Philip asks the Ethiopian eunuch a hermeneutic question, “Do you understand what you are reading?” The eunuch’s response, “How can I … unless some man explain it to me” (Acts 8:31)?
John in 1 John 2:27 does not contradict the Ethiopian: “The anointing which you have received of him abides in you, and you need not that any man teach you.”
Wayne Grudem: "The clarity of Scripture means that the Bible is written in such a way that its teachings are able to be understood by all who will read it" (Systematic Theology, p. 108).
ANY BELIEVER CAN UNDERSTAND THE TEACHINGS OF GOD’S WORD
1. Through gifted Bible teachers in the local church (Romans 12:7).
2. Through Bible-preaching pastors in a local church (Ephesians 4:11).
3. Through proper hermeneutic principles.
Hermeneutics: The principles (science) by which the biblical text is interpreted.
Exegesis: The application (art) of the principles of hermeneutics.
FIVE PRINCIPLES OF HERMENEUTICS
First Principle: Each text must be interpreted in its context
We have to interpret in the immediate context. In the Olivet Discourse, Jesus taught that believers who "endure unto the end, shall be saved" (Matthew 24:13). Those who believe you can lose your salvation love to quote this verse out of context. Jesus is describing believers in the Tribulation Period who will face intense persecution from Antichrist. If they endure and are not martyred, they will be saved that is physically delivered from the Tribulation and enter into the Millennium in their natural bodies.
In addition to interpreting a text in the immediate context, we also need to interpret in the context of the book. John writes in 1 John 2:2 that Jesus is "the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." What does "the whole world" mean in the book of 1 John? It is used only one other time in 5:19 with reference to the extent of Satan's influence. What is the extent of Satan's influence according to 5:19? "the whole world." What is the extent of Jesus' propitiation? "The whole world."
Interpreting these verses in their context gives sensible meaning to them.
Second Principle: Each text has only one interpretation but many application
A. Multiple meanings
Loraine Boettner, allegorically interprets Isaiah 11:6: A fitting example of the wolf dwelling with the lamb is seen in the change that came over the vicious persecutor Saul of Tarsus, who was a wolf ravening and destroying, but who was so transformed by the Gospel of Christ that he became a lamb. After his conversion, he lost his hatred for the Christians and became instead their humble friend, confidant, defender” (Isa. 11:6) (The Meaning of the Millennium p. 90).
B. Single meaning
The normal sense of language demands that this prophecy will literally be fulfilled when the curse is lifted in the millennium and wild animals are domesticated.
Third Principle: Types are interpreted like prophecies
Types have been called “picture prophecies” because types are a kind of prophecy.
A. The excessive view.
C. I. Scofield in The Scofield Study Bible provides an example on page 89 about Exodus 15:25 where God tells Moses to cast a tree in the bitter waters of Marah which then became sweet: "The 'tree' is the cross (Gal. 3:13), which became sweet to Christ as the expression of the Father's will (John 18:11)."
B. The inferred type.
If the whole of the Tabernacle or Wilderness journey is typical then are the parts typical. Bernard Ramm wrote “If the whole (e.g., the Tabernacle, the Wilderness journey) is typical, then the parts are typical. It is up to the exegetical ability of the interpreter to determine additional types in the parts of these wholes” (Protestant Biblical Interpretation p. 228).
C. An innate type. (Is specifically designated in Scripture)
Roy Zuck: “Scripture must in some way indicate that an item is typical” (Basic Bible Interpretation p. 176). Dr. Jerry Hullinger gives a few examples:
The brazen serpent in Numbers 21 was a type because in the mind of God that was pointing forward to the death of Christ. The reason we know it was a type is because of Jesus’ words in John 3:14. (From Ezra to Gnostic Devotions: The Importance of Interpretive Method, p. 129).
Fourth Principle: Numbers and figures of speech are to be interpreted in the normal sense of language.
Roy Zuck (1991) asks this question, “Is figurative language the opposite of literal interpretation?” To which he answers, “Figurative language is not antithetical to literal interpretation; it is a part of it” (p. 147).
Zuck (1991) gives a helpful explanation and example: Generally, an expression is figurative when it is out of character with the subject discussed, or is contrary to fact, experience, or observation. If we hear a sports announcer say, “The Falcons beat the Lions,” we understand him to be referring to two football teams, and not to be suggesting that birds of prey are attacking literal lions (p. 146).
Even in our everyday modern conversation, figurative language is used and understood. Zuck (1991) provides the following guidelines for interpreting figurative language.
1. Always take a passage in its literal sense unless there is good reason for doing otherwise.
There is no reason why numbers in Revelation cannot be interpreted literally. There is no more hidden meaning in the 144,000 (12,000 from the 12 tribes) Jews who will endure the Tribulation in Revelation 14 than the armies of Israel who were numbered in the Old Testament (2 Samuel 24:9). In Revelation 21:12, the wall around the New Jerusalem has on it the names of the twelve tribes of children of Israel. If this is symbolic with no literal meaning, were the twelve tribes of Israel in the Old Testament also not literal tribes? On the twelve foundations of the New Jerusalem are the names of the twelve apostles. If this is only symbolism were the twelve apostles that Jesus chose only symbols? Of course, the number the preterists want to symbolize and eliminate is the literal 1000-year reign of Christ in the future on David’s throne. In his commentary on Revelation, Robert L. Thomas (1995) argues:
If the writer wanted a very large symbolic number, why did he not use 144,000 (7:1 ff.; 14:1ff.), 200,000.000 (9:16), “ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands” (5:11), or an incalculably large number (7:9)? The fact is that no number in Revelation is verifiably a symbolic number. On the other hand, nonsymbolic usage of numbers is the rule (p. 408).
2. The figurative sense is intended if the literal would involve an impossibility.
For example, “John wrote that Jesus held seven stars in His right hand” (Revelation 1:16). In 1:20, John gave the literal interpretation which is seven messages or pastors of the seven churches in Revelation 2, 3.
3. The figurative is intended if the literal meaning is absurd, as in trees clapping their hands (Isaiah 55:12).
In Revelation 12:1, the woman is clothed with the sun which is obviously absurd. The demons portrayed as locusts in Revelation 9:1-12 is another example.
4. Take the figurative sense if the literal would demand immoral action.
In John 6:53-58, Jesus told the unbelieving Jews that they had to drink His blood and eat His flesh to have eternal life. This is cannibalism if literally interpreted.
5. Note whether a figurative expression is followed by an explanatory literal statement.
Revelation 11:8 explains, “the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.” The figurative is made clear by an editorial comment. The woman in Revelation 17 is explained to be a city in 17:18.
6. Sometimes a figure is marked by a qualifying adjective.
An example is “Heavenly Father” (Matthew 6:14).
I am going to add to our list the guidelines Andy Woods (2005) in an excellent article, Dispensational Hermeneutics: A Matter of Genre, gives for interpreting figurative language in Revelation.
7. Another clue involves the words "like" (homoios) or "as" (hōs).
When John employs such language, he is indicating a correspondence between what he saw in the vision and what he was trying to describe. For example, Revelation 8:8 says, "And something like a great mountain burning with fire was thrown into the sea." The word "like" alerts the interpreter to the fact that John is simply using comparative language to describe what he saw and the mountain is not to be interpreted literally.
8. Another clue involves an identical correspondence in the Old Testament.
Because the leopard, lion, and bear in Revelation 13:2 are also used in Daniel 7 to depict nations, the interpreter is alerted to the fact that John is employing symbolic language. Thus, the leopard, lion, and bear also represent nations in Revelation 13 just as they did in Daniel 7.
Robert Thomas (2002) summarizes well our study of this genre: "Apocalyptic genre does not override or cancel normal rules of interpretation for the last book of the Bible .... The book is prophecy and should be interpreted literally as all other prophecy of Scripture should be" (p. 337).
Fifth Principle: Truth in Scripture must be interpreted in light of progressive revelation
You know Peter before Acts 10 could not eat Boganles' ham biscuits or even his mother's. Nor could he eat "endless shrimp" at Red Lobster nor Dave's BBQ. Why do we not circumcise all baby boys on the eighth day for spiritual reasons? Why do we not lobby for capital punishment for all church members guilty of running around on their mates?
In the Old Testament pork was forbidden to be eaten. The New Testament reversed that in Acts 10. God said to Peter, "Rise, Peter; kill and eat" all the country ham biscuits you want. There is no Bible diet that is more spiritual than another.
A. J. Jacobs gave what is now a well-known TED talk on My Year of Living the Bible in December 2007. He turned that speech into a book entitled: The Year of Living Biblically: One Man's Humble Quest to Follow the Bible as Literally as Possible. This book was on the NYT bestseller’s list for three months.
A. J. Jacobs, who is an agnostic, did this experiment for one year. Here is the reason for his experiment: “I'm concerned about the rise of religious fundamentalism, and people who say they take the Bible literally, which is, according to some polls, as high as 45 or 50 percent of America. So, I decided, what if you really did take the Bible literally? I decided to take it to its logical conclusion and take everything in the Bible literally, without picking and choosing” (A. J. Jacobs, The Year of Living Biblically: One Man's Humble Quest to Follow the Bible as Literally as Possible, 6).
Here is his first take away from one year of seeking to prove the Bible cannot be taken literally: “The first is, thou shalt not take the Bible literally. This became very, very clear, early on. Because if you do, then you end up acting like a crazy person, and stoning adulterers.”
God’s chosen people in the OT was the nation of Israel. When Jesus came and offered the kingdom and himself as king to the nation, Israel rejected him. In response, Jesus postponed the kingdom and set aside Israel temporarily. The church today is the people of God not the nation of Israel. While God commanded capital punishment for certain sins in the OT with the nation of Israel, God does not command the church to put to death its members for any sin. God takes sin just as seriously today as He did in the Old Testament. According to 1 Corinthians 5, the church does not stone adulterers in this age but rather the church disciplines them.
Progressive revelation also reveals that there are important distinctions in Scripture. One major distinction is that the nation of Israel was the people of God in the OT but the Church is the people of God today. Sins that were capital offenses in the OT with the nation are not capital offenses in the church because the church is not a nation. The same sins are still to be taken seriously.
Progressive revelation, according to Roy Zuck (1991) is the Biblical truth that "God progressively revealed more truths about many subjects" (p. 271).
FIVE PRINCIPLES OF HERMENEUTICS
Five principles will help you understand what you are reading and studying in God’s Word:
First Principle: Each text must be interpreted in its context
Second Principle: Each text has only one interpretation but many application
Third Principle: Types are interpreted like prophecies
Fourth Principle: Numbers and figures of speech are to be interpreted in the normal sense of language.
Fifth Principle: Truth in Scripture must be interpreted in light of progressive revelation