Alcohol in the Bible

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_in_the_Bible

 

Jesus depicted transforming water into wine. Maerten de Vos, The Marriage at Cana, c. 1597, Cathedral of our Lady, Antwerp, Belgium.

Alcoholic beverages appear in the Hebrew Bible, after Noah planted a vineyard and became inebriated. In the New Testament, Jesus miraculously made copious amounts of wine at the marriage at Cana (John 2). Wine is the most common alcoholic beverage mentioned in biblical literature, where it is a source of symbolism, and was an important part of daily life in biblical times. Additionally, the inhabitants of ancient Israel drank beer, and wines made from fruits other than grapes, and references to these appear in scripture.

Many Christians abstain from alcohol, citing, among other verses, 1 Corinthians 10:21, which states, "You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord’s table and the table of demons." Others think biblical literature displays an ambivalence toward drinks that can be intoxicating, considering them both a blessing from God that brings joy and merriment and potentially dangerous beverages that can be sinfully abused. The relationships between Judaism and alcohol and Christianity and alcohol have generally maintained this same tension, though some modern Christian sects, particularly American Protestant groups around the time of Prohibition, have rejected alcohol as evil. The original versions of the books of the Bible use several different words for alcoholic beverages: at least 10 in Hebrew, and five in Greek. Drunkenness is discouraged and not infrequently portrayed, and some biblical persons abstained from alcohol. Wine is used symbolically, in both positive and negative terms. Its consumption is prescribed for religious rites or medicinal uses in some places.

Lexigraphy

Biblical literature uses several words in its original languages to refer to different types of alcoholic beverages. Some of these words have overlapping meaning, particularly the words in the Hebrew language compared to the words in Koine Greek, the language of both the Septuagint and the New Testament. While some deuterocanonical books may have been originally written in Hebrew or the Aramaic language, some were written in Greek. Hence, the meanings of the words used for alcoholic beverages in each of these languages has bearing on alcohol in the Bible.

Hebrew

The Hebrew Bible was largely written in Biblical Hebrew, with portions in Biblical Aramaic, and has an important Ancient Greek translation called the Septuagint. The modern Hebrew Bible, which generally follows the Masoretic Text, uses several words to represent alcoholic beverages.

Alcoholic content

Yayin and oinos (which in the Septuagint also often translates most of the Hebrew words for alcoholic beverages listed above) are commonly translated "wine", but the two are also rarely, and perhaps figuratively or anticipatorily, used to refer to freshly pressed non-alcoholic juice. For this reason, prohibitionist and some abstentionist Christians object to taking the default meaning to be fermented beverages, but others argue that the words can also refer to alcoholic beverages.

While the wines drunk in the times depicted in the Hebrew Bible were not diluted with water, after the conquest of Palestine by Alexander the Great the Hellenistic custom of diluting wine had taken hold such that the author of 2 Maccabees speaks of diluted wine as "a more pleasant drink" and of both undiluted wine and unmixed water as "harmful" or "distasteful."

Biblical references

Ancient wine press in Israel with the pressing area in the center and the collection vat off to the bottom left.

The many biblical references to wine are both positive and negative, real and symbolic, descriptive and didactic. Both archaeological evidence and written records indicate the significant cultivation of grapes in ancient Israel and the popularity of wine-drinking. The production capacity apparent from archaeological remains and the frequent biblical references to wine suggest that it was the principal alcoholic beverage of the ancient Israelites.

Drunkenness

Easton's Bible Dictionary says, "The sin of drunkenness ... must have been not uncommon in the olden times, for it is mentioned either metaphorically or literally more than seventy times in the Bible," though some suggest it was a "vice of the wealthy rather than of the poor." Biblical interpreters generally agree that the Hebrew and Christian scriptures condemn ordinary drunkenness as a serious spiritual and moral failing in passages such as these (all from the New International Version):

• Proverbs 23:20f: "Do not mix with winebibbers, or gluttonous eaters of meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."
• Isaiah 5:11f: "Woe to those who rise early in the morning to run after their drinks, who stay up late at night till they are inflamed with wine. They have harps and lyres at their banquets, tambourines and flutes and wine, but they have no regard for the deeds of the LORD, no respect for the work of his hands."
• Galatians 5:19–21: "The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: ... drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God."
• Ephesians 5:18: "Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit."

The Drunkenness of Noah by Giovanni Bellini

The consequences of the drunkenness of Noah and Lot "were intended to serve as examples of the dangers and repulsiveness of intemperance." The title character in the Book of Judith uses the drunkenness of the Assyrian general Holofernes to behead him in a heroic victory for the Jewish people and an embarrassing defeat for the general, who had schemed to seduce Judith.

One of the original sections of 1 Esdras describes a debate among three courtiers of Darius I of Persia over whether wine, the king, or women (but above all the truth) is the strongest. The argument for wine does not prevail in the contest, but it provides a vivid description of the ancients' view of the power wine can wield in excessive quantity.

A disputed but important passage is Proverbs 31:4–7. Some Christians assert that alcohol was prohibited to kings at all times, while most interpreters contend that only its abuse is in view here. Some argue that the latter instructions regarding the perishing should be understood as sarcasm when compared with the preceding verses, while others contend the beer and wine are intended as a cordial to raise the spirits of the perishing, while some suggest that the Bible is here authorizing alcohol as an anesthetic. Moreover, some suggest that the wines that Jesus was offered at his crucifixion were also intended as an anesthetic.

Sacrifices and feasts

Further information: Sacramental wine

The Hebrew scriptures prescribed wine for use in festal celebrations and sacrificial rituals. In particular, fermented wine was presented daily as a drink offering, as part of the first Fruits offering, and as part of various supplementary offerings. Wine was kept in the Temple in Jerusalem, and the king had his own private stores. The banquet hall was called a "house of wine," and wine was used as the usual drink at most secular and religious feasts, including feasts of celebration and hospitality, tithe celebrations, Jewish holidays such as Passover, and at burials.

The Last Supper by Simon Ushakov, 1685. Jesus holds a chalice containing wine.

The first miracle of Jesus' public ministry was transforming water into fine wine at a wedding in Cana. Jesus instituted the Eucharist at the Last Supper, which took place at a Passover celebration, and set apart the bread and "fruit of the vine" that were present there as symbols of the New Covenant. Saint Paul later chides the Corinthians for becoming drunk on wine served at their celebrations of the Lord's Supper.

Bringer of joy

The Bible also speaks of wine in general terms as a bringer and concomitant of joy, particularly in the context of nourishment and feasting, e.g.:

• Psalm 104:14–15: "[The LORD] makes ... plants for man to cultivate – bringing forth food from the earth: wine that gladdens the heart of man, oil to make his face shine, and bread that sustains his heart." Gregory of Nyssa (died 395) made a distinction between types of wine (intoxicating and non-intoxicating) – "not that wine which produces drunkenness, plots against the senses, and destroys the body, but such as gladdens the heart, the wine which the Prophet recommends"
• Ecclesiastes 9:7: "Go, eat your food with gladness, and drink your wine with a joyful heart, for it is now that God favors what you do."

Ben Sira discusses the use of wine in several places, emphasizing joy, prudence, and common sense.

Vows and duties

Certain persons were forbidden in the Hebrew Bible to partake of wine because of their vows and duties. Kings were forbidden to abuse alcohol lest their judgments be unjust. It was forbidden to priests on duty, though the priests were given "the finest new wine" from the first fruits offerings for drinking outside the tabernacle and temple.

The Nazirites excluded as part of their ascetic regimen not only wine, but also vinegar, grapes, and raisins, though when Nazirites completed the term of their vow they were required to present wine as part of their sacrificial offerings and could drink of it. While John the Baptist adopted such a regimen, Jesus did not during his three years of ministry.

The Rechabites, a sub-tribe of the Kenites, vowed never to drink wine, live in houses, or plant fields or vineyards, not because of any "threat to wise living" from the latter [Prov. 20:1] practices, but because of their commitment to a nomadic lifestyle by not being bound to any particular piece of land. The Rechabites's strict obedience to the command of their father "not to drink wine" [Jer. 35:14] is commended and is contrasted with the failure of Jerusalem and the Kingdom of Judah to listen to their God.

During the Babylonian captivity, Daniel and his fellow Jews abstained from the meat and wine given to them by the king because they saw it as defiling in some way, though precisely how these would have defiled the Jews is not apparent in the text. A later passage implies that Daniel did drink wine at times, though it may not have been the king's. Similarly, Judith refused the Assyrian general's wine, though she drank wine from the stores she brought with her.

Christians are instructed regarding abstinence and their duty toward immature Christians: "All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall."

Symbolism and metaphor

The commonness and centrality of wine in daily life in biblical times is apparent from its many positive and negative metaphorical uses throughout the Bible. Positively, free wine is used as a symbol of divine grace, and wine is repeatedly compared to intimate love in the Song of Solomon. Negatively, wine is personified as a mocker ("[t]he most hardened apostate" in the Book of Proverbs whose chief sin is pride) and beer a brawler (one who is "mocking, noisy, and restless").

Meeting of Abraham and Melchizedek by Dieric Bouts the Elder

Additionally, the chosen people and kingdom of God are compared to a divinely owned vine or vineyard in several places, and the image of new wine being kept in new wineskins, a process that would burst old wineskins, represents that the new faith Jesus was bringing "cannot be contained within the framework of the old." The complacent are compared with "wine left on its dregs" too long, such that it lacks a good taste and is of no value, and those who are corrupt are compared with excellent wine which has been diluted with water.

Wine was also used as a symbol of blessing and judgement throughout the Bible. Melchizedek blessed and refreshed Abraham's army with bread and wine; Isaac blessed Jacob by saying, "May God give you of heaven's dew and of earth's richness – an abundance of grain and new wine"; and when Jacob blessed his sons, he used a great abundance of wine as a symbol of Judah's prosperity. The nation of Israel was promised abundant wine and other central crops such as grain and oil if they kept God's covenant commandments, and their wine would be taken away as a curse if the Israelites failed to keep the covenant.

Drinking a cup of strong wine to the dregs and getting drunk are sometimes presented as a symbol of God's judgement and wrath, and Jesus alludes this cup of wrath, which he several times says he himself will drink. Similarly, the winepress is pictured as a tool of judgement where the resulting wine symbolizes the blood of the wicked who were crushed. Connected also to the cup of judgement is the wine of immorality, which the evil drink and which both brings and is part of the wrath of God.

Detail from The Good Samaritan by Cornelis van Haarlem (1627) showing the Samaritan pouring oil and wine on the injured man's wounds.

The Day of the Lord, which is often understood by Christians to usher in the Messianic Age, is depicted as a time when "[n]ew wine will drip from the mountains and flow from all the hills," when God's people will "plant vineyards and drink their wine," and when God himself "will prepare a feast of rich food for all peoples, a banquet of aged wine – the best of meats and the finest of wines."

In the New Testament, Jesus uses wine at the Last Supper to signify the "New Covenant in [Jesus'] blood," but Christians differ over precisely how symbolic the wine is in the continuing ritual of the Eucharist.

Medicinal uses

Wine was used in ancient times for various medicinal ends, and the Bible refers to some of these practices. It was likely used as an anesthetic to dull pain, and many interpreters suggest that it was in this capacity that wines were offered to Jesus at his crucifixion.

In the Parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus tells a story about a man from Samaria who assists an injured man by, among other things, pouring oil and wine on his wounds. Oil mixed with wine was a common remedy in the ancient world to cleanse wounds and assuage their pain.

Paul advises Timothy that he should not drink water only, but should use a little wine for the sake of his stomach and frequent infirmities. Some have suggested this advice is particularly in reference to purifying low quality drinking water, while others suggest it was simply intended to help his digestion and general sickliness. Abstentionists generally regard this passage as a positive example of abstention from wine and see Paul's instructions as exceptional and purely for the sake of health, while other interpreters suggest that Timothy was "upright in his aims" but here guilty of an "excess of severity" or that he felt inappropriately bound by a Hellenistic custom that younger men should not drink.

Reading the Bible as having no positive references to alcohol

There are some who interpret certain passages in the Bible as not referring to alcohol, arguing that all positive references to "wine" in Scripture refer to non-alcoholic beverages and all negative references speak of alcoholic beverages. Advocates of this view, called the "two-wine" position, argue that the Greek and Hebrew words rendered "wine" in most English versions are generic terms for fruit juices; context determines if the beverage in view is alcoholic or not. The fact is pointed out that even in earlier stages of the English language, such as in 1611 when the King James Version was translated, "wine" could refer to non-alcoholic beverages as well as alcoholic ones. The two-wine view is widespread in conservative Evangelicalism. Dr. Robert Teachout, a fundamental Baptist seminary professor, argued for this position in his 1979 doctoral dissertation The Use of "Wine" in the Old Testament. Separatist Baptist support for a biblical total abstinence position is widespread. Other sources for this view include the Purified Translation of the Bible, where extensive footnotes are used to promote the idea, and the 19th century Temperance Bible Commentary.

Biblical hermeneutics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_hermeneutics

Biblical hermeneutics is the study of the principles of interpretation concerning the books of the Bible. It is part of the broader field of hermeneutics, which involves the study of principles of interpretation, both theory and methodology, for all forms of communication, nonverbal and verbal.

While Jewish and Christian biblical hermeneutics have some overlap and dialogue, they have distinctly separate interpretative traditions.

Jewish

Traditional

Main article: Talmudical hermeneutics

Talmudical hermeneutics (Hebrew: approximately, מידות שהתורה נדרשת בהן) refers to Jewish methods for the investigation and determination of the meaning of the Hebrew Bible, as well as rules by which Jewish law could be established. One well-known summary of these principles appears in the Baraita of Rabbi Ishmael.

Methods by which the Talmud explores the meaning of scripture:

• grammar and exegesis
• the interpretation of certain words and letters and apparently superfluous and/or missing words or letters, and prefixes and suffixes
• the interpretation of those letters which, in certain words, are provided with points
• the interpretation of the letters in a word according to their numerical value (see Gematria)
• the interpretation of a word by dividing it into two or more words (see Notarikon)
• the interpretation of a word according to its consonantal form or according to its vocalization
• the interpretation of a word by transposing its letters or by changing its vowels
• the logical deduction of a halakah from a Scriptural text or from another law

The rabbis of the Talmud considered themselves to be the receivers and transmitters of an Oral Torah as to the meaning of the scriptures. They considered this oral tradition to set forth the precise, original meanings of the words, revealed at the same time and by the same means as the original scriptures themselves. Interpretive methods listed above such as word play and letter counting were never used as logical proof of the meaning or teaching of a scripture. Instead they were considered to be an asmakhta, a validation of a meaning that was already set by tradition or a homiletic backing for rabbinic rulings.

Biblical source criticism

Among non-Orthodox Jews, there is growing interest in employing biblical source criticism, such as the Documentary hypothesis and the Supplementary hypothesis, for constructing modern Jewish theology, including the following objectives:

• Reconciling modern morals with biblical passages that condone morally problematic acts, such as genocide and other collective punishment
• Rejecting or accepting folkways, social norms, and linguistic trends, picking and choosing as more fully informed Jews
• Learning lessons in spite of biblical underrepresentation, or outright exclusion, of particular modern phenomena

To at least some extent, this is an application of Talmudical hermeneutics to traditional source criticism of the competing Torah schools: Priestly, Deuteronomic, and one, two, or more that are non-Priestly and non-Deuteronomic.

Christian

Until the Enlightenment, biblical hermeneutics was usually seen as a form of special hermeneutics (like legal hermeneutics); the status of scripture was thought to necessitate a particular form of understanding and interpretation.

In the nineteenth century it became increasingly common to read scripture just like any other writing, although the different interpretations were often disputed. Friedrich Schleiermacher argued against a distinction between "general" and "special" hermeneutics, and for a general theory of hermeneutics applicable to all texts, including the Bible. Various methods of higher criticism sought to understand the Bible purely as a human, historical document.

The concept of hermeneutics has acquired at least two different but related meanings which are in use today. Firstly, in the older sense, biblical hermeneutics may be understood as the theological principles of exegesis which is often virtually synonymous with 'principles of biblical interpretation' or methodology of biblical exegesis. Secondly, the more recent development is to understand the term 'biblical hermeneutics' as the broader philosophy and linguistic underpinnings of interpretation. The question is posed: "How is understanding possible?" The rationale of this approach is that, while Scripture is "more than just an ordinary text," it is certainly "no less than an ordinary text." Scripture is in the first analysis "text" which human beings try to understand; in this sense, the principles of understanding any text apply to the Bible as well (regardless of whatever other additional, specifically theological principles are considered).

In this second sense, all aspects of philosophical and linguistic hermeneutics are considered to be applicable to the biblical texts, as well. There are obvious examples of this in the links between 20th-century philosophy and Christian theology. For example, Rudolf Bultmann's hermeneutical approach was strongly influenced by existentialism, and in particular by the philosophy of Martin Heidegger; and since the 1970s, the philosophical hermeneutics of Hans-Georg Gadamer have had a wide-ranging influence on biblical hermeneutics as developed by a wide range of Christian theologians. The French-American philosopher René Girard follows a similar trail.

Denominational differences

Biblical scholars have noted the diversity of interpretations by Protestants and to a lesser extent by Catholics. In his forward to R. C. Sproul’s Knowing Scripture, J. I. Packer observes that Protestant theologians are in conflict about biblical interpretation. To illustrate the diversity of biblical interpretations, William Yarchin pictures a shelf full of religious books saying different things, but all claiming to be faithful interpretations of the Bible. Bernard Ramm observed that such diverse interpretations underlie the doctrinal variations in Christendom. A mid-19th century book on biblical interpretation observed that even those who believe the Bible to be the word of God hold the most discordant views about fundamental doctrines.

The Catholic Church asserts the capital importance of biblical interpretation and Catholic scholars recognize some diversity in the Bible. This allows for an openness of interpretation as long as it stays within the Catholic Church’s theological tradition. So it is that theological factors set the parameters for interpreting the Bible that Catholics believe to be the word of God. According to Roy B. Zuck, such parameters disallow the widely differing interpretations that make it possible for Protestants to prove almost anything by the Bible.

For Catholics, the Catholic Church is the official custodian and interpreter of the Bible. Therefore, Catholicism's teaching concerning the Sacred Scriptures and their genuine sense must be the supreme guide of the commentator. The Catholic commentator is bound to adhere to the interpretation of texts which the Church has defined either expressly or implicitly. Furthermore, the Church Fathers are of supreme authority whenever they all interpret in one and the same manner any text of the Bible, as pertaining to the doctrine of faith or morals; for their unanimity clearly evinces that such interpretation has come down from the Apostles as a matter of Catholic faith.

Pope Benedict XVI indicated in Verbum Domini that "Christianity […] perceives in the words the Word himself, the Logos who displays his mystery through this complexity and the reality of human history." He encourages a "faith-filled interpretation of Sacred Scripture" that has been "practiced from antiquity within the Church’s Tradition […] recognizes the historical value of the biblical tradition." It "seeks to discover the living meaning of the Sacred Scriptures for the lives of believers today while not ignoring the human mediation of the inspired text and its literary genres".

Layers of meaning

Christian biblical hermeneutics considers the original medium as well as what language says, supposes, doesn't say, and implies. David L. Barr states there are three obstacles that stand in the way of correctly interpreting the biblical writings: We speak a different language, we live approximately two millennia later, and we bring different expectations to the text. Additionally, Barr suggests that we approach the reading of the Bible with significantly different literary expectations than those in reading other forms of literature and writing.

According to Vern Poythress, there are three general concepts to understand about any passage of Scripture. First, the original time and context, which includes the personal perspective of the writer, the normative perspective of the text itself, and the situational perspective of the original audience. Second, it is necessary to understand the transmission of Scripture includes contemplating the message being sent through the text, taking into account the concerns of individual writers/translators as well as its broader role in the unraveling narrative of history. Finally, Poythress instructs interpreters to understand Scripture as "what God is saying now" to the individual as well as to the modern church.

Henry A. Virkler argues that there are several types of analysis needed to identify what the author intended to communicate in the biblical passage:

• Lexical-syntactical analysis: This step looks at the words used and the way the words are used. Different order of the sentence, the punctuation, the tense of the verse are all aspects that are looked at in the lexical syntactical method. Here, lexicons and grammar aids can help in extracting meaning from the text.
• Historical/cultural analysis: The history and culture surrounding the authors is important to understand to aid in interpretation. For instance, understanding the Jewish sects of the Palestine and the government that ruled Palestine in New Testament times increases understanding of Scripture. And, understanding the connotations of positions such as the High Priest and that of the tax collector helps us know what others thought of the people holding these positions.
• Contextual analysis: A verse out of context can often be taken to mean something completely different from the intention. This method focuses on the importance of looking at the context of a verse in its chapter, book and even biblical context.
• Theological analysis: It is often said that a single verse usually doesn't make a theology. This is because Scripture often touches on issues in several books. For instance, gifts of the Spirit are spoken about in Romans, Ephesians and 1 Corinthians. To take a verse from Corinthians without taking into account other passages that deal with the same topic can cause a poor interpretation.
• Special literary analysis: There are several special literary aspects to look at, but the overarching theme is that each genre of Scripture has a different set of rules that applies to it. Of the genres found in Scripture, there are: narratives, histories, prophecies, apocalyptic writings, poetry, psalms and letters. In these, there are differing levels of allegory, figurative language, metaphors, similes and literal language. For instance, the apocalyptic writings and poetry have more figurative and allegorical language than does the narrative or historical writing. These must be addressed, and the genre recognized to gain a full understanding of the intended meaning.

However, Poythress argues that the study of the Bible must acknowledge three dimension: God as the speaker, the Bible as His speech, and the people to whom He speaks. But to do this, biblical hermeneutics needs to unravel the layers of meaning found within the "speaker, discourse, and hearer." For some, such as Howard Hendricks and Chuck Swindoll, this can be as simple as taking three steps: observing the text, interpreting the text, and applying the text to one's life.

Reader's context

Further information: African American biblical hermeneutics and Asian American biblical hermeneutics

There is a recognition that the context of the reader has a relationship with one's approach to the Bible. In part, this is related to the presuppositions every reader comes to the Bible, no matter how objective they may try to be.

Scholars such as Vincent L. Wimbush, Fernando F. Segovia, R. S. Sugirtharajah, Mary Ann Tolbert, and Miguel A. De La Torre have argued that the dominant readings of the Bible are influenced by Eurocentric presuppositions, which have produced racially inflected understandings of Christianity and Christian theology. As a corrective, some have spoken of prioritizing social location, especially in terms of minority populations in the United States, such as in African American or Asian American biblical hermeneutics. This often draws on postcolonial or liberative methods for re-readings the Bible.

Other scholars see this as too extreme and based on mainline liberal concerns. In contrast, Asian American evangelicals have established a research group within the Institute for Biblical Research to develop an alternative. Likewise, Esau McCaulley argues that everyone comes to Scripture with different life experiences and cultures which help to point out the blind spots in each other's reading. Instead of the focus on Black political liberation, McCaulley wants to recover a "Black ecclesial interpretation" coming out of the experience of the African American church.

Trajectory hermeneutics

Trajectory hermeneutics or redemptive-movement hermeneutics (RMH) is a hermeneutical approach that seeks to locate varying 'voices' in the text and to view these voices as a progressive trajectory through history (or at least through the biblical witness); often a trajectory that progresses through to the present day. The contemporary reader of Scripture is in some way envisaged by the biblical text as standing in continuity with a developing theme therein. The reader, then, is left to discern this trajectory and appropriate it accordingly.

William J. Webb, employing trajectory hermeneutics, shows how the moral commands of the Old and New Testaments were a significant improvement over the surrounding cultural values and practices. Webb identified 18 different ways in which God dealt with his people moving against the current of popular cultural values. While for Webb the use of this hermeneutic moves to highlight the progressive liberation of women and slaves from oppressive male/bourgeois dominance, the prohibition of homosexual acts consistently moves in a more conservative manner than that of the surrounding Ancient Near East or Graeco-Roman societies. While Paul does not explicitly state that slavery should be abolished, the trajectory seen in Scripture is a progressive liberation of slaves. When this is extended to modern times, it implies that the biblical witness supports the abolition of slavery. The progressive liberation of women from oppressive patriarchalism, traced from Genesis and Exodus through to Paul's own acknowledgement of women as 'co-workers' (Rom. 16:3), sets a precedent that when applied to modern times suggests that women ought to have the same rights and roles afforded to men. Historically, the biblical witness has become progressively more stringent in its views of homosexual practice and the implications of this are not commented upon by Webb.

Quranic hermeneutics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quranic_hermeneutics 

 

Quran

Qur'anic hermeneutics is the study of theories of the interpretation and understanding of the Qur'an, the central text of Islam. Since the early centuries of Islam, scholars have sought to mine the wealth of its meanings by developing a variety of different methods of hermeneutics. Many of the traditional methods of interpretation are currently being challenged with a more modern or contemporary approach. The three primarily established typologies of tafsir are tradition (Sunni), opinion (Shi'i), and allegory (Sufi). The two main types of verses to be interpreted are Muhukmat (clear verse) and Mutishabihat (ambiguous verse). The traditional approach to hermeneutics within the Qur'an embodies an awareness of isnad (chain of transmitters). There are many challenges of addressing modern day human rights, women and minority groups through the traditional hermeneutical model.

Introduction

Hermeneutics is the basis of all scriptural interpretations, and in the context of Islam, often includes vital tools, such as tafsir, and exegesis to aid in analyses of the Qur’an. The tools used for hermeneutical dissection range from the hadith reports, in traditional interpretation, to things like taqwa, and a more contemporary, liberating approach. It is a discipline that sets itself upon the task of specifying and justifying a methodology of interpretation, originally of texts, but by extension of many other interpretants. It has also been called the science or art of interpretation". Hermeneutics may be conceived as either a descriptive or a normative discipline. In a descriptive vein, it aims at a rational reconstruction of an already existing practice of interpretation that presumably is less than perfect. In a normative vein, the goal is to direct, control, and, hopefully, to optimize this imperfect practice. Both projects, the descriptive and the normative, do seem not only legitimate, but also worthwhile. The two leading concepts are interpretation and understanding. Interpretation is a rational activity directed toward the cognitive aim of correct or adequate understanding. (The product of this activity is also called ‘an interpretation.) ‘To interpret’ and ‘to understand’ are transitive verbs; understanding, like interpretation, has an object. One understands something (x), or one fails to understand it. Sometimes we understand something without effort, simply because we have acquired the requisite ability, and nothing more is needed.

Peter Heath posed in 1989 that "the modern study of Islamic hermeneutics is in its infancy"; in response, Jean Jacques Waardenburg proposed five questions and issues that a study of a possible hermeneutics of Islam would have to deal with:

1. Is there a consistent methodology underlying tafsir that one could call hermeneutical, do rules exist "that have been explicitly formulated and consciously applied by Muslim scholars"?
2. Given that much of the tradition of interpretation of the Qur'an is concerned with the interpretation of specific verses, what is the relationship between those interpretations and the interpretation of the Qur'an as a whole
3. What type of philological knowledge, and what type of knowledge of the historical reception of the text is necessary to come to an assessment of Islamic hermeneutics?
4. Can we separate our emotional response to certain verses from the study of the meaning of the text?
5. What is the role of the specialists in the field (the mutakallimiin, the ulama, and the fuqahā') and what is their relationship to the broader circle of students of the Qur'an and the even larger community of believers?

Tafsir as described by Andrew Rippin "is the humanization of the divine word and the divinization of the human spirit."

Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im suggests "Hermeneutics may be defined as the art or science of interpretation, especially for scriptural texts. In view of the inevitability of using human reason and action in understanding and implementing any text, as noted earlier, a hermeneutical process is necessary for understanding the purpose and normative content of a text like the Qur'an." Amina Wadud defines the hermeneutical model as being, "concerned with three aspects of the text, in order to support its conclusions: 1. The context in which the text was written (in the case of the Qur'an, in which it was revealed); 2. The grammatical composition of the text (how it says what it says); and 3. The whole text, its Weltanschauung, or world-view. Often, differences of opinion can be traced to variations in emphasis between these three aspects".

Significant influencers and influences in Quranic hermeneutics

Al-Tabari was a Sunni scholar from the 9th and 10th century and arguably the most predominant figure in Quranic hermeneutics. Al-Tabari's traditional approach to interpretation relies heavily on the Hadith reports as a tool for clarification when the Qur'an presents a mutishabihat (ambiguous verse).

Amina Wadud, a contemporary interpreter of the Qur'an takes a different approach to interpretation by neutralizing the gendered aspect of the Arabic language. The three main aspects of her hermeneutical model are according to Wadud,

1. "the context in which the text was written"
2. "the grammatical composition of the text"
3. "the whole text, or world-view"

Sayyid Qutb is a contemporary interpreter with the main goal to revive Islam. He sees the Qur'an as a source for liberation from oppression. His egalitarian emphasis to the Qur'an is what Qutb states as its main intended purpose. Sayyid views the "West" as a facade for social and political progress. He criticizes the civil rights movement as a hollow example of progress.

Farid Esack, like Sayyid Qutb emphasizes the oppressed as being the primary focus for the initial Qur'anic revelation. Literary analysis being the main focus for interpretation with emphasis on social justice. A main component used by Esack is his emphasis on Taqwa as an indication as to who has the greatest ability to interpret the Qur'an.

Another proposed method for Qur'anic hermeneutics takes into account intertextual polysemy in establishing inner-Qur'anic and intra-Qur'anic-Biblical allusions by looking into the polysemous nature of the Arabic terms used and how they are related to its usage in other instances. For example, it gives insight how the Qibla passages in the Qur'an are in direct engagement with the Shema' passages in Deuteronomy and its Talmudic commentary.

Specific issues in Islamic hermeneutics

Human rights

A specific issue discussed is the relationship between Islam and human rights. ʻAbd Allāh Aḥmad Naʻīm sees the problem as one of the transformation of interpretations of the Qur'an to a globalized world and the mutual social and political influences between that globalized world and the Muslim community. He differentiates between the 'traditionalists' who advocate "strict conformity to Shari'a as an essential prerequisite for accepting the proposed change [toward a more anthropological view of Islam]" and those who do bypass the question of that conformity. A hermeneutic approach to Islam and human rights, he claims, must acknowledge the idea of historical change. A hermeneutic approach to Islam and human rights due to legal or ethical considerations must acknowledge the idea of historical and cultural change. Abdullah Saeed embraces this concept suggesting a "Contextualist" approach to interpretation. Saeed gives a description of contextualist ,"Those I refer to as Contextualists emphasize the socio-historical context of the ethico-legal content of the Quran and of its subsequent interpretations. They argue for understanding the ethico-legal content in the light of the political, social, historical, cultural and economic contexts in which this content was revealed, interpreted and applied. Thus they argue for a high degree of freedom for the modern Muslim scholar in determining what is mutable (changeable) and immutable (unchangeable) in the area of ethico-legal content. Contextualists are found among those Fazlur Rahman called neo-modernists as well as Ijtihadist, the so-called ‘progressive’ Muslims and more generally ‘liberal’ Muslim thinkers today". He emphasis understanding the socio-historical context of scripture and the complex meanings of Quranic verses. The use of abrogation for clarification and abandoning rigid interpretation from previous hermeneutic scholars loosely encompasses Saeed's approach.

Ijtihad: "Ijtihad Islamic legal term meaning “independent reasoning,” as opposed to taqlid (imitation). It requires a thorough knowledge of theology, revealed texts, and legal theory (usul al-fiqh); a sophisticated capacity for legal reasoning; and a thorough knowledge of Arabic. It is considered a required religious duty for those qualified to perform it. It should be practiced by means of analogical or syllogistic reasoning (qiyas). Its results may not contradict the Quran, and it may not be used in cases where consensus (ijma) has been reached, according to many scholars. Islamic reformers call for a revitalization of ijtihad in the modern world".

Approaches to Interpretation Concerning Women and Minority Groups

The growing influence of women in the Muslim world and their increasing access to higher levels of education, combined with the Western interest in the position of women in the Muslim world has a profound influence on Islamic hermeneutics, which must deal with transnationalism and its effect on gender roles. Zayn R. Kassam touches on this by mentioning that, "Muslim women's praxis, particularly the hopes, possibilities, and challenges that accompany this scholarly textual reinterpretation, remains under-researched". Due to this type of interpretation being under-researched, many women in Islamic communities are still oppressed despite the changing of modern society. 'New' schools of Islamic thinking (emblematized by such philosophers as Mohammed Arkoun) have challenged "monodimensional hermeneutics." Modern Qur’anic hermeneutics has been influenced by the changing position and view of women in the Muslim world and increasing numbers of study and interpretations of the text itself. Mohammed Arkoun further expands on this thought explaining, "There are concrete examples how authority and power are conquered, monopolized and translated, not in the theoretical classical frameworks, but in a more simplified vocabulary, accessible to the illiterate peasants, mountain-dwellers and nomads." The Qur’an is such an authoritative text in Islamic communities, and even though there are many different interpretations of the text, stereotypical societal structures still exist in the changing modern world, perhaps because they have not been challenged in prior interpretations. Zayn R. Kassam adds to this by stating that, “The discursive hermeneutics of Qur’anic tafsir is a strategy born of necessity and the unwavering belief in the unfulfilled promise of gender egalitarianism in Islam”. These types of interpretation are in many ways still in their infancy, but growing concern around these topics calls for a new hermeneutical approach for interpreting the Qur’an. Interpretation of the Qur’an in terms of gender rights is becoming more prevalent, especially due to the many changes taking place in modern times concerning gender and other minority or oppressed groups. In terms of these approaches to interpretation, and the hermeneutical model being developed for it, Amina Wadud, is one who can be considered a significant developer. For example, in her analysis, in the context of the creation story in the Qur'an, states that, "The Qur'an encourages all believers, male and female, to follow their beliefs with actions, and for this it promises them a great reward. Thus, the Qur'an does not make a distinction between men and women in this creation, the purpose of the Book, or in the reward it promises". This is an example of modern hermeneutics and the way it can be applied to this issue. Wadud considers that Arabic, the language of the Qur’an, is a gendered language, so that the meaning of certain phrases can be altered just be this factor alone. While she does use traditional tafsir in her analysis, she changes and skips some of the traditional steps, like keeping words in context while also referring to the larger textual development of the term and focusing on what is left unsaid in the Qur’an in relation to what is said. Wadud challenges the traditional hermeneutical approach and tafsir by adding to and changing the usual model. Dr. Wadud has giving us an interpretation of the Quran through a female Muslim lens. She offers a female view of women in the Quran and their importance of their teaching. She suggests that the Quran does not supply gender specific roles for either male or female. Amina states that the patriarchal construct of women’s role in the community was a self-serving one., not ordained by Quranic text. She states that the greater Quranic message is on to establish harmony within the community.

Another minority group to consider in more modern interpretations of the Qur'an is queer theory or interpretations. As mentioned by Kecia Ali, "In queer theory, gender and sexual dimorphisms are social constructions that invariably efface difference, administer power to the powerful, and subject the weak/disfavored to the rule of the strong/favored" (90). In other words, Ali explains that, "Queer theoretical interventions, then, have relevance for social life: challenging the presumed coherence and sacred nature of existing oppressive norms allows other forms of being and relating to emerge and flourish" (91). Queer readings and interpretations of the Qur'an are few and far between, while there are plenty of scholarships on gender-focused interpretations of the Qur'an.

A pioneering interpretive text in this field is Scott Kugle’s Homosexuality in Islam, which focuses on interpreting the Qur’an in the context of homosexuality. His hermeneutical approach mainly entails the use of linguistics, emphasis on human nature, the Qur’an as a liberation document, non- patriarchal interpretation, and bases his sensitive interpretation on seven principles required for interpretations of this sort, “(1) the inherent dignity of all human beings as bearing the breath of God; (2) the sacredness of life; (3) the ethic of pluralism; (4) order with justice; (5) God’s speech is meaningful, such that interpretation is the right and obligation of all Muslims to discover what God intends behind, within, and through scripture’s words; (6) faith complements reason; (7) love is the goal” (41). He uses these seven principles combined with specific tools, such as: (1) Linguistic accuracy; (2) maintaining the primacy of the Qur’an; (3) affirming the Qur’an’s integrity; (4) clarifying the Qur’an’s context; (5)  focusing in principles; (6) restraint in rule making; (7) and embracing moral optimism. Kugle analyzes the story of Lot, which has become a primary source of contention and interpretation in the way that the attitude towards homosexuality has been constructed. During his analysis, Kugle focuses on the intention behind the acts depicted in the story and explains how they could be taken in a different way. He concludes that, “one can argue that the story of Lot is not about homosexuality at all. Rather, Lot criticizes using sex as a weapon. Lot condemns sex acts that are coercive, like rape” (56). He places a lot of emphasis on the intention of sexual acts and how they are to be interpreted/ represented.

Considerations for Interpretation

The secondary source (second to the Quran) that is used for interpretation and clarification is the Hadith. The Hadith report is a compilation of the things Muhammad did and said throughout his life (the portion that was not divinely revealed). Traditional hermeneutics consist of consulting the Hadith as the first step when a Quranic verse is in question. Within the Qur'an there are two distinct types of verses: muhukmat (clear verse) and mutishabihat (ambiguous verse). The most important and well established tafsir typology is Sunni (tradition). Second and third to Sunni is Shi'i (opinion) and Sufi (allegory).

Generally speaking Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im suggest that "the diversity of Sunni, Shi'a, and Sufi Muslims schools of thought signify differences in the hermeneutical framework." More specifically, "Among Muslims, three broad approaches may be identified in relation to the interpretation of ethico-legal content of the Qur'an in the modern period: Textualist, Semi-textualist and Contextualist" according to Abdullah Saeed. He suggest one aspect of interpretation belongs to ethico-legal content. "Examples of ethico-legal content include belief in God, prophets and life after death; regulations related to marriage, divorce and inheritance; what is permitted and prohibited; commandments relating to fasting, spending, jihad and hudud; prohibitions related to theft, dealing with non-Muslims; instructions relating to etiquette, inter-faith relations and governance. In chapter 1 of his book the importance of interpretation of the Quran for modern times and modern needs are highlighted. (“The thrust of my argument, therefore, is towards a more flexible approach to interpretation of these texts by taking into consideration both the socio-historical context of the Quran at the time of revelation in the first/seventh century and the contemporary concerns and needs of Muslims today.

Premillennialism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premillennialism

Premillennialism, in Christian eschatology, is the belief that Jesus will physically return to the Earth (the Second Coming) before the Millennium, a literal thousand-year golden age of peace. Premillennialism is based upon a literal interpretation of Revelation 20:1–6 in the New Testament, which describes Jesus's reign in a period of a thousand years.

Denominations such as Oriental Orthodoxy, Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Anglicanism, Presbyterianism and Lutheranism are generally amillennial and interpret Revelation 20:1–6 as pertaining to the present time, a belief that Christ currently reigns in Heaven with the departed saints; such an interpretation views the symbolism of Revelation as referring to a spiritual conflict between Heaven and Hell rather than a physical conflict on Earth. Amillennialists do not view the millennium mentioned in Revelation as pertaining to a literal thousand years, but rather as symbolic, and see the kingdom of Christ as already present in the church beginning with the Pentecost in the book of Acts.

Premillennialism is often used to refer specifically to those who adhere to the beliefs in an earthly millennial reign of Christ as well as a rapture of the faithful coming before (dispensational) or after (historic) the Great Tribulation preceding the Millennium. For the last century, the belief has been common in Evangelicalism according to surveys on this topic. Amillennialists do not view the thousand years mentioned in Revelation as a literal thousand years but see the number "thousand" as symbolic and numerological.

Premillennialism is distinct from the other views such as postmillennialism which views the millennial rule as occurring before the second coming.

Terminology

The current religious term "premillennialism" did not come into use until the mid-19th century. Coining the word was "almost entirely the work of British and American Protestants and was prompted by their belief that the French and American Revolutions (the French, especially) realized prophecies made in the books of Daniel and Revelation."

Other views

The proponents of amillennialism interpret the millennium as being a symbolic period of time, which is consistent with the highly symbolic nature of the literary and apocalyptic genre of the Book of Revelation, sometimes indicating that the thousand years represent God's rule over his creation or the Church.

Post-millennialism, for example, agrees with premillennialism about the future earthly reign of Christ, but disagrees on the concept of a rapture and tribulation before the millennium begins. Postmillennialists hold to the view that the Second Coming will happen after the millennium.

History

Justin Martyr and Irenaeus

Justin Martyr in the 2nd century was one of the first Christian writers to clearly describe himself as continuing in the “Jewish” belief of a temporary messianic kingdom prior to the eternal state, although the notion of Millennium in his Dialogue with Trypho seem to differ from that of the Apology. According to Johannes Quasten, “In his eschatological ideas Justin shares the views of the Chiliasts concerning the millennium.” He maintains a premillennial distinction, namely that there would be two resurrections, one of believers before Jesus' reign and then a general resurrection afterwards. Justin wrote in chapter 80 of his work Dialogue with Trypho, “I and others who are right-minded Christians on all points are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built... For Isaiah spoke in that manner concerning this period of a thousand years.” Though he conceded earlier in the same chapter that his view was not universal by saying that he “and many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise.” 

St. Irenaeus (c. 130–202), an early Christian Premillennialist.

Irenaeus, the late 2nd century bishop of Lyon, was an outspoken premillennialist. He is best known for his voluminous tome written against the 2nd century Gnostic threat, commonly called Against Heresies. In the fifth book of Against Heresies, Irenaeus concentrates primarily on eschatology. In one passage he defends premillennialism by arguing that a future earthly kingdom is necessary because of God's promise to Abraham, he wrote “The promise remains steadfast... God promised him the inheritance of the land. Yet, Abraham did not receive it during all the time of his journey there. Accordingly, it must be that Abraham, together with his seed (that is, those who fear God and believe in Him), will receive it at the resurrection of the just.” In another place Irenaeus also explained that the blessing to Jacob “belongs unquestionably to the times of the kingdom when the righteous will bear rule, after their rising from the dead. It is also the time when the creation will bear fruit with an abundance of all kinds of food, having been renovated and set free... And all of the animals will feed on the vegetation of the earth... and they will be in perfect submission to man. And these things are borne witness to in the fourth book of the writings of Papias, the hearer of John, and a companion of Polycarp.” (5.33.3) Apparently Irenaeus also held to the sexta-/septamillennial scheme writing that the end of human history will occur after the 6,000th year. (5.28.3).

Other ante-Nicene premillennialists

Irenaeus and Justin represent two of the most outspoken premillennialists of the pre-Nicean church. Other early premillennialists included Pseudo-Barnabas, Papias, Methodius, Lactantius, Commodianus Theophilus, Tertullian, Melito, Hippolytus of Rome, Victorinus of Pettau and various Gnostics groups and the Montanists. Many of these theologians and others in the early church expressed their belief in premillennialism through their acceptance of the sexta-septamillennial tradition. This belief claims that human history will continue for 6,000 years and then will enjoy Sabbath for 1,000 years (the millennial kingdom), thus all of human history will have a total of 7,000 years prior to the new creation.

Ante-Nicene opposition

The first clear opponent of premillennialism associated with Christianity was Marcion. Marcion opposed the use of the Old Testament and most books of the New Testament that were not written by the apostle Paul. Regarding Marcion and premillennialism, Harvard scholar H. Brown noted,

The first great heretic broke drastically with the faith of the early church in abandoning the doctrine of the imminent, personal return of Christ...Marcion did not believe in a real incarnation, and consequently there was no logical place in his system for a real Second Coming...Marcion expected the majority of mankind to be lost...he denied the validity of the Old Testament and its Law...As the first great heretic, Marcion developed and perfected his heterodox system before orthodoxy had fully defined itself...Marcion represents a movement that so radically transformed the Christian doctrine of God and Christ that it can hardly be said to be Christian.

Throughout the Patristic period—particularly in the 3rd century—there had been rising opposition to premillennialism. Origen was the first to challenge the doctrine openly. Through allegorical interpretation, he had been a proponent of amillennialism (of course, the sexta-septamillennial tradition was itself based upon similar means of allegorical interpretation). Although Origen was not always wholly "orthodox" in his theology, he had at one point completely spiritualized Christ's second coming prophesied in the New Testament. Origen did this in his Commentary on Matthew when he taught that “Christ’s return signifies His disclosure of Himself and His deity to all humanity in such a way that all might partake of His glory to the degree that each individual’s actions warrant (Commentary on Matthew 12.30).” Even Origen's milder forms of this teaching left no room for a literal millennium and it was so extreme that few actually followed it. But his influence did gain wider acceptance especially in the period following Constantine.

Dionysius of Alexandria stood against premillennialism when the chiliastic work, The Refutation of the Allegorizers written by Nepos, a bishop in Egypt became popular in Alexandria. Dionysius argued against Nepos's influence and convinced the churches of the region of amillennialism. The church historian, Eusebius, reports this in his Ecclesiastical History. Eusebius also had low regard for the chiliast, Papias, and he let it be known that in his opinion Papias was "a man of small mental capacity" because he had taken the Apocalypse literally.

Middle Ages and the Reformation

Augustinian eschatological foundation

Oxford theologian Alister McGrath has noted that "all medieval theology is ‘Augustinian’ to a greater or lesser extent." Augustine’s (354-430) influence shaped not only the Western Middle Ages, but it also influenced the Protestant reformers, who constantly referred to his teaching in their own debates. His teaching is “still one of the most potent elements in Western religious thought.” Therefore, to analyze what happened to premillennialism in the Middle Ages and the Reformation, it is necessary to observe the Augustinian foundation.

In his early period, Augustine held to the sexta-/septamillennial view common in early Christianity (see above section on Patristic Age). In accordance with this view, Augustine divided history into two separate dispensations, first the church age (the current age of 6,000 years), and then the millennial kingdom (Sermon 259.2). Nevertheless, early in his career Augustine converted from premillennialism to amillennialism. Anderson locates three reasons that may account for Augustine's theological shift:

1. A reaction to Donatist excess - Augustine displayed a revulsion to the Donatists' bacchanal feasts which seemingly used excessive amounts of food and drink (City of God, 20.7). The Donatists were premillennial and thus Augustine formed a connection between their sensual behavior and their earthly eschatological expectation.
2. A reaction to eschatological sensationalism - The millennial fervor of premillennialists as the year AD 500 was nearing caused them to have overly jovial celebrations (some septa-/sextamillennial interpreters calculated Jesus's birth to have happened 5,500 years after creation). These feasts appeared to Augustine to take more pleasure in the physical world than the spiritual. Such earthly revelry was repulsive to Augustine since he placed little value on the material world.
3. A preference for allegorical interpretation - Finally, Augustine was influenced by the popular allegorical interpretation of Scripture, particularly of The Book of Revelation. Tyconius (d. c. 400), a Donatist lay theologian, “whose reinterpretation of his culture’s separatist and millenarian traditions provided the point of departure for what is more brilliant and idiosyncratic in Augustine’s own theology. And it is Tyconius, most precisely, whose own reading of John’s Apocalypse determined the Western church’s exegesis for the next eight hundred years.”

After moving away from premillennialism to amillennialism, Augustine viewed Sabbath rest in the sexta-/septamillennial scheme as “symbolically representative of Eternity.” Moreover, the millennium of Revelation 20 became for him “symbolically representative of Christ’s present reign with the saints.” Richard Landes observed the 4th century as a time of major shift for Christian eschatology by noting that it "marked a crucial moment in the history of millenarianism, since during this period Augustine repudiated even the allegorizing variety he himself had previously accepted. From this point on he dedicated much of his energy to ridding the church of this belief."

Medieval and Reformation amillennialism

Augustine's later amillennial view laid the eschatological foundation for the Middle Ages, which practically abandoned premillennialism. The theological term “kingdom” maintained its eschatological function, though it was not necessarily futuristic. Instead it consistently referred to the present age so that the church was currently experiencing the eschaton. Julian of Toledo (642–690) summarizes the medieval doctrine of the millennium by referring to it as “the church of God which, by the diffusion of its faith and works, is spread out as a kingdom of faith from the time of the incarnation until the time of the coming judgment”.

A notable exception to normative medieval eschatology is found in Joachim of Fiore (c. 1135–1202), a Cistercian monk, who to an extent, stressed premillennial themes. Joachim divided earth's history into three periods. He assigned each age to a particular person of the Trinity as the guiding principle of that era. The first era was the Old Testament history and was accordingly the age of the Father; the current age of the church was the age of the Son; and still in Joachim's future was the age of the Spirit. For Joachim, year 1260 was to mark the end of the second and the beginning of the third and final golden age of earth's history.

During the Reformation period, amillennialism continued to be the popular view of the Reformers. The Lutherans formally rejected chiliasm (millennialism) in The Augsburg Confession. “Art. XVII., condemns the Anabaptists and others ’who now scatter Jewish opinions that, before the resurrection of the dead, the godly shall occupy the kingdom of the world, the wicked being everywhere suppressed.’" Likewise, the Swiss Reformer Heinrich Bullinger wrote up the Second Helvetic Confession, which reads "We also reject the Jewish dream of a millennium, or golden age on earth, before the last judgment." Furthermore, John Calvin wrote in Institutes that millennialism is a "fiction" that is "too childish either to need or to be worth a refutation". The Anglican Church originally formalized a statement against millenarianism in the Anglican Articles. This is observed in the 41st of the Anglican Articles, drawn up by Thomas Cranmer (1553), describing the millennium as a 'fable of Jewish dotage', but it was omitted at a later time in the revision under Elizabeth (1563).

Contrarily, certain Anabaptists, Huguenots, and Bohemian Brethren were premillennial. Michael Servetus taught a chiliastic view, though he was denounced by the Reformers as a heretic and executed in Geneva under Calvin's authority. A few in the mainstream accepted it, such as Joseph Mede (1586–1638) and possibly Hugh Latimer (died 1555), but it was never a conventional belief throughout the period.

Modern era

Comparison of Christian millennial interpretations

17th and 18th centuries

Premillennialism experienced a revival among 17th century Puritans like Thomas Brightman, Joseph Mede, and others. Although they were not premillennial, the English theologian Daniel Whitby (1688–1726), the German Johann Albrecht Bengel (1687–1752), and the American Jonathan Edwards (1703–58) "fueled millennial ideas with new influence in the nineteenth century." It was authors such as these who concluded that the decline of the Roman Catholic Church would make way for the conversion and restoration of the nation of Israel. Edwards taught that a type of Millennium would occur "1260 years after A.D. 606 when Rome was recognized as having universal authority." His Puritan contemporaries, Increase Mather and Cotton Mather, openly proclaimed a belief in a literal millennium. Increase Mather wrote "That which presseth me so, as that I cannot gainsay the Chiliastical opinion, is that I take these things for Principles, and no way doubt but that they are demonstrable. 1. That the thousand apocalyptical years are not passed but future. 2. That the coming of Christ to raise the dead and to judge the earth will be within much less than this thousand years. 3. That the conversion of the Jews will not be till this present state of the world is near unto its end. 4. That, after the Jews’ conversion there will be a glorious day for the elect upon earth, and that this day shall be a very long continuance."

19th century to present

Between 1790 and the mid-19th century, premillennialism was a popular view among English Evangelicals, even within the Anglican church. Thomas Macaulay observed this and wrote "Many Christians believe that the Messiah will shortly establish a kingdom on the earth, and visibly reign over all its inhabitants." Throughout the 19th century, premillennialism continued to gain wider acceptance in both the US and in Britain, particularly among the Irvingites, Plymouth Brethren, Christadelphians, Church of God, Christian Israelite Church. Premillennialism continues to be popular among Evangelical, Fundamentalist Christian, and Living Church of God communities in the 20th and 21st centuries, expanding further into the churches of Asia, Africa and South America.

Many traditional denominations continue to oppose the concept of a literal millennial kingdom. The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod explicitly states, “When Christ returns, 'new heavens and a new earth' will be created (2 Pet. 3:10-13)." The catechism of the Catholic Church teaches in paragraph 676 that the millennium is to be understood as "beyond history". The paragraph in full reads "676 The Antichrist's deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment. The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism,577 especially the "intrinsically perverse" political form of a secular messianism.578".

Whalen has noted that modern premillennialism is "criticized roundly for naïve scholarship which confuses the poetic and inspirational prose of prophecy with fortune telling", though "Premillennialists retort that they merely follow the Word of God, regardless of ridicule." He then notes that, nevertheless, "the virtual theology which surrounds premillennialism is today stronger and more widely spread than at any time in history."

Historic vs. dispensational schools

Contemporary premillennialism is divided into two schools of thought.

Historic school

Main article: Historic premillennialism

Historic, or Classic, Premillennialism is distinctively non-dispensational. This means that it sees no radical theological distinction between Israel and the Church. It is often post-tribulational, meaning that the rapture of the church will occur after a period of tribulation. Historic premillennialism maintains chiliasm because of its view that the church will be caught up to meet Christ in the air and then escort him to the earth in order to share in his literal thousand year rule. Proponents of the view include John Gill, Mike Placko, Charles Spurgeon, James Montgomery Boice, George Eldon Ladd, John Piper, Albert Mohler, Francis Schaeffer, Carl F. H. Henry, Harold Lindsell, D. A. Carson, Bryan Chapell, and Gordon Clark.

Dispensational school

C.I. Scofield popularized dispensational premillennialism through the Scofield Reference Bible.

 

Main article: Dispensationalism

Dispensational premillennialism generally holds that Israel and the Church are distinct entities. It also widely holds to the pretribulational return of Christ, which believes that Jesus will return to take up Christians into heaven by means of a rapture immediately before a seven-year worldwide tribulation. This will be followed by an additional return of Christ with his saints (though there are post tribulation dispensationalists, such as Robert Gundry).

Dispensationalism traces its roots to the 1830s and John Nelson Darby (1800–1882), an Anglican churchman and an early leader of the Plymouth Brethren. In the US, the dispensational form of premillennialism was propagated on the popular level largely through the Scofield Reference Bible and on the academic level with Lewis Sperry Chafer's eight-volume Systematic Theology. More recently dispensationalism has been popularized through Hal Lindsey's 1970s bestseller, The Late, Great Planet Earth and through the Left Behind Series by Tim Lahaye and Jerry Jenkins. Popular proponents of dispensational premillennialism have been John F. MacArthur, Phil Johnson, Ray Comfort, Jerry Falwell, Todd Friel, Dwight Pentecost, John Walvoord (d. 2002), Tim Lahaye, Charles Caldwell Ryrie (in the notes for the Ryrie Study Bible), Norman Geisler, Erwin Lutzer, and Charles L. Feinberg. Craig Blaising and Darrell Bock have developed a form of dispensationalism that is growing in popularity known as progressive dispensationalism. This view understands that an aspect of the eschatological kingdom presently exists, but must wait for the millennium to be realized fully.