The following, from a scholarly introduction to exegesis by three conservative Evangelical scholars on the role of the Holy Spirit in biblical interpretation, should be of interest to LDS readers:
Illumination
For his part, God provides the resource for such obedient understanding of his truth: the illumination of the Holy Spirit. A corollary of this requirement of faith is the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. That is, once people have committed their lives in faith to Jesus as Lord, the Bible speaks of a work that God performs in them. This internal operation enables believers to perceive spiritual truth, an ability unavailable to unbelievers (c. 1 Cor 2:6-16; 2 Cor 3:15-18). This illuminating work of the Spirit does not circumvent nor allow us to dispense with the principles of hermeneutics and the techniques of exegesis. It does mean that a dynamic comprehension of the significance of Scripture and its application to life belongs uniquely to those indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Though scholars possess an arsenal of methods and techniques with which to decipher the meaning of the biblical texts, interpretation falls short of its true potential without illumination of the Spirit. Neither methodology nor the Spirit operates in isolation from the other. Neither is sufficient in itself. For though the Spirit may supernaturally grant to a reader the true meaning of a text, independent of any study, we posit that the Spirit rarely, if ever, operates in this manner. On the other hand, methods alone are not sufficient to understand profoundly and exactly the true meaning and significance of Scripture. Then how are methodology and illumination interwoven?
First, consider whether one can depend simply upon the Holy Spirit for understanding the Bible apart from methods and techniques. Origen (ca. A.D. 200) might have been the earliest defender of this practice, but if so, he was certainly only the first in a long line that continues to this day. The reasoning often goes like this: if the Holy Spirit inspired the original writers, then certainly he can impart his meaning without recourse to such means as historical or grammatical study. C.H. Spurgeon countered such pretension with some advice to budding preachers in “A Chat about Commentaries”:
Of course, you are not such wiseacres as to think of ways that you can expound Scripture without assistance from the works of divines and learned men who have labored before you in the field of exposition. If you are of that opinion, pray remain so, for you are not worth the trouble of conversion, and like a little coterie who think with you, would resent the attempt as an insult to your infallibility. It seems odd, that certain men who talk to such of what the Holy Spirit reveals to themselves, should think so little of what he has revealed to others.
In the pulpit this error may sound like this:
Dear friends, I have consulted no other books or human sources or worldly wisdom. I have considered no commentaries. I have gone right to the Bible—and only the Bible—to see that it had to say for itself. Let me share with you what God showed me.
As B. Ramm, who invented a similar quote, observes, this sounds very spiritual,” but in fact “it is veiled egotism” and a “confusion of the inspiration of the Spirit with the illumination of the Spirit.” The Spirit’s work of illumination does not grant new revelation.
Unfortunately, some deeply spiritual people have purported some obviously incorrect interpretations of the Bible. Being indwelt by the Spirit does not guarantee accurate interpretation. Though the creative work of the Spirit cannot be diminished, the Spirit does not work apart from hermeneutics and exegesis. Rather, he provides the sincere believer that indispensable comprehension of the text (that “Ah, ha!”) by working within and through methods and techniques. An encounter occurs between the Spirit of the Word and the human spirit. Swartley says:
In the co-creative moment, text and interpreter experience life by the power of the divine Spirit. Without this experience, interpretation falls short of its ultimate potential and purpose.
Certainly, we cannot “program” this creative encounter; it requires a stance of faith and humility before the Lord of the universe who has revealed his truth on the pages of Scripture. Yet in seeking to hear his voice, the interpreter becomes open to true understanding. Prayer puts one in the position to hear and understand. For the Christian, prayer is an indispensable ingredient to the proper understanding of Scripture. We must ask God to assist our study and to speak to us through it so that we might understand his truth and will for our lives. We do not substitute prayer for diligent exegetical work. We pray that we will do our work well, that we will be sensitive to the Spirit’s direction, and that we will be obedient to the truth of what we discover. We openly admit our bent to sin and error and our finitude; we ask for an openness to receive what God has revealed and a willingness to learn from others throughout the history of interpretation.
. . .
What are the unique features of the Bible that formulate our preunderstanding?
1. First, we must recognize “the spiritual factor.” The full purpose of the Bible is realized only by the work of the Holy Spirit “who illuminates the mind and witnesses to the veracity of the divine verities.” Illumination does not provide data or information (the Holy Spirit does not provide further revelation to the interpreter), nor does illumination guarantee a correct understanding of the meaning of a passage. Ramm agrees that the ministry of the Spirit cannot replace careful analysis and sound exegesis, but it does assure us in conjunction with such diligence the believer can apprehend the significance and scope of God’s revelation. The Scriptures themselves describe this scope: “All Scripture is given by God and is useful for teaching for showing people what is wrong in their lives, for correcting faults, and for teaching how to live right. Using the Scriptures, the person who serves God will be capable, having all that is needed to do every good work” (2 Tim 3:16-17 NCV).
So the question is not whether a believer is biased, since all interpreters are biased, but, rather, does “the spiritual actor” irreparably bias the believer and thus prevent an objective and true understanding? Not necessarily. In fact, the opposite is true. Given the spiritual nature of the Bible, only a spiritual interpreter can accurately assimilate its contents. All others will simply miss the spiritual dimension—they may even ignore it altogether, whether consciously or unconsciously. Given the Christian presupposition of the Bible’s inspiration, if the divine Spirit who inspired the Bible also enables believers to interpret it, then one could argue that they are better able to discern its true meaning! In fact, if the Bible informs correctly, God promised through the prophet Jeremiah that he would put his instruction in the minds and hearts of his covenant people (Jer 31:33).
This “internal instruction” does not replace learning from the Bible, nor implementing this process of hermeneutics, but it does suggest that God’s people occupy a unique position to grasp his message. Paul recognized that only a spiritual person possesses the capacity to apprehend spiritual truths (1 Cor 2:15f.). Commenting on the text Fee speaks of “the main concern of the entire passage, namely, that God’s wisdom can be known only by God’s people because they alone have the Spirit.”
God’s anointing has educative value (1 Jn 2:17). Concerning this latter verse, Smalley says: “So complete is the spiritual instruction which the true believer has received, John concludes that the need for temporal teaching is removed.” Of course, we must view the assertion in context. Smalley notes that in opposition to gnostic teaching, John stresses that “the ‘consecrated’ Christian . . . has no need of (basic?) spiritual instruction. He is already ‘set apart’ for God’s truth.” In other words, the believer occupies a privileged position to grasp and implement God’s truth.
. . .
The Role of the Holy Spirit
We would be remiss if we did not remind our readers that everything we have taught in this book falls short of the intended goal if interpreters do not simultaneously pray and rely on the Holy Spirit to guide them in the hermeneutic task. We assume that point of departure; it is part of our preunderstanding. Yet as we pointed earlier, an appeal to the Spirit is no substitute for sound interpretive methods. Roy Zuck’s excellent article on “The Role of the Holy Spirit in Hermeneutics” deserves reading from start to finish; here we can merely summarize his fourteen main points:
1. The Holy Spirit does not give new revelation on a par with Scripture.
2. He does not guarantee that our interpretations are infallible.
3. He does not give one person new insights that no one else has.
4. Many non-Christians can apply sound hermeneutics to understand the meaning of Scripture; without the Spirit, however, they refuse to apply it adequately to their lives.
5. Understanding is not the exclusive domain of biblical scholars.
6. Spiritual devotion on the part of the interpreter is crucial.
7. Lack of spiritual preparation can hinder correct interpretation.
8. Here is no substitute for diligent study.
9. The Spirit does not rule out study helps.
10. He does not override common sense and logic.
11. He does not normally give sudden intuitive flashes.
12. The Spirit’s role in hermeneutics is part of the process of illumination.
13. He does not make all of the Bible equally clear.
14. He does not ensure comprehensive understanding.
In short, the five crucial elements for proper interpretation and application are: (1) salvation, (2) spiritual maturity, (3) diligent study, (4) common sense and logic, and (5) humble dependence on the Spirit for discernment. (William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation [Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993],84-5, 111-12, 425-26, emphasis in original)