(This lecture outline is adapted with permission from Roger W. Coon's outline, EGW and Hermeneutics: It's Importance and Place--An Introduction, April 4, 1995.  For further study, see Herbert E. Douglass, Messenger of the Lord, pp. 372-415.)
 

Introduction

• There are four basic theological presuppositions or assumptions one needs to take into account in the study of hermeneutics.
• God reveals himself to humanity through spokespersons (2 Peter 3:2; Rev 1:1; 19:10; 22:6; Jer 1:4-10).
• The Holy Spirit guided the prophets in their writing (inscripturation) of the revelation of God (2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:21).
• The written form of the revelation of God is inspired and authoritative.
• It is possible for men and women of all ages and anywhere in the world to understand the revelation of God (Deut 30:11-16).

 
• This subject of hermeneutics is one of the most important with which we will deal in this course. Perhaps as many as 75% of pastoral problems dealing with Ellen G. White issues revolve around hermeneutical understandings of her writings.

 

• What does the word hermeneutics mean?
• The American Heritage College Dictionary (3rd ed., 1993): "The science and methodology of interpretation, especially of scriptural text."

 
• The chief concern of hermeneutics:
• "What does the prophet mean by what the prophet says?"
• The words, indeed, are significant and important.
• But the ultimate concern focuses upon the meaning/message conveyed by those words.

 
• Therefore, hermeneutics is concerned with
• What words mean and do not mean (semantics).
• How to arrive at the core teaching or message of the data (methodology).

 

Everyone has had experience with interpreting words and meanings. Our contemporary life is full of examples in which we use interpretation to draw the right meaning out of words and expressions.

A visitor from a foreign country reportedly was observed standing upon the platform of the New York City underground railroad, watching a succession of trains, from various lines, arrive and depart. Yet he made no effort to board any.

A police officer strolled over, wondering if the tourist had simply come to see the trains go by, or if, indeed, he wished to take one of the coaches.

Drawing nearer, he noted a look of frustration, helplessness, even exasperation and futility, on the visitor's face.

"Did you wish to take one of the trains?" the police officer inquired politely, noting that a number of trains had arrived and departed, while the man had stood still the whole time.

"Yes, I wish to take the 'A' train," the visitor noted plaintively.

"Well, three of them have come in and gone out while you have been standing here," the officer observed.

"I know," said the man with some impatience.

"Well," persisted the officer, "then what's the problem?"

"I don't have a dog!" the tourist answered with growing irritation.

"You don't need a dog," the policeman said, now thoroughly puzzled.

"O yes I do!" the man said, triumphantly pointing to a signboard on one of the steel beams above the platform, which read: "Dogs must be carried in the coaches."

The visitor's problem, manifestly, was not that he could not read, or that he could not read English. He knew clearly what the sign said! His problem, rather, was that he unfortunately did not know what the sign meant!

• The goal of hermeneutics is to "rightly divide the word of truth" (2 Tim 2:15).

 
• The guiding purpose of hermeneutics is twofold:
• To achieve balance.
• To avoid distortion.

 
• The importance of hermeneutics :
• "Listen as for your life to 'what saith the Scripture.' It is of supreme importance that you hear aright....Your salvation depends on you hearing aright, and receiving with meekness the engrafted Word" (UL 50; from Letter 32, Feb. 5, 1907).

 
• The best methodological approach seeks to develop and employ "tools" (rules) by means of which meaning may be correctly extracted from the message. (The next three parts will deal with methodology.)

 

• The purpose for this introductory lecture on hermeneutics is to show that there is a need for hermeneutics. Whether with the Bible or with the writings of Ellen G. White we need to know what the text says and what it means. Hermeneutics is therefore an important science and theological endeavor.

 

• Earliest preaching:
• Preaching, as customarily thought of today, was first done in the post-Exilic synagogues of Palestine following the captivity. It was inextricably intertwined with concerns about hermeneutics.
• Nehemiah 8:8 : "They read from the book of the law of God, making it clear, and giving the meaning, so that the people could understand what was being read."

 
• Jeremiah. "This is what the Lord says: 'Let not the wise man boast of his wisdom or the strong man boast of his strength or the rich man boast of his riches, but let him who boasts boast about this: that he understands and knows me, that I am the Lord...'" (Jer. 9:23,24).

 
• Philip asked the Ethiopian treasurer, who was reading the book of Isaiah as he rode in his chariot near Gaza, "Do you understand what you are reading?" (Acts 8:30).

 
• Paul prayed that the Christians at Colosse might be filled with the knowledge of God's will "through all spiritual wisdom and understanding" (Col. 1:9). He urged Timothy, in his last epistle, to "reflect on what I am saying, for the Lord will give you insight into all this" (2 Tim 2:7). He also said, "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of God" (v.15).

 
• If, in his word, God tells us we should understand what is in Scripture, if we should boast about understanding and knowing him, if we should handle the word of God correctly, is it, therefore, possible to not understand Scripture, to misinterpret it, and to handle the word of God incorrectly? Yes, it is possible.

 

• A Problem for Jesus

 
• The earthly ministry of Jesus was made unnecessarily difficult because he was so frequently misunderstood.
• By the religious leaders of his day:
• "The envious Pharisees misinterpreted the acts and words of Christ which, if properly received, would have been beneficial to their spiritual understanding" (1SM 30).
• "When Christ was in our world, He said to the Pharisees and scribes, 'Why do ye not understand my words and appreciate them?' They were continually placing their own construction upon the plain words of truth that fell from His lips" (UL 236).
• "But those who had been entrusted with the oracles of God, that they might be faithful expositors of the Scriptures, rejected and denied the Teacher sent from heaven. Christ saw that their spirit and principles were entirely contrary to the Scriptures. He saw that the Word of God was misinterpreted and misapplied. He saw how difficult it would be to instruct the people to read the Scriptures correctly, when their teachers read them in the light of their perverted judgment. What could He do to soften and subdue their hearts? This was the burden of His prayer [when He prayed all night in the mountain--Luke 6:12]" (UL 80).
• By his own disciple, Judas Iscariot:

"He [Judas] would introduce texts of Scripture that had no connection with the truths Christ was preaching. These texts, separated from their connection [context], perplexed the disciples, and increased the discouragement that was constantly pressing upon them. Yet all this was done by Judas in such a way as to make it appear that he was conscientious. And while the disciples were searching for evidence to confirm the words of the great teacher, Judas would lead them almost imperceptibly on another track. Thus in a very religious, and apparently wise, way he was presenting matters in a different light from that which Jesus had given them, and attaching to His words a meaning that He had not conveyed. His suggestions were constantly exciting an ambitious desire for temporal preferment, and thus turning the disciples from the important things they should have considered" (DA 719).

B. A Continuing Problem For Ellen White

• "Many men take the testimonies the Lord has given...picking out a sentence here and there, taking it from its proper connection [context], and applying it according to their idea. Thus poor souls become bewildered, when could they read in order all that has been given, they would see the true application, and would not become confused. Much that purports to be a message from Sister White, serves [only] the purpose of misrepresenting Sister White" (1SM 44).

 

• "Those who are not walking in the light of the message, may gather up statements from my writings that happen to please them, and that agree with their human judgment, and, by separating these statements from their connection, and placing them beside human reasoning, make it appear that my writings uphold that which they condemn. I charge you not to do this work. To use my writings thus . . . is misleading and inconsistent" (To G.C. Tenney, Letter 208, June 29, 1906, p. 3).

 
• Most cases of misinterpretation and extremism concerning the writings of Ellen White have to do with:

b. Diet.                                   g. Racial issues.

c. Dress.                                 h. Cultural issues.

d. Recreation/Amusement.       i. Debt.

e. Education: theory/practice.   j. Homemaking.
 
 

III. Arguments Against the Need For Hermeneutics.

A. Arguments.

• "Take it just as it reads, in plain English. We don't need a fancy set of rules to interpret inspired writings."

• It is added: "After all, didn't Sister White, herself, say, more than once, to the church members of her day: 'Take the Word of God just as it reads'?" (UL 144).
• Indeed, she said this. But what did she mean by what she said?

 

• Life is perceived by some as a simple matter of "black-or-white", two extremes:

• Certain passages of Scriptures take on an ominous significance, with a different emphasis:
• "Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one" (Mat. 5:37; James 5:12).
• "I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm--neither hot nor cold--I am about to spit you out of my mouth" (Rev. 3:15,16).

• Most things in life appear to be divided into but two categories:
• Sheep or goats; wheat or tares; good or bad, right or wrong; cold or hot; yes or no.

• A rigid verbal/mechanical view of inspiration is often held which often leads to rigid legalism and opinions.

 

    In fairness, we must admit that there are dangers with rules of interpretation. There is a potential problem.

• Danger #1 : That in explaining, we "explain-away":

• Rules of interpretation can be a cloak under which to hide a watering down of the clear intent of the word of God, by spiritualizing the obvious intent of the passage.
• Ellen White warned of this danger: "And now, brethren, I entreat you not to interpose between me and the people, and turn away the light which God would have come to them. Do not by your criticism take out all the force, all the point and power, from the Testimonies. Do not feel that you can dissect them to suit your own ideas.... For Christ's sake, do not confuse the minds of the people with human sophistry and skepticism, and make of none effect the work that the Lord would do" (5T 691).
• A good example of this watering down of Scripture is the Corban policy and practice of the Jewish leaders (Matt 15:6, DA 396-397).

 
• Danger #2 : The "everything-is-gray" syndrome :
• In endeavoring to correct one extreme view, there is always the potential danger that, in reaction, one will go to the opposite extreme. In attempting to correct the erroneous view that all things in life are black-or-white, we may, unwittingly, create the wrong impression that nothing is clear, or absolute.
• For, indeed, there are moral absolutes in the Christian walk. Moral purity is an absolute, adultery is always wrong. It is always wrong to lie, cheat, or steal.
• But in some matter (like for example diet), there are gray areas: all is neither right or wrong. We do well to remember what Ellen White said about diet: "The other members of my family do not eat the same things I do. I do not hold myself up as a criterion for them. I leave each one to follow his own ideas as to what is best for him.... It is impossible to make one rule for all to follow" (To Bro. and Sis. G.A. Irwin, Lt 127, 1904, cited in CD 491).

 

1.  Sometimes the words themselves may be clear, but the intended meaning of those words may yet remain unclear.

• Printout from an engine diagnostic computer may have words in plain English, but their meaning is clear only to the technician, who has to translate them to the vehicle owner.
• Initial abbreviations may have different perceived meaning by several different persons:
• P.C. may stand for: personal computer, police constable, Progressist Conservative (for Canadians!)

• Psychology.
• Ellen White wrote : "Satan works through the science of psychology" (1T 290-292). (And, for a fact, he surely does!)
• But does that mean that all psychology is evil?
• Not necessarily. She wrote: "The true principles of psychology are found in the Holy Scriptures" (ML 176).

In 1T 296 we read a statement that has puzzled or troubled many over the years:

• "Phrenology and mesmerism [hypnosis] are very much exalted. They are good in their place, but they have been seized upon by Satan as his most powerful agents to deceive and destroy souls."
• In attempting to analyze the statement (which goes against everything else she wrote concerning these two practices, labeling them unmitigated evils), the crucial question is: what is the antecedent of the "they" as it appears in the expression "They are good in their place...."
• Is there a proper, if greatly limited, place for phrenology and hypnosis? It almost seems so, from reading this one passage.
• If, however, one were to change the antecedent of "they" from "phrenology and mesmerism" to "the sciences of the mind," would that alter the puzzling impression that these words of warning initially make? Yes! And EGW did make such a statement (with the different antecedent) in RH, 18 Feb. 1862 (and again in ST, 6 Nov. 1884)  "The sciences of phrenology, psychology, and mesmerism, have been the channel through which Satan has come more directly to this generation, and wrought with that power which was to characterize his work near the close of probation. . . . Satan has come unperceived through these sciences, and poisoned the minds of thousands and led them to infidelity."

• The King James Version of the Bible, translated in 1611, use many words that are no longer used today or that have changed in meaning.
• Some words have a much more narrow meaning today:


Conversation : today indicates oral discourse between two or more persons; but in 1611, it referred to one's whole way of life.

Meat: today, it refers to flesh food or red meat, then it means food in general.

• Some words have an altogether different meaning today:


Meet: today, a verb indicating the gathering together of a group; then, appropriate, suitable, or fitting.

Approve: today, to accept; then, to marvel at.

By and by: today, in a short time in the future; then, immediately.

Suffer: today, to endure pain; then, to allow.

Outlandish woman: today, ridiculous; then, merely a foreign person.

• In 1675 Sir Christopher Wren laid the foundation stone for St. Paul's Cathedral in London. Thirty-five years later Queen Anne toured the magnificent structure and made her royal pronouncement: "It is awful. It is amusing. It is artificial." Today some might consider these words humiliating, but not to Sir Christopher. In his day these words meant awesome, pleasing and masterful.
• A number of words employed by EGW have changed just in the short time that has elapsed between when she used them and today:
• shut door: as used by ex-Millerites, after Oct. 22, 1844, meant that the door of probation was shut for all who did not accept the validity of Oct. 22; but, by 1852, it came to mean that probation was closed only for those who had openly turned their backs on the doctrine of the second advent in 1844, but the door of mercy was still open for others.
• (See, Comprehensive Index to the Writings of Ellen G. White, Appendix B, pp. 3185-88: "Glossary of Obsolete and Little Used Words and Terms With Altered Meanings.")

• Culturally, the Bible, basically, is an "Eastern" (rather than a "Western") book:
• In the Middle East, and in much of Africa, respect is shown by removing the footwear (see Ex. 3:5); and, also, in Eastern Europe, by standing for prayer. In the West, respect is shown, variously, by kneeling, removing one's hat, rising to one's feet.
• Prophets are sometimes said to be "a child of their age" (the doctrine of "historical conditioning").
• SDAs have no problem in understanding that the prophets (including EGW) were influenced, sometimes even strongly, by the cultural milieu in which they were raised and lived.
• But we do not accept the idea that the prophet was a "prisoner" of the culture of his or her times, and thus unable to transcend it. We say, emphatically, that they were not the helpless, hapless, captive victims of their age and contemporary cultural background; they were enabled by God to transcend it, thus to give messages timeless in their value.
• But an understanding of the age will, in many instances, often help us better understand the prophet, and the prophet's utterances.
• A message written hundreds of years ago can be relevant for today's life.

• Two men in the New Testament asked, essentially, an identical question, under quite different circumstances; and each got an answer quite different from that given the other:
• The Rich Young Ruler asked: "What must I do to inherit eternal life?". Christ told him to (a) sell all he owned, (b) give the proceeds to the poor, (c) take up his cross, and (d) follow Jesus (Mark 10:17-22).
• The Philippian Jailer asked virtually the same question: "What must I do to be saved?" Paul and Silas told him he must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:30-33).
• Why different answers to the same question? Because the conditions, and therefore the needs, of each man differed from the other. The rich young ruler's problem was idolatry of wealth; the Greek jailer's problem, however, was one of intellectual belief. (He was probably steeped in the humanistic philosophy of Greece in which there was no room for the one true God who lived as a human on earth, died a horrible death, and then resurrected from the dead.)

• In DA 780, EGW wrote: "Christ came forth from the tomb glorified"; yet, only 25 pages later in the same book, she wrote: "Christ had not yet been glorified" (DA 805).
• Is she contradicting herself? No.
• In the first statement, "glorified" refers to Christ's physical appearance.
• In the second it referred to his legal status before God, as Saviour.

Conclusion

Many rules of interpretation for the writings of Ellen G. White have been suggested. T. Housel Jemison, in his 1955 prophetic guidance textbook, A Prophet Among You, (pp. 438-449), offered three rules for interpretation (hermeneutics) which apply equally well to all inspired writings, including those of Ellen G. White.
 

The next three lecture outlines will examine and apply, in a case study approach, three basic rules of interpretation.