==========
For the reader who has not studied hermeneutics, here is an example:
Let's get down to brass tacks, by getting the hermeneutics right.
========
In what I just wrote, the whole sentence, normally interpreted, means "Let's examine the basics, the accepted rules for interpreting a passage." The phrase "Let's get down to brass tacks" is figurative-literal language. The literal interpretation of that is "Let's examine the basics."
The phrase "getting the hermeneutics right" is literal language The plain literal interpretation of the phrase is "accepted rules for interpreting a passage."
The rules used to avoid problems are as follows:
A. Normal interpretation is the basic starting point of decoding a passage.
What you read is to be taken as it was written. Unless there is an indication to take it some other way, don't try to find another meaning. The normal interpretation of a Bible passage is the plain literal or obvious interpretation. Confusion arises if something other than what is written is read into it. This makes clear communication impossible. The Bible does not do this.
B. Literal interpretation is normal
The sense of a sentence is the maning of that sentence in ordinary normal conversation or writing. Now, get this: literal interpretation contains both plain literal language and figurative-literal . Unwary people confuse the terms literal language with literal interpretation.
Figurative and/or allegorical interpretation is not normal. (But this abnormal method is what the Catholic traditions are based upon.)
C. Only One Primary Interpretation
. . 1. Scripture has but one meaning. There is only one interpretation to which all context lends itself.
. . 2. It applies directly to those addressed, at some time indicated, and must have a specific meaning for them.
. . 3. With this in view, it can be applied to us under similar conditions which exist relative to those conditions prevailing in the context.
. . 4. There may be several secondary applications that agree, but there is only one primary interpretation--one specific, intended meaning.
Examples:
Exodus 15:26 only applies to the Hebrews at the time of the Exodus, not to Christians today, despite common misapplication.
2 Chronicles 7:14 only applies to Israelites in the Holy Land during the Mosaic Covenant, not to Christians in America today under the New Covenant.
D. One Single Sense:
Every statement of Scripture has only one sense (Isa. 53:5 vs 1 Pet. 2:24):
"But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed" (Isa. 53:5 AV).
"Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed" (1 Pet. 2:24 AV). (This is not about getting over a cold, cancer, or automobile accident. It is about being freed from the power of sin and its guilt, the sin-sickness of the unsaved human.)
"When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense" (Dr. David L. Cooper).
"The grammatical sense, in (Karl A. G.) Keil's understanding is the simple, direct, plain, ordinary, and literal sense of the phrases, clauses, and sentence" (Walter C. Kaiser, Jr.). "Thou shalt understand, therefore, that the Scripture hath but one sense, which is the literal sense. And that literal sense is the root and ground of it all, and the anchor that never faileth, whereunto if thou cleave, thou canst never err nor go out of the way. And if thou leave the literal sense, thou canst but go out of the way" (William Tyndale).
E. Make a distinction between plain literal language and figurative-literal language
. . 1. If the language is plain literal, seek to find out what the word denotes or indicates plainly (Eph. 6:4, provoke not your children to wrath).
. . 2. If the language is figurative-literal, seek to learn what the word or passage connotes or implies (Eph. 6:14, having on the breastplate of righteousness).
. . 3. What is the interpretive key suggested by the image or likeness so vividly portrayed? (John 10:7-10; Jesus = shepherd = door).
F. Expect an abundance of figurative language (not figurative interpretation unless indicated)
Do not be overwhelmed by this, but when it occurs, wind out what the words or the passage means.
G. The Literal Method is Correct because:
. . 1. The Bible passage does not lie to or misdirect the reader
. . 2. It is logical, not nonsensical.
. . 3. The Bible makes sense throughout when interpreted this way.
. . 4. If the interpretation is not literal, it is impossible to communicate or agree on what the passage means.
. . 5. Personal experience bears out the normal interpretation through better understanding of God's mind, God's Ways, and lives spiritually changed.
. . 6. The Lord Jesus Christ interpreted Scripture that way (Mt: 22:43,44) . . 7. Paul interpreted Scripture that way (Heb. 7:17 cf Ps. 110:4; Heb. 8:8-13 cf. Jer. 31:31-34; 1 Tim. 5:18 cf Deut 25:4 and Lk. 10:7)
=========
Now, Jesus educated His disciples to discern figurative language by taking them aside to illustrate His figures of speech in the parables (sower and the seed) and other teaching (David's son being his Lord). By the time He got to the moments described in John 6, they were accustomed to it. So when He said as in the 35th verse moment, ". . . he that cometh to me shall never hunger . . ." Jesus is equating "coming to him" (to follow Him for Spiritual comfort and to be taught Spiritual truths that satisfy our longing for knowledge of Him and His heart) with "not hungering" (that is, He is figuratively spiritual bread, man doth not live literally by bread alone but also by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of Jesus/God, taken into the soul and spirit for spiritual nourishment) which is the same figuratively as "eating My flesh."
That is normal, literal interpretation of figurative-literal language.
This whole literal approach is denied, disdained, and decried by adherents of the allegorical approach to interpretation of what a Bible passage means, from which comes the inescapable disagreements seen on this forum between the Romanists and the evangelicals.
****************
The above is my adaptation of the treatment of hermeneutics in Lesson 3 of Dr. Fred Wittman's book "Here's How The Bible Can Make Sense To You Today," (click here to see) freely available from Happy Heralds, Inc.
Using the methods contained in this book will help one escape the logical but irrational and unspiritual arguments employed by the followers of Origen and the Alexandrian school of false unbiblical theologians since the end of the second century AD until now.
>> . . .(Walter C. Kaiser, Jr.).
"Thou shalt understand, . . . <<
>> Do not be overwhelmed by this, but when it occurs, wind find out what the words or the passage means. <<
>> . . 6. The Lord Jesus Christ interpreted Scripture that way (Mt: 22:43,44)
. . 7. Paul interpreted Scripture that way (Heb. 7:17 cf Ps. 110:4; Heb. 8:8-13 cf. Jer. 31:31-34; 1 Tim. 5:18 cf Deut 25:4 and Lk. 10:7) <<
I tend to read things at face value; recognizing the fact that Jesus used SO many stories and images and allegories and metaphors in His teaching.
Excellent run down. This is a keeper.