Bible Study Methods: Interpretation

Lesson time:45 min.

Introduction
Whereas the question observation sought to answer was, “What does it say?” the question which must
be answered now is, “What is the author’s meaning?” Therefore, the task of interpretation is to discover
the meaning and intention of the author. This requires objectivity. Our human tendency is to answer the
question “What does it mean to me?” We tend to read the Bible in terms of our own background and
biases. Martin Luther wrote, “The best teacher is the one who does not bring his meaning into the
Scripture, but gets his meaning from the Scripture.”
It is Very Important to Understand that Every Passage of
Scripture Has Two Authors: God and the Human Writer
1. The Bible is from start to finish the work of the one divine Author; “All Scripture is inspired by God
(or God-breathed),” 2 Timothy 3:16. Yet, it is no contradiction to speak of the various human authors of
Scripture whom God, in His sovereignty, used to record His Word as it says in 2 Peter 1:21, “ . . . but,
men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”
2. The following is a definition of the term “inspiration:”
The work of God in superintending human authors so that using their own personalities and powers
they composed and recorded without error in the original manuscripts His message to humanity.
3. So, we may speak of the particular literary style of the Apostle Paul or the emotion of David writing
in the Psalms or Jeremiah in crying out in Lamentations, and yet at the same time know that God, in His
sovereignty, worked through them so that they wrote only what He wanted them to write. Therefore,
interpretation is searching for the meaning of the author—the human author—but knowing God spoke
through him.
In this session, we will look at six rules of interpretation that apply to all segments of
scripture. Later, we will look at rules that are unique to special sections of the Bible.

The Six Principles of Interpretation

.

I. RULE ONE – INTERPRET NORMALLY

A. Interpret the Bible as You Would Normally Interpret Any
Letter . . .
. . . you received in the mail carrying specific instructions. The “literal method”1 of interpretation was
one of the great driving forces of the Protestant Reformation. Let me explain what we mean by the
term “literal.” A better term might be “normal” or “ordinary.”
1
 B. We Understand the Bible as We Would Understand Any
Other Piece of Literature
We assume the normal, customary, socially acknowledged meaning of the words as the “literal”
meaning. This is the normal way in which we think, talk, and write, and this is the way God’s Word is
to be understood. The Bible was not written in mystical or veiled allegorical language, but plainly for all
to understand.
“Literal interpretation” then may be defined as:
The method, which seeks to arrive at the precise meaning of each of the Biblical writers as required by
the laws of language (which include grammar and figures of speech) and the facts of history.

II. RULE TWO– INTERPRET ACCORDING TO THE RULES OF

GRAMMAR
Martin Luther Said . . .
“The science of theology is nothing else than the rules of grammar applied to the words of the
Holy Spirit.”
The grammatical study of a text is one of the most basic ways to gain insight into the author’s meaning
and to avoid reading our own preconceived ideas into the text.
The observation of the grammar of a given passage is a basic part of step one of Bible study methods.
God chose to reveal Himself in human language, and language is a reliable medium of communication.
Because of the importance of grammar you should not study the Scriptures with a paraphrased Bible
such as The Living Bible or J. B. Phillip’s translation of the New Testament, but rather with a good
literal translation. There is a difference between study of the Bible and reading of the Bible. Modern
Translations and paraphrases can be useful in giving the reader a different perspective on a particular
passage, but because they are generally written in a thought for thought manner and not word for word,
more literal translations are to be preferred for study of the Bible.

III. RULE THREE – INTERPRET CONTEXTUALLY

IT IS NOT AN EXAGGERATION TO SAY THAT . . .

A. The Study of the Context is the Most Effective, Legitimate,

and Trustworthy Resource at the Disposal of the Interpreter
The context is the place to go to answer your interpretive questions asked during the process of observation.
Every word, every phrase, and every verse has a context, and we stand in great danger of misinterpreting a
verse if we ignore its context. The following examples will illustrate how ignoring the context can lead to
error.
1. John 8:32
“You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
These words are engraved in stone above the entrance to a secular university library. In that context the
implication is that academic learning will liberate men from the bondage of ignorance. But if that
academic learning denies the truth of God’s Word then the passage really does not apply. It is clear
 from the context of John’s Gospel that it is sin that enslaves us and unless that education leads us to
Jesus, who said, “I am the truth” (John 14:6 ), it cannot liberate us.
2. Matthew 16:28
“Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who shall not taste death until they
see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.”
In this verse Jesus assures His disciples that some of them present would not taste death until they had
seen the Son of Man coming in His kingdom. Some have interpreted Christ’s words here to mean that
His second coming would be within the lifetime of some of the disciples. Since it did not come then,
these interpreters have concluded that Jesus was deluded and hence, not the Messiah. The context,
however, provides an easier solution. The very next verse begins Matthew’s account of the
Transfiguration, at which some of the disciples were present (Peter, James, and John). From the context
this is obviously what Matthew and Jesus had in mind in 16:28 with this “coming.”
So, we have rule three:—Use the context to interpret the Bible.

IV. RULE FOUR – INTERPRET BY COMPARING SCRIPTURE

WITH SCRIPTURE
ANOTHER WAY OF STATING THIS PRINCIPLE IS . . .

A. The Entire Bible is the Context and Guide for Understanding

any Particular Passage of Scripture
This principle logically follows from the divine authorship of Scripture. Therefore, because of
the harmony of Scripture with itself, we may gain insight into the meaning of a given passage by
consulting other passages where the same subject is treated. i.e. if you are studying the account
of Christ’s resurrection in John 20, you would also want to study the parallel accounts in
Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Study Bibles usually will list cross-references in the margin that show
you when one of the other gospels has a similar account. Also a good concordance will prove
helpful.
THIS MEANS WE SHOULD . . .

B. Interpret Obscure and Unclear Passages in Light of Clear

Passages
1. “Obscure and unclear passages in Scripture must give way to clear passages.” If a clear passage
seems to conflict with a passage that is difficult to understand then go with the clear passage. God will
not clearly spell out a given doctrine in a lengthy and thorough way in one passage only to turn around
and negate that doctrine by an incidental or ambiguous statement tucked away in a different context
later on. Rather we must build our doctrine on clear passages and use these to interpret the unclear ones.
2. A good example of this is seen with the doctrine of the eternal security of the believer. John 10 and
Romans 8 both contain clear and unambiguous teachings, which affirm the security of the believer.
Therefore when one encounters a passage such as Matthew 24:48f or Hebrews 6, which are ambiguous
on the subject of eternal security, we must interpret them in the light of the clear teachings of Scripture
in other contexts.
3. A final corollary of the principle that Scripture interprets Scripture is that we do not build doctrines
on obscure passages. “Everything essential to salvation and Christian living is clearly revealed in
Scripture.” It is a favorite of cultists to find justification for their false teachings in obscure statements of
 Scripture. Some have constructed an elaborate doctrine of divine healing from 1 Peter 2:24 “by His
wounds you were healed.” Roman Catholics have based the concept of the nun from the case of Anna
in the temple (Luke 2:36-38).
So, rule four is - Interpret by Comparing Scripture with Scripture.

V. RULE FIVE – INTERPRET MAINTAINING THE SINGLE

MEANING OF SCRIPTURE
ANOTHER WAY OF STATING THIS PRINCIPLE IS THAT . . .

A. There is Only One Interpretation for Any Passage of

Scripture But Many Applications
It is perhaps at this point that students of the Bible, past and present, have made their greatest blunders.
This principle is best illustrated by looking at two types of errors.

B. Allegorical Interpretation is the First Error that Obscures the

Intended Meaning of a Passage in Scripture
1. An allegory may be defined as a figure of speech like a metaphor that is expanded into a story. One
of the most famous of early English books was John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress, which is a story of
man named Christian who encounters various challenges that are really temptations that Christians face.
So depression is portrayed as a swamp. Vanity is portrayed as a fair, which is full of empty promises.
Allegory can be a wonderful tool to teach truth. The Bible contains a few allegories such as Isaiah 5:1-7.
An allegory may be identified as such by the hints or explanations of the Biblical author.
2. Error arises when the interpreter takes a straightforward historical narrative and treats it as an
allegory to teach spiritual lessons. The problems is that two interpretations are given to the same
text. Along with the normal interpretation of the narrative as a true historical event, a supposedly
“deeper” meaning of the story is given which is obtained only by seeing the various characters and
details as symbols of deeper spiritual realities.
3. This type of allegorical interpretation was the dominant method of interpreting Scripture until the
Reformation.
a. Water From the Well
For example Genesis 24 (by Origen 250 AD)
Rebecca drawing water from the well for Abraham’s servant means that we must come
daily to the wells of Scripture to meet with Christ.
b.. The Axe Head
2 Kings 6:1-7
This is an example of the type of preaching heard in some evangelical churches of our
day. In this story in 2 Kings 6, the prophets have gone down to the river to cut some
logs for a new house. The axe head of one of the men slips off its handle and falls into
the river. The man cries out to Elisha about the lost axe head. Elisha throws a piece of
wood on the water and the axe head floats to the top and is recovered.
This story then becomes, in the hands of the interpreter, an allegory about the spiritual
life. “Friends, have you lost the axe head of your life? Are you out there swinging
away at those trees but only bruising the bark because you have lost that axe head?
 Well, what you need to do is go back. Stop and go back to where you lost it and allow
God to get it back for you, etc.”
These examples seem harmless in themselves and perhaps even edifying, but
nevertheless, using this method the text becomes like clay in the hands of a potter. He
can shape the text to say practically anything he wants. The root of the error lies in
searching for more than one meaning in a passage.
C. A History of Interpretation
1. Students of interpretation generally agree that the first careful focus and development of a set of rules
for interpretation occurred under Ezra after the Babylonian exile. It is undeniable that Ezra’s
interpretation was “literal.” It is just as undeniable that both Jesus and His apostles interpreted scripture
literally, and examples of their interpretation are spread throughout the New Testament.
a. Matthew 19:1-6
b. Matthew 22:41-46
c. Acts 1:15-20
d. Acts 7:2-4
e. Galatians 3:13
2. Around the time of Christ, two issues arose which persuaded many to replace literal interpretation
with allegorical interpretation. The first issue was “wooden literalism,” the extremely literal
interpretation of the Pharisees. Being highly religious but not having a heart for God, these religious
leaders tried to apply the “letter of the law” but without understanding the spiritual intent. For instance,
they interpreted the command not to work on the Sabbath to mean that a man could not pick up a
needle (since that would indeed mean work to a tailor). (See Matthew 23:15-18). The young church
rebelled against such an empty use of God’s Word and sought other means of interpretation.
3. At the same time, several respected Christian leaders (Philo, Clement of Alexandria, etc.) were much
impressed with Greek philosophy. They considered this system of beliefs to be “truth.” Because they
were Christians, they also believed the Bible to be truth. As a result, a strong effort was made to “find
the Greek philosophy in the Bible.” The only way to accomplish this was to allegorize the Bible to
make it say what Greek philosophy said.
4. There were, of course, many mature Christian leaders who continued to hold to literal interpretation.
Unfortunately (as has been the case many times in history) those who held to the truth were not those
who had the most popularity or power, and so the allegorical method became the most popular until the
reformation. The result of this was that the established (Roman Catholic) church developed a set of
interpretations that were so removed from normal word usage that it was assumed that an average
nonprofessional could not understand the Bible. This allegorical interpretation became the basis for the
traditions of the church, and it was those traditions, not the Bible, that were the basis of authority in the
Catholic Church until the reformation.
5. As God used Nehemiah to rescue the Jews from Babylonian captivity, He used men like Luther,
Calvin and others to rescue the Church from the spiritual darkness of unbiblical church traditions. These
men, at the risk of their lives, proclaimed that the Bible, not church tradition, formed the only basis for
God’s authority. Luther’s statement, “SOLA SCRIPTURA,” (Only the Bible) was the watchword of
the reformation.
Luther put it this way:
“Each passage has one clear, definite and true sense of its own. All others are but doubtful and
uncertain opinions”
Calvin said:
“Let us know then, that the true meaning of scripture is the natural and obvious meaning, and let
us embrace and abide by it, resolutely.”
6. Having been freed from the error of allegorical interpretation, let us not be dragged back to it by our
own ignorance or the error of popular speakers who, unfortunately, do not know any better!
D. Pietistic Interpretation is the Second Error that Obscures the
Intended Meaning of the Bible
1. Piety means devotion to God and that certainly is a good thing. But just as one may take a literal
interpretation of scriptures to the extreme as the Pharisees did, so one might depend too much on their
devotion to Christ and not enough on their diligence in discerning Christ’s intended message.
2. Many devout Christians believe that God speaks to them each day through the Scriptures to give
them specific directions, which pertain uniquely to their individual lives and situations. Please note here
that it is certainly valid to find principles in Scripture, which may then be applied to individual situations
in our lives, but the error comes when the context is ignored and the words of the text are taken as
a message from God applying to that reader, alone. A few will help to illustrate this error.
ANSWER 50
a. Suppose you are undecided about what course of action to take. In your devotions, your eyes land
upon 1 Samuel 10:8, “You shall wait seven days until I come to you and show you what you should
do.” From this you conclude that in seven days you will receive a special message. What is the error
of this?
b. Suppose a friend is experiencing indecision about taking a certain trip. In his daily devotions he
reads about how the church at Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas away on a missionary trip. From this
he concludes God is leading him to make the journey. What is the error of this?
3. The Blind Stab Method
The danger and absurdity of this method of interpretation can be seen in the humorous story of the man
seeking God’s will by opening the Bible at random and with eyes closed stabbing with his finger at a
spot on the page then looking to see what God would say to him. On his first attempt, the finger landed
on the words, “And Judas went out and hung himself.” Thinking this was not an appropriate text for
him, the man tried again. This time his finger yielded the text, “Go and do likewise.” Somewhat taken
aback by this, the man resolves to try again only to discover the words, “Whatsoever you do, do
quickly!”
4. This method of interpretation borders on primitive divination! It “puts the Christian faith in a
ridiculous light, and places the method of determining the will of God on a superstitious, magical basis.
It ought to be added: No promise of the Bible is to be used that is not in keeping with sane principles of
interpretation.” (Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation p.194). And so, rule five of interpretation is:
RULE FIVE: A Passage Has Only One Interpretation
1. Don’t allegorize scripture
2. Don’t spiritualize scripture apart from its context

VI. RULE SIX– INTERPRET ACCORDING TO THE AUTHOR’S

PURPOSE
Look for the controlling purpose of the author, and seek to explain each sub-section of the book in the
light of it. In other words, what was the compelling reason the book was written.
 There are several things to look for which will help you to understand the unifying subject and purpose
of a book.
A. What Does the Author Say?
First of all, look for explicit statements by the author as to why he wrote the book. A few examples of
such statements are 1 Timothy 3:15, 1 John 5:13 and John 20:31.
B. Who Were the First Readers?
Look at the original group for whom the book was written. Were they plagued by false teachers
(Galatians and Colossians)? Were they suffering persecution (1 Peter and 1 Thessalonians)? Were there
immorality and schism problems within the church (1 Corinthians)? Another clue as to the unifying
subject of a book can come from repeated words, phrases and concepts. In John the word “believe,” or
a form of it, Occurs over 100 times. In Hebrews the word “better” occurs repeatedly, and in Philippians
the terms “joy” and “rejoice” are found throughout the book. Notice also the condition of the author as
he writes. Is he in jail (Philippians and Ephesians)? Is he facing death (2 Peter and 2 Timothy)?
If you know the overall subject and purpose of a given book, then the parts (the paragraphs,
verses, and chapters) can and must be interpreted in relation to the whole. Knowing this overall
subject and purpose of the book will also help guard you from erroneous interpretations of
certain verses and paragraphs as well as give you a guide as to the meaning of a given passage
and how it relates to its context.

Summary
RULE ONE—Interpret Normally
RULE TWO—Interpret According to the Rules of Grammar
RULE THREE—Use the Context to Interpret
RULE FOUR:—Compare Scripture with Scripture
1. Interpret the Obscure with the Clear
2. Don’t Build Doctrines on Obscure Passages
RULE FIVE: A Passage Has Only One Interpretation
1. Don’t Allegorize Scripture
2. Don’t Spiritualize Scripture Apart from Its Context
RULE SIX: Interpret According to the Author’s Purpose

APPLICATION EXERCISE:
Have the class together do the following exercise. You can either break into groups
of 4-6 or do the exercise with the entire class.
 Read each example below. Place beside each a number (1-6) corresponding to the 6 rules above to indicate what
rule is being broken in each interpretation. Be careful. One or more of the examples may not be an error.

_____ a. On an altar in a church are engraved the words, “All these things I will give to
you if you will bow down and worship me Matthew 4:9” encouraging the congregation to
worship God.
_____ b. A pastor preaches about David and Goliath. He notes that David picked up five
stones from the brook to use in his sling (1 Samuel 17:40). He goes on to say that God
used this verse to tell him to build five points into his sermon.
_____ c. A particular sect teaches that since Paul mentions the term, “baptized for the
dead” in 1 Corinthians 15:29, that all church members should study their ancestry, find
anyone who died without Christ, and be baptized in their place.
_____ d. A preacher states that since Paul said, “Forgetting what lies behind Philippians
3:13” therefore, we are never to think about or deal with painful childhood experiences in
counseling situations.
_____ e. A popular Bible teacher states that just as the Israelites were not to store up
manna for more than one day, Exodus 16:26, therefore we are to trust God to provide, one
day at a time.
_____ f. A radio speaker says that Moses’ staff, which was a tool he used in ministry (Exodus
4:2-4), actually stands for his wisdom and when the staff became a snake, that meant Moses
became clever like a serpent and outwitted Pharaoh.