Skip to content

Methodology

This page describes the investigative methodology used across all studies in this collection.

Investigative Stance

Each study is produced by an agent that functions as an investigator, not an advocate. This distinction governs every step of the process:

  • Gather evidence from all sides. If a passage is cited by one interpretive tradition, examine it honestly. If a passage is cited by another, examine it honestly.
  • Do not assume a conclusion before examining the evidence. The conclusion emerges FROM the evidence, not the reverse.
  • State what the text says, not opinions about it. The agent does not use editorial characterizations like "genuine tension," "strongest argument," or "non-intuitive reading." It states what each passage says and what each interpretive position infers from it.
  • Never use language like "irrefutable," "obviously," or "clearly proves." Use "the text states," "this is consistent with."

How the Studies Are Produced

Each study is generated by a three-agent pipeline that answers Bible questions through tool-driven research. The pipeline ensures that:

  • Scope comes from tools, not training knowledge. The AI does not decide which verses are relevant based on what it was trained on. Instead, tools search topical dictionaries, concordances, and semantic indexes to discover what Scripture says about the topic.
  • Research and analysis are separated. The agent that gathers data is not the same agent that draws conclusions. This prevents confirmation bias.
  • Every claim is traceable. Raw tool output is preserved in each study's raw-data/ folder, so every finding can be verified against its source.

The Three-Agent Pipeline

Phase 1: Scoping Agent
   | Discovers topics, verses, Strong's numbers, related studies
   | Writes PROMPT.md (the research brief)

Phase 2: Research Agent
   | Reads PROMPT.md
   | Retrieves all verse text, runs parallels, word studies, parsing
   | Writes 01-topics.md, 02-verses.md, 04-word-studies.md
   | Saves raw tool output to raw-data/

Phase 3: Analysis Agent
   | Reads clean research files
   | Applies contextual analysis methodology
   | Writes 03-analysis.md and CONCLUSION.md

Why three agents instead of one?

  • The scoping agent prevents training-knowledge bias. Scope comes from tool discovery, not from what the AI "knows" about theology.
  • The research agent gets a fresh context window dedicated to data gathering. This maximizes the amount of data it can collect without running out of context.
  • The analysis agent gets a fresh context window loaded with clean, organized research. This maximizes its capacity for synthesis and careful reasoning.

The Study Files

Each study directory contains these files, produced by the pipeline:

File Produced By Contents
PROMPT.md Scoping Agent The research brief: tool-discovered topics, verses, Strong's numbers, related studies, and focus areas
01-topics.md Research Agent Nave's Topical Bible entries with all verse references for each topic
02-verses.md Research Agent Full KJV text for every verse examined, organized thematically
04-word-studies.md Research Agent Strong's concordance data: Hebrew/Greek words, definitions, translation statistics, verse occurrences
raw-data/ Research Agent Raw tool output archived by category (Strong's lookups, parsing, parallels, etc.)
03-analysis.md Analysis Agent Verse-by-verse analysis with patterns and connections identified
CONCLUSION.md Analysis Agent Final findings and summary

Interpretive Principles

The analysis agent follows these principles when drawing conclusions from the gathered data:

  1. Scripture interprets Scripture. Clear passages determine the reading of unclear ones -- when the connection between passages is verified by shared vocabulary, OT quotation, or tool-verified parallel score. Using clear passages to interpret unclear ones is standard hermeneutics, not an inference.
  2. The plain meaning of words is explicit. "Only" means only. "Became" means is. "Know not any thing" means lack knowledge. These are not separate conclusions -- they are what the verses say.
  3. Context determines meaning. Analyze words and phrases using expanding circles: verse > paragraph > chapter > book > same author > whole Bible. Context must match before assuming the same meaning across passages.
  4. Scripture is the only authority for doctrine. Church fathers, ancient Jewish sources, and denominational traditions are not authoritative. The question is always: "What does the Bible say?"
  5. The counter-claim to an explicit statement is often the real inference. If the text says something directly, the burden of proof falls on the claim that it means something other than what it says.

Clarity Criteria

When passages appear to be in tension, the following criteria determine which is "clearer" and therefore governs the reading of the other:

  1. Directness of vocabulary -- actual words vs. figurative language
  2. Genre -- didactic > apocalyptic > parabolic
  3. Scope -- universal statement > specific situation
  4. Frequency -- repeated across authors/testaments > single occurrence
  5. Self-interpretation -- when the text explains its own meaning