317-548-2146

The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers 182x300 - How Did Apostles Interpret the Bible?

The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers: Learning to Interpret Scripture from the Prophets and Apostles

Regarding the concept of Abner Chou’s prophetic hermeneutic, an important question is how the New Testament apostles interpreted the Old Testament prophets. Did the apostles shift the meaning of the prophets, or did the apostles find a fuller meaning (sensus plenior) that was absent from the prophetic understanding of the text? Chou concludes that the prophets wrote with an intentionality that sets up future writers by understanding the revelation of the past, the current location of redemptive history, and the theological consequences of their words.[1] Chou utilizes Matthew 1:23 and its reference to Isaiah 7:14 as a case study to further his polemic. Although Chou neither denies the challenges that King Ahaz faced, nor opposes the use of Immanuel as a sign of Judah’s deliverance, he asserts that Isaiah’s focus also addressed a future reality.[2] The most compelling argument supporting Chou’s perspective is the surrounding literary context. For example, it appears that Isaiah 9:1-7 is unavoidably messianic. The strongest argument against a messianic interpretation is the plain historical sense of Isaiah 7:1-17. The author explains that Judah is being attacked by two neighboring kingdoms with the intent of dethroning King Ahaz, and God offers Ahaz a sign in the form of a child’s birth that represents the end of the crisis. I agree with Chou’s conclusion that the text in Isaiah signifies something beyond the present that points toward a grander narrative, which lays the foundation for future developments.

The concept of a dualistic prophecy or double fulfillment may exist within Isaiah 7. A near fulfillment may pertain to Ahaz, and the far fulfillment may pertain to Jesus. If so, William Klein, Craig Blomberg, and Robert Hubbard suggest that the near and far fulfillment could mean that the author of Isaiah 7:14 intended multiple meanings.[3] Alternatively, the far fulfillment could suggest that Mathew recognized a “fuller” sense (sensus plenior) within the text of Isaiah 7:14 that was unknown to the original author. Craig Blomberg appears to provide support for the concept of a fuller sense by stating, “Matthew could indeed speak of Isaiah’s prophecy as fulfilled in Christ,” because “the canonical form of Isaiah was already pointing in this twofold direction.”[4] However, it appears Chou resists both options. First, Chou presupposes that Scripture verses have one meaning, the original author’s intent, thus would reject the idea of multiple meanings.[5] Second, Chou also asserts that the “ideas and implications are already there” and ready for subsequent authors, thus he dismisses the idea of sensus plenior.[6] If the interpreter assumes that the New Testament writers align with a specific hermeneutical assumption such as a single meaning, multiple meanings, or sensus plenior, then not only will the exegetical approach taken by the writers shift in the view of the interpreter, but the interpreter’s exegesis will also shift according to the hermeneutic chosen.

In a similar vein as double fulfillment, a contemporary analysis of Matthew’s use of the Old Testament is offered by Christopher Wright. Wright’s nuanced approach suggests the idea of promise and fulfillment, where the promise, which is bound in the Old Testament covenants, involves ongoing levels of fulfilment.[7] Wright focuses on the relational aspect of the promises of God and how they are fulfilled throughout salvation history. In sum, according to Wright, the New Testament writers looked at all the events of Jesus in light of the Old Testament promises and recognized that “God had kept his word,” and “the Old Testament had declared the promise which Jesus fulfilled.”[8]

In order to summarize these factors into a cohesive whole in respect to the New Testament’s use of the Old Testament, several observations need made. First, Chou asserts that the author of Isaiah is fully aware that the text in 7:14 pertains not only to the present, but also the future, and that although the author did not know everything, he knew enough to setup the future. If this is the case, then it appears that the prophet knew that his text had two meanings, a near and a far. If so, then how does Chou maintain a traditional hermeneutical methodology that relies on a single meaning, the author’s intent, with multiple applications.[9] Second, if Chou is suggesting that Isaiah 7:14 only has one meaning, but the author was aware of the potential  significance or application in Matthew, then why is it necessary for the author to know the future significance? A traditional hermeneutical methodology does not require authorial intent to encompass the knowledge of all the potential applications of the one meaning. Third, the concept of sensus plenior may pertain to the near and far fulfillment in Isaiah 7:14, but to suggest that the author of Isaiah was unaware of the hidden messianic meaning behind the text goes too far considering the eschatological context of Isaiah 9:1-7. Accordingly, an alternative explanation for Matthew’s use of Isaiah 7:14 is necessary.

Matthew’s intent in writing, “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” (Matt 1:23), was not to provide an exegetically sound interpretation of Isaiah 7:14 that aligns with the concepts of a conservative hermeneutic textbook.[10] Matthew had in mind something much more important. Specifically, John Goldingay explains that in Isaiah 7:14 a girl will have a baby signifying that Ahaz’s crisis is over, which will prove that “God is with us,” and a few centuries later, a girl will have a baby in a manger signifying that “God is with us.”[11] The reader can almost hear Matthew’s exuberant thoughts as he recognizes the type of situation he had read about many times in Isaiah, “It is like the story in Isaiah, this is that, God is with us now like he was with Ahaz! Do you see it?” Is it possible that the author of Isaiah could see something more than just the present circumstance of Ahaz, something eschatological, something messianic? Certainly, but it seems unlikely that Matthew was overly concerned about exactly what the original author knew seven hundred years earlier. Matthew was overjoyed by the unchanging character of God working out His plan right in front of his very eyes. God was with Ahaz, and God was with Matthew, and God is still with each one of us today. This…is…that.

______________________________________

[1] Abner Chou, The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers: Learning to Interpret Scripture from the Prophets and Apostles (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2018), 119.

[2] Ibid., 114.

[3] William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004), 174.

[4] Craig L. Blomberg, “Matthew,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 5.

[5] Chou, The Hermeneutics, 26–34.

[6] Ibid., 103.

[7] Christopher J. H. Wright, Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1992), 70.

[8] Ibid., 102.

[9] Chou, The Hermeneutics, 32, 196, 229.

[10] Unless Otherwise Noted, All Biblical Passages Referenced Are in the English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008).

[11] John Goldingay, Isaiah for Everyone (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2015), 34.

 

Bibliography

  • Blomberg, Craig L. “Matthew.” In Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, edited by G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.
  • Chou, Abner. The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers: Learning to Interpret Scripture from the Prophets and Apostles. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2018.
  • Goldingay, John. Isaiah for Everyone. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2015.
  • Klein, William W., Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004.
  • Wright, Christopher J. H. Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1992.
Wilder - How Did Apostles Interpret the Bible?
Derek Wilder Executive Director
DEREK WILDER, PhD, is the Executive Director of Lives Transforming Group, Inc., a Christian counseling ministry focused on personal transformation, and the author of FREEDOM and Minds on Fire. Wilder has a Master of Theological Studies, an MDiv in Pastoral Counseling, and a PhD in Biblical Exposition. Wilder's scholarly focus lies in Pauline studies, with his doctoral dissertation specifically examining the ontological implications present in the eighth chapter of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Wilder, an adjunct professor, founded Convergence Therapy, integrating cognitive therapy and grace-based theology into the accredited college course: “Thought Life & Spirit Growth.”