God and Nature 2026 #1
|
|
By Rev. Terry Defoe
Biblical hermeneutics begins with a simple question: “Did God say that?” An even more important question—a specifically hermeneutical question—follows: “Did I hear God correctly?” We modern Christians are certainly not the first to hear the words of Scripture. Our goal is to hear them as the original audience did—a formidable task given differences in culture, language, and the vast span of time separating us from them. Understanding the Scriptures requires a thorough knowledge of ancient semitic culture because our world is very different from theirs.
Hermeneutics is a technical term for the theory and methodology of interpreting texts. The word is derived from the Greek verb hermēneuein, 'to interpret’, and it is often linked to Hermes, the Greek messenger god, who was tasked with interpreting messages from the gods and passing them along to humans. Hermeneutics seeks an accurate interpretation of materials, as well as an analysis of what goes into the process of understanding itself. It studies the role that preconceptions and contexts play in understanding, and investigates ways to bridge the gap between the author’s original intention and the reader’s understanding. When it comes to understanding the Scriptures, it’s all about hermeneutics. And when it comes to hermeneutics, it’s all about context.
Biblical hermeneutics begins with a simple question: “Did God say that?” An even more important question—a specifically hermeneutical question—follows: “Did I hear God correctly?” We modern Christians are certainly not the first to hear the words of Scripture. Our goal is to hear them as the original audience did—a formidable task given differences in culture, language, and the vast span of time separating us from them. Understanding the Scriptures requires a thorough knowledge of ancient semitic culture because our world is very different from theirs.
Hermeneutics is a technical term for the theory and methodology of interpreting texts. The word is derived from the Greek verb hermēneuein, 'to interpret’, and it is often linked to Hermes, the Greek messenger god, who was tasked with interpreting messages from the gods and passing them along to humans. Hermeneutics seeks an accurate interpretation of materials, as well as an analysis of what goes into the process of understanding itself. It studies the role that preconceptions and contexts play in understanding, and investigates ways to bridge the gap between the author’s original intention and the reader’s understanding. When it comes to understanding the Scriptures, it’s all about hermeneutics. And when it comes to hermeneutics, it’s all about context.
In a very real sense, the Bible is an anthology with the Holy Spirit as its editor. |
LITERALISM
In much of evangelicalism, a literal reading of the Bible is encouraged. But literalism is not the most effective tool in the hermeneutical toolkit. Literalism is unaware, or dismissive, of the context of the words. Consider the following thought experiment:
PRE-SCIENTIFIC
Like police officers investigating a serious incident, interpreters of the Scriptures do their best to piece together a realistic portrait of the way things were in ancient Israel (Walton 2009a), cognizant of the fact that enduring theological truths are often embedded in a pre-scientific framework. The Genesis creation accounts are pre-scientific, not anti-scientific. The “science” in ancient Israel was the science-of-the-day (Lamoureux 2009). Scripture’s descriptions of the natural realm are phenomenological—that is, common-sense observations, not what we understand by science in the modern age. The biblical authors lacked the tools and technology which would enable them to describe nature scientifically, and a blending of the material and supernatural was normal for ancient cultures.
ANCIENT NEAR EAST
Accurate hermeneutics recognizes the influence that neighboring nations had on Israel. There is no doubt that other nations of the Ancient Near East, like Babylon and Egypt, influenced ancient Israel. One of the theological points made by the Genesis creation accounts was a criticism of Babylonian creation mythology. In the Babylonian account, astronomical entities were divinities with oppressive power over humanity. In Genesis, on the other hand, the author makes it clear that the heavenly bodies are inanimate entities created by a single, all-powerful God, and their function is to serve humanity.
COSMOLOGY
Accurate hermeneutics requires a detailed knowledge of Israel’s cosmology. Water is a prominent factor in that cosmology. Above the earth is the firmament: the Hebrew word (raqia) refers to metal pounded flat—metal robust enough to support God’s footsteps. It was commonly believed that there were waters both above and below the firmament (Buchanan 2012). At the time of the Noahic flood, the waters above were released and they inundated the earth. Below the earth was the shadowy realm of the dead called sheol. The ancient Israelites and a succession of others through history, up to the time of Martin Luther, understood the stars to be globes of fire attached to the underside of the firmament. It was believed that a strong wind could disconnect them from the firmament and cause them to fall to the earth.
HISTORICITY
There are Bible narratives that contain echoes of past events told through a theological lens. For example, many Bible scholars are of the opinion that the first eleven chapters of the book of Genesis are a unique kind of literature with a sophisticated literary structure, presenting several important spiritual themes (Hoffmeier et al. 2015). These chapters appear to be theological commentary, partly symbolic, recounting the history, concepts, and stories of the time. Old Testament authors were not historians in the modern sense of the word. Most important to them were the spiritual principles underlying historical events. It is as if these authors were painting portraits while New Testament authors were trying to take photographs. Brush stroke by brush stroke, or pixel by pixel, information that God wanted humanity to know is recorded in his book.
HERMENEUTICAL TOOLKIT
In a very real sense, the Bible is an anthology with the Holy Spirit as its editor. Because many different kinds of literary devices are employed in the Bible’s books, accurate hermeneutics requires a variety of hermeneutical tools and the expertise to know which tool works best with which type of literature. Interpreters need to analyze a document before attempting to interpret it. The Bible is replete with numerous types of texts, authors, and esoteric names, places, and challenging concepts. All of this makes it critically important to analyze each document in terms of its literary dimensions, theological teachings, and historical and cultural features before moving on to interpretation. The most accurate interpretations are not literal but literary.
THE FRAMEWORK HYPOTHESIS
The first chapter of Genesis is not primarily a chronological account but a literary or poetic framework designed to convey theological truths about God and his creation. In other words, it is not a scientific or historical record, as it would be if it were written today; rather, it is a theological or topical explanation of creation. The chapter is structured thematically (Walton 2009b): it presents us with two sets of three days, where the first set of days describes the creation of realms and the second set describes the filling of those realms. The Framework Hypothesis (Davis 2012) states that the creation account, with its sequence of days and emphasis on the Sabbath, is in fact a literary framework for a narrative in which, after the “work” of creation, God takes his place on his throne overseeing the cosmos. Humanity is given a co-regent role, responsible for the ongoing stewardship of the earth. Thus, it is argued that the details—the days, the garden, the serpent, the tree—are symbolic representations of deeper spiritual truths, and the text serves as the ritual commemoration of the creation event placed into the context of Sabbath observance.
INERRANCY
Inerrancy is a critical evangelical doctrine holding that the Bible is without error in everything it deals with, including statements about the natural realm (Bartkowski 1996). Many evangelicals are of the opinion that should a discrepancy arise between the Bible and science, science must be in the wrong (Holloway 2013). Evangelical orthodoxy rejects the higher critical method, a system of Bible interpretation that originated in Germany in the 19th century. The higher critical method (or higher criticism for short) applies critical, academic, scholarly methods to the study of the Bible, treating it much like any other ancient text.
A growing number of evangelical scholars argue that inerrancy is a philosophical category that has passed its “best if used before date.” They contend that the doctrine of inerrancy is not drawn out of the Scriptures but imposed from without, alien to Scripture’s nature and intent (Pinnock 1989). A better word, they claim, is “trustworthiness” or “integrity.”
CONCLUSION
There are two basic ways to deal with contentious issues in the Christian Church.
Philip Melanchthon (1497-1560), mathematician, Lutheran theologian and associate of Martin Luther, assembled a group of scholars at the University of Wittenberg—a group which came to be known as the Wittenberg Circle. Group members included mathematician Georg Joachim Rheticus (1514-1574) and astronomical educator Erasmus Reinhold (1511-1553). Melanchthon was a contemporary of Copernicus (Danielson 2006). Melanchthon argued that Copernican heliocentrism contradicted the plain words of Scripture such as Psalm 93:1: “The world also is established, that it cannot be moved.” Copernicus put theologians on the horns of a dilemma. Was he correct. and the traditional hermeneutic in error? The challenge brought by Copernicus was supported by the Circle scholars and opposed by Luther and Melanchthon, but, despite their opposition, they did not stand in the way of further investigation (Swamidass 2017).
The Wittenberg Circle shows us what irenics looks like in in action. This group of scholars demonstrate a non-destructive way to deal with scientific challenges to traditional doctrines (Westman 1975). That kind of gracious forbearance is sorely needed in the church today.
Times change. Technology changes. But God remains eternally the same. We thank God for his Word and pray for the Holy Spirit’s guidance as we seek to interpret that word accurately.
REFERENCES
Bartkowski, John. 1996. “Beyond Biblical Literalism and Inerrancy: Conservative Protestants and the Hermeneutic Interpretation of Scripture.” Sociology of Religion 57 (3): 259–72. https://doi.org/10.2307/3712156.
Buchanan, Scott. 2012. “Was the ‘Expanse’ Overhead in Genesis 1 a Solid Dome?” Letters to Creationists, September 4. https://letterstocreationists.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/was-the-expanse-overhead-in-genesis-1-a-solid-dome/.
Danielson, Dennis Richard. 2006. The First Copernican: Georg Joachim Rheticus and the Rise of the Copernican Revolution. Bloomsbury Publishing USA. https://archive.org/details/firstcopernicang00dani.
Davis, Ted. 2012. Science and the Bible: The Framework View. BioLogos Foundation.
Hoffmeier, James K; Gordon John Wenham; and Kenton Sparks. 2015. Genesis: History, Fiction, or Neither?: Three Views on the Bible’s Earliest Chapters. Zondervan Academic.
Holloway, Ben. 2013. Young-Earthers and Presuppositionalism. http://www.hollowayquarterly.com/2013/12/young-earthers-and-presuppositionalism.html.
Lamoureux, Denis O. 2009. The Ancient Science in the Bible. BioLogos Foundation.
Liu, Joseph. 2013. “Public’s Views on Human Evolution.” Pew Research Center, December 30. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/.
Longman III, Tremper, and John H Walton. 2018. The Lost World of the Flood: Mythology, Theology, and the Deluge Debate. InterVarsity Press.
Pinnock, Clark H. 1989. “Climbing Out of a Swamp: The Evangelical Struggle To Understand the Creation Texts.” Interpretation 43 (2): 143–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/002096438904300204.
Swamidass, S Joshua. 2017. “A Lutheran Voice in Science.” Concordia Journal 43 (3): 82–90.
Walton, John H. 2009a. Reading Genesis 1 through Ancient (Not Modern) Eyes. BioLogos Foundation.
Walton, John H. 2009b. Reading Genesis 1 through Ancient (Not Modern) Eyes. BioLogos Foundation.
Westman, Robert S. 1975. “The Melanchthon Circle, Rheticus, and the Wittenberg Interpretation of the Copernican Theory.” Isis 66 (2): 165–93. https://doi.org/10.1086/351431.
Terry Defoe was educated at Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia (BA, Sociology, 1978), Lutheran Theological Seminary, Saskatoon Saskatchewan (M.Div., 1982), and the Open Learning University, Burnaby British Columbia (BA, Psychology, 2003). Defoe served as a chaplain at the University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser University. He has been interested in the science-faith dialog for more than 30 years. His intellectual journey took him from young-earth creationism to an evolutionary perspective.
In much of evangelicalism, a literal reading of the Bible is encouraged. But literalism is not the most effective tool in the hermeneutical toolkit. Literalism is unaware, or dismissive, of the context of the words. Consider the following thought experiment:
- You are blindfolded and are led into the university library stacks.
- You are told to reach out and pull a book off the shelf—any book will do.
- It turns out that the book you chose at random was an advanced physics text.
- If you do not have the requisite background, the literalists’ method of “just read[ing] the words off the page” will not yield the level of understanding you seek.
PRE-SCIENTIFIC
Like police officers investigating a serious incident, interpreters of the Scriptures do their best to piece together a realistic portrait of the way things were in ancient Israel (Walton 2009a), cognizant of the fact that enduring theological truths are often embedded in a pre-scientific framework. The Genesis creation accounts are pre-scientific, not anti-scientific. The “science” in ancient Israel was the science-of-the-day (Lamoureux 2009). Scripture’s descriptions of the natural realm are phenomenological—that is, common-sense observations, not what we understand by science in the modern age. The biblical authors lacked the tools and technology which would enable them to describe nature scientifically, and a blending of the material and supernatural was normal for ancient cultures.
ANCIENT NEAR EAST
Accurate hermeneutics recognizes the influence that neighboring nations had on Israel. There is no doubt that other nations of the Ancient Near East, like Babylon and Egypt, influenced ancient Israel. One of the theological points made by the Genesis creation accounts was a criticism of Babylonian creation mythology. In the Babylonian account, astronomical entities were divinities with oppressive power over humanity. In Genesis, on the other hand, the author makes it clear that the heavenly bodies are inanimate entities created by a single, all-powerful God, and their function is to serve humanity.
COSMOLOGY
Accurate hermeneutics requires a detailed knowledge of Israel’s cosmology. Water is a prominent factor in that cosmology. Above the earth is the firmament: the Hebrew word (raqia) refers to metal pounded flat—metal robust enough to support God’s footsteps. It was commonly believed that there were waters both above and below the firmament (Buchanan 2012). At the time of the Noahic flood, the waters above were released and they inundated the earth. Below the earth was the shadowy realm of the dead called sheol. The ancient Israelites and a succession of others through history, up to the time of Martin Luther, understood the stars to be globes of fire attached to the underside of the firmament. It was believed that a strong wind could disconnect them from the firmament and cause them to fall to the earth.
HISTORICITY
There are Bible narratives that contain echoes of past events told through a theological lens. For example, many Bible scholars are of the opinion that the first eleven chapters of the book of Genesis are a unique kind of literature with a sophisticated literary structure, presenting several important spiritual themes (Hoffmeier et al. 2015). These chapters appear to be theological commentary, partly symbolic, recounting the history, concepts, and stories of the time. Old Testament authors were not historians in the modern sense of the word. Most important to them were the spiritual principles underlying historical events. It is as if these authors were painting portraits while New Testament authors were trying to take photographs. Brush stroke by brush stroke, or pixel by pixel, information that God wanted humanity to know is recorded in his book.
HERMENEUTICAL TOOLKIT
In a very real sense, the Bible is an anthology with the Holy Spirit as its editor. Because many different kinds of literary devices are employed in the Bible’s books, accurate hermeneutics requires a variety of hermeneutical tools and the expertise to know which tool works best with which type of literature. Interpreters need to analyze a document before attempting to interpret it. The Bible is replete with numerous types of texts, authors, and esoteric names, places, and challenging concepts. All of this makes it critically important to analyze each document in terms of its literary dimensions, theological teachings, and historical and cultural features before moving on to interpretation. The most accurate interpretations are not literal but literary.
THE FRAMEWORK HYPOTHESIS
The first chapter of Genesis is not primarily a chronological account but a literary or poetic framework designed to convey theological truths about God and his creation. In other words, it is not a scientific or historical record, as it would be if it were written today; rather, it is a theological or topical explanation of creation. The chapter is structured thematically (Walton 2009b): it presents us with two sets of three days, where the first set of days describes the creation of realms and the second set describes the filling of those realms. The Framework Hypothesis (Davis 2012) states that the creation account, with its sequence of days and emphasis on the Sabbath, is in fact a literary framework for a narrative in which, after the “work” of creation, God takes his place on his throne overseeing the cosmos. Humanity is given a co-regent role, responsible for the ongoing stewardship of the earth. Thus, it is argued that the details—the days, the garden, the serpent, the tree—are symbolic representations of deeper spiritual truths, and the text serves as the ritual commemoration of the creation event placed into the context of Sabbath observance.
INERRANCY
Inerrancy is a critical evangelical doctrine holding that the Bible is without error in everything it deals with, including statements about the natural realm (Bartkowski 1996). Many evangelicals are of the opinion that should a discrepancy arise between the Bible and science, science must be in the wrong (Holloway 2013). Evangelical orthodoxy rejects the higher critical method, a system of Bible interpretation that originated in Germany in the 19th century. The higher critical method (or higher criticism for short) applies critical, academic, scholarly methods to the study of the Bible, treating it much like any other ancient text.
A growing number of evangelical scholars argue that inerrancy is a philosophical category that has passed its “best if used before date.” They contend that the doctrine of inerrancy is not drawn out of the Scriptures but imposed from without, alien to Scripture’s nature and intent (Pinnock 1989). A better word, they claim, is “trustworthiness” or “integrity.”
CONCLUSION
There are two basic ways to deal with contentious issues in the Christian Church.
- Polemics /pə-lĕm′ĭks/ — The art or practice of argumentation or controversy. Refuting religious errors of disputation. Pertaining to the history or conduct of ecclesiastical controversy.
- Irenics /i-ren’iks/ — Seeking peace and reconciliation; avoiding conflict. Concerned with promoting peace and unity among Christians. Seeking common ground and the reconciliation of theological differences.
Philip Melanchthon (1497-1560), mathematician, Lutheran theologian and associate of Martin Luther, assembled a group of scholars at the University of Wittenberg—a group which came to be known as the Wittenberg Circle. Group members included mathematician Georg Joachim Rheticus (1514-1574) and astronomical educator Erasmus Reinhold (1511-1553). Melanchthon was a contemporary of Copernicus (Danielson 2006). Melanchthon argued that Copernican heliocentrism contradicted the plain words of Scripture such as Psalm 93:1: “The world also is established, that it cannot be moved.” Copernicus put theologians on the horns of a dilemma. Was he correct. and the traditional hermeneutic in error? The challenge brought by Copernicus was supported by the Circle scholars and opposed by Luther and Melanchthon, but, despite their opposition, they did not stand in the way of further investigation (Swamidass 2017).
The Wittenberg Circle shows us what irenics looks like in in action. This group of scholars demonstrate a non-destructive way to deal with scientific challenges to traditional doctrines (Westman 1975). That kind of gracious forbearance is sorely needed in the church today.
Times change. Technology changes. But God remains eternally the same. We thank God for his Word and pray for the Holy Spirit’s guidance as we seek to interpret that word accurately.
REFERENCES
Bartkowski, John. 1996. “Beyond Biblical Literalism and Inerrancy: Conservative Protestants and the Hermeneutic Interpretation of Scripture.” Sociology of Religion 57 (3): 259–72. https://doi.org/10.2307/3712156.
Buchanan, Scott. 2012. “Was the ‘Expanse’ Overhead in Genesis 1 a Solid Dome?” Letters to Creationists, September 4. https://letterstocreationists.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/was-the-expanse-overhead-in-genesis-1-a-solid-dome/.
Danielson, Dennis Richard. 2006. The First Copernican: Georg Joachim Rheticus and the Rise of the Copernican Revolution. Bloomsbury Publishing USA. https://archive.org/details/firstcopernicang00dani.
Davis, Ted. 2012. Science and the Bible: The Framework View. BioLogos Foundation.
Hoffmeier, James K; Gordon John Wenham; and Kenton Sparks. 2015. Genesis: History, Fiction, or Neither?: Three Views on the Bible’s Earliest Chapters. Zondervan Academic.
Holloway, Ben. 2013. Young-Earthers and Presuppositionalism. http://www.hollowayquarterly.com/2013/12/young-earthers-and-presuppositionalism.html.
Lamoureux, Denis O. 2009. The Ancient Science in the Bible. BioLogos Foundation.
Liu, Joseph. 2013. “Public’s Views on Human Evolution.” Pew Research Center, December 30. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/.
Longman III, Tremper, and John H Walton. 2018. The Lost World of the Flood: Mythology, Theology, and the Deluge Debate. InterVarsity Press.
Pinnock, Clark H. 1989. “Climbing Out of a Swamp: The Evangelical Struggle To Understand the Creation Texts.” Interpretation 43 (2): 143–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/002096438904300204.
Swamidass, S Joshua. 2017. “A Lutheran Voice in Science.” Concordia Journal 43 (3): 82–90.
Walton, John H. 2009a. Reading Genesis 1 through Ancient (Not Modern) Eyes. BioLogos Foundation.
Walton, John H. 2009b. Reading Genesis 1 through Ancient (Not Modern) Eyes. BioLogos Foundation.
Westman, Robert S. 1975. “The Melanchthon Circle, Rheticus, and the Wittenberg Interpretation of the Copernican Theory.” Isis 66 (2): 165–93. https://doi.org/10.1086/351431.
Terry Defoe was educated at Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia (BA, Sociology, 1978), Lutheran Theological Seminary, Saskatoon Saskatchewan (M.Div., 1982), and the Open Learning University, Burnaby British Columbia (BA, Psychology, 2003). Defoe served as a chaplain at the University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser University. He has been interested in the science-faith dialog for more than 30 years. His intellectual journey took him from young-earth creationism to an evolutionary perspective.