Hermeneutics
Lesson #2
By Art Wallis
Introduction: Last week we learned some of the initial information about interpreting Scriptures. Today we plan to go on with our study of D. R. Dungan’s book “Hermeneutics” and try to learn some more of the methods of trying to come to a proper interpretation of Scriptures.
From Dungan’s book…Chapter 4 – Dealing With Method of Interpretation
Section 25 – The value of having some method of interpretation
A. Method involves organization of rules and moving forward to an end while following rules.
B. Dungan likens it to an army having rules, but if everyone is doing what they do, but are not pulling together as a team or as a unit, they can not win the war.
Section 26 – Why method has not been employed
A. It appears that only hit or miss applications of methodology have been employed. Some have worked better than others. Dungan set out to try to provide a standardized method if interpretation of Scriptures that was rational. Others down through the centuries have tried to come up with some sort of hermeneutic, but most of them fell far short of what was actually needed to understand the Word of God.
1. Some thought interpretation was beyond mankind’s ability.
2. Some thought only the privileged few could interpret (Catholic priests)
3. Some thought that it was just plain impossible to understand the Bible
4. Some just didn’t have a sound enough faith in God and His divinely inspired Word to try to interpret the Bible. Some didn’t give God, the Apostles and other inspired writers any more credibility than other writers of that time, thus much false religion and false philosophy was often included in the way the Bible was interpreted.
5. Some do not realize that God gave us the Bible to get to know who He is and that He wants us to understand it and apply it to our own lives.
6. Some think the Bible is just one big blind parable and if you get some of it, fine, if not, what more could you expect to understand?
B. They do not realize that it needs to be interpreted just as any other book that is logically written is interpreted.
C. People spent more time studying about various views about the Bible and about those who espoused said views than they did about the Bible itself.
D. I wonder if D. R. Dungan was writing about the way he himself felt as he wrote what is at the top of page. 54, “Now and then, we find a man in the dark ages contending for something like a correct method of interpretation. But his voice is soon hushed, and a century goes by before the world is favored with another reformer of sufficient force to be known and felt.”
Section 27 – Wrong methods of interpretation
A. Every method that isn’t right is a wrong method. Legion is their number.
B. Supporting things known to be wrong….i.e. faith only doctrine – once saved always saved doctrine – special priesthood doctrine – everybody is going to heaven doctrine -there can be no good ways in man as we are born sinful – we are born predestined to be saved or lost and there is nothing we can do to change that - etc., etc., etc., the logical, rationalistic pagan can see that these things are illogical and can not be so, thus they use the denominational creeds against organized religion. I knew a man who left a denominational church because it taught that his baby that died due to a miscarriage would burn for eternity in hell because it hadn’t been baptized. He KNEW that their doctrine of inherited sin was not right, so he left them religiously.
C. Forcing the Bible to contradict itself. How long were the Jews in Egypt: 400 years or 430 years? Dungan uses the idea that some denominations teach that faith is a gift from God that you get by praying, but God only answers the prayers of those who have faith. That reasoning isn’t reasonable. Such doctrine is utter nonsense to the infidel. They know religion is wrong for thinking in such circles.
D. Turning the right to interpret over to only a few special “clergy”. They perform eisegesis (to force the Bible to say something…to read INTO the text what you want) rather than using exegesis (to take OUT of the text what God or the author wanted us to know and understand). (polemic - an aggressive attack on or refutation of the opinions or principles of anotherb:the art or practice of disputation or controversy) (philology-study [love of] of languages and literature)
Section 28 – The mystical method of interpretation
A. It is mystical because of heathen deities that were supposed to give special insights. But that doesn’t make any sense. Like “why don’t fortunetellers win all of the lotteries”? Paganism can’t help in interpreting the Bible. The apostate church adopted such because they thought it would make religious teachings more palatable to the pagans. (today only those who have “been called” to preach are able to properly interpret the Bible in the minds of their parishioners and church members.) The effect of all of this is that it has effectively kept the average person in the pew from reading the Bible to see for themselves just what it is God has told us. (we need to encourage people to read the Bible through in a year or two years)
B. Several attempts at reformation by so called “Christian” groups over the years have helped rid some of the mystical method of interpretation, but some of it is still with us. Viewing the word of God from a false religion background or point of view.
C. Mystical method has caused all sorts of denominationalism, sectarianism, cults, and all sorts of divisiveness, because it isn’t based on God. If the “divinely called” (tongue in cheek) leaders of various religious groups can not agree on interpretation, how can the average person in the pew ever hope to figure out what God is saying.
D. The Bible means what is says and says what it means. You take the simplest logical interpretation of a verse and go on from there to try to interpret it. Keep it simple!
Section 29 – The allegorical method treats everything as though it were a metaphor, a splendid riddle. Some parts of the Bible are allegories – See Galatians 4:21-31 where it is called an allegory; but the whole Bible is NOT an allegory. As we learned in our second class in here, God has given us direct command, Biblical example, and necessary inference. More on this in next week’s lesson. Again, wicked religious men used allegory and eisegesis instead of using exegesis to twist the scriptures to their own destruction. – 2 Peter 3:16
A. The abuse of the allegorical method in eisegesis as stated by Dungan on pp. 60-61, “Interpreting by this method is not exegesis, but eisegesis—they do not obtain the meaning of the text, but thrust something into it. Its statements of history are mere figures of speech, and mean one thing or another, or nothing, as the interpreter may choose. What the Bible may mean to any man will depend upon what the man would like to have it mean. The genius that would be able to make on thing out of it would be able to make it have the opposite meaning if he preferred.”
B. The case he uses is when Philo of Alexandria allegorizes the four rivers of Eden as four virtues coming from the throne of God. Oh no, those were four rivers, nothing more and nothing less.
Section 30 – Spiritual interpretation – This is one of the things the Quakers or FriendsChurch is involved with. (see the John Wayne movie “the Angel and the Bad Man” for a practical review and refutation of much of this doctrine by John Wayne) “Everyone becomes a law of interpretation unto himself.” – p. 63.It is a spin off of the mystical interpretation. It tries to spiritualize everything in every text making it not apply to this life so much as to the next or to the spirit realm. It takes away accountability and is possibly like an offshoot of Gnosticism. It says that EVERYONE has access to special understanding and interpretation.
Section 31 – The hierarchal method – Only the priesthood can properly interpret (Roman Catholics, Jews, denominational “pastor”, cult leaders)
A. They take all authority for themselves in all matters including interpretation of scripture. Only “the church” can interpret Scriptures properly; and whoever is head of that church is the one who takes on that responsibility.
B. This takes away Christian liberty and makes the higher-ups in the church structure the total rulers as far as doctrine. It takes away Christian liberty, especially by those of the lower levels of the church.
C. People are not allowed to question nor challenge the hierarchy in their rule & interpretation. This caused Luther to begin the Reformation and Luther gave the people the Bible in their own (German) language.
Section 32 – Rationalistic method
A. This is the thought of those in unbelief
B. Reason tries to overthrow faith. This is not “exegesis” as much as it is “exit-Jesus”.
C. It says, “miracles are not reasonable”, therefore it denies Biblical miracles
D. Says, we each get to use our own reasoning as the method of interpretation and the determination of truth.
E. Says human reasoning is better than anything we can find from the Bible. This would be considered “humanism” or “humanistic thought” today.
Section 33 – Apologetic method
A. Claims that everything recorded in the Bible is a true statement.
B. But not all that is recorded is true. If it was recorded what a Cretans spoke, we would not know if the true record was a true saying, for “All Cretans are liars…..” – Titus 1:12
C. There are examples of untrue statements made by uninspired men, but recorded by inspired men – Matt. 26:60, 61 & 65, 66. Much of the Bible records the words of the enemies of God. David committed adultery; did God approve? Cain killed Abel, then lied about it…was that OK? There are many who have lied in the Bible, and their lies are recorded for us, but that doesn’t make their lies into truth. The Bible just truly records what they said when they lied.
D. Also, just because what one says that was inspired once, doesn’t mean that everything that comes out of his mouth is inspired. – Numbers 22:30 Balaam’s Donkey Sometimes we need to consider who, or what, was speaking and what the circumstances were around what was said. WE MUST TAKE THINGS IN PROPER CONTEXT!!!
Section 34 – The Dogmatic method
A. Only that which can be proven can be true.
B. Had its roots in Catholicism then entered into Protestantism
C. Some truth can be found this way.
D. It allows the “traditions” to be on equal par with Scriptures.
1. Jews of Bible times had their “traditions of the elders”
2. Religious bodies today have their “traditions”, creeds, catechisms, creed books, cult writings, documents by the present day ‘council of the twelve’, that give writings they hold on par with the Bible.
E. This method finds in the Bible only what it wants to find.
F. The liberals love this. “If I can’t see it in the verses, it must not be true.”
G. Simon the Pharisee’s wrong assumption about Jesus – Luke 7:36-39
H. Dungan – p. 76, “The Bible is not a book of proof for doctrines, but is the doctrine of God itself to men.”
I. Infidels love the dogmatic method, for he is also dogmatic in his approach against the Bible and is determined to find only what he want to that proves his point against the Bible.
Section 35 – Literal Interpretation – (of everything in the Bible)
A. Used by those who are dogmatists
B. Doesn’t allow for grammatical differences in various parts of speech
C. Wouldn’t appreciate what Hebrews 1:1-4 has to say.
CONCLUSION: We will probably spend most of next week looking at Roger Bacon’s Inductive Method of Interpretation. It has a lot going for it.