How
to Study the Bible, Lesson
Lessons From the Past
Jewish Interpretation
When Paul and Silas were forced to leave Thessalonica, the came to Berea where they found Jews "of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true," (Acts 17:11). Question, what Bible study method did the Jewish Bereans use?
Jewish expositors of the first century believed in the divine inspiration of the Scriptures. That is "for them...the words of the Bible had their origin in God and were in fact the very words of God," (Richard Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period, p. 19). Secondly, they thought there were many different levels of meanings for a text and therefore their task was to deal not only with the obvious but also with the implied or deduced meanings. Finally, they saw their task as making "the words of God meaningful and relevant to the people in their present situations." To do that they had four kinds of interpretation:
Jewish Methods of Interpretation
1. Literalistic: "It means what it says."
2. Midrashic: "That was just like this is." (i.e. an example)
3. Pesher: "This is the fulfillment of that."
4. Allegorical: "This is a figure of speech which means..."
Jude
In both structure and style, Jude is perhaps the most "Jewish" of the books on the New Testament. First the structure of the epistle. It follows what scholars call a "chiasm."1
A " I urge you to contend for the faith" (v.3)
B "For certain men, whose condemnation was written about long ago...."(v4)
B Verses 5-19 are the "proof" of verse 4
A Verses 20-22 form the explanation of verse 3 and describe "how to contend for the faith."
Not only is the structure very Jewish, but the exposition is an example of "midrash." This method illustrates the present Christian crisis with examples from the past. Thus the past is used to help the reader understand the present. This is still a common method of biblical interpretation. For example, someone might call you a "Barnabas" which means a "son of encouragement."
Midrash differs from the pesher type of interpretation because midrash only uses the past to illustrate the present whereas pesher says that the past was prophetic and is being fulfilled in this current situation.
Interpretation in the Early Church
This period extends from Clement of Rome (ca. 95) to Gregory I (who became "Pope" in ca. 590). This period can be illustrated by examining the two great Christian schools of this time. One was located at Alexandria and the other was in Antioch.
The Christian school of Alexandria was founded by Pantaenus and was best remembered for the work of two of her teachers, Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 155-215) and Origen (A.D. 185-254). Origen spoke of the threefold meaning of Scripture which he termed the "body, soul, and spirit" of the text based on 1st Thessalonians 5:23. The "body" gave the literal meaning while the "soul" meaning defined our relationship with others and the "spirit" meaning described our relationship with God. He is best known for his use of the allegorical method of interpretation.
On the other hand, the Christian school at Antioch emphasized historical interpretation over allegorical interpretation. Some of the great teachers were Theophilus of Antioch (ca. 115-118), Diodorus of Tarus (ca. 393), Theodor of Mopsuesia (ca. 350-428), Chrysostom (354-407) and Theodoret (386-458). Unfortunately, some of these men became embroiled in the theological conflicts of the fourth and fifth centuries and were accused of heresy. Thus, when the church split into eastern and western factions, this school lost its influence.
Interpretation in the Middle Ages
Throughout the Middle Ages interpretation is bound by a dull conformity. Church traditions stood supreme. The allegorical method was expanded to the "Fourfold Interpretation."
Fourfold Interpretation
The Letter: The literal meaning of the text
The Allegory: Tells men what to believe
The Moral: Tells men how to behave
The Analogy: Tells men what to hope
Here is an example of the application of this method. If we read the word "Jerusalem" in the Biblical text it would alternately represent:
The Letter: The physical city of Jerusalem
The Allegory: The church
The Moral: The human soul
The Analogy: The heavenly city
All of this without regard for the biblical context wherein the word is found!
Thus two great problems faced biblical interpretation in the Middle Ages: the allegorical method and ecclesiastical tradition.
The Reformation Movement
The battle cry Sola Scriptura (the Bible alone) lifted the Bible above traditions of the Church and brought God's word back to the forefront. Martin Luther (1483-1546) emphasized the single fundamental meaning of Scripture and the right of each individual to interpret the Bible for him/her-self. John Calvin (1509-1564) is remembered for his theological Institutes but he was also a biblical interpreter who generally followed Augustine of Hippo (A.D. 430). Calvin did however stress the importance of context. His interpretations are characterized by brevity and unity.
Unfortunately, during this era the Roman Catholic Church held the Council of Trent. They drew up lists of the Catholic beliefs as opposed to the beliefs of the Protestants. The Protestant reaction was to codify their own beliefs in creeds. This also resulted in some unbalanced interpretations which resulted from studying the Bible in the heat of controversy.
The word "chiasm" is taken from the Greek letter "Chi (X). It occurs when an author develops two themes 'A" and "B" and then repeats them in reverse order "B" and "A" so that is they were diagrammed they would form an X.