# Meaning _Seeking to hear the author's message through the ears of its ancient audience helps us to discover its first and most certain meaning._ ## Principles Armed with an understanding of translation, genre, and socio-cultural context we can begin to derive the meaning of a passage. A key principle of this process is summarised in the following quote from Fee and Stuart:[^htrb] > [!quote] > "It cannot mean what it never meant" &mdash; Fee & Stuart In order to understand what a passage may mean to a modern audience, we must first understand what it meant to an ancient audience. Although this rule may seem restrictive, it helps us to avoid common interpretive mistakes caused by unintentionally imposing our own assumptions on the text.[^obj] However, this principle is not universally accepted. Instead, individuals and communities who have concluded that the Bible is of divine origin incorporate that conclusion into their interpretive framework, allowing it to determine how they derive meaning from the text. This can lead to circular reasoning, lack of critical thought, and doctrinal complacency. Such thinking is perhaps most clearly seen in beliefs about the _perspicuity of scripture_. ### The perspicuity of scripture Our expectations about the clarity (or "perspicuity") of scripture set the scene for how meaning is determined. For those who see divine influence in the formation of the scripture, this can be thought of as answering the question "how easy has God made it to understand the Bible?" - #### No expectation of clarity This view makes no special claim distinguishing the Bible from any other book, and seeks to understand it simply as a piece of ancient literature. It is typically adopted by those seeking to engage the Bible free of preconceived notions regarding its authority or divine origin. - #### Individually accessible truth Motivated by the theological position that the Bible contains God's call to all mankind, this view assumes that "key principles" of scripture are sufficiently clear for an "ordinary" reader to comprehend. There is often disagreement on what these "key principles" are, what skills an "ordinary" reader needs, and how accessible this makes the Bible text to humankind as a whole. - #### Access through divine guidance Faith communities who believe in the active influence of God may appeal to some form of divine revelation to sanction their determination of meaning. This revelation may be through an influential figure, explicit event, or a personal experience like prayer. This may sanction an occasional interpretation or the teaching of the whole faith community. These expectations are often associated with the problem of divine hiddenness. Readers of faith may find it morally problematic that God's message is not equally accessible to all people, but is instead subject to history, geography, politics, eductation, and culture. Doctrines regarding the clarity of scripture are often formulated as responses to these questions. ### Methods Several methods for deriving meaning have evolved to complement differing expectations of how easy scripture is to understand. Several popular methods are outlined below: - #### Historical-critical Sometimes called _[higher criticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_criticism)_, this approach seeks to understand what an ancient text meant to its original audience, with no preconceived expectation that the Bible is different from any other ancient work of literature. The method accounts for many of the ideas documented on this site including investigating the text, form, context, and meaning. However, it makes no attempt to move beyond this stage to determine a meaning today. - #### Historical-grammatical After observing the text, form, and context of a passage, the [historical-grammatical](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical-grammatical_method) approach seeks to identify a presumed _single_ meaning. This is accomplished by forming questions, seeking answers, and integrating these into a single summary of a passage. - #### Reader-response The [reader-response](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reader-response_criticism) method derives meaning from the perception of the reader only. It does not seek to determine the ancient meaning of the text[^canon], though it does consider the response of readers and communities throughout history. This view is commonly adopted by those who believe in a divinely guided reader. Individuals and faith communities do not necessarily subscribe to any single method, adopting elements of each depending on their theological motivations and experiences. ### In this framework > [!info] > **DISCLOSURE**: as a method of interpretation, this guide must necessarily adopt a position on how meaning is derived. This is briefly set out in the following section. This guide attempts to synthesize the methods described above in the following way: - On the perspicuity of scripture, this guide assumes no expectation of clarity, acknowledging the collective expertise required to access ancient texts. However, this starting assumption does not preclude later recognition of divine influence in the formation of faith communities and their texts. - As a framework built from a position of faith[^about], this guide varies from the historical-critical method because it seeks meaning for readers today. Adopting a "high" view of scripture, it assumes that Bible texts express the responses of historical communities who experienced various forms of divine communication. - This guide does not seek limit the value of these experiences to one single meaning like the historical-grammatical method, accepting that the Bible text can express plurality of meaning, be deliberately ambiguous, or encourage a reader to engage their own imagination and context. - However, unlike the reader-response method, this guide also seeks to constrain potential interpretations with our best understanding of a passage's interpretive history. This includes its ancient meaning, later tradition, and the person of Jesus as portrayed in the four gospels. ## Authorial intent Both the historical-critical and historical-grammatical approaches seek to site the meaning of a passage in its ancient context. In order to determine this meaning it is helpful to first consider the participants in any act of communication, and their respective contexts. Participants can be generalised as: > [!image] > ![[meaning-comms.svg|512]] > Participants in communication: speaker and hearer. - *Communicator* - the individual or group who deliver information through speech (the speaker) or text (the author) - *Audience* - the individual or group who receive the information A communicator may be responding to a contemporary issue such as a political moment, social injustice, or divine edict. The audience likewise have their own separate context and may be being critiqued, encouraged, educated, or something else. As we read the Bible we interact with many complex layers of intent which may include: 1. #### The occasion The moment in which the communication occurs, which may be a spoken word or action. This moment is the event itself, before it is recorded in written form. 2. #### Initial authors The people who responded to the occasion by creating a document. In doing so they select a genre and develop literary structures to communicate their response (for example narrative, myth, wisdom saying, poetry, or letter). 3. #### Later editors A set of existing writings are ordered and arranged. Explanatory notes may be added, narratives selected and aligned, and related texts collected into a broader work. 4. #### Translators The text is rewritten in a different language. In doing so, the translators make decisions about meaning from the source language and what an "equivalent" is in the destination language. 5. #### Publishers Translated texts are selected, arranged, formatted, and published. The resulting edition or volumes may be accompanied by further notes describing the publication's motivation, circumstances, and methodology. 6. #### Ourselves From the pages of the published text we reflect on the original occasion through the lens of transmission provided by those who wrote and handled the text. Each layer has its own communicator and audience, each with their own context and concerns. Together they interact to develop multi-layered meaning that has been refined by a community over many generations. ### Limitations Authorial intent[^intent] is not always recoverable, for example: * When intermediate text forms are not available it can be difficult to reliably identify each "layer" of contributions. * Further back in time there is typically less reliable history describing the circumstances of a communicator's interaction with the text. * Identifying a communicator's motivation is an imprecise endeavour. Cautious, evidence-based analysis and comparison helps us to tentatively uncover general themes and priorities. Despite these limitations it is both useful and important for us to explore the worlds of the author and audience. Although we cannot be certain about individual motivations, the cumulative trajectories of their contributions can reveal how they interacted over time, and yield insights that aren't obvious from our vantage point in the present. ## Out of context To understand the importance of "original meaning" we can look at some counterexamples. When we fail to consider the ancient meaning of a passage we create a vacuum which is often filled with our own assumptions and preconceptions. Social media provides a rich supply of stylised verses which strip context in lieu of a pretty picture and shallow motivational wisdom. The following are taken from my [@notinthebible](https://www.instagram.com/notinthebible) account which parodies this type of post for comedic effect, and subsequent more sober reflection. ### Self-centered reading If we ignore the context of a verse then we can unreasonably extend it to apply to a situation that was never intended. > [!image] > ![[meaning-nitb-extrapolation.jpg|384x384]] > "For nothing will be impossible with God." &mdash; Luke 1:37 (ESV) The original verse has nothing to do with God fulfilling our individual aspirations or expectations. In context it is about how humans fail to grasp God’s power and values: God uses unexpected people in unexpected ways (Mary, a virgin, and Elizabeth, who was barren). It is a verse about how God’s actions are _credible_, rather than how God makes unlikely things happen for our personal benefit. Jesus' example runs counter to the way this verse is misused. Although he was God’s son and the Messiah, he still wasn’t willing to invoke God’s power to a selfish end despite an apparently religious goal: throw himself from the Temple and be rescued by angels, thus proving that he was the Messiah (Luke 4:9-10). By ignoring the original meaning, an exclamation of praise in a specific situation is generalised into a rule that turns God into a motivational poster. ### Imposing modern concepts Today we understand "Earth" as a planet, and the "heavens" above us as the vast distances of space. When the Bible uses these terms, it does so without the connotations they have today. > [!image] > ![[meaning-nitb-modern-concepts.jpg|SD|384x384]] > "For nothing will be impossible with God." &mdash; Luke 1:37 (ESV) {% include verse-img.html source="/assets/images/page/meaning/nitb-modern-concepts.jpg" desc="The Lord by wisdom established the planet; by understanding he established space" text="The Lord by wisdom founded the earth; by understanding he established the heavens" verse="Proverbs 3:19" version="nrsv" %} Although we've only had photographs of the earth from space in the last century, the spherical shape of the earth was suggested as far back as the 6th century {% include date.html era="bce" %}, and first established in the 3rd century {% include date.html era="bce" %}.[^sphere] However, the cultures contemporary with the Old Testament writings were absolutely embedded in the flat-earth cosmic worldview[^flat], with heaven above a firmament that held back the “waters above” (e.g. Psa 148:4), the habitable earth below, and an underworld.[^firmament] The ease with which a modern reader plainly reads "earth" as a planetary body rather than simply "land" is a sobering corrective to the desire to interpret without due regard for concepts that the writer's audience would bring to the text. By ignoring the original meaning, concepts alien to scripture are imposed upon it, and assertions are made regarding its meaning that were never intended. ### Misappropriating "I" When we strip context we can forget who the author is, and again assume that the contents of a passage are intended for us personally. > [!image] > ![[meaning-nitb-self-centering.jpg|384x384]] > "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me." &mdash; Philippians 4:13 (NRSV) This verse was penned by Paul from prison and describes his confidence to find contentment in any situation. Whether incarcerated or free, hungry or filled, rich or poor, Paul’s faith in the risen Jesus kept him from despair. The "I" is Paul, _not the reader_. While we may aspire to have the same attitude as Paul in our own difficult situations, this verse does not represent a divine guarantee that our latest business venture, relationship, or fad diet will succeed. If anything, a careful reading should help us realise that God is with us whether or not we fail, not to ensure we succeed at whatever we put our hand to. By ignoring the original meaning, the passage is again made personal to our own situation rather than being understood through the lens of the author. ## Meaning through time "Layers of intent" reveal many moments through time where new meaning is developed and ascribed. This begins with the earliest communication, and can subsequently be seen when the text evolves to meet new community needs. ### Within the Bible The book of Kings seeks to justify the severity of the exile, answering the question _"why has this happened to us?"_. In contrast, the Chronicler writes during and after the exile aiming to answer the question: _"what will happen now?"_ These agendas are apparent in the very different accounts of the life of King Manasseh, who in the Kings account is almost single-handedly responsible for the national sin that resulted in exile: > [!bible] > "...Moreover Manasseh shed very much innocent blood, until he had filled Jerusalem from one end to another, besides the sin that he caused Judah to sin so that they did what was evil in the sight of the LORD." &mdash; 2 Kings 21:6 (NRSV) However, Chronicles paints a rather different picture of Manasseh: > [!bible] > "...God received his entreaty, heard his plea, and restored him again to Jerusalem and to his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the LORD indeed was God." &mdash; 2 Chronicles 33:13 (NRSV) Why the differences? Kings, together with the books of Samuel, are dated to around 550<small>BCE</small> with composition during the Babylonian exile. Chronicles is dated to around 450<small>BCE</small>, after the return from exile. The books of Kings focus on the downfall of the nation, providing an explanation for the exile. It justifies the destruction of the kingdom by explaining the continued rejection of God by both citizens and rulers. By contrast, the books of Chronicles tells the same stories but with a focus on restoration, the house of David, and the kingdom of Judah. Its purpose is to encourage and inspire a people newly restored to their homeland. In this example we see how the same events are portrayed differently in order to meet the needs of the communities to which they speak. ### The Early Church There were many prolific writers in the early church who produced commentaries on different Biblical books, themes, and pressing community issues. The _Early Church Fathers_ represent a geographically diverse group of influential thinkers and writers who shaped the church through its first few centuries.[^ecf] They can be categorised roughly through time as: - #### Apostolic Fathers The _Apostolic Fathers_ are a group of early church leaders who lived in the first and second centuries, and are believed to have met and interacted with the apostles. Many of their written works survive, in whole or in part, including: - ##### Polycarp of Smyrna Wrote the [Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians](http://www.biblicalaudio.com/text/polykarpos_philippians.pdf) which extensively quotes Christian writings that later formed the New Testament. - ##### Papias of Hierapolis Wrote an _Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord_, which appears to have existed in the Middle Ages[^papias] but is now lost. It has been partially reconstructed from quotations.[^papias2] - ##### Clement of Rome Wrote the [First Epistle of Clement](https://ccel.org/ccel/richardson/fathers/fathers.vi.i.html) to the Corinthians as a rebuke to the deposition of some leaders. It offers insight into the organisational structure of the early church. The [Second Epistle of Clement](https://www.ccel.org/ccel/richardson/fathers.ix.html) is dated after his death and appears to be a written version of a sermon. Though recognised as the earliest Christian sermon, its attribution to Clement is doubtful. - ##### Ignatius of Antioch Wrote seven epistles[^ignatius] that survive in a "middle recension" form. A shorter version summarises his writings, while a longer one appears to incorporate later additions. Whether or not these works can authentically be attributed to the named individuals, they remain the earliest records of Christian thought, conduct, and organisation in the years following the apostles. - #### Ante-Nicene Fathers Those who served before the Council of Nicea in 325<small>CE</small>, a defining statement of belief for the Christian church. Prominent writers include: - ##### Tertullian Wrote prolifically on a wide range of subjects which were highly influential in the Western Latin church. - ##### Origen Wrote [commentaries](http://www.john-uebersax.com/plato/origen2.htm) on all the books of the Bible, typically with an allegorical outlook. His views were later declared heresy. - ##### Justin Martyr Wrote [Dialogue with Trypho, the Jew](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ante-Nicene_Christian_Library/Dialogue_with_Trypho), alongside [First](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ante-Nicene_Christian_Library/The_First_Apology_of_Justin_Martyr) and [Second](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ante-Nicene_Christian_Library/The_Second_Apology_of_Justin_Martyr) Apologies, justifying Christian belief, ritual, and practise. - ##### Irenaeus Wrote [Against Heresies](https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103.htm) as a rebuttal of Gnostic thought. - #### Post-Nicene Fathers These church leaders continued to reflect on Christian community of their day, building on the body of tradition and canon which was increasingly well established. Notable personalities include: - ##### Augustine of Hippo Wrote over [100 separate works](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo_bibliography) including commentaries, apologetics, and sermons. - ##### John Chrysostom [Wrote](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:John_Chrysostom) a large number of sermons, including the [Paschal Homily](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Paschal_Homily) which is still used in the Eastern Church today. The proximity of these writings to the events of the New Testament means there is only a short distance between the cultures in which the New Testament was written and received. This makes them a useful resource for exploring the meaning extracted by an early faith community, alongside the interpretive diversity and trajectories of these communities. ### Jewish thought Another useful way to bridge contexts is to look at how Jews have historically interpreted their scriptures. Rabbinic literature (written by leaders of the Jewish community) contains extensive discussion and commentary on the Old Testament. Following the destruction of the Temple by the Romans in 70<small>CE</small>, the oral traditions and study of the Law and Prophets (which were previously centered in Jerusalem) began to be recorded in written form. Two major works were produced: the Jerusalem Talmud (circa 350<small>CE</small>), and the Babylonian Talmud (circa 500<small>CE</small>).[^talmud] The Talmud comprises the _Mishna_ and _Gemara_. - #### Mishna A thematically organised set of elaborations on the Law codes, documenting traditions of the Pharisees developed from the return from exile up to the destruction of the Temple. In Rabbinic Judaism it is considered essential for the correct interpretation of the Hebrew Law. - #### Gemara Commentary on the Mishna, incorporating diverging viewpoints, arguments, and illustrative stories from prominent Rabbis as they reflected on the Bible and accompanying tradition. Today we have access to study Bibles which provide easy, cross-referenced access to insights from these communities. While these show us the diversity of interpretation, they can also demonstrate the _uniformity_ of interpretation too. ## Summary 1. A guiding principle of "it cannot mean what it never meant" helps us to realise when we're imposing our own concerns on the text. 2. Bible passages can be given an unsupported meaning because a careful interpretive processes are not followed. 3. Looking at the concerns of authors, editors, and later interpreters helps us to partially reconstruct and explore the range of meaning conveyed by a text. Having worked to understand what a passage meant to its original audience we can move on to thinking about how that meaning might relate to us today. Find out how to make this step in the next section: [[Application]]. ## Appendix ### Bibliography - Fee, G. & Stuart, D. (2014). _How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (4th ed)_. Zondervan. (Amazon [UK](https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0310517826/) | [US](https://www.amazon.com/dp/0310517826/), [Eden](https://www.eden.co.uk/christian-books/bible-study/bible-study-reference-books/bible-introduction/how-to-read-the-bible-for-all-its-worth/), [Logos](https://www.logos.com/product/5421/how-to-read-the-bible-for-all-its-worth)). - Carson, D. (1996). _Exegetical Fallacies (2nd ed)_. Baker Academic. (Amazon [UK](https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0801020867/) | [US](https://www.amazon.com/dp/0801020867/), [Baker](http://bakerpublishinggroup.com/books/exegetical-fallacies-2nd-edition/132832), [Logos](https://www.logos.com/product/6874/exegetical-fallacies-2nd-ed)). - Chadwick, H. (Editor). (2021). _Oxford Early Christian Texts_. Oxford University Press. ([OUP](https://global.oup.com/academic/content/series/o/oxford-early-christian-texts-oect/)). - Sarna, N., Levine, B., Milgrom, J., Tigay, J. (1999). _JPS Torah/Tanakh Commentary Series_. The Jewish Publication Society. (Amazon [UK](https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=jps+torah) | [US](https://www.amazon.com/s?k=jps+torah), [JPS](https://jps.org/books/jps-torah-commentary-series-5-volume-set/), [Logos](https://www.logos.com/product/166600/jps-tanakh-commentary-collection-jpstc)). ### Notes [^htrb]: Or more properly: “A text cannot mean what it could never have meant for its original readers/hearers.” See "How to read the Bible for all its worth" in the Bibliography. [^obj]: Kitchen, N. (2017). _5 common objections to “it cannot mean what it never meant”_. [living-faith.org](https://living-faith.org/2017/06/22/5-common-objections-to-it-cannot-mean-what-it-never-meant/). [^canon]: The only textual concern of the reader-response method is canonicity: determining which passages are to be read and responded to. [^about]: For more information, see the [About](/en/about) page. [^intent]: For more resources on Authorial Intent and its limits, a good starting point is the [Wikipedia - Authorial intent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorial_intent) article. [^sphere]: "...there is virtually no historical evidence to support the myth of a medieval flat earth". Numbers, R. Newton’s Apple and other Myths about Science. Harvard University Press. 2015. (Amazon [UK](https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0199UKHAE), [US](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0199UKHAE)). [Eratosthenes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes) established the circumference of the earth. [^flat]: See: _Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography in the Bible_. ([biologos.org](https://www.fliedner.es/media/modules/editor/cienciayfe/docs/biologos/25-godawa_scholarly_paper_2.pdf)). [^firmament]: Consider Genesis 1, Noah, Babel, and Jacob’s Ladder to name a few. There are also many poetic allusions, and a neat merism in (much later) Phil 2:10. For a longer writeup on this subject take a look at an [infographic](https://livingfaith373662836.files.wordpress.com/2021/04/0607a-glass-ceiling-infographic.png) I made over on [living-faith.org](https://living-faith.org/2019/01/19/the-bible-has-a-glass-ceiling/). [^papias]: An 1893 book by Adolf Harnack references Middle Ages documents where physical copies of Papias' works appear to have been present. ([Link](http://hypotyposeis.org/weblog/2003/11/harnack-on-papias-in-the-late-middle-ages.html) - translated). [^papias2]: As far as I'm able to ascertain, the most comprehensive reconstruction of his works is by: _Carlson, S. (2021). Papias of Hierapolis Exposition of Dominical Oracles: The Fragments, Testimonia, and Reception of a Second-Century Commentator. Oxford University Press._ Vote for it to be added to Logos [here](https://feedback.faithlife.com/boards/logos-book-requests/posts/oxford-early-christian-texts). [^ignatius]: There has been considerable [debate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignatius_of_Antioch#Authenticity) regarding the authenticity of Ignatius' epistles, particularly because they favour the Bishop-oriented church hierarchy espoused by Catholicism which is repudiated by Protestants. The content of the Epistles is available online: ([Link](https://www.forgottenbooks.com/fr/download/TheEpistlesofStIgnatiusBishopofAntioch_10847048.pdf)). [^ecf]: Study of the Church Fathers is known as _Patristics_. As usual a great jumping-off point is Wikipedia: [Church Fathers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Fathers). [^talmud]: Read the Talmud (both Jerusalem and Babylonian) online. ([Link](https://www.sefaria.org/texts/Talmud)).