I have recently published an article in which a central theme is ambiguity in statutory text. See Townsend ABA Tax Lawyer Article Titled Loper Bright Flip Flops on Chevron Deference: A Tax Lawyer's Perspective (Federal Tax Procedure Blog 8/28/26), here. In this morning’s Torah Study focusing on Deuteronomy 26:1-1:19, Sefaria here, many interesting points were discussed. However, in my mind I veered off into the following question: In Torah interpretation, should the interpreter consider the consequences if the interpretation prevails? (Readers of this blog entry should not spend any time trying to figure out how I got to the question from the Torah reading; it's complex.)
I am a lawyer and this issue plays out in legal interpretation as well. At the expense of lack of nuance in a very complicated subject (statutory or constitutional interpretation), the issue plays out in the debate between so-called textualists (think fomer Justice Scalia and his current acolytes on the Supreme Court) and pragmatists (think retired Justice Breyer and his acolytes on the Supreme Court*). Starkly (without nuance) framed, the issue for text that can have more than one interpretation is between (i) an interpretation of the constitutional or statutory text at the time it was enacted as some mythical reasonable person would have read it regardless of the current consequences of the interpretation (e.g., as a literate (able to read) person in 1789) and (ii) an interpretation that considers the current (2026) consequences of alternative interpretations.
A similar issue arises in Torah interpretation (and of course all Bible interpretation for Jews and for Christians). Stated another way, the issue is whether the reader can update the interpretation to make the interpretation work better in the current world we actually live in? So, in the context of Torah Study, I asked ChatGPT Plus (my current favored AI tool) the following prompt:
In Torah interpretation, should the interpreter consider the consequences if the interpretation prevails?
I link to the entire response here. Please note that I ask the opening prompt and then have an iterative prompt suggested by the ending of the first response.
The ChatGPT Plus conclusion is (after going through details and examples; bold face in original response):
