Methods of Interpretation

Method Everyone who reads the Bible for understanding will use some method of interpretation. “Method” can be defined as, “a systematic procedure, technique, or mode of inquiry employed by or proper to a particular discipline or art” (Merriam Webster Online).

The Mystical Method In the time of the Greek and Roman gods, it was thought that the god spoke through an oracle, usually a priest or priestess D. R. Dungan, Hermeneutics As the church went into apostasy, it adopted many of the heathen practices, thus looking to the priests as official spokesmen for God God’s word became what the priests said it was In the reformation, the creed makers took over Some rely on great men to the point that they must hear what he says before stating the meaning

The Hierarchical Method This is a modified form of the mystical method This says the church is empowered with the knowledge of God’s will If the priests disagree as to meaning, the bishop is consulted If the bishops disagree, the archbishop is consulted And so on, up the earthly chain of command

The Spiritual Method Those who hold this view claim the power to understand God’s will is within all of us Dungan says, “Many plain passages of the word of God will, to them, have the meaning of something very different from what has been said. For, with them, it is not so much what the Lord has said, as what he revealed to them as the meaning of that language.” While a large # of people currently hold this view, it is ironic that they do not interpret the Bible the same way.

The Allegorical Method Those who take this approach believe everything in the Bible is a metaphor. That is, everything that is said means something besides what it says. This is really “eisegesis,” instead of “exegesis,” and allows one to read into the text what he wants to be there.

The Rationalistic Method Rejects any interpretation that cannot be explained with human reason If human reason says there are no miracles, then they must be explained away If it cannot be understood how a particular prophecy could have been made 100’s of years before it actually took place, then it had to be made after the event Jeremiah 10:23 shows it is unacceptable

The Apologetic Method This method makes all the statements of the Bible true, no matter who spoke them Words of the devil, the witch of Endor, Cain and others become truth What they truly said could be in error When Jesus healed the man who had a demon that made him blind and mute, the Pharisees said, “This fellow does not cast out demons except by Beelzebub, the ruler of the demons” (Matthew 12:22-24) Their statements about Jesus were false, though they surely made them

The Dogmatic Method Arises when one sets forth a doctrine and then goes to scripture to prove it true They may use the results of the practice, writings of the early church fathers or the practice of the church to enhance their view if no Bible verse is found in support The devil used this method when he wanted Jesus to throw himself off the temple (Matthew 4:5-7; Psalm 91:11-12), while Jesus pointed to a truth about God’s relationship with man (Deuteronomy 6:16)

The Literal Method Every word of scripture is taken literally They refuse to allow for the use of metaphors, poetic descriptions, or any other use of figurative language Ironically, they are selective in their approach and do not try to make verses like Psalm 22:14 literal, but especially try to literalize verses that support their position

The Inductive Method Described “A leading or drawing off a general fact from a number of observations and experiments” (D. R. Dungan, Hermeneutics) No interpretation is true that does not harmonize with known facts We must be sure to gather as many parts as possible so we can clearly identify the whole For instance, we do not know everything Jesus ever did or said, but we do have sufficient evidence to prove he is the Christ (John 20:30-31)

A Careful Search for Truth In our courts, which use the inductive method, we want all the evidence carefully sought out and presented We do not want a doctor to operate based upon 1 inconclusive test With our souls at stake (John 8:32), we do not want our understanding of doctrine based on only a few verses read without proper consideration of other facts

Examples of the Inductive Method On the Road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35), Jesus expounded all Moses and the prophets hade said concerning him At the Jerusalem council (Acts 15) Peter told of Cornelius’ conversion Paul & Barnabas related the miracles and wonders wrought among the Gentiles O. T. prophets were recited by James (Amos 9:11-12) Philip began at the same scripture and preached Jesus (Acts 8:26-40) Stephen reasoned using Abraham and much of O. T. history (Acts 6:8-7:60)

Inference Used in the Inductive Method Lot went down into Egypt Genesis 12:10 says Abram went down into Egypt, without mentioning Lot Genesis 13:1 tells us Lot came up out of Egypt The purpose of the book of Acts may be inferred from its content “It is a necessary inference that the writer aimed to inform the reader accurately of the beginnings of christianity [sic] and of the divine directions by which men turn to the Lord and form churches” (Clinton Lockhart, Principles of Interpretation)