All:
The interpretation of the Bible is by far one of the least understood disciplines outside of theological academia. Different institutions, Bible colleges and theological seminaries have their favorite approach to the discipline. In some cases these institutions have a predisposition to a particular denominational bent. Because most of the readers at this site are mostly untrained minds, I wanted to provide you an overview summary as well as a comprehensive foundation that will permit you to be able to hold your own when doing your own Bible study. Whether you study alone, with a family member, a spouse, or a small group, or perhaps a church group, what I share will facilitate your ability to offer guidance to others as well.
After all, if you don't have meaningful and appropriate tools, the task, whatever it be, requires a lot more effort and expense of time, money, and resources. If you have ever done any carpentry or construction, you know what I am talking about. Trial and error is a poor teacher and a terrible waste of time, money, and resources.
In the first part of this series of posts, I noted the five most common categories in the discipline of Bible Hermeneutics. For review, these included:
1. Allegorical method.
2. Mystical method.
3. Devotional method.
4. Rational method.
5. Literal method.
Based upon what I shared in part one you can begin to see how people came to making assumptions, and the drawing of conclusions; and furthermore why we have such diversity about beliefs concerning the Bible and its content. This is especially true if one has not been given some training, as for example, a study Bible, or a competent teacher at church or your Sunday school. I covered a basic overview of the "Allegorical" method in part one. It is the preferred and most common found in among Catholics, as well, mainline Protestant denominations.
We turn now to the second method of interpretation of the Bible. The "Mystical" method is closely associated with the "Allegorical" method of interpretation. Some Bible scholars even view the two as synonymous. The origin of the "Mystical" method can be traced to the Jewish Hagadic method of exegesis (explanation by exposition and deductive logic). The "Mystical" method was developed during the inter-testamental period (the 400 years between Malachi and Matthew, a time in which God did not speak to the Israelites.
The "Mystical" method like the "Allegorical" method take discretionary liberties by reading into the text interpretations of meaning not plainly there. The "Mystical" method presumes that hidden beneath the surface of the words and their plain sense interpretations. Using the "Mystical" method, a passage of Scripture with obvious literal meaning is interpreted to have a number of exalted spiritual meanings. Because of the professed desired to reach beyond the letter into the spirit of the word much can be lost. The function of this method has also been called or referred to "Spiritualizing" the text.
History has proven the "Mystical" method to be misleading and of little value in the interpretation of Scripture. The error in its foundational assumption goes beyond that of the "Allegorical" method in that it often presumes that a Scripture may have any number of meanings, and it may be in fact true. In other words, in the authoring Scripture, it meant many things other than those he actually said. The objection to this is, that if God did not mean what He said, then how can the interpreter discover what He did mean? Instead of regarding Scripture as a sensible communication from God, mystics turn it into a riddle and make it say almost anything other than what God meant for it to say. Differing from the "Allegorical", which tend to follow some comparison, spiritualizers are more erratic, not bound by any law. They each become a law of interpretation to themselves. By exalting the interpreter's intentions and ignoring the author's intended meaning, the "Mystical" method fails to reach the basic goal of interpretation and must be discarded if you intend to have clarity of communication.
The third method of interpretation is known as the "Devotional" method. Like the "Mystical", the "Devotional" method of interpretation originated with the Hagadic style of exegesis of the same inter-testamental period. In seeking to apply the Scriptures to their lives, Jewish scribes began to interpret them in the light of their own life situations. In their zeal for application they produced faulty interpretations in church history.
This method had its greatest emphasis among the Pietists of the Post-Reformation period. Thus, it has also been known as the Pietistic method of interpretation.
The "Devotional" method believes the Bible was written for the personal edification of every believer and that the personalized hidden meaning can only be revealed by the shinning of a greater inner spiritual light. 1st John 2:2 is often used as a proof-text for this: "But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things." It searches the Scripture to discover meaning that will build up the spiritual life. In interpretation that which is most important is not what God said to others, but what He is saying to the interpreter. Thus, to interpret the Scriptures "Devotionally" is to search beyond their plain obvious meaning for spiritual meaning applicable to the believer's life. As an example of "Devotional" interpretation, some well-meaning Christians have interpreted Matthew 10:9,10,19 to mean that in their evangelizing they should neither take any material provision nor make any spiritual preparation.
The "Devotional" interpretation is by and large the most common method of Bible study found in churches, men's groups, women's groups, and particularly - liberal churches.
Time has proven the devotional method to be quite dangerous as a system of interpretation. The chief danger of this method is that in seeking to apply Scripture personally the interpreter may ignore the plain literal sense of what God was saying to those in particular historical setting, and thus apply Scripture self-centeredly. The "Devotional" interpretation falls prey to "Allegorizing" or excessive Typology, and often become a substitute for requisites for exegetical and doctrinal studies of the Bible.
This does not rule out "Devotional" practical, and edifying use of Scripture. Certainly, this is a prominent part of and purpose of Scripture, and the Word of God is of no value to the believer unless it is applied to his/her life practically. The interpreter must recognize that Scripture is meant to be applied devotionally, but that this can only be properly done after it has been interpreted literally and historically. "Devotional" interpretation must also be harmonized with doctrinal interpretation.
You have no idea as to how these first three methods of interpretation influence and shape a church's beliefs and doctrine. When I left the the United Methodist Church and went Non-Denominational, I candidated at many different churches in a three-state area. During that time I did pulpit supply, worked for funeral homes, served various short-term interim pastor positions. As a result of this experience, I have preached in some four hundred different churches. Just as an example, I candidated at a church, going through multiple interviews in the process. I pulled the plug on a "call" once I learned the church board did not permit their pastor to marry couples where one or both individuals had a previous divorce. It was part of their charter. I have experiences enough to know that no two churches are alike for hundreds of reasons.
Next time, I will deal with the remaining two methods of interpreting Scripture. Once we move past the most common methods of interpretation, we will begin to examine the many principles that enhance your understanding of God's Holy Word. As you grow in the knowledge of the tools I share, you will find your vision and use of the foundational principles broaden your depth and perspective on God's Word will expand exponentially.
God bless,
Pastor Bob