Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Biblical Essays
    Biblical Essays
    Biblical Essays
    Ebook636 pages15 hours

    Biblical Essays

    By James D. Quiggle

    ()

    Read preview

    About this ebook

    Eighty biblical essays from a Calvinist Dispensational Baptist. These essays address biblical issues such as inspiration, interpretation, how to study the Bible, sin, the Savior, and salvation, eternal security, Calvinism, Dispensationalism, the church, eschatology, eternal life, judgment, pastoring, spiritual gifts, atonement, propitiation, depravity, election, resolving hermeneutical issues, and more. Each may be read independently, and no particular order of reading is required.

    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherJames D. Quiggle
    Release dateMay 18, 2018
    ISBN9780463538470
    Biblical Essays
    Author

    James D. Quiggle

    James D. Quiggle was born in 1952 at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. He grew up in Kansas and the Texas Panhandle. In the early 1970s he joined the United States Air Force. At his first permanent assignment in Indian Springs, Nevada in a small Baptist church, the pastor introduced him to Jesus and soon after he was saved. Over the next ten years those he met in churches from the East Coast to the West Coast, mature Christian men, poured themselves into mentoring him. In the 1970s he was gifted with the Scofield Bible Course from Moody Bible Institute. As he completed his studies his spiritual gift of teaching became even more apparent. He earned a bachelor’s degree from Bethany Bible College during the 1980s while still in the Air Force. Between 2006–2008, after his career in the Air Force and with his children grown up, he decided to continue his education. He enrolled in Bethany Divinity College and Seminary and earned a Master of Arts in Religion and a Master of Theological Studies.As an extension of his spiritual gift of teaching, he was prompted by the Holy Spirit to begin writing books. James Quiggle is now a Christian author with over fifty commentaries on Bible books and doctrines. He is an editor for the Evangelical Dispensational Quarterly Journal published by Scofield Biblical Institute and Theological Seminary.He continues to write and has a vibrant teaching ministry through social media.

    Read more from James D. Quiggle

    Related to Biblical Essays

    Related ebooks

    Christianity For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      FAMILY TIME with God

      Aug 25, 2023

      FAMILY TIME with God
      3 min read

    • Article

      Stumbling Blocks That Delay Church Transformation Part 5

      May 20, 2022

      In my previous writings I have pointed out that institutionalised Christianity is fading away. Organised religious systems are sucking the life of Christ out of believers. In many cases, believers are busy with the church programme, but not with God.

      2 min read

    • Article

      God Wants To Use You Part Ll

      Jun 24, 2022

      God Wants To Use You Part Ll
      1 min read

    • Article

      WHO’S In The NEWS?

      May 19, 2023

      George Verwer died on Friday 14th April at the age of 84. The Church has lost a man who had an astonishing global influence on the way it carries out its vital task of sharing the good news of Jesus. In Operation Mobilisation (OM), which George start

      3 min read

    • Article

      Why Do The Wicked Prosper?

      Sep 4, 2020

      Why Do The Wicked Prosper?
      3 min read

    • Article

      Receiving The Good News Lessons From The Parable Of The Sower

      Jun 12, 2020

      The Bible is the best-selling book of all time. It is the best-selling book year after year, every year. It far outsells any other book, with a whopping 4 billion copies sold over the last 50 years. The mission with which I work, Hellenic Ministries,

      5 min read

    • Article

      The Anglican Church’s Controversial Political Stance On Israel

      Oct 27, 2023

      A decision by the Anglican Church of Southern Africa (ACSA) to declare Israel an apartheid state “is highly concerning” as it “portrays a false view of the conflict between the Palestinians and Israel,” says Bafana Modise, head of communications at S

      3 min read

    • Article

      Famous Fathers In The Bible

      May 20, 2019

      Scripture is filled with people who we can learn much from. When it comes to the challenging vocation of fatherhood, several fathers in the Bible show what is wise to do—and what is not wise to do. Of course, the most important father figure in the B

      2 min read

    • Article

      The Image of Christ this Christmas

      Nov 27, 2020

      It’s not unusual to see nativity scenes this time of year. They’re often lovely scenes, complete with robed figures nestled among sheep, donkeys, and cows on beds of straw. But one thing frequently amiss in these scenes involves the portrayal of Mary

      3 min read

    • Article

      Judas’ Betrayal

      Mar 18, 2020

      Judas’ Betrayal
      1 min read

    • Article

      Letters To The EDITOR

      Mar 18, 2022

      Dear readers, we love to hear your thoughts on the stories that we publish, what is going on around the world, and what the Lord has placed on your heart! Email your letter through to editor@joymag.co.za for a chance to be featured – please try to ke

      7 min read

    • Article

      Bible Fun

      Oct 27, 2023

      Bible Fun
      2 min read

    • Article

      A Miracle Happened Inside Me

      Oct 22, 2021

      Christ for all Nations (CfaN) has had a part in changing the face of Africa. To date, by the grace of God, we have seen more than 81 million people receive Jesus Christ as their Saviour through the ministry of CfaN. We truly thank the Lord for these

      2 min read

    • Article

      Streamline Your Life

      May 18, 2020

      Streamline Your Life
      1 min read

    • Article

      Characters Of The Bible Gideon

      Oct 28, 2022

      Last month we focused on Samson, the last of twelve judges in the book of Judges. Samson’s moral character appears shoddy at best in the biblical narrative. This month, we’ll take a look at another judge who appears a little better, albeit by no mean

      3 min read

    • Article

      The Shame Of The Catholic Church

      Nov 15, 2018

      One doesn't have to be Roman Catholic or even Christian to recognize the great good the Catholic Church has done. America would be worse off were it not its pro-life stance and numerous acts of charity. But good works are sometimes diluted or even ov

      2 min read

    • Article

      A New Day Of Pentecost Part VI

      May 19, 2023

      The scripture above records the final words of Jesus Christ to His disciples before He was taken up into a cloud. One of His last promises was that the Father would send the Holy Spirit, and the baptism of the Spirit would enable the disciples to acc

      2 min read

    • Article

      The Holiness Of God

      Nov 19, 2021

      The Holiness Of God
      3 min read

    Related categories

    Reviews for Biblical Essays

    0 ratings

    0 ratings0 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

      Book preview

      Biblical Essays - James D. Quiggle

      Abbreviations

      Introduction

      The Story of My Salvation

      Inspiration of Scripture

      The Literal Hermeneutic

      Seven Reasons To Use The Literal Interpretation

      How to Study The Bible

      Why Study The Bible?

      The Importance of Context In Bible Study

      The Biographical Study

      Using Bible Commentaries

      Bible Translations and Paraphrases

      Assumptions In Bible Study

      Wrong and Reasonable Assumptions

      Anachronisms In Bible Study

      Eternal Life

      The Two Compartment Theory

      Genesis 3:16

      Genesis 6:2, 4

      Genesis 11:26–32

      Matthew 4:3, 6

      Mark 4:3–9

      John 15:6

      Acts 16:31

      Romans 2:25–29

      Philippians 2:5–8

      Traditional (Essential) Dispensationalism

      Progressive Dispensationalism

      Mid-Acts Dispensationalism

      Foreordination

      Foreordination, Foreknowledge, Free Will

      The Many Meanings of Grace

      Pleasing God

      Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ

      Essential Doctrines

      Sanctification

      The Law

      God

      Christology

      Pneumatology

      The Doctrine of Sin

      The Nature of Sin

      The Origin of Sin

      Sin and the Mentally Deficient

      Total Depravity

      A Parable of Sin and Holiness

      Free Will, Free Choices

      Free Will, Salvation

      Atonement is not Redemption

      A Conversation About Unconditional Election

      Order of Salvation

      Arminianism Versus the Bible

      Arminianism Versus Calvinism

      Election is not Predestination

      What Must I Do To Be Saved?

      Who is Among the Elect?

      The Error of Lordship Salvation

      The Old Testament Atonement

      The Foundation of Eternal Security

      Five Witnesses of Eternal Security

      The Perseverance of Eternal Security

      Born-again

      The Content of Saving faith

      Eschatological Issues in Dispensationalism

      A Dispensational View of Daniel 9:27

      Are the Rapture And Tribulation Near?

      Fulfillment of National Ethnic Israel’s Covenants

      The Failure of Post- and A- Millennialism

      The Old Testament She’ôl (Sheol)

      The New Testament Hades

      Géenna, the Lake of Fire

      The Bema and Great White Throne

      Why Is My Pastor Eating The Sheep?

      What is a Spiritual Gift?

      Functional Gender Differences

      Homogeneity

      Dispensationalism and Supersessionism

      The Tithe

      The Tithe, First Corinthians 9:9–14

      The Tithe, First Corinthians 16:1–3.

      The Tithe, Second Corinthians 8:13–15

      Twelve Things to Remember

      Appendix One My Statement of Beliefs

      Appendix Two Books by James D. Quiggle

      Sources

      Introduction

      In 1877, one of my teachers in the Word, William Greenough Thayer Shedd (1820–1894), better known as W. G. T. Shedd, published a book of Theological Essays, as it was titled, and in 1893 another series of essays, titled Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy. Of course, Shedd was my teacher not in person, but through his written works. This book of Biblical Essays is intended to honor the way the Holy Spirit has used Mr. Shedd in my life.

      Most of these essays originated as Facebook (FB) posts on my two pages (James Quiggle, and James Quiggle, Author) and the four Groups of which I am a member. Many have been expanded for this book, as they are no longer bound by FB word limits (about 1300 words). A handful are from one of my other published books or articles written for other occasions.

      A collection of essays begs the question, Who is the author. Like everyone else, I have labels that identify who I am as a Christian. My beliefs may be fairly described as Calvinist Dispensational Baptist.

      I am a Calvinist. I am in essential agreement with certain beliefs about the Bible as defined by Calvin and others of his generation, and described by this traditional list of doctrines: Bibliology, Theology Proper, Christology, Pneumatology, Anthropology, Hamartiology, Soteriology, Angelology. Of course, these also are labels, and one must turn the can around and read the ingredients to discover what Calvinists believe. I have included my statement of belief, with supporting scriptures, in appendix one.

      I am a Dispensationalist. Some may have noticed two doctrines not on the Calvinist list. These are Eschatology and Ecclesiology. These are not on the Calvinist list because of the three essentials of Dispensational theology, to which Calvinists do not subscribe [Ryrie, Dispensationalism, 39–40].

      A Dispensationalist keeps Israel and the church distinct.

      The distinction between Israel and the church is born out of a system of hermeneutics [interpretation] that is usually called literal interpretation.

      The underlying purpose of God in the world is the glory of God.

      There are other distinctives of Dispensationalism, for which see the essay Traditional (Essential) Dispensationalism. The Dispensationalist is unlike the Calvinist in Eschatology and Ecclesiology (Ecclesiology as related to Eschatology) because of the Literal Hermeneutic. The Calvinist applies the Literal Hermeneutic (see essay Five Reasons to Use Literal Interpretation) to every doctrine except Eschatology, which also affects certain aspects of Ecclesiology (the distinction between Israel and the New Testament church). The Dispensationalist consistently applies the Literal Hermeneutic to every doctrine; thus the differences Dispensationalism has with Calvinism in Eschatology and Ecclesiology. (There is also a small difference in Soteriology, which is also dependent on the Literal Hermeneutic, for which see the essay, The Content of Saving Faith.)

      I am also a Baptist. More accurately, I worship, serve, and fellowship in churches whose doctrines, organization, and practices may fairly be described as baptistic, because baptistic closely follows what I believe about such things. I’m not wedded to any particular denomination. I have led a vagabond life (mostly due to career choices) which has been allowed me to be a member of about a dozen or so local churches in several cities in the USA and Europe, affiliated with different denominations. As I recall, SBC, IFCA, GARBC, CBA, BBFI, and one or two others.

      These eighty essays have been lightly edited from the original. Each may be read independently, and no particular order of reading is required. With these thoughts in mind, onward to Biblical Essays.

      The Story of My Salvation

      My testimony is not the gospel of salvation, merely my story of how I was convicted of sin, the Savior, and salvation.

      When I was high school and college, many of my friends thought I was a Christian, but I was not.

      I was saved four days before my twenty-second birthday. At the time of this writing I am fifty-seven years of age. I found out about ten years ago, when I was forty-seven, that my parents were raised in church; my mom in a Primitive Baptist church, and my dad in the denomination known as the Christian Church. However, they stopped attending church after they left home. They never spoke to their four children about their religious beliefs, not then and not now. To this day I do not believe these good and moral parents have a saving interest in Christ. They gave their children a good moral foundation for life, and my friends thought I was a Christian, because I led the kind of moral life Christians are supposed to lead. I did not lie, steal, curse, drink alcohol, use illegal drugs, or engage in sexual activity. I believed there might be a god, but I was not a Christian, because I knew nothing about Christianity. In my youth I had attended maybe four or five church services at the insistence of close friends. Really, it all seemed kind of silly, and completely unnecessary.

      Let me tell you how little I knew. Part of my high school building burned in my senior year. We went to classes in the huge Southern Baptist church building behind the high school, and the very tall Episcopal church building down the street. My classes in the Baptist building were in the basement, in what I now know to have been Sunday School rooms. But, at the time, I didn’t give it any thought. In these rooms I saw papers on the wall with various names, like Mark, Matthew, John, Paul, and Timothy. I thought these were people who attended that church, and I wondered what they had done to get their names on the walls. As I recall, I asked one of my friends about the names, and was told that these were the names of books of the Bible. Having no interest in the information, I did not pursue the matter.

      After 2 years of college I joined the USAF and about a year later wound up in Indian Springs, NV, about 45 miles north of Las Vegas. After I had been there about five months, an acquaintance began to attend the Baptist church. I was invited, but declined. After repeated invitations I said I would go if the pastor gave people the opportunity to ask questions. I figured that would never happen, and if it did, I would ask questions that would show that religion was stupid.

      Of course, it did happen, and I had too much pride not to keep my word. So, I went. The pastor asked if anyone had any questions. I was actually too shy to speak in public. I also felt strangely compelled to shut up and listen to what he had to say. I began to attend regularly, soon at all three services. I came to understand that there was a real problem between me and God, which the pastor called sin. Despite my good and moral life I began to understand I was not as good as Jesus; and if not that good then I was not good enough for God. Slowly I came to the place where I desired with all my heart to serve God, and nothing else in my life really mattered, unless God would accept me as his servant. I began to read the New Testament, although much of it didn’t make sense to me.

      After about six weeks, I became aware that people in the church were waiting for me to make some kind of decision. I asked the pastor if I could speak to him privately, so we got into his car and began to drive around Indian Springs; it is a very tiny village. After about ten minutes he asked me if we were going to keep driving around or if I had something to say. I told him that I knew he was waiting for a decision, but I was not ready to make a decision. He said, Don’t worry about it James. I’m not asking you to make a decision. When God wants you he’ll get you. So, I stopped worrying. I kept attending church, and I stayed focused on my desire to serve God.

      A week or so later, on a Wednesday evening, May 19, 1974, I was intensely focused on my need and desire to serve God. In my heart I had given myself to him as his servant, and I was waiting for him to accept me, so I could begin to serve him. Some hymn was sung (which I no longer remember), and as I heard the words I suddenly saw, in my mind’s eye, Jesus on the cross for me; in my thoughts I was standing at the foot of the cross looking at Jesus. I didn’t have a vision, nothing so grand, I simply understood, and saw in my thoughts, Jesus dying on the cross for me, bearing my sins, so that I could be saved; and I accepted his death on my behalf and was saved. For me, it was a very dramatic, very personal, and very overwhelming moment. The following Sunday morning I came forward before the church and publically confessed my faith in Jesus Christ as my Savior. A few months later I was baptized. Now, almost 35 years later, he is a faithful Savior who continues to allow me to serve him. Update: Almost ten years have passed since I wrote my testimony. I’ve am now sixty-six years of age. Jesus continues to be a faithful Savior and allows me to continue to serve him.

      My Core Christian Values

      I will enter God’s presence and have intimate fellowship with him through a life filled with worship, praise, prayer, thanksgiving, service, and obedience.

      I will daily ask God for grace, power, guidance, and help for myself and others to live according to His values and His rules for living.

      I will actively seek to know God and understand His Word.

      I will live out my faith without wavering and without fear, for God is my strength.

      I will tell others about Christ the Savior, and extend God’s offer of salvation to them.

      I will assemble with believers of like faith to worship, fellowship, and serve.

      I will encourage others and myself to practice acts of godly love and good works.

      I will practice forgiveness, longsuffering, and mercy toward others.

      I will practice humility, which is valuing myself as God values me and esteeming others as better than myself.

      I will strive to live a life filled with righteous acts in order to be holy as God is holy.

      I will pay attention to and care for the spiritual and physical well-being of others.

      I will remember Christ promised to return, and he is faithful.

      I will continue active in my faith until Christ takes me home to heaven.

      Inspiration of Scripture

      Inspiration means God breathed-out. According to 2 Timothy 3:16, God breathed-out the sixty-six books believers recognize as Scripture. This means that the very words were given by God to chosen men and women who wrote them. According to 2 Peter 1:20–21 the Holy Spirit moved chosen men to write the words of Scripture. When Peter says Scripture is not of private interpretation, he means the words did not come from men, but that the words were inspired into men by the Holy Spirit. The Greek word translated moved (holy men of God spoke as they were ‘moved’ by the Holy Spirit) in v. 21 means to lift up and bear along, such as a ship driven by the wind in its sails, Acts 27:15. The Holy Spirit was the divine breath that breathed God’s word into the human writers. Three aspects of the biblical text must be considered when defining inspiration: the autographs, copies of the autographs, and translations.

      The Autographs

      The term autograph means the writing as it came from the author. For example, the letter Paul sent to the Roman church was an autograph, i.e., it was the original letter, not a copy. Inspiration is claimed for the autographs of the sixty-six books of the Bible. The Bible in the whole and in the parts is inspired as to its very words. Every word in the original writings was inspired, every word was equally inspired, and every word is fully authoritative as God’s word. Inspiration is not communicating religious concepts that men then put into their own words. Inspiration is God communicating the very words the writers wrote. God intended to communicate; words are the means of communication; concepts cannot be communicated without words. The human authors assimilated the concepts in the words given to them by God. They wrote those very same words to communicate those same concepts to others.

      The words God communicated to the human authors were words the human authors knew and used in their own experiences. When the writers wrote, they did so out of their own vocabulary, culture, experiences, and historical circumstances. The Holy Spirit so superintended their written proclamation that the words they wrote were the words the Spirit breathed into them. The words were sometimes dictated to the writers. For example, the Ten Commandments, Revelation’s seven letters, and events future to the writer and original reader (prophecy). The words were sometimes direct speech by God or holy angels, or were communicated in dreams and visions given by God. The original writers were usually aware of their proclamations as divinely given and divinely authoritative, e.g., Moses at Sinai; Paul, 1 Corinthians 7:25.

      All Scripture is inspired, meaning it is an accurate and inerrant report of what was said and done. In this sense all Scripture is true, because it is an accurate report of the words of God, holy angels, men, women, Satan, and the other fallen angels (demons). The scriptures reveal objective propositional truth, wisdom, and knowledge (objective facts) that could not be known until revealed by God. The scriptures reveal objective historical facts and the actions, thoughts, words, and opinions of those living those events. The scriptures reveal the acts, thoughts, opinions, and words of men and women that originated within themselves, that is, which did not come from God, but have been revealed by God in the scriptures, through chosen men superintended by the Holy Spirit to accurately report those acts, thoughts, opinions, and words. The scriptures also accurately report lies. For example, the words of the serpent to Eve, You will not ‘surely die’. Inspiration in that instance means the human author was superintended by the Holy Spirit to report accurately the authentic words of the serpent.

      In the autographs God revealed himself and objective propositional truth by breathing his words into chosen men who wrote them under the superintending guidance of the Holy Spirit. In the autographs God the Holy Spirit superintended the writers to make an inerrant report of the words of God, men and women, holy angels, Satan and demons. In all cases the words reported are authentically the words as spoken or written, and therefore credible as the expression of the thoughts and actions of God, angels (holy and fallen), and human beings. The autographs were inspired and inerrant.

      Copies of the Autographs

      Preservation is not the same as inspiration. God promised an inspired inerrant original. He did not promise inspired inerrant copies. The Jews did not believe they were being divinely guided to make inspired inerrant copies of the Old Testament autographs. They instituted many checks and balances to ensure the most accurate copies possible. A group of men were specially trained as copyists. After a manuscript was copied other specially trained men counted every letter, syllable, word, and paragraph of the copied document and compared the count to the document being copied to ensure the copy accurately reflected the autograph.

      Copies of the New Testament autographs were not inspired or inerrant. However, copies of the autographs were so preserved by God’s providence as to accurately reflect the autograph. The New Testament writings are the most bibliographically documented writings in history. Scant copies (one or two in some cases) exist of the writings of Plato, Aristotle, Seneca, Tacitus, Julius Caesar, and others. Copies of Shakespeare’s (d. 1616) thirty-seven plays are so few and so corrupt (where several versions of a play survives, each differs from the other) that there are about a hundred readings in dispute, each of which materially affects the meaning of the passages in which they occur. There are about 700 copies of Homer’s Iliad, and they are copies made 600 years after the originals were written.

      The oldest surviving (papyrus dries and crumbles) copies of the New Testament are from the second century AD, only 300 years from the autographs. The New Testament survives in 5,800 manuscripts in Koine Greek (whole New Testament, individual books, fragments of books) plus 10,000 Latin manuscripts, and 9,300 manuscripts in other ancient languages. A total of over 25,000 manuscripts.

      In the Greek manuscripts there are over 400,000 slight variations among the various manuscripts. Let us put that in perspective. Over ninety-eight percent of all the early manuscripts agree with one another. No differences between the Greek texts alter any truth or doctrine. Most of the variations are minor spelling (75 percent) or word order (twenty-four percent), which do not materially affect the text. (Koine Greek was not a word order language, it depended on word ending to relate subject to verb, adjectives to nouns, adverbs to verbs.) Adding it all up, only one percent of the 400,000 variations (4,000) are of any consequence. Of that one percent only 400 (.1 percent of the 400,000) affect the sense of the passage, and of those only fifty (.0135 percent of the original 400,000) are actually important. No variant affects truth or doctrine [Some information from Johnson, Behind the Bible].

      Because preservation is not inspiration, a science called textual criticism was developed over many centuries to identify the types of errors that a New Testament copyist might make. By comparing copies of the same text, it is possible to identify copyist errors in one text or another. Comparison of the New Testament manuscripts has allowed the original text to be reconstructed to what is believed to be more than 99 percent accuracy. God determined the autograph, we only seek to recognize or discover it.

      The reconstructed New Testament texts are primarily derived from ancient manuscripts known as the Byzantine, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Alexandrian manuscripts. Other, minor, manuscripts add to our knowledge of the ancient texts. The three major text types in use today are the Received Text (Textus Receptus) from the Byzantine group; the Majority text (the consensus of the majority of Greek manuscripts, similar to the Received Text, but correcting readings thought to have little support in the Greek manuscript tradition); and the Nestle-Aland 27th–UBS 4th text (primarily based on the Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Alexandrian manuscripts).

      The vast majority of variant readings concern grammatical details that do not significantly affect the meaning of the text [Virkler and Ayayo, Hermeneutics, 35]. The variant readings about which any doubt remains among textual critics of the New Testament affect no material question of historic fact or of Christian faith and practice [Bruce, New Testament Documents, 19–20]. God preserved his word such that copies descended from the autographs are sufficient as the rule and guide of faith and practice. In every respect the Bible Christians possess today is an authentic, accurate, and credible reproduction of the autographs.

      Translations

      The most important differences in English Bibles today are not the result of manuscript variations, but the result of the way different translators understand the task of translation. The first choice a translator makes is which group of manuscripts (Byzantine, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrian) or combination of manuscripts will be used as the basis for the translation. The choice of which text or texts to use is based on a complex interaction of fact, opinion, and tradition. As noted above, manuscript variations do not significantly affect the meaning of the text or any material question of historic fact or of Christian faith and practice. The next choice is which translation methodology will be used. The two most prominent translation methodologies are known as formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence attempts to translate the text word-for-word by finding words in the target language (e.g., English) that are reasonably equivalent to the source language (Old Testament Hebrew or New Testament Greek), while paying close attention to word order and grammatical forms. Dynamic equivalence attempts to render the thought of the source language into the target language, and is therefore less concerned with a word-by-word equivalence and grammatical forms. The grammatical forms of the source language are not as important in dynamic equivalence because they are not always the same as the forms used in the target language. Since words in any language have a semantic range, dynamic equivalence may select a word in the target language to translate a word in the source language that is not formally equivalent to the source word, but communicates the same idea as the source word.

      Neither formal or dynamic equivalence is intrinsically superior to the other, that is, both have their appropriate uses. Where exact original meaning is important in the translation, formal equivalence is the better method. Where readability of the translation is important, dynamic equivalence may be preferable. All Bible translations combine aspects of both methods to produce an accurate and readable translation of the source, but one or the other will be the predominant method used in the translation. The 1611 Authorized (King James) Version is an example of a formal equivalence translation. The New King James Bible (NKJV) is a modern formal equivalence translation that also uses some of the principles of dynamic equivalence. The New International Version (NIV) is an example of a modern dynamic equivalence translation that also uses some of the principles of formal equivalence. The Message is an example of a dynamic equivalence translation.

      The dynamic equivalence principles used in producing the NIV results in a more idiomatic translation that communicates Scripture in the style of familiar conversation. The formal equivalence principles used in producing the NKJV (or the HCSB) results in a more literal rendering of the words. For example, NKJV, 1 Samuel 15:33, And Samuel hacked Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal; NIV, 1 Samuel 15:33, And Samuel put Agag to death before the Lord at Gilgal. In those circumstances where a translation more closely representing the original text (word order, grammatical forms) is important, a formal equivalence translation is more desirable.

      [Sourced from James D. Quiggle, Adam and Eve, A Biography and Theology.]

      The Literal Hermeneutic

      The Literal Hermeneutic is often caricatured. Yet, it is the same method of interpretation one brings to any piece of literature

      The literal hermeneutic understands the words and language used by the human authors of the Bible in the normal and plain sense of words and language as used in everyday conversation and writing.

      Understanding words in their plain and normal sense means all words in all languages have a semantic content and range that reflects the historical-cultural background of the original writer and reader.

      Understanding words in their plain and normal sense means that languages also communicate meaning through well-defined rules of vocabulary, grammar, and syntax.

      Understanding words in their plain and normal sense means recognizing all language includes idioms, slang, figures of speech, and symbols specific to that language and the historical-cultural circumstances of original writer and reader, and that these must be interpreted for the modern reader in terms of his or her language.

      Understanding idioms, slang, figures of speech, and symbols in the plain and normal sense of language means an idiom, slang, figure of speech, or symbol is based on something literal and is intended by the writer or speaker to communicate something literal.

      Understanding the biblical use of words, figures of speech, idioms, slang, and symbols means recognizing the biblical authors sometimes used and invested these parts of language with specific theological or spiritual meanings, and that the Holy Spirit maintained the consistency of those meanings among the several human authors.

      If an interpretation invests an author’s words, figures of speech, idioms, slang, or symbols with a meaning other than the plain and normal meaning of their use in the language in which he is communicating, then it is not a literal interpretation, but is an allegorical interpretation: an abstract distortion of the meaning of the text dependent on the interpreter’s imagination, not the biblical writer’s truth-intention.

      The literalness of the Literal Hermeneutic is described by those above seven tenets.

      Figures, Idioms, Slang, and Symbols

      The literal hermeneutic is not aptly named, as it may lead to a misunderstanding of texts using figures of speech, symbols, idioms, and slang terms. Some would say a literal interpretation requires a strictly literal understanding, meaning there are no figures of speech, symbols, etc., in the Bible. This is foolish, because normal every day speech uses figures of speech, symbols, etc. For example, if it is raining cats and dogs outside, who will go out to catch a poodle or Siamese? The Bible was written in the every-day language of the people, which includes figures of speech, symbols, etc.

      Jesus said if your eye offends you, pluck it out, Matthew 5:29. A woodenly literal interpretation requires the believer to physically remove the offending eye. Is Jesus recommending blindness to avoid moral defilement? Or is there a meaning which recognizes a figure of speech in the passage? The answer will be found by understanding pluck it out as a figure of speech and interpreting the figure by the normal and plain use of such things. That is the literal method: figures of speech are used in language to communicate something literal—not a literal application of the figure, but the literal meaning the figure is communicating.

      In the Matthew example, the figure means the believer should remove him or herself from those avenues by which improper sexual thoughts enter into the soul and grow into immoral lust. In the same passage, Jesus said to cut off your right hand if it offends you. Again, this is a figure of speech, not a command to cut off one’s hand. The figure communicated something literal to those listening. The right hand was viewed as the dominant hand, therefore symbolically it indicates the action of one’s will; more simply, one should not make the choices that lead to lust and sin.

      Other examples. One context may require a literal fire, Exodus 12:8, roasting the Passover lamb in the fire. Other contexts may use fire as a symbol of something literal, e.g., Jude 23, some save with fear, snatching them out of the fire. The use of fire in Jude 23 is a symbol meant by the author to communicate the literal punishment due the unsaved sinner. The word snatching in Jude 23 is also a figure of speech in this context, a metaphor for the passionate proclamation of the evangelizing gospel message that when believed saves the soul from endless punishment.

      Here is the rule concerning figures of speech, symbols, idioms, and slang terms: they are based in something real and literal and they communicate something real and literal. Biblical figures, symbols, etc., communicate literal ideas and concepts. For example, a literal fire can cause damage, destruction, or purification (as in smelting ore to remove impurities). Fire used as symbol communicates literal destruction (Isaiah 5:24), judgment (Isaiah 66:16; Revelation 20:15), or cleansing (Isaiah 6:6–7). At Revelation 1:14 Jesus’ eyes are as a flame of fire. The grammatical value of as signifies a simile, which in turn indicates the use of fire has a symbolic value, which in turn is meant to communicate something literal. The eyes speak of penetrating discernment; nothing in the inmost depths of our being can escape the scrutiny of those eyes [Coates, Revelation, 11]. The meaning is intensified by the descriptive flame. Fire is associated with cleansing and with judgment. Believers are cleansed by judgment (e.g., Revelation 2:18), but unbelievers are punished (e.g., Revelation 19:11–12).

      A figure of speech, symbol, etc., is not in and of itself literal, e.g., it is raining cats and dogs, but the figure, whether a simile, metaphor, or personification, communicates something literal: a literal heavy rain. An example of a biblical figure of speech is turned the world upside down, Acts 17:6, to express the radical changes Christianity brought to the established social and religious order. The literal method seeks to understand how the Bible defines and uses each particular symbol or figure of speech, slang term or idiom, to communicate a real and literal meaning.

      The issue with interpreting language is how to recognize the non-literal use of a word. When is fire, or a sword, or some other word, being used symbolically and when is its use literal? The identification of a person, event, or thing as a symbol is critical. For example, if Moses had not understood the rock in the wilderness as a literal and nearby rock (Exodus 17:6), Israel would have died of dehydration. On the other hand, for Paul the literal rock in the wilderness was a symbol of Christ, 2 Corinthians 10:4.

      Another example concerns highly symbolic scriptures, such as parts of the book of Revelation, or parts of the book of Daniel. Did Jesus understand these symbols literally or allegorically? Jesus understood Daniel’s prophecy of the abomination of desolation literally, Matthew 24:15, when you see the abomination, flee. There is a literal meaning to the phrase which is available to the reader and participant.

      Jesus’ use of the Old Testament in the gospels indicates he understood Scripture through a literal hermeneutic. Certainly every prophecy related to Jesus’ person and work at his first advent was literally fulfilled. His apostles followed the same hermeneutic, interpreting the Old Testament in the same way Jesus interpreted it, i.e., using a literal hermeneutic. The book of Revelation, which was given by Jesus, not imagined by John, is an exposition of Old Testament eschatological prophecy. If, for example, the persecution of God’s people is literal, Revelation 13:7, how can the persecutor, the Antichrist-beast, be non-literal? Jesus intended a literal sense to be discovered in the symbols of the Revelation; a literal sense defined by Revelation’s four hundred plus allusions to Old Testament Scripture.

      The interpretive method one uses is especially critical in relation to prophetic promises made to Israel. Questions about the inheritance of the land, Genesis 15:8; 17:8, and the Davidic kingdom promised in 2 Samuel 7:12–16, relate directly to New Testament prophecy in the Synoptic Gospels and the Revelation. Also to be considered are prophecies, such as those in Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah, relating to the return of Israel to the land, and a temple in which the nations will worship. Since Jesus understood Old Testament prophecies literally, such as Daniel’s abomination (Daniel 9:27), and re-gathering Israel after his second advent (e.g., Matthew 24:31), it is a valid assumption he understood the use of the Old Testament in the New literally. This forms a general principle for the believer’s method of interpreting prophetic and symbolic scriptures: believers seeking to interpret prophecy should do like Jesus and use a literal hermeneutic.

      All words are in some sense symbols. How then can we determine when they are to be understood literally, figuratively, or symbolically? The dispensational theologian would reply that the same criterion for determining the valid interpretation of all other types of literature applies here, namely, that the words are to be interpreted in their plain and normal sense according to the author’s intention. If the author meant them to be interpreted literally, we err if we interpret them symbolically. If the author meant them to be interpreted symbolically, we err if we interpret them literally. The principle is easier to state than to apply . . . however, context and syntax provide important clues to intent and thus to meaning [Virkler and Ayayo, Hermeneutics, 27]. Virkler gives six indicators that will help identify when an author does not intend his words to be taken literally:

      The author makes an explicit statement to that end.

      A literal interpretation is impossible.

      A low degree of correspondence exists.

      The imagery is highly developed.

      The author piles up multiple images.

      The author uses original imagery [Virkler and Ayayo, Hermeneutics, 172].

      To this list I add two other indicators. One, the immediate context will help establish the author’s intent. Two, the use of certain words throughout Scripture establishes a pattern of use, e.g., the use of fire in both literal and symbolic contexts. These eight indicators (my two and Virkler’s six) are the best general guides in making decisions concerning use within a specific passage.

      For example, at Daniel 9:25 the angel gives Daniel this prophecy: the street [of Jerusalem] will be built again and the wall. There is no indication the prophecy meant anything other than literal construction on a literal street and wall. Therefore one may be certain that the command to rebuild Jerusalem’s street and wall is literal, and in fact the street and wall were literally rebuilt, as seen in Ezra and Nehemiah. The command to rebuild the wall was given circa Nisan 1, 444 BC, Nehemiah 2:8. In another of Daniel’s prophecies, the time period from the command to rebuild the wall until Messiah the Prince is cut off is said to be sixty-nine sevens, Daniel 9:26. This is not a literal 69 x 7=483 days, as history and common sense reveal. The time from the command, Nisan 1, 444 BC, to Messiah cut off, Nisan 14, AD 33, is 173,880 days. The math concerning Messiah cut off is complicated, but in brief there are 365.2564 days in a solar year, and 476 years from Nisan 1, 444 BC to Nisan 1, AD 33 (there is no year zero between BC and AD) which equals 173,866 days (rounded) plus 14 days to Passover = 173,880 days, after which—the next day—Messiah was cut-off, i.e., crucified, Daniel 9:26. The sixty-nine sevens is a symbol indicating 173,880 days [Quiggle, Daniel].

      One other issue that should be addressed is consistency in interpretation. One cannot mix methods and results of interpretation in a passage or passages of Scripture. For example, Revelation 8:7, all the green grass is burned up. Some give a symbolic value to grass, identifying the symbol as representing either people in general or Gentile nations specifically. In 9:4 and following the demonic locusts are commanded to harm unbelievers but not to harm the grass. If grass is people or nations at 8:7 then it should have the same meaning at 9:4. If the grass is literal grass in both places one’s interpretation does not contradict. Symbols tend to be used in a consistent manner in the same book, and across many books, with exceptions for individual context. Example: fire is either literal or symbolic; in individual contexts the symbolic meaning could be judgment or cleansing.

      The literal principle relates to opposing views of the millennium in Revelation 20. The millennium for the dispensationalist means Christ reigning over the earth for one thousand years in fulfillment of the kingdom promised to David through his heir. If the millennium is spiritualized by a non-literal interpretation, then the resurrection in that passage cannot be a physical reunification of the soul with the body. Nor can Christ’s advent be literal, for the resurrection is a consequence of the advent. Keeping this principle in mind resolves a great many interpretive difficulties.

      General Considerations in Interpretation

      First, there are two general principles of interpretation. The first is known as the Analogy of Scripture. This principle asks, "How does a passage fit into the total pattern of God’s revelation that was revealed prior to its writing [Quiggle, Daniel, 121]? The second general principle is known as the Analogy of Faith. This principle asks, How does a passage fit into the total pattern of God’s revelation that has been revealed at any time? [Quiggle, Daniel, 122]. The first recognizes the historical-cultural circumstances of the human author. The second recognizes that since the Holy Spirit is the divine author of Scripture, then nothing one human author wrote will conflict with something another wrote.

      Second, there are six basic guidelines which should be followed: 1) Scripture does not contradict itself; 2) The scriptures explain themselves; 3) Do not reinterpret a clear scripture with a difficult scripture; 4) Understand the context; 5) The natural meaning of words is the usual meaning; 6) Watch out for personal presuppositions, biases, prejudices, traditions, and dogmatism.

      Third, the interpreter’s purpose is to discover the original circumstances and meaning of a text, i.e., what was the author’s intent. Then, the interpreter should discover the significance of the text, i.e., its application to current times.

      Fourth, Scripture tends to define terms by use, therefore one must consider how words, figures, types, symbols, etc., are used throughout the Scripture.

      Fifth, the consequences of using the literal method are: 1) A text cannot mean what it never meant; 2) The meaning of the text is usually the meaning the original author intended; 3) The secondary meaning of a parable, type, allegory, symbol, figure of speech, myth, or fable, depends on the literal meaning; 4) Non-literal meanings are derived from the original literal language.

      The Analytical Processes of the Literal Hermeneutic

      A better name than literal hermeneutic is needed to reflect the processes used to understand the Bible in the normal and plain sense of its words and languages. The literal hermeneutic is better understood as the grammatical-historical hermeneutic. This hermeneutical method understands the Bible in the normal and plain sense of words and language by analyzing grammar, syntax, vocabulary, and the author’s historical-cultural circumstances.

      In 1976, E. D. Hirsch, an English professor at the University of Virginia, wrote, in Validity in Interpretation, about why one must seek the literal interpretation of any written communication [Kaiser and Silva, Hermeneutics, 30–31]:

      Verbal meaning is whatever someone (usually the author) has willed to convey by a particular sequence of words and which can be shared by linguistic signs.

      The author’s truth-intention provides the only genuinely discriminating norm for ascertaining valid or true interpretations from invalid and false ones.

      The first objective of hermeneutics is to make clear the text’s verbal meaning, not its significance.

      Meaning is that which is represented by the text and what an author meant to say by the linguistic signs represented.

      Significance, by contrast, names a relationship between that meaning and a person, concept, situation, or any other possible number of things.

      The meaning of a text cannot change, but significance can and does change. If meaning were not determinate, then there would be no fixed norm by which to judge whether a passage was being interpreted correctly.

      Biblical interpretation requires the interpreter to analyze the text to determine the original author’s intended meaning. The text is analyzed in six ways. These are historical-cultural analysis, contextual analysis, lexical-syntactical analysis, theological analysis, literary (genre) analysis, and doctrinal analysis. These are followed by comparison with other interpreters [Virkler

      Enjoying the preview?
      Page 1 of 1