irc.christian-chat.net
#Zola_Levitt_Ministries
04/17/2001 9:02 PM CT
9:02 PM: philo: I have designed this lesson in such a way that all can benefit even if you don't hold to dispensational views.
9:02 PM: philo: Dispenationalism claims that it is unique in that it uses consistent literal interpretation. Tonight I want to try to examine what that means and how it can help each student in his own understanding of the Scriptures
9:02 PM: philo: This teaching has been adapted and modified from an article by Thomas Ice
9:02 PM: philo: The First Foundation of Dispenationalism: Consistent Literal Interpretation
9:03 PM: philo: Consistent literal interpretation is essential to properly understanding what God is saying in the Bible
9:03 PM: philo: Yet some believe that consistent literal interpretation is either impossible or impractical.
9:03 PM: philo: One critic believes it to be a "presumption" that "is unreasonable" and "an impossible ideal."1 In spite of such false characterization, what do we mean by consistent literal interpretation?
9:04 PM: philo: A DEFINITION OF LITERAL INTERPRETATION
9:04 PM: philo: The dictionary defines literal as "belonging to letters." Further, it says literal interpretation involves an approach "based on the actual words in their ordinary meaning, .
9:04 PM: philo: . . . not going beyond the facts."2 "Literal interpretation of the Bible simply means to explain the original sense of the Bible according to the normal and customary usages of its language."3
9:05 PM: philo: In other words we are seeking to discover what the passage of Scripture meant to the original audience to whom it was written. What it means to us should come much later.
9:05 PM: philo: For example it is helpful to discover that Paul always used a similar formula consisting of two words in the original language when he was answering questions from his audience.
9:05 PM: philo: The words "now concerning" tip us off to this. In 1 Corinthians 7:1 we read "now concerning the things of which you wrote to me;
9:06 PM: philo: in 8:1 we read "now concerning things offered to idols; in 12:1 we read "now concerning spiritual men/spiritual utterances (gifts is inserted by the translators);
9:06 PM: philo: and in 16:1 we read "now concerning the collection". With this in mind then it seems logical that the words "it is better for a man not to touch a woman" was a Corinthian slogan
9:06 PM: philo: that Paul had to correct and the idea so often advanced that Paul hated women falls to the ground.
9:07 PM: philo: How is this done? It can only be accomplished through an interpretation of the written text which includes consideration of the grammatical (according to the rules of grammar),
9:07 PM: philo: historical (consistent with the historical setting of the passage), contextual (in accord with its context) method of interpretation. This is what literalists mean by consistently literal
9:07 PM: philo: interpretation.
9:07 PM: philo: GRAMMATICAL, HISTORICAL,CONTEXTUAL INTERPRETATION
9:08 PM: philo: Grammatical
9:08 PM: philo: The grammatical aspect of literal interpretation considers the impact that grammar plays on a passage. For example much preaching has been done on Matthew 4 in the temptation of Christ based on the word "if:"
9:08 PM: philo: In English the word always implies some sort of doubt. In Greek this is a first class conditional sentence which assumes the conditional clause to be true.
9:09 PM: philo: We could well translate "since you are the Son of God (previously announced by the voice at the baptism), then do thus and so. The issue of His Sonship is never in doubt
9:09 PM: philo: The temptation is to misuse His powers. This means that a student of the text should correctly analyze the grammatical relationships of words, phrases, and sentences to one another.
9:09 PM: philo: Literal interpreter Dr. Roy Zuck writes,When we speak of interpreting the Bible grammatically, we are referring to the process of seeking to determine its meaning by ascertaining four things:
9:10 PM: philo: (a) the meaning of words (lexicology), (It is important to use an up to date lexicon(dictionary) here. Too many use the dictionary in the back of Strong's to draw erroneous conclusions. That dictionary is over 500 years old and reflects none of the discoveries we have made in the meaning of ancient Greek and Hebrew words in the last 100 years.
9:10 PM: philo: (b) the form of words (morphology), (c) the function of words (parts of speech), and (d) the relationships of words (syntax).4Dr. Zuck has been teaching biblical interpretation for many years at Dallas Seminary and I believe his recent book Basic Bible Interpretation is the best place to start for anyone interested in learning how to interpret the Bible.
9:11 PM: philo: Dr. Zuck gives further amplification of the four areas he noted above: In the meaning of words (lexicology), we are concerned with:(a) etymology-how words are derived and developed,
9:11 PM: philo: (b) usage-how words are used by the same and other authors, (c) synonyms and antonyms-how similar and opposite words are used, and (d) context-how words are used in various contexts.
9:12 PM: philo: In discussing the form of words (morphology) we are looking at how words are structured and how that affects their meaning.For example the word "eat" means something different from "ate", though the same letters are used.A classic illustration of misunderstanding based on the tense of the verb is found in John 20:17.
9:12 PM: philo: The old KJV has "touch me not." (implying that Mary had not yet touched Him) but the underlying original is a present imperative which should be translated "stop clinging to Me" since Jesus had to ascend to the Father to offer the firstfruits offering on Bikkurim the day of his resurrection.The function of words (parts of speech) considers what the various forms do.
9:12 PM: philo: These include attention to subjects, verbs, objects, nouns, and others, as will be discussed later. The relationships of words (syntax) are the way words are related or put together to form phrases, clauses, and sentences
9:13 PM: philo: 5For example in Ephesians 1:18 I have heard much said about the phrase "the eyes of your understanding been enlightened". This is a perfect participle which means an action completed in the past with continuing results.
9:13 PM: philo: Therefore it is something that has happened to the Ephesians already. Therefore the three things that Paul is praying for are that they might understand "the hope of their calling, the riches of their inheritance, and the power of Christ's resurrection in their lives.
9:13 PM: philo: It is because their eyes have been opened that they can understand these future things and any exhortation to believers to open their eyes is futile and misses the intention of the verse on grammatical grounds alone. The grammatical aspect of literal interpretation lets us know that any interpretation conflicting with grammar is invalid.
9:14 PM: philo: Historical
9:14 PM: philo: Proper interpretation of the Bible means that the historical context must be taken into account. This aspect means that one must consider the historical setting and circumstances in which the books of the Bible were written. Dr. Paul Tan explains
9:14 PM: philo: The proper concept of the historical in Bible interpretation is to view the Scriptures as written during given ages and cultures.Applications may then be drawn which are relevant to our times. For instance, the subject of meat offered to idols can only be interpreted from the historical and cultural setting of New Testament times. Principles to be drawn are relevant to us today.6"
9:15 PM: philo: Contextual
9:15 PM: philo: "A text taken out of context is a pretext." This slogan is certainly true! Yet, one of the most common mistakes made by those who are found to have misinterpreted a passage in the Bible is that of taking a verse out of its Divinely ordered context.
9:15 PM: philo: A classic example of this is Luke 6:38. "Give and it will be given to you: good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over will be put in your bosom."
9:16 PM: philo: In our church we often sing this verse set to music as an offertory. However, when considered contextually it is obvious that money is not the subject under consideration. So the songwriter (we often get our theology from songwriters and not from the word) has erred and the congregation has erred in its expectation of an abundant return for giving.
9:16 PM: philo: A second example may be helpful. I personally love the song "Blow the trumpet in Zion" with its strong Jewish flavor.
9:17 PM: philo: However when we check the context in the Book of Joel we discover that the Lord uttering his voice before His army is a reference to the northern army that will invade Israel during the tribulation period not an army of believers going out to
9:17 PM: philo: conquer the land for Jesus.
9:17 PM: philo: A third example is one of my favorites. We have all sung the hymn "Angels we have heard on high, sweetly singing o'er the plains".
9:17 PM: philo: ". However, when we check out the passage in Luke where the angels announce the birth of Messiah to the shepherds we read that "they said..." not that they sang.
9:18 PM: philo: In fact I would argue that it is extremely difficult to find a verse of Scripture that supports the idea that angels sing. In fact in Job 38:7 which some may call to mind it's not the normal word in Hebrew for singing.
9:18 PM: philo: Why is this important? Because, if you have a rule that angels do not sing in Scripture, then it helps us to identify the 24 elders in Revelation 4-5 who sing a new song.
9:19 PM: philo: Even though a sentence may be taken from the Bible, it is not the Word of God if it is placed into a context which changes the meaning from that which God intended in its original context.
9:19 PM: philo: Dr. Zuck says:
9:19 PM: philo: The context in which a given Scripture passage is written influences how that passage is to be understood. Context includes several things:
9:19 PM: philo: €the verse(s) immediately before and after a passage
9:20 PM: philo: €the paragraph and book in which the verses occur
9:20 PM: philo: €the dispensation in which it was written (for example law versus grace)
9:20 PM: philo: €the message of the entire Bible (some will argue that since David committed adultery it is okay for us to do so. They reason "it's in the Bible." Being in the Bible means nothing if it is not approved in the Bible.
9:21 PM: philo: €the historical-cultural environment of that time when it was written.7
9:21 PM: philo: A widely used example of a verse taken out of context is 2 Chronicles 7:14: "if My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray . . .
9:21 PM: philo: Usually this is quoted as an explanation for why America is in decline. Because "My people" are addressed, it is said that the success of a nation is dependent upon the obedience of Christians to the Lord.
9:22 PM: philo: Thus God blesses or curses a nation in accordance with Christian obedience. Then 2 Chronicles 7:14 is cited as a formula for national restoration because the passage says to "humble themselves and pray, and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
9:22 PM: philo: 1."My people" are said in 2 Chronicles 6:24 to be "Israel" as is also indicated by the flow of the historical context.
9:22 PM: philo: 2.Solomon is preparing to dedicate the just completed Temple and 7:14 is God's renewal of the Mosaic Covenant under which Israel and only Israel operates.
9:23 PM: philo: Since this passage involves Israel and not the church which is composed of people from every land, tribe, tongue, and ethnic group it is improper to relate it to present day American Christianity.
9:23 PM: philo: Proper contextual interpretation would allow for the general observation that God delights in a humble and obedient people, but obedience and prayer should be offered according to His plan for the church.
9:24 PM: philo: FIGURES OF SPEECH (This topic is massive. Every serious Bible student should have at least a copy of E.W. Bullinger's Figures of Speech in his reference library.
9:24 PM: philo: Although over 800 pages, it is still not exhaustive of all the figures of speech in the Bible.
9:24 PM: philo: Literal interpretation recognizes that a word or phrase can be used either plainly (denotative) or figuratively (connotative). As in our own conversations today, the Bible may use plain speech, such as "He died yesterday" (denotative use of language).
9:24 PM: philo: Or the same thing may be said in a more colorful way, "He kicked the bucket yesterday" (connotative use of language). \
9:25 PM: philo: An important point to be noted is that even though we may use a figure of speech to refer to someone's death, we are using that figure to refer to an event that literally happened
9:25 PM: philo: Some interpreters are mistaken to think that just because a figure of speech may be used to describe an event (i.e., Jonah's experience in the belly of the great fish in Jonah 2), that the event was not literal. Such is not the case. A "Golden Rule of Interpretation" has been developed to help us discern whether or not a figure of speech was intended by an author:
9:26 PM: philo: When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.8
9:26 PM: philo: A good illustration of this is found in Colossians 3:3 "For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God
9:26 PM: philo: Its a great verse but what does it mean? The secret is unlocked when we realize that our translators have translated the word "hidden" with a figurative sense and not a literal sense
9:27 PM: philo: A subset of the word "hidden" is the word "buried." In other words a buried object will always be hidden but a hidden object will not always be buried. In other New Testament passages it is translated buried. So if we translate it literally, then all becomes clear.
9:27 PM: philo: For you died "figuratively with Christ" and your life (old life lived under Adam) is buried with Christ (identified with Him in his death, burial, and resurrection) in the sight of God (who is the only one that matters).
9:27 PM: philo: Literalists understand that a figure of speech is employed by Isaiah teaching that the Adamic curse upon nature will be reversed in the millennium when he says, "And all the trees of the field will clap their hands" (Isaiah 55:12d).
9:28 PM: philo: This figure is discerned by specific factors in the context in which it was written, all dealing with the removal of the curse upon nature at this future time. Even though figurative language is employed, it will literally happen in history.I thought it would be good to list a few of the most common figures of speech and alert the student to them.
9:28 PM: philo: A. Simile: A truth made clearer by stating that one thing resembles some other well-know thing or truth. It makes the comparison by using the words like or as. Example: My wife is like an angel.
9:28 PM: philo: B. Metaphor: A figure that makes a truth clearer by stating that one thing represents or is defined by another object because of a likeness or analogy between the two. It makes a comparison without using the words like or as. An allegory and a type are extended metaphors. Example: My wife is an angel. Almost all of the "I am" sayings in the gospel of John are metaphors.
9:29 PM: philo: C. Hypocatasis. A truth is made clearer by stating that one thing implies or suggests a comparison to another object or idea. In this figure one person, thing, or action is substituted for another to imply a resemblance. Example: I live with an angel.
9:29 PM: philo: D. Metonymy. This figure is based on a mental relationship in which one thing is substituted for another.
9:29 PM: philo: 1. Cause is substituted for effect. Paul says in Philippians 3:8 "that I may gain Christ" Well it is difficult to see how one gains Christ when one already has Christ. The answer is the figure of speech. Paul is saying "that I might gain what Christ gives ie the prize mentioned in vs. 14. Christ is the cause and the prize is the effect.
9:29 PM: philo: 2. Effect is substituted for cause. Genesis 15:23 "two nations are in your womb" The two nations are the future descendants which are the effect. The two babies in the womb are the cause.
9:30 PM: philo: 3. The main subject is substituted for something related to it. 2 Corinthians 5:17 "if any man be in Christ he is a new creature/creation." He has a new spirit within him. His body of flesh and blood still remains awaiting the resurrection of the body.
9:30 PM: philo: 4. Something related to subject is substituted for the main subject. Genesis 49:10 The scepter shall not depart from Judah. Ie the one who is entitled to hold the scepter.
9:30 PM: philo: E. Synechdoche: One idea is substituted for another very closely related idea. There are four kinds.
9:31 PM: philo: 1. The whole is substituted for a part of it. Genesis 8:13 Noah removed the covering of the ark. Not the whole roof just the trap door.
9:31 PM: philo: 2. A part of it is substituted for the whole thing. Matthew 13:16 Blessed are your eyes=you.
9:31 PM: philo: 3. The species is substituted for the genus. Psalm 72:15 Gold is the species of the genus gifts.
9:32 PM: philo: 4. The genus is substituted for the species. Psalm 118:10a: All the nations is the genus and the species is a great many nations.
9:32 PM: philo: F. Euphemism: In this figure a less offensive word or phrase is substituted for a more explicit one that may offend or suggest something unpleasant. Even our versions fall into this trap and refuse to translate the original properly. The classic case for this is when Elijah accuses Baal of literally "covering his feet=going to the bathroom" or pursuing (in this case women).
9:32 PM: philo: G. Personification: In this figure an inanimate object or an abstract idea is given human qualities. Proverbs 8:12 "I wisdom dwell with prudence."
9:33 PM: philo: H. Anthropomorphism: God is pictured as having the form of a man, or He is represented as having the attributes of a man. Psalm 34:15 "The eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous and His ears are attentive to their ways
9:33 PM: philo: I. Zoomorphism: God is pictured in the form or animals and plants, or He is said to have the attributes of animals and plants. Psalm 61:4 I long to dwell in your tent forever and take refuge in the shelter of your wings" GOD IS NOT LIKE BIG BIRD!
9:33 PM: philo: J. Merism: This figure uses a pair of opposites. Two extreme and contrasting parts of something are used to represent the whole thing. Isaiah 1:2 "Hear O heavens and give ear O earth!.
9:34 PM: philo: H. Hendiadys: In this figure two words joined by and are used to express a single concept. The very troublesome John 3:5 is an example of this. Born of water and spirit (or wind)=born from above
9:34 PM: philo: I. Hyperbole: This figure makes an overstatement for emphasis. This is a favorite one of mine. Mark 9:47 says, "If your eye makes you sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye,... Jesus was obviously overstating to make a point. Perhaps the promise of a hundred fold return in Matthew 19:29 falls into this category.
9:35 PM: philo: J. Idiomatic usage: The language does not literally mean what it says. For example our expression: To pay through the nose. This becomes important in Matthew 24:36. When Jesus says "no one knows the day or the hour" was He speaking idiomatically of the new moon festival, or was He using words that were peculiar to Jewish marriage customs, or was He speaking literally. You decide.
9:35 PM: philo: LITERAL VERSUS LITERALISM
9:35 PM: philo: Dr. Elliott Johnson of Dallas Seminary has noted that much of the confusion over literal interpretation can be removed when one properly understands the two primary ways the term has been used down through church history:
9:35 PM: philo: "(1) the clear, plain sense of a word or phrase as over against a figurative use, and
9:36 PM: philo: (2) a system that views the text as providing the basis of the true interpretation."9
9:36 PM: philo: Thus, literalists, by and large, have used the term literal to refer to their system of interpretation (the consistent use of the grammatical-historical system; Johnson's #2),
9:36 PM: philo: and once inside that system, literal refers to whether or not a specific word or phrase is used in its context in a figurative or literal sense (Johnson's #1).Johnson's second use of literal (i.e., systematic literalism) is simply the grammatical-historical system consistently used.
9:37 PM: philo: The Reformers (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli) revived the grammatical-historical system. It was set against the spiritual (spiritualized) or deeper meaning of the text that was a common approach during the Middle Ages. The literal meaning was used simply as a springboard to a deeper ("spiritual") meaning, which was viewed as more desirable.
9:37 PM: philo: A classic spiritualized interpretation would for example, see the four rivers of Genesis 2-the Pishon, Havilah, Tigris and Euphrates-as representing the human body, soul, spirit and mind
9:37 PM: philo: . Coming from such a system, the Reformers saw the need to get back to the literal or textual meaning of the Bible. For instance, Martin Luther wanted to debate John Eck from the text of the Bible.The system of literal interpretation is the grammatical-historical or textual approach to interpretation. Use of literalism in this sense could be called "macro-literalism."
9:37 PM: philo: Within macro-literalism, the consistent use of the grammatical-historical system yields the interpretative conclusion, for example, that the term "Israel" always and only refers to national Israel whether believing or unbelieving.
9:38 PM: philo: Again in a literal system the 144,000 in Revelation could not ever be Gentiles since the term "sons of Israel" throughout Scripture means physical descendants of the patriarch Jacob who was renamed Israel.
9:38 PM: philo: The church will not be substituted for Israel if the grammatical-historical system of interpretation is consistently used because there are no indicators in the text of Scripture that such is the case.
9:39 PM: philo: Therefore, one must bring an idea from outside the text by saying that the passage really means something that it does not actually say. This kind of replacement approach is a mild form of spiritualized, or allegorical, interpretation.
9:39 PM: philo: Consistently literal interpreters, within the framework of the grammatical-historical system, do discuss whether or not a word, phrase, or the literary genre of a biblical book is a figure of speech (connotative) or is to be taken literally/plainly (denotative).
9:39 PM: philo: This is Johnson's first use of literal which could be called "micro-literalism." Thus, within micro-literalism, there may be discussion by literalists as to whether or not a given word or phrase is being used as a figure of speech, based on the context of a given passage. Some passages are quite naturally clearer than others and a consensus among interpreters develops, whereas other passages may find literal interpreters divided as to wh
9:40 PM: philo: However, this is more a problem of application than of method.Ken Gentry, a replacement theologian, in his attack on consistent literal interpretation, argues that "consistent literalism is unreasonable."10 One of the ways he attempts to prove his point is by arguing that, since literalists take some words and phrases as figures of speech, they are not consistently literal.11
9:41 PM: philo: One of the ways he attempts to prove his point is by arguing that, since literalists take some words and phrases as figures of speech, they are not consistently literal.11
9:41 PM: philo: He asserts that, "the dispensational claim to 'consistent literalism' is frustrating due to its inconsistent employment."12 Gentry seeks to discredit literalism by giving examples of literalists who interpret certain passages as containing figures of speech, citing this as inconsistent with the system of literal interpretation
9:42 PM: philo: According to Gentry, the literalist has to abandon literal interpretation when he realizes that Jesus refers figuratively to Himself as a door in John 10:9.13. Gentry is not defining literal interpretation the way literalists do.
9:42 PM: philo: Therefore, his conclusions about literal interpretation are misguided because he commonly mixes the two senses described by Johnson. When speaking of the macro-literalism, he uses an example from micro-literalism
9:42 PM: philo: , and vice versa, therefore appearing to have shown an inconsistency in literal interpretation. In reality, the examples cited fall within the framework of how literalists have defined what they mean by literal interpretation.
9:43 PM: philo: CONCLUSION
9:43 PM: philo: God's Word is to be understood through consistent literal interpretation which gives us great confidence that we can arrive at the true meaning. It is an important foundation stone supporting the dispensational approach to the Scriptures.
9:43 PM: philo: This concludes our teaching for tonight. The room is now open for questions.
9:44 PM: philo: This concludes part 2 of our study
9:44 PM: philo: we have studied literal interpretation of scripture
-- end --