The Bible:�Revelation, Inspiration, Inerrancy, Composition, Organization, Literary Genres, Interpretation, and Application

IU

Revelation:�“Because humankind is finite and God is infinite, we cannot know God unless he reveals himself to us, that is, unless he manifests himself to humans in such a way that they can know and fellowship with him.”�(Erickson, Intro to Christian Doctrine, p. 33.)

- General Revelation: God’s communication of himself to all persons, at all times, and in all places.��• Nature: The beauty, complexity, and general sense of wonder when considering Creation in all its variety, vastness, and minutia.���• History: “If God is at work in the world and is moving toward certain goals, it should be possible to detect the trend of his work in events�that occur as part of history.” (Erickson, p. 34)

• Human reason/conscience: The moral and spiritual aspects of humanity as a consequence of how we came to be (i.e. our Creator).� All of humanity recognizes that an objective right/wrong exist, and virtually every human culture has contained religion at its core.� - Where did the ideas of morality� and religion come from?��General Revelation is continuously available to all people�• Although it can be distorted or ignored.�• Potential pitfalls: Both Creation and Humanity have been affected by the Fall, limiting the scope of Natural Theology?

Limited content of the message:� �• How much can be gleaned from General Revelation? (Natural Theology)��Thomas Aquinas believed that pure reason�could prove the existence of God, the�immortality of the human soul, and the�supernatural origin of the Catholic Church.��(Acc. to Aquinas, more specific doctrines, like the Trinity, must be accepted based upon Authority {Scriptures and Church})

- Cosmological Proof: Everything we know of is caused by something else, there must exist an un-caused initial cause; i.e. God. {Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover}�- Teleological Argument: The orderliness and apparent purposefulness of the universe must be the result of an intelligent being, i.e. God.� {Plato and the Stoics}�- Anthropological Argument: Immanuel Kant (Critique of Practical Reason, 1781) – We all possess a moral impulse or a categorical imperative; being good does not always pay, therefore there must be a basis for ethics/morality beyond ourselves,� i.e. God.

- Ontological Argument – Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109), God is the greatest of all conceivable beings. A being which does not exist cannot be the greatest of all conceivable beings; therefore, God, by definition, must exist.��• Each “proof” of Natural Theology has a critique, for example, Metaphysical Naturalism in opposition to the Teleological Argument. � - Has the Fall damaged human logic?� - Can logic convince a rebellious heart?

Psalm 19:1-4�¹ The heavens declare the glory of God;�    the skies proclaim the work of his hands.�² Day after day they pour forth speech;�    night after night they reveal knowledge.�³ They have no speech, they use no words;�    no sound is heard from them.�⁴ Yet their voice goes out into all the earth,�    their words to the ends of the world.

Romans 1:18-20 �18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

- Special Revelation: God’s particular communications and manifestations of himself to particular people at particular times, which are available now only by consulting certain sacred writings.����

Why the need for more information about God than General Revelation/Natural Theology can provide?�- The broken relationship between a holy God and fallen sinful humanity. In order to be repaired, humanity needs to know more about God (i.e. his Law, purpose/plan of redemption).��- The objective of special revelation is relational; knowledge about God is for the purpose of knowledge of God. Thus, God has shared what is necessary to re-establish his relationship with humanity (purposefully selective knowledge, not exhaustive).�

Note: Special Revelation predates the Fall, with God giving direct instruction to Adam, the entrance of sin into the equation only makes the need more acute, with the direct presence of God no longer available. ��{with rare exceptions: Moses’ conversation with God on Sinai, even there, Moses could not ‘see’ God directly}

While Special Revelation is superior to General, it does not make it unnecessary. “Without the general revelation, we would not possess the concepts regarding God which enable us to know and understand the God of the special revelation.” (Erickson, p. 45)��“Concepts without percepts are empty; percepts without concepts are blind.”�– Immanuel Kant (percepts = sensory information)

The Nature of Special Revelation:�A personal God presents himself to persons. �• Sharing his Name with Moses�• Making Covenants with Abraham, Moses, David���Scripture is NOT a formal theological presentation�• It does not contain arguments and counter-arguments�• It is not systematized with creedal statements�• It contains little information not directly connected with God’s redemption at work and his relationship with humanity.

Because God is infinite, and we are finite, God must condescend to share with humanity regarding himself, revealing himself in anthropic form (i.e. in human language and human categories of thought/action).��• Such as using vernacular Koine Greek, idioms and metaphors, describing himself as Father, Shepherd, and King.�• The greatest condescension being the Incarnation itself.

God can choose to utilize an analogy to our existence, knowing (as he knows all things) that they are sufficiently approximating the divine reality that they can be used by us to understand a meaningful truth.��• If we try to reverse the order, making our own analogies regarding God, we have no way to verify if our example has a meaningful connection to divine truth.

Modes of Special Revelation: Speech��• Direct conversation with people (Abraham, Moses, Samuel, Paul)�• Angels as intermediaries (Jacob, Gideon, Mary, Joseph, the women at the Empty Tomb)�• Visions/Dreams (Joseph, Ezekiel, Peter, John)�• The consciousness of a message from God given to the prophets, “The word of the LORD came to me saying…” Jeremiah 18:1, Hosea 1:1, Joel 1:1

Inspired writings�• Authors of Scripture where Special Revelation comes through the words they write under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.��The Incarnation�• The entirety of Jesus’ life and speech was a unique Special Revelation from/about God.

• The humanity of Jesus was the means by which the revelation of deity was conveyed in its most condensed and concentrated form, surpassing (not contradicting) all other forms.�- John 1:1-2, 14, 18�1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning…14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth…18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

- 1 John 1:1�1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.

Inspiration:��“That supernatural influence of the Holy Spirit upon the Scripture writers which rendered their writings an accurate record of the revelation, or which resulted in what they wrote actually being the Word of God.”�(Erickson, p. 52)

Why is it needed?�Special Revelation benefits those who directly receive it, but that benefit would be lost without a means to share and preserve it.��- Think of Revelation as a vertical communication, inspiration as�the horizontal follow-up.��- Oral tradition can be a useful tool fulfilling that need, but something more broadly accessible and permanent was needed (i.e. the written word).

- Some things that are Inspired were not given by Revelation (quotes of non-believers, historic information that was available to those making inquiries, genealogies), and some things given by Revelation were not preserved by Inspiration (because the Holy Spirit did not move anyone to write that information down and preserve it).

Luke 1:1-4 (NIV)�1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. {Inspiration without Revelation}

John 21:25 (NIV)�25 Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.�{Revelation without Inspiration}�

Theories of Inspiration�{Can be seen as a sliding scale, less to more}���- Intuition Theory�Views inspiration as a high degree of insight, like artistic ability, possessed by religious geniuses, and not different from that of Plato, Buddha, or Confucius.

Intuition Illumination Dynamic Verbal Dictation

- Illumination Theory�Views inspiration as a heightening of normal ability by the Holy Spirit, increasing sensitivity and perception to spiritual truths; different only in degree, not in kind, from the Spirit’s work with all believers.��

- Dynamic Theory�Views inspiration as a combination of human and divine elements, with the Holy Spirit directing writers to the thoughts/concepts intended, while allowing for the writer’s own distinctive personality in the specific choice of words and expressions.��• The 4 unique portraits of Jesus in the Gospels, reflecting the goals, emphasis, and styles of their authors.��• Paul’s writings, while containing some variety, all ‘sound like’ Paul, and not like Peter, Luke, John, or James (who also have their own unique style).

- Verbal Theory�Views inspiration as a direction from�the Holy Spirit that extends beyond�the thoughts and concepts and is so intense that each word is exactly the word which God wants used at that point to express the message.��• Jesus’ argument from Matthew 22:29-32 quoting Exodus 3:6 hinges upon the present tense of the verb, ‘He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.’ and in Matthew 22:41-46 quoting Psalm 110 hinges upon the possessive suffix, ‘The Lord said to my Lord’.�• Counter-point: Jesus and NT authors felt justified in quoting the LXX instead of the Hebrew text when the wording better suited their purpose.

- Dictation Theory��Views inspiration as God literally dictating the Bible to the writers, no distinctive style is thus attributable to the different authors of the biblical books ��{Muslims contend that Muhammed received the Qur’an in this fashion, he is not considered to be its author.}�• Who the author is, is thus irrelevant, as are questions of authorial intent/purpose, background, and questions of composition and editing.

- Texts within Scripture concerning the process of Inspiration��2 Samuel 23:2-3 (NIV)�2 “The Spirit of the Lord spoke through me;� his word was on my tongue.�3 The God of Israel spoke,� the Rock of Israel said to me:�‘When one rules over people in righteousness,� when he rules in the fear of God,

Acts 1:16 (ESV) (Also: Acts 3:18,21, and 4:25)�16 “Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus.

2 Timothy 3:16 (NIV)�16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,��(theopneustos in Greek, God-breathed, a compound word that Paul invented for this purpose). �

2 Peter 1:20-21 (NIV)�20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

- Objections to inspiration:�Is every portion of Scripture inspired, or only certain segments?�On what basis would such a judgment be made? What we like or dislike?��2 Timothy 3:16-17 (NIV)�16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.�(Original Greek grammar does not rule out, “All God-breathed Scripture is…” as an alternate translation; the context is not definitive.)

1 John 4:5-6 (NIV)�5 They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them. 6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

- How is inspired scripture separated from un-inspired writings?��A question of canon. Who makes the list, how did they know, and how do we know they were right?��- Anti-supernatural perspective�Opposition to the possibility of any divinely given message.

Inerrancy:�“The Bible, when correctly interpreted in light of the level to which culture and the means of communication had developed at the time it was written, and in view of the purposes for which it was given, is fully truthful in all that it affirms.” (Erickson, p. 63)

Examples of texts involved in inerrancy debates:��- The 6 ‘days’ of Genesis vs. scientific consensus about the age of the universe�- Exodus 4:21 or 8:15, who hardened Pharaoh’s heart, himself or God?�- 1 Kings 4:26 says Solomon had 40k stalls for his horses, 2 Chronicles 9:25 (a parallel passage) says only 4k.�- The genealogy of Jesus in Matthew vs. the genealogy in Luke, and Matthew’s omission of 3 names (to balance his 14-14-14 symbolism).�- The chronology/timing of the Passion and Resurrection accounts in the Gospels

Conceptions of Inerrancy:��- Absolute Inerrancy�Holds that the Bible is fully true; the biblical writers intended to give a considerable amount of exact scientific and historical data.��• Thus, apparent discrepancies can and must be explained.

- Full Inerrancy��Also holds that the Bible is fully true, but allows that the scientific and historic reports it contains were reported as they appeared to the observers; popular descriptions, often involed general references or approximations.

• Thus, some apparent scientific/historic discrepancies need not be explained.��• While the Bible’s primary aim is not to give scientific/historic data, such claims as are made are fully true.

- Limited Inerrancy��Also holds the Bible to be fully true in matters of doctrine, but empirical references reflect the understanding current at the time the Bible was written.

• The writers were subject to the limitations of their time; Revelation and Inspiration did not raise the writers above ordinary knowledge. God did not reveal science or history to them. ��{i.e. did not correct their inaccurate geo-centric understanding of the cosmos, for example.}

• The Bible may contain errors in these areas.��• The consequences of which are limited, given that the Bible does not purport to teach science and history; in those areas which fall under its intended purpose, it remains fully truthful.

Objections to focusing on Inerrancy:�A distraction from proper issues��- By focusing on minutiae, the Church misses out on what the Bible is really trying to say about our relationship with God. (majoring in the minors)�

Harmful to the Church��- It creates disunity among those who otherwise have a great deal in common.��- Bart Ehrman, author and former evangelical believer, now apostate, credits doubts about inerrancy with wrecking his faith.�

Why does Inerrancy matter?��- Theological importance�If God is omniscient and omnipotent, our various views of inspiration logically entail a level of inerrancy in the Bible.��• If the Bible is not fully truthful, our view of inspiration is potentially placed in jeopardy. {The two doctrines are linked: high inspiration = high inerrancy, low = low}

- Historical importance�The Church has historically held to the inerrancy of the Bible (only the fully enunciated theory is modern, that our forebearers in the faith assumed it is reflected in how they interacted with the Scriptures).�

A worrying trend:�“there is evidence that where a theologian, school, or a movement begins by regarding biblical inerrancy as a peripheral or optional matter and abandons this doctrine, it frequently then goes on to abandon or alter other doctrines which the church has ordinarily considered quite major, such as the deity of Christ or the Trinity.” (Erickson, p. 62) {fear of the slippery slope}

- Epistemological importance�How do we know what we know? If certain things taught by the Bible are not true, the implications for theology are far-reaching.�

• Historical events like the Virgin Birth and Empty Tomb have far-reaching theological implications.��• On what basis are some scientific/historical assertions maintained while others are jettisoned?�

Attempted solutions to errors/contradictions:��Ignore them – Benjamin B. Warfield, the doctrinal teaching of biblical inerrancy is so strong that the phenomena can be virtually ignored.��• Leaves the questions unanswered; ok with that?

Harmonize them – Louis Gaussen, attempt to eliminate the troublesome phenomena by harmonizing any differences��• Explanations can be rather artificial. �

Abandon inerrancy – a response believed to be forced by the troublesome issues (Dewey Beegle, Scripture, Tradition, and Infallibility, 1973)� �• Pandora’s Box, where does it end, what is left?�

Middle ground – Resolve what can be resolved, admit we lack sufficient information to “fix” all the apparent issues.��- Requires a measure of humility.

Definition revisited:��Inerrancy pertains to what is affirmed or asserted rather than what is merely reported.�

- Recorded statements of those not inspired by the Holy Spirit are to be judged on their own basis. {Quotations from those in the story the narrator is telling could be lies.}��- The Bible’s questions, wishes, and commands are not subject to inerrancy, “Love your enemies!” is neither true or false; the assertion, “Jesus said, ‘Love your enemies!’” is an assertion of Scripture, thus subject to inerrancy.

The truthfulness of assertions should be judged in the cultural setting in which they were expressed.��- Modern quotation standards are not equivalent to ancient ones.��- Numbers used often had symbolic meaning that mattered more than pure accuracy. ��- Thematic concerns often outweighed chronological ones when organizing historical sections (i.e. the Gospels).

Reports of historical events and scientific matters are in phenomenal (how it appeared to them) rather than technical language.��- They make no effort to be scientifically exact; they do not theorize how an event occured, they simply report what is seen.

The doctrine of inerrancy applies in the strict sense only to the original, but in a derivative sense to their copies and translations.��- To the extent that they accurately reflect the originals.

2 Timothy 3:16, when Paul wrote to Timothy that “all scripture is God-breathed”, he was not looking at original Hebrew manuscripts, but a copy, and at times a translation (LXX).�- Detailed Answer: Pastor Powell’s 6 hour lecture on the History of the English Bible, where copying and translating are the primary focus.�https://pastorpowellsponderings.blogspot.com/p/history-of-bible.html

Original Composition Languages: Hebrew�- Biblical/Classic Hebrew: The language of almost all of the Jewish Scriptures (i.e. the Hebrew Bible, Old Testament)��- A Semitic language (like Aramaic), the only living Canaanite language in the world today; the first written example of Paleo-Hebrew is from the 10th century B.C.

Greek�- Koine Greek: The language of the�Christian Scriptures (i.e. the New Testament), as well as that used in the 3rd century B.C. to translate the Hebrew Bible into�Greek, known as the Septuagint (LXX).��- An Indo-European language, the common standard form of Greek spoken and written during the Hellenistic period beginning with Alexander’s conquests in the 4th century BC. It served as the lingua franca (common language) of much of the Mediterranean region and the Middle East for centuries after.

Aramaic�- Biblical Aramaic: the language�used in portions of Daniel (2:4b-7:28), a couple chapters in Ezra (4:8-6:18, 7:12-26) as well as a few other phrases/words in other parts of the O.T. {For a total of 250 verses out of 23,000}��- A Semitic language closely related to Hebrew. The lingua franca of the Assyrian Empire (2500-600 BC, who conquered the Northern Kingdom of Israel in 722 BC)

- It is generally accepted by historians that Jesus and his disciples primarily spoke Aramaic (Jewish Palestinian Aramaic) as it was the common language of Judea in the 1st century AD; most likely a Galilean dialect distinguishable from that of Jerusalem��{Peter during the denial, “Certainly this fellow was with him, for he is a Galilean.” Luke 22:59}

Authors�- Even those portions which contain direct quotations of revelation from God had a human author who wrote down what was said.��- Unlike the Islamic claim of an eternal Qur’an, the Bible was written by real historical people, some of whom also utilized outside sources for information

Examples: Joshua 10:13b “as it is written in the Book of Jashar.” ��Luke 1:1-4 (NIV) “1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.”

- Thus, for Biblical interpretation, the identity of the authors matter (when it can be determined), as does their history and personality. ��- God utilized the vocabulary, syntax and grammar of his authors, their inspired writings sound like their other writings, not some mystical “holy language”.

• The Bible was written by men. ��Although the Bible presents are far more egalitarian view of women than its contemporaries, even depicting several of them as key figures and heroes (Miriam, Deborah, Ruth, Esther, Mary, Elizabeth, Priscilla) and at times quoting them at length; the authors (to our knowledge) were all men.��• In addition, virtually all these men were Jewish (The exception, although not uncontested, being Luke, the author of Luke-Acts)

Explicit attribution, Traditional attribution, and Unknown��- While the number of books in the Bible varies {Protestants 66, Catholics 73 (plus Tobit, Judith, 1&2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch) Eastern Orthodox 79 (plus 1 Esdras 3&4 Maccabees, Prayer of Manasseh, Letter of Jeremiah, Psalm 151}, ��- The total number of authors of the 66 books is probably 40, with 35 attributed in the text itself or by tradition. That leaves 10 ½ books of the Bible with no known author (traditional or otherwise: Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1&2 Samuel, 1&2 Kings, Esther, Job, 50 of the Psalms, Hebrews)

Compilers and editors?�• Modern scholars, often those�with a low-view of inspiration (or none�at all) have rejected the traditional �authorship of many books of the Bible, often attributing them to compilers and editors living hundreds of years later, (such as the JEDP theory of the Pentateuch) and questioning whether the traditional authors (like Moses) even existed.��- In the end, authorship cannot be proven, or disproven, only probable/improbable, a matter of opinion (informed or not) and perhaps faith.

- Time and Place: Commonalities�The Bible is Ancient Literature. Whereas there is approximately a 1,500 year gap from the writing of its first words (Genesis if Moses’ authorship is accepted somewhere between 1446-1406 BC) until its last (John’s Revelation, AD 95), the entirety of the Bible was still written in the Ancient World, and from that perspective. {The Ancient World technically ending with the fall of the Western Roman Empire in AD 476.}�• An understanding of the Ancient World is necessary to properly interpret the Bible.

The Bible is Middle Eastern.��Nearly all the events in the Bible take place in the Middle East,�and nearly all the people in�its narrative are Middle�Easterners.��• An understanding of the Middle East is necessary to properly interpret the Bible.

The entirety of the Bible assumes the Truth of the monotheism proclaimed to Moses at the Burning Bush, rejecting the near universal polytheism of the Ancient Middle Eastern background in which it is set.��• Giving the Bible thematic cohesion and a counter-cultural viewpoint.

Peculiarities: Given the expanse of time and high number of authors, a few outliers are to be expected.��• Esther – The sacred name of God (YHWH) is not utilized in this book. {The only book not represented in the Dead Sea Scrolls}��• Song of Songs (Solomon) – deals rather graphicly in poetic form with a topic typically referred to elsewhere with euphemisms: marital sex.

- Format�For significant portions of the Bible, the first form of the stories that would later be written down was oral.������

Oral Tradition held a massive role in the Ancient World.��• Utilizing a combination of local elders passing down wisdom and history to the next generation, and traveling bards or minstrels whose tales were often set to meter (helping with memorization) like Homer’s epic poetry.

• Lack of literacy and the significant expense of writing materials limited what could be kept in written form in the Ancient World.���- Only a small fraction, of that small percentage of Ancient knowledge which was written down, has survived into the Modern World.�{fire, flood, war, deliberate destruction, time}

- Scrolls/papyrus/codices��The oldest Biblical�manuscripts were written on scrolls��• Virtually all of these have not survived, aided by the destruction of the Temple of Solomon in 586 BC, persecution by the Seleucids around 168 BC, and the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70.

• The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 confirmed that the text preserved by the Masoretes was highly accurate; previously the oldest OT Hebrew manuscript was Codox Cairensis AD 895, but the DSS predate the birth of Christ.�*The Masoretes were groups of Jewish scribe-scholars who worked between the 6th and 10th centuries AD, based primarily in early medieval Palestine in the cities of Tiberias and Jerusalem, as well as in Iraq (Babylonia)…The Masoretes added the vowels to the Hebrew Scriptures.

The most common writing material of the Ancient Near East was papyrus; a form of paper made from a reed that grows along the Nile River. Originally papyrus was kept as a scroll, but early Christian copyists quickly adopted the newly invented codex (book) form for both papyrus and its�replacement, parchment�(animal skin, aka vellum)

• The book form allowed for longer works to be collected together (a scroll can only be so long, 133 ft. is the longest extant scroll, standard about 30 ft.), thus bringing to the forefront questions of Canon as to which writings belonged bound together as the Christian sacred text; the Bible (Greek for books: biblia) ��

Organization: Hebrew Scriptures�- Originally in separate scrolls, began to be codified as a twenty-four “book” canon (counting as one book each: Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, and Ezra-Nehemiah, and the 12 Minor Prophets as a single book), known as the Tanakh, by the 2nd Temple time of Ezra. ��- The Tanakh is organized into three sections: The Torah, Nevi’im, and the Ketuvim.

Torah (literally “teaching”, also Law):��The 5 books of Moses {Greek: Pentateuch}, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

Nevi’im (Prophets): Consisting of three subsections – The Former Prophets: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings; the Latter Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel; and the Twelve Minor Prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi.

Ketuvim (Writings): Consisting of three subsections – The Poetic Books: Psalms, Proverbs, Job; The Five Megillot which are read aloud at specific occasions in the synagogue: Song of Songs {Passover}, Ruth {Shavout, i.e. Pentecost}, Lamentations {Tisha B’Av, Fast day commemorating destruction of Solomon’s and the 2nd Temple}, Ecclesiastes {Sukkot, i.e. Tabernacles}, and Esther {Purim}; and Other: Daniel, Ezra/Nehemiah, and Chronicles.

Christian Bible�- Very early in Church History the writings which the Church considered to be authoritative (i.e. inspired) began to be codified in the newly emerging book form. It is divided into two primary sections: the Old Testament (Hebrew Scriptures) and the New Testament, which reflect the division between the Old Covenant (Abraham, Moses, David) and the New Covenant (Jesus).

Canon��The list of books recognized as worthy to be included in the sacred writings of a worshipping community.�

- “The list of writings acknowledged by the Church as documents of the diving revelation.” {Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, p. 17} The Greek word, kanon, 1st used in that sense by Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, in a letter dated AD 367.�- Thomas Aquinas (AD 1225-74) “canonical scripture alone is the rule of faith”.�- Westminster Confession (1647); after listing the 66 books, “All which are given by inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life”.

The Canon of the Old Testament��Dead Sea Scrolls: fragments of all books of the Hebrew Bible except Esther, but without commentary to indicate that they were definitely considered by their community to be Holy Scripture.�

“When we think of Jesus and his Palestinian apostles, then, we may be confident that they agreed with contemporary leaders in Israel about the contents of the canon. We cannot say confidently that they accepted Esther, Ecclesiastes or the Song of Songs as scripture, because evidence is not available…But when in debate with Jewish theologians Jesus and the apostles appealed to ‘the scriptures’, they appealed to an authority which was equally acknowledged by their opponents.” (Bruce, p. 41)

- Babylonian Talmud (AD 70-200), assigns inspired or authoritative authors to all twenty-four books, and discusses their order.��- Josephus, 90’s AD, twenty-two books (Ruth appendix to Judges, Lamentations to Jeremiah)��- Council of Jamnia, post 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem – “So far as the scriptures are concerned, the rabbis at Jamnia introduced no innovations; they reviewed the tradition they had received and left it more or less as it was.” (Bruce, P. 34)

Septuagint (LXX), 2nd century BC Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures by the Jewish community of Alexandria, Egypt.�- 2nd division is largely same as Hebrew Bible, but with Ruth inserted between Judges and 1 Samuel, and with Samuel and Kings followed by Chronicles, 1 Esdras (a variant Greek edition of history from 1 Chronicles 35:1 to Nehemiah 8:13), 2 Esdras (our Ezra-Nehemiah), Esther, Judith and Tobit. {Judith and Tobit not in Hebrew Bible} Esther in LXX is a considerably expanded version of the Hebrew Esther.

The 3rd division of the LXX contains the poetry and wisdom books, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job, Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus (the book of Jeshua ben Sira). ��{Of these, Wisdom (originally written in Greek) and Ecclesiasticus (originally written in Hebrew) are not found in the Hebrew Bible}.

In the 4th division, Jeremiah is followed not only by Lamentations but also by the book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah {neither of which is in the Hebrew Bible}.

Daniel is amplified by two stories not in the Hebrew text – the History of Susanna, which is put at the beginning, and the story of Bel and the Dragon, which is added at the end – while a prayer of confession and a canticle of praise to God are put in the mouths of Daniel’s three friends in the fiery furnace. The book of Maccabees, forms a sort of appendix to the LXX, not belonging to any of its main divisions…Since Jerome’s time, the additional LXX material has been known as the Apocrypha. (from p. 47-48)

“While the New Testament writers all used the Septuagint, to a greater or lesser degree, none of them tells us precisely what the limits of its contents were.” (Bruce, p. 50)

Early Church usage�“The earliest Christians did not trouble themselves about criteria of canonicity; they would not have readily understood the expression. They accepted the OT scriptures as they had received them; the authority of those scriptures was sufficiently ratified by the teaching and example of the Lord and his apostles. The teaching and example of the Lord and his apostles, whether conveyed by word of mouth or in writing, had axiomatic authority for them.” (Bruce, p. 255)

Criteria of Canonicity��Apostolic Authority, Jesus left nothing in writing, closest in authority was that written by his disciples, none more active in writing than Paul, not a surprise that Paul’s writings were the first to be collected and circulated together.

• “The apostolic authorship of Matthew and John was well established in tradition. But what of Mark and Luke? Their authorship was also well established in tradition, but it was felt desirable to buttress the authority of tradition with arguments which gave those two Gospels a measure of apostolic validation.” (Bruce, p. 257) [By connecting Mark to Peter and Luke to Paul]�• Members of the Holy Family (i.e. James and Jude) were also accorded apostolic authority

Antiquity, “If a writing was the work of an apostle or of someone closely associated with an apostle, it must belong to the apostolic age. Writings of later date, whatever their merit, could not be included among the apostolic or canonical books.” (Bruce, p. 259)

Orthodoxy, “By ‘orthodoxy’ they meant apostolic faith – the faith set forth in the undoubted apostolic writings and maintained in the churches which had been founded by apostles.” (Bruce, p. 260)��• Most important question for any text: What does it teach about the person and work of Christ?

Catholicity, “A work which enjoyed only local recognition was not likely to be acknowledged as part of the canon of the catholic church. On the other hand, a work which was acknowledged by the greater part of the catholic church would probably receive universal recognition sooner or later.” (Bruce, p. 261) – {i.e. Hebrews, which lacked Apostolic Authority, but boasted Antiquity, Orthodoxy, and Catholicity}

Traditional Use, “The reading of ‘memoirs of the apostles’ in church along with the OT writings {Justin Martyr attests to this practice} became an established tradition which made it easy to accord to those ‘memoirs’ the same formal status as that accorded from the church’s earliest days to the law and the prophets.” (Bruce, p. 263)��• Anything previously unknown, or never treated previously as scripture, would have had a difficult time gaining acceptance.

Inspiration, “For many centuries inspiration and canonicity have been closely bound up together in Christian thinking: books were included in the canon it is believed, because they were inspired; a book is known to be inspired because it is in the canon.” (Bruce, p. 263) {circular argument, doesn’t defend against ‘new inspiration’ of Muhammed or Joseph Smith}�• “Only one of the NT writers expressly bases the authority of what he says on prophetic inspiration.” (Bruce, p. 264) {John’s vision of the Apocalypse, Rev 22:19}

Councils�The Early Church utilized a mixture of the above criteria in relation to canonicity of texts, thus the canon was functional within the Church (with ongoing debate around books not accepted by all: Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, Revelation). �No ecclesiastical council had made a pronouncement on the canon which could be recognized as the voice of the church by the time of Augustine.

- Council of Hippo, AD 393, probably the first church council to lay down the limits of the canon of scripture; listing the 27 books of the NT {in a varied order}. It ‘resolved that nothing should be read in church under the name of the divine scriptures except the canonical writings.’ (Bruce, p. 233)�- Council of Hippo’s decision reiterated by the Third Council of Carthage, AD 397, and the Sixth Council of Carthage, AD 419.

Other writings:��Writings which were not included within the Canon can be loosely grouped into three categories:�• Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical – Example: Baruch�Writings from the period between the prophet Malachi and the birth of Christ

• Pseudepigrapha – Example: Gospel of Thomas�Writings falsely claiming apostolic authorship (Peter, Judas, Thomas, Mary, etc.), but not originating in the 1st century and not accepted as legitimate by the vast majority of the Church.

• Non-Apostolic – Example: Shepherd of Hermes�Writings, both orthodox and unorthodox, making no apostolic claim, and originating from the 2nd century onward. {The Letters of Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement}

Literary Styles/Genres�The 66 individual books that together comprise the Bible do not all belong to the same literary style/genre. {Just as they also have unique authorial perspectives and syntax}� �While unanimity as to how many genres are contained in the Bible, and on which books belong to which genres, has never really existed, it is generally accepted that the proper interpretation of Scripture must take these various styles/genres into account.

As evidenced by the early Jewish grouping of the Tanakh in three sections: Torah (Law), Nevi’im (Prophets), and Ketuvim (Writings).

For Example: Clear differences exist between: Genesis, Proverbs, Luke, Ephesians, and Revelation. To treat them all the same, without considering the literary conventions particular to the genre to which they belong, would be to encourage misinterpretation (and thus misapplication).

A descriptive, not a prescriptive aid to study; literary style/genre is not about inviolable rules {i.e. ALL prophecy uses these conventions, includes such and such}. Instead, focus is on commonalities, typical conventions, and cultural expectations.��An “increased appreciation of the literary mechanisms of a text – how a story is told – often becomes the avenue of greater insight into the theological, religious and even historical significance of the text – what the story means.” (Long, The Art of Biblical History)

Individual books can contain several sub-genres within their larger literary framework ��Example: 1&2 Samuel, primary genre is history/narrative, but included within it are stories, sayings, proverbs, poems, songs, battle reports, genealogies, prayers, and prophecies.

Interpretation:��Every reader is an interpreter (of any text, not just the Bible), attempting to understand what is being read (or heard).��

Bringing with them their presuppositions, prior understandings, education, language skills, experiences, culture, and because of them consciously or subconsciously affecting how they receive the author’s intended message.

- This interpretive “baggage” can either help or hinder a reader/hearer’s ability to grasp what the writer/speaker intends.��- Any work that is translated from its original language has already been interpreted, hopefully faithfully, once.��- “The antidote to bad interpretation is not no interpretation, but good interpretation” (How to Read the Bible for all its Worth, Fee & Stuart)

Exegesis vs. Eisegesis

Exegesis: A careful, systematic study to discover the original, intended meaning.���- A historical task, an attempt to read (hear) as the original recipients were supposed to have read (heard) it.

- In order to successfully interpret Scripture, a grammatical-historical exegesis is first necessary, to understand the original meaning, before seeking to understand the current significance ��If you don’t understand how they understood it, you won’t be able to understand how we ought to apply it.

• Start with “them” before considering “us”.��• An interpretation which renders the meaning of a passage something that would have been impossible for the original audience to grasp is therefore a failure of interpretation.

- “A text cannot mean what it never meant.” (Fee & Stuart, p. 26)��- “we can hardly claim to have developed a satisfactory approach if our exegesis is in essence incompatible with the way God’s people have read the Scriptures throughout the centuries.” (Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation, Silva, p. 37)

Paying close attention to context: “Context is King”��Author, historic situation {occasion and purpose}, literary genre, flow of thought {ignoring when necessary punctuation, verse and chapter divisions}, the larger point being made, and how a particular portion fits within that larger point, and Scripture as a whole.�

• Word usage determines word meaning: Words only have meaning in sentences sentences in paragraphs, and paragraphs in a work as a whole.��• Use of the Hebrew Scriptures by NT writers (and influence upon them of), influence of earlier Hebrew Scriptures on authors of portions written later, as well as the history of interpretation within Judaism and Christianity, are also relevant factors when applicable.

Placing a paramount value upon authorial intent, as much as it can be discovered. �����

• To value the perspective of the human author is not to negate the divine character of Scripture.��• In Church history, it is the human author who has at times been forgotten. {In part because of efforts to counter those who denied its divine element}

- “the truth of Scripture is independent of anyone’s ability to comprehend it or willingness to receive it.” (Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation, Moises Silva, p. 31)��- Aims to be objective

Eisegesis: A reader-imposed interpretation (often predetermined) that conforms to one’s own presuppositions, agendas, or biases.��- Reading into the text; including confirmation bias (finding what you were looking for in the first place) and proof texting (taking pieces out of context to conform to an agenda).

- Tends to be�highly subjective���- “we cannot make it mean anything that pleases us, and then give the Holy Spirit ‘credit’ for it. The Holy Spirit cannot be called in to contradict himself, and he is the one who inspired the original intent.” (Fee & Stuart, p. 26)

Tensions in the text:�“the one great aim in our own interpretation of Scripture must be that of resisting the temptation to eliminate the tensions, to emphasize certain features of the Bible at the expense of others.” (Silva, p. 38)�- For numerous issues, the tension in the text is deliberate, and the correct interpretation is to hold those tensions in balance {Ex: OT/NT continuity and discontinuity, Humanity as both dignified and depraved, Salvation as already and not yet}.

- The Bible is divine, but has come to us in a human form (HS inspiration and human authors).��- The commands of God are absolute, yet the historical context of the writings appears to relativize certain elements.��- The divine message should be clear, yet many passages seem ambiguous.

- We are dependent only on the Spirit for instruction, yet scholarship is surely necessary.��- The Scriptures seem to presuppose a literal and historical reading, yet we are also confronted by the figurative and nonhistorical (e.g. parables).

- Proper interpretation requires the interpreter’s personal freedom, yet some degree of external, corporate authority appears imperative.��- The objectivity of the biblical message is essential, yet our presuppositions seem to inject a degree of subjectivity into the interpretive process.

Literal or figurative?�- Does the Word of God say and do more than is immediately apparent?��The Bible contains a wide variety of potential linguistic phenomena which includes:

- Metaphor (“new wine will drip from the mountains” Amos 9:13)� - The “body and blood” of Christ, literal or metaphorical?��- Anthropomorphism (a type of metaphor, God’s “eyes” or “mouth”)��- Typology (the historic person Isaac as a type of those born by the Spirit, used by Paul in Galatians 4:21-31)

- Sensus Plenior: deeper meaning the author was unaware of (“Out of Egypt I called my son” used by Hosea referring to Israel, Hosea 11:1, but quoted by Matthew to refer to Jesus, Matthew 2:15).��- Spiritualizing: The transfer of OT prophecies about Israel to apply to the Church

�- Allegorizing:�The changing of water to wine by Jesus at Cana, John 2:1-11, is symbolic of our need to stop being weak like water and become steadfast like wine.��Or, viewing Jonah as an allegory for Israel, who “ran away” from God and endured three days in the “fish” (exile) before hearing the call to repentance and accepting it (like Ninevah).�

- Dehistoricizing (Jonah wasn’t a real person, treat it as a parable)�Two fundamentally different views: (1) That a particular biblical narrative, while intended to be historical, should be more/less dehistoricized in favor of an allegorical interpretation, (2) that the original point itself of the biblical passage is not historical.

- For example: (1) The story of Jonah or Job as non-historic parables. (2) The parables of Jesus��- Passages that present themselves as historical require a compelling reason to view otherwise (i.e. a convincing argument that the author intended it to be viewed as something other than a normal recitation of history)

“For who that has understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and third day, and the evening and the morning, existed without a sun, and moon, and stars? And that the first day was, as it were, also without a sky? And who is so foolish as to suppose that God, after the manner of a husbandman, planted a paradise in Eden, towards the east, and placed in it a tree of life, visible and palpable, so that one tasting of the fruit by the bodily teeth obtained life? And again, that one was a partaker of good and evil by masticating what was taken from the tree? And if God is said to walk in the paradise in the evening, and Adam to hide himself under a tree, I do not suppose that anyone doubts that these things figuratively indicate certain mysteries, the history having taken place in appearance, and not literally.”�— Origen (AD 184-253), On the First Principles IV.16

Fundamental Problem: How to avoid arbitrariness in figurative interpretation?��- What control is there if anyone can find any mean in any passage?��“And the way is certainly as follows: Whatever then is in the word of God that cannot, when taken literally, be referred either to purity of life or soundness of doctrine, you may set down as figurative.” – St. Augustine

Clear or obscure?��“Up to the time of the Reformation, the Bible was perceived by most people as a fundamentally obscure book. The common folk could not be expected to understand it, and so they were discouraged from reading it. Indeed, the Bible was not even available in a language they could understand. They were almost completely dependent upon the authoritative interpretation of the church.” (Silva, p. 63)

Did God intend the Scriptures to be the domain of those who had received specialized training only, or as something that could be properly understood by the average person?��• “panta ta anankaia dela” (“all the things that are necessary are plain.”) – John Chrysostom, 4th century

• “Accordingly, the Holy Spirit has, with admirable wisdom and care for our welfare, so arranged the Holy Scriptures as by the plainer passages to satisfy our hunger, and by the more obscure to stimulate our appetite. For almost nothing is dug out of those obscure passages which may not be found set forth in the plainest of language elsewhere.” (St. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine 2.6)

• “All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them.” (The Westminster Confession of Faith, 1647)

“The clarity of Scripture does not at all preclude the need for specialists who seek to bridge the gap that separates us from the languages and cultures of the biblical writers.” (Silva, p. 66)�• Clear to the original intended audience is not the same thing as clear to someone from a different time and place. Thus a more focused question would be: Was Scripture intended to be obscure to its original target audience?

As an inspired text, should we expect to find (purposefully) hidden meaning, deeper truths that only the mature can discover?

- The darkness of the human heart vs. the light of the Spirit�Isaiah 6:9-10 (NIV)�9 He said, “Go and tell this people:�“‘Be ever hearing, but never understanding;� be ever seeing, but never perceiving.’�10 Make the heart of this people calloused;� make their ears dull� and close their eyes. �Otherwise they might see with their eyes,� hear with their ears,� understand with their hearts,�and turn and be healed.”�Not a question of the clarity of the prophet’s message (i.e. of Scripture itself), but of the inability of the unrepentant human heart to accept what ought to be a sufficiently clear message.

Mark 4:10-12 (NIV)�10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that, “‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’”

“The church has come to understand the divine message by developing sensitivity to the consistent teaching of the Bible as a whole.” (Silva, p. 71)��- Clarity will be increased, and obscurity decreased, when in conjunction with proper contextual interpretation.

Relative or absolute?��“Though we accept the divine origin and therefore absolute authority of the Scriptures, it is still true that the divine message is couched in human language and that it addresses specific historical and cultural situations, some of which have changed considerably in the course of time.” (Silva, p. 75)

Question: Do these facts relativize the Bible and compromise its absolute authority?��- “The question…is not whether we should contextualize, for we all do it, but rather, how to do it without compromising the integrity of the Bible.” (Silva, p. 76)

“The absoluteness of God’s commands would not be preserved but rather would be compromised if those commands were so general and vague that they applied to all situations.” (Silva, p. 81)

“He who created us knows how to speak to us. He who formed our minds knows how to reach them. The task of biblical interpretation is not an autonomous human endeavor but a response to God’s command. And with God’s command comes the power to fulfill that command.” (Silva, p. 87)

For Israel only, or the Church too?��- When attempting to interpret/apply Old Testament passages concerning the Covenant of Abraham or the Law of Moses, it is necessary to understand those passages within an Old/New Covenant context:

• How the Old Testament (Old Covenant) and the New Testament (New Covenant) relate to each other also impacts one’s perspective on the relationship between Israel and the Church. ��- Is the Church a sequel to Israel, a temporary stand-in for Israel, or a permanent replacement of Israel in God’s plan? {See Romans chapters 9-11 for Paul’s analysis}.

• Which promises, commands, laws were intended to be for all people/times/places, and which were specific to ancient Israel/Judaism?

• In what ways has the New Covenant fulfilled, superseded, or supplanted the Old?��{For example: In Acts, Paul declares, and the Jerusalem Council agrees, that Greek converts to Christianity do not have to obey the Jewish requirements of circumcision, Kosher diets, or Sabbath keeping…At the same time, the book of Hebrews goes to great length to emphasize how Jesus both fulfilled, and superseded, the sacrificial system of the Old Covenant}.

• The negation of the sacrificial system of the Law of Moses by the atoning sacrifice of Christ (see Hebrews in particular) does not deprive that system of divine authority within its original context (i.e. Israel before the coming of the Messiah).

Ancient commands in modern world:��- The relevance for the Church (whether ancient or modern) of the civil aspect of the Law of Moses (as opposed to the ceremonial and sacrificial portions, which the NT makes clear were superseded by the New Covenant) is much debated within the Church.

• The typical approach is to take them individually, seeking to place them within the framework of Scripture as a whole, to determine if they have a temporary or otherwise restricted nature.��Example: Levirate marriage, Dt. 25:5-10 {the plot of Ruth}. Part of the Law of Moses, yet very much connected to A.N.E. cultural practices and agrarian society. In Matthew 22:23-33, Jesus dismisses it as irrelevant to Heaven, but otherwise the NT does not touch on the subject; the Early Church rejected the practice in favor of Greco/Roman inheritance law.

- What of things not explicitly commanded in Scripture (voting, military service), practices common in the Ancient World that are abhorrent in the Modern (slavery, child marriages), or practices condemned in the Ancient World that are acceptable, even celebrated, by many in the Modern (homosexuality, abortion)?

Application:�Claims of credibility, authority, and applicability within Scripture itself.�- “Is there some person, institution, or document possessing the right to prescribe belief and action in religious matters? In the ultimate sense, if there is a Supreme Being higher than humans and everything else in the created order, he has the right to determine what we are to believe and how we are to live.” (Erickson, p. 67)

God, rather than exercising direct authority, has chosen to primarily convey his will through messengers whose (inspired) words were collected together, first as the Hebrew Scriptures (and LXX) and then the Christian Bible.

• Because this is the Word of God, it commands the same respect as if God were speaking to us personally.��• 1 Thessalonians 2:13 (NIV) And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is indeed at work in you who believe.

For the Bible to function in this manner, the reader needs to both understand the message itself and be convinced of its divine origin.��• How is this made possible? Through the working of the Holy Spirit, illuminating understanding and bringing about conviction within human hearts.

Is the Holy Spirit truly necessary to understanding/acceptance?��(1) Ontological differences between transcendent God and finite man, (2) certainty is needed in the spiritual realm, being a matter of life/death and things in the world beyond which we do not have firsthand knowledge of, (3) and the limitations of the human mind/heart given humanity’s fallen nature.

Romans 1:21 (NIV) For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

1 Corinthians 2:14 (NIV) The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.��- The problem is not simply one of unwillingness (rebellion) but more fundamentally of inability (darkened hearts/minds).

For those who have been regenerated (indwelling of the Holy Spirit; i.e. the darkened heart/mind barrier has been removed), what role is played by the Spirit in ongoing understanding/application of the Scriptures?

- Teaches/reminds believers of what Jesus taught (John 14:26), “testifies” about Jesus (John 15:26), convicts “the world” of sin (John 16:8-11), and guides believers “into all truth” (John 16:13).��- “The written Word, correctly interpreted, is the objective basis of authority. The inward illuminating and persuading work of the Holy Spirit is the subjective dimension.” (Erickson, p. 70)

Applicability of Scripture from testimony of Scripture itself:�2 Timothy 3:16 (NIV) All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness��2 Peter 3:16 (NIV) He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. (Peter referring to Paul’s letters as Scripture)

Colossians 3:16 (NIV) Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts.��John 6:63 (NIV) The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit and life.

Time-bound and timeless:��It is necessary to distinguish between the permanent essence of a concept (doctrine, command, ethical stance) and its temporary forms of expression (i.e. what that permanent Truth looks like when applied to real time/place/culture).

- Criteria are required to help guide the understanding of these distinctions lest personal preference and/or current time/place/culture end up being the rubric.��- (1) Constancy across cultures: Is the teaching in question in several settings {i.e OT and NT, Mosaic and Church, Hebrew and Greco-Roman} or is it only made reference to in one setting?

- (2) Universal setting: Was the teaching in question given with an emphasis upon the need for universal applicability?��{Example: Great Commission, Matthew 28:18-20 All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations…And surely I will be with you always, to the very end of the age.}

- (3) A permanent factor as its basis: Is the teaching founded upon an unchanging Truth?��{i.e. the nature of God, the fallen state of humanity. For example: When Jesus teaches about marriage, he cites God’s creation of male and female from Genesis 2:24.}

- (4) A necessary link to an essential experience: Is the teaching itself connected to something universal?��{For example: the fact of the resurrection of Jesus is intertwined with every believer’s experience of regeneration.}

- (5) A final position within progressive revelation: Is the teaching the final form of God’s self-revelation? “As God revealed himself more completely, the later forms elaborated upon and progressed beyond the earlier expressions.” (Erickson, p. 29) {For example: Jesus - “You have heard that it was said…but I say to you that…” Mt. 5:21, 27}

Principles and particulars:��While it is essential that we recognize that all revelation has a point, even for those that are time/culture bound expressions which do not apply in the same fashion to us, our goal is to understand the basic essence of the message.��- What is the essential spiritual truth upon which a given portion of Scripture rests?

This is not a quest for symbolism or hidden spiritual truths (such as allegorizing), but rather an important question: What is the reason why this portion of scripture was written? With a proper historical/grammatical exegetical answer in hand, we can begin the task of determining how that original purpose/meaning applies in our similar or varied circumstances. {An exercise in seeing both the trees and the forest.}

Two important questions:��(1) Are there contemporary situational equivalents to which the situation in Scripture applies directly (or nearly so)?��(2) How can the principle of the lesson given to the ancients (whether Israel or the Church) be faithfully applied without a situational equivalent?

For example: (1) David’s lust after Bathsheba, while connected to ancient questions of polygamy, kingship, and the Mosaic Law, can still easily have a contemporary situational equivalent, even without those additional factors, as fidelity/purity in marriage is an ongoing concern based upon a timeless ethical teaching.

(2) However, Paul’s teachings regarding both slavery {a common reality then but outlawed now} and obedience to the government {a pagan empire then, various other forms now that have no ancient comparison} need to be approached from the standpoint of principle because the particular circumstances in which he made those pronouncements no longer exist.

Some of the most bitter and divisive debates within the Church revolve around one group who insists that a situation is time-bound/particular and another which insists that it is time-less/principled.�{A consistent “all of them are time-bound/particular” or “all of them are time-less/principled” is not viable, as the text of Scripture contains numerous examples of both. Case by case is necessary.}

An example of exegetical historical/grammatical interpretation and application: Philippians 4:13��(NIV) I can do all this through him who gives me strength.�(KJV) I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.�(NLT) For I can do everything through Christ, who gives me strength.

Original Language: Koine Greek��- the textual variant (Christ vs. him) is not significant to interpretation, as the natural antecedent of the pronoun “him” is indeed Jesus Christ.��- The Greek translation of this verse contains no difficult terms/phrases, commonality among various English translations.�

Author: the Apostle Paul, formerly Saul of Tarsus, central figure in the book of Acts, who also wrote (the authorship of some are contested, but not typically Philippians)- Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Philemon, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy and Titus.

Time and Place:�Philippians was written from prison (1:13-14), most likely from Rome in AD 61 (Acts 28:14-31), with secondary theories of Ephesus, AD 53-55 or Caesarea, AD 57-59 as the location/date of writing.

Original Audience:�Philippians 1:1b To all God’s holy people in Christ Jesus at Philippi, together with the overseers and deacons – the letter was written to the 1^st century, 1^st generation, Christians of the Greek city of Philippi (Macedonia), a Roman colony whose citizens were also citizens of Rome (a significant boon to them)

Original Purpose of Philippians:�(1) To thank the Philippians for their gift {1:5; 4:10-19}, (2) to report on Paul’s circumstances {1:12-26; 4:10-19}, (3) to encourage them to stand firm against persecution {1:27-30; 4:4}, (4) to exhort them to humility and unity {2:1-11; 4:2-5}, (5) to commend Timothy and Epaphroditus to the Philippian church {2:19-30}, (6) to warn against the Judaizers and antinomians {ch. 3}.

Literary Form/Genre: Epistle��A writing directed or sent to a person or group of people, usually an elegant and formal didactic letter.��- Often with a wider audience (even posterity) in view beyond the original audience/occasion.

Application: Common usage of 4:13�“it is commonly expounded as a text that promises Christ’s strength to believers in all that they have to do or in all that God sets before them to do.”�(Exegetical Fallacies, Carson, p. 116)��- not an unorthodox concept, for God does indeed promise and deliver strength to those who fulfill his purposes {Ex: David, Elijah, Daniel} but insufficiently connected to the context of Paul’s statement.�

Wider Context:�10 I rejoiced in the Lord greatly that now at length you have revived your concern for me. You were indeed concerned for me, but you had no opportunity. 11 Not that I am speaking of being in need, for I have learned in whatever situation I am to be content. 12 I know how to be brought low, and I know how to abound. In any and every circumstance, I have learned the secret of facing plenty and hunger, abundance and need. 13 I can do all things through him who strengthens me.

Interpretative Conclusion: {vs. 10-13}�The Apostle Paul is sharing with the church at Philippi his ability to find contentment despite trying circumstances, after thanking the people of that church for helping support him through their gifts. Paul gives Christ credit for this ability.

Common error of application:�Unwarranted associative jumps –�“It occurs when a word or phrase triggers off an associated idea, concept, or experience that bears no close relation to the text at hand, yet is used to interpret the text.” (Carson, p. 115)��- the ‘everything’ in 4:13 cannot be completely unqualified

What does ‘everything’ mean as Paul uses it?��Philippians 4:12 I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want.

Conclusion: An exegetically sound historical/grammatical application:��Original Audience – You too can be content, like your mentor Paul, in circumstances both good and bad; this is achieved through strength given by Christ.��Subsequent Audiences – The same principle applies, there is no cultural barrier or issue of timeless vs. time-bound.