The Four Interpretations of Hebrew. Which one do you use?

[shepherdsword]

There are four types of interpretations the Hebrew scribes used to interpret the bible. Collectively they are known as "Pardes (פַּרְדֵּ"ס)" which means "orchid" or "garden"

1. Peshat (פְּשָׁט) – The Simple or Literal Meaning
   • This is the plain, straightforward meaning of the text — what it says at face value, based on grammar, context, and syntax.
   • Example: When the Torah says, “And God said, ‘Let there be light,’” the peshat is that God created light.
2. Remez (רֶמֶז) – The Hint or Allegorical Meaning
   • This level looks for hints, allusions, or deeper symbolic meanings beneath the surface text.
   • Example: The “light” could symbolize divine wisdom or revelation, not just physical light.
3. Derash (דְּרַשׁ) – The Homiletical or Midrashic Meaning
   • This involves moral, legal, or homiletical interpretations — drawing lessons, principles, or stories from the text.
   • Example: A rabbi might darshen (expound) the verse to teach about spiritual enlightenment or ethical living.
4. Sod (סוֹד) – The Secret or Mystical Meaning
   • The hidden, esoteric, or kabbalistic interpretation — exploring divine mysteries and spiritual realities.
   • Example: In sod, “light” could represent the emanation of divine energy or the first manifestation of creation in Kabbalah.

So together:Peshat → Remez → Derash → Sod = Pardes (פַּרְדֵּ"ס)
Each level builds upon the others, moving from the literal to the mystical.


I think we find similar Christian interpretative models. While most of Christianity sticks to the "peshat" or "remez" you can find gnostics and mystics that rely heavily on the "sod" as a method. The Babylonian mystery schools also use pure "sod" as their interpretative model.

What model do you use?

 

[shepherdsword]

I default to "Peshat" except in cases where it makes no sense. I then use Remez.

 

[ScottA]

Thanks for starting the thread!

I just posted this in another thread:

Whatever method one uses when considering what context is correct, it is important to understand that one context event is likely to have come about for the sake of a greater context to come. A good example is David's personal suffering (his own local and immediate context) became a prophetic word about Messiah--which was no violation of context, but rather God bringing forth both events, the one confirming the other. In other words, David did not only suffer for his own circumstances--but also for Christ, as a prophetic witness.

It's important to remember that God's ways are higher than those of men, and that all of scripture contributes toward that higher purpose. It should even be considered foolish, if not short-sighted or arrogant, [to limit God] within His own word to the lower contexts of men. As children of God it would even be inconsiderate of us not to be open--as some are--to all that “Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”

 

[shepherdsword]

Thanks for starting the thread!

I just posted this in another thread:

Whatever method one uses when considering what context is correct, it is important to understand that one context event is likely to have come about for the sake of a greater context to come. A good example is David's personal suffering (his own local and immediate context) became a prophetic word about Messiah--which was no violation of context, but rather God bringing forth both events, the one confirming the other. In other words, David did not only suffer for his own circumstances--but also for Christ, as a prophetic witness.

It's important to remember that God's ways are higher than those of men, and that all of scripture contributes toward that higher purpose. It should even be considered foolish, if not short-sighted or arrogant, [to limit God] within His own word to the lower contexts of men.

Another good example is Sarah casting out Hagar. Bad for Hagar but it was used by Paul to show how the new covenant eradicates the old.

 

[ScottA]

Another good example is Sarah casting out Hagar. Bad for Hagar but it was used by Paul to show how the new covenant eradicates the old.

Yes, Paul spoke of building upon the foundation that others had built--and these are just a few of all that God as the Master Builder has made possible--possible as confirmation and assurance of all that He has promised and is doing.

 

[MatthewG]

"The Spirit is needed to help understand some things…"




“But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” — 1 Corinthians 2:14
“When He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth…” — John 16:13





"The places in the Bible are real…"




“And David took the stronghold of Zion (that is, the City of David).” — 2 Samuel 5:7
“Jesus went out from there and departed to the region of Tyre and Sidon.” — Matthew 15:21
These aren’t mythical—they’re historical locations still identifiable today, anchoring the text in real geography.





"Some things are literal…"




“So God created man in His own image…” — Genesis 1:27
“Jesus wept.” — John 11:35
These are not metaphors—they’re direct, literal truths about creation and the humanity of Christ.





"And some things are not so obvious, especially without the Spirit…"




“These things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom but in those taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual things to spiritual people.” — 1 Corinthians 2:13
“The parables of Jesus… ‘He who has ears to hear, let him hear!’” — Matthew 13:9
Even the disciples often needed explanation: “Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures.” — Luke 24:45

 

[Muna]

Mysteries are shown here, how would the disciples have answered if the same same was given (not just used)

For example, Jesus said,

Mat 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

And so Paul would say in respect to the same

1 Cr 4:1 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.

Seems weird to call what they have an "intepretive model" but God did say how he has spoken, for example here

Hosea 12:10 I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets.

Abraham things in Gal 4:24 (being a prophet) could be compared that way

Gal 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

And then we are told the way the Holy Ghost teaches by way of comparing spiritual things with spiritual

1 Cr 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

How would you reckon each of those?

 

[shepherdsword]

Mysteries are shown here, how would the disciples have answered if the same same was given (not just used)

For example, Jesus said,

Mat 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

And so Paul would say in respect to the same

1 Cr 4:1 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.

Seems weird to call what they have an "intepretive model" but God did say how he has spoken, for example here

Hosea 12:10 I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets.

Abraham things in Gal 4:24 (being a prophet) could be compared that way

Gal 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

And then we are told the way the Holy Ghost teaches by way of comparing spiritual things with spiritual

1 Cr 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

How would you reckon each of those?

What do you mean? Are you asking what model I would use to interpret those verses?

 

[JLB]

There are four types of interpretations the Hebrew scribes used to interpret the bible. Collectively they are known as "Pardes (פַּרְדֵּ"ס)" which means "orchid" or "garden"

1. Peshat (פְּשָׁט) – The Simple or Literal Meaning
   • This is the plain, straightforward meaning of the text — what it says at face value, based on grammar, context, and syntax.
   • Example: When the Torah says, “And God said, ‘Let there be light,’” the peshat is that God created light.
2. Remez (רֶמֶז) – The Hint or Allegorical Meaning
   • This level looks for hints, allusions, or deeper symbolic meanings beneath the surface text.
   • Example: The “light” could symbolize divine wisdom or revelation, not just physical light.
3. Derash (דְּרַשׁ) – The Homiletical or Midrashic Meaning
   • This involves moral, legal, or homiletical interpretations — drawing lessons, principles, or stories from the text.
   • Example: A rabbi might darshen (expound) the verse to teach about spiritual enlightenment or ethical living.
4. Sod (סוֹד) – The Secret or Mystical Meaning
   • The hidden, esoteric, or kabbalistic interpretation — exploring divine mysteries and spiritual realities.
   • Example: In sod, “light” could represent the emanation of divine energy or the first manifestation of creation in Kabbalah.

So together:Peshat → Remez → Derash → Sod = Pardes (פַּרְדֵּ"ס)
Each level builds upon the others, moving from the literal to the mystical.


I think we find similar Christian interpretative models. While most of Christianity sticks to the "peshat" or "remez" you can find gnostics and mystics that rely heavily on the "sod" as a method. The Babylonian mystery schools also use pure "sod" as their interpretative model.

What model do you use?

The word of God, especially from the Old Testament, can be understood in three ways.


The literal Interpretation
The prophetic implication
The personal application


Example: The Passover lamb

The Literal Interpretation:
The children of Israel were instructed to kill a literal lamb and to apply it's blood to the door posts and lintel of their house, so that the death angel would pass over their house.

The Prophetic Implication:
The Passover lamb prophetically pointed to Christ Jesus as "the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world".
Through His blood we have the forgiveness of sins.

Personal Application: This is what some call a "Rhema word" whereby when reading the scriptures, The Holy Spirit causes a verse or a passage to directly apply to you, where the passage "stands out" to you as if the Lord is speaking this to you as a "now word", for you to personally apply to your life. In other words, He may be speaking to you to "apply the blood of Jesus" to the door posts of your mind because you are under attack by evil spirits that are assigned to make you anxious, or have insomnia, or maybe trying to make you go insane... as an example.

 

[MatthewG]

Yeah I don't like any forms of method like that... You just gotta discern for sure.

The word of God, especially from the Old Testament, can be understood in three ways.


The literal Interpretation
The prophetic implication
The personal application


Example: The Passover lamb

The Literal Interpretation:
The children of Israel were instructed to kill a literal lamb and to apply it's blood to the door posts and lintel of their house, so that the death angel would pass over their house.

The Prophetic Implication:
The Passover lamb prophetically pointed to Christ Jesus as "the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world".
Through His blood we have the forgiveness of sins.

Personal Application: This is what some call a "Rhema word" whereby when reading the scriptures, The Holy Spirit causes a verse or a passage to directly apply to you, where the passage "stands out" to you as if the Lord is speaking this to you as a "now word", for you to personally apply to your life. In other words, He may be speaking to you to "apply the blood of Jesus" to the door posts of your mind because you are under attack by evil spirits that are assigned to make you anxious, or have insomnia, or maybe trying to make you go insane... as an example.

The bible is there to help you grow in relationship with God, not nessicarly change ones behavior though overtime, the fire in you that comes from God will burn some of your desires away.




Ai comment:

“The Bible is not merely a rulebook to change behavior, but a living Word to deepen your relationship with God. As you draw near to Him, His Spirit kindles a holy fire within you—a fire that over time burns away desires that once ruled you. For it is written: ‘Is not my word like fire,’ declares the Lord, ‘and like a hammer that breaks a rock in pieces?’ (Jeremiah 23:29). And again, ‘His word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path’ (Psalm 119:105). The more you walk with Him, the more your heart aligns with His—until even your desires begin to shift, not by force, but by fire.

 

[JLB]

Yeah I don't like any forms of method like that... You just gotta discern for sure.



The bible is there to help you grow in relationship with God, not nessicarly change ones behavior though overtime, the fire in you that comes from God will burn some of your desires away.




Ai comment:

“The Bible is not merely a rulebook to change behavior, but a living Word to deepen your relationship with God. As you draw near to Him, His Spirit kindles a holy fire within you—a fire that over time burns away desires that once ruled you. For it is written: ‘Is not my word like fire,’ declares the Lord, ‘and like a hammer that breaks a rock in pieces?’ (Jeremiah 23:29). And again, ‘His word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path’ (Psalm 119:105). The more you walk with Him, the more your heart aligns with His—until even your desires begin to shift, not by force, but by fire.

I'm not big on AI.


Scripture is for instruction in righteousness, that we may thoroughly equipped to serve our King.

 

[MatthewG]

I'm not big on AI.


Scripture is for instruction in righteousness, that we may thoroughly equipped to serve our King.

Yeah, but Jesus is the one whom was ever righteous.

Jesus is the end of the law for righteousness.

Ai comment:
Absolutely, Matthew. That’s a rich doctrinal truth—Jesus alone fulfilled the law perfectly, and through Him, righteousness is no longer earned but received by faith. Here’s a layered version with scripture woven in for teaching or spoken word:





“Yeah, but Jesus is the only one who was ever truly righteous. Not just morally upright—He was the spotless Lamb, the fulfillment of every command, every shadow, every prophecy. As it is written: ‘He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in His mouth’ (1 Peter 2:22). And again, ‘God made Him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God’ (2 Corinthians 5:21).


Jesus is the end of the law for righteousness—not the end of holiness, but the end of striving to earn it. ‘For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes’ (Romans 10:4). The law pointed to Him, but He fulfilled it. Now, righteousness is not achieved—it’s received. Not by works, but by faith. Not by effort, but by grace.”

 

[MatthewG]

What does it mean to be "righteousness of God" - it means to let Jesus come in and through you because he is the one whom is righteous. That doesn't mean you stop being yourself, or the things you are interested in.

 

[Muna]

What do you mean? Are you asking what model I would use to interpret those verses?

Like how would you categorize what the apostles were given as mentioned in post #7 in otherwords.

Because the word mysteries given them by Christ Mat 13:11, and being stewards of the mysteries as Paul speaks in 1 Cr 4:1 speaking a hidden wisdom as he says in 1 Cr 2:7 . That would imply mysteries given them by Spirit (he that knowethe the thoughts of God) who revealth the same etc. I was asking, how would anyone categorize the mention of those, if #4 which falls under "Sod" if I understand it correctly, seems to have a negative connotaion against it. Which appears to set aside how some of those things mentioned in the scriptures while making sure we understand that these Babylonian mystery schools use this pure "sod" as their interpretative model.

And then I thought, wouldnt there also be a fundamental difference between what is an interpretative model (which lists the many ways we might attempt to reason things out at various levels #1, #2, #3, #4) versus spiritual revelation (which is by the Holy Ghost) Who is the one given to teach the things, and/or reveal the things (Whose way of doing so is shown to us as comparing spiritual things with spiritual). Keeping in mind that the natural man cannot recieve those things. And just because Paul said (concerning the things of Abraham) this..."which things are an allegory" (as far as Sarah and Hagar) the natural man would not see in Christ (these spiritual things) even though an athiest (or godless man/ one without the Spirit) can still understand an allegory (outside of Christ) for example.

You could probably take all of those things listed in the OP ...#1,#2,#3,#4 ...and find any one of them taught outside of the religious sphere of things (in the wisdom of men). Laying them out and teaching them the model itself, "Behold, a very systematic way of attempting to interpret all things (which we show you). Thus, learn these four methods and be wise and understanding....See what I mean?

I am not good with my own words or explaining things, but men have these models and abilities also, but the Holy Spirit is left out in the equation in the above, and wouldn't the Holy Spirit play apart in the interpretation of things and wouldn't some of those things as the apostles set forth to us be found in #4 also, which is attributed to the Babylonian schools is how I might best ask it.

 

[shepherdsword]

Like how would you categorize what the apostles were given as mentioned in post #7 in otherwords.

Because the word mysteries given them by Christ Mat 13:11, and being stewards of the mysteries as Paul speaks in 1 Cr 4:1 speaking a hidden wisdom as he says in 1 Cr 2:7 . That would imply mysteries given them by Spirit (he that knowethe the thoughts of God) who revealth the same etc. I was asking, how would anyone categorize the mention of those, if #4 which falls under "Sod" if I understand it correctly, seems to have a negative connotaion against it. Which appears to set aside how some of those things mentioned in the scriptures while making sure we understand that these Babylonian mystery schools use this pure "sod" as their interpretative model.

And then I thought, wouldnt there also be a fundamental difference between what is an interpretative model (which lists the many ways we might attempt to reason things out at various levels #1, #2, #3, #4) versus spiritual revelation (which is by the Holy Ghost) Who is the one given to teach the things, and/or reveal the things (Whose way of doing so is shown to us as comparing spiritual things with spiritual). Keeping in mind that the natural man cannot recieve those things. And just because Paul said (concerning the things of Abraham) this..."which things are an allegory" (as far as Sarah and Hagar) the natural man would not see in Christ (these spiritual things) even though an athiest (or godless man/ one without the Spirit) can still understand an allegory (outside of Christ) for example.

You could probably take all of those things listed in the OP ...#1,#2,#3,#4 ...and find any one of them taught outside of the religious sphere of things (in the wisdom of men). Laying them out and teaching them the model itself, "Behold, a very systematic way of attempting to interpret all things (which we show you). Thus, learn these four methods and be wise and understanding....See what I mean?

I am not good with my own words or explaining things, but men have these models and abilities also, but the Holy Spirit is left out in the equation in the above, and wouldn't the Holy Spirit play apart in the interpretation of things and wouldn't some of those things as the apostles set forth to us be found in #4 also, which is attributed to the Babylonian schools is how I might best ask it.

I think the Spirit can lead in the first 3 of the 4. 1) Peshat-There are direct and literal things the Spirit shows us: example "thou shall not kill" 2)Remez- There are times when the Spirit speaks symbolically and metaphorically example: The parables of Jesus 3) There are times when the Spirit uses Derash. Such as the reference "out of Egypt I have called my son". So none of these three are in opposition to the Spirit's leading, they are all a part of it. However, I think that the "Sod" model goes beyond what the Spirit is saying and delves into some mystic caricature of the Holy Spirit's intent. You see this type of model used for the Kabbalah and other writings of the Babylonian mystery schools. It is also used in many gnostic texts. In looking back at the first three...we can also make the mistake of letting the human intellect interpret as it feasts on the tree of knowledge. Just my take on it.

 

[Muna]

I think the Spirit can lead in the first 3 of the 4. 1) Peshat-There are direct and literal things the Spirit shows us: example "thou shall not kill" 2)Remez- There are times when the Spirit speaks symbolically and metaphorically example: The parables of Jesus 3) There are times when the Spirit uses Derash. Such as the reference "out of Egypt I have called my son". So none of these three are in opposition to the Spirit's leading, they are all a part of it. However, I think that the "Sod" model goes beyond what the Spirit is saying and delves into some mystic caricature of the Holy Spirit's intent. You see this type of model used for the Kabbalah and other writings of the Babylonian mystery schools. It is also used in many gnostic texts. In looking back at the first three...we can also make the mistake of letting the human intellect interpret as it feasts on the tree of knowledge. Just my take on it.

Thanks @shepherdsword , I wasnt sure how mystery was being used in the above because I do not know what Kabbalah is, I never studied it, or even know what a Babylon school is, so I am out of the loop on those things. I just looked at the list and when I saw, "Mysteries" (shown in a negative light "of bad") whereas I am looking in the scripture only and seeing, "Mysteries" (shown in the light of beng"good"). Which are something, "given" to know, something of the Spirit of God, had to ask.

 

[shepherdsword]

Thanks @shepherdsword , I wasnt sure how mystery was being used in the above because I do not know what Kabbalah is, I never studied it, or even know what a Babylon school is, so I am out of the loop on those things. I just looked at the list and when I saw, "Mysteries" (shown in a negative light "of bad") whereas I am looking in the scripture only and seeing, "Mysteries" (shown in the light of beng"good"). Which are something, "given" to know, something of the Spirit of God, had to ask.

The Kabbalah is a book of Hebrew mysticism not for Christian consumption

 

[Luther7]

There are four types of interpretations the Hebrew scribes used to interpret the bible. Collectively they are known as "Pardes (פַּרְדֵּ"ס)" which means "orchid" or "garden"

1. Peshat (פְּשָׁט) – The Simple or Literal Meaning
   • This is the plain, straightforward meaning of the text — what it says at face value, based on grammar, context, and syntax.
   • Example: When the Torah says, “And God said, ‘Let there be light,’” the peshat is that God created light.
2. Remez (רֶמֶז) – The Hint or Allegorical Meaning
   • This level looks for hints, allusions, or deeper symbolic meanings beneath the surface text.
   • Example: The “light” could symbolize divine wisdom or revelation, not just physical light.
3. Derash (דְּרַשׁ) – The Homiletical or Midrashic Meaning
   • This involves moral, legal, or homiletical interpretations — drawing lessons, principles, or stories from the text.
   • Example: A rabbi might darshen (expound) the verse to teach about spiritual enlightenment or ethical living.
4. Sod (סוֹד) – The Secret or Mystical Meaning
   • The hidden, esoteric, or kabbalistic interpretation — exploring divine mysteries and spiritual realities.
   • Example: In sod, “light” could represent the emanation of divine energy or the first manifestation of creation in Kabbalah.

So together:Peshat → Remez → Derash → Sod = Pardes (פַּרְדֵּ"ס)
Each level builds upon the others, moving from the literal to the mystical.


I think we find similar Christian interpretative models. While most of Christianity sticks to the "peshat" or "remez" you can find gnostics and mystics that rely heavily on the "sod" as a method. The Babylonian mystery schools also use pure "sod" as their interpretative model.

What model do you use?

Uh, judaism is an anti-Christ religion. Why in the world are you trying to relate this heresy into a Christian forum? If you understand what you are presenting then you know what the talmud teaches. Totally against God.

 

[shepherdsword]

Uh, judaism is an anti-Christ religion. Why in the world are you trying to relate this heresy into a Christian forum? If you understand what you are presenting then you know what the talmud teaches. Totally against God.

These are simply interpretive models for the Torah. It has been noted that they can be twisted into heretical teaching (such as the gnostic do) Thanks for your feedback.