Contextual Reading vs. Plain Reading: An Apologetic Framework Rooted in Ancient Contexts and Prima Scriptura (original) (raw)

This paper argues for the necessity of a contextual reading of Scripture, contrasting it with the limitations of a plain reading approach. Drawing from ancient Near Eastern (ANE) texts, including Ugaritic, Sumerian, and Second Temple Jewish writings, it demonstrates how understanding the cultural, historical, and literary contexts of the biblical world enriches theological interpretation. By engaging with these ancient sources, the paper shows how contextual reading clarifies complex biblical concepts, such as the divine council, creation, and eschatology, and reveals the theological distinctiveness of Scripture within its cultural milieu. Additionally, it highlights the apologetic value of contextual hermeneutics in addressing modern challenges, such as debates between science and faith or misconceptions about biblical monotheism. Ultimately, this paper proposes that contextual reading, grounded in the Prima Scriptura framework, offers a faithful and intellectually robust approach to interpreting Scripture, preserving its authority while engaging with the broader ancient and modern worlds.