Elsewhere in this issue Dr. Fred H. Klooster provides a tribute to Dr. Cornelius Van Til in recognition of his long and distinguished labors as a defender of the faith. In keeping with this we are here giving special prominence to this review of Dr. Van Til’s The New Hermeneutic (Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Co., Nutley, N.J., 1974, 230 pp., $5.95.) Rev. Peter De Jong, the reviewer, is pastor of the Christian Reformed Church of Dutton, Michigan.

It is a fundamental principle of our Christian faith that the Bible, God‘s Word, is our only guide to the Christian faith and life. The great 16th Century Reformation called men everywhere to listen again to that guide and return to that faith and life.

In our time no question is undergoing more discussion and is more important to the Christian than that about how the Bible must be “interpreted.” Whereas in the past, Christianity often had to face frontal attacks by men who said they simply didn‘t believe its teachings, in our time the Bible faces on all sides the claims of supposed Christian leaders that it is i.n need of extensive overhauling in the light of a new and better way of understanding it. This “new” way of understanding the Bible is what is commonly called (by the Greek word for “interpretation”) “the new hermeneutic.”

In this book Dr. Cornelius Van Til, the Westminster Seminary professor who has become known throughout the world for his long career in teaching the defense of the Christian faith, endeavors to help the reader understand what this new interpretation is. Beginning with an outline of the views of its main representatives, Ernst Fuchs and Gerhard Ebeling, Van Til in a second chapter shows how some other modern theologians John Dillenberger, Fritz Buri, and Schubert M. Ogden) have reacted to these views. A third chapter deals with the ways in which some orthodox theologians (A. D. R. Polman, H. M. Kuitert and S. U. Zuidema) have reacted to them. A concluding chapter deals briefly with representatives of this new hermeneutic in the Netherlands (Herman Wiersinga, C. P. Hartvelt, J. Z. Koole, F. J. Baarda, and C. Augustijn).

Dr. Van Til’s conducted tour through the thought world of these influential modern theologians is not always an easy one, especially for the average reader, to follow. Part of the difficulty comes from the use of technical philosophical language which the philosopher uses daily but the ordinary reader never uses. Part of the difficulty comes from the way in which the modern theologians, even when they use the old Christian terms, give them a meaning that contradicts what they have always understood them to mean. And this is double-talk, not just a careless way of speaking; it is the very heart of their teaching, their “interpretation.”

The New Interpretation in General – In the first part of the book we follow E. Fuchs as he tries to have the New Testament “make sense to modern man.” Fuchs would bring this about by making some “improvements” on the views of Barth and Bultmann, trying more consistently than they did to get rid of the “myths” of the Bible and to bring out what these old stories are supposed to mean—the victory of love among persons.

In much the same way we see C. Ebeling explaining faith in Jesus as not being faith in Jesus as a person, but as faith like that which Jesus had which “makes existence sure” (p. 13) and which is really “participating in the essence of God” (p. 14). Our faith, it is explained, must not be a faith in someone or something apart from ourselves but in what happens in or in relation to us, for the “subject” and “object” of faith are completely “correlative.” God and man, the believer, each depend on the other.

We follow the other modern theologians who arc introduced as they in general express agreement with Fuchs‘ and Ebeling‘s views but want to carry them still further. They would have us realize that no faith is ever final because man’s experience is always changing. Because the modern man can no longer believe in science, in the ideas of Jesus, or in progress, we must devise a faith which fits with this loss of confidence in what people used to think. “The key to our understanding of the Christ lies ultimately in ourselves” (p. 35). We believe in the universal love of God, as Jesus did, quite apart from any dependence on Jesus.

Impact in Reformed Circles – Turning now to the reactions of some orthodox theologians, we find A. D. R. Pol man showing how in the development of these modern views man is busy really creating his own world, insisting on his own independence, being “a law to himself,” becoming his own boss. As Schleiermacher a century and a half ago was already saying, “All forms of thought, which are not, in the last analysis, based on inner experience have no value in theology” (p. 60). And so man is taking the place of God, insisting that nothing has any meaning for him unless it contributes to his own freedom.

Polman directs attention to R. C. Collingwood, the historian, who especially consistent1y developed the idea that history is not the record of events but a consistent interpretation of events which the historian himself creates. The new hermeneutic is the application of this view by theologians.

It is somewhat surprising to Snd in the organization of the book, that H. M. Kuitert is listed among “some orthodox theologians” who are reacting to this “new hermeneutic.” Whatever may be the reason for including him between Polman and Zuidema with whom he would appear to have little in common but a Dutch name, Dr. Van Til‘s 71-page treatment of Kuitert’s views clearly shows that Kuitert is convinced that “the modern theologians are moving in the right direction” and that “we must follow them, but not all the way into subjectivism” (p. 125). Kuitert, like the other modern interpreters wants to get rid of the notion of an infallible Bible. He does not want to tie himself to what the Bible says about the beginning, center, or end of history. We are not to believe that everything the Bible tolls us actually happened, but we must see the Bible in the light of its purpose which is to witness to God’s words and deeds of saving grace in Christ. “To maintain the authority of Scripture apart from the question of the purpose of Scripture, reduces Scriptural authority to an empty authority, and this empty authority leads to the exchange of the freedom of the children of God for the tyranny of man” (p. 112). (Observe the similarity of this quotation from Kuitert to the Christian Reformed Church‘s 1972 statements on biblical authority in its Report 44!)

Although Kuitert, like the modem interpreters, wants to begin with man as the interpreter, he evidently does not want to go all the way with them to Sartre who says “man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself” (pp. 133, 134). Kuitert wants to keep a few things in which one must still believe—the resurrection of Christ, for example. But, having abandoned an infallible Bible, on what can one base the faith of the church? Where is one to find some standing ground between the orthodox with his Bible and the existentialist with faith in nothing but man, the interpreter? Kuitert thinks that he has found such a place on which to begin and stand in the tradition of the church. He thinks that this will keep one from sliding into extreme existentialism. But having abandoned a really authoritative Bible one can hardly expect church traditions and doctrine (which if deprived of their real ground in the inspired Scriptures become mere church politics) to serve as a substitute. Much of Van Til’s treatment of Kuitert‘s views is an exposure of the futility of Kuitert’s effort to find such a standing ground halfway between the orthodox and the flew liberal views of the Bible. There is no ground there.

Tn the next section we follow S. U. Zuidema as he, taking his starting point in the Christ of the Scriptures, criticizes this whole modern humanistic development as, in the tradition of Erasmus, it did not want to throw out the Bible altogether, but yet wanted man to be his own boss. After discussing a variety of philosophers and theologians, Zuidema points out how Kuitert too “opposes every idea of truth which speaks of holding certain assertions for true” (p. 204), yet wants “as an orthodox Christian” to save the resurrection of Christ as a fact of genuine saving significance for men” (p. 205). Kuitert “has to twist himself into all manner of contortions” in the effort to hold these mutually contradictory views.

A brief Anal chapter deals with a few more men in the Nctherlands who, like Kuitert, accept this “new interpretation.” Proceding along this line, Herman Wiersinga rejects Christ’s death as an atonement for sin, explaining it as a mere moral influence on men in the present. C. P. Hartvelt’s explanation that “the Bible is not a book that has fallen from heaven” is listed in three lines of print and J. Z. Koole gets no more attention for this notion that the Bible must not be thought of “as though it had been produced by a tape recorder” for this would not do justice to “the human factor.” F. J. Haarda insists that the message of the resurrection is not historically verifiable hut is simply a matter of belief, and C. Augustijn brings the list to a fitting conclusion by attacking all normative creeds.

Dr. Van Til points out how this group of Dutch theologians with their “new hermeneutic” are “as rapidly as possible, preparing the people for a smooth transition from the worship of the Christ of Reformed Confessions to the worship of the Christ” who is nothing but “a projection of the would-be self-sufficient moral consciousness of man.” And Van Til appeals to them to return from this unbelief to the Christ or the Bible.

Conclusion – The book is not always easy reading. As it traces successively the thinking of various men who hold similar views, perhaps inevitably, it becomes somewhat repetitious. Traveling the same road several times with various men does make very plain to the reader the direction in which they are going.

At two points the discussion is enlivened by imaginary dialogs. In one of them Kuitert is made to discuss his views with Abraham Kuyper, Bavinck, Groshcide, Greijdanus, de Graaf, and Schilder (pp. 116–127). Despite the many references (483 footnotes in one chapter!) it is not always dear whether we are being given the ideas of the man under discussion, those of a third party who has been mentioned, or Dr. Van Til’s explanation of them. The last chapter on modern Dutch Reformed promoters of the new hermeneutic. possibly to avoid more repetition, is very sketchy.

Despite these details of style and structure, this is a very important book. It ought to be required reading for all who must lead the churches. Confusion reigns in them today. Churches which stood firmly for the gospel in opposition to the frontal attack of the old liberalism are being completely confused by the more subtle double-talk of this “new hermeneutic.” Church leaders are often more confused by it than the ordinary members.

It is this “new interpretation” of the Bible that explains why many in our churches as well as others are advocating easier divorce despite the Bible’s teaching about the permanence of marriage, abortions although the Bible forbids murder. permissiveness toward homosexuality despite the Bible‘s condemnations of it, and ordaining women to rule in the churches although Paul plainly taught that this violates “the commandment of the Lord” (I Cor. 14:37).

All such proposals reveal a radically changing view of the Bible. All who are entertaining them or being faced by them might see much more clearly what is involved ir they were better acquainted with the thinking of those who developed and are promoting that changing view of the Bible. I know of no one who during the last half century has shown more clearly what is really happening in this world of modern thought than Dr. C. Van Til. He has been criticized. often unfairly, by those who liked the new views and wanted to promote them in the churches. The current confusion in the churches and the rapid demoralization of their faith and life are showing how essentially correct Dr. Van Til‘s analysis has been. Whether one pursues or agrees with every detail of his explanation or not, his guided tour through the new hermeneutic will help the reader understand the otherwise mystifying developments in church life today. May his writings help many to find their way out of the “hermeneutic” confusion the devil is busily promoting among Christians. back to the only inspired, unchanging, and saving gospel of Christ.