- Mar 10, 2015
- 12,433
- 4,605
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Single
When should someone who is reading a verse from the Bible conclude that they have must have misunderstood it, or if they have correctly understood it, then when should they conclude that they should not accept its validity?
For example, someone could read that Psalms 14:1 states "there is no God" and go around teaching that according to the Bible we should deny the existence of God, but it would be better for them to have the self-awareness to recognize that it is completely absurd to interpret the Bible as saying that and that they must have misunderstood it rather than teaching their interpretation as what the Bible says, especially when it is clearly taken out of context. However, if they did correctly understand that verse as affirming that we should deny the existence of God, then it is clear that they should not accept its validity rather than teaching it as being correct.
So we can take the position that we should not accept that what someone is saying is correct because they have misinterpreted a verse, but even if they have correctly understood it, then we should reject its validity, so either way we should not accept that what they are saying is correct. I think that we should all accept the validity of everything that is taught in the Bible, which is why I do not think that we should interpret any part of it a manner that would mean that we should reject its validity, so it is difficult to be willing to reject the validity of a verse if it is correctly understood to be teaching certain things, but again, if it were actually teaching something like that there is no God or that we should rebel against Him, then we should reject its validity. The Bible does contain some difficult teachings, so there a danger in incorrectly rejecting valid teaching of the Bible because it is not in accordance with our understanding of the Bible, though there is also a danger in wrongly following a teaching that we should been willing to reject. In Acts 17:11, the Bereans were praised because they diligently tested everything that Paul said against OT Scripture to see if what he said was true, so according to that precedent, there is a standard by which we should accept or reject the validity of what he taught.
While we should seek to correctly understand everything in the Bible, it is ok for someone to take the position they don't understand a verse, but they look forward to a time when God reveals its meaning to them. Someone can also take the position that they don't know what the correct interpretation of a verse is, but they do know that certain interpretations are not it. It is better for someone to have the self-awareness that their understanding of a verse is incorrect than for them to promote it as though they are just believing what it is saying.
For example, someone could read that Psalms 14:1 states "there is no God" and go around teaching that according to the Bible we should deny the existence of God, but it would be better for them to have the self-awareness to recognize that it is completely absurd to interpret the Bible as saying that and that they must have misunderstood it rather than teaching their interpretation as what the Bible says, especially when it is clearly taken out of context. However, if they did correctly understand that verse as affirming that we should deny the existence of God, then it is clear that they should not accept its validity rather than teaching it as being correct.
So we can take the position that we should not accept that what someone is saying is correct because they have misinterpreted a verse, but even if they have correctly understood it, then we should reject its validity, so either way we should not accept that what they are saying is correct. I think that we should all accept the validity of everything that is taught in the Bible, which is why I do not think that we should interpret any part of it a manner that would mean that we should reject its validity, so it is difficult to be willing to reject the validity of a verse if it is correctly understood to be teaching certain things, but again, if it were actually teaching something like that there is no God or that we should rebel against Him, then we should reject its validity. The Bible does contain some difficult teachings, so there a danger in incorrectly rejecting valid teaching of the Bible because it is not in accordance with our understanding of the Bible, though there is also a danger in wrongly following a teaching that we should been willing to reject. In Acts 17:11, the Bereans were praised because they diligently tested everything that Paul said against OT Scripture to see if what he said was true, so according to that precedent, there is a standard by which we should accept or reject the validity of what he taught.
While we should seek to correctly understand everything in the Bible, it is ok for someone to take the position they don't understand a verse, but they look forward to a time when God reveals its meaning to them. Someone can also take the position that they don't know what the correct interpretation of a verse is, but they do know that certain interpretations are not it. It is better for someone to have the self-awareness that their understanding of a verse is incorrect than for them to promote it as though they are just believing what it is saying.