The Sense of Scripture: Studies in Interpretation . . .
Restoration Review · 1987-88
(Volumes 29, 30)
PREFACE
This volume contains the 35th and 36th years of my publication endeavors, moving ever closer to four full decades as an editor. I have at least had time on my side, and time allows for reflection. I don't know that I have ever seen a list of rules for an editor, and I have no inclination to form one, not even after 36 years. But I have often pondered the matter of editorial principle, and that word should be in the singular rather than the plural. Is there an editorial principle for all editors, especially for Christian editors?
That principle might be spelled out in such terms as integrity, fairness, relevance, and humor (at least a sense of humor). But also reasonableness and resourcefulness. The editor must first of all have something to say, and then he is to say it reasonably, with "charity toward all and malice toward none." Paul Tillich's disarming phrase "sweet reasonableness" may best express the editorial principle.
But the editorial principle calls for a special kind of wisdom that only the great philosophers seem to understand. William James, one of the few great American philosophers, bequeathed to us this great insight: "The secret of genius is to know when to overlook." If it is good advice for parents, preachers, and professors, it can serve as a basic principle for an editor. One doesn't have to serve 36 years as an editor before he can look back to things he could have and should have overlooked. It takes wisdom beyond the reach of most of us to distinguish between things that cannot be overlooked and things that can be. And we are slow to recognize that some things that consume us do not matter anyway.
The old Jewish philosopher, Benedict Spinoza, who made his living polishing lenses, expressed what I am calling the editorial principle in these words: "See things under the aspect of all eternity." This is more than right perspective, which we talk about: it is seeing things (or trying to) from God's perspective. The prophet Isaiah assures us that our ways and thoughts are not God's ways and thoughts, but do we hear him? When viewed in terms of eternity, how many things really matter all that much?
But it was Socrates who was wisest of them all, or so said the Oracle of Delphi. And Socrates proved it to be true, for only he among all the wise men of Athens could sincerely conclude "I know nothing." The others did not know but did not know they did not know, while Socrates knew that he did not know. Socrates' wisdom cost him his life. He was executed for preaching the likes of "The unexamined life is not worth living." Since he never wrote anything insofar as we know, he might not have made much of an editor. But the old gadfly of Athens would never have survived as an editor anyway neither in his day not in ours. He would be disposed of by those who are certain that the unexamined life is worth living and do not want to be told otherwise.
All this is the editorial principle as I see it, but is it not also the hermeneutical principle, which is the subject of this volume? Whether we call them rules or simply the principle of interpreting Scripture, does not the wisdom of the philosophers put it all together for us. If we start with the Socratic dictum that we are all ignorant before the Scriptures, we are well on our way to being responsible interpreters. And if with Spinoza we can see the Bible in its broader dimensions, in terms of eternity itself, and if with James we have the genius to see what really matters and what doesn't, we will not be without our resources.
--Leroy Garrett, Editor