Introduction to Biblical Studies: Basics of Biblical Interpretation

[rogermetzger]

In 1958, LdS (Mormon) missionaries held "discussions" with our parents, my sister, Ruth, and me. I was 14. Ruth was 12 or 13. The missionaries told us a story about a young man, Joseph Smith by name, and then they gave a Book of Mormon to each of us children and one to our parents, telling us to read it, praying to know that it was true.

A week later, when the missionaries returned, I had read most of the Book of Mormon but 1) I wouldn't insult any god by praying to know something was true that I hadn't read yet but I was willing to consider the possibility that the Book of Mormon contained something useful, 2) I did what most people don't--I read the title page. On that page there was a statement that the Book of Mormon was written for the benefit of Jew and Gentile that they may know that Jesus is THE ETERNAL GOD.

Well, it turns out that LdS don't speak of Jesus as God. At least they didn't in 1958. "A GOD", maybe, but not as "God" and certainly not as THE GOD. So I was inclined to think the title page was intentionally deceptive.

When the missionaries returned, I told them I had decided to adopt the principle of prior reference--the principle that anything purported to be special revelation should be evaluated and interpreted by older revelation. I explained to them that they were using the opposite principle--they were evaluating and interpreting older revelation by what they supposed was modern revelation.

Would the principle I articulated when I was fourteen fall within the category of "principles of interpretation"?