term theology will suffice.
[4] Of course, we do not mean that a true text can in any way ever convey a false doctrine. It is the interpretive device that is false, not the object of the interpretation.
Theology (the word) has become vilified. Theology (the discipline) has been abandoned in favor of a disconnected practice of isolated exegesis (though that term,exegesis, is not typically employed).[1] A specious dichotomy is created between theological studies and exegetical analysis. The belief is that exegesis is a separate and superior practice when measured against theology. Or, to put it another way, a narrowly focused analysis of an isolated scriptural text (exegesis) will somehow miraculously produce ‘The Truth’, even when disconnected from any doctrine or dogma (also bad words); in other words, theology.
I will readily concede that bad exegesis results – without exception – in bad theology. The antithesis, however, is also true: proper exegesis will – again without exception – result in sound, biblical theology. This spurious tension between exegesis and theology is really nothing more than the product of a poor hermeneutic, and that poorly applied.
Hermeneutics (the study and interpretation of Scripture) involves both exegesis and theology. Exegesis is the careful examination of the biblical text (in the original languages, whenever possible) with an aim to accurately represent the author’s original intent as well as the Holy Spirit’s ultimate design. Evangelicals who hold strongly to the belief in biblical authority (sola Scriptura) are correct in saying that the biblical texts are to be reverently held, fervently examined, and faithfully applied. Applied to what end, however?
Hermeneutics is the science of utilizing the end product of careful exegesis and assigning relevance in light of the whole counsel of God. The process includes, however, more than strict linguistic/grammatical word-for-word translation.[2] Lexical, literary, and even aspects of philosophical inquiry also play a significant role. The ultimate aim is to garner the fullest understanding of the text while always submitting to the principle typically termed the Analogy of Scripture (or, alternately, theAnalogy of Faith). This basic principle simply states that Scripture interprets itself with neither contradiction nor error. This does not mean, though, that a text can always be taken at face value without understanding the context in which it is situated, the type of text (e.g., narrative, didactic, poetry, metaphor, etc.), and, ultimately, the way in which the text fits into the greater whole of the totality of revelation contained in the Bible. This, and nothing more, is theology.[3]
The danger inherent in the approach common to much of the modern evangelical community is that certain teachings are “discovered” a posteriori – that is, reasoned inductively from effects to causes (or from presumed teaching to text), rather than a priori – that is, reasoned deductively from the cause (text) to the effect (doctrine).[4] Thus, a number of fallacious doctrines blossom from a ‘proof-text’ that stands in marked contrast to the clear teaching of Scripture in another passage. There is an old maxim that states the matter plainly: “A text without a context is a pretext for a proof-text.” This is why theological hermeneutics has adopted several rules that are consistent with the analogy of Scripture and are designed to prevent the development of erroneous doctrine. Among these are:
- The clear interprets the obscure
- The New Testament interprets the Old Testament
- The didactic (e.g., epistles) interpret the narrative (e.g., gospel stories)
Consequently, any serious study of theology presupposes an acceptance of established hermeneutic principles. Any disagreement at this juncture renders the debate futile and, quite likely, harmful. Those who are prepared to sacrifice a reasoned approach to proper hermeneutics will find themselves frustrated by (and frustrating to) the individual who confines the argument to biblical interpretation and established rules of logic. The reader who accepts the validity of these principles will likely see the concordant harmony of the Reformed theological doctrines. The reader who, alas, denies that there are any principles whatsoever other than the presumed interpretation of a text – with no regard for its context – will likely remain unconvinced. It is our sincere hope, however, that God will use the ministry of the Evangelical Reformed Fellowship to bring a fresh and reverent consideration of His grace, for His glory.
[1] By isolated exegesis, I am referring to the application of a narrow interpretive technique to truncated biblical texts without subjecting them to the unified structure of the Scriptures as a whole to determine their place in the whole counsel of God (i.e., the analogy of Scripture defined herein).
[2] Such a strict word-for-word translation (or, formal equivalent) is certainly appropriate, however, and most useful in an overall translation of the Bible for a version in a language other than the original.
[3] There are several sub-disciplines within the larger family of theological studies (e.g., systematic, biblical, and historical theologies). However, all are concerned with the hermeneutic principles in this discussion and thus the general term theology will suffice.
[4] Of course, we do not mean that a true text can in any way ever convey a false doctrine. It is the interpretive device that is false, not the object of the interpretation.
