Question 9: How Has the Bible Been Interpreted Throughout Church History?

In this chapter, Plummer gives a brief survey of nearly 2,000 years of interpretive history.  Understanding how Christians throughout history have interpreted the Scriptures is quite important as there is much to learn from their methods as well as their missteps.  This survey describes the methodology of five interpretive eras.

The Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament (A.D. 45-90).  The first place we see Christians interpreting the Scriptures is in the citations of Old Testament texts by New Testament authors.  The citations of such texts have a number of characteristics.

First, NT authors cite the OT Scriptures as reliable accounts of God's prior interventions and communications (e.g., Matt 12:40-41; Rom 4:1-25).  Second, the NT authors respected the contexts of the passages they cited - that is, they were not haphazard in their citations.  Third, the NT authors employed the OT in a typological and messianic way.  Plummer adds, "This means they saw God's prior revelation as anticipatory, reaching its climactic fulfillment in the coming of Messiah Jesus."  Finally, the NT authors did not use the OT in allegorical ways - that is, they did not assign meanings to details of the OT texts that the original authors would not have countenanced.

On typology, Plummer warns, "any typological use of the OT not explicitly sanctioned in the NT should be entertained with great caution."

The Rise of Allegorical Interpretation (A.D. 100-500).  Many of the early church fathers employed this method of interpretation by assigning symbolic significance to textual details.  I agree with Plummer when he says, "If allegory is not intended by the author...then a dangerous misrepresentation of the author's meaning can result [if allegory is used]."  Allegory is not a bad thing, Jesus and Paul used them. It is the illegitimate importation of it that is the problem.  This practice could very well have been adopted from the Greco-Roman world as it employed allegorical methodology in an effort to interpret difficult religious texts.

Allegory's tendency to distance the reader from the literal meaning of the text eventually gave rise to creeds and summaries, like the "rule of faith".  An objective, orthodox interpretation had to be put forward as protection against unorthodoxy and heresy.  Plummer states that it was this repetition of church tradition and the summarization of orthodox doctrine that functionally replaced the primacy of the Bible.

The Fourfold Meaning of Scripture (A.D. 500-1500).  During the medieval period we find the assertion that every biblical text has four levels of meaning: the literal, moral, spiritual (allegorical), and heavenly (eschatological or anagogical).  A good example of this can be found in the fourfold interpretation of Jerusalem: the literal plot of ground in Palestine; the moral nature the human soul; the spiritual Church; and the heavenly city, the New Jerusalem.

This practice became widespread and assumed.  Much of the biblical scholarship during this time was not really exegesis of the text; but the cataloging of church father's interpretations of various passages (for more on this era see my post Getting the Reformation Wrong (A Review)).  While the majority of the church's work was given to this sort of scholasticism, there were many who called for a return to the priority of the literal meaning of the text.

The Return to a More Faithful Interpretive Method (A.D. 1500-Present).  While I agree with the title of this section, I do think it tip-toes on the line of using euphemism (that this interpretive method is the "more faithful" one) to further a point that he does not explicitly address.  Anyway - back to the point.

The Reformation's cry was "back to the sources".  While the reformers sought to give primacy to the Scriptures, they also heavily scrutinized the fourfold method.  Calvin writes, "We ought to have a deeper reverence for Scripture than to reckon ourselves at liberty to disguise its natural meaning."  This interpretive method ultimately seeks to understand the Bible by gaining the sense of the author's actual words according to the norms of language and grammar.  Plummer continues, "For evangelicals, the conscious intent of the human author (whether the original author or a later biblical author in canonical reflection) is the touchstone of interpretation."

I would also add that the "analogy of faith" is the reformational interpretive standard - that Scripture interprets Scripture.

For more reading on this important subject Plummer (and I) recommend:
Biblical Interpretation Then and Now: Contemporary Hermeneutics in the Light of the Early Church
A Short History of the Interpretation of the Bible
A History of Biblical Interpretation: The Ancient World

Introduction to Biblical Interpretation