Biblical Interpretation

Biblical Interpretation Literal Method/Sense: Considers the stated facts at face-value. interpretation begins here. All Sometimes people end, simply taking these facts for what they are on the surface. Other times, people use these facts as a starting point for use with another interpretative method. Not all literary forms in the Bible conform to a literal interpretation, e.g. poetry. A solely literal approach supposes that all facets of the Bible are of equal value, that each verse is a word-for-word dictation from God. John 6:25-59 seems to be written primarily with literal interpretation in mind. Spiritual Sense: According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral, and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church. CCC 1115 Allegorical Sense: This sense asks how a passage scripture applies to Christ. For instance, Isaiah 7:14, says, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel. This is probably a reference to the birth of Hezekiah (2 Kings 16:20). Christians, however, see this as a foreshadowing of Jesus birth (Matthew 1:22, 23). See more on the Allegorical Sense on pages 2 and 3. Moral Sense: This sense considers that scripture provides guidance for our lives, our actions; this sense asks how a particular passage applies to one s life, today. E.g. 1 Corinthians 10:11; Hebrews 3:7-4:11. See more on this on page 2. Anagogical Sense: This sense speaks about the future; it asks what this scriptural event says about the eternal, about our destiny. See Revelation 21:1-22:5 for an example. In another example, Jesus prediction that Jerusalem Temple would be destroyed (Mark 13:1, 2) has been fulfilled (A.D. 70). The details of how such a prediction will be fulfilled, however, are typically fuzzy enough to defy pinpoint accuracy. So, while the early Christians did not doubt that the end was coming, they did not know when it would happen (Matthew 24:33, 34; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 1 Corinthians 7:29-31). In fact, Jesus points out that they will not be able to use pinpoint accuracy for this prediction (Mark 13:32-37). The Anagogical Sense provides a general outline of what will happen, such that people can have hope, can correlate their behavior with the punishment that comes late, etc. but, as we shall see, the fulfillment will normally only be fully recognized in hindsight. See more on the Anagogical Sense on page 3. 9/17/2013 1/6

Biblical Interpretation 9/17/2013 2/6 Analogical Method: Seeks similarities between events or ideals as if one were a simile or a metaphor of the other, using imaginative comparison. Jesus seems to intend analogical interpretation in Matthew 13:31-33. With this passage, one easily arrives at an understanding of Jesus intended interpretation. As with most things, one can over do the analogical method; one can use it to discern symbolic meaning when no overt inference suggests this meaning. Sometimes the Holy Spirit does speak to us in surprising ways, even finding symbolic meaning with no overt connection to a passage of scripture. However, we must not force such interpretations. Rather, we do well to be patient, allowing the Holy Spirit to work according to his own sensibilities As an example of interpretation that will seem forced and artificial at least to some people, let us take a look at Augustine s commentary on Genesis: The dry land of the third day [of creation] represents those who hunger and thirst for God while the sea represents the masses of individuals who do not seek the Lord. 1 The Allegorical Sense (p. 1) is a subcategory of this Analogical Method. The Moral Sense (p. 1) is a subcategory of the Analogical Method because it presumes that the commandments to the ancient Jews, for instance, should apply to modern readers, or that their lifestyles should be reflected in our own lifestyles. Allegorical Method: This subcategory of the Analogical Method seeks spiritual meaning from a set of Biblical passages connected by common symbolic themes. Catholics usually see the Allegorical Method as foreshadowing. What was is an archetype of what is to come. Consider Romans 5:14. The Allegorical Method is like a light shining at the head of a journey; the light shows us where we might go but does not favor any one path over another, instead illuminating a wide range of potential paths. Just so, the forecasting of allegory is not pointed enough to provide clear direction by which one might act. Instead, one may see that the forecast was fulfilled only in hindsight. For instance, the sacrifice of sheep (Exodus 20:24) was fulfilled by sacrificing the Lamb of God (John 1:29) on a cross (Mark 15:24). Isaiah 53:4-9 points to this, but Isaiah s allusion was not clear to anyone but Jesus until Jesus had already been crucified. The downfall of this method is that past events may appear to predict future events, and people will try to crack the code to understand the prediction. However, fulfillment of past symbols is only revealed in hindsight. For instance, consider how many people have claimed to know the timing of the end of time. Daniel 7:1-28 seems to be written with allegorical interpretation in mind. Peter uses allegorical interpretation in 1 Peter 3:18-22. 1 Considers Genesis 1:9-13; Augustine. 1997. The confessions. Trans. M. Boulding. Hyde Park, New York: New City Press. From: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/v4/n1/examining-augustine-genesis-commentaries

Biblical Interpretation 9/17/2013 3/6 Anagogical Sense: Sometimes the Anagogical Sense of scripture (see the Spiritual Sense of scripture, on page 1) is a subcategory of the Allegorical Method. This is true when its predictions are not straight forward, but involve the analogical use of symbols. In this usage, the Allegorical Method provides predictions for the future. As an example, see Daniel 2:31-45. A Modern-Historical Approach to Allegory: Some modern Bible scholars sometimes use the Historical Critical Method to interpret allegories from the other direction, starting in the present and working one s way back. More on this on page 4. Historical Critical Method: This method considers the historical setting in which a text was written. What was the cultural setting when the work was written? What were the political and religious issues at stake? What was daily life like at that time? Some specific foci within the Historical Critical Method follow. Form Criticism: Discerning the style of writing that is being used, the context in which the text is to be used. Of what genre is the writing or what was its original purpose? You don t read a modern court record the same as you would modern poetry, so why would you read 1 Kings the same way you would Psalms? As another example, while most prophetic books are set within the context of ancient history (see page 4 for more on ancient history), the Book of Jonah appears to be an exception; it appears to be a parable. Part of form criticism, then is to discern when literal and analogical interpretations are intended and when they are not. Textual Criticism: This involves discerning the character of the written materials considering the fact that they are written material. For instance, what is the material written with and on? How is the text produced? As an example, the Lord s Prayer s doxology, present in some versions of Matthew s Gospel, seems to be as a copy error. For more on this see page 5. Source Criticism: This involves discerning the written materials used as sources for a text. For instance, by considering the various sources behind the Torah, once can discern differing theological schools of thought present in the ancient Israelite world. See more of this on page 6. As another example, the story of the woman caught in adultery, in John 8:1-11, is only poorly understood without considering the prescriptions of the Law of Moses, esp. Leviticus 20:10 (a source innocuously relied upon for the story). The whole scene, as presented by these Pharisees, is a sham, because they asked Jesus to follow the law when they themselves were not prepared to fully do so. According to the Law, an adulterous woman alone was not to be stoned; rather, both members of the adulterous couple were to be stoned. Jesus confronts their deceit and prevails. Redaction Criticism: This technique seeks to learn about those who edited a text by discerning their interests and motivations, as well as their setting, by considering the text itself. For instance, the redactor of the Torah valued all four of the Torah s ancient constitute traditions; see more on this below, on page 6. The Historical Critical Method is only as accurate as one s understanding of the historical setting in which the scriptures were initially told, retold, written, edited, and/or copied.

Biblical Interpretation 9/17/2013 4/6 A Modern-Historical Approach to Allegory: Some modern Bible scholars sometimes use the Historical Critical Method to interpret allegories oppositely from the direction of influence traditionally considered. Considering this method, Biblical authors would start with the later (i.e. then current) material and work their way into past scriptures with their present situation in mind, not as predictive so much as reflective. Let us consider the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:1-7:29). Jesus climbs a hill and from the apex of that hill delivers his greatest sermon. Form Criticism: The Bible sometimes records history but this history is always ancient history. Modern history starts with correct facts and may allow interpretation of those facts. The facts are most important, and interpretation, if present, is always secondary. With ancient history, however, the interpretation is paramount and the facts are of secondary importance. So facts can be changed if necessary to bolster correct interpretation. 2 Source Criticism: Does Jesus ascending a rise from which to teach remind you of any other Bible story? Most people make the connection to Moses teaching from Mt. Sinai, delivering the Ten Commandments (Exodus 19:1-3, 25; 20:1-21). Redaction Criticism: Some, then, propose that Jesus need not have actually climbed a mountain to give his Sermon on the Mount. Whether or not Jesus actually climbed a hill to deliver this sermon, Matthew emphasizes the hill to draw a parallel to Moses. Perhaps Matthew believe that Jesus fulfilled Moses prediction that another like Moses would come (Deut. 18:15-19), and using the phraseology of a mountain was Matthew s way of communicating to his readers to be sure to interpret Jesus as one like Moses. In general, someone connects his experience to a past, scriptural event. He then interprets the recent event in light of the past event. He assigns to his present event symbols and phraseology that bring the past, scriptural event to mind. This way his readers can also interpret the more recent event in terms of the same past event. Another way to consider this is that later Biblical author considered that the past work of scripture did predict his current event, but considers that he was not able to understand that prediction until it was fulfilled. Once he was able to see that the prediction did come true, he adapted the details of his current situation to reflect the details of the prediction, so that all could appreciate its fulfillment. Multiple Interpretation Methods One method of interpretation does not necessarily disqualify another. For instance, Deuteronomy 30:19 s command to choose life seems to be intended literally; the Jews are admonished to choose life for themselves and their descendants. Catholics might use the general analogical method to understand that one should avoid abortion. And notice that this second method also utilizes the moral sense of scripture. 2 For more see Dr. Kathleen Weber, Bible Basic Training: Introduction to the Old Testament, (2002), 3, 4.

Biblical Interpretation 9/17/2013 5/6 The Doxology of the Lord s Prayer: The doxology at the end of the Lord s Prayer in some translations of the Bible seem to be the result of a copy error. Redaction Criticism: A doxology is a brief prayer of praise to God. The King James Version of the Bible includes one at the end of Matthew s version of the Lord s Prayer, but the New American Bible does not. In fact, the earliest manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew do not have this doxology. Where did it come from? o Matthew 6:9-13 KJV: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. o Matthew 6:9-13 NAB: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as in heaven. Give us today our daily bread; and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors; and do not subject us to the final test, but deliver us from the evil one. Source Criticism: The Didache is an early first century catechism which gives witness to the practices of the early Church in Syria. Most if not all scriptural allusions in the Didache correspond to quotes from the Gospel of Matthew better than to any other scripture. Such passages are not identical, but do suggest a relationship between the Gospel of Matthew and the Didache. Some scholars, thus, think that the Didache is a product of the same community that produced the Gospel of Matthew. Form Criticism: The Didache apparently inserts quotes from the same traditional source as from which the Gospel of Matthew drew. The Didache, however, does not distinguish these traditional quotes from the rest of the text. If one does not know Matthew s Gospel well, one may not know when such scriptural quotes in the Didache begin and end, even if he does have some general recognition of the quote. Textual Criticism: The modern printing press was not invented until A.D. 1440. Until that point, the Bible was laboriously copied by hand, which easily allows for copying errors. Scholars speculate that a scribe was copying the Lord s Prayer segment of Gospel of Matthew and absently drew on the text from memory rather than copying each word letter-for-letter. And this speculation suggests that this scribe s memory drew upon the Didache s version of the Lord s Prayer rather than the actual version in the Gospel of Matthew, which sat right before him as an exemplar. o Didache 8:4-10: Our Father, which art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name; Thy kingdom come; Thy will be done, as in heaven, so also on earth; give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our debt, as we also forgive our debtors; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one; for Thine is the power and the glory for ever and ever. 3 3 This quote from the Didache is originally found at: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-lightfoot.html

Biblical Interpretation 9/17/2013 6/6 The Documentary Hypothesis: By using Source Criticism, modern Bible scholars have discerned that the Torah (the Bible s first five books) brings together four main sources. In Genesis 18:1-5, verses 1 and 3 indicate a single traveler, but verses 2 and 5 indicate more than one. The discrepancy is easily understood if two sources were combined into one story. SOURCES Elohist Yahwist (J) Deuteronomist Priestly PALESTINIAN REGION Northern (Oral Trad.) Southern (Oral Trad.) Northern (Prophetic) Southern (Priestly) WRITTEN AT THE TIME OF King David ~ 1012 B.C. King David ~ 1012 B.C. King Josiah ~ 640 B.C. The Exile, ~ 586 B.C. NAMES FOR El or Elohim Yahweh Yahweh Elohim GOD Yahweh Elohainu NAMES God The Lord The Lord our God RENDERED The Lord God PREDOMIN- ANTLY IN Genesis Exodus (Stories of Jacob, Leah, and Rachel) Genesis Exodus (Stories of Abraham, Sarah, Isaac and David) Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Samuel Kings Let s take a look at Genesis 28:12-17 and see what we can discern. Leviticus Chronicles Ezra Nehemiah 12 And dreamed, and behold a ladder fixed on the earth, whose top reached to heaven, and the angels of God ascended and descended on it. 13 And the Lord stood upon it, and said, I am the God of thy father Abraam, and the God of Isaac; fear not, the land on which thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed. 14 And thy seed shall be as the sands of the earth; and it shall spread abroad to the sea, and the south, and the north, and to the east; and in thee and thy seed shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed. 15 And behold I am with thee to preserve thee continually in all the way wherein thou shalt go; and I will bring thee back to this land for I will not desert thee, until I have done all that I have said to thee. 16 And Jacob awaked out of sleep, and said, the Lord is in this place, and I knew it not. 17 And he was afraid, and said, how fearful is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven. 4 First off, we can tell that verses 12 and 17 are from the Elohist by the way the passage refer to God, and similarly that verse 13 is from the Yahwist. The Elohist tends to see God as fearful and distant, so in verse 12, God is not mentioned directly. The Yahwist tends to see God as humanly personal, so in verse 13, God is actually on the ladder and speaks to Abram. The message he delivers (13-15, also Yahwist) is one of reassurance. Despite the message of reassurance, in verse 17, Abram is afraid. This fear makes more sense if we skip the intervening passages and look only at the Elohist material (verses. 12 and 17). Now take a look at Genesis chapters 1 and 2. The contradictions in these chapters are best explained by recognizing that these two chapters hold two separate stories of creation: the first from the tradition of the Elohist and the second from the Priestly Source. 4 Quotes from Brenton, The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English, (Hendrickson, 1995).