http://www.thewordteaches.com/Fedena/Bible%20Study%20Most%20Important.pdf
Full mention principle: When God speaks exhaustively on a subject, take it to the bank.
Christo-centric principle: All Scripture is centered on Christ.
Numeric principle: Numbers represent something. 6-man, 7-God, 8-New Beginning & resurrection, etc.
http://www.preachingpoints.com/2009/01/biblical-hermeneutics/
V.The Fifteen Principles of Interpretation
A. The Dispensational Principle
1. A dispensation is a particular way in which God deals with man in respect to sin and man’s
responsibility.
B. The Covenantal Principle
1. This principle is the one in which the interpretation of a verse or a group of verses is determined by a
consideration of its covenantal setting.
2. These covenants refer to the agreements or contracts made between God and man.
C. The Ethnic Division Principle
1. This principle has to do with rightly dividing the Word in relation to the three ethnic groups mentioned in
scripture:
a. The Jew;
b. The Gentile;
c. The Church.
D. The Typical Principle
1. J. Edwin Hartill, in his book Principles of Biblical Hermeneutics states “A type is a divinely appointed
illustration of some scriptural truth.―
2. The safest position to take is to use those types which come from the Old Testament that are specifically
and clearly revealed in the New Testament.
E. The First Mention Principle
1. “This is the principle by which God indicates in the first mention of a subject, the truth with which that
subject stands connected in the mind of God.― (Hartill)
F. The Progressive Mention Principle
1. “This is the principle by which God makes the revelation of any given truth increasingly clear as the
Word proceeds to its consummation.― (Hartill)
G. The Full Mention Principle
1. “This is the principle by which God declares all that we need to know upon any subject vital to our
spiritual life.― (Hartill)
2. This principle is seen as the ultimate end of The First Mention and Progressive Mention working in
harmony to reach a logical conclusion.
H. The Context Principle
1. “This is the principle by which God gives light upon a subject through either near or remote passages
bearing upon the same theme.― (Hartill)
2. You begin this process by consulting the context of the verse; then the passage; then the book, etc.
I. The Agreement Principle
1. “This is the principle under which the truthfulness and faithfulness of God become the guarantee that
He will not set forth any passage on His Word which contradicts any other passage.― (Hartill)
2. In other words, no scripture will contradict another.
J. The Gap Principle
1. “This principle is defined as that principle of divine revelation whereby God in the Jewish Scriptures
ignores certain periods of time, leaping over centuries without comment.― (Hartill)
2. This is seen numerous times throughout scripture when 2 events seem tobookend a gap in time that is not
addressed.
K. The Double Reference Principle
1. “The Double Reference Principle is that peculiarity in the writings of the Holy Spirit, by which a passage
applying primarily to a person or event near at hand, is used by him at a later time as applying to the Person
of Christ, or the affairs of His kingdom.― (Hartill)
2. Compare Hosea 11:1, which speaks to the nation of Israel as God’s son in their calling out of Egypt and
the same passage being used in Matthew 2:14-15 to speak of Christ’s return from Egypt after the death of
Herod.
L. The Christo-Centric Principle
A. This principle is defined by six points:
1. The mind of Deity is eternally centered in Christ;
2. All angelic thought and ministry are centered in Christ;
3. All Satanic hatred and subtlety are centered at Christ;
4. All human hopes are, and human occupation should be, centered in Christ;
5. The whole material universe in creation is centered in Christ;
6. The entire written Word is centered in Christ. (Schofield, The New Schofield Study Bible NIV, Thomas
Nelson Publishers, Nashville, TN 1989.)
M. The Comparative Mention Principle
1. “This is the principle by which a certain verse or group of verses may be interpreted
by comparing and/or contrasting it with another verse or group of verses.―(Conner and
Malmin, Interpreting the Scriptures)
2. Compare: “To bring things together in order to examine the close relationship they bear to each other,
especially with the view of ascertaining their agreement ordisagreement; points
of resemblance or difference.― (Conner and Malmin)
3. Contrast: “To place together in view things widely differing from each other, though of the same
category or class, in order to make the difference more vividlymarked.― (Conner and Malmin)
N. The Moral Principle
1. “This principle is the one by which the interpretation of a verse or passage is determined by the
discerning the moral it contains.― (Conner and Malmin)
2. Every scripture has one interpretation but many applications.
O. The Parabolic Principle
1. “This principle is the one by which any parable is interpreted by discerning its moral and interpreting
its elements insofar as they are meant to be interpreted.―(Ramm)
2. Guidelines for use:
a. Determine whether or not the passage is indeed a parable;
b. A parable is a comparison between the natural and the spiritual realm;
c. Every parable is designed to conceal and reveal one fundamental spiritualtruth;
d. Since parables are drawn from the cultural background of their authors, the interpreter should research
the manners, customs, and material culture involved in the parable he is interpreting.
http://www.preachingpoints.com/2010/07/laws-of-biblical-interpretation/
When studying scripture, it is important to follow guidelines which retain the spirit of the text. Following are
several rules of interpretation to aid in Biblical study.
1. Discover the Author, the People Addressed and the Life and Times of the People involved in a give case.
2. Discover the Facts and Truths presented in a given passage and note the exact wording of the text.
3. The Golden Rule of Interpretation: When the plain sense of scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense. Take
every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light
of related passages, indicate clearly otherwise.
4. The Law of First Mention: Examine where a doctrine is mentioned for the first time, and study the first occurrence in
order to get the fundamental inherent meaning of that doctrine.
5. The Law of Double Reference: Associates similar or related ideas which are usually separated from one another by long
periods of time, and which are blended into a single picture. This law is based upon one of the fundamental laws of
psychology; The principle of the association of similar or related ideas. Since similarities often suggest comparisons,
prophets regularly depicted that which was a rule in the immediate future or present. Often, prophets would speak in
present tense, and begin describing future events as though they were in the present.
6. The Law of Recurrence: The recording of an event and the repetition of the account which gives added details. Various
authors of the same account, for example, can collectively provide a clearer context and understanding than simply
reading one account alone.
http://www.truthfreesus.com/uploads/discipleship/articles/Basic%20Principles%20of%20Biblical%20
Hermeneutics.pdf
* Author's intended meaning + how it applies to my life.
http://books.google.com/books/about/Hermeneutics.html?id=aGEQAQAAIAAJ
(1) historical-cultural and contextual analysis, (2) lexical-syntactical analysis, (3) theological
analysis, (4) genre identification and analysis, and (5) application. The second edition
includes updated material covering developments in hermeneutics over the past twenty years.
An Instructor's Resource CD containing teaching suggestions, Powerpoint slides, suggested
answers to exercises, and supplementary handouts is available to Bible college and seminary
professors.
Historically, it was PROHIBITTED to worship anyone other than God Almighty, Jehovah / Yahweh,
The Most High God.
Grammatically, we see that the Greek word used for worship of God (the Father) is the same Greek
word used for worship of Jesus -even though other Greek words might have been used.
“In Context,” we see that after people worshiped Jesus, the following verses (in “context”) do not
show him saying anything to prohibit or deny His followers from worshiping Him. -LOLDuel fulfillment or duel meanings.
(Context of both the culture & times as well as the Bible verses right before & after the one in question
–and other scriptures on the same subject elsewhere.) WE AFFIRM the unity, harmony, and
consistency of Scripture and declare that it is its own best interpreter.
In hermeneutics, the interpretation of Scripture, there is a principle of specifics verses generality. Let
me show you a few examples: In Proverbs 3:1-2 (KJV), the Scripture commands: “1My son, forget not
my law; but let thine heart keep my commandments:,” and promises, in return: “2For length of days,
and long life, and peace, shall they add to thee.” NOW, does this mean that EVERY person will have a
“long life” if they are righteous? NO!! This is a general principle, not a specific and all-encompassing
promise! The same thing goes for Ephesians 6:1-3 (KJV), which, quoting Exodus 20:12 and
Deuteronomy 5:16 of the 10 Commandments, makes a similar claim. Let's look at that passage:
“1Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. 2Honour thy father and mother; which is the
first commandment with promise; 3That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the
earth.” Now, do ALL children who honour their parents “live long” on the earth?? NO!! (Many die of
childhood diseases, tragic accidents, and the like.) ~~ LIKEWISE, Jesus was saying that, in
GENERAL, kids have a greater innocent and virgin faith -not EVERY SINGLE ONE of them.
6. Guidelines For Sound Biblical Interpretation
http://hermeneutics.kulikovskyonline.net/hermeneutics/inspirat.htm
6.1 Genre – (a wide variety of literary forms. )
Genre refers to the ‘type’ of the literature. In the Bible, the following major types are found: historical
narratives, legal writings, prophetic oracles, wisdom writings, psalms, gospels, letters and apocalypse.
The gospels also include various subtypes such as parables, sermons and miracle or pronouncement
stories. The type of a text has a significant effect on the way it should be interpreted. Commands in
historical narratives are not universally applicable. Letters are occasional and its text must be read with
respect to its context. The apocalypse is full of symbology. All this impacts interpretation (Klein et al.
1993, p. 259-374)
6.2 Historical Context
Historical context includes the occasion and purpose for writing the book and the social, cultural and
political background and geography. Understanding the historical context aids in understanding the
nature, force and content of the message (Klein et al. 1993, p. 172-179).
6.3 Literary Context
This is one of the most crucial tasks. Words only have unambiguous meaning in sentences and
sentences often only have unambiguous meaning when set in relation to surrounding sentences. It is
important to trace the author’s train of thought and determine why they wrote a particular paragraph or
sentence and what contribution it makes to the overall text. Many erroneous doctrines have come about
by not reading verses and paragraphs in their context (Klein et al. 1993, p. 155-172).
6.4 Content
Content is what the text actually says or communicates. In order to determine what is being
communicated key words need to be identified and examined to determine their meaning in this current
context. Objects, people, places and concepts referenced need to be understood in the same way as the
original audience. Grammatical relationships must be noted and any cause/effect, reason/result,
conditions, questions or commands must be analysed (Fee & Stuart 1993, p. 24).
6.5 General Principles
The Bible should always be approached with the assumption that it is inspired, inerrant and authorative.
Always compare scripture with scripture because the best interpreter of scripture is scripture. The two
testaments form a complete unit and must be interpreted in the light of one another. Total reliance on
the Holy Spirit is essential for correct interpretation. All scripture should be taken literally unless the
context indicates otherwise. Scripture cannot mean what it never meant when it was written. There is
only one meaning in any one scripture although there may be multiple applications. Always be aware
of the presuppositions we bring to the text. These are unavoidable but awareness of them usually
prevents subjective interpretations (Pacific College 1989, p. 86-87).
7. Conclusion
The Bible is God’s authorative word to humanity, set in history. It is understandable, eternally relevant,
always applicable and completely sufficient for all our spiritual, philosophical and psychological needs
although it does not always satisfy our curiosities. But it is when the Bible is read, understood and
obeyed that it truly becomes the inspired and authorative word of God.
Article XV.
http://hermeneutics.kulikovskyonline.net/hermeneutics/csbh.htm
WE AFFIRM the necessity of interpreting the Bible according to its literal, or normal,
sense. The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning which
the writer expressed. Interpretation according to the literal sense will take account of
all figures of speech and literary forms found in the text.
WE DENY the legitimacy of any approach to Scripture that attributes to it meaning
which the literal sense does not support.
The literal sense of Scripture is strongly affirmed here. To be sure the English word
literal carries some problematic connotations with it. Hence the words normal and
grammatical-historical are used to explain what is meant. The literal sense is also
designated by the more descriptive title grammatical-historical sense. This means the
correct interpretation is the one which discovers the meaning of the text in its
grammatical forms and in the historical, cultural context in which the text is expressed.
The Denial warns against attributing to Scripture any meaning not based in a hteral
understanding, such as mythological or alle-gorical interpretations. This should not be
understood as eliminating typology or designated allegory or other literary forms which
include figures of speech (see Articles X, XIII, and XIV).
WE AFFIRM that a person is not dependent for understanding of Scripture on the
expertise of biblical scholars.
WE DENY that a person should ignore the fruits of the technical study of Scripture by
biblical scholars.
This article attempts to avoid two extremes.
The Interpretation of Parables,
Allegories and Types
by Andrew S. Kulikovsky B.App.Sc(Hons)
March 2, 1997
Visitor #
1. Introduction
Figurative language is used in various ways in both testaments and is an integral part of Biblical
literature. The most common and most important forms of figurative language are parables, allegories
and types. Although there may be some overlap in the nature of these language forms there are also
important distinctions particularly in the function they perform.
The purpose of this essay is to examine the nature and characteristics of parables, allegories and types.
Their significance for Biblical interpretation and their limitations and dangers will also be examined.
2. Parables & Allegories
2.1. The Differences Between Parables & Allegories
Parables are short stories that are told in order to get a point across and occur in both testaments of the
Bible. The word "parable" (Gk. parabole) was generally used in reference to any short narrative that
had symbolic meaning (Louw & Nida 1989, p. 391). There are many stories and saying of Jesus in the
New Testament that are identified as parables, but not all of these are parables in the true sense. The
Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-35) may be regarded as a true parable because it is a complete story with
a beginning, ending and plot, but the Leaven in the Meal is a similitude, "You are the salt of the earth"
is a metaphor and "Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes" is an epigram (Fee & Stuart 1993, p. 136137). When "parable" is used in this section it refers to the true parables.
A true parable then may be regarded as an extended simile (Blomberg 1990, p. 32). It is a story that
resembles real-life natural situations and does not contain any mythical or supernatural elements
(Kuske 1995, p. 97). These stories were told in order to catch the listener's attention and provoke a
response. C. H. Dodd (1961, p.16) defines a parable as: "a metaphor or simile drawn from nature or
common life, arresting the hearer by its vividness or strangeness, and leaving the mind in sufficient
doubt about its precise application to tease it into active thought." They often embody a message that
may not be communicated in any other way (Marshall & Tasker, in New Bible Dictionary:Parables).
An allegory, however, is quite different. It is essentially an extended metaphor (Kuske 1995, p. 94) and
uses a story or event (often mythical and supernatural) to illustrate a point (Marshall & Tasker, in New
Bible Dictionary:Parables). They are stories with 2 levels of meaning: human activity and spiritual
reality (Blomberg 1990, p. 15). Allegories encode relatively static series of comparisons that the author
wishes to communicate and always need to be interpreted (Blomberg 1990, p. 35).
Allegories are much less common in the New Testament but are more frequent in the Old Testament. In
an allegory virtually every person, thing, place and event has a symbolic meaning (Fee & Stuart 1993,
p. 140). Examples of allegories are the visions in Daniel 8:1-11 (which is interpreted in Daniel 8:2026), and Ezekiel 1. In the New Testament, nearly every chapter of Revelation contains allegorical
visions.
Throughout the history of the church, there has been great debate over the level of allegory used in
parables. Some have suggested that they are essentially allegories (Blomberg 1990, p. 68, my
emphasis), while others emphatically state the opposite (Fee & Stuart 1993, p. 138). However, it must
be admitted that the line between parables and allegories is a fluid one (Marshall & Tasker, in New
Bible Dictionary:Parables).
2.2. Interpreting Parables
2.2.1. Context & Setting
Jesus told parables to be understood and he told them to common people (Luke 15:3, 18:9, 19:11) (Fee
& Stuart 1993, p. 136). The telling of parables are historical events but it is unlikely that the content of
the parable was historical (Kuske 1995, p. 97). However, this does not mean they are irrelevant or that
the truth and message they communicate is unreliable.
The points of reference or points of comparison (also called the tertium) of a parable are usually
indicated by the historical setting and situation and by the literary context (Kuske 1995, p. 95). The
original audience would have immediately understood the points of comparison when Jesus spoke them
(Fee & Stuart 1993, p. 139-140). Therefore the interpreter needs to hear the parable as the original
audience heard it. The original audience and their customs and culture needs to be studied in order to
grasp how they would have heard, understood and reacted to a particular parable. The interpreter needs
to understand what the various people, places and objects meant and the significance they had to the
audience (Wenham 1989, p. 16). For example, most people are not aware of the dangers of putting new
wine into old wineskins or the dangers of travelling the Jericho road (Wenham 1989, p. 15). The
interpreter must also be aware of any Old Testament allusions in parables (eg. Mark 12:1-12 and Isaiah
5).
The difficulty in interpreting parables is because our modern western society is so far removed in time
and culture from the original audience (Fee & Stuart 1993, p. 137). The historical distance is not only
chronological but social, political and religious (Wenham 1989, p. 15).
Parables always occur as part of a larger context (Klein et al 1993, p. 272). Therefore they need to be
interpreted within this larger literary context and with respect to other parables and other sayings and
events. This is particularly true of the parables of Jesus, which must be interpreted in relation to his
proclamation of the Kingdom of God (Wenham 1989, p. 16). It should also be noted that no one parable
contains the entire gospel (Marshal & Tasker in New Bible Dictionary: Parables).
2.2.2. The Meaning of Parables
Historically, most Christians have interpreted parables as allegories but modern scholarship has
rejected this practice (Blomberg 1990, p. 15-16) because it ignores the realism, clarity and simplicity of
parables (Blomberg 1990, p. 32).. Although parables do have some allegorical elements, these are the
exceptions not the general rule (Blomberg 1990, p. 17). These allegorical elements are called the points
of reference or points of comparison (Klein et al. 1993, p. 337).
Some parables go very close to being allegories, because most of the details in the story are intended to
represent something or someone else (ie. they have many points of comparison). However even these
parables are not allegories because of the function they perform (Fee & Stuart 1993, p. 138). The
parable in Luke 7:40-42 is not allegorical although it appears that way. The purpose of the story is not
found in the points of comparison but in the intended response (of Simon and the woman) (Fee &
Stuart 1993, p. 140).
The details of a parable must be interpreted with strict reference to the points of comparison so the
focus remains on the central meaning of the parable. Sometimes none of the details are important and
do not need interpreting (eg. The Good Samaritan). Sometimes a few of the details are significant (eg.
Parable of the Tenants) and sometimes all the details are important (eg. Parable of the Weeds) (Kuske
1995, p. 95-96).
The interpreter must also be sensitive to the shape and form of parable. The assumption of 1 single
point per parable is not always true (Wenham 1989, p. 17). Some parables are simple and some are
complex. Simple parables will just have one central message but complex ones may have a central
message and several related messages (Wenham 1989, p. 17). For example, the Prodigal Son teaches
that God accepts repentant sinners and also that God wants faithful people to accept repentant sinners
(Kuske 1995, p. 97). In fact the majority of parables make exactly 3 points (Blomberg 1990, p. 21).
A parable may also have multiple shades of meaning depending on the perspective of the hearer. When
Jesus told the parable in Luke 7:40-48, the messages received by Simon and the woman would have
been very different (Klein et al. 1993, p. 338). Simon received a message of rebuke but the woman, a
message of acceptance and forgiveness. Also, Jesus told some parables (with modifications) on
different occasions to different audiences in order to provoke a different response (eg. Parable of 10
minas - Luke 19:10-26 and Parable of 10 talents - Matthew 25:14-28) (Kuske 1995, p. 98).
2.2.3. The Function of Parables
Parables do not serve to illustrate Jesus teaching with 'picture words' and they were not told to serve as
vehicles for revealing spiritual truth - although they most certainly end up doing this. Parables were
told to provoke a response - to address the audience, capture their attention, show them up and cause
them to decide and act (Fee & Stuart 1993, p. 138). The parable Nathan told to King David in 2 Samuel
12 is a clear example. David "burned with anger" at the man who stole the poor man's ewe and wanted
immediate and summary justice. When Nathan revealed that this was what David had done, he felt
remorse and repented. In this respect a parable is like a story with a punchline. The unusual twist in the
story is what gives the parable its impact and biting force (Wenham 1989, p. 14). Parables jolt people
into seeing things in a new way, bringing them to a point of decision and action (Marshall & Tasker in
New Bible Dictionary: Parables).
Jesus parables capture the listeners attention, bringing them face to face with his message, which would
have been much less effective if stated normally (Wenham 1989, p. 13). He did not use them to
illustrate general truth but to force people to determine their attitude toward Him and his message of
the Kingdom of God (Marshall & Tasker in New Bible Dictionary: Parables). This is reflected in the
fact that parables often break the grounds of realism and conventional expectation. For example, no
Jewish father would lovingly greet and accept a wayward son (as in the Prodigal Son) (Klein et al.
1993, p. 337).
Interpreting a parable in some ways destroys what the parable is. It is like interpreting a joke. The
immediacy of the parable is what makes it so effective in provoking people. Explaining the points of
comparison of a parable is like explaining a joke. The impact is lost (Fee & Stuart 1993, p. 138-139).
Mark 4:10-12 seems to be a difficult passage to understand regarding the function of parables. This
passage seems to indicate that parables cloud and hide the message rather than make it clear (in
contrast to the parallel passage in Matthew 13:13). However, the conjunction translated as "that", "so
that" or "in order that" in modern translations (Gk. i{na), is in fact a result clause not a purpose clause
(Moule 1953, p. 142-143). Therefore it would be better translated as "as a result of the fact that". Jesus
told parables as a result of the fact that "they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing
but never understanding."
2.2.4. Limitations & Dangers
The basic danger with interpreting parables is mistaking their function and context. Often, too much is
read into the details of the story and instead of functioning to provoke a response it becomes an
allegory which is essentially a vehicle for truth. The Parable of the Unjust Judge intends to
communicate that we should be persistent in our pleading to God for justice - not that God is unjust or
that we can change his mind by constantly hassling him. Therefore it is far more likely that parables
will be overinterpreted than underinterpreted (Kuske 1995, p. 98).
The problem with this kind of allegorical interpretation is that rarely do two interpreters agree on the
meaning of every detail in the story. Too often the meaning given to details reflects understandings of
Christian doctrine from a later period than Jesus ministry. No one in Jesus time could have expected to
associate the inn-keeper in the Good Samaritan with the Apostle Paul (Augustine's interpretation)
(Blomberg 1990, p. 31-32).
2.3. Interpreting Allegories
Allegories are illustrations and always require interpretation. They are generally interpreted by the
Biblical text itself. A clear example can be found in Daniel 8. Daniel sees a vision of a ram with 2
horns, one being longer than the other and a goat with 1 prominent horn between his eyes, that breaks
off giving rise to 4 smaller horns. From one of these horns another horn came which eventually became
extremely powerful and caused great destruction. These images are precisely interpreted later in the
chapter. The ram represents the kings of Media and Persia (Daniel 8:20) and the goat represents the
King of Greece, the large horn being the first king (Daniel 8:21) which history records as Alexander the
Great. The four horns represent the four kingdoms that emerge from Alexander's kingdom and the
single horn which eventually becomes very powerful, represents a stern faced king who is a master of
intrigue.
3. Types
3.1. Types & Typology
"Successive epochs of salvation-history disclose a recurring pattern of divine activity, which the NT
writers believed to have found its definitive expression in their own day" (Bruce in New Bible
Dictionary: Typology).
Typology is "a way of setting forth the Biblical history of salvation so that some of its earlier phases are
seen as anticipations of later phases, or some later phase as the recapitulation or fulfilment of an earlier
one." In the language of typology the earlier series of events is called the type and the later series of
events is called the antitype (Bruce in New Bible Dictionary: Typology). Klein et al. (1993, p. 130)
defines typology as "the recognition of a correspondence between New and Old Testament events,
based on a conviction of the unchanging character of the principles of God's working.". Buchanan
(1987, p. 3) notes that typology relates one historical event to another, not in details, but in basics.
A type is a picture or pattern of something that lies in the future (Kuske 1995, p. 99). Types can be
people (eg. Moses - Deuteronomy 18:15), places (eg. Most Holy Place - Hebrews 9:3, 8, 12), an office
(eg. High Priest - Psalm 110:4, Hebrews 9:6-7), festivals (eg. Day of Atonement - Hebrews 9:25-26),
an event (eg. Israel being called out of Egypt - Matthew 2:15), an object (eg. bronze snake - John 3:14)
or an animal (Genesis 22) (Kuske 1995, p. 99-100).
3.2. Interpreting Types
3.2.1. Meaning, Purpose and Function of Types
Use of typology rests on belief that God's ways of acting are consistent throughout history. Christ and
the New Testament writers considered many of God's former actions recorded in the Old Testament as
'types' of what He was now doing in Christ. This does not mean that the Old Testament writers intended
to communicate a typological message and probably were not even conscious that what they wrote had
any typological significance (Klein et al. 1993, p. 130). Types would most probably not have been
recognised by the original audience either, but were pointed out by Christ and the New Testament
writers (Luke 24:27, 44, 1 Corinthians 10:6-11).
Typology seeks to discover and make explicit the real correspondences in historical events which have
been brought about by the 'recurring rhythm' of divine activity (Lampe 1957, p. 29). The typological
relationship between the two testaments is summarised by the epigram "The New is in the Old
concealed; the Old is in the New revealed." The Bible is a unity and through typology the Bible speaks
of Christ in almost every part (Lampe 1957, p. 12). In the New Testament, Christian salvation is
presented as the climax or culmination of God's mighty works in the Old Testament (Bruce in New
Bible Dictionary: Typology). Therefore, types are in a sense a vague kind of prophecy. Types teach us
how God works and saves. They prepare us to recognise the person and work of Christ. Many events in
the Old Testament were not recorded primarily for themselves but for what they foreshadowed. They
were images in and through which the Holy Spirit indicated what was to come in the New Covenant
(Lampe 1957, p. 10). However, this does not mean that typological events were not historical (Lampe
1957, p. 13). The presence of types is a clear indication of God at work in history and that He divinely
inspired the Old Testament writers to record these typological events.
Typological study is a necessity if the full meaning of the New Testament is to be grasped and
appreciated. The interpreter needs to see the Old Testament scripture through the eyes of the New
Testament writers (Lampe 1957, p. 18-19). Although, the New Testament writers appear to attach
strange and out of context meanings to Old Testament scriptures, these meanings were assigned under
inspiration and in the light of their experiences of Christ (Klein et al. 1993, p. 131).
Generally most types are in the Old Testament and their antitypes are in the New Testament (Buchanan
1987, p.3). In fact, most Old Testament types are pictures of some aspect of the life of Christ (Kuske
1995, p. 99).
However, there are two archetypal epochs in the Old Testament: the creation and the exodus from
Egypt. The exodus is viewed as a new creation in the way that God constrained the waters on both
occasions (cf. Genesis 1:9f and Exodus 14:21-29) (Bruce in New Bible Dictionary: Typology).
The restoration of Israel from the Babylonian captivity is viewed as both a new creation and a new
exodus. The Hebrew words used for God's workmanship in Genesis 1 and 2 are the same ones used to
describe the restoration (Isaiah 43:7f). Also, as the Exodus generation was led by cloud and fire, which
moved behind them when threatened from the back, so also the exiles received the promise "The Lord
will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rear guard (Isaiah 52:12) (Bruce in New Bible
Dictionary: Typology).
Jesus and the New Testament authors pointed out many types of Christ including the high priest
(Hebrews 5), the priest's duties (Hebrews 10:1-22), the blood from animal sacrifices (Hebrews 13:1113), the Old Testament sacrifices (Hebrews), the red heifer (Hebrews 9:13-14), the Passover lamb (1
Corinthians 5:7), the brazen altar (Hebrews 13:10), the bowls of bronze (Ephesians 5:26-27), the Mercy
seat (Hebrews 4:16), the veil (Hebrews 10:20), the manna (John 6:32-35), cities of refuge (Hebrews
6:18), the bronze serpent (John 3:14-15), the tree of life (John 1:4, Revelation 22:2), Adam (Romans
5:14, 1 Corinthians 15:45), Abel (Hebrews 12:24), Noah (2 Corinthians 1:5), Melchizedek (Hebrews
7:1-17), Moses (Acts 3:20-22, 7:37, Hebrews 3:2-6), David (Philipians 2:9), Eliakim (Revelation 3:7)
and Jonah (Matthew 12:40).
3.2.2. Limitations and Dangers
Types have one point of comparison that serves to illustrate something about the antitype (Kuske 1995,
p. 100). Therefore an interpreter must be extremely careful not to 'stretch' the type too far. They are not
perfect pictures of the real thing, only rough sketches. For this reason it is unwise to use types as a basis
for a doctrinal position.
4. Conclusion
The diversity of language and literary styles used in the Bible shows it to be a wonderful peace of
literature, full of meaning and inspiration. If we approach figurative parts of the Bible, like parables,
allegories and types, with caution and treat their context with full respect then we will avoid making
many interpretive errors.
The parables must be interpreted according to their function, not according to their allegorical
elements. The task of interpreting a parable becomes so much simpler when its context is examined in
order to discover the events that led up to the parable being told, the reason why the parable was told
and the effect it had on the original audience. This will highlight the parable's power, force and
function.
Allegories, although much less common in the Bible, serve to illustrate. They are usually interpreted by
the Biblical text itself.
Types serve to prepare people for later events or people. They serve to illustrate and also to prophesy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_hermeneutics
Theological Group of Principles:
 The Election Principle
 The Historical-grammatical principle based on historical, socio-political, geographical, cultural and
linguistic / grammatical context
 The Dispensation Principle or The Chronometrical Principle: "During different periods of time,
God has chosen to deal in a particular way with man in respect to sin and man's responsibility."
 The Covenantal Principle: "We differentiate between the various contracts that God has made with
his people; specifically their provisions, their parties and their purposes."
 The Ethnic Division Principle: "The word of truth is rightly divided in relation to the three classes
which it treats, i.e. Jews, Gentiles and the Church."
 The Breach Principle: Interpretation of a certain verse or passage in Scripture is aided by a
consideration of certain breaches, either breaches of promise or breaches of time.
 The Christo-Centric Principle: "The mind of deity is eternally centered in Christ. All angelic thought
and ministry are centered in Christ. All Satanic hatred and subtlety are centered at Christ. All
human hopes are, and human occupations should be, centered in Christ. The whole material
universe in creation is centered in Christ. The entire written word is centered in Christ."
 The Moral Principle
 The Discriminational Principle: "We should divide the word of truth so as to make a distinction
where God makes a difference."
 The Predictive Principle
 The Application Principle: "An application of truth may be made only after the correct
interpretation has been made"
 The Principle of Human Willingness in Illumination
 The Context Principle: "God gives light upon a subject through either near or remote passages
bearing upon the same subject."
Sub-divided Context/Mention Principles:
 The First Mention Principle: "God indicates in the first mention of a subject the truth with which
that subject stands connected in the mind of God."
 The Progressive Mention Principle: "God makes the revelation of any given truth increasingly
clear as the word proceeds to its consummation."
 The Comparative Mention Principle
 The Full Mention Principle or The Complete Mention Principle: "God declares his full mind
upon any subject vital to our spiritual life."
 The Agreement Principle: "The truthfulness and faithfulness of God become the guarantee that
he will not set forth any passage in his word that contradicts any other passage."
 The Direct Statement Principle: "God says what he means and means what he says."
 The Gap Principle:"God, in the Jewish Scriptures, ignores certain periods of time, leaping over
them without comment."
 The Threefold Principle:"The word of God sets forth the truths of salvation in a three-fold way:
past - justification; present - sanctification/transformation; future - glorification/consummation."
 The Repetition Principle:"God repeats some truth or subject already given, generally with the
addition of details not before given."
 The Synthetic Principle
 The Principle of Illustrative Mention
 The Double Reference Principle
Figures of Speech Group of Principles:
 The Numerical Principle
 The Symbolic Principle
 The Typical Principle: "Certain people, events, objects and rituals found in the Old Testament
may serve as object lessons and pictures by which God teaches us of his grace and saving
power."
 The Parabolic Principle
 The Allegorical Principle
Techniques of hermeneutics
In the interpretation of a text, hermeneutics considers the original medium[4] as well as what language says,
supposes, doesn't say, and implies. The process consists of several steps for best attaining the Scriptural
author's intended meaning(s). One such process is taught by Henry A Virkler, in Hermeneutics: Principles and
Processes of Biblical Interpretation (1981):
1. Lexical-syntactical analysis: This step looks at the words used and the way the words are used.
Different order of the sentence, the punctuation, the tense of the verse are all aspects that are looked at
in the lexical syntactical method. Here, lexicons and grammar aids can help in extracting meaning from
the text.
2. Historical/cultural analysis: The history and culture surrounding the authors is important to understand
to aid in interpretation. For instance, understanding the Jewish sects of the Palestine and the
government that ruled Palestine in New Testament times increases understanding of Scripture. And,
understanding the connotations of positions such as the High Priest and that of the tax collector helps us
know what others thought of the people holding these positions.
3. Contextual analysis: A verse out of context can often be taken to mean something completely different
from the intention. This method focuses on the importance of looking at the context of a verse in its
chapter, book and even biblical context.
4. Theological analysis: It is often said that a single verse usually doesn't make a theology. This is
because Scripture often touches on issues in several books. For instance, gifts of the Spirit are spoken
about in Romans, Ephesians and 1 Corinthians. To take a verse from Corinthians without taking into
account other passages that deal with the same topic can cause a poor interpretation.
5. Special literary analysis: There are several special literary aspects to look at, but the overarching
theme is that each genre of Scripture has a different set of rules that applies to it. Of the genres found in
Scripture, there are: narratives, histories, prophecies, apocalyptic writings, poetry, psalms and letters. In
these, there are differing levels of allegory, figurative language, metaphors, similes and literal language.
For instance, the apocalyptic writings and poetry have more figurative and allegorical language than
does the narrative or historical writing. These must be addressed, and the genre recognized to gain a full
understanding of the intended meaning.
Howard Hendricks, longtime professor of hermeneutics at Dallas Theological Seminary, set out the method of
observing the text, interpreting the text, applying the text in his book, Living By the Book. Other major Christian
teachers, such as Chuck Swindoll, who wrote the foreword, Kay Arthur and David Jeremiah have based their
hermeneutics on the principles Howard teaches.
David L. Barr states there are three obstacles that stand in the way of correctly interpreting the biblical writings:
We speak a different language, we live approximately two millennia later, and we bring different expectations to
the text.[5] Additionally, Barr suggests that we approach the reading of the Bible with significantly different
literary expectations than those in reading other forms of literature and writing.
[edit]Roman Catholic principles of hermeneutics
The Catholic Encyclopedia lists a number of principles guiding Roman Catholic hermeneutics in the article on
Exegesis (note: the Catholic Encyclopedia was written in 1917 and does not reflect the changes set forth by the
encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu published by Pius XII in 1943, which opened modern Catholic Biblical
scholarship) :
 Historico-grammatical interpretation - The meaning of the literary expression of the Bible is
best learned by a thorough knowledge of the languages in which the original text of Scripture was
written, and by acquaintance with the Scriptural way of speaking, including the various customs,
laws, habits and national prejudices which influenced the inspired writers as they composed their
respective books. John Paul II said that: "A second conclusion is that the very nature of biblical
texts means that interpreting them will require continued use of the historical-critical method, at
least in its principal procedures. The Bible, in effect, does not present itself as a direct revelation of
timeless truths but as the written testimony to a series of interventions in which God reveals
himself in human history. In a way that differs from tenets of other religions [such as Islam, for
instance], the message of the Bible is solidly grounded in history.[6]
 Catholic interpretation - Because the Catholic Church is, according to Catholics, the official
custodian and interpreter of the Bible, Catholicism's teaching concerning the Sacred Scriptures
and their genuine sense must be the supreme guide of the commentator. The Catholic
commentator is bound to adhere to the interpretation of texts which the Church has defined either
expressly or implicitly. :*Reverence - Since the Bible is God's own book, its study must be begun
and prosecuted with a spirit of reverence and prayer.
 Inerrancy - Since God is the principal Author of Sacred Scripture, it can be claimed to contain no
error, no self-contradiction, nothing contrary to scientific or historical truth (when the original
authors intended historical or scientific truth to be portrayed). Minor contradictions are due to
copyist errors in the codex or the translation. Catholics believe the Scripture is God's message put
in words by men, with the imperfections this very fact necessarily implies. That's why it becomes
self-contradictory to hold biblical interpretation to be 'historico-grammatical' and treat the Bible's
own words — which aren't but human — as error-free. Catholic hermeneutics strongly supports
inerrancy when it comes to principles but not, for example, when dealing with Evangelists'
orthographic mistakes. According to Pope John Paul II, "Addressing men and women, from the
beginnings of the Old Testament onward, God made use of all the possibilities of human
language, while at the same time accepting that his word be subject to the constraints caused by
the limitations of this language. Proper respect for inspired Scripture requires undertaking all the
labors necessary to gain a thorough grasp of its meaning.[6]
 Patristics - The Holy Fathers are of supreme authority whenever they all interpret in one and the
same manner any text of the Bible, as pertaining to the doctrine of faith or morals; for their
unanimity clearly evinces that such interpretation has come down from the Apostles as a matter of
Catholic faith.
Pope Benedict XVI has indicated in Verbum Domini, the post-synodal apostolic exhortation on the Word of God,
that "Christianity...perceives in the words the Word himself, the Logos who displays his mystery through this
complexity and the reality of human history". He encourages a “faith-filled interpretation of Sacred Scripture”. He
emphasizes that this manner of interpretation, “practiced from antiquity within the Church’s Tradition...recognizes
the historical value of the biblical tradition". It "seeks to discover the living meaning of the Sacred Scriptures for
the lives of believers today while not ignoring the human mediation of the inspired text and its literary genres".
Verbum Domini #44.
Trajectory hermeneutics
Trajectory hermeneutics or redemptive-movement hermeneutics (RMH)[7][8][9] is a hermeneutical
approach that seeks to locate varying 'voices' in the text and to view this voice as a progressive trajectory
through history (or at least through the Biblical witness); often a trajectory that progresses through to the present
day. The contemporary reader of Scripture is in some way envisaged by the Biblical text as standing in continuity
with a developing theme therein. The reader, then, is left to discern this trajectory and appropriate it accordingly.
William J. Webb employed such a hermeneutic, in his Slaves, Women & Homosexuals. Webb shows how the
moral commands of the Old and New Testament were a significant improvement over the surrounding cultural
values and practices. Webb identified 18 different ways in how God dealt with his people moving against the
current of popular cultural values. While for Webb the use of this hermeneutic moves to highlight the progressive
liberation of women and slaves from oppressive male/bourgeois dominance, the prohibition of homosexual acts
consistently moves in a more conservative manner than that of the surrounding Ancient Near East or GraecoRoman societies. While Paul does not explicitly state that slavery should be abolished, the trajectory seen in
Scripture is a progressive liberation of slaves. When this is extended to modern times, it implies that the Biblical
witness supports the abolition of slavery. The progressive liberation of women from oppressive patriarchalism,
traced from Genesis and Exodus through to Paul's own acknowledgement of women as 'co-workers' (Rom. 16:3),
sets a precedent that when applied to modern times suggests that women ought to have the same rights and
roles afforded as men. Historically, the Biblical witness has become progressively more stringent in its views of
homosexual practice and the implications of this are not commented upon by Webb.
Views of Christian exegesis
Different Christians have different views on how to perform Biblical Exegesis. The two most common views are
revealed and rational.
 Revealed exegesis considers that the Holy Spirit (God) inspired the authors of the scriptural texts, and so
the words of those texts convey a divine revelation. In this view of exegesis, the principle of sensus
plenior applies - that because of its divine authorship, the Bible has a "fuller meaning" than its human
authors intended or could have foreseen.
 Rational exegesis bases its operation on the idea that the authors have their own inspiration (in this
sense, synonymous with "artistic inspiration"), so their works are completely and utterly a product of the
social environment and human intelligence of their authors.
http://www.endtimes.org/hermeneutics.html
Some early church methods of Bible interpretation (Some taken from Jewish scholars)
 Literal: The plain and simple meaning of the text. Jesus supported the literal method, among
others.
 Midrash: Rabbinical approach to interpretation sought to understand the literal, and then expand
the teachings to contemporary issues. "light to heavy"
 Pesher: Exegetical method that suggests the prophetic writings contain
hidden eschatological significance, or divine mystery. Jesus used this method on several
occasions. (Lk 4:16)
 Allegorical: Assumes the text has a meaning other than what the literal wording says. Jesus
never used this method. Practiced initially by Philo of Alexandria, who tried to mix Greek
philosophy and Judaism. Followed by Clement and Origen on the Christian side.
 Typological: seeks to discover a correspondence between people and events of the past and of
the present or future. Matt. 12:40 - Jesus parallels the experience of Jonah with his own
death. Moses was a type of Christ, who brought the people out of bondage, and was rejected by
his own. Isaac when he was offered up by Abraham.
 Christological: Firstly, Jesus, and then the writers of the New testament had a
decidedly Christocentric approach to Bible interpretation. Old testament passages were viewed
in light of the new knowledge they now had about the person and work of the Messiah.
Modern methods
 Functional: Fitting scripture into current day context, disregarding the historical context.
 Literal Grammatical-Historical:
 Literal - means that we take the words for what they mean in their normal, or plain sense.
This means that we start out by taking the words in their most normal meaning. If I say My house is
red, you will understand what I mean. There would be no question about it. However, if I say Listen to
this parable about the Homeowner, or used comparative words like the word like as in like a roaring
lion, you would understand that my words might not be meant to be taken literally, but possibly
figuratively.
I ate like a horse last night, and then felt so sick that I beat my head against the wall trying to figure out
why I ate so much.
Unfortunately, since many people today cannot accept much of the Bible, it is convenient to make the
parts that are undesirable symbolic. For example, they can't believe that God raised Lazarus from the
dead, but they do claim to believe in creation. You may not want to let this secret out, but if God can
create the world, He can raise someone from the dead. This method of interpretation makes no sense. It
picks and chooses which items to believe, and in a way that really just denies the personal God of the
Bible. The story about Lazarus is not told as a parable, but as an historic event. Another example would
be Jonah and the sea monster (whale?). The Bible doesn't give any indication that this should be taken
figuratively. As a matter of fact, Jesus certainly believed in the story of Jonah was literal. Listen to what
Jesus says in Matthew 12:38-40
 Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered Him, saying, "Teacher, we want to see a sign
from You." But He answered and said to them, "An evil and adulterous generation craves for a
sign; and yet no sign shall be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet; for just as Jonah was
three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so shall the Son of Man be three days
and three nights in the heart of the earth.
Was Jesus saying that in the same way that Jonah symbolically was in the belly of the sea monster, I
will be symbolically in the heart of the earth? If this is the interpretation, Jesus would have needed to
tell the listeners that the story of Jonah was not to be taken literally so that they could understand the
non-literal example He was about to give. When we look at what actually happened to Jesus, it is clear
that He meant it literally, and not symbolically.
In speaking about the Literal method, Bernard Ramm in his book Protestant Biblical
Interpretation says "This does not deny that substantial doctrinal truth is conveyed symbolically,
parabolically, typically, and poetically. But as previously indicated, the symbolic et al. (i) depend on the
literal sense for their very existence, and (ii) are controlled by the literal. For example, the effort to
spiritualize the Levitical priesthood and so make it a justification for a clergy-priesthood, is to be
rejected as it lacks New Testament verification."
My point being that Literal doesn't mean that we reject symbolism. This is a misunderstanding among
people in our day that throw stones at those who claim to believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible.
Is poetry to be taken literally? Certainly all biblical text has a point, or literal truth, but the words being
used to describe the truth may not be meant to be taken literally. That is often the nature of poetry. This
is acknowledged by our method of interpretation.
 Grammatical - means we follow the grammatical rules of literature
It follows the rules of grammar, and is expected to use grammatical tools like similes, metaphors, etc.
When interpreting the Bible, standard grammatical tools must be recognized, and then interpreted in
light of the normal usage of the grammatical tool. 1 Peter 5:8 says "Your adversary, the devil, prowls
about like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour." Does this mean that the devil is a Lion that eats
people? No. It's very clear that He is comparing the devil to a Lion. It tells us something of the nature
and purpose of the devil.
Also included here is the ability to use the original languages to determine the true sense of a word.
While not everyone knows Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, most everyone has access to a commentary
that will give notes on points of grammar from the original language. Language students might argue
this point, but in most cases one can come up with a correct interpretation of a passage of scripture with
an English Bible, or possibly a couple of versions of the English Bible.
 Historical - means we seek with diligence to determine the historical background and context
before rendering an interpretation.
To drop the history of the time period is like stripping any conversation from its context. Try applying
everything in the book of Jeremiah to today. Forget about the fact that he is directing much of his words
at the southern kingdom of Judah thousands of years ago, warning them to repent or be sent into exile.
Should we fear that our country is about to be sent into captivity for 70 years?
We are very fortunate today to have more information about Bible times than has been known before.
Archaeological discoveries have opened many doors to understanding biblical history better, and thus
the context of the books of the Bible.
Additional rules
 Interpret according to context
The Bible must be interpreted as part of a whole. To be more precise, each passage of scripture
has 1. its immediate context, 2. the context of the book it belongs to (and author), 3. and the context of
the whole of the Bible. This is a rule of interpretation that is quite often broken it seems. New
interpretations of familiar passages of scripture often make a mistake of context. Spiritualizing
scripture in places that don't warrant this kind of interpretation often breaks this rule of context. Words
mean things only within their context.
 Compare scripture with scripture
This may seem like common sense but historically it wasn't always practiced. All truth in the Bible
should be compared against the Bible since God doesn't contradict Himself. This of course assumes a
belief in the verbal inspiration of scripture.
http://www.amazon.com/Principles-Biblical-Hermeneutics-Edwin-Hartill/dp/0310259002
Included are chapters on: - The Dispensational Principle - The Covenantal
Principle - The Ethnic Division Principle - The Discrimination Principle - The
Predictive Principle - The Application Principle - The Typical Principle - The
Principle of Human Willingness in Illumination - The First Mention Principle - The
Progressive Mention Principle - The Full Mention Principle - The Context Principle The Agreement Principle - The Direct Statement Principle - The Gap Principle The Three-fold Principle - The Election Principle - The Repetition Principle - The
Synthetic Principle - The Principle of Illustrative Mention - The Double Reference
Principle - The Christo-Centric Principle - The Numerical Principle
http://www.biblicaltraining.org/introduction-hermeneutics-part/how-study-your-bible
Introduction to Hermeneutics (Part 1)
I. Presuppositions for Evangelical Biblical Interpretation
A. The Bible as God's Word
B. The Interpreter Must be Born Again
C. The Interpreter Must be Filled with the Spirit
II. The Nature of the Bible: Unity & Diversity
A. A Diverse Collection of Literary Works
1. We must adapt methodology for various kinds of literature.
2. We must recognize the progress of revelation.
3. We must allow the biblical writers to speak for themselves, and then seek an internal
unity behind their diverse expressions of faith.
4. Biblical Theology
B. A Unity of Theme: The story of creation, fall and redemption
1. The Bible is One Story.
2. A “Systematic Theology” becomes a possibility.
III. Introduction to Hermeneutics
A. Hermeneutics is the science and art of biblical interpretation
B. The Goals of Hermeneutics
1. Exegesis: To Determine the Meaning of a Passage in its Original Context.
2. Contextualization
C. Avoid Shortcutting the Hermeneutical Process
1. Application without exegesis
2. Exegesis without contextualization
D. Summary
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=%22principles%20of%20biblical%20hermeneutics%22&so
urce=web&cd=23&ved=0CGAQFjACOBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.ed.ntnu.edu.tw%2F~t04008%
2Ffrontpage%2Fonline%2Fhermeneutics%2Fh-biblical.doc&ei=0v7T8H7MonU6QGXvLnjCQ&usg=AFQjCNFxjE45EGF92ZWWWX7YWI_NNMudRg
[DOC]
Biblical hermeneutics
web.ed.ntnu.edu.tw/~t04008/frontpage/online/.../h-biblical.doc