Biblical Interpretation

CLINTONBALDWINCLINTON BALDWIN
METHODS OF BIBLICAL
INTERPRETATION
The New Perspective On Prophecy
METHODS OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION: THE NEW PERSPECTIVE ON PROPHECY
CLINTON BALDWIN Published & Printed by: Lithomedia Printers Limited, Jamaica W.I.
o part of this book may b reproduced in any form whether electronic or mechanical, photocopying, recording orNotherwise without the permission of the Publisher. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Typset in Arno Pro SmTextCover Design/Layout: Ansurd Carey Published & Printed by: Lithomedia Printers Limited, Jamaica W.I. ISBN 978-976-95216-2-9
Contents
INTRODUCTION Chapter 1: METHODS OF BIBLE STUDY .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. 1 i. The Proof Text Approach .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2 ii. The Exegetical Approach .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. 7 iii. The Theological Approach .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 19 iv. The Systematic Theology or Homiletical Approach.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 20 Chapter 2 THE NATURE OF BIBLE PROPHECY .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. 25 i. Jesus the Fulfillment of all Prophecies .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. 25 ii. Prophecies are Meant to Build Faith in Jesus .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 29 iii. Jesus is God's Final Prophetic Communication .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 30 iv. Predictive Prophecy is not the Future Cast in Concrete .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 31 Chapter 3 ATTITUDE TO PROPHETIC FULFILMENT AND CURRENT WORLD EVENTS i. Avoid Dogmatism Regarding the Detailed Fulfillment of Prophecies .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 39 ii. Be Open to Alternate and Expanded Fulfillment .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 41 iii. Staying Ready as Opposed to Getting Ready: An Affirmation of Salvation .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 43 iv. Stay Busy Being Like Jesus .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .44
CONCLUSION.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 47
Introduction
The bible has been with humanity for thousands of years and is undoubtedly, the most circulated and influential book in Western civilization. Despite its long history and tremendous popularity, the Bible remains one of the most paradoxical books, in that while being revered, it is also feared even hated; while being among the most studied, it is also the most misunderstood. It is supposed to be an instrument for peace, yet untold war has been fought in its name. Its prophecies are supposed to be the basis for a better life for humanity, yet their study and application have been the basis for much disaster, division and confusion. In fact, while the hero of the Bible, Jesus, is termed the prince of peace the religion based on his principles continues to be the most divided religion in the world. No other world religion has nearly as many splintered and opposing denominations as Christianity. Why all this paradox? Why such an abuse of such a noble entity as the Bible? I would like to suggest that the answer lies greatly (not totally) in how the Bible is studied and understood. Unfortunately, while the average Christian in the pew has always been encouraged to study the Bible, they have not been consistently given the tools to do so. Many Christians today, particularly young people, find the Bible virtually impossible to understand and consequently they avoid sustained reading or studying of its contents. It is my objective in this volume to provide some key principles for Bible study that will make this activity a more exciting and rewarding task. It is my hope that the message of the Bible will be more readily and accurately understood, sustained study of the Bible will be fostered,
consequently the negative elements of the paradox described above will be greatly reduced, if not eliminated. Of particular interest to this volume is the mystery and confusion surrounding Bible prophecies. Many Christians are indeed curious as to what will happen in these days which they conclude are the very last days of earths history. A focus on Bible prophecy can be healthy enterprise, or as the experience of many people have shown, it can also be a recipe for disaster. Again, the outcome is very dependent on the method of Bible study that one employs. Therefore, prior to presenting some key principles as to what I consider a healthy approach to the study of Bible prophecy, I find delineate in a very compact manner, a number of unavoidable canons which must be followed in the study of the bible itself. The guidelines for prophetic interpretation are therefore buttressed tenets. The book is intentionally kept short , as a text needs to be everlasting in order to be eternal in the value of its message.
Dedicated to This book is dedicated to my son Mendel, in whom I seek to engender a healthy passion for the word of God.
Methods of Bible Study
Whether or not one is aware of it, each time one opens the Bible to study it, he or she employs a particular method of Bible study. The conclusions arrived at, are very much dependent on the method employed. Pastors and other church leaders are always encouraging their members to study the Bible, and not just to study it, but to do so in a profound manner. However, hardly are members ever told how to study the Bible. In fact, many Christians are unaware that there are specific scientific principles that must govern the study of the Bible. Below is a concise survey of some of the methods used for Bible study. Having outlined these methods, I will then focus on the method I consider most correct and complete for studying the Bible. Before I outline the different methods of Bible study, however, a key principle with respect to the entire Bible must first be highlighted. The principle is that no part of the Bible was originally written to a modern audience. The entire Bible was written thousands of years ago in languages and cultures which are different from our modern expressions and lifestyles. The books which were written to the ancient people of God were intended to be understood by them. Thus the messages of what came to be the entire Bible first had a primary meaning to its original recipients which may or may not be equal to the meaning which they have to a later audience. For example, such words as new heaven and new earth, judge,
temple/sanctuary, covenant, law, day, word of God, eternal, etc. (Isa. 65:17-22; 66:22-24; Judges 1, Lev. 25:28; Isa. 8:20; Jer 4:2; Deut 5:5, 22; Lk 5:1; 8:11; 11:28; Matt 5:17, 18; Gal 3:23, 24; Jude 7) sometimes had different meanings to the people of the Old and New Testament than are generally understood today. Therefore, before we can determine what the Biblical message means to us today, we must first determine what the author intended it to mean to his original audience; or, what his original audience understood by what was written. In fact, because a message in the Bible is often reinterpreted by a later Bible writer, we sometimes have at least three levels of meaning to a particular text or passage. These are: 1) the meaning to the very first readers, 2) the meaning made of the same message by a later writer within the Bible, and 3) the meaning as it
Methods of Biblical Interpretation
applies to us today. The key principle involved here is an examination of the primary and secondary meaning(s). By primary meaning, I speak of what the message meant to the very first audience to which it was addressed. Secondary meaning simply put, signifies the meaning that the text or passage had for a later audience within the Bible itself and also the meaning it has for our time.
I. The Proof Text Method The proof text method is one that comes quite naturally to most people. As the name suggests, this method seeks to find a text to prove each point being made. While the motive is honorable, the weakness in the method is that it usually finds a text to prove an already known point, instead of first discovering a point from the text. In other words, it unknowingly reads into the text. It approaches the scripture with a preconceived idea and uses the text of scripture to substantiate that idea. I must emphasize that this is usually not consciously done. To a certain extent, it is the default position of many people who do not have formal training in Biblical Studies. Even when we are conscious of this method, because of the passion to substantiate our theological positions from scripture, we sometimes instinctively bend scripture to
support our points.
Another characteristic of the poof text method is that it ignores the various contexts of the verse or passage being studied. By doing this, the text is made to say what the interpreter knowingly or unknowingly wants it to say. Thus the Bible is not allowed to speak objectively on its own terms. Use of the proof text method also tends to mix contexts indiscriminately. It does so particularly with the ancient contexts of the text and the present or future contexts in which the text is being applied. This sometimes happens when a modern illustration is used to interpret a text or passage, or a modern dictionary is used to define a Biblical word. Having made a logical deduction from a modern
The New Perspective on Prophecy
illustration, the interpreter then uses the conclusions from his present context to determine the meaning of the text/passage in its ancient context(s). The danger lies in the fact that what is logically true today, may not have been logically true when the Biblical message was written. For example, it is logical for us to think in terms of secular or religious
activities. However, this was never a logical deduction for the people of Bible times. For them, there was no such dichotomy of existence. Life for the ancients was an entirely religious or spiritual affair.
This is particularly evident in the Old Testament where God is presented as being responsible for everything both good and bad (Isa 45:7; 1 Sam 11:6; 18:12; 16: 14, 15; (Exo 4.21; 7.3, 22; 8.15, 32; 1 Kings 22: 1923). Certainly, God is not directly responsible for every action, but that was how ancient peoples logically understood God. According to John Walton, It would be difficult to discuss with the ancients the concept of divine intervention, because in their worldview deity was too integrated into the cosmos to intervene in it. The term natural world would be meaningless or nonsensical to them. There was no purely natural cause and effect, no natural laws, no natural occurrenceseverything was imbued with the supernatural.
1
It is logical to the modern mind that whenever we think of law, we think of stipulations, do's and don'ts. However, to the ancient peoples,
this was not necessarily the case, as law could also include stories. Thus, the book of Genesis which for the most part consists of Narratives, is part of the Torah or law. In fact, as evidenced from the words of Jesus, even the Psalm was logically seen as law (compare John 10:34 with Psa 82:6 and John 15:25 with Psa 35:19; 69:4). In addition, it is logical for many religious people today to think of Biblical laws as either being moral or ceremonial. For the Jews of the Old and New Testament, such a distinction did not exist as all laws were logically seen as coming from God and were of equal moral importance. It is logical for us to understand the phrase everyone who dwells in the earth, to mean the entire population of the planet. However, while in some parts of the Bible this may be the meaning of the phrase, this would not be the logical meaning that John the Revelator intended his readers to conclude. In Revelation, this phrase is John's characteristic
Methods of Biblical Interpretation way of speaking of the wicked; not the entire population of the earth (Rev 3:10; 6:10; 8:13; 11:10; 13:8, 14; 17:2). In contrast to those who dwell on the earth, John classified the rest of the earth's population as those who dwell in heaven namely, the saints (Rev 1:6; 5:9-10; 13:6). With this is mind, we should therefore be very careful how we use a modern illustration or example to explain a Bible passage. The proof text method of interpretation tends to ignore this principle.
The other trait of the proof text method is probably its most marked feature. This is the practice of comparing texts with texts. A key passage from scripture used to support this practice is Isaiah 28:11-13 which reads in part:
So the word of the Lord to them will be order on order, line on line, a little here, a little there, that they may go and stumble backward, be broken, snared and taken captive (NASB).
Interestingly, this text as is commonly used to support Bible study, is a proof text to support the proof method. The fact is, in its primary context this passage was not speaking about Bible study. The context was that the spoken word of God (not the written word) would be a sure witness to Israel's demise. This common Bible study emphasis of the text removes it completely from primary context. As mentioned earlier,
supporting a point with a number of texts/passages can be a healthy procedure if all the texts in their primary contexts are communicating the same message. Yet another character istic of the proof. owever, if the point of each text in its primary context is unrelated to the other texts in their primary contexts, then using a number of texts in such a situation is proof texting and such a method is faulty.
text method is that it tends to ignore or is sometimes oblivious of the significance of the Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic meanings of words. These are the primary languages in which the Bible was written. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, with small sections in Aramaic, and the New Testament was written in Greek. As is well known, the same words and phrases sometimes have different meanings in different languages. Because the proof text method places little or no emphasis on the original languages, it tends to interpret the Bible based on the meaning of words in the modern language(s) of the interpreter. Not only does the proof text approach ignore the meaning of the words in the original languages of the Bible, but it also ignores the literary constructs within which the words occur2 The New Perspective on Prophecy
Another element of the proof text method is that it completely downplays the human element in scripture and exaggerates the divine dimension of scripture. By human dimension I refer to the fact that scripture was communicated through human instrumentalities and inevitable to this process is that human frailties are reflected in language, grammar, vocabulary, illustrations, and even concepts of the scripture. For example, whereas the Greek of the book of Hebrews in very good Greek, the Greek of Revelation is extremely bad Greek grammar and that of Mark is described as barbarous and unrefined.3 The human element is also reflected when in an effort to communicate the point that God is indeed the creator, books like Job, Isaiah, The Psalms and others, teach a geocentric universe, with the earth planted on pillars, and the sky a solid dome (Hebrew raqia) that keeps in place the ocean above the heavens from inundating the earth (Gen 1:6, 7; 6: 6,7; 7:11; Job 37:18; 38:4, 13; Psa 104:3-5; 148: 4-5; Exo 39: 3; Jer 10:9; Mal 3:10). Certainly, no one today believes such concepts.
1
By literary construct, I refer to such arrangements of words as chiastic structure, parallelism, the various tenses of the Greek or Hebrew verb or simply the biblical author's unique use of words As is well known, words do not have meaning, they derive meaning. For example, as seen above, the phrase Those who dwell on the earth used about fifteen times by John in Revelation ((Rev 3:10; 6:10; 8:13; 11:10; 13:8, 14; 17:2) does not mean everyone who lives on the planet, but only the wicked.
William L. Lane, The Gospel According to Mark: The New Internal Critical Commentary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 26. 5
Likewise, the human element is reflected in David's desire that the babies of his enemies be killed by being dashed against the wall (Psa 137: 9) and their parents be utterly destroyed. Slavery as allowed in both the Old and New Testament is also another reflection of the human dimension to scripture (Exo 21:2-11, 20-21; Lev 25:44-46; Eph 6:5-9; Col 3:22, 23). The corrective element within scripture itself, for example, the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) helps us to recognize that these shortcomings presented in the scripture are descriptions not prescriptions. However, the proof text method denies and downplays this human side of scripture. Ignoring these human limitations led the Catholic Church to condemn Copernicus (14731543) and Galileo (1564-1642) because they taught that the earth was not the centre of the universe. Copernicus and Galileo would have been killed had they not tactfully recanted on their positions. Bruno (1548-1600) however, was not so lucky as he was placed in a dungeon for seven years and afterwards burned at the stake. This happened because he rightly taught that there were innumerable suns and an infinite number of planets. The slave trade from Africa to the Western world was perpetuated because the human side of scripture was ignored. Slave traders used the Bible to support their nefarious activities. In fact, when we recognize that there exists approximately 27 million slaves in
the world today4 we cannot ignore the human side of scripture being discussed here. In addition, there are hundreds of cults worldwide that expose the most inimical doctrines, because they ignore this principle.
The fact that we acknowledge the human side of scripture is not in any way to deny that scripture is divinely inspired. Certainly, scripture is divinely inspired. However, whatever definition of inspiration we formulate it must emerge from scripture itself. We should not step away from scripture, create a definition of inspiration and then use such a definition to define scripture. When we look at the features of
scripture as it stands before us, we discover that God did not ignore the human element in his communication with mankind, thus there is both the divine and human dimensions to the inspiration process. The scripture is indeed an incarnation of the Divine. It is this divine side that helps us to balance the human dimension of scripture, so that we do not make the same mistakes as slave traders, or the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages, or of those who today continue to use the Bible to suppress women. As mentioned above, the Finally, the proof text method is more concerned with what the text means, as opposed to what the text meant. Bible was written within definite historical contexts and had meaning to the people to whom
it was originally written. The original or primary meaning(s) should first be determined before the present application is made. However, the proof text approach is more passionate about having the Bible speak to current situations and as such it tends to ignore or downplay the primary meaning of the text or passage. Because of this methodological flaw, most of the conclusions arrived at, while they may suit the interpreter's purpose, are usually contrary to the Bible writer's original intent.
Based on the above qualities, it is obvious that this method reads into the text instead of reading out of the text. Unintentionally, this method manipulates the evidences to support a preconceived idea. Again, it must be emphasized that most of the times the person(s) using this method is unaware that this is being done. Unfortunately, this method of Bible study is employed by the majority of Christians. While the proof text method is helpful in connecting someone to the Bible, as a methodological approach, its flaws are obvious and hence it should not be consciously used.
II. The Exegetical Method The word exegesis is from the Greek word exegeomai which means to lead out of or to read out of. Thus this method seeks to lead or read out of the text/passage, instead of reading into-(eisegesis) the text or the passage. It is the complete opposite of the proof text method. This method is highly conscious that the Bible was written thousands of years ago in definite historical contexts and had specific meaning to the people then. As such, it seeks to focus on what the text meant in its primary context. With this method, each text or passage is dealt with as a unit. Application to present needs is not the emphasis of this approach, but simply the meaning of the text to its first century or pre-first century audience. It is strictly an objective historical enquiry without any passion for application. In order to accomplish its objectives, the exegetical method takes a number of ancient contexts into consideration. These include the: (a) Textual context (b) Literary and Grammatical contexts (c) Historical context (d) Political context (e) Theological and Philosophical contexts
The following is a brief exposition on each of these contexts.
(a) The Textual Context: The textual context is concerned with what the Bible writer literally wrote. The concern is genuine because we do not possess the autographs of any of the books of the Bible. What we now have are copies of copies of copies of whatever was first written. An interesting thing about these copies is that no two copies are exactly alike. This is so, because these copies were made by hand, and over centuries of copying, due to various reasons, errors came into the text. For example, we now have approximately 5,746 copies of the Greek New
Testament with an estimated 300,000 variant readings. There are more variants than actual words in the New Testament. While most of these variants are not significant5 and do not affect the meaning of the text, there are others which do. Therefore, before one can analyze the text we must first determine if the text is there to be analyzed. This is done by carefully selecting the best reading of the best manuscripts. Admittedly, this process is very difficult for the person who is not trained in the process, albeit, by reading from a number of modern versions one can generally deduce the earliest and best rendering of a text. For example, it makes no point crystallizing a point from the following words written in John 5:4 of the King James version:
For an angel went down at certain seasons into the pool, and troubled the water: whoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatever disease he had.
The reality is, this verse is not found in the earliest and best manuscripts. Rather, it was a marginal gloss inserted into the text hundreds of years later to explain how the water in the pool came to be troubled. This verse first appeared in Codex Alexandrinus some five
hundred years after the gospel of John was written.
Interestingly, the King James Version is one of very few versions that carry this text. Most of modern Christianity has grown up on the King James Version and so psychologically and emotionally, all its renditions of scripture are very sacred to us. However, the startling reality is that due to the fact that the King James Version is based upon only six of the know 5,746 extant Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, it has many short comings. These short comings are made even more glaring when we consider that these six manuscripts on which it is based are
from the 12th century, that is, twelve hundred years after the New Testament was written. The modern versions like the Revised Standard Version (RSV), or the New International Versions (NIV) are based upon much earlier manuscripts, and while not perfect in all their details they are generally more faithful to the original Greek. A guiding principle in choosing modern versions is that those versions compiled by a committee should be chosen, not those compiled by an individual or an organization. The NIV and RSV mentioned above are examples of the former, the New Word Translation and Living Bible are examples of the latter. The Bible student who cannot read the original languages should consult a number of committee versions before he makes a final decision (my next book, soon to be published, will elaborate some more on this issue).
The exegetical method recognizes the phenomenon of variants in the text of scripture and therefore selects and analyzes the best readings from the best manuscript(s). Again, although not the ideal (the ideal is to consult the original Greek or Hebrew), it is possible to deduce what is the most likely original by comparing a number of modern versions and then choosing the rendering that occurs in most versions. Indeed,
the textual analysis can be very time consuming, but it is fundamental and cannot be avoided, for as was mentioned earlier, before you can analyze the text, the text must be there to be analyzed.
(b) The Literary and Grammatical Contexts: Among other things, the literary and grammatical contexts have to do with: 1) the way the words were put together by the particular author, 2) the meaning of words and phrases, 3) the style of the biblical author and 4) the genre in which the writing was done, for example, prose, poetry or apocalyptic. All these elements are vital to an accurate understanding of the Bible. In Galatians 2:16, Paul writes that the believer is justified by the faith of/in Jesus. The Greek words translated in some versions as the faith of Jesus, and in others as
10
faith in Jesus are the Greek words, pisteos Iesou Christou. 6
This combination of words exists in what is known as a genitive construction and can be translated differently depending on the type of genitive construction that it is analyzed to be. If it is considered to be a subjective genitive, then it is translated as the faith of Jesus or the faithfulness of Jesus. By this translation, Paul is saying that we are not justified by anything done by or through us, but by a reality totally outside of our experience, namely, the faith or faithfulness of Jesus. If it is translated as an objective genitive, then it is translated as faith in Jesus; in which case, Paul is interpreted to be saying that we are justified by a reality resident within our experience, namely, our faith in Jesus. The difference is extremely significant, for whereas faith cannot be separated from works, to say that we are justified by our faith in Jesus is to say that we are justified by works. Whether or not those works are done by the aid of the Holy Spirit is beside the point, it is still justification by works.
On the other hand, to be justified by the faithfulness of Jesus signifies that Jesus' faithful obedience to God manifested ultimately in the cross, is the cause and
complete grounds of our salvation. While our faith may lay hold of his faith, that which he is doing within us can only be an approximation of what he has done for us, as obviously, that which is being accomplished in us is incomplete and imperfect. However, his life, death and resurrection on our behalf is perfect lacking nothing. God accepts this perfect reality on our behalf. Thus, as long as we remain connected to Jesus we can be seen as 100 percent righteous before God. The simple distinction in the type of literary construction used is a great aid in illuminating all these positions.
11
Another example of this genitive construction is found in Rom 8: 35. The Greek words are agapes tou Christou. The phrase can be interpreted as Christ's love (subjective genitive) or, love for Christ (objective genitive). In the former, Paul is inquiring as to who will be able to separate us from the love that Christ has for us. In the latter, he would be asking who shall separate us from the love that we have for Christ. The difference is obvious.
Other elements of literary contexts have to do with the form of literature in which the book was written. Books like Daniel, Zachariah and Revelation are written in a literary genre called apocalyptic. This writing style has certain distinctive features which must be considered if these books and others like them are to be properly understood. Some of these features are parallelism, symbolism, dualism, visions and dreams, cosmic sweep, angelic encounters, imminent eschatology, and 'out of the body' experience of some of the characters.
Knowing how these apocalyptic elements function go a far way in helping to understand these books. For example, when John speaks of the stars falling to the earth ( Rev 6:12-17) because he has a cosmic sweep in his orientation of earth/falling
stars, these passages cannot be correctly interpreted to mean a portion of the globe (like the New England states of the United States) but the entire globe. 7 The meaning of words is also a dimension of the literary context. In Ephesians 1:14, Paul refers to the Holy Spirit as a seal which is an arrabon of our salvation until we acquire possession of it. The Greek word arrabon signifies not just a down payment on that which is owned, but a down payment that is essentially of the same essence of the final payment and which serves as a guarantee that the final payment will be made. Thus the Holy Spirit in the life of the Christian is not only an essential essence of the ultimate salvation, but it is also a seal (evfragi,zw -ephragizo,) that guarantees that this ultimate salvation will be given when Jesus comes. All these are only a sampling of the various literary and grammatical aspects that must be considered in order to do an informed exegesis of any portion of scripture.
12
(c) Historical Context: The historical context has to do with elements like authorship, place of writing, date of writing and the audience addressed. In addition, it also deals with political, social and cultural conditions existing at the time of writing. As mentioned earlier, the books that now comprise the Bible were written at different times to different peoples under varying historical circumstances. Because each author has his own literary style and addressed different sets of issues, then the above elements of historicity must be considered if the best sense of any passage is to be obtained.
For example, a knowledge of Mark's and Matthew's historical and cultural contexts helps us to better understand their varying presentation of Jesus' words on divorce and remarriage. According to Matthew 5: 32 and 19: 9, Jesus only allowed the man to divorce the woman. The woman is not given this opportunity. However, Mark in his account (10:11-12), allows both men and women to divorce each other. This difference in presentation makes sense when it is recognized that Matthew wrote to a Jewish audience in Syria, Palestine around 70 AD, while Mark wrote to a Gentile audience possibly in
Rome, around 60AD. Jewish custom at that time allowed men to divorce women, but not women to divorce men, hence Matthews presentation. On the contrary, Mark wrote to a Roman audience, in which both men and women were allowed to divorce each other. Consequently, Mark presented Jesus as allowing both possibilities. This historical and cultural background helps us to better understand these diverse presentations of Jesus' words. In addition, the exceptive clause, (except for the cause of fornication) must also be understood against the historical background. This clause occurs only in Matthews gospel at 5:32, and 19:9. In Jesus day there was a very lively debate between two schools of thoughts regarding the issue of divorce. Reasoning from Deut 24:1 the school of Hillel (Hillel was a famous scholars who lived just before the time of Jesus) argued that a man could divorce his wife for two reason; these reasons were Any Cause and Adultery. The Any Cause divorce was deduced from the words of Deut 24:1 : If he finds a cause of indecency8 in her. Hillel reasoned that the word A Cause- Hebrew dabar, implied any reason not just sexual immorality. Thus, according to the rabbis who followed Hillels logics, even a simple trivia as burning the cake or simple dislike for woman was grounds for divorce. The opposing school again founded by another famous scholar, Shammai, claimed that adultery was the only exception for divorce allowed by Deuternomy 24:1. The question to which Jesus was answering was posed within this context, hence the phrasing of the question Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for Any and every cause. Jesus took sides with the more conservative school of Shammai and ruled that divorce should be on
the grounds of fornication. However, Jesus was not saying what he is commonly understood today as saying, namely, that based on all of scripture adultery was the only grounds for divorce. When we listening to the discussion within the historical context of the prevailing debate of Jesus day, we realized that Jesus was saying that based specifically on Deuternomy 24:1 (not all of scripture) adultery was the only grounds on which a man could divorce his wife. Obviously, Paul did not understand Jesus as making a universal statement, least he would not have given different exception for divorce, namely abandonment. This is recorded in 1Cor 7:15.
David Instone-Brewer, gives a good illustration to communicate Jesus point. He writes: Imagine my wife is dressing to go out and is wondering whether to wear a jacket over her dress. She asks me, Should I wear the jacket? I answer, I think you should just wear the dress. Then imagine my surprise when she comes downstairs wearing the dress and nothing elseno shoes, no stockings or anythingexplaining, well you said I should just wear the dress.9 Brewer then concludes, This is exactly what some people do to Jesus reply, Nothing except sexual immorality. Instead of regarding this as an answer to a specific sexual question about the grounds for divorce in Deuteronomy 24:1, they regard it as a universal statement about the whole of scripture.10 Unfortunately, many individuals have endure untold and unending cruelties in their marriage, and have been counseled against divorce, because the atrocities were not adultery. Such counsels are indeed a gross misunderstanding of Jesus words, simple, because the historical context is not carefully considered.
Another example of the importance of the historical context can be seen from the account of Abraham's purchase of the field of Machpelah. The story is recounted in Genesis 23. Verse 17 relates that along with buying the field, Abraham also bought all the trees that were in the field. To our modern mind this statement is redundant, as in our context buying land automatically means purchasing the trees thereon. However, the
13
text is made clearer when it is known that in Abraham's time, when one buys a plot of land he did not automatically buy the trees on it. Ownership of the trees had to be secured by an additional purchase. Certainly, the text is made plainer by a knowledge of the historical context.
The story of the tower of Babel for example, is better understood against the historical background that it was placed in Mesopotamia and not Palestine. In the fourth millennium BC, the main building material in Mesopotamia was kiln-fired bricks. This was unlike Palestine where buildings were made mainly from the abundance of stones that covered the landscape; thus the explanation of Genesis 11:3.
Additional understanding is gained from knowing that in the Mesopotamian culture, it was customary for the people to build high11 towers called Ziggurats. These towers were built on the compound of their temples, and were described as having their heads in the heavens. According to John Walton, this was an idiomatic expression12
like our English word skyscraper. At the top of these towers would be a
small room with a bed, table, and provision for the gods. These elements provided refreshments for the gods as they traveled back and forth from heaven to earth and the underworld. The gods would be assisted in their journeys by the stairways built on the outside of the Ziggurats. Thus, contrary to what is popularly believed today, the tower of Babel was not intended for the people to ascend to heaven or to their gods, but for their gods to come down to them.13 Genesis 11:4 in keeping with the cultural understanding of the time also described the Tower of Babel as having its head in the heavens, (wro'sho bashamaim). Essentially, the story is a polemic by the writer of Genesis against the idolatry of the heathen people. Again, historical and sociological background is vital to clearer understanding of the text.
14
(d) The Political Context: The political setting is that dimension of the historical context that examines the socio-political conditions that existed at the time of writing. This is important as the political climate also helps to shape the meaning of the Biblical text. For example, Daniel chapter one speaks of Nebuchadnezzar's invasion of Jerusalem in the third year of the reign of King Jehoiakim. The context of the invasion is made clearer, when it is recognized that in 605 BC, and shortly before this time, Judah was ruled by two evil kings in close succession, Manesseh and Jehoiakim. Consequently, they reaped the curses of the covenant as recorded in Deuteronomy 28. In addition, the rise of Babylon to world dominance in the sixth century BC also helps to explicate the context.
In New Testament times, the intolerance of the Roman government toward self proclaimed Messiahs anywhere in the empire, helps us to better understand why Jesus remained reticent about his Messiahship; at least most of the time. This is particularly evident in Mark's gospel which was written to a Roman audience. Apparently, Mark did not want to incite undue Roman animosity against the Christians living in Rome.
Also, the negative political stance of the Caesars towards insurrection helps us to better understand why at Jesus trial before Pilate, the emphasis of the accusation made by the Jewish leaders, was that Jesus had declared himself a king. This charge was unlike the charge of blasphemy which they brought against him before the Jewish Sanhedrin. (See, Mk 14: 53-65; 15:1,2; Matt 26: 65; 27: 11-22, 27-31; Lk 23: 1-7). Towards the end of the first century the Caesars demanded worship of themselves as gods. The book of Revelation was written in this climate around AD, 95. This historical situation helps us to better understand Johns emphasis in the book on the worship of God and God alone. It also helps us to better understand the difference between Pauls positive approach to the civil authorities as recorded in Romans 13 versus Johns negative approach to civil authorities recorded throughout Revelation. When Paul wrote Romans around 55AD, Romes stance against Christianity in general, and the demand for emperor worship was not as caustic as it was when John wrote Revelation in AD95. Again the Political context matters for a clearer understanding of the scriptures.
(e) Theological Context The theological context has to do with what each biblical author believed, and also with the central message of his book, or a section thereof. What the biblical authors wrote was naturally grounded in their belief system and was therefore influenced by it.
Methods of Biblical Interpretation When certain authors That an evil spirit from the Lord came upon Saul and incited him murder David (1 Sam 16: 15; 11: 16; 18;120 t must be noted that the Bible writers were not merely writing history, but they were also theologizing the history at their disposal. In other words, they were also to interpreting history based on their understanding of God as influenced by their culture.
or that God sent a lying spirit to deceive Ahab (1 Kings 22: 19-23) or that God is the creator of good and evil (Isa 45:7 KJV), it becomes evident that these authors share the common theological belief of their time that God was responsible14 for everything good and bad. This theological position is contrary to God's clearest revelation in Jesus (see Heb 1:1-3; Matthew 5-7). James also wrote: Let no one say when he is tempted I am being tempted by God. For God cannot be tempted by evil, and he himself does not tempt anyone (James 1: 13). It should be noted that all revelations of God prior to that given in Jesus were imperfect. Jesus is the only perfect revelation of God in scripture (John 1:18; 5:39-40; Heb 1:1-3; 1Pet 2:22). The belief that the dead continues to live in a shadowy, lifeless form below the earth, reflects the belief system of ancient times and not objective reality concerning dead people (Job 2:5,6; Isa 14:9-20).15 Ancient cosmologies present the sky as a solid dome, the earth as flat, resting on pillars, with a watery chaos below the earth in which the
16
dead continued to live in shadowy form. To accept that the dead continues to live at a place not within the earth, but below the earth, one would logically also need to accept that the earth is flat and rests on pillars, among other things. However, when such beliefs are seen as the theological understanding of ancient peoples, useless confusion and contradictions can be avoided.
We gain a deeper insight into the birth narrative and other events recorded in the first five chapters of Matthew when we recognize that Matthew's conceptual framework was that Jesus was a New Moses/Israel. Consequently, as Moses was rescued from a death decree so likewise Jesus was rescued from a death decree. As Israel came out of Egypt after a death decree, so likewise Jesus came out of Egypt after a death decree and then went through the anti-typical Red Sea experience in baptism just as Israel went through the Red Sea after their emergence from Egypt (Exo 1; 2:8; Matt 2; 3; see also 1 Cor 10:12). The baptism, that is, Red Sea experience, is followed by the wilderness experience of forty days paralleling Israel's forty years in the wilderness. During this time, Jesus indicated his own
awareness of his role as the new Israel in the new exodus by consistently meeting the devil's temptations with quotations from Deuteronomy 6-8, where Israel's temptations in the wilderness are summarized. Finally, Jesus appears on the mount as a new Moses with his twelve disciples representing the twelve tribes of Israel; and repeats the law as Moses did at the end of the wilderness sojourn (Matt 5-7). Indeed Matthew's narratives can be better understood when they are seen, not only as historical facts but as facts being theologized.
This principle holds true for practically the entire Bible. In addition, Matthew presents Jesus as king, Mark presents him as a man of action, and Luke as the servant of humanity. Thus, in Matthew, Jesus' genealogy is traced through the line of David, the ideal king of Israel (Matt 1:1, 2-25). However, in Luke, it is traced to Adam the father of humanity (Lk 3: 23-38).
17
Mark omits his genealogy as in Mark, Jesus started out being an adult, busily engaged (Mark 1). In Matthew, the wise men visited Jesus- a royal honor, but in Luke, he was visited by lowly shepherds, people who in the first century were considered sinners (Matt 2:1-12; Lk 2: 820). The above examples also alert us that there are different theological beliefs or emphases in scripture. It cannot be taken for granted that the theology of one book is exactly the same as the theology of another book. The theological framework of each book must be considered if the messages of the Bible are to be clearly understood. It is obvious from the above discussion of the various contexts, that the exegetical approach is very involved. It should also be noted that these contexts are interrelated. By focusing on these different contexts, the meaning of words, phrases, concepts and figures of speech, among other things, are first understood within the real life situations in which they were first written. This method therefore seeks to make its conclusions from the original languages in which the Bible was written (Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic) and not from a rendering of a text in a modern language. This is an extremely important activity, for as was mentioned above, words, phrases, and
concepts have different meanings in different languages. To further illustrate, we will look briefly at two related passages from Isaiah 65 and 66. For behold I create new heavens and a new earth and the former things will not be remembered or come to mind. But be glad and rejoice forever in what I create; for behold I create Jerusalem for rejoicing and her people for gladness. I will also rejoice in Jerusalem and be glad in my people no longer will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his days; for the youth will die at the age of one hundred and the one who does not reach the age of one hundred will be thought accursed. They will build houses and inhabit them; they will plant vineyards and eat their fruits. For just as the new heavens and new earth which I will make will
18
endure before me, declares the Lord, so your offspring and your name will endure. And it shall be from new moon to new moon and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all mankind will come and bow down before me says the Lord (65:17-21; 66: 22, 23 NASB).
Many Christians reading these passages automatically interpret new heavens, new earth to mean, the new creation after the return of Jesus and hence Sabbath signifies the keeping of the Sabbath in the new earth after Jesus returns. While I am in no way disputing the importance of the Sabbath or the fact of a new earth subsequent to the return of Jesus, interpreting this passage in its historical, sociological, grammatical, philosophical, and theological contexts reveal that it was not speaking to the second coming of Jesus or to Sabbath-keeping in the new earth.
This passage was written against the socio-historical background of Judah in Babylonian captivity in the sixth century BC. God is here committing himself to deliver them from exile and to restore them to their homeland. The restoration would be so dramatic that it was described in Edenic language by Isaiah. Using the Hebrew principle of poetic parallelism new heavens and earth in 65:17, is used to refer to Jerusalem in verse 19. It is obvious that new earth here could not
have been speaking of an event subsequent to the coming of Jesus because in describing the events associated with the new heavens and new earth, the passage in verse 20, also speaks of people dying.
Furthermore, the literary construction new moon . Sabbath whenever used in the Old Testament always signal the seventh-day Sabbath and the monthly ceremonial16 Sabbath (2 Kings 4:23; 1 Chron 23:31; 2 Chron 2:4; Neh 10:33; Isa 1:13; Ezk 45:17; 46:1; Hosea 2:11; Amos 8:5). The latter occurred every 28th day. While
19
many Christians believe in the obligatory nature of the seventh-day Sabbath, practically all Christians admit, and rightly so, that we are no longer obligated to keep the New Moon Sabbath of the Old Testament, because it finds its fulfillment in Jesus. Therefore, to advocate that there will be the keeping of the Sabbath in the new earth based on this passage, would be to prove too much, as then one would also have to advocate the keeping of the ceremonial Sabbath in heaven. Again, a position which is unfounded where the New Testament is concerned. Therefore, we must understand new heaven and new earth not in light of later revelations of say, John in Revelation, but from that of Isaiah's historical, sociological, and theological context, in which case it meant the glorified restoration of Judah in Palestine. (Further elaboration on Israel's restoration is done below). In conclusion, the exegetical method is always willing to keep silent and let the Biblical author define his terms within his primary historical context, irrespective of how such a definition cuts against our logical understandings of the same term.
III. The Theological Method The theological method is for the most part the same as the exegetical
method. The significant difference is that while the exegetical method deals with individual units (particular texts, or passage(s) of specific books) the theological method deals with themes. So while the exegetical method may study a particular text in a particular book or section of that book that has to do with for example, repentance, the theological method deals with the concept of repentance in that entire book, or in any number of books in which the word may occur.
For example, when the word faith (pistis) is studied throughout 20 Romans or Galatians, it is obvious that it signified a status of salvation or the means of accepting salvation. When the same word is examined throughout the pastoral epistles (1, 2 Timothy, Titus) it signified a set of doctrine or truths to be believed. Justified/justification as used by Paul means a status. Justified/justified as used by Matthew means right action. The theological approach seeks to distinguish the thematic presentation of each author on each word, concept, or subject. Of course, these themes are expressed as they were understood by the original recipients. Like the exegetical method, all the various contexts are considered so as to determine what the themes meant. Therefore, like the exegetical method, the theological method is an historical study.
IV. The Systematic Theology or Homiletical Method
This method focuses more on application. While it may take into consideration what the text meant originally, the focus of this approach is what the text means for practical living today. This method therefore seeks to obtain principles from the Bible and then show the relevance of these principles to practical living in our time. For example, the Systematic theology approach will use the Bible as its base to demonstrate that vegetarianism is good for our health, or that smoking is dangerous to health. It does so, not because there is a specific passage in the Bible that deals with vegetarianism or smoking (there is none), but because healthful living is advocated in scripture.
Another example could relate to the way we dress. The systematic theology approach stipulates that an individual should not go naked in public and also that men should uncover their heads in buildings. This is not because there is a specific text or passage in scripture which when interpreted in its original context stipulates these practices, but because modesty can be taught from scripture.
21
Methods of Biblical Interpretation Because the systematic theology approach is more concerned with application to present needs, it can interpret the Bible to say different things using the same text or passages. For example, it can use texts dealing with modesty to advocate that the dress of women in certain parts of India should be long enough to cover their legs. The method does so because the covering of a woman's legs represents modesty in that culture and the Bible teaches modesty. On the other hand, the same text or passage could also be used to advocate that the dress of women in Jamaica or the United States need not cover their legs, as showing the legs in these cultures represents modesty or is not a violation of modesty.
Questions dealing with issues like jewelry, hat wearing, dress reform, worship liturgy, church organization, and women's ordination, are all systematic theology questions. In order to address these issues, the interpreter deduces principles from relevant passages of scripture which, may or may not be speaking directly to the issue in question. Obviously, this is a helpful way to approach scripture. However, there might be a danger when one is unaware that he/she is using the method, as then one can read into the scriptures and have scripture make specific legislation on an issue, when in fact it is the interpreter's deduction which arrives at such legislation. To say for
example, that a specific text as understood by its original recipients commands or prohibits vegetarianism would be to misrepresent the Bible writer. Of course, vegetarianism can be deduced from the texts that advocated healthful living, just like seven or eight hours of sleep nightly can also be deduced from these texts. However, such deductions are the interpreters action and not that of the Bible writer. Our deductions in and of themselves may be correct, but we still should not read our right deductions back into scripture.[side bar]
Philippians 4:13 reads: I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. Almost all the time this text is used in church, it is used in an homiletical or systematic theological way. It is often used to encourage people to achieve great exploits or just about anything. Such an interpretation is an application of the text, not a
22
communication of what the text meant in its primary context. In its primary context this was not the intent of this text. Reading from verse twelve, it becomes very clear that Paul wished to communicate that with respect to hard times and good times he was able to cope. All things contextually meant the various circumstances of deprivation or abundance that Paul found himself in, to which he affirmed that he was able by God's strength to cope, namely, do all things. Therefore when we reason from this text that we can, for example, be successful in our careers, or that we can study successfully for an exam, or preach a good sermon, we are taking a systematic theology/homiletical approach to the text. These conclusions are our deductions, that what Paul meant in his primary context. In and of themselves these conclusions may or may not be correct, but whatever the case we cannot make them Pauls conclusions. Again, should not read our right conclusions back into scripture and have the Bible writers say what we have concluded.
From the above description of the systematic or homiletical method, a very significant difference between it and the exegetical and theological methods emerges. While the exegetical or theological approach remains constant in its interpretation of the Bible, the
systematic theology approach will always change in its interpretation. This is so because the systematic approach interprets to reflect changes in modern situations. It should be noted though, that whatever the Bible writers wrote a few thousand years ago does not change for they are not rewriting the text, neither can the original readers change their minds. So whereas the exegetical and theological methods seek to uncover what was done (or written), the systematic approach addresses the question of what should we do today.
Because the systematic approach is concerned with applications, then the authority of the message communicated will be pegged to the authority of the individual or organization that is making the application. This is a very important principle to remember, for, too often personal or religious authority is confused with Biblical authority. Thus, because a particular doctrinal position is endorsed by an organization, people come to believe that the position of the organization is exactly what the Bible in its primary context is communicating, not knowing that the organization's position may only have been an application of a Biblical principle and as such may not apply to all times and places. [example if can find]
23
Methods of Biblical Interpretation Conclusion From the discussion so far, it is obvious that the exegetical method followed by the theological method are the best methods of studying the scriptures. The exegetical method recommends itself as being the best as it is the least subjective of all the methods. While the theological method is very close to the exegetical, it involves the harmonizing of themes and this automatically introduces some element of subjectivity, as the Biblical writers may not have been involved in harmonizing the particular theme or themes we so choose to harmonize. In fact, from all appearances, each author of a Biblical book was not aware that his book would be circulating alongside other books in a closed canon of scripture.
Originally, each book circulated independently and was only brought together with other books by the process of canonization which occurred hundreds of years after the books were written.17 Thus Biblical authors were not necessarily systematizing with the other books which later came to be in the canon. Therefore, the harmonizations that we make from scripture are quite often our harmonizations and not necessarily what each Biblical author was saying independently. Finally, while the proof text method is helpful in connecting someone with the Bible, as a methodology, its flaws are obvious and hence it should not be consciously used.
With this in mind, we will now take a look at some characteristics of Bible prophecy which have been gleaned using the exegetical method. Occasionally, the systematic approach will be used, as application is also of great importance. Since the proof text method has no characteristics to recommend it, it should not be used and is not employed in this book.
24
CHAPTER 2 THE NATURE OF BIBLE PROPHECY
In order to make the proper application of the prophecies of the Bible to our times, a number of characteristics of Bible prophecy will now be examined after which some relevant applications will be made.
I. Jesus: The Fulfillment of all Prophecies According to the New Testament, all the prophecies of the Old Testament point to Jesus and are fulfilled in Him. This is the explicit testimony of Jesus himself on a number of occasions. In John 5:39-40 he proclaimed:
You are searching the scriptures because you are thinking that in them you have eternal life; it is these scriptures that are testifying about me; and you do not wish to come to me in order that you may have life (my translation from the Greek)
The word translated search is the Greek word eraunate. Here it is in the present tense of the indicative mood and denotes present continuous action. Thus the translation, You are searching the scriptures. Indeed, that was exactly the habit of the Jewish leaders to
whom Jesus was speaking. Scripture, Greek, graphas denotes the Old Testament in general which was the scriptures of most of the Jewish leaders in the time of Christ. According to Jesus, all the Jewish scriptures testified or witnessed about him. Put another way, he is the intent or meaning of the entire Old Testament.
In another place, Matthew 5:17, 18, Jesus again affirmed: Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them (RSV).
The words law and prophets were the common way of speaking of the
25
Methods of Biblical Interpretation entire Old Testament. The Jewish Bible in the time of Christ (and even to this very day) is divided into three sections. The first section consisted of the first five books of Moses: Genesis to Deuteronomy, and was called the Law. The Hebrew word commonly used to designate this first section is Torah and the Greek equivalent as used in Matthew five is nomos. The second section was comprised of all the prophetic books and was called the prophets. The Hebrew designation being the Nev'im and the Greek designation as used in Matthew five, is prophetas from which our English word prophet is derived. The third section was called writings or Kethuvbim. The poetic books such as the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastics, Song of Songs, and Lamentations formed this latter section.
While these three designations continue to describe the Hebrew Bible to this very day, with only one exception (Lk 24:44), the New Testament consistently uses the words Law and Prophets (nomos kai prophetas) to describe the entire Old Testament. Passages such as Matt. 7:12; Lk. 24:27; John 1:45; Acts 28:23; John 10:34; and 1 Cor
14:21 communicate the point. Therefore, the point of Jesus in this text is that he is the fulfillment of the entire Old Testament.
A key motive that accentuates the point that Jesus is the fulfillment or meaning of the entire Old Testament, is the presentation of Jesus throughout the New Testament as being the recapitulation of just about all the major themes and personalities of the Old Testament. He is the new Adam, the new Joseph, the new Moses, the new David, the new Elisha, the new Creation, the new Exodus, the new Covenant, the new Temple, among other realities (Rom 5:1-8; Matt 1-5; Act 3:2224; John 13:18; 6; Lk 1:35; 9:36; Lk 3:18; Matt 26:28, 29; Gal 3:16; John 2:19-21).
We have already seen above how Matthew in the first five chapters of his book presents Jesus as a New Israel coming out of Egypt. Israels historical experiences of death decree, Rea Sea crossing, receiving of law on a mountain and forty years sojourn in the wilderness are all recapitulated in the birth, Egyptian sojourn, baptism, wilderness encounters, and sermon on the mount delivery, of Jesus (Matt 1-7). Matthews theme is, as it happened then to the old Israel so it happened now to the new Israel Jesus.
26
The New Perspective on Prophecy Like Matthew, Luke also portrays Jesus as the new Israel. Speaking of the cross experience, Luke described it as His (Jesus') departure that was to happen at Jerusalem (Luke 9: 31). The word translated departure is the Greek word exodus. As the old Israel had an exodus, so likewise Jesus, the new Israel, had his exodus, namely, the cross and resurrection events. John describes Jesus as the vine. This is an Isaiahic term for Israel as a nation (Isa 3:14; 5: 1-7; see also, Psa 80: 816). In Paul's thinking, Jesus is the seed of Abraham, that is, Israel (Gal 3:16) and also the second Adam (Rom 5).
Since the entire Old Testament points to Jesus and whereas the prophecies are also part of the Old Testament, indeed since the New Testament explicitly affirms that the prophetic books were fulfilled in Christ, we are on very solid ground when we say that all the prophecies of the Old Testament point to Jesus and were fulfilled in him. While the prophecies of the Old Testament point forward to Jesus and were fulfilled in him, those of the New Testament point backwards to the Christ event (that is, the life, death and resurrection of Jesus) and are an illustration of that event as it played out in human history.[side bar] It is on this
27
Methods of Biblical Interpretation premise that before John the Revelator wrote about the many gory animals and all types of convoluted symbols, he first described the entire book as The Revelation of Jesus Christ (1:1). The genitive construction, revelation of Jesus (apokalupsis Iesou Christou) signifies both the revelation given by Jesus (subjective genitive) and the revelation about Jesus (objective genitive). John wishes his readers to know that irrespective of the language or whatever one thinks about the book's messages, the book is about Jesus. It is an unveiling from, and about Jesus.
It is therefore safe to conclude that New Testament prophecies dealing with the post-cross era, are a recapitulation of the life of Christ as it plays out in human history. For example, as Christ's ministry lasted for three and a half years with much persecution, so also the church, his body, must endure persecution for three and a half times, or 1260 days (Rev. 11: 11,12; 12: 6, 14). As Christ was eventually delivered, so likewise his people will be eventually delivered (Rev. 11:1-13). As Ezell states, John is not interpreting the future, he is interpreting the significance of the cross and the resurrection for the 18
future (emphasis his). Therefore, since Jesus is the meaning of all prophecies, before we determine how a prophecy is fulfilled
chronologically, politically, sociologically or historically, we must first understand how it is fulfilled Christologically. [Place in side bar]
This strongly suggests that whereas prophecies post-cross are an application of the Christ event, prophetic time should be reckoned more as quality time rather than by duration of time. The person of Christ cannot be delineated into segments of time, but being the alpha and the omega, he permeates all times. In fact, contrary to our modern western concept of time which focuses on duration or points in time,
28
The New Perspective on Prophecy the ancient Jewish concept of time (and the entire Bible is Jewish) has to do with time quality or time content, that is, concrete events as they happened within time. Put another way, time is seen as that which happened, not as an abstract phenomenon, for example, the year 2009. Thus, quality time is more Biblical than duration of time.
II. Prophecies Are Meant To Build Faith In Jesus The epitome of the relationship that we are called to have with Jesus is one of faith. The burden of the New Testament is that the believer is first called to a faith relationship with Jesus and within that context of a relationship with the person Jesus, good works will ensue (John 15:15; Rom 12:1-2; Eph. 2: 1-10; Col 3:1-5). Thus, although the rich young ruler had kept the commandments from his youth, Jesus bade him Sell all that you have and follow me, (Matt. 19: 16-21). In other words, his real life with God began only as he followed Jesus; not when he began to do right things. In the New Testament both righteousness and sin are defined in reference to the person of Christ (Matt 11:28-30; John 16:8-10; Rom 14:23).
Therefore, the key function of that which is fulfilled in Jesus- prophecyis to build faith in Jesus. When we think of predictive prophecy in the Bible, we usually think of specific predictions and their exact fulfillment. However, predictive prophecy is primarily not about
prognostications. It is rather a phenomenon designed to buttress our faith in God. The primary function of predictive prophecy is not to tell the future but rather to illustrate the significance of the cross for the future.[side bar] Interestingly, when the disciples asked Jesus concerning the signs which should precede his coming, Jesus gave generic signs, namely, signs which operated in his time and which would continue until the end of time (Matt 24:1-30). He consistently repeated the words 'keep watch' (Matt. 25:42, 44; 25:13; Lk. 21:8, 34, 36). In other words, the emphasis of prophecy should not be upon dates but upon
29
Methods of Biblical Interpretation the need to abide in Jesus so as to be ready at all times. III. Jesus Is God's Final Prophetic Communication
The New Testament is very clear that Jesus is the greatest revelation of God to humanity, not just spiritually, or ethically, or sociologically, but also prophetically. Put another way, all that God wishes to communicate to mankind regarding the future he has already said in principle in Jesus Christ (John 1:18; Heb 1:1-3). The Christ event encapsulates not only the past, but also the future to the very end of time. Jesus is the alpha and the omega of God's communication. This principle is in keeping with the above two principles that affirm Jesus as the fulfillment of all prophecies and that the intent of prophecy is to build faith in Jesus.
Because God has already spoken in final terms in Jesus, then, two very important implications must be borne in mind. One, in order to know what will happen in the future we must first study the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. His existence is a microcosm of what will happen in the future.[side bar] As we shall see shortly, that was the principle upon which John wrote his prophetic book of Revelation. Two, all prophets subsequent to Jesus are what I wish to call prophet-lets, that is, they are minor prophets, seeking to make relevant to their generation the
prophecies of God that have already been spoken by the major prophet, Jesus. In other words, Jesus in principle gave the wholesale message, and all subsequent prophets are small retailers, breaking bulk for the customers of their generation, their local time and contexts. It means therefore, that if we are to correctly understand a prophet subsequent to Jesus, we must first test the teachings of that prophet in light of the teachings of Jesus, and secondly we must study the message of that prophet within the time and contexts of that particular prophet. Again, we should be very conscious that such a prophet(s) spoke
30
The New Perspective on Prophecy specifically to his or her local contexts. Stated another way, we should always study the teaching of non-biblical prophets in light of the Christ event, as recorded in scripture, not the Christ event in light of the teachings of the non-biblical prophet.[side bar] Paul probably had this in mind when he counseled the Thessalonians and Corinthian members to test all prophets (1 Thess 5:20, 21; 1 Cor 14:29).
Logically, in order to study a non-biblical prophet in light of the teachings of Jesus, we must first study the teachings of Jesus as if the message of the extra-biblical prophet does not exist. Having objectively determined the prophetic message of Jesus from scripture, one can now study the message of the non-biblical prophet within that prophet's local context, and then compare the latter with the standard message of Jesus already established.19 Failure to do this will inevitably cause one to veto the prophetic message of Jesus with the message of the non-biblical prophet.
IV. Predictive Prophecy Is Not the Future Cast in Concrete Another attribute of Bible prophecy is the fact that it usually presents an impressionistic outline of the future, not a scientific, detailed photograph of the future. Thus, prophecies are usually not
fulfilled exactly as they were first proclaimed but in their essential message. This attribute of Biblical prophecy, is perhaps the most important characteristic; yet I believe it is the least understood quality of predictive prophecy. Because of this I will spend some extra time on this point. A few examples will illustrate.
Jeremiah prophesied that Jehoiakim would have the burial of an ass, his body would be thrown in the streets, and none of his kinsmen
31
Methods of Biblical Interpretation would ever again reign on his throne (Jer. 22:19; 36:30). According to 2 Kings 24:6; 2 Chron. 36:8, Jehoiakim appeared to have had a normal burial, and more importantly his son Jehoiachin reigned for three months, followed by Jehoiachin's uncle, Zedekiah, who reigned for eleven years (2 Chron 36:10, 11). However, the essential message of the prophecy was fulfilled as Jehoiakim died detested by all, and Zedekiah was the last king of Judah.
Isaiah and Jeremiah prophesied that upon its invasion by the Medes, Babylon would be completely demolished, and all its inhabitants destroyed (Isa. 13:16-18; Jer. 51:11- 32). However, when the Medes and Persians invaded Babylon, they did not destroy the city; in fact, they made it their seat of government, and the city continued for many centuries afterwards (Dan 6-7). The substance of the prophecy was eventually fulfilled however as Babylon eventually disappeared in ruins some time in the second century AD.
The major and minor prophets, predicted the return from Babylonian exile as a glorious event, characterized by a highway in the desert from Babylon to Israel, the drying up of the Euphrates River, and a large repatriation of exiles accompanied by scores of converted Gentiles. There would also be a renewed temple, outstripping Solomon's
temple. Economically and politically, the Jews would be independent forever (Zech. 8:20-23; Isa. 11; 19:23-25; 56:6-7; Mic. 4).
The post-exilic events reveal that these prophecies were only fulfilled essentially. There was no highway made in the desert, most of the Jewish exiles refused to return to Judah, economic deprivation dogged the life of those who returned, while some wept when they saw the quality of the New Temple (Ezra 3:12; Neh. 1-13). They were constantly subjugated by the Greeks then by the Romans. Please note that these prophesies regarding the return from exile were not conditional prophecies, but were proclaimed as unilateral actions of God based on
32
His own mercy and initiative (See for example, Ezk. 36:22-28; Isa 11; 65; 66).
In keeping with the prophecies of a utopia which should have been in Israel's history back then, are the Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament. Contrary to what many modern Christians believe, almost all the messianic prophecies of the Old Testament portray the Messiah as a military/political ruler who would secure political, economic, social and spiritual liberation primarily for the nation of Israel. The Messiah as God's anointed was supposed to be a warrior king after the order of David, Israel's ideal king. Messiah was supposed to inaugurate the period of bliss described above. Again, this was supposed to have happened sometime after the Babylonian exile. It should have been inaugurated on what was frequently referred to in the Old Testament as the Day of Yahweh. According to Isaiah 65 and 66, that new age would be characterized by the fact that:
No longer will there be in it [Jerusalem] an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his days; For the youth will die, at the age of one hundred and the one who does not reach the age of one hundred will be thought
accursed. They will build houses and inhabit them; they will plant vineyards and eat their fruits. They will not build and another inhabit, they will not plant and another eat... they will not labour in vain or bear children for calamity... and it shall be from new moon to new moon and from Sabbath to another, all mankind will come to bow down before Me, says the Lord. Then they will go forth and look on the corpse of the men who have transgressed against me (Isa 65:20- 25; 66:23- 24, NASB).
In addition: The wolf will lie down with the lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the young goat and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little boy will lead them. The cow
33
Methods of Biblical Interpretation and the bear will graze, their young will lie down together, and the lion will eat straw like an Ox. The nursing child will play by the hole of the cobra, and the weaned child will put his hand on the viper's den. They will not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain, for the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea (Isa 11: 6-9,
NASB; see also 65:25; Ezk 36:22-38).
Again, using the principle of the exegetical method described in chapter one, we can easily see that these passages were not speaking of the second coming as we know it today. Obvious clues of this are that the passages speak of the keeping of the New Moon (a ceremonial Sabbath) and death being a part of that environment. All these are realities that the New Testament described as not being a part of the new order after the second return of Jesus (Rev. 21.4; 1 Cor. 15:53, 54).
Within this context of a future utopia, the Messiah was to be the instrument of Yahweh who would vanquish the enemies of Israel and inaugurate the new age back then in Israel's history. A few other passages are sufficient to communicate the point:
A shoot will come from the stump of Jesse. He will strike the earth with the rod of his mouth; with his breath he will slay the wicked. In that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples; the nations will rally around him and his place of rest will be glorious (Isaiah 11:1, 4).
For in the days of Midian's defeat you have shattered the yoke that burdens them, the bar across their shoulders, the rod of their oppressors. Every warrior's boot used in battle and every garment rolled in blood will be destined for burning for unto us a child is born unto us a son is given, and the government will be upon his shoulders and
34
The New Perspective on Prophecy he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end (Isa 9: 4-7, NIV; See also Isa 24:23; Ezk 17:22-24).20 Jesus is portrayed in the New Testament as fulfilling the Messianic prophecies of the New Testament. It is obvious that he did not fulfill these prophecies literally as they were prophesied. The enemies he vanquished were not the political enemies of national Israel, but the spiritual enemy of the entire world - sin, the Devil and his angels (John 12:31; Col. 2:15; Rev. 12:7-12). He did so, not by wielding the sword but by dying upon a cross (Rev 5:5-10). He now reigns as God's Messiah, not upon David's throne in Palestine, but at God's right hand in heaven (Acts 2:33-36; 5:31; Rev 4; 5). This is indeed another example of prophecy being fulfilled, but not in the exact terms in which the prophecy was first made.
Another very interesting Old Testament prediction which was not fulfilled exactly the way it was prophesied was the period of time Judah spent in Babylonian captivity. According to Jeremiah, they were to be in Babylonian captivity for seventy years (Jer. 25:11, 12; 29:10; 2 Chron. 36:21). Note that like all the examples given above, this too was not a conditional prophecy but a straight pronouncement of God's unilateral decision as to what would happen. During the time of
Jeremiah there were three major deportations of the Jews to Babylon.
35
Methods of Biblical Interpretation The first occurred in 605 BC, the second in 598/7 BC and the third in 587 BC. The third deportation was the ultimate of the three as it marked the destruction of the temple and the complete exile of all the Jews to Babylon.
It is well established, that the Jews returned to Judah in 538 BC. Therefore, if the beginning of the exile is marked from 605 BC, then the duration of the captivity was sixty seven years. If the commencement is reckoned from 598/7BC, then the duration was sixty or fifty nine years. The duration would be only forty nine years if 587 BC is used as the beginning of the exile. Whichever date one chooses as the beginning of the exile, Jeremiah's prophecy was certainly not fulfilled precisely, but only essentially, as indeed a large number of Jews returned from the Babylonian exile.
The fact that prophecies were fulfilled essentially is not only a phenomenon of the Old Testament but also of the New Testament. Two examples are prominent. In Acts 21:10 and11, the prophet Agabus under the compulsion of the spirit, prophesied that the Jews of Jerusalem would bind Paul and turn him over to the Gentiles. According to Acts 21:27-36, the Jews never bound Paul, rather they attempted to kill him. He was rescued from the Jews by the Gentiles,
not turned over to them. Again, the prophecy was not fulfilled literally as it was first proclaimed but fulfilled essentially (as Paul got into much trouble which led to his imprisonment in Rome).
Finally, one of the most pronounced prophecies in the New Testament is yet to be fulfilled literally as it was first proclaimed. In almost every book of the New Testament, the second coming of Jesus is presented as something that would happen in the first century. There are more that two dozen such references. A few will suffice:
Matt. 24:34; Lk. 21:32: This generation shall not pass until all
36
The New Perspective on Prophecy these things (including the second coming)take place.
1 Thess. 4:16: We who are alive and are left shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Please note that the we here is Paul and his audience. Not us who are living in 2009.
Heb. 10:37: Yet a little while and the coming one shall come and shall not tarry.
1 Cor. 7:29-31: The appointed time is short this world in its present form is passing away. Please note that the words present form in the text equals the form that existed then, when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians about AD 54.
1 Cor. 10:1 . . . For our instruction upon whom the end of the ages has come . Our refers to Paul and his Corinthians audience.
Phil 4:5: The Lord is at hand.
Heb 1:2: In these last days he has spoken to us by a Son.
Heb 9:26: He has appeared at the end of the age to put away
sin by the sacrifice of himself
1 Pt. 4:7, 17: The end of all things is at hand .
1 John 2:18: Children, it is the last hour. (Emphases supplied in the above texts)
Quite often when these passages are read, we instinctively make the application to our day without recognizing that these passages were written to real people within a real time and place and had its primary meaning to the people back then. Again, using the principles of exegesis as outlined in chapter one, and indeed even from a common sense reading of these passages, it becomes obvious that they
37
Methods of Biblical Interpretation referenced the second coming as something that would happen in the first century AD. Please note again, no conditions are attached to these texts, rather they describe what God willed to happen. Therefore, it means that whenever Jesus returns, his coming will not be fulfilled literally as it was prophesied, in terms of the time of his coming.
Indeed, there are abundant evidences to substantiate the position that prophecies are not fulfilled literally in the way they were first proclaimed and that they are not the future cast in an unchangeable
mold21. Several additional examples can be cited from scripture but I think the point is well made.
Based on the evidences, we can conclude that the fulfillment of prophecies can be likened to the viewing of a mountain range from a distance. From a far distance, the mountain appears to be smooth and as one composite. However, when one approaches the mountain, the smoothness of the mountain vanishes as the hills, valleys, cliffs, ravines, rivers and streams become evident. Prophecies from the initial vantage point of their presentation gives an impressionistic outline of the future but when that which is prophesied is realized, it can appear very different from the original forecast. To use another metaphor,
prophecy is like the shadow of a reality. While your shadow can tell a few things about you, it is obvious that it cannot communicate the complexities of your anatomy. Prophecies are meant to give the shadow of the future, but not the full complement of the future reality. With this in mind the obvious question is, what should be our attitude to the prophetic conclusions that we not draw from scripture? The next chapter will address this question.
38
CHAPTER 3 ATTITUDE TO PROPHETIC FULFILMENTS AND CURRENT WORLD EVENTS Based on the above characteristics, I wish to make four
recommendations regarding prophetic conclusions as they relate to happening in our world today.
I. Avoid Dogmatism Regarding the Detailed Fulfillment of Prophecies As discussed above, prophecies are meant to build faith in Jesus. Dogmatism is not faith.[side bar] The pages of history are littered with bitter disappointments and misguided efforts of people who adopted a literalistic approach to the fulfillment of prophecy. In fact, it would be reasonable to conclude that it was this approach that led the Jews to reject Jesus. As discussed above, the Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament were predominantly about a conquering king who would offer complete liberation to national Israel. However, Jesus in his fulfillment of these prophecies did not fulfillment them literally and consequently many Jews rejected him as the messiah.
The suffering servant account in Isaiah 42 to 52 is probably the only prophecy that portrays a suffering Messiah. Modern Christians with the advantage of the New Testament scriptures have no problem
seeing Jesus in this passage. However, it is doubtful that the Jews in the time of Christ saw a Messiah in these scriptures due to the fact that the word Messiah never occurred in these passages and the suffering servant is sometimes described as an individual and other times as the nation of Israel (Isa 53: 1-12; 42:18,19; 43:10; 44:1,2,21; 45:4; 49:35,6,7,8). Furthermore, the Jews were confronted with an overwhelming number of scriptures which offered the image of a conquering Messiah. However, Jesus came and reinterpreted the
39
Methods of Biblical Interpretation concept of Messiah as he did with so many other concepts and realities of the Old Testament. See for example, Hosea 11:1-4 compared with Matthew 2:15; Isaiah 9:1-11 compared with Matthew 4:14-16.
I believe that from the overwhelming demonstration of God's power in Jesus' life and ministry, there were enough evidences for the Jews to accept him as God's Messiah. However, most of them were only interested in abiding by the very letter of the prophecies, irrespective of the living evidences to the contrary, before their eyes. Furthermore, Jews had many approaches to the interpretation of scripture that allowed for a less than literal interpretation of the scriptures. One method for example was called the Gezear Shawah.
By this method, if the same word occurred in two passages then each passage could be used to interpret the other passage although each passage in its primary context could be speaking of different things. Paul employed this method in Romans 4:7. In this text, Psalm 32:1, 2 and Genesis 15:6 are fused together based on the fact that the word reckoned occurs in both texts. Thus the point is forged that the man whose sin is forgiven is reckoned as righteous. In (Gen 15:6) righteousness is reckoned to Abraham, and in the other Psalm 32:2, forgiveness is reckoned to sins confessed. Paul, using the Jewish hermeneutical principle of Gezear Shawah, equates forgiveness and
justification because both concepts are said to be reckoned. Thus the point is communicated that justification equals forgiveness of sin.
There were many other methods of scriptural interpretation employed during the time of Jesus, and which are also reflected in the New Testament.22 However, the details are beyond the scope of this short text. All this reinforces the point that like the Jewish leaders we have sufficient evidences to avoid dogmatism and detailed literalism with regards to the fulfillment of prophecy. We should take care lest the scriptures that are intended to draw us closer to Jesus and make us wiser for the future become the means whereby we miss the blessings of God, just like some Jews in the time of Jesus. It can be very
40 The New Perspective on Prophecy dangerous to make the wrong use of a good thing. Seventh-day Adventists of all Christians should be conscious of this as their history has what is refered to as the Great Disappointment. In 1844, Seventh-day Adventist pioneers interpreted the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation to conclude that Jesus was coming on October 22, 1844. It was indeed a bitter disappointment. Hans Linslay also interpreted various prophecies to conclude that Jesus was coming in 1988. That too has been an embarrassment for millions of Evangelical Christians. The examples of the past regarding prophecies teach us that the prophecies will be fulfilled in principle, not necessarily in every detail. We are on safe ground when
we take note of this historically consistent pattern.
II. Be Open to Alternate and Expanded Fulfillment
This second point is obviously an expansion on the first point. Again, we can take our queue from the life of Christ with respect to the prophecies of the Old Testament. His life was both like and unlike the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament. He was like the Old Testament Messiah in that he offered liberation. He was unlike the Old Testament Messiah in that, whereas the liberation promised by the Old Testament Messiah was centered around political and economic liberation for national Israel, Jesus' liberation centered around humanity at all times and all places and provided liberation primarily from the greatest of all enemies - sin and the Devil. This is indeed an expanded fulfillment.
41 There are many Christians who expect the final test of faith to be centered around Sabbath versus Sunday as the correct day of worship. Without in any way contesting the validity of this interpretation, shouldn't we be open for the possibility that there could be an expanded fulfillment of this prophecy? Let us reason a bit. The day of
worship is an issue that concerns people who believe in Jesus and God. It is not an issue that concerns atheists or secular people, or people of other world religions. What if the issue of the final test be expanded to include whether or not Jesus/God is to be worshiped any at all, irrespective of days? In such a case, the Devil would have blocked many people from coming to Jesus, hence making the choice of a day irrelevant in their case.
Even now many Christians are unaware that in the early centuries of Christianity, Christians were persecuted because of the exclusive claims Christians made regarding Jesus. In the Greco-Roman world in which Christianity was born, there were many other God-man (theos aner) whose lives paralleled that of Jesus in many areas. Many of them were believed to have died an atoning death and to have arisen from the dead. The early Christians denied any validity to these other heroes and ascribed authenticity only to Jesus. This caused them to endure severe persecution.
Therefore, instead of only a narrow focus of the worship of God on one day versus another, shouldn't we as modern Christians be prepared for the possibility that the above experience of the early Christians may be repeated with even greater sophistication? Shouldn't we be prepared for the Devil to change or nuance his strategies, especially those that
we are aware of? Please note, I am not here contesting whether or not there will be an end time test for God's people. The issue is, based on what we have seen concerning prophecies, shouldn't we be prepared for any possible changes that may occur in the exactitude of their fulfillment?
42 Methods of Biblical Interpretation
The New Perspective on Prophecy What if the issue be expanded to include whether or not God exists? Are Christians in their regular worship services being educated to deal with the many sophisticated arguments involved in this area? I do not think so. What if it becomes small and deceptive like the constant temptation to be unChrist-like in our daily actions? Remember the objective of the Devil is for people to lose their soul at all cost and any strategy that will accomplish that will be just as good as any other. Being killed by a boulder is just as dangerous as being killed by a small bullet. In both cases you are one hundred percent dead. Failure to recognize that prophecies may not be fulfilled exactly as they were prophesied, will stymie us from acquiring the comprehensive preparation we need for the future.
III. Staying Ready as Opposed to Getting Ready: An Affirmation of Salvation Whereas prophecy is intended to build faith in Jesus, it should be used as a means of alerting the Christian to the importance of staying ready for the second coming of Jesus. As mentioned earlier, when asked concerning the signs which would precede his coming, Jesus in Matthew 24 gave generic signs. That is, signs that were fulfilled in his time and continue to be fulfilled even to this very day. Again, the lesson to be learned is that Jesus did not want his followers to build a precise timetable concerning the
future. As they saw wars, famine, pestilence, persecution, earthquakes (Matt 24), et cetera, they would stay ready and watchful knowing that his coming was potentially near at all times. Interestingly, the signs in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 are punctuated with the words be ready, stay watchful (Matt. 25:42, 44; 25:13; Lk. 21:8, 34, 36). The fact is, the Christians must be ready at all time for, the son of man is coming at an hour when you do not think he will (Matt 24:44).
Concerning the status of our eternal salvation, I prefer the vocabulary
43
Methods of Biblical Interpretation staying ready rather than getting ready. I prefer the former, because of what it communicates. Intrinsic to a healthy vibrant Christian experience is the realization that the person in Christ is fully justified, sanctified, reconciled, sealed, possesses eternal life and currently holds citizenship status in heaven (Rom. 5:1, 8-10; 2 Cor. 5:17-21; Gal. 2:15,16; Eph. 2:11-13; John 3:16-18; 5:24; 1 John 5:11,12; Phil. 3:20). In short, he currently enjoys a saved status (Eph. 2:6-8). This is so because the person in Christ now possesses all the qualifications for eternity to an extent that cannot be improved upon by his present good living. He has the full righteousness of Jesus credited to his account and that cannot be augmented by anything coming from him even if it is accomplished by the aid of the Holy Spirit.23 In other words, the daily response of the Christian to God demonstrated in goods works is not a means of qualifying him or her for heaven. Put another way, it is not a means of getting ready but it is a grateful response to the fact that he has been made ready by the justifying action of God in Jesus. Indeed, he has been made ready to an extent that cannot be improved upon. His life is now one of complete praise demonstrated in good works. With such an attitude, the literal fulfillment or non-fulfillment of prophecies cannot shake one's spiritual foundation as he or she has an abiding assurance of salvation, based on that which is greater than prophetic events, Jesus Christ
himself.
IV. Stay Busy Being like Jesus The fourth lesson to be learned from the principles concerning prophecies is the importance of being like Jesus at all times. In first Corinthians 12: l, Paul lists the gifts of the Spirit and then compares
44
The New Perspective on Prophecy them with love in chapter thirteen. In this chapter, prophecy is one of the gifts that is superseded by love. He writes: And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge . . . but have not love I am nothing. For our knowledge is imperfect and our prophecy is imperfect . . . but the greatest of these is love.
In Romans 13, Paul also writes: Owe no one anything except to love one another for he who Loves his neighbour has fulfilled the law. The commandments, You shall not commit adultery, you shall not kill, you shall not steal, you shall not covet, and any other commandment are summed up in the sentence, You shall love your neighbour as yourself. Love does no wrong to a neighbour; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law (13: 8-10, RSV).
Therefore, in Paul's estimation love supersedes prophecy. This means that we are in the best shape of being ready for the second coming, not necessarily by having precise prognostications about future events, but simply by being loving. [Side bar] It is common knowledge that more people remain a part of the church due to the love they experience within the church than because of the accuracy of the church's doctrines.
In the Johannine writings the acid test for the believer is the test of love. In John 14:15 Jesus declared: If you love me keep my commandments. Contextually, his commandments is the love commandment. Hence he prescribed earlier:
A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this shall all men know that you are my disciples if you have love one for another (John13:34-35, NASB).
Later in 15:12, he again declared: This is my commandment that you love one another, just as I have loved you.
45
Also of great importance in this issue is the fact that Jesus' promise of the Holy Spirit in John's gospel is given within the context of the believer being empowered to love as Jesus loved (John 15:12-27).
Paul echoes the same sentiment in his writings by repeatedly affirming that the Spirit is the distinguishing mark of those who are in Christ, and then affirming that the fruit of the Spirit is love.
If any man has not the spirit of God he is none of his (Rom 8:9, 14; 9). And you also was included in Christ, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed you were marked in him with a seal, the promised holy spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possessionto the praise of his glory (Eph 1:13, 14, NIV)
Do not grieve the Holy Spirit with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption (Eph 4:30).
For the fruit of the spirit is love. . . . (Gal 5:18)
The bottom line is, though I have all prophecy and have not love, it profits me nothing. In the end time the greater emphasis must be on love. Indeed, that was the overwhelming passion of the New Testament writers. 46
CONCLUSION
In order to correctly glean the messages from the Bible one must employ correct methods of Bible study. In this text, based on an exegetical and theological approach I have concluded that predictive prophecy is not the future already determined in every detail. Rather prophecies are sign posts designed to build faith in Jesus. As such, they are outlines and possible alternatives relating to the future. The Christian must always walk by faith and not by sight.
It is my wish that as modern Christians navigate the complexities of Biblical prophecies along with their fulfillments, they will be left with a stable emotional climate borne out of careful, analytical study of the Bible that leads to a faith relationship with Jesus. The pages of this book have been dedicated to this end.
47
BIOGRAPHY
Clinton Baldwin holds a Ph.D. in Religion from Andrews University, with special emphasis in New Testament Textual Criticism. He currently teaches in the department of Religion and Theology at Northern Caribbean University (NCU), Mandeville, Jamaica, where he also directs the Biblical Manuscript Research Centre. Dr. Baldwin has written several scholarly articles and a previous book: Justification by Faith More than a Concept a Person. His dissertation, The So-Called Mixed Text: An Examination of the Non Alexandrian and Non Byzantine Text-type in the Catholic Epistles is shortly to be published by Peter Lang Publishers in the SBL series. Clinton's wife, Andrea (Ph.D. Curriculum and Instructions) also teaches at NCU. They have a son, Mendel.
John Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006), 87, 97.
By literary construct, I refer to such arrangements of words as chiastic structure, parallelism, the various tenses of the Greek or Hebrew verb or simply the biblical author's unique use of words As is well known, words do not have meaning, they derive meaning. For example, as seen above, the phrase Those who dwell on the earth used about fifteen times by John in Revelation ((Rev 3:10; 6:10; 8:13; 11:10; 13:8, 14; 17:2) does not mean everyone who lives on the planet, but only the wicked.
3
William L. Lane, The Gospel According to Mark: The New Internal Critical Commentary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 26.
See Kevin Bales, Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999) also Craig Kielburger, Free the Children: A Young Man Fights Against Child Labor and Proves that Children Can Change the World (New York: Harper Perennial, 1998).
For example, these may be simple spelling errors, and the correct word is obvious from the context. However it is not so much the quantity of errors which are significant, but the fact of variants which are of importance. It takes only one word to change the entire The same expression occurs at least seven times in Paul's writings. These are Romans 3:22; 2:26; Gal 2:16 twice; Phil 2:9; Gal 2:20.
meaning of a text or passage.

6
For a brief yet very insightful discussion of the themes connected to these passages, See, Hans K. Larondale, The Application of Cosmic Signs in the Advent Tradition, Ministry (September, 1998): 2527; also Donald Casebolt, Is Ellen White Interpretation of Biblical Prophecy Final? Spectrum 12 (1982): 2-9. 8 According to David Instone-Brewer, the word indecency can also be translated, sexual immorality. For a much more involved discussion on the issue See, David Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the Church: Biblical and Solutions for Pastoral Realities (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 54-140. I am dependent on Brewer for much of the discussion on this issue. For sure, the issue is more involved than can be discussed in this short volume. 9 Ibid., 61.
10
Ibid.
11 12 13
For additional details see John H. Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought, 119-122. Ibid., 2006), 121. Ibid.
14
Additional examples can be seen in the thought that it was always the Lord [or Pharaoh], never Satan, who hardened Pharaoh's heart (Exo 4.21; 7.3, 22; Exo 4.21; 7.3, 22; 8:15, 32). When Samson disobeyed, it was not because of his own wayward attitude, but because the Lord had so ordained it (Judges 14:4, 19, 20). In 2Kings 3, the kings of Israel, Judah and Edom combined forces to fight against the Moabites. After marching for seven days, the three armies ran out of water. The three kings immediately concluded that God had brought them into the predicament so that they would be defeated by the Moabites. King Jehoram of Israel insisted, Alas for the Lord has called these three king to give them into the hand of Moab (verses 10 and 13). It turned out that was not the case.
In many ancient cultures that predated that of Israel, for example, the Sumerians, the Egyptians and the Babylonians, the earth was perceived as emerging out of waters, flat, resting on pillars and having a nether world underneath that served as the abode of evil and of the dead. This sky as we now know it, was understood to be a solid dome in which the sun, moon and stars were set. This solid dome (Hebrew, raqi'a, Latin, firmamentum, hence our English firmament) prevented the waters of the primeval ocean above the sky from inundating the earth. Seely writes: Astonishing as it may seem to the modern mind, with very rare exceptions, the idea that the sky is not solid is a distinctly modern one. Historical evidence shows that virtually everyone in the ancient world believed in a solid firmament. P. Seely, The Firmament and the Water Above in Part I: The Meaning of raqu 'a in Genesis 1:68, Westminster Theological Journal 53(1991):236, John Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006), 169.
16
15
I write ceremonial in quotations for, as mentioned above, the ancients did not think in these categories. The point still stands that such Sabbaths that were fulfilled in Jesus are no longer obligatory.
The current books of the New Testament Canon were first suggested by Athanasius, Bishop of Alexander in 367 AD. That was more than three hundred years after they were written. A similar situation transpired for the Old Testament canon. Douglas Ezell, Revelations on Revelation: New Sounds From Old Symbols (Waco: Word Book, 1977), 22. Ezell elaborates: John is not looking at a sneak preview of history down through the corridors of time to the end; he is declaring God's revelation of the meaning of the cross-resurrection for time and history until the end. (All emphases his) Ibid. We should also remember that in
18
17
Jewish thinking time is reckoned more by its quality than by its duration.
19
Modern Christian organizations like the Seventh-day Adventists, the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses who believe in recent prophets in their midst, need to be particularly aware of this principle. The Bible should never be studied in light of the teachings of Ellen White or Joseph Smith. On the contrary, the teachings of these individuals should be studied in light of the Bible.
For additional passages pertaining to:(1).The destruction of Israel's enemies on that day, Isa 24:23; 29:8; Mic 4:11-13; Zec 14:12-15; (2). The return to Israel of the scattered exiles from all over the world, Zion, Jer 31:1-25; Ezk 20:33-44; Isa 35; Zac 8:712; 20:23; Psa 11:1-3; 17:50; (3). The re-establishing of the Jews in Palestine and the restoration of the land to a glorified state akin to the garden of Eden, Isa 65;66; Isa 2:2-4; Mic 4: 1-3; Jer 31:23, 38-40; Ezk 17:22-24; 40-48; Zac 8:1-23; 9; (4).The enthronement of Yahweh and/or his anointed to universal sovereignty, Isa 24:23; 52:7; Ezk 17:22-24; 20:33, 40; 34:11-16, 2331; 43:7; Mic 4:6f; Zac 14:8-11; Psa 17:23-51; and (5), The ingathering of the pious from among the Gentiles to the fold of Israel to share in the perpetual blessing of the new age, Isa 2:2f; 25:6-10; Zac 8:20-23; Mic 4:1f; Isa 54:15; Amos 9:12; The NewTestament reinterpreted the concept of The Day of the Lord, applying it to the second coming of Jesus. For some concise and straight forward summaries of the concept see for example Francis D. Nichol, ed. Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Hagerstown: Review and Herald 1980) 4:2536; George Eldon Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 79-102; idem., The Presence of the Future (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 1974); idem, Jesus and the Kingdom: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism (New York: Harper 191964); Jon Pauline, What the Bible Says About the End Time (Hagerstown: Review and Herald, 1994).
21
20
If one still chooses to doubt this position then let me remind such a person that there are many other things from scripture that Christians hold dear, that cannot be substantiated by so many scriptural examples. Thus, if one insists on doubting this conclusion then to be consistent there are many other positions which he or she would do well to rethink.
Principally among these were the seven rules of Hillel, a famous Jewish rabbi whose school of thought was operative in the time of Jesus. In addition to Gezerah shawah mentioned above Hillel also proposed the following six rules: 1) Qol wehomer (light and heavy) that is, an inference drawn from a minor premise to a major premise and vice versa, 2) Binyan ab mikathub 'ehad building of the father or family from a single text; that is, the establishing of a principle from the base of a single text, 3) Binyan ab mishene kethubim , building of the father of a family from two texts, as the words suggest, this is the establishing of a conclusion from two
22
texts; 4)Kelal upherat (the general and the particular, deducing a general position from a particular verse 5) kayose bo mimeqom 'ahar , anology made from another passage, and 6) Dabar hilmad me 'anino explanation obtained from context. See, Walter C. Kaiser Jr. Towards and Exegetical Theology: Biblical Exegesis for Preaching and Teaching ( Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981), 53-55. R. Timothy McLay: The Use of the Septuagint in New Testament Research (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 33. In addition to these rules, typology was also used among the Jews and this too was less than a literal interpretation of scripture.
23
When Paul affirmed that, by the deeds of the law shall no one be justified (Gal 2: 15, 16; Rom 3:21-28 ) he was speaking to Christians, people who believed in the empowering of the Holy Spirit for good works. His contention was that humanity was justified by God's action in Jesus (the faithfulness of Jesus) not God's action in humanity, namely our faith in Jesus. We should be careful not to advocate a Christ or Holy Spirit centered legalism. Good works even done under the unction of the Holy Spirit, never can qualify us before God. Our salvation is rooted only in what Jesus has done for us. Gerhard Pfandl, et al., Adult Sabbath School Bible Study Guide (Silver Springs, MD: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventist, Jan-March, 2009), 81.

Biblical Interpretation

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Biblical Interpretation

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

CLINTONBALDWINCLINTON BALDWIN

The New Perspective On Prophecy

METHODS OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION: THE NEW PERSPECTIVE ON PROPHECY

Methods of Bible Study

Methods of Biblical Interpretation

support our points.

The New Perspective on Prophecy

Methods of Biblical Interpretation

The New Perspective on Prophecy

Methods of Biblical Interpretation

The following is a brief exposition on each of these contexts.

The New Perspective on Prophecy

hundred years after the gospel of John was written.

Methods of Biblical Interpretation

The New Perspective on Prophecy

faith in Jesus are the Greek words, pisteos Iesou Christou. 6

Methods of Biblical Interpretation

The New Perspective on Prophecy

Methods of Biblical Interpretation

The New Perspective on Prophecy

The New Perspective on Prophecy

Methods of Biblical Interpretation

The New Perspective on Prophecy

Methods of Biblical Interpretation

The New Perspective on Prophecy

IV. The Systematic Theology or Homiletical Method

The New Perspective on Prophecy

CHAPTER 2 THE NATURE OF BIBLE PROPHECY

The New Perspective on Prophecy

NASB; see also 65:25; Ezk 36:22-38).

Jeremiah there were three major deportations of the Jews to Babylon.

Phil 4:5: The Lord is at hand.

Heb 1:2: In these last days he has spoken to us by a Son.

sin by the sacrifice of himself

1 Pt. 4:7, 17: The end of all things is at hand .

we take note of this historically consistent pattern.

II. Be Open to Alternate and Expanded Fulfillment

42 Methods of Biblical Interpretation

Concerning the status of our eternal salvation, I prefer the vocabulary

Methods of Biblical Interpretation

For the fruit of the spirit is love. . . . (Gal 5:18)

meaning of a text or passage.

S-ar putea să vă placă și