Robert Lowery

On Wednesday afternoon, May 16, we registered new seminary students who will begin in August. I always look forward to meeting them, and one of my responsibilities is to welcome them to the seminary. Here is what I will share with them:

A few days before that afternoon, Saturday, May 11 to be exact, we had commencement service for our graduating seminarians. It is always a day of celebration. It is, what one of my colleagues called, “Payday!” On Friday, the day before, I was indeed paid a portion of my salary. But my real salary is the students who go out from this community to serve Jesus.

On commencement day we presented them with a diploma, a master’s hood, and a towel with the seminary logo on it. As we welcome you to the seminary, I want to share with you some guiding words made popular by Stephen Covey, author of The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People: Begin with the end in mind.

As you begin this relationship with our seminary, please begin with the end in mind. At least one end. Begin thinking about your commencement day. I have attended approximately thirty commencement services for our students, and that means I have heard approximately thirty commencement sermons or wannabe sermons. With due respect towards all of the preachers, only one stands out. It was preached by Bill Remond, one of our alums and a former congressman from New Mexico. At the end of his sermon he said: “Now these three remain, the diploma, the hood, and the towel. And the greatest of these is the towel.”

As you begin think about the end. And think about everything in between. Wed study and service. What God has brought together, let no one separate.

Begin with the end in mind.

Think towel.

Technorati Tags: Seminary, service, Covey

I have lost track how many times I have been asked this question. The question is neither legitimate nor good; it is vague and misses the point. Why? Because I do not know what the inquirer means by “literal.” In fact, every time I have been quizzed on this issue of interpretation, the person has never been able to offer a correct definition of the word. Why? It is a slippery one. We have forgotten the history behind the word.

In the book Alice in Wonderland, there is an exchange between Humpty Dumpty and Alice over the way that the former has misused a word. Alice challenges him about him using a word incorrectly, and Humpty responds: “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.” Alice responds: “The question is . . . whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

Frankly, when I am quizzed if I interpret Revelation literally, the question is frequently asked in a scornful tone, as if I am some kind of “liberal” (whatever that word means!). Bob, one of the readers of my postings, wrote: “I have tried to scrap entirely the use of the word ‘literal’ in describing the exegetical process. It is shorthand for all kinds of presuppositions about the truthfulness of the text . . . It is a shame that so many think that bland, literalistic ‘left-behind-ism’ could ever offer anything more profound than the depth, color and spatial palate that John . . . actually paint from . . . ” Point well made. I like his use of images!

On those occasions in which I have been asked the question about a “literal” interpretation of Scripture, I decided to offer a bit on the history of hermeneutics (the history of the way Scripture has been interpreted). For nearly a thousand years (during medieval times, roughly 500-1500), interpreters of Scripture said that there were four different senses found in a passage of Scripture:

• literal (the original meaning)
• allegorical (a method in which the characters, events, or places signify “deeper” meaning{s} than their literal meaning)
• anagogical (discovering what the text said about the future life)
• moral (lessons from Scripture we can apply to our behavior)

Reformers like Martin Luther and John Calvin rejected the fourfold approach and stressed the first level, “the literal sense” of the Bible. I use the word the way they used the word and not the way we use it in our day when we try to differentiate between “figurative” and “literal.” We turn these two words into opponents, like boxers in a ring (a powerful metaphor expressing a truth!). Luther, Calvin, and others emphasized the first of the four senses. The word “literal” means “the sense of the letter.” Therefore, if “the letter” refers to the actual words used by the original authors is metaphorical or symbolic, so be it. Consider this observation by N.T. Wright (see The Last Word, p. 73):

The Reformers were careful to explain this point when arguing for what they saw as the metaphorical sense of Jesus’s words at the Last Supper (“This is my body”) over against what to us would be called the “literal” sense–i.e., the view that (as we say) Jesus “meant it literally,” which would support a rather crude notion of transubstantiation. For them, the “literal” sense was the sense that the first writers intended, which in this case, they argued, was some kind of figurative meaning. . . . We need to note carefully that to invoke “the literal” meaning of scripture, hoping thereby to settle a point by echoing the phraseology of the Reformers, could be valid only if we meant, not “literal” as opposed to metaphorical, but “literal” (which might include metaphorical if that, arguably was the original sense) as opposed to the three other medieval senses. . .

The question of “literal” interpretation must be linked with the issue of genre. As I note in Revelation’s Rhapsody (see pp. 67ff.), John used genres that could express truth in symbolic and non-symbolic ways. An author’s original intended meaning could be expressed in both symbolic and non-symbolic ways!

In a nutshell, when I am asked “Do I interpret the Bible in general and the book of Revelation in particular, literally?” I first explain what I mean by the term and then I summarize by saying: “I interpret a book of the Bible or a passage in a book naturally in light of the book’s genre.”

Technorati Tags: Bible, Revelation, interpretation

Earlier this spring I was speaking at the Wisconsin Christian Convention in the Wisconsin Dells. College Press had set up a booth in the foyer, and one of the books being sold was my work on Revelation. I was honored that the publisher would do so.

In the hallway, a convention-goer asked me if it was true that my book was also published by Logos Bible Software out of Bellingham, Washington. I acknowledged that it had indeed been published in electronic form, and she asked me Why? Good question. Let me give two responses to that question.

Why an electronic copy? In general, the reasons are time, money, space, and portability. Specifically, I wanted my book to be in electronic form because this is the delivery system for an increasing number of books, and electronic books are in high demand around the world. For those of us who like to hold a book in our hands, to read a book on a computer can be quite a shock. Yet the publishing world is changing. One of the key reasons why I wanted this volume to be available to computer users is that many of my students in America are not purchasing print editions of works but rather they are adding electronic books to the library on their computer, thereby making books more accessible and transportable. Not only are books being read this way by Americans, but each summer I teach somewhere in Eastern Europe, and my students are buying more and more books in the electronic format because they are less expense, take up less space (not everyone has an office to house thousands of books!), and can be carried anywhere.

There is a second reason, and this one focuses on “Why Logos Bible Software?” Simply put, it is the world’s biggest developer of Bible software, and if I believe that my book will be a helpful one to people, I want to reach as many as possible. Bible software is a designation for those computer programs for studying the Bible. And what a revolution the software has started, especially Logos! I am delighted that this Christian company decided to publish my book because, in my opinion, it is not only the largest developer, but in my opinion, it is the finest. If you would purchase Logos Bible Software 3, you will be amazed at how it locates, organizes, and presents biblical information from electronic resources. It compares versions, enables the user to do word and topic studies, to name some of its features. Every week books are being added. It is easy to begin using and will take the user about as deep as he/she wants to go. I could go on and on, but you get the point. It is an outstanding resource for students of the Word.

(At Lincoln Christian Seminary many of us are so sold on its value that we teach a course called Interpreting Scripture that requires students to purchase Scholar’s Library. Students use the library to study the Greek and Hebrew Scriptures. I require students in all of my exegesis courses to use the program. I am convinced its influence will only grow in the years ahead.)

But “Why Logos Bible Software” for my book? Let me give a few of the reasons. You can do advance topic, passage, and word searches. All biblical references and footnotes operate as “hotspots,” immediately presenting the cited information whenever the cursor rolls over them. The hotspots will even open your favorite translation at the click of a mouse. (How many of the readers of my book will actually look up all of the Scripture references? If they choose not to do so, my book will not be as helpful as I desire. How many will actually turn to the back of the book and read the footnotes, notes that I believe are as helpful as the text itself?! The notes and the Scriptures are quickly available, just a click away.)

As we have been blessed by the invention of the printing press, today we are blessed by the invention computers and electronic libraries. Logos Bible Software provides ease-of-use, a wide range of resources for lay people to preachers and teachers to professors. The features are truly user-friendly. And the price? I would have been able to buy even more books over the years if I would have been able to purchase them in electronic. And neither my house nor my office would have been so cluttered!

I am honored that both College Press and Logos Bible Software published my first book. I am in their debt. In the years ahead, may God bless both formats.

Technorati Tags: Bible, Logos Bible Software, College Press, Revelation’s Rhapsody

The other night I was playing with my three and a half year old granddaughter, Carissa. Once again we were trying to connect the dots in one of her books. She still hasn’t mastered the number system yet, but considering her age, she does well. She marvels every time when a picture forms. We then get out the crayons and fill in the image with splashes of colors. Our playtime that night provides a lesson about what we as Christians do when we study God’s Word: When we study Scripture we are attempting to connect the dots.

And what helps us connect the dots? Numbers are not used when trying to make the connections, but stories are. Specifically, how do we link Revelation with Exodus or Daniel or John’s Gospel? In recent years Bible scholars have been writing about the meta-narrative of Scripture, the overarching theme that connects all of the inspired writings. I believe the meta-narrative found in Scripture teaches us that God wants us to be in relationship with him, and he will do whatever it takes to establish and nurture that relationship. God’s desire to be in relationship with his creation is clearly taught in the opening chapters of Genesis and after sin enters the world, and the climax of God’s efforts is found in the last book of Scripture.
Read more…

5 July 2007
Haus Edelweiss
Heiligenkreuz, Austria

The class on New Testament Eschatology has ended. All of the students did amazingly well on their final exam. It was an oral exam, and I was able to ask each student twenty-five questions. They interacted with each other well. Not one made below an A in giving any answer. Quite remarkable! I am blessed to be able to participate in such a remarkable ministry. However . . .

One student lingered after all the others had left. He wanted to talk with me about one of my postings, the one on Matthew 24 and the principle of interpreting the obscure by the clear. As we were discussing Matthew’s account, something struck me more clearly than ever before. There is irony in the discourse. The disciples ask Jesus to provide signs when the destruction of the temple/the end of the age=the final coming would occur. They had mistakenly blended these two events together, and Jesus corrects their misunderstanding. But here is the irony: Jesus provides signs when Jerusalem and the Temple would be destroyed, and the signs would lead up to the destruction in their lifetime, that first century generation. In 70 A.D. Matthew 24:1-35 was fulfilled. But Jesus does not provide any signs concerning his final coming. In fact, he goes so far as to say there will be none and that we must always be prepared. Isn’t it fascinating, I asked the student, that many today turn the signs associated with events leading up to and including 70 A.D. have mistakenly been applied to the end of the world? Many have missed the point. The student from Bulgaria did not. But then he has not been confused by the prognosticators that bring much confusion to Christians in the United States.

I pray that the time is quickly approaching when people will grow weary of those who use the Scriptures to predict the future. Such individuals need to end their subscriptions to news magazines, newspapers along with ending their listening to or watching modern day prophets and spend more time in the Word.

Technorati Tags: Bible, interpretation, Revelation, end times

2 July 2007
Haus Edelweiss
Heiligenkreuz, Austria

In today’s lesson I stressed that three topics–the genres of Revelation, the use of the Old Testament, and John’s use of symbolism–are interconnected. You cannot break off one from the other two. In discussing the hermeneutical principle that you must interpret Scripture in light of the laws of language, I emphasized many points, but they responded very enthusiastically to four:

First, John uses two words in Rev. 1:1 (translated in the NIV as “to show” and, in an unfortunate translation “to make known” which is better translated “to make known in symbols”). I showed them how both words are used in the writings of John as well as the book of Daniel (see 2:45) to emphasize the nature of language that John is going to be using: He clearly communicates from the outset that symbolic language is the dominant language found in the book.

Second, symbols do not mean that something is less true, but rather they enrich the communication of the truths that John is passing on to us from God.

Third, they concluded that to ask whether or not a person interpreted Revelation “literally” is a rather silly question. The term “literal” they said was to interpret a passage in light of the author’s original intended meaning and that meaning could be expressed in symbolic and non-symbolic language. As I write in my book, the Bible student must interpret a passage naturally in light of the genre of the book.

Fourth, a common guideline is that the Bible student interprets something “literally” unless the context demands otherwise. In light of Rev. 1:1 and the nature of the genres of the book, we should say that when studying Revelation we should interpret a passage symbolically–numbers, colors, animals, pieces of furniture, etc.–symbolically unless the context demands otherwise.

1 July 2007
Haus Edelweiss
Heiligenkreuz, Austria

Our study of how to read Revelation continued today, with special focus on how John used the Old Testament to communicate what he saw and heard. A couple of observations from the session.

First, the students resonated with the call to allow Scripture to interpret Scripture. They acknowledged that far too often people allow current events to interpret Revelation rather than:

(a) John’s historical setting;
(b) John’s use of the Old Testament; and
(c) the layers of context within Revelation itself.

There was consensus that if certain interpreters are correct in reading Revelation through the lens of contemporary events, why can’t these post-modern day interpreters agree with one another? Are they like those who interpret the writings of Nostradamus, making his words fit whatever is going on in today’s world? Not a bad insight!

Second, after reviewing with them some examples in which John uses the Old Testament, I suggested that they need to spend hours of time reading through the Old Testament allusions that I have included in the back of my book. They need to see if those allusions help us see a dominant thought revealed in a symbol that Israel carried with them through the centuries. And then the fun began. At random I assigned each a verse or two and asked them to look up all of the allusions and then share with the class what they had discovered. Allowing several minutes for them to work, I then asked them to share what they had discovered. They were excited. They could understand the concept John was teaching not by going to commentaries outside of Scripture but by allowing the Old Testament Scriptures to help them understand Revelation.

At the conclusion, one of the students observed that perhaps we ought to spend more time soaking our heads and hearts in Scripture rather than in focusing on news headlines or reading commentaries. Not a bad suggestion!