How to Interpret the Bible

SUMMARY: There are at least 3 important principles of biblical interpretation:

1. Scripture interprets Scripture. To understand a passage, consider it in light of other passages on the same topic. Seek consistency.
   
2. Audience relevance. In other words, how would the original audience have  understood a given text?
   
3. Exegesis vs Eisegesis. Exegesis is the discipline of drawing from a passage the meaning intended by the author. Eisegesis is reading one’s own presuppositions into the text. Eisegesis is a particularly common error. Be honest with the text, even if you don’t like it.

Many conservative Christians proudly say, “We take the Bible literally.” Indeed, they use this statement as a test for orthodoxy. But be discerning. Here are a few questions to consider:

• When Jesus said that He is the vine (John 15:5), did He mean that He is a plant?
• Is God literally a rock (2 Samuel 22:3; Psalm 18:2, etc.)?
• Should we literally hate our mother and father so that we can be Jesus’ disciple (Luke 14:26)?
• If your eye causes you to sin, should you literally pluck it out, as Jesus said (Mark 9:47)?
• Must we sell everything we have and give it to the poor in order to inherit eternal life (Luke 18:18-22)?
• Is it necessary to literally eat Christ’s body in order to have life (John 6:53)?
• Did the mountains and the hills really break into song and the trees clap their hands (Isaiah 55:12)?
• Would the moon literally turn to blood before the Day of the Lord (Joel 2:31)?
• When God judged Babylon, an event in actual history, did the stars and sun literally stop giving their light (Isaiah 13:10) and the heavens literally tremble (Isaiah 13:13)? When God judged Edom, did the sky literally roll up like a scroll (Isaiah 34:4)? When God judged Israel, according to Micah 1:2-16, did the mountains literally melt and the valleys split? When God judged Egypt, did He literally come riding on a cloud (Isaiah 19:1)?

This is especially pertinent to Bible prophecy. In light of the last bullet point above, consider what you think of Matthew 24:29-34 which describes Jesus’ Parousia (“Second Coming”) with similar language: sun will be darkened, stars falling from heaven, Jesus riding on a cloud, etc. This is what theologians call “Hebraic apocalyptic language.” It is poetic language usually used when YHWH judged nations.

We should consider the possibility that given the non-literal nature of many Old Testament passages, similar New Testament passages are also non-literal. Are such New Testament passages about Jesus coming “in divine judgment” against apostate old covenant Israel in AD 70―similar to how YHWH came in judgment in the Old Testament―and not about a literal bodily appearance? This interpretation is reinforced by the numerous time statements that limit the Second Coming to the first century.

I have a conservative view of the Bible and believe that it is the inspired Word of God in its entirety—and that it communicates a literal sense even when it employs non-literal genres. But that does not mean that every word or phrase was meant to be taken in a wooden literal sense. The fact is that nobody is a consistent literalist, nor should anyone be!

In our everyday language, we use figures of speech so often that we do not even think about them. We say things like “I could eat a horse,” “cat got your tongue,” “the four corners of the earth,” “the sky is falling,” “coming apart at the seams,” “he has a yellow streak down his back,” etc. We use hundreds of such idioms that are not literal, but people in our culture understand exactly what is meant.

The Bible too uses a variety of literary devices. It uses parables, poetry, hyperbole, allegories, metaphors, and many other figures of speech. In particular, it is common in the Bible to use astronomical and cosmic destruction language to describe important prophetic events. These events are often when God “came down” in judgment against the Jews or their enemies.

Hebraic terminology may be unfamiliar to us but was clearly understood by first-century Jews. Certain events prophesied in the Bible in Hebraic apocalyptic language we know for certain have already been fulfilled, such as God’s judgments upon Babylon and Edom (above).

Are there times when we should understand the Bible literally? Of course! But, should we really interpret the Bible “literally” in every instance? Of course not. It is more faithful to Scripture to interpret each passage the way it was INTENDED in its context and understood by its original audience.

Theologians call this “audience relevance.” An example is Matthew 24:34 where Jesus spoke of the timing of certain prophesied events: “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” Here Jesus is speaking to his disciples who asked a question in response to Jesus predicting the destruction of the temple and the close of the old covenant age―at his Parousia: “Tell us, when will things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and the close of the age?” (Matthew 24:3) Many Christians today futurize “this generation” to mean some future generation. But clearly Jesus’ disciples would have understood that the things Jesus predicted would happen while some of those living in the first century were still alive.

Another important interpretive technique is using “Scripture to interpret Scripture.” For example, related to  Matthew 24:29-34 is the statement Jesus made in Matthew 16:27-28― “For  the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming his kingdom.” This passage demands that Jesus’ Parousia would occur while some of those living in the first century were still alive―Scripture interpreting Scripture.

There are some three dozen passages in the New Testament that directly or by implication say that Jesus would return while some of his followers were still alive. We cannot just ignore or cavalierly explain away such passages and be faithful to God’s Word. Eisegesis leads to perhaps the most common errors of biblical interpretation. Throughout New Testament history Christians have been trying to understand prophecy based on then existing news events. Today we call that “newspaper eschatology.” Check out an article at my website “History of False Prophets.”

One can attempt to circumvent these important interpretive principles. But, regarding the return of Jesus, it is so clear and so powerful that if Jesus failed to return when He said He would, Jesus is reduced to a false prophet and Christianity falls―as opponents of Christianity charge. Either Jesus was a false prophet, or else many Christians have a mistaken understanding of the nature of the Second Coming. A correct understanding of biblical language proves the critics of Jesus wrong. He did come in the nature and timing that He predicted.

So, we continue our study. Hang in there.