The role of the Holy Spirit in the hermeneutical process rests on an understanding of both objective and subjective authority. Millard Erickson explains that for Christians the objective basis of authority is Scripture, whereas the subjective basis of authority is the Holy Spirit’s illuminating power and persuasive initiatives.[1] Without question, both are needed. However, the question remains as to the nature of the relationship between the two. On the one hand, some, such as staunch fundamentalists, may emphasize the objective authority of Scripture to the practical exclusion of the Spirit, while others, such as certain charismatic groups, may emphasize the Spirit and relegate Scripture to a mere after-thought. A proper understanding of authority must establish a complementary relationship between both the objective and subjective aspects of authority.
Bifurcating the objective and subjective nature of authority causes significant concerns. For example, when identifying the Spirit’s role in interpretation, Daniel Fuller separates human reason from human will by suggesting that the Spirit takes no part in the cognitive interpretive process, but instead, only influences the heart of the interpreter.[2] Certainly, human reason is necessary for proper interpretation, but to exclude the Spirit from the interpretive process misses the point. Darrell Bock provides a more appropriate perspective by asserting that the Spirit’s role has more to do with prompting an openness and willingness to receive the message of Scripture than in providing the content of Scripture.[3]
God’s Empowering Presence_ The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul
In other words, the Spirit does have a role in exegetical analysis by providing interpretive insight into the objective authority of Scripture by illuminating the study of grammar, syntax, history, geography and other disciplines, which in no way negates the necessity of these disciplines. However, it is not unreasonable to conclude that illumination of the Spirit may have more to do with the appropriation of Scripture into a believer’s life than the cognitive interpretive process. Regardless, without a Spirit-guided deployment of exegetical tools for the proper interpretation of Scripture, the content appropriated would likely be faulty. Accordingly, the objective authority of Scripture and the subjective authority of the Spirit must remain two sides of the same coin. Regarding 1 Corinthians 2:13, the context of the pericope does not undermine the importance of using exegetical tools to obtain a proper understanding of Scripture. In fact, just a few verses earlier in verse 9, Paul appears to provide a loose quotation from Isaiah 64:4, and a few verses later in verse 16, Paul quotes a question from Isaiah 40:13. It would seem unreasonable to suggest that Paul ignored the grammar, historical background, and other exegetical initiatives likely taught to him by Gamaliel when referencing these Scriptures. Furthermore, the immediate literary context of verse 13 read in light of verses 14-16 suggests that Paul’s point was not that human reason must be avoided, but that human understanding cannot comprehend divine realities without the aid of the Spirit. Finally, although the final phrase of verse 13, πνεύματος, πνευματικοῖς πνευματικὰ, is admittedly difficult to interpret, Gordon Fee suggests the grammar supports a translation that highlights the necessity of the Spirit’s involvement in communicating spiritual concepts.[4] In sum, without diminishing the necessity of proper Spirit-guided exegetical analysis via human reason, Paul’s language in verse 13 is asserting that the communication of spiritual truths moves beyond the capacity of human reason and requires the power of the Holy Spirit.
___________________________________________
[1] Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013), 221.
[2] Daniel Fuller, “The Holy Spirit’s Role in Biblical Interpretation,” International Journal of Frontier Missions 14, no. 2 (April-June 1997): 92.
[3] Darrell L. Bock, “Opening Questions: Definition and Philosophy of Exegesis,” in Opening Questions, ed. Darrell L. Bock and Buist M. Fanning (Wheaton: Crossway, 2006), 31; emphasis added.
[4] Gordon D. Fee, God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1994), 105. Fee explains that the participial construction demands a close link to the previous content and the anarthrous πνευματικοῖς suggests that the adjective likely does not pertain to a class of individuals, see 104-5n37.
Bibliography
- Bock, Darrell L. “Opening Questions: Definition and Philosophy of Exegesis.” In Opening Questions, edited by Darrell L. Bock and Buist M. Fanning. Wheaton: Crossway, 2006.
- Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013.
- Fee, Gordon D. God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1994.
- Fuller, Daniel. “The Holy Spirit’s Role in Biblical Interpretation.” International Journal of Frontier Missions 14, no. 2 (April-June 1997): 91–95.
