Hermeneutics - LBC 2009.teacher

Hermeneutics:
The Art and Science of

Biblical Interpretation 1
2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be
ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
“That’s just your interpretation!” How many times have unbelievers (and even believers!) used
such a statement to disregard the clear teaching of the Word of God? We must admit that
interpretation is necessary for us to understand what the Bible says. In fact, virtually every form
of communication requires some degree of interpretation. Confusion and contradiction result
when we fail to interpret communication properly.
One might suppose that all Bible-believing Christians would interpret the Bible in the same way.
Unfortunately, such is not the case. Differences between genuine believers often stem from
different interpretations of the same texts. The “obvious” meaning and application of a passage
may not be so obvious to some.
Agreed-upon rules of interpretation help believers come to reasonable understandings and
applications of the Bible. Once everyone is “playing by the same rules,” differences in
interpretation are minimized.
Professing Christians often display a remarkable apathy and indifference toward understanding
the Bible. Instead of acquiring the necessary tools for Bible interpretation for themselves, they
expect others to tell them what the Bible means and how to apply it. Or, what’s even worse,
having never considered the rules of Bible interpretation, some believers tenaciously hold false
or faulty interpretations. Those who don’t know or who ignore the basic rules of interpretation
inevitably mishandle—wrongly divide—the Scripture.
Every believer is responsible to read, understand, and apply God’s Word. This series is designed
to help believers do so.
1
Much of this material comes directly from Dr. Rolland McCune’s Hermeneutics class notes, Detroit Baptist
Theological Seminary, 1996 revision of his notes. Modified by Brad Anderson, Liberty Baptist Church of Antigo,
WI in 2009-2010. Other resources noted as used.
Contents:
Part 1: Introduction and General Principles
Lesson 1: Introduction to Hermeneutics
Lesson 2: God’s Communication to Man
Lesson 3: Basic Equipment for Biblical Hermeneutics
Lesson 4: Principles of General Hermeneutics (2 Parts)
Part 2: A Method of Biblical Interpretation
Lesson 5: Interpretive Pitfalls
Lesson 6: Interpreting Figurative Language
Lesson 7: Interpreting Type and Symbol
Lesson 8: Interpreting Wisdom Literature
Lesson 9: Interpreting Psalms
Lesson 10: Interpreting Narratives
Lesson 11: Interpreting Prophecy
Lesson 12: Interpreting Parables
Lesson 13: Interpreting Epistles
Lesson 14: Putting It All Together: A Logical Method of Interpretation
Part 3: Related Issues
Lesson 15: The History of Interpretation
Hermeneutics:
The Art and Science of Biblical Interpretation
Lesson 1: Introduction to Hermeneutics
Every student of the Bible engages in hermeneutics. Some do it well and others do it poorly, but
everyone does it. What is hermeneutics? Don’t let the word itself intimidate you. The concept is
rather simple.
I. THE DEFINITION OF HERMENEUTICS

A. Various definitions
1. “Hermeneutics is the science and art of biblical interpretation. It is a
science because it is guided by rules within a system; and it is an art
because the application of the rules is by skill, and not by mechanical
imitation.” (Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation)
2. “Biblical interpretation is a rational and spiritual process
that attempts to understand an ancient inspired writer in
such a way that the message from God may be understood
and applied in our day. Hermeneutics is both a gift (art) and
a set of logical guidelines (science) for understanding
human languages.” (Bob Utley)
3. “Biblical hermeneutics is the study of the theoretical principles involved
in bringing out to this and every age the relevance of the Bible and its
message.” (J. I. Packer, “Hermeneutics and Biblical Authority”)
B. Further explanations and comments
1. Evangelicals commonly claim that “the Bible is our only rule for faith and
practice.” Why then do so many Christians disagree about faith and
practice? Differences are based on differing interpretations and
applications of the Bible. Accepting the authority of the Bible does not
necessarily lead to a universal understanding of the Bible. That’s why
interpretation is so important.
2. Interpretive error is exceedingly common in preaching and publishing (as
we’ll discover in the lesson on interpretive pitfalls). Many read their own
meanings into the text instead of taking them from the text (exegesis).
Interpretive error is partially due to sin’s effect on the human mind, but in
many cases, it is the result of laziness or mere ignorance of the basic
principles of Bible interpretation. Both leaders and laypersons are guilty of
mishandling the Bible. Yet with minimal training, any believer can
become a skilled interpreter of God’s Word. Cf. Acts 17:11 and 2 Tim
2:15.
Hermeneutics Lesson 1: Introduction 2
3. Every believer is responsible for hiding God’s word in his heart (Ps
119:11), meditating on it, and obeying it (Josh 1:8). Scripture is “inspired”
and “profitable” for many things (2 Tim 3:16-17). Such texts show us that
God gave His Word for a purpose and that believers must have the
capacity to appreciate, understand, and obey it.
4. Christians today have ready access to the Bible in many forms— written,
audio, computer, video, etc. With all the available Bible study tools,
engaging in personal Bible study is easier today than at any time it the
past. Every Bible student should possess the tools and techniques to mine
the Bible for the “much fine gold” (Ps 19:10) contained therein.
5. Biblical interpretation is not the sole domain of the professional theologian
(i.e., pastors, professors). Every believer should know the basic rules of
biblical interpretation and be able to arrive at reasonable interpretations
using a few basic tools. Bible study and interpretation is for every believer.
Quote: “I cannot persuade myself that a book intended for the salvation
and conversion of the whole world should cover its meaning in any such
mystery and doubt that none but critics and philosophers discover it”2
II. THE LINGUISTIC BACKGROUND OF HERMENEUTICS
A. The English Derivation of the Word Hermeneutics
The word “hermeneutics” comes from the Greek verb hermeneuo in its various
forms and usages. This in turn apparently comes from the Greek god Hermes (aka
Mercury) who in Greek mythology was the messenger of the other gods and the
interpreter of Zeus. It was said that Hermes discovered language and how to write
it and was the god of eloquence and literature. His task was to take what
surpassed human understanding and put it into a form that human beings could
comprehend.
Hermeneuo in its various forms is used 19 times in the NT in principally two
ways: to “explain” and to “translate.” Hermeneutics is the task of explaining the
meaning of Scriptures.
B. Texts:
Luke 24:27 “he expounded” (diermeneuo), meaning “to unfold the meaning of
what is said, to explain.”
John 1:42 “which is by interpretation…”
1 Corinthians 12:10 “the interpretation of tongues…”
2
From Bob Utley, Biblical Interpretation Seminar Textbook, freebiblecommentary.org/ pdf/seminar.textbook.pdf
C. An OT Illustration: Nehemiah 8:1-8

Ezra and the others read the Hebrew Scriptures and “gave the sense,” i.e., they
gave a running exposition and application of it. The readers interpreted or
explained the Scriptures for the audience.
D. A NT Illustration: Acts 8:27-35
The Ethiopian official was reading the OT Scriptures (probably the LXX) and
having trouble understanding what he read. Philip came along and helped him
interpret the passage (from Isa 53).
E. We should recognize that, although every believer is capable of understanding
Scripture, preachers and teachers are also valuable in helping people understand.
III. THE NEED FOR BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS
Why do we need to understand what God has revealed to us in the Bible?
 To ascertain God’s message
 To form a correct theology
 To have valid content in preaching
 To have valid application to ethical living
 To dispel error and misconception
Beyond these reasons, the following pertain.
A. All Bible Reading Requires Interpretation.
1. While the major themes of the Bible are essentially clear, the “plain
meaning” of a particular passage is often not plain to some readers. The
Bible is not equally simple to understand in all its parts. Several passages
of the Bible are notoriously difficult to understand. It’s unrealistic to say,
“You don’t have to interpret the Bible; just read it and do what it says.”
Every reader is an interpreter. It’s not a matter of whether you’ll interpret
the Bible; it’s a matter of how you’ll interpret it.
Note the Quote: We never perceive reality without interpreting it. More
precisely, we never perceive reality until we have already interpreted it.
The only reality that we notice and the only reality that we know is always
and already interpreted.3
3
Keven Bauder, “Fundamentalism: Whence? Where? Whither? Part 6 - Digression One: Really?” In the Nick of
Time, 9/18/2009.
2. Some readers follow the “common sense” school of interpretation—

simple common sense guides one’s understanding. Words mean what they
seem to mean. This may sound reasonable, but “simple common sense” is
rather rare, and one person’s common sense may not seem so “common”
to others. Thus, rules of interpretation must extend beyond mere common
sense.
Example: How should one interpret the sentence, “There’s a cow in the
field.” Is it really a cow? Maybe it’s a bull, a steer, or a heifer. Maybe it’s a
buffalo. Is it even bovine? The word “cow” can refer to any number of
animals (e.g., elephant, moose, whales)—and even humans! Even
seemingly simple statements require interpretation.
3. The act of identifying something accurately, saying something true about
it, and having someone else understand what you said, is really quite an
amazing feat. Words can have various meanings, depending on context
and intent. The fact that we can actually communicate to one another is
somewhat surprising.
4. Historically, God’s people have always recognized the need for accurate
Bible interpretation to go along with Bible reading. William Tyndale, one
of the first to translate the Bible into English, provided prefaces and
footnotes throughout his translation. The Geneva Bible included thousands
of explanatory notes. The original KJV also provided many marginal notes
and alternative readings to help the reader understand the text. Reformers
like Luther and Calvin produced commentaries and catechisms to teach
what the Bible means.4
B. Hermeneutics is Required to Bridge the “Gaps.”
The Bible was written many years ago by people unlike us in many ways. Biblical
principles are eternally relevant (i.e., meaningful, applicable), yet reflect a
particular historical and literary context. Bridging the “gaps” between the biblical
world and our world is somewhat problematic.
Several gaps we must bridge:
1. The Historical Gap: Thousands of years separate us from the writers of the
Bible. Knowing the life and times of the writer is essential to bridge this
gap.
2. The Cultural Gap: Many biblical practices have little or no expression in
our culture. E.g., “cutting” a covenant, levirate marriage, animal sacrifice,
foot washing, removal of the sandal, weights and measures, women’s head
coverings, the holy kiss, etc.
3. The Geographical Gap: Modern readers may be ignorant of the
geographical setting of Bible stories, which adds to misunderstanding.
4
Refer to a very helpful article, “Against the Theory of ‘Dynamic Equivalence’” by Michael Marlowe,
http://www.bible-researcher.com/dynamic-equivalence.html, Oct 2009.
Geography consists of:

1) Climate: what affects it and what it affects
2) Land formations: plains, mountains, valleys
3) Water formations: seas, lakes, rivers, wadi systems
4) Trade routes
4. Linguistic Gap: The Bible was written in three ancient languages: Hebrew,
Aramaic, and Greek. There are many problems to be overcome in
translating from one language to another.
5. The Literary Gap: Should we take the first few chapters of Genesis as a
historical record, as myth, or symbolically? How are we supposed to
interpret Hebrew poetry? What is a Gospel? What kind of literature is the
book of Revelation? These questions have to do with the types (genres) of
literature the Bible contains and the proper ways to interpret them. Lack of
literary understanding leads to misinterpretations.
The Bible contains many expressions that we do not commonly use and
which obviously call for interpretation. For example, what did Paul mean
when he said “touch not a woman” or “many sleep”? Do you know what
the following expressions mean? Seed as the dust of the earth, possess the
gate, slack hands, covered his feet, spread your cloak, gird up your loins,
let none of his words fall, open the ears, enlarge my coasts, my portion,
horn of salvation, fruit of the mouth, whitewashed sepulchers, salt of the
earth, gather to your fathers, fatted calf, prodigal son, light under a bushel.
Note: Many of the newer Bible translations give the meanings of such
expressions instead of translating literally. There are pros and cons to this
practice, as we shall see.
Another Note: If you are using the King James Version, you no doubt
know the meaning of the following expressions: ague, amerce, beeves,
besom, blains, bolled, broided, bruit, cauls, chamois, collop, cotes, draught
house, earing, fuller, habergeon, hough, maw, messes, mincing, muffler,
ouches, parbar, polled, selvedge, sith, wen, wimples, withs, wot.
C. Hermeneutics is Required for Proper Application of Scripture.
1. We interpret the Bible not only to know what it says, but also to obey it
(James 1:22). We must understand and apply the Bible to our modern
situation. Correct understanding comes before correct application.
Understand first, apply second.
2. Satan knows and even understands what the Bible says (Ps 91:11-12; Mt
4; James 2:19). Many unsaved people are similarly knowledgeable, yet
have never applied the Bible to themselves. Understanding without
application falls short of the intent of Scripture.
3. Even those who interpret the Bible in similar ways may apply it quite
differently. E.g., what does “modest apparel” look like (cf. 1 Tim 2:9)?
What is appropriate hair length for men and women (cf. 1 Cor 11:14-15).
How does one show that he does not “love the world” (cf. 1 Jn 2:15)?
What does it mean to “abstain from all appearances of evil” (1 Thes 5:22)?
People apply such principles differently.
IV. THE CHALLENGE OF HERMENEUTICS
A. Many in our post-modern culture deny the idea that any statement has a particular
meaning for anyone other than the reader. That is, they allege that each individual
must come to his own understanding of any communication, and that meaning
will be different for every individual. There can be, they say, no “right” or
“wrong” interpretation of anything; everyone has his own interpretation. Every
interpreter is biased and influenced by his background and context. Any statement
can be understood in many ways, depending on who is reading or hearing it.
B. Many today hold that there is no such thing as absolute truth. Everything is a
matter of personal perspective or opinion. Thus, no one can say for sure what
anything means. What an individual feels about something is all that matters.
Since ultimate truth is beyond our reach, it is useless to claim that the Bible says
anything that applies to everyone. Claims to objective and universal truth are
arrogant, intolerant, uninformed, and dangerous, they say (note the contradiction
in that statement).
C. Christianity, of course, depends on the historical truth that Jesus is “the Christ, the
son of the living God” (Mt 16:16), that he died on the cross and rose again (1 Cor
15:3-4), and that those who believe in him will “have life through his name” (Jn
20:31). These statements mean something. If the Gospel can be interpreted in any
and every way, then it becomes meaningless. If the Bible can mean anything to
anyone, then it has lost its true meaning. Christians must stand for objective truth,
insist that interpreters can come to a correct understanding of biblical statements,
and proclaim the Gospel confidently. Jesus is “the truth” (Jn 14:6) and God’s
Word “is truth” (Jn 17:17).
D. Even committed Christians must intentionally apply the rules of interpretation to
find the author’s original intent. Like everyone else, Christians have biases. We
must avoid reading the Bible through our own “lenses” of experience and
tradition. We must allow the Bible to say what it says; we take the Bible as is,
without trying to change its original meaning to suit ourselves.
Note the Quote: We must force ourselves to remove the glasses of
denominational and cultural tradition and view the Bible in light of its own day.
Denominational and cultural traditions can be helpful, but they must always be
subject to the Bible, not vice versa.5
5
Utley
V. THE TASK OF HERMENEUTICS

A. The main task of hermeneutics is to understand what the original author meant in
order to understand what it means to us today. The meaning of Scripture is based
on authorial intent.
B. Because of inspiration (2 Tim 3:16), God is the author of Scripture. Yet God used
individuals to receive, record, and publish this deposit. The authors of the Bible,
both Divine and human, had a particular intent for their writing, and that is what
we must seek to understand and apply.
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 2: God’s Communication To Man
Hermeneutics is necessary because God has communicated to man. The Bible contains God’s
revelation, and man has the responsibility to understand and respond to this communication.
I. REVELATION FROM GOD

A. The Definition of Revelation
1. In a general sense, revelation is a disclosure of what was previously
unknown. To be known, God must reveal Himself; He cannot be
discovered or known “from below.” Revelation is always from the top
down.
2. “In the broadest sense revelation is the sum total of the ways in which God
makes himself known” (Bernard Ramm, Special Revelation and the Word
of God, p. 17).
3. In a theological sense, revelation is God’s communication of information
about Himself and/or the world. God reveals both Himself and
information about Himself.
4. The Bible is an objective truth deposit. Biblical hermeneutics applies to
the verbal, informational, propositional revelation of God.
B. The Extent of Revelation
In one sense, everything that is not God reveals something about Him. Every
aspect of the universe bears testimony or witnesses concerning God. His stamp is
on everything that He has created. In theology, revelation from God is in two
forms or has two aspects: general and special.
1. General Revelation
a) This is “God’s witness to himself for all men. It is general in two
senses. (1) It is a general revelation for all men; i.e., not restricted
to a specific man or people. (2) It is a general kind of revelation”
(Bernard Ramm, Special Revelation and the Word of God, p. 17).
b) “General revelation, mediated through nature, conscience, and the
providential ordering of history, traditionally has been understood
as a universal witness to God’s existence and character” (Bruce
Demarest, General Revelation, p. 14).
c) General revelation essentially tells us that God exists and that He is
good, powerful, etc. See Psalm 19:1-6 and Romans 1:18-23.
Hermeneutics Lesson 2: God’s Communication to Man 9
2. Special Revelation
a) Special revelation is “God’s word in a concrete form to a specific
person or group” (Bernard Ramm, Special Revelation and the
Word of God, p. 17). Millard Erickson says it is “God’s
manifestation of himself at particular times and places through
particular events” (A Concise Dictionary of Christian Theology, p.
144). See Psalm 19:7-14 and 1 Corinthians 2:6-12.
b) The Bible is special revelation. It is an objective truth deposit of
special revelation in propositional, cognitive form. Thus, it is the
object of hermeneutics.
II. THE INSPIRATION OF THE TEXT
A. The Definition of Inspiration
1. By inspiration, we understand that supernatural influence exerted on the
sacred writers by the Holy Spirit, by virtue of which their writings are
given divine truthfulness, and constitute an infallible and sufficient rule of
faith and practice (Louis Berkhof, Principles of Biblical Interpretation, p.
41).
2. In a sense, inspiration is an act that encompasses a process and a result.
The process of inspiration gave us the Scriptures, which are inspired.
3. Technically speaking, inspiration applies to the writings, not the writers,
although the writers are obviously involved and cannot be excluded from
the overall picture. “All Scripture is given by inspiration…” (2 Tim 3:16).
Inspiration guarantees that what God said, the human author said; what the
human author wrote, God wrote. More importantly for hermeneutics, what
the human author meant, God meant (cf. 1 Cor 2:13).
B. The Explanation of the Doctrine of Inspiration
1. Inspiration Is a Miracle of Divine Creation
Scripture is a product of the creative activity of God. God “breathed” them
into existence (2 Tim 3:16, cf. 2 Pet 1:21).
2. Inspiration Employed Human Languages
a) The Bible Reflects Human and Divine Authorship.
God and man are both necessary and responsible for production of
the Scriptures. “Holy men of God spoke as they were moved
(borne along) by the Holy Spirit” (1 Pet 1:18). There was a
cooperation of the divine and human participants in the process.
b) The Biblical Languages Are Purely Human.

(1) The Hebrew of the OT is not “heavenly Hebrew” and the
Greek of the NT is not “Holy Ghost Greek.” The Hebrew
was one of the northwest Semitic human languages, and the
Greek was koine (common) Greek.
(2) The biblical languages had literary genres (types, kinds)
that must be treated as they were understood in their day.
(3) The rules of grammar and syntax must be applied to the
text today as they were applied originally.
(4) The meaning gleaned today from the biblical languages
must be the same as understood by the people to whom the
Scriptures were given in their human languages.
III. THE TRANSMISSION AND PRESERVATION OF THE TEXT
A. Evidences of the Preservation of the Text
1. The Biblical Idea of the Ultimate Indestructibility of Scripture
a) Matthew 5:18 – This verse speaks of the Bible’s ultimate
indestructibility. However, the “jots and tittles” imply something
about the text itself.
(1) The “jot” is probably the Hebrew letter yod ( y), and the
“tittles” could be the little distinguishing horns or marks
used to make certain letters (e.g., Myhla)
(2) The implication is that the text of Scripture would be
preserved.
b) John 10:35 – Scripture not being “broken” implies that it will be
available and authoritative.
c) 1 Peter 1:9-13 – What the prophets wrote is part of the divine
record and is authoritative and indestructible (especially v. 12),
again implying the preservation of what the prophets wrote.
Note: Psalm 12:6-7 is often cited as a text proving the eternal preservation
of Scripture. However, the grammar6 of the passage shows that this text is
not as strong as some suggest.
2. Biblical Indications
a) Exodus 17:14
b) Numbers 33:2
6
The grammatical construction of the text shows that the word “them” in vs. 7 probably does not refer to “the words
of the LORD” in vs. 6. The promise of preservation applies to “the godly man” of vs. 1.
c) Deuteronomy 31:24-26
d) Joshua 24:26
e) 1 Samuel 10:25
f) 2 Kings 22:8
3. Inherent In the Continuing Authority of Scripture
a) If the Scriptures are authoritative for all times, they must be
generally available. There must be some means for their continuing
availability despite whatever problems pertain to copies,
translations, versions, etc.
Note, however, 2 Kings 8:22f, where part of the Bible was
apparently lost or out of circulation for some time. There is no
biblical promise that all Scripture will be available to all people at
all times.
b) Inspiration, authority, and preservation seem to go together
theologically. If the text is inspired, it automatically has authority
and will be preserved for future generations.
4. Implied In the Warnings Regarding the Scriptures
These are warnings not to add to or subtract from Scripture, either its
words or message.
a) Warnings regarding the words themselves:
(1) Deuteronomy 4:2
(2) Deuteronomy 12:32
(3) Proverbs 30:5, 6
(4) Revelation 22:18-19
b) Warnings regarding the message of the words:
(1) Mark 7:9, 13
(2) 2 Corinthians 4:2
(3) 2 Thessalonians 3:14
5. Implied In the Commands To Know the Scriptures
Or, conversely, in the rebukes for not knowing the Scriptures.
a) Deuteronomy 6:4-9
b) Psalm 1:2
c) Matthew 22:29
d) John 3:10
6. The Existence of Translations, Versions, Copies, and Reproductions of the

Text
B. The Divine Activity in the Preservation and Transmission of the Text
1. God has used providential (i.e., normal) means to preserve the text of
Scripture. God miraculously inspired the text originally, but its
preservation has not been a miracle. Preservation and transmission are not
miraculous processes. The hand of fallible copyists and translators is
evident in the manuscripts that survive. Had God chosen to miraculously
preserve the text (or a particular manuscript [MS]), we would expect the
Bible to affirm that fact and the MSS [manuscripts] to give evidence of it.
2. God’s Word has been preserved in the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek MSS.
While no two MSS are exactly identical, experts are able to sort through
the data and arrive at the correct reading most of the time (the process of
textual criticism). No part of Scripture has been lost or so corrupted that
we no longer have a reasonable idea of what the original said.
3. The Scriptures teach its own preservation but never mentions the means or
methods by which it would be preserved. Nothing in the Bible suggests
where or how it would be preserved. So we must look to history to show
us how God has preserved His Word.
4. The Word of God is preserved or contained in any translation of Scripture
that accurately reproduces the original writings. Even if a translation
contains certain flaws or weaknesses, it can still be considered the Word of
God (as the KJV translators affirmed).
IV. THE FUNDAMENTAL BASIS OF BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS: THE CLARITY OF
SCRIPTURE.
A. The Meaning of the Clarity of Scripture: The Doctrine of Perspicuity
1. The Bible’s Central Message is Clear.
a) No Christian can fail to learn from the Bible what he needs to
know for his spiritual welfare. No sinner can fail to learn what he
needs to know to be right with God. The central message of the
Bible consists of revealed truth about creation, the fall into sin, the
provision of redemption, and the consummation in the Last Days.
These truths are essentially clear and evident to any reader.
(1) Psalm 119:105, 130
(2) 2 Tim 3:15
b) We do not deny that the Bible contains difficult, obscure passages.
Not all of the Bible is equally clear, and some parts defy
interpretation to this day, although we have to conclude that they
were understood at the time of writing and first reading. E.g.,
baptism for the dead (1 Cor 15:29).
2. The Bible Has One Truth System.

There is only one correlated, non-contradictory network of divine truth in
the Bible. God intended Scripture to say something, and it’s the job of the
interpreter to understand and appreciate the intended meaning.
3. The Bible Possesses Its Own Meaning.
Scripture interprets itself from within. One can compare Scripture with
Scripture and learn God’s message. Scripture does not need
supplementation from human reason, tradition, or experience to get the
central message.
B. Implications For Hermeneutics
1. The Bible Must Be Interpreted Correctly.
A biblical text has a particular meaning—the one intended by God and by
the original author. Every passage has a correct or proper interpretation
(although there is no guarantee that any particular interpreter will find it).
Since God’s intent was to communicate meaning, God’s people should be
able to find the correct interpretation.
2. The Bible Has No Contradictory Meanings.
Since there is one correlated, non-contradictory network of divine truth,
every interpretation must be compatible with and must fit in to the clear
teachings of other Scripture.
3. A Person Can Interpret Scripture Directly For Himself.
No official teaching office of the church, no clergyman, scientist,
psychologist, philosopher, or anyone else need come between a person and
the Bible. This does not mean, however, that every person will come to the
correct interpretation. But it does mean that interpretation is not limited to
an elite few. Every believer can get something from Scripture. Cf. 1 John
2:27.
This ability for direct access to and interpretation of the Bible does not
suggest that teachers are unnecessary. Pastors are expected to learn and
teach “sound doctrine” (Titus 1:9). Teachers are valuable in that they help
us understand and apply the Bible (cf. Ezra 7:10; Neh 8:8; Acts 8:31).
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 3: BASIC EQUIPMENT FOR BIBLICAL
HERMENEUTICS
I. BASIC TOOLS
A. General Tools
1. Bible Atlases
a) The NIV Atlas of the Bible, by Carl Rasmussen (Zondervan, 1989).
b) The Moody Atlas of Bible Lands, by Barry J. Beitzel (Moody,
1985).
c) The Macmillan Bible Atlas, Yohanan Aharoni and Michael Ave-
Yonah, eds. (Macmillan, 1977 rev.).
2. Bible Concordances
Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (Thomas Nelson, 2000).
3. Old Testament and New Testament Backgrounds
a) Old Testament:
(1) Kingdom of Priests, by Eugene Merrill (Baker, 1987).
(2) The Biblical World, Charles Pfeiffer, ed. (Baker, 1966).
b) New Testament:
(1) Backgrounds of Early Christianity, by Everett Ferguson
(Eerdmans, 1987).
(2) Harper’s World of the New Testament, Edwin Yamauchi,
ed. (Harper and Row, 1981).
(3) The New Testament Manners and Customs of Bible Times,
by Ralph Gower (Moody, 1987).
4. Bible Dictionaries
a) The New International Dictionary of the Bible, J. D. Douglas and
Merrill Tenney, eds. (Eerdmans, 1987).
b) The New Bible Dictionary, J. D. Douglas, ed. (Eerdmans, 1970).
c) The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary, R. K. Harrison, ed. (Moody,
1988).
Hermeneutics Lesson 3: Basic Equipment of Biblical Hermeneutics 15
5. Bible Encyclopedias
a) The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised, G. W.
Bromiley, ed. (Eerdmans, 1979-1988).
b) Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, Walter Elwell, ed. (Baker, 1988).
c) Zondervan Pictoral Encyclopedia of the Bible, Merrill C. Tenney,
ed. (Zondervan, l975).
6. Commentaries7
Commentaries are valuable because they provide:
a) Historical context
b) Answers to content questions
c) Thorough discussion of difficult texts
d) Interpretive options
e) Suggested applications
Note: Many of the above tools are available today in computerized form. Some
programs include all or most of the above resources free (e.g., Online Bible, e-
Sword). Programs that are more powerful can be quite expensive (e.g., Libronix,
Bible Works) but are very helpful for the serious Bible student. Many tools are
also freely available on the Internet.
B. A Couple Translations of the Bible
1. If you can’t read the original languages fluently, you must use a translation
of the Bible in your own language. The purpose of a translation is to
convert the original language text into the “receptor” language with as
much accuracy and clarity as possible. A reader with average intelligence
and education should be able to read and understand the language of the
translation.
2. It is probably best to use one main translation or version for preaching and
teaching, but use several good translations for study. A comparison of
translations will usually show where the problems in interpretation are and
perhaps help the reader understand the meaning.
3. Basic things to consider in choosing a good translation:
a) The Question of Original Language Texts
7
For a list of recommended commentaries and Bible study aids, consult www.dbts.edu/pdf/Booklist.pdf.
Versions of the Bible differ because they follow different original

language textual traditions. There is some variation within the
available Hebrew and Greek MSS. The vast majority of these
variations have little or no affect on the meaning of the text. A very
small minority of the variations affect meaning. None of the
variations changes the overall impact of Scripture or change what
the Bible teaches in general.
(1) Taken as a whole, no conservative, literal translation of the
Bible will lead you astray no matter what its textual
background.
(2) OT: There are only a handful of variations in the various
editions of the Hebrew OT (the Masoretic text).
(3) NT: Majority/Byzantine family vs. Critical/Eclectic family
(a) Among all the MS evidence for the NT, two
primary “families” emerge. Those within a family
vary only insignificantly from other MSS within
that family and vary more significantly from the
other family of texts. Still, the percentage of
difference between the major families of NT MSS is
very low; less than five percent of variations have
much significance. Most variations have to do with
word order, spelling, and the like, and have very
little impact on meaning.
(b) Majority/Byzantine text advocates claim that the
best translations follow the majority of Greek MSS.
About 80% of available Greek MSS are in the
Byzantine family of texts. Most of these MSS are
no older than the Middle Ages (8th-15th centuries).
Older translations like the KJV follow this family of
texts.
(c) Critical/eclectic text advocates claim that the best
translations follow the oldest available MSS. The
oldest MS are papyrus fragments, many of which
were not recovered until the 1800s. Some of these
fragments go all the way back to around 120 AD.
Other MSS of this family are from the 3rd and 4th
centuries, so they are considerably older than the
Majority/Byzantine family.
(d) The vast majority of NT scholars today recognize
the critical text (NA27/UBS4) as the best and most
faithful reproduction of the original MSS. Newer
translations follow this MS tradition.
(e) Some scholars maintain their loyalty to the

Majority/Byzantine text type. Older translations
(like the KJV and NKJV) follow this MS tradition.
(4) All things considered, it is wise to consult at least one of
the newer translations, several of which can be very helpful
for the interpreter (e.g., NASB, ESV, NIV).
Excursus on the King James Version Only (KJO) Movement
The KJV has been and remains an important and influential translation of the
Bible in English. Many believers use this translation and find it very satisfactory.
Unfortunately, some attribute direct inspiration to the KJV itself. That is, they say
that the KJV is the result of divine inspiration just as the original manuscripts
were. They may even claim that the KJV corrects or supersedes the originals.
They claim that the KJV is the one and only legitimate English translation, and
that it alone has been miraculously, inerrantly preserved.
The more strident KJO advocates not only claim that the KJV is the only
preserved Word of God in English, but also condemn most other English
translations as corrupt or even Satanic. To them, if it’s not the KJV, it’s not the
Bible. Any variation from the KJV is totally unacceptable, in their view.
While everyone has a right to his own opinion on the matter, we must recognize
that the extreme end of the KJO movement is in serious error. Inspiration and
inerrancy apply to the original manuscripts only. Translations and versions are
“inspired” to the degree that they accurately reproduce the original MSS. God did
not miraculously prevent slight errors from creeping into any particular MS of the
Bible. The KJV itself has undergone significant revisions over the years to
improve its accuracy and to update its language. Further, we can demonstrate
conclusively that the KJV has its own set of weaknesses. Claims of divine
inspiration, preservation, and inerrancy cannot be applied perfectly and without
reservation to any translation, English or otherwise. One should not attribute to a
copy or translation what is true only of the original.
The KJV is a fine translation that many Christians treasure. We can acknowledge
the value of the KJV without falling into the errors noted above. We can also
acknowledge the value of other accurate English translations without forsaking
the KJV. We must deny and refute the claims of the extremists in the KJO
movement.
b) Theories of Translation
Before going on, we should recognize that every translation also
provides some interpretation.
Note the Quote: Anyone who translates also interprets: the
translation is not simply a rendering of the underlying text but also
an expression of the translator’s understanding of it. And every
translator is a child of his own time and of his own culture. … We
must therefore distinguish between what comes from the original

text and what is added by the translator.8
(1) Literal or Formal Correspondence
(a) Literal versions keep as closely as possible to the
original wording. They emphasize what the author
wrote/said; emphasis is put on the text. Little effort
is made to simplify or eliminate elements of the text
that would require explanation or education (i.e.,
awkward or foreign-sounding expressions).
(b) The KJV, NKJV, NASB, and ESV are good
examples of essentially literal translations (although
none of them are word-for-word literal in many
cases).
(c) PROBLEMS:
(i) Literal translations can obscure the meaning
of language if they follow the original
language “woodenly,” i.e., without
explaining the meaning of the phrase. E.g.,
“coals of fire” (Isa 6:6) actually means,
“burning coals” in English. Or “body of His
glory” (Phil 3:21) means “His glorious
body.” “Before your face” (Mark 1:2) means
“ahead of.” Others: “possess his vessel” (1
Thes 4:4), “touch a woman” (1 Cor 7:1),
“Anathema Maranatha” (1 Cor 16:22), or
“Lord of Sabaoth” (Rom 9:29).
Other examples of Hebrew or Greek idioms9
that sound odd in English: opened his mouth
and taught, answered and said, gall of
bitterness, went in and out, necessity is laid
upon me, there is tidings in his mouth, pride
of his countenance, fill up the measure of
your fathers, make the heart of this people
fat, and make their ears heavy, ye are
straightened in your own bowels
8
Ernst Würthwein, The Text of the Old Testament: An Introduction to the Biblia Hebraica. Translated by Erroll F.
Rhodes (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979), p. 47. Quoted in Marlowe, “Against the Theory of ‘Dynamic
Equivalence,’ http://www.bible-researcher.com/dynamic-equivalence.html
9
An idiom is a particular expression that makes sense in one language but that may not make much sense when
translated literally into another. Examples: in a pickle, a day late and a dollar short, once in a blue moon, ace up your
sleeve, make a killing, rat race, walk in the park. How would you translate such expressions into another language?
(ii) There are “degrees” of literalness in the

literal or formal correspondence theory.
Examples:
(a) Genesis 5:32 says that Noah was the
“son of” 500 years.
(b) Isaiah 40:1 “Speak ye comfortably”
(KJV). The Hebrew has “speak to
the heart” and is better translated
“speak kindly” (NASB) or “speak
tenderly” (NIV).
(c) Matthew 1:18 Lit. “She was having
in the belly by the Holy Spirit” but is
correctly translated “she was with
child.”
(d) Matthew 27:44 “Cast the same in His
teeth” (KJV) is not in the Greek text.
It says simply, “They reviled/
reproached Him.”
(e) The expression “God forbid” (Rom
3:4, 6, 31, etc.) in the KJV is literally
“may it never be.”
(f) 1 Corinthians 16:2 is literally
“according to the first of the
sabbath,” where “sabbath,”
following a common Hebrew usage,
means “week.”
(g) 1 Corinthians 16:13 has “quit ye like
men” (KJV), which is one word in
Greek, meaning “behave like men,”
i.e., with boldness and courage.
(d) Whereas other theories of translation studiously
avoid ambiguity in their desire to communicate the
meaning of a passage, the literal theorists want to
retain ambiguity where the text seems to warrant it.
Literal translations give a word-for-word rendering
when possible and let the reader discern the
meaning for himself.
Note: As you can see, literal translations require some

significant interpretation on the part of the reader. Since the
translator converts the expression directly into another
language, the reader must figure out the meaning of
unfamiliar expressions himself. This may be beneficial, but
it also requires more interpretive skill of the reader.
Another Note: The only place you’ll find a truly word-for-
word translation is in an interlinear Bible. All other
translations have some degree of non-literalness inherent
within them.
(2) Dynamic Equivalent or Functional Equivalent
(a) Dynamic equivalents seek to present the meaning of
the text in clear, accurate, idiomatic language. They
update language and grammar for modern readers,
trying to achieve the equivalent effect of the
original in the receptor language. They emphasize
content over form; the emphasis is on what the
author meant, not on how he said it.
(b) The NIV, NAB, and TEV are examples of dynamic
equivalent translations.
(c) PROBLEMS:
(i) Dynamic equivalents tend to be quite
interpretive. The translators give the reader
what they think the author meant rather than
his literal words. They provide the modern
English equivalent of the Hebrew or Greek
idioms, which often is not a word-for-word
translation.
(ii) This theory has less objectivity (or more
subjectivity) in translation; it puts the
emphasis on the reader; i.e., so he can
understand the text.
(iii) The modern language of some of these
translations can be shallow and faddish,
using the latest jargon current in the culture.
This tends to trivialize the contents.
“The tendency in these versions is to reduce
the text to a uniformly bland, [colorless],
and even childish manner of speaking
throughout the Bible.”10
10
Michael Marlowe, “Against the Theory of ‘Dynamic Equivalence,’ http://www.bible-researcher.com/dynamic-
equivalence.html
(iv) Rendering the text in clear language for the

reader (readability) often comes at the
expense of faithfulness to the original
wording (accuracy). In some cases, the
translation/interpretation is simply wrong
(e.g., Heb 11:26 in the NIV). Dynamic
translations also tend to ignore some OT
allusions and associations and drop some
words altogether (e.g., “behold” in Luke
1:48).
E.g., Isa 57:15a; Amos 4:6; Phil 2:1; 1 Pet
1:13 (compare KJV & NIV)
(3) Free Translation (paraphrase)
(a) The intent of a free translation is to render the
Scriptures in the most simple and easily understood
way as possible. Free translations convey the ideas
but with less concern about the exact words of the
original language.
(b) Examples are The Living Bible, Phillips
Translation, and The Message.
(c) PROBLEMS:
(i) Free translations tend to be careless with the
original words; they interpret and explain
the meaning too much. In their effort to
eliminate anything difficult or unusual from
their translation, they often fail to convey
the original meaning accurately.
(ii) Free translations are often the work of one
person (e.g., Taylor, Peterson) rather than a
committee of scholars, and reflect that
person’s biases.
(iii) Free translations are more like running
commentaries than faithful reproductions of
the original words.
“Paraphrases take greater risks with the
original, and they confound translation with
commentary, leading to expectations on the
part of the reader than are not borne out by
the original text.”11
11
Paul Helm, “Dynamic Equivalence—Is There Such a Thing?” http://paulhelmsdeep.blogspot.com/2009/09/
dynamic-equivalence-is-there-such-thing.html, Sept. 14, 2009.
(iv) Reading a free translation can be somewhat

helpful, but one should not use a free
translation as a primary text. Free
translations have no value for Bible study.
Both formal equivalent (literal) versions and functional equivalent
(dynamic) versions have strengths and weaknesses, and both are
useful tools for students of the Word. A literal version is especially
helpful for those who want to preserve, as much as possible, the
original form of the language and who want to interpret the text for
themselves. The KJV, NKJV, NASB, and ESV fit into this
category.
“Though not as fluent as other versions, its literal nature makes the
NASB the closest approximation to the Hebrew or Greek” (Grant
Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral).
Dynamic translations are helpful in that they “give the sense” of
expressions that English readers may not understand (like those
discussed above). The translators give the reader what they think
the authors meant, and in most cases, they get it right. When the
reader comes to an expression that seems obscure or unfamiliar, he
can refer to a dynamic version to help him understand the
language. Both kinds of translation are valuable. However, avoid
free translations and paraphrases.
II. THE SPIRITUAL QUALIFICATIONS OF THE INTERPRETER

A. The New Birth (regeneration)
John 8:43 shows that unsaved people cannot “hear” the words of Christ and thus
do not understand them.
1 Cor 2:10-14 shows that saved people have the capacity, through the ministry of
the Holy Spirit, to understand the Bible. Unsaved people are not qualified to
interpret the Bible.
B. A Deep Reverence for God. Deuteronomy 29:29; Proverbs 1:7
The interpreter of Scripture must realize that ultimately God, and thus His Word,
are incomprehensible. This produces humility when approaching biblical
hermeneutics.
C. A Desire to Know the Word of God
Terry calls this “a disposition to seek and know the truth” (Biblical Hermeneutics,
p. 156). A teachable spirit, along with a desire to know, are necessary.
D. Obedience and Maturity in Personal Life 1 Corinthians 2:15-3:3; Hebrews 5:11-
14
1. A “spiritual” (i.e., mature) Christian has the capacity to “judge all things”
and has “the mind of Christ.”
2. A worldly or disobedient Christian is liable to make inaccurate
interpretations because he is not in harmony with the Holy Spirit who gave
the Scriptures. Moises Silva recommends “a submissive predisposition” as
necessary for proper interpretation. “The desire to keep God’s
commandments, the determination to do God’s will—this is the great
prerequisite for true biblical understanding” (An Introduction to Biblical
Hermeneutics, Walter and Moises Silva, eds., pp. 24-25).
3. Included in this matter are common sense and a right use of reason and
logic. The Holy Spirit does not lead one to bizarre interpretations, those
which lack internal consistency, or which contradict themselves or other
revealed truth. There is nothing wrong with clear thinking and balance in
weighing options and finding possible meaning.
III. THE ROLE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT IN HERMENEUTICS: ILLUMINATION
A. The Meaning of Illumination: Illumination is an operation of the Holy Spirit on
the Christian reader’s mind, enabling him to grasp the significance of the Word of
God. See 1 Cor 2:4, 5; Eph 1:17; 1 Thes 2:13; 1 John 2:20, 21, 27.
B. The Need For Illumination
1. The human mind is depraved. It cannot of itself process spiritual things
correctly; it has a native hostility against God and all the things of God.
Depravity has a negative effect on the human mind, making it prone to
error and misjudgment. Thus, proper interpretation is impossible without
the Holy Spirit’s illumination.
a) 1 Corinthians 2:14
The natural man does not accept/welcome the truth of God. He
cannot “understand” spiritual things. I.e., he cannot experientially
know them, or experience them. The natural man cannot know or
experience the significance of the truths of God because they are
spiritually appraised, discerned, or discriminated, and he does not
have the Spirit. On the other hand, the spiritual man does have the
Spirit and can appraise spiritual things (v. 15).
b) Romans 8:7
c) Ephesians 4:18
2. The Holy Spirit operates on the mind of the interpreter. He illumines or
enlightens the person not the Bible. He does not explain Scripture as such
but quickens the human intellect so that it has the capacity to handle
Scripture properly. Cf. Psalm 119:18.
C. Clarification of What Happens in Illumination
a) No New Revelation is Given.
The illumination of the believer is always in association with the

Word of God. It does not give something in addition to the Word.
Illumination enables one to grasp the significance of the Word; it
does not provide direct revelation or inspiration.
b) Diligent Study is Required.
(1) The believer, the Holy Spirit, and the Word are in a
cooperative relationship.
(2) “Just as the biblical writer used his own talents and
investigation, so the biblical interpreter must read and study
and struggle to understand the biblical text. The more self-
consciously active the interpreter is in that process, the
more likely is the Spirit’s illumination” (Fred Klooster, The
Role of the Holy Spirit in the Hermeneutical Process, p.
460).
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 4: PRINCIPLES OF GENERAL
HERMENEUTICS, PART 1
We are finally ready to discuss the practical principles of hermeneutics, i.e., how do we go about
the task of understanding the Bible?
The goal of interpretation is to know the author’s intended meaning as expressed in the text. The
interpreter must discover, to the best of his ability, what the original author most likely meant his
audience to understand. Correct understanding of the meaning of the text must begin with the
meanings the writer gave to his own words.12 Before we can understand what a passage means
for us, we must understand what it meant originally. Employing the following rules or principles
of hermeneutics will help us recognize the author’s original meaning.
I. INTERPRET SCRIPTURE LITERALLY OR NORMALLY.

A. The preferred method of interpretation is called literal, normal, or literary
interpretation. We interpret the Scriptures in much the same way we do other
forms of literature—we assume the words mean what they say, unless there’s a
good reason not to. Since God used human language to reveal his thoughts to
man, man should employ the common principles used to interpret human
language. This approach can successfully handle every type of biblical literature.
We need not switch interpretive methods when we move to a different literary
form. Apply this general rule: “When the plain sense makes sense, seek no other
sense.”
B. The literal method of interpretation is often called the “grammatical-historical”
method because the goal is to find what the original author intended to say. The
grammar and the historical background of a passage are central in determining the
original author’s intent. The reader of the Bible takes the passages as they were
meant grammatically and historically by their original authors and for their
original audiences.13 Meaning is anchored in the text, not in the reader.
“We affirm the necessity of interpreting the Bible according to its literal, or
normal, sense. The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the
meaning which the writer expressed. Interpretation according to the literal sense
will take account of all figures of speech and literary forms found in the text.”14
12
William Arp, “Authorial Intent,” Baptist Bible College and Seminary, Journal of Ministry and Theology Volume 4
(Galaxie Software, 1997; 2003), vnp.4.1.40.
13
Mike Stallard, “Literal Interpretation: The Key to Understanding the Bible.” Baptist Bible College and Seminary,
Journal of Ministry and Theology Volume 4 (Galaxie Software, 1997; 2003), vnp.4.1.27-4.1.28.
14
Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, Article 15.
Hermeneutics Lesson 4: Principles of General Hermeneutics 26
C. Admittedly, sometimes the plain sense doesn’t make sense (e.g., Jesus’ statement
“I am the door.”). The grammatical-historical method takes figures of speech
(e.g., metaphors, similes) and symbolic language into consideration.
D. One might ask why we should interpret the Bible literally. After all, there is much
symbolism and figurative language in the Bible, which might suggest a less literal
approach. But there are several good reasons for approaching the Bible as literally
as possible.
1. The purpose of language is to communicate, not to confuse. God created
man to receive revelation. If that communication is not understandable in
its plain form, then language is not serving its purpose. The plain sense of
Scripture usually makes sense, which suggests a literal approach to the
text.
2. Dealing with the text of Scripture itself seems to argue for a literal
hermeneutic. Literalism is not just a philosophical form forced on the text;
it’s a proper inference from Scripture. The overall context of the Bible
argues for literal interpretation. The authors appear to expect their readers
to take them at their word.
For example, God expected the first humans to understand him and do
what he said (cf. Gen 1:27-30). Adam and Eve understood God according
to the plain meaning of his words.
3. Bible prophecy has been fulfilled literally. Prophecies concerning Jesus’
birth, rearing, ministry, death and resurrection were all fulfilled literally.
Even the symbolism in prophecy points to something tangible.
4. Without the literal method, all objective meaning is lost. If we can’t count
on words to mean what they say, interpretation becomes subjective and
arbitrary. It’s impossible to say what a text means if the parts of a text
stand for something other than their surface meanings.
5. The literal method of interpretation can deal with every part of the Bible in
a consistent manner. One can apply the grammatical-historical-literary
approach to any biblical literature.
6. Literal interpretation is able to deal with literary techniques such as figures
of speech and symbolism. One can maintain literal interpretive techniques
and still recognize types, symbols, parables, allegories and fables.
II. LET SCRIPTURE INTERPRET SCRIPTURE.
“The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself;
and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of
any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one) it may be reached and
known by other places that speak more clearly” (Westminster
Confession, chap. 9).
A. We look to the Bible itself to see how to interpret it. But how can we interpret the
Bible before we figure out how to interpret the Bible? Seems like a circular
problem.
Solutions:
 God apparently “programmed” humans to use language. This is part of the
image of God that all people reflect. In hermeneutics, man uses the received
laws of language to gain a basic understanding of what the Bible says. This
basic understanding can then be further examined and refined with continued
study.
E.g., Adam and Eve must have understood God’s communication to them
immediately after their creation, even though they had never taken a class in
language arts. They had an inherent capacity for language as bearers of God’s
image. They understood what God said, and so can we.
 Some principles are drawn from the Bible itself, such as:
1. The doctrine of inspiration guarantees that there are no contradictions in
Scripture. If God is the author, everything should fit together in a non-
contradictory system of truth.
2. The repeated commands to obey God’s Word imply that believers have the
capacity to understand and do what God has said.
3. How the Bible writers use other Scripture informs us about how we should
use it.
4. Fulfillment of prophecy is a good indicator how to interpret prophecy,
especially the unfulfilled parts.
 Interpretation calls for a process of refinement.
1. The reader approaches Scripture using the received laws of literature (i.e.,
the normal way of understanding what you read).
2. Based on this normal understanding of literature, one draws conclusions
and hypotheses, formulates doctrines, etc.
3. One then checks to see if his conclusions fit consistently with the rest of
Scripture. One must modify and reformulate his beliefs as needed to
maintain conformity with Scripture.
4. Principles of interpretation naturally emerge from this process.
It may seem like circular reasoning to draw the principles of interpretation from
the Bible so that we can turn around and use them to interpret the Bible. But that
is essentially what we must do. We find the rules of interpretation in the Bible
itself.
B. The Bible contains one interlocking network of non-contradictory truth. The Bible
is in complete harmony and is capable of being interpreted from within. It is self-
interpreting.
The Holy Spirit is the divine author of Scripture. Any particular part of Scripture
must fit with every other part of Scripture. An interpretation of a passage must be
in harmony with the rest of Scriptural teaching.
C. How to Apply This Principle
1. A clearly established teaching cannot be overturned by a single statement
or an obscure passage. In other words, the clear teaching of the Bible must
inform us how to understand unclear passages.
Examples:
a) 1 John 3:6 “Does not sin.” Cf. 1 John 1:8
b) Hebrews 6:4-6 “If he falls away.” Cf. John 10:28-29
2. Obscure texts must be interpreted in light of the plain and positive texts.
Examples:
a) James 2:20-26, cf. John 3:16, Rom 5:1, Eph 2:8, etc.
b) 1 Corinthians 15:29 Baptism for the dead.
III. CHECK THE CONTEXT.
A. The Importance of Context
1. Simply put, context is king. The literary context of a passage has great
influence on its meaning.
“Unless we can grasp the whole before attempting to dissect the parts,
interpretation is doomed from the start. Statements simply have no
meaning apart from their context” (Grant Osborne, The Hermeneutical
Spiral, p. 19).
2. The biblical authors wrote with an argument in view. With a few
exceptions (e.g., Proverbs), authors usually express their thoughts in a
series or flow of connected ideas. Therefore, the interpreter must know
where the thought of the text starts and how the pattern develops.
3. It is easy to fragment the text into isolated words and phrases and then try
to extract meaning from these fragments. False doctrines are often built on
passages taken out of their contexts.
B. Varieties of Context
1. Book Context and Purpose in Writing
Not only the sections of a biblical book but the author’s purpose in writing
and the major theme of the book should be considered as context.
“The parts have no meaning apart from the whole. Only when the message
of the whole passage is considered can the parts be studied for details of
this central message” (Grant Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral, p. 125).
2. Section Context
This deals with the major blocks of material in a book, i.e., the outline of
the book and the relation of a passage to the major block. This requires
reading the book in order to get the sectional divisions, or at least having a
trustworthy outline of the book at hand.
3. Immediate Context
a) This is the general flow of subject matter at hand. It entails the
immediate clauses and phrases of the passage, i.e., the paragraph.
“The paragraph is the key to the thought-development of biblical
books” (Grant Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral, p. 23).
b) The paragraph is probably the most important context to consider
when trying to understand a particular word. Every word has a
certain range of meaning (“semantic range”), but context nearly
always narrows down the options to a very limited number of
possible intended meanings.
4. Parallel Passages: verbal and real
a) Verbal Parallels: If you are trying to find the meaning of a
particular word, you can check where else in the Bible the same
word is used.
b) Real Parallels: The Gospel accounts in particular are filled with
parallel passages. You should check these parallel passages to see
how the other writers recorded the event.
IV. STUDY THE LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR.
A. Consider Word Meaning.
The best tool for word study is a lexicon (like a dictionary) because it deals with
words.
1. General Principles of Word Meanings
a) Language Communicates a Particular Meaning (Univocal—“one
voice”).
(1) Words have but one meaning (signification) in a particular
context. They can have only one set of propositional,
cognitive values in any given place.
Note the Quote: There is only one meaning for every place
in Scripture. Otherwise the meaning of Scripture would not
only be unclear and uncertain, but there would be no
meaning at all—for anything which does not mean one
thing surely means nothing (William Ames).
(2) A denial of the univocal nature of language renders

communication impossible. One cannot even try to
disprove this rule without using it. Verbal expressions like
puns, jokes, and double entendres violate the rule, but we
find few of these in the Bible.
(3) What about a “deeper” or “fuller” meaning, one in addition
to or beyond which the author intended (sensus plenior)? A
few considerations:
(a) Inspiration guarantees that what the human author
intended and wrote is exactly what the divine author
intended and caused to be written.
(b) No author or speaker is ever aware of every
potential implication of his words. Any additional
meaning would still be based on the original intent,
not different from the author’s original words and
intent.
(c) Any supposed meaning not based on the words of
the original passage is suspect. Base your
interpretation on the plain sense of the words
whenever possible.
b) Words Have A Semantic Range.
Semantic range refers to how a word was used and what it meant at
the time of writing. Words can mean different things in different
contexts. However, most words have a fairly stable semantic core
so that they can’t mean anything anytime.
c) Words Have Meaning in Association With Other Words.
(1) Words do not have automatic meaning; they do not carry
meaning outside of their relationship with other words.
Words are assigned meanings through use.
(2) The basic unit of language is not the word but the sentence,
which then extends to the paragraph and, in the case of the
Bible, the section and eventually the book.
d) Word Meanings Are Ultimately What the Author Intended.
Words derive meaning from the author who wrote them, not from
themselves. Proper biblical hermeneutics determines the author’s
intended meaning and conveys that same meaning and message
today.
2. Factors in Determining Word Meanings

a) Etymology: Etymology is an attempt to trace the history of a word
back to its original meaning by looking at the component parts of
the word. This can be valuable, but it’s easy to find dubious
meanings. E.g., the word for church (ekklesia) is “to call” plus
“out,” hence, “those called out.” Yet the proper meaning of the
term is “assembly, congregation.”
English examples of words that defy etymology: pineapple,
butterfly, grape nuts, dandelion.
b) Usage: Usage determines meaning. Usage of a word in a particular
context is the primary factor in determining the meaning of a word.
B. Consider Word Relationships.
1. Find the Unit of Thought.
Ask the questions, “What’s the point?” “What does the author say in the
paragraph?” “Why does he say it at this point?”
2. Look For Connectors.
These words indicate transitions from one thought to another. Noting the
transitions enables one to follow the author’s argument within a paragraph
and from one paragraph to another. It helps to follow the inner logic of the
passage.
Examples: and, therefore, just as, even so, if…then, such as, since,
because
V. FIND THE AUTHOR’S PURPOSE IN WRITING.
A. Check the Author’s Statements.
1. Ecclesiastes 12:13
2. Luke 1:1-4
3. John 20:31
4. 1 John 1:1-4; 5:13
B. Check the Author’s Exhortations.
1. Hebrews 10:19-23; 10:32-35; 12:1-3
2. “Let us . . . “ Heb 4:1, 11; 6:1; 12:1; 13:15
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 4: PRINCIPLES OF GENERAL
HERMENEUTICS, PART 2
This lesson continues our examination of the principles of hermeneutics.
VI. SEEK TO UNDERSTAND THE HISTORICAL-CULTURAL BACKGROUND.

The preferred method of hermeneutics is often described as “grammatical-historical”
interpretation because it takes the historical setting (or culture) of a passage into
consideration. Culture may be defined as “the customary beliefs, social forms, and
material traits of a racial, religious, or social group” (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate
Dictionary). We must understand such details because they have a significant influence
on what the author intended to say and how we interpret him.
A. The Importance of Historical and Cultural Information
“Culture includes what people think and believe, say, do, and make” (Roy Zuck,
Basic Bible Interpretation, p. 79). Cultural categories to consider: political,
religious, economic, legal, agricultural, architectural, material, domestic,
geographical, military, and social.
1. It Provides the Necessary Setting For the Biblical Material.
God’s revelation is rooted in historical fact. Revelation came through
certain cultural forms in at least two ways: (1) The Bible writers
themselves came from a particular culture; and (2) the message from God
came to people in terms of their specific cultural settings.
Example: In the OT, prosperity was described in terms of sitting under
one’s vine and fig tree (1 Kings 4:25; Micah 4:4).
2. It May Provide the Occasion for Writing.
Certain books owe their occasion for writing to historical-cultural events
or other factors.
Examples: Lamentations (fall of Jerusalem), Joel (locust plague), Ezra
(return from Babylon), 1 Corinthians (Paul’s response to problems at
Corinth)
3. It Provides Understanding of Biblical Teaching.
Historical and cultural study is necessary for the modern reader to
understand many biblical expressions, such as the ancient landmark (Prov
22:28), various items of clothing, farming methods, household items,
money, contracts, etc.
Examples: Judges 12:14 – what is the significance of this bit of

information? [Probably that having many sons and riding about on a
donkey were status symbols in Israel at that time. The forty sons could not
have been possible without multiple wives, a sign of great wealth. Thus,
Abdon was a wealthy, prominent man.]
Matt 12:38-41 – without a familiarity with the OT and with Jewish
culture, you would have little idea about what Jesus meant.
B. How to Determine Cultural Pertinence
How does the modern reader decide whether a biblical detail pertains only to
Bible times or if it has lasting significance? Is a principle timeless or culturally
bound?
Note: Many things in the Bible are “culturally bound,” that is, pertaining to a
particular place and time and not directly applicable beyond that context. Part of
the art and skill of Bible interpretation is recognizing when something has
continuing significance and when it does not. Example: Sabbath Day observation
We can ask several questions of a passage to help discern whether something has
continuing application or is culturally bound.
1. Is it primarily an OT practice for Israel or a NT practice for the church?
Deciding on this will settle many issues.
Examples of OT requirements no longer in force: dietary laws (Lev 11;
Deut 14), tasseled garments (Num 15:38-40), rules for grain harvesting
(Lev 23:5-20). NT believers are “not under the law” (Rom 6:14; Gal 5:18).
Dispensationalists see a distinction between Israel and the church, while
others try to bridge the two. How you apply OT principles will depend on
your understanding of the relationship between Israel and the church.
2. What is the morality of the situation? If the detail seems to be based on
God’s unchanging nature, then it likely has permanent application for all
believers of all times.
Examples:
a) Genesis 9:6—Capital punishment is based on the image of God in
man.
b) 1 Corinthians 11:3—Subordination of women to men in the home
and local church is grounded in the Trinity.
c) 1 Timothy 2:12-14—Women preachers are prohibited on the basis
of creation and fall.
d) 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-20; Rev 21:8—Various “sin lists” describe
behaviors that are inherently wrong for all people everywhere at all
times.
3. What is Prescriptive and What is Descriptive?

a) What’s the difference?
(1) Prescription: to command or demand; something ought to
be done or believed
(2) Description: what happened; may or may not imply that we
should do the same
b) Examples:
(1) Descriptive: Many of the events in the OT are descriptive
and do not offer us an example to follow. E.g., many events
in the life of Abraham; events in Judges; going to the
temple at the hour of prayer (Acts 3:1); preaching until
midnight (Acts 20:7)
(2) Prescriptive: Believers ought to meet regularly for worship
and instruction (Heb 10:25).
4. Is It a Timeless Principle or a Specific Application?
A principle may be absolute and timeless while its application in the
biblical setting may be culture bound. It is possible for the Bible to support
an absolute principle but not make the application absolute, i.e., the same
in every culture of every age.
Examples:
a) Prayer Practices. The Bible reflects various postures for prayer,
such as standing, kneeling, prostration, upraised hands, downcast
eyes, etc.
b) Transvestism (Deut 22:5). This is an absolute principle but may be
expressed differently in different cultures. The principle of cross
dressing is sexual perversion. Does this prohibit a Scot from
wearing his kilts? What about men wearing earrings today?
c) Footwashing (John 13:12-16). The principle is humble service.
d) The Holy Kiss (1 Cor 16:20). The principle is fellowship.
e) Women Wearing Veils (1 Cor 11:5). The principle is recognizing
proper authority and gender roles.
f) Hair and Dress Styles (1 Tim 2:9-10). The principle is modesty and
humility.
5. Is It A Timeless Principle or a Historical-Cultural Occasion?
Examples:
a) Eating Meat Offered to Idols (1 Cor 8-10). The practice is

uncommon in many cultures, but the principle is timeless—give no
offense to a weak brother and to give no credence to idolatry in any
form.
b) Separation From A Brother (2 Thess 3:6). Laziness or a refusal to
work was the particular issue here, but the broader issue was
disobedience to apostolic teaching and authority.
6. What is the Bible’s Consistent Witness on the Topic?
a) The Bible uniformly witnesses against murder, adultery,
drunkenness, theft, hatred, homosexuality and many others sinful
behaviors.
b) It always promotes love, mercy, fidelity, patience, kindness, good
works, honesty, etc.
c) See if the Bible consistently condemns or approves of the behavior
in question.
7. What is the Modern Application?
When we seek to apply a biblical principle, several options are available.
a) Retain Both the Principle and Its Cultural Expression.
We may decide that it’s necessary to do the exact same thing the
biblical characters did in the same way they did it.
Examples where we retain both the principle and the expression of
it: family roles, church attendance on the Lord’s Day, church polity
b) Retain the Principle But Update the Cultural Expression.
Specify the principle involved and think about appropriate ways to
apply it to the modern situation.
Examples: substitute handshake for the holy kiss, substitute a
church building for in-home meetings, use media (TV, radio,
newspaper, Internet) to proclaim the Gospel
c) Assume Both the Principle and Its Biblical Cultural Expression are
Culturally Bound.
In some cases, neither the practice nor the principle have
continuing authority. We do not have to apply the principle or the
practice.
Examples:
(1) The practice of levirate marriage (Gen 38:11ff)
(2) Not charging interest to a fellow Jew (Exod 22:25)
(3) Purification of women after childbirth (Lev 12:1-8)
(4) Head coverings on women as an expression of submission

to authority (1 Cor 11:13-15). This one is hotly disputed by
some.
VII. SEEK ONE PRIMARY MEANING.
A. In general, each passage has a single meaning, and only one meaning, which the
human author understood and intended to convey to his readers. The most
important question to ask is “What main point is the author is trying to make?”15
We find this through a grammatical-historical analysis of the text. We are not
trying to find a “deeper” or “spiritual” meaning, but the plain, clear meaning on
the “surface” of the text.
B. The implications or applications of a passage may be far reaching. The human
author may not have understood the full significance of his inspired words (see 1
Pet 1:10-12). We also find that NT authors, under inspiration, sometimes employ
OT texts in ways we would not normally expect, beyond their apparent
grammatical-historical meanings. For example, Matthew quotes Hosea 11:1 (“out
of Egypt I have called my son”), which speaks of the nation of Israel, and applies
these words directly to Jesus. Other passages which use the OT in creative ways:
Luke 20:17-18/Isa 8:14-15, Heb 2:13/Isa 8:17-18, Mt 4:12-16/Isa 9:1-2, 1 Cor
15:54/Isa 25:8, etc.16
C. For our purposes, we must apply the rule, “A text cannot mean what it never
meant.” The original meaning must be evident in how we interpret a passage.
VIII. THINK DISPENSATIONALLY.
A. God’s relationship with man changed over time in response to the progressive
unfolding of revelation. From Genesis to Revelation, we see evidence of different
arrangements (dispensations) between God and man. Thus, some parts of the
Bible simply don’t directly apply to modern believers. The Mosaic Law, for
example, applies specifically to the Israelites before the time of Christ, not to
church-age believers (Rom 6:14; Gal 2:19; Col 2:14). Most of the Book of
Revelation will not come into play until after the return of Christ.
B. However, this does not imply that we can’t learn from the parts that don’t directly
apply to us. The entire Bible is “profitable” (2 Tim 3:16) and all of it is beneficial
for us. So try to determine if the text you are reading directly applies to you, or if
you should seek more general principles to apply.
1 Cor 10:11 Now all these things happened to those people as examples, and they
were written for our instruction, to whom the ends of the ages have come.
C. Note: Progressive revelation brings about additional light, but it does not
completely reverse or contradict previous revelation. New revelation may add to
or supersede, but it does not contradict. A word or idea in the OT does not take on
an opposite meaning in the NT. For example, the word “Israel” means the same
thing in both testaments. Progressive revelation is like the building process: the
15
Fee and Stuart, pp. 22-23.
16
For more on this issue, see the articles by Robert Thomas in Master’s Seminary Journal, vols. 12 and 13.
superstructure is added to the foundation; it doesn’t replace it.

IX. PRINCIPLIZE.
A. Much of the Bible is historical narrative, that is, written in story form. A common
error in interpretation is thinking that just because something happened in a Bible
narrative, it should always happen that way. Instead, we should seek underlying
principles from the biblical stories. Find those timeless, abiding truths that the
narrative illustrates.
B. For example, the Book of Ruth teaches us several important lessons, such as the
importance of loyalty, the grace of God, and how God provides for His people.
But one should not think that just because Ruth found her husband by lying down
at the feet of a sleeping farmer, all girls seeking husbands should do likewise.
Likewise, the story of David and Goliath does not teach us how to deal with our
own personal “giants.” What are some underlying principles in that story? [Trust
God, be willing to take risks, righteous indignation, etc.]
X. PROPOSE A TENTATIVE INTERPRETATION.
Once you’ve gone through the necessary steps, state what you think the text means. Make
sure your interpretation rests solidly on the evidence from the passage. You must be able
to support your interpretation from the context of the passage and from historical and
grammatical evidence.
It should be obvious by now that accurate biblical interpretation requires a good amount
of study and thought. Such rigorous work is often difficult, but not beyond the ability of
most mature Christians.
XI. CHECK YOUR INTERPRETATION.
Once you think you understand what a passage is saying, how can you be sure that your
interpretation is valid? Perhaps you are mistaken. Consider the following:
A. Christians have been interpreting the Bible for many centuries. It is highly
unlikely that you are the only one in the history of the church who has found the
proper interpretation of a passage. Check to see if your understanding is
consistent with what other respected, orthodox interpreters say. If no one else
shares your conclusions, you’re almost certainly wrong.
How can you check your interpretations? [good commentaries, your pastor]
B. The most probable interpretation is coherent—it must make sense. An important
rule of interpretation is, “If the plain sense makes sense, seek no other sense.” If
God is the author of Scripture, every interpretation will be reasonable and
sensible. Interpretations that are contradictory or nonsensical are false.
C. The most probable interpretation follows the recognized norms of the language in
which it was written. A true interpretation will not violate the standard rules of
grammar or violate the conventions for its type of literature.
D. Questions to ask:
1. Does it express or conform to orthodox Christian theology? Do other

respected, orthodox Christians hold this view?
2. Does it correspond to typical patterns of God’s truth or activity as clearly
revealed in rest of the Bible?
3. Does it work in Christian experience, producing godliness and other valid
qualities and advancing God’s program?
XII. MAKE NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE APPLICATIONS.
A. Interpretation should lead into application (James 1:22). Once you understand a
principle, you should start thinking about how to apply it to your life. Ask
yourself, “So what? What must I do with this principle?”
B. We must rely on the ministry of the Holy Spirit to help us both understand and
rightly apply Scripture.
C. Application is more individual/personal than is interpretation. How you apply a
principle may be different than how others apply it. Application is often
determined by one’s personal
1. need
2. situation
3. level of maturity
4. desire to know and follow God
5. cultural and denominational traditions
6. current historical situation17
D. Some Helpful Guidelines
1. Be sure to apply the primary intent of the biblical author,
not just minor details of the passage.
2. Not all truth is meant for immediate or personal
application. The Bible often records that which it does not
advocate. Some passages simply do not contain many
applicable principles. Don’t try to force an application
where one does not reasonably exist.
3. Application should never seem contrary to other clear Bible
passages.
4. Application should never seem contrary to Christlike
conduct. Extremes in application are as dangerous as they
are in interpretation.
5. Questions to ask of a passage to find applications:
a) Are there examples to follow?
17
Utley
b) Are there commands to obey?

c) Are there errors to avoid?
d) Are there sins to forsake?
e) Are there promises to claim?
f) Are there rules by which to live?
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 5: Interpretive Pitfalls
As noted earlier, error in interpretation is very common. Failure to interpret the Bible adequately
is one of the reasons Christianity is so fragmented today. Interpretive errors fall into various
categories, which we’ll explore below. If we are aware of the kinds of errors that are common,
we can intentionally avoid them. This lesson will examine several common interpretive errors.
I. Allegorization: An allegory is a comparison—“this stands for that.” The allegorical

method of interpretation asserts that underlying the plain sense of the text is a hidden or
deeper meaning. Each element of a text is given a meaning other than, or in addition to,
the plain sense of the text. The interpreter’s job is to go beyond the plain sense of the text
to get at the “real” meaning.
A. Examples: The four rivers of Genesis 2 represent the body, soul, spirit, and mind;
the seven locks of Samson’s hair represent the seven deadly sins; in the story of
Jesus turning water into wine, the clay water pots represent man, and the wine
represents the joy of the Holy Spirit.
B. This style of interpretation was very common in the Middle Ages before the
Reformation. Martin Luther, for example, before his conversion, followed the
mediaeval method of interpretation which distinguished many different meanings
in the same word. For example, Jerusalem could mean the good, virtue, or
reward; Babylon might mean the evil, vice, or punishment. One word may have
four bad and four good senses, according as it is understood literally or
figuratively. It was during the Reformation that a more literal/normal method of
interpretation regained acceptance.
C. Although a desire to apply a passage to the modern situation is commendable, we
dare not get more out of a text than is legitimate. A commitment to the
grammatical-historical approach will usually prevent such errors.
II. Spiritualizing: One is spiritualizing when he uses elements of a story to teach a spiritual
truth that is not rooted in the text. This practice is very similar to allegorizing.
Hermeneutics Lesson 5: Interpretive Pitfalls 41
For example, when teaching the story of the Gibeonites who tricked Joshua into a peace
treaty (Josh 9), one might suggest that Satan also tries to trick believers into making
wrong decisions. Or one might suggest that the command to annihilate the Amalekites (1
Sam 15) means that we must eradicate personal sin in our lives. Similarly, in David’s
fight with Goliath (1 Sam 17), one might suggest that we all have our own personal
“Goliaths” to fight, such as gossip, envy or pride. Jesus’ command that Simon “thrust out
a little from the land” (Luke 5:3) has nothing to do with separation from the world. Avoid
reading foreign ideas into the text.
III. Failure to account for personal bias
Every interpreter carries his own set of experiences, education, denominational traditions,
and a host of other influences with him as he interprets the Bible. If we are aware of such
biases, we can compensate for them by allowing the Bible to speak for itself. We must
intentionally avoid reading our own ideas into the text.
IV. Lifting a passage out of its context
A. Perhaps one of the most common interpretive errors occurs when the reader lifts a
passage out of its context. By removing a passage from the author’s day and the
author’s intended purpose, one can make the Bible say anything.18 Remember the
most basic interpretive rule: context is king.
B. Examples: 2 Peter 2:20-23 seems to imply that a believer can lose his salvation.
However, who is in view in the passage? (see vs. 1).
V. Failure to appreciate the significance of literary genre on the meaning of a passage
A. Each literary form in the Bible—narrative, poetry, wisdom, prophecy, Gospel,
epistle, apocalypse—has a set of rules that governs how the reader should
approach it. One should not confuse the different types of literature contained in
the Bible. Recognize the kind of literature you are studying and interpret it
accordingly.
B. Examples: Solomon’s admonition to “Train up a child in the way he should go:
and when he is old, he will not depart from it” (Pr 22:6) should be considered as a
statement of wisdom that generally proves true, not an iron-clad guarantee that
rightly-trained children will never stray.
VI. Failure to treat figures of speech appropriately
A. The Bible is filled with figures of speech, cultural idioms, and symbolic language.
Some of these expressions are easily interpreted (“I am the door,” “I am the good
shepherd,” “I am the vine.”). Others are quite difficult.
B. Examples: “Ephraim is a cake not turned” (Hos 7:8). “The horseleach hath two
daughters, crying, Give, give” (Prov 30:15). A person must “hate” the members of
his own family to be a disciple of Christ (Luke 14:26). One must eat Jesus’ flesh
and drink his blood to have eternal life (John 6:54-56).
VII. Oversimplification or neglecting the full biblical teaching
18
Utley.
A. It’s easy to pull one or two statements from the Bible and make conclusions based
on them. However, if we want to know what the Bible teaches on a particular
topic, we must consider everything the Bible says about it, not just a few verses.
Similarly, we must consider how all the details of a passage influence our
interpretation of it. Seemingly minor details often have major consequences.
B. Examples: Some suggest that because God is love, he would never punish the
sinner. However, God is also holy, righteous, and just. It is an error to emphasize
one of God’s attributes while ignoring the others.
Jesus’ statement that “all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye
shall receive” (Mt 21:22) should not be taken in isolation from the other things
Jesus and the other NT authors said about prayer. James’ statements about the
necessity of good works (James 2:20-26) should be correlated with what the Bible
states about salvation by grace without the works of the law.
VIII. Failure to distinguish between descriptive and prescriptive elements of a passage
A. Descriptive elements within a narrative simply declare what happened without
suggesting that anyone follow that example. Narrative literature is mostly
descriptive.
B. Prescriptive elements demand that we obey a command, follow an example, or
believe a doctrine. The epistles of the NT are largely prescriptive in nature.
C. The fact that something happened or that someone did something does not imply
that anyone else should do the same. The Bible often records events without
advocating that anyone follow suit. Some parts of the Bible record events that
were unique, not to be repeated. Some parts of the Bible simply lack direct,
practical application to us today.
Examples: Many of the things Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did were sinful and bad
examples. The Book of Judges is filled with stories of shocking and shameful
conduct. King David provides both good and bad examples for us. Some things
recorded in Acts at the beginning of the church are not repeatable.
IX. Failure to understand the meaning of words
A. Words do not have meaning in and of themselves. Words become meaningful as
they are used in connection with other words. Valid interpretation depends on
understanding the meaning of words as they appear in context.
B. A dictionary or lexicon will give you a range of meanings for most words. But the
author of the passage most likely meant only one thing. Context must inform us as
to what the most probable meaning of a word is. Usage of a word in context
always controls meaning.
C. The Bible student must be very careful when doing word studies. It’s easy to read
too much into the meaning of a word. Preachers seem especially prone to get
more out of a definition than what is appropriate.
D. Examples: John probably did not intend to convey any significant distinction in
meaning by his use of the different words for “love” (philos, agape) in John
21:15f. The word “servant/minister” (Acts 13:5), although literally translated as
“under-rower,” probably has little to do with rowing on the lower level of a
Roman ship.
X. Failure to account for the differences between the OT and the NT.
A. The NT is the guide for Christian living. The New Covenant has replaced the Old
Covenant. The OT is profitable in many ways and provides good information for
us by way of example and admonition, but is not the guidebook for Christian
living (1 Cor 10:11; 1 Tim 3:15-17).
B. We interpret the OT in light of the NT. We know how to apply the lessons from
the OT based on what the NT tells us. However, we should avoid reading NT truth
back into the OT. Most church truth was not revealed to OT saints—it was “a
mystery” to them. We don’t force ideas revealed in the NT back into the OT.
C. Many ideas introduced in the OT find their fulfillment in the NT (e.g., the seed of
the woman, the seed of Abraham, animal sacrifices, the person and work of the
Messiah). NT teaching corresponds to the meaning of concepts expressed in the
OT. The foundation laid in the OT is completed and filled in by the NT. NT
interpretation unfolds the intended meaning of the OT promises.19
D. Examples: God’s promise to Abraham regarding a “seed” (Gen 15:5) was fulfilled
by Christ (Gal 3:16, 19). The fulfillment corresponds to the original promise.
While the fulfillment of the promise by Christ goes beyond what Abraham
probably understood, it still corresponds to the OT sense.
19
Elliot E. Johnson, GTJ 11 (Fall 1990).
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 6: Interpreting Figurative Language
Some have accused those who hold to a literal approach to Scripture of interpreting the Bible
“flatly” or “woodenly,” that is, without recognizing how figures of speech influence meaning.
This accusation is mistaken. The literal-normal method recognizes and interprets figures of
speech appropriately and accurately.
I. Introduction
A. The Bible contains various types of literature: prose, poetry, wisdom, prophecy,
narrative, epistle, gospel, and parable, among others. We find figurative language
within every kind (genre) of literature.
B. What is figurative language? We recognize figurative language “when a word is
employed in another than its primary meaning, or applied to some object different
from that to which it is appropriated in common usage” (Milton Terry, Biblical
Hermeneutics). In other words, a writer uses figurative language when he
represents one thing in terms of something else.
C. How do we determine when an author is using figurative language?
1. If the item can be taken normally or if its plain sense or face value sense
makes good sense, take it literally.
E.g., the first few chapters of Genesis seem to be a historical report of
what actually happened, not a poem or a legend. The book of Job contains
much poetry, yet there is no overriding reason to think of it as fictional.
2. Figurative language is probably present when a literal understanding
appears to be unusual, contradictory, impossible, or absurd.
a) Isaiah 55:12 The trees “clap their hands”
b) Isaiah 66:2 “trembleth at my word.”
c) Jeremiah 1:8 Jeremiah was an “iron pillar” and a “bronze wall”
d) Micah 1:2 “Listen, O earth”
e) Matthew 7:3 “And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy
brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own
eye?”
Hermeneutics Lesson 6: Interpreting Figurative Language 46
f) Matthew 17:20 “If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye

shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it
shall remove.”
g) Matthew 26:26 “This [bread] is my body . . . take eat”
h) Acts 7:54 “Gnashing [grating] the teeth” at Stephen
i) Galatians 2:9 “Pillars” in the church
3. Note context. Does the context allow for or demand a figurative meaning?
Sometimes an explanation of the figure is near at hand in the context.
a) John 6:53f In Jesus’ discussion of eating his flesh and drinking his
blood, he says the following, suggesting that his words should not
be taken literally:
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth
nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they
are life.
b) 1 Thes 4:13-16 “Asleep” is explained as being “dead.”
4. Note genre. Some genres, such as prophecy and poetry, tend to include
large amounts of figurative language. Jesus used figurative language
frequently. The epistles have some, but not as much.
D. Figurative Language Yields Literal or Normal Meaning.
1. Passages are not to be interpreted both figuratively (non-literally) and
literally. The correct approach follows the intention of the author. Figures
of speech are intended by the authors to convey clear meaning. They do
not open the door to multiple senses or multiple meanings.
2. There is a difference between interpreting the Bible figuratively (invalid)
and interpreting figures of speech normally (valid). The presence of
figurative language does not require us to drop the literal-normal method
of interpretation.
II. Types of figurative language
A. Simile and Metaphor: Figures Emphasizing Comparison
1. Simile: A simile is an expressed or formal comparison using phrases such
as “like” or “as.”
Psalm 1:3-4 “He shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, … The
ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.”
Jeremiah 23:29 “Is not my word like a hammer”
Psalm 42:1 “As the deer pants for the streams of water”
1 Peter 1:24 “All flesh are like grass”
2. Metaphor: A metaphor is an unexpressed or implied comparison
describing one thing in terms of something else.
Psalm 23:1 “The Lord is my shepherd”

Isaiah 40:6 “All flesh is grass”
Luke 12:32 The disciples are a “little flock”
John 10:7, 9 “I am the door”
Hermeneutical principles for simile and metaphor: Look for the single,
authorially-intended meaning in the comparison, chiefly by noting context. The
meaning may involve more than one factor or comparison, but must be textually
based, i.e., found in the words.
Psalm 1:3; Jer 17:8—“Like a tree” probably refers to good health and abundant
fruit, as is explained in the rest of the verse. One should not press every detail
about a tree onto the Christian life. I.e., the bark and the sap are irrelevant.
Matt 5:13—“Ye are the salt of the earth.” Jesus probably was referring to the
preservative or flavoring nature of salt, not the many other things that could be
said about salt.
B. Parable and Allegory: Extended Comparisons
1. Parable: A parable is an extended simile where the story and its application
are usually kept separate.
Matthew 13:24, 31, 44, 45, 47 “The kingdom of heaven is like . . .”
We’ll take a whole lesson to discuss hermeneutical principles for
interpreting parables.
2. Allegory: An allegory is an extended metaphor where the story and its
application usually intermingle.
Psalm 80:8-15 The vine brought out of Egypt
Isa 5:1-6 Vine and vineyard
John 15:1-10 Vine and branches
Ephesians 6:11-17 Christian armor
Hermeneutical Principles for Allegories
1. Note the Historical Setting and Literary Context of the Allegory.
Judges 9:7-15 The only way to understand what this story is to be familiar
with the historical background described within the chapter.
2. Find the Points of Comparison.
John 15:1-10 The vine, vinedresser, and the branches
Ephesians 6 The pieces of armor
3. Remember that the presence of allegorical language in a passage does not
mean that literal statements in Scripture should be taken allegorically.
B. Figures Involving Association or Substitution

1. Metonomy: the substitution of one word or thing for another, usually
because of a close mental association.
Genesis 42:38 Jacob’s “gray hair” would go down to Sheol in sorrow. This
speaks of his old age, being an old man.
Ecclesiastes 12:1-7 The imagery here refers to various parts of the body.
Romans 3:27-30 The “circumcision” and “uncircumcision” mean Jews
and Gentiles.
2. Synecdoche: the substitution of a part for the whole or the whole for the
part, usually because of the natures of the things associated.
Micah 4:3; Isa 2:4 Beating swords into plowshares means total
disarmament.
Romans 1:16 “Greek” stands for Gentiles.
Sometimes “repentance” stands for repentance and faith, and sometimes
“faith” also stands for both. Luke 24:47; Acts 15:31; Acts 17:30
3. Merism: the substitution of two contrasting parts for the whole.
Psalm 139:2 “Sit down” and “rise up” stand for all his activity.
Acts 1:21 “Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the
time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us”
4. Hendiadys: the substitution of two coordinate terms for a single idea
wherein one defines the other.
Genesis 3:16 “Pain and childbirth” (lit) means painful childbirth.
Acts 1:25 “Ministry and apostleship” means apostolic ministry.
Philippians 2:17 “Sacrifice and service” means sacrificial service.
Hermeneutical principle: Look for the meaning intended by the association or
substitution.
C. Special Figures Regarding God
1. Anthropomorphism: attributing human bodily parts to God
2 Chronicles 16:9 God’s eyes move to and fro.
Psalm 8:3 The heavens are the work of God’s fingers.
Psalm 31:2 “Incline your ear to me”
2. Anthropopathism: attributing human emotions to God
Zechariah 8:2 Jealousy
Psalm 2:4 Laughter
Eph 4:30 Grief

3. Zoomorphism: attributing animal parts and characteristics to God
Psalm 91:4 Feathers and wings
Hermeneutical Principle: Look for the meaning intended by the association.
D. Figures Involving a Personal Dimension
1. Personification: This is the representation of a thing, quality, or idea as a
person.
Psalm 114:3 “The sea looked and fled”
Numbers 16:34 “The earth opened her mouth and swallowed Korah”
2. Apostrophe: This is addressing a non-personal item as a person.
Psalm 114:5-6 “What ails you O sea?”
Jeremiah 47:6 “O sword of the Lord”
The Hermeneutical Principle: Find the meaning intended by the association.
E. Other Figures of Speech
1. Hyperbole: intended overstatement or exaggeration
Num 14:2 “All the sons of Israel grumbled against Moses and Aaron; and
the whole congregation said to them, ‘Would that we had died in the land
of Egypt! Or would that we had died in this wilderness!’”
Matt 5:29 “If they right eye offend thee, pluck it out.”
Matt 19:24 “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than
for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”
Luke 14:26 “If any man come to me and hate not his father and mother…”
John 12:19 “Behold, the world is gone after him.”
Acts 17:6 “These that have turned the world upside down …”
Gal 5:12 “I wish that those who are troubling you would even mutilate
themselves.”
2. Euphemism: describing a delicate subject in other than literal terms
Gen 4:17 “Adam knew his wife, and she conceived”
Gen 18:11 “it ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women.”
Lev 20:18 “uncover her nakedness”
1 Sam 24:3 “cover his feet”
1 Cor 7:1 “touch a woman” (or “come near” or “come to her” or “take
her”)
3. Irony: reversal of meaning (including sarcasm); the words mean the

opposite of what they say.
Job 12:2 “No doubt but ye are the people, and wisdom shall die with you.”
4. Rhetorical Questions: a question not intended to be answered by the
hearers.
Ex 4:11 “And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man’s mouth? or
who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the
LORD?”
Ex 14:11 “And they said unto Moses, Because there were no graves in
Egypt, hast thou taken us away to die in the wilderness? Wherefore hast
thou dealt thus with us, to carry us forth out of Egypt?”
John 8:43 “Why do ye not understand my speech? Even because ye cannot
hear my word.”
The Hermeneutical Principle: Find the meaning intended by paying attention to
the context.
A rule that applies to all figurative language is that even though figures of speech cannot be
taken literally, they usually point to or reflect something that is literally true. Figures of speech
communicate truly and accurately using non-literal language. Thus, the use of figurative
language does not introduce absurdity or contradiction into the Scriptures. We must recognize
and interpret biblical figures of speech normally, much like we would when we encounter them
in other forms of literature. The presence of figurative language in the Bible does not invalidate
the literal method of interpretation.
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 7: Interpreting Type and Symbol
The presence of types and symbols in the Bible add another layer of complexity to the
interpreter’s task. A good understanding of what types and symbols are, along with some rules
for interpretation, will help us grasp the significance of these biblical elements.20
I. Types
A. Definition
1. The word “type” comes from the Greek “tupos,” used 15 times in the NT.
A type is a model, pattern, example, or mark. A type implies a
correspondence or resemblance between two things. One thing resembles
or matches something else. Something from the OT pre-figures or
suggests something in the NT. The preceding thing is called a type, and the
thing suggested or prefigured is called the antitype.
Most conservative Bible students recognize that the OT includes types that
are later specified in some way in the NT. The two testaments are related
by types and antitypes, shadows and fulfillments. The NT looks back to a
number of persons, things and events in the OT and treats them as
foreshadowing persons, things, and events. Some people see types
throughout the OT; some see just a few that are explicitly designated as
types.21
2. A type carries an image of its corresponding fulfillment and is always
future in fulfillment. It is prefigurative and inherently prophetic.
3. The main ingredients of biblical type:
a) There must be a genuine resemblance between the type and
fulfillment. The resemblance is not merely in looks or outward
features but in substance and function.
20
Some of the material in this and following lesson comes from the From Moses to You Sunday school curriculum
by Barry Pendley, available at www.freesundayschoollessons.org.
21
Roy Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation, 171-172.
Hermeneutics Lesson 7: Interpreting Types and Symbols 52
b) There must be biblical evidence that a typical relationship exists.

Certain resemblances may be used as illustrations and analogies
but they do not thereby constitute true biblical types. The
resemblance must be intended by God as a type.
Zuck suggests six ingredients of a type:22
(1) The type and antitype must have a natural correspondence
or resemblance.
(2) The type must have a historical reality (the antitype
depends on the literal meaning).
(3) The type must prefigure or foreshadow the antitype; i.e., it
looks ahead.
(4) The type is “fulfilled” or “completed” by the antitype; the
antitype is greater than and is superior to the type.
(5) The type must be divinely designed.
(6) The type and antitype must be designated as such in the
NT.
A similarity between two individuals does not necessarily mean
that one is a type of the other. For example, a common mistake is
to see Joseph as a type of Christ. Even though there are similarities
between Joseph and Christ, the Bible never directly states that
Joseph is a type of Christ. However, the Bible does assert that
Adam is a type of Christ (Rom 5:12-21).
4. Classifications of types:
a) Persons. E.g., Melchizedec is a type of Christ (Heb 7); Jonah’s
experience in the fish typified Jesus’ experience in the grave (Matt
12:40).
b) Events. E.g., Aspects of Israel’s wilderness sojourn typify elements
of the Christian life (1 Cor 10:1-11).
c) Institutions. E.g., the Sabbath typifies the Christian’s spiritual rest
(Col 2:7; Heb 4:3-11); the Passover celebration is fulfilled in
Christ (1 Cor 5:7); the Passover lamb typifies Christ’s sacrifice (1
Pet 1:19).
d) Actions. E.g., the brazen serpent is a type of Jesus’ crucifixion and
salvation by faith (John 3:14-15); the tearing of the curtain in the
tabernacle when Jesus died typifies the believer’s direct access to
God (Heb 10:20).
e) Offices. E.g., the office of high priest is a type of Jesus’
intercession for believers (Heb 4:14; 9:12); the office of prophet
typifies Jesus’ being a spokesman for God (Deut 18:18).
22
Zuck, 178.
B. Hermeneutical Principles for Types

1. Be careful with typology. Conservative scholars recognize fewer than 20
types in the whole Bible.23
a) Don’t suggest one thing is a type of something else unless the NT
verifies that to be the case.
b) Don’t invest too much meaning in types even when you find a
legitimate one. The fact that one thing is a type of another does not
suggest that the two are identical in every respect. The significance
of a type and its antitype rests on the major parallels between the
two, not the minor details.
2. Determine the literal sense of the type. Types are built on a literal
understanding of the text. There’s no need to allegorize or spiritualize the
text.
3. Find the Divine intent.
a) This principle deals mainly around how the divine intent is
displayed by God and thus discerned by the interpreter. What
constitutes “biblical evidence” that a typical relationship exists?
b) Factors in determining divine intent:
(1) Direct Statement
(a) Romans 5:14 – Adam is a “type” [tupos] of Christ.
(b) 1 Corinthians 10:6 – “These things happened as
examples (tupos) for us.”
(c) 1 Peter 3:21 – “And corresponding to that
(antitupos), baptism now saves you.”
(2) The Use of Metaphor or Simile
(a) 1 Corinthians 5:7 – The Passover lamb
(b) Hebrews 4:3, 9, 11 – “Sabbath” and “rest” for
Christians
(c) John 3:14 – Moses and the brazen serpent
(d) Matthew 12:40 – Jonah in the fish’s belly
(3) Direct Allusion
(a) Hebrews 5:4-5 – Aaronic priesthood and Christ
(b) Hebrews 6:20ff – Melchizedekian priesthood and
Christ
23
Zuck finds only 17 (p. 179-180).
(c) Hebrews 13:11-12 – OT sacrificial animals burned

“outside the camp” and Christ’s suffering “outside
the gate.”
NOTE: If evidence of divine intent is lacking, then the
interpreter may be merely engaging in a form of
allegorization.
4. Allow the Antitype (Fulfillment) to Govern the Situation.
a) The typical relationship is largely determined on the NT end where
the evidence of the relationship is found. This is where the
similarities and applications can be discerned.
b) Did the OT author know he was recording a type? It is highly
unlikely that he did. Typology, while wholly predicated on the
divine intent, resides in the area of implications of the human
author’s words. It is not a form of sensus plenior (multiple
meanings). No one knows the implications of his speech on any
subject much less on theological truth. But God does know all
implications and He can draw out certain ones for His purposes.
5. Find the Clear Point(s) of Correspondence Between Type and Antitype.
a) Romans 5:14 – Adam is a type of Christ in representation or
headship.
b) John 3:14-16 – The serpent in the wilderness was an object of
faith that represented the nullification of death and disaster.
c) 1 Corinthians 10:6 – Israel’s craving of evil things is similar to
what was going on in the church.
(1) 10:7 – Idolatry
(2) 10:8 – Immorality
(3) 10:9 – Testing God
(4) 10:10 – Grumbling
6. Be Aware of Dispensational and Other Theological Factors.
If the church is a “mystery,” i.e., revelation not given in the OT but
disclosed to Paul (Eph 3:2-9), then it would seem that there are no true
types of the church in the OT.
II. Symbol and Symbolic Act
A. Definitions
1. “A symbol is a sign which suggests something rather than stating it”
(Mickelsen, Interpreting the Bible).
2. “A symbol is some object (real or imagined) or action which is assigned a

meaning for the purpose of depicting rather than stating the qualities of
something else” (Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation).
3. A symbol is an object or some kind of action which conveys a teaching. It
is illustrative. A symbol may represent something past, present, or future.
A symbol does not necessarily resemble the thing represented (i.e., it need
not be similar, but may be so). The meaning is not in an inherent
correspondence but must be assigned to the symbol.
4. Like types, the central idea of a symbol is a correspondence or
resemblance. However, unlike a type, a symbol has no time reference. A
type has a specific fulfillment—the antitype. Symbols do not; they are
more general. Symbols are easily misunderstood.
5. As with typology, people often carry symbolism too far, seeing symbols
where none legitimately exists.
6. Common biblical symbols:
a) Baptism symbolizes the believer’s identification with Christ (Rom
6:3-14).
b) The Lord’s Supper symbolizes Jesus’ suffering and death on the
cross (1 Cor 11:23-26).
c) Darkness symbolizes sin, evil, or disaster (Rom 1:12; Eph 5:11).
d) Light symbolizes that which is good, true and righteous (John 1:4;
1 John 1:5).
e) The color red may symbolize sin and white purity (Isa 1:18).
f) Yeast (leaven) symbolizes both sin (1 Cor 5:6) and growth (Matt
13:33).
g) A lamb is symbolic of Christ and His sacrifice (John 1:29; 1 Pet
1:19).
h) Flocks of sheep symbolize groups of humans (Mt 10:6)
i) A wolf symbolizes false teachers (Matt 7:15).
j) A lion may symbolize Satan (1 Pet 5:8) or Christ (Rev 5:5).
k) A sword is symbolic of divine chastisement (Deut 32:25; Ps 7:12)
and of a slanderous tongue (Ps 57:4). The word of God is likened
also to a sword (Heb 4:12).
l) Others: trees, dogs, foxes, vines/vineyards, olives, milk and honey,
shepherds, serpents, fruit
B. Hermeneutical Principles for Symbols and Symbolic Acts
1. Note the Historical and Literary Contexts.
a) If the purpose of the symbol can be discerned from its setting, then
the point will usually be clear.
b) Note the literary genre (type of literature). Prophecy and poetry
often contain symbolism, but narrative usually does not contain as
much symbolic language. If the passage is part of a vision, it
probably contains symbolic ideas.
c) Look for how the text deals with the symbol. Sometimes a passage
makes it very clear what the correspondence is between the symbol
and its referent and it may even state the meaning. For example,
the ten horns on the fourth beast in Daniel 7 symbolize “ten kings
who will come” (v. 24).
d) Other examples:
(1) Jeremiah 1:13 The boiling pot from the north. Jeremiah was
a prophet during the decline before the Captivity and the
northern power was Babylon who would eventually “scald”
Israel.
(2) Ezekiel 4:1-3 A symbolic siege of a city. The context is the
Exile and the symbol depicts the siege and fall of
Jerusalem.
(3) Ezekiel 37:1-14 The valley of the dry bones. The context
deals with Israel’s captivity and dispersion. The symbol
speaks of Israel’s regeneration and regathering in the end
times. It does not teach a second blessing or an experience
of sanctification subsequent to salvation, or even a
“regathering in unbelief” for Israel.
(4) Matthew 26:26-28 The bread and the cup were instituted on
the night of Christ’s betrayal and threshold of His death.
The Lord’s Supper is clearly symbolic.
(5) Revelation 1:16 pictures Jesus with a sword coming out of
his mouth. This is certainly symbolic imagery. The Word of
God is like a sword (Heb 4:12) and judgment is often
associated with a sword (Rev 19:15). Perhaps the judgment
associated with God’s Word is the idea of the symbolic
imagery.
2. Find the Point(s) of Teaching Between the Sign and What is Represented.
In other words, look for the object (the symbol), the referent (what the
symbol refers to), and the meaning.
For example, a lamb (the symbol) pictures Christ (the referent) because
Christ endured a sacrifice similar to what lambs did (the meaning). John
called Jesus “the Lamb of God” (John 1.29). Sheep (symbol) picture
people (referent) because they often go astray (Isa 53.6).
3. Compare With Similar or the Same Symbols in Scripture.

a) Leaven often suggests something negative when used as a symbol.
(1) Mt 16:6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware
of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
(2) Mr 8:15 And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware
of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod.
(3) 1 Cor 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a
little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
(4) However, note Mt 13:33 The kingdom of heaven is like
unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three
measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.
b) The number seven sometimes suggests completion or perfection
when used symbolically.
(1) Genesis 2:1; cf. Exodus 20:11
(2) Joshua 6:4
(3) Revelation 2-3 The seven churches.
To Symbolize or Not to Symbolize, That is the Question

A great debate rages over whether some of the language of prophecy is symbolic
or not. Some see much prophetic literature as symbolic, describing spiritual
realities in poetic terms that are not to be taken literally. For example, some
suggest that the prophecies regarding a thousand-year period of peace and
righteousness ruled by Christ (the Millennium) is really just a symbolic or
figurative way of describing the church.24 But those who take a more literal view
assert that if language can be understood literally, it should be. Hence, they see a
literal millennial reign of Christ in which the promises of prophecy will actually
occur just as they were written. One should stick with a literal viewpoint unless
significant factors make it impossible to do so.
Other Symbolic Ideas

Some people see numbers as highly symbolic. They suggest that three is the
number of the Trinity, that six is the number of man, that seven is the number of
perfection, etc. There are entire books written on biblical numerology. But the
best way to deal with numbers is to understand them normally or literally unless
the Bible itself provides a symbolic interpretation, which is very rare. In general,
there is no special significance assigned to numbers. They mean what they seem
to mean without any other special significance.
24
This view is called “amillennialism” and is common among Reformed and Presbyterian believers.
Similarly, it is dangerous to assign meaning to a certain color. For example,

looking for meaning in the colors of the Tabernacle is a common practice. There
are some colors that do have meaning, as noted above. But unless the text
specifically associates a color with a meaning, it’s unwise to do so.
Even animals may be assigned symbolic meanings. The donkey seems to be
associated with humility (Matt 21:5), the horse with royalty (Rev 6:2) and the lion
with danger, destruction and boldness (Num 23:24; Ps 22:21). And of course, the
snake may symbolize Satan or deception (Gen 3:1; Rom 3:13). But again, one
must avoid the temptation to import symbolic meanings into texts that are clearly
literal.
Exercise: Read Revelation 1:16. Point out the symbolic language in the text and suggest the
significance of the symbols.
And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp two-edged sword:
and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.
1. What kind of literature is this? Prophecy/apocalyptic; a vision (Rev 1.10), which suggests
that the language here is symbolic.
2. Is there anything preventing a literal understanding of the text? Stars in one’s hand is
uncommon; a sword for a tongue almost demands symbolic interp, a face like the sun
likewise suggests a symbolic understanding.
3. Suggest the referent and/or the meaning for the symbols:
Seven stars: 7 pastors/messengers of 7 churches (1.20)
Right hand: power, authority
Sword: authority, power, judgment (cf. Rev 19:15)
Face like the sun: glory, majesty, power, brightness, holiness, purity
4. Does the context reveal the meaning of the symbols? Rev 1.20 the stars are the
angels/messengers/pastors of the churches.
5. How do we know who the “he” in the passage is? Context – 1.13, 17-18 clearly it’s Jesus.
6. How would you explain the meaning of the imagery? What does the symbolism imply?
Christ has authority over the church; he’s ready to bring judgment upon the world; he is
great in power and glory
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 8: Interpreting Wisdom Literature
Solomon wrote the following to his son: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge,
but fools despise wisdom and discipline” (Prov 1:7). Wisdom and discipline are the subjects of
the Bible’s wisdom literature. Besides the Book of Proverbs, Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, and Song
of Solomon also contain similar wisdom literature. While wisdom literature is not confined to
Proverbs, this lesson will deal primarily with proverbial literature. Proverb belongs to the genre
of wisdom literature, which deals in applying divine truth in practical experiences of one’s life.
I. Characteristics of Proverbs
A. What is a biblical proverb? Several definitions:
1. Proverbs are “short, pithy sayings, in which a wise counsel, a moral
lesson, or suggestive experience, is expressed in memorable form” (Terry,
Biblical Hermeneutics).
2. “Proverbs consist of short, sagacious sayings from everyday life”
(Mickelsen, Interpreting the Bible).
3. A proverb is “a brief statement of universally accepted truth formulated in
such a way as to be memorable” (Osborne, The Hermenetical Spiral).
4. A proverb is a short, pithy saying that expresses a wise, general truth in a
memorable way. This expression is often in the area of basic values and
proper attitudes as well as right action. Hebrew wisdom was very
practical. It was based on experience, not special
revelation. It focused on an individual being successful in
life (all of life: sacred and secular). It is divine “horse-
sense.”25
For example, the saying “an apple a day keeps the doctor away” is a
proverb declaring the importance of diet for good health. A biblical
proverb differs from other proverbs in that its author has written under
inspiration, and the author is viewing life from God’s perspective.
B. Proverbs are usually short, memorable, and sometimes even humorous. They
often overstate or oversimplify things in order to make a point. Proverbs are
simple yet profound statements of godly wisdom.
C. Proverbs are based upon the teachings of the OT Law. Wisdom as it appears in
Proverbs and other wisdom literature refers to skill in godly living under the Law.
25
Utley
Hermeneutics Lesson 8: Interpreting Wisdom Literature 60
NT believers must be careful in understanding and applying the Proverbs because

of their close association with the OT Law.
II. Types of Proverbs
There are two different types of proverbs:
A. The wisdom sentence: an observation based on experience; a generally stated
truth that does not necessarily persuade or exhort.
The wise inherit honor, but fools he holds up to shame. (Pr 3:35)
A wife of noble character is her husband's crown, but a disgraceful wife is like
decay in his bones. (Pr 12:4)
B. The admonition: a command, followed by reasons or motivations for why one
should obey it usually introduced by the word “for.”
My son, do not go along with them, do not set foot on their paths, for their feet
rush into sin, they are swift to shed blood. (Pr 1:15-16)
My son, do not forget my teaching, but keep my commands in your heart, for they
will prolong your life many years and bring you prosperity. (Pr 3:1-2)
III. The Subjects of Proverbs
Many of the Proverbs point out the contrast between three types of people.
A. The Wise Person: A wise man is one who is rightly related to God—he is saved.
He also seeks after godly wisdom and obeys the Law of God.
My son, if you accept my words and store up my commands within you, turning
your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding, and if you call out
for insight and cry aloud for understanding, and if you look for it as for silver and
search for it as for hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the
LORD and find the knowledge of God. (Pr 2.1-5)
B. The Simple Person: This person is gullible, ignorant, or easily distracted. He
follows others to destruction. While it’s not a sin to be simple, those who are
simple display a lack of godly character.
I saw among the simple, I noticed among the young men, a youth who lacked
judgment. (Pr 7:7)
C. The Fool: Simply stated, the fool has all the characteristics of an unsaved person.
There are several types of fools:
1. The Arrogant Fool: This is the most common way to understand the fool
in Proverbs. In one word, he is a menace. He is pictured as one who is
stupid, arrogant, and gossipy.
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise
wisdom and discipline. (Pr 1:7)
Stay away from a foolish man, for you will not find knowledge on his lips.
(Pr 14:7)
2. The Scoffing Fool: This fool is a troublemaker with a bad attitude who
despises correction.
How long will you simple ones love your simple ways? How long will
mockers delight in mockery and fools hate knowledge? (Pr 1:22)
3. The Lazy Fool: This sluggard is a fool who refuses to work.
As a door turns on its hinges, so a sluggard turns on his bed. The sluggard
buries his hand in the dish; he is too lazy to bring it back to his mouth. (Pr
26:14-15)
IV. Parallelism in Proverbs
Hebrew poetry and proverbs often use a poetic device called parallelism. Proverbs are
usually made up of two lines. Correct interpretation is based on determining what
relationship exists between the two lines. The first line relates to the second line in any of
the following ways:
A. Same Idea: The second line simply restates the first in other words.
Penalties are prepared for mockers,
and beatings for the backs of fools. (Pr 19:29)
B. Developing Idea: The second line adds to the thought of the first.
A king’s wrath is like the roar of a lion;
he who angers him forfeits his life. (Pr 20:2)
C. Opposite Idea: The second line contrasts with the first.
The light of the righteous shines brightly,
but the lamp of the wicked is snuffed out. (Pr 13:9)
D. Explained Idea: The second line explains the reason for the first.
Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
or you will be like him yourself. (Pr 26:4)
V. Rules for Interpreting Proverbial Literature
A. Understand the nature of proverbial literature. Proverbs are not iron-clad, legal
guarantees. They are general guidelines for joyful, godly living. For example,
those who “train up a child in the way he should go” (Pr 22:6) can be reasonably
sure that “when he is old, he will not depart from it.” However, such an outcome
is not guaranteed. A proverb states what normally is true in most cases. Proverbs
state principles rather than promises.
B. Proverbs do not cover every possible exception. They are general rules that
usually apply, but not in some cases. For example, a gentle answer usually turns
away wrath (15:1), but sometimes it does not.
C. Proverbs often contain figurative or symbolic language. Make sure you
understand the significance of symbolic imagery (see the previous material on
interpreting figures of speech and symbolism). For example, in Proverbs 1:20,

wisdom is personified.
D. Be careful when handling those portions of wisdom literature that strictly apply to
those living under the OT Law. For example, God promised the Israelites long life
and prosperity for obeying the Law (3:2-10). The general principle is true, but we
shouldn’t see such promises as unconditionally binding for those in the church.
E. You may need to translate the principle of the proverb into the modern situation.
For example, Proverbs 22:11 states, “He who loves a pure heart and whose speech
is gracious will have the king for his friend.” There are few kings left in the
world, and few of us have the opportunity to know them personally. Thus, we
must look at the statement more generally.
F. Individual proverbial statements stand by themselves. While “context is king” for
other types of literature, context may not be too significant for a proverb. For
example, read a few of the proverbs in Proverbs 29. Although they are all
contained in the same chapter, most of these proverbs stand alone as independent
units of thought.
G. Proverbs generally make one main point or highlight one particular principle.
Seek to understand the point of the proverbs’ comparison or contrast. Avoid the
temptation to read more into the text than is really there. Example: the virtuous
woman “is like the merchant’s ships” (31:4). In what way?
H. Interpret proverbs in light of other biblical doctrine. If your understanding of a
proverb conflicts with or contradicts clear teaching from another part of the Bible,
your understanding is wrong. And always check your interpretation with the
experts (a good commentary or your pastor). You may also want to consult a
couple of different Bible versions to see how the translators handled the text (e.g.,
Pr 26:2).
Wisdom literature normally deals with life’s major questions and mysteries. Other books of the
Bible, like Job, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon, are longer, more developed treatments of
life’s mysteries. Many of the same principles discussed above apply to the interpretation of these
books.
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 9: Interpreting Psalms
Psalms are versatile parts of Scripture. We look to them during times of joy and anticipation
(e.g., weddings and holidays) as well as when faced with grief and suffering (e.g., funerals and
hospital visits). The Psalms are some of the best-known and beloved pieces of literature known
to man. Everyone appreciates the comforting words of the Twenty-third Psalm. The Book of
Psalms has played an important role in both the history of Israel and the church.
Psalms are similar to proverbs in that they are found in many different books of the Bible. The
books of Job, Proverbs, Psalms, Song of Solomon, and even the book of Judges (Deborah’s
Song) all contain psalms. Also, psalms are similar to proverbs in that they are usually composed
of short, parallel verses. Since the Psalms are so well known and appreciated, we ought to make
sure we understand how to interpret them.
I. Basic Information about the Psalms

A. A psalm is a special type of literature. Our English word “psalm” comes from the
Greek and Latin versions of the OT. The Hebrew word for a song sung to the
accompaniment of instruments is mizmor. The Septuagint (the Greek translation
of the OT) used the word psalmos to translate this word. The Hebrew Bible
entitles the collection of psalms “Praises.” Each psalm is a song. So we might
think of the Psalms as the Hebrew hymnal. The entire book of Psalms is often
called the Psalter.
B. The first psalm written was undoubtedly the one composed by Moses (#90),
somewhere around 1400 B.C. The final psalm was perhaps the one composed by
Heman (#88), somewhere around 450 B.C. Thus, the Psalms span a period of
nearly 1,000 years. Dating the individual psalms is a tricky task. We are
dependent upon whatever clues we can gather from the superscriptions and the
psalms themselves.
C. Some of the titles of the Psalms include the tune to which the psalm is supposed
to be sung or other musical information regarding the psalm. For example, Psalm
4 is prefaced with the words “To the chief Musician on Neginoth, A Psalm of
David.” Neginoth likely referred to an instrument or to a tune the psalm was sung
to.
D. Many of the psalms are preceded by a brief superscription, indicating such things
as the author of the psalm, the historical situation which occasioned the psalm,
various musical notations, etc. There has been considerable debate among
scholars as to the accuracy of these superscriptions. Though not part of the
Hermeneutics Lesson 9: Interpreting Psalms 64
original text (it is generally agreed that they were later added by the compiler(s)
of the Psalter), conservative scholars view them as reliable, though not inspired.
In fact, the Hebrew Bible considers them to be part of the text, making them the
first verse of each psalm.
E. The Psalter is divided, like the Pentateuch, into five books, each closing with a
doxology or benediction:
1. The first book comprises the first 41 psalms, all of which are ascribed to
David except 1, 2, 10, and 33 which, though anonymous, may also be
ascribed to him.
2. Book second consists of the next 31 psalms (42-72) 18 of which are
ascribed to David and 1 to Solomon (the 72nd). The rest are anonymous.
3. The third book contains 17 psalms (73-89) of which the 86th is ascribed to
David, the 88th to Heman the Ezrahite, and the 89th to Ethan the Ezrahite.
4. The fourth book also contains 17 psalms (90-106) of which the 90th is
ascribed to Moses, and numbers 101 and 103 to David.
5. The fifth book contains the remaining 44 psalms. Of these, 15 are ascribed
to David, and number 127 to Solomon.
F. Each psalm makes up a single chapter in the Book of Psalms. Therefore, a
relationship exists between all of the verses in a psalm. This is unlike the book of
Proverbs, in which there is no clear relationship between the individual proverbs.
G. The word selah occurs seventy-one times throughout the Psalms, and three times
in Habakkuk, but nowhere else in the OT. It may denote an instrumental interlude,
some appropriate response by the congregation, or perhaps it means something
like “forever.”26
Many there be which say of my soul, There is no help for him in God. Selah. I
cried unto the LORD with my voice, and he heard me out of his holy hill. Selah.
(Psalms 3:2, 4)
H. When referring to a psalm, one should say “Psalm 100,” for example, rather than
“Psalms chapter 100.” One wouldn’t say “Hymns chapter 100,” but “Hymn
number 100” or just “Hymn 100.” It’s the same with the Psalms.
I. We find over one hundred direct quotations from the Psalms in the NT. So
interpreting this type of literature is an important skill to develop.
II. Types of Psalms
A. Hymns
Nearly a third of the psalms are songs of praise and adoration directed to God.
Hymns are concerned with praising God for Who He is and for what He does (or
has done).
Example: Psalms 8 & 150
26
C. Hassell Bullock, An Introduction to the OT Poetic Books (Moody, 1988), p.123.
B. Laments
In over a third of the psalms, the author expresses concern over a trial that he or
his people are undergoing. The focus of a lament is always on submission to God.
The premise of a lament could be stated as following: “Bad things are happening,
but God is in control of every situation. I can trust in Him.”
Example: Psalm 3 – David fled from Absalom.
C. Royal Psalms (sung to honor the king)

These psalms express tribute to God’s control in the political realm. Some of the
royal psalms also deal with the Messiah’s coming kingdom.
Example: Psalm 2 – David as God’s king is protected by the Lord
D. Proverbial or didactic (teaching)

These psalms are statements of godly wisdom and encourage those who fear God
to behave in godly ways.
Example: Psalm 1 – The righteous man will prosper.
E. Imprecatory psalms
These psalms call down curses on God’s enemies.
Example: Psalms 35, 69, 109
Due to their harsh nature, many have difficulty accepting the imprecatory psalms.
To properly understand such psalms, one must remember that they were written in
the context of the theocracy—the nation of Israel under God’s rule. In the
theocracy, God normally blessed obedience and chastised disobedience. In an
imprecatory psalm, the psalmist is not so much venting personal rage against his
enemies as he is asking God to uphold the terms of the theocratic covenant,
punishing the disobedience of the transgressor, for His name’s sake. In the church
age, imprecatory prayers are rarely appropriate (see Matthew 5:44).
F. Some of the psalms are called “Messianic” because they contain prophecies or
information about the coming Messiah. For example, Psalms 2, 18, 22, 45 and
110 contain Messianic ideas.
G. Psalms of ascent (sometimes called “pilgrim” psalms)—for example, Psalms 120-
134. These were sung on the way to Jerusalem for the three annual feasts—
Passover in the Spring, Pentecost in the Summer, and Tabernacles in the Fall—
mentioned in Exodus 23:14-19 and Leviticus 23:4-44.
H. Other classifications include penitential psalms (32 & 51) and praise psalms (8 &
100)
III. Parallelism in Psalms
Like the Proverbs, Psalms normally display a form of parallelism.
A. Same Idea: The second line restates the first.
The heavens declare the glory of God;

the skies proclaim the work of his hands. (Ps 19:1)
B. Opposite Idea: The second line contrasts with the first.
For the Lord watches over the way of the righteous
but the way of the wicked will perish. (Ps 1:6)
C. Growing Idea: The second and following lines build upon the first.
Ascribe to the Lord, O mighty ones,
ascribe to the Lord glory and strength.
Ascribe to the Lord the glory due to his name;
worship the Lord in the splendor of his holiness. (Ps 29:1–2)
D. Explained Idea: The second line explains the first
I know that my Redeemer lives,
and that in the end he will stand upon the earth. (Job 19:25)
IV. How to Interpret Psalms
In order to interpret a psalm properly, keep the following rules in mind:
A. The Psalms relate directly to the history of Israel; therefore, a psalm cannot be
fully understood apart from that history. If you don’t know the OT very well, you
won’t understand the Psalms, either. Sometimes the historical situation that
produced a psalm is unknown, so it’s hard to figure out what the author is talking
about. Most good cross-reference Bibles will point out places in the OT which
help determine the background of the psalm you are studying. The preface to the
psalm often gives its historical background. See Psalms 2 & 51.
B. Try to determine who is speaking. Sometimes the voice of a psalm is an
individual (Ps 27); sometimes it’s a community (Ps 44). David wrote many of the
Psalms, but he is not the only author.
C. Try to determine the type and tone of the psalm. Psalms may be hymns, laments,
royal or proverbial in nature.
D. Note the type of parallelism the psalm uses. Make sure your interpretation follows
the comparisons and contrasts reflected in the parallelism.
E. See if the psalm is quoted in the NT. If so, see how the NT authors interpreted the
psalm.
F. Remember that a psalm may be directly linked to the historical situation
mentioned in the psalm. Be careful about making a psalm apply directly to you or
your situation. Look for broad, general principles rather than specific promises.
G. Since psalms are songs, they usually have a theme or subject. All the parts of the
psalm will say something about that theme. Compose one brief sentence that
summarizes the argument or theme of the whole psalm. For example, the theme of
Psalm 1 is the righteous man will prosper.
H. Pay close attention to the language of the psalm. Poetry is often highly figurative
and full of symbolic imagery, so be careful how you understand the words of a
psalm. Define all unknown words and expressions. It’s often helpful to read the
psalm in two or three versions of the Bible. Older versions do not identify the
stanzas of the psalm; modern translations usually do.
I. Like Proverbs, Psalms relate general principles, not exception-less promises.
Certain expressions in Psalms may have exceptions or may be conditional. E.g.,
Ps 103:3, 145:14, 16, 19.
J. Suggest a potential interpretation. As always, compare Scripture with Scripture.
No doctrine based in the Psalms will contradict any other part of the Bible. Also
check what respected scholars have said about the psalm.
K. Think of several ways to apply the principle to your life. How will you change in
response to the teaching of the psalm?
Exercise: Work through the above rules in Psalm 1.

1. How does this psalm relate to the history of Israel? No direct connection. However, the
concepts of “blessed” and “ungodly,” “sinners,” and “scornful” are all based on the
OT definitions of these terms.
2. Who is the author? anonymous
3. What type of psalm is it – hymn, lament, royal or proverbial? Proverbial/didactic
4. What kind of parallelism does the psalm use? Various
5. Is the psalm quoted in the NT? Not directly
6. Is the psalm culturally bound? Is there anything preventing a broad application of the ideas?
no
7. What is the theme or subject of the psalm? Put it in a sentence. The righteous man will be
blessed; the sinner will not be.
8. Is there any figurative or symbolic language to define? yes If so, what? “As a tree” –
comparison between a person and a tree; “fruit,” “leaf shall not wither,” ungodly like
“chaff.” I.e., the “blessed man” prospers (like a healthy, fruitful tree) while the “ungodly
… shall perish.”
9. Are the promises here universal or conditional? Conditional—for the “blessed man” who fits
the description given. The benefits are for those who keep the OT Law.
10. Summarize the general teaching or principle of the psalm. What are some other general
principles? God blesses the righteous, but the wicked suffer; separation from
wickedness; God’s presence in the life of believers
11. How is this psalm going to change your life? Trust God to bless me; stay away from wicked
influences; try to turn sinners from their path
The ability to interpret the Psalms is an important skill to develop. Because this type of literature
has its own set of characteristics, the interpreter must be careful in his conclusions. Make sure
that as you study the Psalms you apply the rules from this lesson.
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 10: Interpreting Narrative Literature
The Bible contains more narrative than any other type of literature. Over 40% of the OT alone is
narrative; whole books are given over to it; some books on prophecy use a narrative approach.
The Gospels and Acts are also narrative literature. Since the Bible contains so much of this
material, it is important to know how to interpret this kind of literature properly. It’s quite easy
and common for people to misuse and misinterpret biblical narrative. In this lesson, we’ll learn
how to approach and understand narrative literature.
I. What Biblical Narratives are Not.

A. Not Exhaustive Histories
1. Biblical narratives contain the information the author (and God) intended
to include and nothing more. Narratives are selective and illustrative.
2. Narrative accounts do not contain a full historical recording of all the data,
only those details that serve to make the author’s point. What they record
is true, but not exhaustive. Cf. John 20:30 & 21:25.
B. Not Usually Directly Doctrinal or Instructive
1. Narrative most often illustrates or demonstrates truth or doctrine taught
directly elsewhere. Biblical stories are not doctrinal expositions. They are
somewhat comparable to parables as a teaching vehicle.
2. Narratives generally teach by implication and/or extrapolation. For
example, the reader is left to infer from the David and Bathsheba narrative
some of the causes and effects of adultery and deceit. The story illustrates
and brings out some of the implications of the Sixth Commandment
(murder), Seventh (adultery), Ninth (false witness), and Tenth
(covetousness), among other things.
3. In some cases, direct approval or censure is recorded of an action, such as
Joshua’s failure to consult the Lord (Josh 9:14), Israel’s “whoring after”
Gideon’s ephod (Jud 8:27), or how David’s adultery displeased the Lord (2
Sam 11:27).
II. What Narrative Is
A. Simply put, a narrative is a story, a narration of events. Narrative literature is an
account of what happened.
Hermeneutics Lesson 10: Interpreting Narrative Literature 70
B. Biblical narratives have a divine side to them. There is something ultimately

revelatory in view in the biblical narratives. They are really about God and what
He did; He is the hero of the stories in the last analysis. They are designed to
teach lessons to the readers.
C. Biblical narrative has theological purpose, i.e., the outworking of God’s decree or
plan. Generally, in the OT and Gospels, this plan concerns Israel, and in the NT
(Acts and Epistles especially), it concerns the church. Biblical narrative is
ultimately about God and what He did, so underlying all Bible stories are
theological principles.
1 Corinthians 10:11 Now all these things (OT events) happened unto them for
examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the
world are come.
D. All narratives have some common elements:
1. Setting: the background of the story—characters, geography, time, etc.
2. Action: what happened (the plot of the story)
3. Conclusion: the outcome of the action. The conclusion often tips you off
as to why the author wrote the story. For example, Ruth, a young Moabite
woman, chose to worship God while the Israelites were living in
disobedience. God, in turn, blessed Ruth by placing her in the royal line of
David, and ultimately of Christ. It’s not until the end of the story that we
truly understand the purpose of the book.
4. Most narratives follow a pattern: background or introduction, problem or
conflict, complications, climax, solution of problem, and conclusion.
III. The Goal of Interpreting Narrative
A. The reader should have a three-fold goal:
1. Understanding what the text says (the content).
2. Understand what the text meant to the original readers. What point was the
author (under inspiration) was trying to make?
3. Understand what the text means to modern Christians today. One must
first understand what the text said originally before he can attempt to pull
out (exegete) any principles from it.
B. Understanding the content is the easy part—just read the text. The content is what
happened, the plot of the story. The underlying principles are more difficult to
discern. It often takes repeated readings and considerable thought and prayer to
grasp the timeless principles that modern believers can extract.
C. Once the principles are brought to the surface, one can then suggest how the
modern believer may apply them. Identifying such principles is the goal of
interpreting narrative.
IV. Common Mistakes in Interpreting Narrative

Most errors in interpreting narrative stem from the desire to find a personal application of
the story. After all, of what benefit is a story if it contains no personal application? So
people often seek spiritual principles in the story and in the process mishandle the text.
We’ve already examined several interpretive pitfalls in Lesson Five, so we’ll quickly
review the most common mistakes associated with narrative literature.
A. Allegorization: assigning spiritual meanings to the details of the text when the
text does not indicate any such meanings.
Examples: Philo (a Jewish teacher around the time of Jesus) taught that Sarah and
Hagar represent virtue and education, Jacob and Esau represent wisdom and
foolishness, and the seven-branched candle stick in the tabernacle represents the
seven planets in the solar system.27 Assigning any kind of spiritual meaning to the
five smooth stones David picked up, or to the seven locks of Samson’s hair, or to
the various colors used in the Tabernacle, or to the red rope in Rahab’s window is
allegorization. Unfortunately, allegorical interpretation is quite common.
B. Spiritualization: finding spiritual similarities between a text and a spiritual
principle when such does not exist in the text.
For example, suggesting that the story of David and Goliath teaches that God will
help us overcome “giants” (i.e., problems or difficult situations) in our lives is
spiritualization. So is proposing that just as the walls of Jericho fell down, so we
must destroy certain “walls” in our own lives (or build “walls” if we’re following
Nehemiah’s example).
Such methods are questionable at best and dangerous at worst. The reader’s goal is to
find the timeless principles underlying the passage, not to arbitrarily assign “spiritual”
meanings to the details of the text.
V. Rules to Keep in Mind When Interpreting Narrative
A. Try to discern the author’s original intent in writing. The author’s purpose may be
stated or implied within the text. Make sure you know the purpose of the book in
which the story is found. Try to determine how the story fits into the author’s train
of thought. You can find such information in a study Bible, commentary, or Bible
handbook.
B. Remember that context is king. Read the material preceding and following your
passage and try to discern what the context adds to your understanding.
C. Note the setting, action, and conclusion of the story. Become very familiar with
the contents of the narrative. Make sure you understand all the words of the
passage.
D. Focus on the major aspects of the story, not the minor details. The principle(s) you
extract must be based on the significant features of the story. For example, in the
27
Zuck, p. 32.
story of Ruth, the fact that she gleaned a particular kind of grain (barley and
wheat) has no great significance.
E. Distinguish between what may be normative and what is not. Most of the material
in narratives, especially those in the OT, is non-normative; that is, modern
believers need not duplicate the events related in the story. The fact that
something occurred in a narrative does not guarantee that it should always happen
that way. For example, it’s normal for a widow to seek a husband, but the method
Ruth used to snag Boaz is not normal or given as an example to follow.
F. Some things related in narratives are culture-bound, i.e., applicable in that time
and place but not applicable today. For example, in Ruth’s day, when someone
pulled off his sandal at the city gate, it had a specific meaning (Ruth 4:7).
G. Principlize: attempt to discover in a narrative the spiritual, moral or theological
teachings that underlie the story. What is the moral of the story? What do we learn
about God or about ourselves? Make sure the principles you are considering are
truly found in the text. Check that you are not allegorizing or spiritualizing.
“Principlizing is an attempt to discover in a narrative the spiritual, moral or
theological principles that have relevance for the contemporary believer…
Principlizing focuses on those principles implicit in a story that are applicable
across times and cultures.” (Virkler, Hermeneutics).
H. Compare Scripture with Scripture. The principle(s) you extract must be taught
elsewhere in the Bible and not contradict other portions of Scripture. A single
narrative passage is never a solid basis of a doctrine. As always, check your
results with the experts (good commentaries, your pastor, etc.).
I. Consider appropriate applications of the principle(s) to your own life. Make sure
your application of the text fits the underlying general principle(s) found in the
text. A primary aim in Bible study is to obey the principles you find.
Exercise: Apply the above rules to the woman at the well narrative (John 4:4-42).
1. What is John's purpose in the book? (See Jn 20:31). How does this passage fulfill his
purpose? Shows that Jesus is the Christ.
2. What is the context of the story of the woman at the well? What material precedes the
passage? The growing number of his disciples excited the curiosity of the Pharisees, who
constituted the ruling religious class. The growth of any messianic movement could easily
be interpreted as having political overtones, and Jesus did not want to become involved
in any outward conflict with the state, whether Jewish or Roman. In order to avoid a
direct clash, he left Judea and journeyed northward to Galilee.28
3. Why was Jesus in Samaria? He was on his way from Judea to Galilee. What do we know
about the Samaritans? The Jews had little or no communication with them. The Jews
despised the Samaritans and half-breed apostates.
28
Expositor’s Bible Commentary
4. What are the major aspects (the plot) of the story? Jesus arrives at the well, engages a
woman in conversation, and leads her to the belief that He is the Messiah. She goes and
tells others who come to the same belief.
5. What aspects of the story are culture-bound? A woman being at a well in the middle of the
day; the hostility between Jews and Samaritans
6. Are there any words or ideas that need to be defined? The “sixth hour” – probably noon.
Living water (vs 10) is spiritual life due to the presence of the Holy Spirit; "meat to eat"
was Jesus' purpose, his desire to complete the task God had given him. Verse 20 “this
mountain” – the Samaritans had set up their own temple on Mt. Gerezim, but the Jews
had destroyed it many years before this encounter. “Messiah.”The fields being “white
already to harvest.” Sowing and reaping.
7. Suggest some of the timeless principles underlying the story. Primary: Jesus is the Messiah.
Also, salvation is available outside Judaism; God loves sinners; use common situations
to witness; tell others about Christ; we must worship God in spirit and in truth
8. Are these principles taught elsewhere in Scripture? Do other orthodox believers hold these
same principles? yes
9. How might you apply the principles to your own life? Witness to others, worship in spirit
and in truth
10. Suggest a couple of inappropriate interpretations and applications of this text. The proper
place for personal evangelism is a well; it's necessary to go to Samaria to witness;
always ask for something to drink before witnessing; stay two days wherever you witness.
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 11: Interpreting Prophecy
Many people are curious about what the Bible predicts about the future. Tomorrow somehow
holds more intrigue and fascination than yesterday or today. Astrologers and psychics are doing a
booming business because people want to know what’s going to happen next. Even unbelievers
are curious about what the Bible says about the future.
The only One who knows the future is God Himself. He planned all events—past, present and
future—and therefore can tell us what will happen. Fortunately, He has told us what that future
will look like. God is the source of prophecy.
Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own
interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as
they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Pet 1.20-21)
I. What is Prophecy?
The word “prophecy” comes from two Greek words meaning, “to speak for or before.”
Actually, much of what the prophets said was “forthtelling” the Word of God rather than
“foretelling” it. Predictive prophecy is the speaking and writing of events before they
occur. Prophecy is found throughout the Bible and pertains to many subjects. Some
predictions were fulfilled shortly after the prophecy, and some are yet to be fulfilled.
Much of the Bible is prophetic literature, so it is important that we understand how to
approach it.
II. Rules for Interpreting Prophecy
A. As always, consider the context. Make sure you understand what precedes and
what follows the passage in question. The literary context will usually indicate if
the fulfillment will be in the eschaton or in the relatively near future in history
from the perspective of the author. Certain expressions are helpful in this regard,
such as the “Day of the Lord,” “in that day,” “the latter days,” and “the time of the
end.”
B. Employ normal, literal hermeneutics as much as possible. That is, follow the same
principles of interpretation as used throughout the rest of the Bible—grammatical,
historical, literary interpretation. Don’t seek “deeper” mystical or symbolic
meanings. As always, if the plain sense makes sense, seek no other sense.
Hermeneutics Lesson 11: Interpreting Prophecy 75
C. Note how the historical situation influences the prophecy. For example, in Joel, a
locust plague gives the setting for the prophet to talk about the coming Day of the
Lord.
D. Consider the significance of figurative or symbolic language. Some prophecy
records what the author saw in visions. Visions tend to be highly symbolic and
full of meaningful imagery. However, even such language is communicating a
literal truth. Note how figurative language is used in Gen 3:15 and Rev 1:13-16.
E. Realize that some prophecies are fulfilled partially at one time and fully at another
time. For example, the OT prophets likely did not understand how the Messiah
could be both the suffering servant (Isa 53) and the conquering king (Zech 9.9).
They didn’t see the time between the two comings of Christ. The technical word
for seeing two or more parts as one is “foreshortening.” Try to determine if the
prophecy has been partially fulfilled, totally fulfilled, or not yet fulfilled. Read Isa
61:1-2 and Luke 4:16-21.
F. Look for “built in” interpretations. Sometimes the prophecy gives its own
interpretation. For example, in Daniel 2, Daniel explains the meaning of the
vision to the king (and to the reader). An angel explains the interpretation of the
vision in Daniel 10. The text frequently gives the explanation of the prophecy.
G. Compare parallel passages. Many OT prophetic passages (especially in Daniel)
correlate to the prophecies in Revelation.
H. Suggest an interpretation. Check it with the rest of Scripture and with respected
scholarship.
I. Consider what difference the prophecy should make in your life. Some prophecies
have no direct application to believers, but others should affect the way you live.
For example, the prospect of future events should affect your daily life (read Titus
2:11-14 and 2 Peter 3:10- 14).
III. Why Literal Interpretation?
One might ask why prophecy should be interpreted literally. After all, there is much
symbolism and figurative language in prophecy, which might suggest a less literal
approach. But there are several good reasons for approaching prophecy as literally as
possible.
A. The purpose of language is to communicate, not to confuse. God created man to
receive revelation. If that communication is not understandable in its plain form,
then language is not serving its purpose.
B. Bible prophecy has been fulfilled literally, for the most part. For example,
prophecies concerning Jesus’ birth, rearing, ministry, death and resurrection were
all fulfilled literally. Jeremiah’s prophecy concerning Israel’s seventy-year
captivity in Babylon was also fulfilled literally. When Jesus ascended into heaven,
he said that he would return in the same way—literally and physically (Acts 1.9-
11). So we should expect other prophecies to be literally fulfilled as well.
C. Without the literal method, all objectivity is lost. Even symbolic and/or figurative
language must have some basis in reality. If prophetic language is purely
symbolic, then it’s virtually impossible to say for sure what it means.
D. Without literal interpretation, many prophecies seem to have little or no meaning.
For example, the last eight chapters of Ezekiel describe in minute detail a temple
that will be built in Jerusalem. If no such temple is going to be built (during the
Millennium), then the prophecy has little or no significance.
IV. Interpretive Schemes
A. Theology and hermeneutics go together. Theology influences interpretation and
vice versa. There are two major interpretive schemes you should be familiar
with.29
1. Covenant Theology: Covenant theologians see no essential distinction
between the nation of Israel and the Church. The Church has replaced the
nation of Israel in God’s plan. The promises God made to Israel are now
being fulfilled spiritually in the Church, often called “spiritual” or “true”
Israel. There will be no millennial kingdom because the kingdom is the
church. Covenant theology interprets much prophecy symbolically. The
promises regarding Israel’s future peace, prosperity, and power are all
fulfilled by the church.
2. Dispensational Theology: Dispensationalism takes a much more literal
view of prophecy. Dispensational theologians maintain a clear distinction
between Israel and the Church. Israel differs from the church in origin,
composition, and destiny. The church age is currently God’s plan, but
Israel will eventually receive all the promises given in the OT. Jesus will
reign over the nation of Israel (and the world) from the throne of David in
Jerusalem in the future; He is not reigning on David’s throne right now.
B. These two theologies have produced different ways of viewing the future:
1. Premillennialism: Premillennialists believe in a literal one thousand-year
reign of Jesus Christ on the earth, the Millennium. Christ will return for
His saints at the Rapture, after which He will return to earth and establish
His millennial reign. During the Millennium, the nation of Israel will
experience the blessings God promised to Abraham and David. The church
is not fulfilling all the promises given to Israel, although it does benefit
from them (e.g., the “new covenant” of Jer 31:31).
2. Amillennialism: The prefix “a” means “none”; thus, amillennialists
believe that there will be no literal thousand-year reign of Christ on the
earth. The kingdom is currently in existence (i.e., the church) and Christ is
ruling the church from heaven. Jesus never will actually reign over an
earthly nation of Israel from the throne of David in Jerusalem. The
promises to Israel are being fulfilled now in a spiritual or symbolic way by
the church, which is the promised kingdom.
29
For a good discussion of the two views, see Renald Showers, There Really is a Difference (FOI, 1990).
3. Postmillennialism: The prefix “post” means “after”; thus,

postmillennialists believe that Christ will return after the Millennium. The
church will triumphantly subdue every element of society around the
world. So many people will be saved that the earth will become a virtual
Christian kingdom. After an extended period of peace, prosperity and
spiritual progress, Jesus will return to usher in the eternal state.
4. Panmillennialism: Panmillennialists aren’t sure about how it’s going to
work out, but they figure it will all “pan out” in the end. 
5. Who’s Who? Fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals tend to be
premillennialists. Most Reformed believers are amillennialists or
postmillennialists. Present day “dominion theology” is postmillennial.
Supporters claim that Christians should take over the leadership of every
aspect of society in order to bring it back under the authority of Christ.
Roman Catholics believe their church (and no other) is the kingdom of
God.
V. Interpreting the Book of Revelation
Mention the topic of Bible prophecy and a discussion about the Book of Revelation will
not be far behind. We should admit that Revelation is a very difficult book to interpret.
Historically, believers have approached the book in the following ways:30
A. Historicist: the book is a prewritten record of the course of history from the time
of the apostles to the end of the world. Fulfillment is considered to be in progress
at present and has been unfolding for nearly two thousand years. The seven
churches mentioned at the beginning of the book refer to seven periods in history,
so the various prophecies have been and are occurring right now.
B. Preterist: the fulfillment of Revelation’s prophecies has already occurred in the
ancient past, not long after the author’s own time. The book describes, in
symbolic terms, the events of 70 AD when the city of Jerusalem was destroyed by
the Romans. This view depends on the book being written before 70 AD. Only the
very end of the book has yet to be fulfilled.
C. Futurist: the majority of the prophecies of the book has not yet been fulfilled and
awaits a future literal fulfillment. Everything from Revelation chapter 4 on refers
to events in the future. Cf. Rev 1:19 for the three-part division of the book.
D. Spiritual (or Idealist or Symbolic): one should not attempt to find individual
fulfillments of the visions. The book is like a great drama depicting spiritual
realities. Fulfillment is entirely spiritual/symbolic and recurrent. Events in the
book describe things that will happen throughout history, such as conflict between
Christ and Satan, between the saints and the anti-Christian powers of the world,
and the victory of Christ and believers over their enemies. One should not attempt
to find literal fulfillments of the prophecies in history or in the future.
30
Steve Gregg, Revelation: Four Views (Nelson, 1997), pp. 2-3.
Over the history of the church, the above four positions have been popular. The futurist
view (and premillennialism) appears to be the oldest, but the other views have been
popular as well. Luther and many reformers took a Historicist approach to Revelation.
This appears to be the classic Protestant position. The Futurist approach again gained
popularity through the Bible conference movement in the 19th and 20th centuries. Today,
most conservative evangelicals support either the Futurist or Preterist approach.
Dispensationalists are futurists.
Note: How one views the future, and how one interprets Revelation, is not a basis by
which to judge the orthodoxy of that person. Historically, good men have held varying
interpretations of prophecy. We would do well to remember this.
The Futurist/Dispensational View of Prophecy

Below is a visual representation of how most Dispensationalists envision the fulfillment of
prophecy.31
Conclusion: The study of prophecy is a very interesting and profitable pursuit, as long as you
follow the correct rules of interpretation. The study of prophecy should comfort us with the
knowledge that God’s plan always works out, and challenge us to greater commitment in His
service.
31
Taken from BFL Teen Edition, Lesson 32.
Discussion:
1. Why is there so much disagreement when it comes to interpreting prophecy? Because
everybody is employing a different set of hermeneutical rules. Also, prophecy as a genre is
notoriously difficult to interpret.
2. How do we know when to interpret prophecy literally and when to interpret figuratively? If
the plain sense makes sense, that’s probably the right sense. When the text says something
that is impossible or highly unlikely, then the language is probably symbolic and should be
understood as such. C.f. Rev 1.16.
3. Explain prophetic foreshortening. The prophets often saw the prophecy fulfilled in one step,
when in fact the prophecy may have a segmented fulfillment—part at one time and part at
another.
4. Explain how theology affects interpretation. People generally try to fit the text into the
theological framework they support. If the text does not fit into the system, you’ve either got
to change your interpretation or change your system.
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 12: Interpreting Parables
Jesus spoke many parables in the Gospels—about 35 of them. Parables are often defined as an
“earthly story with a heavenly meaning.” However, this definition, while memorable, is not
very accurate. Since parables are so common, it is wise for us to consider how to properly
interpret them. How do we approach the parables?
I. What is a Parable?
A. The word “parable” comes from the Greek word “parabole’,” the combination
of the preposition “para,” meaning “beside” and “ballein,” meaning “to throw.”
A parable is a form of figurative language “thrown alongside” a principle to
illustrate it. Rather than using a single word or phrase to make the comparison, a
parable suggests the comparison by means of a short, fictitious story, a true-to-
life narrative told to illustrate or illuminate truth.
B. The goal of a parable is to prod hearers and readers to consider the similarities
between the story and their own situation.32 Parables make principles come to
life. John Bunyan’s famous book Pilgrim’s Progress is an extended parable that
illustrates the Christian life.
C. The word “parable” can refer to short, memorable statements called similitudes.
Instead of a story, this kind of parable is much like a proverb (a wise saying or
maxim), but usually employs common elements of life and customary habits.
Read Luke 14:7-8, 10-11, and 21:29-31 for examples of similitudes.
II. Why Did Jesus Speak in Parables?
[Jesus] told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to
those on the outside everything is said in parables so that, ‘they may be ever seeing but
never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn
and be forgiven!’” (Mk 4.11-12)
Jesus gave two reasons for His speaking in parables: they revealed truth to those who
genuinely were seeking truth, and they hid truth from those who were not. Those who
had rejected Jesus revealed the hardness of their hearts. They had rejected the truth and
were thus unable to comprehend the purpose or meaning of the parables. Parables kept
truth from them because they were not genuinely interested in truth. Parables sparked
the interest and thinking of those who were seeking the truth. Even so, often the
disciples did not understand the point of the parables, so Jesus explained His meaning
to them.
32
Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation, p. 194.
Hermeneutics Lesson 12: Interpreting Parables 81
Jesus is well known for His parables, but they are found in the OT as well (e.g., 2 Sam
12:1-13). Before or after telling a parable, Jesus would often say, “The kingdom of
heaven is like . . .” Sometimes Jesus said, “Hear a parable . . .”
III. Misinterpreting Parables
Parables are some of the most abused literature in Scripture. Misinterpretation of
parables usually takes two forms: getting too much out of the parable or missing the
main point of the parable.
A. Assigning Invalid Meanings—getting too much from a parable
Interpreters often look for a hidden or deeper meaning in the parables. Note how
Augustine, an early Church Father, interpreted the parable of the Good
Samaritan:
Detail of the Parable “Real” (hidden) meaning

Man going to Jericho from Adam is the man, Jerusalem represents
Jerusalem heaven, Jericho represents man’s mortality
Thieves jumped him thieves were the devil and his angels
Was stripped of his immortality
Was beaten persuaded him to sin
Was left half-dead he lives physically, but is dead spiritually
A priest and a Levite pass priest = OT Law, Levite = the prophets
The good Samaritan Jesus Christ
Had his wounds bound restrained his sin
Treated with oil and wine comfort of hope and a fervent spirit
Man placed on a donkey belief in the incarnation of Christ
The next day the Lord’s resurrection
Stayed at an inn the church
Given two-pence promise of this life and the life to come
Hosted by innkeeper the Apostle Paul
You probably did not realize that the Parable of the Samaritan had all of these
“deeper” meanings. The fact is, it does not. This interpretation assigns meanings
to the details of the text that go far beyond the author’s intended meaning and
exemplifies the dangers of misinterpreting a parable. Augustine was guilty of
allegorization, importing meaning into the parable and finding more in it than
what was legitimately there.
B. Missing the Main Point

The other interpretive mistake readers make is to miss the main point of the
parable. Often the details of the parable are so interesting and the apparent
comparisons so clever that one misses the main point Jesus was making.
Augustine (from above) gives us a good example of that. He perceived many
interesting meanings from the details but ignored the main point of the parable
—the characteristics of a good neighbor.
C. Basing Doctrine on Parables
Parables illustrate doctrine; they do not set or determine doctrine. E.g., Matt
13:5-7 (the Parable of the Sower) does not teach that genuine believers can lose
their salvation. Matt 13:30 (the Parable of the Tares) does not teach that heretics
should be allowed to remain in the church. If the primary support for a doctrine
comes from parables, that doctrine is of questionable value.
IV. How to Interpret Parables
A. Read through the parable several times.
Become very familiar with the story (the plot). Jot down questions and notes for
further study. If the parable is repeated in another place, read it there as well.
The Gospels often tell the same story from different perspectives. Consult a
Harmony of the Gospels to compare texts side by side. Read the passage in a
couple of versions if the language is unclear.
B. Try to determine why the parable was told.
The text often indicates, either directly or indirectly, why Jesus told a parable. A
problem, question, or special situation often prompted Him to tell a parable.
This purpose is important to know. You can’t understand a parable until you
grasp why it was told. Finding the purpose of the parable usually tells you the
main point and interpretation of the parable. Fortunately, Jesus often introduces
his parables with an explanation of why He is telling it. Context usually tells
you the purpose of the parable.
Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice
is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. (Mt 7:24)
Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like
to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field: (Mt 13:31)
Then Jesus told his disciples a parable to show them that they should always
pray and not give up. (Lk 18:1)
C. Note the point(s) of comparison.
A parable illustrates a truth by way of comparison or analogy. Thus, you must
understand the true-to-life situation (i.e., the historical context and culture)
before you can understand the comparison Jesus is making. Fortunately, Jesus
often clearly reveals the comparisons He’s making within the parable. That is,
he explains how the story is related to the topic He’s speaking about. Note what
Jesus says is like something else; that’s the point of the comparison. For
example, in the Parable of the Sower (Matthew 13:18–23), Jesus explains the
meaning of each of the four types of soil where the seed fell. But if you don’t
understand how soil and seeds work, the parable will have little meaning to you.
The Parable of the Ten Virgins (Mt 25:1-13) makes little sense if you don’t
understand some things about Jewish wedding rituals and lamp oil.
In some parables, the implications are so clear that Jesus doesn’t explain the
connections. For an example, see the Parable of the Unmerciful Servant
(Matthew 18:21–35).
D. Pay special attention to the language and symbols in the parable.
Because parables are comparing one thing to another, they normally contain
symbolic language and imagery that the reader must decipher. The main figures
in a parable stand for something else. For example, in the Parable of the
Vineyard (Matthew 21:33-44), the landowner is God, the vineyard is Israel, the
tenant farmers are the religious leaders, the landowner’s servants were the OT
prophets, and the landowner’s son is Jesus. What or whom do the main figures
in the Parable of the Prodigal Son represent (cf. Luke 15:11-32)? Father—God;
PS—repentant believer, the Gentiles, a sinner turning to X; the Other Son—
Israel; rejoicing—rejoicing in heaven over the salvation of a lost
person/repentance of a believer.
E. Try to determine the main point of the parable.
Parables generally have one main point.33 The details of the parable beyond that
one central point are usually not significant. Don’t make the parable “stand on
all fours,” that is, don’t try to make every part of the story stand for something.
Try to grasp the main point. For example, in the Parable of the Lost Sheep
(Luke 15:1-7), the story illustrates the truth that there is rejoicing in heaven
when one sinner repents. The other details of the story, such as the fact that
there were one hundred sheep or that he brought the lost sheep home on his
shoulders, are insignificant. Don’t make comparisons where none exists. Try to
condense the general teaching of the story in one sentence. Often, the final
statement in the parable states the point of the parable.
Matthew 13:1-9, The Parable of the Sower: People respond in various ways to
the preaching of the Word. (In this case, the details are meaningful.)
Matthew 13:24-30, The Parable of the Tares: Counterfeit faith is common.
Luke 12:16-21, The Parable of the Rich Fool: Materialism is foolish.
F. Note the actual or intended response of the hearers.
The response of the audience to the parable hints at the parable’s meaning. Jesus
often concludes His parables with instructions to the audience. For example,
after the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus called His audience to action
33
Some longer parables (e.g., the Prodigal Son) make several significant points.
with the words “Go and do likewise.” Thus, the conclusion of a parable may
reveal the central meaning.
G. Suggest an interpretation.
Once you follow the above steps, the meaning of the parable should become
obvious. As always, your interpretation should square with the rest of Scripture.
Never base a doctrine on a parable alone. You may want to check a couple of
commentaries to see if your results compare favorably with what respected
scholars say.
H. Suggest appropriate applications.
Remember that the goal of Bible study is to apply the principles you find. Think
about how you will change your life in response to the parable’s teaching.
Exercise: interpret the familiar Parable of the Wise and Foolish Builders (Matthew 7:24–27).
Follow the steps from above.
1. What is the plot of the parable? Wise man built his house on a rock and it withstood the
storms; foolish man built his house on sand and it fell.
2. Why did Jesus tell the parable? Illustrating the difference between those who hear and
obey and those who hear and reject.
3. What are the points of comparison?
Those who hear and obey: like a wise man who built on rock
Those who hear and reject: foolish man who built on sand
Why is it wise to build on rock? Security, confidence, strength
Why is it foolish to build on sand? Insecurity, weakness
Note the connections: Obeys the word–wise man–builds on rock–house stands; rejects
the word–fool–builds on sand–house falls
4. What imagery or symbolism must the reader explain? Rock, sand, storms, the house
standing or falling
5. What’s the main point of the parable? Those who obey the word of Christ enjoy
stability.
6. Does the response of the hearers aid in interpreting the parable? No.
7. Suggest an interpretation of the parable. It’s wise to hear and obey Jesus; it’s foolish to
hear and not obey Him; those who hear and obey Jesus have a firm foundation and can
be confident; those who don’t can’t.
Of what significance is the fact that the same trials hit both houses? It implies that the
same trials hit both believers and non-believers. This is not the main point of the
parable, but it seems a valid inference.
Suggest a few misinterpretations. That the main point of the parable is to build your
house on a rock rather than on sand; that trials always come in threes (rain, floods,
wind); rain = x, floods = y, wind = z.
8. Suggest applications based on the principles of the parable. Hear and obey the words
of Christ. Commit yourself to daily Bible reading. Seek to obey the principles you read
or hear. Recognize that Christianity is a sure foundation for living.
Conclusion: Since parables are so common in the NT, it’s important that we know how to
interpret them. Follow the rules from this lesson, and you’ll understand the parables better.
Discussion:
1. Why are parables so easy to mishandle? Because they are figurative to begin with and
easily misunderstood.
2. Explain why Jesus spoke in parables. To conceal truth from those not interested in truth
and to illustrate truth to those who were.
3. Why should you never base a doctrine on a parable alone? Because parables are easy to
misinterpret; it’s easy to make a parable say what you want it to say; doctrines should be
based on more than one passage.
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 13: Interpreting the Epistles
The Apostle Paul traveled extensively throughout Israel, Greece, and modern-day Turkey,
preaching the Gospel and planting new churches. He trained men to be pastors and deacons in
these churches. Timothy and Titus were sent to two difficult areas to train other leaders. While
Paul traveled, he encouraged and instructed both Timothy and Titus in their tasks by writing
letters to them. He also wrote letters to churches he and/or others had started. These letters were
copied and collected by the early church and eventually included in the canon of inspired
Scripture. In this lesson, we’ll study how to interpret this type of literature. It’s essential that we
learn to do so because the majority of the information about the Christian life is found in the
epistles.
I. Characteristics of an Epistle
A. The word “epistle” is somewhat uncommon in modern speech, so many people
don’t know what an epistle is. Some jokingly suggest that an epistle is the wife of
an apostle. The word comes from the Greek “epistolos” which simply means “a
letter.” The epistles are letters Paul, Peter, John and others sent to various people
or churches shortly after the time of Christ. These letters were written under
divine inspiration and are thus true and authoritative for us today. Much of the NT
is composed of epistles.
B. Epistles were very important to the establishment and growth of new churches.
These epistles are helpful for us today as well. They contain many practical
teachings that speak directly to us in the church age.
II. The Patterns of an Epistle
Epistles share many things in common with the kind of letters we are familiar with. We
have some type of greeting (e.g., “Dear ________”); then we explain the purpose of our
letter (e.g., “I am writing you because . . .”). We say what we want to say, and then we
close with some kind of good-bye (e.g., “Yours truly, …). Epistles in the Bible were
intentionally written with a similar pattern.34
A. Opening greeting
This is similar to our opening statements. However, this greeting details who is
writing and to whom he is writing. After this introduction, the phrase “Grace,
mercy and peace to you . . .” is found in all of Paul’s letters. Most of the other
Epistles contain a similar kind of introductory greeting.
34
Ryken, p. 155.
Hermeneutics Lesson 13: Interpreting Epistles 87
Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus at
Philippi, together with the overseers and deacons: Grace and peace to you from
God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. (Phil 1:1-2)
B. Thanksgiving
The writer usually gave thanks for something the church has done or for what
God has done.
I thank my God every time I remember you. In all my prayers for all of you, I
always pray with joy because of your partnership in the gospel from the first day
until now. (Phil 1:3-5)
C. Body
This is the main content of the letter. The letter may consist of:
 Doctrinal teaching (Eph 1-3)
 A warning against false teachers/teaching (Col 2:8)
 A rebuke for following false teaching (Gal 1:6–7)
 A word of encouragement for ministry well done (1 Th 1:6–8)
 Instructions regarding worship (1 Tim 3:15)
 A plea to the church to solve problems (1 Cor)
D. Final comments and/or greetings
In the closing, the writer briefly extends further greetings to faithful people in the
church (e.g., 2 Tim 4:19). Sometimes, the writer gives greetings from his helpers
in ministry (e.g., Phm 23–24).
Greet all the saints in Christ Jesus. The brothers who are with me send greetings.
All the saints send you greetings, especially those who belong to Caesar's
household. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen. (Phil
4:21-23)
III. Principles for Interpreting Epistolary Literature
A. Do some background reading.
It’s vital to know the historical context of each epistle. Find out who wrote the
epistle and what motivated it (the occasion). Since each epistle was written with a
specific purpose in mind, it is important to discover what that purpose is. Most
study Bibles will give you a brief introduction to the book. A working knowledge
of the Book of Acts is also helpful, because the epistles were written in the course
of history covered by Acts. A Bible handbook (like Haley’s) or a book on NT
survey contains much helpful background information.
B. Read the book through several times.
Read and re-read the epistle. Consulting two or three versions is helpful. Take
your time and try to absorb what you are reading. Most epistles are short enough
to read through in one sitting.
While you are reading, try to focus on one paragraph at a time. Paragraphs are
either identified with the paragraph symbol (¶), as in the KJV, or by the layout of
the text, as in most new versions. Paragraphs contain one main idea, so find out
what that idea is. Ask two questions while reading: 35
 What does the author say in each paragraph?
 How does this paragraph help support or advance the author’s main theme?
While you are reading, have a pen and notebook ready and make a question/idea
list. This is a good place to make notes about each paragraph. (Note: Paragraphs
sometimes overlap chapter divisions, e.g., Eph 4:29–5:2.)
C. Identify the different parts of the letter.
 Opening: Who is writing to whom?
 Thanksgiving or Praise: to whom and why?
 Body of the letter: what's the problem or point of the letter?
 Closing comments: What final instructions or comments does the author make
and why?
D. Identify the overall theme of the book.
Try to condense the general argument of the book into one or two sentences. It’s
important to know the theme because each part of the book says something about
the theme. Sometimes the theme is obvious, sometimes not. If you have trouble
determining this on your own, you can usually find this information in a study
Bible or commentary.
Example: What is the theme of Galatians? The Epistle of Galatians eloquently
defends Paul’s apostolic authority and contains in summary form what the apostle
taught. In particular it contains a clear statement of justification by faith and
builds on that foundation a defense of Christian liberty against any form of
legalism … Galatians was written to call early Christians back from the Mosaic
Law to grace, from legalism to faith. It is an emphatic statement of salvation by
faith apart from works.36
E. Make an outline of the book.
It’s often helpful to trace the author’s argument through the book. Note how the
author moves from point to point. Compare your outline to one published in a
study Bible or commentary.
IV. Interpreting specific passages
If you’ve followed the above steps, you should have a good general grasp on the contents
of the epistle in question. Take the following steps to interpret any part of an epistle:
A. Start with the paragraph your passage is in. While you can try to interpret a single
35
Fee and Stuart, p. 51.
36
John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck and Dallas Theological Seminary, The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An
Exposition of the Scriptures (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983-c1985), 2:588.
sentence or even a phrase, remember that “context is king.” Find out the theme
and purpose of the paragraph your passage is in, and then determine how that
paragraph fits into the overall scheme of the book.
B. Define all significant words. Since words and sentences convey the meaning of
the text, it’s essential that you understand the vocabulary and structure of the
passage at hand. It may be helpful to consult a dictionary or another version.
With the availability of books and computerized Bible study aids today, even
those not familiar with the original languages can do significant research on the
meaning of Bible words.
C. Consider whether the passage is culturally bound. Some of the epistles deal with
issues that applied directly only to the original audience, not to us. For example,
Paul wrote to the Corinthians regarding how to deal with meat offered to idols (1
Cor 8). We don’t deal with that issue at all. Since there is no direct application of
that passage, we have to consider whether there may be broader, general
principles that might be applicable.
D. Consider other passages that may pertain to the interpretation of your passage. All
truth is interlocking. Other passages may help clear up the meaning in the text you
are looking at. Let Scripture interpret Scripture. A primary rule of interpretation is
to let clear, direct teaching inform unclear passages.
Example: Is there a contradiction between Paul’s statements on justification by
faith and James’ statement that “faith without works is dead”?
E. Suggest a potential interpretation. Write down what you think the author meant.
Then check that meaning with other passages.
F. Check a couple of good commentaries and/or other resources (pastors, teachers,
etc.). Note that it’s usually best to do your own research and study before you read
what others have to say about it. Again, if your conclusions are seriously out of
line with what respected scholars think, you need to adjust your results.
Exercise: Read Philippians 2:1-11 (one paragraph). Let's try to interpret verse 6.
1. What is the purpose and theme of the Book of Philippians? General doctrine and
Christian living. Not one specific theme–more general warnings and exhortations
regarding various subjects–unity and humility, joy, false teachers, persecution. NIV Study
Bible has good paragraph.
2. What part of the letter is this? Body – Doctrinal teaching
3. What’s the theme of this paragraph? Note vs. 2 and vs. 5. Unity and humility
4. What words do we need to define in verse 6?
form – note that vs. 7 uses the same word (morphe)
robbery – a thing to be seized upon or to be held fast, retained
5. Is there anything culturally bound within the text? No
6. Are there other passages that teach about the deity of Christ? Yes, many. This passage
supports the doctrine.
7. What did Paul mean here? Jesus did not consider the glories of heaven something to be
retained, but left heaven and came to earth. Although Christ is essentially God (equal to
God), he did not regard such equality as something to be held on to.
8. Is the author teaching that Jesus became less than God when he came to earth? No– This
is not suggesting that Jesus left his deity behind, but he temporarily laid aside some
aspects of it.
Conclusion: It’s important to know how to interpret epistles because this type of literature
makes up a large portion of the NT. Plus most of what we know about life in the church age is
based on the epistles. Follow the above guidelines for interpreting the epistles.
Discussion:
1. Why is it so important to know how to handle epistolary material? Because the NT has a lot
of it, and it’s the primary resource for telling the believer how to live in the church age.
2. How are epistles different from narrative? Narrative tells a story; epistles generally don’t.
Narratives are usually non-normative and non-didactic; epistles are usually both normative
and didactic. Narratives describe, epistles prescribe.
3. Explain the idea of a passage being culturally bound. The info applies directly only to the
original recipients of the letter. There may be broad, general principles that we can extract,
but you have to be careful about it.
4. What if you come up with an interpretation that no one ever thought of before? You’re
almost certainly wrong.
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 14: Putting It All Together: A Logical Method
of Interpretation
We are nearing the end of our journey exploring the art and science of biblical interpretation. In
this lesson, we’ll try to pull together the primary tasks the Bible interpreter must complete in
order to come to an accurate understanding of the Bible.37
I. Prepare Yourself Spiritually.

A. Fruitful Bible study is a combination of dependence on the Holy
Spirit and the sharpening of your God-given abilities of reason
and analysis. The Spirit was given to help us understand God’s
Word (John 14:26; 16:13-14; 1 Cor 2:10-16). Bible study is a
spiritual exercise. Those not prepared spiritually will find little
profit in Bible study.
B. Prayer should be “priority one” in interpretation and application.
Prayer is not an automatic link to true interpretation, neither in
its quality or quantity, but it is the first indispensable step. Prayer
is not overcoming some reluctance on God’s part to open His
book to us, but it is a recognition of our dependence on Him.
C. Personal cleansing from sin is also a prerequisite. Known,
unconfessed sin hinders our relationship with God (Isa 59:1-2).
He does not require sinlessness in order to understand the Bible,
but the Bible is spiritual truth and sin is a barrier to spiritual
things. We need to confess and forsake known sin (I John 1:9).
We need to open ourselves to the Lord for inspection (Ps 139:1,
23-24). Many of His promises are conditional on our faith
response; so too, our ability to understand the Bible.
D. We need to develop a desire to know God and His Word (Ps 9:7-
14; 42; 119). When we become serious with God, He is able to
draw near to us and open His will for our lives (Zech 1:3-4; James
4:8).
37
Much of this material comes from Bob Utley’s hermeneutics seminar textbook.
Hermeneutics Lesson 14: Putting It All Together 92
E. We need to immediately apply (put into practice) the truth

gleaned from our Bible study into our lives (James 1:22). Many of
us already know much more biblical truth than we are living.
Application is not optional; wise people hear and obey (Mt 7:24f).
Walk in the light you have and more light will be given.
II. Remember the fundamental rules of interpretation (from Lesson 4)

A. Interpret literally or normally, using the grammatical-historical
method. “If the plain sense makes sense, seek no other sense.”
Unless there is a good reason to think the author is speaking
non-literally, interpret the passage literally.
B. Context is king. Always consider how the surrounding words and
paragraphs influence a passage.
C. Consider the historical and cultural background and what
influence it has on the passage. Some passages are “culturally
bound” and do not have a parallel significance to modern
believers.
D. Try to understand what the original author intended to say to the
original audience. “A text can never mean what it never meant.”
Try to determine what the author’s purpose in writing was.
E. Decide if the passage commanding or describing. Much of the OT
describes events without prescribing that we duplicate them.
F. Seek one primary meaning, the “plain sense,” rather than
“deeper, hidden” meanings. The writer had only one meaning in
mind.
G. Look for underlying, timeless principles.
H. Remember the difference between Israel and the church. Many
things pertaining directly to the nation of Israel do not have
continuing application for the church.
I. Compare Scripture with Scripture. Seek to correlate truth. Find
out what the rest of the Bible has to say about your passage or
topic.
III. Process the Text Logically
A. Read the Bible! One cannot know what a passage means if he
does not know what it says. Careful reading and outlining are the
keys to understanding.
Mt 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err [go
astray, wander], not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of
God.
Ac 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in
that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and
searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
1. It may be helpful to consult more than one translation.
a) Primary study should be done out of an essentially

literal translation: KJV, NKJV, NASB, ESV.
b) Further study may require consulting a dynamic
equivalent translation: NIV, NRSV. These Bibles “give
the sense” of a passage instead of giving a word-for-
word rendering. Sometimes this is helpful, but one
must recognize that the text is quite interpretive.
One can use these versions almost like a
commentary.
c) Avoid paraphrases and “free” translations: Living
Bible, New Living Translation, The Message,
Contemporary English Version, Good News Bible,
Jerusalem Bible, Today’s English Version
2. Read the entire book or literary unit in one sitting. When
you read, allow yourself a prolonged period of study time in
a quiet place. Read carefully and slowly to familiarize
yourself with the contents. You must see the whole before
the significance of the parts becomes obvious.
B. Write down your textual observations (i.e., take notes). Keep
track of key words or ideas that need to be defined. Define the
key words with a Bible dictionary or lexicon.
C. Notice the major divisions (literary units) of the author’s
thoughts. These are identified by changes in subject, time, topic,
tone, place, style, etc. The basic unit of thought is the paragraph.
D. Make an outline of the passage.
E. Consider the historical context. Look for verses in the biblical text
to answer these questions.
1. Who wrote the passage?
2. To whom was the passage addressed?
3. Why was the passage written to them?
4. When was the passage written?
5. What historical circumstances were involved?
F. Consider the literary context, i.e., the material surrounding the
passage at hand. This would include the previous and following
paragraphs, the chapter containing the passage and the whole
book. Make sure you understand the meaning of the words and
expressions in the passage.
G. Consider how the genre of your passage influences its meaning.

We’ve examined how to interpret figurative language, types and
symbols, wisdom literature, psalms, narratives, prophecy,
parables and epistles. Approach each genre appropriately.
H. Consider parallel passages or similar passages found elsewhere
in the Bible. Since the entire Bible is inspired (2 Tim 3:16) and
since our basic presupposition is that it does not contradict itself,
we must allow the Bible to fully explain itself on a given subject.
I. Make a tentative interpretation. Write down what you think the
text means. Make sure your interpretation fits the evidence from
the passage.
J. Check your results.
1. Consult your pastor: Bible students often neglect or ignore
their own pastors as sources of information and help in
Bible interpretation. Pastors may not be “experts” on some
theological issues, but they likely can give you a
reasonable answer or at least point you in the right
direction.
2. Consult recognized experts: scholars, teachers, writers,
speakers, etc.
3. Consult one of the better study Bibles: MacArthur, Ryrie,
Reformation Study Bible, NIV Study Bible notes
4. Consult conservative commentaries: Commentaries are
usually written by scholars who have studied a passage or
book intently and in far more detail and depth than the
average person is able. Their explanations are often very
insightful.
5. Consult historical resources: Pastors, theologians, and
scholars have been publishing their thoughts on the Bible
for many centuries. Find out what Christian writers have
said about your passage throughout history.
6. Consult systematic theology books: Theology books are
usually extensively indexed by both text and topic. Check
the index for your text. Read the material corresponding to
your topic or text. Find out how your ideas fit into the
whole of Christian theology.
K. Avoid common interpretive pitfalls.
1. Allegorization: finding deeper or hidden meanings in the
elements of a passage
2. Spiritualization: finding spiritual meanings that were not

intended by the author
3. Confusion: failing to recognize distinctions (e.g., between
Israel and the church); failing to consider other portions of
Scripture
4. Proof-texting: stringing together a series of favorite texts to
prove a point, while at the same time ignoring those
passages that conflict
Hermeneutics:
Lesson 15: The History of Interpretation
A basic understanding of the history of interpretation is valuable for every student of the Bible. It
may come as a surprise that historically many interpreters have not followed the grammatical-
historical (literal) method. In fact, allegorism in one form or another has been predominant in the
history of the church. This is unfortunate but true.
A study of history should expose us to and warn us against the errors of faulty hermeneutical
methods. Hopefully, modern exegetes will not make those same mistakes.
The history of interpretation runs in general eras or periods. In this sketch, some of the important
or dominant characteristics of each period will be outlined.
I. JEWISH/RABBINIC INTERPRETATION (OT)

A. Generally, rabbinic interpretation was allegorical. The rabbis held
that since Scripture came from God, (1) multiple meanings are to
be found in the text, and (2) every detail of the text (even the
individual letters) has importance for interpretation regardless of
how insignificant or incidental.
B. Four main types of Jewish interpretation were in use at the time
of Christ.
1. Literal: This was called peshat, a grammatical-historical
method which served as a basis for other methods.
2. Midrash: Midrash means “sacred study,” and sought
deeper meanings by breaking the texts into pieces and
focusing on insignificant details. It was given to fanciful
allegorical interpretations.
3. Pesher: This comes from the Qumran sect. It had principles
of midrash but with a heavy eschatological (end times)
emphasis.
4. Allegorism: Allegorism of literature had been used widely
by the Greeks and was adopted by Hellenized Jews (i.e.,
those who had accepted the Greek culture) for their
purposes.
Hermeneutics Lesson 15: The History of Interpretation 98
a) The Jews (particularly at Alexandria, Egypt) had a

religious heritage from Moses and a philosophical
tradition which came from the Greeks. They
employed allegorism to reconcile the two traditions.
They interpreted Moses allegorically and brought him
into conformity with Plato and other philosophers.
b) The chief representative of rabbinic allegorism was
Philo of Alexandria (20 BC-AD 54), the most
influential biblical scholar of the Diaspora (the
scattered Jewish people). He sought to reconcile
Greek philosophy and the Pentateuch and show his
Jewish contemporaries that Greek philosophy was
really from the OT. Philo said the literal meaning is
for the immature but the allegorical is for the mature.
II. APOSTOLIC INTERPRETATION
A. The fundamental hermeneutical principle for the apostles was
that Jesus literally fulfilled OT prophecies. Cf. Is 61:1-2 with Lk
4:18-21.
B. The apostles found predictions about the work of Christ or the
Church in the OT. They frequently quoted the OT to support their
statements about Jesus (Acts 2:25-36, 13:29, 33, 15:15, etc.)
C. The NT writers were somewhat creative in their use of OT texts
(cf. Mt 2:15; Gal 4:24). However, they often followed the plain
meaning of the OT passages they quoted (e.g., Isa 7:14/Mt 1:22-
23).
D. The apostles took the sayings of Jesus normally, according to the
plain sense, without seeking hidden or unusual meanings (1 Cor
11:23f).
III. PATRISTIC INTERPRETATION (AD 100-590)
A. Patristic (i.e., having to do with the church Fathers) interpretation
is reflected in various schools. The school at Antioch, founded by
Lucian in the early fourth century, was noted for its sound,
grammatical-historical interpretation and its wholehearted
opposition to allegorism. Theodore of Mopsuestia (ca 358-428)
was especially noteworthy. In contrast, the schools at Alexandria,
Caesarea, and Edessa were given to the allegorical method.
B. Unfortunately, allegorism dominated the church Fathers. The
allegorical method was valuable (they thought) in that one could
use it to defend Christianity against intellectual criticism and
harmonize Christianity with various philosophies.
C. Early Patristic Allegorism
1. The Epistle of Barnabas (ca AD 130): The author (unknown)

allegorized passages favorable to Judaism. He allegorized
the clean and unclean animals (a fertile field for all
allegorists), the Song of Solomon, and many other
passages.
2. Justin Martyr (AD 164): Justin allegorized Judah’s
immorality with Tamar, David’s adultery, and Jacob’s wives,
along with the bells on the high priest’s robe, among
others.
3. Clement of Rome and Irenaeus: By means of excessive
typology of the OT, both tried to establish NT truths and
practices. Clement gave every text a literal and a spiritual
meaning. E.g., he saw bishops and deacons in Isaiah 60:17
as referring to officers and overseers of the church.
Irenaeus saw the Garden of Eden as a type of the church,
etc.
4. The Alexandrian School:
a) Clement of Alexandria (born c. AD 150): He saw five
senses to Scripture:
(1) Historical: What actually took place
(2) Doctrinal: Moral, religious, and theological
teaching; biblical statements taken directly into
one’s thought
(3) Prophetic: Genuine prophecies and types
(4) Philosophical: Allegorizing the Bible to
accommodate Greek philosophy, showing the
influence of Philo and the Stoics
(5) Mystical: Much like the former; Lot’s wife
symbolized impiety which produces blindness
of heart
b) Origen (AD 185-254): Origen was a deep allegorist.
He believed Scripture had a triple interpretation,
what he called body, soul, and spirit. The body of
Scripture was the literal, external words; the soul was
man’s relationship to his fellow man; and the spirit
was man’s relationship to God, and God’s relation to
Himself, the world, and man. Origen’s allegorical
approach would dominate interpretation in the
Church for the next 1000 years!
c) Post-Origen Influence
(1) Jerome (d. AD 420): Originally, he was an

allegorist but later was influenced by the
school at Antioch. However, he never
completely abandoned allegorism.
(2) Augustine (d. AD 430): His four-fold sense of
Scripture had the following ingredients:
(a) The literal (“letter” as he called it)—what
happened.
(b) The allegorical—what one must believe
(c) The moral—what one must do
(d) The anagogical—what one must hope
To his credit, Augustine also proposed the
following important rules of hermeneutics:
(1) Focus on the literal or historical meaning
unless the literal made no sense.
(2) Clear passages should be used to
understand less clear ones.
(3) Compare Scripture with Scripture.
(4) Context is the final judge of meaning.
Unfortunately, Augustine usually ignored most
of his sounder principles and engaged in
allegorism.
IV. MEDIEVAL INTERPRETATION (590-1500)
A. Biblical scholarship showed almost no originality during the
Middle Ages. Scholars were content to compile the statements of
the church fathers. Tradition arose and played a key role in
theology. The doctrine of the dominant church (Roman Catholic)
was thus patristic (based on the Fathers) and not exegetical
(based on the Bible text). Again, the allegorical method was quite
prominent.
B. Reasons for the widespread use of medieval allegorism:
1. Allegorism was used to justify the papacy.
2. Knowledge of the biblical languages continued to be
practically non-existent, and exegesis was severely
stunted.
3. The apostate condition of the Roman Catholic Church
cultivated mysticism and extreme pietism in some of the
monasteries (e.g., Cluny, St. Victor).
C. The Dark Ages (7th-12th Centuries)

1. Gregory the Great (ca. 604) and Venerable Bede (735):
Both were allegorists. Gregory taught that Job’s three
friends are the heretics, and when they came to Job, they
were returning to the Holy Church. Job’s 7000 sheep
represented innocent thoughts, the 3000 camels were high
and vain notions, the 500 oxen were virtues, and the 500
she-asses were wanton inclinations. Bede allegorized the
Prodigal returning to the Father’s house to mean worldly
philosophy coming home to the Church.
2. Bernard of Clairvaux (1135): Mysticism arose during this
time and produced some mystical allegorists of note.
Bernard used allegorism to support the papacy. For
example, the two swords of Luke 22:38 were taken to be
“spiritual” and “material” respectively. The first was to be
used by the church and the second by the soldiers when
ordered to do so by the church. Innocent III’s claims to the
papacy were in part founded on this interpretation. Bernard
interpreted the sun and moon of Genesis to be the papacy
and the secular rulers respectively.
3. Cabbalists (12th ct): Letterism and allegorization was taken
to absurdity. Since God gave to Moses words, letters, vowel
points, and accents, they had supernatural significance.
Each letter in a word represented different words, so they
substituted words with the same numerical value.38
38
From Shane Belding, Biblical Discernment in the Pew, D. Min. project at Central Baptist Theological Seminary,
Minneapolis, MN.
D. The Scholastic Period (13-15th Centuries).

1. The leading light here was Thomas Aquinas (1274). He held
to the four-fold sense of Scripture, dwelling mostly on the
non-literal aspect. With Aquinas and the scholastics came a
divorce between theology and exegesis and a marriage
between theology and philosophy.
2. A contemporary of Aquinas, Bonaventura, held to a seven-
fold sense of Scripture corresponding to the seven seals of
the apocalypse. They were historical, allegorical, mystical,
symbolical, synechdocal, and hyperbolic.
V. THE REFORMATION ERA (1500-1650)
A. The Reformation brought an end to free-wheeling allegorism and
a return to the study of the biblical languages and sound
hermeneutics. The Reformers and pre-Reformation leaders were
grammatical-historical interpreters. With the translation of the
Bible into numerous languages and dialects came a new interest
in biblical interpretation.
B. Among the early Reformers, Luther and Melanchthon followed
the literal sense of Scripture although at times they lapsed into
allegory. Calvin was free from allegorism and mysticism. His
great principle was “Scripture interprets Scripture.”
C. Sola Scriptura (Scriptures Only) became the rallying cry of the
Reformers. This led to a “back-to-the-Bible” movement in which
all church practices had to be supported by Scripture. Since the
Bible was the authoritative source document, accurate exegesis
and analysis was very important to the Reformers.
VI. THE POST-REFORMATION AND MODERN ERAS (1650-1940s)
A. Protestant Scholasticism/Confessionalism: In response to post-
Reformation Catholic decrees and dogmas, the Protestants
developed a creedal approach to theology. Appeal was made to
creeds and confessions (statements of faith) for authority, and
exegesis in many quarters turned cold and sterile. Good
hermeneutics became sidetracked as “dogmatics” (doctrine)
became dominant over exegesis. Proof-texting in its worst sense
often prevailed.
B. Pietism: Believers wanted something warm-hearted and practical

for their everyday lives, a personal experience with God, not
mere doctrine. Thus pietism arose, which emphasized edification
instead of exegesis. Unfortunately, personal reflections on
Scripture were often not rooted in accurate biblical analysis.
Pietists often disregarded the grammatical-historical method in
favor of an “inner light” type of interpretation. This left them
susceptible to false theology.
C. Rationalism/Biblical Criticism: Rationalism promoted reason as
the only determining method of finding truth. Human reason
stands in judgment of every biblical statement. Biblical revelation
was discounted as rigid, authoritarian, and culture-bound.
Rationalism was the main product of the Enlightenment for
biblical studies. (The Enlightenment was a 17th and 18th century
overthrow of dogma, tradition, and revelation, and an elevation
of human intellectual autonomy.)
D. Liberalism: Liberalism was merely an extension or natural
outcome of the hermeneutics of rationalism. In this system, the
inspiration of Scripture is denied, the idea of evolution is applied
to Israel’s religion with the OT books having their authorship and
dates of composition altered radically, the idea of the
supernatural is denied, and the Bible is interpreted only as
history (and not very accurate history at that).
E. Neo-orthodoxy: This is in one sense a non-rational, emotional,
subjective approach to Scripture, and in another sense only a
variation of the rationalism of the liberal approach. Neo-
orthodoxy’s basic premise is still the autonomy of the human
intellect despite the idea that an “encounter” with God is
supposedly above human intellectual process.
1. God reveals Himself in His presence and not in words.
Knowledge does not come from biblical statements but
from a personal, indescribable experiences with God.
2. God is the Wholly Other, totally outside human perception.
Only myths can bridge the gap between man and God. The
biblical events are not meant to be viewed as historical but
as myths to convey spiritual truth.
3. Truth is paradoxical, filled with apparent contradictions; the
Bible need not be rationally coherent. The Bible itself is
treated by the neo-orthodox in the same basic manner as
the liberals.
VII. MODERN DAY (1940-PRESENT)
A. Some suggest that the text’s affect on the reader is more

important than the text itself. The relevance of the text to the
reader is most significant, not what the text says. The reader
determines meaning for himself; the author’s meaning is
secondary. Meaning is found in the reader’s response. Every
reader will get something different from the text, so there can be
no uniform understanding.
B. Many deny that a reader can access the author’s original intent.
The author and the reader live in separate worlds. The reader
cannot escape his own set of biases and thus cannot truly
understand what the author intended. All the reader can know is
how he feels about the text. Objectivity is impossible. Absolute
truth is impossible.
C. A variety of groups seeks to interpret the Bible according to their
own interests, political positions, and points of view: feminist,
liberation, sociological, etc.
D. Fortunately, many evangelical Christians retain their
commitment to the grammatical-historical method of
hermeneutics. Many still believe that “All scripture is given by
inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for
correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God
may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (2 Tim
3:16-17). We must strive to maintain this commitment.

Hermeneutics - LBC 2009.teacher

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hermeneutics - LBC 2009.teacher

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hermeneutics - LBC 2009.teacher

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is hermeneutics?

What is hermeneutics?

What are some of the different approaches to biblical interpretation throughout history?

What are some of the different approaches to biblical interpretation throughout history?

Hermeneutics:

The Art and Science of

I. THE DEFINITION OF HERMENEUTICS

C. An OT Illustration: Nehemiah 8:1-8

2. Some readers follow the “common sense” school of interpretation—

Geography consists of:

V. THE TASK OF HERMENEUTICS

I. REVELATION FROM GOD

b) The Biblical Languages Are Purely Human.

6. The Existence of Translations, Versions, Copies, and Reproductions of the

2. The Bible Has One Truth System.

Versions of the Bible differ because they follow different original

(e) Some scholars maintain their loyalty to the

must therefore distinguish between what comes from the original

(ii) There are “degrees” of literalness in the

Note: As you can see, literal translations require some

(iv) Rendering the text in clear language for the

(iv) Reading a free translation can be somewhat

II. THE SPIRITUAL QUALIFICATIONS OF THE INTERPRETER

The illumination of the believer is always in association with the

I. INTERPRET SCRIPTURE LITERALLY OR NORMALLY.

(2) A denial of the univocal nature of language renders

2. Factors in Determining Word Meanings

This lesson continues our examination of the principles of hermeneutics.

VI. SEEK TO UNDERSTAND THE HISTORICAL-CULTURAL BACKGROUND.

Examples: Judges 12:14 – what is the significance of this bit of

3. What is Prescriptive and What is Descriptive?

a) Eating Meat Offered to Idols (1 Cor 8-10). The practice is

(4) Head coverings on women as an expression of submission

superstructure is added to the foundation; it doesn’t replace it.

1. Does it express or conform to orthodox Christian theology? Do other

b) Are there commands to obey?

I. Allegorization: An allegory is a comparison—“this stands for that.” The allegorical

f) Matthew 17:20 “If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye

Psalm 23:1 “The Lord is my shepherd”

B. Figures Involving Association or Substitution

Eph 4:30 Grief

3. Irony: reversal of meaning (including sarcasm); the words mean the

b) There must be biblical evidence that a typical relationship exists.

B. Hermeneutical Principles for Types

(c) Hebrews 13:11-12 – OT sacrificial animals burned

2. “A symbol is some object (real or imagined) or action which is assigned a

3. Compare With Similar or the Same Symbols in Scripture.

To Symbolize or Not to Symbolize, That is the Question

Other Symbolic Ideas

Similarly, it is dangerous to assign meaning to a certain color. For example,

NT believers must be careful in understanding and applying the Proverbs because

interpreting figures of speech and symbolism). For example, in Proverbs 1:20,

I. Basic Information about the Psalms

C. Royal Psalms (sung to honor the king)

D. Proverbial or didactic (teaching)

The heavens declare the glory of God;

Exercise: Work through the above rules in Psalm 1.

I. What Biblical Narratives are Not.