The Historical Development of Biblical Hermeneutics

1. Introduction

Hermeneutics is a vital part of what the Christian faith is all about and therefore it is necessary for us to thoroughly understand the science and art of interpretation. hermeneutics is basic to Christian theology and the life and work and mission of the church.

1.1 The word hermeneutics is derived from the Greek word hermeneutics, meaning interpreter. The Greek word hermeneutics is in turn derived from Hermes (called Mercury by the Romans) who, in Greek mythology, was the messenger of the gods and patron of eloquence. Thus, at the outset, we see that hermeneutics is concerned with divine truth and with making that truth clear and precise so that it can be understood. Therefore, hermeneutics may be defined as the science and art of, interpretation, especially of ancient writings which are held to contain divine truth.

1.2 In the ancient Greek world it was believed that men of ancient times stood nearer to the source of truth than those living in a later age. Therefore, the writings handed down from those men of old were considered to be worthy of special veneration and careful explanation. According to the view of the ancient Greeks, in the golden age near the beginning of the world-cycle men stood nearer to the gods and were thus in a position to receive and hand down the pure truth. However it was vitally important that their words be correctly interpreted. Hence the discipline of hermeneutics had its origin.

1.3 The early Christian church, being influenced by Greek “thought and culture, naturally to do over this assumption. It fit in well with the doctrine of the faith once delivered to the mantes" the sacred history written down "in Scripture by the "prophets and the apostles who stood so near to God. Indeed, one of the tests of canonicity applied to the biblical writings was that of nearness to God or to Jesus on the part of the author of the book in question. Therefore very important to the early Christians to discover and apply the correct principles for the interpretation of Scripture, and hermeneutics thus became an important part of the study of Christian theology.

1.4 There were, among the early Christians, numerous ways of interpreting Scripture among them being the literal, the allegorical, the analogical, and the anagogical (or the spiritual, the mystical). Each of these various schools of interpretation had to be carefully assessed and considered according to the rules of interpretation being employed This state of affairs continued in the church at large until the Enlightenment in the eighteenth century, and still prevails among conservative Protestant circles up until the present time.

1.5 In a technical sense, that, Hermeneutics as applied to Scripture can be defined as the investigation and determination of the rules and principles which guide the interpretation of Scripture. Hermeneutics is the theory or methodology of scripture interpretation.

1.6 Hermeneutics is to be distinguished from textual criticize and exegesis, although it most certainly is closely related to these disciplines. Textual criticism seeks to determine the actual text ~ its origins, authenticity, reliability and accuracy. Exegesis is the actual process of interpretation, as when a pastor in preparing sermon, uses the Hebrew or Greek text in determining the meaning of the scriptural passage in question. hermeneutics is the theo of interpretation the presuppositions, theological and otherwise which determine the way in which one interprets the passage Obviously, exegesis rests upon the foundation of textual criticism for one must have the most accurate and reliable text possible in order to exegete its meaning. It is equally obvious that exegesi rests upon the foundation c\f hermeneutics, for one’s theological position fundamentalist, conservative, neo”=orthodox or liberal will color one’s exegesis. It is, however, not so obvious the textual criticism also rests upon the foundation of hermeneutic for one’ s hermeneutical principles or methodology can determine how one approaches the task of textual criticism. ‘ The conservatives, who are already committed to the historic resurrection of Jesus, are careful to reject any textual critics which may cast doubt upon the reliability of the resurrection accounts. .The liberals, on the other hand, who are often committee to a form of naturism which denies the possibility of the history‘ resurrection of Jesus, will sometimes interpret such texts as myth logical or scientifically unreliable. Thus we see that hermeneutic is basic to any understanding of Scripture 'which seeks to serious understand the message of the scriptural writers in the light our situation today?).

1.7 Traditionally hermeneutics has been divided into two categories--general hermeneutics and Special hermeneutics. General hermeneutics is concerned with generalities such as context, language, history, and culture. Special hermeneutics deal with... specifics such as figures of speech, symbols, poetry, prophecy, typology, doctrinal teachings and various literary forms. it is obvious that the context and culture in which Paul lived is quite different from that of twentieth century Europe. This can be clearly seen when we consider Paul’s views on women. When we consider that Jesus spoke Aramaic, the New Testament was written in Greek, and today we read it in Taiwanese, Kuoyd, or English, we can appreciate the differences in language. These are are 8 of general hermeneutics, and they are extremely important in coming to a meaningful interpretation of Scripture. We can see the importance of special hermeneutics when we consider that the Psalms are poetry,‘Exodus is history, and when Jesus speaks ofteafing down the temple and rebuilding it in three days he is using a figure of speech. Therefore, this knowledge will mean that passages from the Psalms, Exodus, or from Jesus’ words on the destruction and rebuilding of the temple will be interpreted differently.

THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS

Any comprehensive study of hermeneutics must necessarily began with a survey of the historical development of biblical hermeneutics. Such a survey gives us an overall view of how hermeneutics has developed within the church and how the church’s interpretation of Scripture has changed down through the ages.

2. The Jewish Period (BC 457-AD 550)

2.1. One of the earliest interpreters of Scripture in post. exilic Judaism was Ezra a scribe whose task it was to teach the law of Moses to the people. Instruction, in order to be carried out properly, demands interpretation and explanation. Ezra was aided by a group of men, and together they attempted to deal, with the bilingual situation of the times. The text was in Hebrew and the common people spoke Aramaic so the interpreter iirst had to translate from Hebrew into Aramaic and then give an oral explanation. It was here that the Targums--the Aramic explanations of the Hebrew text-had their beginnings, (Scripture was interpreted within the context of the oppression of the Jewish people and this oppression was seen as God’s judgement upon them for their sinfulness.

2.3.1 Another early Jewish group was the Qumran Community, a kind of monastic group which was separated from the mainstream of the Jewish community. This group was responsible for the writing of the famed Dead Sea Scrolls. In their interpretation of the biblical texts they frequently did not refer to the context but made their own intepretations based upon (1) the Qumran Community itself; (2) other groups diii'erent from Qumran but in the same contemporary setting; and (3) eschatology. Thus, their interpretation of Scripture often tells us more today about the Qumran Community-their theology, community life, and religious practices-than about the Scriptures themselves and the context in which the Scriptures were written.

2.2 From the Maccabean times tolthe end of the Herodian age (BC 168-AD 10) Jewish biblical interpretation was charao terized by a series of debates between two rabbis,,each of whom had their respective followers. These two rabbis came to be known as ‘ghe pairs ’ and they kept alive the crucial differences in interpretation as well as maintaining the essentials of Judaism. Two schools, those of Hillel and Shammai climaxed this kind of interpretive activity. Shammai interpreted with strict rigidity while . Hillel emphasized the qualifying factors of surrounding circumstances. Hillel classified the topical material into six orders and then" applied seven exegetical rules. These rules were:

(1) ‘light and heavy ’ which signified movement from the less to the greater.

(2) ‘ equal decision ’ which meant discernment of analogies and comparisons.

(3) deducing the general implications from .‘one passage.

(4) deducing general implications from more than one passage.

(5) applying rules 3 and 4 to a more precise statement of the general by reference to the particular, and .vice versa.

(6) the use of one passage to interpret another.

(7) the use of the whole context to elucidate a verse or a ' passage,

These rules were significant for biblical interpretation in that they stressed logical procedures and forced” the interpreter to carefully observe what was actually written in the text. Unfortunately, some of the rabbis looked for ‘hidden meanings ’ in the texts and thus often confused the task of interpretation instead of clarifying it.

2.3 I From about AD 10 to 550 a great quantity of literature was being produced by Jewish interpreters who were not only interpreting the biblical texts but were also interpreting the interpretations ! Indeed, there were instances of interpretations of ' interpretations of interpretations of interpretations. Obviously, . these Jewish scholars were interested in not only what the Scriptures had to say, but even more so in what the interpreters had to say. During this period of history the Jews moved from a primarily oral religious tradition to a Written religious tradition, and almost immediately two literary forms arose : the midmsh or midrashim which were running commentaries on the Old Testament; and the mishna Where the biblical material was discussed and interpreted in a topical arrangement (eg. laWs on agriculture, festivals, Women and marriage laws, injuries and civil laws, holy things and the temple, and clean things). The mldrashim and the mix/mg both have contents classilied either as llalakah or flaggadah‘ Halakah referred to the legal material in Scripture while Haggadah el‘erred to the non-legal material such as history, prOphecy, and personal experiences of the psalmists. The Haggadah tended to be devotional, sermonic, and practical in nature. It is important to note that the interpretative emphasis is upon what God demand‘ and how men should respond to God’s demands. There is no discussion of who God is as something or someone separate from his demands and the proper response of men to him. At the same time there developed a mystiCiI attitude toward the language itself so that every letter was seen to have some deep hidden mystical meaning. Needless to say, such interpretation came to be all but meaningless. In about 450 the Palestinian Talmud appeareq with the Babylonian Talmud appearing about 500-550. The two talmuds were interpretations of the interpretations of '_ about 150 authorities on Scripture. Much of the material in the two talmuds has proven to be useful in the interpretation of the New Testament. Two groups of interpreters also arose; the Tannaz'm (teachers) who composed the mishna and were active from about 10-220; and the Amoraim (speakers, interpreters) who interpreted the interpretations of the Tannaim and who were active from about 220--SOO. In all of this interpretative work a great deal of literature was produced, little was done to bring about a unifying principle of interpretation, and all too often there was a failure to begin with the actual historical context of the biblical passages. Thus there was often a lapse into mystical ‘ hidden meanings’ and a highly subjective interpretation of the meaning of the text.

2.4 Jews scattered throughout the Mediterranean region they maintained their own ethnic and religious heritage. In spite of this, however, they began to speak the language of the civilized world of the time-Greek-and soon the need arose for a Greek translation of the Old Testament. This was accomplished between BC 250-150 and has come to be known as the Septuagint (LXX). In Alexandria the Jews grew numerically, religiously, and culturally and it was here that, under the influence of Greek thought, the allegorical method of biblical interpretation was developed by the Jewish community; allegorical method interprets the text apart from its grammatical meaning. What the original writer was trying to say is not emphasized. nstead the emphasis is placed upon what the interpreter wants the text to say. The Jews used the allegorical method as a means of defending their faith and by the iirst century AD this method was used almost exclusively by Hellenistic Judaism. An example of allegory is cited by Mickelsen: ‘ ,The dietary laws which made the Gentiles ridicule the Jews really taught various kinds of discrimination necessary to obtain virtue. Whether animals chew or do not chew the cud really points to the fact that ‘ the act or chewing the cud is nothing else than the reminiscence of life and existence ’ (Interpreting the Bible, pp. 28-29). Philo made allegory his main method of interpretation. He was aware of the literal meaning of the Pentateuch and he held, to a theory of biblical interpretation that was close to the dictation theory, but he taught that literal meanings were less important ' than the ideas he accepted from such philosophical schools as Stoicism and Neo-Platonism. Already at this early date, we ' can see how philosophy has provided a basic framework for hermeneutics. Philo interacts with ideas outside of Judaism (especially Greek philosophy) and he maintains his allegiance to the main beliefs and practices of the Jewish faith, but the influence of his exegetical method has far exceeded the influence of his philosophical and theological methods. As a result the allegorical method of interpretation became a permanent feature of Alexandrian thought.

3. The Patristic, Period (AD 95490)

3.1. Mickelsen describes the Patristic Period in the following words: During this period the canon of the New Testament was established, the orthodox View of the deity and humanity of Christ was delineated, as well as the relationship of the Spirit to the Father and the Son. In all of these theological discussions the role of exegetical study cannot be minimized, although the Greek and Latin fathers employed philosophical _ categories and used abstract nomenclature, they did make a careful and extensive interpretation of the New Testament as the basis of key theological formulations. Nevertheless, although there are examples of careful exegetical study on major questions, allegorizing, itself continued to grow unit had a firm hold on biblical studies that could not be broken for one thousand years.

The Patristic Period was an important period for the chum}l theologically, for it was during this time that early creeds Were adopted, the canonicity of Scripture was discussed, and many of the great doctrinal controversies were settled so that the church could now distinguish between orthodoxy and heresy, It was a formative period for the still young Christian church as it struggled to move its Jewish roots into a largely Greek and Roman culture.

3.1.1 During the second century there were a number of well. known figures in the church who have left their mark on the field of biblical hermeneutics. Ignatius’ interpretation was Christo-centric with the basic emphasis being on faithfulness to Jesus Christ. Marcion based his hermeneutic on the theological error that he did not accept the Old Testament nor any of the Gospels except Luke. Even here he eliminated all that he considered to be Jewish interpolations or what he thought were alien Jewish ideas. Thus he did not accept the Old Testament view . of God as being the same God and Father of Jesus Christ found in the New Testament. Justin Martyr used the Old Testament extensively but he was so concerned with what the Old Testament says about Christ (in terms of prophecy) that he failed to be aware of what the prophets were saying to their contemporaries. Irenaeus, who ‘lived in both the East and the West, sought to maintain ‘ correct ’ interpretation of Scripture and his standard consisted ‘of what was taught in the churches. This is highly significant, we have the beginnings of the concept of the church as the authoritative interpreter. At the same time Irenaeus had a sound historical perspective and he held that the Old Testament law was important to the history of the Jewish people.

3.1.2 The city of Alexandria had become a center of culture and intellectual ferment, and living in the city were a group of Christians who were attempting to make the Christian faith meaningful to the milieu of the city. This in and of itself was significant, for many Christians looked upon cities as evil and there was a tendency to idealize the rural life. This group of Alexandrian Christians included such creative thinkers as Pantaenus (the) first teacher of the ‘ school’ of Alexandria), Clement of Alexandria (155-215), and Origen (185-254). Of t ese three, Origen made the greatest impact on biblical studies and hermeneutics. He was forced to leave Alexandria and then went to Caesarea in Palestine where he founded a flourishing school. Origen used allegory as his basic interpretative method. However, it is well to remember that, in spite of this Criticism, he made great advances in textual criticism, biblical studies in general, apologetics, and human learning and knowledge as a Whole. In his View there was a threefold sense of understanding Scripture, body (= the literal, outward, external events), soul (= man 5 personal relationships and experiences with his fellow men), and the spirit (= man’s relationship to God and God’s relationship to himself, his world, _ and to mankind). An example of this kind of interpretation is the story of Rebecca at the well drawing water for the servant of Abraham and his cattle. This means, in Origen’s view, that we must come to the wells of Scripture in order to meet Christ. The problem with this kind of hermeneutic is that it communicates what the interpreter is thinking but it does not necessarily communicate the message of the biblical writer. The contextual meaning of the text is ignored and we are left only with the interpreter-’5 assertions. This allegorical method is especially dangerous in that the assertions in and of themselves might be good but at the same time they do not do justice to the biblical text and to the meaning which the biblical writer intended.

3.1.3 The city of Antioch was also the site of an important school of Christian thought which arose and included a number of important scholars: Theophilus of Antioch (lbw-188), Diodorus of Tarsus (d. 393), Theodor of Mopsuestia (350-428), Chrysostom (3 54-407), and Theodoret (386-458). All of these men emphasized historical interpretation and they also made use of typology. They also believed that the literal meaning did not exclude the use of ‘ metaphor, hence, theirs was not a ‘ wooden ’ rigid literalism. To them the term ‘literal’ meant ‘the customarily acknowledged meaning of an expression in its particular context’). However, due to the theological; controversies of the timew-especially the Nestorian controversy-a. and the split of the church into the Eastern Church (Greek) and the Western Church (Latin), the Antioch School lost influence and the Alexandrian School. with its allegorical method of interpretation gained influence until allegorizing became the common and accepted method of interpreting Scripture.

3.1.4 Jerome (347-419) is known today as the translator of the Bible into Latin, but he was also a renowned interpreter of Scripture as well. 1 Early in his ministry he admired the allegorical method but then later he rejected 'it. However : he was unable to completely give up allegorizing and still held to the View that a text had ‘ multiple senses ’ and whole ‘ forests of spiritual meanings ’. ,Augustine (354-430) was a great scholar whose philosophy has influenced the church perhaps more than any other person. He was an incisive theologian and a clear thinker, yet he resorted to allegorizing. This was due in part . to his Manichaean background, for allegorizing helped him to be able to accept-the Christian faith. He had no knowledge of Hebrew and very little knowledge of Greek. He did not trust Jerome’s Vulgate Bible and so he did most of his work in old Latin. An example of his allegorical interpretation: Psalm 3 :5 speaks of lying down, sleeping, and awakening or rising up again. According to Augustine’s interpretation, the psalmist is really referring to the death and. resurrection of Christ. Needless to say, Augustine’s biblical studies do not match the greatness of his philosophical and theological works}

4. The Period of the Middle Ages (600-4340)

4.1 The period of the Middle Ages is the period of the rise .of monasticism and the growth and development of the great monastic orders of the church, the founding of universities, the growth of scholasticism and Christian philosophy, the great medieval synthesis between religions and culture, the period of Gregorian chant, and the creation of the so-called Christian culture of Europe. It was a period of history when the church in Europe ruled supreme, and when the great towering cathedrals were built as monuments of the people’s love for God and the church. Church tradition ruled supreme and the biblical writings and the writings of the church fathers were used to support the claims of the church to authority and power. All intellectual thought was controlled by philosophical theology and theological philosophy, and inferences from basic. ideas already accepted were more important than examining whether or not these ideas had any biblical Validity. This seriod of great biblical scholarship and creativity in the area of herme-f 'cs. At the same time, however, it must be remembered that the monks, through their patient copying of the Scriptures page by page, kept the flame of learning alive during the periods of the terrible plagues, and that all of this took place before the invention of the movable ’ type and the translation of the Bible into the language of the common people. During the Middle Ages the Bible was translated only into the language tie eaurch and of the scholars-Latm. The common people could not understand Latin and so mvillage usually had only one large Bible which was chained to the lectern in a poorly lit, cold, draftyihggch. Most of the people were poor] educates armers Whose only means of under-v . standing the message of Scripture was through the dramatic and colorful liturgy of the mass. Therefore, there were cultural ”WI-Wm “the mass liturgy, confession s speculative philosophy, and church tradition.

4.1.1 This does not mean, however, that there was no biblical scholarship during the Middle Ages, for there were interpreters of Scripture who saw a number of senses or meanings in Scripture. Revelation was not only expressed in Scripture, but it was also hidden in Scripture. Sixteenth century poetry expresses this well as the following rough translation and paraphrase shows : The letter shows us what God and our fathers did ; The allegory shows us where our faith is bid; The moral meaning gives us rules of daily life 1 The anagogy shows us where We end our strife.

Thus interpretation could be literal, allegorical, moral, or .anagogical. The literal is the plain, evident meaning; the more“ sense tells men what to do ; the allegorical sets forth what they are to believe; and the anagogical focuses on what Christians are r0 hope for. Thus the name ‘ Jerusalem ’ in a given text could haw, four senses or meanings; literally it refers to the literal city of Jerusalem in Palestine ; allegorically it could mean the church’s morally (tropologically) it would refer to the human soul; and analogically it refers to the heavenly city. It was not always necessary to apply all four of these senses or meanings; sometimes two or three were sufficient for a particular passage. The difficulty here is obvious-this is really a magical approach to language, for it removes all certainty of meaning. Indeed, it can result in impossible contradictions as when ‘ Jerusalem ’ is specifically ,used to refer to the literal city in Palestine. There is no way it can,-in that same context, refer to the soul, to the heavenly city, . or to the church. In such a situation this particular interpretation of Scripture actually does violence to the text' and obscures the meaning of the text rather thanclarifying it. Surely this is not the intention of biblical hermeneutics.

4.1.2 ' From 600 until 1200 allegory was used almost exclusively by medieval theologians. Numerous collections of allegorical interpretations were written and circulated, and books such as the ‘ Song of Solomon were especially popular. Often the writers seemed to .take special delight in seeing how many meanings a particular "word Could Shave. Mickelsen cites the following example: ‘ The word“ a” could mean a gathering of water, Scripture, the present age, the human heart, the active life, heathen, . or baptism’ (Interpreting the Bible, p. 36). Here seven meanings are givenfor just one word. It is‘.obvious that to determine the meaning of aword on the basis of a list such as this instead of on the basis of the context can do nothing but lead the reader far away from the actual meaning of the text. Fortunately, toward the end of the Middle Ages the use of allegory declined even though it was still extensively used in some quarters.

4. 1. 3 During the Middle Ages there were a number of exegetical anthologies from the church fathers in circulation Men such as Augustine, Jerome, Ambrose, Bede, and Isidore of Seville were cited. The biblical text itself was printed by hand and comments were written in the margins and between the lines of the text. These Citations were not randomly selected but were chosen to reach a conclusion based upon all the opinions cited. These comments written into the margins and between the lines 'of the text were known as Glossa Ordinaria, and were to a large extent the sum total of creative biblical study during the Middle Ages.

4.1.4 St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) was without doubt the most influential theologian and philosopher of the Middle Ages, and indeed, one of the greatest systematic thinkers that the church has ever produced. ‘He had a tremendous grasp of Scripture and the story is told that he had memorized the entire Latin Bible. He believed that the liter,_a..l___sense_o_£_Scripture was the basis 0 . logical reasoning arid this was a great step forward from the alle3W time. However, he was unable to totally. break away from the multiple sense meaning View of Scripture as the following quote from his Summa .Theologica shows :

God is the Author of Holy Scripture. He has given a mean-r ing not only to the words but to the things they signify, so that the things signified in turn signify something else Primarily, words signify things, which IS the historical sense; secondarily, the things signify other things, and we get the spiritual sense. The latter is of three sorts. The Old Law is allegorically interpreted in the New Law, but the inter-é pretation of matters affecting Christ and our obligation is tropologz’cal, and that which deals with the eternal glory is the anagogz’cal or celestial sense. The literal sense is that which the author intends, but God being the Author, we may expect to find in Scripture a wealth of meaning. The difficulty which Aquinas faced, and which we still face today, is the role and function of figurative language mhow may . it be recognized and what does it mean ‘2 Aquinas, however made a start in the right direction. ' ’

Nicholas of Lyra (1279-1340) lived‘ between the times’ of the Middle Ages and the Reformation. and thus stands asa kind. of bridge between. the two periods. Like those of the Middle Ages he accepted the practice of the fourfold multiple sense of Scripture, but he was also influenced by rabbinic studies and thus stressed the importance of the literal sense of Scripture He was critical of the Vulgate because it was not always true a; the Hebrew text, and he often took issue with many of the allegorical interpretations of the period. Nicholas’ system of biblical interpretation prevailed at the University of Erfurt where Marti;1 Luther studied, and there is no doubt that Luther was greatly influenced by him and his method of interpretation. Thus, as the, Middle Ages began to draw to a close, the seeds were planted for a new direction in biblical studies and hermeneutics.

5. THE REFORMATION PERIOD 1483-1564

5.1 The Reformation was one of the greatest social, political, and religious upheavals which the western World-«and perhaps the entire World-«has ever known. During the Reformation the Bible, among Protestants at least, came to be recognized as the supreme and sole authority for faith and practice. For the Protestants, no assertion of the hope or teaching of a church council was considered valid unless it was solidly based upon the Scriptures. The concept of sola scriptura became the battery of the Reformation and this emphasis served to advance both the methodology of interpretation and the actual practice of interpretation. The two great theological systems of Luthe1 and Calvin, which have influenced the church ever since, were based upon Scripture as the authority rather than the church and tradition as authority. In a different way this was also true of the Anabaptists. It should be noted, however, that the church and tradition did play an important role in the Protestant View of Scripture, for' sola scriptura in and of itself is an impossibility; what was signihcant and new was that the major emphasis was placed upon Scripture. '

5.2.  It is important to keep in mind that the Reformation was part of a great change that was taking place in Europe following the Middle Ages-“perhaps the, greatest and most significant change in the history of western civilization. There were basically ‘ three parts to this period : the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment, and this period stretched out over almost 500 years.” It should be pointed out that one of great differences between Asia and Europe is that Asia has never gone through these great changes which Western European civilization went through. Briefly, these changes can be summarized as follows:

The Renaissance (14th-16th centuries): a period between the Middle Ages and the modern period when there was a revival of learning, a renewed interest in the arts and the study of ancient writings, the beginnings of modern science, the move from an agriculturally based economy to a commerce oriented economy with the rise of modern cities, the exploration of other parts of the world (cg. America, Asia, etc.). and a return to the classical influences of Greek philosophy, It was a period when the foundations were laid for the Reformation and -when humanist studies became more important than the church-controlled theological and philosophical studies.

The Reformation (16th century): a period building upon the humanistic studies and inventions of the Renaissance when the religious, political, and social structures of the Middle Ages were ' successfully challenged. The Feudal social system fell, the centralized political authority of Rome came to an end, the democratization of the Church began with Protestantism, the common man and his opinions became important, the economic hold of the church and the feudal lords was broken, and the power base shifted more and more to smaller and smaller religious, social, and political units; It is highly significant to note the invention of the printing press which made it possible for everyone to have-a Bible of their own ; the translation of the Bible into the vernacular so that everyone could read and understand the Bible in their own language; and the concept 'of sola scriptura which gave each person the right to interpret the, Bible for himself. Thus the Bible, in a very real sense became the keystone of the entire Reformation.

The Enlightenment (18th century): a period which followed after the social and political upheavals of the Reformation had largely settled down. It was a philosophical movement. Which was characterized by a lively questioning of authority " much theorizing about politics, and an emphasis upon the empirical method in science. Reason was elevated abon revelation and the Enlightenment carried the question. raised by the Renaissance and the Reformation even further often to the dismay of many Christians. The intellectual ferment of the 18th century has had a direct affect .uPOll 19th century biblical studies with the rise of textual criticism and the German scientific approach to theological and biblical studies.

Taken together, these three movements have had a, profound influence upon our own century in that they have signified a radical departure from an authoritarian, feudalistic, agriculturally based unquestioning society. Needless [to say, this period of history from the l4th-18th centuries has also changed our views concerning hermeneutics and biblical interpretation;

5.3. The Renaissance was vitally important in the development of hermeneutics, for the renewed emphasis upon the classics and the study ‘of ancient manuscripts meant that scholars were now' going back to the original texts. Reuchlin and Erasmus urged all interpreters of Scripture to study the Scriptures in the original languages (and not in the Latin Vulgate) and during this period Reuchlin published ' a Hebrew grammar and a Hebrew lexicon while Erasmus edited the first critical edition of the New Testament in Greek, which incidentally, Luther used in his biblical studies. Thus ' the Renaissance provided the leaders of the Reformation with the necessary scholarly tools to interpret the Scriptures in an entirely new way; For the lirst time anyone who had an interest in biblical studies now had the means available to carry out those studies. ‘ As a result of this renewed interest in the, _classics, Greek philosophy (as distinguished: from Scholastic philosophy), and the biblical manuscripts in the original languages the fourfold principle of biblical interpretation which had held sway in the church for close to one thousand years was abandonedi and the principle was established that there is but one sense is 7 Scripture. Berkh of comments concerning the principles used by the Reformers in their hermeneutic.

5.4. Martin Luther (1483-1546) was not only the one who sparked the Reformation. with his famed 95 theses, but he was also a biblical scholar who wrote numerous commentaries, translated the Bible into German, and was convinced that every Christian had the right to read and interpret the Bible for himself. .In addition, Luther emphasized the necessity for taking the context and the historical circumstances into account, was of the opinion that the interpreter should be a person of faith and spiritual insight, and sought to find in Scripture that which centered on Christ. Luther was primarily a man of action, and therefore he did not seek out the finer details of Scripture. Thus if passages did not deal directly with Christ or did not ht into the major themes which is sought to convey (e.g. justification, righteousness, .faith, salvation, etc.) then he had a tendency to overlook or ignore , these passages. He was primarily concerned with the main themes of the gospel message. Needless to say, Luther rejected the allegorical method (although he occasionally resorted to its use) and emphasized the literal sense of Scripture. An important concept of Luther (and of other Reformers as well) was that to have a ‘ genuine depth of spiritual meaning in Scripture, the interpreter must experience the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Thus Luther’s view of "Scripture was not static, but it was a dynamic perspective where the interpreter, the Holy Spirit, and the Scriptures interacted together in order to discover the meaning of the passage in question,

5.5. Philip Melanchthon (1497-1560) was a contemporary of Luther and was his superior in terms of learning. His talents lay in his extensive knowledge of Hebrew and Greek and this made him an excellent interpreter. In his interpretative work he relied on two basic hermeneutical principles : (l) the Scriptures must be understood grammatically before they can be understood theologically~-a principle that spelled death to the old allegorical] method of interpretation; and (2) the Scriptures have but on certain and simple sense. Melanchthon is important as a biblical scholar in his own right but he was also a close associate of Luthers‘ and advised him on many of the more scholarly aspects of biblical studies.

5.6. John Calvin (15094564) is known as the forefather of the Presbyterian and Reformed churches and as being the author of that massive theological work The Institutes of the Christian Religion.’ Calvin was both an exegete and a theologian. The Institutes were a systematizing of Reformation theology into an orderly compound for use by the local churches, and their influence upon theology has been great, even until the present day. Thus Reformed Theology is characterized by being systematic. Calvin was also a systematic and careful exegete who sought to interpret Scripture so that it could be understood in the local churches. Calvin’s commentaries (which omit only one book of the New Testament and eight of the Old Testament) form the major portion of his writings. In fact, they are still in use today ! While Calvin held to the View that much of what was in the Old Testament could by typically interpreted to refer to Christ, he did not share Luther’s view that Christ should be found everywhere in Scripture. He insisted that the prophets should be interpreted in the light of historical circumstances and that commentaries and exegetical " work should be characterized by lucid brevity. Calvin held that Scripture was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and it should therefore also be interpreted under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Thus, like Luther, Calvin held to a dynamic theory of interpretation. 'It is significant to note that Calvin was educated in the humanistic tradition of the Renaissance which gave a breadth to his work not found in many others of the Reformation Period.

5.7. Other Reformers who were also significant interpretaton and exegetes include Bucer, Zwingli, Oecolampadius, Heinrich, and Bullinger. All were similar in their hermeneutical principles to Luther and Calvin. From the time of Calvin’s death in 1564 until the end of the sixteenth century the Protestants were sharply divided and involved in numerous controversies over creeds and , confessions, for this was the period of creed and theological system making for the various Protestant groups. ‘Between 1545 and 1563 the Catholic Council of Trent met and drew up a series of decrees setting forth the Catholic dogmas and canons criticizing the Protestants. The Protestants then replied in kind with their creeds, confessions, statements of faith, systems of doctrine, and numerous pglemical writings. Unfortunately these works were often unbalanced because adequate biblical study was neglected in favor of making theological statements. Although the Protestants still held to the principle of sola scriptura and refused to subject their exegesis and interpretations to the domination of tradition or the authority of the Church as formulated by the councils and popes, they fell into the danger of leading it into bondage to the confessional standards of the various Protestant churches. The result of this was that all too often the creeds and confessions became the authority so that exegesis and biblical interpretation became the hand-maid of dogmatic and interpretation became a search for proof-texts to prove a particular dogmatic system of belief or confession of faith. This was particularly true of the Lutherans but the Reformed churches were guilty as well. During this time the concept of biblical inspiration and interpretation moved from a dynamic View, as held by Luther and Calvin, to an extreme mechanistic view that was essentially static. One group, the Buxtorfa, held that even the vowel points of the Hebrew text were divinely inspired ! During the latter half of the sixteenth century there were three significant developments in the field of Protestant hermeneutics ’: the Socinians, the Dutch theologian Coccejus, and the Pietists.

5.8. The Socinians were agroup who held the view that the Bible must be interpreted in a strictly rational way, that is, in harmony with reason. According to the Socinians, the Scriptures could not contain anything that was contrary to reason. This meant that everything in Scripture could be rationally apprehended. Anything that did not fall into this category, such as the doctrines of the Trinity, the two natures of Christ, etc. was rejected by the Socinians. Thus while the Socinians freed themselves from thg domination of the creeds and confessions, they themselves fell into the trap of having their hermeneutical principles dominated by their own dogmatic system of rationalism.

5.9. The Dutch theologian Coccejus was opposed to the methods of interpretation employed by those who used the Bible as a collection of proof-texts. In his View such methods of biblical interpretation failed ‘to do justice to Scripture as an organism, of which the different parts were typically related to one another. Co‘ccejus was of the opinion that each passage should be studied in the light of the context, the prevailing thought of the passage, and the purpose of the author. His basic hermeneutical principle was that the words of Scripture signify all that they can be made to signify in the entire discourse. Unfortunately, this View lapsed back into multiple meanings because of the confusion between the aetual sense 'and all of the possible applications. Coccejus also had an excessive typology, especially concerning Christ and the church in the Old Testament. Not all agreed with Coccejus, however, and J. A. Turretinmin opposition to Coccejus and his followerswasserted that the Scriptures should be interpreted without any dogmatic presuppositions using the aid of logic and analysis.

5.10. The Pietists were a group of Christians who had become Weary of all the strife between the various Protestant groups and therefore they reacted against the dogmatic Scriptural interpreter. tio’hs of their day. They advocated studying the Scriptures in the , original languages under the influence of the Holy Spirit. However, they were more concerned with the pcrismatic (that is, drawing inferences for reproof, etc.) and-the practical (that is, with prayer, Christian conduct, etc.) than with the grammatical", historical and analytical study of the texts. Eventually, the two members of the Pietist movement, Rambach and Francke, advocated a psychologi cal interpretation in which the interpreter’ s feelings should be in harmony with those of the biblical writer one is seeking to under ' stand. The difliculty with the Pietists’ hermeneutical principles was that they led to abuses and to an execessive subjectivity in interpretation.

The Reformation (preceded by the Renaissance and followed by the Enlightenment) was undoubtedly the turning point in terms of biblical hermeneutics, even as it was a great turning point for western civilization as a whole. , The allegorical method which had dominated biblical studies for close to a thousand years was replaced by a threefold emphasis upon (1) the study of the Scriptural texts in the original languages ; (2) the translation of the Scriptures into the languages of the common people; and (3) the fact that, each individual was able to read and interpret the Scriptures for themselves. Thus the foundations had been laid for an in-depth study of Scripture such as the church had never“ before witnessed in its history

6. The Post-Reformation Period (1588-1804)

6.1. The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries can be characterized by the great variety of views which appeared during that time. These included rationalism, empiricism, excessive concern with . theological systems and abstract theological fomulations, and the tendency among Protestant groups to divide over different interpretations of Scripture. According to Mickelsen, ‘ Theology often controlled exegesis in opposition to the correct order in which exegesis controls theology. Men looked for texts to prove their theology and explained away evidence that seemed to be contrary to their particular view’.

6.2. Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) was a Roman Catholic, who although influenced by the views of the Reformation, never left the Catholic Church, He opposed the abstract categorizing of deity and spoke of God in terms of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. He had a distaste for abstract reason and tended to emphasize the heart which feels, Senses and experiences God. Pascal was a careful student of Scripture and stated that “there is enough clarity to enlighten the elect and enough obscurity to humble them ” in the Bible. His life and work is evidence that there was still some creative biblical interpretation being carried on within the confines of the Catholic Church during this particular period of history.

6.3. The Reformation produced three major strains of Protestandem: the Lutheran (stemming from Luther), the Reformed (Stemming from Calvin), and the Free Churches (stemming from Zwingli). In addition, however, there was a fourth strain known as the Anabaptists who stressed believers baptism, the absolth authority of Scripture as over against creeds and confessions, the separation of church and state, and a radically different form of social life which tended to be communal, simple, and (according to the Anabaptists) based upon the New Testament. For theological reasons they came into conflict with the major Protestant groups, and their views on the separation of church and state brought them into open conflict with the state-church system of the times. The result was that other Christian groups-~Roman Catholic, Lutheran, and Reformed-began to persecute the Ana. baptists with the ironic result that free biblical interpretation became a point of division and not unity among the Protestants. Unfortunately, this tendency toward division has continued into the present so that in the United. States today there are Well over 256 different Protestant denominations and sects. Says Mickelsen “ The grim twist of misdirected zeal in the Post-Reformation times serves as a warning to each of us that Christian truth must be lived as Well as analyzed, discussed, and classified”.

6.4. The Post Reformation Period saw a great many advances being made in textual, linguistic and historical studies as scholars began to classify the biblical materials in order to determine the original text of the Bible. Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek grammars began to circulate. In addition an emphasis began to be placed upon textual criticism and historical studies as interpreters saw the inadequacy of merely using the Bible as a source for proof texts.

6.5. Perhaps the most significant characteristic of the Post Reformation , Period was the rise ' of rationalism as the major philosophical influence along with deism, humanism and empiricism. The [philosophers of the time were many: Hobbes, Descartes, Spinoza, Locke, Berkely, Hume, Leibnitz and Kant. The rationalists held that human intellect was capable of deciding what is true and false and what is right and wrong. Reason and retention on all that the mind encounters was held to be the supreme authority as over against revelation. Thus the rationalists accepted only those portions of Scripture which did not contradict reason. The empiricists on the other hand, were critical of any proposition that could not be proved by means of sense experience, and they used this as a standard by which to judge the Scriptures. These philosophical movements had a deep and lasting impact upon biblical hermeneutics as Mickelsen explains : ‘ Since interpreters are always influenced by thought movements of their times (whether they support them, oppose them or seek to modify them), biblical studies during this period show the impact of man’s confidence in reason.

7. Conclusion

The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries also brought about discovery on the part of biblical scholars which may seem. Rather obvious to us today, but which was quite new for that particular period of history. Mickelsen relates this discovery in detail: During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, scholars began to recognize that Hebrew poetry existed and that it was extensively found in the Old Testament. In England, The work was translated into English under the title: Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews. The literary form by which a writer conveys his ideas influences the meaning that they have upon a reader. If we ignore the form, we cannot accurately understand the meaning

Thus a new area of biblical studies was born form criticism, which together with textual criticism and historical and grammatical studies, provided new tools for scholars to use in their, interpretation of the biblical texts. A new day was about to dawn in the held of hermeneutics.