Holy Scriptures by Donald G. Bloesch, InterVarsity Press, 1994.

In his book Holy Scripture, Donald G. Bloesch explores how to understand the revelation, inspiration, and interpretation of the Scriptures. Throughout his discussion, he develops the ideas that there are three general views available today. The first is to take the view of evangelical rationalists who equate Scripture with divine revelation. The second is to adopt the view of religioethical experientialists who believes that human moral experience produces theological understanding. The third is that of biblical evangelicals, who believe that people can have a real knowledge of God through the Holy Spirit as they read or hear the Bible. Bloesch also explains the influence that Ruldolf Bultmann has had on theology, the problem of myth in the Bible, and the many different ways that truth is understood.

For much of church history, most Christians held that the Bible is without error. More recently, many views on whether or not the Bible contains errors have sprung up. Many of these have come from the rationalism of the enlightenment, a rationalism that Bloesch criticizes as having devastated theology, especially through the effects of historical criticism, which has caused many theologians to dismiss the miracles and stories of the Bible. On the opposite side, many have taken the inerrancy of the Bible to mean that God gave each word of the original manuscripts. Bloesch takes the middle ground by stating his belief that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but that it is not completely errorless because it came through human authors in a cultural and historical context.

In addition to these views on inerrancy, three views on the authority of the Bible are dominant today. These are the sacramental, the scholastic, and the liberal or modernist. The sacramental view holds that God works through the Bible, the church, and the sacraments in order to relate to humanity. The scholastic view holds that the infinite is accessible to the finite, and that it is important to harmonize the axioms of Scripture in order to have a comprehensive view of life and the world. The liberalist or modernist view holds that the revelation of God in the Bible is a revelation into self-discovery that helps us understand ourselves.

The meaning of this revelation, according to Bloesch, has been understood in many ways. In Church history, revelation was a higher form of knowledge that builds and completes the natural understanding of God. Because of the Enlightenment, many modern theologians see the revelation of the Bible as objective and static. This idea has been altered in neo-Protestant and Catholic theology. For example, Schleiermacher gives a mystical or experiential understanding of revelation, whereas other scholars, such as Pannenberg, give it a historical understanding. Bloesch contends that although revelation, whose goal is salvation, came through history, it transcends human reason, and can only be understood and believed through the Holy Spirit.

Bloesch goes on to declare that the Scriptures are both divine and human. Calvin, Wesley, and other past theologians tended to ignore the human aspect. Now, many who hold to historical and literary criticism also tend to deny the human origin of the Scriptures. In the Roman Catholic mindset, God is the primary author of Scripture, and humans are the secondary authors. The Reformers recognized the human aspect of the Scriptures as well as the divine.
As for the truth in the Scriptures, Protestant Orthodoxy defends the historic and scientific accuracy of the Scriptures, but elevates reason as an authority alongside of the Scriptures. Pietists and Puritans believe that the Bible is dead without the Holy Spirit. Fundamentalists teach that truth is in the original autographs, but that the copyists made errors. Truth for them tends to be factual and logical. Neo-evangelicals, similar to fundamentalists, accept historical and form criticism, and have a very high view of scripture. Many neo-orthodox scholars contend that the Bible is the Word of God even though the human authors made errors. Liberal and neo-Protestant scholars, such as Bushnell and Tillich, believe that inspiration means enlightenment, and that truth is found in experience.

Tradition has existed alongside of the truth of the Bible throughout history. Tradition in the early church was a way to hand down Scripture, and was subordinate to the Bible. During the Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church made tradition into an additional source of truth in order to defend the Church against the Reformers. Many modern Protestants now believe that tradition is as authoritative as the Bible. Bloesch, along with Barth, contends that the Bible must be interpreted by the Holy Spirit, and that the church cannot establish traditions above the Scriptures.

The question of which books belong in the Bible, or canonicity, has been debated in history. Roman Catholics believed that the church has the power to determine canonicity. The Reformers, in contrast, emphasized that the Holy Spirit must determine canonicity. They believed that, because the Scriptures are over the church, they cannot be determined by the church.

How to come to a right interpretation of the canonical books, or hermeneutics, is another theological debate that is answered various ways. Many Christians believe that the surface meaning of the text is enough. However, the Scriptures themselves call for an interpretation. This interpretation, according to traditional Catholics, is given by the church. Similarly, adherents to Eastern Orthodoxy believe the mind of the church interprets the Scriptures. Modern liberal Christians hold that the magisterium of scholars provides the correct interpretation. Sectarian fundamentalists teach that the Bible alone, without tradition, is the correct way to interpret the Bible. The Reformers believed that the Bible must be interpreted by the illumination of the Holy Spirit in the community of believers. Bloesch believes that the presence of the Word of God in the Bible speaks through the text. To interpret it, we must see it as sacred history culminating in Jesus Christ. We can criticize the text, but also must
let it criticize us, and must pray for a proper understanding of it.

The question of how many meanings the Bible contains is another problem in theology. In Medieval times, the theory that the Bible contains levels of meaning was popular. Most of the church fathers, the Reformers, and the Roman Catholic teachers spiritualized the events of the Bible, or used typology. This idea that the text of the Bible contains more than one meaning decreased after the Reformation, but is now becoming popular again. Bloesch believes that typology is only valid if it is based on critical historical exegesis, and argues for a historical-pneumatic hermeneutics. In this hermeneutic, historical criticism gives the cultural context, but illumination by the Holy Spirit brings us the revelational meaning of the historical events.

Rudolf Bultmann, according to Bloesch, has had a huge impact on biblical studies in the twentieth century. He caused the movement to substitute existential truth for ontological truth, and made salvation central to theology. With Barth, Brunner, and Gogarten, he helped to bring back the paradox and the dialectic, and made the translation of scripture, rather than the meaning of scripture, the main theme of theology. Influenced by his Lutheran heritage, he believed faith to be “a new understanding of existence.” Bultmann’s primary concern was to take rid the Bible of archaic language, especially supernaturalistic and mystical speculations, in order to make it acceptable to the modern mind. Bultmann believed that God is not accessible to the senses, and we cannot speak of His being. He reconceived ethics as a freedom for obedience through love, and declared that people know the good they should do, but fail because of their human natures.

This problem of myth in the Bible is a concern to many theologians. Many rationalists, such as Bultmann, believe that the biblical myths are projections of inner experiences. Bloesch holds that the events in the Bible are real events that surpass human understanding, and were written in what he calls “mythopoetic” language, mythical language from the surrounding people that is used to describe Biblical events. These events, according to Bloesch, should not be taken literally since they are written in this type of language. For example, Bloesch believes that the millennium should not be taken as a literal thousand-year reign of Christ.
Bloesch continues by explaining that the definition of truth is also debated. The most common understanding is the correspondence theory, which is held by modern naturalists. This theory sees truth as a description of the way things are, and a substantial correspondence between our perception and reality. Another is the coherence theory, in which truth is logically interrelated and congruent with all of reality rather than being an agreement with external reality. Mystics believe that truth is the vision of the unity behind the world of appearance. Pragmatics holds that truth is whatever is workable, especially if it serves humanity. In modern technological societies, truth is that which is valid or precise, and can be verified by empirical reason. Truth in the Bible means genuineness, veracity, faithfulness, steadfastness, and the right description of reality. It came through hearing and conforming to the ontological reality. The Bible, although not completely historically accurate, leads us into truth.

Evaluation:

Donald G. Bloesch, in his book Holy Scripture, explained the issue of the inerrancy, authority, meaning, divineness and humanness, and truth of the Bible. He also explained the idea of tradition as an additional source of truth, the issue of canonicity, the debate of hermeneutics, and the idea of levels of meaning in the Bible. He went on to cover the huge impact that Rudolf Bultmann has had on theology, and concluded with the various understanding of truth, including Biblical truth.

Bloesch does an excellent job of explaining the various views on the revelation, inspiration, and interpretation of the Bible, and of developing his own balanced view of these. For example, rather than going to the extremes of the rationalists, who do not believe that that Bible should be taken literally, or of the fundamentalists, who believe that God gave every word of the manuscripts of the Bible, Bloesch believes that the Bible is both divine and human. It was inspired by God, but can contain errors because it was written by human authors.
Bloesch, however, became unbalanced in his discussion of myth in the Bible. He argues that many Biblical events should not be taken literally because they were written in what he calls “mythopoetic” language, or the language used in the myths of the surrounding pagan societies. While it is true that many elements of these events probably are symbolic, such as angels using literal swords to strike people down, and that the Bible must be interpreted according to the genre that each part was written in, Bloesch takes this idea too far. An example of this is his statement that the millennium spoken of in the Bible cannot literally be one thousand years because this idea was written in this “mythopoetic” language. Although the author was using “mythopoetic” language, this does not mean that he did not have some literal truth to convey through this language. A thousand-year reign, even in “mythopoetic” language, could mean a literal thousand-year reign. Perhaps the author wanted to explain that Christ would reign for one thousand years, and did not see any need to use metaphorical language to indicate this. He probably knew that his readers would be able to understand the concept of a literal thousand-year reign.

In spite of this, Bloesch concludes with an excellent explanation the many ways that truth is understood. He makes the interesting point that our society tends to see truth as what is valid or precise, and can be verified by empirical reason. In the biblical understanding, however, truth is more than just a right description of things. It is conformity to the true God. The Bible, although written by human authors, leads us into truth.

Overall, Bloesch does an excellent job of explaining the views of the Bible, and of elaborating his own balanced views. Although he goes too far in his explanation of “mythopoetic” language, he concludes by giving an excellent explanation of the views of truth in the world and in the Bible.