Introduction
The Reformation and the Right Reading of Scripture, by Iain Provan, is a grand tour of the history of biblical interpretation with an eye toward establishing what should be the correct method of biblical interpretation. Provan’s contention is that, by and large, the reformers (e.g., Martin Luther and John Calvin) were correct in their approach to Scripture, if not necessarily in all of their conclusions. Provan’s historical survey is not limited to the Reformation period, but covers the entire span of Christian history. Provan argues for a “seriously literal” view of Scripture that couples modern insights with a high view of Scripture. This is a long, well-documented, and far-ranging book and reading through it can aptly be called “a journey.” Despite its length and vast amount of information it contains, Provan’s writing is never dull and he does an excellent job guiding the reader along the way. Previous knowledge of the topics addressed (church history, history of interpretation, current debates on interpretation) would, of course, be helpful, but Provan provides enough background so that prior knowledge is not absolutely necessary.
Book Summary
Provan begins by dividing current biblical interpretation into four categories: historical criticism, postmodernism, “Chicago constituency” (i.e., those affirming the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy/Hermeneutics), and counter-Reformational Protestantism (i.e., Protestants who are looking to the patristic period for guidance on reading Scripture). While not a systematic theology of Scripture, the book covers many of the standard topics: canon, inerrancy, science and Scripture, historical and modern interpretational methods, etc. Provan addresses these topics in an almost narrative fashion, weaving together philosophical and historical discussions along the way. Ultimately, Provan argues for a “seriously literal” reading of Scripture that seeks to regain the attitude of Luther and Calvin toward the interpretation of the Bible, but in a way that takes into consideration the best of modern advances and insights.
Allegory
Provan takes special aim at the historical use of allegorical interpretation and the growing resurgence of such interpretation among Protestants. According to Provan, allegorical interpretation is the source of many errors. He contends that the source of allegorical reading is found in Greek paganism, not the biblical text. Philo and Origen are given special attention for their use of allegory. Paul’s use of allegory in Galatians is addressed in detail since it is often used as the justification for an allegorical reading of Scripture.
Inerrancy
Provan has a complicated relationship with the concept of inerrancy. On the one hand, Provan comes across as a strong defender of the Bible’s integrity and inspiration. On the other hand, Provan seeks to distance himself from the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy/Hermeneutics (CSBI/H), which many take as the most complete expression of inerrancy. Provan’s primary exception with CSBI/H appears to revolve around the interpretation of Genesis 1-11. The assessment of CSBI/H is probably the weakest point of the book and was surprisingly uncharitable.
The uncharitable nature of Provan’s assessment of CSBI/H is especially surprising since, with the exception of Genesis 1-11, Provan seems to substantially align with a CSBI/H way of reading. Provan may not want to word his views in exactly the same way CSBH/I does, but it is not clear how the exegetical conclusions Provan reaches would be significantly different from those of CSBI/H.
Conclusion
In a book of this breadth and depth, it is practically impossible to agree with everything written. My biggest exception to the book is Provan’s overly-optimistic view of the current “scientific consensus.” Provan is correct to assert that the scientific endeavor cannot be (and has not been) neglected by Christians. My concern is that Provan seems to throw all of his criticism at Christian’s who have neglected scientific discoveries in a way that has resulted in later embarrassment; however, he fails to give adequate weight to the fact that many scientific theories have risen and fallen throughout the centuries. Scientific conclusions cannot be ignored, but they also cannot be taken as truth just because there is a current consensus. After all, scientific revolutions are usually made by those who disagree with the current scholarly consensus.
Despite some inevitable disagreements, it remains that this is an exceptionally well-done book. This is a book that I would recommend to anyone researching canon, Christian history, or biblical interpretation. The book is long and wide-ranging, so it is not for the fainthearted; however, for those who are invested in these discussions, Provan guides the reader on an enjoyable and enlightening journey.
Studies in the Bible 