Advanced Hermeneutics Outlined

Transcription

1 Advanced Hermeneutics Outlined By Feridoon Mokhof [ADVANCED HERMENEUTICS OUTLINED-FERIDOON MOKHOF]

2 I. EXEGESIS (THE PRACTICE) A. Inductive Inductive reasoning tries to rebuild the original pattern and construction of the book, chapter or paragraph under investigation. With inductive study, rather than answering questions, the Exegete will analyze a section of Scripture and try to determine what the author was trying to convey. Inductive Bible Study involves the observance of possible cases and then assumes it is true in the other cases that have not been tested. As a result, Inductive Bible Study uses the imagination to move from observation of the Scripture to the theories or concepts that explicate truths for application. Deductive reasoning starts with the general and moves to the particular and is therefore a priori (prior to looking at the facts). Inductive reasoning, on the other hand, starts with the particular and moves to the general and is therefore a posteriori (after seeing the evidence). A Major issue in the process of inductive reasoning is experience verses Biblical truth. Experience must never be the tool used to interpret Scripture. Understanding how to execute an inductive study is indispensable for developing sound teachings. Inductive reason forms specific instances to a general rule. It observes specific instances and notices specific pattern. The inductive method of Exegesis is also called the discovery method of Exegesis. Induction is a process in which a person begins with specific, individual items, facts, instances, observations and puts them together to form a general principle. 1. Steps of Inductive Study There are three basic steps to inductive Bible study: a. Observation Reveals what the text says. In this step we need to record observations, make Note of themes, and Notice Divisions. b. Deliberation focuses on the general Hermeneutics, context, history and language. Here basic observations begin to identify; we need to observe outlines, key words, key Phrases, key verse or verses, theological themes, journalistic questions, parallel passages, extra biblical materials, genre c. Application centers on the practical and relevant truth to be lived out as a Christian in today's world in relation to the meaning of the concentration of how it applies to me. In this step we will go through three stages of; making application, obedience, and homiletic 2

3 These basic steps will enable us to better understand the Scriptures. We need to pray before the start of our study and remain in an attitude of prayer as we do in order to show God our dependency on Him and to ensure our fruitful study of spiritual truth. B. Deductive Unlike the Inductive Method of Bible Study, Deductive Exegesis uses logic rather than imagination to draw its conclusion. Deductive analysis may initially derive its primary conclusion thorough inductive reasoning. Deductive Exegesis is used to prove a point rather than determine the truth of Scripture. This method of Biblical analysis brings preconceptions to the Bible Study and then seeks out Biblical data to prove these presumptions. A Deductive approach to Bible Study is often called the extending conjecture approach because the assumptions that the Bible Student has before he goes to the Bible are, often unconsciously, carried with him to the Bible and applied to or extended into the Biblical text. As he reads the passage with certain ideas already in mind, he will probably not see all that is there to see in the passage. The deductive reasoning process often happens without the person being aware that he is using a deductive process, or that he is violating the text by reading meaning into it rather than allowing the text to give out its own inherent meaning. C. Charting Books By charting a book, chapter or passage, we maintain continuity with the rest of the book, chapter or verse and nothing is taken out of context. We must maintain that a text has meaning, so long as it remains in relation to its parent text. 1. Four levels of reading: The first level is called Preparatory Reading. This level of reading is only superficial. Preparatory reading is a quick read of the book that we intend to study. The second level is called Investigative Reading. At this point, the reader is trying only to identify key points. At this level of reading, the student should try to establish the historical situation of the book. The third level is called Analytical Reading. At this stage of reading, we are no longer interested in superficial data. We are now in the process of definitive in-depth analysis. At this stage of reading, study every little detail so that nothing is missed. Here, the student should try to establish the historical and theological context of the book. The student should ask questions such as. What are the controlling themes of this book? Who are the people involved? Why and where did the event take place? Are there any sub-plots? The fourth level of reading is called Comparative Reading. This becomes especially 3

4 applicable when we read the Bible. We must allow Scripture to interpret Scripture. 2. A Charting method In Charting we need to find the system that will best suit our methods. This part of our study goes through several stages: a. Make a Superficial Analysis. During the first few times through the book read I swiftly, and preferably read it in one sitting without interruption. Ignore the chapter and verse divisions. Try to determine the mood of the author when he wrote the book. Make note of any major themes or topics that present themselves. Also make note of any recurring thoughts or subjects. Remember that Observations and interpretations should be placed in separate locations of notes. b. Additional Research. Attempt to ascertain as much cultural and geographical knowledge on the text as possible. c. Divisions into Major Sections. When the survey is complete, divide the book into appropriate major divisions. Do not force divisions. Allow the divisions to be natural and self evident. Divisions can usually be located by transitional or summary phrases. d. Subdivide Major sections. Make subdivisions of the major categories titling them appropriately. Like the divisions above, these divisions should be natural. Title these sections with descriptive titles for later review and study. e. Making the chart. Several methods can be used for making a chart to review information. Some suggestions are vertical, horizontal, and spiral. The chart should be concise enough that the entire book can be displayed on a single page. The following are some important aspects of a chart. i. The whole book at a glance ii. The titles and references for each major division and subdivision iii. The relative length of each division f. Analyzation. Scrutinize, analyze, and meditate on each section, attacking it from eleven different angles. The eleven (11) operations are: 1. Read for meaning Begin making observations on each section by carefully reading the unit for meaning. Read the unit as a whole unit, from beginning to end without stopping several times. Then read it again as a unit several times 4

5 in different translations. Each time you read it, try to read it as though it were your first time! Take time to meditate on the meaning and the main point of the section. Endeavor not to overlook the obvious teachings of the passage. The message that is in plain view is what you should see first. Beware of the temptation to get more out of the text than is actually there. Attempt to discover the one or two sentences which express the one central thought or main point of the text. Ask yourself, what point did the writer intend to stress here? What is the built-in emphasis? Keep the entire section in mind as you scrutinize each part of it. Then, reread the passage as a whole. 2. Outline the each section Make a new outline of each section, reviewing thoughts, arguments and main information and points. Allow the text to speak for itself. 3. Note the purpose of this section 4. Ask the six journalistic questions (Who, what, why, when, where and how) 5. Note grammatical detail 6. Identify relationship 7. Reword the text 8. Paraphrase the section 9. List the main teachings 10. Condense each section 11. Test yourself on the content above g. Topical Reading. Key words may illuminate the topic under investigation h. Re-Construction i. Interpretation 5

6 j. Application k. Homiletic D. Diagramming a Paragraph or Verse The Biblical expositor committed to the literal interpretation of Scripture and sentence diagramming provides two (2) invaluable services: It shows the basic structure of Biblical passages, and it enables the expositor to construct an accurate outline. 1. Identify Genre The easiest thing that a Bible Student can do to begin to build a better Hermeneutic is to start reading individual passages of Scripture in their context, which can simply mean reading what is written just before and just after it. The second thing that can be done that will help to understand Scripture better is to identify which genre your passage falls under. Different genres cause us to take different approaches to interpretation. 2. Main Thought 3. Subordinate thoughts 4. Modifiers 5. Thought Flow 6. Grammatical Settings 7. Identify Biblical Sentence II. Hermeneutic Techniques A. Allegorical An allegory is a figure of speech which contains a hidden or deeper spiritual meaning or application. It is the symbolic representation of truth about God or man. Allegorical speech is a tool whereby the writer or speaker conveys hidden or mysterious truths by the selective use of words, which have literal meanings. Allegories are a legitimate literary tool in communicating literal truth. Allegory is different from analogy in that allegory appeals to the imagination. Analogy appeals to reason. Allegorical interpretation believes that one can always look for the "real" or more "spiritual" meaning behind the obvious interpretation of the text. In every allegory, there is a twofold sense. There is the immediate or historic, which is understood from the natural meaning of the words, and the ultimate, which is concerned with the things signified by the words. Two modes of Allegorical Interpretation are found in dealing with the Bible. The first one is symbolic or typological interpretation, derived mainly from Palestinian Jews. The other is 6

7 the philosophical or mystical modes originating with the Alexandrian Jews of Egypt. Allegory also uses type and antitype extensively. The Biblical Authors themselves make extensive use of the allegorical method of interpretation. Allegorical interpretation is not for the novice or beginner. Paul makes mention of this method of interpretation giving and example in his letter to the Galatian Church (Gal. 4:24). Paul draws on the sons of Abraham and their mothers as an allegorical interpretation of the text. This is the only place in Scripture where the word allegory is used. One of the most allegorical texts of the Old Testament is the Book of Ezekiel. B. Spiritual Much like the definition of the allegorical exegesis of Scripture, the spiritual method assumes that the literal interpretation of the text is not the only possible way a text can be interpreted. Spiritual exegesis, like allegorical interpretation of Biblical text requires maturity and years of training and is not for the apprentice. Spiritual insights and interpretations of Biblical text must be appropriately founded. Spiritual application must not be confused with spiritual interpretation. Coercive interpretations seek to force listeners to do something. C. Devotional Devotional use and interpretation of the Bible must be governed by the general rules of Hermeneutics. Application must have a solid foundation upon which it stands. Devotional Hermeneutics demands that we pay strict attention to the context of the passages we are using to determine application. The Bible is a book of principles. It is more a book of principles than specific directions. The concept behind Devotional interpretation is daily living and application. Devotional Hermeneutics looks at the Biblical text searching for how to apply the Scriptures to life. In all the interpretive methods of Biblical Hermeneutic the Bible must be allowed to speak for itself. Here we will point out three approached to Devotional Hermeneutics here. 1. Deductive Interpretation. The question behind devotional Hermeneutics is how does the text apply to me? The devotional aspect first asks how can I walk out the text? 2. Counseling. Moses was the mediator between not only man and God but also man and man. Counsellors must look at the Biblical text and find ways of instructing those they counsel. Therefore, their approach is deductive and devotional. When the Biblical Counsellor is locating, quoting or studying the Biblical text the meaning of that text must never be forced 7

8 3. Promises One area that many Believers love to look into as a devotional tool is the promises of God. While this seems like a positive practice, we must maintain that the context of the promise must be strictly adhered to before the promise can be received. Simply being in Christ does not always qualify the Believer to receive rewards that demand certain actions and behavior such as obedience. Claiming a passage as a promise that is taken out of context will result in a loss of faith. Before we can claim a promise or passage, we must first ascertain it scope. D. Reason The Rationalistic approach to Biblical Hermeneutics is much more critical than any other method. This method viewed the Bible as if it were just another human document without any Divine inspiration or authority. Rationalism relies on the intellect and logic of humanity rather that viewing the Bible as a document that originated from God. Rationalism can be defined as the assumption that human reason is the measure of all things. We must maintain that the mind of degenerate man is incapable of discerning the truth of God s Word. Because it is not a natural document, the Spirit must be involved in its interpretation. Without redemption, humanity is incapable of understanding the true intent of the Bible. E. Literal Many Christians today are committed strictly to the literal Hermeneutic method of interpretation. The Literal Hermeneutic concludes that Biblical text can be interpreted from the understanding of plain everyday living. Biblical Hermeneutic has been caught between two basic schools of thought. The first is that of Marcion and his heretical view of the Old Testament and God. The second school of thought is that Origen and his super-elevation of the Old Testament. Marcion portrayed the Old Testament in a diminutive fashion which reduced it to non-use. His view of the Old Testament was so radical that he annulled its use. He used only the Book of John and a select few of Paul s writings as His Bible. Origen on the other hand almost excluded the New Testament s use. Neither of these two views is acceptable. We must contend that Biblical data has one common thread of revelation throughout. During the Christian reformation, this issue played a major part in the development of Hermeneutics. In contemporary Christian history, these two schools still have their proponents. Bultmann represents the Marcion heresy and Carl Barth represents the Origen view. Barth propagated a strictly Christo-centric view of the Old Testament. The clear unity of both Testaments must be argued. The unity of the two Testaments is neither legalistic nor strictly Christo-centric. The fundamental premise of the Bible is the progressive revelation of humanity s redemption. Therefore, the New Testament must not be divorced or alienated from its parent, the Old 8

9 Testament. The Old Testament looked forward to the redemption of humanity. This revelation and expectation was realized in the New Testament. Hermeneutics are the science and art of Biblical interpretation. It is a science because it is guided by rules within a system. And, it is an art because the application of the rules is by skill, and not by mechanical reproduction. This causes us to know that Hermeneutic principles are not laws imposed upon Scripture. Hermeneutics interpret Scripture through the normal methods of human communication. Hermeneutics apply to the universal laws of human communication. There are five principles involved in the Literal Method of Interpretation: a. The Law of Context b. The Law of Comparisons c. The Law of Preference d. Spelling, grammar and figure of speech must be given attention in each passage. e. God revealed Himself to man by means of man s ways and culture. The study of Biblical language will reveal normal grammatical meanings of Biblical text. However, language can be encoded to contain special messages hidden within the text. This may also be true of the Bible. To discover the literal meaning of any passage we must understand the reason the author produced the original text. Literal interpretation of the Bible must never negate the theological implications and designs of the book. The Bible, as the Word of God, must be read as a whole. It has collective harmony. No passage of Scripture, correctly interpreted, will contradict another passage. All apparent contradictions are the result of our misunderstandings concerning the Biblical text. The language of the Bible itself requires literal interpretation. The Biblical text demonstrates that the text was communicated and understood literally. The Literal method of interpretation is a system for judging the interpretive skills of men. Literal Interpretation does not exclude the Figurative. Figurative and symbolic meanings can be produced from literal text. Literal Interpretation does not exclude the Spiritual meaning. Because God is a Spirit, His language and speech are Spiritual. Therefore, His Book, the Bible, is filled with Spiritual content. Spiritual meanings in no way negate literal meanings. Literal Interpretation does not exclude the Allegorical meanings. By excluding the possibility of allegorical interpretation, it would be impossible to see the multitude of Messianic pictures available in the Bible. F. Covenantal In Scripture, the central paradigm of the saving relationship with God is the covenant motif. It is clear that the Biblical canon presents God consistently, as a personal Being who 9

10 interacts personally with those beings created in His image. In Christ, God reveals His personhood in historical and experiential ways. The Old Testament sacrificial system, which was used in part to accomplish atonement between God and Israel, found its expression in the context of the covenant. The basic character of Old Testament religion was interpersonal. Every breach of this Law was a personal offence against this God whose concern and love had been so explicitly expressed. These beaches in the Covenant were solved through the daily sacrificial system as a daily covenantal renewal. Communion with God was mediated through the rite of sacrifice. Indeed all humanity (Rom. 1:18 3:20), finds itself in desperate need for a means of restoration to God s fellowship. As the basis of reconciliation, the atonement provides the means for this to occur. Furthermore, since all sin is essentially relational, the overcoming of the curse of sin must involve personal and relational means. In Biblical terms, the covenant is the prime agency of God's self-revelation in history. God reveals Himself to be the covenant God. The essence of the covenant between God and man is "I will be your God, and you will be My people." An understanding of the covenant is central to understanding the history of redemption. Covenant Hermeneutics is that system of theology which recognizes the successive covenants of Scripture as a unity, and the means by which God brings order to His creation and brings about redemption for His elect." The Bible originates with a revelation of the covenantal aspects of God in relationship to humanity. To understand God s person and works properly, we must see Him in light of the covenant He has made and fulfills with His people. The various covenants, of which we read in the Old Testament, were all covenants of promise, including the covenant of law established through Moses. From the perspective of Paul, all of the Biblical covenants, whether made with Abraham, Moses, or David, were elaborations of the one, single, basic promise of God. Therefore, although there were many covenants made throughout the Old Testament, it is Biblically accurate to view them as explanations of a single promise of God. Every promise in the covenants was affirmed and confirmed in the person and work of Christ. Christ is the model of that righteousness revealed in the Mosaic Law (Matt. 5:17; Rom 10:4; Heb. 4:15; 1 John 2:5-6), as well as, the true and perfect, atoning sacrifice for sinners, which required in the Mosaic Covenant (Heb. 9). Subsequent covenants do not conflict with each other but complement and expand upon previous motifs and promises. All of the promises of God's covenants center on Christ and His redemptive work. We must recognize the unity and continuity of God's covenantal administrations. Suzerainty Treaties The standard treaty-form in the ancient world was structured in five parts, all of which appear in the Biblical covenants: Preamble, Historical Prologue, Ethical Stipulations, Sanctions, and Succession Arrangements. One of the best examples of a document written in this treaty-form is the Book of Deuteronomy. Several unique 10

11 features of the Suzerainty Treaty may shed more light on the Mosaic Covenant. First, the treaty made a distinction between those who were parties to the treaty and those who were not. It reminds us that the covenant with Moses was designed to help the recipients enjoy the blessings promised under the Abrahamic covenant. The stipulations provided guidelines in maintaining the relationship and indicated what was expected of one in covenant relationship with God. Legalism has absolutely no place in a covenantal relationship with God. Remember that all must enter into such a relationship in the same way that Abraham did. He was chosen by the grace of God apart from any merit on his part. In fact, God did not even choose him because of any foreseen faith that Abraham might exercise in the future; He made a sovereign choice based on His own criteria, not on anything within man. When an individual enters the Kingdom of God by faith, he also enters the Abrahamic Covenant. The covenant with Moses was not one through which a person could begin a relationship with God. It was, rather, a covenant wherein the Believer enjoyed his relationship with God through his obedience. Another characteristic of the Suzerainty Treaties is that the treaty/covenant implies the existence of a community. God did not make the Mosaic Covenant with a single individual, but with a nation. This nation was bound together with a common purpose and will. Moreover, the purpose and will of this nation was to be in complete harmony with God s purpose and will. The covenant was meant to help facilitate that end. In order for it to function properly, the whole community of God s people had to be united in living that covenant. A third characteristic of the Suzerainty Treaty is love. This is a crucial aspect of a covenant relationship, which, few have grasped in regard to the Mosaic Covenant. As Deuteronomy 7:7-11 and 10:15 make abundantly clear; love is what motivated God to make the covenant at Sinai. Jesus spoke about such love in John 14:15: If you love Me, you will keep My commandments He was directing His teaching to the portion of the remnant of Israel whom He was training to reach their fellow Israelites and the nations for Him. The natural expression of that love is to live out our new life, in Him, through the stipulations, laws, and decrees of the Mosaic Covenant. Because He always relates to His people through a covenant, this applies to everyone whom He calls His own. Let us examine one last characteristic of the Ancient Near Eastern suzerainty treaties: the provision for renewal. When the covenant makers died and new generations took over, covenants were often renewed. When a covenant was renewed, the stipulations were sometimes altered to fit the needs of the generation that was renewing the covenant. However, one covenant does not set aside another; one does not invalidate another so as to nullify its stipulations. Rather, it renews, expands, adapts, and updates. This is the point Paul makes in Galatians 3:l7. 11

12 Covenant and Atonement The term Atonement can mean make expiation, wipe away, forgive, appease, or propitiate,. Expiation focuses on the removal of the sin, which incurred God s wrath, and this is usually done through sacrifice. The Biblical writers portray God as the One who initiates. God s forgiveness at all levels was conditioned upon the repentance of the sinner and this involved a contrite confession of sin Lev. 5:5. The sacrificial acts were not effective unless they were accompanied by true repentance. God s forgiveness was conditioned upon the sinner s repentance Lev. 5:5. G. Symbolic Biblical Symbology is a method of communication where a symbol is used to convey a thought or concept. Etymologists suggest that the alphabet was originally constructed from a group of symbols. The Bible is filled with symbols. These symbols are often the key to interpreting the intent of a book or verse. The word symbol means to throw together or to compare. The difference between types and symbols is that types have a specific antitype and symbols are often signs. Symbols often speak in metaphoric terms and language. Because of the flexibility of the symbol, we must be careful not to make the above mentioned definitions to strict. Symbols do not always fit normative rules. Symbols have a basis in reality. The Tabernacle of Moses is a good picture of the uses of such symbols. Symbols include: numbers, natural materials, colors, people, names, titles, directions, places, creatures, and actions. Hermeneutic Principles a. Comparative Interpretation b. Reference and Characteristics c. Diversity of Symbols d. Prophetic Symbols e. Numeric Symbologies f. Doctrine Doctrine should be built upon solid Hermeneutic principles and not vague symbols. H. Parabolic Parables are short stories that are told in order to make a specific point. Parables often rely on human circumstances to convey spiritual truth. Most Scholars believe that the Old Testament contains more allegories than the New Testament. This is due to the extensive 12

13 Christo-centric content of the Old Testament. Although Christ employed the parable as a means of inculcating His message more extensively and more effectively than any other teacher, He did not invent the parable. It was His custom, in general, to take over from the religious and linguistic world of thought in His own day. The parable was a very common tool of teaching among the first century Jews. The Midrash is a commentary totally devoted to parabolic stories. In order to accurately interpret parables, we must try to hear the parable as the original audience did. The interpreter must realize how the places and objects used in the parable affected the audience. Parables must be interpreted within the total reference points of comparison so the focus remains on the central meaning of the parable. Some scholars have suggested the following purpose for parabolic teachings; reveal truth to Believers, conceal the truth from unbelievers, and presents new truth concerning God s Kingdom. Some scholars suggest to interpret a parable is to destroy a parable. A parable without interpretation is a parable without power. Without interpretation, the parabolic meaning and plot is lost. We must remember that the Biblical parable must cross cultural and historical boundaries in order to make its point. Determining the audience is specifically important in determining the intent of the parable. Old Testament Parables and Proverbs are used as metaphor or a simile. By understanding parabolic structure, we will be more readily able to ascertain parabolic type. Parables often have a basic structure. This structure is most often found in the language, meter, and rhyme used to convey the story. Each parable has a specific point or plot that it used to make its point. Here are some helpful hints for determining parabolic types of speech; narrative style, look for change, points of reference, identify patterns, and identify relationships. Parables are like mini-dramas. The plot and lesson of the parable, made during any phase of the parables presentation, must be noted. Parables have a unique way of remaining an intricate part of our memory. When a parable is seated in the conscience, it will help produce the ethical result desired by its author. Parabolic doctrine must be the result of authentic scriptural teaching. We must take great care not to build doctrine on isolated incidents and texts. Scholars suggest that parables have no place in doctrine. Any Scripture that supports established Biblical doctrine cannot be divorced from its parental place within Biblical text. I. Prophetic Prophecy and Eschatology are specialized fields that require a great deal of time to understand. Every interpretation of Scripture must proceed from the natural meaning of the text without having to force the meaning into a category, genre or specific filed of study. We must maintain that a great danger occurs when the Biblical student approaches the study of Prophecy and Eschatology from a deductive approach. The Biblical text must be inductively studied thoroughly, before any conclusion can be ascertained. Prophecy is often poetic and 13

14 ancient poetry, like modern poetry, uses words in a metaphoric or symbolic sense more often than the prose method does. We need to see what the prophecy meant to the people to whom it was given. Emphasis on prophecy must be properly directed, and balanced within the entire Biblical message. The key to understanding why certain prophecies and prophetic events transpired can only be ascertained from the cultural, historical background of the text. Regarding Eschatology we should know that there are four school of thought on this matter; Amillennialism, Post- millennialism, Pre-millennialism, and Dispensationalism. Now, the five important principles of a good Prophetic Hermeneutic: 1. Seek to understand the author/author's intended meaning. 2. All Scripture must be taken in its proper context. 3. Always compare Scripture with other Scripture. 4. Determine the literal references of figures of speech that provide comparison, substitution, and amplification. 5. Recognize the near/far implications and applications in prophetic passages. If we are to understand Biblical prophecy, or any other part of Scripture, we must approach the Bible with humility, relying on the Holy Spirit, with the conviction that God's Word is true and cannot contradict itself. III. Historical Development of Hermeneutics The history of Hermeneutics is older than Biblical text. A. Jewish Hermeneutics The Bible is a book written by Jews primarily to Jews. The Bible is a Jewish book. It was written against the backdrop of their language, traditions, culture and lifestyle. Because the book is Jewish, we must realize that the Jews have the oldest system of Hermeneutics in practice to this very day. The system initiated by the Jews may very well have originated with Ezra, the Prophet, Priest and Scribe. Some Scholars have even called him the Father of Hermeneutics. In the Book of Nehemiah, chapter eight verses one though eight, we have the first record of Hermeneutics in practice. This verse states the essence of what Hermeneutics is all about. 1. Literal School The School of Hermeneutics, which is said to have originated with Ezra, was a school of literal interpretation. The Jews translated and interpreted God on their arm and forehead. 2. Diaspora The Jews of post-exile were scattered throughout the world. This caused the Jews, in various parts of the globe, to need translation in their own language. Not only did the need translations, they needed a system of Hermeneutics. Major centers for 14

15 Jews developed competing systems of Hermeneutics. It is for this reason that there are two Talmuds. One is the Jerusalem Talmud and the other is the Babylonian Talmud. It may have been Ezra who set the books of the Old Testament in order. He divided the Old Testament into three sections. The first section was the Torah or Law. The second section was that of the prophetic writings. The final sections were the sacred writings such as Psalms and other such writings. These three divisions were abbreviated into an acronym called the Tanakh. The Ta was for the writings of Moses or the Torah. The Na was for the writings of the Prophets or the Neviim. The final section Kh was for the Ketuvim or the writings. The Jerusalem school played a prominent role in Jewish writings until the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. The three major influences on Jewish Hermeneutics were: Israeli Schools, Babylonian Schools, and Alexandrian Schools. The Alexandrian Schools were very diverse from the Babylonian and Israeli Academies. This is because the Alexandrian Schools were heavily influenced by Grecian thought and philosophy. The Septuagint was created because they refused to maintain their use of Hebrew. While a Greek philosophy and thought heavily influenced the Alexandrian Jews, there were those students from these schools that did excel and impact Judaism and the interpretation of God s Word profoundly. Philo is one such individual. His writings are accepted by Jew and Christian alike in this contemporary age. An outstanding Alexandrian Jew of the New Testament was Stephen. He was well versed in the Scriptures and possessed deep revelation into the role and power of Jesus, as Messiah. 3. The Role and History of the Scribe Those who played a major role in interpreting Word of God were the Scribes. Ezra is a perfect example of a godly Scribe. The Scribes employed such means as counting words and letters to guarantee authenticity. The history of the Scribes is divided into five periods, indicated by the names given to Scribes during successive times. The following is a list of those historic divisions; the Sopherim, the Tanaim, the Amoraim, the Saboraim, and the Gaonim. 4. Ezra s Reforms Ezra is the originator of institutions known as "the regulations of Ezra." It appears to have been Ezra who made a scheduled reading of God s Word. During the time of Christ, the Torah was read on a triennial basis. Ezra played a strict part in the holiness of the Israeli nation. Ezra was responsible for a revival of holiness. Because Ezra read and explained the Biblical text, we have in Ezra an example of early expository preaching In this sense Ezra is the prototype of Biblical expositors. It is evident that detailed exegesis was part of the scribal expertise. According to 15

16 Rabbinic tradition, Ezra introduced many basic tenets out of which the "Great Synagogue" and its preaching developed. Centuries later, the early Church borrowed much of its polity, order of worship, and even it s preaching from the Synagogue. According to Moses, the purpose for this reading was "in order that they [the people] may hear and learn and fear the Lord your God, and be careful to observe all the words of this law" (Deut 31:12b). To hear, learn, fear, and do what is written: this is the passion of expository preaching. Ezra demonstrated a threefold proclamation of God s Word. That proclamation was expressed by commitment, study and practice. He did not emphasize the law as an end in itself; rather, he was convinced that the covenant community needed to return to God by taking seriously his revelation and applying it to every aspect of life. 5. The Synagogue The assemblies of Ezra were undoubtedly Synagogues of some sort or measure. The exact origin of the Synagogue is uncertain. Some Scholars place the invention of the Synagogue in the hands of Moses, others Ezra and still others Joshua. The term Synagogue is Greek meaning gathering. Hebrew names for these gatherings include Kehilah and Edah. The term Edah seems to encompass the whole community, while the term Kahal is a local gathering or assembly. Regardless of its initial institution, the Synagogue came to power and prominence during the Babylonian Exile. Of primary importance within the Synagogue was the study and interpretation of God s Word. Studies into the structure and organization of the Synagogue show that not one single individual was responsible for the guidance of the assembly. 6. Rabbinic Hermeneutics The approach of the varying Rabbis can be seen in the Mishnah or the Talmud. Two points of understanding are of great importance when reviewing Rabbinic Hermeneutics; Purpose that was the understanding of how to walk out the commands of God, and Oral Torah. The Oral Torah said three thins; be deliberate in judgment; raise up disciples; and make a fence around Torah. The Oral Torah played a major role in the interpretation of the Scriptures within the Jewish Hermeneutic system. Hillel s Seven Rules It suffices to say here that the School of thought created by Hillel was acceptable to two major New Testament figures. The first being Christ, Himself and the second, being Paul. Rules codified by Hillel 16

17 1) Light and Heavy 2) Equivalence of Expression 3) Building of the Father from one Text 4) Building of the father from two (2) or more Texts 5) The General and Particular 6) Analogy from another Passage 7) Explanation obtained from context 7. Rabbinic Schools There were two schools of the Pharisees. These two schools were contrary to one another. One school, the Shammaites, was strict legalists. They demanded the observance of the Law to the strictest letter. The other school, the Hillelites, sought to follow the intent or spirit of the Law. Both Jesus and Paul were students of the latter school. These schools were called "houses." Shammai School was the school of Jerusalem the Galilean area was accustomed to the teachings of Hillel. Shammai consistently pushed the Mosaic Law to an unbearable extreme and no heed given to the practical reform that was really needed in Jewish morals. It was the school of Shammai rather than the school of Hillel, which Christ predominantly condemned. 8. Apostolic The Apostolic method of Hermeneutics had its primary foundation in Rabbinic Hermeneutics. Tanakh formed the foundation for all apostolic exposition and homilies. While studying this historical process, one must not lose sight of the fact that the Messianic Community did not come about as the product of literary activities. Nor did they see themselves imprisoned by written words. On the one hand the Messianic Christians interpreted the sacred books of their ancestors in a new light derived from their faith in Christ. The key to all Apostolic Hermeneutics was the person and work of Christ. Their Hermeneutics were very much Christo-centric. One of the reasons understanding the apostolic approach to Scripture is so important is that fact that many of the apostolic teachings were canonized as the New Testament. The Disciples followed the teaching of Christ and used them as a Hermeneutic foundation for their interpretation of Scripture. Paul had to learn to approach the Scriptures with a Messianic Hermeneutic. Paul applied his Hermeneutics to the Hebrew text and proved Christ s validity and role. Be very careful in interpreting Paul s letters. Ask first and foremost why he wrote the letter, and what argument is he making. His argument will reveal the opposition that Paul was making. Above all, Paul was trying to maintain and develop a balanced Hermeneutic in his audience. The Christo-centric principle of Hermeneutics produced great revelation and devotion to Christ. In the practice of Apostolic Hermeneutics, the Scriptures did not only serve as tools by which Christian truth was demonstrated. The relationship was mutual. The acceptance of 17

18 Christ in faith provided also a key for understanding the Scriptures. The Early Church taught, without hesitation and ambiguity, the Divine Authority of the Old Testament. Scripture is the Word of God and as such it "cannot lose its validity" (Jn 10:35). Also key to understanding Apostolic Hermeneutics is their projected purpose and intent of the Old Testament. Paul establishes a view of the Old Testament s role in the life of New Testament Believers. We can see this in 2Ti 3: Hermeneutics of the Church Fathers The big theological questions over which Christians struggled in the first four centuries were about the nature of God and about the person of Christ. How could God become man? And how could a man be both God and man? 1. Heresies Here are the three major heresies that the Church Fathers faced; Greek Philosophy, the Deity of Christ, and the validity of the Old Testament. These heresies of the day sealed his commitment to allegory. The Gnostic sects rejected the Old Testament on the grounds that it taught a different God than the one revealed in Christ. They believed that in contrast to the New Testament God of love, the Deity of the Old Testament was vengeful, jealous, capricious, and often directly responsible for sin and evil. 2. Major Practices Historical data shows that the Church Fathers certainly emulated apostolic practice and the Christo-centric interpretation. One particular approach, which apparently developed in the Jewish community of Alexandria, was that of Philo. It is not surprising, therefore, that a Jew such as Philo, antecedently committed to the Bible as the Word of God on account of his Jewish background. The important thing to Philo was the philosophical and allegorical based Hermeneutics. It has been recorded that the allegorical method of Hermeneutic was used extensively by Origen. Origen firmly believed that the Bible was the Word of God, and one of the major concerns was to assist Christians facing the intellectual challenges of the third century by providing scriptural answers to the questions posed by Hellenistic philosophy and culture. He maintained that the Bible contained three levels of meaning: the body level, the psychic level, and the spiritual level. Origen assumed that there should be some correspondence between the literal and allegorical meanings of Scripture. Generally, for the allegorical to be true, the literal should be. Medieval The Medieval period was a period of little activity or advancement for the Church and Hermeneutics. Medieval theologians said that the text could be read in a four-fold way: the literal sense, the moral sense, the allegorical sense, and the anagogical sense. 18

19 Reformation Hermeneutics Luther, and then Calvin, along with the other Reformers, abandoned allegorical interpretation and went back to looking for the natural historical meaning of the Old Testament. As they did so, they also recovered the historical Gospel, restored justification as the basis of sanctification, and moved grace from the heart of the Believer back into the heart of God. The Reformation's Hermeneutical principles came out of what the Bible said, and so the Gospel returned to being the key to proper interpretation. Post Reformation Hermeneutics 1. Pietism Pietism s interpretation often concentrates on the emotional more than the truth. 2. Criticism The Enlightenment led to various developments in the business of interpreting the Bible. Once the theory of interpretation was divorced from Divine revelation in the Bible, working out what the Bible said came to bethought of as a matter of human scientific advances 3. Rationalism Those in this group believe that whatever is not in harmony with educated mentality was to be rejected. This movement stressed that the human intellect can decide what is true and false. The Bible, then, is true if it corresponds to man's reason, and what does not correspond can be ignored. This led to radical criticism of the Scriptures, as mentioned above and laid the basis for liberal theology. Modern Hermeneutics Modern secular Scholars often viewed the Bible as no more than a record of the evolutionary development of Israel and the Church rather than God's revelation of Himself to man. The following list is an overview of the history of recent Hermeneutic. 1. Subjectivism i. Divine Authority of Scripture ii. Existentialism Soren Kierkegaard a Danish philosopher, known as "The father of modern existentialism," related reason to the lowest level of human operation. He rejected Christendom and its formal rationalism and cold creedalism, and taught that faith is a subjective experience in one's moment of despair. 2. Historical Criticism 19

20 i. Literary Hermeneutics ii. The Tubigen School According to F.C Bauer, the founder of the "Tubigen School," Christianity developed gradually from Judaism into a world religion. Influenced by Hegel (thesis, antithesis, synthesis), he taught that Peter and Paul directed two antagonistic groups; but they were finally synthesized in the ancient Catholic Church. The Tubigen School attempted to reconcile the church's teaching with philosophy and Biblical studies. Bauer fathered distinct strands of Biblical Theologies found in the New Testament and reemphasized the historical understanding of the Bible. iii. De-supernaturalized Jesus David F. Strauss took a mythological approach to the Bible, which resulted in his denying grammatical-historical interpretation and miracles iv. Documentary Hypothesis 1. Documentary Hypothesis 2. Old Testament Historical Development 3. Exegetical Commentators 4. Liberalism 5. Orthodoxy 6. Neo-Orthodoxy Karl Barth ( ) in his Commentary on Romans stressed that the Bible is not a human document, that God is transcendent not immanent, and that man is a sinner. Neo-orthodox leaders include Emil Brunner ( ) and Reinhold Neibuhr. These successors of Barth believed that God speaks through the Bible in Divine-human encounters and thus, it becomes the Word of God. To them, the Bible is a record of and witness to revelation, not revelation itself 7. Bultmannism Under the influence of Heidegaer's existentialism, he teaches that the New Testament should be understood existentially 20

21 by eliminating from it those mythological "foreign" elements such as miracles, including the resurrection of Christ, which is unacceptable today. Bultmann followed the Marcion heresy that portrayed the Old Testament in a diminutive fashion which reduced it to non-use. 8. Canonical Criticism The goal of canonical criticism is to understand how the passage reflects and interacts with the foundational beliefs of a given community or tradition. 9. Sociological Criticism 10. Deconstructionism IV. The Holy Spirit and Hermeneutics One definition given to the word Hermeneutics is: the message of the Spirit. The word Hermeneutic is a compound word from two Greek words hermes and pneuma. Hermes was the messenger of the mythological gods. Pneuma is the Greek word for Spirit. Therefore, Hermeneutics bears the meaning of, the message of the Spirit. Recent Scholarship has realized and determined that the Bible is a spiritual book. Therefore, as a spiritual book, it has spiritual content. Any view of the Holy Spirit s role in the interpretation must be based upon the Biblical text. To simply claim that an interpretation is authoritative because it was inspired by the Holy Spirit is inadequate. The role of the Spirit in Biblical Hermeneutics must be controlled and weighed by the Biblical text itself and adequate Hermeneutic techniques. Interpreting the Scripture, by means of the Holy Spirit, is older than the Church. However, Scripture is clear to point out that Spiritual Hermeneutics are not Systematic Hermeneutics. Those who accept the Holy Spirit s role in Biblical Interpretation are more ready to accept Biblical miracles as being authentic. Those who embrace the Spirit s activity in Biblical Hermeneutics have a more supernatural and or spiritual worldview than those who do not. The most promising Hermeneutic is one that has consulted Systematic Hermeneutics and the insight of the Holy Spirit. 1. Inspiration Inspiration requires the supernatural agent of the Holy Spirit upon the writers of the Sacred Text. Inspiration is the voice of the Spirit dictating truth to an individual for record. 2. Revelation The word revelation means, to uncover or unveil. Where inspiration is the authoring of 21

22 the text; revelation is the disclosure of that text. During the Biblical times, revelation came to man through various methods. Those methods were; the Spoken Word, Dreams, Visions, through the Spirit, Scripture. Contrary to past revelations, the tool or standard to weigh modern revelation by is the Word of God. There are three well-marked modes of revelation, which we may designate; external manifestation, internal suggestion, and concursive operation. Dreams may seem to us little fitted to serve as vehicles of Divine communications. But there is no suggestion in Scripture that revelations through dreams stand on a lower plane than any others. We should bear in mind that the intellectual or spiritual quality of a revelation is not derived from the recipient, but from its Divine Giver. It is clear that God directly intervenes in the affairs of humanity by manifesting His Divine revelations as a series of raw communication between God and man. God spoke to Moses face to face, not in dark speeches (Num 12:8). Throughout the whole history of revelation down to the appearance of Jesus to Paul on the road to Damascus, God has shown Himself visibly or through the varying modes of revelation to His servants; whenever it has seemed good to Him to do so. Just as He has used Theophanies, He has spoken with them in objective speech. However, it is not merely the mouths of men with which God thus serves Himself in the delivery of His messages, but their hearts and minds as well. Contemporary Revelation It should be noted that contemporary revelation must incorporate the Spirit and be weighed against scriptural standards. 1. Enlightenment Paul tells the Assembly at Ephesus that he wishes for the eyes of their understanding to receive enlightenment (Ep.1:18). Here, Paul uses the eye is as a symbol of the inner man. He is not discussing mysticism or Gnostic religions. Here, Biblical dictionaries point out the metaphoric use of the eye as a spiritual capacity to discern, know and receive revelation. This spiritual enlightening is the product of the Spirit of God, which the Spirit brings about through the Divine Word (Ps 119:130; 2Ti3:15; 2Pe 1:19). Spiritual sight and hearing has to do with our ability to receive the true intent of the Biblical Message, as presented by the Spirit. There is always a spiritual and mystical side to Biblical practices. By reducing these experiences to perfunctory observance, we become Saduceean in our walk with God. 2. Discernment Discernment has two basic sides. The first is the unmasking of illusion. The enemy employs the use of God s Word as a tool to draw us into sin. His use of a lie in association with the truth of God s Word confounds the human soul. The second is the spiritual ability to obtain deeper spiritual wisdom especially from the Biblical Text. Both abilities are spiritual. The 22