Comparing three interpretive methods
In a separate essay, we describe some of the
methods that Christians use to interpret the Bible, including:
||Using a literal interpretation: The events happened exactly as described.
||Viewing the Bible as a historical document: The passages contain a great
deal of mythical content: magical occurrences which never happened.
However the stories themselves are spiritually very significant.
||Using Midrash. The events probably never happened. However, they
demonstrate God's ancient presence with believers continues through history.
||Viewing the Bible as folklore. Ancient stories were circulated for decades
or centuries via an oral tradition before being fixed in written form. Some
were legends and myths; others were accounts of real events. Various groups
within a religion or culture passed on different versions of the story. By the
time that multiple versions of the same story were written down, many
discrepancies had developed.
Two examples are described below. The first three interpretation methods are
used on the same biblical passage. They are intended to illustrate how devout,
thoughtful, sincere, and intelligent Christians can use different analysis
techniques and arrive at totally different understandings of the same verses:
Example 1: The parting of the waters:
Interpreting the Bible literally: Moses, in Exodus 15:5-28; Joshua,
in Joshua 3:14-17; Elijah in 2 Kings 2:7-8; and Elisha in 2 Kings 2:13-14
actually called upon God to part the waters. Each time, God responded by
physically separating the water with, at least in the first three stories, dry
land under foot. These were real, miraculous events which happened at a
specific time and location. If we were there with a camera, we could have
recorded the miracle. God temporarily suspended normal physical laws, such as
gravity, and the ability of the sea/river bed to absorb water. The Bible is
recording real miracles.
Interpreting the Bible as a historical document: No miracles
probably occurred in ancient times as the Bible describes. The stories may
well have been mythical. That is, they contained important spiritual
information, but described events that never actually happened. If the waters
really did separate, the event must have been caused by natural forces.
Perhaps a strong wind drove the Red/Reed Sea away from its normal shoreline.
Perhaps a tidal wave generated by a volcano temporarily disturbed the water.
1 Perhaps an earthquake dammed up the Jordan river and stopped
its flow for a few hours. 2 (The latter phenomenon
has been observed six times at that location between 1160 and 1927
Interpreting the Bible using Midrash: Whether these events happened
or not was not important. The stories showed how God continued to work through
various heroes and prophets, and how subsequent water separation events were
linked to the first event at the Red/Reed sea.
Example 2: The births of John the Baptist and of Jesus
||Interpreting the Bible literally:|
In the King James Version of
Matthew 1:23 states: "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and
shall bring forth a son..."
Luke 1:27 to 35 states: "To a virgin espoused to a man whose name
was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary....And,
behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt
call his name JESUS....The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power
of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which
shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."
John's conception happened
precisely as described in Luke 1:3-25. A priest named Zechariah and wife
Elizabeth had no children; Elizabeth was infertile and both were old. The
angel Gabriel told the priest that his wife would conceive and bear a son who
would "make ready a people prepared for the Lord." (NIV) She did become
pregnant and their son was given the name of John. Both Luke and Matthew
described how the Holy Spirit came upon the virgin Mary
and made her pregnant. The unique conception of John the Baptist and the
miraculous conception of Jesus occurred exactly as described in the gospels.
If this belief had appeared in only one place in the Gospels, one might
speculate that an error had been made by a copyist, and that the virgin
conception reference was not in the original author's copy. The two
references vastly reduce that possibility. Mary must have been a virgin when
Jesus was conceived.
Disbelief in the virgin birth has been referred to by many early
Christian writers as:
"madness and blasphemy" by
"sacrilege" by St. Ambrose,
"impiety and smacking of atheism" by Philostorgius,
"full of blasphemies" by the author of Prędestin,
"perfidy of the Jews" by
Interpreting the Bible as a historical document: John's conception
might have happened when his parents were older than normal. The author of
Luke may have exaggerated the age of John's parents to make the conception
appear miraculous. |
virgin conception of Jesus did not happen as
described in Luke and Matthew. References to Jesus' birth in Paul's epistles
and the Gospel of John appear to describe a purely normal Jesus had a human
father and a mother, and was conceived in the usual manner. Christianity had
to compete with many other religions in the Mediterranean area, almost all of
whom had a miraculous birth story associated with their founder, who was
viewed as a savior of humanity and a god-man/hero. A miraculous conception was
created by the early Christian movement in order to emphasize the importance
of Jesus, and to place Christianity on a par with other
faiths. Paul had no knowledge of it because the myth had not been created
before he died. The author(s) of the Gospel of John certainly would have known
about the myth, but rejected it in his writings.
Interpreting the Bible using midrash: The Hebrew Scriptures
describe four unusual births similar to John the Baptist in the Christian
Scriptures: Ishmael, Isaac, Samson and Samuel. Usually, prior to the birth, an
angel appears to an individual; the latter is afraid; the message of an
upcoming birth is given; objections are raised; a sign is given; and the birth
is considered unusual because he mother was either old or infertile. John's
conception is thus tied to repeating stories of unusual births during the
history of the Jews, in the midrash tradition. But his conception was doubly
unusual because his mother was both old
and infertile. This use of midrash points out that John was even more
important than any of the four Old Testament figures. By having Jesus
conceived by a virgin, the significance of his conception is raised above that
of John to the status of a true miracle. This use of midrash implies that
Jesus was much more important than either John or the Old Testament figures.
The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above
essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today
Charles Pellegrino, "Return to Sodom and Gomorrah: Bible stories
from Archeologists", Random House, (1994), Page 235-237.
reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com online book store
- Ibid., Page 264.
Michael Goulder, "Midrash and Lection in Matthew", SPCK, London, UK
Michael Goulder, "Luke, A New Paradigm", Sheffield Academic Press,
Sheffield UK, (1989).
John Shelby Spong, "Liberating the Gospels : Reading the Bible with
Jewish Eyes," HarperSanFrancisco, (1997).
"The Virgin Birth in Catholic Theology," New Advent, at:
Copyright ę 1996 to 2009 by Ontario
Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Latest update 2009-JAN-27
Author: B.A. Robinson