 |  |
No.3.
pp. 229 - 232
We have considered some of the essential rules to be observed if we are to get a
correct interpretation of the Word of God. One of the most important is that we should
approach the Scriptures from the literal standpoint, making allowances for figures of
speech, symbols, and types, and avoiding the allegorical system of spiritualizing, which is
destructive of true understanding, we should note that this does not mean spiritual
application cannot be made. This can be done safely only when the primary, basic and
literal interpretation of the Bible has been settled. There is only one interpretation of a
passage of Scripture, but there may be a number of applications of that passage; these
are secondary to the interpretation and must be kept so. Roman Catholics find their
sacramentalism by allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament and its ritual. Christian
Science, Swedenborgianism, Theosophy and other cults can find their basis in the Bible
only by excessive spiritualizing and all this leads to hopeless contradiction. Why?
Because first account has not been given to the literal exposition of Scripture. To rest
one's theology on a secondary meaning of the Bible is not interpretation, but imagination,
and human opinion, and in such a procedure the real meaning of God's Word is bound to
be lost. The only certain way of obtaining a correct understanding is to anchor
interpretation to literal exposition in the sense that we have explained the word "literal".
Another reason for the importance of this method is that it acts as a check upon the
imagination of men; in other words, it is a principle of control, which enables human
opinion and error to be avoided. The failure of the spiritualizing or allegorical method of
exposition was made evident in the first centuries, when the early Christians sought to
take a stand against antichristian Gnosticism. The Gnostics claimed to have special
knowledge and revelation, and when they touched the N.T. Scriptures they excessively
spiritualized them. Unfortunately, the early Fathers, men of piety, and sincere as they
were, did the same with the Old Testament, and therefore had little effective answer to
such heresy, for the Gnostics had as much right to spiritualize the New Testament as the
Fathers did the Old. What was right for one part of Scripture was surely valid for
another. The fact is that with both, the method of approach was wrong.
Cultural Background.
We mean by this the total ways, manners, tools and institutions by which a people
carry on their existence. What a word or expression literally means can only be
understood by knowing the background of the people who used it. We are not concerned
with what a word means today in the twentieth century, but what it meant in century one,
when it was used. Language is always in a state of flux, losing meanings and gaining
others, and so we should be prepared to take the trouble to go into past history and
explore the background of Bible times.