How should we draw meaning from the Bible?

Here are some common questions in regard to interpreting the Bible:

• Is the Bible largely figurative?
• Is it simply a collection of stories designed to teach us moral lessons?
• Should it be taken in a completely literal way?
• Who determines a passage’s meaning?  The reader or author?

These are important questions to ask and to answer.  Without answers to these questions we do not have a way to consistently determine meaning from the Bible.  Additionally, the answers to these questions will greatly impact our theology.

A hermeneutic is a set of principles used to determine meaning from a literary passage.  I believe the correct hermeneutic for use with the Bible is a Face-Value Hermeneutic.

This term for a serious way to approach the Bible was coined by Robert Van Kampen in his book The Rapture Question Answered: Plain and Simple.[ref]Robert Van Kampen, The Rapture Question Answered: Plain and Simple (Revell: Grand Rapids, 1997).[/ref]  Van Kampen defines it as understanding “what we read or hear by taking what is said to us at face value – or, by taking it literally, if you prefer that word – in its most natural, normal, customary sense.”[ref]Ibid.[/ref]  Now you may wonder, why not just say we should treat the Bible literally?  “Face-value” better depicts how we should interpret it.

Let’s look at an example.  Consider Psalm 91:4a: “He [God] shall cover you with His feathers, and under His wings you shall take refuge.”  If we are 100% committed to taking the Bible literally, should we conclude the book of Psalms teaches God has feathers and wings?!  Of course not!

If we approach this verse and take it at its face-value, or as we would naturally tend to, what would we conclude?  Clearly, the Psalter is using a figure of speech – a metaphor, to be exact.  He is likening God’s shelter and comfort to a mother bird covering her young with her wings.  Figures of speech are powerful.  The verse provides us a clear picture of how God will take care of us.  We can go to God to be comforted and protected, and in seeking Him we will find a place of refuge.

If we were to say the Holy Spirit could not use figures of speech, we would be greatly limiting God’s ability to communicate with us.  Any writer or speaker knows how the proper usage of figures of speech will increase an audience’s attention and comprehension.  Figures of speech are tools for the speaker and writer, and we should expect God to have access to these tools.  Indeed He does; the Bible is full of them.

We have established the Bible contains figures of speech, and we should understand them as such.  Figures of speech are clearly identified by their content and context. Should we limit the figurative aspect of the Bible’s meaning to these instances?  Or can we extend a figurative approach to places where a literary figure is not clearly being used?

Normally when this is done passages of the Bible are “spiritualized” or “allegorized.”  Readers and interpreters decide a particular passage has some deeper “spiritual” meaning, or they treat it as a fictional story meant to teach us a moral or theological lesson.  While the stories in the Bible are certainly meant to teach us morals and theology, we do not need to remove their historicity for them to do so.

When we remove a passage’s historicity without the Bible explicitly stating we should, we make two mistakes.  First, we are missing out on the historical truths the Bible is teaching us.  Proverbs states “the beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord.”  Christianity has an impact on our entire worldview, and disregarding what the Bible says about history will negatively impact our understanding of the world!  Secondly, the reader is using information from outside of the Bible to override what the Bible says.

It is this second mistake which is the most critical, and the strongest reason we should not take a figurative approach to the Bible unless clearly indicated by the literary context.  Proverbs 3:5 says, “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding.”  What the Bible teaches us and what God’s Word says should be the basis for our understanding.  We should not elevate ourselves or outside sources to a place above God.

When our preconceived notions or beliefs override the Bible and distort its meaning, we are not placing the authority with Scripture.  Instead, we are giving authority to ourselves or other human conventions.  Van Kampen vividly describes the problems with such an approach:

Those who take it upon themselves to change the obvious meaning to something less obvious, have, in my opinion, a kind of God-complex.  Like God, they have the right to make the text mean whatever they would like it to mean instead of what the Author intended it to mean.  It is my firm belief that the true meaning of any text can only be understood when that text is taken at face value, in context, harmonized with all the other passages of Scripture speaking to the same issue.  When that meaning is found, that meaning stands in judgement of us.  Never do we dare stand in judgement of it![ref]Ibid.[/ref]

When we go beyond the obvious to “spiritualize” or “allegorize” parts of the Bible, ultimately, we are placing ourselves in theological authority over God.  We destroy the ability for the Bible to convict us with the truth.  In addition, if passages can be spiritualized or allegorized without a clear indication from the text that this is the proper approach, then where does this begin and where does this end?  The capability for the Bible to communicate truth is broken.  Without a well-defined way to determine if a passage should be taken literally or not, the reader can never really know if their understanding is correct.  And if we decide any reader can determine their own unique and personally correct understanding, then we remove God from His proper place.

The meaning of the Bible is determined by the author – who is ultimately the Holy Spirit.  When we read a passage in the Bible, we should take it at face-value.  If the context clearly indicates it is a figure of speech, we should seek to properly understand the figurative meaning.  If the passage is a narrative which refers to real places and people, we should understand it as a true historical narrative.  We should read biblical poetry as poetry, biblical prophecy as prophecy, biblical letters as letters, and biblical parables as parables.  We conclude with Van Kampen’s succinct summation of the face-value hermeneutic:

If the plain sense makes sense, then you have the right sense.