Check him out.
Saturday, August 16, 2008
On iTunes Now...
The radio program Echoes tuned me into a great artist who distributes his work on the internet. General Fuzz has several albums worth of stuff that you can download. I enjoy his most recent compositions the most, but find all of it good.
Check him out.
Check him out.
Davidson on Education
In an essay written in 1935 to document and explain the history of the book, I'll Take My Stand, Donald Davidson indicates that he and the other Agrarians wrote the book to Southerners as Southerners. He laments that perhaps, this was presumptuous. The Agrarians and the critics of the book did not even use the primary terms (Agrarianism and Industrialism) in the same way. Later he makes the following statement:
It was first of all a book for mature Southerners of the late nineteen-twenties, in the so-called New South - Southerners who, we trusted, were not so far gone in modern education as to require, for the act of comprehension, coloured charts, statistical tables, graphs, and journalistic monosullables, but were prepared to use intelligence and memory.Wouldn't it be nice to have people like that? He didn't and I doubt we will either for a long time. But that is one of the things a good classical education seeks to remedy. The act of interacting with primary sources, as much as possible, helps build the kind of person who can use his intelligence and memory. Sure we use maps and sometimes charts to help us colect similar types of information. I think Davidson went a little too far. However, the modern education system, including modern journalism (which is supposed to be a primary agent of continuing education for adults) has reduced all learning to statistics, graphs, and monosyllables.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
The Process
I have been down to Clemson University several times in the past two weeks. I have registered for my final class, a Master's Research class. I have paid for said class (Thanks, Dad!). I have spoken to advisors in the department and managed to get all the appropriate forms signed and turned in. I have raided the library more times than I'd like to think. My limit on books is 200. I'm not sure how close I am on that.
This is just one part of a bookcase. The stuff you can see is in front of my books.
I have photocopied, scanned, and printed more articles than I ever thought I would. Here are some of them on my
desk
and floor
The process is to begin to read as much as I can about Davidson and figure out what exactly I can say about him or ideas that he had that hasn't been said before. With my Senior Thesis at UTC, I did this by looking at how B.B. Warfield and Charles Hodge both used the philosophy of Thomas Reid, called Common Sense Realism. Stuff had been written on Reid, Warfield, and Hodge, but no one brought it together and said what I tried to say.
At this point I have read two biographies of Davidson, several books on the Agrarian movement, and a ton of Davidson's own writings. I am coming close to something. I can feel it. I just hope it happens before school starts. My ability to read for seven hours at a time reduces severely at that point. If I have a thesis statement by that point, however, then I have about 45 days to write at least 90 pages on my topic. If I make it to October 15 with a draft, I should be home free from there.
I have photocopied, scanned, and printed more articles than I ever thought I would. Here are some of them on my
desk
The process is to begin to read as much as I can about Davidson and figure out what exactly I can say about him or ideas that he had that hasn't been said before. With my Senior Thesis at UTC, I did this by looking at how B.B. Warfield and Charles Hodge both used the philosophy of Thomas Reid, called Common Sense Realism. Stuff had been written on Reid, Warfield, and Hodge, but no one brought it together and said what I tried to say.
At this point I have read two biographies of Davidson, several books on the Agrarian movement, and a ton of Davidson's own writings. I am coming close to something. I can feel it. I just hope it happens before school starts. My ability to read for seven hours at a time reduces severely at that point. If I have a thesis statement by that point, however, then I have about 45 days to write at least 90 pages on my topic. If I make it to October 15 with a draft, I should be home free from there.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Paternalism in Southern History
I find it very interesting that, in Southern historiography, no white southerner can have any concern for an African-American without it being paternalistic. There is no room for generosity, love, compassion, or genuine fellowship. Every attempt by a white southerner to reach out to the African-American is dubbed "paternalism" which means that they are reaching down, not out.
To a large degree I suppose we have brought this on ourselves, but it ticks me off.
To a large degree I suppose we have brought this on ourselves, but it ticks me off.
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Metaphysical Poetry
“About the beginning of the seventeenth century appeared a race of writers that may be termed metaphysical poets.”
Samuel Johnson first used the term “metaphysical poets” in a disparaging way in his Lives of the Poets in 1744. He faulted these writers for using their wit to construct false conceits, tying dissimilar ideas together in a violent fashion. He acknowledged that many of these poets were “men of learning” and that they occasionally hit on truth, saying “their learning instructs, and their subtlety surprises; but the reader commonly thinks his improvement dearly bought, and, though he sometimes admires, is seldom pleased.”
By the end of the seventeenth century the poetry studied in this guide had fallen out of favor and was largely ignored for nearly two centuries. Poets like T.S. Eliot recovered the genius of the metaphysical poets and stated that the metaphysical poets were merely “engaged in the task of trying to find the verbal equivalent for states of mind and feeling. And this means both that they are more mature, and that they wear better, than later poets of certainly not less literary ability.” He noted that English poetry changed significantly after John Milton (1608-1674) and John Dryden (1631-1700) and that poets lost the technique of feeling the experiences that create poetry. In Eliot’s opinion, it is a lost art to convert heterogeneous experiences into poetry, and this is what the metaphysical poets did.
The poets that are generally labeled “metaphysical” are men like John Donne, Andrew Marvell, George Herbert, Henry Vaughan, Abraham Crowley, Edward Herbert, Richard Crashaw and a host of other poets generally living during the seventeenth century (1600’s). From time-to-time sonnets of men like William Shakespeare will be slipped in. As Eliot noted, it was an organic transition from the dramatists of the sixteenth century that gave rise to the conceits of the seventeenth century poets. What makes a poem “metaphysical”? The poets we are concerned with wrote about a broad range of topics, both secular and sacred. However, their poetry is very much characterized by wit. Wit is different from humor, which is what we generally associate the word with today. Humor is more-or-less immediately funny. Wit requires a second glance or reconsideration before it is realized. Wit “suggests intellectual brilliance and ingenuity, verbal deftness, as in an epigram.”
An epigram is a short poem with a witty twist at the end. The form of the epigram comes from Rome, but has been well-developed by English-speaking authors as well. It may be the best way to illustrate the use of wit that is central to metaphysical poetry. Consider the epigrams reproduced below:
Little strokes
Fell great oaks.— Benjamin Franklin
Here lies my wife: here let her lie!
Now she's at rest — and so am I.— John Dryden
Another major characteristic of metaphysical poetry is use of the conceit. A conceit is a “fairly elaborate figurative device of a fanciful kind which often incorporates metaphor, simile, hyperbole or oxymoron and which is intended to surprise and delight by its wit and ingenuity.To put it more simply, a conceit is a comparison of two things which are really nothing alike. Probably one of the best examples comes from John Donne’s poem “A Valediction: forbidding Mourning.” In this poem Donne compares the love he shares with his wife to a drafter’s compass:
Our two souls therefore, which are one,
Though I must go, endure not yet
A breach, but an expansion,
Like gold to aery thinness beat.
If they be two, they are two so
As stiff twin compasses are two ;
Thy soul, the fix'd foot, makes no show
To move, but doth, if th' other do.
Using this conceit, Donne explains that his going will do nothing more than expand the circumference of their unified love. It cannot diminish the love they share, for their souls are joined as the compass is joined. One leg of the compass provides a footing, an anchor; while the other moves away if needs be, but always they are connected at the center.
Samuel Johnson first used the term “metaphysical poets” in a disparaging way in his Lives of the Poets in 1744. He faulted these writers for using their wit to construct false conceits, tying dissimilar ideas together in a violent fashion. He acknowledged that many of these poets were “men of learning” and that they occasionally hit on truth, saying “their learning instructs, and their subtlety surprises; but the reader commonly thinks his improvement dearly bought, and, though he sometimes admires, is seldom pleased.”
By the end of the seventeenth century the poetry studied in this guide had fallen out of favor and was largely ignored for nearly two centuries. Poets like T.S. Eliot recovered the genius of the metaphysical poets and stated that the metaphysical poets were merely “engaged in the task of trying to find the verbal equivalent for states of mind and feeling. And this means both that they are more mature, and that they wear better, than later poets of certainly not less literary ability.” He noted that English poetry changed significantly after John Milton (1608-1674) and John Dryden (1631-1700) and that poets lost the technique of feeling the experiences that create poetry. In Eliot’s opinion, it is a lost art to convert heterogeneous experiences into poetry, and this is what the metaphysical poets did.
The poets that are generally labeled “metaphysical” are men like John Donne, Andrew Marvell, George Herbert, Henry Vaughan, Abraham Crowley, Edward Herbert, Richard Crashaw and a host of other poets generally living during the seventeenth century (1600’s). From time-to-time sonnets of men like William Shakespeare will be slipped in. As Eliot noted, it was an organic transition from the dramatists of the sixteenth century that gave rise to the conceits of the seventeenth century poets. What makes a poem “metaphysical”? The poets we are concerned with wrote about a broad range of topics, both secular and sacred. However, their poetry is very much characterized by wit. Wit is different from humor, which is what we generally associate the word with today. Humor is more-or-less immediately funny. Wit requires a second glance or reconsideration before it is realized. Wit “suggests intellectual brilliance and ingenuity, verbal deftness, as in an epigram.”
An epigram is a short poem with a witty twist at the end. The form of the epigram comes from Rome, but has been well-developed by English-speaking authors as well. It may be the best way to illustrate the use of wit that is central to metaphysical poetry. Consider the epigrams reproduced below:
Little strokes
Fell great oaks.— Benjamin Franklin
Here lies my wife: here let her lie!
Now she's at rest — and so am I.— John Dryden
Another major characteristic of metaphysical poetry is use of the conceit. A conceit is a “fairly elaborate figurative device of a fanciful kind which often incorporates metaphor, simile, hyperbole or oxymoron and which is intended to surprise and delight by its wit and ingenuity.To put it more simply, a conceit is a comparison of two things which are really nothing alike. Probably one of the best examples comes from John Donne’s poem “A Valediction: forbidding Mourning.” In this poem Donne compares the love he shares with his wife to a drafter’s compass:
Our two souls therefore, which are one,
Though I must go, endure not yet
A breach, but an expansion,
Like gold to aery thinness beat.
If they be two, they are two so
As stiff twin compasses are two ;
Thy soul, the fix'd foot, makes no show
To move, but doth, if th' other do.
Using this conceit, Donne explains that his going will do nothing more than expand the circumference of their unified love. It cannot diminish the love they share, for their souls are joined as the compass is joined. One leg of the compass provides a footing, an anchor; while the other moves away if needs be, but always they are connected at the center.
Friday, August 8, 2008
Going for the Gold, or the hat, or the paper, or something...
I just found out I am about 90 some-odd pages away from my M.A. in History. I thought I had a language requirement hanging over my head but I talked to the director of the Language department and they said I was clear. So now, with all my coursework done I just have to write my thesis.
I met with my advisor yesterday about this and we talked through the timetable. Unless I can graduate this semester (Fall 2008) I will have to wait until August 2009. But my advisor is going on a sabbatical beginning this Spring and will be gone until August 2009. To graduate this semester I have to have a draft of the thing on his desk in September (i.e. 30 days).
I'd like to be done. But I'm not sure I can do this whole thing in 30 days. I think I'm going to give it a try though.
So the saga of the M.A. for Mr. Sisk continues. Mr. Sisk, who is writing a masters thesis on Donald Davidson's attempt to counter modernity through Agrarianism, Distributism, and Regionalism. Donald Davidson who was hopelessly modern but hated modernity (which he identified with nothing more than industrialism).
I have typed a single page with "90 Pages" written on it and taped it above my monitor. That way I will remember for the next 30 days that I have nothing more important (in my spare time) than an essay of 90 pages on Modernism and the futile reaction of one little man from Vanderbilt University.
Follow the continuing saga here, if you wish. Maybe even support me if you can.
I met with my advisor yesterday about this and we talked through the timetable. Unless I can graduate this semester (Fall 2008) I will have to wait until August 2009. But my advisor is going on a sabbatical beginning this Spring and will be gone until August 2009. To graduate this semester I have to have a draft of the thing on his desk in September (i.e. 30 days).
I'd like to be done. But I'm not sure I can do this whole thing in 30 days. I think I'm going to give it a try though.
So the saga of the M.A. for Mr. Sisk continues. Mr. Sisk, who is writing a masters thesis on Donald Davidson's attempt to counter modernity through Agrarianism, Distributism, and Regionalism. Donald Davidson who was hopelessly modern but hated modernity (which he identified with nothing more than industrialism).
I have typed a single page with "90 Pages" written on it and taped it above my monitor. That way I will remember for the next 30 days that I have nothing more important (in my spare time) than an essay of 90 pages on Modernism and the futile reaction of one little man from Vanderbilt University.
Follow the continuing saga here, if you wish. Maybe even support me if you can.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Milton on Education
“The end then of learning is to repair the ruins of our first parents by regaining to know God aright, and out of that knowledge to love him, to imitate him, to be like him, as we may the nearest by possessing our souls of true virtue, which being united to the heavenly grace of faith makes up the highest perfection.” John Milton, Of Education
Milton’s words are powerful. They presuppose something very important. They presuppose, in their very statement, that repair work has to be done. We can go through the litany of problems with modern education, but we don’t have to to see where Milton is coming from. You see, Milton does not locate the problem of education in the newest curricular fad, multicultural program, or pro-homosexual textbook selection. Milton locates the problem systemic in education exactly where it is, the fall. The goal of education, according to Milton, is to repair the ruins of the fall. To bring us back into wonderful, blissful communion with our heavenly Father and the glory of His only-begotten son, Christ, our Lord. Not that we reverse the fall through education, but that we seek to suppress it. We seek, through knowing God aright, through loving Him in knowledge, through imitation of His divine attributes, “to be like Him … by possessing our souls of true virtue.” That is the goal of a classical and Christian education.
Milton’s words are powerful. They presuppose something very important. They presuppose, in their very statement, that repair work has to be done. We can go through the litany of problems with modern education, but we don’t have to to see where Milton is coming from. You see, Milton does not locate the problem of education in the newest curricular fad, multicultural program, or pro-homosexual textbook selection. Milton locates the problem systemic in education exactly where it is, the fall. The goal of education, according to Milton, is to repair the ruins of the fall. To bring us back into wonderful, blissful communion with our heavenly Father and the glory of His only-begotten son, Christ, our Lord. Not that we reverse the fall through education, but that we seek to suppress it. We seek, through knowing God aright, through loving Him in knowledge, through imitation of His divine attributes, “to be like Him … by possessing our souls of true virtue.” That is the goal of a classical and Christian education.
Uncle Tom's Cabin-Themes Part Two
The other major theme we need to consider when reading Uncle Tom's Cabin is Stowe's understanding of Christian Ethics. This theme goes two ways for Stowe. On the one hand, Christian ethics are lauded on the part of Tom and ultimately George Shelby. They are Christ figures in the novel. Tom accepts the humiliation of his life with the understanding that as long as he trusts his life to God he will persevere. Tom is seen reading his Bible, accepting his humiliating position in life, and taking cruel and undeserved punishment from an authority figure, much as Christ. George Shelby, though a late-comer in the novel, is seen acting out his ethical principles to find and rescue Tom from Legree.
The other way Stowe uses Christian ethics is to condemn most of the white characters in the novel and convict readers of the novel. While each person in the novel confesses Christ, they do not truly represent Christ-likeness as Stowe understands it. True Christ-likeness, as Stowe understands it, would immediately free the slaves since she holds slavery itself to be antithetical to Christian love and charity. Rather, many white characters use Christianity as a means to gain and keep power as opposed to a way of changing the world. In this respect we can see Stowe’s link to the social reform movements of Transcendentalism in America.
The other way Stowe uses Christian ethics is to condemn most of the white characters in the novel and convict readers of the novel. While each person in the novel confesses Christ, they do not truly represent Christ-likeness as Stowe understands it. True Christ-likeness, as Stowe understands it, would immediately free the slaves since she holds slavery itself to be antithetical to Christian love and charity. Rather, many white characters use Christianity as a means to gain and keep power as opposed to a way of changing the world. In this respect we can see Stowe’s link to the social reform movements of Transcendentalism in America.
Major Technological Breakthrough by Tristan Gylberd
I found this in the recent edition of Arx Axiom. It was originally published December 1998 in the Stirling Bridge newsletter.
"There is nothing new under the sun." Ecclesiastes 1:9
At the recent technology show in Las Vegas, a protocol for a new technological breakthrough was announced. The new protocol, Bio-Optic Organized Knowledge device, will be trade named BOOK. This new BOOK protocol is a revolutionary technological marvel-with no wires, no electric circuits, no batteries, nothing to be connected, and nothing to be switched on. It's so easy to use, even a child can operate it after only a short training session. Compact and portable, it can be used practically anywhere-even sitting in an armchair by the fire-yet it is powerful enough, and contains enough data storage space to potentially hold as much information as a CD-ROM disc.
Here is how it works. BOOK is constructed of sequentially numbered sheets of fully recyclable paper, each capable of holding thousands of bits of information. The pages are locked together with a custom-fit device called a binder which keeps the sheets in their correct sequence. Opaque Paper Technology (OPT) allows manufacturers to use both sides of the sheet, doubling the information density and cutting costs. Experts are divided on the prospects for further increases in information density; for now, BOOKS with more information simply use more pages. Each sheet is scanned optically, registering information directly into your brain. A flick of the finger takes you to the next sheet. BOOK may be taken up at any time and used merely by opening it. BOOK never crashes or requires rebooting, though like other display devices it can become unstable if dropped overboard. The "browse" feature allows you to move instantly to any sheet, and move forward or backward as you wish. Many come with the "index" feature, which enables users to pinpoint the exact location of any selected information for instant retrieval.
Marvel of marvels, it has also been determined, following a series of laboratory tests in the most adverse conditions, the new protocol is altogether Y2K compliant. Indeed, it seems to be entirely unaffected by the seemingly omnipresent Millennium Bug-thus, guaranteeing the survival of the technology regardless of what the next year brings us in the way of basic infrastructure disruptions.
Optional BOOKmark accessories allows users to open BOOK to the exact place they left it in a previous session-even if the BOOK has been closed. BOOKmarks fit universal design standards; thus, a single BOOKmark can be used in BOOKS by various manufacturers. Conversely, numerous BOOK markers can be used in a single BOOK if users want to store numerous views at once. The number is limited only by the number of pages in the BOOK. Users may also wish to make personal notes next to BOOK text entries with yet any one of another series of optional accessories-transferable programming tools: the Portable Erasable Nip Cryptic Intercommunication Language Stylus, known by the trade name, PENCILS. Portable, durable, and affordable, BOOK is already being hailed as a precursor of a new wave of educational and entertainment products. Also, BOOK's appeal seems so certain that thousands of content creators have committed to the platform and investors are reportedly flocking in. Look for a flood of new titles soon.
"There is nothing new under the sun." Ecclesiastes 1:9
At the recent technology show in Las Vegas, a protocol for a new technological breakthrough was announced. The new protocol, Bio-Optic Organized Knowledge device, will be trade named BOOK. This new BOOK protocol is a revolutionary technological marvel-with no wires, no electric circuits, no batteries, nothing to be connected, and nothing to be switched on. It's so easy to use, even a child can operate it after only a short training session. Compact and portable, it can be used practically anywhere-even sitting in an armchair by the fire-yet it is powerful enough, and contains enough data storage space to potentially hold as much information as a CD-ROM disc.
Here is how it works. BOOK is constructed of sequentially numbered sheets of fully recyclable paper, each capable of holding thousands of bits of information. The pages are locked together with a custom-fit device called a binder which keeps the sheets in their correct sequence. Opaque Paper Technology (OPT) allows manufacturers to use both sides of the sheet, doubling the information density and cutting costs. Experts are divided on the prospects for further increases in information density; for now, BOOKS with more information simply use more pages. Each sheet is scanned optically, registering information directly into your brain. A flick of the finger takes you to the next sheet. BOOK may be taken up at any time and used merely by opening it. BOOK never crashes or requires rebooting, though like other display devices it can become unstable if dropped overboard. The "browse" feature allows you to move instantly to any sheet, and move forward or backward as you wish. Many come with the "index" feature, which enables users to pinpoint the exact location of any selected information for instant retrieval.
Marvel of marvels, it has also been determined, following a series of laboratory tests in the most adverse conditions, the new protocol is altogether Y2K compliant. Indeed, it seems to be entirely unaffected by the seemingly omnipresent Millennium Bug-thus, guaranteeing the survival of the technology regardless of what the next year brings us in the way of basic infrastructure disruptions.
Optional BOOKmark accessories allows users to open BOOK to the exact place they left it in a previous session-even if the BOOK has been closed. BOOKmarks fit universal design standards; thus, a single BOOKmark can be used in BOOKS by various manufacturers. Conversely, numerous BOOK markers can be used in a single BOOK if users want to store numerous views at once. The number is limited only by the number of pages in the BOOK. Users may also wish to make personal notes next to BOOK text entries with yet any one of another series of optional accessories-transferable programming tools: the Portable Erasable Nip Cryptic Intercommunication Language Stylus, known by the trade name, PENCILS. Portable, durable, and affordable, BOOK is already being hailed as a precursor of a new wave of educational and entertainment products. Also, BOOK's appeal seems so certain that thousands of content creators have committed to the platform and investors are reportedly flocking in. Look for a flood of new titles soon.
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Hermeneutics Part Five
Today we consider the final major principle in interpreting the Bible.
Scripture must be interpreted according to the genre in which it is written: Poetry should not be interpreted as prose, nor should prophecy be interpreted as prose. Each style of literary genre is to be interpreted differently, not all as the same thing. This hampers the so-called literal interpretation of Scripture. Scripture is full of allusions, allegorical remarks, metaphors and other literary devices. Many students of the Bible claim to interpret the Scriptures literally, but they cannot do this consistently. For instance, John 15:1 portrays Christ as a vine, yet few (if any) interpreters would say that Jesus meant this literally. Is the difference in the text, does Jesus clue us into the metaphor in any way. Not really. He just says "I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser." Throughout the Old Testament we see God portrayed in a variety of metaphors. None of these are to be taken literally with respect to God, for God is spirit and cannot be understood as anything literal or physical. He even warned against this in the Decalogue. Anthropomorphism is a frequent literary device among ancient writings and is never meant to be taken literally. Scripture may have a divine origin, but its writers were men who had to follow the rules of grammar for their social context, just as we do today. Idioms and other literary devices are not uncommon in Scripture, and we must not impose literal constraints on passages that do not have them. How do we tell the difference? We return to the previous point and let Scripture interpret Scripture. In the Olivet discourse Christ references events of catastrophic and cosmic proportions. Today most evangelical Christians understand these events to be future because they have not happened in time. However, this presents the problem of expecting a literal fulfillment of prophecy, which cannot be justified. In the book of Isaiah, the prophet records that in God's judgment on Babylon "the stars of heaven will not give their light and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be darkened in its going forth and the moon will not cause its light to shine" (Isaiah 13:10). This passage must be understood to have been fulfilled because of later revelation in the book of Daniel which references the judgment of Babylon by God through other nations (Daniel 2:36-45). Is this passage to be interpreted literally as one would passages such as Genesis 6 where God destroyed the earth with a flood? Some have suggested that events such as these are literal to God. However, this does not really answer the question. In supposing that scripture was written for contemporary hearers, it must also be supposed that they understood what was being written or said. Otherwise the very nature of Scripture as personal revelation from God is useless. Why would God go about telling us what is real to Him if it is not real to us as well? In short, even if passages such as Isaiah 13:10 are to be taken as literal to God, though not to mankind, they must have some form of reference point to mankind and interpretational value. Therefore, are they to be taken as literal to us? The direct answer is obviously not. The heavens are still around, we can look up and see them. This discussion should inform our understanding of the Olivet Discourse. Is it necessary to restrict Christ's words to literal events which were to occur? Not at all.
If we use these principles of hermeneutics carefully and faithfully, the Scriptures will open up to us with very few problems. We will not understand everything. That is part of the hermeneutical problem. We were not alive when they wrote and have a very different perception of things. The problem of translation is that it does not always catch the idioms and figures of speech that a culture like Israel or Babylon, or even Rome would have known instantly. It is perplexing to us to understand why Christ said that the Pharisees strained out a gnat to swallow a camel, but not impossible to understand it. There are some passages of Scripture that have perplexed scholars for years. The great church father Augustine once wrote concerning the "Man of Sin" in 2 Thessalonians, that he had no idea what Paul was talking about. The best efforts have yet to come to a conclusive answer to the question yet. That does not mean that no answer exists, only that we lack the tools to find it with. All of Scripture is meant to be understood. It may not be for our generation to understand that passage yet. It was not meant for the early church to understand the doctrine of justification, it was meant for those men who suffered for the Protestant Reformation to draw on the Scriptures and the insights of godly men to set down clearly the doctrine of sola fides. This is to say that we should be mindful of our task as exegetes of Scripture. It is there to say something. The depths of Scripture are deep, but they are not inpenetrable. We can exegete a passage to learn what that has to say. We can expound a passage based on our exegesis and learn what the Scriptures have to teach us there. We can systematize the passage with other similar passages to see what God would teach us regarding a similar theme. We can systematize the entire Bible and learn God's will for humanity. But we can do none of these things exhaustively, or without the aid of the Spirit. He is the primary agent in the understanding of Scripture. It is He who, as the Westminster Confession says, is the "supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we can rest" since it is He who is "speaking in the Scripture" (WCF I.x).
Scripture must be interpreted according to the genre in which it is written: Poetry should not be interpreted as prose, nor should prophecy be interpreted as prose. Each style of literary genre is to be interpreted differently, not all as the same thing. This hampers the so-called literal interpretation of Scripture. Scripture is full of allusions, allegorical remarks, metaphors and other literary devices. Many students of the Bible claim to interpret the Scriptures literally, but they cannot do this consistently. For instance, John 15:1 portrays Christ as a vine, yet few (if any) interpreters would say that Jesus meant this literally. Is the difference in the text, does Jesus clue us into the metaphor in any way. Not really. He just says "I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser." Throughout the Old Testament we see God portrayed in a variety of metaphors. None of these are to be taken literally with respect to God, for God is spirit and cannot be understood as anything literal or physical. He even warned against this in the Decalogue. Anthropomorphism is a frequent literary device among ancient writings and is never meant to be taken literally. Scripture may have a divine origin, but its writers were men who had to follow the rules of grammar for their social context, just as we do today. Idioms and other literary devices are not uncommon in Scripture, and we must not impose literal constraints on passages that do not have them. How do we tell the difference? We return to the previous point and let Scripture interpret Scripture. In the Olivet discourse Christ references events of catastrophic and cosmic proportions. Today most evangelical Christians understand these events to be future because they have not happened in time. However, this presents the problem of expecting a literal fulfillment of prophecy, which cannot be justified. In the book of Isaiah, the prophet records that in God's judgment on Babylon "the stars of heaven will not give their light and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be darkened in its going forth and the moon will not cause its light to shine" (Isaiah 13:10). This passage must be understood to have been fulfilled because of later revelation in the book of Daniel which references the judgment of Babylon by God through other nations (Daniel 2:36-45). Is this passage to be interpreted literally as one would passages such as Genesis 6 where God destroyed the earth with a flood? Some have suggested that events such as these are literal to God. However, this does not really answer the question. In supposing that scripture was written for contemporary hearers, it must also be supposed that they understood what was being written or said. Otherwise the very nature of Scripture as personal revelation from God is useless. Why would God go about telling us what is real to Him if it is not real to us as well? In short, even if passages such as Isaiah 13:10 are to be taken as literal to God, though not to mankind, they must have some form of reference point to mankind and interpretational value. Therefore, are they to be taken as literal to us? The direct answer is obviously not. The heavens are still around, we can look up and see them. This discussion should inform our understanding of the Olivet Discourse. Is it necessary to restrict Christ's words to literal events which were to occur? Not at all.
If we use these principles of hermeneutics carefully and faithfully, the Scriptures will open up to us with very few problems. We will not understand everything. That is part of the hermeneutical problem. We were not alive when they wrote and have a very different perception of things. The problem of translation is that it does not always catch the idioms and figures of speech that a culture like Israel or Babylon, or even Rome would have known instantly. It is perplexing to us to understand why Christ said that the Pharisees strained out a gnat to swallow a camel, but not impossible to understand it. There are some passages of Scripture that have perplexed scholars for years. The great church father Augustine once wrote concerning the "Man of Sin" in 2 Thessalonians, that he had no idea what Paul was talking about. The best efforts have yet to come to a conclusive answer to the question yet. That does not mean that no answer exists, only that we lack the tools to find it with. All of Scripture is meant to be understood. It may not be for our generation to understand that passage yet. It was not meant for the early church to understand the doctrine of justification, it was meant for those men who suffered for the Protestant Reformation to draw on the Scriptures and the insights of godly men to set down clearly the doctrine of sola fides. This is to say that we should be mindful of our task as exegetes of Scripture. It is there to say something. The depths of Scripture are deep, but they are not inpenetrable. We can exegete a passage to learn what that has to say. We can expound a passage based on our exegesis and learn what the Scriptures have to teach us there. We can systematize the passage with other similar passages to see what God would teach us regarding a similar theme. We can systematize the entire Bible and learn God's will for humanity. But we can do none of these things exhaustively, or without the aid of the Spirit. He is the primary agent in the understanding of Scripture. It is He who, as the Westminster Confession says, is the "supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we can rest" since it is He who is "speaking in the Scripture" (WCF I.x).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)