Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics

Foundations and Principles of Evangelical Biblical Interpretation

Graeme Goldsworthy

• Publisher: IVP Academic
• Year: 2014
• ISBN:
  9780830898367
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Studies

While there are many books on hermeneutics, Graeme Goldsworthy's perception is that evangelical contributions often do not give sufficient attention to the vital relationship between hermeneutics and theology, both systematic and biblical. In this new paperback edition of Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics, Goldsworthy moves beyond a reiteration of the usual arguments to concentrate on the theological questions of presuppositions, and the implications of the Christian gospel for hermeneutics. In doing so, he brings fresh perspectives on some well-worn pathways. Part I examines the foundations and presuppositions of evangelical belief, particularly with regard to biblical interpretation. Part II offers a selective overview of important hermeneutical developments from the sub-apostolic age to the present, as a means of identifying some significant influences that have been alien to the gospel. Part III evaluates ways and means of reconstructing truly gospel-centered hermeneutics. Goldsworthy's aim throughout is to commend the much-neglected role of biblical theology in hermeneutical practice, with pastoral concern for the people of God as they read, interpret and seek to live by his written Word.

PART I

EVANGELICAL PROLEGOMENA
TO HERMENEUTICS

Introduction

The purpose of Part I is to consider the grounds and basic assumptions, along with their justification, of evangelical belief and biblical interpretation. Evangelicals have always believed that, although there is great diversity in the Bible, there is a discernible and essential unity to its message. At the heart of evangelicalism is the belief that the gospel of Jesus Christ is the definitive revelation to mankind of God’s mind, and the defining fact of human history. The person and work of Jesus provide us with a single focal point for understanding reality. The Bible also makes it clear that we are either for Jesus or against him, we either have the Son or we do not. In other words, there is no neutral position, no objective starting point, which is common to believers and unbelievers, for judging what is ultimately real and what is true.

Neutrality and complete objectivity are the presuppositional myths of the modern secular outlook, and they are also the assumptions, sometimes unexamined, of many Christian thinkers. On occasions we have to struggle to discern the basic assumptions of someone’s position. I prefer to declare my position from the outset, and then to give my reasons for it. Broadly speaking, I write from the perspective of the orthodox Christian theism that undergirds what we understand by the labels of evangelical and Reformed Christianity. In Part I of this study I will examine the foundations of evangelical faith as the basis of our reconstructive endeavours in Part III. These will also provide the norms that bring alien philosophical influences under scrutiny in Part II. This requires some definition of the terms ‘evangelical’ and ‘gospel’. We will be concerned with authority and meaning as we enquire into the function of the Bible in God’s outworking of our salvation. We either stand by the supreme authority of God, or we adopt the assumption of human autonomy. The one is the classical position of Christian theism,1 and the other is the position of humanistic rationalism2 in all its varieties. That is why chapters 1–4 will deal with such things as the basic and doctrinal presuppositions of the evangelical position. In Part III we will apply these to the practicalities of interpretation. If our presuppositions are unsustainable, then our whole system fails.

Evangelical presuppositions must be shown to be preferable to those of modern philosophical hermeneutics. The question of the contribution of philosophical hermeneutics cannot be ignored, but neither can the implications of Christian theism for a biblical philosophy. If the Bible does indeed provide the data for assessing the nature of reality (metaphysics), the validity of knowledge (epistemology), and the criteria of right and wrong behaviour (ethics), then it contains the basis of a Christian philosophy. It also means that the principles of hermeneutics are to be found within the Scriptures themselves. In Part I, then, we examine the presuppositions and main tenets of Christian theism as the basis for an evangelical approach to hermeneutics.

1. THE NECESSITY FOR HERMENEUTICS

Much ado about nothing?

‘Surely it’s a matter of common sense!’

‘I’ve been reading the Bible for thirty-five years, and I don’t need a lot of intellectual theories to tell me what it’s all about.’

‘The Bible is quite clear and understandable. And while we’re talking about it, what do you think Isaiah meant in this difficult passage?’

We have all heard similar expressions from time to time. On the one hand, the Bible is read by millions and largely understood. On the other hand, any thoughtful reader knows there are passages that are less clear than others. We also know that Christians who express the same essential understanding of the inspiration and authority of Scripture can disagree about important issues such as the interpretation of prophecy, the meaning of baptism, the normative nature of Acts 2, or the structure of the second coming of Christ. Of course, when a common enemy such as secularism or liberalism threatens evangelicals, then there is neither Baptist nor paedobaptist, amillennialist nor premillennialist, dispensationalist nor covenant theologian, Anglican nor Presbyterian, for all are one in Christ! Christians with a diversity of views will come together under the common umbrella of evangelicalism if they think they have sufficient reason. In less challenging times, however, differences can become matters of potential and real division, and even hostility, being expressed under that broad evangelical umbrella. Suddenly the clarity of Scripture seems to mean, ‘It’s quite clear to me: why can’t you see what is obvious?’ Throwing proof texts at each other like so many grenades only results in unseemly shrapnel and much suspicion and hurt. But if I as an Anglican am to understand my Baptist brethren; if I as a Calvinist am to understand my Arminian brethren; if I as an amillennialist am to understand my premillennialist brethren; and if they are to understand me, then we must try to understand each other’s starting points and theological assumptions. This is where hermeneutics should play an important part. Even more basic is the desire of all of us simply to know and understand what God says to us in his word. We are concerned to be Christians in an alienated world, and we desire to see Christ glorified in this world. We want to hear and know God through his word.

Hermeneutics as a recognized discipline originally was mainly concerned to deal with problem texts in the Bible. The ordinary reader can easily skate over difficult readings with perhaps the intention to come back another time to try to figure them out. But what, after all, is a problem text? We conclude there is a problem when we cannot make sense of a passage. Mostly we recognize that problems arise because we, the readers, lack understanding of the theological, historical or cultural context of particular texts. Occasionally we may discover that there are real textual or linguistic problems. These show up where the Bible translators have provided their considered rendition while adding marginal notes such as ‘Hebrew uncertain’. But otherwise, we tend to regard the problem as being in the readers rather than inherent in the text. When we differ from other evangelicals on doctrinal matters, our inclination is to see the problem as lying in those who differ from us about something we regard as clear. Our confidence in the overall clarity of Scripture remains unshaken.

What is/are hermeneutics?

Hermeneutics is about communication, meaning and understanding. ‘Hermeneutics’, according to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, is a plural noun. Common usage applies the plural word to the process of interpretation. So we will frequently use ‘hermeneutics’ as meaning the formal (academic) discipline, and treat it as a singular noun with a singular verb. Definitions of hermeneutics that are found in the recent literature include the following:

The study of the locus of meaning and the principles of interpretation.1

The science of reflecting on how a word or an event in the past time and culture may be understood and become existentially meaningful in our present situation.2

The task of finding out the meaning of a statement for the author and for the first hearers or readers, and thereupon to transmit that meaning to modern readers.3

Defining the rules one uses when seeking out the meaning of Scripture.4

Other authors imply the definition in their description of the goal or problems of hermeneutics, for example:

The goal of biblical hermeneutics is to bring about an active and meaningful engagement between the interpreter and text, in such a way that the interpreter’s own horizon is re-shaped and enlarged.5

The goal of interpretation . . . is ‘to know the Author’s/author’s intended meaning as it is expressed in the text’.6

The central problem of biblical hermeneutics [is] ‘How can the human word of a time long since vanished be understood as God’s word to the present?’7

These are fairly typical definitions, and it can be seen that simply to refer to interpretation is to raise a number of questions. These definitions are drawn from authors of differing theological stances, a fact that becomes more obvious when we investigate further the way these definitions are followed through. The reason for such differences is that the seemingly innocuous definitions carry a great variety of presuppositional baggage. Since we are dealing with the written documents of the Bible, different assumptions can be made about how meaning is related to the documents themselves. The definitions vary in their focus on the author/s, the text and the readers. Each of these dimensions will need some clarification if we are to make sense of the task.

The necessity for hermeneutics

The ‘ordinary, Bible-believing Christian’ may well question the need for such an enquiry and discipline as hermeneutics. After all, does it not make a simple, straightforward matter of reading the Bible unnecessarily complicated? Protestantism has always held to the notion of the clarity of Scripture. The rejection of priestcraft, of a supreme ecclesiastical authority that displaced the Bible, was a mark of the Reformation for the ordinary Christian. The medieval church did not use the Bible in either the original or the vernacular languages, but had recourse mainly to the Latin version. Church authority had resisted translations into the common language so that the Scriptures were not accessible to any but the clergy, and not always to them. The Reformers worked with a view to every man and woman having direct access to the Scriptures. Yet anyone who has attempted the task of translation will know that it is not a simple and straightforward process.

It is not only the fact that the biblical texts were originally written in languages foreign to our own, and within cultural contexts very different from our own, that necessitates hermeneutics. Translation, reading and proclamation all include varying degrees of adaptation to the readers’ and hearers’ culture, a process we call contextualization.8 Neither can be achieved without consideration of meaning. Translation involves recasting a text in a different language from its original. Contextualization involves the restating of the meaning of the text in a way that is understandable to the intended receivers. We also recognize that interpretation is not solely required by our remoteness from the time and culture of the texts. Cognition of words spoken to us by our immediate contemporaries requires some measure of interpretation. There is also the fact of our sinfulness and consequent inconsistency with our accepted principles of the inspiration and authority of the Bible as God’s word written.

All human communication is done using symbols, either visual or auditory.9 The question we face in the process of interpretation is what relationship the symbol has to its referent — that is, to the thing it symbolizes. For example, the same word-symbol may occur in two different languages and mean totally different things. Again, the same sentence in a range of different contexts may mean something different in each context. The same symbol, for example the ...