I would like to comment on Hasel’s work, “Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture.” I enjoyed his concept of “the Hermeneutical Spiral,” which challenges us in how we approach the Bible and do hermeneutics. The main focus of doing theology is by being and doing a methodology that is God-centered. This challenge brings our presuppositions and pre-understandings to be submitted to be changed and reformed by the text of the Holy Bible. Hasel states that we, as interpreters of the Bible, should be very humble and let the text of the Scripture take priority over our own interpretations. Thus, as he continues, “it should be the Bible that is allowed to determine our presuppositions and methodology rather than physics, mathematics, or biology.” I would also add to the end of this statement two more: ‘scientific or doubtful views.’
Perhaps, in the realm of education, as we are all educated, we have tendencies to think that we are superior to the Bible. The Bible should be given enough space to breath in how to teach us its principles. Hasel adds that “the interpreter should be enabled to think increasingly with the biblical text rather than just think about the text of the Bible.” What a challenge for young pastors and teachers! I like his insights and hope to practice such a method in my utilization of Biblical hermeneutics.
My comment is on Understanding Scripture chapter 7: Guidelines for the Interpretation of Scripture
First I found it interesting while reading tonight I ran into the same scripture verse, in Isaiah 65, that was the main verse in question in one of our presentations this afternoon. Muller says it is not quite the description of heaven found in Revelation 21-22 (similar to the questions one of our classmates had asked today). Muller's comments on the passage are found on page 118 if you'd like to read the whole thing.
As I read through the chapter I really appreciated the detailed break down of how to interpret scripture and I gained a deeper understanding of the wheels in motion within the biblical hermeneutical method. I am left with a few questions. A) Muller says any application of the text to our situation today must be tied to the original meaning - of course he goes on to show how to interpret the original meaning but I see this as the area obviously where things can go awry.
He advises keeping the scripture within its context - within the biblical book. So why do we so often and so quickly jump out of the book? I know "Intertextual Reading" is addressed in Chapter 9 - however I think (my own opinion) there should be more of an emphasis on staying within the book, the context of the book and within the texts in the book prior to going outside of the biblical book for interpretation.
In this article, Fernando Canale explains the concepts of revelation and inspiration. At the onset of this explanation is the point that the Bible makes internal claims to being inspired by God Himself. In no way am I questioning that the Bible is inspired of God, but I do wonder if those internal claims are our best proof for the inspiration of scripture. I am not the world’s best basketball player because I claim to be that myself. It seems that the internal claims of the Bible should be some of our final proofs as to the inspiration of scripture. The proof really comes in the experience of the Holy Scripture on individual lives. I wonder if this experiential approach were more used, if we would be better able to reach our current postmodern generation? The postmodern mindset questions absolute truth and therefore the authority and inspiration of scripture. But the inroad to this mindset from a Christian perspective would be to address their need for experiencing true spirituality. It is at the point that we can share with them our own experience with the Word of God or even as they experience it for themselves, that they can progress in the process toward a greater understanding.
On page 42 is written, “We have to distinguish carefully between a central theme or person in Scripture and postulating a theological center whereby other portions of scripture are relegated to a secondary status.” I think often we tend to lean toward the latter, a theological center of interpretation. As the wheel model of inspiration would suggest, our hermeneutic must be Christ centered. If this is not the case we have lost the real reason for Scripture in the first place. This is not to say that our theology does not come out of Scripture, but we must first and ultimately come to Christ in our hermeneutics. This point has been driven home a number of times for me in class this semester, but possibly one of the clearest pictures was from one of Dr. Paul Scott Wilson’s lectures. Dr. Wilson made the point that most of our preaching has lost its Christ-centeredness. He went on to prove the importance of maintaining the whole gospel message when we preach. Also, Hasel continues by explaining the relationship between Scirpture and Christ, which in my opinion would eliminate any argument for placing theological centers before a Christological center.
My comment is on Chapter 7 of The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, "Are Ellen G. White's Writings Christ Centred?"
I read this chapter twice and the final part of the chapter 3 times and something really dawned on me regarding the main points on pages 92 and 93 which describe the way that Jesus restores human personhood. What I already knew as an idea, but really digested through these points is that through "melding" with Christ we are not only conduits for His message but we receive his power and therefore have the power to do things that he did. I think I grew in my understanding of what "partaking of the divine nature" really means. Also I understand more concretely and have pondered more on the idea of God as social by nature and hence in our personhood, as part of humanity, we are social and called to spread to our fellow humans the power and person of Jesus. These two points really stood clear after reading this chapter.
During and after reading chapter 7 on the guidelines for interpretaion of Scripture topic number 2 "Interpreting a Biblical Text" I was left with one question. How do we as Adventist end up with so many different interpretations of a text while claiming to be using the basic exegetical steps or some similar steps? I know there are differences among non-Adventist Christians but even among Adventist there are differences on some doctrines and principles. I went on-line under the key word interpreting bible text and what I found was that almost every site I opened claimed to be using the same steps in almost the same way as laid out in chapter 2. I was wondering then, if the same steps are bieng applied how do we come to so many different conclusions on some of the same doctrines and principles? One of the things I thought was very important, and all the steps are important, was turning to God in prayer. In that section it was suggested that there is nothing wrong with praying not only prior to the study but also praying through out the study presenting to the Lord what is complicated or challenging askig God for the answers. I know a minister who teaches prophecy that will pause, kneel in prayer while presenting a sermon asking God to allow His Holy Spirit to be the interpreter and mouth piece for what needs to be said. Although there are quite a few reasons for arriving at the wrong interpretation of Scripture one sure way to be able to understand and have the right interpretation of God's Word is to depend solely on Him for the answers, a step we sometimes take for granted.
The summary in chapter 7 of "Are Ellen White's Writings Christ-centered," discussed 3 points on how like Scripture relations among divine and human persons are in terms of (1)the place of Christ among the divine persons, (2)the nature of Christ as the divine-human person, and (3)the christ-centered connections among divine and human persons. She first describes the relationship in divinity as being social in nature and she says that there are 3 divine persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit and how the Father is in the Son and the Spirit; the Son is in the Father and the Spirit and the Spirit is in the Father and the Son. One thing I thought about this social relationship is how this relates to us. Just think about how the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are social with us--Divinity and Humanity abiding or dwelling together. How the Father loves us so much that He sent His Son to die for us, John 3:16 and then before Jesus ascended to the Father He didn't want to leave us alone so He prayed the Father to give us another comforter, that He may abide with us forever, John 14:16. He, the Comforter is to not only abide with us but be in us, John 14:17. Jesus said "I will not leave you comfortless, I will come to you, that is in the person of the Holy Spirit. What a blessing to know that as social beings the Godhead is social and desires to be not only around us but in us. Praise God!
Martin Hanna asks the question of whether or not Ellen G. White’s writings are Christ-Centered? Anyone who has ever read Ellen G. White would agree that she is completely centered on Jesus Christ in all of her writings. Now as to whether or not she was “Cosmic Christ” centered…that’s a whole other question altogether. If the term Cosmic-Christ refers to the context of Jesus’ incarnation, coming to live with man in the “cosmos”, then of course, but unfortunately that’s not the only thing implied in the use of this term. According to Elain Siemsen, a writer for The Lutheran, wrote in her April, 2004 article “Who is the Cosmic Christ?”… “In the writings of the early church teachers like Bishop Irenaeus of Lyon (130-200), we see more of the foundation for cosmic Christology. Irenaeus taught that the faithful must look to creation to see the UNITY that begins with the Word of God working out God’s plan of salvation. God's unwearied Word made all things, Irenaeus wrote. The UNITY of creation reflects the UNITY of the Godhead: Father, Son and Spirit. In one continuous line of action from creation-incarnation-life and work-death-resurrection, Irenaeus saw perfect expression of God's own UNITY...Creation, the cosmos, is the location, the setting where we have lived out our disobedience...damaging, if not contributing to the destruction of the cosmos that God blesses in creation. Consequently, it must be here, within creation, that we understand our salvation. The promise for our present and the future is that God's grace, always existing in the cosmos, has entered into history in the incarnation of Jesus and reconnects creation to redemption for all time. Cosmic Christology affirms a persistent hope. This hope offers us this challenge: We are called to live with justice and peace toward humanity and all of the creation. Christ who redeems all the cosmos calls us to reject actions and beliefs that create division between people, between humanity and nature, or between God and creation.” Sound familiar? Cosmic Christology is all about UNITY…it is ecumenical all the way back to the 2nd century. Don’t get me wrong, I love the idea of UNITY, but Christ calls me to “reject actions and beliefs that create division between people?” I’m not so sure about that. If that were the case we would have never had the early church or the Reformation. Jesus says in Matthew 10:34 “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” If unity requires me to adopt something that isn’t biblical then I would rather have division. Blessings in Jesus!
I am on chapter 8 in Hanna’s book, so I haven’t quite made it to chapter 10, but I can understand “reticence” to accepting Scripture is an incomplete representation of God due to the element of human transmission. I believe this does challenge the authority of Scripture…but in my opinion so does the whole idea of prima scriptura versus sola scriptura. I’m not sure that a holistic approach reestablishes the authority of the bible, but in my mind it makes room for dualistic dialecticism. In my mind the use of a wholistic approach opens the door for the adoption of false doctrine. That’s been the reality of years past. Blessings brother!
I am commenting on “Innerbiblical Interpretation: Reading the Scriptures Intertextually,” by Ganoune Diop, in our textbook. I have appreciated Diop’s view on the interpretation of Scripture. He has a refreshing and concise approach, which was a blessing and eye opening for me regarding how to utilize the Bible. The most positive view that Diop has presented here is that the Bible is its own interpreter. He points out that “the reader of the NT must be steeped in the OT in order to understand its various themes.” Diop has not hidden the fact that the entire Bible is inspired by God. The Bible does not contradict itself, but “the issue of innerbiblical interpretation is crucial to enable us to grasp the organic unity of all Scripture and to interpret properly its various sections” (Diop).
Diop gives fourteen examples of how the Biblical writers interpret each other’s writings, which is done in various ways and for different reasons. These examples help me to recognize that God was and is in control of His Word. Sometime as scholars we argue there are inconsistencies between different writers of the Bible, while the writers’ interpretation of each other has no conflict at all; however, the only conflict is the interpretation by those of us who suggest the writers of the Bible contradict other writers. Although, “at times they [Biblical writers] correct what was not ideal in their audiences’ ethics, behavior, world views, understanding, or interpretation of the OT texts” (Diop), please note that this was done by the Biblical writers who were led by the Holy Spirit, not by just anybody who thought to interpret it this way or that way.
I loved what the last chapter in Hanna's book had to say about reasonable faith. It basically explained that reason is not to be used above faith. Reason is a powerful tool to be used for the glory of God. And it is a gift from God for intended use. However, many men have deified reason to the point that they put it above the things of God. They think they can use it to fully explain God. And when they encounter insurmountable intellectual barriers thus discovering the limitations of a human brain many of their first instincts are to downplay the role of God in comparison with a hypothesis that supports their train of logic. This is a contemptable misuse of a God-given power. If we could fully explain God, then most likely we wouldn't need Him. One of the great qoutes I enjoyed in this book is this,"While God does not promise to remove every doubt, He does give sufficient evidence as a reason for faith." Conversely to what I was just saying, many Christians beleive in faith alone with the absence of reason. They believe that to trust at all in science is bordering on heresy. This is also a misuse of ourGod-given abilities. As much as God wishes us to be faithful even in the things of God we do not yet fully understand, does not the bible also say "come now, let us reason together." Often times these two faculties are used best when used in conjuction.
In the book entitled "Understanding Scripture" An Adventist Approach, I've been really digesting a reading from the end of the book in one of the appendices regarding bible study methods. In one section regarding pre-suppositions, it was intersting to note many of the presuppositons arising from the claims of scripture. The first few had to do with origin of the bible. First of all, scripture is to be regarded as the primary revelation of God above nature or anything else. All scripture is inspired from God. All scripture is also applicable to all cultures and backgrounds. It's power to transform lives transcends everything from eastern and mediterannean cultures to the centuries of the human race. Among the pre-suppositions I was reading a couple of interesting ones that dealt with science, reason, and nature. One of them was talking specifically with human reason in conjunction to the bible. Human reason is subject to the bible not equal to or above it. There is a place for reason within theolgy, but it does not hold primacy. "Pre-suppositions regarding the scriptures must be in harmony with the claims of scriptures and subject to correction by them." Man must allow for correction from the holy spirit's guidance in God's word, and let not ego nor anything else be paramount.
Understanding Scripture An Adventist Approach Chapter 5 “The Authority of Scripture” Peter M. van Bemmelen.
What a refreshing essay on the “Authority of Scripture”! You know Peter M. van Bemmelen cuts through the absolute MESS of voices claiming insight as to what constitutes proper biblical hermeneutics. I really appreciate the simple and straight forward nature of van Bemmelen’s article. He makes it plain…true authentic Seventh-day Adventists follow in the Protestant Reformer’s footsteps in upholding sola Scriptura as the governing principle in the development of our theology. Well along comes science, and while science has brought us a number of modern-day conveniences, it also has brought us the nuisance of textual criticism. Arrogantly, men have challenged the veracity of the Bible over the last hundred plus years. Picking and choosing, as if they were at a lunch buffet, textual critics have attempted to explain which parts of the Holy Scriptures are indeed accurate and which parts fail to meet their supposed elevated scientific standard…van Bemmelen explains that it was at this point that Adventist theology adopted the idea of tota Scriptura …maintaining our belief that ALL of the Bible is inspired by God. I would like to get my hands on more of van Bemmelen’s material…I find his style of research and writing to be clear and refreshingly Biblical. May God give us the wisdom and courage to stand for His truth in the face of all opposition.
In chapter 12 of Understanding Scripture an Adventist Approach this statement stops me in my tracks “There are many other things Jesus did…The world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” (John 21:25). This blows my mind because that means that Jesus’ life and ministry was not limited to what was written about Him in the 4 gospels. So, the question is how come the Holy Spirit did not impress on these four writers: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, to include more things like how Jesus was as a teen or if He had a best friend, or if he played the sport of the day or His home life? Could it be that those things are not important or is there something else to it? After reading this chapter I could not help but wonder what would have happened if Mary Magdalene or Lazarus or even Martha had written a gospel. The chapter states that the Holy Spirit inspired the gospel writers and inspired what was recorded. While there is a lot about the birth, ministry and death of Jesus, there is not a lot about his growing years except for the statement by Luke “ And Jesus increase in wisdom, in statute and in favor with God and Man” (Luke 2:52) Does that mean that His life outside of ministry was not important or pen worthy? Here’s what I think. Jesus died the death I should have died. His love for me caused His death. A God like that wants to have a personal relationship with me. He longs to share my life. So could it be when it comes to the small and not so small matters in my life that Jesus wants to minister to me, with me and for me as needed? He wants an intimate relationship with me so that I can write my own Gospel. The Gospel of Jesus written by Simona would have my first hand experiences with Jesus. I would mentally record how He impacted my life and how His impact moved my life to touch others. So I am no longer worried about the blanks that could have been filled in by the 4 Gospel writers. I look forward to the blanks that will be filled in when I allow Jesus full reign over my life. The Gospel according to _____________. You fill in the blank and know Jesus for yourself.
THE SUM OF THE PARTS EQUALS A HOLE! (HOLE IS NOT A TYPO) By Simona Mills
Chapter 9 in the Cosmic Christ of Scripture What Does the Bible Say was a chapter that made me squirms in my seat. “…the evil suppression of truth results from our…foolishness…” How often do I miss the truth by my presuppositions that has not been surrendered to the righteousness of God and by faith in God. “Faith alone…” as the author Dr. Hanna states is a faith that is seasoned with reason in the “light of Christ”. I do not pretend to always understand all the writings of Paul. But I do appreciate the fact that while he did not condemn worldly knowledge, he chose to not let it be the thread of his preaching. He chose to weave his preaching with the thread of Christ and Him crucified. I enjoyed how this chapter enabled me to see the science of the cosmos in scripture without creating problems with theology. That is not always an easy task when we are looking at God’s revelation through the book of nature. The idea of partly veiled knowledge discussed by Dr Hanna is valuable and helps shed light on the holes in science and my sometimes partial understanding of theology in scripture. I concur that incomplete knowledge in science coupled with the incomplete knowledge of scripture (no matter how I slice it I am still gaining knowledge from the Word so it is still incomplete) and knowledge of Christ, when coupled or linked together, can create a strong chain of knowledge. This chain grows stronger as we allow the God of the Cosmos to unveil the light that strengthens our knowledge. So a sum of the parts can equal a hole if not linked with the Cosmic Christ of scripture.
In looking at some of the issues with Hermeneutics I believe that we as Seventh Day Adventist have to seriously look at the way we view those who are suffering from forms of illness in relation to our views of the health message. I know that most would understand that the common cold is no indicator of any hidden sins but what happens when it is Cancer or some other major disease? Do we still look at these people with our noses lifted like the Pharisees did in there day? I think the answer to this question is a sad yes. I believe that we as Seventh day Adventist need to take a second look at the health message and teach it in its biblical entirety with less isogesis and more exegesis. Now don’t get me wrong I do see the many advantages of a healthy diet and exercise and I work to try to make it a part of my every day routine but some of us have taken a beautiful life giving message and made it a burden and a division between us and this is sad. I have watched loving, God fearing Christians being counseled not to go to the doctor for treatment because it shows there lack of faith in a God who can cure them through prayer and Nuni Juice!! This is not by lay people but so called educated pastors. What are we doing? During the guest lecturers a point that was made stuck out in my mind and it was that God has called us to come and reason together. Are we truly REASONING together or are we so stuck in our ways that we would rather watch someone die with a cup of NUNI than to live with Chemo Therapy???
During a presentation about spiritual gifts I wondered if our definition of spiritual gifts is a little limited in its scope. Yes, we all know the good spiritual gifts when we see them, singing, preaching, or just a good greeter at the church doors but could there be more to this than what meets the eye? Could being a Military soldier be a form of spiritual gift and if it is, what would this do to the view of the military we have as SDA Christians? Are we therefore selective in our definition of spiritual gifts to ensure that those things we do not see as truly "spiritual" are excluded from this category? I must admit that I have some reservations in my definition of what is a spiritual gift or not, but I do wonder if by doing such I am limiting the scope of God’s effectiveness in our ever day lives. The adjoining question to that would be dose a person have to be in a certain place and job for their spiritual gifts to function? Using my Soldier as an example, though gifted in the art of war and defense of his people, like David, does he have to be in the military to use this skill and talent the Lord has given him? I will let you decide…
Interpreting and Applying Biblical Ethics In Understanding Scripture Chapter 16.
This chapter was helpful but I still have a hard time knowing what to throw out and what to keep. It is like eating a watermelon with very tiny pink seeds. It is hard to distinguish between the fruit and the seeds that you spit out. I know this is a bit crass when referring to the Bible but sometimes I feel we are bit crass in our ethical hermeneutics. We are quick to make certain issues moral and ethical ones and quick to get rid of things that don't make sense to us immediately or are not convenient for us today. I think there are obvious universal ethics such as Don't kill, don't sleep with your neighbor's spouse, Keep the Sabbath day holy, but what about wearing a shirt of a combination of different fabrics or other such texts that are not as clear. In instances like these, we the tag on our polyblend shirt and deem the text irrelevant because we like our shirt from the GAP. Is there a clear line or do we simply take the things that work for our own lifestyle and leave the things that do not. I am not suggesting that we wear 100% cotton all the time nor am I suggesting that there is something wrong with shopping at the GAP. I think the problem is in our hermeneutics. I liked the author's suggestion to model our lives after Jesus. This seems like an obvious thing to do, we where the WWJD T-shirts but what does this mean, really? Jesus flipped all of the cultural and religious assumptions on their back. He and his disciples picked grain on the Sabbath and healed people on the Sabbath and it seemed that they were crossing ethical boundaries. But Jesus' emphasis was love. Perhaps this should be ours to. Perhaps in keeping Jesus' commandment that says Love the Lord your God with all your heart . . . and love your neighbor is where we need to start. The Ten Commandments fall under those categories for sure and the other commandments, although some may be a bit more obscure we can measure off the two greatest commandments given by Jesus. I appreciated what the author said about foreigners. He said, another way you can tell the difference between cultural and universal ethics is if the law refers to the foreigner within your gates. Now this is obviously does not cover all the bases but I believe it is a good place to start!
I appreciated this chapter of Dr. Hanna's book where it talked about increasing one's knowledge day by day and using reason as our ally. I think that we can use human reason, not over scripture or Christ but in conjunction with God and the way he reveals Himself. I think that as an Adventist it would be way to easy for us not to use our minds. After all, our forefathers and mothers have done all the thinking for us so why do we need to question or come to new understandings when the old ones are sufficient? But are they sufficient or are there new things that God wants us to discover daily about ourselves, the world around us, and most importantly, Himself? I like the quote that Dr. Hanna uses from Ellen White. It says this: "God desires his workers to gain daily a better understanding of how to reason logically from cause to effect, arriving at wise, safe conclusions. He desires them to add to their strength of memory. We cannot afford mistakes that are the result of our cherishing erroneous ideas. As little children we are to sit at the feet of Christ, learning of Him how to work successfully. We are to ask God for a sound judgment, and for light to impart to others. There is need of knowledge that is the fruit of experience. We should not allow a day to pass without gaining an increase of knowledge in temporal and spiritual things."
She goes on but I will not. The bottom line is that we must not be intimidated by new things but we should look for them and share them with others. God is constantly revealing Himself in new and powerful ways and he wants us to use the minds that He gave us, relying on His wisdom as we seek for further truth.
I grew up in an Adventist community of wonderful Christians but realize how easy it would have been for me to take their word for it rather than discover Jesus and His truth for myself. I am so thankful that God reveals himself to each of us personally and that we do not have to take someone else's word for it!
In response to Chapter 2: Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics
Hermeneutics can never be independent of the rationality of reason, and faith in the scriptures as the divine word of God. Human reason can by no means be fully dependable therefore it becomes essential to have rules to guide in the discipline of hermeneutics. But even amid these regulations, there is a greater need for the aid of the Holy Spirit.
It gives us reasonable balance when we address the fact that our minds can fall subject to the influences of fallen forces. This obliges us to assume spiritual responsibilities that will diminish the attacks of these forces as we perform our hermeneutics. Our reasoning only is flawed and misleading, if it is not under the appropriate spiritual control.
We need the Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth, and lift our mind to agreement with the mind of Christ. Without Christ’s guidance our eyes are blinded and even the most straightforward truths will be impossible to distinguish.
It is possible for Satan to influence our minds as we seek to utilize this God given gift of reasoning. But regardless of this limitation, God has not left us out of the equation. He speaks through Christ, He speaks through the scriptures and he continues to speak through us by the power of consecrated reasoning that is faithful to scripture.
It is intriguing to note the importance of typology, allegories, and parables in helping to refine a more principled methodology for interpreting scripture. Distinguishing between types and antitype, and analyzing the biblical blueprint to gain a the light of a more superior fulfillment, has done more than simply helped us to curtail the imbalance of over imposing personal theology in interpreting both text and context. It has helped us to develop the process of biblical hermeneutics, while mastering the theologically inclusive method of going to and fro in and out of scripture to acquire knowledge of truth.
Avoiding warped interpretations demands us to resist the temptation of relying to heavily on one system of interpretation. Allegories requires us to go far beyond text and literalistic explanations to see the context, both biblically and extra biblically, including history and culture in order to grasp a reasonable understanding.
The challenge to interpret these passages of scripture has helped us to develop a method of theology which borrows from various hermeneutical disciplines. Openness and flexibility are the results of this and also the privilege of arriving at truth more precisely.
The author has given fair critical and reasonably sound treatment to his topic, and has also given innovative principles for conducting hermeneutic in regard these literary types.
George W. Reid (ed). Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach. (Hagerstown: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2006), 27-46. This chapter addresses the issue of presupposition and Hermeneutics. The idea that an individual is able to be totally objective and not be influence by his biases are is realistic. Every human being is subject to biases and they influence the way people see the Scripture. I believe that the book made a very important point when it alluded to the fact that interpreters need to accept their presuppositions. It is noteworthy to say that interpreters cannot divest themselves from their past, experiences, resident ideas, and preconceived notions and opinions. In addition, the impact that sin has on the human mind is another reason that influence the interpretation of Scripture. Sin causes pride, self-deception, doubt, distance and distortion. Conversely, the hermeneutical principles of Scripture definitely assist the interpreter in relation to the hermeneutical process. In this process the Bible is its own interpreter, and all passages are interpreted in light of the whole Bible. However, the book emphasized that Christ should be the center of hermeneutics and should be the connection between Christ and Scripture should be highlighted strongly. Clearly, the way to proceed in biblical interpretation is to accept and be aware of one’s presuppositions.
George W. Reid (ed). Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach. (Hagerstown: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2006), 47-74. Revelation and Inspiration play a very important role in the understanding of Scripture. The reason why these two concepts are so important is that humans cannot know anything about God unless He reveals it. Similarly, inspiration certainly is not inspiration if the divine element is eliminated. I believe that the divine human connection that is evident in the production of the Scripture is definitely a fundamental principle when it comes to revelation and inspiration. This chapter plays a key role in understanding the nature of revelation and the prominent models of inspiration that exist. However, the author did a good job emphasizing the positives and weaknesses of each theory. Certainly, this chapter was very beneficial for me as it relates to the content of the class. In addition, the information covered in this chapter broadens my understanding of Revelation and inspiration, and assist in the understanding of key issues that confront the Bible scholar when seeking to understand the nature and content of Revelation. Therefore, I must say that I am a better student of the word because of this chapter.
Reflection by Eric Ollila “The Authority of Scripture” by Peter van Bemmelen Understanding Scripture Monday, November 26, 2007
This chapter had a couple of points that I wanted to touch on. The first is regarding where the authority of Scripture is derived from. The author states that “Divine authority is rooted in love and exercised in service and in self-denial.” Christ’s own personal authority was based “primarily on diven love and defined by truth, so the Scriptures speak to us with that same authority.”
It was powerful to me today to reflect on the ‘servant’ nature of the Scriptures. The author quotes Bernar Ramm when he says “both the divine Savior and the divne Scriptures bear the form of a servant even though both contain within themselves the divine glory.” It goes on to say “while Christ made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servan, being made in human likenesss, yet He spoke with divein authority. Likewise, while the Scriptures are given in the weakness an din the imperfection of human language, nevertheless, every word of God is pure…is truth…is living and powerful…cannot be broken… and stands forever.” (p. 78)
It struck me that one of the biggest reasons why God does indeed have so much authority is because of the fact that He does serve every single thing that has ever been created. He is the sustainer of life. In Him all things consist (see Col. 1:17). Because He is the servant of all, He is the Lord of all. It takes shear power and might and wisdom and endurance and love and patience and temperance and justice to be able to be a constant servant. It is just the opposite of what we really think as humans. We look at servant hood as weakness, as if any ole person can serve, but true service requires more than weakness and inefficiency. It requires a total pouring out of ones self. God does this continuously. That is the essence of Him, He lives to give.
Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy Richard Davidson
This chapter was very eye opening I learned some practical things about understanding prophecy in the Old Testament. Davidson said there are three major categories of predictive prophecies in the OT (outside of Daniel): (1) Messianic prophecies; (2) oracles against the foreign nations; (3) and covenant-centered kingdom promises/prophecies given to Israel as a geopolitical entity, including end-time prophecies involving the final worldwide showdown between Israel and her enemies. He said further that there are two genres of Predictive Prophecy; General (Classical) Prophecy and Apocalyptic Prophecy. He says that General Prophecy deals with local/national contemporary and Apocalyptic Prophecy deals with universal sweep of history with emphasis on the end time. One statement that stuck out to me was that predictive prophecy was not given simply to satisfy curiosity about future events but for moral purposes, such as the establishment of faith in God and motivation to holy living. In think that when you live in the face of prophecy you can make rational decisions about the life you will lead. For the Old Testament people they faced many situations of prophecies of deliverance and of doom. Either way the peoples’ faith could be strengthened in God and their actions would demonstrate how they believed in Him. The prophecies would cause them shape up or get worse. I also believe that God gave prophecies to show the people how much He loved them. Just like God gave prophecies in the Old Testament he has also given them in the New Testament. Therefore the people who know of Prophecies today must see the love of God in giving prophecies. I think that its awesome that God tells us how things are going to be. It strengthens my faith in him and I know that I can trust what he says he will do because he has prophesied before and it came to pass, so what will be different in the future.
Chapter XI in Understanding Scripture Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy – Richard Davidson
The reality that predictive prophecy was not given to satisfy the curiosity about future events, but instead for moral purpose and as a motivation to holy living caught my attention in a particular way. I thought about the thirst with which we, humans, search for answers. I also thought about the pride that tempts us as our understanding grows deeper and deeper. I believe that a big responsibility comes along with the understanding of the prophecies –understanding that is the result of God revealing more unto us - and that the SDA church has been blessed with knowledge that is to be brought with love, modesty and humility to the world.
Jeremiah 18:7-10 as quoted by the author sheds a great light on the way in which God deals with the nations of the world, as expressed in the predictive prophecies. Read in the context of the chapter I found it sufficient to clarify the apparent intrigue in the matter.
I loved the manner in which Dr. Davidson expressed the godly impartiality in salvation. I would like to quote a little. ”There were not two plans for two different groups in the OT; all were called to join the biblical Israel, the one people of God.” And again, “The NT does not present a picture of two separate programs of salvation for two separate people of God.” Separation is a word that has been brought forth along with sin. Separation is not heavenly. And what I am thinking of now is that many times it seems easy to talk about impartiality, yet at the very core of our honesty, we may need at admit sometimes that our minds or hearts fall into the temptation of separating, of categorizing, after some criteria or others. As I contemplate the respect and attention that God offers to each one of us, I see more and more how godly impartiality is - to really look at the heart, and pray and hope for a home in heaven for everybody and anybody.
Chapter XI in Understanding Scripture Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy – Richard Davidson
The reality that predictive prophecy was not given to satisfy the curiosity about future events, but instead for moral purpose and as a motivation to holy living caught my attention in a particular way. I thought about the thirst with which we, humans, search for answers. I also thought about the pride that tempts us as our understanding grows deeper and deeper. I believe that a big responsibility comes along with the understanding of the prophecies –understanding that is the result of God revealing more unto us - and that the SDA church has been blessed with knowledge that is to be brought with love, modesty and humility to the world.
Jeremiah 18:7-10 as quoted by the author sheds a great light on the way in which God deals with the nations of the world, as expressed in the predictive prophecies. Read in the context of the chapter I found it sufficient to clarify the apparent intrigue in the matter.
I loved the manner in which Dr. Davidson expressed the godly impartiality in salvation. I would like to quote a little. ”There were not two plans for two different groups in the OT; all were called to join the biblical Israel, the one people of God.” And again, “The NT does not present a picture of two separate programs of salvation for two separate people of God.” Separation is a word that has been brought forth along with sin. Separation is not heavenly. And what I am thinking of now is that many times it seems easy to talk about impartiality, yet at the very core of our honesty, we may need at admit sometimes that our minds or hearts fall into the temptation of separating, of categorizing, after some criteria or others. As I contemplate the respect and attention that God offers to each one of us, I see more and more how godly impartiality is - to really look at the heart, and pray and hope for a home in heaven for everybody and anybody.
Chapter XV, Hermeneutics and Culture, in Understanding Scripture – Lael O. Caesar
The topic of cultural influence on Biblical hermeneutics is a delicate one. I was very interested to read through the chapter.
Here are some of my thoughts on this topic that has had my attention for a while.
Living in a few cultures I have often wondered why such striking differences between people who read the same Bible and serve the same God. Why are there different interpretations of the same text?
One of the biggest area of connection between culturally different Christian communities is, I would say, the doctrinal element of religion. What varies a lot from culture to culture is the approach.
I came to realize for myself that what opens the door for differences between cultures of the same religion is mainly the way in which people understand God’s transcendence and immanence. Although Christians of one culture may profess God’s relationship with us, humans, and may strive to have it, in reality, at the practical level, there may be little personal experience due to a strong but coated sense of God's transcendence. At the same time, people of another culture may experience a more authentic personal relationship with God, having a more clear understanding of His immanence. On the other hand, another thing that contributes to the drawing of the line is the aspect of God's justice or love that one culture or another chooses to point to more, while the interpretation of the Scriptures are filtered through this perspective. I also came to believe that the governing pattern of a culture shapes the mentality and infiltrates into the religious aspect of life, creating a grid of guidelines that will influence the worship style, the manner of approaching the doctrine and the interpersonal relationships of the worshipers. The question is: Are these differences vital unto salvation? We trust God’s justice in dealing with each one of us considering all of our life-living conditions, but on our part, in as much as it is in our power, seeking to see God as He is, in His true character is crucial for every one of us, individually, and it may require from some of us to abandon mentalities that we have grown up with and have possibly unwillingly assimilated. Our struggles in the journey of understanding God as He really is are different from culture to culture, from person to person, and He is working with each one of us in our needs.
Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach. Chapter five: The Authority of Scripture.
How can we know that the Bible is the Word of God? This question is discussed in this chapter. Does this mean that anyone who reads the Bible automatically believes that it is what it says about itself and do what it says to do? Obviously not, even among professed believers this is hardly the case. The Bible, the Word of God does not force its’ ideology on anyone. It simply states what it is and from where it came. The choice is up to the one who reads, to accept it as it is written (Deuteronomy 30:19-20). The author of this article, Peter M. van Bemmelen, makes this clear in his fifth point on page 86, where he discusses humanity’s ability to choose. It is evident that we all have the power of choice. You choose to read this review and may agree with it, if you so choose. Van Bemmelen states, “The primary response to that authority [the Scriptures] by humans should be a response of faith, issuing in willing obedience.” If we do not respond to it in faith does it make it any less than what it is, no! The Bible does not seek the approval of men but seeks to dispense the knowledge of God to a world that is searching for answers. It provides all the knowledge that is need for us to understand God and to understand our obligation to Him.
Chapter 7: Are Ellen White's Writing Christ-Centered?
The key statement in this chapter which was the cornerstone to understanding whether or not Mrs. White’s writings are Christ-centered was this one: “Christ, His character and work, is the center and circumference of all truth; He is the chain on which the jewels of doctrine are linked. In Him is found the complete system of truth.” I like that statement; and unpacking it in a different way, using another metaphor, I would say that Christ is like a picture painted, a priceless masterpiece, each individual stroke of the paintbrush is an individual doctrine making up the big picture.
The statement was brought out that God loves to reveal Himself to His people. And Christ is one such revelation; He is indeed the Supreme Revelation. For my research paper I was reading about how from a non-Messianic Jewish standpoint, Christ never really identified Himself directly as either the Son of Man, the Son of God, or the Messiah. Especially is this so in the synoptic Gospels. Those who hold this same viewpoint tend to look down on John’s Gospel as being a bit fanciful since the heartbeat of that Gospel is Christ’s divinity. But in this chapter, we see that Ellen White backs up the testimony of the Scripture when she says, “Jesus speaks of Himself as well as His Father as God”.
Her writings were focused on a balanced understanding of Christ’s nature. She demonstrated that in spite of His divinity, He was yet human, bearing the same nature that we have, but remaining unsullied from the “same sinful, corrupt propensities” to sin that we have cultivated as a result of sinning. No theologian, philosopher, seminarian, pastor, or bishop could put it plainer in my estimation. I think Mrs. White was on the money.
Garth Dottin Interpretation of the Gospels and Epistles Chapter 12 of Understanding Scripture
The author Rice makes a valuable point about bible scholars. He says “anyone reading through the synoptic gospels will immediately recognize the same portrait while being refreshed by the different shadings.”I believe that theologians have majored in minors for many years. We have been taught to critique, analyze, and exegete and have imparted our knowledge to others. However, it has created a generation that questions the very fabric of biblical truth and authority. The picture of Christ in the gospels and in scripture becomes a blemished portrait that has been tainted with theological criticisms. Rice notes that scholars consider the differences between the gospels as a “synoptic problem.” There are a plethora of questions that can emerge in the mind of the believer when the biblical text is observed from a critical position. Furthermore, it becomes difficult for the ideas of inspiration to be accepted. Rice says “These differences are not to be looked upon as errors or something that renders the gospels unreliable, but as tantalizing challenges that expand our own view of who Jesus is and what he taught and did.” The differences of the gospels should adequately present a perfect picture of our Savior, and His mission of salvation for a blemished world. It should not present a blemished savior with a tarnished word to a sinful world.
Romel Charles The Cosmic Christ of Scripture Chapter 10: Are Ellen White’s Writings Relevant to the Cosmos? I guess sometimes we just have to ask the questions that need to be asked just to prove that the answer was true to begin with. This instance is no different because the answer to the question is yes. Ellen White’s writings are relevant to the cosmos. Like Dr. Hanna said in his book, “in spite of the distortion caused by sin, the cosmos is an open book which reveals God.” It is evident in the world that sin is in existence because of the crime, violence, mass murders, drug abuse, hatred, rape, suicide, immorality and the list goes on, but God is still evident in the world because of the good people and the fact that the sun still rises and set (or earth rotates) although there is still sin in the world. Ellen White bring that out in her writings because although there are appalling and terrible things occurring in the world God still cares and the love that He has for us is evident in the Bible and is also reflected in the words of Ellen White. Also, the fact that there are people that have never heard the name of Jesus but still do good deeds is another way that her writing are relevant because when they do encounter them they will come to the realization that they were already reflecting Christ.
Romel Charles Understanding Scripture Chapter 17: Ellen G, White and Hermeneutics It is amazing to know that in reading this chapter that the hermeneutical principles that Ellen White used are the basically the same that anyone would use. I guess you expect people like Prophets and Prophetess’ that are so in tuned with God that it should be easy for them but they have to put in work just like anyone else. She invited the Holy Spirit to guide in the study, she was willing to obey the truth that was found and she was also open-minded. She also believed that she, as well as we, needed to be careful of extreme interpretation and religious fanatics. The one that I liked the most was to use common sense. This was the most interesting to me because although there are many people in the world with degrees from top universities around the globe, it is a shame that many people do not have common sense not just with educational things but when it comes to matters of the Bible. I believe that it is because of the increase of technology that people are not using their brains anymore and expect that a computer or another person should grant them the answers to the questions that they hold. It is a shame that we have allowed an increase in technological knowledge hinder our common sense when it comes to interpreting the Bible because something as simple as this can unify the Christian community and its interpretation of the Bible.
Understanding Scripture, Ch. 5 The Authority of Scripture
That the authority of Scripture would be a major issue for Christianity and the Seventh-day Adventist Church really is deplorable in my estimation. The psalmist says, “Thou hast magnified Thy word above all Thy name” (Psalm 138:2b). And Ellen White echoes that in Prophets and Kings pg. 158 when she wrote, “The honor of His throne is staked for the fulfillment of His word”. So we right there for the Adventist there should be no conflict with accepting the Scripture as authority. I hope I am not oversimplifying this conundrum but it really is that simple. I think the author does an excellent job of presenting this to our notice. But I believe that this should have never been a problem in the first place. It’s like saying an NBA star has problems with accepting that he has to wear his team’s uniform during every game (in which he isn’t injured).
Jews and Christians have accepted the Scriptures as their authority for thousands of years. Of course Christians have incorporated in addition to the Torah, Writings and Prophets, the further ministration of the Spirit of Prophecy manifested in people like Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, James, Jude, and Paul, in the form of Gospels and Epistles into their Scriptures. The author made the point that because the Scriptures come from God, by default they carry with them godly authority. While man’s authority is based on mundane things, God’s is eternal. I like how he correlated Christ’s authority, which was based on love in truth with the same kind of authority that the Scriptures have. I think my favorite statement in this chapter is this: “When honored as an authoritative message from God, this Book, although written many centuries ago, remains an immovable point of contact with our Creator.” This is the essence of why we should not have an issue with accepting the Bible as authority.
Garth Dottin The Cosmic Christ of Scripture Chapter 10: Are Ellen G. White’s writings relevant to the cosmos?
Dr Hanna takes the position that the revelation of Scripture and the revelation of nature are not in conflict with each other. Each sheds light on the other. He quotes from White who says “the whole natural world is designed to be an interpreter of the things of God.” This quote motivated me to ask a question. If nature interprets the things of God, then how should we understand diseases and death in nature? I was excited to see the next quote which answered my question. “In spite of the distortion caused by sin, the cosmos is an open book which reveals God.”Sin is the catalyst behind the degradation of the cosmos. Nevertheless, the cosmos still reveals the character of God. The cosmos identifies the impending death of sin, disease, and even death itself. This is evident through a simple observation of the seasons. In the fall the trees die but spring revives them and they are restored. It reveals hope to sinners of an assured eradication of sin.
A sentence on pg. 121 in Dr. Hanna’s book caught my attention: “It is important that we recognize that harmony alone is not sufficient evidence of correct interpretations. Not just any harmony will do because it is possible to harmonize incorrect interpretations of the cosmos and Scripture.” I find this sentence to be a very important warning for preachers of the word of God to be honest and not just make any old link to make the Bible and Science harmonize to prove the Bible is correct. I have sensed that in Adventist Church many have done this and given a bad name to religion by using facts of science and linking them to texts in the Bible just for the sake of showing how the two relate. But when an expert hears facts, they know they are distorted and wrong and as a result the minister loses credibility and also religion gets a bad name as a result. While we know that the cosmos illuminates scripture, we have to be sure that our facts are straight and that we do good sound research before we as ministers, teachers, etc present information from the pulpit, especially if it is information in an area that we are not an expert in. By doing this we can keep the integrity of the pulpit and also honor God by making sure that the facts that we use are indeed well founded on good evidence rather than some neat fact that is unsubstantiated.
Comment on Appendix A of Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach
In reading this document of Methods of Bible study, I appreciate the thoroughness of the Adventist Church in its guidelines of how to study the Bible. One caution that is mentioned in studying the Bible, I believe is very important and needs to be emphasized as much as possible from the time the people begin to know Jesus: It cautions against reading a modern-day parallel to each of the Biblical texts and coming out with a totally different meaning than the author intended. Unfortunately, growing up with the “proof text method” this is something that the Adventists should have taught long ago. Sure the Bible is its own interpreter, yet, I have seen in Bible studies texts that say what the author of the Bible study want it to say, but when reading the context the meaning is totally opposite to that of what the Bible study author intended. Now, I believe that this idea needs to be emphasized as much as possible so that we don’t have Bible studies floating around the globe using texts that are taken out of context. Again, I think it will bring more credibility to the work and ensure that we train new converts to look at the Bible as a whole and have a holistic approach to reading and understanding scripture rather than using a text taken out of context to prove a point. I think in this case there needs to be a caution or comment on how to use concordances properly to ensure that the text being used to answer a point is one that answers that point being offered at that point.
Hermeneutics and culture. Chapter 15-Understanding Scripture An Adventist Approach. Culture in the contemporary definition implies the sum total of ways of living whereby religion is one of them. Then how should message of scripture be transmitted to different cultures, should it be changed to suit each culture? Lael Caeser provides a solution that incorrect mental set up can lead to the loss of truth and of life. This implies that the way we develop our presupposition will largely determine the outcome. Although we have different cultures within our church the focus remains to sola scriptula which will always serve as a guiding factor as we deal with hermeneutics. We must be willing to see others as colleagues when we enter into the meaningful conversation but not master-servant relationship. When this is not done the oppressors have no conscience but to defend themselves. Due to master-servant relationship, the perceived oppressive have come up with different defense mechanisms to counteract this oppressions. For instance the Black theology focuses on the liberation of the African-American from the white dominated theology which they perceive as not taking them to the real savior who liberated everybody. Likewise the feminist theology tend to move further from the Jewish culture which marginalized women from leadership positions, they propose a better hermeneutics to serve all equally. Like Paul in I Corinthians 9:20-22, Lael suggests that we must proclaim the gospel in an appropriate and meaningful way to each subgroupings regardless of gender, continent or ethnic. Jesus is the Lord to all people regardless of any culture. Our role as Seventh-day Adventists is to give proper hermeneutics to the world so that the discrimination based on culture to eliminate completely. We should have one voice and follow the footsteps of Jesus Christ so that those who feel oppressed may get a way of escape and feel that the savior is for both not a chosen few.
Hermeneutics and culture. Chapter 15-Understanding Scripture An Adventist Approach. by Morumbwa dickson
Culture in the contemporary definition implies the sum total of ways of living whereby religion is one of them. Then how should message of scripture be transmitted to different cultures, should it be changed to suit each culture? Lael Caeser provides a solution that incorrect mental set up can lead to the loss of truth and of life. This implies that the way we develop our presupposition will largely determine the outcome. Although we have different cultures within our church the focus remains to sola scriptula which will always serve as a guiding factor as we deal with hermeneutics. We must be willing to see others as colleagues when we enter into the meaningful conversation but not master-servant relationship. When this is not done the oppressors have no conscience but to defend themselves. Due to master-servant relationship, the perceived oppressive have come up with different defense mechanisms to counteract this oppressions. For instance the Black theology focuses on the liberation of the African-American from the white dominated theology which they perceive as not taking them to the real savior who liberated everybody. Likewise the feminist theology tend to move further from the Jewish culture which marginalized women from leadership positions, they propose a better hermeneutics to serve all equally. Like Paul in I Corinthians 9:20-22, Lael suggests that we must proclaim the gospel in an appropriate and meaningful way to each subgroupings regardless of gender, continent or ethnic. Jesus is the Lord to all people regardless of any culture. Our role as seventh-day Adventists is to give proper hermeneutics to the world so that the discrimination based on culture to eliminate completely. We should have one voice and follow the footsteps of Jesus Christ so that those who feel oppressed may get a way of escape and feel that the savior is for both not a chosen few.
MORUMBWA DICKSON What does the Bible say? Chapter 9: The cosmic Christ of scripture. The world is in confusion on what exactly on how to read the three books (Christ, the Scriptures and the cosmos) of God but Dr. Hanna has endeavored to tackle these basic issues in a clear simple way using the biblical evidences. Then now how do we read the cosmos? We therefore need more adequate light in order to read according to Dr. Hanna. This adequate light must come from God who will make shine when we have recognized Jesus as supreme who brings many to His Glory. But sin has darkened man’s mind such that he is not able to see what is revealed in the cosmos. Similarly true science and wisdom comes as a gift from God who has demonstrated that we cannot understand the cosmos without his guidance. Daniel and his friends proved the Babylonian wrong because they depended on God totally (Daniel 1: 4). False science aims at suppressing the truth which is caused by futile reasoning that man can do all by himself without recognizing the fact that God’s glory is seen in the cosmos. For us to understand the cosmos well we need to have the mind of Christ (1 Cor 2:10-16) which will enable us to discern what the cosmos is all about and accept God’s gifts of true wisdom and good spiritual perception. Satan has misused man in a way that is appealing to man that he has the necessary philosophy and wisdom to do all but we can see nothing good has come out. This is why Paul appears to reject wisdom but in the real sense it is false wisdom that he rejects since they do lead one to understand Christ, the scripture and the cosmos. Finally Paul depicts Jesus as the image of God who created, sustains and reconciles all things in the cosmos (Col 1:15-20). He in turn leads us to understand the knowledge of God’s plan for the cosmos. As the creator of the cosmos chose Israel so it is today to us. Christ has unveils us the necessary light to understand the true concept of the cosmos.
My Comments from the Book, “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture” Chapter 4 “Are Ellen G. White Writings Biblical?”
In chapter 4 of the book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture,” Dr. Martin Frederick Hanna answers the question “Are Ellen G. White books Biblical?” The answer that Dr. Hanna gives is yes. Ellen G. White in her life exalted the Bible above her books. She recommended the bible to the Church at the start and at the end of her ministry. She said, “Brethren and Sisters, I commend unto you this Book.” Ellen G. White was a strong advocate of wholistic thinking. She recommended the wholistic usage of scriptures in the following ways: 1. Compare scripture with scripture to get clear understanding. The Book of Revelation is to be compared with the book of Daniel. There is harmony of the scriptures (page 48). 2. Scriptures should help us to understand the world (cosmos) better. “Cosmos illuminates the scriptures” (page 50). 3. The Bible should lead us to know Christ better (John 5:39). The Bible is a wonderful revelation of Jesus Christ. Christ is God’s book of revelation (page 51, 54, 55). 4. The bible should be used to measure and test all secular teachings and experience. It is good for believers to endeavor to acquire the secular knowledge but that knowledge should not lead us to despise or to downgrade the word of God (page 52). As we daily endeavor to increase both the temporal and spiritual knowledge we need to make sure that it is in harmony with the scriptures (Isa 8:20). This chapter has an important message for the pastors today. It is unfortunate that some pastors don’t exalt the scriptures as high as expected. Some of them don’t posses copies of the Bible or carry them, we need to stop our business and do God’s business. Communicate a clear message from God, “thus says the Lord.”
Comments on Chapter VII of the Book “Understanding Scripture” Topic: “Guidelines for the Interpretation of Scriptures.
In chapter VII of the book “Understanding Scripture”, Ekkehardt Muller gives 10 guidelines for the interpretation of the scriptures. These guidelines must be read both by the clergy and the laity. But because we pastors (or clergy) play a key role in interpreting the word to the people, we must read them. They should be our checklist. They must be posted on the walls of our rooms of study. Muller says that we should begin the process of interpretation by prayer. He gives the example of Daniel in the Bible. In Daniel 9, Daniel surrenders to God in submission. He goes to God with humility of heart. God in turn reveals to Daniel what is going to take place in many years to come. He reveals to Daniel the coming of the Messiah the prince. Likewise, we also need to approach the word of God with humility. Those who are thirsty God is to give water and fill them with the water of life (John 4:13). In humility we need to study the texts of scripture and to make application of it. In applying the text to our lives, Muller says that we should endeavor to “personalize the text”. This is very important. Sometimes we study the scriptures and apply it to the members because we feel that we ourselves are holy and do not lack anything. We need to ask ourselves, “What does God want to tell me with this passage.” It is time for us as clergy to stop the “holier than thou” attitude and see ourselves as much in need of the savior as those we need to bring to Jesus.
Job Getange My Comments from the Book, “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture” Chapter 4 “Are Ellen G. White Writings Biblical?”
In chapter 4 of the book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture,” Dr. Martin Frederick Hanna answers the question “Are Ellen G. White books Biblical?” The answer that Dr. Hanna gives is yes. Ellen G. White in her life exalted the Bible above her books. She recommended the bible to the Church at the start and at the end of her ministry. She said, “Brethren and Sisters, I commend unto you this Book.” Ellen G. White was a strong advocate of wholistic thinking. She recommended the wholistic usage of scriptures in the following ways: 1. Compare scripture with scripture to get clear understanding. The Book of Revelation is to be compared with the book of Daniel. There is harmony of the scriptures (page 48). 2. Scriptures should help us to understand the world (cosmos) better. “Cosmos illuminates the scriptures” (page 50). 3. The Bible should lead us to know Christ better (John 5:39). The Bible is a wonderful revelation of Jesus Christ. Christ is God’s book of revelation (page 51, 54, 55). 4. The bible should be used to measure and test all secular teachings and experience. It is good for believers to endeavor to acquire the secular knowledge but that knowledge should not lead us to despise or to downgrade the word of God (page 52). As we daily endeavor to increase both the temporal and spiritual knowledge we need to make sure that it is in harmony with the scriptures (Isa 8:20). This chapter has an important message for the pastors today. It is unfortunate that some pastors don’t exalt the scriptures as high as expected. Some of them don’t posses copies of the Bible or carry them, we need to stop our business and do God’s business. Communicate a clear message from God, “thus says the Lord
Understanding Scripture, Chapter X. Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literatue. From Evangelista Polanco
All the books of the Bible are very, very important, but in my opinion the book of Psalms is one the best for Christians and non-Christians use it as if God is talking to us directly. Disciples such Peter, and John do mention this book many time in their letters or epistles. Psalms and Wisdom of Solomon were inspired by God to several different authors. A long time ago, I just knew that the Psalm was written by David, but later I learned about the other authors. The types of Hebrew Poetry let us know that it has its origin in the life of the people, which is obviously when we read it. In this book appear more than one-third of the Old testament poetry. I think that the book of psalm is more used to look for comfort, and there are a lot of prayers in comformity to our souls. Reading the wisdom literature we learn how to be wise and how to face our daily problems. I find that both Psalms and the Wisdom Literature are very helpful for us in order to face our life's problems and living an harmonious life with our God.
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture What does the Bible Say?
From Evangelista Polanco
This chapter has been very important to me because it has help me how to understand more about what the Bible really say. Here Dr. Hanna teach us about the books of Scripture and the cosmos that need to be examine with a wholistic method. He shows us a wheel which describe the order of the text, the scripture, and the cosmos. This picture help us to understand the light revealed in the cosmos and in the Scripture, and I agree, that our sins do not let us see certain light revealed to us throught our Lord Jesus Christ. What about Science? I think that it is concerning of knowledge and not about the science that the world teaches us. Then what the Bible says will be only understood by those who look God with all their heart. If we do not have the mind of Christ or at least the desire, the will of being obedient, then God will reveal to us what it is already written in His word and we will understand, and if we love our God we will practice His teachings.
Understanding the Scripture. Chapter XIII: Interpretation of Biblical Types, Allegories, and Parables.
This chapter is an important piece for the purpose of this class because is dealing with special aspect of the literary forms in the Bible. Many misunderstandings and wrong applications come exactly from a mistake in the way of analyzing the text. As we learn more about this topic, we understand we can't treat a narrative as we treat a poem, for the purpose of meaning, and we can not try an apocalyptic passage as if it were a poem. Parables, Types and Allegory are different kind of literary elements that are used very often in the New and Old Testament. Some scholars prefer to classify them (Parables, Types and Allegory) as part of special hermeneutics. Parables, for example, is the preferred way of Jesus teaching in the Gospels. A good, sincere and diligent student of the Bible should know more on how to treat these different elements of the literary. One example of a bad use of parables is the one mentioned by the author of this chapter, Lazarus and the Rich Man. The wrong ideas that some people acquire from this parable, by using wrong Hermeneutics, it is used for some denominations, to try to prove the doctrine of hell. I would recommend a good study of the literary forms, and genres, which are within context of a given passage, before jumping into quick conclusions and interpretations. Besides, it is also suggested by the author of this chapter, other elements of good exegesis, which are cultural and historical background.
Comment based on The Cosmic Christ. (71-85) "The Theme of the Bible is Jesus."
I like the way this chapter presents the relationship between the Divine Persons of the Godhead. I have studied Genesis in the Hebrew context and find the singularity and plurality of God and how the Trinity is there acting in unity as one God. At the same time, it is interesting to understand that there are aspects of the Trinity that are more farer than what are able to comprehend. The term Trinity by itself does not occur in the Bible, although the concept is implicit on some passages, by referring to three different persons which can be harmonized by others passages which estates the singularity of God. However, our limitation as humans must circumscribe us to the Scripture explanation. It is so, because we need to realize that this is one of the most complicated mysteries, which we won’t be able to fully comprehend until we see Jesus. When talking about man, it surprised me the first time I discovered that the Bible refers to “Adam” as a name for man, and then, it is also used as including woman and man in a single word ADAM(no hebrew font available), which turns us back to see the term as humanity. It is very well explained in this chapter by Dr. Hanna referring to the social way in which we have being created as image of God. Christ, the Son, is in the whole Scripture, in the Old Testament and in the New Testament as well. He stated “the Scripture testifies about me” (John 5:39). But, wherever we see Christ we need to always remember to see also God, because He is God. Whenever Jesus acted, He showed the Godhead and not individualism. So should be we, a community of faith, but acting as one body of Christ.
Understanding Scripture- November Blog: Mike Rhynus
I am commenting on the 17th chapter of Understanding Scripture, “Ellen G. White and Hermeneutics.” By Gerhard Pfandl. Pfandl is commenting on the way Ellen White interprets scripture and is giving some general guidelines at the beginning of the chapter. It was here at the beginning where I read something interesting. He speaks of being “open-minded” in our interpretations and willing to surrender previously held positions. He mentions that Ellen White was open to new truths found in scripture and actually chided those who refused to consider that some expositions of scripture held by Seventh-day Adventists could be in error. This statement spoke to me because in the past I have felt that some Adventists think we have everything right and have seemed to have a pompous aura about them. Ellen White makes it clear in the following quote that there is a possibility more light can be shed on Adventism and the interpretation of scripture in general. She states:
There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation (CW 35).”
I enjoy the part at the end that says no true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. I find that to be somewhat bitter-sweet because I would like to assume Adventism would not lose anything under close investigation, however, I tend to be skeptical and always allow room for error. One part I left out above was an additional quote from Ellen White that tells of never reaching truth if you search scriptures in order to vindicate your own opinions. However, truth can and shall be reached when you search in order to learn what the Lord says (COL 112). Let us all strive to obtain truth and new light in our search of the Lord. Blessings- Mike Rhynus
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture. November Blog. Mike Rhynus
I am writing in regards to chapter 10, “Are Ellen White’s Writings Relevant to the Cosmos?” Something jumped out at me while I was reading a quote from Ellen White. It said, “Scripture is an incomplete representation of God due to its humanity, and to the process of its preservation, transmission and translation.” I was somewhat surprised upon my first reading of this statement due to the fact that we place such a heavy importance on scripture and believe it to be a revelation of God. Dr. Hanna clarifies by saying that even with these limitations; the divine and human dimensions of Scripture are wonderfully united. Every chapter and every verse of the Bible are communication from God to man. However God, as White states, has not put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. She claims the writers of the Bible were God’s penmen, not His pen. So really we don’t have a solid revelation of God because of sin and the way it has skewed the world. We have partial revealing of God through Scripture, the cosmos, and through Christ, but not full revelation if I am not mistaken. To quote Dr. Hanna from an earlier chapter, “Our knowledge of Christ, Scripture, and the cosmos is partial, but partial knowledge is real knowledge.” I guess I can deal with that. -MR
Comment on Chapter 13: Interpretation of Biblical Types, Allegories, and Parables (Understanding Scripture)
I appreciate the way that Tom shepherd treats the topic of types, allegories, and parables in chapter 13. As he points out, dealing with those concepts does bring about an opportunity for “imaginative theological thought” (p. 223). However, in dealing with typology specifically, there are some scholars who have problems seeing the correlations that some Old Testament texts have with certain New Testament passages. They argue that these texts are time-conditioned and only relevant for a particular time period. This is one extreme that we need to avoid. On the other hand, there are some who draw comparisons where it is inappropriate to do so. In so doing, these individuals misrepresent Scripture. There are people who take certain concepts too far and derive inaccurate theological meaning. They end up making connections and links that God did not intend to emerge out of His Word. Hence, we need to be careful so that we do not gravitate toward either extreme. With that said, we should not be afraid to make typological connections. If there is a solid biblical connection to be made, we should draw it out and bring it to full view. One of the things that I like about typology is the way that it integrates different parts of Scripture. Those who view Scripture as a single unit will indeed have no difficulty accepting the correlations that come from accurate topological comparisons. I think that some people dismiss typological links that exist in Scripture because they have a disconnected view of the Bible. Since God is indeed the Author of both Testaments and knows the end from the beginning, He can certainly make correlations within His Word. I think that we need to embrace typology and deal with it properly. First, we need to accurately search Scripture and see these amazing correlations that exist. Second, we need to avoid “the pitfalls of overextending typological understanding” (p. 225). A correct understanding of typology will help us see the inseparable links that exist in Scripture. We will also see the big picture in Scripture. Typology is truly special in that it shows God’s invisible hand guiding the formation of Scripture from start to finish.
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture: How To Read God’s Three Books. Chapter seven: Are Ellen White’s writings Christ-centered?
I apologize in advance for the direction in which I have taken in my response to this chapter’s content. It is not relevant to the chapter as a whole, but to a point made in it. The nature of Christ has been debated for centuries; I do not think another comment on the subject would create much of a difference, but please, permit me to add my microscopic contribution to this sea of dialogue. In chapter seven page 89, Dr. Hanna’s quote referenced by his fifth footnote is where my attention was drawn. The footnotes used the words, “heredity,” “infirmities” and “degeneracies” and I question what do these terms mean in light of the sinless nature of Christ. I am persuaded of His sinless nature as revealed in the Scriptures, yet how do I attempt to explain the difference between Him not having the “corrupt propensities” of man but yet possessing the “fallen nature” or heredities, infirmities, and degeneracies of man? I recently came across a comment by Ellen White that could lend some light on the subject. She states, We mourn over Adam's transgression…But if Adam's transgression were the only evil that we had to meet, this world would be in a much better condition than it is. There has been a succession of falls since Adam's days.--Manuscript 18, 1887, pp. 1-3, 5. ("Christian Temperance," no date.) The last sentence, “There has been a succession of falls since Adam’s days,” implies that the condition of the world at the time of Christ was one of choice by those who had lived from Adam until then. In every human being, since the fall was the temptation of Adam repeated, daily. Unfortunately, many had succumbed to them and as a result, the degree of heredity has grown. Each generation that chose to disobey God, increased in selfishness, pride and all other ungodly characteristics that waited for our approval to be manifested. Jesus was born with this “fallen humanity,” these “infirmities,” “heredities,” but in His humanity, He recognized that yielding to such things led to a separation from God and He refused to partake of their deception. He was tempted to act and think on what was already now innate to human nature, selfishness, pride, etc., but He saw that their result would separate Him from His Father and so He chose rather to contradict every human tradition of emotions and determined to abide in Him who sent Him. The example of Jesus’ life shows that we too have a choice, we can live as He lived, daily, “choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season” (Hebrews 11:25). This is the human divine connection and this is what He desires to see in us, a reflection of Himself.
Comment on Chapter 16: Interpreting and Applying Biblical Ethics
I would like to comment on the section that deals with “application of Scripture to issues not addressed in the Bible” (p. 300). I believe that the Bible does have governing principles for all the different issues that we come across in our world today. Though we wrestle with legitimate “ethical quandaries,” (p. 300) there are sufficient provisions given through Scripture to help us face those highly complex matters. I do not think that there is a single subject matter that Scripture is ill-equipped to address. We can find underlying biblical principles that address all types of issues. I believe that Scripture is adequate in dealing with humanity’s problems. I think that Paul’s claim about Scripture in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 is right on target. Scripture is not only “useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,” it is also able to thoroughly equip us for every good work.
Sometimes, we make the mistake of searching for just a text or passage to address a particular issue. In so doing, we treat Scripture like a textbook. We sometimes go into Scripture the way that we would approach a textbook with an index at the end of it. In which case, the index gives us the specific page number where we can locate the item that we are looking for. However, we cannot deal with the Bible in the same manner. In dealing with tough and divisive issues, we may have to compare several passages to answer a particular question that Scripture does not seem to deal with specifically. Nonetheless, a solid understanding of the big message of the Bible helps us find answers to more detailed questions. However, before we can begin to deal with these tough issues, we first need to have a good foundation on the teachings of Scripture. Also, as we interpret these complex matters, we need to make sure that our hermeneutical lens is well-positioned so that it captures a full picture of what the Bible is really saying. Through the help of the Holy Spirit, we will find in Scripture all the help that we need to respond to the challenging issues that we face.
Comments on “How to read the Book of the Cosmos: Christ in the light of General Revelation.” The Cosmic Christ of Scripture – Martin Frederick Hanna Comment posted By – Francisco Joao Lopes – Revelation Inspiration and Hermeneutics – Fall 207
In his Book the Cosmic Christ of Scripture, Dr, Hanna used the term “Book” to referrer to the main 3 means of revelation that God has used to convey His message to the entire humanity. Something I have realized recently there are a lot of people who classify themselves as visual people – They understand better when they see images. So the use of the book analogy to express God’s means of revelation is beneficial for these visual people when presented with a new, but still old light that God used other means of revelation. For people that used to have the Bible as God’s Revelation when presented with other methods of revelation will feel to some extent uncomfortable with the idea of other means of revelation. So for the use of the term book to refer to other means of Revelation is a helpful tool especially for the visual people. And I believe that human being by nature is a visual being, some more than others. Another aspect I have learned from Dr. Hanna, both by reading his book and assisting his class, is that he is a person that is not stuck by terminologies and he encourages his audience not to be so. So based on his openness to this matter which has opened my horizon, I would like to expand a bit more this concept of book to refer to the revelation God has made available to all through the cosmos. First thing to consider is that all the three books reveal God and do not contradict each other. What is constant conflict is the interpretation of the data found on these books but not their content. As Dr, Hanna rightly pointed out in his book each book has its own primacy in its on sphere without ever contradicting each other. Without underestimating the value of the other two books which are well established in the Christendom, we would like to say that the book of the Cosmos is a very special book for those who consider themselves to be visual people. We can say that the book of cosmos is an interactive book in the sense that it can be read using all our five senses. It is an audio-visual book. So while reading this book, the reader can hear, touch, see, smell, taste and so on. But there is a danger with the use of this book for the visual people - that is, trying to make this book that seems to speak more clearly the rule of faith and practice. The purpose of the book of the Cosmos is to bring more light in understanding the other two books. As Dr. Hanna put it is his book “we need adequate light in order to read well…There is a sense in which the light of the cosmos provides the widest context within which we do theology. The cosmos travails for the revelation of the sons of God (Rom 8:18-26)”. So as important and helpful as it is, the book of cosmos does not have the epistemological primacy as some might try to attribute to it, this belongs the Scripture and the Scripture alone.
Comment posted By – Francisco Joao Lopes – Revelation Inspiration and Hermeneutics – Fall 207 Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Perspective Hermeneutics and Culture - By Lael O. Caesar. In this chapter of this official compilation of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, the author deals with the issue of hermeneutic and culture. This is a contemporary issue that saw its birth with the emergency of modern anthropology which see culture as “the sum total of ways of living developed by a group of human beings and handed on from generation to generation.” This modern concept of culture includes religion. For Adventist church which is an international church having members in above 204 recognized countries of the world, this is a very big challenge: How to maintain a respect for all these cultural diversity and still maintain unified hermeneutical principles. For the Congregationalist churches this main not present a challenge, but the Seventh Day Adventist Church which uses the representative governing model it is a real challenge. The awareness to this modern anthropological concept has contributed a lot for the various theological divisions such as: The Black (African-American) Theology, Minjung Theology, the Feminist Theology. Each of these theological division put emphasis on certain aspects which are shaped by the cultural or social background behind it. The SDA church as a world-wide church has to relate to all these theological divisions and many others subdivisions. One thing that the SDA church has done and will continue to do is the uplift the principle of Sola, Prima and Tota Scriptura. The principles are derived from the Bible and Bible alone and then are contextualized to the cultural setting where it has to be applied. The world wide church every five years come together and underline those eternal principles as found in the Bible then provide room for those principles to be applied in their cultural context. This issue is a complex one, and as the author of the chapter mentions, it cannot be exhausted in just one chapter neither one entire book. But he closed his argument with some profound words which I found suitable to end this reflection: “In God’s program of restoration, the role of the Seventh-day Adventist church’s assignment continues to be to repair the breach in God’s law and in His Word. It is to finish the Reformation work of turning from human means of salvation to God’s way and to His Word alone.”
In Chapter 13 in the book “Understanding the Scripture” information was presented regarding different views on scripture. The way we look at things plays an important role in our analyzing. Christians come to different meanings in scripture and formulate doctrines from different views. For all practical purposes, being different doesn’t necessarily mean error, some texts do have multiple meanings. It is all a matter of hermeneutics.
Cosmic Christ. P.71-85 The bible says that man was created in the image of God. In the Godhead you have three different persons working together in love and unity, and man was created to resemble that love and unity. As time can tell, humanity has had a hard time with love for their fellowman and unity for mankind. For example, why is it that there are so many marriages ending in divorce? Where is the unity and love in the human trinity of the husband, wife, and kids in the express image of the heavenly trinity? The other day I heard that 70% of all marriages end in divorce. What happened to the love? The numbers are even higher for second marriages. Where is the hope? Is it that we have lost the concept and meaning of love and unity in committed relationships? Are we in trouble of destroying the very institution that God created to show us the true meaning of love and unity. Will things get worse or will they get better? If Christians are having a hard time with relationship unity how will it be, that they will present themselves for Christ at the wedding feast.
In the 10th chapter of his book, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, Hanna writes “…in spite of the distortion caused by sin , the cosmos is “an open book which reveals God.” Just past this statement, he continues, “…the whole of the natural world is designed to be an interpreter of the things of God.”
In reflection to this text I am reminded of a specific tree, though I can’t remember the name of it, that grows in the Pacific North West. This tree grows pine cones, as do many other trees, only the pine cones on this variety are very hard and tightly closed. Tightly secured to the tree, under normal conditions, these pine cones will never plant new trees. What it takes is a forest fire, which under the intense heat, the cones begin to open up. This is the only way these pine cones have been found to open. The only way for new ones to grow is by the destruction of the old one. The only way to have new life is by the death of another one. To me, this seems to be a good illustration of nature, or the book of cosmos, is showing a light onto the sacrifice of Jesus that we might live. I am reminded of a statement Ellen White made, (this is not word for word) “He died the death that we deserve so that we could live the life that He deserves.”
Just out of curiosity, I wonder if the biological build up of this tree has changed since the fall of man, as in my mind, fire would not have a significant place in Eden. I mean, I can’t see God burning down the garden to plant some more trees every now and then.
In Understanding Scripture, chapter 15, the third section is entitled “Biblical Evaluation.” Under this heading, the first two sentences state, “Unawareness of roots often produces disorientation. Meaningful gospel conversations, therefore, must involve awareness about roots.” While I do not disagree with this statement, I do admit that I have wrestled with where our position should be in these terms for a denomination. I believe, especially in the United States, that we have no choice but to create multi-cultural congregations. Those inside our church need to be, to some degree, a reflection of the people we live among, which includes those from all cultures and races of the earth. If I have a strictly Anglo church, it will be more difficult to bring persons in of other ethnicities. (Though this section is speaking of culture more than race, the racial issue was a significant part of previous parts of the chapter.) My last church was a great experience in following God to make a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural church. There was an equal representation of persons from Anglo and from African descent in attendance, as well as Hispanic and Asians. I believe that the mixture of this church serves as a good model for our denomination at large, especially in places of high ethnic diversity. The difficulty though, arises when, as the two sentences above call our attention to, we attempt to apply the Gospel and the work of the church to all of these cultures at once. Though I have attempted to practice understanding of the different roots present, I have not been so good at leading to each culture in different ways, only from my own angle. I practice trying to not be stereotypical of one type of root, but how can you be more than what you are? My question is this, Shouldn’t the church be able to develop its’ own culture? Isn’t it possible to have a church culture that appeals to all races and all cultures at the same time?
Chapter # 4 Are Ellen G. White Writings Biblical? This Chapter has provided many solid biblical references as well as comments on the writings of Ellen G. White. During many years these writings had been under may attacks even when the writings of Ellen G. White provide a strong Biblical foundation to back up the Primacy of Scriptures. She says that In His Word, God communicated to men the necessary knowledge for salvation. The Scriptures must be accepted as fully equipped and with absolute authority and infallible revelation of God’s will. They constitute the rule of the character they reveal doctrines to us, and they are the touchstone of the religious experience. Ellen G. White Writings are despised by some leaders. As Seventh Day Adventist we believe that the same Spirit that Inspired the scriptures is the Spirit that inspired the writings of Ellen G. White. She did never pretend that her writings will take over the authority of scripture. She encourages us to understand Scripture with the Scripture. Creation also has shown us many times that the Bible was right for long time. This proves the primacy of the Bible in according to Ellen writings. Doctor Anna emphasizes the way escriture lead us to Christ as well as Ellen’s writings, Jesus said in the Bible “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me.” Jn 5:39 This Chapter reinforced my convictions on Ellen G. White writings and encourage me to go back to the Scripture as primary source of of God’s will.
I love exploring, solving mysteries and puzzles. That's what I think of when we speak of types, antitypes, allegories, and parables. This chapter (13), from the textbook, Understanding Scripture, is what I needed. It is interesting and gives you simple explanations what these terms mean, do, and contain. I am also glad that we've gone over this in class, however at times I find myself and others confuse the type with the antitype. For instance, such as mentioned in page 225,--"in Hebrews the heavenly sanctuary is termed the tupos and the earthly in the antitupos. The reason for this is that the heavenly supercedes the earthly and is actually the "blueprint" according to which the earthly tabernacle is contruced." I would of that the other way around because the earthlyl sanctuary is a shadow of the heavenly. Anyways, we are fortunate in some aspect that we understand more of what Jesus was saing through parables, than the disciples did. I also would love to have been with the disciples and Jesus on the road to Emmaus and hear Jesus show Himself in the Old Testament. Wouldn't you?
“Understanding Scripture”. Ellen G White and Hermeneutics, Chapter 17. There were some very challenging and inspiring things in this topic. It is so easy to misinterpret Ellen G white or Use her writing as an Inspired Commentary of the Bible which is not right, her words are not the last words on the meaning of the text. What I found challenging is on page 310, he says it is better for one to study one passage until it is clear and find deeper meaning for it before moving to another one, but as Pastors one is required to have a wide knowledge of the bible and although it is true it becomes hard when you want to get an overview of what the whole book is saying. Something I learned which was very helpful of which I think everyone should know who uses Ellen G White’s writing is on how she uses her writing whether it is in exegetical, theological or Homiletical sense. This will help a lot in misquoting and taking things as they are not. For example in most of her writing she writes or uses passages of the bible in a Homiletical sense but most of the time people will take those quotations as teaching or through them formulate some doctrine whereas in Homiletical sense you can use the quote to be either Doctrine or Teaching. Ministers should especially learn also how to ‘carry’ a text from exegetical to Homiletical because it is Homiletical sense that the word of God speaks to us daily needs or they should know how to “carry” the text from theological to Homiletical. This chapter was very helpful in the way one should view and interpret the writings of Ellen G White.
“The cosmic Christ of Scripture”, Chapter 7: Are Ellen G White’s Writings Christ Centred? In this chapter i agree that the writings of Ellen G white are Christ centred however what am struggling with is the quotation and the elaboration of the statement about the nature of Christ. The statement says that. “He veiled his divinity with the garb of his humanity, but did not part with his divinity”. To me it sound like though Jesus was human he still had some divine power which made him to be sinless. Jesus seems to take different forms for example in Philippians 2:4-5. The word in the “form of God” is used in such a sense by the Septuagint and in the New Testament. He appeared to the two disciples, en hetera morphe-In another form, Mk. 16:12. Metemorphothe-he was transfigured before and in taking the form of humanity I believe he was made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man. He was really and truly man, took part of our flesh and blood, and appeared in the nature and habit of man. And he voluntarily assumed human nature, from this perspective it could be better understood, Jesus who bore our infirmities, tempted as we are but yet was sinless. His sinlessness was not a result of his divide “favor” that he had but rather his full dependence of his father. He overcame every temptation by the word of God and thus remained sinless.
The divine and human state of Jesus Christ is a phenomenon believers have been wrestling over for years. I also find it amazing that God could be fully God yet reside in human body that has human limitations. I believe we could go back and forth in this debate for years yet at the end of the conversation, God has been graceful enough to let us make the decision to believe him or not. I’m thankful for his dual state of being and I pray that we all can grow in his divine character each day.
It is important that we recognize that harmony alone is not sufficient evidence of correct interpretation… This is such a truthful statement. Anyone can create harmony, in fact I am sure that the devil thinks that his kingdom is in harmony. If we think that harmony is so necessary that we change our minds, compromise our standard, just so that we can be harmonious and therefore correct, we are in danger of losing our souls. Harmony is not what we should be aiming for, but rather a complete and thorough understanding of who Christ is so that our thoughts, impressions and opinions are in line with His Word. We must remember that if dots are connected that do not belong together, a picture will still be formed, as messed up as that picture may be. If we use that picture as a launching pad for our beliefs, our theories or our faith we will lose in the end. A false premise brings false conclusions and false interpretations and ultimately wrong decisions.
The other comment I would like to make is with regard to reason. Ellen White says that Reason is limited and in need of faith because God is supreme. It’s amazing that the very thing that is supposed to help us can be so perverted that it can also harm us. Although God wants us to be intelligent, inquiring, and acute as is plainly stated in the book the Cosmic Christ of Scripture, when we think we have reached a level of intelligence that we can challenge God, challenge His Word and can no longer accept by faith the word as true, we run the risk of losing our faith to reason. Since not everything can be proved or explain by reason we must be constantly vigilant that in our questionings, or reasoning, we do not cross the threshold into the place where we are putting our reasoning or the reasoning of any intellectual individual on par with scripture, nor placing the human in rivalry with the divine. We must also be careful that we are not accepting what’s being put forward as reasoning because it supports some thing that we are doing or want to get involved in and in some way quiets our conscience. If we accept something it should be that we have prayed about it, checked it’s validity through scripture and found it to be in harmony with the word of God. Harmony remember is different chords playing melodiously together, not the same sound.
I completely agree with Ch 3 of Understanding Scripture that on one can come to Scripture without preconceived ideas. The chapter goes on to explain that there are some presuppositions that Adventists must take on, or at least acquire in their reading of Scripture. This is true but I think it is also important to note that because each of us comes with our own presuppositions we much have patience with each other. We should be able to approach different opinions with respect because just as someone else is coming with different presuppositions we too come with different presuppositions. There are of course wrong presuppositions, but those must be revealed through the Holy Spirit to the other person. We also must be willing to admit that perhaps we too have some wrong presuppositions. The more we are open and honest with Scripture, the more we allow the Holy Spirit to work, the more our presuppositions will become aligned with what the Scriptures teach. I don’t completely agree with Ellen White when she says, “Brethren, let not a mind or hand be engaged in criticizing the Bibl.” I am not saying that we should have critical attitudes but it is only in questioning, weighing, and seeking that we will be convicted of truth. There are inconsistencies. Even if we don’t ask them, there are others who are asking those questions. If we have not dealt honestly with those same questions what answers will we give others who are seeking, or other who are criticizing?
It is a very interesting idea that all three, Scripture, Christ, and the cosmos can be sola and prima Scriptura. Scripture is sola and prima Scriptura because it points to the only way to life. The revelation of Christ is also sola and prima Scriptura because He created everything. Lastly the cosmos is sola and prima Scriptura because this is the context into which Christ came, lived, died, and rose again. So there is a harmony between the three. They all do support each other. I never thought of it this way but now it is clear that God uses these three modes of revelation. Also the idea that “the Bible is not a textbook” but we can go “to and fro” between these revelations to come to a better understanding of God is new to me. I’ve never thought about what that phrase meant, and now the idea that we can run to and fro between the different revelations, and that both secular and sacred knowledge will increase is an interesting perspective. I like the flexibility that there are other revelations but the also the certainty that everything is Biblical and Christ-centered. We do need to reconsider our modes of thinking in order to expand our base so that we can catch more knowledge while at the same time staying true to Scripture.
To comment on chapter 4 in the Cosmic Christ of Scripture,i would start by saying that it had a gripping introduction and a claer organizational plan set forth from the beginning.I agree with the the statement that by the increase of knowledge a people is to be prepared to stand in the latter days. The more we study God's word it is the more we will be prepared. It is interesting that Ellen White says that nature and scripture don't disagree, while in our world the beliefs of men seem to make them disagree. But because God is the author of both, they do agree. It is true that their is little good in studying scripture if we don't want to increase in the knowledge of Christ. For example, what does it avail the historical critics to study scripture when it is all said and done. The question comes down to a saving faith in the Christ of Scriptre. I like the statement " As they impart the light that God graciously bestows upon them to those in darkness, they will be confimed in the faith." Truly, working for others is in essence working out our own salvation. We are also blessed by it. i was encouraged by the statements that "we should not allow a day to pass without gaining an increase of knowledge in temporal and spiritual things." We should seek to learn as much as we can, so that we can be of greater good. I thought Dr Hanna did a good job in presenting the Wholistic idea of Scripture, Nature and Christ having unique primacies while complementing each other.
Commenting on Understanding Scripture Chapter 4. It was said that we know about God only by way of His revelation. When i think about this, it is true. If God did not reveal Himself to us through His revelation, we truly would not know about Him. We may sometimes take this for granted.i argree with the statement that Howeverever we believe Scripture came about, it will influence our understanding and interpretation of it. I appreciated the breaking down of 2 Peter 1:21. In short, both God and human beings were involved in the generation of Scripture. And also "even when human being were involved in writing Scripture, they did not originate the explanations, expositions, or interpretations that originated in God as author. My question is, if scripture nowhere addressses the problem of " the concrete ways in which the divine and human agencies interfaced," must we tackle it? Is there a danger in doing so? I think so. i also think by submission to God we could truly understand more. Canale seemed to answer my question, further in the article when he said "It is true that God acts in ways hidden from our sight. Yet, scripture and Ellen G. White give us abundant evidence on which to build our understanding." Well said. I thought Canale presented a nice balance when he said "Since the whole Bible is revealed and inspired within the level of human thought and language, it does not present divine perfection; yet,its words reliably disclose God's thoughts and will to us." I also like the fact that he acknowledges the limitations in understanding this subject fully. Could this be a new model (Biblical M.) to be adapted by SDA..I pray that God would lead us in the right way.
Hanna, Martin. “Chapter Eight: Reading the Book of the Cosmos: Irreconcilable Differences?” and “Chapter Nine: What Does the Bible Say?”, from The Cosmic Christ of Scripture. Berrien Springs; Andrews University, 2006.
Chapter Eight focused on the Revelation of Nature, the third Revelation of God. Hanna writes that many want to divorce biblical and scientific study due to irreconcilable differences, yet is this really necessary? Do religion and science occupy two totally different fields if they are answering the same questions? In Chapter nine Hanna focuses on what the Bible says about the Revelation of Nature. He writes that we need to read all of the books in relation to one another and since they come from the same source, God, they should agree if we are reading them correctly. The cosmos is seen as the widest context in which we “do theology”, then Scripture and then the text. I wonder why Christ is not the most concise way we do theology as opposed to the text? Hanna further writes that despite sin marring creation it is still a legitimate revelation of God. I wonder if nature is a revelation at all anymore since we do not have the same perspective as the Biblical writers. In older times, when it rained, God sent it. When something happened God did it. Everyone understood the world in terms of God’s actions but today this isn’t so. We understand that rain is from precipitation from a body of water and most of what we know about the world comes filtered through the scientific method. This method has left no room for God so most accept that we have evolved from nothing and are going no where. I am not speaking about the irreconcilable differences of Science or religion but simply a revelation that un-believers cannot see God in because of their mindset.
Hasel, Frank M. “Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture”, from Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach.
This chapter is very similar to my paper and deals with presuppositions when interpreting Scripture. Hasel writes that presuppositions are unavoidable and cannot be separated from biblical interpretation. He writes, “The notion of presupposition(s) plays an important role in biblical interpretation. We all hold a number of beliefs that we presuppose or accept when we come to the task of interpreting Scripture. No one is able to approach Scripture with a blank mind. Presuppositions delimit the boundaries within which biblical interpretations can and should properly function. They also determine the method and, through the method, also the influence, to a considerable degree, the outcome of our interpretation. In other words they directly affect our theology and authority that Scripture has for our life and for doctrine.” He writes though that Scripture must change those negative presuppositions such as evolution so we can have a God-centered methodology and theology. He writes that some necessary biblical presuppositions are that God is a personal God who acts and speaks, he is the Creator who wants our fellowship and that sin disrupts this communion. As readers we are expected to be open and honest, have faith, humility, obedience, love and pray. The chapter ends talking about Scriptural principles such as sola, prima and tota scriptura.
I agree with the statement that E. R. O. White says that Jesus as our model of moral behavior is “Christianity’s unique contribution to ethics: the identification of the moral ideal with a historical person” (289). This strikes out to me because when we talk about ethics we are trying to fin what is the best way, and possibly we look to the Bible, and yet we still feel uncomfortable at times with our decision because of human emotion. So much of ethics today is not specifically address by the Bible and one could say each person’s ideas are valid. Yet in reality only Christianity can and will say that the solution of ethics and this theories can actually meet a historical person. Jesus. Only Jesus can fill this role since he was without sin. That is why the example of Jesus and the fruits of the spirit are the best way to know what one’s action should be and that there is a historical figure shows us that it can be done.
Also that when the Bible describes the ethical nature of someone: like David, its’ statements must be understood at the time and condition when they were given. Such when David was declared pure it was because he was right with God, it does not mean that the rest of his life could be identified with that purity.
Ethics are not to produce what we want but should point to our imitation of Christ as our leader and example.
It feels strange to say this but I think I finally understood clearly how Scripture related to Christ and the cosmos in the wheel diagram. That “Scripture provides the principles that keep theology Christ centered and relevant to the world”, is easily understood. In a world that is full of people that believe their own things of God and many times are so out-of-sync with other God believers, there must be the rule. For if God is ruler above all, He also needs to provide us a way in which we can be ruled and conform to that position.
The Bible is that rule for humanity. And from whatever point we read it we first must not look at what it is telling us but rather what is it saying about God. From then we can move to how it applies to my own life. Since God made nature, naturally the conclusion would be to think that the Bible should go together with nature, because they come from the same source, therefore they are to complement each other. When we read our Bibles constantly and go to and from within the Scriptures we will see nature and the Bible come together to start forming a bigger book, both with point to Christ.
I'd like to make a quick response to what EJ said about applying faith to reason. One of the things I’ve noticed in sitting in this revelation, inspiration and hermeneutics class this semester is that there are so many ways Satan can take small elements of truth, wrap them up in a sparkly, philosophical wrapper of error and present them as truth. As we continue to move through the seminary, I think it would do us all well to not try and get too big of a grasp on what WE interpret as truth. Historically, we all know that once you attempt to outrun the wisdom of God, you run the risk of becoming your own God. There all elements of God that keep him a mystery and as soon as you remove the mystery of God, he ceases to be a God. EJ…. I love the observation; maybe I need to be eating what you eat for breakfast!!! LOL
In relationship to what many of you have wrote concerning Biblical and Scientific knowledge, tonight I was reading “Partly Veiled Knowledge” on page 111 of “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture.” In that very short but highly informative paragraph Dr. Hannah wrote something that really inspired an interesting thought for me……. How is it that the partial knowledge that we function out of in earth and science has the expansive ability to preach the fullness of Christ? For some it may sound like an any easy question to answer but for the rest of us who aren’t PHDDDDDDD’S like myself, how is it possible that our partial education in the experience of this human life is able to communicate the fullness of God??? Just a thought for the gifted intellectuals in the class! (by the way I’ve really enjoyed you all this semester!!)
Comment on chapter 5 of the book ‘The Cosmic Christ of the Scripture’.
God’s intentions in creation were extremely noble for man to understand today in this world marred by sin. The principle purpose of His creation was that, the creation to interpret his character, wisdom, thoughts power and glory. Men and woman who fear the Lord in both Old and new Testament have testified and acknowledged the fact that creation was intended to reveal God and his will towards lost mankind. One the examples is King David. For he, says in the book psalms chapter 19:1 that “the heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands”. David implies that the actual purpose of the work of his hands is to declare his glory. On the other hand David is giving a testimony that, no one can claim that he has no knowledge about God .For God by his grace decided to make it every clear that he is revealed by his creation. Ellen G. white in her terrible personal experience in the deep waters of Pacific Ocean also expresses the same mind with David that through her personal experience on the deep waters of Pacific Ocean. In her testimony, she says that, as the water tossed up the boat, not only that she saw the hand of God in the inform of angels, but also she had better understanding of God than before. This is to say that she learned a lesson by nature. She has classified the way we approach Gods revelation. This is through Christ or human way. This is through incarnation that, God became man in the person of Jesus. Christ being the express image of the father was to fully vindicate Gods character. Equally through human nature Gods revelation was to be manifested. For his law is written upon every nerve, muscle fiber and faculty. Possibly, was well understood by David, for he says in Psalms chapter 139:14 “I praise you for I am wonderfully and fearfully made”. That even though, as a result of sin it is impossible to know God perfectly in the world. Another means of knowing God is through the scripture. She confesses that through human imperfectness in preservation, transmission, and translation, makes the scripture incomplete to fully vindicate God. Even though, she says that the scripture is absolutely necessary to give knowledge of salvation. The neglect of the light of God as manifested in Jesus , man and the world has made to cherish Satan’ thoughts above Gods word they have become blind. For the word of God the lamp that sheds light. Indeed the true science must agree with the scripture for God needs his people to intellectuals Christians
In chapter eight of The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, Dr. Hanna points out that there are some who try to create a distance between theology and science, when there really shouldn’t be such a distance. The Bible makes it clear that the Author of the Bible is the same Author of nature, and as such that Author shouldn’t contradict Himself in multiple books that He has authored. Dr. Hanna quotes The American National Academy of Sciences as stating that scientific and biblical study are “separate and mutually exclusive realms…whose presentation in the same context leads to misunderstanding of both”. I agree with Dr. Hanna when he writes that “there may be harmony between theology and science. I agree simply on the basis of the fact that if one derives moral principles, anthropological extrapolations, origins conclusions, ancient historical information, or sociological norms from science, these are topics upon which Scripture comments. To at least be able to compare the two requires a methodological study of both. There doesn’t necessarily have to be a misunderstanding of both simply from a study of both. I don’t see them as mutually exclusive realms, they are rather two realms with some overlap, and the overlap should be sought to be reconciled.
In Understanding Scripture chapter XV Lael Caesar deals with cultures effect upon hermeneutics in his article titled Hermeneutics and Culture. I was impressed by the significance culture can have upon an individual’s hermeneutic. Caesar outlines theologies born from oppression such as black theology, minjung theology, and feminist theology. He indicates the importance of grounding the reading of the Bible in one’s own experience while not making it the verifiable basis of scripture. In the above listed theologies an area of concern is created when the starting point for a theology is the subjective reality of a group or an individual and not the biblically defined starting point within the Bible. Caesar indicates that the only safe starting point for theology should be the human condition as it was at creation and not the many disadvantaged position’s of humanity today. Before reading this chapter I did not have an appreciation for the presuppositions that arise on a group level and their impact on the conclusions of theological thought. I wonder to what extent Adventism as a group develops presuppositions that are unwarranted biblically and where those presuppositions would take us.
This blog is in response to the book Understanding Scripture and the chapter contributed by Gerald A. Klingbeil titled The Text and the Canon of Scripture. My reading this chapter is strangely juxtaposed to a recent reading of Larry Richards article written for BRICOM also titled, “Ellen G. White’s Writing: An Extension of Canon.” While the intent of the authors differ in conclusion much of what is said in each article overlaps. One element that particularly disturbs me, or at the least causes me to inquire is the notion of “self-authentication” and scripture. Klingbeil states, “…it seems clear that the OT and the NT books were self-authenticating.” He indicates that the writings within the canon were recognized to be of divine origin and as such were permitted into the canon of scripture. Later Klingbeil writes, “Those writings which included a “Thus says the Lord” and which had proven their inspiration to their contemporaries were, therefore, included.” He indicates that the most decisive criterion in determining whether something belongs in the canon regards the concept of inspiration. It seems that this reasoning borders upon a circular fallacy. Example: The OT and NT are self-authenticating, we know this because they state “Thus saith the Lord,” (Internal) and are said to be by the community (external) therefore they are Canon. With this formula wouldn’t the Koran also be canon? Certainly to the Muslim community it would be. Richards hammers out what Klingbeil makes reference to in the “proven” regarding the writings and their readers. Klingbeil states that the sociological interpretation of the process of canonization and a high-view of scripture cannot really coexist. Perhaps, but is the only proof for the divine inspiration of a document a self assertion within it and someone’s word that it is. Is there another test? Richards points out that the fruit of the writings is imperative in determining its authenticity as canon. As I understand his argument it is only when somebody undergoes the radical changes that the Bible talks about can they really say that it is canon. Not that it was not canon before, but that our proof it is canon is the effectual working out of its message in our lives. To me there is something fundamentally wrong with the term “self-authenticating.” The very process of authentication requires some outside perspective. I believe that we know the Bible is truly the word of God when the things that we were powerless to change, change through the interaction with its content. The Bible may have always been the word of God, but effectively it cannot be promoted as such without the above process taking place.
This chapter was one of great interest to me. I will focus on two main aspects of theis chapter. My first impression was that of confusion. I was of the opinion that faith reason and the Holy Spirit was a hermeneutical principle that was separate and apart from other hermeneutical principles. Based on my understanding it seems as though this is saying that Hermeneutics in general involves the process whereby one has to use his or her reasoning powers or abilities to understand the scriptures. I make this remark because to me that would be in direct contridiction to the hermeneutical principle of Sola Scriptura which assumes that 'the Bible is the ultimate authority and does not need the principle of riticism which to me is one tennant of the Faith, reason and Holy Spiriti Hermeneutical principle. Which if that as is stated prior is indeed a separate Hermeneutical principle or method. The next section I will focus on is the section of the chapter that discusses the possiblility of Faith taking presidence over reason in the Method or process of Hermeneutics. The author states that it is implied in the book of 1Cor. chapter 10:5 that that is the direction we aught to lean toward. He further explains his understanding by questioning the validity of denying the human senses and the geological, philosophical thought process that would go along with making faith a priority or reason. This is a very interesting discussion outlined in this chapter. It is my hope to take time to understand these arguments further in an effort to come to a better understanding of this Hermeneutical process.
In chapter two of his book, The Cosmis Christ of Scripture,Dr. Martin Hanna ask a very pointed question; Is there a problem with Biblical authority? He immideatly answers with the use of the Sola Scriptura Method is my understanding, by quoting from the Bible itself Romans chapter 13:1 which emphatically states that;"There is no authority but God: the authorities that exist are ordained of Go" carefully adminishes his readers to be very careful about how one studies the Bible. He continues by saying that a person could be a sincere seeker and yet misread the inspired word of God. I particularly liked the analogy that gives a careful warning about being careful about stringing texts together that are not necessarity related for the particular study or devine will of God for our lives. Which could possibly end in suicide. Ha Ha. This tells me that even though the Bible can be trusted based on historical factors and others we probably need to use faith and reason. In addition since God is the author of the scripture and life, why would he want someone to kill him or herself.
Was reading this section of the book “The Cross of Christ written” by John Stott, entitled “The Heart of the Cross”.John Stott considers the necessity of the cross and skilfully unpacks the doctrines of propitiation and expiation. This section is, in our times of doubt, liberalism and relativism, most provocative. In presenting the theology of the cross, The Cross of Christ seeks to explain the horror of sin and understand the outrageousness of forgiveness. Between these two foundational truths lie the necessity of the cross and the necessity of Jesus as our substitutionary atoning sacrifice. And this is the foundation of John Stott’s (and the Church’s) stand against all who seek to dilute the glory of the cross. Stott writes, “We strongly reject, therefore, every explanation of the death of Christ which does not have at its centre the principle of ‘satisfaction through substitution’, indeed divine self-satisfaction through divine self-substitution. The cross was not a commercial bargain with the devil, let alone one which tricked and trapped him; nor an exact equivalent, a quid pro quo to satisfy a code of honor or technical point of law; nor a compulsory submission by God to some moral authority above him from which he could not otherwise escape; nor a punishment of a meek Christ by a harsh and punitive Father; nor a procurement of salvation by a loving Christ from a mean and reluctant Father; nor an action of the Father which bypassed Christ as Mediator. Instead, the righteous, loving Father humbled himself to become in and through his only Son flesh, sin and a curse for us, in order to redeem us without compromising his own character [...] The biblical gospel of atonement is of God satisfying himself by substituting himself for us.” (p. 188) I like the way he did not consider it the main point of his work to remove or try to wrestle with the removing of the mysterious cloud around the cross, but first he just defined it by saying what the cross signifies not and then was careful to say that God was satisfied through the sacrifice on the cross; though we may not fully understand how with details the reason and which aspect of the cross did make Him satisfied, Stott does not deny the fact that was satisfied.
I believe our joy and satisfaction is found in God’s satisfaction and deep pleasure. Have we ever imagine God saving us objectively on the cross, and was not satisfied? Could we have been assured of any satisfaction? And I believe that creation has a major role to play in understanding the mystery of the cross, or rather its blessedness. When god created, we know that it was perfectly done and finished, and safely to inhabited by Man. The satisfaction of God was our perfection creation and it is also our perfect salvation.
As was going through the eighteenth chapter of the letter of Paul to the Romans, i tried to free my mind from all the presumptions that I had, and try to get the message as the Romans was supposed to get by the listening while that letter was being read in their church.
and when it came to the part where Paul was saying: "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified"
I got one thing that i will not have gotten if i kept truiing to figuring out the predestiantion issue... Instead I saw predestination a kind of comfort. I believe that what Paul wanted to give when he was introducing this them in the concluding part of his work on righteousness. This text, appears to me as an introduction of the conclusion; jut as we have said in class that the previous verses help us to understand verse 29 better, so is the las verses of this chapter... "For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."
283 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 283 of 283I would like to comment on Hasel’s work, “Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture.” I enjoyed his concept of “the Hermeneutical Spiral,” which challenges us in how we approach the Bible and do hermeneutics. The main focus of doing theology is by being and doing a methodology that is God-centered. This challenge brings our presuppositions and pre-understandings to be submitted to be changed and reformed by the text of the Holy Bible. Hasel states that we, as interpreters of the Bible, should be very humble and let the text of the Scripture take priority over our own interpretations. Thus, as he continues, “it should be the Bible that is allowed to determine our presuppositions and methodology rather than physics, mathematics, or biology.” I would also add to the end of this statement two more: ‘scientific or doubtful views.’
Perhaps, in the realm of education, as we are all educated, we have tendencies to think that we are superior to the Bible. The Bible should be given enough space to breath in how to teach us its principles. Hasel adds that “the interpreter should be enabled to think increasingly with the biblical text rather than just think about the text of the Bible.” What a challenge for young pastors and teachers! I like his insights and hope to practice such a method in my utilization of Biblical hermeneutics.
My comment is on Understanding Scripture chapter 7: Guidelines for the Interpretation of Scripture
First I found it interesting while reading tonight I ran into the same scripture verse, in Isaiah 65, that was the main verse in question in one of our presentations this afternoon. Muller says it is not quite the description of heaven found in Revelation 21-22 (similar to the questions one of our classmates had asked today). Muller's comments on the passage are found on page 118 if you'd like to read the whole thing.
As I read through the chapter I really appreciated the detailed break down of how to interpret scripture and I gained a deeper understanding of the wheels in motion within the biblical hermeneutical method. I am left with a few questions. A) Muller says any application of the text to our situation today must be tied to the original meaning - of course he goes on to show how to interpret the original meaning but I see this as the area obviously where things can go awry.
He advises keeping the scripture within its context - within the biblical book. So why do we so often and so quickly jump out of the book? I know "Intertextual Reading" is addressed in Chapter 9 - however I think (my own opinion) there should be more of an emphasis on staying within the book, the context of the book and within the texts in the book prior to going outside of the biblical book for interpretation.
On chapter 4 of Understanding Scripture...
In this article, Fernando Canale explains the concepts of revelation and inspiration. At the onset of this explanation is the point that the Bible makes internal claims to being inspired by God Himself. In no way am I questioning that the Bible is inspired of God, but I do wonder if those internal claims are our best proof for the inspiration of scripture. I am not the world’s best basketball player because I claim to be that myself. It seems that the internal claims of the Bible should be some of our final proofs as to the inspiration of scripture. The proof really comes in the experience of the Holy Scripture on individual lives. I wonder if this experiential approach were more used, if we would be better able to reach our current postmodern generation? The postmodern mindset questions absolute truth and therefore the authority and inspiration of scripture. But the inroad to this mindset from a Christian perspective would be to address their need for experiencing true spirituality. It is at the point that we can share with them our own experience with the Word of God or even as they experience it for themselves, that they can progress in the process toward a greater understanding.
On chapter 3 of Understanding Scripture…
On page 42 is written, “We have to distinguish carefully between a central theme or person in Scripture and postulating a theological center whereby other portions of scripture are relegated to a secondary status.” I think often we tend to lean toward the latter, a theological center of interpretation. As the wheel model of inspiration would suggest, our hermeneutic must be Christ centered. If this is not the case we have lost the real reason for Scripture in the first place. This is not to say that our theology does not come out of Scripture, but we must first and ultimately come to Christ in our hermeneutics. This point has been driven home a number of times for me in class this semester, but possibly one of the clearest pictures was from one of Dr. Paul Scott Wilson’s lectures. Dr. Wilson made the point that most of our preaching has lost its Christ-centeredness. He went on to prove the importance of maintaining the whole gospel message when we preach. Also, Hasel continues by explaining the relationship between Scirpture and Christ, which in my opinion would eliminate any argument for placing theological centers before a Christological center.
My comment is on Chapter 7 of The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, "Are Ellen G. White's Writings Christ Centred?"
I read this chapter twice and the final part of the chapter 3 times and something really dawned on me regarding the main points on pages 92 and 93 which describe the way that Jesus restores human personhood. What I already knew as an idea, but really digested through these points is that through "melding" with Christ we are not only conduits for His message but we receive his power and therefore have the power to do things that he did. I think I grew in my understanding of what "partaking of the divine nature" really means. Also I understand more concretely and have pondered more on the idea of God as social by nature and hence in our personhood, as part of humanity, we are social and called to spread to our fellow humans the power and person of Jesus. These two points really stood clear after reading this chapter.
During and after reading chapter 7 on the guidelines for interpretaion of Scripture topic number 2 "Interpreting a Biblical Text" I was left with one question. How do we as Adventist end up with so many different interpretations of a text while claiming to be using the basic exegetical steps or some similar steps? I know there are differences among non-Adventist Christians but even among Adventist there are differences on some doctrines and principles.
I went on-line under the key word interpreting bible text and what I found was that almost every site I opened claimed to be using the same steps in almost the same way as laid out in chapter 2. I was wondering then, if the same steps are bieng applied how do we come to so many different conclusions on some of the same doctrines and principles?
One of the things I thought was very important, and all the steps are important, was turning to God in prayer. In that section it was suggested that there is nothing wrong with praying not only prior to the study but also praying through out the study presenting to the Lord what is complicated or challenging askig God for the answers. I know a minister who teaches prophecy that will pause, kneel in prayer while presenting a sermon asking God to allow His Holy Spirit to be the interpreter and mouth piece for what needs to be said. Although there are quite a few reasons for arriving at the wrong interpretation of Scripture one sure way to be able to understand and have the right interpretation of God's Word is to depend solely on Him for the answers, a step we sometimes take for granted.
The summary in chapter 7 of "Are Ellen White's Writings Christ-centered," discussed 3 points on how like Scripture relations among divine and human persons are in terms of (1)the place of Christ among the divine persons, (2)the nature of Christ as the divine-human person, and (3)the christ-centered connections among divine and human persons. She first describes the relationship in divinity as being social in nature and she says that there are 3 divine persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit and how the Father is in the Son and the Spirit; the Son is in the Father and the Spirit and the Spirit is in the Father and the Son. One thing I thought about this social relationship is how this relates to us. Just think about how the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are social with us--Divinity and Humanity abiding or dwelling together. How the Father loves us so much that He sent His Son to die for us, John 3:16 and then before Jesus ascended to the Father He didn't want to leave us alone so He prayed the Father to give us another comforter, that He may abide with us forever, John 14:16. He, the Comforter is to not only abide with us but be in us, John 14:17. Jesus said "I will not leave you comfortless, I will come to you, that is in the person of the Holy Spirit. What a blessing to know that as social beings the Godhead is social and desires to be not only around us but in us. Praise God!
A Response to Chapter 7 of Dr. Hanna’s book.
Martin Hanna asks the question of whether or not Ellen G. White’s writings are Christ-Centered?
Anyone who has ever read Ellen G. White would agree that she is completely centered on Jesus Christ in all of her writings. Now as to whether or not she was “Cosmic Christ” centered…that’s a whole other question altogether.
If the term Cosmic-Christ refers to the context of Jesus’ incarnation, coming to live with man in the “cosmos”, then of course, but unfortunately that’s not the only thing implied in the use of this term.
According to Elain Siemsen, a writer for The Lutheran, wrote in her April, 2004 article “Who is the Cosmic Christ?”… “In the writings of the early church teachers like Bishop Irenaeus of Lyon (130-200), we see more of the foundation for cosmic Christology. Irenaeus taught that the faithful must look to creation to see the UNITY that begins with the Word of God working out God’s plan of salvation. God's unwearied Word made all things, Irenaeus wrote. The UNITY of creation reflects the UNITY of the Godhead: Father, Son and Spirit. In one continuous line of action from creation-incarnation-life and work-death-resurrection, Irenaeus saw perfect expression of God's own UNITY...Creation, the cosmos, is the location, the setting where we have lived out our disobedience...damaging, if not contributing to the destruction of the cosmos that God blesses in creation. Consequently, it must be here, within creation, that we understand our salvation. The promise for our present and the future is that God's grace, always existing in the cosmos, has entered into history in the incarnation of Jesus and reconnects creation to redemption for all time. Cosmic Christology affirms a persistent hope. This hope offers us this challenge: We are called to live with justice and peace toward humanity and all of the creation. Christ who redeems all the cosmos calls us to reject actions and beliefs that create division between people, between humanity and nature, or between God and creation.”
Sound familiar? Cosmic Christology is all about UNITY…it is ecumenical all the way back to the 2nd century. Don’t get me wrong, I love the idea of UNITY, but Christ calls me to “reject actions and beliefs that create division between people?” I’m not so sure about that. If that were the case we would have never had the early church or the Reformation. Jesus says in Matthew 10:34 “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” If unity requires me to adopt something that isn’t biblical then I would rather have division. Blessings in Jesus!
I am on chapter 8 in Hanna’s book, so I haven’t quite made it to chapter 10, but I can understand “reticence” to accepting Scripture is an incomplete representation of God due to the element of human transmission. I believe this does challenge the authority of Scripture…but in my opinion so does the whole idea of prima scriptura versus sola scriptura. I’m not sure that a holistic approach reestablishes the authority of the bible, but in my mind it makes room for dualistic dialecticism. In my mind the use of a wholistic approach opens the door for the adoption of false doctrine. That’s been the reality of years past. Blessings brother!
I am commenting on “Innerbiblical Interpretation: Reading the Scriptures Intertextually,” by Ganoune Diop, in our textbook. I have appreciated Diop’s view on the interpretation of Scripture. He has a refreshing and concise approach, which was a blessing and eye opening for me regarding how to utilize the Bible. The most positive view that Diop has presented here is that the Bible is its own interpreter. He points out that “the reader of the NT must be steeped in the OT in order to understand its various themes.” Diop has not hidden the fact that the entire Bible is inspired by God. The Bible does not contradict itself, but “the issue of innerbiblical interpretation is crucial to enable us to grasp the organic unity of all Scripture and to interpret properly its various sections” (Diop).
Diop gives fourteen examples of how the Biblical writers interpret each other’s writings, which is done in various ways and for different reasons. These examples help me to recognize that God was and is in control of His Word. Sometime as scholars we argue there are inconsistencies between different writers of the Bible, while the writers’ interpretation of each other has no conflict at all; however, the only conflict is the interpretation by those of us who suggest the writers of the Bible contradict other writers. Although, “at times they [Biblical writers] correct what was not ideal in their audiences’ ethics, behavior, world views, understanding, or interpretation of the OT texts” (Diop), please note that this was done by the Biblical writers who were led by the Holy Spirit, not by just anybody who thought to interpret it this way or that way.
I loved what the last chapter in Hanna's book had to say about reasonable faith. It basically explained that reason is not to be used above faith. Reason is a powerful tool to be used for the glory of God. And it is a gift from God for intended use. However, many men have deified reason to the point that they put it above the things of God. They think they can use it to fully explain God. And when they encounter insurmountable intellectual barriers thus discovering the limitations of a human brain many of their first instincts are to downplay the role of God in comparison with a hypothesis that supports their train of logic. This is a contemptable misuse of a God-given power. If we could fully explain God, then most likely we wouldn't need Him. One of the great qoutes I enjoyed in this book is this,"While God does not promise to remove every doubt, He does give sufficient evidence as a reason for faith." Conversely to what I was just saying, many Christians beleive in faith alone with the absence of reason. They believe that to trust at all in science is bordering on heresy. This is also a misuse of ourGod-given abilities. As much as God wishes us to be faithful even in the things of God we do not yet fully understand, does not the bible also say "come now, let us reason together." Often times these two faculties are used best when used in conjuction.
In the book entitled "Understanding Scripture" An Adventist Approach, I've been really digesting a reading from the end of the book in one of the appendices regarding bible study methods. In one section regarding pre-suppositions, it was intersting to note many of the presuppositons arising from the claims of scripture. The first few had to do with origin of the bible. First of all, scripture is to be regarded as the primary revelation of God above nature or anything else. All scripture is inspired from God. All scripture is also applicable to all cultures and backgrounds. It's power to transform lives transcends everything from eastern and mediterannean cultures to the centuries of the human race. Among the pre-suppositions I was reading a couple of interesting ones that dealt with science, reason, and nature. One of them was talking specifically with human reason in conjunction to the bible. Human reason is subject to the bible not equal to or above it. There is a place for reason within theolgy, but it does not hold primacy. "Pre-suppositions regarding the scriptures must be in harmony with the claims of scriptures and subject to correction by them." Man must allow for correction from the holy spirit's guidance in God's word, and let not ego nor anything else be paramount.
Understanding Scripture
An Adventist Approach
Chapter 5
“The Authority of Scripture”
Peter M. van Bemmelen.
What a refreshing essay on the “Authority of Scripture”! You know Peter M. van Bemmelen cuts through the absolute MESS of voices claiming insight as to what constitutes proper biblical hermeneutics. I really appreciate the simple and straight forward nature of van Bemmelen’s article. He makes it plain…true authentic Seventh-day Adventists follow in the Protestant Reformer’s footsteps in upholding sola Scriptura as the governing principle in the development of our theology. Well along comes science, and while science has brought us a number of modern-day conveniences, it also has brought us the nuisance of textual criticism. Arrogantly, men have challenged the veracity of the Bible over the last hundred plus years. Picking and choosing, as if they were at a lunch buffet, textual critics have attempted to explain which parts of the Holy Scriptures are indeed accurate and which parts fail to meet their supposed elevated scientific standard…van Bemmelen explains that it was at this point that Adventist theology adopted the idea of tota Scriptura …maintaining our belief that ALL of the Bible is inspired by God. I would like to get my hands on more of van Bemmelen’s material…I find his style of research and writing to be clear and refreshingly Biblical.
May God give us the wisdom and courage to stand for His truth in the face of all opposition.
FILL IN THE BLANK! By Simona Mills
In chapter 12 of Understanding Scripture an Adventist Approach this statement stops me in my tracks “There are many other things Jesus did…The world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” (John 21:25). This blows my mind because that means that Jesus’ life and ministry was not limited to what was written about Him in the 4 gospels. So, the question is how come the Holy Spirit did not impress on these four writers: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, to include more things like how Jesus was as a teen or if He had a best friend, or if he played the sport of the day or His home life? Could it be that those things are not important or is there something else to it? After reading this chapter I could not help but wonder what would have happened if Mary Magdalene or Lazarus or even Martha had written a gospel. The chapter states that the Holy Spirit inspired the gospel writers and inspired what was recorded. While there is a lot about the birth, ministry and death of Jesus, there is not a lot about his growing years except for the statement by Luke “ And Jesus increase in wisdom, in statute and in favor with God and Man” (Luke 2:52) Does that mean that His life outside of ministry was not important or pen worthy? Here’s what I think. Jesus died the death I should have died. His love for me caused His death. A God like that wants to have a personal relationship with me. He longs to share my life. So could it be when it comes to the small and not so small matters in my life that Jesus wants to minister to me, with me and for me as needed? He wants an intimate relationship with me so that I can write my own Gospel. The Gospel of Jesus written by Simona would have my first hand experiences with Jesus. I would mentally record how He impacted my life and how His impact moved my life to touch others. So I am no longer worried about the blanks that could have been filled in by the 4 Gospel writers. I look forward to the blanks that will be filled in when I allow Jesus full reign over my life. The Gospel according to _____________. You fill in the blank and know Jesus for yourself.
THE SUM OF THE PARTS EQUALS A HOLE! (HOLE IS NOT A TYPO) By Simona Mills
Chapter 9 in the Cosmic Christ of Scripture What Does the Bible Say was a chapter that made me squirms in my seat. “…the evil suppression of truth results from our…foolishness…” How often do I miss the truth by my presuppositions that has not been surrendered to the righteousness of God and by faith in God. “Faith alone…” as the author Dr. Hanna states is a faith that is seasoned with reason in the “light of Christ”. I do not pretend to always understand all the writings of Paul. But I do appreciate the fact that while he did not condemn worldly knowledge, he chose to not let it be the thread of his preaching. He chose to weave his preaching with the thread of Christ and Him crucified. I enjoyed how this chapter enabled me to see the science of the cosmos in scripture without creating problems with theology. That is not always an easy task when we are looking at God’s revelation through the book of nature. The idea of partly veiled knowledge discussed by Dr Hanna is valuable and helps shed light on the holes in science and my sometimes partial understanding of theology in scripture. I concur that incomplete knowledge in science coupled with the incomplete knowledge of scripture (no matter how I slice it I am still gaining knowledge from the Word so it is still incomplete) and knowledge of Christ, when coupled or linked together, can create a strong chain of knowledge. This chain grows stronger as we allow the God of the Cosmos to unveil the light that strengthens our knowledge. So a sum of the parts can equal a hole if not linked with the Cosmic Christ of scripture.
In looking at some of the issues with Hermeneutics I believe that we as Seventh Day Adventist have to seriously look at the way we view those who are suffering from forms of illness in relation to our views of the health message. I know that most would understand that the common cold is no indicator of any hidden sins but what happens when it is Cancer or some other major disease? Do we still look at these people with our noses lifted like the Pharisees did in there day? I think the answer to this question is a sad yes. I believe that we as Seventh day Adventist need to take a second look at the health message and teach it in its biblical entirety with less isogesis and more exegesis. Now don’t get me wrong I do see the many advantages of a healthy diet and exercise and I work to try to make it a part of my every day routine but some of us have taken a beautiful life giving message and made it a burden and a division between us and this is sad.
I have watched loving, God fearing Christians being counseled not to go to the doctor for treatment because it shows there lack of faith in a God who can cure them through prayer and Nuni Juice!! This is not by lay people but so called educated pastors. What are we doing? During the guest lecturers a point that was made stuck out in my mind and it was that God has called us to come and reason together. Are we truly REASONING together or are we so stuck in our ways that we would rather watch someone die with a cup of NUNI than to live with Chemo Therapy???
During a presentation about spiritual gifts I wondered if our definition of spiritual gifts is a little limited in its scope. Yes, we all know the good spiritual gifts when we see them, singing, preaching, or just a good greeter at the church doors but could there be more to this than what meets the eye? Could being a Military soldier be a form of spiritual gift and if it is, what would this do to the view of the military we have as SDA Christians? Are we therefore selective in our definition of spiritual gifts to ensure that those things we do not see as truly "spiritual" are excluded from this category?
I must admit that I have some reservations in my definition of what is a spiritual gift or not, but I do wonder if by doing such I am limiting the scope of God’s effectiveness in our ever day lives. The adjoining question to that would be dose a person have to be in a certain place and job for their spiritual gifts to function? Using my Soldier as an example, though gifted in the art of war and defense of his people, like David, does he have to be in the military to use this skill and talent the Lord has given him? I will let you decide…
Interpreting and Applying Biblical Ethics In Understanding Scripture Chapter 16.
This chapter was helpful but I still have a hard time knowing what to throw out and what to keep. It is like eating a watermelon with very tiny pink seeds. It is hard to distinguish between the fruit and the seeds that you spit out. I know this is a bit crass when referring to the Bible but sometimes I feel we are bit crass in our ethical hermeneutics. We are quick to make certain issues moral and ethical ones and quick to get rid of things that don't make sense to us immediately or are not convenient for us today. I think there are obvious universal ethics such as Don't kill, don't sleep with your neighbor's spouse, Keep the Sabbath day holy, but what about wearing a shirt of a combination of different fabrics or other such texts that are not as clear. In instances like these, we the tag on our polyblend shirt and deem the text irrelevant because we like our shirt from the GAP. Is there a clear line or do we simply take the things that work for our own lifestyle and leave the things that do not. I am not suggesting that we wear 100% cotton all the time nor am I suggesting that there is something wrong with shopping at the GAP. I think the problem is in our hermeneutics. I liked the author's suggestion to model our lives after Jesus. This seems like an obvious thing to do, we where the WWJD T-shirts but what does this mean, really? Jesus flipped all of the cultural and religious assumptions on their back. He and his disciples picked grain on the Sabbath and healed people on the Sabbath and it seemed that they were crossing ethical boundaries. But Jesus' emphasis was love. Perhaps this should be ours to. Perhaps in keeping Jesus' commandment that says Love the Lord your God with all your heart . . . and love your neighbor is where we need to start. The Ten Commandments fall under those categories for sure and the other commandments, although some may be a bit more obscure we can measure off the two greatest commandments given by Jesus.
I appreciated what the author said about foreigners. He said, another way you can tell the difference between cultural and universal ethics is if the law refers to the foreigner within your gates. Now this is obviously does not cover all the bases but I believe it is a good place to start!
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture Chapter 4.
I appreciated this chapter of Dr. Hanna's book where it talked about increasing one's knowledge day by day and using reason as our ally. I think that we can use human reason, not over scripture or Christ but in conjunction with God and the way he reveals Himself. I think that as an Adventist it would be way to easy for us not to use our minds. After all, our forefathers and mothers have done all the thinking for us so why do we need to question or come to new understandings when the old ones are sufficient? But are they sufficient or are there new things that God wants us to discover daily about ourselves, the world around us, and most importantly, Himself?
I like the quote that Dr. Hanna uses from Ellen White. It says this: "God desires his workers to gain daily a better understanding of how to reason logically from cause to effect, arriving at wise, safe conclusions. He desires them to add to their strength of memory. We cannot afford mistakes that are the result of our cherishing erroneous ideas. As little children we are to sit at the feet of Christ, learning of Him how to work successfully. We are to ask God for a sound judgment, and for light to impart to others. There is need of knowledge that is the fruit of experience. We should not allow a day to pass without gaining an increase of knowledge in temporal and spiritual things."
She goes on but I will not. The bottom line is that we must not be intimidated by new things but we should look for them and share them with others. God is constantly revealing Himself in new and powerful ways and he wants us to use the minds that He gave us, relying on His wisdom as we seek for further truth.
I grew up in an Adventist community of wonderful Christians but realize how easy it would have been for me to take their word for it rather than discover Jesus and His truth for myself. I am so thankful that God reveals himself to each of us personally and that we do not have to take someone else's word for it!
In response to Chapter 2: Faith, Reason, and the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics
Hermeneutics can never be independent of the rationality of reason, and faith in the scriptures as the divine word of God. Human reason can by no means be fully dependable therefore it becomes essential to have rules to guide in the discipline of hermeneutics. But even amid these regulations, there is a greater need for the aid of the Holy Spirit.
It gives us reasonable balance when we address the fact that our minds can fall subject to the influences of fallen forces. This obliges us to assume spiritual responsibilities that will diminish the attacks of these forces as we perform our hermeneutics. Our reasoning only is flawed and misleading, if it is not under the appropriate spiritual control.
We need the Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth, and lift our mind to agreement with the mind of Christ. Without Christ’s guidance our eyes are blinded and even the most straightforward truths will be impossible to distinguish.
It is possible for Satan to influence our minds as we seek to utilize this God given gift of reasoning. But regardless of this limitation, God has not left us out of the equation. He speaks through Christ, He speaks through the scriptures and he continues to speak through us by the power of consecrated reasoning that is faithful to scripture.
It is intriguing to note the importance of typology, allegories, and parables in helping to refine a more principled methodology for interpreting scripture. Distinguishing between types and antitype, and analyzing the biblical blueprint to gain a the light of a more superior fulfillment, has done more than simply helped us to curtail the imbalance of over imposing personal theology in interpreting both text and context. It has helped us to develop the process of biblical hermeneutics, while mastering the theologically inclusive method of going to and fro in and out of scripture to acquire knowledge of truth.
Avoiding warped interpretations demands us to resist the temptation of relying to heavily on one system of interpretation. Allegories requires us to go far beyond text and literalistic explanations to see the context, both biblically and extra biblically, including history and culture in order to grasp a reasonable understanding.
The challenge to interpret these passages of scripture has helped us to develop a method of theology which borrows from various hermeneutical disciplines. Openness and flexibility are the results of this and also the privilege of arriving at truth more precisely.
The author has given fair critical and reasonably sound treatment to his topic, and has also given innovative principles for conducting hermeneutic in regard these literary types.
George W. Reid (ed). Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach. (Hagerstown: Review and Herald
Publishing Association, 2006), 27-46.
This chapter addresses the issue of presupposition and Hermeneutics. The idea that an individual is able to be totally objective and not be influence by his biases are is realistic. Every human being is subject to biases and they influence the way people see the Scripture. I believe that the book made a very important point when it alluded to the fact that interpreters need to accept their presuppositions. It is noteworthy to say that interpreters cannot divest themselves from their past, experiences, resident ideas, and preconceived notions and opinions.
In addition, the impact that sin has on the human mind is another reason that influence the interpretation of Scripture. Sin causes pride, self-deception, doubt, distance and distortion. Conversely, the hermeneutical principles of Scripture definitely assist the interpreter in relation to the hermeneutical process. In this process the Bible is its own interpreter, and all passages are interpreted in light of the whole Bible. However, the book emphasized that Christ should be the center of hermeneutics and should be the connection between Christ and Scripture should be highlighted strongly. Clearly, the way to proceed in biblical interpretation is to accept and be aware of one’s presuppositions.
George W. Reid (ed). Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach. (Hagerstown: Review
and Herald Publishing Association, 2006), 47-74.
Revelation and Inspiration play a very important role in the understanding of Scripture. The reason why these two concepts are so important is that humans cannot know anything about God unless He reveals it. Similarly, inspiration certainly is not inspiration if the divine element is eliminated. I believe that the divine human connection that is evident in the production of the Scripture is definitely a fundamental principle when it comes to revelation and inspiration. This chapter plays a key role in understanding the nature of revelation and the prominent models of inspiration that exist. However, the author did a good job emphasizing the positives and weaknesses of each theory. Certainly, this chapter was very beneficial for me as it relates to the content of the class.
In addition, the information covered in this chapter broadens my understanding of Revelation and inspiration, and assist in the understanding of key issues that confront the Bible scholar when seeking to understand the nature and content of Revelation. Therefore, I must say that I am a better student of the word because of this chapter.
Reflection by Eric Ollila
“The Authority of Scripture” by Peter van Bemmelen
Understanding Scripture
Monday, November 26, 2007
This chapter had a couple of points that I wanted to touch on. The first is regarding where the authority of Scripture is derived from. The author states that “Divine authority is rooted in love and exercised in service and in self-denial.” Christ’s own personal authority was based “primarily on diven love and defined by truth, so the Scriptures speak to us with that same authority.”
It was powerful to me today to reflect on the ‘servant’ nature of the Scriptures. The author quotes Bernar Ramm when he says “both the divine Savior and the divne Scriptures bear the form of a servant even though both contain within themselves the divine glory.” It goes on to say “while Christ made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servan, being made in human likenesss, yet He spoke with divein authority. Likewise, while the Scriptures are given in the weakness an din the imperfection of human language, nevertheless, every word of God is pure…is truth…is living and powerful…cannot be broken… and stands forever.” (p. 78)
It struck me that one of the biggest reasons why God does indeed have so much authority is because of the fact that He does serve every single thing that has ever been created. He is the sustainer of life. In Him all things consist (see Col. 1:17). Because He is the servant of all, He is the Lord of all. It takes shear power and might and wisdom and endurance and love and patience and temperance and justice to be able to be a constant servant. It is just the opposite of what we really think as humans. We look at servant hood as weakness, as if any ole person can serve, but true service requires more than weakness and inefficiency. It requires a total pouring out of ones self. God does this continuously. That is the essence of Him, He lives to give.
Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy
Richard Davidson
This chapter was very eye opening I learned some practical things about understanding prophecy in the Old Testament. Davidson said there are three major categories of predictive prophecies in the OT (outside of Daniel): (1) Messianic prophecies; (2) oracles against the foreign nations; (3) and covenant-centered kingdom promises/prophecies given to Israel as a geopolitical entity, including end-time prophecies involving the final worldwide showdown between Israel and her enemies. He said further that there are two genres of Predictive Prophecy; General (Classical) Prophecy and Apocalyptic Prophecy. He says that General Prophecy deals with local/national contemporary and Apocalyptic Prophecy deals with universal sweep of history with emphasis on the end time. One statement that stuck out to me was that predictive prophecy was not given simply to satisfy curiosity about future events but for moral purposes, such as the establishment of faith in God and motivation to holy living. In think that when you live in the face of prophecy you can make rational decisions about the life you will lead. For the Old Testament people they faced many situations of prophecies of deliverance and of doom. Either way the peoples’ faith could be strengthened in God and their actions would demonstrate how they believed in Him. The prophecies would cause them shape up or get worse. I also believe that God gave prophecies to show the people how much He loved them. Just like God gave prophecies in the Old Testament he has also given them in the New Testament. Therefore the people who know of Prophecies today must see the love of God in giving prophecies. I think that its awesome that God tells us how things are going to be. It strengthens my faith in him and I know that I can trust what he says he will do because he has prophesied before and it came to pass, so what will be different in the future.
Chapter XI in Understanding Scripture
Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy – Richard Davidson
The reality that predictive prophecy was not given to satisfy the curiosity about future events, but instead for moral purpose and as a motivation to holy living caught my attention in a particular way. I thought about the thirst with which we, humans, search for answers. I also thought about the pride that tempts us as our understanding grows deeper and deeper. I believe that a big responsibility comes along with the understanding of the prophecies –understanding that is the result of God revealing more unto us - and that the SDA church has been blessed with knowledge that is to be brought with love, modesty and humility to the world.
Jeremiah 18:7-10 as quoted by the author sheds a great light on the way in which God deals with the nations of the world, as expressed in the predictive prophecies. Read in the context of the chapter I found it sufficient to clarify the apparent intrigue in the matter.
I loved the manner in which Dr. Davidson expressed the godly impartiality in salvation. I would like to quote a little. ”There were not two plans for two different groups in the OT; all were called to join the biblical Israel, the one people of God.” And again, “The NT does not present a picture of two separate programs of salvation for two separate people of God.” Separation is a word that has been brought forth along with sin. Separation is not heavenly. And what I am thinking of now is that many times it seems easy to talk about impartiality, yet at the very core of our honesty, we may need at admit sometimes that our minds or hearts fall into the temptation of separating, of categorizing, after some criteria or others. As I contemplate the respect and attention that God offers to each one of us, I see more and more how godly impartiality is - to really look at the heart, and pray and hope for a home in heaven for everybody and anybody.
Chapter XI in Understanding Scripture
Interpreting Old Testament Prophecy – Richard Davidson
The reality that predictive prophecy was not given to satisfy the curiosity about future events, but instead for moral purpose and as a motivation to holy living caught my attention in a particular way. I thought about the thirst with which we, humans, search for answers. I also thought about the pride that tempts us as our understanding grows deeper and deeper. I believe that a big responsibility comes along with the understanding of the prophecies –understanding that is the result of God revealing more unto us - and that the SDA church has been blessed with knowledge that is to be brought with love, modesty and humility to the world.
Jeremiah 18:7-10 as quoted by the author sheds a great light on the way in which God deals with the nations of the world, as expressed in the predictive prophecies. Read in the context of the chapter I found it sufficient to clarify the apparent intrigue in the matter.
I loved the manner in which Dr. Davidson expressed the godly impartiality in salvation. I would like to quote a little. ”There were not two plans for two different groups in the OT; all were called to join the biblical Israel, the one people of God.” And again, “The NT does not present a picture of two separate programs of salvation for two separate people of God.” Separation is a word that has been brought forth along with sin. Separation is not heavenly. And what I am thinking of now is that many times it seems easy to talk about impartiality, yet at the very core of our honesty, we may need at admit sometimes that our minds or hearts fall into the temptation of separating, of categorizing, after some criteria or others. As I contemplate the respect and attention that God offers to each one of us, I see more and more how godly impartiality is - to really look at the heart, and pray and hope for a home in heaven for everybody and anybody.
Chapter XV, Hermeneutics and Culture, in Understanding Scripture – Lael O. Caesar
The topic of cultural influence on Biblical hermeneutics is a delicate one. I was very interested to read through the chapter.
Here are some of my thoughts on this topic that has had my attention for a while.
Living in a few cultures I have often wondered why such striking differences between people who read the same Bible and serve the same God. Why are there different interpretations of the same text?
One of the biggest area of connection between culturally different Christian communities is, I would say, the doctrinal element of religion. What varies a lot from culture to culture is the approach.
I came to realize for myself that what opens the door for differences between cultures of the same religion is mainly the way in which people understand God’s transcendence and immanence. Although Christians of one culture may profess God’s relationship with us, humans, and may strive to have it, in reality, at the practical level, there may be little personal experience due to a strong but coated sense of God's transcendence. At the same time, people of another culture may experience a more authentic personal relationship with God, having a more clear understanding of His immanence.
On the other hand, another thing that contributes to the drawing of the line is the aspect of God's justice or love that one culture or another chooses to point to more, while the interpretation of the Scriptures are filtered through this perspective. I also came to believe that the governing pattern of a culture shapes the mentality and infiltrates into the religious aspect of life, creating a grid of guidelines that will influence the worship style, the manner of approaching the doctrine and the interpersonal relationships of the worshipers. The question is: Are these differences vital unto salvation? We trust God’s justice in dealing with each one of us considering all of our life-living conditions, but on our part, in as much as it is in our power, seeking to see God as He is, in His true character is crucial for every one of us, individually, and it may require from some of us to abandon mentalities that we have grown up with and have possibly unwillingly assimilated. Our struggles in the journey of understanding God as He really is are different from culture to culture, from person to person, and He is working with each one of us in our needs.
Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach. Chapter five: The Authority of Scripture.
How can we know that the Bible is the Word of God? This question is discussed in this chapter. Does this mean that anyone who reads the Bible automatically believes that it is what it says about itself and do what it says to do? Obviously not, even among professed believers this is hardly the case. The Bible, the Word of God does not force its’ ideology on anyone. It simply states what it is and from where it came. The choice is up to the one who reads, to accept it as it is written (Deuteronomy 30:19-20).
The author of this article, Peter M. van Bemmelen, makes this clear in his fifth point on page 86, where he discusses humanity’s ability to choose. It is evident that we all have the power of choice. You choose to read this review and may agree with it, if you so choose. Van Bemmelen states, “The primary response to that authority [the Scriptures] by humans should be a response of faith, issuing in willing obedience.” If we do not respond to it in faith does it make it any less than what it is, no! The Bible does not seek the approval of men but seeks to dispense the knowledge of God to a world that is searching for answers. It provides all the knowledge that is need for us to understand God and to understand our obligation to Him.
Chapter 7: Are Ellen White's Writing Christ-Centered?
The key statement in this chapter which was the cornerstone to understanding whether or not Mrs. White’s writings are Christ-centered was this one: “Christ, His character and work, is the center and circumference of all truth; He is the chain on which the jewels of doctrine are linked. In Him is found the complete system of truth.” I like that statement; and unpacking it in a different way, using another metaphor, I would say that Christ is like a picture painted, a priceless masterpiece, each individual stroke of the paintbrush is an individual doctrine making up the big picture.
The statement was brought out that God loves to reveal Himself to His people. And Christ is one such revelation; He is indeed the Supreme Revelation. For my research paper I was reading about how from a non-Messianic Jewish standpoint, Christ never really identified Himself directly as either the Son of Man, the Son of God, or the Messiah. Especially is this so in the synoptic Gospels. Those who hold this same viewpoint tend to look down on John’s Gospel as being a bit fanciful since the heartbeat of that Gospel is Christ’s divinity. But in this chapter, we see that Ellen White backs up the testimony of the Scripture when she says, “Jesus speaks of Himself as well as His Father as God”.
Her writings were focused on a balanced understanding of Christ’s nature. She demonstrated that in spite of His divinity, He was yet human, bearing the same nature that we have, but remaining unsullied from the “same sinful, corrupt propensities” to sin that we have cultivated as a result of sinning. No theologian, philosopher, seminarian, pastor, or bishop could put it plainer in my estimation. I think Mrs. White was on the money.
Garth Dottin
Interpretation of the Gospels and Epistles
Chapter 12 of Understanding Scripture
The author Rice makes a valuable point about bible scholars. He says “anyone reading through the synoptic gospels will immediately recognize the same portrait while being refreshed by the different shadings.”I believe that theologians have majored in minors for many years. We have been taught to critique, analyze, and exegete and have imparted our knowledge to others. However, it has created a generation that questions the very fabric of biblical truth and authority. The picture of Christ in the gospels and in scripture becomes a blemished portrait that has been tainted with theological criticisms. Rice notes that scholars consider the differences between the gospels as a “synoptic problem.” There are a plethora of questions that can emerge in the mind of the believer when the biblical text is observed from a critical position. Furthermore, it becomes difficult for the ideas of inspiration to be accepted. Rice says “These differences are not to be looked upon as errors or something that renders the gospels unreliable, but as tantalizing challenges that expand our own view of who Jesus is and what he taught and did.” The differences of the gospels should adequately present a perfect picture of our Savior, and His mission of salvation for a blemished world. It should not present a blemished savior with a tarnished word to a sinful world.
Romel Charles
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture Chapter 10: Are Ellen White’s Writings Relevant to the Cosmos?
I guess sometimes we just have to ask the questions that need to be asked just to prove that the answer was true to begin with. This instance is no different because the answer to the question is yes. Ellen White’s writings are relevant to the cosmos. Like Dr. Hanna said in his book, “in spite of the distortion caused by sin, the cosmos is an open book which reveals God.” It is evident in the world that sin is in existence because of the crime, violence, mass murders, drug abuse, hatred, rape, suicide, immorality and the list goes on, but God is still evident in the world because of the good people and the fact that the sun still rises and set (or earth rotates) although there is still sin in the world. Ellen White bring that out in her writings because although there are appalling and terrible things occurring in the world God still cares and the love that He has for us is evident in the Bible and is also reflected in the words of Ellen White. Also, the fact that there are people that have never heard the name of Jesus but still do good deeds is another way that her writing are relevant because when they do encounter them they will come to the realization that they were already reflecting Christ.
Romel Charles
Understanding Scripture Chapter 17: Ellen G, White and Hermeneutics
It is amazing to know that in reading this chapter that the hermeneutical principles that Ellen White used are the basically the same that anyone would use. I guess you expect people like Prophets and Prophetess’ that are so in tuned with God that it should be easy for them but they have to put in work just like anyone else. She invited the Holy Spirit to guide in the study, she was willing to obey the truth that was found and she was also open-minded. She also believed that she, as well as we, needed to be careful of extreme interpretation and religious fanatics. The one that I liked the most was to use common sense. This was the most interesting to me because although there are many people in the world with degrees from top universities around the globe, it is a shame that many people do not have common sense not just with educational things but when it comes to matters of the Bible. I believe that it is because of the increase of technology that people are not using their brains anymore and expect that a computer or another person should grant them the answers to the questions that they hold. It is a shame that we have allowed an increase in technological knowledge hinder our common sense when it comes to interpreting the Bible because something as simple as this can unify the Christian community and its interpretation of the Bible.
Understanding Scripture, Ch. 5
The Authority of Scripture
That the authority of Scripture would be a major issue for Christianity and the Seventh-day Adventist Church really is deplorable in my estimation. The psalmist says, “Thou hast magnified Thy word above all Thy name” (Psalm 138:2b). And Ellen White echoes that in Prophets and Kings pg. 158 when she wrote, “The honor of His throne is staked for the fulfillment of His word”. So we right there for the Adventist there should be no conflict with accepting the Scripture as authority. I hope I am not oversimplifying this conundrum but it really is that simple. I think the author does an excellent job of presenting this to our notice. But I believe that this should have never been a problem in the first place. It’s like saying an NBA star has problems with accepting that he has to wear his team’s uniform during every game (in which he isn’t injured).
Jews and Christians have accepted the Scriptures as their authority for thousands of years. Of course Christians have incorporated in addition to the Torah, Writings and Prophets, the further ministration of the Spirit of Prophecy manifested in people like Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, James, Jude, and Paul, in the form of Gospels and Epistles into their Scriptures. The author made the point that because the Scriptures come from God, by default they carry with them godly authority. While man’s authority is based on mundane things, God’s is eternal. I like how he correlated Christ’s authority, which was based on love in truth with the same kind of authority that the Scriptures have. I think my favorite statement in this chapter is this: “When honored as an authoritative message from God, this Book, although written many centuries ago, remains an immovable point of contact with our Creator.” This is the essence of why we should not have an issue with accepting the Bible as authority.
Garth Dottin
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture
Chapter 10: Are Ellen G. White’s writings relevant to the cosmos?
Dr Hanna takes the position that the revelation of Scripture and the revelation of nature are not in conflict with each other. Each sheds light on the other. He quotes from White who says “the whole natural world is designed to be an interpreter of the things of God.” This quote motivated me to ask a question. If nature interprets the things of God, then how should we understand diseases and death in nature? I was excited to see the next quote which answered my question. “In spite of the distortion caused by sin, the cosmos is an open book which reveals God.”Sin is the catalyst behind the degradation of the cosmos. Nevertheless, the cosmos still reveals the character of God. The cosmos identifies the impending death of sin, disease, and even death itself. This is evident through a simple observation of the seasons. In the fall the trees die but spring revives them and they are restored. It reveals hope to sinners of an assured eradication of sin.
A sentence on pg. 121 in Dr. Hanna’s book caught my attention: “It is important that we recognize that harmony alone is not sufficient evidence of correct interpretations. Not just any harmony will do because it is possible to harmonize incorrect interpretations of the cosmos and Scripture.” I find this sentence to be a very important warning for preachers of the word of God to be honest and not just make any old link to make the Bible and Science harmonize to prove the Bible is correct. I have sensed that in Adventist Church many have done this and given a bad name to religion by using facts of science and linking them to texts in the Bible just for the sake of showing how the two relate. But when an expert hears facts, they know they are distorted and wrong and as a result the minister loses credibility and also religion gets a bad name as a result. While we know that the cosmos illuminates scripture, we have to be sure that our facts are straight and that we do good sound research before we as ministers, teachers, etc present information from the pulpit, especially if it is information in an area that we are not an expert in. By doing this we can keep the integrity of the pulpit and also honor God by making sure that the facts that we use are indeed well founded on good evidence rather than some neat fact that is unsubstantiated.
by Clifford Lim
Comment on Appendix A of Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach
In reading this document of Methods of Bible study, I appreciate the thoroughness of the Adventist Church in its guidelines of how to study the Bible. One caution that is mentioned in studying the Bible, I believe is very important and needs to be emphasized as much as possible from the time the people begin to know Jesus: It cautions against reading a modern-day parallel to each of the Biblical texts and coming out with a totally different meaning than the author intended. Unfortunately, growing up with the “proof text method” this is something that the Adventists should have taught long ago. Sure the Bible is its own interpreter, yet, I have seen in Bible studies texts that say what the author of the Bible study want it to say, but when reading the context the meaning is totally opposite to that of what the Bible study author intended. Now, I believe that this idea needs to be emphasized as much as possible so that we don’t have Bible studies floating around the globe using texts that are taken out of context. Again, I think it will bring more credibility to the work and ensure that we train new converts to look at the Bible as a whole and have a holistic approach to reading and understanding scripture rather than using a text taken out of context to prove a point. I think in this case there needs to be a caution or comment on how to use concordances properly to ensure that the text being used to answer a point is one that answers that point being offered at that point.
By: Clifford Lim
Hermeneutics and culture. Chapter 15-Understanding Scripture An Adventist Approach.
Culture in the contemporary definition implies the sum total of ways of living whereby religion is one of them. Then how should message of scripture be transmitted to different cultures, should it be changed to suit each culture? Lael Caeser provides a solution that incorrect mental set up can lead to the loss of truth and of life. This implies that the way we develop our presupposition will largely determine the outcome.
Although we have different cultures within our church the focus remains to sola scriptula which will always serve as a guiding factor as we deal with hermeneutics. We must be willing to see others as colleagues when we enter into the meaningful conversation but not master-servant relationship. When this is not done the oppressors have no conscience but to defend themselves.
Due to master-servant relationship, the perceived oppressive have come up with different defense mechanisms to counteract this oppressions. For instance the Black theology focuses on the liberation of the African-American from the white dominated theology which they perceive as not taking them to the real savior who liberated everybody. Likewise the feminist theology tend to move further from the Jewish culture which marginalized women from leadership positions, they propose a better hermeneutics to serve all equally.
Like Paul in I Corinthians 9:20-22, Lael suggests that we must proclaim the gospel in an appropriate and meaningful way to each subgroupings regardless of gender, continent or ethnic. Jesus is the Lord to all people regardless of any culture. Our role as Seventh-day Adventists is to give proper hermeneutics to the world so that the discrimination based on culture to eliminate completely. We should have one voice and follow the footsteps of Jesus Christ so that those who feel oppressed may get a way of escape and feel that the savior is for both not a chosen few.
Hermeneutics and culture. Chapter 15-Understanding Scripture An Adventist Approach.
by Morumbwa dickson
Culture in the contemporary definition implies the sum total of ways of living whereby religion is one of them. Then how should message of scripture be transmitted to different cultures, should it be changed to suit each culture? Lael Caeser provides a solution that incorrect mental set up can lead to the loss of truth and of life. This implies that the way we develop our presupposition will largely determine the outcome.
Although we have different cultures within our church the focus remains to sola scriptula which will always serve as a guiding factor as we deal with hermeneutics. We must be willing to see others as colleagues when we enter into the meaningful conversation but not master-servant relationship. When this is not done the oppressors have no conscience but to defend themselves.
Due to master-servant relationship, the perceived oppressive have come up with different defense mechanisms to counteract this oppressions. For instance the Black theology focuses on the liberation of the African-American from the white dominated theology which they perceive as not taking them to the real savior who liberated everybody. Likewise the feminist theology tend to move further from the Jewish culture which marginalized women from leadership positions, they propose a better hermeneutics to serve all equally.
Like Paul in I Corinthians 9:20-22, Lael suggests that we must proclaim the gospel in an appropriate and meaningful way to each subgroupings regardless of gender, continent or ethnic. Jesus is the Lord to all people regardless of any culture. Our role as seventh-day Adventists is to give proper hermeneutics to the world so that the discrimination based on culture to eliminate completely. We should have one voice and follow the footsteps of Jesus Christ so that those who feel oppressed may get a way of escape and feel that the savior is for both not a chosen few.
MORUMBWA DICKSON
What does the Bible say? Chapter 9: The cosmic Christ of scripture.
The world is in confusion on what exactly on how to read the three books (Christ, the Scriptures and the cosmos) of God but Dr. Hanna has endeavored to tackle these basic issues in a clear simple way using the biblical evidences. Then now how do we read the cosmos? We therefore need more adequate light in order to read according to Dr. Hanna. This adequate light must come from God who will make shine when we have recognized Jesus as supreme who brings many to His Glory. But sin has darkened man’s mind such that he is not able to see what is revealed in the cosmos.
Similarly true science and wisdom comes as a gift from God who has demonstrated that we cannot understand the cosmos without his guidance. Daniel and his friends proved the Babylonian wrong because they depended on God totally (Daniel 1: 4). False science aims at suppressing the truth which is caused by futile reasoning that man can do all by himself without recognizing the fact that God’s glory is seen in the cosmos.
For us to understand the cosmos well we need to have the mind of Christ (1 Cor 2:10-16) which will enable us to discern what the cosmos is all about and accept God’s gifts of true wisdom and good spiritual perception. Satan has misused man in a way that is appealing to man that he has the necessary philosophy and wisdom to do all but we can see nothing good has come out. This is why Paul appears to reject wisdom but in the real sense it is false wisdom that he rejects since they do lead one to understand Christ, the scripture and the cosmos.
Finally Paul depicts Jesus as the image of God who created, sustains and reconciles all things in the cosmos (Col 1:15-20). He in turn leads us to understand the knowledge of God’s plan for the cosmos. As the creator of the cosmos chose Israel so it is today to us. Christ has unveils us the necessary light to understand the true concept of the cosmos.
My Comments from the Book, “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture” Chapter 4 “Are Ellen G. White Writings Biblical?”
In chapter 4 of the book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture,” Dr. Martin Frederick Hanna answers the question “Are Ellen G. White books Biblical?”
The answer that Dr. Hanna gives is yes. Ellen G. White in her life exalted the Bible above her books. She recommended the bible to the Church at the start and at the end of her ministry. She said, “Brethren and Sisters, I commend unto you this Book.”
Ellen G. White was a strong advocate of wholistic thinking. She recommended the wholistic usage of scriptures in the following ways:
1. Compare scripture with scripture to get clear understanding. The Book of Revelation is to be compared with the book of Daniel. There is harmony of the scriptures (page 48).
2. Scriptures should help us to understand the world (cosmos) better. “Cosmos illuminates the scriptures” (page 50).
3. The Bible should lead us to know Christ better (John 5:39). The Bible is a wonderful revelation of Jesus Christ. Christ is God’s book of revelation (page 51, 54, 55).
4. The bible should be used to measure and test all secular teachings and experience. It is good for believers to endeavor to acquire the secular knowledge but that knowledge should not lead us to despise or to downgrade the word of God (page 52).
As we daily endeavor to increase both the temporal and spiritual knowledge we need to make sure that it is in harmony with the scriptures (Isa 8:20).
This chapter has an important message for the pastors today. It is unfortunate that some pastors don’t exalt the scriptures as high as expected. Some of them don’t posses copies of the Bible or carry them, we need to stop our business and do God’s business. Communicate a clear message from God, “thus says the Lord.”
JOB GETANGE
Comments on Chapter VII of the Book “Understanding Scripture” Topic: “Guidelines for the Interpretation of Scriptures.
In chapter VII of the book “Understanding Scripture”, Ekkehardt Muller gives 10 guidelines for the interpretation of the scriptures. These guidelines must be read both by the clergy and the laity. But because we pastors (or clergy) play a key role in interpreting the word to the people, we must read them. They should be our checklist. They must be posted on the walls of our rooms of study.
Muller says that we should begin the process of interpretation by prayer. He gives the example of Daniel in the Bible. In Daniel 9, Daniel surrenders to God in submission. He goes to God with humility of heart. God in turn reveals to Daniel what is going to take place in many years to come. He reveals to Daniel the coming of the Messiah the prince.
Likewise, we also need to approach the word of God with humility. Those who are thirsty God is to give water and fill them with the water of life (John 4:13). In humility we need to study the texts of scripture and to make application of it.
In applying the text to our lives, Muller says that we should endeavor to “personalize the text”. This is very important. Sometimes we study the scriptures and apply it to the members because we feel that we ourselves are holy and do not lack anything. We need to ask ourselves, “What does God want to tell me with this passage.” It is time for us as clergy to stop the “holier than thou” attitude and see ourselves as much in need of the savior as those we need to bring to Jesus.
Job Getange
My Comments from the Book, “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture” Chapter 4 “Are Ellen G. White Writings Biblical?”
In chapter 4 of the book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture,” Dr. Martin Frederick Hanna answers the question “Are Ellen G. White books Biblical?”
The answer that Dr. Hanna gives is yes. Ellen G. White in her life exalted the Bible above her books. She recommended the bible to the Church at the start and at the end of her ministry. She said, “Brethren and Sisters, I commend unto you this Book.”
Ellen G. White was a strong advocate of wholistic thinking. She recommended the wholistic usage of scriptures in the following ways:
1. Compare scripture with scripture to get clear understanding. The Book of Revelation is to be compared with the book of Daniel. There is harmony of the scriptures (page 48).
2. Scriptures should help us to understand the world (cosmos) better. “Cosmos illuminates the scriptures” (page 50).
3. The Bible should lead us to know Christ better (John 5:39). The Bible is a wonderful revelation of Jesus Christ. Christ is God’s book of revelation (page 51, 54, 55).
4. The bible should be used to measure and test all secular teachings and experience. It is good for believers to endeavor to acquire the secular knowledge but that knowledge should not lead us to despise or to downgrade the word of God (page 52).
As we daily endeavor to increase both the temporal and spiritual knowledge we need to make sure that it is in harmony with the scriptures (Isa 8:20).
This chapter has an important message for the pastors today. It is unfortunate that some pastors don’t exalt the scriptures as high as expected. Some of them don’t posses copies of the Bible or carry them, we need to stop our business and do God’s business. Communicate a clear message from God, “thus says the Lord
Understanding Scripture, Chapter X.
Reading Psalms and the Wisdom Literatue.
From Evangelista Polanco
All the books of the Bible are very, very important, but in my opinion the book of Psalms is one the best for Christians and non-Christians use it as if God is talking to us directly. Disciples such Peter, and John do mention this book many time in their letters or epistles. Psalms and Wisdom of Solomon were inspired by God to several different authors. A long time ago, I just knew that the Psalm was written by David, but later I learned about the other authors. The types of Hebrew Poetry let us know that it has its origin in the life of the people, which is obviously when we read it. In this book appear more than one-third of the Old testament poetry. I think that the book of psalm is more used to look for comfort, and there are a lot of prayers in comformity to our souls. Reading the wisdom literature we learn how to be wise and how to face our daily problems. I find that both Psalms and the Wisdom Literature are very helpful for us in order to face our life's problems and living an harmonious life with our God.
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture
What does the Bible Say?
From Evangelista Polanco
This chapter has been very important to me because it has help me how to understand more about what the Bible really say.
Here Dr. Hanna teach us about the books of Scripture and the cosmos that need to be examine with a wholistic method. He shows us a wheel which describe the order of the text, the scripture, and the cosmos. This picture help us to understand the light revealed in the cosmos and in the Scripture, and I agree, that our sins do not let us see certain light revealed to us throught our Lord Jesus Christ. What about Science? I think that it is concerning of knowledge and not about the science that the world teaches us. Then what the Bible says will be only understood by those who look God with all their heart. If we do not have the mind of Christ or at least the desire, the will of being obedient, then God will reveal to us what it is already written in His word and we will understand, and if we love our God we will practice His teachings.
Understanding the Scripture. Chapter XIII: Interpretation of Biblical Types, Allegories, and Parables.
This chapter is an important piece for the purpose of this class because is dealing with special aspect of the literary forms in the Bible.
Many misunderstandings and wrong applications come exactly from a mistake in the way of analyzing the text. As we learn more about this topic, we understand we can't treat a narrative as we treat a poem, for the purpose of meaning, and we can not try an apocalyptic passage as if it were a poem.
Parables, Types and Allegory are different kind of literary elements that are used very often in the New and Old Testament. Some scholars prefer to classify them (Parables, Types and Allegory) as part of special hermeneutics.
Parables, for example, is the preferred way of Jesus teaching in the Gospels. A good, sincere and diligent student of the Bible should know more on how to treat these different elements of the literary.
One example of a bad use of parables is the one mentioned by the author of this chapter, Lazarus and the Rich Man. The wrong ideas that some people acquire from this parable, by using wrong Hermeneutics, it is used for some denominations, to try to prove the doctrine of hell.
I would recommend a good study of the literary forms, and genres, which are within context of a given passage, before jumping into quick conclusions and interpretations. Besides, it is also suggested by the author of this chapter, other elements of good exegesis, which are cultural and historical background.
Comment based on The Cosmic Christ. (71-85)
"The Theme of the Bible is Jesus."
I like the way this chapter presents the relationship between the Divine Persons of the Godhead. I have studied Genesis in the Hebrew context and find the singularity and plurality of God and how the Trinity is there acting in unity as one God.
At the same time, it is interesting to understand that there are aspects of the Trinity that are more farer than what are able to comprehend.
The term Trinity by itself does not occur in the Bible, although the concept is implicit on some passages, by referring to three different persons which can be harmonized by others passages which estates the singularity of God. However, our limitation as humans must circumscribe us to the Scripture explanation. It is so, because we need to realize that this is one of the most complicated mysteries, which we won’t be able to fully comprehend until we see Jesus.
When talking about man, it surprised me the first time I discovered that the Bible refers to “Adam” as a name for man, and then, it is also used as including woman and man in a single word ADAM(no hebrew font available), which turns us back to see the term as humanity. It is very well explained in this chapter by Dr. Hanna referring to the social way in which we have being created as image of God.
Christ, the Son, is in the whole Scripture, in the Old Testament and in the New Testament as well. He stated “the Scripture testifies about me” (John 5:39). But, wherever we see Christ we need to always remember to see also God, because He is God. Whenever Jesus acted, He showed the Godhead and not individualism. So should be we, a community of faith, but acting as one body of Christ.
Understanding Scripture- November Blog: Mike Rhynus
I am commenting on the 17th chapter of Understanding Scripture, “Ellen G. White and Hermeneutics.” By Gerhard Pfandl.
Pfandl is commenting on the way Ellen White interprets scripture and is giving some general guidelines at the beginning of the chapter. It was here at the beginning where I read something interesting. He speaks of being “open-minded” in our interpretations and willing to surrender previously held positions. He mentions that Ellen White was open to new truths found in scripture and actually chided those who refused to consider that some expositions of scripture held by Seventh-day Adventists could be in error. This statement spoke to me because in the past I have felt that some Adventists think we have everything right and have seemed to have a pompous aura about them. Ellen White makes it clear in the following quote that there is a possibility more light can be shed on Adventism and the interpretation of scripture in general. She states:
There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation (CW 35).”
I enjoy the part at the end that says no true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. I find that to be somewhat bitter-sweet because I would like to assume Adventism would not lose anything under close investigation, however, I tend to be skeptical and always allow room for error. One part I left out above was an additional quote from Ellen White that tells of never reaching truth if you search scriptures in order to vindicate your own opinions. However, truth can and shall be reached when you search in order to learn what the Lord says (COL 112). Let us all strive to obtain truth and new light in our search of the Lord.
Blessings- Mike Rhynus
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture. November Blog. Mike Rhynus
I am writing in regards to chapter 10, “Are Ellen White’s Writings Relevant to the Cosmos?” Something jumped out at me while I was reading a quote from Ellen White. It said, “Scripture is an incomplete representation of God due to its humanity, and to the process of its preservation, transmission and translation.” I was somewhat surprised upon my first reading of this statement due to the fact that we place such a heavy importance on scripture and believe it to be a revelation of God. Dr. Hanna clarifies by saying that even with these limitations; the divine and human dimensions of Scripture are wonderfully united. Every chapter and every verse of the Bible are communication from God to man. However God, as White states, has not put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. She claims the writers of the Bible were God’s penmen, not His pen. So really we don’t have a solid revelation of God because of sin and the way it has skewed the world. We have partial revealing of God through Scripture, the cosmos, and through Christ, but not full revelation if I am not mistaken. To quote Dr. Hanna from an earlier chapter, “Our knowledge of Christ, Scripture, and the cosmos is partial, but partial knowledge is real knowledge.” I guess I can deal with that. -MR
James W. Dieujuste
Comment on Chapter 13: Interpretation of Biblical Types, Allegories, and Parables (Understanding Scripture)
I appreciate the way that Tom shepherd treats the topic of types, allegories, and parables in chapter 13. As he points out, dealing with those concepts does bring about an opportunity for “imaginative theological thought” (p. 223). However, in dealing with typology specifically, there are some scholars who have problems seeing the correlations that some Old Testament texts have with certain New Testament passages. They argue that these texts are time-conditioned and only relevant for a particular time period. This is one extreme that we need to avoid. On the other hand, there are some who draw comparisons where it is inappropriate to do so. In so doing, these individuals misrepresent Scripture. There are people who take certain concepts too far and derive inaccurate theological meaning. They end up making connections and links that God did not intend to emerge out of His Word. Hence, we need to be careful so that we do not gravitate toward either extreme. With that said, we should not be afraid to make typological connections. If there is a solid biblical connection to be made, we should draw it out and bring it to full view.
One of the things that I like about typology is the way that it integrates different parts of Scripture. Those who view Scripture as a single unit will indeed have no difficulty accepting the correlations that come from accurate topological comparisons. I think that some people dismiss typological links that exist in Scripture because they have a disconnected view of the Bible. Since God is indeed the Author of both Testaments and knows the end from the beginning, He can certainly make correlations within His Word. I think that we need to embrace typology and deal with it properly. First, we need to accurately search Scripture and see these amazing correlations that exist. Second, we need to avoid “the pitfalls of overextending typological understanding” (p. 225). A correct understanding of typology will help us see the inseparable links that exist in Scripture. We will also see the big picture in Scripture. Typology is truly special in that it shows God’s invisible hand guiding the formation of Scripture from start to finish.
By James W. Dieujuste
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture: How To Read God’s Three Books. Chapter seven: Are Ellen White’s writings Christ-centered?
I apologize in advance for the direction in which I have taken in my response to this chapter’s content. It is not relevant to the chapter as a whole, but to a point made in it. The nature of Christ has been debated for centuries; I do not think another comment on the subject would create much of a difference, but please, permit me to add my microscopic contribution to this sea of dialogue.
In chapter seven page 89, Dr. Hanna’s quote referenced by his fifth footnote is where my attention was drawn. The footnotes used the words, “heredity,” “infirmities” and “degeneracies” and I question what do these terms mean in light of the sinless nature of Christ. I am persuaded of His sinless nature as revealed in the Scriptures, yet how do I attempt to explain the difference between Him not having the “corrupt propensities” of man but yet possessing the “fallen nature” or heredities, infirmities, and degeneracies of man?
I recently came across a comment by Ellen White that could lend some light on the subject. She states,
We mourn over Adam's transgression…But if Adam's transgression were the only evil that we had to meet, this world would be in a much better condition than it is. There has been a succession of falls since Adam's days.--Manuscript 18, 1887, pp. 1-3, 5. ("Christian Temperance," no date.)
The last sentence, “There has been a succession of falls since Adam’s days,” implies that the condition of the world at the time of Christ was one of choice by those who had lived from Adam until then. In every human being, since the fall was the temptation of Adam repeated, daily. Unfortunately, many had succumbed to them and as a result, the degree of heredity has grown. Each generation that chose to disobey God, increased in selfishness, pride and all other ungodly characteristics that waited for our approval to be manifested.
Jesus was born with this “fallen humanity,” these “infirmities,” “heredities,” but in His humanity, He recognized that yielding to such things led to a separation from God and He refused to partake of their deception. He was tempted to act and think on what was already now innate to human nature, selfishness, pride, etc., but He saw that their result would separate Him from His Father and so He chose rather to contradict every human tradition of emotions and determined to abide in Him who sent Him.
The example of Jesus’ life shows that we too have a choice, we can live as He lived, daily, “choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season” (Hebrews 11:25). This is the human divine connection and this is what He desires to see in us, a reflection of Himself.
James W. Dieujuste
Comment on Chapter 16: Interpreting and Applying Biblical Ethics
I would like to comment on the section that deals with “application of Scripture to issues not addressed in the Bible” (p. 300). I believe that the Bible does have governing principles for all the different issues that we come across in our world today. Though we wrestle with legitimate “ethical quandaries,” (p. 300) there are sufficient provisions given through Scripture to help us face those highly complex matters. I do not think that there is a single subject matter that Scripture is ill-equipped to address. We can find underlying biblical principles that address all types of issues. I believe that Scripture is adequate in dealing with humanity’s problems. I think that Paul’s claim about Scripture in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 is right on target. Scripture is not only “useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,” it is also able to thoroughly equip us for every good work.
Sometimes, we make the mistake of searching for just a text or passage to address a particular issue. In so doing, we treat Scripture like a textbook. We sometimes go into Scripture the way that we would approach a textbook with an index at the end of it. In which case, the index gives us the specific page number where we can locate the item that we are looking for. However, we cannot deal with the Bible in the same manner. In dealing with tough and divisive issues, we may have to compare several passages to answer a particular question that Scripture does not seem to deal with specifically. Nonetheless, a solid understanding of the big message of the Bible helps us find answers to more detailed questions. However, before we can begin to deal with these tough issues, we first need to have a good foundation on the teachings of Scripture. Also, as we interpret these complex matters, we need to make sure that our hermeneutical lens is well-positioned so that it captures a full picture of what the Bible is really saying. Through the help of the Holy Spirit, we will find in Scripture all the help that we need to respond to the challenging issues that we face.
By James W. Dieujuste
Comments on “How to read the Book of the Cosmos: Christ in the light of General Revelation.” The Cosmic Christ of Scripture – Martin Frederick Hanna
Comment posted By – Francisco Joao Lopes – Revelation Inspiration and Hermeneutics – Fall 207
In his Book the Cosmic Christ of Scripture, Dr, Hanna used the term “Book” to referrer to the main 3 means of revelation that God has used to convey His message to the entire humanity. Something I have realized recently there are a lot of people who classify themselves as visual people – They understand better when they see images. So the use of the book analogy to express God’s means of revelation is beneficial for these visual people when presented with a new, but still old light that God used other means of revelation. For people that used to have the Bible as God’s Revelation when presented with other methods of revelation will feel to some extent uncomfortable with the idea of other means of revelation. So for the use of the term book to refer to other means of Revelation is a helpful tool especially for the visual people. And I believe that human being by nature is a visual being, some more than others.
Another aspect I have learned from Dr. Hanna, both by reading his book and assisting his class, is that he is a person that is not stuck by terminologies and he encourages his audience not to be so. So based on his openness to this matter which has opened my horizon, I would like to expand a bit more this concept of book to refer to the revelation God has made available to all through the cosmos. First thing to consider is that all the three books reveal God and do not contradict each other. What is constant conflict is the interpretation of the data found on these books but not their content. As Dr, Hanna rightly pointed out in his book each book has its own primacy in its on sphere without ever contradicting each other.
Without underestimating the value of the other two books which are well established in the Christendom, we would like to say that the book of the Cosmos is a very special book for those who consider themselves to be visual people. We can say that the book of cosmos is an interactive book in the sense that it can be read using all our five senses. It is an audio-visual book. So while reading this book, the reader can hear, touch, see, smell, taste and so on. But there is a danger with the use of this book for the visual people - that is, trying to make this book that seems to speak more clearly the rule of faith and practice. The purpose of the book of the Cosmos is to bring more light in understanding the other two books. As Dr. Hanna put it is his book “we need adequate light in order to read well…There is a sense in which the light of the cosmos provides the widest context within which we do theology. The cosmos travails for the revelation of the sons of God (Rom 8:18-26)”. So as important and helpful as it is, the book of cosmos does not have the epistemological primacy as some might try to attribute to it, this belongs the Scripture and the Scripture alone.
Comment posted By – Francisco Joao Lopes – Revelation Inspiration and Hermeneutics – Fall 207
Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Perspective
Hermeneutics and Culture - By Lael O. Caesar.
In this chapter of this official compilation of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, the author deals with the issue of hermeneutic and culture. This is a contemporary issue that saw its birth with the emergency of modern anthropology which see culture as “the sum total of ways of living developed by a group of human beings and handed on from generation to generation.” This modern concept of culture includes religion. For Adventist church which is an international church having members in above 204 recognized countries of the world, this is a very big challenge: How to maintain a respect for all these cultural diversity and still maintain unified hermeneutical principles. For the Congregationalist churches this main not present a challenge, but the Seventh Day Adventist Church which uses the representative governing model it is a real challenge.
The awareness to this modern anthropological concept has contributed a lot for the various theological divisions such as: The Black (African-American) Theology, Minjung Theology, the Feminist Theology. Each of these theological division put emphasis on certain aspects which are shaped by the cultural or social background behind it. The SDA church as a world-wide church has to relate to all these theological divisions and many others subdivisions. One thing that the SDA church has done and will continue to do is the uplift the principle of Sola, Prima and Tota Scriptura. The principles are derived from the Bible and Bible alone and then are contextualized to the cultural setting where it has to be applied. The world wide church every five years come together and underline those eternal principles as found in the Bible then provide room for those principles to be applied in their cultural context.
This issue is a complex one, and as the author of the chapter mentions, it cannot be exhausted in just one chapter neither one entire book. But he closed his argument with some profound words which I found suitable to end this reflection: “In God’s program of restoration, the role of the Seventh-day Adventist church’s assignment continues to be to repair the breach in God’s law and in His Word. It is to finish the Reformation work of turning from human means of salvation to God’s way and to His Word alone.”
In Chapter 13 in the book “Understanding the Scripture” information was presented regarding different views on scripture. The way we look at things plays an important role in our analyzing. Christians come to different meanings in scripture and formulate doctrines from different views. For all practical purposes, being different doesn’t necessarily mean error, some texts do have multiple meanings. It is all a matter of hermeneutics.
Cosmic Christ. P.71-85
The bible says that man was created in the image of God. In the Godhead you have three different persons working together in love and unity, and man was created to resemble that love and unity. As time can tell, humanity has had a hard time with love for their fellowman and unity for mankind. For example, why is it that there are so many marriages ending in divorce? Where is the unity and love in the human trinity of the husband, wife, and kids in the express image of the heavenly trinity? The other day I heard that 70% of all marriages end in divorce. What happened to the love? The numbers are even higher for second marriages. Where is the hope? Is it that we have lost the concept and meaning of love and unity in committed relationships? Are we in trouble of destroying the very institution that God created to show us the true meaning of love and unity. Will things get worse or will they get better? If Christians are having a hard time with relationship unity how will it be, that they will present themselves for Christ at the wedding feast.
The Cosmos that reveals God
In the 10th chapter of his book, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, Hanna writes “…in spite of the distortion caused by sin , the cosmos is “an open book which reveals God.” Just past this statement, he continues, “…the whole of the natural world is designed to be an interpreter of the things of God.”
In reflection to this text I am reminded of a specific tree, though I can’t remember the name of it, that grows in the Pacific North West. This tree grows pine cones, as do many other trees, only the pine cones on this variety are very hard and tightly closed. Tightly secured to the tree, under normal conditions, these pine cones will never plant new trees. What it takes is a forest fire, which under the intense heat, the cones begin to open up. This is the only way these pine cones have been found to open. The only way for new ones to grow is by the destruction of the old one. The only way to have new life is by the death of another one. To me, this seems to be a good illustration of nature, or the book of cosmos, is showing a light onto the sacrifice of Jesus that we might live. I am reminded of a statement Ellen White made, (this is not word for word) “He died the death that we deserve so that we could live the life that He deserves.”
Just out of curiosity, I wonder if the biological build up of this tree has changed since the fall of man, as in my mind, fire would not have a significant place in Eden. I mean, I can’t see God burning down the garden to plant some more trees every now and then.
In Understanding Scripture, chapter 15, the third section is entitled “Biblical Evaluation.” Under this heading, the first two sentences state, “Unawareness of roots often produces disorientation. Meaningful gospel conversations, therefore, must involve awareness about roots.” While I do not disagree with this statement, I do admit that I have wrestled with where our position should be in these terms for a denomination. I believe, especially in the United States, that we have no choice but to create multi-cultural congregations. Those inside our church need to be, to some degree, a reflection of the people we live among, which includes those from all cultures and races of the earth. If I have a strictly Anglo church, it will be more difficult to bring persons in of other ethnicities. (Though this section is speaking of culture more than race, the racial issue was a significant part of previous parts of the chapter.) My last church was a great experience in following God to make a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural church. There was an equal representation of persons from Anglo and from African descent in attendance, as well as Hispanic and Asians. I believe that the mixture of this church serves as a good model for our denomination at large, especially in places of high ethnic diversity. The difficulty though, arises when, as the two sentences above call our attention to, we attempt to apply the Gospel and the work of the church to all of these cultures at once. Though I have attempted to practice understanding of the different roots present, I have not been so good at leading to each culture in different ways, only from my own angle. I practice trying to not be stereotypical of one type of root, but how can you be more than what you are? My question is this, Shouldn’t the church be able to develop its’ own culture? Isn’t it possible to have a church culture that appeals to all races and all cultures at the same time?
Chapter # 4 Are Ellen G. White Writings Biblical?
This Chapter has provided many solid biblical references as well as comments on the writings of Ellen G. White. During many years these writings had been under may attacks even when the writings of Ellen G. White provide a strong Biblical foundation to back up the Primacy of Scriptures. She says that In His Word, God communicated to men the necessary knowledge for salvation. The Scriptures must be accepted as fully equipped and with absolute authority and infallible revelation of God’s will. They constitute the rule of the character they reveal doctrines to us, and they are the touchstone of the religious experience.
Ellen G. White Writings are despised by some leaders. As Seventh Day Adventist we believe that the same Spirit that Inspired the scriptures is the Spirit that inspired the writings of Ellen G. White. She did never pretend that her writings will take over the authority of scripture. She encourages us to understand Scripture with the Scripture. Creation also has shown us many times that the Bible was right for long time. This proves the primacy of the Bible in according to Ellen writings. Doctor Anna emphasizes the way escriture lead us to Christ as well as Ellen’s writings, Jesus said in the Bible “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me.” Jn 5:39
This Chapter reinforced my convictions on Ellen G. White writings and encourage me to go back to the Scripture as primary source of of God’s will.
Ch. 13...Types, Allegories, and Parables.
I love exploring, solving mysteries and puzzles. That's what I think of when we speak of types, antitypes, allegories, and parables. This chapter (13), from the textbook, Understanding Scripture, is what I needed. It is interesting and gives you simple explanations what these terms mean, do, and contain. I am also glad that we've gone over this in class, however at times I find myself and others confuse the type with the antitype. For instance, such as mentioned in page 225,--"in Hebrews the heavenly sanctuary is termed the tupos and the earthly in the antitupos. The reason for this is that the heavenly supercedes the earthly and is actually the "blueprint" according to which the earthly tabernacle is contruced." I would of that the other way around because the earthlyl sanctuary is a shadow of the heavenly. Anyways, we are fortunate in some aspect that we understand more of what Jesus was saing through parables, than the disciples did. I also would love to have been with the disciples and Jesus on the road to Emmaus and hear Jesus show Himself in the Old Testament. Wouldn't you?
“Understanding Scripture”. Ellen G White and Hermeneutics, Chapter 17.
There were some very challenging and inspiring things in this topic. It is so easy to misinterpret Ellen G white or Use her writing as an Inspired Commentary of the Bible which is not right, her words are not the last words on the meaning of the text.
What I found challenging is on page 310, he says it is better for one to study one passage until it is clear and find deeper meaning for it before moving to another one, but as Pastors one is required to have a wide knowledge of the bible and although it is true it becomes hard when you want to get an overview of what the whole book is saying.
Something I learned which was very helpful of which I think everyone should know who uses Ellen G White’s writing is on how she uses her writing whether it is in exegetical, theological or Homiletical sense. This will help a lot in misquoting and taking things as they are not. For example in most of her writing she writes or uses passages of the bible in a Homiletical sense but most of the time people will take those quotations as teaching or through them formulate some doctrine whereas in Homiletical sense you can use the quote to be either Doctrine or Teaching. Ministers should especially learn also how to ‘carry’ a text from exegetical to Homiletical because it is Homiletical sense that the word of God speaks to us daily needs or they should know how to “carry” the text from theological to Homiletical.
This chapter was very helpful in the way one should view and interpret the writings of Ellen G White.
“The cosmic Christ of Scripture”, Chapter 7: Are Ellen G White’s Writings Christ Centred?
In this chapter i agree that the writings of Ellen G white are Christ centred however what am struggling with is the quotation and the elaboration of the statement about the nature of Christ. The statement says that. “He veiled his divinity with the garb of his humanity, but did not part with his divinity”. To me it sound like though Jesus was human he still had some divine power which made him to be sinless.
Jesus seems to take different forms for example in Philippians 2:4-5. The word in the “form of God” is used in such a sense by the Septuagint and in the New Testament. He appeared to the two disciples, en hetera morphe-In another form, Mk. 16:12. Metemorphothe-he was transfigured before and in taking the form of humanity I believe he was made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man. He was really and truly man, took part of our flesh and blood, and appeared in the nature and habit of man. And he voluntarily assumed human nature, from this perspective it could be better understood, Jesus who bore our infirmities, tempted as we are but yet was sinless. His sinlessness was not a result of his divide “favor” that he had but rather his full dependence of his father. He overcame every temptation by the word of God and thus remained sinless.
The divine and human state of Jesus Christ is a phenomenon believers have been wrestling over for years. I also find it amazing that God could be fully God yet reside in human body that has human limitations. I believe we could go back and forth in this debate for years yet at the end of the conversation, God has been graceful enough to let us make the decision to believe him or not. I’m thankful for his dual state of being and I pray that we all can grow in his divine character each day.
Pg 121 Cosmic Christ of Scripture
It is important that we recognize that harmony alone is not sufficient evidence of correct interpretation… This is such a truthful statement. Anyone can create harmony, in fact I am sure that the devil thinks that his kingdom is in harmony. If we think that harmony is so necessary that we change our minds, compromise our standard, just so that we can be harmonious and therefore correct, we are in danger of losing our souls. Harmony is not what we should be aiming for, but rather a complete and thorough understanding of who Christ is so that our thoughts, impressions and opinions are in line with His Word. We must remember that if dots are connected that do not belong together, a picture will still be formed, as messed up as that picture may be. If we use that picture as a launching pad for our beliefs, our theories or our faith we will lose in the end. A false premise brings false conclusions and false interpretations and ultimately wrong decisions.
The other comment I would like to make is with regard to reason. Ellen White says that Reason is limited and in need of faith because God is supreme. It’s amazing that the very thing that is supposed to help us can be so perverted that it can also harm us. Although God wants us to be intelligent, inquiring, and acute as is plainly stated in the book the Cosmic Christ of Scripture, when we think we have reached a level of intelligence that we can challenge God, challenge His Word and can no longer accept by faith the word as true, we run the risk of losing our faith to reason. Since not everything can be proved or explain by reason we must be constantly vigilant that in our questionings, or reasoning, we do not cross the threshold into the place where we are putting our reasoning or the reasoning of any intellectual individual on par with scripture, nor placing the human in rivalry with the divine. We must also be careful that we are not accepting what’s being put forward as reasoning because it supports some thing that we are doing or want to get involved in and in some way quiets our conscience. If we accept something it should be that we have prayed about it, checked it’s validity through scripture and found it to be in harmony with the word of God. Harmony remember is different chords playing melodiously together, not the same sound.
I completely agree with Ch 3 of Understanding Scripture that on one can come to Scripture without preconceived ideas. The chapter goes on to explain that there are some presuppositions that Adventists must take on, or at least acquire in their reading of Scripture. This is true but I think it is also important to note that because each of us comes with our own presuppositions we much have patience with each other. We should be able to approach different opinions with respect because just as someone else is coming with different presuppositions we too come with different presuppositions. There are of course wrong presuppositions, but those must be revealed through the Holy Spirit to the other person. We also must be willing to admit that perhaps we too have some wrong presuppositions. The more we are open and honest with Scripture, the more we allow the Holy Spirit to work, the more our presuppositions will become aligned with what the Scriptures teach. I don’t completely agree with Ellen White when she says, “Brethren, let not a mind or hand be engaged in criticizing the Bibl.” I am not saying that we should have critical attitudes but it is only in questioning, weighing, and seeking that we will be convicted of truth. There are inconsistencies. Even if we don’t ask them, there are others who are asking those questions. If we have not dealt honestly with those same questions what answers will we give others who are seeking, or other who are criticizing?
It is a very interesting idea that all three, Scripture, Christ, and the cosmos can be sola and prima Scriptura. Scripture is sola and prima Scriptura because it points to the only way to life. The revelation of Christ is also sola and prima Scriptura because He created everything. Lastly the cosmos is sola and prima Scriptura because this is the context into which Christ came, lived, died, and rose again. So there is a harmony between the three. They all do support each other. I never thought of it this way but now it is clear that God uses these three modes of revelation. Also the idea that “the Bible is not a textbook” but we can go “to and fro” between these revelations to come to a better understanding of God is new to me. I’ve never thought about what that phrase meant, and now the idea that we can run to and fro between the different revelations, and that both secular and sacred knowledge will increase is an interesting perspective. I like the flexibility that there are other revelations but the also the certainty that everything is Biblical and Christ-centered. We do need to reconsider our modes of thinking in order to expand our base so that we can catch more knowledge while at the same time staying true to Scripture.
To comment on chapter 4 in the Cosmic Christ of Scripture,i would start by saying that it had a gripping introduction and a claer organizational plan set forth from the beginning.I agree with the the statement that by the increase of knowledge a people is to be prepared to stand in the latter days. The more we study God's word it is the more we will be prepared. It is interesting that Ellen White says that nature and scripture don't disagree, while in our world the beliefs of men seem to make them disagree. But because God is the author of both, they do agree. It is true that their is little good in studying scripture if we don't want to increase in the knowledge of Christ. For example, what does it avail the historical critics to study scripture when it is all said and done. The question comes down to a saving faith in the Christ of Scriptre. I like the statement " As they impart the light that God graciously bestows upon them to those in darkness, they will be confimed in the faith." Truly, working for others is in essence working out our own salvation. We are also blessed by it. i was encouraged by the statements that "we should not allow a day to pass without gaining an increase of knowledge in temporal and spiritual things." We should seek to learn as much as we can, so that we can be of greater good. I thought Dr Hanna did a good job in presenting the Wholistic idea of Scripture, Nature and Christ having unique primacies while complementing each other.
Commenting on Understanding Scripture Chapter 4. It was said that we know about God only by way of His revelation. When i think about this, it is true. If God did not reveal Himself to us through His revelation, we truly would not know about Him. We may sometimes take this for granted.i argree with the statement that Howeverever we believe Scripture came about, it will influence our understanding and interpretation of it. I appreciated the breaking down of 2 Peter 1:21. In short, both God and human beings were involved in the generation of Scripture. And also "even when human being were involved in writing Scripture, they did not originate the explanations, expositions, or interpretations that originated in God as author. My question is, if scripture nowhere addressses the problem of " the concrete ways in which the divine and human agencies interfaced," must we tackle it? Is there a danger in doing so? I think so. i also think by submission to God we could truly understand more. Canale seemed to answer my question, further in the article when he said "It is true that God acts in ways hidden from our sight. Yet, scripture and Ellen G. White give us abundant evidence on which to build our understanding." Well said. I thought Canale presented a nice balance when he said "Since the whole Bible is revealed and inspired within the level of human thought and language, it does not present divine perfection; yet,its words reliably disclose God's thoughts and will to us." I also like the fact that he acknowledges the limitations in understanding this subject fully. Could this be a new model (Biblical M.) to be adapted by SDA..I pray that God would lead us in the right way.
Hanna, Martin. “Chapter Eight: Reading the Book of the Cosmos: Irreconcilable Differences?” and “Chapter Nine: What Does the Bible Say?”, from The Cosmic Christ of Scripture. Berrien Springs; Andrews University, 2006.
Chapter Eight focused on the Revelation of Nature, the third Revelation of God. Hanna writes that many want to divorce biblical and scientific study due to irreconcilable differences, yet is this really necessary? Do religion and science occupy two totally different fields if they are answering the same questions? In Chapter nine Hanna focuses on what the Bible says about the Revelation of Nature. He writes that we need to read all of the books in relation to one another and since they come from the same source, God, they should agree if we are reading them correctly. The cosmos is seen as the widest context in which we “do theology”, then Scripture and then the text. I wonder why Christ is not the most concise way we do theology as opposed to the text? Hanna further writes that despite sin marring creation it is still a legitimate revelation of God. I wonder if nature is a revelation at all anymore since we do not have the same perspective as the Biblical writers. In older times, when it rained, God sent it. When something happened God did it. Everyone understood the world in terms of God’s actions but today this isn’t so. We understand that rain is from precipitation from a body of water and most of what we know about the world comes filtered through the scientific method. This method has left no room for God so most accept that we have evolved from nothing and are going no where. I am not speaking about the irreconcilable differences of Science or religion but simply a revelation that un-believers cannot see God in because of their mindset.
Heather Barbian
November
Hasel, Frank M. “Presuppositions in the Interpretation of Scripture”, from Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach.
This chapter is very similar to my paper and deals with presuppositions when interpreting Scripture. Hasel writes that presuppositions are unavoidable and cannot be separated from biblical interpretation. He writes, “The notion of presupposition(s) plays an important role in biblical interpretation. We all hold a number of beliefs that we presuppose or accept when we come to the task of interpreting Scripture. No one is able to approach Scripture with a blank mind. Presuppositions delimit the boundaries within which biblical interpretations can and should properly function. They also determine the method and, through the method, also the influence, to a considerable degree, the outcome of our interpretation. In other words they directly affect our theology and authority that Scripture has for our life and for doctrine.” He writes though that Scripture must change those negative presuppositions such as evolution so we can have a God-centered methodology and theology. He writes that some necessary biblical presuppositions are that God is a personal God who acts and speaks, he is the Creator who wants our fellowship and that sin disrupts this communion. As readers we are expected to be open and honest, have faith, humility, obedience, love and pray. The chapter ends talking about Scriptural principles such as sola, prima and tota scriptura.
Chapter xvi
I agree with the statement that E. R. O. White says that Jesus as our model of moral behavior is “Christianity’s unique contribution to ethics: the identification of the moral ideal with a historical person” (289). This strikes out to me because when we talk about ethics we are trying to fin what is the best way, and possibly we look to the Bible, and yet we still feel uncomfortable at times with our decision because of human emotion. So much of ethics today is not specifically address by the Bible and one could say each person’s ideas are valid. Yet in reality only Christianity can and will say that the solution of ethics and this theories can actually meet a historical person. Jesus. Only Jesus can fill this role since he was without sin. That is why the example of Jesus and the fruits of the spirit are the best way to know what one’s action should be and that there is a historical figure shows us that it can be done.
Also that when the Bible describes the ethical nature of someone: like David, its’ statements must be understood at the time and condition when they were given. Such when David was declared pure it was because he was right with God, it does not mean that the rest of his life could be identified with that purity.
Ethics are not to produce what we want but should point to our imitation of Christ as our leader and example.
Cosmic Christ
It feels strange to say this but I think I finally understood clearly how Scripture related to Christ and the cosmos in the wheel diagram. That “Scripture provides the principles that keep theology Christ centered and relevant to the world”, is easily understood. In a world that is full of people that believe their own things of God and many times are so out-of-sync with other God believers, there must be the rule. For if God is ruler above all, He also needs to provide us a way in which we can be ruled and conform to that position.
The Bible is that rule for humanity. And from whatever point we read it we first must not look at what it is telling us but rather what is it saying about God. From then we can move to how it applies to my own life. Since God made nature, naturally the conclusion would be to think that the Bible should go together with nature, because they come from the same source, therefore they are to complement each other. When we read our Bibles constantly and go to and from within the Scriptures we will see nature and the Bible come together to start forming a bigger book, both with point to Christ.
I'd like to make a quick response to what EJ said about applying faith to reason. One of the things I’ve noticed in sitting in this revelation, inspiration and hermeneutics class this semester is that there are so many ways Satan can take small elements of truth, wrap them up in a sparkly, philosophical wrapper of error and present them as truth. As we continue to move through the seminary, I think it would do us all well to not try and get too big of a grasp on what WE interpret as truth. Historically, we all know that once you attempt to outrun the wisdom of God, you run the risk of becoming your own God. There all elements of God that keep him a mystery and as soon as you remove the mystery of God, he ceases to be a God. EJ…. I love the observation; maybe I need to be eating what you eat for breakfast!!! LOL
In relationship to what many of you have wrote concerning Biblical and Scientific knowledge, tonight I was reading “Partly Veiled Knowledge” on page 111 of “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture.” In that very short but highly informative paragraph Dr. Hannah wrote something that really inspired an interesting thought for me……. How is it that the partial knowledge that we function out of in earth and science has the expansive ability to preach the fullness of Christ? For some it may sound like an any easy question to answer but for the rest of us who aren’t PHDDDDDDD’S like myself, how is it possible that our partial education in the experience of this human life is able to communicate the fullness of God??? Just a thought for the gifted intellectuals in the class! (by the way I’ve really enjoyed you all this semester!!)
Comment on chapter 5 of the book ‘The Cosmic Christ of the Scripture’.
God’s intentions in creation were extremely noble for man to understand today in this world marred by sin. The principle purpose of His creation was that, the creation to interpret his character, wisdom, thoughts power and glory. Men and woman who fear the Lord in both Old and new Testament have testified and acknowledged the fact that creation was intended to reveal God and his will towards lost mankind. One the examples is King David. For he, says in the book psalms chapter 19:1 that “the heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands”. David implies that the actual purpose of the work of his hands is to declare his glory. On the other hand David is giving a testimony that, no one can claim that he has no knowledge about God .For God by his grace decided to make it every clear that he is revealed by his creation. Ellen G. white in her terrible personal experience in the deep waters of Pacific Ocean also expresses the same mind with David that through her personal experience on the deep waters of Pacific Ocean. In her testimony, she says that, as the water tossed up the boat, not only that she saw the hand of God in the inform of angels, but also she had better understanding of God than before. This is to say that she learned a lesson by nature. She has classified the way we approach Gods revelation. This is through Christ or human way. This is through incarnation that, God became man in the person of Jesus. Christ being the express image of the father was to fully vindicate Gods character. Equally through human nature Gods revelation was to be manifested. For his law is written upon every nerve, muscle fiber and faculty. Possibly, was well understood by David, for he says in Psalms chapter 139:14 “I praise you for I am wonderfully and fearfully made”. That even though, as a result of sin it is impossible to know God perfectly in the world. Another means of knowing God is through the scripture. She confesses that through human imperfectness in preservation, transmission, and translation, makes the scripture incomplete to fully vindicate God.
Even though, she says that the scripture is absolutely necessary to give knowledge of salvation. The neglect of the light of God as manifested in Jesus , man and the world has made to cherish Satan’ thoughts above Gods word they have become blind. For the word of God the lamp that sheds light. Indeed the true science must agree with the scripture for God needs his people to intellectuals Christians
Thomas Masimba.
In chapter eight of The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, Dr. Hanna points out that there are some who try to create a distance between theology and science, when there really shouldn’t be such a distance. The Bible makes it clear that the Author of the Bible is the same Author of nature, and as such that Author shouldn’t contradict Himself in multiple books that He has authored. Dr. Hanna quotes The American National Academy of Sciences as stating that scientific and biblical study are “separate and mutually exclusive realms…whose presentation in the same context leads to misunderstanding of both”. I agree with Dr. Hanna when he writes that “there may be harmony between theology and science.
I agree simply on the basis of the fact that if one derives moral principles, anthropological extrapolations, origins conclusions, ancient historical information, or sociological norms from science, these are topics upon which Scripture comments. To at least be able to compare the two requires a methodological study of both. There doesn’t necessarily have to be a misunderstanding of both simply from a study of both. I don’t see them as mutually exclusive realms, they are rather two realms with some overlap, and the overlap should be sought to be reconciled.
In Understanding Scripture chapter XV Lael Caesar deals with cultures effect upon hermeneutics in his article titled Hermeneutics and Culture. I was impressed by the significance culture can have upon an individual’s hermeneutic. Caesar outlines theologies born from oppression such as black theology, minjung theology, and feminist theology. He indicates the importance of grounding the reading of the Bible in one’s own experience while not making it the verifiable basis of scripture. In the above listed theologies an area of concern is created when the starting point for a theology is the subjective reality of a group or an individual and not the biblically defined starting point within the Bible. Caesar indicates that the only safe starting point for theology should be the human condition as it was at creation and not the many disadvantaged position’s of humanity today. Before reading this chapter I did not have an appreciation for the presuppositions that arise on a group level and their impact on the conclusions of theological thought. I wonder to what extent Adventism as a group develops presuppositions that are unwarranted biblically and where those presuppositions would take us.
This blog is in response to the book Understanding Scripture and the chapter contributed by Gerald A. Klingbeil titled The Text and the Canon of Scripture. My reading this chapter is strangely juxtaposed to a recent reading of Larry Richards article written for BRICOM also titled, “Ellen G. White’s Writing: An Extension of Canon.” While the intent of the authors differ in conclusion much of what is said in each article overlaps. One element that particularly disturbs me, or at the least causes me to inquire is the notion of “self-authentication” and scripture.
Klingbeil states, “…it seems clear that the OT and the NT books were self-authenticating.” He indicates that the writings within the canon were recognized to be of divine origin and as such were permitted into the canon of scripture. Later Klingbeil writes, “Those writings which included a “Thus says the Lord” and which had proven their inspiration to their contemporaries were, therefore, included.” He indicates that the most decisive criterion in determining whether something belongs in the canon regards the concept of inspiration. It seems that this reasoning borders upon a circular fallacy. Example: The OT and NT are self-authenticating, we know this because they state “Thus saith the Lord,” (Internal) and are said to be by the community (external) therefore they are Canon. With this formula wouldn’t the Koran also be canon? Certainly to the Muslim community it would be. Richards hammers out what Klingbeil makes reference to in the “proven” regarding the writings and their readers. Klingbeil states that the sociological interpretation of the process of canonization and a high-view of scripture cannot really coexist. Perhaps, but is the only proof for the divine inspiration of a document a self assertion within it and someone’s word that it is. Is there another test? Richards points out that the fruit of the writings is imperative in determining its authenticity as canon. As I understand his argument it is only when somebody undergoes the radical changes that the Bible talks about can they really say that it is canon. Not that it was not canon before, but that our proof it is canon is the effectual working out of its message in our lives. To me there is something fundamentally wrong with the term “self-authenticating.” The very process of authentication requires some outside perspective. I believe that we know the Bible is truly the word of God when the things that we were powerless to change, change through the interaction with its content. The Bible may have always been the word of God, but effectively it cannot be promoted as such without the above process taking place.
This chapter was one of great interest to me. I will focus on two main aspects of theis chapter. My first impression was that of confusion. I was of the opinion that faith reason and the Holy Spirit was a hermeneutical principle that was separate and apart from other hermeneutical principles. Based on my understanding it seems as though this is saying that Hermeneutics in general involves the process whereby one has to use his or her reasoning powers or abilities to understand the scriptures. I make this remark because to me that would be in direct contridiction to the hermeneutical principle of Sola Scriptura which assumes that 'the Bible is the ultimate authority and does not need the principle of riticism which to me is one tennant of the Faith, reason and Holy Spiriti Hermeneutical principle. Which if that as is stated prior is indeed a separate Hermeneutical principle or method. The next section I will focus on is the section of the chapter that discusses the possiblility of Faith taking presidence over reason in the Method or process of Hermeneutics. The author states that it is implied in the book of 1Cor. chapter 10:5 that that is the direction we aught to lean toward. He further explains his understanding by questioning the validity of denying the human senses and the geological, philosophical thought process that would go along with making faith a priority or reason. This is a very interesting discussion outlined in this chapter. It is my hope to take time to understand these arguments further in an effort to come to a better understanding of this Hermeneutical process.
In chapter two of his book, The Cosmis Christ of Scripture,Dr. Martin Hanna ask a very pointed question; Is there a problem with Biblical authority? He immideatly answers with the use of the Sola Scriptura Method is my understanding, by quoting from the Bible itself Romans chapter 13:1 which emphatically states that;"There is no authority but God: the authorities that exist are ordained of Go" carefully adminishes his readers to be very careful about how one studies the Bible. He continues by saying that a person could be a sincere seeker and yet misread the inspired word of God. I particularly liked the analogy that gives a careful warning about being careful about stringing texts together that are not necessarity related for the particular study or devine will of God for our lives. Which could possibly end in suicide. Ha Ha. This tells me that even though the Bible can be trusted based on historical factors and others we probably need to use faith and reason. In addition since God is the author of the scripture and life, why would he want someone to kill him or herself.
Was reading this section of the book “The Cross of Christ written” by John Stott, entitled
“The Heart of the Cross”.John Stott considers the necessity of the cross and skilfully unpacks the doctrines of propitiation and expiation. This section is, in our times of doubt, liberalism and relativism, most provocative. In presenting the theology of the cross, The Cross of Christ seeks to explain the horror of sin and understand the outrageousness of forgiveness. Between these two foundational truths lie the necessity of the cross and the necessity of Jesus as our substitutionary atoning sacrifice. And this is the foundation of John Stott’s (and the Church’s) stand against all who seek to dilute the glory of the cross. Stott writes,
“We strongly reject, therefore, every explanation of the death of Christ which does not have at its centre the principle of ‘satisfaction through substitution’, indeed divine self-satisfaction through divine self-substitution. The cross was not a commercial bargain with the devil, let alone one which tricked and trapped him; nor an exact equivalent, a quid pro quo to satisfy a code of honor or technical point of law; nor a compulsory submission by God to some moral authority above him from which he could not otherwise escape; nor a punishment of a meek Christ by a harsh and punitive Father; nor a procurement of salvation by a loving Christ from a mean and reluctant Father; nor an action of the Father which bypassed Christ as Mediator. Instead, the righteous, loving Father humbled himself to become in and through his only Son flesh, sin and a curse for us, in order to redeem us without compromising his own character [...] The biblical gospel of atonement is of God satisfying himself by substituting himself for us.” (p. 188)
I like the way he did not consider it the main point of his work to remove or try to wrestle with the removing of the mysterious cloud around the cross, but first he just defined it by saying what the cross signifies not and then was careful to say that God was satisfied through the sacrifice on the cross; though we may not fully understand how with details the reason and which aspect of the cross did make Him satisfied, Stott does not deny the fact that was satisfied.
I believe our joy and satisfaction is found in God’s satisfaction and deep pleasure. Have we ever imagine God saving us objectively on the cross, and was not satisfied? Could we have been assured of any satisfaction? And I believe that creation has a major role to play in understanding the mystery of the cross, or rather its blessedness. When god created, we know that it was perfectly done and finished, and safely to inhabited by Man. The satisfaction of God was our perfection creation and it is also our perfect salvation.
As was going through the eighteenth chapter of the letter of Paul to the Romans, i tried to free my mind from all the presumptions that I had, and try to get the message as the Romans was supposed to get by the listening while that letter was being read in their church.
and when it came to the part where Paul was saying: "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified"
I got one thing that i will not have gotten if i kept truiing to figuring out the predestiantion issue... Instead I saw predestination a kind of comfort. I believe that what Paul wanted to give when he was introducing this them in the concluding part of his work on righteousness. This text, appears to me as an introduction of the conclusion; jut as we have said in class that the previous verses help us to understand verse 29 better, so is the las verses of this chapter... "For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."
Post a Comment