Grace Institute: Bible Study Methods: Interpretation, Correlation and Verification

Interpretation, Correlation and Verification Bible Study Methods Winter 2009

Download as a PDF file

March 1, 2009: Word Studies

Homework due March 9

The Principles of Interpretation

Errors in Interpretation

Allegory

Allegorical interpretation asserts that there is a plural meaning to scripture: that which is to be understood at face value and a secondary meaning where each element of the primary meaning has a deeper spiritual meaning. This style of interpretation relies upon imaginative allegorical connections. A sub-set of this is “typological” interpretation, where every story found in the Old Testament is assumed to foreshadow the New Testament.

Cults

Cults interpret the bible to have a secret meaning which can only be revealed through special knowledge.

Protestant Pietism

Scripture is read in anticipation of specific directions emerging from our daily reading of scripture. The secondary meaning of a passage is what God is saying to me right now. This happens when we read a passage as if it is intended to be a specific answer to decisions or situations that we are confronted with each day.

For example, a believer may be trying to decide whether or to make a trip to the coast for the weekend. That day during their quiet time they read in Acts how Paul and Barnabas were sent by the church in Antioch to go on a journey, so the believer sees this as confirmation that indeed God wants them to take the trip.

This treats scripture no better than some sort of Christian horoscope or biblical 8-ball.

Premature association

This is when correlation is brought into the interpretative process too early. As a result, the interpreter may take the meaning of the correlative passage as the meaning of this passage without truly determining if it is what this passage teaches.

Fragmentary Interpretation

The fragmentary interpreter treats the bible as if it is a collection of isolated verses to be understood apart from its immediate and broader contexts.

Dogmatic Interpretation

This is when the interpreter has theological agenda in which they believe strongly or which colors their view of every scripture. The bible is seen as a series of proof texts for that preconceived viewpoint.

Correct Interpretation

Interpretative Principles

Meaning is derived out-of the text. It is not imposed on the text.

If we have done our observation steps correctly, this will take care of itself. Nonetheless we must always keep in mind that meaning comes from the content of the subject passage. This is the foundation of inductive bible study.

There is only one true interpretation to the text.

There are not secondary allegorical, secret meanings hidden within the passage that require some special knowledge or creativity on the part of the reader. The primary meaning of the passage is the only meaning.

Don't let the difficulties in a passage keep you from the primary point of a passage.

Within a passage there may be some details which might be difficult to understand, usually the point of the larger passage is clear. For example in 1 Corinthians 15:29 Paul speaks of the “baptism of the dead.” It is not clear what he means by this, and this is the only time this phrase is used in scripture. However, what we do know from 1 Corinthians 15 is that Paul is talking about the truth of the resurrection. Our focus should be on that clear truth rather than on the uncertain elements within the passage.

If the literal sense makes sense, seek no other sense.

The text means what is normally or plain stated in the passage. This does not mean the interpreter overlooks figures of speech, metaphors or obvious allegories. However, we only consider a passage metaphorical or symbolic only when text clearly expects us to, or when a literal meaning is impossible or absurd (Revelation 1:16).

The easiest explanation is usually the most accurate explanation.

Often we assume that the trickiest or most creative interpretation must be accurate. Instead, after making our observations and connecting this with the historical and grammatical contexts, most of the time the interpretation is readily obvious to us.

The text cannot mean what it never could have meant to its author or his readers.

This rule may not help us determine the actual interpretation of the passage, but it can exclude certain interpretations for us. The proper interpretation of a passage must conform to he laws of grammar and the facts of history.

Context, context, context!

Literary context – The original readers usually read the subject passage as part of a greater whole. For, example, an entire epistles would have been read aloud to a church in one sitting. Each passage therefore needs to fit within the structure of the entire book.

Historical context – What was taking place politically, socially or economically at the time the original readers heard the passage? What was taking place at the same time this was being written and read?

Cultural context –Who is in power in this culture? How forms of communication are used? What is used for money? What ethnic issue do the readers face? What is family-life like? All of these factors will change the meaning of the passage.

Geographic context – What was the terrain like? What topographic features are significant? What was the weather like? How far were the readers from the action taking place? What was the city like? Was it rich or poor?

Theological context – What did the readers understand about God? How did they worship God? How much of the scripture did they have? What other religious ideas were competing for influence at this time?

Use your imagination!

Correlation

One of the hallmarks of the Protestant reformation is sola scriptura . This is the principle that scripture alone is our final authority. This has been, however, one of the greatest criticisms of Protestantism, for it has lead to a multitude of denominations and cults as each person interprets scripture alone.

However, sola scriptura was never intended to allow for each person to have their own private interpretation of the bible. Rather, as our final authority, we must let scripture interpret scripture. This is the correlation step in inductive bible study.

The bible is a unique book, in that it is a collection of 66 different books written over the course of more than a millennium by forty different authors in 3 different languages. Yet it has a unity and consistency which is awe inspiring. The correlation step in our process guards us against wrong interpretation as we test our conclusions with the unified message of the scriptures.

Principles of Correlation

Progressive Revelation – The Bible shows God's revelation to man as evolutionary. That is, the New Testament fulfills and clarifies the truth of the Old Testament (Matthew 5:17-20, Galatians 3:17-25, Hebrews 1:1-2). New Testament passages should give way to the Old Testament

Scripture Interprets Scripture – Doctrines should be based on extensive treatments of scripture, not a single enigmatic verse. That is, obscure passages should give way to clear passages.

Scripture is Harmonious – Scripture has one unified system of theology. Scripture is not contradictory. If passages appear to contradict, it is because we have misinterpreted a passages or because we have not applied principles 1 and 2.

Theology of the Whole – No doctrine may be found in 1 or 2 verses. Debates over doctrine can not be settled by a list of scripture references. Instead each passage of the bible must be interpreted within its immediate context and in the context of the whole of scripture.

Process of Correlation

We cannot hope to correlate every passage with the entire bible. For one, we don't have time to do a full review of the entire bible with each passage we are studying. Instead, the process of correlation requires that we connect the passage with what we currently know about the whole of scripture, and then narrow down our correlation to specific related passages. Finally, the process is always on-going. As we study more and more of scripture, we will find that interpretations we have done in the past will be modified and improved as we gain in our understanding of more and more of the bible.

Formal Association

We begin by looking for passages which have related topics. This helps narrow down the process of correlation. However, there is a danger in that it tends to divide scripture into superficial compartments rather than see the interconnectedness of all scripture. Furthermore, following cross references can take you down rabbit trails which lead away from the target text. Stay on topic!

Use bible study tools to find related passages. Such tools might include a Topical Bible, Concordance, or the cross-reference system in your bible. However, don't take for granted that these tools have properly related a passage. Use good discernment and judge each cross reference by the context of the passages.

Your Word Study will often provide an important process which helps you to find and analyze related scriptures.

Informal Association

This process looks for connections between various biblical passages or theological concepts which do not appear on the surface to be directly related. The danger in this process is that we try to force scriptures that have no relation to each other connect. For example, just because a metaphor works in one passage doesn't mean that metaphor always relates in all of scripture. Informal association is related more to the unity of the whole message of scripture, not each component part.

Informal association improves as a student grows in their general bible knowledge.

Verification

Uses of a Commentary

The final step in the process is to verify your conclusions with other bible scholars. This serves only as a final check on your interpretation to make sure that we are in the ball park with our personal inductive bible study. For example, if you've come up with an interpretation that no one else has in the history of Christendom, then you are probably wrong in your interpretation. Let's face it, we aren't that smart!

We must never become arrogant enough to think that we are going to have all the answers or that the Holy Spirit only illuminates the scripture to us. We should benefit from the research, insight and illumination of others.

Commentaries are especially useful when you face difficult interpretive questions that just can't be answered from your own inductive study. However, be careful, because commentaries often disagree. Never use just one commentary, but check two or three reliable commentaries. If there interpretations differ, then read through the justification each uses. Objectively weigh the justifications and if you've done your own independent study of the passage, you'll be able to make an informed decision as to which interpretation is most likely the accurate one. Finally, remember, commentaries and study bibles are not inspired by God. They are just one person' opinion.

For that reason, using commentaries are to be left for the end of our study, not the beginning. The Scriptures will always mean more to us when we have done our own discovery than if we short cut the process and just read commentaries and study bibles.

Selecting Commentaries

Types of Commentaries

Exegetical – Highly technical commentaries which are bases on the original language text. Emphasizes textual criticism. Difficult for the layman to read.

Expositional – Bases comments on the original language, but often will transliterate the Greek. Does both a phrase-by-phrase review of the text as well as synthesize the text into the whole.

Devotional – Easy to read commentary which emphasizes practical application of the passage. Uses many illustrations and often uses the text as a springboard for other topics.

Evaluating Commentaries

Be aware that not all commentaries are approach the scripture as the inspired Word of God. Just because it is n print doesn't mean it is accurate. Nonetheless, we can often find valuable information in commentaries which come from a different theological bias than our own. Furthermore, just because you agree with a commentator's theology doesn't mean they are going to have the best commentary.

The easiest way to judge a commentator is to review which seminary the commentator graduated from. “Safe” seminaries include Dallas, Denver, Western, Trinity, Talbot, and Trinity. Be more cautious with Asbury, Harvard and Princeton.

The publisher can also be a good test for the theology of a commentator.

• Normally reliable: Moodys, Zondervan, Baker, Inter-Varsity, NavPress.
• Inconsistently reliable: Word, Tyndale
• Charismatic publishers: Bethany Fellowship, Vision House, Logos.
• Denominational publishers: Broadman (Southern Baptist), Standard Publishers (Church of Christ), Abingdon (Methodist), Concordia (Lutheran).
• Sometimes secular publishers have great books written by solid authors: Oxford.

Recommendations

• Bible Knowledge Commentary – Edited by Walvoord & Zuck. This was written by professors from Dallas Seminary. Consistent theology, thorough and in 2-volumes (Old & New Testament).
• Expositor's Bible Commentary – Edited by Frank Gaebelein. 12-volumes. Available on CD-ROM for less than $100. More detailed than the Bible Knowledge Commentary, but a solid Expositional commentary.
• Other good commentaries: Wycliffe, New Bible, International Bible Commentary, Bible Exposition Commentary (Wiersebe), John McArthur.
• Be careful with the “public-domain” commentaries. They tend to be devotional and dated in their research. Examples: Matthew Henry, Jamieson Fausset & Brown.

Other Useful Tools

• Study Bibles: Ryrie, Nelson, NIV Study Bible
• Bible Handbooks: Eerdmans Handbook of the Bible, Unger
• Bible Dictionaries: Holmans, Easton.
• Bible Atlas: Moody's Atlas

Assignment

1. Interpretation - Using all the observation and interpretative tools, write a one paragraph interpretative paragraph on Ephesians 2:1-10. The goal is to clarify the meaning of the text by explaining the text phrase by phrase in the order in which the text appears.
2. Correlation - Using both formal and informal association, look up at least five correlative scripture passages to Ephesians 2:1-10. For each passage write one or two sentences explaining how the passage confirms or informs your interpretation of Ephesians 2:1-10.
3. Verification - Read at least one commentary on Ephesians 2:1-10. Write a short paragraph (two or three sentances) explaining how the commentary agrees, disagrees, or expands on your interpretation of Ephesians 2:1-10.
4. Interpretation redux – Now, using the information you gained in the correlation and verification process, rewrite the interpretation paragraph to incorporate any new insights gained. Note: I want you to turn in both your first draft and the final interpretive paragraph.