The California Collection/TheCaliforniaCollection.cdr/his101/interp.arj/INTERP.TXT

Text File | 1990-04-14 | 6KB | 113 lines

              THE BIBLE - From God to us with love
                   [Part II:  Interpretation]

     In the last issue of the Singles Communicator, I demonstrated
in my article, THE BIBLE (Part I:  Unity), that there is complete
harmony in the Scriptures which cannot be explained by coincidence
or collusion.  The unity of the Bible is a strong argument in favor
of its divine authorship.

     Now that we've established that there's good evidence for the
authenticity of the Scriptures, we are faced with another potential
problem often articulated like this:  but-that's-just-your-
interpretation.

     I have been afflicted with the but-that's-your-interpretation
response on many occasions, and I often wonder if those who use
this line of argument really understand what they're implying.
It's as if no individual can come to know the truth because many
people arrive at varying conclusions.  Should we simply conclude
that we're victims of a relative world floundering on a sea of
subjectivity?  Is man really like an empty bubble floating on a sea
of nothingness unable to come to a sure knowledge of God and an
authoritative understanding of what the Bible describes as His
will?

     The but-that's-just-your-interpretation evangelists fail to
take into account certain facts regarding biblical interpretation.
The vast majority of Bible readers have no problem with agreement
on the central teachings of the Bible.  The main message is crystal
clear:  God, because of His unconditional love, entered into the
world and became a man in the person of Jesus Christ and died a
substitutionary death on our behalf, paying the penalty for sin.
By developing a personal relationship with Christ, by placing their
faith in Him, mankind can have their relationship restored with
God.

     All Bible-believing churches from a host of different
denominational backgrounds accept the essentials (or the basic
fundamentals) of Christian faith.  For example, all branches of
Christianity believe Jesus Christ was God the Son, second person of
the Trinity, born of the virgin Mary, who died on the cross for our
sins, and rose from the dead as a vindication of His messianic
claims.  So, the main message of the Bible is clear for those who
will read it openly and seek to find out its meaning.  The problem
comes when people attempt to force the Bible to say what they want
it to say based on their own preconceived ideas.

     But some may cry, "This is a free country and isn't everyone
entitled to his or her own interpretation of the Bible?"  Of
course, but not all interpretations are correct.  A college student
studying for a final examination on the history of Nazi Germany
may, in fact, interpret William L. Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of
the Third Reich" to be arguing that Hitler was a great
philanthropist abounding with such heavenly, unconditional love for
the Jews that he killed them so they would be able to receive their
eternal reward quickly.  Since this imaginative student failed to
understand William L. Shirer in terms of what he actually said, the
teacher will grade his work accordingly, and no excuse such as but-
that's-my-interpretation will hold up.  Interpretive relativism
deserves a great big F (failing), in flaming red.

     The first principle in interpretive integrity is to make a
necessary distinction between what biblical scholars call exegesis
and eisogesis.  Exegesis means to explain what a passage says.  The
word comes from the Greek words meaning "to guide out of."  To
exegete Scripture is to analyze from the words the meaning that is
objectively there.  By this process we are now in a position to
discern what the inspired author intended to communicate.  On the
other hand, eisogesis has the same root but a different prefix.
The prefix eis, also coming from the Greek, means "into."  Thus,
eisogesis refers to the practice of reading "into" the text the
meaning one wants to get out of it.

     When we claim to know the meaning of a biblical passage, we
must be prepared to show from the grammar, the history, the
culture, and the context that the writer intended to convey that
idea.  This is not an invention, but a principle of life.  When you
receive a letter from your parents or a friend, you read it
grammatically (evaluating the writing according to its conformity
to the rules of grammar), historically (based on your knowledge of
that person in the past and present), and contextually (studying
the person's sentences in light of the paragraphs and entire
letter.)

     The great need for intellectual honesty in approaching the
Bible cannot be overemphasized.  God's Word is not to be used like
a "Ouija board" attempting to make Scriptural passages fit one's
preconceived notions.  The apostle Peter, referring to the wisdom
in which Paul wrote, warned, "His letters contain some things that
are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort,
as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction" (2 Peter
3:16).

     While the but-that's-just-your-interpretation rebels throw all
common sense to the winds of relativism, the Bible remains
mankind's greatest privilege.  No other book so loves and respects
the life of man.  No loftier songs about man's true plight and
glory, about his agony and joy, misery and hope, have ever been
expressed, and nowhere has man's need for guidance and the
certainty of his ultimate redemption been so clearly conceived.

     God spoke not to confuse, but to enlighten.  In approaching
the Bible grammatically, historically, culturally, and
contextually, which are principles grounded into the very fiber of
our being, we are now in the position for God's Spirit to illumine
His Word and search out its application to our lives.

-----
from The Singles Communicator
Mike Moriarty, Editor
A Publication for Single Adults of Immanuel Bible Church
Springfield, Virginia
July/August 1989