Of course as we come to Scripture, we lDllllt acknowledge our own biases.and pre-

understandings, but we rome willing, and claiming the divine p1'Ol1liI;e, that the Spirit will

bring our presuppositions ever more in harmony with the biblical presuppositions (see John

16:13; 14:16, 17,26, etc.). In This paper an attempt is made to suIIlIIlllJi.ze the main contours

of the Scriptural presuppositions and principles of interpretation. as they emerge from a sWdy

of the biblical passages that speak: to this topic. ~

First. I present four foundational principles for Biblical i.nterpretation, which may be

comidered a.s bemleneulical "'first principles." These include:

A. By the Bible and the Bible Alone (Soia Scriprura)B. The Totality of Scripture (Tofa Scriptura}C. The Analogy of Scripture (Analogia Scriprurae)D. Spiritual Things Spiritually Discerned (SpiritaJia Spirataliter &aminotur)

Each of these principles has several corollaries or sub-categories, which are briefly

discussed. Then follows discussion of six spxific, practical, steps or guidelines for biblical

interpretation fhat arise out of Scripture. These include:

A. Text and TranslationB. Historical Context/Questions ofIntroductionC. Literary Conrext!AnalysisD. GrammaticaIlSymactical/SemJmti.c AnalysisE. Theological Context!AnalysisF. Contemporary Application

A concluding appendix contrasts the two major henneneulical methods employed in current

scholarly discussion, evaluatmg them llCCOrding to Biblical principles.

4Many of these points are adapted from, and build upon. the author's anicle, "BiblicalInterpretation," in the Handbook ofSeventh-day Adventisr Theology, Commentary Series, vol.12 (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2(00), 58-104.

4

105

way or escaping subjectivity. Modern scholars are increasingly more willing to recognize that

all come to the SCripture wilh their own preunderstandings, presuppositions, biases. 'Ibis

cannoc be remedied by approaching the text "scientifically" without a "faith bias." In fact,

siD::c the SCript1..lreS call for a response of faith, an atteInptcd "neutral" sta.nl.:e is already at

cross-currelts with the intent of Scripn.tre (cf. Matt 13:11-11; John 6:69; Acts 2:38).

Believing and Spirit-led interpreters also come with their own biases and

Preunderst.at:ids and are DOt imperviollS to error (cf. Acts 11:15). But fur Cbrist:ians who

believe the pl"OIni.ses of Scripture, it is possible to a8k God to transform their minds 50 that

they increllBiIlgly adopt and iocorpora.te the presuppositions of SCripture and 001 their own (see

Rom. 12: I). The Spirit of truth was promised to the disciples, and to us: '"When the Spirit of

trutIl comes, he will guide you into all the truth" (John 16:13). II must be noted that me "yoo"

ben: is plural; the Spirit directs interpreters togelbet' in me fellowship of the church body (ps

119:63; Acts 2:42; 4:32; Rom 12:4-8; 1 Corintbians 12; Eph 4:3-6), where they may be

benefited by exchange with and correction of other believers.

I:nIcrpreters must make adecision that lheir preunderstand..illgs will derive from and be

under eootrol or the Bible itself, and comtantly be open for modification and enlargement on

tbe basis of SCrJpture. They must consciously reject any external keys or systems to impose on

SCripture from without, whether it be naturalistic (closed system of cause and effect without

any room for the supernatmal), evolutionary (the developmental axiom), bumanistic (man the

final norm), or relativistic (rejection of absolutes). They must ask lhe Spirit who inspired the

Word to illuminate, shape, and modify their preunderstandings according to the Word, and to

guard lheir understandings to remain faithful to the Word.

. 25

115

the Hebrew original points to One who is God, who is also anointed by God, thus implying the

rdationship between the Father and the Son in me Godhead.

There are Il1lDlerous examples in Scripture where the NT writers are careful 10

represent faithfully the meaning of crucial words in the original OT passage. Note, e.g.,

Paul's usc of "!be just sbalilive by faith M (Rom 1: 17 citi08 Hab 2:4l1); Matthew's selection of

the LXXpanflenos "virgin" to best represent the Hebrew <almih of Isa 7:14 ("A virgin shall

conceive ... ," Matt 1:22, 23:11 NlV); and Christ's use of the word "gods" in John 10:34,

citing Ps 82:6.n

Numerous ocher examples may be cited, where !be NT quotation of an OT passage

involYCS the NT writer's recognition of the wider context of the OT citation. This larger OT

conleXt is frequently the key to understanding !he interpretation drawn by the NT writer. For

example. C. H, Dodd has shown how Peter aJludes to the larger context of Jcel2 in his

Penrecost sermon, and again, bow that Matthew's interpretation of Has 11:1 in Matt 2: 15 is

:DOt taking me OT passage out of context, but rather seeing it in the larger COIlleXt of the

eschatologicallMessiank New Exodus motif in Hosea and the other eighlh-cenbJry prophets. 13

The grammatical-syntactical and sematUk:-eoncextualllIlalysis often becomes more

involved for us today than fur tbQse whose native tongue was the living biblical

30See Moody, pp. 205-208.

J1See Archer, Encycltpedin. DJBible Difficulties, pp. 266-268.

32See ibid, pp. 373, 374.

JJDodd, According to the Scriptures, pp. 59,60; ct. Kaiser, 1'h£ Uses o/the OUITestament in the. New, pp. 43-53.

35

118

NT wrirers simply announce the antitypical fulfillment of what had already been verbally

indicated by the OT prophets.

The NT writers do DOt give an exhaustive list of OT types, but show the bcrm.eIM:Utical

procedure, controUed by the or indicators, of ideotifyiog biblical types. Furthermore, the NT

WItten provide a theological (salvation-historical) substrueWre for interpreting me

escbatological fulfdlmen1 of OT rypes. Based upon a clear theological W¥1ersraodiog of the

theocratic kingdom of Israel and the kingdom prophecies within the context of covenant

blessings and curses, the NT reveals a three-stage fulfillment. oftbe OT types and kingdom

propbecies-iJChrist, in tbe church, and in \:he apocalyptic wind-up of salvation history_ Each

8lAge has a different modalily of fulfillment based upon the namre of Christ's presence and

reign..llI Thus the NT writers have worlced oot a sound hermeneutic for interpreting tbe types

and kingdom prophecies of the OT, built upon solid collfrols arising from the OT scripmres.

The deeper theological meaning of SCripture also involves the interpretation of

apocalyptic prophecy. There are four major schools of interpretation for biblical apocalyptic

literature. The consistent view of the early church and all the Reformers was historicist, which

recognized that the visions of Daniel and John span the entire period of history from the

prophet's day till the end of time and beyond. A second major view, the pretn'iSl, arising in

Ihe time of the Catholic ColJ11tef-Refonnation (traceable to the Jesuit scholar AlcazM, and now

held by most mainline Protestants), insists that the apocalyptic prophecies focused mainly on

the past (especially the time of Antioctlus Epiphanes for Daniel and the Roman emperors for

»see ibid, pp. 106-108, 129, 130, and Hans K. LaRondelle, The Israel ofGod illProphecy: Principles ofProphetic Inlerpmaz;on, AJXlrews University Monographs, Srudies inReligion, vol. 13 (Berrien Springs: Andrews University Press, 1983).

38