skip to main |
skip to sidebar
As May 21, 2011 approaches we will certainly hear and see more warnings from Harold Camping and his followers. Camping has declared that the Bible "guarantees" May 21 this year as the day Jesus will return. The sad strange story of Harold Camping is that of a man who isolated himself from the church of Jesus Christ and thus became his own authority. In the first of a series of articles, Robert Godfrey helps us understand the impact of this isolation on Harold Camping's understanding of the Bible. After Camping began to work full-time with Family Radio, he spent much time studying the Bible. His knowledge of Bible verses is impressive indeed. But his study of the Bible was undertaken in isolation from other Christians and theologians. He adopted a proud individualism. He did not really learn from Bible scholars. He studied the Bible in isolation from the church and the consensus of the faithful. As a result his understanding of the Bible became more and more idiosyncratic. No one could help, direct, or restrain him. He was really an autodicdact, that is, someone who teaches himself. He never really submitted his ideas to be challenged and improved by others. He was truly his only teacher. He has repeatedly said that he would be glad to change his views if he is shown that he is wrong from the Bible. But this humble statement covers a very arrogant attitude, because no one can ever show him that he is wrong. He alone really understands the Bible.
Read the entire article HERE.
According to Harold Camping, Jesus will rapture his church on May 21, 2011. That event, according to premillinial dispensationalists will touch off a seven year Great Tribulation which will be followed by the return of Christ and his 1,000 year earthly reign. Many who have thankfully tuned out the foolishness of Mr. Camping have nevertheless fallen prey to "newspaper eschatology" - the practice of reading biblical prophecy into current events. This became especially popular among evangelicals in the 1970's with the popularity of men like Hal Lindsay and his Late Great Planet Earth. But is this a proper way to read biblical prophecy?
Old Testament scholar Richard Pratt wrote an outstanding article in 1993 addressing this very issue. Are we able to observe current events and make accurate predictions concerning the last days?
Pratt writes:
The last half of our century has witnessed an explosion of interest in what biblical prophecies say about our future. Record sales of Hal Lindsey’s Late Great Planet Earth (3 million), and John Walvoord’s Armageddon: Oil and the Middle East Crisis (1.4 million),1 indicate that many English speaking evangelicals read the Bible to find out what will happen in the future and how current events fit within that chronological framework.
Recent events have only encouraged enthusiasm for this hermeneutic. Moral decay in western culture has raised fears of cataclysmic divine retribution. Political troubles in various parts of the world have been interpreted as the initial stages of history’s grand finale. As a result, evangelicals have developed nothing less than a monomania in the interpretation of biblical prophecy. More than anything else, they try to discover God’s plan for the future and what role events today play within that divine program.
Our study will challenge this widespread hermeneutical orientation by exploring the role of historical contingencies intervening between Old Testament predictions and their fulfillments. As we will see, events taking place after predictions often directed the course of history in ways not anticipated by prophetic announcements. Sometimes future events conformed to a prophet’s words; sometimes they did not. For this reason, neither prophets nor their listeners knew precisely what eventualities to expect. If this proposal is correct, it indicates that the emphasis of many contemporary interpreters is misplaced, and that we must find other hermeneutical interests in biblical prophecy.
Read the entire article HERE.
I value the work of Vern Poythress. He has been enormously helpful in the field of biblical hermeneutics. In an article entitled "Christ the Only Savior of Interpretation" first published in the Westminster Journal of Theology Dr. Poythress writes:Since human interpretation is corrupted by sin, it no less than other human activities stands in need of redemption. Interpretive sins no less than other sins can find a remedy only in the sacrifice of Christ (Acts 4:12). Hence we must affirm that Christ is the Savior of interpretation. We acknowledge this truth indirectly whenever we speak of the indispensable work of the Holy Spirit in illumining to us the message of Scripture (1 Cor 2:14-16). Yet this work of the Holy Spirit can never be independent of the work of Christ in dying and rising in order to save us. Hence it is worthwhile to make explicit ways in which Christ redeems our human interpretation, as one aspect of his redemption of the total creation (Rom 8:18-27; Col 1:20).
We are accustomed to thinking of biblical interpretation as Christocentric. Biblical theologians correctly observe that NT use of the OT is consistently Christ-centered in character (note Luke 24:25-27, 44-49). "No matter how many promises God has made, they are 'Yes" in Christ" (2 Cor 1:20). Certainly this conviction should affect our hermeneutical procedure: we ought to come to any particular passage of the Bible asking the question of how the passage speaks about Christ. In a real sense, Christ is the central content of the Bible's message.
But Christ is the center of interpretation in at least two more senses besides this familiar one. First, he is the Lord of interpretation. As the omnipotent God and the eternal Word he is not only the author and speaker of Scripture, but also the creator, the providential ruler, and the standard for every step in every person's interaction with the Bible.
Second, Christ is our redeemer with respect to interpretive sinfulness. He is the substitute, sin-bearer, and purifier for our interpretive rebellion.
Read the entire article HERE.
