BI Seminar

Biblical Interpretation Seminar
Notes and Schedule

Schedule
Day 1
Session 1:
• Unit 1: A Sure WORD to be Sure About – Doctrine of Scripture
o (Reading: None)
• Unit 2: The Problem with “Just Applying” the Bible
o (Reading: KBH1, 27-36, 39-65; JCH2, 23-26)
• Discussion: 1 Samuel 1 – “The First Case of Anorexia?”
Session 2:
• Unit 3: A Hermeneutical “Hat Rack” – Context, Context, CONTEXT!
• Unit 3: Historical-Grammatical Method/Seven Concise Steps in Exegesis
o (Reading: JCH 71-97)
• Discussion: Context & the Great Commission
• Debrief: Context & the Great Commission
Session 3:
• Unit 4.1: How We Got the Bible – Text, Canon & Translation
o (Reading: KBH, 165-197; JCH, 37-57, 59-68)
• Discussion: Do I Need to be a Textual Critic?
• Unit 4.2: How We Got the Bible – Text, Canon & Translation
Session 4:
• Unit 5: Coming to the Text ‘As You Are’ – Interpreter & Holy Spirit
o (Reading: KBH, 201-243, 635-636)
• Unit 6: Coming to the Text ‘As You Are’ – Authority, Obedience & Method
o (Reading: KBH, 244-290; JCH, 153-185)
• Unit 7: Tools of the Trade
o (Reading: KBH, 637-681)
1
KBH = W.W. Klein, C.L. Blomberg and R.L. Hubbard, Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (1993; 3rd
Ed, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2017) [718 pages].
2
JCH = Camery-Hoggatt, Jerry, Reading the Good Book Well: A Guide to Biblical Interpretation (Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 2007) [233 pages]
Day 2
Session 5:
• Unit 8: Cube Face 1 (Setting): Asking Historical Questions
o (Reading: KBH, 134-144, 312-324; JCH, 139-151)
• Discussion: Historical Questions of Haggai
• Unit 9: Cube Face 2 (Style): 1. OT Poetry
o (Reading: KBH, 361-413)
Session 6:
• Discussion: Interpreting Psalm 133
• Unit 10: Cube Face 2 (Style): 2. Narrative, Law, Poetry, Prophecy & Wisdom
o (Reading: KBH 417-509)
• Discussion: Interpreting Ecclesiastes 9:13-16
Session 7:
• Unit 11: Cube Face 2 (Style): 3. Gospels, Letters, Revelation & Parables
o (Reading: KBH, 510-567; JCH, 127-137)
• Discussion: Interpreting a Parable
• Unit 12: Cube Face 3 (Semantics) & 4 (Syntax): Words & Words Working Together
o (Reading: KBH, 293-312, 324-360; JCH, 99-113)
Session 8:
• Discussion: Words Working Together in John 3:16
• Unit 13: Cube Faces 5 (Summation) & 6 (Significance): Applying the Text Wholly
to Yourself (Reading: KBH, 602-635; JCH, 15-22)
• Unit 14: Taking the Bible to Church & Life
o (Reading: KBH, 571-601; JCH, 3-14)3
3
There are readings for two further important areas of biblical interpretation:
Learning from the History of Interpretation

(KBH, 66-116; JCH, 219-225)
More Recent Approaches to Interpretation – Possibilities and Pitfalls

(KBH, 117-164, JCH 115-126, 187-203)
Immerse: Biblical Interpretation Seminar – Unit 01– page 1
NOTE: For single copy/electronic use only.
UNIT 1
A Sure WORD to be Sure About:
The Doctrine of Scripture
We believe the Holy Bible to be that collection of sixty-six books from Genesis to Revelation
which, as originally written, was objectively the very Word of God; that it was written by men
supernaturally moved; that it is verbally and plenarily inspired; that it is truth without any
admixture of error; and therefore is and shall remain to the end of the age, the only complete and
final revelation of the will of God to men; the true centre of Christian union and the supreme
standard by which all human conduct, creeds and opinions should be tried.
—Fellowship Statement of Faith, Article 1
Items to note:
1. The statement observably quotes the Bible’s own words on itself without apology
2. It’s statements carry no reservations or qualifications in what they assert
3. It declares the Bible’s divine origin and abiding qualities of perfection and the human means
in the divine communication
4. It declares an absolute assurance of the Bible’s unique determining character for all human
conduct, belief and opinion
I. PRESUPPOSITIONS ABOUT REALITY
- The absolute first consideration is how one construes reality
18th Century Enlightenment

- Enlightenment  saw the move to a materialistic approach to reality
- Scientific inquiry is based in naturalism: the absolute character of unbroken chains of cause and
effect
- Biblical interpretation began to embrace the materialistic perspective over time
- Materialism frustrates Biblical interpretation—because it is anti-supernaturalistic
- There is no “outside” to the circle of reality; no divine causation; no God; only “god”—a human
construct
Biblical Perspective
- The presupposition of Scripture = there is ONE PRIOR ABSOLUTE REALITY  God
- The cosmos is derivative from (Gen. 1:1) and is personally/actively sustained by (Col. 1:15-20)
that Prior Absolute Reality
- God also intervenes: esp. through the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ  these
are historical realities expressive of God’s personal saving intervention in space and time (2 Cor.
5:19; Gal. 4:4f.; Phil. 2:6-11)
- Christianity is absolutely dependent upon the interpretation of God’s acts (Heb. 1:1f.)
II. PRESUPPOSITIONS ABOUT THE BIBLE
- Supernaturalism is an indispensable presupposition to proper interpretation, but it does not

guarantee accurate perception
- What is needed  “special revelation”
A. The Bible is Inspired Revelation

- Bible = “special revelation”
Immerse: Biblical Interpretation Seminar – Unit 01– page 2
- It engenders divine intentionality—“a supernatural book, God’s written revelation to his people given
through prepared and selected spokespersons by the process of inspiration.” 1
- The documents of the OT clearly purport to deliver divine communication in narrative and direct
divine speech
- Jesus himself and the NT writers presume that the OT is divine communication
- The NT indicates God’s arrangement to communicate through human beings (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet.
1:20-21)
- The NT writers do not blush to state (2 Pet. 3:16; 1 Tim. 5:18 = Deut. 25:4/Luke 10:7; Rev. 19:9) and
imply (1 Cor. 2:13; Col. 4:16) what NT documents are divine communication
- There is circularity to the above argument (but note the internal consistency and intersection with
historical, cultural and archeological evidence)
B. The Bible is Both Authoritative and True

- inspiration  authority and truth issues
- Note the pitched debate concerning the extent to which words of Scripture are the word of God
- The textbook embraces the “minority view”—the Bible as “true in all it intends to teach. Its statements
convey what is factual; its record is faithful and reliable.”2
- VERBAL PLENARY INSPIRATION: Scripture in the original autographs is the very word of God
and good for faith and action
- In the face of apparent problems, presume that “the jury is still out” rather than committing yourself to
the risk of a premature verdict
C. The Bible is Spiritual

- Another implication – Scripture’s life-changing potential
- OT (e.g., Psalm 1; Isa. 55:10f.) NT (e.g., 2 Tim. 3:16f.)
- Truth read, preached and taught (Rom. 1:16f.; 1 Thess. 1:4f.) is the means of God’s powerful working
- Needed—a sense of strong anticipation of good things
D. The Bible is a Text of Both Unity and Diversity

- God has communicated to humanity through humanity without sacrificing human authorial integrity
- This implies an overarching coherence in the 66 documents
- It also indicates the expectation of diversity in the 66 documents
- Polarities of unity and diversity pose challenges to interpretation
E. An Understandable Document
- Presumptive implication  there is a divine intention that the interpreter should and will understand
- The Bible is an inclusive rather than exclusive book
- This should hearten the interpreter through any challenges
1
William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg and Robert L. Hubbard Jr. Introduction to Biblical
Interpretation (1993; rev. edn., Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2004), 144 (authors’ italics).
[Hereafter KBH.]
2
KBH, 146.
Immerse: Biblical Interpretation Seminar – Unit 01 – page 1
DISCUSSION
Your Best Defense of God’s Word
CASE STUDY: A non-Christian friend rather candidly criticizes in your hearing the conviction
that to believe the Bible alone is God’s word is arrogant and smacks of bigotry. “What gives
Christians the right to make such an exclusive claim? After all, there are many other religions
and other holy books aren’t there?”
THE TASK: How would you respond in a way that is 1) faithful to the Bible and 2) humbly
inviting?
UNIT 2
The Problem with “Just Applying” the Bible:
The Need for Hermeneutics
- “…without an organized approach or means to understanding, we would not be able to comprehend
anything.”1
- The reality of this is that experience bears out that our lives are filled by interpretive process
A. Intuition Rather than Deliberation

- The challenge—we do most of our interpretation intuitively and without conscious deliberation2
B. The Crisis of Failure or Impairment

- Misread communications are a burden upon us; properly read symbols of communication help to
correct understanding and effective function
C. Scripture
- For biblical interpretation the mandate is correct understanding—nothing less will do
- Unfortunately little systematic thought is given to the matter of method
D. What We Need
- with so much at stake, we must be quite conscious, deliberate and careful to “establish, explain and
demonstrate”3 precepts and methods for interpretation
II. BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS
A. The Terminology
- “hermeneutics” from verb hermēneuō (e`rmhneu,w)  “I explain, interpret or translate” (cf. Luke
24:27; John 1:42; 9:7; Heb. 7:2); noun hermēneia (e`rmhnei,a: f.)  “interpretation” or “translation”
(cf. 1 Cor. 12:10; 14:26)
- The word “hermeneutics” then denotes the process by which we understand what a
communication—whether written, oral or visual—“means”4
- Corley, Lemke and Lovejoy define hermeneutics as “the theory and principles of interpretation; …
correctly understanding the thought of an author and communicating that thought to others.”5
- This course will take the term “exposition” to describe “a method of elaborating the meaning of a
text as determined by exegesis and showing its contemporary relevance or application without
distorting or falsifying its original meaning….” 6 To put this another way:
EXPOSITION = EXEGESIS + APPLICATION
1
William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg and Robert L. Hubbard Jr. Introduction to Biblical
Interpretation (1993; rev. edn., Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2004), 4 (italics mine). [Hereafter
KBH.]
2
KBH, 4.
3
KBH, 5.
4
Two additional terms of interest: exegesis (evxh,ghsij: exēgēsis evxhgei/sqai: “to explain/interpret”
evx [out] + h`ge,omai [to lead/bring])  to draw something out of a text; eisegesis (eivsh,ghsij: eisēgēsis
eivshgei/sqai: eivj [in] + h`ge,omai [to lead/bring])  to put something into a text.
5
B. Corley, S. Lemke, and G. Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1996), 367. [Hereafter CLL.]
6
CLL, 364. For further discussion of the debate, see R.N. Soulen and R.K. Soulen, Handbook of
Biblical Criticism (3rd ed.; Louisville/London/Leiden: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 58.
B. Science and Art
- Hermeneutics: “… neither an art nor a science; it is both a science and an art.” 7
- “science” suggests method
- “art” indicates interpersonal, situational dimensions
- HOWEVER, we must admit that method/system do not rigidly give meaning without remainder
III. INTERPRETER
A. Taking Account of Ourselves

- Communications arise in historical and personal processes and circumstances, BUT so too do
interpreters
- We must take account of ourselves as part of the interpretive process
- It is a healthy admission that we do not stand outside the interpretive circle, but vitally within it
- Method calls for us to account for our “pre-understanding”
- If I don’t take account of the fact that my interpretation of a Bible passage is colored by my
background and experience, this could keep me from a clear sense of what it means
B. One Preacher, One Sermon, Many “Hearings”

- REMEMBER: “We often see things not as they are so much as we are.”
- Preachers and teachers intuitively know this reality as their listeners describe what they have “gotten”
from the content of the messages preached and taught
IV. WRITER, AUDIENCE AND TEXT
- Any communication is multifaceted, involving:
1) the communicator’s intended meaning

2) the meaning understood by the recipients
3) the meaning actually encoded in the communication itself8
- While we have great access to 3), the reality is that 1) and 2) are remote from us
- Yet greatest success in interpretation calls for us to be aware of all three elements in the
communicative process
A. “Decoding” the Communication Itself

- We must read and analyze the text of Scripture in literary context
- We must be aware that particular words have a range of meaning (Note the “tree” example in KBH,
9.):
Referential meaning: the word “tree” refers to  “the large leafy plant growing outside that
bears apples in fall”
Denotative meaning: a specific meaning of “tree”  a biologist’s specific, scientific
definition: “a woody perennial plant at least several feet high that has a single erect main stem
and side branches growing out of the stem”
Connotative meaning: a special sense of “tree” having emotional overtones positive/negative
 Peter says Jesus died on the “tree” (1 Pet. 2:24) it is more than a mere definition (Peter’s
use of the word also illustrates contextual meaning (here, context tells us “tree” means “the
cross”)
- Words communicate in context rather than in isolation—therefore, we have to focus on how the words
are “working” in the sentences and paragraphs in which they appear; we also have to be careful to
reckon with the different kinds of literature in which we’re reading the words
7
KBH, 5.
8
KBH, 8.
B. “Consulting” the Author and First Recipients
- Expanded consideration of context will deliver greater certainty of an accurate understanding of writer
and first recipients
- Q: How do we “consult” with them  we have to ask questions about the ancient biblical author and
his ancient readers and ask about the ancient world in which they lived
- This keeps us from the danger of anachronism—reading the Bible through a 21st century grid and
ignoring its antiquity
V. THE IMPACT OF DISTANCE
A. Distance in Time
- Our distance in time from the original written documents is very great
 The NT texts are some 2000 years old
 The OT texts are several millennia older than the NT!
- We must also be aware of the fact of gaps between the events themselves and the record of those
events
B. Distance in Culture
- There is also a huge gap culturally between Bible times and our own time
- Life patterns, customs, experiences, and convictions cannot simply be compared
- If we don’t account for cultural differences between our time and the times of the Bible, we risk
obscuring or distorting the meaning of the text
C. Geographical Distance
- Geographical naïveté can also blinker our understanding of the text of Scripture
- We must pursue a better sense of the physical “layout of the land”
D. Distance in Languages
- We speak modern languages; our Bibles are translations of the ancient texts
- The language of the events and the accounts of the OT and the NT are different from our own
VI. A FINAL WORD
“… any valid approach to interpretation must concern itself with two crucial dimensions:
(1) an appropriate methodology for deciphering what the text is about, and (2) a means of
assessing and accounting for the readers’ present situation as we engage in the interpretive
process.”9
9
KBH, 13.
DISCUSSION
The Need for Hermeneutics
TASK: Read 1 Samuel 1 and the article “Anorexia seen in biblical tale.” Answer
the following questions which illustrate the risk in “Just Applying” the Bible:
1. What is the eminent Dr. Schiff bringing to the task of his interpretation of 1
Samuel 1 as described in the article?
2. Does Dr. Schiff “bend” the text? In what ways?
3. How do you see the 1 Samuel text “pushing back” or challenging Dr.
Schiff’s interpretation?
1 Samuel 1:1
1 There was a certain man from Ramathaim, a Zuphite from the hill country of Ephraim, whose name was Elkanah
son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. 2 He had two wives; one was
called Hannah and the other Peninnah. Peninnah had children, but Hannah had none.
3
Year after year this man went up from his town to worship and sacrifice to the LORD Almighty at Shiloh, where
Hophni and Phinehas, the two sons of Eli, were priests of the LORD. 4 Whenever the day came for Elkanah to
sacrifice, he would give portions of the meat to his wife Peninnah and to all her sons and daughters. 5 But to Hannah
he gave a double portion because he loved her, and the LORD had closed her womb. 6 Because the LORD had closed
Hannah’s womb, her rival kept provoking her in order to irritate her. 7 This went on year after year. Whenever
Hannah went up to the house of the LORD, her rival provoked her till she wept and would not eat. 8 Her husband
Elkanah would say to her, “Hannah, why are you weeping? Why don’t you eat? Why are you downhearted? Don’t I
mean more to you than ten sons?”
9
Once when they had finished eating and drinking in Shiloh, Hannah stood up. Now Eli the priest was sitting on his
chair by the doorpost of the LORD’s house. 10 In her deep anguish Hannah prayed to the LORD, weeping bitterly. 11
And she made a vow, saying, “LORD Almighty, if you will only look on your servant’s misery and remember me,
and not forget your servant but give her a son, then I will give him to the LORD for all the days of his life, and no
razor will ever be used on his head.”
12
As she kept on praying to the LORD, Eli observed her mouth. 13 Hannah was praying in her heart, and her lips were
moving but her voice was not heard. Eli thought she was drunk 14 and said to her, “How long are you going to stay
drunk? Put away your wine.”
15
“Not so, my lord,” Hannah replied, “I am a woman who is deeply troubled. I have not been drinking wine or beer;
I was pouring out my soul to the LORD. 16 Do not take your servant for a wicked woman; I have been praying here
out of my great anguish and grief.”
17
Eli answered, “Go in peace, and may the God of Israel grant you what you have asked of him.”
18
She said, “May your servant find favor in your eyes.” Then she went her way and ate something, and her face was
no longer downcast.
19
Early the next morning they arose and worshiped before the LORD and then went back to their home at Ramah.
Elkanah made love to his wife Hannah, and the LORD remembered her. 20 So in the course of time Hannah became
pregnant and gave birth to a son. She named him Samuel, saying, “Because I asked the LORD for him.”
NOTE: For single copy/elctronic use only.
UNIT 3
A Hermeneutical Hat Rack
Context, Context, CONTEXT!
I. HISTORICAL-GRAMMATICAL METHOD
- The foundational issues and priorities in interpretation are critical

- Issues of the text (preservation, compilation, translation, interpretation through history) are also critical
- The objective in interpretation  textual meaning
- The challenge: to account for author, text and reader
- Historical-grammatical method has focus to history and grammar broadly understood
A. Historical Focus
- God’s word cannot be otherwise understood than in the light of history
- Historical-grammatical method  focus to where people lived (geography); patterns of mutual
association (society); tools, construction and art (material culture); expressions of ideas
(intellectual and religious culture)1
- Accessed through surviving artifacts—written records, archaeology and geography—and
conceptual models
B. Grammatical Focus
- Interest to the work words do in literary context
- Historical-grammatical method  focus to ancient range of word meanings (lexical); meaning in
context of work with other words (grammar); in literary forms (genre); and the “making of the
case” (discourse argument)
C. The Matter of the Reader

- Also need for the reader to take adequate account of him or herself
D. Three “Worlds” of Interest

- Out of this, three “worlds” of interest emerge:
1. The “world behind the text” (Author)
2. The “world within the text” (Text)
3. The “world before the text” (Reader)
II. BRUCE CORLEY’S SCHEMA2
- A moderately revised version of Corley’s schema for organizing the elements of the historical-
grammatical method
- “cubing the text” in terms of six key strategies for biblical interpretation
1
W.B. Tolar, “The Grammatical-Historical Method,” in Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive
Introduction to Interpreting Scripture, Corley, B., S. Lemke and G. Lovejoy, eds. (Nashville: Broadman
and Holman, 1996) 225.
2
B. Corley, “A Student’s Primer for Exegesis,” in Bibilical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive
Introduction to Interpreting Scripture, B. Corely, S. Lemke, G. Lovejoy, eds. (Nashville: Broadus, 1995) 1-
19.
NOTE: For single copy/elctronic use only.
A. “Cubing” the Text
1. The Diagram
2. The Diagram Explained
3. The Strategies Described
i. Setting – priority to answer questions of historical context

ii. Style – priority to pursue the literary forms
iii. Syntax – priority to discover the grammatical connections
iv. Semantics – priority to understand the meanings of key words
v. Summation – priority to grasp the argument the text makes
vi. Significance – priority to the message of the text for us
Immerse: Biblical Interpretation Seminar - Unit 03 - page 1
UNIT 3
SEVEN CONCISE STEPS IN EXEGESIS1
I. INTRODUCTION
- objective  how to exegete a passage

- theory to practice move can be difficult: 1) the student requires a finished paper, and 2) the pastor
requires a preachable sermon, not just a collection of research notes by “the deadline.”
- Not all genres lend selves to the method

- Letter materials easier to handle; Narrative—whether OT or NT—somewhat more difficult; poetry
lend itself less well
II. THE SEQUENCE OF STEPS
Step 1 – Read the passage several times in various translations.

- use several English translations (more literal or restrained dynamic equivalence; not paraphrases)
- We will use 2 Timothy 3:16-17.
1.1. Note and mark substantive differences among the translations

 Major variations may indicate exegetical issues
 Minor variations may only indicate style
 2 Timothy does show differences in how the text is rendered but these look like
translation choices
1.2. Check footnotes for manuscript variants in the originals

 this might account for the differences
 2 Timothy appears not to have any significant manuscript variants (a check in
several commentaries can confirm this
Step 2 – Map the boundaries of the passage by observing format markers in the translations.
- look at headings, paragraphing, and punctuation in the English translations
- Sections, paragraphs, and sentence give clues to structure and relationships
2.1. Observe the paragraphing and sentences

 translations differ in how they represent the text
 get some sense of this
 2 Timothy paragraphing and sentences generally stable across translations
2.2. Check the punctuation of an Interlinear

 Note translations closest to Hebrew/Greek. (Example: Eph. 1:3-14)
 Note punctuation – does it influence how parts of the test relate?
 2 Timothy punctuation generally stable across translations
Step 3. Construct a structural analysis of the passage and display it in graphic form.
- identify and visualize the “flow” of thought in the text
- mark the flow by a sentence flow or block diagram
- success here depends upon knowledge of English grammar
Adapted from Bruce Corley’s “A Student’s Primer for Exegesis,” in Biblical Hermeneutics: A
1
Comprehensive Introduction to Interpreting Scripture, B. Corely, S. Lemke, G. Lovejoy, eds. (Nashville:

Broadus, 1995) 1-19.
3.1. Follow the word order of a more formal translation (e.g., NASB)
 Arrange and revise text layout on a scratch pad
 Follow the conventions noted below
 We follow NASB and Greek-English Interlinear for 2 Timothy
3.2. Mark off sentence divisions with horizontal lines and tag them with Roman numerals
 This notes major textual divisions
 Three significant things said at 2 Timothy 3:16-17
3.3. Coordinate by lining up and subordinate by indentation

 Indicate main phrases (principal statements, assertions, and such) by coordination.2
 Indicate modifying phrases (what elaborates, explains, otherwise clarifies main phrases)
by indentation
 Main phrases designated “A;” modifying phrases by “B”
 See PowerPoint for 2 Timothy 3:16-17
3.4. Underline connections and otherwise highlight repetitions

 underlined words show grammatical linkages or relationships (2 Timothy “and,” “so
that”)
 note repeated phrases or words and/or repeated forms of words (e.g., participles; 2
Timothy has a repeated sequence of “fors” at v. 16)
Step 4 – Adapt an outline for the paper/sermon from the structural analysis of the text.
- expository papers should be well written: 1) not only readable and persuasive as prose; 2) its parts
should reflect the logic and the relationships in the text
- Expository sermons or teaching are no less concerned with the logic and the relationships of the text
- muddled understanding of how a text coheres  muddled paper and sermon
4.1. Restate the displayed text as brief topics in outline form

 Expository papers/sermons are powerful to the reader/hearer to the extent that they
disclose the content of the text
 note the verse boundaries for each major section and its subsections
 2 Timothy3:16-17, we have three major moves asserting all Scripture’s 1) nature as
divinely sourced and authoritative [God-breathed]; 2) its purpose in a broad utility
[profitable]; and 3) its result in an activist Christian capacity [adequate/equipped].
4.2. Fashion the big idea/theme and headings of the paper/sermon after the outline
 disciplined reflection as above, gives insight into the “big idea” of the text
 “big idea” is sub-served - everything clarifies or elaborates upon it
 “big idea” is key for introduction of expository paper; almost invariably it is the “heart”
of an expository sermon
 “big idea” of 2 Timothy 3:16-17 in its context (see 2 Timothy 3:1—4:5)  the
reasons why we must be people of the Book. No other document has the authoritative
nature of Scripture; no other document will serve the broad purpose of Scripture;
and no other document will have the powerful result of Scripture.
Step 5 – Develop the sections of the paper/sermon with a focus on syntax, semantics and summation.
- Most research & writing occurs at this point
- Press to understand grammar, lexical sense and logical argument
2
It may also be good to put these in bold capitals because it is in these main phrases that one often
finds the “big ideas” of the text.
5.1. Describe main verbs and their phrase/clause modifiers

 main verbs strike at the nerve center of the grammar
 modifiers indicate the ground, manner, extent of action, or in some other way qualify or
explain
 2 Timothy: verb “to be” must be supplied at verse 16 (“is”) and is found at verse 17
(“may be”); verb “to be equipped” is in perfect passive (“having been equipped”)
5.2. Define key words and repeated themes

 identify key words
 usually a number of lexical elements needing further clarification
 Explore the function of repeated phrases (e.g., “in Christ”)
 Much in 2 Timothy but “God-breathed” will certainly be one word of considerable
interest for further study, as will “profitable,” “adequate,” and “equipped.”
5.3. Trace the argument from one paragraph to another

 the context of a text ought not to be left hanging in the air
 Summarize how the “big idea” and its clarification connect with what precedes and
follows
 Here, your work from Steps 3 and 4 for 2 Timothy comes to full fruition; I would
follow the nature, purpose, result sequence as the argument
Step 6 – Introduce the paper with a focus on setting and structure.

- After the body of the exposition is finished, prepare an introduction
- Do this with the utmost care
6.1 Raise the reader’s interest in the text.

 it is vital to set stage, giving an overview of the text and issues—whether the introduction
is written or sermonic
 for sermons, stage setting is oral and probably more story-like—object is to engage the
hearer personally
 For 2 Timothy  how the lack of information or a document with proper
instructions can create problems—from the fairly mundane to the tragically
disastrous
6.2. Give attention to the historical context

 avoid introductory “over kill”
 give only what is relevant to a clear understanding of the text
 What shed’s light on text is desirable; what does not distracts
 For 2 Timothy 3:16-17: “What was going on in the Ephesian context where Timothy
was serving that resulted in such an urgent and forceful affirmation from Paul of
the Scripture
6.3. Sketch the literary form

 give a sense of both genre and narrative place
 this is very important to know
 2 Timothy has the ring of “final words” (Paul is old and imprisoned; threat on his
life is quite certain; he needs to ‘pass the torch’ to Timothy)
Step 7 – Conclude the paper/sermon with a focus on significance.

- for papers closing paragraphs should discursively review textual argument and highlight its theological
and pragmatic message
- ask questions of application here, sensitive to the “distance” of the text from the modern reader but
convinced of its intentional “reach” to the contemporary context in analogous applications
- for sermons, the above are not only important, they are essential
- the preacher will want prayerfully to elaborate objectives in keeping with the “big idea”
- make sure that they reflect cognitive (knowing/believing), affective (feeling/experiencing) and
behavioral (bodily doing/obeying) dimensions of true understanding.
7.1. In a few sentences summarize the truth claims and indicate their biblical theological role.
7.2. Briefly indicate the faith issues and their role in historical and systematic theology and in life.
- Some very practical encouragements can be given for believers to ‘put wheels on’ Paul’s
instruction for their own lives
And Finally…
“Approach exegesis with expectancy. The Spirit is our guide in the Word that “we
might know what God has graciously given us” (I Cor. 2:12).” 3
Further to this, God’s word will not return to him empty but will accomplish what he
desires and achieve the purpose for which God sent it (Isa. 55:11).
3
Corely, 18.
DISCUSSION
Seven Concise Steps in Exegesis
Using Matthew 28:18-20
SPECIFIC TASK: Your task in this Discussion is to collaborate together,

moving through the sequence of the “Seven Concise Steps in Exegesis”1 laid
out in the document Seven Steps (Focus on Steps 1 – 4). Using Matthew
28:18-20 as your source text, discuss and indicate your observations,
showing not only what you have discovered but also its significance.
Arrange for a person in your group to prepare a single transparency briefly
noting your findings.
Step 1 – Read the passage in several translations and the differences across
them.
Step 2 – Map the boundaries of the passage by observing format markers in

the translations. (2.1 paragraphs, punctuation; 2.2 English [original])
1
Adapted from B. Corley, “A Student’s Primer for Exegesis,” in Biblical Hermeneutics: A
Comprehensive Introduction to Interpreting Scripture, B. Corely, S. Lemke, and G. Lovejoy, eds.
(Nashville: Broadus, 1995) 1-19.
Step 3 – Construct a structural analysis of the passage and display it in
graphic form (3.1-2 sentence divisions & tagging; 3.3 coordinate &
subordinate).
Step 4 – Adapt an outline from your structural analysis of the text.

UNIT 4
How We Got the Bible
Text, Canon and Translation
TEXTUAL CRITICISM1
- “How did you get your Bible?” can be answered in a number of ways.
- It can be answered personally; it can be answered theologically; and it can be answered in terms of the
process of preservation through time from first writing
- Our interest is to explore this last way of answering the question
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Fallible Copyists
- We must contend with several realities: 1) first copies of the Bible have perished; 2) until the mid-
1400s the Bible was copied by hand (manuscript = manus + scriptus) and was subject to all the
weaknesses of the human body and mind; 3) there now exist 1000’s of MS 2 copies of Bible
documents
- The above does not undermine our affirmation of the reality of the Bible as word of God; it does
mandate a process that must be engaged to get to the Biblical originals through surviving MSS
B. Textual Criticism Defined

- The object of textual criticism is to recover the original text through a comparison and analysis of
the imperfect copies
- The process calls for us to 1) sift all the Biblical material and compare each MS; 2) detect errors
and changes; 3) determine which variant is more likely to represent the original
- Textual criticism is essentially a reversal of textual corruption
- NOTE: 1) the overwhelming majority of variants are relatively minor; 2) the important variants
are such that the NT text is 97%+ assured and the OT 90%+ assured;3 3) it must also be admitted
that there is variability in the practice of textual criticism (remember it is a science and an
artsomething like good detective work); 4) Textual Criticism calls for a basic knowledge of the
original languages
II. MAJOR MOVES IN TEXTUAL HISTORY
A. Hebrew Old Testament Textual History
1. Early Period—Composition to 400 BC

 We do not yet have MSS from this period
 There is, nevertheless, evidence of preservation and revision in the OT itself
 Preservation: 1) The OT has survived; 2) The OT mindset favored canonicity; 3)
Scribal practice throughout appears to reflect a conservative attitude to the OT text
1
Revised and supplemented from Michael W. Holmes, “Textual Criticism,” in Foundations for
Biblical Interpretation, D.S. Dockery, K.A. Mathews and R.B. Sloan, eds. (Nashville: Broadman and
Holman, 1994) 156-86.
2
MS = manuscript; MSS = manuscripts.
3
KBH, 122.
 Revision: 1) Ezra-Neh. (Neh. 8:8) shows the pastoral urgency for clarification; 2)
Parallel portions of the OT show variation; 3) There is an obvious contemporization
of what is archaic; 4) Revisions, nevertheless, show adherence to boundaries
2. Intermediate Period—400 BC to AD 70
 This period spans the time from the “end of prophecy” to the destruction of the
Temple (AD 70)
 It also shows the pattern of preservation and revision
 There are five variant text types discernable in the DSS,4 Book of Jubilees and NT
3. AD 70 to 1000
 There is a move away from the five text types toward textual stability
 It embraces a conservative and quality text (proto-MT; Babylonia?)
 From AD 600-1000, Jewish Scholars (Masoretes = “to hand down”) take especial
care to safeguard textual transmission
 Aaron Ben Asher copies the definitive MS in the 10 th century
4. AD 1000 to 16th century

 100s of MT MSS have survived from this period.
 In AD 1330, the Christian chapter numbering practice is adopted for the OT
5. 16th Century to Modern Day

 This is the period of the great printed Hebrew editions
B. Greek NT Textual History
1. First Three Centuries

 In this earlier period, there is a greater “freedom” in copying
 MS groups (families) begin to arise—each has its distinctive aspects
 Most of the variants in the MS traditions arise before the end of the 2 nd century AD
2. Seventh Century AD
 By the 7th century AD, the use of the NT Greek has all but disappeared except in the
Byzantine Empire
 The Byzantine text type comes to dominate as the type used by the Orthodox church
3. First Greek NT (1516)

 Erasmus prepares and publishes the first edition of the Greek NT
 He uses a handful of late Byzantine texts
 In his dedication he writes: “You have therefore the text now received by all.” (basis
for KJV being identified as from the TR = “textus receptus” or “received text”)
4. Westcott and Hort (1881)

 These two NT scholars build on others’ work
 They are the first to adopt an eclectic text5 which breaks with the TR
 Westcott and Hort indicated, in a clear and systematic way, the principles of textual
criticism
5. Modern Greek Texts

 Editing has gone on; more discoveries continue to be made into the 20 th century
4
DSS = Dead Sea Scrolls.
5
Eclectic text = the adopting of a text that is based, not upon the choice of a single textual family
of MSS, but upon a principled analysis of the whole textual tradition.
 The two most widely used Greek NTs:
1) Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece (27th edn)
2) United Bible Society’s Greek New Testament (4th edn)
 These two editions present essentially an identical text.
III. TYPES OF ERRORS6
A. Accidental Errors
- These errors result from the process of copying books and the mechanics of the copying process
- The text usually has no breaks and little if any punctuation: hence there can be problems of
skipping and duplicating
- The challenges of reading, remembering, and copying also render texts subject to error
- There is also the problem of basic human frailty
B. Intentional Errors
- Not all errors in the MS tradition were unconscious/innocent
- Copyists might alter the text for the purposes of: 1) harmonization; 2) updating; 3) “correction;” 4)
simplification; or 5) explanation
- We should add that while the errors reflect intent, they do not reflect malice to corrupt
IV. THE SOURCES
A. The Old Testament
1. Hebrew MSS
 Masoretic Text (MT)  the oldest MS of the MT is Leningrad B19a (L) and dates to
AD 1009
 Smaritan Pentateuch (SP)  2nd century BC; idiosyncratic theology reflected
 Desert Scrolls  these MSS date from the mid-3rd cent. BC to AD 135; they have
been found at Khirbet Qumran (DSS), Nahal Hever, Wadi Muraba‘at and Masada
 Minor Witnesses  silver rolls of Num. 6:24-26 dating to 7th or 6th cent. BC
2. Versions
 Septuagint (LXX)  a Greek translation of the Hebrew (dates c. 295-247 BC)
 Aramaic Targums  these are less helpful than the LXX
 The Old Latin (OL) and Vulgate (Vg)  these MSS are based on the LXX
 Syriac Peshitta  originates in Edessa (1st – 4th cent. AD) and probably based on the
LXX
B. The New Testament

- Unlike classical texts, the NT has a large number of MSS
- There are some 5,800 MSS in Greek; 10,000 MSS in Latin; and over 9,000 in other ancient
versions
- Result  Textual criticism is a sometimes complicated process
1. Greek MSS7
 Papyri  these are the earliest NT MSS
 They are called papyri after the writing material used (papyrus)
 These are among the oldest copies dating to 200 AD
6
See Holmes for fuller discussion.
7
Numbers of MSS in each category are based on recently available catalogues of the Institut für
neutestamentliche Textforschung (INTF) in Münster, Germany.
 Gothic “p” and Arabic superscript number designates the papri (e.g., p46)
 There are about 120 known MSS; most are fragmentary
 Uncials  are continuous text Greek MSS written on material other than papyrus
 They date from the 4th through 10th centuries
 “Uncial” = a style of Greek lettering similar to English capital letters
 There are about 322 known MSS
 Miniscules  get their name from the style of writing: i.e., small letters in a cursive
style
 Some 2907 MSS exist; some of these obviously fit into “families”
 Generally, they are later in time, but some can be quite important (1739)
 Lectionaries  these are books with selections from Scripture for worship and
reading
 Some 2,445 or so exist
 They are designated by the letter l or the abbreviation Lect.
 They represent a similar text to the miniscules
2. Ancient Versions
 In the 2nd century AD, the NT begins to be translated into other languages
 It is hard to know what the underlying Greek text is because of the translation
 The principle versions are: 1) Latin; 2) Syriac; 3) Coptic; 4) Others
3. Citations in Church Fathers

 Citations of early fathers give us insight into the variant renderings that were known
and generally where these renderings were found geographically and in time
 There are difficulties in telling sometimes if one is dealing with a quotation or an
allusion
 They help us in dating and localizing text-types
V. PRINCIPLES FOR FINDING THE ORIGINAL READING 8
A. The Fundamental Principle

- The variant most likely to be original is the one that best accounts for the existence of the others
B. External Evidence (NT here)

- categorizing MSS can be done because there are three9 broad text-types
1. Alexandrian Family/Text Type

 This text type is named for the fact that many MSS come from Egypt
 It existed well before the 2nd cent. AD
 It represents a carefully controlled and supervised transmission and copying process
2. Western Family/Text Type

 This text type is as old as the Alexandrian
 It is associated with “the West”
Supplemented from Holmes, “Textual Criticism,” 106-109.

8
James A. Brooks, “An Introduction to Textual Criticism,” in Biblical Hermeneutics: A

9
Comprehensive Introduction to Interpreting Scripture, Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke and Grant Lovejoy, eds.
(Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1996) 256: “Some scholars also identify a fourth type, the Caesarean,
but it is probably an early form of the Byzantine. Nobody has claimed originality for it.”
 It represents an uncontrolled copying process
3. Byzantine Family/Text Type

 This has come to be known as the “Majority Text” (80% of all MSS)
 It appears only in the 4th century AD
 The Byzantine is the largest and latest text-type
 It is least reliable for recovering the original
Another Key Principle: Weigh MSS, Don’t Count Them
Situation 1:
[X] (autograph)
X1 X2 X3 (good copies)
Y1 (later variant)
Situation 2:
[X] (autograph)
X1 X2 (good copies)
Y1 (later variant)
Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y7 Y8 Y9
- Other principles in determining the earliest reading by external evidence:
1) Prefer the oldest MS reading

2) Prefer the reading most widely attested in the MS tradition
3) Prefer the reading supported by greatest number of text types
C. Internal Evidence
- The following considerations of evidence internal to the documents are important in deciding for a
particular MS reading:
1) Prefer the shorter reading

2) Prefer the more difficult reading
3) Prefer the reading that suits the author’s style and diction
4) Prefer what fits the context best
5) Readings that disagree with parallel passages are more likely to be original
VI. EPHESIANS 1:1 – AN EXAMPLE
- for a particularly interesting example of the text critical issues and their impact upon a passage, see
Ephesians 1:1
- For helpful discussion, you should consult The Greek New Testament (4th edn.; Stuttgart: Deutsche
Bibelgesellschaft/United Bible Societies, 1994) 654 and Bruce M. Metzger, ed., A Textual
Commentary on the Greek New Testament (3rd ed.; United Bible Societies, 1971) 601.
CANON & CANONICAL CRITICISM
I. THE MOVE FROM BIBLICAL DOCUMENTS TO CANON
A. Canon
- The word “canon” means “rod”; it came to denote an established “series” or “list”
- The word was first used to describe the biblical documents in the mid-4th century AD—it indicates
a fixed list to which nothing can be added or subtracted
B. The Old Testament Canon

- Fact: No individual OT text speaks of a finished canon
- It is clear that several passages indicate an authoritative collection
1. The Law
 These are the first five books and they indicate God directing Moses to write (Exod.
17:14; 20:1; 24:4; Lev. 1:1; Deut. 31:9)
 People receive the writing as the Word of God (Exod. 24:3); they obey it as such
(Deut. 31:13)
 It is absolutely clear by 450 BC that Genesis to Deuteronomy are considered
authoritative
2. The Prophets
 The former prophets refers to Moses and the Pentateuch as authoritative (Josh. 1;1-
18; Judg. 2:1-15; 1 Sam. 12:6-15; 1 Kings 2:3; 8:56; 18-25)
 The latter prophets show the continued authority of Moses (5x); there are even more
references to the “law” and the “covenant”
 The prophets themselves show themselves to be God-ordained and speaking on
God’s behalf (thus says Lord)
3. The Writings
 The writings refer to Moses often and the Pentateuch dictates are determinative (Ezra
3:2; Neh. 8:1-14; 2 Chron. 8:13)
 The sayings of Solomon are noted as worth preserving
 Note especially the compilation process of the Psalter
4. “External” Attestation
 The Apocrypha (Ben Sirach) acknowledges the “Law/Prophets/Writings” (132 BC)
 The Maccabean revolt has a Scripture focus
 Qumran shows a strong interest in the OT writings
 The NT as well is suffused with the OT
C. The New Testament Canon
1. A Collection of Collections
 earliest list of NT books having all 27 is AD 367 (order: Gospels, Acts, General
Epistles, Paulines, Revelation)
 earliest 1st century indication of collection may be 2 Pet. 3:16
 Exclusive collections made in 2nd century
 Authorship and authority discussed in 2nd century
 Muratorian Canon (2nd to 4th century?)—distinguishes between books read in
worship and those read for private devotion
2. Variable Documents and Orders
 Certain apostolic documents don’t make it into NT canon (cf. references to
documents that apparently haven’t survived to us at 1 Cor. 5:9 and Col. 4:16)
 p46 (AD 200)—has Rom., Heb., 1 and 2 Cor., Eph., Gal., Phil., Col., 1 Thess. (prob.
2 Thess.)
 Some MS collections have non-canonical documents in them (5th cent. MS Codex

Alexandrinus = 1 and 2 Clement; 4th cent. MS Codex Sinaiticus = Barnabas,
Hermas)10
II. INCIPIENT CANON OR PROCESS
- Heresy, false writings, and persecution create a sense of urgency to canon, but even into 5 th century
canon is not settled in all Christian communities
- History emphasizes process rather than event character of canon a process that is “historical” rather
than “biblical”
- The move to canon is also not a matter of council decisions
- Carthage (AD 397) documents accepted because they had been accepted
III. CANONICAL CRITICISM
A. History
- Canonical criticism is a relatively recent approach
- It treats the NT documents as components of the completed body of the Holy Scripture
- The big question at issue: How is the text affected by its canonical position?
- Canonical criticism originated out of OT/intertestamental work and concerns about the inadequacy
of the Historical-Critical method.
B. Main Practitioners
- Major proponents: Brevard Childs; James Sanders
- Brevard Childs becomes interested in 1964—he argues for a theological exegesis that considers
the wider canonical context; in 1984 he writes New Testament as Canon and explores the
implications of the final form the NT took (the key emphasis is on the final canonical product)
- James Sanders emphasizes canonical process; he asks, “How did the community modify the
sacred text in various crises (emphasis here is to the use of the literature by the community); there
is here no single stable meaning
IV. CRITIQUE OF CANONICAL CRITICISM
A. Strengths
- This methodology affirms the integrity of the biblical documents in their “canonical shape”
- It shows an aware of differences, but more interested in commonalities
- It affirms the equal authority of all the documents (there is no canon in canon)
- This method is offered as bridge between biblical and systematic theology
10
Note also the variable orders for the Gospels:
Irenaeus, Athenasius, Murat.Can. Matt.-Mark-Luke-John (historical?)
Clement of Alexandria Matt.-Luke-Mark-John (Syn/John?)
Old Latin Matt.-John-Luke-Mark (apostles 1st?)
Occasionally one finds John-Matt.-Luke-Mark (apostles & genealogies 1st?)
B. Weaknesses
- The Scripture documents themselves, and not their canonical order, are inspired; the canon “a
collection of authoritative texts” not an “authoritative collection of authoritative texts”
- Sanders’ work on canonical process turns text transparent
V. AN EXAMPLE – PSALM 1 & 150 AND

“CANONICAL SENSITIVITY”
- The Psalter is not a single document but, like Proverbs, a “collection.”

- Whereas in single biblical documents or in the later ordering of different biblical documents there may
be danger in a canonical approach in interpretation, the sense of a very early and careful collection and
ordering of the Psalms is evident.
- It is not only a good idea to ask, “What does this Psalm mean?” but also to ask, “Is there something to
be learned from where this Psalm is located in the collection? Is it working beyond its boundaries?”
- The above is a helpful approach which we might call “canonical sensitivity” or “restrained canonical
criticism”
- Students are directed to consult Derek Kidner’s very helpful comments upon the structure of the
Psalter in the first volume of his commentary on the Psalms. 11
11
D. Kidner, Psalms 1-72 (Downers Grove: IVP, 1973), 4-7
TRANSLATIONS
- Important carefully to reflect on a number of issues when choosing a translation

- Translations reflect decisions and priorities and an approach to the task
- You must take time to research before you decide
- What is the difference between a “version” and a “translation”?
version = an edition of the Bible that builds upon the language and style of a previous translation
or version in the same language
translation = an edition of the Bible that proceeds directly from the original languages of the text
without conscious influence of an earlier version
A. Translation Technique
- Formal equivalence  the interest is more in a word for word translation (equality with original)
- Dynamic/functional equivalence  the interest is more in a phrase-for-phrase translation (smooth
& contemporaneous English)
- Paraphrases  “expand” the translation to include commentary/explanation
- John 1:1a:
NRSV: “In the beginning was the Word.”
Phillips: “At the beginning God expressed himself.”
Living Bible Paraphrased: “Before anything else existed, there was CHRIST.”12
- Most translations/versions can be set into an approximate relationship relative to one another
along the continuum from more extreme Formal Equivalence to more extreme
Dynamic/Functional Equivalence. Soulen and Soulen13 give the following sequence:
FORMAL ASV, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, NIV, NEB, TNIV, JB, CEB, TEV (GNB), CEV, NLB, LB, The Message DYNAMIC
B. Committee vs. Individual Translation?

- Prefer a committee translation over an individual translation for study and exposition purposes
- Use several translations if you cannot access the original languages
C. Making a Choice
- Which translation/version is best? The answer depends somewhat upon what purpose you have in
mind
- Jerry Camery-Hoggatt recommends the following:
For rapid reading: you might prefer a paraphrase over a formal equivalent
For detailed study: you would prefer a formal equivalent or mediating translation/version
For witnessing: it depends very much upon the person you are talking to
For worship: functional equivalency translations could possibly be preferred 14
12
Soulen and Soulen, Handbook of Biblical Criticism, 151.
13
Soulen and Soulen, Handbook of Biblical Criticism, 222f.
14
Camery-Hoggatt, Reading the Good Book Well, 67f.
DISCUSSION
Do I Need to be a Textual Critic?
THE CASE STUDY: Having been introduced to textual criticism you

might feel like saying, “Well, thankfully, the work of textual criticism has
been done by the experts so I don’t have to bother with it.” Consider the
following scenario:
You’ve just begun a Home Bible Study on the Gospel of Mark with a
group of young Christians and new converts. You wisely asked the
attendees to read through the entire Gospel and familiarize themselves
with its content as “homework” before the first study on chapter 1. When
you ask them how it went at the first gathering, a recently joined new
believer (whom you personally led to the Lord) says, “Actually I’m quite
upset. My Bible has a slash after verse 8 and a note that reads: ‘The most
reliable early manuscripts omit Mark 16:9-20.’ Is this only in my Bible or
is it in every Bible? What does it mean; are verses 9-20 part of the Bible
or aren’t they?”
YOUR TASK: Having heard the introductory presentation on textual

criticism, if you were the Bible study leader (and a Christian mentor and
friend!), how would you answer his/her question in a way that was both 1)
accurate to the realities at a simple enough level, and 2) pastorally sensitive
to young faith? Discuss this with your colleagues.
NOTE: For single copy/electronic use only
UNIT 5
The Implication of Coming to the Text “As You Are”:
Interpreter and Spirit
I. THE PLACE OF THE INTERPRETER
A. Qualifications
- “qualifications” in interest of “valid interpretations”1 of Bible
- Reasoned faith  belief and trust in God; this is foundational for full comprehension; but it is not
an absolute guarantee of accuracy
- All other things being equal, the believing interpreter is able to understand and portray the true
significance of the message—(s)he knows it “from the inside”
- Obedience  the commitment not only to apply oneself wholly to text, but the text wholly to
oneself (J.A. Bengel)
- What a text “meant” reaches only halfway; what it “means” in cognitive, affective, and behavioral
terms  obedience
- Commentaries and sermons/studies often “fail” here
- Illumination  a “dynamic comprehension of the significance of Scripture and its application to

life”2 through the Holy Spirit’s indwelling.
- “We have not received the spirit of the world bu the Spirit who is from God, that we may
understand what God has freely given us. …The man without the Spirit does not accept the things
that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them,
because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Cor. 2:12, 14)
- To be without the Spirit is to experience multiple disadvantages
- Christian Community  Christian growth and salvation have far too long been mistakenly thought
as exclusively individual
- There no such thing as a Christian in isolation from others in Biblical theology
- Cyprian: “No salvation outside of the church.” (!?!) is a correct statement if it is seen that God is
saving a people and salvation has to do with becoming a part of the people of God
- The community serves as a “check” against mistaken interpretations and is the “needful context”
of understanding
- Appropriate methods  no amount of prayer/fasting is a substitute for good methodological

discipline and hard work
- There must be a both/and mindset to the above rather than either/or
B. Coordination
- The qualified interpreter embracing Scripture on it presuppositional terms provides the best and
only way to true understanding, adequate description and proper application.
II. PRE-UNDERSTANDING
A. Definition
- “Pre-understanding” = what the interpreter brings to the task of interpretation out of his/her own
personal historical conditioning
- Pre-und. is part of identity and a “given” beginning place of the interpreter
1
KBH, 135.
2
KBH, 139.
- It consists in 1) information; 2) attitudes; 3) ideological commitments; and 4) methodological
approaches brought to the interpretative task3
B. Hermeneutical Spiral
- A key question: what happens to pre-understanding in the interpretative enterprise?
- Unbending pre-understanding rejects the text (e.g., ideological criticism) or presses upon it
interpretations foreign to it  distortion/misapplication
- Pliable pre-understanding is itself confirmed and/or changed  potential for God-honoring life
change
- NOTE: in the dialogue/dance between interpreter and Scripture, the text should “leads”
III. THE SPIRIT
A. The Extremity of the Enlightenment

- The Rationalistic, mindset of the Enlightenment  treat the Scripture as naturally-formed and
bearing witness to only natural events
- Deny the Spirit’s reality and work in creation and inspiration and one denies the Spirit’s existence
and work in illumination and interpretation
B. The Extremity of Mystical Pietism

- The opposite excess  a kind of mystical pietism that asserts the Spirit’s work apart from/against
study
- Illumination can be hindered by wrong approaches to Scripture
- claim of Spirit’s illumination against careful interpretive method = lazy, dangerous, and wrong
C. Spirit and Interpretive Method

- Assert the reality of supernatural and triune God’s personal intervention into warp and woof of
material reality from “outside” in saving acts and speech
- The above is the necessary and reasonable presupposition to a proper reading and apprehension of
Scripture
- H.C.G. Moule: “the blessed Spirit is not only the true Author of the written Word but also its
supreme and true Expositor.”
- Right method is critical to understanding, but apart from the Spirit in the interpreter, no amount of
method will deliver true understanding
- Stephen Fowl: “we cannot expect to be transformed into communities of wise readers of Scripture
apart from the work of the Holy Spirit.”4
IV. THE SPIRIT’S ROLE5
KBH gives the following list of assertions from Roy B. Zuck’s article which explores and delimits the
relationship of the Holy Spirit in the task of interpretation:
1. The Spirit does not give new revelation on a par with Scripture
2. The Spirit does not guarantee infallible interpretation
3. The Spirit does not give one person new insights that no one else has
3
D.S. Ferguson cited in KBH 154.
4
S.E. Fowl, “The New Testament, Theology, and Ethics,” in Hearing the New Testament:
Strategies for Interpretation, ed. J.B. Green (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans/Carlisle: Paternoster, 1995) 408f.
5
R. Zuck, “The Role of the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics,” Bibliotheca Sacra 141 (1984) 121-129;
KBH 503f.
4. Without the Spirit, the unregenerate may have some cognitive sense of the Scripture but will
refuse to apply it adequately to their lives
5. Understanding is not the exclusive domain of biblical scholars
6. Spiritual devotion in the interpreter is crucial
7. Lack of spiritual preparedness hinders accurate interpretation
8. The Spirit is not a substitute for diligent study
9. The Spirit is not a substitute for quality study aids
10. The Spirit does not override common sense and logic
11. The Spirit does not normally give sudden intuitive flashes of insight into the meaning of Scripture
12. The Spirit’s role in interpretation is included in but not identical with illumination
13. The Spirit doe not make all of the Scripture equally clear
14. The Spirit does not ensure comprehensive understanding

UNIT 6
The Implication of Coming to the Text “As You Are”:
Authority, Obedience and Method
I. INTRODUCTION
- A FACT of biblical interpretation  No method is perfect!

- The objective we should pursue is a greater intimacy with and certainty in interpreting the
Scriptures
- Clarity as to the content and intention of the text permits us a more AUTHORITATIVE
communication and a more confident application
A. Inherent and Ascribed Authority

- inherent authority: authority that is native to something/one
- ascribed authority: authority that is given to someone/thing
B. Authority and the Bible

- Interpretive method does not relate to or affect Scripture’s intrinsic authority (Scripture has that
anyway: 2 Tim. 3:16)
- Interpretive method relates to the matter of extrinsic authority; it is a matter of true understanding
and obedience
II. AUTHORITY AND OBEDIENCE
- Affirming scriptural authority is all about being ready to change our understanding on the basis of
helpful new information/perspectives
- Hermeneutical decisions and refinement  fuller obedience (Matt. 7:21, 24-27; James 1:19-25)
III. AUTHORITY AND INTERPRETIVE METHODS
- some methods have greater potential to disturb and others less so (e.g., Textual Criticism—less;
radical Feminist Biblical Interpretation—much more so)
- Several helpful principles should be kept in mind:
A. Separate Methodologies from Skeptical Presuppositions

- a method may be quite salvageable but its inventors/practitioners may have developed/used it out
of hostile presuppositions/motives
- an example of this is source criticism
- people’s wrong assumptions/uses of a method don’t necessarily disqualify a method
B. Methods that Clarify Author’s Intention in Writing to the First Readers are Desirable
- this statement affirms scriptural authority
- authority does not reside in whether we know who wrote the biblical documents (e.g., Jonah,
Gospels)
- authority is not compromised if the documents show the author to be using an accepted convention
(e.g., reported speeches)
C. Scriptural Authority Resides in the Canonical Texts, Not in Real or Supposed Earlier Forms
- while it is good to know about the processes by which the biblical documents came to be,
hypothetical sources or earlier stages are not “more authoritative” than the canonical texts
- this holds even for documents referred to in the OT and NT which we do not possess
- this also holds in the matter of background studies or sociological approaches to the Bible
D. When Doing Scholarly Research, Allowing for Suspended Judgment and Paradox is Appropriate
- that God permitted His word to come through human agency does not mean there is error
- equally, it does not mean that every question we have can be answered—the documents have their
own terms of reference and implicit intentions
- interpretive methods can help us along the way; but not necessarily all the way—we need to be
prepared to live with tension and suspend final judgment on various issues where there is
insufficient clarity
- Critical methods can clarify for better obedience (extrinsic authority)

- BUT methods do not increase/decrease the Scriptures’ inherent authority and do not disclose
material of comparable or greater authority
IV. THE PRACTICAL IMPLICATION OF “BIBLICAL” AUTHORITY
- It is a danger to hold some parts of the Bible over others; this establishes a “canon with a canon”
through neglect, habit, or intentional method. Scripture is not a matter of picking and choosing
- Examples of the danger: talk of Paul’s “main letters”; seeing Paul as more important than the rest
of the NT; consistent choices/avoidances in preaching, teaching and personal devotion
“Apply yourself wholly to the text; apply the text wholly to yourself.”
—John Albert Bengel
- The true expression of a true conviction of the authority of Scripture is a life increasingly more
fully lived in obedience to it.
NOTE: For single copy/electronic use.
UNIT 7
Tools of the Trade
I. INTRODUCTION
I’d like to talk a bit about the “Tools of the Trade” when it comes to biblical interpretation. Now it’s pretty
obvious to anyone who has ever gone into a Christian bookstore and even more so the biblical studies and
theology sections of a bookstore like the ones at Trinity Western University or Regent College, that there
are a lot of resources on offer—in fact it can be a bit bewildering and not a little intimidating. I think we all
know that when it comes to literal tool boxes, most folks are perfectly happy to have a small but quite
strategic collection of tools for doing essential projects around the house—they’ll have a hammer, saw, a
screw driver with multiple heads, and maybe a few wrenches and pliers. Other folks will accumulate a
more ambitious collection of tools, including smaller power tools because they want a broader range of
options to tackle project before calling someone to rescue them. And then there are the folks who become
professionals—they’re the ones with big garages or work rooms that are filled with large and sometimes
quite expensive collections of quite specialized tools. They’re the ones that get called when there’s a tricky
or complicated project.
I thought I’d bring a few of the basics along to show you what’s on offer and to demystify the whole matter
of possible tools for the hermeneutical toolbox.
II. THE BIBLE ITSELF
A. Biblical Texts – in the Original and in Translation

Obviously, we’ve talked a bit about the biblical documents in the original Hebrew and Greek. The course
textbook describes different resources that a person who knows the original languages can get hold of on
pages 506-508.
Two that I might mention are the Biblica Hebraica edited by Rudolph Kittel and the United Bible Society’s
Greek New Testament. In both cases, you can see that these volumes not only contain the text of the
scriptures, they also note in the footnotes variant readings of the text.
Interlinear Bibles provide a very literal word for word English translation of the biblical text standing in a
word for word relation directly beneath the Hebrew or Greek words and phrases they translate. Typically
there will be a smoother translation into English in a running column down the side of the page.
We’ve talked about parallel Bibles. There are also resources that will set the four Gospels in parallel to one
another so that a person can cross compare the different accounts regarding the life and ministry of Jesus
for differences and similarities. These are called Harmonies of the Gospels.
B. Word Dictionaries (Lexicons  from lex meaning word)

When someone wants to find out what a word means in a modern language, they’ll typically look it up in a
dictionary (either a physical one or electronically). The entry for that word will show the number of broader
categories of that word’s usage and a particular aspect of its sense in each case, sometimes even using the
word in a sentence as an example. Of course, the Bible is a collection of ancient texts and so you would
need to look up the word in a dictionary that gives the ancient range of possible usages. This is what we
have in a Hebrew/English and Greek/English Lexicons.
C. Theological Dictionaries
A theological dictionary will discuss theologically significant words found in the Old and New Testament.
A number of these are featured in the course textbook at pages 512-515. Some will discuss the theological
significance of the words in the original languages like the multivolume Theological Dictionary of the Old
Testament and the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Others, like the three volume New
International Dictionary of New Testament Theology will be careful to help those without the biblical
languages understand the full discussion.
D. Concordances
A concordance is a volume that is organized according to the alphabetical order of the words occurring in
the Bible or a Testament. It quotes the line in which the word occurs and gives in sequence the location of
the word in the Bible by book, chapter and verse. This sort of resource allows you to study every use of an
individual English word or phrase as it occurs throughout the Bible and discover what Hebrew or Greek
word it corresponds to. Strong’s and Young’s Analytical Concordances are two older examples of English
concordances based upon the KJV. There are concordances in the original languages of the Bible as well
as for other English versions or translations (NASB, NIV).
II. DICTIONARIES, ENCYCLOPEDIAS & ATLASES
A. Dictionaries and Encyclopedias

There are many different kinds of Bible dictionaries and encyclopedias. They provide articles on an
amazing range of subjects related to Scripture. They range from single volume dictionaries like the
HarperCollins Bible Dictionary (I have an older edition) to multivolume dictionaries, like the Zondervan
Pictorial Dictionary and the Interpreter’s Dictionary. Some are largely text, but others are amazingly rich
in color photographs, maps, charts, tables and schematic diagrams to help the reader to best understanding.
The three volume Illustrated Bible Dictionary is a wonderful example of this.
B. Atlases
An atlas will give you a geographical sense of the world of the Bible. It will provide maps and descriptions
of physical features (rivers, mountains and such), plants and animals, as well as the territory of nations and
the travel and/or settlement of various individuals and groups. I have used Aharoni and Avi-Honah’s
Macmillan Bible Atlas for many years, though it has been updated and enlarged several times.
III. HISTORY AND BACKGROUNDS
There are numbers of volumes that can introduce you to the history of Bible times, telling you not only
about what was going on in the OT and NT but also about the wider world in which the events of biblical
record occurred. They can help you to appreciate both the context and sometimes even give helpful insights
into what would otherwise be quite puzzling. The textbook describes any number of such helpful resources
on pages 520-528. Craig Keener has provided a great Bible resource in his IVP Bible Backgrounds
Commentary to the New Testament which helps answer many questions about the culture, customs, laws
and practices that are noted in the NT. Walton, Mathews and Chavalas have done the same thing with the
IVP Bible Backgrounds Commentary to the Old Testament.
IV. COMMENTARIES
Finally, I’d like to talk a little bit about commentaries. There are single volume commentaries of the whole
Bible, there are multi-volume series of commentaries in the OT and NT, and there are individual
commentaries. In fact, there is an embarrassing wealth of resources, so much so that a person is hard
pressed to decide.
Levels of difficulty – popular/intermediate/advanced.
History/application?
Series or individual?
Any good roadmaps? D.A. Carson and Tremper Longman III.

Immerse: Biblical Interpretation Seminar – Unit 08 page 1
UNIT 8
Cube Face 1: Setting – Asking Historical Questions
I. PRIORITY
- The priority in considering “setting” is to answer questions of historical context

- Of interest is the historical context of the events and circumstances recorded
- There should also be an interest in the historical context of the author and original readers of the
document(s) being considered
- The pursuit of as accurate an accounting of historical context as possible is founded in the reality that
the Biblical texts are ancient records of ancient events and so must be understood against the backdrop
of their native context
II. INTEREST
A. Chronology
- At what time in history did the events themselves occur?
- At what time in history was the account of the events set in writing?
B. Archaeology
- What material artifacts (e.g., tools, art, architecture) have been preserved to us that might shed
light upon our understanding of the particular passage in question?
C. Geography
- Geography has to do with the location and distribution of individuals and the earth features among
which they lived
- Focus to the geography of the people and events of the biblical records
- Focus to the geography of the documents in terms of their place of origin and intended destination
- Be careful to consider the possible interaction between location, earth features (or forces) and
peoples
D. Culture
- What was the way of life of the peoples of the Old and New Testaments?
- Ask about ideas, objects and ways of doing things as expressed in arts, beliefs, customs,
inventions, language, technology, and traditions
- NOTE: In this and the following three categories it is also important to account for the fact that
the Scriptures are best understood against the background of contemporary ancient near eastern
cultures which might allow for close and helpful comparisons and contrasts
E. Literature
- The documents of the OT and NT are not the only documents that we have to hand
- Judaism generated a literature beyond the canonical documents
- There is also a wealth of literary production that forms a broader context to the biblical documents
in the ancient near east
- How might these help us better to understand the biblical documents?
F. Society
- What were the patterns and networks of association between individuals, groups and institutions in
antiquity?
- What institutions might have formalized those patterns and networks of association?
G. Political Institutions
- What were the formal institutions of governance in antiquity at the time of the biblical
events/documents?
- How might this help us to understand better the records?
III. RESOURCES
- Commentaries (i.e., both introductions and discussion of specific passages)

- Introductions to the OT and NT
- Bible Atlases
- Dictionaries and Encyclopedias
- Histories
- Specialist studies
- Check the annotated bibliography of resources at the back of the KBH textbook
IV. A FEW CAUTIONS
A. Weaknesses
- There is a danger of viewing the unique realities of spiritual experience from an entirely human
frame of reference
- There is danger in importing paradigms forged in the modern context which do not reflect at all
the context or dynamics of antiquity
- There is a temptation to trim evidence so that it fits
- There is a general danger of reductionism (explaining away the presence of the divine as nothing
but historical or social scientific mechanism)
B. Strengths
- Keeping a view to historical context helps to distinguish between our own life context and the life
context of the biblical records (REMEMBER: Our interest is to draw out material; not to inject it
into the text!)
- There is potential to help clarify what is going on in the Biblical text
- Historical sensitivity acknowledges the fact of distance and that ancient cultures are highly
complex
V. ACTS 16 WITH AND INTEREST TO HISTORICAL CONTEXT
A. Acts 16 the “Usual” Way

- Paul and Silas dragged before officials; the trial is a farce
- Kangaroo court: trumped up charges; howling mob, weak-kneed magistrates  leads to unfair,
harsh, illegal verdict and punishment
- Difficulties with this picture: Why, if the apostles are Romans, don’t they claim their citizen rights
at the “Roman” (i.e., at the earliest possible) time? Some say, they don’t because Paul is not a
citizen (?!)  The implication is that Luke was ignorant of the dynamics of Roman citizenship or
created a fictional Paul (?!)
- Solution: look to the dynamics of social status and legal privilege in antiquity, how trials were
conducted, and ask what were the priorities of Paul this will generate solutions
B. Acts 16 with Sensitivity to “How Things Worked” in Antiquity
Figure 1 – 1st Century AD Metal Stocks Found in the Gladiator’s

Barracks at Pompeii1
1
With this metal version of stocks, prisoners’ ankles would first be placed between the ‘teeth’ of
the frame, then the long rod would be slotted through the holes at the top of each tooth securing the
prisoners against escape. A jailor might “innovate” the security, spreading prisoners’ feet wide apart with
several teeth spaces between. This was a form of torture. Cf. B.M. Rapske, The Book of Acts and Paul in
Roman Custody (AICS, 3; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans/Carlisle: Paternoster, 1994).
Figure 2 – Letter of Pliny to Tiro on His Appointment to a Second

Proconsulship2
Figure 3 – Factors Influencing the Treatment of Accused Persons3
2
Pliny’s letter to Tiro (Ep. 9.5) on the latter’s succession to a second proconsulship. Translation in
P.D.A Garnsey, Social Status and Legal Privilege in the Roman Empire (Oxford: Clarendon, 1970), 77f.
3
The dotted lines indicate “best” and “worst” case scenarios for an accused person. For example,
a “worst” case scenario would see a low status accused (without some or all of the ancient status markers
noted at the top of the figure) who has committed a serious offense (serious in itself or relative to the status
of the victim) against a high status plaintiff (possessing most or all of the ancient status markers noted at
the top of the figure). This would press the magistrate to render a harsher verdict or call for a more
close/severe confinement for the prisoner (note the range of confinement possibilities on the extreme right
of the figure). Despite legislation, magistrates were not immune to corrupting influences (such as the
money, influence, or power of one or the other of the parties) which might cause them to subvert even the
ancient course of justice. For an extensive consideration of the influence of rank and status upon the course
1) The magistrates act fairly
2) The charges have merit
3) The accusers have merit
4) The accused are of no account
5) The crowd plays a legally appropriate role
6) Punishment and custody are appropriate to the supposed status and crimes of the accused
7) Paul’s non-claim of citizenship makes sense
8) Paul’s late citizenship claim makes sense
of Roman justice, see P.D.A Garnsey, Social Status and Legal Privilege in the Roman Empire (Oxford:
Clarendon, 1970).
Immerse: Biblical Interpretation Seminar - Unit 08 – page 1
DISCUSSION
How Setting Informs Haggai 1
THE TASK: Engage in a discussion with your colleagues about how

answering questions of Setting could open Haggai 1:1-15 to a better
understanding. Silently read the passage. As you do, list the questions you
would like to get answers on? Why might the answers be helpful? Share
what you’ve discovered with your discussion colleagues.
Verse & question you would ask. Suspected helpfulness?

Immerse: Biblical Interpretation Seminar - Unit 08 – page 1
UNIT 9
Cube Face 2: Style 1 – Biblical Poetry
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Poetry in the Bible1
1. Old Testament
 1/3 of the OT is poetic in form
 Fully Poetic: Psalms, Prov., Song, Lam., Obad., Micah, Nahum, Hab., Zeph.
 Largely Poetic: Job, Isa., Hosea, Joel, Amos, ½ of Jer.
 Some Poetic: Gen., Ex., Num., Deut., Judges, I and II Sam., Eccl., Ezek., Dan., Zech.
 No Poetic: Lev., Ruth, Ezra, Neh., Esth., Hag., and Mal.
 A diagram that shows the tendency to poetic expression in the OT:
LESS Law  Prophets  Writings MORE

POETRY POETRY
2. New Testament
 NT has poetic sections with strong Hebraic style
 Jesus’ epigrammatic teaching
 Hebraic style poetry: Luke 1 and 2 and Revelation
 NT hymns (e.g., John 1:1-18; Phil. 2:6-11; Col. 1:15-20)
 more general poetic structures and devices throughout the NT
 BUT poetry far less significant in NT
B. Poetry Defined and Hebrew Poetry Distinguished

- Poetry generally 1) tends to more terseness, vivid words, and structure than prose, and 2) engages
the reader through images and appeals to feeling, emotion and experience
- comparisons between English and Hebrew is not entirely helpful because there are some
significant differences
- Hebrew poetry in Bible was not fully appreciated until fairly recently
- OT poetry is unlike classical, European, and even later Jewish poetry
II. THE SOUNDS OF HEBREW POETRY
A. Rhyme and Meter

- English Rhyme = pairing words with virtually identical sounds, at the end of successive or
alternating lines
- English Meter = rhythmic alternation between accented and unaccented syllables in lines
- Hebrew rhyme  lacks “English” end-rhyme

- occasionally uses end-rhyme in final sounds of successive lines using suffixes or through word-
pair rhyme. Consider the example provided in your text from Isa. 22:5 which has rhymed words:
Kî yôm mehûmâ umebûsâ umebûkâ

For it is a day of tumult, trampling, turmoil.
- There is much debate re. whether Hebrew poetry has regular meter
- KBH argue for free rhythm = “the flexible use of accented syllables within certain broad limits.”2
1
The following presentation essentially summarizes the work of N.K. Gottwald, “Poetry, Hebrew,”
Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962) 3:829-838 and KBH 273-319.
- No matter how many accents per line, each line/pair expresses either a complete thought or two
related thoughts
- lines of couplets = roughly equal length
- accented syllables have at least one intervening unaccented syllable
- parallel lines will not normally exceed four; and certain patterns more prevalent
- Conclusions:
1) this cautions against making alterations to the text to make it “fit.”
2) reading a literal English translation with sensitivity to rhythm will permit a deeper insight
and measured conclusions
B. The Sounds of Poetic Words

- even if you don’t know Hebrew, it is good to keep in mind that poetic effects in Hebrew are also
created through sounds
- Assonance = creating memorable poetic unity through words having the same or similar vowel
sounds
- assonance may be simple (Jer. 49:1) or more complex (Job 9:16b)
- Alliteration = repetition of the same/similar-sounding consonants within a poetic unit with a view
to unity and emphasis
- Alliteration may be of single sounds (Psalm 127:1b), similar sound sequences over parallel lines
(Job 14:2), or sound over extended series of lines (Joel 2:15-16a)
- Note combinations of Assonance and Alliteration (Jer. 1:10; Isa. 5:1)
- Wordplay (= pun, paranomasia) linkage of two or more words

- may differ in one of three consonants (Isa. 5:7), alteration of letters in roots (Psalm 6:10 [11]),
changes in vowels of words with the same consonants (Jer. 1:11-12), the same word with different
meanings (Eccl. 4:1); or simple word repetition (Isa. 5:1)
- Onomatopoeia = words whose sound imitates the sounds of the actions they portray (Judges 5:22)
- THE KEY QUESTION: “What meaning or significance does the poetic sound stand in service
of?”
III. THE STRUCTURE OF HEBREW POETRY
A. Parallelism
- parallelism  simple repetition or contrast of members; rather, it is
…that phenomenon whereby two or more successive poetic lines dynamically strengthen, reinforce, and
develop each other’s thought. As a kind of emphatic additional thought, the follow-up lines further define,
specify, expand, intensify, or contrast the first.3
- Hebrew parallelism “deepens” the meaning

- A rule of thumb = think “complexity”
- In Hebrew poetry a line is called a stich:
1) stich = single line of poetry
2) distich = two lines (couplet)
3) tristich = triplet
- A distich is roughly synonymous (Psalm 77:1) or contrasting (Prov. 14:34)
2
KBH, 277.
3
KBH, 284.
- ellipsis  2nd (or 3rd) stich omits items found in 1st (Amos 8:10) or has an added element not in 1 st
stich (Psalm 50:4)
B. How Parallelism Works

- Parallelism usually between extremes of equality in members (a b b’ a’: Prov. 19:5) and no
equality (a b: Psalm 115:18)
- Between the above extremes, parallelism may work through grammatical factors (Psalm 6:5[6];
Prov. 3:1), lexical-semantic factors (word relationships) and phonologic factors (sound
relationships)
C. Types of Parallelism
- six general categories of interrelationship in Hebrew parallelism:
1) parallelism of contrast  where the stichs stand in antithetical or non-antithetical contrast
2) parallelism of subordination  in which the following stich clarifies the means by which,
through reason and example, or indicating timeframe
3) parallelism of continuation  where following stichs actually advance communication rather
than merely repeating it
4) parallelism of comparison  usually the less familiar is explained by the more familiar;
results in a simile or, in absence of words “like/as” a metaphor
5) parallelism of specification  progressive unfolding or clarification in successive stichs:
general-to-specific, general statement with following sequence of more precise
explanations/clarifications, shift to dramatic specification, or specifies by ellipsis and an
added element
6) parallelism of intensification  second stich restates the first in a more pointed, extreme or
forceful way: increased numbers, intensified verbs, or noun sequences
- may be challenges in specification – you can see in some of the definitions above that there can be
overlaps and mixed forms
- careful reflection on the poetic relations will invariably reward the interpreter
D. Other Poetic Structures

- Staircase/Stairstep Parallelism = distich (tristich) develops through steps—note visual “stairing”
(e.g., Jer. 31:21b; Psalm 57:8 [9])
- Chiasm = where the 2nd member of a distich stands in an opposite order to the 1st (forms a kind of
“X” [e.g., Psalm 76:1])
- extended chiasm = reversal of members (tristich  extended texts [Jer. 2:5-9]  entire biblical
books [!?!])
- KEY—“The longer the section and greater the disproportion in various members, the less one’s
confidence of a chiasm.”
- Merismus = extremes noted to describe totality (Jer. 31:34b; cf. Gen. 1:1), or polar opposites in
parallel (Psalm 95:4-5)
- Inclusio = repetition of a phrase at the very beginning and the very end of a passage  serves as a
bracketing device (Psalm 8:1a and 9)
IV. THE LANGUAGE OF POETRY
A. Simile and Metaphor

- NOTE: peculiar power/emotive quality of poetry = function of verbal pictures
- power behind passages like Psalm 23, Jer. 22:19
- Simile = one thing compared to another with “like” or “as”

- The simile may be simple, paired, multiple, or extended
- Metaphor = comparison between two things without “like” or “as”
- anthropomorphism a special case of metaphor; human characteristics predicated to God
- metaphors too may be paired, multiple, or extended
- KEY: pursue the single aspect or dimension that is shared by two members; be careful not to
over-interpret
B. Other Poetic Language Devices

- Personification = where the author predicates to an inanimate object/abstract idea the traits of
humanity
- E.g., Psalm 43:3; Prov. 8:4, 6, 20-21; Psalm 98:9; Judges 5:17
- Apostrophe = direct reference to someone/something absent as though it were present

- Psalm 2:10; 1 Cor. 15:55; Hos. 13:14; James 5:11
- Hyperbole = conscious exaggeration for effect

- not untruthful; expresses strong feelings
- E.g., Job. 37:1; Psalm 22:14
- numbers are sometimes used hyperbolically (Amos 5:3)
- Metonymy = substitution made of one thing for another

- Psalm 23:5; Amos 7:9; Prov. 12:19
- Synecdoche = part is intended to refer to whole

- Amos 8:10; Psalm 44:6 [7]; Joel 2:28
- Key Q: “Why is this figure of speech being used?”
- Irony = indicate the exact opposite of what is intended

- strong warning/cautioning function
- E.g., Amos 4:4b; Zech. 11:13; 1 Kings 18:27
V. INTERPRETING POETRY
- Pattern for smaller portions:

1) identify the figure(s) present in the passage in question
2) interpret the figure to distill its figurative from its literal meaning
3) determine the function of the figure
- Pattern for larger poetic portions, see KBH4
4
KBH, 316-319.
DISCUSSION
Interpretation of Psalm 133
SPECIFIC TASK: Read over Psalm 133 (Figure 1 on page 2) carefully in

light of the lecture and notes on poetry which summarize the KBH textbook.
Collaborate with your colleagues in answering the questions and following
the instructions below:
1. Is there parallelism in this Psalm? If so, what kind(s)?

2. Are there any other poetic structures?
3. Delineate the text’s “major moves” structurally (Step 3 of the 7
Concise Steps but mindful of the poetic aspects).
4. What might the “big idea” in this passage be?
5. What further questions would you ask of this passage beyond those
noted above?
Figure 1 – Psalm 133 (NIV)

UNIT 10
Cube Face 2: Style 2 – OT Genres
I. INTRODUCTION
- OT presents five primary literary types—Narrative, Law, Poetry, Prophecy and Wisdom
- Each calls for sensitivities to “frame of reference, ground rules, strategy, and purpose.” 1
II. NARRATIVES
- The greatest volume of OT writing is narrative (= 40%)
A. Reports
1. Report Types
 Report = “a simple description of the bare facts of a past event or occurrence in the third
person”
 may serve to explain derivation of a place name (=aetiology) or a practice
 there are different kinds of reports:
1) anecdote – personal event/experience
2) battle report – military action and outcome
3) construction report – how and with what materials/people things made
4) dream report – 1st or 3rd person; “to dream,” “and behold;” followed by
interpretation
5) epiphany/dream epiphany – visible/dream appearance of God to human
6) historical story (report with literary elaboration), historical series (sequence with
theme = history) and memoir (1st person history)
2. Interpretive Principles
 Focus to subject and its contribution to larger themes
 Reports are generally more descriptive and don’t have as much devotional content
 Call for sensitivity to points being made—usually indirect or subtle
 Look for the common theme(s) in histories
B. Heroic Narratives & Prophet Stories

1. Heroic Narrative Types
 relates a series of episodes in the life of an individual later deemed important
 display hero’s virtue/bravery or failings with a view to life values for the reader
 epic hero’s exploits in a larger than life way (Genesis 1-11 = cosmic epic; Genesis 12-32
= ancestral epic)
2. Prophet Narrative Types

 recounts life of a prophetic figure with the objective to edify and emulate (Daniel)
 may also teach virtues through negative example (Jonah)
 discover modeled relationships between main character and God and/or man
 modeled values for emulation
 focus to large themes and what they teach
1
KBH, 324.
 be careful that applications of timeless principles embodied are to analogous

circumstances
C. Comedy
1. Comedy
 Comedy = narrative that move to a “happy ending” (marriage, celebration,
reconciliation) through dramatic reversal(s)
 amuses through surprise
 delineate reversal-to-happy-ending pattern
 focus to character development in heroes and villains
 plot role God plays in the events
 define main themes
 application/significant truth should be found in the main theme(s)
D. Farewell Speech
1. Farewell Speech
 Farewell speech = last will and testament in 1st person
 intended to exhort, instruct, warn in pivotal circumstances (e.g., imminent death)
 delineate the pivot point
 note directive point(s) of the speech and contribution to larger themes
 application of the directive point(s) by analogy
E. Embedded or Sub-Genres
- like the NT, the OT contains numerous sub-genres embedded in the text
1. Popular Proverb
 Popular proverb = a maxim that embodies a well-known general truth
 often it is prefaced by a formulaic phrase, “so it became a saying …” or “that is why they
say….”
 blessing or cursing formulas also generally fit this category
2. Riddle, Fable, Parable

 riddle = a statement whose hidden meaning must be discovered
 fable = an account of the actions of animals or inanimate objects that teaches a moral
truth
 parable = a story told to embody an important truth
3. Song
 sung to make work go quickly, celebrate victory, lament a loss (dirge)
4. List
 inventories names/items sharing a particular characteristic
 most common variation = genealogy
 less common is the ancient itinerary
5. General Interpretive Principles

 Interpret embedded genres in context
 Q: what does embedded genre contribute to overall narrative flow?
 Prefer the author’s own statements for main idea(s)
III. LAW
- The designation “Law” actually covers a number of key collections:

1) Covenant Code (Exod. 20:22—23:33)
2) Deuteronomic Code (Deut. 12-26)
3) Holiness Code (Lev. 17-26)
4) Priestly Code (Exod. 25-31; 34:29—Lev. 16; Numbers passim)
A. Law Types
1. Casuistic Law
 Casuistic Law an be defined as, essentially, case law
 It is in the 3rd person and follows the “if … then” formula (Deut. 24:1-4)
 The primary interest  civil + criminal offenses and legal remedies
2. Apodictic
 Can be defined as, essentially, absolute law
 It is set in unconditional commands and prohibitions
3. Legal Series
 Apodictic law is set in a grammatically structured series (10 commandments)
 Casuistic laws related together in legal series by theme (topical group)
4. Legal Instruction
 2 examples in Leviticus:
- Levitical instruction for priests/leaders
- Ritual instruction for people generally
 OT law has a primarily ethical/relational thrust
 OT has paradigmatic, timeless, total relevance for Christians
 Matt. 5:17: “All of the OT applies to Christians, but none of it applies apart from its
fulfillment in Christ.”2 (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16)
 interpret individual laws in context
 keep cultural context in view
 apply laws to what NT identifies as analogous people and situations
 a law’s application is a function of how it compares to laws in category
B. Deuteronomy
1. Deuteronomy
 The book of Deuteronomy is a special case
 It has a paraenetic function; i.e., its intent is persuasion to action
 It follows a similar pattern to ANE suzerain-vassal treaties
 One of the biggest differences  Israel is not addressed directly by its sovereign (= God)
but by his representative (Moses)
 Interpret Deuteronomy against ANE context
 The historical threat of syncretism with Canaanite religion is a “big context”
2
KBH, 347.
 Don’t mistake the tone of Deuteronomy—It is deeply invested and emotive and NOT
dispassionate
 Consider embedded genres
IV. POETRY
- Poetry is next most common genre after Narrative
A. Poetry Types
1. Prayer
 complaint = individual/corporate liturgical prayer asking God to deliver from a humanly
unsolvable crisis
 if spoken by king = royal complaint
 imprecatory psalm = hyperbolic cry to God against enemy
 dirge  occasions of mourning and despair
2. Song
 Songs of various kinds form a critical part in the worship of God
 thanksgiving and royal thanksgiving songs praise Yahweh
 other forms: personal hymns, coronation hymns, Zion hymns, Yahweh-kingship hymns
and love songs
3. Liturgy
 psalms with two or more speakers (antiphonal as e.g., Psalm 136)
 Psalm 118 is intended to be read liturgically
 Also entrance liturgies and prophetic liturgies
4. Wisdom Psalm
 Wisdom psalms have an instructional thrust—their object is to inculcate wisdom
 The style and vocabulary are like Proverbs and Ecclesiastes
B. Interpretive Principles
- treat poetry with a view to its integrity (context is Psalm itself)
- focus to (= Sitz im Leben) of the poem so far as it can be discerned
- Interpret poetry to the features of its type
- Allow genre to break text down naturally
- Application must be congenial to first Life Situation
- Usage should conform with original purpose and appointments
- Take royal psalms with focus to Jesus the Son of David
V. PROPHECY
A. Prophecy Types
1. Disaster
 The announcement of imminent/future disaster announced to an individual or nation (Jer.
28:12-14)
 FORM:
a) occasion of message declared
b) “Thus says the Lord”
c) predict/detail disaster
 additionally elements—notice of prophetic commission, call to hear or give reasons for
disaster
 once the elements have been identified, the text is much easier to interpret
2. Salvation
 A prophecy of salvation is opposite to a disaster prophecy (Isa. 2:1-5)
 It announces the deliverance of God and inspires hope
3. Woe Speech
 An example of the woe speech is Micah 2:1-5)
 distinguishing features:
a) “Woe to those who/you who,”
b) following participles – what merits woe
c) predicts divine retribution
4. Dirge
 An address to the nation as though they were already dead or judged (Amos 5:1-3)
 The disaster is proleptically present
5. Hymn
 A Prophetic Hymn indicates what will be sung in the future by the hearers of the
prophet’s words (Isa. 12:4-6)
6. Liturgy
 A liturgy is where the prophet and other person(s) engage antiphonally (Jer. 11:18-23)
 It may consist in a communal complaint, pleas for relief and such
7. Disputation
 a rhetorical form in which the prophet tries to persuade his audience to accept the validity
of some truth (Malachi; Haggai)
 The prophet speaks as one of the people; he makes a case
8. Lawsuit
 The prophet engages people as though they were in a court of law (Hos. 4:1-3)
 filled with forensic terminology
 prophet speaks for God (prosecutor and/or judge)
9. Against Foreign Nations

 words of judgment against foreign nations (Zech. 9:1-8)
 war oracles  a) give assurances to Israel of victory and b) serve as threats against the
nations concerned
10. Vision Report

 essentially prophet’s own report of what he saw in a divinely given vision (1 Sam. 9:9)
 contains the words “see/made to see” and the words “and behold” followed by the vision
report itself
 Three types:
1) oracle-visions – question and answer based in vision seen (Jer. 24)
2) dramatic word vision – scene from heaven discloses future earthly events
(Amos 7:1-6)
3) revelatory-mystery vision – angelic guide helps prophet (Dan. 8)
11. Narrative
 Vocation reports = prophet’s call and commission (Isa. 6)
 pattern = a divine confrontation, a commission, the prophetic objection, a divine
reassurance, and a sign of confirmation
 Instruction about symbolic actions (Hos. 1:2-9)
 form = a command to perform the action, a report of performance, and the interpretation
B. Interpretive Principles
1. Nature of Prophecy
 by and large the greatest energy in the OT devoted not to foretelling, but to forthtelling
(dealing with the corrupt social and spiritual life)
 Interest is to immediate rather than distant future so that lives would be positively
changed
 Recall sensus plenior (= fuller sense) discussion in an earlier lecture
2. Specific Interpretive Principles

 Confidence in application is directly proportional to appreciation of clarity of text
 Context interprets context
 Seek the most likely time in history for fulfillment
 prophecies concerning Israel find fulfillment in church
 Focus to major points and general purposes over symbolic details
 Prefer smaller sections in immediate contexts over whole book
 Application should have a view to major point(s)
C. Apocalyptic
1. Apocalyptic
 In apocalyptic, the means of the divine communication’s apprehension is through
dreams, visions and symbolism
 In apocalyptic, God relates to humanity and history by radical intervention that ushers in
a whole new age
 Set a modest goal—do not despair
 Take symbolic numbers seriously but not literally
 OT/NT apocalyptic connections will mutually interpret
 Apocalypticist’s priority is to his readers and their circumstances
 Focus to the main points
 Application should have interest to the main points and not the minute details
VI. WISDOM
- primary wisdom documents  Proverbs, Job, Ecclesiastes

- NOTE: “Put simply, proverbs teach probable truth, not absolute truth. By nature, proverbs are not
absolute promises from God that guarantee the promised outcome if one follows them. Rather, they
point out patterns of conduct that, if followed, give one the best chance of success, all things being
equal. In other words, they offer general principles for successful living rather than a comprehensive
“legal code of life.”3
3
KBH, 389 (compare the notice of this observation in the earlier version of KBH, 313).
A. Proverbs
1. Proverbs
 key elements:
1) a “short wise saying”
2) it has the status of a well-known and generally acceded to because “used for a
long time by many people.”
 Typically proverbs are in the indicative mood and make simple declarations or
observations about life
 descriptive (Prov. 15:23)
 prescriptive (Prov. 14:7)
 comparative (Prov. 12:9)
 numerically contrastive using x/x + 1 (Prov. 30:29-31)
 most common antithetic proverb (Prov. 15:19)
 Determine the type of proverb and whether it involves any figures of speech
 Study the content of parable for its character, scope and bearing
 see if context helps toward its meaning (consider theme)
 for most proverbs the correct interpretation is centered on what is obscure
 many proverbs teach probable truth, not absolute truth
 interpret proverbs in terms of ancient context; not modern Western culture
B. Instruction
1. Instruction
 couched in the imperative and has character of instruction
 instruction may be a single brief epigrammatic expression, a collection of the sayings of
the wise (Prov. 22:17-24:22), wisdom speech is a particular speech where wisdom is
personified and embodied
 Carefully observe the literary form
 Follow the narrative flow as you would an actual speaker who is passionately pleading
with passersby
 summarize the teaching point by completing the sentence, “This shouting person urges
me to ….”
C. Example Story and Reflection

1. Example Story
 example story narrates a personal experience or otherwise illustrates an important truth or
principle to the interested observer
 will have the form of opening, example story, and moral (Prov. 24:30-34)
2. Reflection
 reflection is where writer “reports personal musings and conclusions about a truth, often
citing first-hand observations, example stories, and lengthy thought.” 4
 Form = “I saw and considered/passed by” + quote a proverb or use rhetorical questions or
cite example stories + concluding moral
 Ecclesiastes is filled with this form5
4
KBH, 392.
5
E.g., Eccl. 1:12-2:26 [moral 2:24-25]; 3:16 [moral 3:22]; 4:1; 5:13 [moral 5:18-20]; 6:1; etc.
 Pursue how the components of the example story and reflection support the concluding
moral
 concluding moral will contain writer’s main point
 the application flows from the moral
D. Disputation Speech (Job)

1. Disputation Speech
 Job is the most significant example of a disputation speech
 It records the disputes between Job and friends, but esp. between Job and the Lord (Job
38f, 40f.)
 It contains the genres of complaint (Job 16:7, 16f.) and petition (Job 16:18-21)
 other elements: hymns/hymnic elements and avowels of innocence
 Study the complete utterances of main characters (Job, Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar, and
Elihu)
 Study the declarations of God, noting why there is such a stress on Job’s ignorance and
how this is related to the self-assuredness of the other speakers
 Note recurring themes and how they’re developed
 Pay attention to answers unfolded rather than searching for answers to questions that the
author did not choose to discuss
 Job’s avowal of innocence provides a crucial interpretive clue to understand the book
ending and so it must be held to be determinative: i.e., God vindicates and rewards Job
and criticizes Jobs friends
The Literary Type/Genre of

Ecclesiastes 9:13-16
SPECIFIC TASK: Read Ecclesiastes 9:13-16 being mindful of its context.

Keeping an eye to the course notes, work with your colleagues to discover
the literary type/genre of this passage and its application. Answer the
following questions:
1. What kind of literature is Ecclesiastes 9:13-16 and what is the

evidence in the text for your conclusion?
2. Is the passage self-contained or is it connected with the verses
before and/or after? Why is this important?
3. Recalling especially Step 3 in the “Seven Concise Steps” sequence,
lay out the “major moves” of the text structurally.
4. What might the “big idea” of this passage be? What in the text
leads you to your conclusion?
UNIT 11
Cube Face 2: Style 3 – NT Genres
I. INTRODUCTION
- average reader’s perspective; treat NT from uniform perspective (= 27 “books”); this clouds the issue
of distinctive approaches
- must consider genre issues: Must be guided by the features and intentions that characterize genre
- genre determined by formal features, author’s intention, compositional process, setting of author,
setting for intended use, actual subject matter and content
- primary genres: gospel, acts, epistle and apocalypse (common sub-genre—parable)
- recently greater interest in genre = genre criticism
II. WHAT IS A ‘GOSPEL’?
A. Modern Biography or History?

1. Modern Biography
 many inclined to call gospels “biographies” of Jesus
 this is misleading because of both what is not in a gospel and what is in it
2. Modern History
 are the Gospels “histories”?
 a comparison across gospels suggests they are not like modern history
 material is gathered by themes and theological directions
 there is a broad historical concern for sequence
B. Ancient Candidate Genres

- there are several concerns of which we must be aware:
1) Literary genres not fixed or static over time.
2) Evangelists would not have “shopped” a genre.
3) While we should look for similarities, this must not obscure significant and subtle
differences.
- the following ancient candidate genres have been proposed:

1) Greco-Roman Fiction
2) Jewish Midrash (R.H. Gundry)
3) Extended Parable (W. Kelber)
4) Greco-Roman Popular Biography
- The last 1st century genre commends itself as most likely for comparison with the Gospels, but
dissimilarities still suggest a poor match
C. Genre Distinctives of “Gospel”

- A connected narrative of the ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus
- Composed from the Jesus tradition
- Reflects and serves early Christian proclamation
- Presupposes Christian Beliefs and vocabulary
D. Implications for Interpretation

- Craig Blomberg encourages the use of the term “theological biography” as helpful description of a
Gospel
- We must understand individual passages in light of each evangelist’s overarching intention
- Assume that no chronology is implied unless it is explicitly present in the text
III. WHAT IS “ACTS”?
A. Gospels and Acts

- Acts is markedly distinct from the Gospels
- The focus in Acts is on more characters and contemplates a greater range in geography
- The primary interest in terms of the characters is in Peter and Paul; there is a secondary interest in
some of the deacons
- The book might better have been entitled, the Acts of the Holy Spirit (1:8)
B. History or Theology?
- The debate concerning the value of Acts has in past been split between history (British) and
theology (Germans)
- place of Paul and his theology as well as chronology figure in the discussion
- an inclusive position is best: Acts is both history and theology
C. Entertainment?
- R.I. Pervo has argued that Acts is primarily entertainment
- His “retelling” or “amplification” of Acts to show parallels with historical novel is actually
distortion; he novelizes Acts
- Acts entertains to be sure; but not as a later fictionalizing of the events of the early church.
D. Implications for Interpretation

- Acts has greater interest in chronological sequence
- To ask theological questions may be helpful in foreclosing wrong questions—what of the
Samaritans and the eunuch? Acts 8 should be seen in light of Acts 1:8 agenda
- NOTE—in narratives we must be careful to ask whether the text is descriptive or prescriptive
IV. WHAT IS AN “EPISTLE”?
A. Letters Private and Public

- “letter” indicates all forms of correspondence (commercial, govt., military, general, etc.)
- Adolf Deissmann distinguishes between 1) “Real” letters  informal, occasional documents; and
2) “Non-real” documents  classical Greek treatises. Categories have been influential but not
entirely helpful.
- Paul’s letters clearly not literary essays, but more than private. Note that Paul writes
1) as an apostle of risen Lord
2) to communities
3) includes theological teaching reaching well beyond historical particulars
B. Letter Form
- Ancient letters were highly stylized and conventional—opening, thanksgiving, body, closing. NT
writers often alter form, bending it to message
1. Opening
 usually “A to B Greetings” (Acts 15:23; 23:26; Jas. 1:1 has “greetings”)
 in NT, there are significant expansions that often point to the letter’s purpose(s)
 senders/addressees are noted in terms of their relation to God in Christ
 The usual Hellenistic greeting was chairein (Jas. 1:1); it is replaced with “grace, [mercy]
and peace”
2. Introductory Thanks/Blessing
 Greek letters often have a health wish, expression of joy, thanks for deliverance, or
prayer/remembrance of recipients
 The NT again adapts—thanksgiving/benediction often introduces key topics (Paul’s are
Hellenistic in form but Jewish and highly pastoral/apostolic in content)
 Paul expresses gratitude to God for what God has done in readers
3. Body
 There is great variety in the NT letters reflecting different situations/objectives
 The letters are basically tripartite—i.e., opening (builds common ground;
occasion/purpose); middle (develops subjects); ending (accentuates and reiterates
previous content and builds relational bridges with the readers)
4. Letter Closing
 Greek closings have the object of maintaining contact and enhancing friendship—
greetings, health wish, farewell
 Paul includes a contact/friendship aspect (Rom. 16; 2 Cor. 13:12f.; Col. 4:10-17); he
typically will include a benediction/doxology instead of a health wish/farewell; often
strong confidence is expressed
 In closing, Paul will personally “take pen to hand” (1 Cor. 16:21; Gal. 6:11)
C. Letter Function
- letters have been classified functionally according to sub-genres in letter writing
1. Parenetic Letters
 parenetic letter = letter of exhortation (persuade or dissuade); strategy in praise
 I Thess (first 3 chapters = praise; then deals with serious concerns)
 Pastoral Epistles (recalls Paul’s past behavior; call to imitate)
 I Peter (not as close a fit but strong exhortation thrust)
2. Recommendation Letters
 Recommendation letter = introduces or intercedes or commends
 Philemon (excellent example: commends a new status Onesimus to master); III John
(commends traveling missionaries to Gaius)
3. Rhetorical Categories
 usually divided into judicial (accuse/defend; forensic) which tries to convince audience
of right/wrongness of past action; deliberative (persuade/dissuade; hortatory) argues
for/against future action; epideictic (praise/blame) urges to affirm point of view/set of
values in present
- other letters may be “mixed forms”

- Letters without standard epistolary open/close are harder to classify
V. WHAT IS “THE REVELATION”?
- What is the Revelation and how do you interpret it?

- Calvin wasn’t sure what to do with Revelation  he wrote no commentary on it (!?!?!)
- While it is obviously a difficult document, considerations of genre can be helpful
- Revelation has 3 distinct genre features—it shares aspects of epistle, prophecy and apocalyptic
A. Letters
- Revelation is a general letter to be shared among seven churches in Asia Minor and it is a
collection of individual letters
- Sir William Ramsey and C.J. Hemer show chs. 2-3 disclose meaning out of local historical
information
- “sequence” of letters suggests a clockwise “postal route”
- “bundling” of letters  each letter is “to the churches”
B. Prophecy
- Prophetically, Revelation refers to actual events; they will occur in future time
- There are different ways in which prophecy is fulfilled in the NT: literal (e.g., Micah 5:2 = Matt.
2:6); typological correspondence (historical patterns recapitulated in direction of ultimate end;
e.g., Babylon = Rome = ?)
- John records what he actually saw; What are the visions? Are they equal to photographs? or do
they refer to well-known imagery/symbolism needing “translation”?
- We need to do meticulous study and research
C. Apocalypse
- J.J. Collins: apocalypse = “a genre of revelatory literature with a narrative framework, in which a
revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendent
reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial insofar
as it involves another, supernatural world.”
- Non-NT examples: 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, Apocalypse of Peter: images unusual, even bizarre or
grotesque—but communicate about last days. Divine world cataclysm brings justice; creates new
society. Encourages a beleagured community. [So too in Revelation.]
- There are several distinctions between Revelation and other apocalypses:
1) Revelation refers to self as prophecy
2) has prophetic warnings/calls for repentance
3) no pseudonymity
4) optimistic worldview
5) no pseudoprophecy
6) realized eschatology indicated
7) little interpretation by angelic beings
8) Messiah has come/made atonement
- imbalance between prophecy (historical) and apocalyptic (symbolical) typically leads to

misinterpretation
- Guidelines:
1) take John’s interpretation of symbols as normative
2) account for imagery from OT/Jewish apocalyptic milieu
3) take seriously 1st century Asian historical info
4) observe when imagery supports central truth; don’t allegorize or “spread” it
- Generally, prefer 1st century Asia Minor Christian understanding over modern speculations.
VI. WHAT IS A “PARABLE”?
A. Introduction
1. A Distinctive of Jesus’ Teaching

 It is estimated that 35% of Jesus’ teaching is in parables
 They are works of art and didactic weapons
 Impact  deeply embedded in Western culture and language
2. Parable Defined
 English dictionary = “a short narrative with two levels of meaning.”
 Usage in Greek (parabolē: parabolh,) and Hebrew (mashal: lvm) shows the biblical sense
is much wider than the English definition.
 In the NT “Parable” = metaphor, figurative saying, proverb, similitude, story, example
and allegory
3. Luke has the most Parables

 Estimates of the number of parables found in the Gospels vary from 56 to 74
 Mark has 11 parables (3 are not in both Matthew and Luke); Matthew has 27 parables
(10 are unique = M); Luke has 34 parables (15 are unique = L); John has only 2 parables
(10:1-18; 15:1-8 and they are disputed)
B. The Purpose of Parables

- The parables appear to have three purposes
- Parables disarm—can get past peoples’ defenses; dramatic OT example at 2 Sam. 12:1ff.; NT
examples: Mark 12:1-12 (esp. v. 12); Luke 15:1-32 (esp. vv. 1f.)
- Parables reveal—described as instruments of revelation (Luke 8:8); used to illustrate or clarify (cf.
Luke 10:29)
- Parables conceal—Mark 4:10-12//Matt. 11:25-27 also shows a concealing function; Parables hide
the message from “outsiders” (Isaiah 6:9-10); the passage expresses what happened customarily in
Jesus’ ministry; parables are far from plain and clear.
C. History of Parables Interpretation

- We may divide the history of parables research into four major periods:
1. Early Period (NT-1888)

 allegorical method dominated
 holds that each element of a parable represents/symbolizes something else
 Origen of Alexandria (c. AD 185-254)  threefold sense
 Middle Ages (c. AD 540-1500)  adds a fourth sense
 Reformation  generally rejects allegory
 Post-Reformation  still resorts to extended allegory
2. Adolf Jülicher (1888-1935)

 massive two-volume work published in 1888/89
 argued Jesus’ parables were originally not allegories but similitudes  they have only
one point of comparison or likeness
 Allegory, where found, is due to the evangelists
 This amounted to an overreaction to allegorization
3. Dodd and Jeremias (1935-1970)

 C.H. Dodd argued that the parables of Jesus had to be understood in terms of the
KINGDOM
 Dodd’s idea was marred by the fact that he saw the kingdom as only “here and now” and
not “future”
 J. Jeremias argued that one must take into account how the first hearers would
understand the parable
 Dodd and Jeremias both argued vigorously that each parable had but one point
 H. Conzelmann and W. Marxsen argued that one should consider how the church (oral
period) and how the Evangelist himself (redaction) understood the parable
4. Further Developments (1970 to Present)

 K.E. Bailey (1976; 1980) focuses on the structure and ancient “Palestinian mindset” of
the parables
 Recently, NT parables have been compared with 2,000 early Jewish rabbinic parables
 C.L. Blomberg (1990) argues that there are indeed allegories and usually have between
one and three points to make depending upon the number of main characters they have
 K.R. Snodgrass (2008) for more recent discussion and formulations
D. How to Interpret a Parable1

- A number of questions can helpfully be asked in pursuit of the main teaching point(s) of a parable:
1. What is (are) the main point(s)?

 consider the following issues in this regard:
i) Context and Sequence
ii) Structure and Wording
iii) Thrust(s)
 One of the greatest dangers in parable interpretation has been to see too many points
 Rule of thumb—look for as many main points as there are main relationships or
characters. Most of Jesus’ parables will make three points, though some will probably
make only one or two.2
2. How would the first hearers have understood the Parable?

 21st century attitudes/understandings are very different, even opposite to 1st century AD
ones
 Step into the 1st century AD historical, cultural, religious mindset of the first hearers
 NOT what is unusual/mundane or positive/negative to me but to the first hearers
3. What is the Evangelist’s “interpretation” of the Parable?

 Note the gospel writer’s inclusion/location of the parable
 Mark how it is handled relative to the parallels
4. What does the Parable mean to me (personal significance/application)?

 Ask: “What must I do to say ‘Yes’ to Jesus’ teaching?”
 Cf. Matt. 7:24 and James 1:22
1
R.H. Stein, Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981) 72-81.
2
C.L. Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables (Downers Grove: IVP, 1990) 166 and 325f.
Discussion
Interpretation of Luke 15:11-32
Instructions. Utilizing the insights gained from your reading of KBH and
from the notes provided, collaborate with your colleagues in answering the
following questions regarding the parable at Luke 15:11-32. Of course, the
questions assume you will keep in mind the dictum, “Context, context,
context!” and will build your responses on the foundation of the “Seven
Concise Steps” material earlier considered as you answer!
The Four Questions:
1. What is (are) the main point(s) of the parable?
2. How would the first hearers have understood the Parable?
3. What is the Evangelist’s “interpretation” of the Parable?
4. What does the Parable mean to me (personal significance/

application)?
…and One More Question: Is the parable correctly named in the headings
of most translations?
UNIT 12
Cube Faces 3(Syntax) & 4 (Semantics): Words &
Words Working Together
I. INTRODUCTION
- An absolute datum for hermeneutics  the biblical authors intended to communicate so as to be

understood. (KBH)
- The above statement holds even in the use of literary devices
- The objective  to pursue the first-intended message of the authors for the first recipients
- The distance between the modern reader and the ancient biblical text calls for a self-conscious,
systematic pursuit of the message
- Recall the 6 interests of the interpreter in Corley’s “cubing” a text

- We will consider the following two:
1. Syntax (grammatical relationships or how words work in context)
2. Semantics (lexical elements or the range of meanings of words and what they mean in a
particular context)
II. LITERARY CONTEXT
A. Definition
- Literary context: what precedes or follows a word or passage and fixes or sets constraints upon its
meaning
- It can be narrowly drawn to words and sentences or encompass the whole of the Biblical canon
- The intended meaning of a particular text is that meaning which is most consistent with its literary
context.
B. The Importance of Literary Context

- Context is everything!
- Think about the potential range of meaning in the statement: “This coffee is poison!”
- Understanding/misunderstanding is a function of the appropriate and sufficient context
- Every Biblical passage must be interpreted in a manner consistent with its immediate and broader
context
- First, meaning is a function of the logical flow-of-thought.

 Authors typically relate information consistent with theme
 Taking a text out of context violates its integrity as the functioning part of a unified whole
- Second, context indicates the appropriate meaning of particular words

 Words are multivalent—i.e., they can have a range of meanings
 Randomly assigning one or several meanings to a word will not lead to understanding
- Third, Biblical documents were intended to be understood as wholes and not in fragments
 Be cautious with chapter divisions, versification, and paragraph and section headings—they
are not original
 Versification is helpful to find a passage but it can hinder understanding
 Consistency of text with context is paramount
C. Principles of Hermeneutics Related to Context
- There are three important principles in pursuit of accurate interpretation:
- First, each statement must be understood according to its natural meaning in the literary context
in which it occurs
- Second, a text without a context may be a pretext

 A text understood outside of its context has been misunderstood
- Third, the smaller the passage studied, the greater the chance of error
 Only in wider context will the smaller burden of meaning carried by each part make sense
 “Normally speaking, the paragraph constitutes the basic unit of thought in prose.” (KBH)
D. Circles of Contextual Study

- Q: How broad a context should be taken into account?
- There are “domains” of context; they do not all have equal priority
1. Immediate Context
 Immediate context holds pride of place in the level of control it exerts
 Focus to theme and structure
 Theme  dominant subject—“This passage says about X that ….”
 Structure  chronological sequencing, thematic continuities, logical order, literary
genre, psychological transfer and abrupt transition (KBH)
 Always go for natural contextual connections
2. Literary Context of the Entire Book

 Document context is the next most important
 Read the entire Biblical document before doing a particular interpretation
 Have an interest to the following questions:
1) What general purpose(s) or controlling theme(s) are indicated?
2) What is the basic plan of the document?
3) Are there parallel passages?
3. Literary Context of the Entire Bible

 The whole Bible is a legitimate context for a particular passage
 Dependencies are evident even to a cursory reading of the text as we see both
internal and external use of Biblical documents
 There is a lower level of impact on interpretation owing to chronological,
circumstantial and literary distance
 The greatest relative impact is where the same author has written another document;
a lesser impact in interpretation arises when comparing a different author in the same
Testament; the least impact on interpretation arises with similar passages across two
testaments
III. SYNTAX (GRAMMATICAL ANALYSIS)
- The meaning words bear is directly related to what those words are doing relative to other words
- Morphology = the form of individual words and how alteration of their form (inflection) impacts
function
- Syntax = the way a language combines words to communicate
- In English, word order is more of a key than the marking of words for function (inflection)
- In Greek and Hebrew, words are marked for function
A. Importance
- Meaning is a function of the interrelation between words, sentences and larger units
- Grammatical study is critical to correct interpretation  biblical languages sometimes convey
nuances hard to capture in English (See examples in KBH)
- Knowledge of the original languages is very helpful, BUT careful grammatical analysis of quality
literal translations (e.g., NASB, RSV, NRSV) helps a lot
- The NIV’s interests are more to readability—but the benefits come at a cost
B. Discovering Structural Relationships

- The textbook commends the following process:
- First, discover the natural divisions of the section for study

- Genre, of course, is a key—narratives are easier, letters less so, prophecy is a greater challenge
- Look for “self-contained” sections of scripture
- Second, trace the flow of thought in the passage

1) discern where paragraphs/larger units of thought begin/end
2) how is the argument sustained—due weight must be given to principal and subordinate
statements that qualify them [[e.g., James 1:2-8]]
3) explore subordinate statements to see how they qualify main statements
- Analysis in a text is extremely helpful: it delineates the principle argument and the supportive or
qualifying material much more clearly
- Third, consider the impact of the verbs on the meaning of the text
- The biblical languages have complex verbal systems
- They carry markers for mood, aspect, time, kind, and voice of the action
- Recall: “For those who do not know the biblical languages, there is no substitute, again, for literal
translations and reliable commentaries that evaluate the verbal elements.” (KBH)
- Fourth, among other important grammatical elements must be included connectives

- connectives govern relationship between clauses (KBH)
- Fifth, adjectives and adverbs are also of critical importance to interpretation
- Sixth, pronouns must also be considered

- They are more clearly marked for function in Greek and Hebrew than English
- English is unable to distinguish between the singular and the plural “you.”
IV. SEMANTICS (LEXICAL ANALYSIS)
A. The Nature of Words

- “The correct interpretation of Scripture is the meaning required by the normal meaning of the
words in the context in which they occur.” (KBH)
- Q: How is it that words have meaning?
- First, words are arbitrary signs
- Second, words generally have a range of meaning

- What specifically a word means is a function of context
- A word means the meaning called for by the context
- Third, each meaning of a word forms part of a distinct semantic field or domain
- Fourth, meanings don’t remain fixed over time

- Words undergo change
- The history of meanings and etymology/root may bear little if any relation to present usage
- Past meaning/derivation do not exert residual influence on current usage
- The range of meanings for legitimate consideration  what existed in the time the Scripture was
written
- Finally, words can have both connotative and denotative meanings

- Q: Is there, beyond the denotative (‘dog’ as beast) meaning, any connotative (‘dog’ as pejorative
expression for a human) thrust?
B. Steps for Performing Word Studies

- Not all words are of equal significance. Therefore,
- First, determine which words merit close consideration
- Second, determine the range of meaning for the word

- There are good exegetical aids for OT and NT that give the range of meanings for the relevant
time period in question
- The student without Hebrew or Greek is helped by English language Theological Dictionaries and
Concordances
- The degree of interpretive impact of various texts and particular passage in question is based on
degree of closeness
- Finally, select the meaning that best fits the context

- “best fit” takes into consideration all of the factors thus far considered
- Remember, CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT!!!
V. RESOURCES
A. Syntax
- See the annotated resources section in KBH.
- Analysis of the original text in the original languages using Hebrew/Greek reference grammars
(Heb.: Gesinius; Weingreen; Davidson; Gk.: Robertson, Blass-Debrunner-Funk; Moulton &
Turner, etc.)
- For non-specialists: Consultation through interlinear Hebrew/Greek editions and cross-comparison
of various literal (more formal equivalence) English Bible translations
B. Semantics
- See the annotated resources section in KBH.
- Hebrew/Greek Lexicons (Heb.: Koehler-Baumgarten; Brown-Driver-Briggs; Gk.: Bauer-Danker-
Arndt-Gingrich)
- Theological Dictionaries (Theological Dictionary of the OT; Theological Dictionary of the NT;
New International Dictionary of the NT)
- English Concordances (Young’s and Strong’s Analytical Concordances)
Discussion – Unit 12 – page 1
Discussion
Literary Context, Syntax & Semantics
John 3:16
This discussion will give you opportunity to explore a very familiar passage—John
3:16—in its immediate literary context. Resources are provided.
1) Note the issues of literary context that affect a proper understanding of John 3:16
(What are the circumstances? Who is speaking John 3:16 and to whom?)
2) Lay out the connections in John 3:16 (= syntax) (You might want to frame this step
in the same graphic manner as for the Gt. Commission exercise. From what you’ve
discovered in the resources consulted, explain how the connecting words are connecting
the elements of the verse together.)
3) Identify the important words in John 3:16 and subject them to analysis (= word
study; semantic analysis) (What words would you identify as worthwhile studying more
closely? Why do you think they’re important?)
4) Discuss and refine your findings through interaction with your colleagues.
UNIT 13
Cube Faces 5 (Summation) & 6 (Significance)
ACTS 12:1-19 [24]—A CASE STUDY IN SUMMATION AND SIGNIFICANCE
- read very carefully Klein, Blomberg and Hubbard chapter 12 (“Application”)

- KBH helpfully warn against certain mistakes in application—essentially the neglect of historical,
literary and personal context
- Their remedy is a four-step process to ensure that modern application is legitimately emergent from the
biblical text. The steps they recommend are these:
1) Determine the original application(s) intended by the passage.

2) Evaluate the level of specificity of those applications to their original historical situations. If
the original specific applications are transferable across time and space to other audiences,
apply them in culturally appropriate ways.
3) If the original applications are not transferable, identify one or more broader cross-cultural
principles that the specific elements of the text reflect.
4) Find appropriate applications for today that implement those principles. 1
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Summation (Discourse Analysis)

- Focus is to grasp the argument the text makes
- The interest is to pursue the overall thrust or persuasive logic of the passage
- In doing this one is interested in pursuing the “big idea” of the text
- The “big idea” will be immensely helpful in being able to deliver on the present day significance
of the text
- For resources, see KBH2
B. Significance
- Focus is to the message of the text for the modern reader
- The interest is in the relationship between the author’s meaning and the world of the reader or
some aspect of it
- The interest of the interpreter is very much to appropriate application which has two key
elements:
1. It is constrained by the authorial intention of the text
2. Within the former constraint, it is creatively free in pursuing analogous needs,
circumstances, or situations to which the text presently speaks
- Recall the discussion of pre-understanding and how the modern reader, in the “dance” with the
text, progressively jettisons faulty pre-understanding as the text progressively informs and
illumines the mind
- For resources, see KBH.
II. ACTS 12—SUMMATION, OR THE “BIG IDEA”
A. Less Likely Options on the “Big Idea”

- There is no “big idea?”
1
See KBH, 483 for summary and discussion on pages 482-504.
2
Guides to structural and propositional analysis: Cottrell & Turner, 188-229; Osborne, 19-40, 93-
126; Schreiner, 97-126.
- Leadership Transition from Peter to James?
- Staying Cool Under Fire?
- The Power of Prayer?
- Divine Punishment?
- Great Entertainment?
B. The “Big Idea” … Assurance

- probably to be found in Peter’s words at verse 11
- note—1) little direct speech in ch. 12; 2) verse 11 the longest sustained piece of direct speech; 3)
Peter is wide awake; 4) his words are very OT and theological; 5) Peter is all alone in the street
- “… now I know without a doubt….”  ASSURANCE
III. ACTS 12—SIGNIFICANCE, OR THE “BIG IDEA” APPLIED
A. Point of Engagement—We All Crave Assurance

- Assurance …
1. a deep human hunger
2. energizes us for the challenges
3. without it there is uncertainty … and worse
- This is even truer in the realm of spiritual things
B. The Lord Gives Assurance (12:1-24)

- What if you were asked to do something that was going to create a firestorm?
- What would you need more than anything else in the world?
- You would need assurance
- Christians have been called to such a task; in its rigors, Jesus gives assurance
1. Assurance – the CRAVING of Persecuted Witnesses (1-5)

 Persecution is NOT a metaphor here
 The West suffers “mild irritations”
 Elsewhere, Christians suffer greatly for their witness
 “More Christians have died for their faith in the 20th century than in the previous 19 centuries
combined.”—Nina Shea
 Persecuted Witnesses cry out to the Lord in their craving …
2. Assurance – the GRACE of the Lord who is Greater than Persecution (6-11)
 When security could not be greater …
 When the prison cell could not be darker …
 When the hour could not be later …
 When Peter could not be more passive …
 … the Lord graciously acts
 Why should we call the Lord’s deliverance a “grace?” For several important reasons.
i) While discipleship meant bearing a cross
ii) And Peter had already been told he would be martyred (John 21:18f.)
iii) And martyrdom for faithfulness assured one’s real life
iv) And Jesus had pledged that he was near in all circumstances
v) … yet the Lord released Peter from prison—two times!
3. Assurance – the TEST of our Hearts (12-16)

 Do you know that assurance can be a test of our hearts?
 A QUESTION—How is it that, while Peter can breach all kinds of hostile security measures
with God’s help, he cannot get through the church door?
i) Sheer Joy may be Acceptable—the example of Rhoda
ii) Skepticism is not Acceptable—the case of the church
 Does the Lord deliver his witnesses from the hands of persecutors? Absolutely! (Sundar
Singh)3
4. Assurance – an ENERGIZING to Further Witness (17-24)

 Peter left “for another place” (v. 17)
 A place of preaching , teaching and ministry
 E.g. of Sundar Singh—when released, he resumed preaching
 The answer to assurance is continuing courageous witness
 “… but the word of God continued to increase and spread.” (v. 24)
 This verse is about the zeal of the assured.
C. Point of Conclusion
- Review principle points
- Conclude with the challenge of Acts 5:20
3
F.F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954) 250, citing B.H. Streeter
and A.J. Appasamy, The Sadhu (London, 1921) 30ff.
SUMMARY & SIGNIFICANCE

Judges 6:25-32 (NIV)
Given that a number of you had questions regarding breaking down a narrative passage into its
“major moves” and giving some accounting of the more specific layout of individual verses, I’ve
laid things out for a view in on that. You will notice that I’ve underlined the principal statements,
sometimes putting space between subject, verb and object so that any explanatory material could
be set below more specifically under the element it modifies. A little trick I’ve used to get a
sense of what is being modified is to ask questions. For example, at v. 25 there is material that
further modifies the receiver of the action (object)—the bull. So you ask, Which bull? What
modifies “bull” will answer the question: The second bull. The bull from your father’s herd. The
bull that’s seven years old. You can profitably do the same for the doer of the action (subject)
and for the action (verb) as well. In v. 25 the subject is understood to be Gideon so you could
represent that by supplying “You” in brackets: [You] take the bull.
The layout below is admittedly “fast and dirty”—you can see it’s not entirely complete. I’ve left
some things “clustered” rather than doing the above in every instance. The interest has been to
give attention particularly to the most significant narrative and to the recorded
instruction/conversation. I hope that this will be a further help.
I. GOD’S FIRST MISSION FOR GIDEON (25-26)

25
That same night the LORD said to him,
“Take the bull

[the] second [one]
from your father’s herd,
the one seven years old.[a]
Tear down the altar

of your father
to Baal
and
cut down the Asherah pole[b]
beside it [the altar].
26
Then
build [an] altar

a proper kind [c]
to the LORD your God
on the top of this height.
offer the second[d] bull
Using the wood of the
Asherah pole that you cut down,
as a burnt offering.”
II. GIDEON OBEYS… (27)

27
So
Gideon took ten of his servants

and
did as the LORD told him. = [they] did [it]
as the LORD
But told him
he did it
at night
rather than in the daytime.
because
he was afraid
of his family
and
[of] the townspeople,
III. COMMUNITY & FAMILY REACTIONS (28-31)
A. The Community Reacts (28-30)

28
In the morning when the people of the town got up, there was Baal’s altar, demolished, with
the Asherah pole beside it cut down and the second bull sacrificed on the newly built altar!
29
They asked each other,
“Who did this?”
they were told,

When they carefully investigated,
“Gideon did it.”

son of Joash
30
The people of the town demanded of Joash,
“Bring out your son.
He must die,
because
he has broken down Baal’s altar

and
[he has] cut down the Asherah pole beside it.”
B. Gideon’s Father Reacts (31)

31
But
Joash replied to the hostile crowd around him,
“Are you going to plead Baal’s cause?
Are you trying to save him?
[If] Whoever fights

for him
[then] [whoever] shall be put to death

by morning!
If Baal is a god,
really
[then] he can defend himself

when someone breaks down his altar.”
IV. GIDEON’S NEW NAME (32)

32
So
they gave the name Jerub-Baal[e]
[to] him
that day,
saying, “Let Baal contend with him.”
because
Gideon broke down Baal’s altar,
NOTES:
As I was thinking about this passage in terms of summary and significance, for better or for
worse, I got to thinking of the movie Patriot. In it, Mel Gibson plays the part of a pacifist and
very reluctant citizen who is forcibly drawn to fight in the Revolutionary War between America
and Britain. One of the more riveting scenes occurs near the end of the movie during a pitched
battle just as the American forces are beginning to cave under the onslaught of the British. The
Americans have turned tail and are retreating in disarray. At that point, the Mel Gibson character
grabs a fallen American battle flag, holds it aloft, and runs forward urging the American forces to
reengage the British. Of course, this heroic act turns the tide of the battle.
Regimental standards and battle flags were a part of the protocol in the field of battle. Such a flag
was the rallying point or the object that one followed in the heat and chaos of battle.
In a sense, we could use this metaphor to describe how God uses Gideon in the next chapter and
a half. God raises Gideon (or should we more properly say, his singular faithfulness to God) as a
kind of battle standard around which Israel should rally. In a sense, God desires for us to be
available as rallying points for his work in the world today.
I. GOD’S FIRST MISSION FOR GIDEON (25-26)

As our passage opens, God, who has just commissioned Gideon to be his servant to liberate the
Israelites from Midianite oppression gives Gideon his first mission. Unusually, it is a mission
more of self-consecration than it is anything. Gideon had earlier sought a sign from God; now
God seems to seek a sign—a sign of Gideon’s seriousness in obedience. It probably also stands
as the start of his “ministry,” beginning with the requirement that he draw a very public “line in
the sand” and show where he stands.
The first part of Judges 6 makes very clear that Gideon’s self-image had been stained by idol
worship as well as what other people thought of him, his family and his tribe. Here we see the
material expression of that. Gideon and his father’s household are complicit in the worship of
Baal and his consort. In fact, Gideon’s father Joash appears to be the custodian/priest of an altar
to Baal and an Asherah pole that was located on his own property! (Is he the community’s
“spiritual leader”? Something like this must be the case as the Lord identifies the altar to Baal
and the Asherah pole as “your father’s”!)
It is no surprise that God on the very night of the first meeting commands him: “Take the second
bull from your father’s herd, the one seven years old. Tear down your father’s altar to Baal
and cut down the Asherah pole beside it. Then build a proper kind of altar to the Lord your
God on the top of this height. Using the wood of the Asherah pole that you cut down, offer the
second bull as a burnt offering.”
God’s priority is very clear as one commentator has put it—Baal must go before Midian goes.
Before Gideon can be a reforming and liberating agent among his people, it is clear that he will
have to take a stand as a reforming, liberating agent at home. God wants him to set his father’s
house in order; quite literally, to “clean up his own back yard!”
Any reforming ministry or calling requires tearing things down and rebuilding. Each of the
elements in the destruction has its counterpart in the rebuilding. Gideon is to break down the
altar used for Baal and use its stones to construct a proper altar to the Lord God. The seven year
old bull, probably intended as a sacrifice to Baal, was to be slaughtered and offered up to the
Lord. The Asherah pole was to be cut into pieces and its pieces used as firewood to burn the
sacrifice to the Lord. What had been illegitimately devoted to Baal and his consort must be used
for the Lord God alone. The Lord God will brook no rivals.
This action will be a battle cry. It is a personal challenge to the community’s misplaced religious
commitment and it certainly holds potential to destroy Gideon’s relationship with his family and
especially his father Joash who is a leader in the worship of Baal. It is a provocative and
dangerous act.
II. GIDEON OBEYS (27)

V. 27 tells us that Gideon obeyed: “So Gideon took ten of his servants and did as the Lord told
him. But because he was afraid of his family and the men of the town, he did it at night rather
than in the daytime.” Some have suggested that Gideon’s use of ten of his servants was a
cowardly gesture, but this is far from the truth. We know from altars to Baal that have been
discovered that they were large—over 25’ by 4.5’ and constructed of heavy stones. The work
was far more than one man could do in a single night. But it is clear that Gideon was also
afraid—the text makes the fact clear—that’s why he worked in the dead of night to do what God
told him. Had he chosen to destroy the altar and Asherah pole during the day, there would surely
have been a confrontation. That, he didn’t want—he wanted to be safely off somewhere else
when the night’s work of destruction and reconstruction was discovered. He was going against
his community and his father, and he was afraid. But, he did what God commanded him—to the
letter!
III. REACTIONS (28-31)

A. Predictable Hostility (28-30). The first reaction to what Gideon did was quite
predictable. When the men of the town got up the next morning, they found Baal’s altar in ruins,
the Asherah pole cut down and burned and a new altar to the Lord on which were the remains of
a freshly offered bull. This was a sacrilege against Baal and an insult upon the community that
worshipped him. The writer of Judges tells us that when they found out who had done this
terrible piece of “vandalism,” they literally wanted Gideon’s hide—“The men of the town
demanded of Joash, ‘Bring out your son. He must die….’”
B. Surprising Support (31). The second reaction is a surprise. Joash, the custodian of the
sanctuary of Baal, stood up in bold defense of his son Gideon and pronounced a warning against
any vigilante action they might contemplate against him: “Are you going to plead Baal’s cause?
Are you trying to save him? Whoever fights for him shall be put to death by morning! If Baal
really is a god, he can defend himself when someone breaks down his altar.” Joash was saying
that for a human to take Baal’s cause in hand was to usurp Baal’s prerogative in dealing with
Gideon personally. It was an insult to the deity and it was worthy of capital punishment.
The reason that I say this is surprising support is that we might have expected Joash to side with
the town’s people, but he doesn’t. Something is going on here. Perhaps what Gideon did, in one
great convulsive gesture, was to move the entire household in a direction that everyone knew
they should have been heading for in the first place anyway! Gideon, in stating his own
commitment to God alone by destroying Baal’s altar and the Asherah pole, was creating the
means for his own family to also take a stand for the Lord. He drew a line in the sand which was
a challenge for his father’s house to join him. There seems to be a joining, but it could be
construed as carrying a measure of “wait and see” ambivalence: Notice that Joash can easily be
understood as speaking in the name of Baal and as the community’s religious head when he says,
“Anyone who kills my son diminishes the glory of Baal by acting on Baal’s behalf. (Perhaps
implying, as though Baal can’t kill Gideon all by himself!)” He as much as says, “You think that
you’re zealous for the glory of Baal; I will show you zeal for Baal! Lay a hand on my son, and so
help me, you will die!” One might say that in “outholying” the zealots he did two things—1) he
retained his position as priestly leader in the community and 2) he protected his son from the
immediate violence of men by solemnly declaring vindication a divine matter.
IV. GIDEON’S NEW NAME (32)

Gideon did the right thing. But now he is in the gunsights of the enemy. And the sign of that is
the “new name” that he receives from those who heard about what he has done. “that day they
called Gideon “Jerub-Baal,” saying, “Let Baal contend with him,” because he broke down
Baal’s altar.” One resource I looked at said that Gideon was given a “powerful name … even
though he had not really earned it.” This puzzles me. The text says he got the name “that day”
and the ones who gave him the name (“they”) were those who earlier wanted to kill him on the
spot. They were most emphatically not his admirers! The name that is given to him, from the
text, appears to be a kind of community curse upon him—it means “Let Baal get him!”
But it is true that the name does become more powerful as Gideon lives on, because the longer
he survives, coming to no harm, the clearer it becomes that Baal is not the true god. It becomes
equally clear that the Lord is the only true God and he is protecting Gideon who obeys him and
challenges others to do the same. But the name is still a kind of cursing nickname, the best that I
can figure. It would be like someone giving you a curse name for your Christian commitment—
party crasher Kari, bible thumper Bill, fundamental Phil. It’s a kind of witness and “badge of
courage” even though others are not exactly friendly in giving the nickname.
FINAL OBSERVATIONS
God does raise his people up as battle flags in the work place, in the community, and amongst
friends and family. Faithfulness to the Lord will draw fire and hostility. But isn’t that just what
happens in response to the raising of a battle flag? People want to cut it down and tear it to
shreds, or capture it as a trophy.
The challenge is to believe God, trust in him, and do his will. I suspect that, like Gideon, we will
find that our commitment will put us in the opposition’s cross hairs. It will be uncomfortable at
least, and we may well feel very afraid. It may even result in a hostile nickname. But, like a
battle flag, the faithful and the faith they espouse in the only true God and his Son will also draw
friends, family and a wider humanity seriously to reconsider their ultimate loyalties.
UNIT 14
Taking the Bible to Church & Life
I. INTRODUCTION
- Focus in the course has been to helpful method in interpretation

- Bible  a sure word, and we can be sure about it
- This session looks at the range of Scripture’s use in our contemporary context (focus will be to
textbook description)
II. TO GAIN INFORMATION & UNDERSTANDING
- KBH: the Bible is “the primary source of data or information” 1 for the Christian faith
- It speaks with authority about God’s identity, actions in creation and redemption, and ultimate
expectations
- appeals to us created as intellectual beings with a disposition and hunger to ask ultimate questions
III. TO WORSHIP & CREATE LITURGY
- KBH: Scripture’s pages contain “motivation and opportunities for worship.” 2

- Scripture observes and describes worship of various kinds—inanimate creation worships and inspires
worship (e.g., Psalm 19:1-4); individuals ‘recorded at worship’ and through ‘writing worship’ affirm
the rightness of worshipping God and give reasons to do so
- Scripture guides through providing a vocabulary and offering helpful patterns (OT and NT/individual
and community)
- vocabulary of expressions in worship in prayers, hymns, readings, psalms, and ordinances and patterns
of worship in components, rhythm, duration, postures, places and such
- Scripture in its description, instruction and historical example, affirms that “worship is holistic….” 3
IV. TO FORMULATE THEOLOGY
- Scripture also guides theological formulation.

- Human beings the world over are “theologians”—whether they believe in a god or gods or deny the
same
- Theological formulation is about one’s belief system and worldview
- Scripture offers guidance instead of leaving people to the dangers of imagination and guesswork
- Theology sourced in the Scripture “offers the Church a secure understanding of itself and how it fits
into God’s overall purposes in history and eternity.” 4
- The Bible is also the best test of theology. We must listen to how theology is “done” in the details of
life by the writers of the OT and NT documents (= “biblical theology” or “task theology”)
- We are also confronted with the task of doing theology ourselves (= “systematic theology”)
1
KBH, 451.
2
KBH, 452.
3
KBH, 456.
4
KBH, 456.
- Millard Erikson: systematic
theology is striving “to give a coherent statement of the doctrines of the Christian faith, based
primarily on the Scriptures, placed in the context of culture in general, worded in a contemporary
idiom, and related to the issues of life.”5
- Individuals, communities, and denominations are called to this task and, through history, have engaged
the issues of their day through a consistent and biblically sensitive theological structure
- There needs to be a process of theological refinement. KBH: “This does not mean that God’s truth
keeps changing. Rather, it reflects the nature of the process of systematizing: it always exhibits the
perspectives and concerns of those who do it.”6
- How the Bible informs theology:
1. Valid theologizing must follow the sound exegesis of the appropriate biblical texts.
2. Theology must be based on the Bible’s total teaching, not on selected or isolated texts.
3. Legitimate theology respects and articulates the Bible’s own emphases.
4. They [Theologians] must state theological points in ways that explain and illuminate their
significance for the life and ministry of the Church today.
5. Theology must be centered in what God has revealed in Scripture.
6. Modern theologians cannot do their work as if in a vacuum, as if no Christians have ever
considered these issues prior to their own time. 7
V. TO PREACH & TEACH
- Christian preaching should be a “word from God”

- only that form of public address that is sourced in, mindful of and constrained by the Bible counts as
Christian preaching  content of Scripture clearly annunciated and accurately applied counts as
Christian preaching; self-help, psychology, and human opinion doesn’t.
- The same holds for Christian teaching
VI. TO PROVIDE PASTORAL CARE
- KBH: “The Bible has always been a source of positive guidance as well as comfort and consolation for
God’s people.”8
- There will be life and faith crises of various kinds—experiences of disappointment, physical and
emotional suffering, dying, death and bereavement, loneliness, losses of various kinds, and the regrets
of actions taken or not taken
- people are open to and look for authentically helpful spiritual care—for comfort in the crisis and for
some sort of “sense-making” that will ease the trouble or give restfulness in its pain and mystery
- The Bible offers true hope and exemplifies good hope-giving, but also sets the boundaries of
legitimacy for the task when a care giver or pastor is tempted to “say more” than Scripture or more
than he or she knows
- KBH: “we can confidently promise people for the Bible only those things that God has in fact intended
to say. A responsible system of hermeneutics will restrain well-intentioned but misguided help.”9
VII. FOR SPIRITUAL FORMATION IN

THE CHRISTIAN LIFE
- “Read your Bible pray every day … and you’ll grow, grow, grow.”
5
Cited in KBH, 458.
6
KBH, 459.
7
KBH, 462-465.
8
KBH, 469.
9
KBH, 470.
- Scripture will form us in spiritual
ways that equate to growth and depth of Christian character, commitment and life
- KBH: “To obey God requires an act of submission, and the biblically informed believer has the
resources to submit in ways that fulfill God’s will.” 10
VIII. FOR AESTHETIC ENJOYMENT
- KBH: “the Bible delights the people of God”11 = adventure, humor, and pageantry of the documents of
Scripture which engage the reader at an emotive and literary level
- Bible continues to be the world’s “best seller”
- Northrop Frye, professor of literature, described the influential quality and character of the Bible in his
book entitled The Great Code
- Its stories, imagery and vocabulary have had, arguably, the greatest influence upon and been the
inspiration for all sorts of artistic expression within and outside of Christendom—literary, artistic and
dramatic.
- An absolute datum for the full range of uses of Scripture: “the best outcomes result from the most
accurate interpretations—and outcomes constitute God’s purpose for the Bible.”12
10
KBH, 474.
11
KBH, 475.
12
KBH, 475.

BI Seminar

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

BI Seminar

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Biblical Interpretation Seminar

Notes and Schedule

Learning from the History of Interpretation

More Recent Approaches to Interpretation – Possibilities and Pitfalls

I. PRESUPPOSITIONS ABOUT REALITY

- The absolute first consideration is how one construes reality

18th Century Enlightenment

II. PRESUPPOSITIONS ABOUT THE BIBLE

- Supernaturalism is an indispensable presupposition to proper interpretation, but it does not

A. The Bible is Inspired Revelation

B. The Bible is Both Authoritative and True

C. The Bible is Spiritual

D. The Bible is a Text of Both Unity and Diversity

A. Intuition Rather than Deliberation

B. The Crisis of Failure or Impairment

II. BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS

EXPOSITION = EXEGESIS + APPLICATION

A. Taking Account of Ourselves

B. One Preacher, One Sermon, Many “Hearings”

IV. WRITER, AUDIENCE AND TEXT

- Any communication is multifaceted, involving:

1) the communicator’s intended meaning

A. “Decoding” the Communication Itself

V. THE IMPACT OF DISTANCE

VI. A FINAL WORD

2. Does Dr. Schiff “bend” the text? In what ways?

- The foundational issues and priorities in interpretation are critical

C. The Matter of the Reader

D. Three “Worlds” of Interest

II. BRUCE CORLEY’S SCHEMA2

A. “Cubing” the Text

2. The Diagram Explained

3. The Strategies Described

i. Setting – priority to answer questions of historical context

- objective  how to exegete a passage

- Not all genres lend selves to the method

II. THE SEQUENCE OF STEPS

Step 1 – Read the passage several times in various translations.

1.1. Note and mark substantive differences among the translations

1.2. Check footnotes for manuscript variants in the originals

2.1. Observe the paragraphing and sentences

2.2. Check the punctuation of an Interlinear

Comprehensive Introduction to Interpreting Scripture, B. Corely, S. Lemke, G. Lovejoy, eds. (Nashville:

3.3. Coordinate by lining up and subordinate by indentation

3.4. Underline connections and otherwise highlight repetitions

4.1. Restate the displayed text as brief topics in outline form

5.1. Describe main verbs and their phrase/clause modifiers

5.2. Define key words and repeated themes

5.3. Trace the argument from one paragraph to another

Step 6 – Introduce the paper with a focus on setting and structure.

6.1 Raise the reader’s interest in the text.

6.2. Give attention to the historical context

6.3. Sketch the literary form

Step 7 – Conclude the paper/sermon with a focus on significance.

SPECIFIC TASK: Your task in this Discussion is to collaborate together,

Step 2 – Map the boundaries of the passage by observing format markers in

Step 4 – Adapt an outline from your structural analysis of the text.

B. Textual Criticism Defined

II. MAJOR MOVES IN TEXTUAL HISTORY

A. Hebrew Old Testament Textual History

1. Early Period—Composition to 400 BC

4. AD 1000 to 16th century

5. 16th Century to Modern Day

B. Greek NT Textual History