Rules for Bible interpreting...

[berean_315]

That is true to a degree InspectorVol, but God gave us pastors and teachers for a reason. The plain things of scripture a child can understand, but things like understanding God's nature can drown even a theologian. Theology, Eschatology , Hermaneutics, Ecclesiology and other disciplines of study require stingent rules to follow so that the text is interpreted properly.

Well said Apologist, and good list rkbo. As in reading any writing we need to adhere to basic principles. Nothing magic, but as mentioned, need to focus on what the writer literally intended to say, who his audience was, context (words have context in sentences; sentences in paragraphs, etc.), literary form, etc. We don't want to allegorize something that wasn't meant to be.


Gerald

 

[edjones]

There are several methods of Bible study that may be employed to arrive at a correct understanding of Bible truth.

I. Law of Application-- Application of Scripture may be made only after the correct doctrinal meaning has been determined.

II. Law of Literal Interpretation-- When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense, lest it make non-sense.

III. Law of First Mention-- God has order the meaning of a word in it's first occurrence in Scripture as to forecast how that word would be associated in the rest of the Scriptures.

IV. Law of Progressive Mention-- God make the revelation of any given truth increasingly clear as the Word proceeds to its consummation.

V. Law of Subsequent Mention-- God in later Scripture adds details to prior events, or give events never before recorded.

VI. Law of Context--The meaning of any particular element is controlled by what precedes and what follows. A verse out of context is a pre-text.

VII. Law of Discrimination-- The Scriptures must be divided so as to make a distinction where God makes a difference.

VIII. Law of Agreement--God will not set forth any passage in His Word which contradicts any other passage.

IX. Law of Repetition-- God will often repeat something previously said as a means of emphasis.

X. Law of Double Reference-- A passage may apply primarily to a person or event near at hand, but is used by the Holy Spirit at a later time as applying to the Person of Christ, or the affairs of His kingdom.

XI. Gap Law-- God, in the Scriptures, will sometimes skip over lengthy periods of time without comment.

XII. Laws of Right Divisions-- God's Word must be divided according to dispensations, covenants and ethnic groups.

XIII. Law of Types-- God often employs types as a divinely appointed illustration of some spiritual truth.

XIV. Law of Numerical Design-- Numbers in the Bible have a specific meaning that teach specific truths.

XV. Synthetic Technique-- God inspired the literary structure of the Bible so that it is constructed in introversion, alternation, or combinations of both.

 

[filosofer]

Interpret Christologically

John 5:39
You study the scriptures thoroughly because you think in them you possess eternal life, and it is these same scriptures that testify about me

Luke 24:44-45
44 Then he said to them, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled." 45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the scriptures,

 

[snw7]

Alright Ed - you're confusing me. First you say:

I don't think any of those rules should apply to Gods Holy words.
Ed
[\quote]

Then you give a list of 15 rules/laws which you believe must be adhered to in order to understand scripture.

Is it Hermaneutics you don't agree with?

confused in phoenix,
shawn

 

[edjones]

I SAID "There are several methods of Bible study that may be employed to arrive at a correct understanding of Bible truth"

Did I say "I believe must be adhered to in order to understand scripture."? No, I didn't.

Does his guidelines resemble mine?

Always correct the Greek with the English(KJV).
Ed

 

[filosofer]

Always correct the Greek with the English(KJV)

???

 

[snw7]

First of all - get a dictionary.

Adhere - (verb) To give support or maintain loyalty.

You give support to what you believe by saying the following: "There are several methods of Bible study that may be employed to arrive at a correct understanding of Bible truth."

I infer you to mean, by saying "a correct understanding of Bible truth, " that other methods (ie. Hermaneutics, etc.) are not correct methods to correctly derive an understanding of the Bible. You say as much in the post where I quoted you.

Also, the following statement is a bit ludicrous, don't you think?

"Always correct the Greek with the English (KJV)."

A little history lesson - the Greek version of the New Testament (the letters, the historical writings, etc) were written many, many years before English my friend. That means that the Greek is more correct that the English.

Further, in matters of linguistics, you always - repeat ALWAYS - lose something in the translation and transliteration from one language to the next. The purpose of all the different English version bibles is to try and get the correct meaning and/or thought of the original. You should really use several different versions in order to understand what the original Greek was attempting to say.

A good version for thought to thought between the Greek and English is the NIV. A good word for word version is the NASB. These however are not all encompassing. But unless you are willing to undertake the task of learning Greek, then you need to face the facts of referencing several translations/transliterations of the original language.

You don't make the original Mona Lisa painting inferior to the numerous copies and start changing the original based upon that.

shawn

 

[Apologist]

Originally posted by snw7
First of all - get a dictionary.

Further, in matters of linguistics, you always - repeat ALWAYS - lose something in the translation and transliteration from one language to the next. The purpose of all the different English version bibles is to try and get the correct meaning and/or thought of the original. You should really use several different versions in order to understand what the original Greek was attempting to say.

A good version for thought to thought between the Greek and English is the NIV. A good word for word version is the NASB. These however are not all encompassing. But unless you are willing to undertake the task of learning Greek, then you need to face the facts of referencing several translations/transliterations of the original language.



shawn

Well said Shawn and very true also. Of course if you are dealing with a staunch 'KJV Only' proponent then nothing you say will do any good in changing their mind.

God Bless

 

[edjones]

Fib., are you Greek? I'm English, I have an English Bible. Its my Final Authority. I correct everything (mostly me) with IT. Does that seem odd to you? Why would God not want us to have his words? I believe God preserved His words
in the English lang. in the KJV. So thats what I go by and will
stand before the Judgement Seat of Christ with. But thats not what gets me there its the precious atoneing blood of The Lord Jesus Christ.
ed

 

[Hervey]

Shawn said >

A good version for thought to thought between the Greek and English is the NIV. A good word for word version is the NASB. These however are not all encompassing. But unless you are willing to undertake the task of learning Greek, then you need to face the facts of referencing several translations/transliterations of the original language.

There are what are called Major and minor manuscripts. They are a group of manuscripts that mostly agree with each other, (about 95 %) , are called the Major manuscripts. The translators of the KJV used these Major manuscripts.

However, the newer versions , like the NIV, used what are called, the minor manuscripts, which have less agreement among them, and also have a greater disagreement to the Major manuscripts.

The Greek manuscripts were put into two groups. The Major, and the minor. Those translations which came from the minor manuscripts, have a "lot" more unsubstantiated materials/information, than does the Major manuscripts. The Major manuscripts agree with each other about 95 % of the time, and the minor manuscripts only agree with each other about 70% of the time.

It is an untruth to declare the use of many translations, as a correct way of trying to find out what the Greek manuscripts tell us ! !!

There are kinds and types of lies that go out into the world, and this is just one of them !

Another lie, is to declare that the AKJV does not have any flaws in it !

When are people going to stop lying, and go and find out truth, about where the source has come from, and how your translations were put together ? ?

Love IN Christ - Hervey

 

[rkbo]

So I see this thread is turning into translation wars eh? Hervey where did you get you information about the major and minor MSS data. That is the stats about them not agreeing with each other?

Also I take issue with you calling people liars.

 

[Hervey]

The first thing I need to correct, is that it is the minor manuscripts that mostly agree with each other, because of the minor amount of flaws that were found.

It was the Major manuscripts that had the most flaws in them. Sorry for say this backwards !

Here is just one site that gives this information, but there are many other sources from which you will find the same information about the minor and major manuscripts.


http://clawww.lmu.edu/faculty/fjust/Bible/English_Translations.htm


Find out how your translation came into being !

Love IN Christ - Hervey

 

[edjones]

List a 'flaw' hervy.

Using the New International Version Bible, answer the following questions.

Do not rely on your memory. As the Bible is the final authority, you must take the answer from the Bible verse (not from footnotes but from the text).


Fill in the missing words in Matthew 5:44. "Love your enemies,__________ them that curse you, ______________ to them that hate you, and pray for them that __________ and persecute you."


According to Matthew 17:21, what two things are required to cast out this type of demon?


According to Matthew 18:11, why did Jesus come to earth?


According to Matthew 27:2, what was Pilate's first name?


In Matthew 27:35, when the wicked soldiers parted His garments, they were fulfilling the words of the prophet. Copy what the prophet said in Matthew 27:35 from the NIV.


In Mark 3:15, Jesus gave the apostles power to cast out demons and to: ____________


According to Mark 7:16, what does a man need to be able to hear?


According to Luke 7:28, what was John? (teacher, prophet, carpenter, etc.). What is his title or last name?


In Luke 9:55, what did the disciples not know?


In Luke 9:56, what did the Son of man not come to do? According to this verse, what did He come to do?


In Luke 22:14, how many apostles were with Jesus?


According to Luke 23:38, in what three languages was the superscription written?


In Luke 24:42, what did they give Jesus to eat with His fish?


John 3:13 is a very important verse, proving the deity of Christ. According to this verse (as Jesus spoke), where is the Son of man?


What happened each year as told in John 5:4?


In John 7:50, what time of day did Nicodemus come to Jesus?


In Acts 8:37, what is the one requirement for baptism?


What did Saul ask Jesus in Acts 9:6?


Write the name of the man mentioned in Acts 15:34.


Study Acts 24:6-8. What would the Jew have done with Paul? What was the chief captain's name? What did the chief captain command?


Copy Romans 16:24 word for word from the NIV.


First Timothy 3:16 is perhaps the greatest verse in the New Testament concerning the deity of Christ. In this verse, who was manifested in the flesh?


In the second part of First Peter 4:14, how do [they] speak of Christ? And, what do we Christians do?


Who are the three Persons of the Trinity in First John 5:7?


Revelation 1:11 is another very important verse that proves the deity of Christ. In the first part of this verse Jesus said, "I am the A______________ and O___________, the _________ and the _______:"



Conclusion: Little space is provided for your answers, but it's much more than needed. If you followed the instructions above, you not only failed the test, you receive a big goose egg.

( These are all missing in the NIV.) So now what do you think of your "accurate, easy to understand, up to date Bible"?

If you would like to improve your score, and in fact score 100%, you can take this test using the Authorized (King James) Bible.

"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"
Gal. 4:16

 

[filosofer]

Hervey, I read that web site in your above post. It says exactly opposite of what you have written, namely that the more recent translations are better because they incorporate all of the manuscript evidence, especially those discovered in the last two hundred years.

So now, I am confused by what you are claiming.
And the statistics you quoted above are not at all accurate relative to manuscript differences.

 

[filosofer]

Ed,

In your most recent post, you have already assumed that the textual tradition behind the KJV is the only standard. So all of your questions are moot. Suppose someone used those same questions but began with the statement that the textual tradition behind the NAS is the only standard, and why di the KJV add all of those things to word of God? Same argument.

And which version of the KJV is the only inerrant version? Since there have been at least seven revisions. Even if the Bible you use now says it is the KJV of 1611, it most likely is not. It probably is 1769. So, why the changes in the KJV?

Also, I visited the web site you listed. Interesting that the first item in the list is this:

Fifteen general rules were advanced for the guidance of the translators:

1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the Truth of the original will permit.

So according to your own source, the original is the standard. Which original? Obviously the Greek. So how does the KJV "correct the Greek"?

 

[edjones]

Most Bible critics do not believe that the Bible is perfect (The Alexandrian Ideology). They usually also accept the Alexandrian manuscripts as superior to those of Antioch.
A King James Bible believer(Me) accepts the Antiochian manuscripts or Textus Receptus as superior to the Alexandrian.They (ME) also accept the Antiochian Ideology in that they accept the Bible as infallible and do not believe it contains any errors or mistranslations and that it cannot be improved.

Note also : Textus Receptus man also accepts the Antiochian manuscripts or Textus Receptus as superior to the Alexandrian. But a Textus Receptus man accepts the Antiochian manuscripts yet he views them with the Alexandrian Ideology.
He does not accept any translation as perfect and without error. He generally feels that the King James is the best translation but can be improved. He usually stumbles at Acts 12:4 and states that it is a mistranslation.
This contradiction is NOT the result of a bad or dishonest heart so much as it is the result of a bad education. Most Textus Receptus men have been taught by others who have been deceived into accepting, unconsciously, the Alexandrian Ideology.


Whats YOUR Final Authority?

 

[JohnR7]

>>There are several methods of Bible study that may be employed to arrive at a correct understanding of Bible truth.

ED! We missed you over on the other board. We even had a thread where everyone was talking about how we missed your posts. Of course that does not mean we always agree with you

I was to some degree influenced by your "King James Only" arguements. I do make more of a effort to give the King James Version more preferance now. Of course I attend a King James Only Church. So it does fit in with what we believe there.

It's good to run into you again, and see your posts. Thanks, JohnR7

 

[lig75]

Pretty snobby of some who want rules for college grads, and to leave out those below that level. I don't believe in having to keep our nose in a dictionary or encyclopedia when preaching orally or written. I believe the Lord meant the Gospel to be presented as simple as possible where even the wayfaring unlearned could understand. Also unless they come as a little child they shall not enter in. I do not believe in preaching hell-less sermons. Not believing there is a hell surely doesn't make it go away. It is real and so is Heaven. We need to teach others how to detour from Hell through Jesus Christ. There truly is no hell for the redeemed. In HIM, with love, Troop

 

[Hervey]

filosopher:

I knew that this site said that the newer translations were better. However, i disagree with that statement !

The site does give some very important information that is relative, and I thought that there was enough info, that was accurate, to bring this site to your attention.

And why do you say that my information is not accurate ?

Love IN Christ - Hervey

 

[filosofer]

Pretty snobby of some who want rules for college grads, and to leave out those below that level. I don't believe in having to keep our nose in a dictionary or encyclopedia when preaching orally or written. I believe the Lord meant the Gospel to be presented as simple as possible where even the wayfaring unlearned could understand. Also unless they come as a little child they shall not enter in. I do not believe in preaching hell-less sermons. Not believing there is a hell surely doesn't make it go away. It is real and so is Heaven. We need to teach others how to detour from Hell through Jesus Christ. There truly is no hell for the redeemed.

Not sure what you are referring to? What 'rules for college grads"?
Who is "preaching hell-less sermons"?