The Governing Absolute
in Biblical Interpretation

by Larry Newman

There is one dictum governing the theological task which must be consistently held before us. That dictum is this: there is one absolute in the theological process, which necessarily is the catalytic point of any theological deliberation, and that absolute is the Word of God. This principle has been recognized and honored by the guardians of the gospel since the days of Calvin, Luther, and Zwingli and must be honored in our day as well.

The Church faces grave danger exactly at that point where theological constructs are made to be absolutes. Our theology must always be open to adjustment or reformation when it is exposed to and judged by a fuller and more competent understanding of the Word of God. Bernard Ramm is correct in his observation relative to theology:

Even though it is in service of the Word of God, in the service of the serious business of preaching, and in the service of the most important of all subject matters, it is nevertheless a very human task that must be done over and over again.1

T. F. Torrance has so aptly expressed this truth:

By its very nature the self-revelation of this God summons us to acknowledge the absolute priority of God's Word over all the media of its communication and reception, and over all understanding and interpretation of its Truth. The Word and Truth of God reach us and address us on their own free ground and on their own authority, for they cannot be understood, interpreted, far less assessed for what they are, on any other standard besides themselves. Hence in all our response to God's Word and in all formulation of divine Truth we are summoned to let God retain his own reality, majesty, and authority over against us.2

Torrance further avers:

In divine revelation we have to do with a Word of God which is what it is as a Word of God in its own reality independent of our recognition of it, and we have to do with a Truth of God which is what it is as Truth of God before we come to know it to be true. That means that in all our response to God's self-revelation as it is mediated to us in space and time through the Holy Scriptures we must seek to understand and interpret it in accordance with its intrinsic requirements and under the constraint of the truth which bears upon our minds in and through it, and not in accordance with requirements of thought which we bring to it or under the constraint of rigid habits of belief which we retain at the back of our minds irrespective of what we experience beyond ourselves. Divine revelation which commands a response of this kind is very disturbing, for it uproots us from the comfortable certainty of our preconceptions and calls in question the mechanisms we constantly develop in order to give a firmness to our evangelical beliefs in themselves as beliefs, rather than in the objective ground to which as beliefs they are properly correlated and in reference to which they are always open to revision.3

A Maturing People

Much water has passed under our Pentecostal bridge since the evidential constructs we have inherited were formulated. Great advances have been made in both biblical and theological scholarship. Archeological discoveries have enhanced our knowledge of ancient times and practices. Many of these discoveries have affirmed the validity of the Bible as the Word of God.

The constituency of the Pentecostal Movement has evolved from a people who were predominantly from the poorer classes, to become (through what Donald McGavren has called lift) members of America's middle classes.

Pentecostals have become an educated and affluent people. Among our ranks we find the children of those who worshiped in storefronts and canvas tents, who knelt on rough wooden floors or walked sawdust trails, who earned their bread as blue collar workers, people who are the inheritors of their parent's faith, but not their poverty nor their lack of education. Within our memberships there are those holding advanced degrees from various disciplines, such as attorneys, medical doctors, teachers, businessmen, engineers, and college professors. In ever increasing numbers the pastors and denominational leaders of most Pentecostal bodies are earning advanced degrees from our nation's universities and seminaries.

What has just been described, is a people in the process of maturing. An important aspect of that maturing process has been, and will continue to be, our struggle with the ongoing theological task. As a people, we have reformed our theology relative to many issues. Granted, to this point the issues have been peripheral, but we have demonstrated a willingness to rethink our position on many matters and have made needed adjustments, such as the rejection of our former legalistic concepts (regarding the use of cosmetics, women's dress codes and the like).

A Call for Serious Theological Labors

I sincerely believe that the time has come to rethink our protected areas which we call our "Pentecostal Distinctives." William MacDonald, a Pentecostal, has pointed to the need for new direction in Pentecostal thought:

Certainly it is no discredit to our spiritual forefathers in this century if they confined themselves primarily to the vehicles of popular written communication (e.g., tracts, magazines and sermon books). These were the generations of change and revival, and the literature was appropriate to the cause. Now the success of the Pentecostal revival calls for consolidation and advance, for continuous searching of the Scripture, careful scholarship, competent sifting of the oral tradition, and comparative study with other Christian traditions.4

In the same vein MacDonald further observes:

However, there seems to be a reluctance to reassess our doctrines which we consider to be unique, as though we thought that we would be attacking the heart and soul of the Faith. In a very real sense, we are guilty of imposing upon these theological constructs an "absoluteness" with which they must not be invested. Even as subjecting other aspects of our "Pentecostal faith" to a fresh scrutiny by the Word of God, in the light of advanced evangelical scholarship and archeological discoveries, has helped us to a fuller and more competent understanding of the written Word, so we must also surrender all doctrines which are distinct to Pentecostalism to that same scrutiny.5

Dr. Roy Blizzard, an archeologist and Hebrew Studies scholar, has correctly observed,

As a result of the archeological discoveries and the textual studies of the past 35 years, we are now able to understand the Bible, and especially the words of Jesus, as never before in the last 1900 years. With these tools now available, no effort should be spared in correcting every mistranslation and in clarifying every misinterpretation of the inspired text.6

If a particular distinctive must fall under the judgment of the Word of God, so be it. A theology which desires to stand apart from the Word or over the Word is not worth the paper it is written on.

The Only Distinctive Which Matters

There is one distinctive which we Pentecostals should wear with satisfaction. That is the fact that we are a people of the "anointing," a people who recognize, honor, and are under the leadership and guidance of the Holy Spirit. That should be the only distinctive necessary to justify our existence. Anything else is incidental.

In every spectrum of the larger Church, our emphasis on the anointing, empowerment, and leadership of the Spirit has thrust to the forefront of Christian thinking, matters pertaining to the Person and work of the Holy Spirit. That is significant!

Notes

  1. Bernard Ramm. After Fundamentalism: The Future of Evangelical Theology, (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1983), p. 194.
  2. T. F. Torrance. Reality and Evangelical Theology (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1982), p. 13.
  3. Ibid., pp. 13-14.
  4. David B. Barrett, ed., World Christian Encyclopedia. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982), p. 723. (According to a brochure issued by the Assemblies of God Office of Information dated 6/87 the Assemblies of God constituency in the USA at the end of 1986 totaled 2,135,104. Church membership in the USA totaled 1,258,724.)
  5. Russell P. Spittler, ed., Perspectives on the New Pentecostalism. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1976), pp. 59-60. 6. Ibid., pp. 68, 73.
  6. David Bivin and Roy Blizzard, Jr., Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus. (Austin, Tx.: Center for Judaic-Christian Studies, 1984), p. 117. See also: Clark H. Pinnock. The Scripture Principle, (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1984), pp. 206-207.


Back to Page One

© 1999, Larry Newman