12 - Historical Interpretation and the Analogy of Faith
December 14, 2004 | Comments: 4
SYS 501 – Hermeneutics – Lecture 12 – Historical Interpretation and the Analogy of Faith
I. Historical Interpretation
A. Study of Scripture in light of historical events, places and circumstances
B. Grammatical Interpretation must be understood within context of its historical setting
C. Basic assumptions of Historical Interpretation
1. The Word of God was given progressively in an historical way, and therefore must be understood in the light of history
2. Words must be understood as they originated in the minds of the authors
3. Authors and their writings must be considered against their respective historical backgrounds
D. Demands upon the exegete
1. Know the author and his life as much as possible
2. Reconstruct the environment in which the book was written
a. Consider historical data (biography, geography, et al.)
b. Consider historical hypotheses (cultural customs, morals, religion, et al.)
c. Imagine oneself in author’s place as much as possible
3. Determine the author’s purpose and intention in writing
4. Transfer oneself into the time and place of the author’s world
a. Personal characteristics of the author or speaker, and of the readers and hearers
(1). Social circumstances
(2). Political circumstances
(3). Religious circumstances
b. Author’s time of life, and particular circumstances at the time of writing
c. Linguistic idioms of the time
II. The Analogy of Faith, aka the Analogy of Scripture
A. Defined: Scripture interprets Scripture
B. Developed by Tertullian
C. To be applied both grammatically and historically
D. Two degrees of the Analogy of Faith
1. Positive analogy – founded on clear teachings about which there is no doubt
2. General analogy – rests upon broad scope of Scripture, more by implication
E. Criteria for determining the degree of the Analogy of Faith
1. Number of passages presenting the same doctrine
2. Unanimity and correspondence in the passages
3. Clarity in the different passages
4. Distribution of the passages throughout Scripture
F. Rules for the application of the Analogy of Faith
1. Doctrines clearly supported cannot be contradicted by an obscure passage
2. A passage neither supported nor contradicted by the analogy of faith may be used as a positive foundation for a doctrine, though without the weight of a supported passage
3. Doctrines supported only by an obscure passage with no support from the Analogy of Faith, can only be accepted with great reserve
III. Historical narratives
A. Record events, are not didactic in nature
B. Should not be used a primary sources for doctrine
Comments
Should we pay attention to the inscriptions introducing most of the psalms to provide the occasion? Is it helpful to provide the historical context for each psalm? Would you preach Moses’ psalm differently if your text was from the Psalter than if it were from the historical narrative?
nathan on December 29, 2004 at 06:19 AM
-important notes here on historical context. When I get around to it, I am going to publish a book, titled, “I Haven’t Got a Clue,” in which each chapter focuses upon a text inexplicable for me. One chapter will be dedicated to Romans 12: 20, unless, of course, you can explain it for me. Some have attempted to understand it by supplying the custom of giving one’s guest a pot of coals to take home on his head to start his fire. I have studied the text in its context in Proverbs (precious little textual context in Proverbs for any couplet.) -And what about that statement of Jesus about the difficulty a rich man finds in his attempts to enter the kingdom of heaven? Is it helpful to us to know the names of the gates in the walls of Jerusalem to understand these words of Jesus? Should the church today know more about the cultural practice of “covenant”? suzerain treaties? animal sacrifice?
nathan on December 29, 2004 at 06:31 AM
Are the following lines from David, simple or complex? Do they shed light on other more difficult texts or must we look for other texts in scripture clearer to shed light upon them?
“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”
“Take not thy Holy Spirit from me.”
“Sing to the Lord a new song.”
“Kiss the Son lest he be angry.”
nathan on December 29, 2004 at 06:36 AM
On your first comment, yes we should certainly pay attention to the introductory inscriptions, and any other historical data we have at our disposal. Providing the historical context for each psalm to the extent possible is just part of good exegesis. We start by endeavoring to understand the author’s mind and heart in the context of his immediate circumstances and experiences, and then we may proceed from there to broader prophetic and/or didactic significance.
I don’t think my approach to preaching a psalm would be fundamentally different if it were part of a narrative text. In preaching a psalm from the Psalter, I would still try to give the historical context as much as possible, referring to corresponding narrative texts if available. So in general terms I would say that the difference between preaching the psalm in narrative and the psalm in the Songbook would be the more limited amount of historical data available to the expositor in the latter.
Being a great advocate of sequential line-upon-line expository preaching, if I were preaching through 1 Samuel, the week I spent on Hannah’s prayer in chapter 2 would necessarily be understood within the narrative flow, with history before and after. Whereas the psalms in the Songbook would usually be presented in more of a “one off” manner.
andrew on December 29, 2004 at 10:21 AM
