Tag Archives: Biblical hermeneutics

Bible Interpretation

What Training Do We Need to Interpret the Bible?

2 Comments

Post Author: Bill Pratt

Let’s get some facts out on the table about the Bible.  The Bible is composed of some 66 separate documents that were written approximately between the years of 1500 BC to AD 100 in two primary languages (Hebrew and Greek), and produced in cultures and historical contexts that are radically different from ours.

All of these elements make it difficult to interpret the biblical texts correctly: 1) the fact that we are dealing with many documents written by many different authors, 2) the fact that these documents were written in foreign and ancient languages, 3) the fact that the cultures that produced these documents are very different from ours, and 4) the fact that we are far removed from the historical contexts of these documents.

If a Christian wanted to overcome all of these obstacles to understand the Bible, what disciplines must she master?  Christian philosopher Tom Howe puts the question this way:

Does this imply that in order to understand God’s Word one must be competent in the biblical languages, in Hebrew and Greek culture and customs, in the history of nations and people who have interacted with Israel and the church; that the interpreter must be a competent philosopher of history, philosopher of language, philosopher of science, metaphysician as well as an accomplished theologian?

Howe’s answer to the question is both “yes” and “no.”  First, let’s look at the sense in which the answer is “no.”  Howe answers:

If by “to understand the Bible” one means the capacity to grasp and receive the message of salvation through Christ which is the aim of the Word of God, then the answer is emphatically, No! The nature of man, having been created in the image of God as a rational creature, seems to be a sufficient prerequisite to hear, understand, and receive the message of salvation through Christ.

This is an incredibly important point.  Howe is saying that the message of salvation through Christ is understandable to any human being because we are made in the image of God as rational creatures.  Thus no training is necessary to understand the central thrust of the Bible.  The Bible is perspicuous, or clear, according to Francis Turretin, “in things necessary to salvation [so] that they can be understood by believers without the external help of oral tradition or ecclesiastical authority.”

What about the rest of the Bible that is not so clear?  Howe mentions that even the Apostle Peter claims that some things that the Apostle Paul wrote were hard to understand (2 Pet 3:15-16). If a person wants to immerse themselves in all of Scripture, not just the clear parts, they are going to need to be equipped.  Howe argues that

the interpreter needs to apply all the skill and training that he or she can bring to the task. We not only strive correctly to interpret God’s Word, but to endeavor accurately to proclaim it to those desiring to hear and to defend it against those who would, in our view, corrupt it. To this end, the interpreter must endeavor to become equipped in many different areas of knowledge all of which relate to the task of interpretation.

This, my friends, is why we rely so heavily on the scholars who immerse themselves in Hebrew and Greek, who become experts on ancient history, who soak up all of the cultural information they can relevant to the biblical texts, who become adept philosophers.  These scholars provide us with English translations of the Bible, with commentaries chock full of historical context and language notes, with dictionaries that illuminate ancient culture.

If you want to correctly interpret all of Scripture, you need training.  For those of you who have neither the ability nor the desire for that training, God has made clear those parts necessary for salvation, and for that we are eternally thankful!

Bible Interpretation

When Reading the Bible, When Should We Look for Application?

Leave a comment

Post Author: Bill Pratt

If you’re reading a Bible passage, when should you start thinking about how it applies to your life?  Many of us think that this is the first thing we should do after reading a passage, but I want to discourage that way of thinking.

Before thinking about how a passage applies to us, we should first spend our time trying to find the objective meaning of the text.  What was the original author trying to say to the original audience?

Theologian Norman Geisler, in his Systematic Theology, Volume One has some helpful advice for us:

The objective meaning of a text is the one given to it by the author, not the one attributed to it by the reader. Readers should ask what was meant by the author, not what it means to the reader. Once a reader discovers what the author meant by the text, he has obtained its objective meaning. Thus, asking, “What does it mean to me?” is the wrong question, and it will almost certainly lead to a subjective interpretation. Asking of the author, “What did he mean?” will almost certainly lead the reader in the right direction, that is, toward the objective meaning.

The first step, then, is to figure out what the author’s intended meaning of the text is.  Many of us are tempted to skip this step because, well, it’s hard.  It’s a lot easier to just read some verses and try to apply them to our own experiences.  Figuring out what the original author meant might require we spend some time studying the text, consulting a Bible dictionary, reading a commentary.

It’s true that trying to find out the original meaning of the text can be hard work, but most things in life worth having come from hard work.  Bible study is no exception.  Once you’ve discovered the meaning of the text, then start thinking about how it applies to your life.  Remember that the text only has one meaning, but it may have several applications or implications.

Geisler offers this example from science to make this more concrete: “Einstein knew that e=mc2 (Energy equals mass times the speed of light [constant] squared), and so does an average high school science student. However, Einstein knew many more implications of this than the average high school student.”

You must first understand what is meant by e=mc2 before thinking about all of its implications.  The better a student understands the meaning of e=mc2, the more implications he will see.  Likewise, when you read a Bible passage, work to understand what the author intended to say to his original audience.  Once you’re comfortable that you have the objective meaning, then start your search for the implications of the text for your life.  If you get these out of order, you’ll surely get way off track with your understanding of the Bible.

Bible Interpretation

What Are Nine Common Errors When Interpreting Biblical Narratives?

8 Comments

Post Author: Bill Pratt

Our local church, Cornerstone, has embarked on a year-long study of the Book of Joshua.  Our pastor, Dr. Byrd, is going to prepare detailed sermon notes each week, which will then be translated by the other pastors into lessons for Sunday school classes.

As we kick off this series in Joshua, I have been drawn back to one of my favorite books on biblical interpretation, Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart’s How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth.  In the past I shared ten principles for interpreting Old Testament narratives from their book, but this time I want to highlight nine errors that are commonly made when interpreting biblical narratives, also from their book.

Allegorizing.  “Instead of concentrating on the clear meaning of the narrative, people relegate the text to merely reflecting another meaning beyond the text.”

Decontextualizing.  “Ignoring the full historical and literary contexts, and often the individual narrative, people concentrate on small units only and thus miss interpretational clues.  If you take things out of context enough, you can make almost any part of Scripture say anything you want it to” (emphasis added).

Selectivity.  “It involves picking and choosing specific words and phrases to concentrate on while ignoring the others and ignoring the overall sweep of the narrative being studied.”

Moralizing.  “This is the assumption that principles for living can be derived from all passages.  The moralizing reader, in effect, asks the question , ‘What is the moral of this story?’ at the end of every individual narrative.  An example would be, ‘What can we learn about handling adversity from how the Israelites endured their years as slaves in Egypt?’  The fallacy in this approach is that the narratives were written to show the progress of God’s history of redemption, not to illustrate principles.”

Personalizing.  “Also known as individualizing, this refers to reading Scripture in the way suggested above, supposing that any or all parts apply to you or your group in a way that they do not apply to everyone else.  This is, in fact, a self-centered reading of the Bible.  Examples of personalizing would be, ‘The story of Balaam’s talking donkey reminds me that I talk too much.’  Or, ‘The story of the building of the temple is God’s way of telling us that we have to construct a new church building.'”

Misappropriation.  “It is to appropriate the text for purposes that are quite foreign to the biblical narrative.  This is what is happening when, on the basis of Judges 6:36-40, people ‘fleece’ God as a way of finding God’s will!  This, of course, is both misappropriation and decontextualizing, since the narrator is pointing out that God saved Israel through Gideon despite his lack of trust in God’s word.'”

False appropriation.  “It is to read into a biblical narrative suggestions or ideas that come from contemporary culture that are simultaneously foreign to the narrator’s purpose and contradictory to his point of view.”

False combination.  “This approach combines elements from here and there in a passage and makes a point out of their combination, even though the elements themselves are not directly connected in the passage itself.”

Redefinition.  “When the plain meaning of the text leaves people cold, producing no immediate spiritual delight or saying something other than what they wish it said, they are often tempted to redefine it to mean something else.”  Fee and Stuart use the example of 2 Chronicles 7:14-15: “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. Now my eyes will be open and my ears attentive to the prayers offered in this place.”  Christians today want to apply this promise to their own land, but as Fee and Stuart point out, this promise was only directed toward the ancient land of Israel.

As our church moves through the Book of Joshua, I hope we can avoid these common errors.  The most important step in interpreting any biblical text is to first work very hard to discover what the original author was trying to communicate to the original audience.  Only after we have done the hard work of finding the original meaning can we then apply the text to our contemporary world.