More on this book
Kindle Notes & Highlights
So, under divine superintendence, the goal of the Bible is to bring its readers to receive the forgiveness of God in Christ and thus to possession of eternal life in relationship with the triune God (John 17:3).
1. The clear purpose of the human author is a good place to start in understanding the Bible. The Scripture cannot mean less than the human authors consciously intended.
2. God, as the Lord of history and revelation, included patterns or foreshadowing of which the human authors were not fully aware. Under God’s sovereign hand, his prior historical interventions were in themselves prophetic—pointing forward to Christ.
3. Sometimes it is asserted that the Bible can never mean something of which the human author was not consciously aware as he was writing. It is possible, however, to affirm a hermeneutical approach based on authorial intent without affirming the above statement.
Up until the mid-seventeenth century, essentially all persons who claimed the name of Christian accepted that the Bible was completely truthful in all matters that it asserted.
While the concept of a limited canon is ancient (Deut. 31:24–26; Dan. 9:2), the first person to use the Greek word Kanōn to refer to Christianity’s restricted list of inspired books was apparently Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria (ca. A.D. 352, Decrees of the Synod of Nicea 5.18).2
Rather, the canon is a collection of authoritative writings.
The first canonical list that matches exactly our twenty-seven–book New Testament is the list by Athanasius in his Easter letter (letter 39) of A.D. 367.
Assuming the unified nature of the Bible, as well as the progressive unfolding of God’s plans (Heb. 1:1–3), it is clear that a person with an established understanding of God’s overarching purposes will be better equipped to understand individual pieces of the story.
The messianic, typological interpretation of the Old Testament found in the New Testament, while comparable to midrash or pesher, is a far cry from the fanciful interpretations of the rabbis.
Obviously, where Jesus and Paul intended allegorical meaning in the New Testament, faithful interpretation demands respect for this powerful genre. It is the illegitimate importation of allegory that is the problem.
In other words, Bultmann claims that a necessary presupposition to the academic study of the Bible is to maintain that supernatural events do not happen.
Open my eyes that I may see wonderful things in your law.
As we approach the Bible, we need to realize that sin affects all of our being—our emotions, wills, and rational faculties. We can easily deceive ourselves or be deceived by others. We need the Holy Spirit to instruct and guide us. Thus, prayer is the essential starting point for any study of the Bible.2
These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life”
we believe that all the Bible is inspired by God and thus noncontradictory, passages of Scripture that are less clear should be interpreted with reference to those that are more transparent in meaning.
While it is certainly beneficial to read large portions of Scripture in one sitting, no biblical diet is complete without extended rumination on a smaller portion of text. Scripture itself is filled with instructions on such a meditative approach.
Meditation is a middle sort of duty between the word and prayer, and hath respect to both. The word feedeth meditation, and meditation feedeth prayer; we must hear that we be not erroneous, and meditate that we be not barren.
The Bible is not a philosophy textbook to be debated; it is a revelation from God to be believed and obeyed.
As we encounter trials in life and meet those difficulties trusting in God and his Word, we can expect the Lord to conform us more into the image of his Son.
The study of ancient Near Eastern culture, while fascinating in its own right, is not the purpose of Bible study. Not a few resources billed as helps for understanding the background of the Bible are little more than collations of interesting facts and speculations about tangentially related background issues.
Any portion of Scripture must be read within the context of the sentence, paragraph, larger discourse unit, and entire book. The farther one moves away from the words in question, the less informative is the adduced material.
By choosing one particular book of the Bible and spending focused time in it over a period of several weeks or months, one will begin to see the importance and benefit of careful Bible study.
In order to understand the Bible, one must read it. And, in order to read the individual parts of the Bible in context, one must read the whole.
God demands that we approach him in faith and receive his revelation with trust.
We may be able to recite a systematic theology text from memory, but if our lives are devoid of the love and faith we profess, we are nothing but clanging gongs or clattering cymbals—empty, annoying noisemakers (1 Cor. 13:1).
Let the holy Scriptures ever have the pre-eminence; and, next [to] them, the solid, lively, heavenly treatises, which best expound and apply the Scriptures; and next [to] those, the credible histories, especially of the church … but take heed of the poison of the writings of false teachers, which would corrupt your understandings.1
Also, if a person purchases a study Bible from an avowed theological perspective, one faces the danger of letting theological predilections take priority over the text of Scripture.
A Christian teacher was not meant to function in isolation or to refuse the beneficial input of other Spirit-gifted teachers in the church.
The final theory of communication (and the one I am advocating) is that the author of a text is the ultimate arbiter of its meaning.7
Second, the problem of distinguishing human and divine intent arises only in prophecy texts, especially those few texts that seem to be used in ways that vary from the human author’s explicitly distinguishable original intent.
“Yes, a text can have more than one meaning, if the human author consciously intended multiple meanings of his work.”
While some non-Christian scholars take this view, Christians should not consider this a valid option, as Matthew was divinely inspired and would not illegitimately quote the Old Testament (2 Tim. 3:16).
2. Another approach to Isaiah 7:14 claims that the Holy Spirit had an additional hidden meaning for Isaiah’s prophecy. Isaiah was not cognizant of a later fulfillment, but the Spirit-inspired author, Matthew, applied the text to Jesus in his day—showing that God had a fuller, deeper sense to the original prophecy, which he revealed at a later time.
Yet, if an Old Testament text is to be legitimately applied to Jesus, it seems only natural to expect the original human author to have consciously intended that usage on some level.
Whatever portion of the Bible one is studying, it is important to remember that the person and saving work of Jesus Christ is the ultimate focus of God’s revelation.
In what way is Christ anticipated in this text, or in what way is his arrival heralded?
The kingdom already has arrived in Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection, but the kingdom is not yet fully present.3 While forcefully advancing and amazingly productive, the kingdom is not fully and universally instituted
Another way of thinking about the Bible as a whole is to employ the idea of covenant.
Similar to the old and new covenant distinctions, one also can view the Bible through the grid of law and gospel.
“In what ways does this passage reveal God’s progressive, saving revelation of himself to wayward humans?” Or, “Where does this passage fit into God’s saving plan—is it anticipatory, climactic, or looking backward to God’s culminating intervention in Christ”
The New Testament is so named because it is a witness to the fulfillment of God’s promise of a new covenant (Latin: testamentum), instituted and centered on the person of Jesus
Jesus, in his person and work, provides the undergirding (the theological substructure) for the expected response of God’s people.
If we reflect on what biblical texts are applicable today, it is also important to consider whether a text is prescriptive or descriptive. That is, does a text prescribe (command) a certain action, or does it describe that behavior? This question can be complex, as some behaviors are described in praiseworthy ways so that they essentially have a secondary prescriptive function.
The accurate determination of the genre of a work is essential to its proper interpretation.
The purpose of all Scripture, historical narratives included, is to make people wise, leading to a saving knowledge of Christ, as Paul noted was the case in Timothy’s life (2 Tim. 3:15).
One of the most helpful ways to learn how to interpret historical narrative is to listen to or read numerous examples of judicious interpretation.
Longenecker was asking whether we, as modern interpreters, can apply typological interpretive methods to passages not so cited by New Testament authors.
Though many skilled interpreters appeal to sensus plenior, I believe all New Testament citations of the Old Testament can be explained without recourse to it.
The letters in the New Testament are more than time-bound communication; they are works inspired by the Holy Spirit, offering authoritative instruction to the church in every age.
