Sproul Knowing Scripture

1. Auflage 2016
ISBN: 978-0-8308-9329-4
Verlag: InterVarsity Press
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: Adobe DRM (»Systemvoraussetzungen)

E-Book, Englisch, 153 Seiten

An Expanded Edition of the Commonsense Approach to Studying Scripture The Bible is the written Word of God, and it is treasured by many. But it is also an ancient book about people and cultures very different than us. Thus, while we know we should read it, many of us have a hard time understanding the Bible.In this expanded edition of Knowing Scripture, R. C. Sproul helps us dig out the meaning of Scripture for ourselves. The author says, 'The theme of this book is not how to read the Bible but how to study the Bible.' He presents in simple, basic terms a commonsense approach to studying Scripture and gives eleven practical guidelines for biblical interpretation and applying what we learn. With a minimum of technical jargon, Sproul tackles some of the knotty questions regarding differences of interpreting the Bible, including - discovering the meanings of biblical words - understanding Hebrew poetry, proverbs and parables - approaching historical and didactic passages - being careful with predictive prophecy - discerning how culture conditions the Bible - choosing and using Bible translations, commentaries, Bible software and other helps Now with a new preface, Knowing Scripture is a basic book for both beginning Bible readers and experienced students of Scripture.

R.C. Sproul (1939-2017) was founder Ligonier Ministries, an international Christian discipleship organization located near Orlando, Florida. He was also copastor of Saint Andrew's Chapel in Sanford, Florida, first president of Reformation Bible College, and executive editor of Tabletalk magazine. His radio program, Renewing Your Mind, is still broadcast daily on hundreds of radio stations around the world and can also be heard online.Sproul contributed dozens of articles to national evangelical publications, spoke at conferences, churches, and schools around the world, and wrote more than one hundred books, including The Holiness of God, Chosen by God, and Everyone's a Theologian. He also served as general editor of the Reformation Study Bible.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Sproul, R. C.

Leseproben

2

Personal Bible Study and Private Interpretation

Most homes in the Western world have a Bible. Researchers inform us that the average home in the United States has four. The Bible is the best-selling book of all time and continues to be the best-selling book every year. A 2008 Harris Interactive Poll reported that regardless of the demographic group the Bible is the all-time favorite book of American adults. Undoubtedly, many of these Bibles serve as decorations or as a convenient place to store photos and press flowers, handy also to display in a prominent place when the pastor is visiting the home. Because of the easy accessibility of Bibles, many of us have forgotten the awesome price that was paid for the privilege of possessing a Bible written in our own language that we can interpret for ourselves.

Martin Luther and Private Interpretation

Two of the great legacies of the Reformation were the principle of private interpretation and the translation of the Bible into the vernacular. The two principles go hand in hand and were accomplished only after great controversy and persecution. Scores of persons paid with their lives by being burned at the stake (particularly in England) for daring to translate the Bible into the vernacular. One of Luther’s greatest achievements was the translation of the Bible into German so that any literate person could read it.

Luther himself brought the issue of private interpretation of the Bible into sharp focus in the sixteenth century. Hidden beneath the famous response of the Reformer to the ecclesiastical and imperial authorities at the Diet of Worms (his trial for heresy) was the implicit principle of private interpretation.

When asked to recant of his writings, Luther replied, “Unless I am convinced by sacred Scripture or by evident reason, I cannot recant. For my conscience is held captive by the word of God and to act against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand, I can do no other, God help me.” Notice that Luther said “unless I am convinced . . .” In earlier debates, Luther had dared to presume to interpret Scripture contrary to interpretations rendered both by popes and by church councils. That he would be so presumptuous led to the repeated charge of arrogance by church officials. Luther did not take those charges lightly but agonized over them. Luther agreed that if his teachings could be shown to be in error by the Prophets and the Gospels, he would “recant any error, and . . . be the first in casting my writings into the fire.” He believed that he could be wrong but maintained that the pope and councils could also err. For him only one source of truth was free from error. He said, “The Scriptures never err.” Thus unless the leaders of the church could convince him of his error, he felt duty-bound to follow what his own conscience was convinced Scripture taught. With this controversy the principle of private interpretation was born and baptized with fire.

After Luther’s bold declaration and subsequent work of translating the Bible into German, the Roman Catholic Church did not roll over and play dead. The church mobilized its forces into a three-pronged counteroffensive known as the Counter Reformation. One of the sharpest prongs of the counterattack was the formulations against Protestantism made by the Council of Trent (1545-1563). Trent spoke to many of the issues raised by Luther and other Reformers. Among those issues was the issue of private interpretation. Trent said:

To check unbridled spirits it [the Council] decrees that no one, relying on his own judgment shall, in matters of faith and morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, distorting the Holy Scriptures in accordance with his own conceptions, presume to interpret them contrary to that sense which holy mother Church, to whom it belongs to judge of their true sense and interpretation, has held or holds, or even contrary to the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, even though such interpretations should never at any time be published.

Do you catch the flavor of this pronouncement? The statement is saying, among other things, that it is the responsibility of the teaching office of the Roman Catholic Church to expound and declare the meaning of the Scriptures. This is not to be a matter of private judgment or private opinion. This statement by Trent was clearly designed to speak to the Reformation principle of private interpretation.

If we examine the statement closely, however, we can see that it contains a very serious misunderstanding of the Reformed principle. Did the Reformers promote the notion of unbridledness? Does private interpretation mean that an individual has the right to interpret Scripture to suit him- or herself? May a person interpret Scripture in a whimsical, capricious manner with no restraint? Should the private individual take seriously the interpretations of others, such as those who specialize in teaching the Scriptures? The answers to these questions are obvious. The Reformers were also concerned with ways and means to check unbridled spirits. (That is one of the reasons they worked so hard to delineate sound principles of biblical interpretation as a check and balance to fanciful interpretation.) But the way in which they sought to check unbridled spirits was not to declare the teachings of the church or its leaders infallible.

Perhaps the most crucial term that appears in Trent’s declaration is the word distorting. Trent says that no one has the private right to distort the Scriptures. With that, the Reformers most heartily agreed. Private interpretation never meant that individuals have the right to distort the Scriptures. With the right of private interpretation comes the sober responsibility of accurate interpretation. Private interpretation gives license to interpret but not to distort.

When we look back to the Reformation period and see the persecutions of those who translated the Scriptures into the common tongue, we are horrified. What is often overlooked in such historical reflection, however, is that there were many well-meaning people involved in that action. Rome was convinced that if you put the Bible into the hands of unskilled laypeople and left them to interpret the Book, grotesque distortions would emerge and these would lead the sheep astray, perhaps into everlasting torment. Thus to protect the sheep from embarking on a course of ultimate self-destruction, the Church resorted to corporal punishment, even to the point of execution. (Note that some parts of the Protestant church also used corporal and capital punishment, though not over this particular issue.)

Luther was aware of the dangers of such a move but was convinced of the clarity of Scripture. Though the dangers of distortion were great, he thought that the benefit of exposing multitudes to the basically clear message of the gospel apart from the pope, church councils and church fathers would bring far more to ultimate salvation than to ultimate ruin. He was willing to take the risk to turn the valve that might open a “floodgate of iniquity.” Luther wrote:

We need not regret that the books of many fathers and councils have, by God’s grace, disappeared. If they had all remained in existence, no room would be left for anything but books; and yet all of them together would not have improved on what one finds in the Holy Scriptures.

And the Reformed Second Helvetic Confession (1566) says:

We do not despise the interpretations of the holy Greek and Latin fathers, nor reject their disputations and treatises as far as they agree with the Scriptures; but we do modestly dissent from them when they are found to set down thing differing from, or altogether contrary to, the Scriptures.

Private interpretation opened the Bible for laypeople, but it did not do away with the principle of the educated clergy. Going back to biblical days, the Reformers recognized that in Old and New Testament practice and teaching there was a significant place for the rabbi, the scribe and the ministry of teaching. That teachers should be skilled in the ancient languages, customs, history and literary analysis is still an important feature of the Christian church.

Luther’s famous doctrine of the “priesthood of all believers” has been frequently misunderstood. The doctrine simply maintains that every individual Christian has a role to perform and a function to maintain in the total ministry of the church. We are all called to be “Christ to our neighbor” in a certain sense. But that does not mean that the church has no overseers or teachers. Regarding this the Augsburg Confession, of which Luther approved, says, “It is taught among us that nobody should publicly teach or preach or administer the sacraments in the church without a regular call.” And the Second Helvetic Confession says, “God has always used his ministers for the gathering or erecting of a Church to himself, and for the governing and preservation of the same.” Thus for the Reformers the “priesthood of all believers” did not mean that there is no distinction between clergy and laity.

Many people have become disenchanted with the organized church in our present culture. Some have overreacted in the direction of ecclesiastical anarchy. Today, people of all generations cry, “I don’t have to go to anybody for a pastor; I don’t believe in an organized church or a structured government of the body of Christ.” In the hands of such people the principle of private interpretation could be a license for radical subjectivism.

Objectivity and...