View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Andrews University Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 17/2 (Autumn 2006): 36–80. Article copyright © 2006 by Author. From Vision to System: Finishing the Task of Adventist Theology Part III Sanctuary and Hermeneutics Fernando Canale Andrews University Theological Seminary 1. Review At the beginning of the twenty-first century, Adventist theology stands divided. In the first article of this series, we discovered that Ad- ventist theological pluralism originated when the lay theology of early Adventism faced the academic world of scholarly research. Theological tradition, philosophy, and science generated questions they were not pre- pared to answer. By the late seventies, a sector of Adventism was adjust- ing Adventist beliefs to Evangelical theology. Simultaneously, another sector was adjusting Adventism to science. In the process, Evangelical and Progressive Adventisms forgot and replaced the sanctuary vision that originated the systematic understanding of Christian theology that brought Adventism to existence. The nature of Adventist pluralism is methodological. It generates from disagreements on the basic principles from which we interpret scripture and understand Christian doctrines. It seriously endangers the unity, ministry, and mission of the church. In the second article, we saw that Adventism could overcome its pre- sent theological divisions by creatively engaging in biblical and system- atic theologies. Systematic theology provides the scholarly method and space for the complete and harmonious system of truth Adventist pio- neers saw. Systematic and biblical theologies assume methodological conditions and a hermeneutical vision to guide them in the discovery of truth. 36 CANALE: FROM VISION TO SYSTEM III 2. Introduction However, the conviction that philosophy and science provide the hermeneutical guide and principles from which Christian theologians should interpret scripture and articulate Christian doctrines in a system- atic way is the methodological rock on which the great and long theo- logical tradition of Christian theology rests. Can we challenge this con- viction in a scholarly way? Can we derive the theological apriori from scripture? Is a biblical systematic theology possible at the scholarly level? To answer these questions we need to consider the hermeneutical role philosophy and science play in Christian theology. Within this gen- eral context, the specific purpose of this article is to assess the possibility of interpreting the theological apriori from sola-tota scriptura and the hermeneutical light of the sanctuary doctrine. To reach this goal, we will (1) underline the hermeneutical role that philosophy has in Christian theology; (2) recognize the scholarly area where theologians should identify, criticize, interpret, and formulate the philosophical and scientific conditions of theological method, interpreta- tion, and construction; (3) identify the hermeneutical principles of Chris- tian theology; (4) call for a biblical interpretation of them; (5) argue that theological pluralism in Adventism stems from different interpretations of the hermeneutical principles of theology; (6) explore briefly the her- meneutical consequences of the timeless understanding of God’s reality derived from philosophy; (7) explore briefly the hermeneutical conse- quence of the temporal understanding of God’s reality present in scrip- ture; (8) explain the context in which the sanctuary doctrine functions as hermeneutical vision; (9) suggest that the sanctuary and covenant doc- trines clarify each other and work together as hermeneutical vision; (10) argue that postmodernity open the door for the scholarly acceptance of the biblical approach to theological hermeneutics; (11) describe the na- ture of theological pluralism in Adventism; (12) consider a way to over- come theological pluralism in Adventist theology; (13) and outline the challenge to think theologically in the light of scripture within postmod- ern times. 3. Philosophy: Nobody’s Land Should Biblical Adventism concern itself with Philosophy? Adven- tism and philosophy seem to cancel each other out. Because of its strong biblical origins, Adventist theology has not engaged philosophy at its 37 JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY disciplinary level.1 In the last decades of the twentieth century, Progres- sive Adventism began dealing with ethical issues and searching for the meaning of beliefs in the context of their cultural situation. Their search relates better to systematic than exegetical methodology. Thus, Progres- sive Adventism departed from Biblical Adventism not only in methodol- ogy,2 but also in disciplinary concentration. Progressive Adventism en- gaged in issue-oriented thinking that relates to philosophy more closely than biblical studies. Meanwhile, mainstream Adventism was ill prepared to understand and evaluate the new ideas developing on this front. Be- cause these ideas have departed radically from Biblical Adventism, it becomes necessary to consider the role that philosophy should play in Adventist theology. In this article I will briefly argue that, in part, the present theological pluralism in Adventism is nurtured by a lack of critical and creative thinking in this area where the hermeneutical foundation for all theologi- cal disciplines lies. Overcoming theological pluralism in Adventism, then, requires faithful creative thinking in the area of philosophy. Adventism cannot avoid theological pluralism by reaffirming its tra- ditional commitment to stay away from philosophical study and reflec- tion. Implicitly or explicitly, all theologians assume philosophical no- tions whose existence and operation go unnoticed at the level of theo- logical thinking. These assumptions are necessary for the proper opera- tion of all theological disciplines and their interdisciplinary relations. The question is not whether we have to use philosophical assumptions in the- ology, but how we are going to interpret them. More specifically, from what source we are going to derive our interpretation of the hermeneuti- cal principles of Christian theology. In short, Adventism cannot choose not to use philosophical ideas. Adventist theologians can only choose how to interpret the philosophical ideas they must use when approaching the task of Christian theology from the sola-tota scriptura principle. 1 Most Evangelical and Protestant theologians do not engage in the scholarly field of philosophy. They draw from philosophical thought what they need for theological con- struction as needed. Tradition results from the direct hermeneutical contributions of onto- logical and epistemological teachings from various philosophers throughout Christian history. 2 While Evangelical and Progressive Adventisms endorse the historical critical method, Biblical Adventism works with the historical grammatical method. See, Fernando Canale, "From Vision to System: Finishing the Task of Adventist Biblical and Systematic Theologies—II." Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 16/1-2 (2005): 121-124. 38 CANALE: FROM VISION TO SYSTEM III Does this mean the end of the sola-tota scriptura principle? In other words, since theologians “have to” use “philosophical” ideas, are they in practice bound to capitulate to the multiple sources of theology matrix?3 I suggest that this is what Protestant and Evangelical theologians im- plicitly do. They deal with philosophy by using philosophical ideas pro- duced by different philosophical systems through the history of western civilization.4 Evangelical and Progressive Adventists borrow this meth- odological pattern and implicitly or explicitly use philosophical and sci- entific guidance in their interpretation of scripture and understanding of Christian doctrines. Philosophy and science produce the ideas that guide the hermeneutical enterprise of Christian theology in all its disciplines, including biblical and systematic theologies. To avoid implicitly drawing our interpretation of the hermeneutical principles of theological method from philosophy and science, it is nec- essary to apply the sola-tota scriptura principle to the criticism and in- terpretation of them. This preliminary task calls for the contributions of at least a scholarly discipline that is almost non-existent in Evangelical and Adventist theologies. Let us consider briefly the task of fundamental theology. 3 Stanley Grenz and John R. Franke point out that theologians who reject the reality of the fact that the interpretation of scripture “is always shaped by the theological and cultural context within which interpreters participate. and seek an interpretation unen- cumbered by the ‘distorting’ influence of fallible ‘human’ traditions are in fact enslaved by interpretive patterns that are allowed to function uncritically precisely because they are unacknowledged” (Beyond Foundationalism: Shaping Theology in a Postmodern Context (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002), 112-113). 4 Stanley Grenz and John Franke summarize this broadly accepted methodological conviction by explaining that the sola scriptura principle means that scripture is the norma normans non normata (the norm with no norm over it) of Christian theology. Yet, “in another sense [they add] scriptura is never sola. Scripture does not stand alone as the sole source in the task of theological construction or as the sole basis on which the Chris- tian faith has developed historically. Rather, scripture