Archives For Interpretation

Some things preach well, and then some things preach very well! The idea that there are four unique and distinct words for “love” in Koine Greek is very popular among evangelical pastors. I surmise one reason it is so widely accepted as true, in light of the textual issues, is that it preaches well.

No one has had more influence in the mass proliferation of the four loves than C.S. Lewis. Lewis lays out this four-fold study of the Greek words for love in his book The Four Loves. Lewis argues that the four Greek words for love (agape, phileo, eros, storge) all communicate different types of love (unconditional, friendship, romantic, affectionate). But is this true? D.A. Carson thinks not and addresses this issue in his book Exegetical Fallacies: Continue Reading…

The Christian canon is not a fixed deposit of traditions from the past, but a dynamic vehicle by which the risen Lord continues through the Holy Spirit to guide, instruct, and nourish his people. The imperative “to search the Scriptures” reveals the need for its continuous interpretation. The activity of hearing, reading, and praying is required, indeed mandated by the Scripture itself. In every successive generation new light has been promised for those seeking divine illumination to provide fresh understanding, new application to changing cultures, and a call for repentance for persistent failure in living out the imperatives of the gospel. In this constant struggle to live a faithful Christian life, the Scriptures of the church afford the abiding context from which to grow into the image of Christ. It is thus a theological gyroscope for maintaining one’s direction when buffeted by the ever-shifting winds of change.

Childs, Brevard S. The Church’s Guide for Reading Paul: The Canonical Shaping of the Pauline Corpus (p. 26).

Below are three humorous examples of how Old Testament scholars would interpret a Stop sign. These three examples come form a larger list titled Hermeneutics in Everyday Life by Tim Perry. Continue Reading…

Recently, Truett Seminary’s professor of theology Dr. Roger Olson shed light on his low view of the Old Testament in a comment on his blog. Olson states:

I would go so far as to say that we should not focus on the cultural meaning, the circumstances, etc., except out of historical interest. Everything we need to know about God and salvation is in the New Testament. The OT was types and shadows. It provides some context for understanding the New Testament, but it provides nothing essential for doctrine or practice that Christians cannot find in the NT.

Source: Regarding Old Testament “Texts of Terror”: Comment #25098

The post itself has many disappointing comments about the Old Testament and Olson’s “interpret everything through a lens of love” theologizing, but his comment in view shows where the rubber meets the Marcion-esque road he is traveling.  Continue Reading…

Updated: I found corresponding handouts for each lecture and linked them below.

I am taking an Ezra-Nehemiah exegesis class this semester and one of our textbooks is V. Philips Long’s Art of Biblical History. Long is currently Professor of Old Testament at Regent College but formerly taught at Covenant Theological Seminary (CTS) for 15 years. CTS has several of Long’s lectures on their iTunesU account, two of which are on the subject of Long’s Art of Biblical History. They are well worth the listen.

Audio

Art of Biblical History I

Art of Biblical History II

Handouts

Art of Biblical History I

Art of Biblical History II

There are no purely objective readers. We all bring certain biases and agendas to the text before us. The goal is not to purify one’s self from this condition but to realize and account for such “baggage.” In Appendix A, titled Hermeneutics, in Michael B. Shepherd’s Daniel in the Context of the Hebrew Bible, Shepherd addresses how the biased reader of the Bible should approach the text and then behave once inside the revealed biblical world.

If postmodernism has been of any value at all, it is that it has taught the children of modernity about the fallacy of objectivity. Continue Reading…

In Isaiah 9:6, the child prophesied to be born will be called “Everlasting Father.”

For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Isa 9:6 NIV

At first look, the text seems to be calling Jesus, the second person of the Triune Godhead, the Father. However, there is no need for confusion or a perceived contradiction. John Gill explains:

The everlasting Father; which does not design any relation of Christ in the Godhead; and there is but one Father in the Godhead, and that is the first Person; indeed Christ and the Father are one, and the Father is in him, and he is in the Father, and he that has seen the one has seen the other, and yet they are distinct, Christ is not the Father; the Son and Spirit may be considered with the first Person as Father, in creation and regeneration, they being jointly concerned therein, but not in the Trinity: it is easy to make it appear Christ is not the Father, but is distinct from him, Continue Reading…

Vos: What is Biblical Theology?

Joshua —  December 16, 2011 — 3 Comments

Yesterday, I was blessed to pick up a hardback copy of Geerhardus Vos’ Biblical Theology. I hope to read through most of it over the winter break. I rarely hear the term Biblical Theology. It seems Systematic Theology  is more the rage on my own campus and elsewhere.

What is meant by the term Biblical Theology? Vos, Princeton Theological Seminary’s first professor of Biblical Theology, explains:

Biblical Theology is that branch of Exegetical Theology which deals with the process of the self-revelation of God deposited in the Bible.

In the above definition the term “revelation” is taken as a noun of action. Biblical Theology deals with revelation as a divine activity, not as the finished product of that activity. Continue Reading…


John 3:16 is one of the dearest of all Bible verses for many Christians. It is a great summary statement of the Gospel. But all too often the verse is miscited, misquoted, and mistranslated. The Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) provides a clear reading of what the Greek text is communicating.

For God loved the world in this way: He gave His One and Only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life.

The point of the text is that God showed his love by giving his son as the means of salvation to all who believe in him. However, this is not how many laymen and pastors alike understand the verse. Too often it is preached as, “For God so intensely loves you that He gave His only Son.” I suspect the New Living Translation (NLT) Bible has some responsibility in the matter. The NLT completely mistranslates the Greek:

For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

Beyond the NLT’s influence is most likely a deep seated sentimentalism and/or emotionalism pushed upon the very Word of God whereby the verse loses its intended meaning. In this month’s edition of SBC Life, the journal of the Southern Baptist Convention, former SBC President Dr. Frank Page misses the mark in quoting John 3:16. In the section, “A Word From Frank S. Page,” Dr. Page writes: Continue Reading…

Many believe that to properly understand biblical narrative one must “become” the author of the narrative by gathering as much historical background information as possible in order to provide a context for the passage in view. John Sailhamer addresses the issue of biblical narrative and historical background information in his book The Meaning of the Pentateuch.

If we grant the importance or necessity of historical background information in understanding the author’s setting, should we also grant for understanding the life setting of the central characters and events of the narrative? Many biblical theologians see no difference between the historical setting of the author of a biblical book, such as Moses would have written, and the historical setting of the lives of the biblical characters recorded in those books. Important questions of authorship, interpretation and history turn on such seemingly insignificant matters. Continue Reading…