2.17 - Interpretation of Symbols
February 13, 2005 | Comments: 2Biblical Hermeneutics Part Second Chapter 17
The interpretation of symbols, says the author, is one of the most difficult subjects for the interpreter of Scripture. Symbols are by nature enigmatical representations of spiritual truths, and therefore require a sober and discriminating judgment. The first step in finding general guidance is to collate an ample and varied group of biblical symbols, which are also accompanied by an authoritative interpretation. With these we may then seek to derive general principles and methods.
Having done this himself at length in this chapter, Terry deduces the following fundamental principles for the interpretation of symbols: the names of symbols are to be taken literally, symbols will always represent something different from themselves, and there will be always be some traceable resemblance between the symbol and what it represents. The great task of the interpreter is therefore to identify the primary points of resemblance between the symbol and the thing symbolized. To do this well, he must pay heed to the historical standpoint of the writer, the scope and context in which the symbol is presented, and the significance of any similar symbols used elsewhere in Scripture.
Most of this chapter deals directly with the interpretation of symbols within the biblical text. These are found in visions, such as Jeremiah’s almond rod and Zechariah’s flying scroll, and in material things, such as the tabernacle. In the latter Terry addresses both the overarching symbol of God’s abiding presence with His people, and also the specific elements in this example which are symbolic, e.g. the ark of the covenant, the mercy seat, the great sacrificial altar, the altar of incense, the laver, etc. While cautioning as he has elsewhere that we must not seek to apply significance to every incidental detail in a figure, he shows in this case of the tabernacle, that applying the analogy of Scripture we find the symbolic meanings of the particulars well supported.
Comments
for those of us passionate about the history of redemption, we are tempted to make every symbol a type of Christ and then, if the symbol will not conform, we make it a symbol of redemptive significance. What about that ark? (Noah’s ark). Symbol, type, redemptive historical significance? What about David’s five stones he collected to hurl at Goliath? What about Aaron’s garb? Nathan.
nathan on February 16, 2005 at 07:17 AM
As we discussed in person, Noah’s ark yes, especially in light of 2 Peter 3.18-21; David’s 5 stones, doubtful; and Aaron’s garb, definitely, along with almost everything else associated with the tabernacle.
Andrew on March 07, 2005 at 10:40 PM
