What you are saying makes perfect sense if we were to approach the Bible as merely a collection of writings by different authors communicating to different audiences in there own words about what they understood God was teaching them and wanted them to communicate.
But that is NOT what the Bible is because that is NOT what the Bible declares itself to be. The Bible declares itself to be the very Word of God Himself. And that God Himself is the Word. We cannot separate the two. The mechanics of how God assured that the human scribes spoke and penned exactly the events and information, using exactly the phrases and words, in the original languages, that God desired is ultimately God's business. But we can know for a certainty that it is so because the Bible, the Word of God Himself, declares it to be so.
So therefore, when determining how we are to approach and interpret scripture, we MUST look to the Bible itself and ONLY to the Bible and to the ENTIRE Bible to instruct us. That is to define our Hermeneutic. And God has graciously accommodated us in this matter.
No one would dispute that we must use proper grammatical rules of the original languages as a start. But we must understand that the Bible is its own dictionary and its own interpreter because it ultimately has only ONE AUTHOR. God Himself. And God may and does use a word or a phrase in one part of the Bible to indicate how we He may be using it in other parts of the Bible. "Jerusalem" is a good example.
In my previous posts I have tried to point out some of the scriptures where God defines what our Hermeneutic should be.
We must keep in mind that God has given us the Bible, not as a history book, but to present HIS PLAN FOR MANKIND AND HIS CREATION. And to DEMONSTRATE HIS GLORY. To show us our relationship to God. To demonstrate His perfect Justice and unfathomable Mercy in Salvation. In other words. the GOSPEL
But let me be clear so that there is no misunderstanding.
When God writes about a historical event, that record is absolutely true and trustworthily recorded the way it literally occurred. And we can learn some historical and moral and spiritual lessons from the event and the literal record itself without going any deeper.
However, we have not come to the ultimate truth that God is teaching in that record until we have uncovered the underlying Gospel message that God is teaching in the particulars of the event and the words and phrases that God has used to record that event.
And, most importantly, as we seek to uncover the underlying Gospel message by comparing scripture with scripture and allowing the Bible to be its own interpreter, our conclusions must harmonize with everything else the Bible declares about that aspect of the Gospel. As God declares the scriptures are "not subject to any private interpretation".
This is not easy to do and takes time and effort to "compare spiritual things with spiritual". And God Himself must open our spiritual eyes to give us understanding in accordance with His will and His time table.
Fortunately God had provided some to be teachers that have taken time and study to do their homework and guide us in this. Of which I most certainly do not claim to be one. But we must recognize that no teacher is infallible and we must check out what they are teaching by going back to the Bible again and again.
May God in His Mercy lead us into truth as we search the scriptures.
Thank you David0920 for those added comments. Just to focus on your comment, "when determining how we are to approach and interpret scripture, we MUST look to the Bible itself and ONLY to the Bible and to the ENTIRE Bible to instruct us. That is to define our Hermeneutic", which seems to sum up the point you're making here.
True, ultimately only the Word of God is God's Message to the world, & I believe hermeneutics is only the principle applied so as to enable us to grasp & correctly handle the given Word, so that the Spirit might take us further into knowledge of Truth. All those parts of Hermeneutics are only essential for employing the basic tools to 'rightly divide the Word', but those tools can never in themselves guarantee us access to the true, deeper meanings, but they will give us a proper foundation to proceed. Therefore, as much as it is commendable to you or others to believe that they will resort to no other tool to assist them, except the Bible in their hands, we can see that even this can bring on questions & disputes with others reading the same Scriptures who are dependent on the same Holy Spirit to lead them. I ask, 'why is this so?'
A classic one is whether Hell/Lake of Fire is an actual place of eternal torment or simply expressed in a figurative manner to denote something else quite different. Biblical hermeneutics always demands a literal interpretation (unless the wording in context is metaphorical), it demands that we apply historical, grammatical, contextual principles to Hell to help us know what meaning is intended, and of course, to compare that Scripture with others to learn what God has spoken about it, through other authors.
Without these principles, here's what can happen by those who look only to the spiritual, deeper message of the Bible & disregarding any other method to approach them: we can make Hell to mean whatever we think it should mean, there's no hunger to learn what it is supposed to mean when the original languages are referred to, Hell (as many other biblical topics) can be over-spiritualized to apply to anything that we are comfortable with (e.g. since God is a God of perfect Love, His consignment of anyone to an eternal fire is preposterous). And this is only one example; demonstrating that we, who have the Word of God in English, must be cognizant of the many other stages of its development from when God first inspired the original authors to pen those words.
What we now accept as the pure unchangeable Word of God in the KJV is quite different from their original languages. With various copies of the originals made, of translation difficulties (text gathering, text comparison, etc.), of limitations of 'English' words to correctly express the meaning & intent of the original, all guarantee that what we have now does not bear an exact resemblance to the original writings; insofar as correctly expressing the original words into English words/ideas. We can ask any Hebrew or Greek reader, who is proficient in English as well, to verify this - and we are talking about complete accuracy to the original here. Yet, we accept the KJV as God-inspired, when in fact it was the original writings that were so & the KJV has been as faithful as is possible to them.
I believe the KJV is the best we can have in our language, but if we believe that the "Bible is its own dictionary & its own interpreter" (at least to learn of the deeper spiritual Truths), & then to not use the tools available to us, this will certainly leave us less informed than we can & ought to be.
What I read & understood of Hell as a new believer, is a far cry to what I know now, given the Hebrew/Greek words, contexts, etc. Without this knowledge, any other interpretation is headed for failure. Once we learn this, then understanding the Bible's Truths, with the Spirit's enabling, will be fruitful.
But I will acknowledge this: if an unbeliever reads the Gospel in the Bible for the first time, knowing nothing else, he can certainly receive conviction of sins & shown the path to salvation by the Spirit's Work through the Word. But can that person then give an explanation of why this is so? Most likely not. Only after much studying & related Scripture comparisons, can he learn, digest & apply God's Truth & why his salvation is "so great".
I'm not exactly sure what you are driving at in your last set of comments. But let me respond to a couple of things.
If you are making the point that no Bible translation is perfect, I would certainly agree. Only the original autographs and certain copies which we have in the original languages are without error of any kind.
And if the "tools" to which you are referring are a Concordance or an Interlinear which can assist us in finding where and how each original Hebrew and Greek word is used in the KJV, I absolutely agree that these tools can a should be used by the serious student of the Bible in their study of scripture. And there use is a a requirement for anyone that claims to be a TEACHER of the Bible.
And furthermore, we should be using the best translation available to us. Which in English, I believe, is the KJV. And we should avoid a "paraphrase" version of the Bible like the plague.
Also, as I indicated earlier, the Red Letter editions of the Bible should be avoided since they project the false idea that the words of Jesus are to be looked upon with greater authority than other words in the Bible. Not so in any sense since the ENTIRE Bible is the Word of God Himself.
Thanks David0920 for the clarification. What drove me to some of the comments I made which you found bewildering, was your statement, "when determining how we are to approach and interpret scripture, we MUST look to the Bible itself and ONLY to the Bible and to the ENTIRE Bible to instruct us." And this I quoted in my response to you.
I made an assumption (which of course does not always guarantee the correct response), that you believed that the Bible was the only Book to be used, to the exclusion of everything else (e.g. lexicons, dictionaries, encyclopedias, etc.). That in the Bible itself we will find all that we need to satisfy our quest for knowledge, & if not found, the Spirit will in time bring us clarity. So obviously, I misunderstood your statement on this aspect, as I recalled others who held a similar position on the sole use of the Bible (sola scriptura) but had talked down any reference to other non-biblical helps, as I mentioned here. Unfortunately, I assumed you too held this position, for which I apologize for my error. Though my understanding of biblical hermeneutics & my example of the interpretation of Hell in the Scriptures, would still stand, as both the sole use of the Bible, alongwith other helps & the Spirit's leading to the right Scriptures, will keep us on the path of correct Bible interpretation.
When we talk about the "writings" that are not the Bible itself, that is an entirely different matter. These are not infallible nor necessarily trustworthy.
For example, a commentary or a creed or a confession is the product of man and not the Word of God nor inspired by God. What they are saying may or may not be in accordance with the Bible. The mere fact that they differ greatly on a particular doctrine is proof of that. They must always be checked out from the Bible itself. As would apply to any secular writing.
The Bible ALONE and in its ENTIRETY MUST be our ultimate authority when it comes to understanding what God is teaching.
I want to again state that the Bible ITSELF tells us how we are to approach and interpret the Bible. God is very clear about defining the "Biblical Hermeneutic", as I tried to outline and provide some of the scriptural references in my original post on the subject.
I do agree with what you've written here, David0920, that the Bible alone must be our ultimate authority. Everything we need is found in it. But when you shared in your first post in the other thread about noticing the different interpretations being given by others (not your words here, but what I can recall from that thread), I sensed that you had particular folk in mind, maybe even from my comments to others on their biblical questions. So, I felt the need to first establish those basic principles that should assist a Bible expositor/commenter on what it means to "rightly divide the Word". These should be fundamental principles that give a solid base before the Bible can be opened up for exploring, Scripture comparison, & Spirit-led insights. This of course, can never guarantee that we all must come to an agreement (as you can see clearly here in these pages), but at least the person commenting should first assess whether his approach to reading the Scriptures are established on clear irrefutable ground rules & not on what was read or heard, or even what seems to make sense to the natural mind.
Thank you again for responding. I had no particular person in mind when I stated what I believe to be the principles that God sets forth in His Word to guide us in interpreting scripture.
And I want to say that I have appreciated the back and forth we have had on this fundamental and crucially important question.
If I may quote from your last response:
"So, I felt the need to first establish those basic principles that should assist a Bible expositor/commenter on what it means to "rightly divide the Word". These should be fundamental principles that give a solid base before the Bible can be opened up for exploring, Scripture comparison, & Spirit-led insights."
In that statement I think you have summarized the commonly held approach to establishing the principles by which we are to interpret scripture. And if we were talking about any book by any human author, I would agree.
But the Bible is NOT just any book by a human author. The Bible is the Word of God Himself. Therefore we should not approach the Bible with a preconceived set of rules as to how we are to interpret it. We must look for those rules in the Bible itself and apply what God Himself declares to be the principles of Bible interpretation:
That Christ is the author of the whole Bible.
That Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
That Christ spoke in parables and without a parable He did not speak.
That we are to compare spiritual things with spiritual. The Bible is its own interpreter.
That God has sealed up certain truths in the Bible only to be unsealed as we approach the end.
That the Bible alone and in its entirety is the Word of God.
These are the principles that God Himself has established that we must use as we seek to "rightly divide the word of truth".
Thank you David0920 for sharing that. I think we will have to part from each other on this matter. As much as I can understand & appreciate what you've given as the right way to approach the Bible, I still maintain that there is still a fundamental mind-set & approach we must have before we even first open those sacred pages. If we throw out those essential rules, then we can do or interpret anything we want, to God's Word, all under the guise of being Spirit-led & inspired. I know that the Spirit can & will do all that is necessary to guide us into all Truth, but how many are actually believing what the Spirit reveals & how their own perceptions & coloring of the Scripture assures them of the 'truth', their 'truth'.
An example that comes to mind: Psalm 82:6 states, "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." And Jesus refers to it in John 10:34, "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" The answer? 'from those Scriptures, all God's children are also gods'. I doubt if you believe that. Rather, using the basic tools first, will help us understand what is meant.
Even for example, the Bible translators, had to be firmly grounded on a set of established rules & patterns of their work before they could even begin (& the same goes for those in Bible translation today, working amongst various people groups). If the basic laws are not adhered to, I wonder what sort of mess the work of Bible translation (& even expository deliveries) would find themselves in. And by the way, I see no difference in those translating the Bible from original texts to those of us who have the Bible in our hands & read it with both understanding & discernment of the Truths within. We need those rules so as to rightly divide the Word. The Holy Spirit will then take us into a deeper understanding & application of those Truths, which makes the Bible more than a record of historical events, which is so to many casual readers.
Let me just say this in response to your "parting of the ways" comment.
What you are really saying, as I understand it, is that if we apply the principles that God lays down in His Word for approaching and interpreting the Bible, without first applying our own reason and logic and conventional wisdom to how we approach the Bible, we can go off in any direction we want.
Frankly, I see just the opposite. We must first apply the principles that God defines in His Word as to how we are to interpret the Bible. And any conventional rules that man's wisdom may have developed must be subservient to God's rules.
Carefully applying God's rules actually keeps us on the right track. Failing to do so can lead us down a rabbit hole from which we might not emerge.
Ultimately, it is God Himself that must open our spiritual eyes to truth from the Scriptures, as the Bible itself declares.
Correct David0920, except I wouldn't quite put it that way. Rather: 'if we seek to understand the spiritual message from Scripture that God has for us in His Word, without first applying proven & accepted biblical interpretative conventions on how we should approach the Bible, we can go off in any direction we want.' We can take many examples from the Word; I believe I gave one on 'the Lake of Fire'. How one interprets this place will demonstrate how one has approached this phrase.
I don't know your interpretation of it, but if one should say that it is an actual place of eternal torment, then that person has already applied those important rules (maybe unknowingly), that what the Scripture says of it, is certainly a literal place, both the original language, wording & grammar verify this, and other Scriptures support this view. But the one who disregards the rules of interpretation & is focussed only on searching for some spiritual Truth in every verse, may arrive at various conclusions; maybe: 'it is only a figurative expression of God's 'Work'; I have no interest or acceptance of what the Greek has to say about it; I even disregard Jesus' assurance of such a place, believing that He had (or, there is) another meaning for it.' In my experience, those who reject the normal conventions of interpretation, usually have little or no interest in hearing anything else. Why? Because it's not what the Spirit is showing me - I'm learning deeper Truths that others with 'carnal' minds cannot perceive, therefore all must be rejected to get to this 'gold that has to be dug out'.
And we could say the same of Luke 16:19-31, where many say that this was only a parable of Jesus, when this whole account repudiates the intent & meaning of a parable; and of course, if this belief is taken to its end, it would make Jesus a deceiver & a scare-monger. But comfort is falsely taken that this must be a parable giving a spiritual meaning & warning, thus making Jesus true to His Word.
I do understand your concern regarding "parables" and I will again try to explain, perhaps with examples, how I believe God is directing us to interpret the Bible in this regard.
I also want to address in some detail my understanding of God's Judgment Program which is now quite different than what has been understood and taught throughout the Church Age. I will do this in a separate post, perhaps several. This focuses in on another principle that God very clearly sets forth in the Bible that there are certain truths in the Bible that have been sealed up until the end and are being opened up during this time. All coming directly from the Bible. The passages you reference, particularly in Luke and our understanding of how God uses the word "torment", will be pivotal in that discussion.
I will close now and try to get to some of this today.
That is not what I said and certainly not what I meant. God is infinite and the Bible reveals only the character and nature of God that He chooses to reveal to us. Our finite minds could never begin to understand every aspect of the character and nature of God.
But God identifies Himself totally with the Word of God, and the Bible with God Himself. As the Bible declares in John 1.
John 1:1-5
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
So can there be any doubt whatsoever that the Bible has ONE AUTHOR, and that is God Himself.
The point I am making is that we MUST come to the Bible recognizing that the Bible ALONE and in its ENTIRETY is GOD'S WORD. Not merely a collection of books ABOUT God's Word by many authors, or merely CONTAINING God's Word. But it is, in fact, THE WORD OF GOD Himself, that God has given us, form Genesis 1:1 through Revelation 22:21.
This is not a small or insignificant matter. It is FUNDAMENTAL to understanding what God is teaching as we read and study the Bible.
Chris,
Thank you for responding.
What you are saying makes perfect sense if we were to approach the Bible as merely a collection of writings by different authors communicating to different audiences in there own words about what they understood God was teaching them and wanted them to communicate.
But that is NOT what the Bible is because that is NOT what the Bible declares itself to be. The Bible declares itself to be the very Word of God Himself. And that God Himself is the Word. We cannot separate the two. The mechanics of how God assured that the human scribes spoke and penned exactly the events and information, using exactly the phrases and words, in the original languages, that God desired is ultimately God's business. But we can know for a certainty that it is so because the Bible, the Word of God Himself, declares it to be so.
So therefore, when determining how we are to approach and interpret scripture, we MUST look to the Bible itself and ONLY to the Bible and to the ENTIRE Bible to instruct us. That is to define our Hermeneutic. And God has graciously accommodated us in this matter.
No one would dispute that we must use proper grammatical rules of the original languages as a start. But we must understand that the Bible is its own dictionary and its own interpreter because it ultimately has only ONE AUTHOR. God Himself. And God may and does use a word or a phrase in one part of the Bible to indicate how we He may be using it in other parts of the Bible. "Jerusalem" is a good example.
In my previous posts I have tried to point out some of the scriptures where God defines what our Hermeneutic should be.
We must keep in mind that God has given us the Bible, not as a history book, but to present HIS PLAN FOR MANKIND AND HIS CREATION. And to DEMONSTRATE HIS GLORY. To show us our relationship to God. To demonstrate His perfect Justice and unfathomable Mercy in Salvation. In other words. the GOSPEL
But let me be clear so that there is no misunderstanding.
When God writes about a historical event, that record is absolutely true and trustworthily recorded the way it literally occurred. And we can learn some historical and moral and spiritual lessons from the event and the literal record itself without going any deeper.
However, we have not come to the ultimate truth that God is teaching in that record until we have uncovered the underlying Gospel message that God is teaching in the particulars of the event and the words and phrases that God has used to record that event.
And, most importantly, as we seek to uncover the underlying Gospel message by comparing scripture with scripture and allowing the Bible to be its own interpreter, our conclusions must harmonize with everything else the Bible declares about that aspect of the Gospel. As God declares the scriptures are "not subject to any private interpretation".
This is not easy to do and takes time and effort to "compare spiritual things with spiritual". And God Himself must open our spiritual eyes to give us understanding in accordance with His will and His time table.
Fortunately God had provided some to be teachers that have taken time and study to do their homework and guide us in this. Of which I most certainly do not claim to be one. But we must recognize that no teacher is infallible and we must check out what they are teaching by going back to the Bible again and again.
May God in His Mercy lead us into truth as we search the scriptures.
Thank you David0920 for those added comments. Just to focus on your comment, "when determining how we are to approach and interpret scripture, we MUST look to the Bible itself and ONLY to the Bible and to the ENTIRE Bible to instruct us. That is to define our Hermeneutic", which seems to sum up the point you're making here.
True, ultimately only the Word of God is God's Message to the world, & I believe hermeneutics is only the principle applied so as to enable us to grasp & correctly handle the given Word, so that the Spirit might take us further into knowledge of Truth. All those parts of Hermeneutics are only essential for employing the basic tools to 'rightly divide the Word', but those tools can never in themselves guarantee us access to the true, deeper meanings, but they will give us a proper foundation to proceed. Therefore, as much as it is commendable to you or others to believe that they will resort to no other tool to assist them, except the Bible in their hands, we can see that even this can bring on questions & disputes with others reading the same Scriptures who are dependent on the same Holy Spirit to lead them. I ask, 'why is this so?'
A classic one is whether Hell/Lake of Fire is an actual place of eternal torment or simply expressed in a figurative manner to denote something else quite different. Biblical hermeneutics always demands a literal interpretation (unless the wording in context is metaphorical), it demands that we apply historical, grammatical, contextual principles to Hell to help us know what meaning is intended, and of course, to compare that Scripture with others to learn what God has spoken about it, through other authors.
Without these principles, here's what can happen by those who look only to the spiritual, deeper message of the Bible & disregarding any other method to approach them: we can make Hell to mean whatever we think it should mean, there's no hunger to learn what it is supposed to mean when the original languages are referred to, Hell (as many other biblical topics) can be over-spiritualized to apply to anything that we are comfortable with (e.g. since God is a God of perfect Love, His consignment of anyone to an eternal fire is preposterous). And this is only one example; demonstrating that we, who have the Word of God in English, must be cognizant of the many other stages of its development from when God first inspired the original authors to pen those words.
What we now accept as the pure unchangeable Word of God in the KJV is quite different from their original languages. With various copies of the originals made, of translation difficulties (text gathering, text comparison, etc.), of limitations of 'English' words to correctly express the meaning & intent of the original, all guarantee that what we have now does not bear an exact resemblance to the original writings; insofar as correctly expressing the original words into English words/ideas. We can ask any Hebrew or Greek reader, who is proficient in English as well, to verify this - and we are talking about complete accuracy to the original here. Yet, we accept the KJV as God-inspired, when in fact it was the original writings that were so & the KJV has been as faithful as is possible to them.
I believe the KJV is the best we can have in our language, but if we believe that the "Bible is its own dictionary & its own interpreter" (at least to learn of the deeper spiritual Truths), & then to not use the tools available to us, this will certainly leave us less informed than we can & ought to be.
What I read & understood of Hell as a new believer, is a far cry to what I know now, given the Hebrew/Greek words, contexts, etc. Without this knowledge, any other interpretation is headed for failure. Once we learn this, then understanding the Bible's Truths, with the Spirit's enabling, will be fruitful.
But I will acknowledge this: if an unbeliever reads the Gospel in the Bible for the first time, knowing nothing else, he can certainly receive conviction of sins & shown the path to salvation by the Spirit's Work through the Word. But can that person then give an explanation of why this is so? Most likely not. Only after much studying & related Scripture comparisons, can he learn, digest & apply God's Truth & why his salvation is "so great".
I'm not exactly sure what you are driving at in your last set of comments. But let me respond to a couple of things.
If you are making the point that no Bible translation is perfect, I would certainly agree. Only the original autographs and certain copies which we have in the original languages are without error of any kind.
And if the "tools" to which you are referring are a Concordance or an Interlinear which can assist us in finding where and how each original Hebrew and Greek word is used in the KJV, I absolutely agree that these tools can a should be used by the serious student of the Bible in their study of scripture. And there use is a a requirement for anyone that claims to be a TEACHER of the Bible.
And furthermore, we should be using the best translation available to us. Which in English, I believe, is the KJV. And we should avoid a "paraphrase" version of the Bible like the plague.
Also, as I indicated earlier, the Red Letter editions of the Bible should be avoided since they project the false idea that the words of Jesus are to be looked upon with greater authority than other words in the Bible. Not so in any sense since the ENTIRE Bible is the Word of God Himself.
I made an assumption (which of course does not always guarantee the correct response), that you believed that the Bible was the only Book to be used, to the exclusion of everything else (e.g. lexicons, dictionaries, encyclopedias, etc.). That in the Bible itself we will find all that we need to satisfy our quest for knowledge, & if not found, the Spirit will in time bring us clarity. So obviously, I misunderstood your statement on this aspect, as I recalled others who held a similar position on the sole use of the Bible (sola scriptura) but had talked down any reference to other non-biblical helps, as I mentioned here. Unfortunately, I assumed you too held this position, for which I apologize for my error. Though my understanding of biblical hermeneutics & my example of the interpretation of Hell in the Scriptures, would still stand, as both the sole use of the Bible, alongwith other helps & the Spirit's leading to the right Scriptures, will keep us on the path of correct Bible interpretation.
When we talk about the "writings" that are not the Bible itself, that is an entirely different matter. These are not infallible nor necessarily trustworthy.
For example, a commentary or a creed or a confession is the product of man and not the Word of God nor inspired by God. What they are saying may or may not be in accordance with the Bible. The mere fact that they differ greatly on a particular doctrine is proof of that. They must always be checked out from the Bible itself. As would apply to any secular writing.
The Bible ALONE and in its ENTIRETY MUST be our ultimate authority when it comes to understanding what God is teaching.
I want to again state that the Bible ITSELF tells us how we are to approach and interpret the Bible. God is very clear about defining the "Biblical Hermeneutic", as I tried to outline and provide some of the scriptural references in my original post on the subject.
Thank you again for responding. I had no particular person in mind when I stated what I believe to be the principles that God sets forth in His Word to guide us in interpreting scripture.
And I want to say that I have appreciated the back and forth we have had on this fundamental and crucially important question.
If I may quote from your last response:
"So, I felt the need to first establish those basic principles that should assist a Bible expositor/commenter on what it means to "rightly divide the Word". These should be fundamental principles that give a solid base before the Bible can be opened up for exploring, Scripture comparison, & Spirit-led insights."
In that statement I think you have summarized the commonly held approach to establishing the principles by which we are to interpret scripture. And if we were talking about any book by any human author, I would agree.
But the Bible is NOT just any book by a human author. The Bible is the Word of God Himself. Therefore we should not approach the Bible with a preconceived set of rules as to how we are to interpret it. We must look for those rules in the Bible itself and apply what God Himself declares to be the principles of Bible interpretation:
That Christ is the author of the whole Bible.
That Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
That Christ spoke in parables and without a parable He did not speak.
That we are to compare spiritual things with spiritual. The Bible is its own interpreter.
That God has sealed up certain truths in the Bible only to be unsealed as we approach the end.
That the Bible alone and in its entirety is the Word of God.
These are the principles that God Himself has established that we must use as we seek to "rightly divide the word of truth".
An example that comes to mind: Psalm 82:6 states, "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." And Jesus refers to it in John 10:34, "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" The answer? 'from those Scriptures, all God's children are also gods'. I doubt if you believe that. Rather, using the basic tools first, will help us understand what is meant.
Even for example, the Bible translators, had to be firmly grounded on a set of established rules & patterns of their work before they could even begin (& the same goes for those in Bible translation today, working amongst various people groups). If the basic laws are not adhered to, I wonder what sort of mess the work of Bible translation (& even expository deliveries) would find themselves in. And by the way, I see no difference in those translating the Bible from original texts to those of us who have the Bible in our hands & read it with both understanding & discernment of the Truths within. We need those rules so as to rightly divide the Word. The Holy Spirit will then take us into a deeper understanding & application of those Truths, which makes the Bible more than a record of historical events, which is so to many casual readers.
Let me just say this in response to your "parting of the ways" comment.
What you are really saying, as I understand it, is that if we apply the principles that God lays down in His Word for approaching and interpreting the Bible, without first applying our own reason and logic and conventional wisdom to how we approach the Bible, we can go off in any direction we want.
Frankly, I see just the opposite. We must first apply the principles that God defines in His Word as to how we are to interpret the Bible. And any conventional rules that man's wisdom may have developed must be subservient to God's rules.
Carefully applying God's rules actually keeps us on the right track. Failing to do so can lead us down a rabbit hole from which we might not emerge.
Ultimately, it is God Himself that must open our spiritual eyes to truth from the Scriptures, as the Bible itself declares.
May God in His Mercy so do.
I don't know your interpretation of it, but if one should say that it is an actual place of eternal torment, then that person has already applied those important rules (maybe unknowingly), that what the Scripture says of it, is certainly a literal place, both the original language, wording & grammar verify this, and other Scriptures support this view. But the one who disregards the rules of interpretation & is focussed only on searching for some spiritual Truth in every verse, may arrive at various conclusions; maybe: 'it is only a figurative expression of God's 'Work'; I have no interest or acceptance of what the Greek has to say about it; I even disregard Jesus' assurance of such a place, believing that He had (or, there is) another meaning for it.' In my experience, those who reject the normal conventions of interpretation, usually have little or no interest in hearing anything else. Why? Because it's not what the Spirit is showing me - I'm learning deeper Truths that others with 'carnal' minds cannot perceive, therefore all must be rejected to get to this 'gold that has to be dug out'.
And we could say the same of Luke 16:19-31, where many say that this was only a parable of Jesus, when this whole account repudiates the intent & meaning of a parable; and of course, if this belief is taken to its end, it would make Jesus a deceiver & a scare-monger. But comfort is falsely taken that this must be a parable giving a spiritual meaning & warning, thus making Jesus true to His Word.
I do understand your concern regarding "parables" and I will again try to explain, perhaps with examples, how I believe God is directing us to interpret the Bible in this regard.
I also want to address in some detail my understanding of God's Judgment Program which is now quite different than what has been understood and taught throughout the Church Age. I will do this in a separate post, perhaps several. This focuses in on another principle that God very clearly sets forth in the Bible that there are certain truths in the Bible that have been sealed up until the end and are being opened up during this time. All coming directly from the Bible. The passages you reference, particularly in Luke and our understanding of how God uses the word "torment", will be pivotal in that discussion.
I will close now and try to get to some of this today.
That is not what I said and certainly not what I meant. God is infinite and the Bible reveals only the character and nature of God that He chooses to reveal to us. Our finite minds could never begin to understand every aspect of the character and nature of God.
But God identifies Himself totally with the Word of God, and the Bible with God Himself. As the Bible declares in John 1.
John 1:1-5
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
So can there be any doubt whatsoever that the Bible has ONE AUTHOR, and that is God Himself.
The point I am making is that we MUST come to the Bible recognizing that the Bible ALONE and in its ENTIRETY is GOD'S WORD. Not merely a collection of books ABOUT God's Word by many authors, or merely CONTAINING God's Word. But it is, in fact, THE WORD OF GOD Himself, that God has given us, form Genesis 1:1 through Revelation 22:21.
This is not a small or insignificant matter. It is FUNDAMENTAL to understanding what God is teaching as we read and study the Bible.
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment below to start a new comment thread.
Note: Comment threads older than 2 months are automatically locked.
Do you have a Bible comment or question?
Please Sign In or Register to post comments...
Report Comment
Which best represents the problem with the comment?