Differences in Hermeneutics
The Dispensational heremeneutical principle rejects or at least discourages any allegorization of the Old Testament and Origen of the ante-Nicene patristic period is often pointed to as the source of the allegorical principle of interpretation. The oft-repeated claim of those of the Dispensational tradition is that they interpret the Scriptures “literally” whereas those of the Reformed (Amillennial) tradition are frequently criticized for “spiritualizing” the Scriptures. In reality, the difference is really that the former tradition generally understands the Old Testament only from an earthly (carnal) perspective, while the latter insists that the doctrines, rituals, and events of the Old Testament were always intended by God to provide a living picture to His people of the greater spiritual truths which are more clearly taught in the New Testament.
Because of the sharp distinction he makes between national Israel and the Church, the Dispensationalist will mainly confine his interpretation of Old Testament soteriology to the Old Testament text itself, and will likewise restrict his interpretation of New Testament soteriology mainly to the Pauline epistles. In fact, the consistent Dispensationalist will deny that the Gospel and the Christian Church are found in the Old Testament. The Reformed expositor, however, sees the New Testament as the fulfillment of the Old Testament, and will interpret the types and shadows of the Old in light of the clear revelation of the New. There is therefore a continuity between the two Testaments; the Old Testament serves as the foundation of God’s revelation — each successive covenant is the addition of another floor to the building — and the New Testament serves as the roof of the completed structure:
But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.... Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste (Isaiah 28:13, 16; cf: Matthew 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17).
Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; that at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: but now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; and that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: and came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. For though him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; in whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: in whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit (Ephesians 2:11ff).
Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house. For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house. For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God. And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after; but Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end (Hebrews 3:1-6).
Contrary to Dispensationalism, the New Testament makes free use of the allegorical method of interpreting the Old Testament. For example, the Apostle Paul wrote:
For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even it is now. Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free (Galatians 4:22-31).
Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Paul pointed to Hagar and Ishmael as a type of national Israel under the bondage of Sinai, which was to be “cast out,” and to Sarah and Isaac as a type of the Church (Zion), the members of which “are the children of promise.” It should be noted that Paul clearly stated in verse 21 that this allegory was the true meaning of the law: “Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?” In Colossians 2:16-17, Paul again referenced the true spiritual meaning behind the Old Testament, focusing specifically on the ceremonial laws: “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.” In 1 Corinthians 9:7-12 and 1 Timothy 5:17-18, Paul gave the Mosaic case law against muzzling an ox a spiritual interpretation and applied it to Christian ministers. The writer of Hebrews likewise wrote that the temple was a type of “the true tabernacle” (Hebrews 8:2) and that the sacrifices were a “shadow of heavenly things” (verse 5). In the next chapter, we read that the law was “a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things” (Hebrews 10:1). Again, the true interpretation of the Old Testament, according to the New Testament writers, is a spiritual one, not a natural or carnal one. It was because the Jews failed to discern the spiritual meaning of "the law and the prophets" that they were unable to receive their Messiah when He walked among them:
But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him: that the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him (John 12:37-41).
But as it written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned (1 Corinthians 2:9-14).
[God] also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: how shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: and not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: but their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away (2 Corinthians 3:6-16).
With all the above scriptural evidence in mind, it is clear that any system which adopts the hermeneutical principle of the Jews — a principle which caused them to reject and crucify the Son of God and thus to be severely judged by God — has to be rejected by the Christian, for surely it will have a negative effect on his faith and understanding of the true nature of the Gospel.
To Be Continued...
0 comments:
Post a Comment