Reading Methods and Approaches

Reading Methods and Approaches

The Hebrew Bible was not written in a vacuum. It came from real places, people, and history, shaped by centuries of experience and expectation. From antiquity, it was not just read but wrestled with, debated, and cherished. People kept returning to these words, searching for meaning, searching for God. That has not changed.

From ancient rabbis to early Christians, from medieval theologians to modern scholars, readers have approached these texts with different questions and ways of understanding. Some looked for patterns that stretched across generations. Others saw hidden meanings beneath the surface. Some focused on historical context, trying to return to what the first readers might have heard. These methods shaped how people saw God’s work in history, and many still shape how Scripture is read today.

For thousands of years, readers have tried to understand how these ancient words speak beyond their immediate setting. Some saw foreshadowing, others found direct fulfillment, and some drew connections between symbols and spiritual truths. These different approaches did not replace each other. They built on each other, forming a long conversation about what Scripture means and how it speaks across time.

Typology sees some stories and figures in the Hebrew Bible as echoing forward, setting the stage for something greater. The Passover lamb points toward a sacrifice. Adam’s story finds its resolution in Christ. Paul called Adam a type of Jesus, showing how one brought death, and the other brought life. Typology sees history as moving with purpose, patterns unfolding, building toward something that changes everything. This way of reading was used by New Testament writers and developed by early Christian thinkers like Augustine and Irenaeus.

Pesher interpretation saw the Hebrew Bible speaking directly to the reader’s own time. The Qumran community responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls practiced this method, believing that biblical prophecy contained hidden meanings revealed only in their era. For example, their commentary on Habakkuk reinterprets the prophet’s words to describe their struggles against the “Wicked Priest” and other enemies. This approach often linked ancient texts to contemporary events, seeing them as coded messages for their day. While some apocalyptic writings adopted elements of this approach, the New Testament’s inspired explanations, such as Matthew’s use of Hosea 11:1 (“Out of Egypt I called my son”), should not be mistaken for Pesher. Instead, they reveal the fullness of God’s intended meaning in Scripture.

Allegorical reading believed the surface meaning of Scripture pointed toward something more. Origen read the Song of Solomon not as poetry about human love but as a picture of Christ’s love for the Church. Paul used this approach to describe Sarah and Hagar as symbols of two covenants. Medieval theologians like Thomas Aquinas wove allegory into their readings, drawing out spiritual truths from historical events.

Midrash was rabbinic interpretation that engaged with Scripture through dialogue. Midrash did not just explain the text but expanded on it, filling in gaps, asking new questions, and wrestling with meaning. It was an ongoing conversation with God’s word, treating Scripture as alive and active. Jewish sages developed two primary types: Midrash Halakhah, which focused on legal interpretation, and Midrash Aggadah, which expanded narratives with additional details.

Historical-critical reading emerged in modern times as scholars turned to history, language, and culture to understand Scripture in its original setting. This approach, developed in the 18th and 19th centuries, focused on human authors, their historical world, and how the texts were formed over time. It led to insights about biblical context and raised questions about traditional interpretations of prophecy and fulfillment.

Canonical interpretation sees the Bible as a connected story instead of reading each book separately. Brevard Childs and Richard Hays championed this thinking, showing that meaning deepens when Scripture is read as a whole. Jesus fulfills Old Testament hopes through direct prophecy, patterns, themes, and echoes built across the biblical narrative.

Theological interpretation argues that the best way to read Scripture is as part of the Church, within the life of faith. This approach sees Scripture as more than just history or literature. It is God speaking. That means interpretation is not just an intellectual exercise but about being shaped by the text, encountering God through it, and allowing it to form how we live.

Each of these approaches brings something different to the table. They do not cancel each other out. Instead, they offer different angles, questions, and ways of listening to the same text.

Scripture does not communicate in just one way. Some things are stated outright, others unfold through the story, and some ideas are left unstated but meant to be drawn out by the reader. This pattern is everywhere, in all kinds of writing, teaching, and storytelling.

Some passages make direct statements. The Torah gives commands. The prophets declare God’s word. These are meant to be taken at face value. Some truths are revealed through people and events. Joseph’s life does not come with bullet points about God’s providence, but the pattern is unmistakable. His story is one of suffering and exaltation, betrayal and redemption, laying the groundwork for something even more remarkable. Some messages are not spelled out but are waiting to be discovered. Isaiah 53 speaks of a suffering servant carrying burdens that are not his own. Later, Jesus steps into that role. The connection is there but is not made with a flashing sign. It has to be recognized.

These three ways of communicating are everywhere in Scripture. Recognizing them helps us read more carefully, thoughtfully, and in tune with how meaning works in the biblical story.

Reading well requires patience, humility, and a willingness to listen to what we think a passage should say and what it is saying. It also means recognizing some of the challenges that come with interpretation.

Context matters. The Hebrew Bible was written in a very different world. Its first readers were not thinking about 21st-century theological debates. They were dealing with their own struggles, questions, and need for hope. Perspective shapes interpretation. Everyone comes to Scripture with assumptions shaped by culture, experience, and belief. Recognizing that is the first step to reading with more honesty and depth. How we read shapes what we believe. Some approaches lean more on history, others on theology. Some focus on connections, others on distinctions. The method matters. It influences what we see and how we understand God’s work.

These ways of reading are not just historical artifacts. They still shape how people approach Scripture today. The question has always been the same from ancient rabbis to modern scholars, from early Christians to churches today. How do these words reveal who God is and what He is doing?

In the chapters that follow, we will examine how these approaches play out in key passages, how Jesus and the New Testament writers engaged with Scripture, and what that means for how we read today. This is not just about understanding their methods. It is about stepping into the same story, listening with fresh ears, and letting Scripture do what it has always done: point toward something bigger than itself.

~PW 🌮🛶