ThesisPDF Available

Book Critique_How to Read the Bible_Fee & Stuart_Ragsdale

Authors:
Mark P. Ragsdale
Mark P. Ragsdale
Mark P. Ragsdale

Abstract

This essay will provide summary, analysis and critique of How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth: A Guide to Understanding the Bible, 4th Edition, by Gordon D. Fee and Douglas K. Stuart. It endeavors to briefly summarize and highlight the issues or sub-topics explored in each chapter; immediately followed by critical analysis and evaluation of that chapter. The methodology employed will include: the point of view of the authors, the ideological or philosophical perspective they bring to the work, evaluation of their implicit or explicit perspective, adequacy and veracity of whatever evidence they offer in order to support their viewpoint, as well as, clarity, logic, and flow of their arguments. The work will expose gaps, inconsistencies, or contradictions of the author’s work in order to provide a conclusive review. Ultimately, this thesis will argue that the biblical scholar would derive greater benefit from the reading of this book than would a new believer seeking to better understand and obey Scripture.
LIBERTY UNIVERITY RAWLINGS SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
A Book Critique of “How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth: A Guide to Understanding the
Bible,” written by Gordon D. Fee and Douglas K. Stuart
Submitted to Dr. Mark Rathel
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the completion of
201620 Spring 2016 NBST 610 – D01-LUO
Hermeneutics
By
Mark P. Ragsdale
April 17, 2016
Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................1
Summary, Analysis, and Critique.................................................................................................1
Conclusion....................................................................................................................................10
Bibliography..................................................................................................................................11
2
Introduction
This essay will provide summary, analysis and critique of How to Read the Bible for All
Its Worth: A Guide to Understanding the Bible, 4th Edition, by Gordon D. Fee and Douglas K.
Stuart. It endeavors to briefly summarize and highlight the issues or sub-topics explored in each
chapter; immediately followed by critical analysis and evaluation of that chapter. The
methodology employed will include: the point of view of the authors, the ideological or
philosophical perspective they bring to the work, evaluation of their implicit or explicit
perspective, adequacy and veracity of whatever evidence they offer in order to support their
viewpoint, as well as, clarity, logic, and flow of their arguments. The work will expose gaps,
inconsistencies, or contradictions of the author’s work in order to provide a conclusive review.
Ultimately, this thesis will argue that the biblical scholar would derive greater benefit from the
reading of this book than would a new believer seeking to better understand and obey Scripture.
Summary, Analysis, and Critique
Fee and Stuart provide Bible scholars, teachers, preachers, and Christian apologists (all
Bible in-takers) various methods and tools for better interpretation of Scripture within their
respective context and genres. On one hand, the aforementioned audience may overlook
rationally-obvious and timeless textual content in search of “greater” allegorical or revelatory
meaning than was intended by the original author. On the other hand, the text can be interpreted
as conveying a contemporary legal mandate via virtually every biblical passage or narrative
found within its genres. Fee and Stuart argue that an interpreter’s first consideration should be
context; the original writer’s and original audience’s perspective as preeminent to Scriptural
interpretation.1
1 . Gordon D. Fee and Douglas K. Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth: A Guide to
Understanding the Bible. 4th Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), loc. 1988, Kindle.
3
Such argument emanates from the author’s presupposition that all Bible readers are
interpreters. But not all, especially new believers, are equipped to ingest and employ the author’s
methods. Clearly, anyone who has heard multiple sermons on the same passage from different
preachers, or has sourced myriad scholarly exegesis on the same passage, would conclude that
interpretations differ. In consideration of variant, and even divergent theological positions
regarding identical Scripture, Fee and Stuart’s methodology provides a sound interpretational
standard. However, even if agreeing that the methodology prevents the “abuse” of Scripture, the
authors fail to concede that: while historical circumstances to a general contemporary audience
may not mirror context of the original audience; that context may apply to a certain specific
contemporary audience.
For example, the idea of women’s requirement to wear a veil (1 Cor. 11:6) was not
proposed by Paul to the other churches he founded. On one hand, Corinth’s geographical and
socio-economic makeup could provide contextual need for such a mandate at that time and place.
On the other hand, however, those very contextual circumstances could also indeed exist in
certain contemporary church settings. Furthermore, the relative contemporary issue may provide
for pastoral censorship of short skirts, short shorts, and stiletto pumps; or in the case of males:
Kiss tee-shirts. Fee and Stuart do not relay the possibility of relative context, however.
With respect to homogeneity of the passages, Fee and Stuart prefer certain Bible
translations over others. Namely, those translations based upon the earlier original writings are
preferred over those translating from either later texts or those providing loose translations. In
the case of the latter, the best translations would be accompanied by others derived from the
earlier writings.2 While providing strong historic argument for their translation preferences, Fee
and Stuart fail to acknowledge that such interpretations may have already endured some sense of
hermeneutical interpretation by the translator. For example, their assessment of The Message,
2 . Fee and Stuart, How to Read the Bible, 1024-1026.
4
argued as a loose interpretation, could be credited as reflecting the translator’s hermeneutical
interpretation, rather than simply a “commentary,” as the authors suggest.3 Ultimately, the
authors’ clear choice for interpreters would be the NRSB, NIV, and NASB with argument
against the KJV and NKJV as they are translated from latter documents.4
Fee and Stuart do not paint all biblical genres with the same brush. Chapter Three argues
for the interpreter to pursue Epistle text within textual units. 1 Corinthians, as within the genre of
Epistle, is employed as an initial (and perhaps best) example for the interpreter to determine
historical context of original writer and audience. Chapter Four explores the broader sense of
hermeneutics in context of the Epistles. Within this genre, the context of historic-cultural
relativity begins to paint a picture for those subjects that prove timelessly, morally-imperative to
the contemporary church cf. those relevant only for the original audience. Moreover, the authors
argue, “A text cannot mean what it never could have meant to its author or his or her readers.”5
Thus, proper exegesis requires a comparison of contemporary circumstances and setting cf. those
of the original writer and audience. As argued earlier, the authors do not leave ample intellectual
space between universal moral imperatives and those that a Pastor may deem comparable (at
least in form) to contemporary circumstances found in the church he or she is called to Pastor. As
such, both those Bible interpretations the authors deem loose, as well as, pastoral hermeneutical
application of Scripture as local church imperatives are implicitly dismissed. But Fee and Stuart,
with a consistent flow of their work, transition their argued exegetical methodology to other
genres, such as the narratives found in the OT.
3 . Ibid., 845.
4 . Ibid., 1040-1046.
5 . Ibid., 601.
5
Chapter Five deals with the genre of narrative that Fee and Stuart describe as God’s story
based upon biblical-historic events: God as protagonist, Satan (or those in disobedience to God)
as antagonists, and God’s chosen people as agonists.6 In this, they argue the plot of each narrative
as God having created a people in his image as stewards over his creation. Once again, the
authors warn interpreters against ingesting each of the stories as personal moral imperatives.
Ultimately, Fee and Stuart argue their point based upon two primary tenets: allegories contain
myriad hidden meanings (unintended to instruct personal moral imperatives); but teach implicitly
what is elsewhere found explicitly within Scripture. Moreover, the authors argue that the
narratives should be interpreted based upon three hermeneutical principles: they should not be
taken for literal contemporary practice; their hermeneutical value can be found in their
illustrative patterns; their patterns are repeated throughout Scripture.7 Any critical review would
question how a new believer might either relate to or understand this perspective.
In this, Fee and Stuart devote the latter part of Chapter Five to an implicit interpretation
of OT narratives. “We turn to the book of Ruth for another narrative to illustrate further how
much one can learn from what is implicit in narrative — parts the narrator has embedded in the
story that you might miss on a first, or otherwise casual , reading of the book.”8 As such, the
authors argue that the NT Book of Acts can be seen through this paradigm of interpreting Luke’s
narrative; as provided by the authors in Chapter Six. Interestingly, one might observe that Acts is
often construed by scholars as either a continuation of Luke’s Gospel, or a second Gospel
according to Luke. While Fee and Stuart straddle this transition from the narrative genre to the
6. Fee and Stuart, How to Read the Bible, 1719.
7 . Ibid., 1719-1899.
8 . Fee and Stuart, How to Read the Bible, 1899.
6
Gospel genre, their interpretational methodology clearly separates the former from the latter;
favoring Acts to be interpreted as a narrative.
In one sense a separate chapter on the Acts of the Apostles is a bit redundant, for almost
everything that was said in the last chapter applies here as well. However, for a very
practical hermeneutical reason, Acts requires a chapter of its own. The reason is simple:
most Christians do not read Acts in the same way they read Judges or 2 Samuel, even if
they are not fully aware of it.9
This provides a significant point of contention for those who believe Acts to be within the
genre of Gospel cf. OT narrative as Fee and Gordon contend. New believers would likely find
themselves unequipped for any counterargument. Nonetheless, this intermediary chapter is used
as a nice transition between OT and NT interpretational methodologies.
Chapter Seven argues the Gospels as a unique genre (albeit separate from Acts) providing
layers of context; primarily due to their writing as having occurred decades after the events they
describe. Secondly, each of the four Gospel writers was communicating to different audiences.
Carrying forward the theme of the book, the interpreter is advised to not only consider the
original writer and audience, but the historical Jesus in context of each of the four Gospel
writers. Within this genre, Fee and Stuart contend that Jesus can be best understood via an
understanding of first-century Judaism. On the one hand, the literary arrangement of each Gospel
author, as providing Scriptural insight, is more of a horizontal exercise; seeking parallels
between each Gospel, cf. a vertical interpretation. On the other hand, the authors recommend that
interpreters actually think vertically; being aware of the historical contexts regarding Jesus and
the author’s audience. The methodology makes sense, at least to scholarly interpreters; but would
prove confusing to laypersons. Ultimately, one is left wondering why Acts, other than having
occurred following Jesus’ death and resurrection, would be read as narrative rather than Gospel.
Particularly, Paul’s apologetic address to Thessalonica (Acts 17:1-9) cf. his apologetic address at
Athens (Acts 17:22-32) beckon more of a Gospel interpretation than a narrative interpretation.
9 . Ibid., 2063-2066.
7
Chapter Eight deals with the genre of Jesus’ parables. Unlike allegories, where each point
of the story should be individually exposed, parables deliver one major thematic point. The
authors argue that parables provide a means for Jesus to proclaim the Kingdom of God.10 Their
argument, regarding parables as a separate NT genre from the others, transitions well from the
Gospels (although the parables are included within the Gospels); but provides an odd shift back
into the OT found in Chapter Nine. While the evolution is logically understandable, there is a
gap between the authors’ re-visitation of the OT Law: as under the narrative genre cf. OT
treatment of the Law within the NT genres (Gospels and Letter to Timothy).
As noted; Chapter Nine deals with the OT Law. The authors question how OT Law might
apply to the contemporary church under the new covenant in Christ Jesus. The ideas of suzerain
vassal covenant for Israel cf. the (unmentioned Royal) vassal covenant of Christ for believers are
argued as not being mixable. Namely, OT Law is not intended to be conflated with NT moral
imperatives. Moreover, the NT provides more stringent matters of the heart than the OT Law
contemplates. The authors do provide six helpful guidelines in understanding the OT Law cf.
New Covenant.11 This is one point new believers would, could, and should grasp; if those readers
could contend with the more difficult material persisting so late in the book.
Chapter Ten deals with the OT prophets. Again, the subject-matter, while genre-specific,
lacks sequential canonical order. Nonetheless, Fee and Stuart accurately describe the OT
prophets both serving as spokespeople for God and enforcers of the covenant. Their Books serve
as collections of spoken oracles primarily within the genre of poetry. As such, they are not
10 . Fee and Stuart, How to Read the Bible, 3057.
11 . Fee and Stuart, How to Read the Bible, 3147-3501.
8
always presented in original chronological order, and are thus difficult to read in one sitting12
(but arguably in better canonical order than the author’s subject transitions).
In carrying forth the authors’ consistent theme of original author and audience, Fee and
Stuart recommend the interpreter to consult a Bible dictionary with commentary prior to
interpretation. Prophetic writings must be considered in context of the history of Israel cf. the
prophet’s specific oracle. As such, Fee and Stuart argue that often the oracle is metaphorical to
contemporary application.13 However, the task would naturally be more difficult to understand
(particularly for new believers) given that the oracles are as collections, rather than historically
trackable narratives describing Israel’s history. But wouldn’t this countermand the charge of
identifying context of the original audience?
Chapter Eleven deals with the Psalms. Fee and Stuart contend that there are seven
categories of Psalms: laments; thanksgiving; hymns of praise; salvation history; celebration and
affirmation; wisdom; and songs of trust. In this, the authors reiterate that while each sub-genre
retains a formal structure and a function; they also require context to the OT history of Israel.14
Outside of perhaps belonging closer to the beginning of their book, their instruction for
interpretation leaves little or no room for unabashed critical counterpoint.
In Chapter Twelve, Fee and Stuart collect Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes
as the Wisdom Books. The authors explore the definition and intent of wisdom literature in
context of a frequently-abused and often misunderstood genre. They argue wisdom as a matter of
right position with God cf. human rational intelligence. In this, the authors focus primarily on the
Book of Proverbs. Again, the authors’ imperative is to never interpret Scripture out of context
12 . Ibid., 3542-3547.
13
. Ibid., 3674-3847.
14 . Fee and Stuart, How to Read the Bible, 3964-4336.
9
and never assign biblical writings arbitrarily or as contemporary biblical moral imperatives15 As
previously argued regarding Paul’s call for wearing of veils in 1 Cor. 11:6; certain timeless moral
imperatives may certainly be found in Proverbs. However, Fee and Stuart under-emphasize this
point.
Finally in Chapter Thirteen, Fee and Stuart deal with the Book of Revelation. The Book’s
inclusive combination of apocalypse, prophecy, and letter provide a primary focus upon
apocalypse. In this, the authors provide five characteristics: dependence upon OT prophetic
literature; a form of visionary literature; imagery as more fantasy over reality: culminating in its
own formally-stylized literary genre.
In that John the Revelator was speaking for God, the Book is prophetic. However,
Revelation seemingly self-identifies, in genre, as an Epistle; expressing seven letters to seven
churches. This unique genre (similar to how the authors qualify the Gospels, sans Acts) and in
any exegetical exercise; Fee and Stuart recommend the interpreter to read through the entire
book. Their arguably preterist perspective, presents analytical problems as to their viewpoint:
“We need to learn that pictures of the future are just that — pictures. The pictures express a
reality, but they are not themselves to be confused with reality, nor are the details of every picture
necessarily to be ‘fulfilled’ in some specific way.”16 Namely, Fee and Stuart’s interpretation of
Revelation is consistent with their overall non-literal biblical interpretation found throughout
their work. The finest example of this may be found in their commentary on divorce and
remarriage.
Divorce is scarcely a valid option for couples, both of whom would be followers of Jesus
— a point repeated by Paul (1 Cor. 7: 10 – 11). But in a culture such as postmodern,
English-speaking North America, where one out of two adult converts will have been
15 . Ibid., 4338-4804.
16 . Fee and Stuart, How to Read the Bible, 5074.
10
divorced, the question of remarriage should probably not be decided mindlessly and
without redemptive concern for new converts.17
This is to say that Fee and Stuart may be argued as taking original cultural context too far.
More pointedly; what, if any Bible verse do they consider a timeless moral imperative? OT
writings, Prophets, Law, as well as, NT Gospels (sans the Book of Acts), Epistles, and
apocrypha appear to have no literal contemporary meaning whatsoever; according to these
authors.
17 . Ibid., 2767.
11
Conclusion
This essay has provided summary, analysis and critique of How to Read the Bible for All
Its Worth: A Guide to Understanding the Bible, 4th Edition, by Gordon D. Fee and Douglas K.
Stuart via: the point of view of the authors, the ideological or philosophical perspective they
bring to the work, evaluation of their implicit or explicit perspective, adequacy and veracity of
whatever evidence they offer in order to support their viewpoint, as well as, clarity, logic, and
flow of their arguments with respect to: gaps, inconsistencies, or contradictions. It has
determined that their work provides sound hermeneutical methodology regarding the use of
contextual information; original author and audience. However, the adequacy of their argument
lacks clear delineation of canonical order to the genres they identify. In some cases, the authors
conflate genres (The Four Gospels cf. the Book of Acts as narrative). In others, gaps are left
between OT and NT treatment of Law within the confines of linear (vertical) or comparative
(horizontal) understanding. As such, the biblical scholar would benefit more from the reading of
this book than would a new believer seeking to better understand and obey Scripture.
12
Bibliography
Fee, Gordon D. and Douglas K. Stuart. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth: A Guide to
Understanding the Bible. 4th Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014. Kindle.
13
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.