IN BIBLICAL BOUNDS:
Using the Imagination within Biblical Limits
Dale Durie, Crown College
In recent years evangelical preaching has come to place a high value on the use of the imagination in the interpretation and proclamation of Scripture. This paper seeks to affirm this value while establishing biblical limits. Specific biblical teaching on the imagination is examined and the implications for biblical preaching explored.
An intruder trips an electronic eye and a siren sounds. An airliner drifts into secure air space and is intercepted by F-16s. Instant re-play shows the athlete stepped out of bounds as he tight-roped the sideline. The winning touchdown is taken away.
As these examples show, definite boundary markers can provide an indispensable service. They alert us to intruders and tell us what is "in" or "out" of bounds.
When it comes to the use of the imagination in the interpretation and proclamation of Scripture, what are the boundary markers? How do we know what is in or out of biblical bounds?
The Biblical Bad News
Like most human abilities, the imagination can be wielded for good or evil. In Scripture, however, people are depicted most often as wielding their imaginations for evil. What do we learn from the Bible's predominantly negative picture?
1. Our Inclination Is to Use Our Imaginations for Evil.
One of the Hebrew words for imagination is yeser. In its most basic sense it means "to frame, form." (Gesenius, 1979, 362) In Psalm 103 David writes, "...the Lord has compassion on those who fear him; for he knows how we are formed (yeser), he remembers that we are dust (13b-14)." In this literal sense, the emphasis of Scripture is on the object being formed or shaped, especially an idol (see Habakkuk 2:18) (McComiskey, 1980, 396).
The term, however, can have a more metaphorical use as well. It can refer to non-literal things being fashioned. For instance, in Genesis 6:5 the Lord saw the wickedness of mankind and that "every inclination (yeser) of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time." This propensity to "fashion" evil becomes the impetuous for God's destroying mankind with the flood. After the flood God knows nothing has really changed. So in Genesis 8:21, God makes the promise not to wipe out mankind again, "even though every inclination (yeser) of his heart is evil from childhood."
The inclination to use our imagination for evil can also be seen in Deuteronomy 31. As Moses is about to die, and the people are about to enter the Promised Land, God predicts Israel will rebel. "I know what they are disposed (yeser) to do, even before I bring them into the land I promised them on oath" (21b).
Another Hebrew term, (maskit), also captures the evil use of our creative capacity. It comes from a term meaning "to look at, to behold (Gesenius, 1979, 513)." It is used in the Old Testament to refer to "looking at" idols or idolatrous images (see Ezekiel 8:12; Leviticus 26:1 and Numbers 33:52).
Most significantly, however, maskit is used to refer to looking at "the chamber of images" in one's mind. For instance in Proverbs 18:11 the wealthy "imagine" (ma�k�t) their wealth as an "unscalable wall." In Psalm 73:7b Asaph the worship leader also depicts the wicked with this term. He says, "the evil conceits (maskit) of their minds know no limits."
This picture of the human use of the imagination for evil is reinforced by another term used in the Old Testament to connote imagination: hashab. Gesenius, in his Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon of the Old Testament, says, "The primary idea seems to be that of computing, reckoning.... (Gesenius, 1979, 311)." While this term for creativity and imagination can convey good or evil uses (we will look at the good uses later in this study), Gesenius points out that the term is "more frequently used in a bad sense; to devise evil, to plot (Gesenius, 1979, 513)." Saul uses his creativity this way. In response to David's popularity after slaying Goliath, he asks David to secure a hundred Philistine foreskins as payment for his daughter's hand in marriage. Samuel tells us, " Saul's plan (hashab) was to have David fall by the hands of the Philistines" (1 Samuel 18:25).
This use of our imaginations to plot destruction comes out in other places too. Throughout the Psalms the wicked plot the demise of others (10:2; 21:11; 35:20; 36:4; 41:7; 52:2). Jeremiah (11:19; 18:11, 18), Esther (9:24) and even God (Hosea 7:15; Micah 2:3) experience what it is like when people creatively plot against them for destruction (In an interesting twist God is depicted as plotting against the wicked in Nahum 1:11).
An especially vivid use of the term hashab comes in Amos. In describing the decadence of Israel, which would lead to her destruction, Amos says,
You lie on beds inlaid with ivory
and lounge on your couches.
You dine on choice lambs
and fattened calves.
You strum away on your harps like David
and improvise (hashab) on musical instruments.
You drink wine by the bowlful
and use the finest lotions,
but you do not grieve over the ruin of Joseph.
Therefore you will be among the first to go into exile;
your feasting and lounging will end.
Amos 6:4-7
These people use their creative capacity to soften the reality of their sinful excesses.
2. Our Imaginations Can Be Used to Say in God's Name What God Never Said.
In the book of Ezekiel we find more bad news regarding the use of our imaginations. Here God's people are in exile in Babylonia. The condition of God's people in the Babylonian exile is not severe. Though placed at the specific site of Tel Aviv, it seems that they had freedom of movement within the country and the opportunity to engage in commerce. "They were regarded more as colonists than slaves (Alexander, 1986, 743)." This lack of harsh punishment led the Jews to believe that God was not terribly displeased with their behavior. It also led some Jews to accept the teaching of false prophets and prophetesses who proclaimed that the exile would end very soon and that no more judgment would come on Jerusalem and Judah.
In Ezekiel chapter 13:2 God calls Ezekiel to deliver a message to these false prophets and prophetesses. In commissioning Ezekiel for this task God says,
Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel who are now prophesying. Say to those who prophesy out of their own imagination (l�b)....
Again in verse 17 we read,
Now, son of man, set your face against the daughters of your people who prophesy out of their own imagination (leb)....
The word l�b and the related word lebab mean "heart, understanding, mind (Bowling, 1980, 1:466)." In its most concrete sense leb refers to "the internal organ and to analogous physical locations (Bowling, 1980, 1:466)." However, of the over five hundred uses of leb or lebab in the Old Testament, only two refer to the physical heart (Exodus 28:29 & 30). All the other times it is used in a metaphorical sense. Referring to this abstracted sense, Andrew Bowling, in Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, writes,
..."heart" became the richest biblical term for the totality of man's inner or immaterial nature. In biblical literature it is the most frequently used term for man's immaterial personality functions as well as the most inclusive term for them since, in the Bible, virtually every immaterial function of man is attributed to the "heart" (Bowling, 1980, 1:466).
Hence, in Ezekiel 13:2 and 17 the NIV translates leb as "imagination." These prophets and prophetesses did not deliver a message from God. In their hearts they "imagined" their own message and then said it was God's.
And what was God's message to these that would dare to say on God's behalf what God never said? It comes in Ezekiel 13:2b-3, 6-9.
Therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: "Because of your false words and lying visions, I am against you, declares the Sovereign LORD. My hand will be against the prophets who see false visions and utter lying divinations. They will not belong to the council of my people or be listed in the records of the house of Israel, nor will they enter the land of Israel. Then you will know that I am the Sovereign LORD."
And what was God's message to the prophetesses who also prophesied out of their own imagination? The answer comes in verses18-23 and is essentially the same message given to the prophets. God stands against those who use of their imaginations to say in God's name what God never said.
While the Old Testament rebukes false prophets who use their imagination to invent a message, the New Testament (Paul in 1 Timothy 1:4; 4:7; 2 Timothy 4:4; Titus 1:14 and Peter in 2 Peter 1:16) rebukes those who peddle myths.
The English word translated "myth" in the NIV is the Greek word mythos, which means, "tale, story, legend, myth, fable (Bauer, 1979, 529)." There is not certainty as to precisely what Paul and Peter were referring to in their rejection of mythos. In the LXX mythos appears very seldom, and "never in books translated from the Hebrew Bible (Bruce, 1977, 644)." Since the history of the word prior to the New Testament "leaves us no doubt that it derived from the Greek world," some, like John Chrysostom of old, "see here a reference to the ancient stories of the gods, and to a Christian allegorizing of these, such as is actually found in the ancient world (Stahlin, 1967, 4:782)." In such an interpretation Paul and Peter are forbidding the re-interpreting of Roman and Greek stories to give them "Christian" meanings. Yet if this were the case one would expect Paul to speak more clearly about the myths themselves, and one would not expect Paul to use a term that can so easily be construed in popular Greek simply as an "untrue story" or "fable (Stahlin, 1967, 4:782)."
Others see in the term mythos, especially as it is used in 1 Timothy 1:4 with genealogies, a reference to "Gnostic Myths." In such a view Paul is referring to "the series of aeons in Gnosticism (Stahlin, 1967, 4:782)." Yet, genealogies in the New Testament "bears unmistakably the marks of Judaism, not Gnosticism (Buchel, 1967, 1:664)."
This author, along with others, sees Paul and Peter referring to "Jewish fables" proclaimed by a Jewish or Jewish-Christian Gnostic sect. This view has the most credence because at the time the early form of Gnosticism was "flourishing in the soil of Hellenistic Jewish Christianity (Stahlin, 1967, 4:783)," and because the context of the Pastorals suggest a strong Jewish element (cf. "avoid... genealogies... and quarrels over the law" --Titus 3:9) (Bruce, 1977, 645). In such an interpretation, Paul and Peter are pointing at Gnostic allegorizing of Jewish teachings, some of which were from the Hebrew Old Testament. The results of this twisting of the Old Testament were interpretations that paralleled or even supported Gnostic philosophies or myths. Gustav Stahlin, in his article on mythos for the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament says,
In this type of interpretation, which opened the door to Gnostic caprice (cf. Tm. 1:4), the Church saw a danger which caused it to hoist a warning signal even though it did not have to be totally opposed to the Jewish haggada in other respects (Stahlin, 1967, 4:783).
The focus of the New Testament's strong rebuke, then, is the use of the imagination to twist God's word to match modern philosophies (or in our day modern psychology) or even false religions (as in our day Islam, many eastern religions, the New Age movement and the health and wealth preachers do). This is worthy of strong rebuke because God's word belongs to quite a different category: it is a record of fact. As the Apostle Peter says "...we did not follow cleverly invented stories (mythos), when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses..."(2 Pet. 1:16).
The Biblical Good News
The biblical bad news is that our inclination is to use our imagination for evil and it is possible to go so far as to use our imaginations to invent or to so twist a message so that we are saying in God's name what God never said.
There are, however, positive references to the use of the imagination. What do we learn from this picture?
1. God Sanctions the Use of Our Imaginations for His Purposes.
Earlier we examined some of the negative uses of the word hashab ("to compute, to reckon, to plan" [Gesenius, 1979, 311]). As we saw earlier, in its worse sense it is a weapon that can be used against God and his standards (scheming for evil). Yet this word can also refer to devising good. Moses clearly captures both aspects of hashab in Genesis 50:20. Here, in Jacob's absence, Joseph is reassuring his brothers that he holds no grudge against them and intends them no harm. Joseph says, "You intended (hashab) to harm me, but God intended (hashab) it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives" (50:20). While we scheme for evil, God schemes for good.
The possibility for man to use hashab for good is implied in 2 Chronicles 26:15 too. In an ambiguous sense it is used to describe king Uzziah's rise to power in Judah during the divided kingdom. He is described as being aided by "skillful men" (noun form of the verb hashab) who design military machines for him. While Uzziah's pride from his rise to power lead to his downfall, the use of man's hashab is in no way rebuked here. There is the possibility, then, that hashab can be used by people for good.
Exodus 31:1-6 goes even further. In this context God is instructing Moses on all the specifics for the construction of the Tent of Meeting and of the articles to go in it.
Then the LORD said to Moses, "See, I have chosen Bezalel son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, and I have filled him with the Spirit of God, with skill, ability and knowledge in all kinds of crafts -- to make (hashab) artistic designs for work in gold, silver and bronze, to cut and set stones, to work in wood, and to engage in all kinds of craftsmanship. Moreover, I have appointed Oholiab son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan, to help him. Also I have given skill to all the craftsmen to make everything I have commanded you..."
Bezalel's ability to work in the arts and his skills as a craftsman were gifts of the Holy Spirit. Bezalel and Oholiab, his assistant, use their imaginations under the influence of the Holy Spirit to construct all that pertained to the tabernacle and its service. With this positive use of (hashab) we see God sanctioning the use of the imagination for his purpose.
2. God Sanctifies Our Imaginations for His Service.
In English it does not take much for us to change the phrase "sanctioning the imagination" into "sanctifying the imagination." Exchange "ion" for "fy" and the job is done. But in God's economy it took signing a "new deal" between himself and mankind--a deal that required the death of his Son--for this change to become possible. It took the inauguration of a new covenant.
God's promise of this New Covenant through Jeremiah states,
I will give them singleness of heart and action, so that they will always fear me for their own good and the good of their children after them. I will make an everlasting covenant with them: I will never stop doing good to them, and I will inspire them to fear me, so that they will never turn away from me.
Jeremiah 32:39-40
The word translated "inspire" in verse 40, is the words "heart" (leb, which we have seen the NIV translates in other place "imagination") and "give" in Hebrew (Gesenius, 1979, 572). In the new covenant God will inspire his people--give them the heart for obedience. The instrument (leb) once tuned for evil will be re-tuned for good. Ezekiel's record of God's prophecy concerning the new covenant reinforces this same promise.
I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart (leb) of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you (literally "to make" [Gesenius, 1979, 657]) to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.
Ezekiel 36:26-27
Our imaginations can be inspired and moved to accomplish good, even godly purposes when used by our new heart that is under the Spirit's influence.
This is not to say that the sanctified imagination is without limitations. Paul reminds us so in Ephesians 3:20-21. In this the climax of the first half of Ephesians Paul writes,
Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen.
In this, the only passage in the New Testament to make reference to the imagination, the translators are translating the verb voeo (in its root form). The verb means, "to direct one's mind to (Delling, 1985, 1226)." Paul is reminding us that while we are able to "imagine" with our sanctified imaginations some of the things of God, our imagination is not so great as to be able to "direct our minds" to all that God will do for us and in us.
We see, then, that while we have a propensity to use our imagination for evil and to invent or twist God's message, God still sanctions its use and has sanctified it for his service. What are the implications of all this for our preaching?
The Implications for Biblical Preaching
Drawing from what we have learned, two principles emerge.
1. We Must Restrain Our Imaginations in Interpretation.
It has been said that, "The Bible is, in the finest sense, the most imaginative book ever written (Kilby, 1981, 37)." We find in the Bible stories, poetry, proverbs, riddles, songs, parables, symbols, drama, paradoxes, and epigrams. As Leland Ryken puts it,
[The Bible's] most customary way of expressing God's truth is not the sermon or theological outline but the story, the poem, the vision, and the letter, all of them forms and products of the imagination (Quoted by Wiersbe, 1994, 40).
To accurately interpret such an imaginative book we must use our imaginations. As Haddon Robinson says of the Bible's dominant genre, "A reader has a better chance of winning the lottery than understanding narratives without their imaginations (Robinson, 10/01/99, PreachingToday.com)."
A. W. Tozer, in his book Born After Midnight, says the same thing with regard to the whole Bible.
The weakness of the Pharisee in days of old was his lack of imagination, or what amounted to the same thing, his refusal to let it enter the field of religion. He saw the text with its carefully guarded theological definition and he saw nothing beyond.
A primrose by the river's brim
A yellow primrose was to him,
And it was nothing more.
When Christ came with his blazing spiritual penetration and His fine moral sensitivity, He appeared to the Pharisee to be a devotee of another kind of religion, which indeed He was if the world had only understood. He could see the soul of the text while the Pharisee could see only the body, and he could always prove Christ wrong by an appeal to the letter of the law or an interpretation hallowed by tradition....
I long to see the imagination released from its prison and given to its proper place among the sons of the new creation. What I am trying to describe here is the sacred gift of seeing, the ability to peer beyond the veil and gaze with astonished wonder upon the beauties and mysteries of things holy and eternal (Tozer, 1978, 50-51).
We must, then, use our imagination in interpretation. But, if our inclination is to use our imagination to invent or twist God's message, if our inclination is to bend the text to our thoughts, how do we use our imagination yet keep from saying in God's name what God never said?
The answer is to restrain our imaginations in the interpretive stage. To be more specific, we must tie our imaginations to the ideas, images, and emotions gleaned from "a historical, grammatical, and literary study of a passage in its context (Robinson, 1980, 20)." When determining the meaning of a text, we must not tether off to the silent, to the invisible, to something not gleaned from solid study.
Instead, we must tie our imaginations to what was said, to what did happen, to what is true to our text and the passage's intended purpose. In narrative literature we are "in-bounds" if we tether off our imaginations to the scenes, details and dialogue of the story as we have received it. To draw meaning from invented scenes, details or dialogue is out-of-bounds. In poetry and emotionally charged texts it means restraining our imaginations to the weight of the terms as originally used, not as used today. And, with images it means interpreting them consistent with how they were used in that day, not ours.
When in interpretation, then, we restrain our imaginations to what we glean from a historical, grammatical, and literary study of the text; we are using our imagination "in-bounds." This in turn allows our imaginations to be a tool that helps us say in God's name what God truly said.
2. We Must Loose Our Imaginations in Proclamation.
As creatures created in the likeness of the Creator, God wants creative servants. And when our service includes preaching, the Creator wants the artistic and fresh communication of His message. In fact God inspires such creativity and innovation. David says in Psalm 40:3:
He (God) put a new song in my mouth,
a hymn of praise to our God.
Many will see and fear
and put their trust in the LORD.
Jesus modeled the use of the imagination to communicate God's message in creative ways. For example, the parables were not "Bible stories" when they were told, but secular, worldly stories invented to communicate God's truths. "He didn't read them out of a book. He made them up on the spot. He created them out of life. He used his imagination (Robinson, 10/01/99, PreachingToday.com)."
We too must cultivate and loose our sanctified imaginations to proclaim God's message creatively and effectively. As Galli and Larson remind us,
Preachers face a bracing challenge: to proclaim the millenniums-old Scriptures in a way that never grows musty. We can say nothing really new, but it must seem new. Like a resourceful cook finding different ways to whip up a plate of meat and potatoes, we must proclaim the familiar gospel in unfamiliar ways, week after week (perhaps two to five times a week), month after month, year after year. Clearly, the creative demand on a pastor makes working as a restaurant chef on Mother's Day look easy (Galli & Larson, 1994, 23).
Being creative, even a bit unpredictable, requires a lot of perspiration. But we must break a sweat because American audiences "live in a world of compact disc players that shuffle ten discs, remote controls that herd five hundred channels, and Wal-Marts with the square footage of a small country (Elliot, 2000, ix)." With such a variety of options they have grown, or soon will grow, restless with one preaching style.
So we must loose our imaginations in proclamation. We must dare to tell some stories that don't sound like religious stories because they parallel the text. We must use some language that doesn't sound like it belongs in church because it carries the weight of the author's language. We must learn to "shuffle" our preaching style with new genres and when inspiration strikes.
Of course effective communication requires more than creativity for creativity's sake. If we do something "new" every week listeners are not going to feel safe. The goal must be to loose our imaginations in such a way as to aid in communication. So, while listeners need us to have a "go to" preaching style, we want to loose our imagination to cause "movement" on our "go to" pitch. Trying new types of illustrations (video, interview, testimony, etc.), asking for an audience response after each point (through responsive reading, music, drama, communion, etc.), giving a take-home reminder of the message, and many other elements can bring about "movement."
Communication is also aided when we loose our imagination to learn an entirely new pitch. Listeners "lean in" and "look close" at the sight of a new preaching style (inductive vs. deductive, 1st or 3rd person narrative vs. didactic, etc.). While requiring more perspiration, occasionally using a new pitch can also greatly increase the effectiveness of one's "go to" pitch.
In proclamation, then, we must loose our imaginations. We must accept God's call to create a new song. For only when we do will we see God's truth creatively poured through our personalities. Only when we do will we be able to offer living sermons with a message worth listening to.
Bibliography
Alexander, Ralph H. "Ezekiel." In The Expositor's Bible Commentary Volume 6, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986.
Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: The University Of Chicago Press, 1979.
Bowling, Andrew. ���. In Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, ed. R. Laird Harris, vol. 1, 465-466. Chicago: Moody Press, 1980.
Bruce, Frederick F. "mythos." In The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, ed. Colin Brown, 644-645. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1977.
Buchel, Friedrich. "genealogiai." In Theological Dictionaryof the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittlel and trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, vol. 1, 663-664. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1967.
Cohen, Gary G. ��N. In Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, ed. R. Laird Harris vol. 1, 875-876. Chicago: Moody Press, 1980.
Delling, Gerhard "h�mnos." In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament: Abridged in One Volume, ed. Grehard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, 1226-1227. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985.
Elliott, Mark Barger. Creative Styles of Preaching. Louisville: John Knox Press, 2000.
Galli, Mark and Craig Brian Larson. Preaching that Connects: Using the Techniques of Journalists to Add Impact to Your Sermons. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994.
Gesenius, H. W. F. Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979.
Kilby, Clyde S. "Christian Imagination." In The Christian Imagination, ed. Leland Ryken. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981.
McComiskey, Thomas E. ���� �. In Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, ed. R. Laird Harris, 395-397. Chicago: Moody Press, 1980.
Robinson, Haddon W. Biblical Preaching: The Development and Delivery of Expository Messages. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980.
_______. "Using Your Imagination." In PreachingToday.Com Journal, (October, 1999).
Stahlin, Gustav. "mu~qos." In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittlel and trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, vol. 4, 781-783. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967.
Wiersbe, Warren W. Preaching & Teaching with Imagination. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.
_______. ed. The Best of A.W. Tozer. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Christian Publications, 1978.