Chad Chambers
Southern Baptists and Pre-Critical Exegesis
Introduction
As the first decade of the twenty-first century draws to a close, the discipline of biblical
interpretation finds itself in a state of flux as postmodernism1 continues to challenge the modern
worldview. Perhaps, most significant for biblical studies has been postmodernism’s frontal
assault on the modern vision of objective or universal truth. On this front, numerous ‘new’
theories of interpretation have opposed the historical-critical method of interpretation, the
prevailing method of modern biblical scholarship, and its search for a biblical text’s one true
meaning. Theologians and exegetes, such as Karl Barth, Hans Frei, Brevard Childs, Stephen
Fowl, Gustavo Gonzalez, and Elizabeth Schüssler Fiorenza have each, in their own way, offered
alternative ways of interpreting Scripture.
Regularly, an antagonist of these ‘new’ theories of interpretation is the so-called
conservative fundamentalist.2 While conservative fundamentalists usually are not defined in any
specific terms, the label is designed to distinguish them as the prototypical modern interpreter
who relies precisely on the mindsets and methods in question. In this paper, I am going to
assume to speak for my particular Christian denomination, which is frequently if not always,
placed within this faction, namely Southern Baptists. My primary purpose is to establish that
when one considers the Southern Baptist doctrine of Scripture, as defined in our own official
statements this is, in many respects, a case of mistaken identity. I also have a secondary purpose
for this paper and that is to call Southern Baptists to reexamine our habit of biblical interpretation
in light of our own understanding of Scripture. All too often, what has passed as Southern
1
I am using postmodernism in the most general sense in that it comes after modernism. Of course, even in this
general sense it still conveys distrust in the ideas of modernism.
2
For example, Stephen E. Fowl and L. Gregory Jones, Reading in Communion (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock
Publishers, 1998), 1.
1
Chad Chambers
Baptist interpretation defies what we claim about Scripture, or in more colloquial terms, we do
not practice what we preach. I contend that if Southern Baptists practice exegesis according to
our own doctrine, our interpretation should correspond most intimately not with modern or postmodern exegesis, but with the works of Origen, Augustine, and Aquinas.
To accomplish these tasks necessitates beginning with the works of Origen, Augustine,
and Aquinas. By examining what David C. Steinmetz describes as the pre-critical exegetical
tradition,3 I identify a simple but fundamental doctrine of Scripture and from this I construct a
two-fold exegetical theory. With this historical perspective, I examine the Southern Baptist
doctrine of Scripture, illustrating the similarities between our understanding of Scripture and that
of the pre-critical tradition. As would be expected, there will be instances of divergence, but in
studying their works, Southern Baptists may surprisingly find comfort and reassurance.4 In
conclusion, I briefly outline a way forward for Southern Baptists that embraces the doctrinal
similarities and adopts a pre-critical exegetical theory as the foundation for our interpretation of
Scripture.
A Pre-Critical Doctrine of Scripture
To define pre-critical exegesis as a particular historical era is an arduous task and an
unnecessary one within the scope in this paper. Rather, I desire to show that a stable doctrine of
Scripture existed throughout various periods of the pre-critical tradition, by discussing the works
of Origen, Augustine, and Aquinas. I emphasize three facets of this doctrine which were active
for each of these theologians and exegetes: Scripture as the divinely inspired revelation of God
David C. Steinmetz, “The Superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis,” Theology Today, 37 (1980): 27-38.
As a supplement to this engagement with the pre-critical understanding of Scripture, I have included an appendix,
which examines the exegetical methods of Augustine and Aquinas. With Southern Baptist congregations
specifically in mind, my desire is to reveal that engaging their writings can enrich both our understanding of the
nature of Scripture and our interpretation of Scripture.
3
4
2
Chad Chambers
containing wisdom necessary for salvation; the truths of Scripture as real and complex; and
genuine understanding of Scripture requires the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Scripture as Divinely Inspired with a Purpose
The divine inspiration of Scripture was the common, if not universal, conviction of the
Christian Church’s forefathers.5 Origen, Augustine, and Aquinas considered this matter of such
importance that they evaluated this particular subject extensively in their respective works on
Scripture.6 Though they each approached the subject in a unique way, their final conclusions
were analogous. Origen states, characteristically, “The Scriptures themselves are divine, that is,
are inspired by the Spirit of God.”7 Moreover, according to these three exegetes, God designed
Scripture with a specific purpose, namely to reveal the wisdom necessary for salvation.
Salvation in the pre-critical tradition, however, signified something different from what it
often denotes to Southern Baptists. Southern Baptists frequently depict salvation as a cognitive
recognition of a certain set of facts about who God is and what God has done, as revealed in
Scripture. For these pre-critical exegetes, however, salvation was fundamentally eternal union
with God and God revealed Himself in Scripture to lead humanity toward union with its author.
Augustine states, “It is to be understood that the plentitude and the end of the Law and of all the
sacred Scriptures is the Love of a Being who is to be enjoyed.”8 To avoid any misunderstanding
of this distinction, pre-critical exegetes surely believed certain truths about God’s character and
God’s divine actions, but the purpose of God’s self-revelation was not merely mental assent, it
was eternal union. Accordingly, Scripture primarily contained God’s self-revelation to be
5
J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (San Francisco, CA: HarperSanFrancisco, 1978), 60-64.
Origen, First Principles, trans. G.W. Butterworth (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1936);
Saint Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, trans. D.W. Robertston, Jr. (Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice
Hall, 1997); and Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province (Allen,
Texas: Christian Classics, 1981).
7
Origen, First Principles, 16.
8
Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 30.
6
3
Chad Chambers
encountered and not a set of dogmas to accept as true. Therefore, the first facet of the pre-critical
doctrine of Scripture is that Scripture is the divinely inspired self-revelation of God designed to
reveal Himself to humanity.
The Truths of Scripture are Real and Complex
Pre-critical exegetes naturally assumed that since the subject of Scripture was the
heavenly Father, understanding the truths of Scripture would be a demanding task. David
Steinmetz, in his celebrated article “The Superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis,” traces a precritical understanding of biblical interpretation, which accentuates how they dealt with the
complexity of Scripture. To begin with, pre-critical exegetes believed Scripture had a certain
meaning in the historical context in which it was authored and read, but they denied that biblical
texts were restricted to this one particular meaning. Rather, precisely because Scripture was
God’s self-revelation it should, and did, have multiple meanings. Aquinas states, “Since the
author of Holy Writ is God, Who by one act comprehends all things by His intellect, it is not
unfitting…if…one word in Holy Writ should have several senses.”9 Additionally, Augustine
writes, “When, however, from a single passage in the Scripture not one but two or more
meanings are elicited…there is no danger if any of the meanings may be seen to be congruous
with the truth taught in other passages of the Holy Scripture.”10 Therefore, they did not deem
recovering the original meaning of the text as the sole objective of biblical interpretation, even
though the original meaning remained important in their exegesis. Consequently, Steinmetz
concludes that according to the pre-critical exegetical tradition, a biblical text had a field of
possible meanings that were all edifying for the Church.
9
Aquinas, Summa Theologica, 7.
Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 101-102.
10
4
Chad Chambers
For pre-critical exegetes, however, the field of possible meanings did not validate any
and all interpretations of a biblical text. Instead, it dealt with the complexity of Scripture in a
manner that allowed Scripture to speak of the Divine nature in all its intricacy, while also
ensuring interpretation had adequate boundaries. Steinmetz states, “The language of the bible
opens up a field of possible meanings. Any interpretation which falls within that field is valid
exegesis…any interpretation which falls outside the limits of that field of possible meanings is
probably eisegesis and should be rejected as unacceptable.”11 Therefore, pre-critical exegetes
did not deny that Scripture contained truth nor did they attempt to confine a text to only one valid
meaning. Instead, they developed a doctrine of Scripture that was adequate for the complex
nature of the text they were interpreting and the God they were encountering in the text.
Therefore, the conviction that because Scripture was “established on principles revealed by
God,”12 it contained real yet complex truths is the second facet of the pre-critical doctrine of
Scripture.
The Guidance of the Holy Spirit
For pre-critical interpreters, understanding the complex truths revealed in Scripture was
beyond the capacity of human nature and consequently, human beings required divine assistance
to comprehend Scripture. Origen eloquently states, “These treasures require for their discovery
the help of God, who alone is able to ‘break in pieces the gates of brass’ by which they are shut
in and concealed, and to burst the iron bolts and bars which prevent us from entering in and
reaching all those truths written in veiled language.”13 This divine assistance, according to pre-
Steinmetz, “The Superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis,” 78. My main critique of Steinmetz’s article is that he does
not offer a way of defining the field of possible meanings for a text. Later, I will assert that Southern Baptists offer
a specific way of defining the field of possible interpretations within our doctrine of scripture.
12
Aquinas, Summa Theologica, 2.
13
Origen, First Principles, 306.
11
5
Chad Chambers
critical exegetes, comes from the Holy Spirit whose intention was “to enlighten holy souls.”14
This quote alludes to another crucial component for pre-critical exegetes, namely that Godly
character, beginning with faith, was necessary if one expected to encounter God in Scripture. In
fact, Origen writes, “Divine things are communicated to men somewhat obscurely and are the
more hidden in proportion to the unbelief and unworthiness of the inquirer.”15 Traits, such as
faith, humility, love and piety, however, were also beyond the aptitude of humankind and
consequently, pre-critical exegetes relied on the indwelling of the Holy Spirit for both spiritual
formation and genuine understanding.
The awareness of the role of the Holy Spirit in illuminating Scripture did not negate the
importance of diligent study or formal education for Origen, Augustine, or Aquinas. Indeed,
each of these exegetes used methods learned in their formal education to elucidate the truths of
Scripture. They also considered the exegesis of the fathers before them as valuable tools for
comprehending the meanings of biblical texts. Furthermore, it is obvious in their writings that
they had extensively studied the Scriptures. Aquinas believed that the study of Scripture was the
one true science16 and Augustine states, “He will be the most expert investigator of the Holy
Scriptures who has first read all of them and has some knowledge of them.”17 Genuine
understanding, however, ultimately depended on divine assistance, regardless of the amount of
effort spent studying the Scriptures. Thus, the third facet of the pre-critical doctrine of Scripture
is that understanding Scripture is a gift from God secured only through the illumination of the
Holy Spirit.
14
Ibid, 284.
Ibid, 266.
16
Aquinas, Summa Theologica, 3.
17
Augustine, First Principles, 40.
15
6
Chad Chambers
A Two-Fold Pre-Critical Exegetical Theory
In constructing a pre-critical exegetical theory, I am not attempting to reveal their
systematic method for interpreting scriptural texts because according to their understanding,
accomplished exegesis was not primarily the result of a proper method. Rather, I am presenting
a theory of how the pre-critical exegetical tradition’s doctrine of Scripture led them to value the
proper formation of a virtuous exegete over any exegetical method. The formative process, as
expressed by Augustine, includes two distinct yet intertwined aspects: the expert reader and the
active community.18
The Expert Reader
Proper education, including the study of Scripture, played a significant part in Origen,
Augustine, and Aquinas’ respective roles as a priest, bishop and scholar, as previously
mentioned. Augustine’s tome On Christian Doctrine was a work specifically aimed towards
providing students with the skills necessary for studying and interpreting Scripture. Even though
this work offered guidance on proper methods for interpreting Scripture, it dealt principally with
the formation of a virtuous exegete. According to Augustine, a fundamental aspect of being an
expert reader was that “the life of the speaker has greater weight in determining whether he is
obediently heard than any grandness of eloquence.”19 Therefore, before one could be known as
an upright exegete he/she must be known as an upright person. In this manner, Augustine
stressed the prominence of traits such as, humility, a pure heart, and faith in the life of an exegete
but of utmost importance was love. Augustine based all faithful interpretation on his ‘rule of
charity’, which stated that all Scripture built up a love of God and neighbor. As the controlling
Michael C. McCarthy, “‘We Are Your Books’: Augustine, the Bible, and the Practice of Authority,” Journal of
the American Academy of Religion, Vol. 75, No. 2 (June 2007): 324-352. McCarthy makes this distinction and this
article significantly shaped the following discussion.
19
Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 164.
18
7
Chad Chambers
factor for exegesis, he insisted that the love of God and neighbor be evident in the life of the
exegete.
Along with character formation, the virtuous exegete should be one who diligently sought
to encounter God in Scripture because Augustine believed exegetes “derive their authority from
their status as expert readers.”20 Accordingly, he pictured the early formative years of the
virtuous exegete as that of a lone reader since it required time and in some respects silence to
devote oneself to the formidable task of engaging Scripture in all its richness. In fact, upon
being appointed a priest, Augustine requested he be allowed to retreat from public life so he
would have the ability to learn the Scriptures deeply.
In On Christian Doctrine, Augustine explicated many characteristics the expert learned
during this time, and four are worth specifically mentioning. First, an expert reader needed a
profound knowledge of the languages of Scripture, a knowledge that allowed him/her not only to
read the text but also to be able to pay close attention to the details of the text. Furthermore, this
knowledge afforded them the ability to test the work of others to ensure the Church had
accurately translated texts. Augustine states, “We must seek a knowledge of those languages
from which Scripture is translated…because by means of them we may test the truth or falsity of
those who have sought to translate meanings as well as words.”21 Second, the expert reader must
be familiar with Scripture in its entirety. This holistic understanding enabled the reader to
reinforce the unity of Scripture and to find meaning through referencing other passages.
Augustine even suggested that an expert reader should have Scripture memorized in order “to
make them not altogether unfamiliar to us.”22 Third, an expert reader can engage in human
models of learning, such as philosophy, mathematics, or history in order to become a more adept
McCarthy, “We Are Your Books,” 329.
Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 46.
22
Ibid, 42.
20
21
8
Chad Chambers
exegete. Aquinas also determines that these other sciences were useful when interpreting
Scripture, but he clearly delineated their value, stating: “This science [the study of Scripture] can
in a sense depend upon the philosophical sciences, not as though it stood in need of them, but
only in order to make its teaching clearer.”23
Nevertheless, being an expert reader did not mean that one secured a complete awareness
of Scripture for no one was capable of fully comprehending all that Scripture contains. Origen
powerfully affirmed this sentiment, writing, “He [Paul] did not say that God’s judgments were
hard to search out, but that they could not be searched out at all; not that his ways were hard to
find out, but that they were impossible to find out. For however far one may advance in the
search and make progress through an increasingly earnest study, even when aided and
enlightened in mind by God’s grace, he will never be able to reach the final goal of his
inquiries.”24 Thus, the fourth characteristic of being an expert reader is that it was a lifelong
enterprise to labor after sound doctrine for oneself and the Church.
The Active Community
The importance of education in becoming an expert reader of the biblical text cannot be
overstated, but the ultimate goal of virtuous exegesis, according to Origen, Augustine, and
Aquinas, was not knowledge, but embodiment. As a result, along with a proper education an
expert reader needed to be a part of an active community to fulfill his/her ultimate task. Initially,
according to Augustine, the expert reader provided an example of the true interpretation through
embodiment. This was especially important in Augustine’s largely illiterate culture, and he
urged churches to learn by studying the life of the expert reader. He writes, to new coverts in his
23
24
Aquinas, Summa Theologica, 3.
Origen, First Principles, 311.
9
Chad Chambers
own church, “We here are your books. So pay attention.”25 In this way, Augustine believed the
educated and the uneducated could engage in biblical exegesis together through being involved
in the communal life of worship, prayer and contemplation.
Augustine’s insistence on communal involvement meant that interpretation was not a
stable endeavor done in isolation, and then taught to the community by the learned exegete.
Actually, the active community was nothing less than the heavenly classroom where the expert
reader’s formation continued as he/she joined the community in learning. Augustine states, “We
all listen to that one from whom we can equally learn. In His school all of us are fellow
students.”26 The active community was the location of true formative engagement with the text
as the community performed the text’s interpretation in its act of worship; its places of work; and
with its family, and friends. William Harmless states, “Here the rhythms of education moved to
the rhythms of the liturgy itself.”27 In this manner, the text came to be understood more
accurately by the community as it became embodied and the voice of the community was heard
as it struggled to find its place in the text and to find God’s place in their world. It was not that
the voice of the community diminished the authority or truthfulness of the text, but the text
gained its rightful authority over the community and demonstrated its truthfulness, as the
community responded to Scripture’s invitation to transport its truths from the pages and live
them out in their daily existence.
Southern Baptist Doctrine of Scripture
From the beginning, Southern Baptists had no common statement of doctrinal belief
because of an underlying apprehension to creeds or creedal statements. Southern Baptists held
25
Saint Augustine, Sermons, III/6 (184-229Z), trans. by Edmund Hill (E. Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 1993)
254; quoted in McCarthy, “We Are Your Books,” 332.
26
Saint Augustine, Enarrationes in psalmos, ed. by Eligius Dekkers (Brepols: Corpus Christianorum Series Latina,
1990); quoted in McCarthy, “We Are Your Books,” 338.
27
William Harmless, Augustine and the Catechumenate (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1995), 235.
10
Chad Chambers
that Scripture was the only standard by which doctrine should be tried. Yet in 1925, responding
to concerns over modernism, specifically the controversy over evolutionary theory, Southern
Baptists drafted The Baptist Faith and Message. The document did not claim to have authority
over individual churches it only provided a summary of Southern Baptist doctrine for the Baptist
community and the world. Thirty-eight years later, in 1963, Southern Baptists appointed a
committee to revise the statement and in 2000, The Baptist Faith and Message was revised for a
third time. Even though the three statements share a common heritage, they are each unique. I
am using the 1963 statement on Scripture as the basis of this paper.28
The 1963 Baptist Faith and Message’s Statement on Scripture
The Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is the record of God’s
revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has
God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error,
for its matter. It reveals the principles by which God judges us; and therefore is,
and will remain to the end of the world, the true center of Christian union, and the
supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinions
should be tried. The criterion by which the Bible is to be interpreted is Jesus
Christ.29
Scripture is Divinely Inspired with a Purpose
The similarities between the Southern Baptist doctrine of Scripture and the pre-critical
doctrine of Scripture in regards to Scripture’s inspiration and purpose are striking. Like precritical exegetes, Southern Baptists affirm the divine inspiration of Scripture. In an all too rare
moment of agreement, Southern Baptists and Aquinas use almost identical concepts to explain
the Scripture’s inspiration. Both believe that in some respects, the human author had a direct
28
I find the 1963 version as the preferred statement of Southern Baptist doctrine. Even though there was much
public debate over the 2000 version due to its stances on controversial topics, for example its disagreement with
women as pastors, my concern with the document starts at a deeper level. The 2000 draft claims a more direct
authority over individual churches and believers than the previous statements by identifying itself as an “instrument
of doctrinal accountability.” In reality, this identification indicates a creedal status and consequently, for me the
2000 draft moves away from one of the core values of Southern Baptists.
29
Herschel H. Hobbs, The Baptist Faith and Message (Nashville, TN: Convention Press, 1996), 19.
11
Chad Chambers
role in the writing of Scripture, but ultimately, God authored Scripture.30 Additionally, Southern
Baptists and Aquinas agree that Scripture “derives its certitude from the light of divine
knowledge.”31 As a result, it is to be treated seriously and given the respect due to divine
instruction. Thus, in line with pre-critical exegetes, Southern Baptists avow that Scripture is
authoritative precisely because it is God’s self-revelation to humanity.
Additionally, Southern Baptists and pre-critical exegetes acknowledge that Scripture
contains the wisdom necessary for salvation. Even if these two groups characterize salvation
differently, as previously discussed, they both rely on a similar understanding of the nature of
Scripture to reach their conclusions. I expect that if Southern Baptists seriously embrace our
similarities with pre-critical exegetes and engage their writings our comprehension of salvation
will greatly benefit. They can remind us that Scripture directs our attention beyond its words to
God’s creative and redemptive work that culminates in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus
Christ. In any case, the first facet of the Southern Baptist doctrine of Scripture, that Scripture is
Divinely inspired with a purpose, is akin to that of the pre-critical exegetes.
The Truths of Scripture are Real and Complex
The second facet of the Southern Baptist doctrine of Scripture maintains that Scripture
contains authentic truth. Scripture perfectly records God’s redemptive purposes and actions
among humanity and it directs faithful readers to union with God through its words. The claim
of perfection is, perhaps, the stance that most often causes others to label Southern Baptists as
conservative fundamentalists. Yet, pre-critical interpreters were also unequivocal believers in
the Scripture containing God’s perfect truth. Aquinas explains in Summa Theologica that faith
30
31
Aquinas, Summa Theologica, 7.
Ibid, 3.
12
Chad Chambers
rests solely on the revelation of God contained in Scripture,32 also stating, “Faith rests upon
infallible truth.”33 This indispensable aspect of the nature of Scripture is crucial for how both
Southern Baptists and the pre-critical exegetical tradition interpret Scripture. It directs
interpretation in such a foundational way that if one discounts it when engaging their – or our –
exegesis, the conclusions can become inconceivable.34
Moreover, Southern Baptists affirm the pre-critical assertion that the truth contained in
Scripture is complex. Nevertheless, establishing a point of contact between Southern Baptists
and pre-critical exegetes concerning the complexity of truth is a challenging task because even
though both agree that there is intrinsic meaning in the text they have different views on how to
discover it. The discrepancy stems from the fact that Southern Baptists are recognized for being
literalists in their exegesis,35 whereas, pre-critical exegetes are recognized for their multidimensional, or spiritual, interpretations. This difference cannot be disregarded when comparing
Southern Baptist and pre-critical exegesis, but there are a few points of connection between these
two schools of interpretation.
Pre-critical exegetes commonly utilized the spiritual sense to clarify passages in Scripture
that did not make sense to them in a literal way, but they did not share a definitive appreciation
of how and when to employ it.36 In fact, the three exegetes I have discussed each defined the
spiritual sense in different ways and used it differently within their exegesis. One consistency,
32
Ibid, 6.
Ibid, 5.
34
Often, my critique of those who point to the works of Origen, Augustine, and/or Aquinas as exemplar models of
their ‘new’ way of interpreting Scripture is that they ignore, or marginalize, this aspect of the pre-critical doctrine of
Scripture. By disregarding this aspect, they deny the very reason these exegetes understood Scripture as
authoritative and therefore, worthy of being studied.
35
This is not entirely a fair representation of Southern Baptist exegesis because it relies heavily on analyzing
“official” statements. Yet, in doing so it discounts what is, in my opinion, the most influential form of Southern
Baptist exegesis, the sermon. In this form, Southern Baptist exegesis closely resembles that of the pre-critical
tradition because it is common to have a preacher use allegory or typology to draw meaning from a text. Thus, one
of my critiques of Southern Baptists is that our “official” statements are not consistent with our actual practices.
36
Eventually, spiritual interpretation became formally known as the four-fold sense of Scripture, but it still lacked a
definitive model or paradigm for its application.
33
13
Chad Chambers
however, was that they believed that the language of Scripture served as a controlling factor for
interpretation, or in other words, Scripture interpreted Scripture. Origen states, “We are taught
out of scripture itself how we ought to think of it.”37 Furthermore, pre-critical exegetes did not
consider that the spiritual sense overruled over the literal sense.38 Aquinas went as far as to say,
“Nothing necessary to faith is contained under the spiritual sense which is not elsewhere put
forward by the Scripture in its literal sense.”39 On these specific matters, Southern Baptists
concur with the pre-critical exegetes’ affirmation that Scripture can illuminate Scripture and that
the literal sense is the prevailing sense of Scripture, even if we do not fully agree with the way
they employed spiritual interpretation.
Another consistency between pre-critical exegetes was that spiritual interpretation
allowed them to reinforce the unity of Scripture. Aquinas insists that finding multiple meanings
within a single passage does “not produce equivocation or any other kind of multiplicity”40
within Scripture. Rather, the multi-vocal nature of Scripture bears witness to the unity of
Scripture by accentuating its purpose of bringing salvation to humanity. Pre-critical exegetes,
however, recognized the inherent risk associated with spiritual interpretations and guarded
against the spiritual sense ultimately discrediting Scripture through appealing to the “rule of
faith.” Origen states that exegetes should “keep to the rule,”41 and Augustine amplifies stating,
“When investigation reveals an uncertainty as to how a locution should be pointed out or
construed the rule of faith should be consulted.”42 In basic terms, the “rule of faith” was most
likely a summary of Christian doctrine in narrative form, but its actual contents are debatable.
37
Origen, First Principles, 275.
Origen may be the exception to this rule, but it is open to debate. For, he does seem to say that the spiritual
meaning is that to which we should strive, but he also suggests that the literal meaning ought to be preserved.
39
Aquinas, Summa Theologica, 7.
40
Ibid.
41
Origen, First Principles, 272.
42
Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 79.
38
14
Chad Chambers
Augustine, however, states, “The Rule of faith…as it is found in the more open places of the
Scriptures and in the authority of the Church.”43 Therefore, whatever the specific contents may
have been, the “rule of faith” was itself birthed from Scripture. As a result, in appealing to the
“rule of faith” pre-critical exegetes were asserting that the Scriptures themselves had a unifying
element.
Southern Baptists also affirm Scripture’s unity and The Baptist Faith and Message
establishes Christ as the specific criterion by which Scripture is interpreted. The 2000 version,
elucidating the 1963 version, states, “All Scripture is a testimony to Christ, who is Himself the
focus of divine revelation.”44 A distinctive core of historic Baptist faith is that the sole authority
for faith and practice is Jesus Christ whose will is revealed in Scripture. Thus, Southern Baptists
profess a living faith that revolves around centering one’s life in the living Christ and embodying
Jesus’ life in one’s own. In this way, Jesus defines both our interpretation and praxis, and is the
unifying element of Scripture. While this may not correspond exactly with the pre-critical
exegetes “rule of faith”, it does correspond with their understanding that there was a unifying
element within Scripture.45
The Southern Baptist doctrine of Scripture, like that of the pre-critical exegetical
tradition, deems that Scripture contains undeniable, albeit complex, truth. Even though this
second facet of the doctrine of Scripture, in some cases, has resulted in different exegetical
methods Southern Baptists stand firmly within the tradition of pre-critical exegesis by affirming
the perfect truth of Scripture and the complex nature of that truth.
43
Ibid.
Southern Baptist Convention, “The Baptist Faith and Message,” available from sbc.net/BFM/bfm2000.asp;
Internet; accessed 28 November 2009.
45
I believe Southern Baptists have illumined the pre-critical tradition’s doctrine of Scripture, on this specific point,
by providing a consistent means by which to judge valid and invalid interpretations of a scriptural text.
44
15
Chad Chambers
The Guidance of the Holy Spirit
The Baptist Faith and Message does not consider the Holy Spirit’s role in understanding
Scripture within the section on Scripture. Nevertheless, in the section on the Holy Spirit it states,
“Through illumination [the Holy Spirit] enables men to understand truth.”46 According to
Southern Baptists, humanity transgressed the command of God through sin leaving it incapable
of obtaining fellowship with God. As a result, the truths of Scripture became impenetrable
without divine assistance. The Holy Spirit, “the Spirit of God,”47 acts within humankind to
enable it to read Scripture and understand its truths. Furthermore, Southern Baptists require the
Holy Spirit’s assistance to “cultivate Christian Character.”48 The Holy Spirits works within an
individual to cause a change of heart allowing him/her to come into fellowship with God. Thus,
the Holy Spirit is active in both spiritual formation and Scripture’s illumination. In these two
ways, the Southern Baptist doctrine of Scripture is analogous to the pre-critical doctrine of
Scripture.
Contrary to pre-critical exegetes, however, Southern Baptists’ reliance on the Holy Spirit
for illumination, coupled with concerns over modern educational practices, have led to a
negative view of formal education within many of its churches. This is not an official
denominational position, or even the majority’s view, but its presence is real in Southern Baptist
life. For example, there have been multiple resolutions offered during the yearly convention
calling for Southern Baptists to remove their children from public schools.49 Furthermore, a real
battle over the future of Southern Baptist educational institutions is taking place and Baptist
colleges, such as Wake Forest University, Mercer University and Belmont College, have severed
46
Hobbs, The Baptist Faith and Message, 31.
Ibid.
48
Ibid.
49
For example, Pinckney-Shortt Resolution 2004.
47
16
Chad Chambers
ties, or had their ties severed, with the denomination over struggles to define “Christian
education.” The struggles often focus on competing ideas on the purpose and value of education.
For instance, a question frequently debated is, “Is education primarily intended to direct how to
think rightly [i.e., indoctrinate] or to discover how to rightly think?” A great deal is at stake for
the future of our denomination as this, and other correlated questions are answered, and this is
definitely an area where embracing the pre-critical exegetical tradition could greatly benefit
Southern Baptist life.
Conclusion: Southern Baptists as Pre-Critical Exegetes
Southern Baptists and Origen, Augustine, and Aquinas share fundamental agreement over
the doctrine of Scripture, but this common ground has not always resulted in a similar exegetical
theory, often to Southern Baptists’ detriment. Therefore, in conclusion I want to outline three
ways Southern Baptists can benefit from embracing our resemblance to the pre-critical exegetical
tradition and adopting a similar exegetical theory.
First, an association with pre-critical exegetes does not limit our ability to proclaim and
be formed by the truths of Scripture. Rather, they provide us with a foundation for claiming that
Scripture contains truth. They augment our understanding that Scripture is “the perfect treasure
of divine instruction”50 and we can join them in boldly declaring that Scripture reveals God’s
truth. Thus, Southern Baptists can stand with the Origen, Augustine, and Aquinas and not be
taken in by the postmodern effort to deconstruct universal or objective truth. Conversely,
believing that the omniscient God is the author of Scripture means that we cannot limit Scriptural
texts only to a single valid meaning. Thus, we can stand with the pre-critical exegetes and
disavow the fallacy of the modern search for one true meaning in all texts. Thereby, affirming,
that this method is not an attempt to understand the God of Scripture, but to control God by
50
Hobbs, The Baptist Faith and Message, 19.
17
Chad Chambers
requiring him to become rationally or empirically defined. The way forward is to recapture the
pre-critical understanding, which was not afraid to name truth, but did not feel the need to evade
its mystery. In this way, Scripture is not primarily a spiritual memoir that we read to find
mystical utterances hoping to gain inner peace, nor is it primarily a textbook that we read hoping
to gain elusive knowledge. Rather, it is God’s self-revelation we digest, even participate in, so
that it can nourish our souls and form us into the community it would have us to be, the
community we claim to be: a people of the Book.
Next, we cannot disparage education and higher learning as a means of cultivating the
life of the mind so that it knows how to grow in understanding. To read Scripture in a manner
consistent with pre-critical exegetes is arduous and indeed, only the Spirit can provide true
understanding. Yet, it is through our God-given capacity to think and learn that the Spirit often
works. Thus, for pre-critical exegetes listening to the Spirit and thinking critically were not
alternatives. Like them, Southern Baptists need to be recognized not only for our obedience to
the Spirit but also for our ability to read well and think judiciously and this requires that we learn
how to translate, interpret, and preach the sacred text accurately. Consequently, we need to
establish and support educational institutions that teach how to use the mind in rigorous ways.51
Places whose sole intent is not to indoctrinate its students, but which train our pastors, scholars,
and church members to critically engage Scripture, while also teaching them to have a reverence
for Scripture and a discipline of carefulness in regards to its interpretation. In this way, we can
form congregational leaders who are living embodiments of Scripture, and not Southern Baptist
doctrine, so they can lead us in fulfilling our goal of being a people of the Book.
For one example of a Baptist institution attempting to accomplish a similar mission, see Baylor University –
Baylor 2012.
51
18
Chad Chambers
Finally, our churches need to be communities faithfully embodying the text for our
world. Our places of worship must mold us into living witnesses to the transformative power of
Scripture. Thus, we must affirm the autonomous nature of our churches, in the deepest sense,
enabling them to embody Scripture with and for their community. Each community must be
empowered to interpret Scripture, through the Holy Spirit’s guidance and with Christ as their
criterion, according to the context in which they live. Consequently, a community living and
worshipping within an impoverished, war torn nation must not be required to read Scripture in
the same way as a church living and worshipping in a white suburban American neighborhood.
Nor, should a church living in a culture where women are savagely subjected to the authority of
men be required to read Scripture in the same way as a church worshipping in a culture where
radical feminism flourishes. Undoubtedly, reading and understanding Scripture communally
means that we lose centralized control over interpretation, but instead, we foster active
communities who understand Scripture more completely, and witness to it more clearly, as they
become its embodiments. Consequently, the text is illumined to us all as we worship the one
true God collectively and we truly become people of the Book: a people who can say, with
Augustine, “We here are your books. So pay attention.”52
52
McCarthy, “We Are Your Books,” 338.
19