“The literal method of interpretation is that method that gives to each word the same basic meaning it would have in normal, ordinary, customary usage, whether employed in writing, speaking or thinking.” [1]
In essence, the literal interpretation method is that which treats scripture as any other literature, interpreted based on the rules of grammar. Any other writing is interpreted based on any historical or grammatical considerations, and the scripture should be approached in the same manner. C. Ryrie states that this might better be called the “normal” or “plain” interpretation method [2].
Many have accused the literal interpretation method for ignoring figures of speech, such as similes, metaphors or hyperbole, and requiring a wooden translation. This is not a valid statement, for the literal interpretation method does recognize such parts of speech just as they would be recognized in any other writing. When one comes to a passage that has such figures of speech, he or she would interpret that passage using the meaning of the figures of speech. Similarly, for a passage without figures of speech he or she would interpret the passage using the normal language rules.
The fundamental basis of this interpretation method is that God gave language to be able to communicate with humanity. When God gave the scriptures, He chose to do so through the written word. Therefore, it seems that God expects that someone reading the scriptures will be able to understand what is written.
This interpretation method guards against subjective interpretation. Each person, approaching the same passage of scripture, should be able to reach essentially the same interpretation starting from the same understanding of the historical and grammatical context.
[1] J. D. Pentecost, 1958. Things to Come. Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
[2] C. C. Ryrie, 2007. Dispensationalism. Moody Publishers, Chicago, Illinois.
Thinking About The Truth 