Models for Interpretation of Scripture

Models for Interpretation of Scripture emerged from John Goldingay's recognition that biblical interpretation in the late twentieth century had become fragmented into competing methodologies, each claiming to unlock Scripture's true meaning. Writing as both an Old Testament scholar and an Anglican priest, Goldingay observed that interpreters were often talking past each other, armed with different assumptions about what the Bible is and how it should be read. Rather than defending a single approach, he set out to map the interpretive landscape and show how different methods might complement rather than cancel each other.

Goldingay organizes biblical interpretation around five primary models: Scripture as witnessing tradition, authoritative canon, inspired word, experienced revelation, and script for performance. Each model illuminates different aspects of how the Bible functions in the life of faith. Scripture as witnessing tradition emphasizes its historical character as human testimony to God's acts. As authoritative canon, it provides normative guidance for belief and practice. As inspired word, it carries divine authority through human language. As experienced revelation, it becomes the medium through which God continues to speak. As script for performance, it invites communities to embody its vision in their own contexts. Goldingay demonstrates how each model addresses genuine aspects of Scripture's nature while remaining incomplete on its own. He argues that faithful interpretation requires holding these approaches in creative tension rather than choosing sides in hermeneutical warfare.

The work has influenced a generation of biblical scholars and pastors seeking to navigate interpretive diversity without falling into relativism. Goldingay's irenic spirit and theological wisdom have made this a standard text in seminaries wrestling with hermeneutical questions. Who should read this: pastors and students overwhelmed by competing interpretive methods, scholars seeking a constructive alternative to hermeneutical fragmentation, and thoughtful Christians wanting to understand why faithful people read the Bible so differently. Those seeking simple answers or rigid methodological prescriptions will find Goldingay's nuanced approach frustrating.