Request your free, three-month trial to Tabletalk magazine. You’ll receive the print issue monthly and gain immediate digital access to decades of archives. This trial is risk-free. No credit card required.
Try Tabletalk NowAlready receive Tabletalk magazine every month?
Verify your email address to gain unlimited access.
About twenty-five years ago, I was talking to a woman who taught elementary school–age children at a private Christian school. The institution had recently hired a new Bible teacher for the high school, a pastor. This woman was perplexed because the Bible teacher was teaching his students something that he called hermeneutics. She had never heard that word before, and perhaps many of you reading this article are seeing it for the first time yourself.
At the time, I was finishing my college career as a religion major, and I was certainly no expert on the subject. I did know enough, however, to tell her that she did not need to be concerned about the word hermeneutics, because the term simply refers to the rules and processes for interpreting and applying a written text. When we are talking about the Bible, then, hermeneutics is essentially the science and method of biblical interpretation. It is the procedures that we follow to properly understand what the author of the text wants to communicate to us.
Thinking back to that conversation, I sometimes wonder if I should have said more. I was correct that the word hermeneutics in itself is nothing to fear. I should have warned my friend, however, that in our world today, enamored of subjectivism as it is, there is no longer one set of interpretive rules that we can assume when people toss around the phrase biblical hermeneutics. If you know anything about the state of modern academia, you know that there are academic societies that meet yearly to discuss things such as “liberating hermeneutics”: how the Bible can be used to tear down capitalism; “feminist hermeneutics”: guidance for using the Bible to critique the so-called patriarchy; and “LGBTQ+ hermeneutics”: attempting to use the Bible to destroy the church’s long-standing teaching on covenant marriage and to argue that homosexual relationships are part of God’s will for human beings.
Christian readers know that such versions of hermeneutics are absurd, but these things are out there in the academic world and are always threatening to make inroads into the church. As we reject such things for the errors that they are, however, we need also to remember that the misuse of a discipline does not invalidate the proper use of a discipline. The Bible is a written text, and like all other texts—indeed, like all other forms of communication—it must be interpreted to be understood and followed. There is a proper biblical hermeneutic that we can follow to rightly understand and apply the Word of God.
books about hermeneutics
Writing an article about biblical hermeneutics is particularly challenging because there is much that could be said. Several of the books on hermeneutics that sit on my shelf are three hundred to four hundred pages long. I have only five pages to talk about the subject. There is no way I can cover the same ground, nor do I think I need to. You can pick up a hermeneutics book from a trusted author and learn everything you need to know about the rules for interpreting each biblical genre (law, proverb, psalm, narrative, apocalyptic, and so on).
Here I have to particularly recommend Knowing Scripture by Dr. R.C. Sproul, and not just because I work for the ministry that he founded. I picked up this book in college almost thirty years ago, buying it from a book table at a Christian conference for college students. I had no idea who R.C. Sproul was or that Ligonier Ministries even existed. But to this day, I think it is probably the best book on hermeneutics available for the layperson. In fact, I think it is probably the most important book that Dr. Sproul ever wrote because it gives sound instruction on how we can rightly understand the words of the living God. A Christian who can properly interpret and apply the Scriptures cannot help but be a mighty warrior in the kingdom of God. I commend this work to you if you want a look at the rules for reading each biblical genre, some guidance in basic Bible study, and much more.
That said, I am going to focus on just a few points and approaches that are vital for us to remember as we seek to interpret the Bible. These are things that I believe we sometimes forget as we are thinking about hermeneutics and the rules for reading biblical genres.
a spiritual book requires a spiritual reading
Often books on biblical hermeneutics stress that the Bible is just like other books and is to be read as we read other books. This is a point made to remind us that the Bible is not a secret codebook that hides its meaning or that requires some esoteric practices to understand it. With respect to the rules that we follow, for instance, we read biblical historical narratives as we read other historical narratives because the historical- narrative genre communicates meaning in the same way whether we are talking about biblical narrative or a narrative retelling of other historical events. The same is true of poetry and other biblical genres. These genres “work” the same way in the Bible as they do in other literature.
So there is much truth in the observation that the Bible is a book like other books and should be read as we read any other book. Nevertheless, we cannot forget that in one essential respect, the Bible is not a book like other books. Alone among the works of literature that human beings have written, Scripture is the inspired Word of God (2 Tim. 3:16–17). Yes, the Lord used human beings to put the words of the Bible on paper; thus, the Bible has a certain human character about it. Yet that does not invalidate its divine character. So the words that have been written by human authors are at the same time the very words of God Himself.
Because the Bible is the very Word of God, it is a spiritual book, and a spiritual book requires a spiritual reading. Ultimately, only believers in the Lord Jesus Christ can rightly understand the Bible. We draw this conclusion from many passages, particularly Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 1–2. The Apostle makes it plain that the Apostolic teaching he gives is from the Holy Spirit and that only those who have the Holy Spirit will receive his instruction. Paul’s words by good and necessary consequence apply to all the words of Scripture because we know that all the words of Scripture are from the Holy Spirit.
Therefore, to understand and apply God’s Word rightly, we must be God’s people. We must be born again by the Spirit of God and must trust in the Lord Jesus Christ alone for salvation. We must approach the Bible with a humble spirit, with prayer, with a willingness to be corrected, and so on. We must bring a spiritual reading to this spiritual book.
None of this is to say that only perfect Christians can comprehend the Bible or that unbelievers are completely unable to figure out the original meaning of the biblical text. We can find good ideas even in commentaries written by non-Christians and by professing Christians who do not have as high a view of Scripture as they should. Comprehension here has less to do with what the text says or means than with one’s ability to actually believe that the meaning of the text is true. Ultimately, only those with the highest view of Scripture and who trust in Christ will be able to fully plumb and receive by faith the depth of biblical teaching.
the full sense of scripture
A word of caution is now in order. When I argue for a spiritual reading, I am not arguing for any kind of reading that looks for a secret or hidden meaning. Throughout church history, there have always been people who have “found” meanings in the text that really have no connection to it whatsoever, whether through wild allegory, secret codes, visionary experiences, or other means. A spiritual reading is a reading that we engage in while being spiritually prepared through faith and prayer to encounter God in the Bible. A spiritual reading seeks what Westminster Confession 1.9 calls “the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one).”
That statement from the confession tells us two vital things. First, the sense or meaning of any Scripture “is not manifold, but one.” This tells us that a biblical text will not have multiple, contradictory meanings. If two people read a text and interpret it to mean two irreconcilable things, then one or both of the interpreters must be wrong. We necessarily conclude this from the biblical teaching that God cannot lie (Heb. 6:18) and that He cannot repent (1 Sam. 15:29). A contradiction is a violation of truth, and repentance is an admission of error. If there were true contradictory meanings in a biblical text, then God would have spoken a falsehood in inspiring the Bible and would have to repent. Since God cannot lie or repent, it is therefore impossible for any text to have contradictory meanings.
Additionally, that the biblical text cannot have contradictory meanings entails that the text really cannot mean one thing to one person and something different to another. Many of us have been at Bible studies where we have heard something like, “To me this verse means . . .” Perhaps some of us have even said that ourselves. But this is impossible. The text has a single meaning intended by the author, not many different meanings. To be fair, often when people say things such as “to me this verse means,” they really mean that the text might have a particular application for them that it may not have for others. That, in fact, can be true. The same truth can be applied in many different ways, depending on the reader’s particular circumstances.
The meaning or sense of a text is one and not manifold, but we need now to look more fully at what it means for any biblical text to have a single sense. Note also that Westminster Confession 1.9 speaks of “the true and full sense of any Scripture.” This phrase recognizes that the one sense of any Scripture can be more complex or have more facets to it than we might think on a quick, surface reading. Christian interpreters have long recognized the depths of the Bible, that the verses and passages of Scripture have a richness to them that repay the careful reader with more and more shades of meaning as the reader returns to them and meditates on them.
A relatively simple example of this is the phenomenon of the double fulfillment of many prophetic passages. Many prophecies have both an initial fulfillment in their original context and a greater fulfillment later on. Consider Hosea 11:1: “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” Quite clearly in the book of Hosea itself, the prophet refers to the exodus from Egypt when God saved Israel and adopted the nation as His son (see Ex. 4:22). Matthew 2:15 later quotes the text from Hosea and tells us that it is fulfilled in Jesus and His parents’ coming up out of Egypt once it was safe to do so after the death of Herod the Great.
So which of the two meanings is it? Is the nation of Israel the son that God called out of Egypt, or is the incarnate Lord Jesus the Son that God called out of Egypt? Both. But these meanings do not contradict one another, for they are part of the full sense of the text. Israel, indeed, was called by God to serve Him as His beloved adopted son before the nations and thereby to show the gentile nations that Yahweh, the covenant Lord of Israel, is the one true God. In light of Israel’s failure in this vocation, God sent His beloved and only begotten Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, to represent Israel and to succeed where Israel failed. Jesus, because He represents Israel and is the true Israel of God, repeats the history of Israel in His own life and ministry, including His own exodus from Egypt. But instead of failing as Israel did, Jesus succeeded, and now by His witness through the church, the nations are coming to worship the God of Israel (Matt. 28:18–20). The Israel of Hosea 11:1 is both the nation of Israel and the Lord Jesus Christ, and these truths do not contradict but complement each other. The full, single sense of the text incorporates both. Each is a facet that shines a light on the full meaning of Hosea’s prophecy.
Importantly, we can know the full sense of Hosea’s teaching only by also taking into account the New Testament. Because the Bible has a single divine Author who has spoken in many books, the full sense of any single text can be found only as we read it in light of the entire canon and compare Scripture to Scripture.
the rule of faith and the rule of love
One final point to keep in mind as we read the Bible is the ultimate aim for which God’s Word is given. Augustine of Hippo, looking to the two greatest commandments, argued that Scripture was given to us so that we might love God and love our neighbor as ourselves (Matt. 22:34–40). He was right. If we are not focusing on love for God and neighbor and growing in these virtues as we read the Bible, something has gone terribly awry.
In keeping with the importance of love of God and neighbor, Augustine and others have stressed the importance of reading the Bible according to the rule of faith and the rule of love. The rule of faith has to do with our love for God, informing us of the key truths about who He is and what He has done, for we surely cannot love Him without knowing such things. Essentially, the rule of faith consists of the great Trinitarian expressions of faith that the church has handed down for generations, particularly the Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed. The rule of faith is not something we use to stand as judge over Scripture, but it is a tool to be employed as we seek to understand the text. It is a summary of the core truths found in Scripture and preached by the Apostles, so it is a safe guide to help us make sure that we have not gone astray in our biblical interpretation. The rule of faith is not inspired by God as Scripture is, but it is the fruit of the church’s teaching, and God has given us the church as teacher and guide in learning and following His Word. The church is not infallible, but the church is wise, and we ignore its guidance at our peril. The church has handed down the rule of faith, which has been adopted by Christians of vastly different theological persuasions and has been used with profit for centuries. Though not divinely inspired, it is for all practical purposes not subject to change. Many heretics have tried to refute or change it over the centuries, but these efforts have always met with failure. We can be confident that the church has heard the voice of God and rightly interpreted His Word in giving us the rule of faith.
The second rule for reading Scripture is the rule of love, and this consists simply in seeking to figure out how a particular text shows us how to love our neighbors. With some texts, such as the Ten Commandments, we see how to love our neighbors with ease. “You shall not steal” (Ex. 20:15) means that we love our neighbors by not defrauding them of what lawfully belongs to them. It is more difficult to see how other texts teach us to love our neighbor. I am thinking here of things such as the genealogies in 1 Chronicles 1–9. It takes more work to see how the genealogies connect to how we treat other people, for how do lists of names teach us to love our neighbors as ourselves?
Even here, though, we can glean some principles. Genealogies are given, among other reasons, to show us how the biblical story connects to real people from history and real historical events. These lists of names remind us that what the Bible describes happened in real time and space and that the only reason that we should take the Bible seriously is that God really has spoken in history and acted in history. How, then, do we love our neighbor after reading the genealogies? By insisting that the Bible is conveying historical fact wherever it intends to do so, because our neighbors can be saved only if these things truly happened.