The Enlightenment marked a huge chasm for serious Biblical studies because it imported a very alien methodology and set of assumptions.
Not only Jesus and the Apostles, but also ancient and medieval Biblical studies, seem to read the Bible as if we are all essentially standing together with the saints of the Old Testament.
Whatever superficial cultural & historical differences there might be are of no substantial relevance to understanding the Word of God.
Neither Jesus nor the Apostles ever feel the need to "bridge the cultural or historical" gap between themselves in Roman/Greek Palestine and the nomadic world of Abraham or the exilic Babylonian/Persian context of Daniel etc.
They never try to explain how ancient Egyptian/Hittite/Assyrian myths relate to anything written by Moses or the Prophets.
Some argue this means that Jesus and the Apostles were bad at Bible study and we must not follow their example - or that we can do better than them, understanding the true original intention of those Biblical texts.
Others argue that they were exempt from the "normal" rules of Bible study because the Spirit gave them the "right conclusions" without following the proper method.
However, for most of Christian history all around the globe, most Christians tried to follow the example of Jesus and the Apostles in reading the Bible - even if they didn't perhaps always agree on exactly what that method was or the conclusions it led to.
The early Church Christians are routinely mocked today (or were until recently) because they read the Old Testament as if those ancient OT saints were consciously trying to confess the content of the Nicene Creed and were not only consciously looking forward to ALL the incarnate work of the LORD Jesus Christ, but also looking forward to the global Church with her sacraments of Baptism and Eucharist.
In other words, the older Christian Bible readers mostly seemed to assume that not only do the Law and the Prophets testify to the LORD Jesus & His Church in all kinds of detailed ways, but that the original authors were mostly conscious and deliberate about this.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗴𝗮𝗽 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗻 𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗿 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗲𝘅𝘁 (𝘄𝗵𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗡𝗲𝘄 𝗼𝗿 𝗢𝗹𝗱 𝗧𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁) 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗼 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗵𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 & 𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗘𝗩𝗘𝗥𝗬𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗼 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘀𝗶𝗻, 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗶𝗻 𝗖𝗵𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗟𝗢𝗥𝗗 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻 𝗛𝗶𝘀 𝗖𝗵𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗵 𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗲.
Jesus and His Apostles did not try to bridge the cultural/historical gap to the Law and the Prophets that post-Enlightenment Biblical studies became so fixated with - and as we read Jesus & His Apostles neither do we need to bridge any cultural/historical gap to them.
“Paul, as a child of his age, addressed his contemporaries. It is, however, far more important that, as Prophet and Apostle of the Kingdom of God, he veritably speaks to all men of every age.
The differences between then and now, there and here, no doubt require careful investigation and consideration.
But the purpose of such investigation can only be to demonstrate that the differences are, in fact, purely trivial.”