Standing on the Shoulders of Giants

What did Baconianism mean when applied to biblical interpretation? For Bacon, standing at the dawn of the scientific revolution, the main enemy had been Aristotelian philosophy. Thus he taught that science must start by clearing the decks—by liberating the mind from all metaphysical speculation, all received notions of truth, all the accumulated superstition of the ages. “With minds washed clean from opinions” (in his words)......

The method suffered from several serious weaknesses, which we need to grasp in order to understand how it continues to shape the way we read the Bible today. First, the very notion that Christians needed a “scientific” exegesis of Scripture represented a degree of cultural accommodation to the age. By embracing the most widely held scientific theory of their day—and even applying it to theology—evangelicals came close to losing the critical distance that Christians are called to have in every age. Moreover, the empiricist insistence that theology was a collection of “facts” led easily to a one-dimensional, flat-footed interpretation of Scripture.

Metaphorical, mystical, and symbolic meanings were downplayed in favor of the “plain” meaning of the text. And by treating Bible verses as isolated, discrete “facts,” the method often produced little more than proof-texting—pulling out individual verses and aligning them under a topical label, with little regard for literary or historical context, or for the larger organizing themes in Scripture.

Perhaps most serious, however, was the Baconian hostility to history—its rejection of the creeds and confessions that had been hammered out by the church over the course of centuries…… It means the church loses the wisdom of the luminous intellects that have appeared throughout church history—Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin. By adopting the Baconian method, many American evangelicals lost the intellectual riches of two millennia of theological reflection…… the idea that a single generation can reject wholesale all of Christian history and start over again is doomed to theological shallowness.

Old Books for New Perspectives

The very language and concepts in currency today—like Trinity or justification—were defined and developed over centuries of controversy and heresy fighting, and unless we know something of that history we don’t really know the meaning of the terms we are using,

Moreover, in our own age, with its keener sense of the historical context of knowledge, we recognize that it is unrealistic to think people are capable of approaching Scripture with minds swept clean, like blank slates…… They lose the critical distance afforded by checking their ideas against those of Christian scholars across a wide range of different cultures and historical periods. Instead of seeing farther by standing on the shoulders of giants, they are limited to what they are able to see from their own narrow perspective within a tiny slice of history.

That’s why C. S. Lewis urged Christians to read “old books,” not just contemporary ones. It is difficult not to be taken in by the prejudices of our own age, he wrote, unless we have access to another perspective—which is what old books provide. The great figures in church history are our brothers and sisters in the Lord, members of the Body of Christ extended across the ages, and we can learn much by honing our minds on the problems they wrestled with and the solutions they offered.

- Nancy R. Pearcey, Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity, 2004

Keeping the Bible in the Real World

Every biblical text is organically connected to the era of its writing. Whether looking back to the past, recording the present, or projecting into the future, every Bible passage or book is linguistically, historically, and culturally a product of its day.
 
Here is a hard-and-fast rule of interpreting any part of the Bible:
 

Never project present ideas onto ancient texts! Also, avoid superimposing later biblical ideas on earlier ones.

 
Remember, the time and culture of King David was a far cry from that of Abraham’s day, and Daniel’s epoch was a world away from King David’s. Not to mention the historical and cultural distance between Daniel and the apostle Paul! And beware when you hear it said, “Take the Bible literally.” What does that mean anyway? Literal is a slippery concept. Most often it winds up being what somebody thinks a biblical passage “literally” says “to them.” This approach is dangerous when we seek to interpret the Bible accurately.
 
The proper way to understand the Bible is authentically. As far as possible, this means seeing it in its original historical context. An authentic interpretation is one that respects an author’s language, culture, and history without superimposing elements that are foreign or anachronistic to the time of writing. While we may not be able to know every detail of an author’s historical setting, getting as much accurate information as possible will always enhance our understanding of the text. This is where a discipline like archaeology proves invaluable.
 
The worlds of the biblical characters were real worlds. Sights, sounds, and smells. Blood, guts, and grime. Cities, towns, and villages. Houses, temples, and palaces. Swords, spears, and arrows. Jars, bowls, and lamps. A significant portion of the Bible deals with the accoutrements and objects of material culture. Such things are accessible only by the trowels and brushes of archaeological excavations. While ancient history is pieced together mostly from written texts and inscriptions, the finer details and nuances of societies and cultures are best illuminated from the physical remains buried in the eroding sediments of past civilizations. Indeed, archaeology has a lot to say on the subject of biblical interpretation!
 

Two Extreme Views on Archaeology

Unfortunately, there are two extreme views on the subject of the Bible and archaeology.
 
On the far left are scholars who want the Bible eliminated from ancient Near East archaeology altogether. Archaeology should not be done with a biblical “agenda,” they say. They want archaeology for archaeology’s sake, without a biblical bias attached to it. For these so-called biblical minimalists, the Bible gets little or no voice in the pursuit of archaeology.
 
On the far right are those who think the exact opposite. They disallow archaeology a place in studying the Bible. Put more accurately, they reject any archaeological data that casts doubt on their own interpretation of the Bible. In their minds, because archaeology seems to contradict many of their traditional interpretations of the Bible, they would just as soon steer clear of both archaeology and ancient Near East scholarship. For them, archaeology has no right to speak to biblical interpretation.
 
 

- Steven Collins & Joseph M. Holden, The Harvest Handbook of Bible Lands: 

A Panoramic Survey of the History, Geography and Culture of the Scriptures, 2020.

 

Five Principles for Rightly Handling Scripture

God’s word is our most important and indisputable authority. This is not to say it is the only authority. R. C. Sproul notes that the Reformation notion of sola Scriptura does not mean the Bible is the only authority for the Christian, but that it is the only infallible authority—for the simple reason that God himself is infallible.

1. Scripture should speak to all of life
We should not see the Bible as a manual for how to escape this world, but rather as a book of wisdom for, in part, applying God’s revealed truth to all of life now. Scripture should be both the foundation and impetus for all our knowledge pursuits.
 
2. Scripture should define your paradigm
All of us tend to like the parts of Scripture that support our paradigms while we ignore or downplay the parts that threaten our status quo. But bad things happen when we start shaping Scripture around us rather than ourselves around Scripture. We must always be on guard against force-fitting Scripture into boxes of our liking.
 
3. Scripture is valuable as a whole, not just the parts
Context is everything in Bible study. The truth of any given verse becomes clearer when we see it in the larger context. We get the most out of the Bible when we read it in big chunks and grasp its grand narrative. The Bible is a cohesive narrative.
 
4. Scripture should spark worship and obedience
We must “be doers of the word, and not hearers only” (James 1:22). Our lives should be beautifully transformed by the Bible because we obey what it says. Part of this is acknowledging that the Bible should engage not only our minds, but also our hearts, leading us to love the Lord and trust him more and more. We read the Bible to know its author, to behold the beauty and glory of Christ.
 
5. Scripture doesn’t have to make complete sense
This doesn’t mean we turn off our brains, throw up our hands, and tolerate theological fuzziness. Rather, the difficulties of Scripture should invite us to even more rigorous and precise examination, going deeper and wider in our study as lifelong learners, not because we have to know everything God knows, but because the more immersed we are in Scripture, the nearer we feel to his sweet presence.
 

- Brett McCracken, The Wisdom Pyramid:

Feeding Your Soul in a Post-Truth World, 2021

 

The Curse of the Law

Some people—including some Christians—might think that interpreting the law too carefully is legalistic. We have enough trouble keeping the easy commandments; so what is the point of looking at God’s law in exhaustive detail? Isn’t that legalistic?
 
On the contrary, it is when we have a limited understanding of the law that we are most tempted to legalism, because then we think that we can keep it. If all God commanded us to do was to avoid murdering someone, we might be able to obey him. But we need to interpret the sixth commandment in the context of the whole Bible, with everything it says about murderous intentions. Since the law is spiritual, it condemns unrighteous anger as well as murder. Since it is positive as well as negative, it requires the active preservation of life. And since it represents a whole category of sins, we are forbidden to harm people in any way or to allow others to do so.
 
Is this a legalistic way of thinking? Not at all. This kind of Biblical reasoning rescues us from legalism by preventing us from lowering God’s standard. God’s standard is only maintained when we recognize what his righteousness truly requires. And when we know what God requires, in all its fullness, we also see the full extent of our sin. It is only a full understanding of God’s law that reveals our full need for the gospel. In the words of J. Gresham Machen, “A low view of law always brings legalism in religion; a high view of law makes a man a seeker after grace.”
 
Here we need to recall how to use God’s law. As we have seen, the Ten Commandments are a multi-use item. One of their primary purposes is to show us our sin, so that we will see our need for a Savior. The law points us to Jesus Christ, whom the Scriptures identify as “the end of the law” (Rom. 10:4), meaning that he is the goal or true purpose of the law. The more clearly and thoroughly we understand what God’s law requires, the more clearly and thoroughly we understand the grace that God has provided for us in Jesus Christ.

Christ and the Moral Law

What does the moral law, summarized in the Ten Commandments and rightly interpreted, reveal about the person and work of Jesus Christ? It reveals the full extent of his perfect obedience. The Bible assures us that although Jesus was “born under law” (Gal. 4:4), he “fulfill[ed] all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15) and “committed no sin” (1 Pet. 2:22). This was no small accomplishment! The law of God searches to the very soul. It is utterly exhaustive in the righteousness it requires. We are not capable of keeping even a single commandment with perfect integrity. But Jesus kept them all, down to the last detail, and he did it on our behalf. If we are joined to him by faith, then God regards us as if we had kept his whole law perfectly. Christ was crucified “in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us” (Rom. 8:4a). Therefore, the law shows us what perfect righteousness we have in Christ. To put this in more technical terms, when we know what the law requires, we can understand the doctrine of justification.
 
The moral law also reveals the full extent of Christ’s atonement. The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins. If we have a narrow understanding of God’s law, we might imagine that we did not have very many sins to die for. But a full interpretation of the Ten Commandments reveals the full extent of our sin, and thus it reveals the full extent of the atonement. Christ died for all our sins. He died for our sins against God and our sins against humanity. He died for our idolatry, profanity, and adultery. He died for our lying, stealing, and murder. He died for our sins both inside and out. He died for all the sins we commit in every category of God’s command. He even died for all the sins we committed by sharing in the sins of others. Christ died for all our sins, suffering the full penalty that our guilt deserved. The more thoroughly we understand the implications of God’s law, the more truly grateful we are for the grace of God in the atoning death of Jesus Christ. When we know what the law requires, we can understand the cross.
 
Finally, for those who have put their faith in Jesus Christ, the moral law reveals the full duty of the Christian life. This is another use of God’s law. It shows God’s redeemed people how to live for God’s glory. When we give the law its full interpretation, we gain a better grasp of God’s righteous standard in all its perfection, and thus we have a better idea of how to please him. To put this in theological terms, when we know what the law requires, we can understand the doctrine of sanctification. This is why we study God’s law: to understand our great need for Christ and his gospel and to learn how many ways we can glorify God for his grace.