Featured Hermeneutics Taught in Seminaries

th1bill · Jun 10, 2016

Martin Marprelate said: ↑

Dr Peter Masters is pastor of the Metropolitan Tabernacle (Spurgeon's) in London.

A few years back he wrote a book on interpretation called Not Like Any Other Book (Wakeman Books. ISBN 870855-43-4).

In this book he claims that Seminaries today are teaching a methodology of hermeneutics which has arisen over the last 50 years, which older evangelicals opposed, and under which men like Spurgeon would have been unable to preach the way they did.

His claim is that there are six principles of interpretation which are being taught today and which are restricting the preaching of the word:

1. 'The Wholly-Human Bible.' The sole task of the expositor is to understand the literal sense consciously intended by the original human author to be fully understood by his contemporary hearers. There is no other meaning to a text.

2. 'The Super-Simplified Bible.' Every passage of Scripture has but a single sense or meaning, and no other.

3. 'The Blind Date Bible.' The interpreter must not bring to a passage and religious opinions, expectations or presuppositions.

4. 'The Fragmented Bible.' No biblical doctrine or other text may be allowed to throw light on a passage unless it was known to the original human author (so the New Testament must not be used to throw light on the O.T.

5. 'The Strictly-Scientific Bible.' The interpreter must never allegorize or spiritualize a passage for this is utterly reprehensible (I wonder how Matthew Henry would have got on with that!).

6. 'The Add-on Application Bible'. An application for today must be derived strictly from the human author's intended meaning.

I was put in mind of this when I was looking for a short message for my local branch of the Gideons. I came across the story of Eleazar the son of Dodo in 2 Sam. 23:9-10. I planned to speak about the necessity to make a stand for God and the Bible today when so many Christians are reluctant to do so, and that if we do so, they will be encouraged to join with us. I would also speak about the need to keep a firm grasp on our Bibles and Eleazar did on his sword. But when I looked at Dale Ralph Davis' commentary on 2 Samuel, he has virtually nothing to say about the Mighty Men. He was obviously reluctant to 'spiritualize.'

So what do you brothers think? Do seminaries today teach as Masters claims? If so. is that a good thing or a bad thing? Do you ever use Henry or Spurgeon as well as modern commentators and if so, do you notice the difference?

Cool
Click to expand...

I would never do well with any of this, regardless of their position on the scriptures. In the first place I am a Biblicist because I find issue with both of the major divisions. But my first and predominant rule for the subject of Hermeneutics is "No scripture, series of scriptures, or collection of scriptures can ever be clearly or correctly understood without the light of all scripture shining on it/them.

There are a couple of points that I have gone over with Pastors in the past that believing as I do I have, through the teaching of the Holy Spirit come to understand about the scriptures;

The scripture's context is one context from "In the beginning..." through the very last verse of Revelation 22.

Men, under the influence of God, penned the Word of God.

God is the Author of the Bible and it's commentaries that are included.

The Bible is the Jewish Version a.k.a. the Old Testament.

The New Testament is composed of twenty-seven God Authored Commentaries on the Bibble He Authored for our edification.

Revmitchell · Jun 10, 2016

Martin Marprelate said: ↑

His claim is that there are six principles of interpretation which are being taught today and which are restricting the preaching of the word:

1. 'The Wholly-Human Bible.' The sole task of the expositor is to understand the literal sense consciously intended by the original human author to be fully understood by his contemporary hearers. There is no other meaning to a text.

2. 'The Super-Simplified Bible.' Every passage of Scripture has but a single sense or meaning, and no other.

3. 'The Blind Date Bible.' The interpreter must not bring to a passage and religious opinions, expectations or presuppositions.

4. 'The Fragmented Bible.' No biblical doctrine or other text may be allowed to throw light on a passage unless it was known to the original human author (so the New Testament must not be used to throw light on the O.T.

5. 'The Strictly-Scientific Bible.' The interpreter must never allegorize or spiritualize a passage for this is utterly reprehensible (I wonder how Matthew Henry would have got on with that!).

6. 'The Add-on Application Bible'. An application for today must be derived strictly from the human author's intended meaning.
Click to expand...

Awww! The Bible is restricted to what it actually says instead of what we can make it say. Making scripture say what it never says is wholly human.

Featured Hermeneutics Taught in Seminaries

th1bill Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Revmitchell Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Useful Searches

Featured Hermeneutics Taught in Seminaries

th1bill Well-Known Member Site Supporter

Revmitchell Well-Known Member Site Supporter

th1bill Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Revmitchell Well-Known Member
Site Supporter