The Ridge or the Base

For those who are aware of the issues, the above question is a significant one. For those who are not aware of the issues, let me summarize for you so that this essay makes some contribution to the next time you open the Bible and read.

The issue raised by this question is the quandary of whether a man A) should read Scripture with interpretation in mind first, or B) whether he should disband the attempt to interpret until after he has done the work of exegesis. Or, in other words, should the Bible be read with a intent to interpret, or should he deal with the words on the page as words before he can interpret?

The position of this essay is B. It will become evident that before any interpretation can be done, a man must work through the meaning of the words on the page of Scripture first. That work is called “exegesis.” It is similar to scaling a mountain by establishing a base in order to begin the ascent to the ridge.

Definitions

In order to make sure we are all playing the same game, we need to understand the definitions of the terms germane to our discussion.

• Inerrancy
  • The quality and nature of the Bible, the 66 books of the Protestant canon, being from God through the pens of men, make the Bible a singular revelation, self-disclosure.
  • This collection of writings, in the original forms, were without error in form, content, and syntax.

• Exegesis
  • “Exegesis” is the critical or technical application of hermeneutical principles to a biblical text in the regional language with a view to the exposition or declaration of its meaning.”¹
  • I will take some liberties with this definition pertinent to our discussion.

• Hermeneutics ²
  • “Hermeneutics is the science of interpretation.“
  • It is a science, and not an art.

• Exposition
  • “’Exposition’ is defined as a discourse setting forth the meaning of a passage in a popular form.” ³
  • In other words, “exposition” is the proclamation a man does after he has worked hard at Exegesis and Hermeneutics.

These definitions are not my own, necessarily. However, I believe these definitions as my own. I will make a distinction in the term Exegesis that needs to be clarified, but otherwise they are what I believe.

First Step

The basis of exegetical, hermeneutical, and expositional work is Inerrancy. Once Inerrancy is removed, redefined, or altered in any way, the other three components come crashing down. Inerrancy is the quality of the original manuscripts and are the only manuscripts of that nature in history. ⁴ Therefore, with that as the basis, how we work through the text of Scripture will reveal how well we understand and respect Inerrancy.

The process of the determination of whether Exegesis comes before Hermeneutics, or the other way around, is based upon Inerrancy. Inerrancy affirms that every word, word form, word arrangement, and every detail of those arrangements, in the original languages, is inspired and cannot be altered without doing harm to the Spirit-inspired meaning of the text.

For example, Paul wrote:

Galatians 3:16 (LSB)

¹⁶ Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as referring to many, but rather to one, “And to your seed,” that is, Christ. ⁵

The Greek text is as follows:

Galatians 3:16 (UBS5)

¹⁶ τῷ δὲ Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦ. οὐ λέγει, Καὶ τοῖς σπέρμασιν, ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐφʼ ἑνός, Καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου, ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός. ⁶

In this example, one of many that I could use, Paul demonstrates his argument of the Messianic Kingdom, as promised to Abraham and his “seed,” with the noun “seed” as singular. Paul tells that the original text of Genesis 17:7, as found in the Hebrew language there, is not plural as in “seeds.” But, if we look into that passage, we do see that the covenant was made with Abraham as well as the Seed, the Christ. However, that is for another discussion.

The point is, the fact that the original language has a singular noun there, and that Paul based his argument upon that singularity, gives us indication of the nature of Inerrancy. The Spirit of God put that direct object as a singular, masculine, noun-a male seed from the man Abraham.

In this particular case, it is not possible to come to a conclusion of the meaning apart from this kind of work. We must be committed to, and understand the extent of, Inerrancy so that we can organize our studies correctly.

Next Step

Once we commit ourselves to Inerrancy, we must determine the meaning of the words of the text. This is not Hermeneutics. Hermeneutics is the science of Bible interpretation, but unless we know the meanings of the words, the arrangements of the words, and the syntax of those words, we simply cannot take the next step of determining the meaning of the passages that contain those words.

In other words, unless I know the definitions of the words of an Inerrant passage of Scripture, I cannot interpret them. Those words are not native to me, or anyone alive today, because spoken Hebrew and spoken Greek of today are foreign to the written Hebrew and Greek of the Bible. Therefore, we must investigate, through the tools available to us of lexicography, and work through the definitions of the individual words of a particular passage.

Please note, we are not interested in the meaning of the passage at this point, only the words that are in that passage.

For example, looking at that same illustration as above, we have individual words in Koine Greek that, to Paul, mean so much because he spoke and wrote them. However, to me, it is literally Greek, pun intended.

The best way to come to the definitions of each, and every, word in the passage is to build a table in this way:

Word	Parse	Meaning	Notes
δὲ	Conjunction, adversative	But, yet
τῷ Ἀβραὰμ	Masculine, singular, Dative, Proper name	Abraham
ἐρρέθησαν	3rd person, plural Aorist middle/passive Indicative	They were spoken	How were they spoken?

I am not worried about the meaning of the passage. I am only trying to learn the meaning of each word of the passage. The meaning of the text as determined by the author, will come together well enough downstream of this foundational work.

There are other aspects to this that I won’t go into now (i.e. Syntactical Exegesis, Problem Solving, Sentence Diagram). However, I hope this can illustrate the fact that Hermeneutics cannot come before Exegesis. Exegesis is the technical work of words, syntax, and grammar. That work does not concern itself with the overall meaning of the passage, only the trees of the forest. They are the building blocks of meaning for the use of Hermeneutics in the next step.

Hermeneutics

Once we have done the exegetical work, we can then sit back and examine everything and interpret what we have found. This work would fill a volume or more to explain. However, the basic and simple rule to follow for accurate hermeneutic is this:

INTERPRET THE BIBLE THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN.

Every passage of Scripture is given in human, known, language. Each passage is given in historical context and with some kind of historical impetus for the author to write. Researching and organizing that information is vital to the hermeneutic. There are subjects of the verb, verbs, direct objects of the verb, etc… These are the things that must be known and comprehended before there is an attempt to understand the meaning of the passage.

To reverse this process is to put the interpretation before the words of the verse. This is “pretext” and a theological Hermeneutic, not an exegetical one. It is assuming a meaning before the real examination of the passage is made, which dominates the landscape of the church historically and in modernity. It is relying upon another’s work. Since a pastor is to rightly divide the word, reliance upon the work of others is dishonest for the man of God. It is one thing to refer to the work of others and see what they came up with. It is another thing to sidestep the work and go straight to the conclusions of others to see which ones I agree with.

The science of Bible interpretation is built upon the actual text, a work that is the technical work of exegesis. However, once that exegesis is done, and a good grasp of the language is had, putting it altogether to determine the meaning is next. The “interpretation” is very soon exposed to the exegete. The meaning is discovered, the significance is evident. The historical/grammatical hermeneutic, the only proper way to interpret Scripture since the Scripture was written in actual language and in an historical context, preserves the exegetical work that is done.

Exposition

A short statement about exposition is in order. Exposition, as noted above, is the proclamation, explanation, on a popular level, to the audience to whom we speak. Exposition, as with Hermeneutics, does not offend the Exegesis that was done. It is consistent with Exegesis. The rules of the right Hermeneutic that are followed, rules that uphold the Exegesis, will feed the Exposition.

The effect of this Exposition is that the Holy Spirit, Who inspired the Words in the first place, takes the truths discovered in the text and implants them in the hearts and minds of the saints. The power of the Truth drives deeply into the person via the Spirit of Truth.

My point in saying all of this is to emphasize that the entire process of the exposition of the Word of God begins with Exegesis, the technical work in the words. This is the beginning of “cutting it straight.”

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.  (2 Timothy 2:15, LSB)

1. Thomas, Robert L. ‘Bible Translations: The Link between Exegesis and Expository Preaching,’ The Master’s Seminary Journal 1/1 (Spring 1990): p. 54,
   ↩︎
2. Terry, Milton S. ‘Biblical Hermeneutics: A Treatise on the Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments.’ Edited by George R. Crooks and John F. Hurst. New Edition, Thoroughly Revised. Vol. II. Library of Biblical and Theological Literature. New York; Cincinnati: Eaton & Mains; Curts & Jennings, 1890), p. 17
   . ↩︎
3. Thomas, p.54 ↩︎
4. I understand that we do not have those manuscripts in possession. Rather, we have copies of those manuscripts and, through the work of Textual Criticism, we can duplicate the biblical text with tremendous certainty. ↩︎
5. All quotations will be from The Legacy Standard Bible. Three Sixteen Publishing, 2022, unless otherwise noted. ↩︎
6. Aland, Barbara, Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, and Bruce M. Metzger, eds. The Greek New Testament. Fifth Revised Edition. Stuttgart, Germany: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2014. ↩︎