"To treat figurative language as if it were literal, and to treat literal language as if it were figurative, constitute two of the greatest hindrances to understanding the meaning of the Bible."
("Basic Bible Interpretation:
Special Topics in Bible Interpretation," (here) citing "Protestant Biblical Interpretation" (Chapter 9), by Bernard Ramm)
I believe the above words of Ramm are extremely important. So many today do not know how to interpret the scriptures, especially prophecy.
Here is what Ramm wrote (emphasis mine):
Reasons for Figurative Language
Figurative language is often used to speak about abstract concepts in terms of concrete things. All human speech contains this type of language because it is intrinsic to the way people communicate.
Very often when we are talking about something which is not perceptible by the five senses, we use words which in one of their meanings refer to things or actions that are. When a man says that he grasps an argument he is using a verb (grasp) which literally means to take something in the hand but he is certainly not thinking that his mind has hands or that an argument can be seized. To avoid the word grasp he may change the form of the expression and say, "I see your point," but he does not mean that a pointed object has appeared in his visual field. Everyone is familiar with this linguistic phenomenon and the grammarians call it metaphor. But it is a serious mistake to think that metaphor is an optional thing which poets and authors may put into their work as a decoration and plain speakers can do without. The truth is that if we are going to talk at all about things which are not perceived by the senses, we are forced to use language metaphorically. There is no other way of talking. Anyone who talks about things that cannot be seen, or touched, or heard, or the like, must inevitably talk as if they could be seen or touched or heard.
Bible language should be understood in its normal, ordinary, or literal sense unless there is a convincing reason for considering it otherwise:
If a statement would be absurd, irrational, or impossible if taken literally then the author is probably using a figure of speech. Examples of this would include trees clapping their hands (Isaiah 55:12) or a person being referred to as a dog (Phil 3:2), a door (John 10:7), or a lamb (John 1:36).
If an inanimate object is used to describe a living thing, then the statement may be considered to be figurative. For example, Jesus described Himself by saying He is the bread of life (John 6:35) and the light of the world (John 8:12). In a similar way, when life and activity are attributed to inanimate objects, these statements can also be considered to be figurative expressions.
Often the context of a passage will point out whether a figure of speech is intended. In many cases, the figurative passage is followed by a clear interpretation. For example, those who are "asleep" (1 Thess 4:13-15) are later described as those who have actually died (1 Thess 4:16). Also, the word "sword" must be understood figuratively in Eph 6:17, (1) because of the prepositional phrase "of the Spirit" and (2) because of the subsequent explanation: "which is the Word of God."
Figurative speech, as already discussed, is a picturesque, out-of-the-ordinary way of presenting literal facts that might otherwise be stated in a normal, plain, ordinary way. Saying that "the argument does not hold water" is an unusual way of saying the more ordinary sentence, "The argument is weak." Both sentences convey a literal fact. One conveys it in a figurative fashion, the other in a nonfigurative way. In other words, as Radmacher put it, "Behind every figure of speech is a literal meaning, and by means of the historical-grammatical exegesis of the text, these literal meanings are to be sought out." Any figure of speech depends on ordinary-literal language. When Peter wrote, "The devil prowls around like a roaring lion" (1 Peter 5:8), the legitimacy of that figurative comparison is based on our understanding of something about actual lions. The same is true of types, symbols, parables, allegories, and fables.
Identifying Types of Figurative Language
Figures of Comparison. This is the most common type of figurative language in the Bible, and it typically expresses a similarity between two things that are otherwise dissimilar.
In examining figures of comparison, remember that ordinarily only one point of comparison is intended. The comparisons are limited, and the reader is not permitted to improvise or decide what point of comparison he likes best or finds compatible with his doctrinal structure. If we are not careful, the Scriptures will no longer be an independent authority, sitting in judgment on our ideas, but rather we interpreters will become the authorities, building unsound doctrine on misapprehension of a figurative biblical expression.
Figures of Substitution. This involves having one thing represent another or stand in place of another thing. In figures of substitution sometimes part of a thing will be spoken of as if it were the whole thing, or the whole may stand for only a part.
Figures of Personification. This involves taking a characteristic of a person and attributing it to a non-personal object, or attributing a human characteristic to God.
Figures of Exaggeration or Irony. This involves saying more than is literally required, or saying the opposite of what is literally meant.
Rhetorical Questions. This involves asking questions without expecting an answer. This forces the reader to think about the answer and consider its implications for affirming a specific truth.
Idiomatic Expressions. An idiom is an expression that cannot be understood simply from the meanings of the individual words of which it is composed. Usually it is unique to a particular group of people, and in order to understand the intended meaning we must bridge the gap between ourselves and that group.
Principles for Interpreting Figurative Language
Determine whether figurative language is being used. Use the general guidelines above to determine whether a passage contains a figure of speech. It would violate the principle to authorial intent to interpret a figurative passage literally, or to interpret a literal passage figuratively. Sometimes a normal statement is wrongly taken as a figure of speech; for example, when John wrote that 144,000 will be sealed with 12,000 from each of the 12 tribes of Israel (Rev 7:4-8), there is no compelling reason to understand this statement figuratively.
Determine what the figure of speech (image) is referring to (referent). For example, Isaiah 8:7 says, "Therefore the Lord is about to bring against them the mighty floodwaters of the River." How are we to determine whether these floodwaters are literal or figurative? This is a figurative expression because the very next phrase gives the referent: "the mighty king of Assyria with all his pomp." The floodwaters are the image and the king of Assyria is the referent. "Sometimes the image is stated, but the nonimage or referent, though not given explicitly, is suggested by the context. In Luke 5:34 the bridegroom is not said to be Jesus, but the meaning is implicit since Jesus said in the next verse that the bridegroom would be taken from them. The guests of the bridegroom are not specified, though they are most likely Jesus' disciples who are eating and drinking, much like bridegroom guests." Determine the specific point of comparison that is being made between the image and the referent. For example, Isaiah 53:6 says, "All we, like sheep, have gone astray." The image is sheep, the referent is human beings, and the specific point of comparison is the tendency of sheep to stray off on their own, just as human beings stray away from their Shepherd and Creator. Not every aspect of sheep is part of this figurative comparison - only their tendency to stray is being emphasized.
Determine the specific meaning that was intended by the biblical author when he used a particular figure of speech in a specific context. Treat each figure of speech individually according to its specific context, and do not assume that a particular figure always means the same thing throughout the Bible. For example, in Hosea 6:4 the figure of "dew" is used to describe the transience of Judah's loyalty to God, but in Hosea 14:5 the figure of "dew" describes the Lord's blessing on them.
Interpreting Biblical Prophecy
Bible prophecy is a special topic because it often makes use of figurative language, and because there are special time elements involved in the prophet's message. The two aspects of biblical prophecy have sometimes been called foretelling and forthtelling because there is a future predictive element as well as a message of exhortation, reproof, correction, or instruction to a specific people living at a specific time in history. To correctly interpret biblical prophecy, "We need an approach that will read nothing into prophecy that is not there, that will make clear all that the prophet said or wrote to his own people, and that will make the correctly interpreted message of the prophet relevant to our own times."
Prophecy does have a predictive element, but we must never forget that biblical prophecy was spoken into a specific historical situation with the intention of motivating a particular group of people to action in their own day. The foretelling of the future was included to show that God is working out His plan in history and is moving forward according to His own timetable. God's future actions were meant to influence what the readers or listeners were doing at the time they heard the message. In light of His future activity, they were meant to live differently from those who ignore God. "To lose sight of the original hearers and to focus our attention on what may tickle the fancy of the curious-minded in the present day is to lose sight of the very reason for the message. This results in a tragic distortion of the purpose behind the prophecy."10
The primary guideline for interpreting biblical prophecy is to view the passage in its normal, simple, direct, ordinary meaning unless there is a convincing reason to do otherwise. Just as with any other Bible language, we should understand predictive passages literally unless there are specific reasons for viewing them in some figurative sense. "Of course figurative and symbolic language is used extensively in prophetic passages, but this does not mean that all prophecy is figurative or symbolic. We should begin with the assumption that the words are to be taken in their normal sense unless a figure of speech or symbol is indicated. Deeper and mystical senses should not be sought.
No comments:
Post a Comment