Has the Church Misread the Bible? The History of Interpretation in the Light of Current Issues

Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation #1

by Moisés Silva

In this, the first volume of Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation, Moises Silva presents a unique and practical perspective on the history of interpretation. 'I do not intend to provide in this volume a full-blown history of biblical hermeneutics . . . (Rather,) my thesis is that this history is characterized by the church's appreciation, sometimes implicit rather than consciously formulated, that we face a series of difficult 'tensions' in our reading of Scripture . . . . The attempt to hold these seeming polarities in tension is the principle that brings unity to the great diversity of problems surrounding the history of biblical interpretation.' Some examples of these areas of tension are, 'To what extent should we understand the biblical language as being literal and to what extent as figurative?' 'The Bible is God's Word, yet what it has come to is through human beings and in human form.' 'The commands of God are absolute, yet the historical context of the writings appear to relativize certain elements.' 'God's message should be clear, yet many passages seem to be ambiguous.' By showing how the church in the past has dealt with these same issues, Silva provide the reader with a clearer insight into the contemporary problems of interpretation.

Genres: Theology, Christian, History

136 pages, Paperback

First published October 18, 1987

About the author

Moisés Silva (PhD, University of Manchester) has taught biblical studies at Westmont College, Westminster Theological Seminary, and Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. He lives in Litchfield, Michigan.

Reviews

[Brian · Rating 5 out of 5]

No, they didn't. Silva grapples with the rather serious issue of allegorical interpretation in the history of the church. Although he affirms the grammatical-historical method, Silva points out that allegorical interpretation is not so foreign to us as we think: the church fathers often use it the way we use application, and so their interpretation is not so off-base as you might think--especially on central issues like the Trinity, Christology, or doctrine of God. Silva also is careful not to dismiss sensus plenior interpretations of the Old Testament, and even anticipates the hot debate that I already have had about meaning and significance. So, a helpful book in realizing that Christianity hasn't gone off the rails just because we had poorer ways of reading Scripture for a great deal of time.

[Радостин Марчев · Rating 4 out of 5]

Кратка, но много читаво написана книга. Макар че не е нова съдържанието й е напълно актуално - всъщност аз не открих нищо, което да виждам като остаряло. Написана е едновременно ерудирано (липсата на по-голямата задълбоченост е продиктувана изцяло от обема) и много балансирано.
Учудвам се, че до този момент не съм попадал на препратки нито към нея нито към цялата поредица, от която тя се явява първа. За съжаление последната все ще не е (поне официално) дигитализирана.

[Jason · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very excellent little book from a conservative Evangelical perspective. I only give it four stars because it is a bit dated. That doesn't denigrate from the topic at all, but there are newer works that deal especially with the interaction of postmodern thought and biblical interpretation (the work of Vanhoozer for instance). An excellent starting place for discovering "the problems" of modern interpretation and some thoughtful gestures toward a solution

[Tyler Brown · Rating 3 out of 5]

A little book on the major debates surrounding interpretation of scripture. The discussion on perspicuity is a high point. Most Christians assume the correct answers to these questions when they pick up a bible though.

[Jeff Hill · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent! I enthusiastically recommend you read anything by Silva you can get your hands on!

[Mr S Jarvis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good read

[Keith Pinckney · Rating 3 out of 5]

Thoughtful.

[Jake Ruefer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some people have!

[Jonathan · Rating 2 out of 5]

I started this book thinking I was going to get a glimpse of how our understanding of the Bible has changed over time. It wasn't quite what I was looking for.

As a history of philosophical questions of interpretation, it's an okay book. Silva looks at how different (primarily protestant) theologians have interpreted the Bible and the big questions that arose: divine inspiration, historical exegesis, allegory, obscurity or clarity, and the relativism of interpretation and application. As an introduction to these questions and a brief glimpse at some examples, it was okay.

But as for actual answers to the title question, "Has the Church Misread the Bible", it was really lacking. The author's answer to that question seems to be, "No, it hasn't, because I don't want it to have." Bold questions are asked, but aren't really explored at all. Specific details on theological questions are almost completely absent. And when something really gets called into question, it is usually tied up with, "Well, Luther/Calvin did that too, so who are we to judge?" He does at least point out contradictions in Luther's positions, but then seems to always suggest that it shows the issues are complex and have more than one answer, rather than the idea that Luther may occasionally misread something. There was an extremely strong pro-Reformed bias to the whole book that made it look like the author wasn't seriously willing to question anything that had ever been supported by the Reformation

In the end, one of the greatest questions was left completely unaddressed. All these academic codewords aside, has the Church ever misread the Bible out of pure self-interest? Has war, violence, slavery, absolute power, enormous wealth, racism, nationalism, moral perversion, oppression of the poor, etc. ever been justified by the Church's reading of the Bible not because of its interpretative technique, but because those with authority in the church deeply desired a certain interpretation for themselves? I didn't see Silva ever asking that question in the entire book, and from my reading of history, that's a more significant issue in Biblical interpretation than all of his technical terms put together.

[E · Rating 4 out of 5]

Brief book that doesn't try to do a lot, but what it does, it does well. After providing a brief but helpful look at the history of biblical interpretation, Silva looks at the main issues that have vexed that history. The big kahuna has always been "allegorical" vs. "literal." I put those terms in quotation marks because the topic is so much larger than those terms express that they're almost misleading. A more "literal" interpretation of the Scriptures is a hallmark of the Reformation--and a salutary one--but don't think that Origen and the allegorists of the previous 1500 years were rubes--they were not. Stuck in their presuppositions, perhaps, but aren't we all?

Other divides he discusses--divine or human? clear or obscure? relative or absolute? He makes clear that none of these are simple either/or determinations. The answer is always A and B, not A or B. This is a quick read and I would recommend it as much for Silva's method as for his answers. He's a superb writer, and it's a shame he's not written more than he has in the past 30 years.

[Vincent Ng · Rating 4 out of 5]

Moises writes a very brief book regarding the Bible and the ways that the Bible can be misread. The book is quite clear with helpful headings to understand the book. It touches upon the elements of philosophy, literary criticism, linguistics, history, science, and theology and its impact on the church's interpretation of the Bible in terms of its' clarity or obscurity, whether a translation should be translated literally or figuratively, and its' relativity and absoluteness.

[J. Alfred · Rating 3 out of 5]

One of two required texts from my first seminary class. On the first page of my notebook I wrote "Seminary. I know, right?". Anyway, this is a goodn'. Discusses some tough stuff, makes you smarter, and answers, more or less, "well, we can't really know. but probably not." Kind of cheerful.

[Jared Mcnabb · Rating 4 out of 5]

Silva manages to give a good history of interpretation and interpretive issues while at the same time arguing that the reader should hold onto the tensions of Scripture (clarity/obscurity, literal/figurative). I could see someone taking Silva too far here

[Peter Stonecipher · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked this up for his discussion of the allegorical methods of Origen. Silva gives much food for thought concerning how we read the Bible.