Scripture interpretation

[Amanah]

I invite the Elders to please comment on or correct the following

One problem with Scripture interpretation is the framework through which you view the relationship between God and mankind.

Covenant Approach:
(Biblical approach)

- Focuses on specific covenants that God established with mankind, such as:
- Adamic (creation)
- Noahic (after the flood)
- Abrahamic (with Abraham and his descendants)
- Mosaic (the Law given at Sinai)
- Davidic (God's promise to David)
- New Covenant (established through Jesus Christ)
- Emphasizes the progressive revelation of God's redemptive plan through these covenants.
- Sees God's dealings with mankind as both conditional and unconditional, with an emphasis on His sovereign grace and faithfulness.
- Highlights the unity and continuity of God's plan across different covenants.

Dispensationalism
(Fairly recent development)

- Views God's relationship with mankind as a series of dispensations or periods, each with its own unique rules and expectations.
- Emphasizes a literal, futuristic interpretation of biblical prophecy.
- Typically divides history into 7-8 dispensations, such as innocence, conscience, human government, promise, law, grace, and kingdom.
- Sees God's dealings with mankind as primarily conditional, based on human response to divine revelation.

Key differences:

- The covenant approach focuses on specific covenants, Dispensationalism focuses on periods of time.
- The covenant approach highlights continuity and progression
Dispensationalism tends to emphasize discontinuity between different periods.
- The covenant approach emphasizes God's sovereignty and grace, Dispensationalism often stresses human responsibility.

[Amanah]

Dispensationalism, a relatively recent development in Bible interpretation, emerged in the 1800s through the teachings of John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren movement. Popularized in the United States through the Scofield Reference Bible (1909) and later amplified by evangelical leaders like Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye, dispensationalism has become a dominant force in evangelical circles. However, its framework for understanding God's relationship with mankind is problematic.

In contrast to dispensationalism, the covenant approach offers a more biblical and cohesive framework for understanding Scripture. By emphasizing specific covenants, such as the Adamic (Genesis 2:15-17), Abrahamic (Genesis 12:1-3, 15:1-21, 17:1-27), Mosaic (Exodus 19:1-24:8), Davidic (2 Samuel 7:1-29, 1 Chronicles 17:1-27), and New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34, Hebrews 8:6-13), we see a progressive revelation of God's redemptive plan (Ephesians 2:11-22, 3:1-21).

Dispensationalism, on the other hand, fragments history into distinct dispensations, creating a disjointed narrative that prioritizes human response over God's faithfulness. By focusing on covenants, we acknowledge both conditional and unconditional aspects of God's dealings with mankind (Genesis 12:1-3, Jeremiah 31:31-34), whereas dispensationalism tends to emphasize human responsibility, potentially leading to a works-based understanding of salvation (Ephesians 2:8-10, Titus 3:4-7).

Conclusion:
Scripture affirms the unity and continuity of God's plan across different covenants (Ephesians 1:3-14, Colossians 1:15-23), emphasizing God's sovereignty and grace (Romans 8:28-39, Ephesians 1:3-14). In contrast, dispensationalism introduces unnecessary divisions and a conditional focus that diminishes God's sovereign grace. By returning to a covenantal understanding of Scripture, we can better appreciate the richness and coherence of God's redemptive plan.

[Esaias]

Does the Bible provide its own internal framework for organising and presenting its data?

All these post-Biblical man-developed systems leave something to be desired, in my opinion.

[Amanah]

Bro E

I'm thinking there are more guidelines (methods, rules) for scripture interpretation. Would you please discuss them.

I want to make sure my doctrine is sound when I witness to people and when I speak to the ladies group at my church.

[coksiw]

I think what you are looking for is called Covenant Theology.

Covenant Theology is a form of Biblical Theology. Biblical Theology always sounds right, until a lack of deep understanding of it takes it far its original intention and destroys the unity of Scripture which the Systematic Theology tries to champion. People that champion Covenant Theology also come up with some random stuff.

BTW, David Bernard criticizes both.

Anyway, may God gives you wisdom and understanding to keep things balance.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by coksiw

I think what you are looking for is called Covenant Theology.

Covenant Theology is a form of Biblical Theology. Biblical Theology always sounds right, until a lack of deep understanding of it takes it far its original intention and destroys the unity of Scripture which the Systematic Theology tries to champion. People that champion Covenant Theology also come up with some random stuff.

BTW, David Bernard criticizes both.

Anyway, may God gives you wisdom and understanding to keep things balance.

Thank you

[donfriesen1]

This will prove to be a very interesting discussion I look forward to reading.

To bring clarity, it would help to clearly define, with detail, the key words: covenant, dispensation, etc. Often words mean different things to different people. For example, the story of Noah shows the first use of the word covenant. In it God tells Noah what to do and says this is my covenant with you. This doesn't convey the idea of an agreeing but of a commanding and Noah's compliance. But reading between the lines may show more. Usually covenants are thought, in my mind, to be agreements between 2 or more parties, which require both parties outlining their stance and the others agreeing to each others terms. Does the first use of the word covenant convey this? I think not. And so a detailed definition should be established of the words used, done so all are talking about the same concepts.

[Amanah]

Hi Don

Actually,

Here is a more organic system of bible interpretation:

1. Narrative and Historical Progression: The Bible unfolds as a story, with each section building upon the previous one. Understanding the chronological and geographical context is essential.

2. Genre and Literary Style: Recognize the different genres, such as history, poetry, prophecy, letters, and apocalyptic literature, each with its unique characteristics and interpretation guidelines.

3. Context: Consider the immediate context, including the passage's purpose, audience, and authorial intent.

4. Types and Shadows: Identify patterns and foreshadowing in the Old Testament that find fulfillment in the New Testament.

5. Progressive Revelation: Recognize how God's revelation unfolds progressively, with later sections building upon earlier ones.

6. Themes: Identify recurring themes and motifs throughout the Bible, demonstrating its cohesive message.

7. Note how later biblical authors interpret and apply earlier texts, providing insight into the intended meaning.

Basically, let the bible interpret the bible.