Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Thoughts on Literal Interpretation


What is literal interpretation? It is taking the Bible in the original sense of speaking in the normal, customary, and proper usage of language. Tan points out that “In order to determine the normal and customary usages of Bible language, it is necessary to consider the accepted rules of grammar and rhetoric, as well as the factual historical and cultural date of Bible times.”[1]  This means one accepts the normal usage of language. However, literal interpretation is taken by some as wooden, non-flexible, and even absurd.  Normal usage of language includes:

  • Literal interpretation accepts figurative language as a normal and customary part of language. Figurative language does not militate against literal interpretation. William Tyndale declared: "Thou shalt understand, therefore, that the Scripture hath but one sense, which is the literal sense. And that literal sense is the root and ground of all, and the anchor that never faileth, where unto if thou cleave thou canst never err nor go out of the way. And if thou leave the literal sense, thou canst not but go out of the way. Nevertheless, the Scripture uses proverbs, similitudes, riddles, or allegories, as all other speeches do; but that which the proverb, similitude, riddles, or allegory signifieth is ever the literal sense, which thou must seek out diligently."[2]
  • Literal interpretation recognizes that the Scripture contains spiritual truths. However, to know these spiritual truths come not by spiritualization, but are revealed through the ordinary, customary, language.  

All Bible students believe in literal interpretation in some form. The problem is that not all Bible students are consistent in their interpretation, especially in the field of prophecy. A prime example of this is seen in Zechariah 9:9-10. Zechariah 9:9 is the prophecy of Jesus triumphal entry into the city of Jerusalem. All commentators agree that had a literal fulfillment. Jesus rode into the city on a donkey. Zechariah 9:10 which speaks a coming of total disarmament and world peace. It speaks of the Messiah’s dominion being world wide. Yet, many all the sudden make this spiritual in content. They do not believe this will be literally fulfilled by the second coming of Christ to set up his kingdom of earth. For example, Matthew Henry says:

His kingdom is not of this world, but a spiritual kingdom. It will not be advanced by outward force or carnal weapons, ver. 10. It shall be propagated and established by speaking peace to the heathen. Christ came, and preached peace to them that were afar off, and to them that were nigh, proclaiming on earth peace, and good will toward men. His kingdom shall extend to all parts of the world, in defiance of opposition. His gospel shall be preached to the world, and be received among the heathen.[3]

Why is verse 9 literal, while verse 10 is spiritual? It is so, only by inconsistent interpretation. To be consistent, one should hold to literal in both verses, unless there is some clear indication that it should not be. There is no such indication here, except the will of the interpreter. The result is that it is not the text that becomes the authority and indicator of the meaning, but the mind of the interpreter.

If we take the text following the normal, customary, and usual rules of language we see a moral literal meaning. Feinberg follows this when he gives the meaning of verse 10.

He speaks peace to the nations: in three short words in the original we have the blessed act told forth. This does not mean that He will speak peaceable or teach peace, but by an authoritative word He will command it. Then will be accomplished by His word that men have sought to bring about by the use of arms and munitions. True, He speaks peace to individual hearts now (Eph. 2:17), but in that day He will speak peace to the nations. Note that peace is not the result of peace conferences, not of the preaching of social gospelizers, but of the direct, immediate activity of the glorified Son of God, the Prince of Peace. Therefore, He is the Desire of all nations, though they know if not.[4]

J.C. Ryle is correct and observes:

“…the literal sense of the Old Testament prophecies has been far too much neglected by the Churches, and is far too much neglected at the present day, and that under the mistaken system of spiritualizing and accommodating Bible language, Christians have too often completely missed its meaning.”[5]



[1]  Paul Tan, THE INTERPRETATION OF PROPHECY, 29.
[2]  Quoted by J.I. Packer, FUNDAMENTALISM AND THE WORD OF GOD, 103.
[3]  Matthew Henry, COMMENTARY OF THE HOLY BIBLE, 2:515.
[4]  Charles L. Feinberg, GOD REMEMBERS: A STUDY OF ZECHARIAH, 129.
[5]   J.C. Ryle, ARE YOU READY FOR THE END OF TIME? 9.

2 comments:

  1. To me, it is understanding the Bible as a normal person normally would. A normal person doesn't take, "I am the door" literally

    Josh Hunt
    www.joshhunt.com

    ReplyDelete