Webster’s 1828 Dictionary defines a ‘presupposition’ as “a supposition previously formed.”[1] Interestingly enough, ‘supposition’ is “the act of laying down, imagining or admitting as true or existing, what is known not to be true, or what is not proved.”[2] While this may seem odd, we understand Webster’s point in that the concept may very well be true, but not established by proof. Regarding one’s presuppositions toward the Word of God and the very reason a word like ‘presupposition’ is used in one’s approach to the Scriptures is because we all come to the Bible predisposed in a number of areas regarding what we think and will think and how we will respond to its content. The basis for these thoughts and responses are our various presuppositions; our ‘previously formed suppositions.’ As time goes on and we grow in our knowledge of the Scriptures our ‘suppositions’ are shaped by the Scriptures themselves, thus altering the way we approach and respond to the Word of God.
Presuppositions are products of a number of variants in one’s life. McQuilken said this quoting Ernst Best, “We must know ourselves….Each of us approaches Scripture with his own, or her own presuppositions. These presuppositions are part of our world view, part of our personal theology. In the first instance they relate to the way we regard Scripture. Does it consist of infallible propositions? Is it the record of certain acts of God? Is it an inspired record? Is there revelation outside Scripture? Our views here will dictate how we handle the text. Our minds are not empty when we read or listen to Scripture; what we hear is already partly predetermined by what is already in them; our presuppositions shape what we understand.”[3] Our presuppositions are part of our world view as Best points out.
Our presuppositions, as a part of our world view, affect the way we see things, including Scripture. One example of this being the case can be found in the mind of one who has grown up in church. An assumption this person might approach the Scripture with is that it is indeed absolute in its truth and authority. Whether this is right or wrong is not the point. The fact is a person that has been brought up to believe such a thing is going to approach the Scriptures and respond to them in a way that is different from one who has been brought up by an atheist. The one that believes the Scripture to be true and authoritative will look to the Book as a foundation for living. The atheist will look to the Book as a historical document and will judge the content based on his own his own moral compass and leanings. So then we understand, even from this one example, that our own presuppositions affect the way we approach and thus interpret Scripture.
Regarding my personal presuppositions to the Word of God and thus to the interpretation of it, they are simple. I believe that the Word of God is just that, God’s Words supernaturally recorded and preserved by God, through natural men for the purpose of God’s revelation of Himself and thus His will to mankind. As I said before, our presuppositions are a part of our world view and therefore what I have given and what I will give are presuppositions as they have come to be. My world view has changed and thus my presuppositions as I have been exposed to the Word of God. Therefore, much of the way I approach Scripture is determined by passages such as Psalms 12:6-7, II Timothy 3:16, II Peter 1:21, and Psalm 119:89 to name a few. Because I believe that God worked supernaturally in conveying, recording, and preserving His Word I believe that it was conveyed and recorded without error, and is to be considered absolutely accurate. Because of the supernatural work of God in the preservation of His Word, I believe that it is as accurate today as it was when it was first inspired. I believe that because the Bible is the Word of God that it is absolute in its authority. The Word of God is the will of God. Because of the supernatural state of the Word of God in that it was given and has been preserved by the power of God it is both accurate and authoritative, and it is eternal. The Word of God being from the omniscient mind of God speaks with as much relevance today has it had when it was first revealed in its original setting and context. That being said, I feel compelled to consider also the humanity of the Book.
The Word of God is also a human Book. The truth and relevance of the Word of God today, being God’s revelation of Himself to His people at particular times and in particular settings, rests on understanding the relevance of each message in the day that it was given. Thus the original intent of the author is essential to appropriate interpretation and by virtue of interpretation, application as far as we are concerned. The method of deriving the appropriate idea being conveyed in its context is the application of a literal or normal hermeneutic. We must consider many factors in interpreting Scripture as we would any other literary work. “But our object just at this point is to emphasize the fact that the Scriptures are in a book form, are written by human pens, that God’s messages have flowed through human minds as channels; that all these writings have to do with persons, places, times, events, geographical and historical surroundings, and are framed in human speech and according to the laws of grammar and the usages of language; and all these things must be considered and examined if we are to know the Scriptures and the power of God in them.”[4] Pierson sums up well the tools of the trade in regard to the interpretive work, and this is the work that is necessary if we are to accurately and authoritatively represent the truth of the Word of God and apply it as it was intended by the author. At least that is my assumption based on my world view as it has come to be formed and shaped by the very Scriptures I have sought to interpret.
[1] Webster, Noah. American Dictionary of the English Language. San Francisco: Foundation for American Christian Education, 2000. Print.
[2] Webster, Noah. American Dictionary of the English Language. San Francisco: Foundation for American Christian Education, 2000. Print.
[3] McQuilkin, Robertson. Understanding and Applying the Bible. Illinois: Moody Publishers, 2009. p. 21-22
[4] Pierson, Arthur, T. Knowing the Scriptures. New York: Gospel, 1910. p. 66
Presuppositions are products of a number of variants in one’s life. McQuilken said this quoting Ernst Best, “We must know ourselves….Each of us approaches Scripture with his own, or her own presuppositions. These presuppositions are part of our world view, part of our personal theology. In the first instance they relate to the way we regard Scripture. Does it consist of infallible propositions? Is it the record of certain acts of God? Is it an inspired record? Is there revelation outside Scripture? Our views here will dictate how we handle the text. Our minds are not empty when we read or listen to Scripture; what we hear is already partly predetermined by what is already in them; our presuppositions shape what we understand.”[3] Our presuppositions are part of our world view as Best points out.
Our presuppositions, as a part of our world view, affect the way we see things, including Scripture. One example of this being the case can be found in the mind of one who has grown up in church. An assumption this person might approach the Scripture with is that it is indeed absolute in its truth and authority. Whether this is right or wrong is not the point. The fact is a person that has been brought up to believe such a thing is going to approach the Scriptures and respond to them in a way that is different from one who has been brought up by an atheist. The one that believes the Scripture to be true and authoritative will look to the Book as a foundation for living. The atheist will look to the Book as a historical document and will judge the content based on his own his own moral compass and leanings. So then we understand, even from this one example, that our own presuppositions affect the way we approach and thus interpret Scripture.
Regarding my personal presuppositions to the Word of God and thus to the interpretation of it, they are simple. I believe that the Word of God is just that, God’s Words supernaturally recorded and preserved by God, through natural men for the purpose of God’s revelation of Himself and thus His will to mankind. As I said before, our presuppositions are a part of our world view and therefore what I have given and what I will give are presuppositions as they have come to be. My world view has changed and thus my presuppositions as I have been exposed to the Word of God. Therefore, much of the way I approach Scripture is determined by passages such as Psalms 12:6-7, II Timothy 3:16, II Peter 1:21, and Psalm 119:89 to name a few. Because I believe that God worked supernaturally in conveying, recording, and preserving His Word I believe that it was conveyed and recorded without error, and is to be considered absolutely accurate. Because of the supernatural work of God in the preservation of His Word, I believe that it is as accurate today as it was when it was first inspired. I believe that because the Bible is the Word of God that it is absolute in its authority. The Word of God is the will of God. Because of the supernatural state of the Word of God in that it was given and has been preserved by the power of God it is both accurate and authoritative, and it is eternal. The Word of God being from the omniscient mind of God speaks with as much relevance today has it had when it was first revealed in its original setting and context. That being said, I feel compelled to consider also the humanity of the Book.
The Word of God is also a human Book. The truth and relevance of the Word of God today, being God’s revelation of Himself to His people at particular times and in particular settings, rests on understanding the relevance of each message in the day that it was given. Thus the original intent of the author is essential to appropriate interpretation and by virtue of interpretation, application as far as we are concerned. The method of deriving the appropriate idea being conveyed in its context is the application of a literal or normal hermeneutic. We must consider many factors in interpreting Scripture as we would any other literary work. “But our object just at this point is to emphasize the fact that the Scriptures are in a book form, are written by human pens, that God’s messages have flowed through human minds as channels; that all these writings have to do with persons, places, times, events, geographical and historical surroundings, and are framed in human speech and according to the laws of grammar and the usages of language; and all these things must be considered and examined if we are to know the Scriptures and the power of God in them.”[4] Pierson sums up well the tools of the trade in regard to the interpretive work, and this is the work that is necessary if we are to accurately and authoritatively represent the truth of the Word of God and apply it as it was intended by the author. At least that is my assumption based on my world view as it has come to be formed and shaped by the very Scriptures I have sought to interpret.
[1] Webster, Noah. American Dictionary of the English Language. San Francisco: Foundation for American Christian Education, 2000. Print.
[2] Webster, Noah. American Dictionary of the English Language. San Francisco: Foundation for American Christian Education, 2000. Print.
[3] McQuilkin, Robertson. Understanding and Applying the Bible. Illinois: Moody Publishers, 2009. p. 21-22
[4] Pierson, Arthur, T. Knowing the Scriptures. New York: Gospel, 1910. p. 66
RSS Feed