My ninth commandment for commentary usage is:
You shall not quote a commentator as the final word on an interpretive matter, but must demonstrate your conclusions from the scriptural text itself.
Perhaps you’ve seen it happen. Perhaps you’ve even done it yourself. I know I have. The discussion gets going, and people are bouncing ideas off one another. But suddenly the record scratches and the room goes silent, because someone dropped a name or invoked an expert. All rise! The final and authoritative word has been spoken from heights to which mere mortals could never attain.
What I’m Not Saying
Before I get any further into the meaning or intention of this commandment, let me clarify what I am not saying.
First, I am not saying that you should never quote a commentator. By all means, please make use of the commentaries and resources available to you. And by all means, give credit where credit is due!
Second, I am not saying that you should never quote a commentator in a discussion or Bible study group. I am saying only that you ought not to do so on interpretive matters. And what I mean by “interpretive matters” is conclusions about the meaning or main point of the text. In this sense, commentaries are one of the 5 false authorities to watch out for in a small group discussion.
This commandment follows the previous one on purpose. If you heed that commandment, you will have taken care to draw a distinction between factual information in the commentary (cultural or historical background, direct observation of the text, etc.) and reasoned interpretations in the commentary (arguments made, with premises and conclusions, to draw principles or instructions from the text). That distinction can now serve you well. If your study group is in need of some factual information that might otherwise be inaccessible, go ahead and quote the commentator!
For example, in a Bible study discussing Genesis 21: “The commentary at the bottom of my study Bible says that the name ‘Isaac’ and the term ‘laughing’ are repetitions of the same Hebrew word. Could that repetition signal some sort of wordplay we ought to be aware of?”
Third, I am also not saying that we must never quote commentaries on interpretive matters. I am saying only that we must not do so as the final word on the matter. I would have no concern whatsoever with someone saying, “I read such and such in a commentary, but what do the rest of you think? Is such a conclusion supported by the text?”
What I’m After
The intention behind this commandment is found in the final clause, that we must be able to demonstrate our interpretive conclusions from the scriptural text itself. It might be helpful to quote a commentary to show that you’re not the only one in history who has identified a particular conclusion from a particular passage. As long as you can still articulate that conclusion from the passage itself.
If you read something in a commentary and trust the author’s conclusions despite what the text says, you have most likely violated commandment number 5. And if you submissively believe the commentator’s conclusions and simply can’t speak to the matter from the text, you have likely violated commandments 2 and 3. And if you proclaim a commentator’s conclusions as definitive truth on an interpretive matter, you probably have violated commandments 6 and 7.
The best use of a commentary is to help you understand the text. If, however, you come away understanding the commentary but not the text, the mission got off course somewhere.
In the first century, the Jewish scribes loved to hold debates, pitting one ancient commentator against another. At times, they even sought to rope Jesus into taking one side or the other (Mark 10:2). He wouldn’t play those games, and, as a result, the populace observed in him an authority they couldn’t find among their typical teachers (Matt 7:28-29). Of course, there was something unique about Jesus’ authority as the Son of God proclaiming the word of God.
However, Jesus delights to share his authority with his disciples (Luke 9:1-2). The authority of God’s word is present whenever God’s people seek the Lord in those very words (Acts 17:11) and proclaim them with intelligible simplicity (Acts 17:2-3). Can you do this from the Scriptures? Or do you tend to get stuck in merely explaining the various interpretive schools and camps you have read about?
Because I once read a commentary that suggested it might be a bad idea to do that.
Leave a Reply