« Back to help center history

Biblical interpretive approaches

Understanding the Bible involves more than just reading the text. Different Christian traditions, denominations, and movements employ various approaches to interpreting Scripture, often reflecting their specific views on authority.

Hermeneutics and bias

At the heart of biblical interpretation lies hermeneutics, the study of how we understand and interpret texts. Every reader brings their own set of assumptions, experiences, and biases to the text. These factors can influence how we understand and apply biblical teachings. Recognizing and acknowledging these biases is crucial for responsible interpretation.

Within the context of this Christianity Codidact Q&A site, recognizing and clearly stating one's own biases and hermeneutical approach is essential for engaging in productive and respectful Q&A. By at least identifying your Christian tradition, denomination, or movement affiliation(s), you provide valuable context for your questions and answers. This transparency helps others understand the lens through which you are interpreting Scripture, fostering more nuanced and informed discussions. It also helps to prevent misunderstandings that arise from unstated or assumed perspectives. When asking a question, clearly specify the Christian tradition, denomination, or movement whose perspective you are seeking. In the same vein, when answering a question, ensure you are transparent about the perspective informing your response.

The myth of unbiased interpretation

It's important to address the viewpoint held by some, particularly within certain Protestant traditions, that they approach Scripture without bias, relying solely on the Bible (Sola Scriptura). This perspective emphasizes the Bible's inherent clarity and sufficiency, suggesting that faithful reading requires minimal external interpretation. While sincerity in seeking unbiased understanding is commendable, the reality is that every individual, regardless of theological stance, brings pre-existing frameworks and assumptions to the text (including what books are included in the Bible). These frameworks are shaped by cultural background, personal experiences, and even the specific translation of the Bible being used.

Acknowledging these influences doesn't diminish the authority of Scripture; rather, it promotes a more honest and self-aware approach to interpretation. Even those who adhere to Sola Scriptura are still interpreting through the lens of their own understanding, which is inevitably shaped by their context. Therefore, on this site, even if you believe you approach Scripture without denominational bias, it is still essential to identify yourself as, e.g., Protestant, or more specifically, as belonging to a particular Protestant tradition, such as Baptist, Presbyterian, or non-denominational. You can further identify the specific source text or translation you relied upon (e.g., KJV, ESV) and any movements that inform your thinking (e.g., dispensationalism) or methods employed (e.g., historical-grammatical hermeneutic). This identification provides valuable context for your contributions and fosters more productive dialogue. It allows others to understand the broad interpretive framework you are using, even if you believe you are just reading the Bible.

Common biblical interpretive approaches:

Understanding the Bible involves a variety of hermeneutical approaches, each with its own assumptions and methodologies. Here are some examples of approaches used in Christian and academic settings:

• Historical-Critical Method:

  • Focuses on the historical context of the text, including its authorship, date, and original audience.
  • Employs methods like source criticism, form criticism, and redaction criticism to analyze the text's development.
  • Aims to reconstruct the historical circumstances surrounding the text's composition.
  • Most commonly used in academic biblical studies scholarship.

• Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics:

  • Emphasizes the literal meaning of the text, considering its grammatical structure and historical context.
  • Seeks to understand the author's intended meaning through careful analysis of language and context.
  • Often used by conservative evangelical traditions.

• Canonical Interpretation:

  • Interprets individual texts within the context of the entire biblical canon.
  • Emphasizes the unity and coherence of Scripture, recognizing the interconnectedness of its various parts.
  • Considers the final form of the biblical text as authoritative (be sure to specify what is considered the "final form" if applying this approach, since Christians do not agree on which biblical texts are "Scripture").

• Traditional Interpretation:

  • Relies upon the established interpretations of a specific Christian denomination or tradition.
  • Emphasizes the authority of church teachings, creeds, confessional documents, patristic consensus, etc.

• Socio-Critical / Postmodern Hermeneutics:

  • Examines the social, political, and economic contexts of the biblical text and its interpreters.
  • Focuses on issues of power, oppression, and liberation in the Bible and its interpretation.
  • Emphasizes the subjective nature of interpretation and the role of the reader in constructing meaning, questioning the possibility of objective truth.
  • Draws on perspectives from liberation theologies and feminist hermeneutics.

• Socio-Rhetorical Criticism:

  • Analyzes the persuasive strategies and rhetorical devices used in biblical texts within their social and cultural contexts.
  • Examines how authors sought to persuade their audiences, considering factors like social status, cultural values, and rhetorical conventions.

• Reader-Response Hermeneutics:

  • Highlights the active role of the reader in creating meaning.
  • Recognizes that interpretation is not solely determined by the text but also by the reader's engagement with it.
  • Focuses on the reading process and the reader's experience of the text.

• Allegorical and Typological Interpretation:

  • Sees events and figures in the Old Testament as foreshadowing or types of events and figures in the New Testament, focusing on the redemptive narrative of Scripture.
  • Seeks to find hidden or symbolic meanings within the text.

• Literal Interpretation: (With caveats)

  • Interprets the text according to its plain, ordinary meaning.
  • Can vary in its application, with some taking a strictly literal approach and others allowing for figurative language.
  • It is important to specify both the Christian tradition(s), denomination(s), or movement(s) that inform your perspective as well as the specific Bible translation (or source text) you are relying upon if using this approach, as the application of literal interpretation and corpus of biblical texts can vary significantly. See the above section on "The myth of unbiased interpretation."

Important considerations

• No single hermeneutical approach is universally accepted within Christianity (Christians don't even all agree on which biblical texts are considered "Scripture").
• These approaches are not mutually exclusive; interpreters may draw on elements from multiple hermeneutics.
• The choice of hermeneutical approach significantly influences the interpretation of biblical texts.
• Awareness of one's own hermeneutical assumptions and biases is essential for responsible interpretation.
• Understanding the historical and cultural context of the text, and the original languages, can be used to support many of these approaches.

Through awareness of these different approaches, we can engage with the biblical texts in a more informed and nuanced way.