Seven Rules of Bible Interpretation

Nadiine said:

Is one of the qualifications of a mod to be a miracle worker. lol

& I disagree, a Mod isn't here just to "agree" with people. They can debate & discuss like anyone else; in agreement or disagreement.
& in Tamara's defense, many of her posts that I've come across are positive or neutral.

Click to expand...

Lucky you....
not all of us have that experience.

DreamerOfDreams said:

Not everyone... just a few.
I look back at people who on occasion have agreed...and who have on occasion disagreed. We get along fine.
Then I see people who NEVER agree with anything I post. Every single one of their posts is a disagreement. Every single discussion ends up in a personal attack and accusations. That tells me something. It sure ain't because they are fond of me.

"Right on, up and in!"

I just wanted to see if you would say:
"Left off, down and out!"

And you are a mod. You are SUPPOSED to be looking for reasons to unify and things to agree on!

Click to expand...

That's not my job description as a mod. I don't have to set aside my beliefs for the sake of (false) unity just because I'm a mod.

We agree on stuff, Dods. I don't know why you're making such a big deal out of it. I could just as easily say - "hey, you should try agreeing with me every once in a while." From my point of view, you're the contentious one because I'm right and you are always disagreeing with me. Why can't you just find things to post that we'll all agree with? Then you wouldn't have to worry about people disagreeing.

I mean, in this thread, your posts were made in disagreement with the OP - so, were you just ragging on Jim M and everyone in the thread who had already posted in agreement with the 7 rules? Or were you posting your honestly-held disagreement?

Why is it that when you disagree, it's not ragging, but when we disagree with you, it is?

And unfortunately we cannot escape the constant ragging since you cannot put mods on ignore.

DreamerOfDreams said:

And unfortunately we cannot escape the constant ragging since you cannot put mods on ignore.

Click to expand...

BTW, I'll still be disagreeing with you when I feel the need. I am not intimidated by being accused of "ragging".

Nuff said.

Flesh can't resist and often cannot ignore. Flesh often use the "ignore button" while Spirit-filled chose to ignore with the help from GRACE.

I have no doubt you will.... no doubt at all.
Nevertheless we are talking about gardens and tomatles in another thread...
a more "fruitful" discussion you might say.

Tamara224 said:

BTW, I'll still be disagreeing with you when I feel the need. I am not intimidated by being accused of "ragging".

Nuff said.

Click to expand...

JimfromOhio said:

Flesh can't resist and often cannot ignore. Flesh often use the "ignore button" while Spirit-filled chose to ignore with the help from GRACE.

Click to expand...

Gee... another dids fan club member with nothing good to say... .EVER.
Do you guys have chapters? Organized events? Posters?
Can I have one?

Where do I sign up?

MaidInHisImage said:

I think if people don't want to take things personal they shouldn't post personal remarks.
Love the sinner, hate the sin,
Discuss the behavior and not the character of a person.

Click to expand...

Exactly - I haven't followed this thread or what was said, but in general, your statement should hold true for all posts.
Depending on how close a subject is to our heart, tho, I do understand how anger's can flare up; we discuss some very important & serious issues.
I think it's natural that tempers flare & passions get the best of us.

But we need to be careful.

Zzub said:

This has got to be the most spiteful and pathetic post I have ever read on CF ever.

Click to expand...

What's your problem with it?
Ps. maybe you haven't read too many other posts here on CF? lol

Nadiine said:

Exactly - I haven't followed this thread or what was said, but in general, your statement should hold true for all posts.
Depending on how close a subject is to our heart, tho, I do understand how anger's can flare up; we discuss some very important & serious issues.
I think it's natural that tempers flare & passions get the best of us.

But we need to be careful.

Click to expand...

Advise well taken from a lady with a cat on her head. lol

Jim M said:

Um, I hate to step into the middle of this disagreement, but haven’t we strayed a bit from the OP? It’s about rules of Bible interpretation.

\o/

Christianity is the best armor you can have but the worst cloak.​

Click to expand...

Oops. Sorry for my part, Jim. Back to the OP...

Well then, go back to the OP and tell us all how we should and can and cannot read the Bible then.

Cheers,
|ZZ|

according to the OP we should:

Jim M said:

FYI (and discussion) I have pasted below Seven Rules of Bible Interpretation found at bibletopics.com.

\o/

An ignorant person is someone who doesn’t know something you only learned yesterday.​

~~~​

Seven Rules of ​

Bible Interpretation​

"And so we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation." (2 Peter 1:19,20 NAS)

Click to expand...

interpreted to mean a sure way of iterpreting, see following

We can't have a "sure word" about the meaning of Scripture (or anything else) unless we have a sure method to interpret the words. The following seven rules are the center of all grammatical interpretation. They have been accepted and used by scholars from Socrates to the present. While my hope is that they will be used to "rightly divide the word of truth" of the Holy Bible, they are equally applicable to legal, historical, and other such language.

Since the Bible teaches that God is not the author of confusion (1 Cor. 14:33), how can the many disagreements today between Christians and the proliferation of the cults be explained since all, or nearly all, claim to use the Bible as the basis of their doctrines? Nearly all false doctrines taught today by Christians and cultists alike can be traced to the distortion of the meaning of Biblical words. These seven rules are prayerfully offered in the hope that they may help many come to the truth of what God says in His Word.

Guy Duty said in his book Divorce and Remarriage writes: "When two interpretations are claimed for a Scripture, the construction most in agreement with all the facts of the case should be adopted. When all the facts of an interpretation are in agreement they sound together in harmony, like notes in a chord. Biblical interpretation is more than knowing a set of rules, but it cannot be done without the rules. So, learn the rules, and rightly apply them...." (Divorce and Remarriage, Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1967)

Click to expand...

Here are the seven rules:

Rule 1 DEFINITION: What does the word mean? Any study of Scripture must begin with a study of words. Define your terms and then keep to the terms defined. The interpreter should conscientiously abide by the plain meaning of the words. This quite often may require using a Hebrew/English or Greek/English lexicon in order to make sure that the sense of the English translation is understood. A couple of good examples of this are the Greek words "allos" and "heteros". Both are usually translated as "another" in English - yet "allos" literally means "another of the same type" and "heteros" means "another of a different type." ​

Click to expand...

Rule 2 USAGE: It must be remembered that the Old Testament was written originally by, to and for Jews. The words and idioms must have been intelligible to them - just as the words of Christ when talking to them must have been. The majority of the New Testament likewise was written in a milieu of Greco-Roman (and to a lesser extent Jewish) culture and it is important to not impose our modern usage into our interpretation. It is not worth much to interpret a great many phrases and histories if one's interpretations are shaded by pre-conceived notions and cultural biases, thereby rendering an inaccurate and ineffectual lesson. ​

Click to expand...

Rule 3 CONTEXT: The meaning must be gathered from the context. Every word you read must be understood in the light of the words that come before and after it. Many passages will not be understood at all, or understood incorrectly, without the help afforded by the context. A good example of this is the Mormon practice of using 1 Cor. 8:5b: "...for there be gods many and lords many..." as a "proof text" of their doctrine of polytheism. However, a simple reading of the whole verse in the context of the whole chapter (e.g. where Paul calls these gods "so-called"), plainly demonstrates that Paul is not teaching polytheism. ​

Click to expand...

Rule 4 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: The interpreter must have some awareness of the life and society of the times in which the Scripture was written. The spiritual principle will be timeless but often can't be properly appreciated without some knowledge of the background. If the interpreter can have in his mind what the writer had in his mind when he wrote - without adding any excess baggage from the interpreter's own culture or society - then the true thought of the Scripture can be captured resulting in an accurate interpretation. Oliver Wendell Holmes said, "Our only interest in the past is for the light it throws upon the present." ​

Click to expand...

Rule 5 LOGIC: Interpretation is merely logical reasoning. When interpreting Scripture, the use of reason is everywhere to be assumed. Does the interpretation make sense? The Bible was given to us in the form of human language and therefore appeals to human reason - it invites investigation. It is to be interpreted as we would any other volume: applying the laws of language and grammatical analysis. As Bernard Ramm said: "What is the control we use to weed out false theological speculation? Certainly the control is logic and evidence... interpreters who have not had the sharpening experience of logic...may have improper notions of implication and evidence. Too frequently such a person uses a basis of appeal that is a notorious violation of the laws of logic and evidence." (Protestant Biblical Interpretation, Boston:W. A. Wilde, 1956) ​

Click to expand...

Rule 6 PRECEDENT: We must not violate the known usage of a word and invent another for which there is no precedent. Just as a judge's chief occupation is the study of previous cases, so must the interpreter use precedents in order to determine whether they really support an alleged doctrine. Consider the Bereans in Acts 17:10-12 who were called "noble" because they searched the Scriptures to determine if what Paul taught them was true. ​

Click to expand...

Rule 7 INFERENCE: An inference is a fact reasonably implied from another fact. It is a logical consequence. It derives a con- clusion from a given fact or premise. It is the deduction of one proposition from another proposition. Such inferential facts or propositions are sufficiently binding when their truth is established by competent and satisfactory evidence. Competent evidence means such evidence as the nature of the thing to be proved admits. Satisfactory evidence means that amount of proof which would ordinarily satisfy an unprejudiced mind beyond a reasonable doubt. Jesus used this rule when he proved the resurrection of the dead to the unbelieving Sadducees in Matt. 22:23-33.​

Click to expand...

Learning these seven rules and properly applying them will help keep any interpreter from making errors and will hopefully alleviate many of the disagreements unfortunately present in Christianity today.

"A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels: to understand a proverb, and the interpretation." (Prov. 1:5,6)

Click to expand...

pilgrimage said:

according to the OP we should:

interpreted to mean a sure way of iterpreting,

see following literal translation according to usage in the culture interpreted according to context, not isolated phases social context reasonablity of the interpretation consistency of method of interpretation continuity of logical procession

Click to expand...

Not sure why everyone's opposed to this then...

The question is, are you using the seminary(cemetary) method, or the Spirit-guided method...

I'll refer that question to Jim M. since it's his quote.

My quote was "according to the OP we should:"

"And so we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation"

Click to expand...

We can't have a "sure word" about the meaning of Scripture (or anything else) unless we have a sure method to interpret the words. The following seven rules are the center of all grammatical interpretation. They have been accepted and used by scholars from Socrates to the present. While my hope is that they will be used to "rightly divide the word of truth" of the Holy Bible, they are equally applicable to legal, historical, and other such language.

Since the Bible teaches that God is not the author of confusion (1 Cor. 14:33), how can the many disagreements today between Christians and the proliferation of the cults be explained since all, or nearly all, claim to use the Bible as the basis of their doctrines? Nearly all false doctrines taught today by Christians and cultists alike can be traced to the distortion of the meaning of Biblical words. These seven rules are prayerfully offered in the hope that they may help many come to the truth of what God says in His Word.

Learning these seven rules and properly applying them will help keep any interpreter from making errors and will hopefully alleviate many of the disagreements unfortunately present in Christianity today.


"A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels: to understand a proverb, and the interpretation." (Prov. 1:5,6)

Click to expand...

I like and agree with the rules in principle, but here's the problem I have with all this: many of those scholars who interpret the Bible this way will tell you that speaking in tongues, miracles and healing is not for today and most of us SF/PC's are wrong. What do we do with that?
Being one of those people who needs concrete examples, here's what I do (yeah I know - so what, right?). I read the Word. It either speaks something to my heart and a light goes on, or I say "ok Lord, I don't get this one". If it's the latter, I get out more than one translation. I read some commentaries. I pray about it. I get out the lexicon/expository/etc. I more or less follow those rules. Either the light goes on at this point or I say "Lord, You're gonna have to teach me this one." And He does, because He leads us into all Truth and gives us His mind.

I spent three years at Bible College.

Was it helpful?

Not really.

Wednesday afternoons I used to hole myself in the library and spend 3-5 hours reading Kenneth Hagin books. That was what made me spiritually.

Cheers,
|ZZ|