אבנימ

Biblical Hermeneutics Part Second Chapter 27

In this chapter Terry affirms that the hermeneutical principles set forth in his treatise necessarily rule out the idea that Scripture may have more than one distinct meaning. In this he carefully defines and demonstrates the principle, and differentiates between what it specifically excludes and what it does not.

To say that Scripture may have more than one clear meaning is tantamount to saying that it has no sure meaning at all. One such case where plain meaning is commonly abused is in explicit designations of time. Scripture tells us of a God whose intention is to reveal Himself to the objects of His love. We must conclude that He does not capriciously mock the recipients of His revelation by posing riddles and enigmas that cannot be understood through the judicious use of the gifts of reason and language with which He has endowed them. When the Scripture does present riddles and enigmas, its context clearly advises us of the fact.

The doctrine of univocal meaning is sometimes construed and applied so as to limit the scope of the application of a text, to destroy the doctrine of type and antitype, or to narrowly limit the fullness of parts of the prophetic revelation. The author takes pains to correct these errors. He affirms that while the language of Scripture has no double sense, the applications may be and often are manifold; otherwise it would not be so useful (2 Timothy 3.16). Similarly there may be diverse applications of certain prophecies, e.g. the appearance of antichrist in the person of Nero does not dictate that other, and even more infamous antichrists will not appear. The protoevangelium has one meaning, but its fulfillment is exhibited many times throughout history. With respect to typological persons and events, again, there is one sense of the language, and the use of sound hermeneutical principles will show it to be prefiguring its greater fulfillment to come.