Interpretive Principles
The following important principles of Biblical interpretation (hermeneutics) were published on Facebook by Elder Joseph Weyel. I added some thoughts regarding each of them for further consideration.
1. Context, Context, Context (Context is key).
The context of creation speaks of a God who created and has dominion over nature. Thus nature is a domain too small to accommodate all things which come to pass. God is supernatural and some things take place outside the domain of nature.
2. If the literal sense makes sense, seek no other sense.
This is true. To apply this correctly, it is important that one embrace the existence of supernatural events that arise from context in #1 above. In common practice, we may be inclined to think of supernatural references as metaphorical, but the bible repeatedly teaches and affirms literal supernatural events. State another way, "literal" can be unnecessarily confused with "natural." "The iron did swim" is literally true, but is is not a natural truth that arises from natural laws, but a supernatural truth that arises from the overruling of natural laws by God's sovereign power.
3. If two texts appear to be in conflict, at least one of them is being misunderstood or misapplied.
This is just incredibly important. Our Calvinist brethren often refer to the evident contradictions in their theology as "antinomies" but this is just a fancy name for a contradiction. It is possible to press beyond those contradictions to a logical understanding of the truth, provided one does not permit the cancerous error of "antinomy" to creep into one's theology.
4. Never make explicit that which in the scripture is, at best, implicit.
True enough. However, there are things in scripture that are implicit AND certain. The bible never explicitly states that the thief on the cross was ever regenerated yet based on the promise of his eventual residency in heaven we know that at some point he was. This is implicit, given that it is not explicitly stated, but it is also certain. So, we must guard against the wholesale downgrading of "implicit" to "uncertain" because not all implicit things are uncertain.
5. Recognize always that there are limits of human understanding and do not speculate beyond the clear teaching of the scripture.
This is a sharp tool that is often clumsily handled. The result can be more injurious than beneficial. As often as not, I've seen this observation invoked as a means of avoiding a logical argument that demonstrates the errors in someone's theology. The limits of human understanding could be used to undermine anything that anyone reasonably knows from any source. Indeed, who is the arbiter of where the "limit" of human understanding is set? This is a deep topic and I enjoy discussing it, but will stop there...
6. Guard against allowing a system (framework) of theology to give a text its meaning.
I agree. I also affirm that scripture IS a system and that it must be used as a framework to interpret the word of God. This is what is meant by “scripture interprets scripture.”
In response to these principles, Elder Michael Ivey added a few more for consideration with his commentary on each:
7. NEVER presume to know the definition of a word.
Plus, it is helpful to know if the same English word is used for more than one Greek or Hebrew word which have different meanings. Knowing this allows one to better understand which English word signification best conveys the writers meaning. The Oxford Universal English Dictionary on Historical Principle and Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language, 1828 Edition are the two English dictionaries I prefer.
8. Parables are a genre to themselves.
Although they seem allegorical, they are not allegories per se. Rather they are context-specific, made-up analogies which the author designed to characterize some tension that is context apparent and usually, either explicitly or by obvious inference, also includes the resolution of the tension. Also, when Jesus explains a parable, you have in his explanation 100% of its meaning and either explicitly or by obvious context-limited inference, its proper application going forward. For instance, Jesus explains the "kingdom" parables of sower and the seed, wheat and tares, etc. His explanations DO NOT include instructions about how to identify people who are not saved. From this, we are given to understand these parables are not correctly applied for any such purpose. Rather, these parables serve to reveal not everyone responds to the gospel the same and also, they supply reasons why people respond to the gospel differently. They affirm the kingdom will grow and spread here on earth despite people having varying degrees of proper response to the gospel. They identify the proper level of kingdom commitment disciples should have; and finally, how Jesus' return and his unerring judgment in the resurrection will ultimately resolve the tension of unsatisfactory responses to the gospel and inadequate kingdom participation here in time.
I found the topic interesting and profitable and I commend Elder Weyel for stirring up the spiritual mind and Elder Ivey for his willingness to contribute. We do well to think more about such matters and I’m thankful for those Elders who know and share such things.
- Elder Daniel Samons