Hermeneutical Interpretation of Matthew 22:34-38 Explained

Introduction to Hermeneutics and the Passage

One of the biggest challenges facing any reader of the Bible is developing an appropriate understanding of what, precisely, one is reading. A plain reading of any scripture is satisfactory much of the time for day-to-day application — though even this is debatable — yet there is much to be said for possessing a thorough knowledge of the variety of factors that contribute to a deeper understanding of any given passage. Even then, considerable debate exists as to what would be considered appropriate and satisfactory interpretation of what the Bible communicates at any given moment. Clearly, a mere linguistic reading is insufficient. This becomes evident when one considers colloquialisms, context, cultural practices, the intentions of the author, and the nature of the event or subject being conveyed.

What is called hermeneutical interpretation is therefore often necessary to employ in order to receive a much clearer knowledge of the text. Hermeneutics, being an art and a science — sometimes simultaneously, sometimes individually — seeks to elaborate various textual interpretations by employing a method that draws from all of the characteristics mentioned above. As such, this paper focuses on one passage in the New Testament: the Gospel of Matthew, chapter twenty-two, verses thirty-four through thirty-eight. A brief hermeneutical analysis of that passage will be performed, with the aim of arriving at a deeper understanding of the text and of the hermeneutical method itself. Such practices are helpful not merely in the case of this verse, but anywhere in the Bible — or in any text, for that matter.

Let us first look at the passage itself. In Matthew 22:34–38 it states: "But when the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him. 'Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?' And he said to him, 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the greatest commandment.'"

Translation Considerations

In any hermeneutical analysis, we must first secure an adequate translation. In the case of translations, this naturally goes far beyond the reach of the ordinary researcher whose knowledge of Greek, Latin, or ancient Aramaic may not be sufficient to examine every word in detail. That said, having a cursory understanding of the more significant words — as to their meaning in the original language — is far from an obstruction to good interpretation. Study guides and introductory language tools can be incredibly helpful, since words as they appear in their original language carry meanings that are sometimes lost in translation.

Skilled translators typically take into account contextual passages as well as idiomatic usage, both ancient and modern. Allowing for contextual translation reduces the likelihood of misunderstanding what a passage means, since a strictly word-for-word rendering — as anyone who has used a mechanical translator knows — can be disastrous for understanding the sense of a literary passage or even a simple sentence. Some knowledge of the source language is certainly helpful, though it is not strictly necessary. In cases involving obscure languages with few available translations, linguistic knowledge may be essential; however, in the instance of the passage above, we may assume that the current translation does not introduce significant ambiguity or misrepresent what the author is stating.

Historical Context: The Sadducees and Pharisees

With the translation of the passage reasonably secure, we may turn to other considerations for our hermeneutical analysis. Under historical considerations, we must first understand precisely with whom Jesus is speaking. Who were the Sadducees, and did they have a particular reason to question Jesus? Why would they wish to trip him up, and are there extenuating circumstances that contributed to this conflict? While many questions hover at the edge of clarity, these are sufficient to address for now.

The Sadducees were a religious sect with certain distinctive interpretations of scripture. To address every detail of this complex religious group would exceed the scope of this paper, but a few of their key ideas are worth noting. The Sadducees, as the Bible tells us, disagreed with other groups on certain points of scriptural doctrine — notably, the resurrection of the dead. Unlike the Pharisees, they did not believe in the eventual resurrection of those in Sheol. However, how this doctrinal position directly relates to the passage at hand is unclear, since the lawyer's question concerns the Law of the Hebrews, not eschatology. The doctrinal dispute between the Sadducees and the Pharisees is therefore largely irrelevant to the specific exchange recorded in Matthew 22:34–38.

Conclusion

In short, a hermeneutical interpretation of Matthew 22:34–38 employs the same standards that any good interpreter of literature and religious texts should apply. Not every contextual layer proved equally relevant: the doctrinal debate between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, for instance, turned out to be largely tangential to this passage. However, the context of the author — Matthew's evangelistic purpose — and the context of the events leading up to the passage both proved highly relevant. By applying hermeneutical standards of contextual analysis at the levels of the text, the author, and the characters within the narrative, a much greater understanding of this passage can be achieved. The same approach, moreover, can be fruitfully applied to any biblical text — or, indeed, to any literary work requiring careful interpretation.