I. Intro and the Need to Interpret (Other recommended reading: Knowing Scripture [R.C. Sproul], Interpreting the Bible (B. Mickelson) and Better Bible Study [Berkely & Alvera Mickelson])
A. Terms:
1. Genrethe term for types of literature in the Bible; it is vital to know what type your selected Scripture is in order to properly study it
2. Exegesis is about learning to ask the right questions of the text. The goal of good interpretation is to get at the "plain meaning of the text."
3. Everyone who reads the Bible is at the same time an interpreter, thinking that our understanding is the same things as the Holy Spirit's or human author's intent.
B. Know that different Scriptures will read in different ways.
1. The point to reading biblical texts ought to be that what we read, we read with the intention of obeying. Don't be afraid to find the main truth right at the surface; the point of bible study is not trying to discover what no one else has ever seen before.
2. The point of hermeneutics ultimately is application: how do I bring the "then and there" to "here and now?"
C. The scholar is primarily concerned with what the text meant; the layperson is usually concerned with what it means. The believing scholar insists we must be both, that the biblical texts mean what they meant.
D. Tasks:
1. Find out what the text originally meantexegesis
2. Learn to see that meaning in contemporary context (application)hermeneutics
E. Tools
1. Your Bible, whatever translation, which is you beginning point, is in fact the end result of much scholarly work, as any English Bible translation is already a product of interpretation.
2. Good translators take the problem of our language differences (English, Hebrew and Greek) into consideration, but this is not easy, as different foreign words can take on a single English word that may take different meanings in different contexts.
F. About Exegesis
1. The goal of any person doing exegesis is to get at the "plain meaning," but this plain meaning usually becomes simply what the person wants to find anyway.
2. The antidote to bad interpretation is not no interpretation, but good interpretation, based on common-sense guidelines. George Ladd: "The Bible is the Word of God given in the words of men in history."
a. Since the Bible is God's Word, it has eternal relevance
b. God chose to speak His Word through human words in history
c. Every book in the Bible has historical particularity as well as eternal relevance
G. The Bible has a human side, at once an encouragement and a challenge:
1. In speaking through real persons, in a variety of circumstances, over a 1500-year period, God's Word was expressed in the vocabulary and thought patterns of those persons and conditioned by the culture of those times and circumstances. God's Word to us was first of all His Word to them.
2. One of the most important aspects of the human side of the Bible is that to communicate His Word to all human conditions, God chose to use almost every available kind of communication
a. Narrative history
b. Genealogies
c. Chronicles
d. Laws of all kinds
e. Poetry of all kinds
f. Proverbs
g. Prophetic oracles
h. Riddles
i. Drama
j. Biographical sketches
k. Parables
l. Letters
m. Sermons
n. Apocalypses
H. The first task is exegesisthe careful, systematic study of the Scripture to discover the original, intended meaning (basically a historical task), to find out what was the original intent of the words of the Bible.
1. Problem 1: Exegesis is often too selectiveit's only done when there is an obvious problem between biblical texts and modern culture, usually resulting in reading one's own foreign ideas into a text, making God's Word something other than what God really said.
2. Problem 2: One does not begin by consulting the experts; but when it is necessary, try to use the better sources. Often the sources consulted are not written by true experts (they are secondary sources using other secondary sources rather than the primary ones)
3. Good exegesis requires knowledge of the biblical languages, social backgrounds, determination of textual origin, use of study tools. The key to this is to learn to ask the right questions of the text. Two basic kinds of questions we should ask: those that relate to content and of context, under which we ask the historical and literary.
4. Context:
a. Historicaldeals with time, culture, location and topography of author and readership, and occasion of writing;
i. Will probably require a good Bible dictionary
ii. More important questions of occasion and purpose are probably answered in the book itself
iii. Make your own observations first!
b. Literarywords only have meanings in sentences, and for the most part only have meaning in relation to preceding and succeeding sentences;
i. The most important question to ask over and over: "What's the point?" Follow the author's train of thought
ii. It is imperative to use a translation that recognizes paragraphs and poetry
c. Contentthe meanings of words, the grammatical relationships in sentences and the choice of the original text where the manuscripts have variant readings; also includes the number of items mentioned after having determined historical context
i. Mostly questions of meaning ordinarily asked of the biblical text
ii. Some questions will require outside help, but this is the last thing one should do
I. Tools:
1. a good Bible dictionary
2. a good Bible handbook
3. good commentaries
4. a good translation
J. Hermeneuticsthe search for the contemporary relevance of ancient texts; here is where we ask the questions about the Bible's meaning in the "here and now."
1. Devotional reading is not the only kind one should do. One must also learn to study the Bible, which will in turn must inform one's devotional reading.
2. Proper hermeneutics begins with solid exegesis. The reason not to begin with here and now is that the only proper control of hermeneutics is to be found in the original intent of the biblical text. Hermeneutics based on individual meaning become pure subjectivity. And who is to say that one person's interpretation is right and another's is wrong. Anything goes.
3. In contrast to such subjectivity, we insist that the original meaning of the text, as much as it is in our power to discern it, is the objective point of control. It would be argued, of course, that common sense would keep one from such foolishness; unfortunately, common sense is not so common. We cannot make scripture mean anything that pleases us and then give the Holy Spirit credit for it.
4. On this one thing, however, there must surely be agreement: a text cannot mean what it never meant. Or, more positively, a biblical text for us means what it meant when it was first spoken.
Fee & Stuart, Chapter 2
II. The Basic Tool: a Good Translation
A. The 66 books of the Protestant Bible were originally written in three different languages: Hebrew (most of the Old Testament), Aramaic (a sister language to Hebrew used in half of Daniel and two chapters in Ezra) and Greek (all of the New Testament). Since you probably don't know these languages, it is recommended that you use a good English translation, or several good translations.
B. Since you are reading a translation, you are already involved in interpretation, like it or not. To read in translation is not a bad thing, it is simply inevitable. The trouble with using only one translation, be it ever so good, is that one is thereby committed to the exegetical choices of the translation as the Word of God. The translation you are using may be correct, but it may also be wrong.
1. First, it is probably good practice to use mainly one translation, provided it is a good one. This will aid in memorization as well as give consistency. Also, if using one of the newer translations, notes in the margins will be available to explain difficulties. However, for study of the Bible, you should use several well-chosen translations. The best thing is to use translations that one knows will differ.
2. Choices of translation should not be based on personal preference or "readability." To make an educated choice, we need to understand the science of translation as well as some of the good English translations. The translation must make two kinds of choices: textual linguistic.
3. The translator needs to make sure he is using as close a text as possible to the original text as it left the author's hand. The situation is the same for Old and New Testaments:
a. No original copies exist.
III. The Epistles: Learning to Think Contextually
A. Intro
B. Nature of the Epistles
1. Epistles themselves are not a homogeneous lot
a. "Real letters" (to Adolf Deissmann)meant only for the original addressees, not to just anyone
b. "Epistles" were meant as an art form to be appreciated by everyone
2. Epistles tend to have specific forms
a. Name of the writer
b. Name of the recipient
c. Greeting
d. Prayer wish or thanksgiving
e. Body
f. Final greeting and farewell
3. Epistles are occasional documentsarising out of and intended for a specific occasion; all are from the first century
a. Called forth by specific circumstances on either writer's or (most often) reader's side
b. Usually to correct behavior
c. Correction of doctrine or misunderstandings
d. Problems
i. We have the answers; it is difficult to ascertain the question or problem
ii. Epistles are not first of all theological treatises; "task" theology is implied
C. The Historical ContextForm a tentative but informed reconstruction of the situation that the author is speaking to
1. Consult a Bible dictionary or intro in your commentary to learn as much as possible about the addressee(s)
a. Learn about the location
b. Demographics
c. Culture
2. Develop the habit of reading the whole letter through in one sitting (nothing can replace this)
a. This is how letters are always meant to be read
b. Get the big picture firstread the whole book in one sitting, taking a few very brief notes
c. What you notice about the recipients themselves
i. The author's attitudes
ii. Any specific things mentioned as to the specific occasion of the letter
iii. The letter's natural, logical divisions
3. Based on the logical divisions, create an outline, beginning with obvious major divisions
a. Some letters consist of successions of arguments, but most basically form one long one
b. This will only be a tentative outlinewe know only what's on the surface at this point
4. Applying the Historical Context
a. Read each of the major divisions at least twice (again, for the "big picture" of the argument)
b. Go back and list in a notebook everything you can that tells you something about the recipients and their problems
c. Make another list of key words and repeated phrases that indicate the subject matter of the author's answer
d. Determine specifically what the author is saying
D. The Literary Contexttrace the argument of the letter paragraph by paragraph, then in a sentence or two explain the point of each paragraph for the arguments as a wholeor explain who it functions as part of the author's solutions to the problem(s) of the recipients
1. THINK PARAGRAPHSnot just natural units of thought, but the absolutely necessary key to understanding the argument in the various epistles
a. In a compact way state the content of each paragraphWhat does the author say in this paragraph?
b. In another sentence or two try to explain why you think the author says this right at this point
2. Summarizing the analysis
a. The exegesis is self-containedwe need not go outside the text once to understand the point
b. There is nothing in the text that does not into fit the argument
c. All of the section should make perfectly good sense of everything within the section
E. Problem Passagessome guidelines for texts difficult to understand
1. These texts were not written to usthe original author and original recipients were on a similar wavelength that allows the inspired author to assume a great deal on the part of his readers
2. Very often the point of a passage is still within one's grap, even if one cannot have full certainty about some of the detail.
3. Learn to ask what can be said for certain about a text and what is possible but not certain
4. Consult a good commentary on such difficult passages. Good commentaries will discuss the various options that have been suggested as solutions, with reasons for and against
5. Even scholars to do not have all the answers; where there are multiple viable options as to what a text meant, even the scholars are guessing
IV. The Epistles: the Hermeneutical Questionwhat do these texts mean to us?
A. Our Common Hermeneuticwe bring our enlightened common sense to the text and apply what we can to our own situation; what does not seem to apply is simply left in the first century
1. Most of the matters in the Epistles fit very nicely into common-sense hermeneutics. For most texts it is not a matter of whether one should or not; it is more a matter of "stirring one another up by way of reminder" (2 Peter 1:15)
2. Our lack of consistency in interpretation of scripture is the source of our problems and differences bring out:
a. Our theological heritagecause us to read this heritage into some texts while we read around others
b. Ecclesiastical tradition
c. Cultural norms
d. Our existential concerns
B. The Basic Rule: A text cannot mean what it never could have meant to its author or his or her readers; this rule does not always help one find out what a text means, but it does help to set limits as to what it cannot mean
C. The Second Rule: Whenever we share comparable particulars (i.e., similar specific life situations) with the first-century setting, God's Word to us is the same as his Word to them
1. Doing good exegesis and discovering God's Word to the original readers brings us immediately under that same Word
2. Exegesis must be done well so that we have confidence that our situations and particulars are genuinely comparable to theirs
D. Hermeneutical Problems (p. 66)
1. IntroductionWhen there are comparable particulars and comparable contexts in today's church, is it legitimate to extend the application of the text to other contexts, or to make a text apply to a context totally foreign to its first-century setting?
a. Inherent in extended application is the bypassing of exegesis altogetherwhy not simply begin with the here and now and fall heir to centuries of error?
b. When there are comparable situations and comparable particulars, God's Word to us in such texts must be limited to its original intent
c. The extended application is usually seen to be legitimate because it is true; that is, it is clearly spelled out in other passages where that is the intent of the passage
2. The Problem of particulars that are not comparableHow do the answers to non-twentieth-century problems speak to twentieth-century Christians?
a. We must do our exegesis with particular care so that we hear what God's Word to them really was. In most cases a clear principle has been articulated.
b. The "principle" does not now become timeless to be applied at random or whim to any and every kind of situation It must be applied to genuinely comparable situations.
c. Problem: how does one distinguish matters of indifference from matters that count?
i. What the Epistles specifically indicate as matters of indifference may still be regarded as such
ii. Matters of indifference are not inherently moral, but are culturaleven if it stems from religious culture
iii. The sin lists in the Epistles (e.g., Rom. 1:29-30; 1 Cor. 5:11; 6:9-10; 2 Tim. 3:2-4) never include the first-century equivalents of the items listed above
d. The free person is not to flaunt his or her freedom; the person for whom such matters are a deep personal conviction is not to condemn someone else
3. The Problem of cultural relativity
a. It is the place where the problem of God's eternal Word having been given in historical particularity comes most sharply into focus; has the following steps:
i. The Epistles are occasional documents, conditioned by the language and culture of the first century, which spoke to specific situations in the first-century church
ii. Many of the specific situations in the Epistles are so completely conditioned by their first-century setting that all recognize that they have little or no personal application as a Word for today, except perhaps in the most distant sense of one's deriving some principle from them
iii. Other texts are also thoroughly conditioned by their first-century settings, but the Word to them may be translated into new, but comparable settings
iv. It is not, therefore, that still others of the texts, although they appear to have comparable particulars, are also conditioned by their first-century setting and need to be translated into new settings or simply left in the first century
b. There have been some who have tried to reject the idea of cultural relativity altogether, which has led them more or less to argue for a wholesale adoption of first-century culture as the divine norm
c. The recognition of a degree of cultural relativity is a valid hermeneutical procedure and is an inevitable corollary of the occasional nature of the Epistles
d. Guidelines to distinguish between items that are culturally relative and those that transcend their original setting and have normativeness for all Christians of all times:
i. One should first distinguish between the central core of the message of the Bible and what is dependent upon or peripheral to it
ii. One should be prepared to distinguish between what the New Testament itself sees as inherently moral and what it does not
iii. One must make special notes of items where the New Testament itself has a uniform and consistent witness and where it reflects differences
a) Sound exegesis may cause us to see greater uniformity than appears to be the case now
b) Precisely because other matters appear to be more cultural than moral, one should not be disturbed by a lack of uniformity
c) One should not pursue exegesis only as a means of finding uniformity, even at the cost of common sense or the plain meaning of the text
iv. It is important to be able to distinguish within the New Testament itself between principle and specific applicationthis leads us to suggest that one may legitimately ask at such specific applications, "Would this have been an issue for us had we never encountered it in the New Testament documents?"
v. It might also be important, as much as one is able to do this with care, to determine the cultural options open to any New Testament writer. The degree to which a New Testament writer agrees with a cultural situation in which there is only one option increases the possibility of the cultural relativity of such a position.
vi. One must keep alert to possible cultural differences between the first and twentieth centuries that are sometimes not immediately obvious
vii. One must finally exercise Christian charity at this point. Christians need to:
a) Recognize the difficulties
b) Open the line of communication with each other
c) Start by trying to define some principles
d) Have love for and a willingness to ask forgiveness from those with whom they differ
4. The Problem of task theology
a. Introduction
i. Much of the theology in the Epistles is task-oriented and therefore is not systematically presented
ii. This must not be taken to mean that one cannot in fact systematically present the theology that is either expressed in or derived from statements in the Epistles
iii. The Bible student must always be forming and "reforming" a biblical theology on the basis of sound exegesis
iv. A given writer's theology is found in his presuppositions and implications as well as in his explicit statements
b. Cautions that are the direct result of the occasional nature of the Epistles
i. Because of their occasional nature, we must be content at times with some limitations to our theological understanding
a) What is said beyond what the texts themselves reveal cannot have the same biblical or hermeneutical import as what can be said on the basis of solid exegesis
b) In Scripture God has given us all we need, but not necessarily all that we want
ii. Sometimes our theological problems with the Epistles derive from the fact that we are asking our questions of the text that by their occasional nature are answering only their questions
a) One of the problems, of course, is that we ourselves do not possess Paul's apostolic authority nor his inspiration
b) We must attempt to bring a biblical worldview to the problem; but no proof texting, when there are no immediately relevant texts
c. Our immediate aim is for greater precision and consistency; our greater aim is to call us all to greater obedience to what we do hear and understand
V. The Old Testament Narratives: Their Proper Use
A. IntroductionThe Holy Spirit knew what he was doing when he inspired so much of the Bible in the form of narrative. We think it is obvious that this type of literature serves God's revelatory purpose well.
B. The Nature of Narratives
1. What Narratives areStories!
a. The Bible contains what we often hear called God's storya story that is utterly true, crucially important and often complex
b. Bible narratives tell us about things that happenedbut not just any things. Their purpose is to show God at work in his creation and among his people
c. All narratives have a plot and characters; the Old Testament narratives, however, have plots that are part of a special overall plot, and have a special cast of characters, the most special of whom is God himself
2. Three Levels of Narratives
a. The top levelthe whole universal plan of God worked out through his creation. It is often referred to as the "story of redemption" or "redemptive history." Key aspects:
i. The initial creation itself
ii. The fall of humanity
iii. The power and ubiquity of sin
iv. The need for redemption
v. Christ's incarnation and sacrifice
b. The middle levelcentered on Israel
c. The bottom levelthe hundreds of individual narratives that make up the other two levels
3. Things to note carefully:
a. Every individual Old Testament narrative (bottom level) is at least a part of the greater narrative of Israel's history in the world (the middle level), which in turn is a part of the ultimate narrative of God's creation and his redemption of it (the top level)
b. What we have, then, are individual narratives (sometimes of a compound nature) within a major narrative within an ultimate narrative
4. What Narratives are not
a. Not just stories about people who lived in Old Testament times. They are first and foremost stories about what God did to and through those people
b. Not allegories or stories filled with hidden meanings. But there may be aspects of the narratives that are not easy to understand
i. Narratives do not answer all our questions about a given issue
ii. Reading into stories is what happens when people identify supernatural events in the biblical narratives as the result of such things as the intervention of UFOs, time machines or supposed lost ancient secret scientific discoveries
c. Do not always teach directly. They emphasize God's nature and revelation in special ways that legal or doctrinal portions of the Bible never can, by allowing us vicariously to live through events and experiences rather than simply learning about the issues involved in those events and experiences
i. If you are a Christian, the Old Testament is your spiritual history. The promis and calling of God to Israel are your historical promise and calling (Gal. 3:29)
ii. Although the Old Testament narratives do not necessarily teach directly, they often illustrate what is taught directly and categorically elsewhere. This represents an implicit kind of teaching, which in cooperation with the corresponding explicit teachings of Scripture, is highly effective in generating the sort of learning experience that the Holy Spirit can use positively
d. Each individual narrative or episode within a narrative does not necessarily have a moral all its own. Narratives are analogous to parables in that the whole unit gives the message, not the separate individual parts
5. Principles for Interpreting Old Testament Narratives
a. Usually does not directly teach a doctrine
b. Usually illustrates a doctrine or doctrine taught propositionally elsewhere
c. Record what happenednot necessarily what should have happened or what ought to happen every time
d. What people do in narratives is not necessarily a good example for us; frequently, it is just the opposite
e. Most of the characters in the Old Testament narratives are far from perfect and their actions are, too
f. We are not always told at the end of a narrative whether what happened was good or bad. We are expected to be able to judge that on the basis of what God has taught us directly and categorically elsewhere in the Scripture
g. All narratives are selective and incomplete; not all the relevant details are always given
h. Not written to answer all our theological questions
i. May teach either explicitly (by clearly stating something) or implicitly (by clearly implying something without actually saying it)
j. In the final analysis, God is the hero of all biblical narratives
C. Examples of Narrative Interpretation
1. The Joseph NarrativeThe inspired narrator is leaving no room for doubt as to the hero of the storyGod. And the moral is that God was with Joseph
2. The Ruth Narrative
a. Explicit teaching is that which the inspired narrator actually says; implicit teaching is that which is clearly present in the story, but not stated in so many words
b. You want to read things out of a narrative, rather than into it
c. Things the narrative tells us about Ruth:
i. She converted to faith in the Lord, the God of Israel
ii. Implicitly, that Boaz was a righteous Israelite who kept the Mosaic Law, though many other Israelites did not
iii. Implicitly, this story is part of the background of the ancestry of King Davidand by extension, therefore, to Jesus Christ
iv. Implicitly, that Bethlehem was an exceptional town during the Judges period by reason of the faithfulness of its citizenry
d. Careful attention to details and to the overall movement of a narrative and its context are necessary if its full meaning is to be obtained. What is implicit can be every bit as significant as what is explicit.
D. Warnings
1. Implicit does not mean "secret"you will get into all sorts of trouble if you try to find meanings in the text that you think God has "hidden" in the narrative
2. Implicit means that the message is capable of being understood from what is said, though it is not stated in so many words
3. If you are not able confidently to express to others something taught implicitly, so that they can understand it and get the point, too, you probably are misreading the text
E. Some Final Cautions
1. Why is it that people so often find things in Bible narratives that are not really there?
a. They are desperate for information that will:
i. Help them
ii. Be of personal value
iii. Apply to their own situation
b. They are impatientthey want their answers now, from this book, from this chapter
c. They wrongly expect that everything in the Bible applies directly as instruction for their own individual lives
2. Common errors of interpretation
a. Allegorizingpeople relegate the text to merely reflecting another meaning beyond the text
b. Decontextualizingignoring the full historical and literary contexts, and often the individual narrative, people concentrate on small units only and thus miss interpretational clues
c. Selectivitypicking and choosing specific words and phrases to concentrate on, ignoring the others, and ignoring the overall sweep of the passage being studied
d. False Combinationscombines elements from here and there in a passage and makes a point out of their combination, even though the elements themselves are not directly connected in the passage itself
e. Redefinitionwhat people are often tempted to do to make a text mean something to them when the plain meaning of the text leaves them cold, producing no immediate spiritual delight or saying something they do not want to hear
f. Extracanonical authorityby using come sort of special external key to the Scriptures, usually a set of doctrines or a book that claims to reveal scriptural truths not otherwise knowable, people suppose that they can unlock the mysteries of the Bible
g. Moralizingthe assumption that principles for living can be derived from all passages. The moralizing reader in effect asks the question, "What is the moral of this story?" at the end of every individual narrative
h. Personalizingalso known as individualizing, this is reading Scripture in a way that supposes than any or all parts apply to you or your group in a way that they do not apply to everyone else
3. Do not be a monkey-see-monkey-do reader of the Bible. No Bible narrative was written specifically about you.
4. Your task is to learn God's word from the narratives about them, not to try to do everything that was done in the Bible
VI. Acts: the Question of Historical Precedent
A. Introduction
1. Most Christians do not read Acts in the same way they read Judges or 2 Samuel, even if they are not fully aware of it
2. Most sectors of evangelical Protestantism have a "restoration movement" mentality
3. It is our lack of hermeneutical precision as to what Acts is trying to teach that has led to a lot of the division one finds in the church
4. With Luke's intention or purpose in writing Acts, it must be emphasized that we always mean that the Holy Spirit lies behind Luke's intention
B. The Exegesis of ActsAlthough Acts is a readable book, it is also a difficult book fro group Bible study. The reason is that people come to the book, and thus to its study, for a whole variety of reasons
1. Acts as History
a. Luke was a Gentile, whose inspired narrative is at the same time an excellent example of Hellenistic historiography
i. Such history was not written simply to keep records or to chronicle the past
ii. It was written both to encourage or entertain (i.e., to be good reading) and to inform, moralize or offer an apologetic
iii. Luke has been greatly influenced by his reading of, and living, with, the Old Testament narratives
b. Making note of Luke's own theological interests is of special importance as your read or study acts. Exegesis of Acts, therefore, includes not only the purely historical questions like What happened but also the theological ones such as What was Luke's purpose in selecting and shaping the material in this way?
2. The First Step
a. Read Acts all the way through in one or two sittings
b. As you read make mental notes of such things as key people and places, recurring motifs (what really interests Luke?), natural divisions of the book)
c. Go back and skim read, and jot down with references your previous observations
d. Ask yourself Why did Luke write this book?
3. Acts: an Overviewlet's note the natural divisions as Luke himself gives them to us. Acts can be seen to be composed of six sections, or panels, which give the narrative a continually forward movement from its Jewish setting based in Jerusalem with Peter as its leading figure toward a predominantly Gentile church, with Paul as the leading figure, and with Rome, the capital of the Gentile world, as the goal.
a. Acts 1:16:7 a description of the primitive church in Jerusalem, its early preaching, its common life, its spread and its initial oppostion
b. Acts 6:89:31 a description of the first geographical expansion carried out by the "Hellenists" (Greek-speaking Jewish Christians) to Diaspora Jews or "nearly Jews" (Samaritans and proselytes)
c. Acts 9:3212:24 a description of the first expansion to the Gentiles. The key is the conversion of Cornelius
d. Acts 12:2516:5 a description of the first geographical expansion into the Gentile world, with Paul in the leadership
e. Acts 16:619:20 a description of the further, ever westward, expansion into the Gentile world, now into Europe
f. Acts 19:2128:30 a description of the events that move Paul and the Gospel on to Rome, with a great deal of interest in Paul's trials, in which three times he is declared innocent of any wrongdoing
g. According to Luke, all of this forward movement did not happen by man's design; it happened because God willed it and the Holy Spirit carried it out
4. Luke's Purpose
a. The key to understanding Acts seems to be in Luke's interest in this movement, orchestrated by the Holy Spirit, of the Gospel from its Jerusalem-based, Judaism-oriented beginnings to its becoming a worldwide, Gentile-predominant phenomenon
b. This interest in "movement" is further substantiated by what Luke does not tell us
i. He has no interest in the "lives," that is biographies, of the apostles
ii. He has little or no interest in church organization or polity
iii. There is no word about other geographical expansion, except in the one direct line from Jerusalem to Rome
iv. All of this together says that church history per se was simply not Luke's reason for writing
c. Luke's interest also does not seem to be in standardizing things, bringing everything into uniformity
d. Nonetheless, we believe that much of Acts is intended by Luke to serve as a model. But the model is not so much in the specifics as in the overall picture
5. An Exegetical Sampling
a. As always, one begins by reading the selected portion and its immediate context over and again
b. The real problem stems from the fact that Luke himself does not try to harmonize everything for us
c. Not every sentence in every narrative or speech is necessarily trying to tell us something. But every sentence in every narrative or speech contributes to what God is trying to say as a whole through Acts.
C. The Hermeneutics of ActsHow do the individual narratives in Acts, or any other biblical narrative for that matter, functions as precedents for the later church, or do they? Almost all biblical Christians tend to treat precedent as normative authority to some degree or another.
1. Some General Principles
a. The crucial hermeneutical question here is whether biblical narratives that describe what happened in early church also function as norms intended to delineate what must happen in the ongoing church
b. Our assumption is that unless Scripture explicitly tells us we must do something, what is only narrated or described does not function in a normative wayunless it can be demonstrated on other grounds that the author intended it to function in this way
c. Doctrinal statements derived from Scripture fall into three (or four) categories:
i. Christian theology (what Christians believe)
ii. Christian ethics (how Christians ought to behave)
iii. Christian experience and Christian practice (what Christians do)
d. Within these categories one might further distinguish two levels of statements
i. Primary-level statementsdoctrinal statements derived from the explicit propositions or imperatives of Scripture (i.e., what Scripture intends to teach)
ii. Secondary-level statementsstatements derived only incidentally, by implication or by precedent
e. A similar distinction may be made with regard to the doctrine of Scripture. That it is the inspired Word of god is primary; the precise nature of inspiration is secondary.
f. Almost everything Christians derive from Scripture by way of precedent is in our third category, Christian experience or practice, and always at the second level
g. Closely related to this discussion is the concept of intentionality
h. It is a general maxim of hermeneutics that God's Word is to be found in the intent of the Scripture
i. Luke was trying to show how the church emerged as a chiefly Gentile, worldwide phenomenon from its origins as a Jerusalem-based, Judaism oriented sect of Jewish believers, and how the Holy Spirit was directly responsible for this phenomenon of universal salvation based on grace alone.
j. Principles of hermeneutics of historical narrative
i. The Word of God in Acts that may be regarded as normative for Christians is related primarily to what any given narrative was intended to teach
ii. What is incidental to the primary intent of the narrative may indeed reflect an inspired author's understanding of things, but it does not have the same didactic value as what the narrative was intended to teach
iii. Historical precedent, to have normative value, must be related to intent. That is, if it can be shown that the purpose of a given narrative is to establish precedent, then such precedent should be regarded as normative.
k. The problem with all of this, of course, is that it tends to leave us with little that is normative for those broad areas of concernChristian experience and Christian practice
2. Some Specific PrinciplesSuggestions as to the hermeneutics of biblical precedents:
a. It is probably never valid to use an analogy based on biblical precedent as giving biblical authority for present-day actions
b. Although it may not have been the author's primary purpose, biblical narratives do have illustrative and, sometimes, "pattern" value
i. In cases where the precedent justifies a present action, the precedent does not establish a norm for specific action
ii. Warning: if one wishes to use a biblical precedent to justify some present action, one is on safer ground if the principle of the action is taught elsewhere, where it is the primary intent so to teach
c. In matters of Christian experience, and even more so of Christian practice, biblical precedents may sometimes be regarded as repeatable patternseven if they are not understood to be normative. The decisions as to whether certain practices or patterns are repeatable should be guided by the following considerations:
i. The strongest possible case can be made when only one pattern is found (although one must be careful not to make too much of silence), and when that pattern is repeated within the New Testament itself
ii. When there is an ambiguity of patterns or when a pattern occurs but once, it is repeatable for later Christians only if it appears to have diving approbation or is in harmony with what is taught elsewhere in Scripture
iii. What is culturally conditioned is either not repeatable at all, or must be translated into the new or differing culture
VII. The Gospels: One Story, Many Dimensions
A. The Nature of Gospels
1. Jesus himself did not write a Gospelthey are not books by Jesus but books about Jesus, which at the same time contain a large collection of his training
a. The Gospels are not like Acts, for here we have both a narrative of Jesus' life and large blocks of his sayings (teachings) as an absolutely basic part of that life. But the sayings were not written by him, as the Epistles were by Paul. Jesus' primary tongue was Aramaic; his teachings come to us only in a Greek translation
b. God gave us what we know about Jesus' earthly ministry in this way, not in another way that might better suit someone's mechanistic, tape-recorder mentality
2. There are four gospelsThe question of the nature of the gospels can best be answered by first speaking to the question, "Why four?" Because different communities each had need for a book about Jesus
3. For the later church, none of the Gospels supersedes the other, but each stands beside the others as equally valuable and equally authoritative. How so? Because in each case the interest in Jesus is as at two levels
a. There was the purely historical concern that this is who Jesus was and this is what he said and did; it is this Jesus, who was crucified and raised from the dead, whom we now worship as the risen and exalted Lord.
b. There was the existential concern of retelling this story for the needs of later communities that did not speak Aramaic but Greek, and that did not live in a basically rural, agricultural, and Jews setting, but in Rome, or Ephesus, or Antioch, where the Gospel was encountering an urban, pagan environment
B. The Historical Contextfirst of all has to do with Jesus himself, but also has to do with the individual authors (the evangelists) and their reasons for writing
1. The Historical Context of Jesusin General
a. It is imperative to the understanding of Jesus that you immerse yourself in the first-century Judaism of which he was a part
b. For this kind of background information there is simply no alternative to some good outside reading
c. An especially important feature of this dimension of the historical context, but one that is often overlooked, has to do with the form of Jesus' teaching. Everyone knows that Jesus frequently taught in parables. What people are less aware of is that he used a whole variety of such forms.
d. Jesus also made effective use:
i. Proverbs (Matt. 6:21; Mark 3:24)
ii. Similes and metaphors (Matt. 10:16, 5:13)
iii. Poetry (Matt. 7:6-8; Luke 6:27-28)
iv. Questions (Matt. 17:25)
v. Irony (Matt. 16:2-3)
2. The Historical Context of Jesusin Particular
a. This is a more difficult aspect in the attempt to reconstruct the historical context of Jesus because Jesus' words and deeds were handed on orally during a period of perhaps thirty years or more, and during this time whole gospels were not being passed on.
b. It was the content of the Gospels that was being passed on in individual stories and sayings (pericopes). Many of these sayings were transmitted along with their original contexts. Scholars have come to call such pericopes pronouncement stories, because the narrative itself exists only for the sake of the saying that concludes it.
c. The real difficulty comes with the fact that so many of Jesus' sayings and teachings were transmitted without their contexts
d. Many such sayings (without contexts) were available to the evangelists, and is was the evangelists themselves, under their own guidance of the Spirit, who gave these sayings their present contexts
e. As you read the Gospels, one of the questions you will want to ask, even if it cannot be answered for certain, is whether Jesus' audience for a given teaching was his close disciples, the larger crowds, or his opponents
3. The Historical Context of the Evangelist
a. The Gospels themselves are anonymous (in the sense that their authors are not identified by name) and we cannot be sure of their places of origin
b. We can be fairly sure of each evangelist's interest and concerns by the way he selected, shaped, and arranged his materials
C. The Literary contexthas to do with the place of a given pericope in the context of any one of the Gospels
1. Interpreting the Individual Pericopeswhen interpreting or reading one of the Gospels, one needs to keep in mind the two realities about the Gospels: there are four of them, and they are "two-level" documents
a. Think Horizontallywhen studying a pericope in any one gospel, one should be aware of the parallels in the other gospels
i. The purpose of studying the gospels in parallel is not to fill out athe sotry in one gospel with details from the others
ii. The basic reasons for thinking horizontally are two
a) The parallels will often give us an appreciation for the distinctives of any one of the Gospels
b) The parallels will help us to be aware of the different kinds of contents in which the same or similar materials lived in the ongoing church
iii. There is such a high degree of verbal similarity among the Synoptics in their narratives, as well as in their recording of the sayings of Jesus. But for this to carry over to the narratives is something elseespecially so when one considers:
a) These stories were first told in Aramaic, yet we are talking about the use of Greek words
b) Greek word order is extremely free, yet often the similarities extend even to precise word order
c) It is highly unlikely that three people in three different parts of the Roman Empire would tell the same story with the same wordseven to such minor points of individual style as prepositions and conjunctions
iv. The best explanation:
a) Mark wrote his gospel first, probably in part at least from his recollections of Peter's preaching and teaching
b) Luke and Matthew had access to Mark's gospel and independently used it as a basic source for their own
c) John wrote independently of the other three and thus his gospel has little material in common with them
v. Awareness of Gospel parallels helps one to see how the same materials sometimes came to be used in new contexts in the ongoing church
b. Think Verticallywhen reading or studying a narrative or teaching in the Gospels, one should try to be aware of both historical contexts, that of Jesus and that of the evangelist
i. Caution: the purpose of thinking vertically is not primarily to study the life of the historical Jesus. The Gospels in their present form are the Word of God to us; our own reconstructions of Jesus' life are not.
2. Interpreting the Gospels as Wholeslearning to see the kinds of concerns that have gone into the composition of each of the Gospels that make each of them unique
a. In reading and studying the Gospels one must take seriously not only the evangelists' interest in Jesus per se, what he did and said, but also their reasons for retelling the one story for their own readers
b. The gospel writers were authors in the sense that with the Spirit's help they creatively structured and rewrote the material to meet the needs of their readers
c. There were three principles at work in the composition of the Gospels: selectivity, arrangement, and adaptation
i. Selectivitythe evangelists as divinely inspired authors selected those narratives and teachings that suited their purposes
ii. Arrangementthe evangelists and their churches had special interests that also caused them to arrange and adapt what was selected
iii. Adaptationexplains most of the so-called discrepancies among the Gospels
D. Some Hermeneutical Observations
1. The Teachings and Imperatives
a. Given that one has done exegesis with care, the teachings and imperatives of Jesus in the Gospels should be brought into the twentieth century in the same was as we do with Paul, Peter or James in the Epistles
b. Because many of Jesus' imperatives are set in the context of expounding the Old Testament Law and because to many people they seem to present an impossible ideal, a variety of hermeneutical ploys have been offered to "get around" these imperatives as normative authority for the church
c. To seethe imperatives as law is to misunderstand them. They are not law in the sense that one must obey them in order to become or remain a Christian; our salvation does not depend upon perfect obedience to them. They are descriptions, by way of imperative, of what Christian life should be like because of God's prior acceptance of us.
2. The Narratives
a. Tend to function in more than one way in the Gospels
b. Stories such as the rich young man or the request to sit at Jesus' right hand are placed in a context of teaching, where the story itself serves as an illustration of what is being taught. It seems to us to be the proper hermeneutical practice to use these narratives in precisely the same way
3. A Final, Very Important Word
a. One dare not think he or she can properly interpret the Gospels without a clear understanding of the concept of the kingdom of God in the ministry of Jesus
b. The basic theological framework of the entire New Testament is eschatological; to be eschatological in one's thinking meant to be looking for the end
c. The coming of the end also meant a new beginningthe beginning of God's new age, the messianic age. The new age was also referred to as the kingdom of God.
d. Jesus came and announced that the coming kingdom was at hand with his ministry
e. On the third day he was raised from the dead and he appeared to many of his followers. But instead of "restoring the kingdom of Israel" he returned to the Father and poured out the promised Spirit.
f. Very early, beginning with Peter's sermon in Acts 3, the early Christians came to realize that Jesus had not come to usher in the "final" end, but the "beginning" of the end, as it were. It was already, but not yet
g. The early believers lived between the timesthat is, between the beginning of the end and the consummation of the end. The hermeneutical key to much in the New Testament, and especially the ministry and teaching of Jesus, is to be found in this kind of "tension."
VIII. The Parables: Do You Get the Point?
A. The Parables in History
1. The reason for the long history of the misinterpretation of the parables can be traced back to something Jesus himself said.
a. He seems to have suggested that the parables contained mysteries for those on the inside, while they hardened those on the outside.
b. Because he then proceeded to "interpret" the parable of the Sower in a semi-allegorical way, this was seen to give license to the hardening theory and endless allegorical interpretations.
2. It is extremely doubtful whether most of the parables were intended for an inner circle at all
a. In at least three instances Luke specifically says that Jesus told the parable to people (15:3, 18:9, 19:11) with the clear implication that the parables were to be understood.
b. If we have trouble at times understanding the parables, it is not because they are allegories for which we need some special interpretive keys. Rather it is related to some things suggested earlier about the Gospels.
c. One of the keys to understanding them lies in discovering the original audience to whom they were spoken; many times they came down to the evangelists without a context
3. Our exegesis of the parables must begin with the same assumptions that we have brought to every other genre so far: Jesus was not trying to be obtuse, he fully intended to be understood. Our task is first of all to try to hear what they heard.
B. The Nature of Parables
1. The Variety of Kinds
a. Not all the sayings we label as parables are of the same kind
i. True parablea story, pure and simple, with a beginning and an ending; it has something of a "plot" (the Good Samaritan, for example)
ii. Similitudea "parable" more like an illustration taken from everyday life that Jesus used to make a point
iii. Metaphors and Similessometimes called "parabolic sayings," they function in a way similar to the similitude, but their pointtheir reason for being spokenis considerably different
b. A parable may approach something very close to allegory, where many of the details in a story are intended to represent something else. But the parables are not allegorieseven if at times they have what appears to us to be allegorical features. The reason we can be sure of that has to do with their differing functions.
c. Because the parables are not all of one kind, one cannot necessarily lay down rules that will cover them all
2. How the Parables Function
a. Story parables function as a means of calling forth a response on the part of the hearer
b. Parables were spoken, and we may assume that most of the hearers had an immediate identification with the points of reference that caused them to catch the pointor be caught by it
c. By interpreting we can understand what they caught, or what we could have caught had we been there
C. The Exegesis of Parables
1. Finding the Points of Reference
a. Like a joke, the two things that capture the hearer and elicit a response are the same two things that captured the hearers of Jesus' parables, namely their knowledge of the points of reference and the unexpected turn in the story
b. A true allegory is a story where each element in the story means something quite foreign; a parable will not be so removed
c. The point of the parable is not in the points of reference as it would be in a true allegory. The points of reference are only those parts of the story that draw the hearer into it, with whom he or she is to identify in some way as the story proceeds.
d. The point of the story is to be found in the intended response
2. Identifying the Audience
a. The significance of identifying the audience because of the meaning of the parable has to do with how it was originally heard
b. The task of interpretation is a combination of three things:
i. Sit and listen to the parable again and again
ii. Identify the points of reference intended by Jesus that would have been picked up by the original hearers
iii. Try to determine how the original hearers would have identified with the story, and therefore what they would have heard
c. The exegetical difficulties you will encounter will stem mostly from the cultural gap between you and Jesus' original audience, which may cause you to miss some of the finer points that go into the makeup of the whole story
3. The "Contextless" Parablesparables found in the Gospels without their original historical context
a. It is a matter of trying to determine the points of reference and the original audience. The key is in the repeated rereading of the parable until its points of reference clearly emerge
b. In the Laborers in the Vineyard, there are only three points of reference
i. The landowner
ii. The full-day laborers
iii. The one-hour laborers
c. The point is similar to that of the Prodigal Son
i. God is gracious
ii. The righteous should not begrudge god's generosity
d. The same thing happens with the parable of the Lost Sheep (Matt. 18:12-14)
i. Functions along with the Lost Coin and Prodigal Son as a word to the Pharisees
ii. The lost sheep is clearly a sinner, whose finding brings joy in heaven. Again, as a word to the Pharisees, it justifies Jesus' acceptance of the outcasts
4. The Parables of the Kingdomexpress the dawning of the time of salvation with the coming of Jesus, but the parables we have in mind here are those that expressly say, "The kingdom of God is like"
a. It must be noted that the introduction, "The kingdom of God is like" is not to be taken with the first element mentioned in the parable
i. The expression literally means "It is like this with the kingdom of God"
ii. The whole parable tells us something about the nature of the kingdom, not just one of the points of reference, or one of the details
b. It is tempting to treat these parables differently from those we have just looked at, as if they actually were teaching vehicles rather than stories calling for response
i. Originally these parables were a part of Jesus actual proclamation of the kingdom as dawning with his own coming
ii. They are themselves vehicles of the message calling for response to Jesus' invitation and call to discipline
c. Since these parables are indeed parables of the kingdom, we find them proclaiming the kingdom as "already/not yet." But their main thrust is the "already." Such urgency in Jesus' proclamation has a twofold thrust:
i. Judgment is impending; disaster and catastrophe are at the door
ii. But there is Good News; salvation is freely offered to all
iii. Some parables that illustrate these two aspects of the message
a) In Luke 12:16-20 the parable of the Rich Fool has been set in a context of attitudes toward possessions in light of the presence of the kingdom. The point of the parable, you will note, is not the unexpectedness of death. It is the urgency of the hour.
b) The urgent ho that calls for action, repentance, is also the time of salvation
d. Parables are not to be allegorized. They are to be heardheard as calls to response to Jesus and his mission
D. The Hermeneutical Questionthe hermeneutical task posed by the parables is unique. It has to do with the fact that when they were originally spoken, they seldom needed interpretation
1. We concern ourselves basically wit the parables in their present biblical contexts. What we need to do is what Matthew did (e.g., 18:10-14; 20:1-16): Translate that same point in our own context.
2. Our other hermeneutical suggestion is related to the fact that all of Jesus' parables are in some way vehicles, proclaiming the kingdom. The urgent message of the kingdom as present and soon to be consummated as still needed in our own day.
IX. The Law(s): Covenant Stipulation for Israel
X. The Revelation: Images of Judgment and Hope
A. Introduction
1. The hermeneutical problems are intrinsic
a. The book is in the canon; thus for us it is God's Word, inspired of the Holy Spirit
b. When we come to it to hear that Word, most of us in the church today hardly know what to make of it
2. At the same time, however, there is a rich, diverse symbolism
a. Some is manageable (judgment in the form of an earthquake, 6:12-17)
b. Some is obscure (the two witnesses, 11:1-10)
3. Most of the problems stem from the symbols, plus the fact that the book deals with future events, but at the same time is set in a recognizable first-century context
4. No one should approach the Revelation without a proper degree of humility. There are already too many books on "The Revelation Made Easy."
5. The Revelation is a book on which a lot of popular books and pamphlets have been written. In almost every case, these popular books do no exegesis at all. They jump immediately to hermeneutics, which usually takes the form of fanciful speculations that John himself could never possibly have intended or understood.
B. The Nature of the Revelationthe first key to the exegesis of the Revelation is to examine the kind of literature it is: a unique, finely blended combination of three distinct literary types: apocalypse, prophecy, and letter
1. The Revelation as Apocalypse
a. The taproot of apocalyptic is the Old Testament prophetic literature, especially as it is found in Ezekiel, Daniel, Zechariah, and parts of Isaiah
i. Apocalyptic was concerned about coming judgment and salvation
ii. It was born either in persecution or in a time of great oppression
iii. It expected that God would bring an end that would mean the triumph of right and the final judgment of evil
b. Apocalypses are literary works from the beginning-The prophets were basically spokespersons for Yahweh, whose spoken oracles were later committed to writing and collected in a book. But an apocalypse is a form of literature.
c. The "stuff" of apocalyptic is presented in the form of visions and dreams, and its language is cryptic (having hidden meanings) and symbolic. The most important of these devices was pseudonymity, that is, they were given the appearance of having been written by ancient worthies
d. The images of apocalyptic are often forms of fantasy rather than of reality
i. A beast with seven heads and ten horns (13:1)
ii. A woman clothed with the sun (12:1)
iii. Locusts with scorpion's tails and human heads (9:10)
e. Because they were literary, most of the apocalypses were very formally stylized
f. The Revelation of John fits all these characteristics of apocalyptic but oneRevelation is not pseudonymous
2. The Revelation as Prophecy
a. The major reason John's apocalypse is not pseudonymous is probably related to his own sense of the end as already/not yet
i. Crucial to this understanding is the advent of the Spirit
ii. The message of Jesus, attested by him and to which John and the churches bear witness, is the clear evidence that the prophetic Spirit had come
b. What makes John's Apocalypse different is first of all this combination of apocalyptic and prophetic elements
i. On the one hand, the books is cast in the apocalyptic mod and has most of the literary characteristics of apocalyptic
ii. On the other hand, John clearly intends this apocalypse to be a prophetic word to the church
c. "To prophesy" does not mean primarily to foretell the future but rather to speak forth God's Word in the present (a word that usually had as its content coming judgment or salvation)
3. The Revelation as Epistlethis combination of apocalyptic and prophetic elements has been cast into the form of a letter
a. All the characteristics of the letter from are present
b. John speaks to his readers in the first person/second person formula (Iyou)
c. There is an occasional aspect to the Revelation
C. The Necessity of Exegesisit is precisely the lack of sound exegetical principles that has caused so much bad, speculative interpretation of the Revelation to take place
1. The first task of the exegesis of the Revelation is to seek the author's, and therewith the Holy Spirit's, original intent. As with the Epistles, the primary meaning of the Revelation is what John intended it to mean, which in turn must also have been something his readers could have understood it to mean.
2. Since the Revelation intends to be prophetic, one must be open to the possibility of a secondary meaning, inspired by the Holy Spirit, but not fully seen by the author or his readers. The task of exegesis here is to understand what John was intending his original readers to hear and understand.
3. One must be especially careful of overusing the concept of the "analogy of Scripture" in the exegesis of the Revelation
a. To interpret Scripture by Scripture must not be tilted in such a way that one must make other Scriptures the hermeneutical keys to unlock the Revelation
b. Any keys to interpreting the Revelation must be intrinsic to the text of the Revelation itself or otherwise available to the original recipients from their own historical context (as it is incorrect to assume that John's readers had to have read Matthew or 1 and 2 Thessalonians)
4. Because of the apocalyptic/prophetic nature of the book, there are some added difficulties at the exegetical level, especially having to do with the imagery
a. One must have a sensitivity to the rich background of ideas that have gone into the composition of the Revelation
i. The Old Testament
ii. Other apocalyptic literature
iii. Ancient mythology
b. Apocalyptic imagery is of several kinds
i. In some cases the images are constantthey always refer to the same thing (the beast out of the sea seems to be a standard image for a world empire, not for an individual ruler)
ii. Some images are fluid (the "Lion" of the tribe of Judah turns out in fact to be a "Lamb" [Rev. 5:5-6]the only lion there is in the Revelation)
iii. Some of the images clearly refer to specific things (the seven lampstands are identified as the seven churches; the dragon in chapter 12 is Satan)
iv. Many of the images are probably general (the four horsemen of chapter 6 probably do not represent any specific expression of conquest, war, famine, or death)
c. When John himself interprets his images, these interpreted images must be held firmly and must serve as a starting point for understanding others
d. One must see the visions as wholes and not allegorically press all the details. These details are:
i. For dramatic effect (6:12-14)
ii. To add to the picture of the whole so that the readers will not mistake to points of reference (9:7-11)
5. Apocalypses in general, and the Revelation in particular, seldom intend to give a detailed, chronological account of the future. John's larger concern is that God is in control of history and the church.
D. The Historical Context
1. Try to read the book all the way through in one sitting. Read for the big picture. Do not try to figure out everything.
2. As you read, be making some mental or brief written notes about the author and his readers
3. Go back a second time and specifically pick up all the references that indicate John's readers are "companions in his suffering" (1:9)
a. "To the one who overcomes"
b. Christian martyrs slain because of the "word" and the "testimony" (6:9-11)
c. The great multitude who will never again suffer (7:16)
d. Suffering and death linked to bearing "the testimony of Jesus" (12:11, 17)
e. Suffering and death specifically attributed to the beast (13:7, 14:9-13, 16:5-6, 18:20, 24, 19:2)
4. This motif is the key to understanding the historical context and fully explains the occasion and purpose of the book
5. The main themes are abundantly clear: the church and the state are on a collision course; and initial victory will appear to belong to the state
a. It will get far worse before it gets better (6:9-11)
b. Do not capitulate in times of duress (14:11-12, 21:7-8)
c. Christ holds the keys to history, and he holds the churches in his hands (1:17-20)
d. The church triumphs even through death (12:11)
6. One of the keys for interpreting the Revelation is the distinction John makes between two crucial words or ideastribulation and wrath
a. Tribulation (suffering and death) is clearly part of what the church was enduring and was yet to endure
b. God's wrath is his judgment that is to be poured upon those who have afflicted God's people
7. The opening of seals 5 and 6 (6:9-17) raises the two crucial questions in the book
a. In seal 5 the Christian martyrs cry out, "How long, Sovereign Lord, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?"
i. They must "wait a little longer," because there are to be many more martyrs
ii. Judgment is nonetheless absolutely certain, as the sixth seal indicates
b. In seal 6, when God's judgment comes, the judged cry out "Who can stand?" The answer is given in chapter 7: those whom God has sealed, who "have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."
E. The Literary Context
1. Understanding the specific visions
a. It is especially important not only to wrestle with the background and meaning of the images (the content questions) but also to ask how the particular vision functions in the book as a whole. It is a creatively structured whole, and each vision is an integral part of that whole.
b. The basic structure is clear and not an object of debate; differences come in how one interprets the structure
2. General Structure
a. Chapters 1-3 set the stage and introduce us to most of the significant "characters"
i. John himself (1:1-11)
ii. Christ (1:12-20), whom John describes in magnificent images derived partly from Daniel 10 as the Lord of history and the Lord of the church
iii. The church (2:1-3:22)
b. Chapters 4-5 help set the stage as the church is told that God reigns in sovereign majesty
c. Chapters 6-7 begins the unfolding of the actual drama itself
i. Three times throughout the book visions are presented in carefully structured sets of seven (chs. 6-7, 8-11, 15-16)
ii. In each case the first four items go together to form one picture
iii. In 6-7 and 8-11 the next two items also go together to present two sides of another reality
iv. These are then interrupted by an interlude of two visions, before the seventh item is revealed
d. Chapters 8-11 reveal the content of God's judgment (giving us the big picture)
i. The first four trumpets indicate that part of that judgment will involve great disorders in nature
ii. Trumpets 5 and 6 indicate that it will also come from the barbarian hordes and a great war
iii. The seventh trumpet sounds the conclusion: "The Kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ"
e. Chapters 12-22 offer details of the judgment and triumph of chapters 8-11
f. Chapter 12 is the theological key to the bookwithin the recurring New Testament framework of already/not yet, Satan is revealed as a defeated for (already), whose final end has not yet come
g. Chapter 13-14 show how for John's church that vengeance took the form of the Roman Empire with its emperors who were demanding religious allegiance
h. Chapters 15-16 tell how the Empire and the emperors are doomed
i. Chapters 17-22 conclude as a "tale of two cities"
i. The city of earth (Rome) is condemned for its part in the persecution of God's people
ii. The city of God follows, where God's people dwell eternally
F. The Hermeneutical Questions
1. The hermeneutical difficulties
a. God's Word to us is to be found first of all in his Word to them, even though the Prophets and the Revelation often speak about things that for them were yet to be
b. Often what was "yet to be" had a temporal immediacy to it, which from our historical vantage point has now already taken place
c. We can still hear as God's Word the reasons for the judgments
d. We can still hear as God's Word that discipleship goes the way of the Cross, that God has not promised us freedom from suffering and death, but triumph through it
e. All of this is a word that needs to be heard again and again in the churchin every clime and in every age. And to miss that Word is to miss the book altogether
2. Our difficulties like with that other phenomenon of prophecy, namely that the "temporal" word is often so closely ties to the final eschatological realities. Suggestions:
a. We need to learn that pictures of the future are just thatpictures. The pictures express a reality but they are not themselves to be confused with the reality, nor are the details of every picture necessarily to be "fulfilled" in some way.
b. Some of the pictures that were intended primarily to express the certainty of God's judgment must not also be interpreted to mean "soon-ness," at least "soon-ness" from our limited perspective
c. The pictures where the "temporal" is closely tied to the "eschatological" should not be viewed as simultaneouseven though the original readers themselves may have understood them that way. What we must be careful not to do is spend too much time speculating as to how any of our own contemporary events might be fitted into the pictures of the Revelation.
d. Although there are probably many instances where there is a s3econd, yet to be fulfilled, dimension to the pictures, we have been given no keys as to how we are to pin these down.
e. The pictures that were intended to be totally eschatological are still to be taken so. This we should affirm as God's Word yet to be fulfilled. But even these are pictures; the fulfillment will be in God's own time, in his own way.
3. Just as the opening word of Scripture speaks of God and creation, so the concluding word speaks of God and consummation