Apologetics vs. Only Text

[Sister_in_Christ]

I had an interesting Bible study last night. It was the first night I had attended, and the leader was explaining how to interpret the Bible.

He claimed that all you need is the Bible itself. Everything you need for interpretation, understanding, and context is within the Word.

For this reason, he doesn't believe in going to outside sources for help. He doesn't really believe in commentaries. He doesn't believe we need to study history or archaeology or science to learn about God.

Now, I agree that as far as doctrine goes, it's all in the Bible. However, I also believe God reveals Himself through creation, and there's alot to be learned there.

Thoughts?

 

[BeStill&Know]

I had an interesting Bible study last night. It was the first night I had attended, and the leader was explaining how to interpret the Bible.

He claimed that all you need is the Bible itself. Everything you need for interpretation, understanding, and context is within the Word.

For this reason, he doesn't believe in going to outside sources for help. He doesn't really believe in commentaries. He doesn't believe we need to study history or archaeology or science to learn about God.

Now, I agree that as far as doctrine goes, it's all in the Bible. However, I also believe God reveals Himself through creation, and there's alot to be learned there.

Thoughts?

I agree with him, however commentaries, history, especially archaeology, and science are like the dessert, apart from the main course. For seekers and new babes, these other things help to solidify God's Word with His Holy Spirit. Many scientist came to God because of their own research. reasons.org

 

[Sister_in_Christ]

I agree with you, but it got me wondering. What about before we had the official Bible? Or people who still don't have access to one? God still speaks to them. All of creation speaks of His name. If God only revealed Himself through the text, then only those with access to the text could hear Him.

Since God has reached people in other ways, would that mean that we can also gain understanding of Him outside the Bible?

 

[football5680]

I wouldn't agree with method because it shows a lack of humility. We should be willing to look at the arguments of other people and use any resource that may allow us to get closer to the truth. Two people may read the same verse and come to different conclusions, while both of them claim to be led by the Holy Spirit. Obviously at least one of them isn't so this method is flawed.

 

[Sister_in_Christ]

I wouldn't agree with method because it shows a lack of humility. We should be willing to look at the arguments of other people and use any resource that may allow us to get closer to the truth. Two people may read the same verse and come to different conclusions, while both of them claim to be led by the Holy Spirit. Obviously at least one of them isn't so this method is flawed.

I agree that we need to listen to others. His point was more that anything that would shape our doctrine would be in the Bible.

 

[BeStill&Know]

I agree with you, but it got me wondering. What about before we had the official Bible? Or people who still don't have access to one? God still speaks to them. All of creation speaks of His name. If God only revealed Himself through the text, then only those with access to the text could hear Him.

Since God has reached people in other ways, would that mean that we can also gain understanding of Him outside the Bible?

God speaks through the Wind, through lightning storms, through nature, burning bushes, donkeys, through children, through our pets, through others, through circumstances, through life lessons, our families, our mates, our enemies, through dreams and visions, through trials and tribulations, through sickness, and sufferings.........................................................Bless you and good night.

 

[Sister_in_Christ]

God speaks through the Wind, through lightning storms, through nature, burning bushes, donkeys, through children, through our pets, through others, through circumstances, through life lessons, our families, our mates, our enemies, through dreams and visions, through trials and tribulations, through sickness, and sufferings.........................................................Bless you and good night.

So, then my question would be, do you believe God adds to the Bible through His revelations? Or, does He just help us understand what is already there?

 

[BeStill&Know]

So, then my question would be, do you believe God adds to the Bible through His revelations? Or, does He just help us understand what is already there?

Good question Sister, for me He has giving me understanding/wisdom relating to what is already in His Word. His Word has to be the standard, the measure we evaluate everything else. At this time nothing comes to mind answering your question concerning does God add to the Bible through His Revelations, except this passage>
King James Bible Galations 1:8
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
As you know a couple of religions were established based on an angel giving a new revelation of the Word of God.

 

[TheNorwegian]

He claimed that all you need is the Bible itself. Everything you need for interpretation, understanding, and context is within the Word. For this reason, he doesn't believe in going to outside sources for help. He doesn't really believe in commentaries. He doesn't believe we need to study history or archaeology or science to learn about God.

This sounds very naive. Did you study the Bible in its original languages in that meeting? If not, then you already rely on lots and lots of help from the outside sources, including from commentaries and archaeology. Without such help there would be no English Bibles. Then only people who can read Greek and Hebrew fluently would be able to access the Bible. Further more, no-one who is alive today would be able to read Ancient Greek without the help of grammars, commentaries, etc.

I could expand this much further, but I think you get my point

 

[Sister_in_Christ]

This sounds very naive. Did you study the Bible in its original languages in that meeting? If not, then you already rely on lots and lots of help from the outside sources, including from commentaries and archaeology. Without such help there would be no English Bibles. Then only people who can read Greek and Hebrew fluently would be able to access the Bible. Further more, no-one who is alive today would be able to read Ancient Greek without the help of grammars, commentaries, etc.

I could expand this much further, but I think you get my point

Yes. Since this last post, I have decided to stop going to this study. He believes in an interpretation of the Bible that I just can't agree with. Now, he does know Hebrew, Aramaic, and greek, and basically has the whole Bible memorized. So, it was difficult to not convince myself he was right because he knew more. But, I just kept feeling like it wasn't right for me to be there anymore.

 

[TheNorwegian]

Yes. Since this last post, I have decided to stop going to this study. ... But, I just kept feeling like it wasn't right for me to be there anymore.

Probably wise of you! If someone think he knows everything better than everyone else he is probably very insecure (or even deluded). Some people seems to think that THEY know better than everybody else. How likely is that? We all need the insights and perspective from people around us. I like this saying "some people who seem very confident that the Holy Spirit can speak to them, seem to have very little confidence that the Holy Spirit can talk to somebody else"

 

[Soyeong]

I had an interesting Bible study last night. It was the first night I had attended, and the leader was explaining how to interpret the Bible.

He claimed that all you need is the Bible itself. Everything you need for interpretation, understanding, and context is within the Word.

For this reason, he doesn't believe in going to outside sources for help. He doesn't really believe in commentaries. He doesn't believe we need to study history or archaeology or science to learn about God.

Now, I agree that as far as doctrine goes, it's all in the Bible. However, I also believe God reveals Himself through creation, and there's alot to be learned there.

Thoughts?

I agree that whenever possible we should allow the Bible to interpret itself. Whenever the NT quotes the OT, I've made a practice of going back and reading the entire chapter that's being quoted from because in a high context society, quoting a single line was often meant to bring to mind more than just what was quoted. However, the Bible is not the only context we have for understanding it. For example, the events of the Bible take place in a Jewish cultural context, so studying that can give us a better idea of how Jesus' audiences understood him. For instance, studying Jewish practices of vine dressing and sowing or Jewish inheritance laws can give us more insight into understanding Jesus' parables that can't be gained through just studying the Bible.

 

[Sister_in_Christ]

Probably wise of you! If someone think he knows everything better than everyone else he is probably very insecure (or even deluded). Some people seems to think that THEY know better than everybody else. How likely is that? We all need the insights and perspective from people around us. I like this saying "some people who seem very confident that the Holy Spirit can speak to them, seem to have very little confidence that the Holy Spirit can talk to somebody else"

Hm. I really like that one. I agree completely. I thought it was odd that he didn't use any extra-biblical references, because he didn't trust them. Now, not that a commentary is on the same level as the bible, but God speaks to those who will listen. Who's to say you're the only person in history God revealed Himself to? It would be a very boastful foundation.

Now that I have had his son as an employee at my business, I have learned more about this man's character. He takes the scriptures about women being silent in church to mean that women must have nothing useful to say. And he treats his children as if they are stupid. I know everyone has faults, but I do believe this past week in his study, the spirit clearly told me that this man wants to be worshipped. He's more focused on being acknowledged for his intellect than focusing that acknowledgement on God, the one who gave him intellect to begin with!

 

[TheNorwegian]

[QUOTE="Sister_in_Christ, post: 69118848, member: 383383". Now, he does know Hebrew, Aramaic, and greek, [/QUOTE]

It would be interesting to know how he learned Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. I sure hope he did not use external sources like dictionaries or grammars. Maybe God revealed those languages to him as he was studying the text

 

[Sister_in_Christ]

[QUOTE="Sister_in_Christ, post: 69118848, member: 383383". Now, he does know Hebrew, Aramaic, and greek,

It would be interesting to know how he learned Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. I sure hope he did not use external sources like dictionaries or grammars. Maybe God revealed those languages to him as he was studying the text [/QUOTE]
He actually learned at Dallas Theological. So he has a doctorate in biblical studies. That's why it was hard to discredit him off hand.

 

[Job8]

I agree with you, but it got me wondering. What about before we had the official Bible?

Before we had the "official Bible" (or more precisely the Bible as we know it from a non-Catholic perspective), God gave Israel the Old Testament (the Tanakh) which was completed about 400 years before Christ. When the Lord Jesus Christ walked on this earth, that Hebrew Bible was God's revelation to men, while He Himself was the living Word of God revealing the Father to mankind. By about 90 AD, the complete Bible was available in the form of manuscripts. By the 14th century there were printed texts of the Hebrew and Greek testaments, and also translations in many languages. So the Bible has been around for about 3,500 years (partially or completely).

Or people who still don't have access to one?

Today the Bible can be accessed in almost every language on the internet. So this is a non-issue.

God still speaks to them. All of creation speaks of His name. If God only revealed Himself through the text, then only those with access to the text could hear Him.

Yes God does reveal Himself through His creation, but no one will learn of His salvation through creation. Therefore Christ has commanded His Church to preach the Gospel to every creature, and the Gospel is also called "the Word of God". Where is this Word found? In the Holy Bible. So creation is obviously insufficient.

Since God has reached people in other ways, would that mean that we can also gain understanding of Him outside the Bible?

God can speak directly to men, and Christ does so even to this day. That is not the issue. Because God has given man His written Word, and because it is now available in almost every language, and because it reveals (a) the nature and character of God, (b) the nature and redemptive work of Christ, (c) God's eternal plan for redeemed and restored Israel, and (d) God's eternal plan for the Church, we turn to the Bible to know the heart and mind of God and of Christ.

As to your Bible study, since Scripture interprets Scripture, Christians must rely on Scripture to explain itself (while ensuring that only a reliable translation is being used). At the same time, there are legitimate Bible study tools such as concordances and lexicons, which can assist in studying Scripture, and which should be use. But the Teacher is always God the Holy Spirit, and if we resist God's truth when it is revealed, we will not be given more light. God's Word is meant to change hearts and lives, therefore its study is not a mere academic exercise.

Commentaries should only be consulted by those who are already solidly grounded in the Word, since they do present theological biases, many of which are erroneous. The commentaries which are sound can be helpful, but God requires that every believer personally study His Word. Prove all things, hold fast that which is good (1 Thess 5:21).

 

[TheNorwegian]

I agree with you, but it got me wondering. What about before we had the official Bible? Or people who still don't have access to one? God still speaks to them. All of creation speaks of His name. If God only revealed Himself through the text, then only those with access to the text could hear Him.

Since God has reached people in other ways, would that mean that we can also gain understanding of Him outside the Bible?

before we had the official Bible the stories of Jesus were repeated verbally (Matt 28:20 Matt 26:15 Acts 10:38-46). Jewish disciples were extremely good at remembering and retelling. One of the reason why the Gospels were written after 30+ years is that Christianity spread so quickly and so far - also among non-Jews - that it became important to conserve the oral stories in writing.

Commentaries should only be consulted by those who are already solidly grounded in the Word, since they do present theological biases, many of which are erroneous. The commentaries which are sound can be helpful, but God requires that every believer personally study His Word. Prove all things, hold fast that which is good (1 Thess 5:21).

This is poor advice. New believers need to study the Bible, but they should not be their own authority in interpreting it. New believers need more than any other to listen to the teachers God has given to the church, whether they write books or preach in your congregation. However, it is of course important to read healthy commentaries, just like it is important to listen to healthy preaching