Your interpretation =/= What the scripture means

[Hidden In Him]

I really don't understand what point you're trying to make.

It's important to note to self that your questions can also be invalidated, LoL.

The only interpretations which cannot be invalidated are those which are correct... unless they aren't, in which case they can be.

 

[RadiantGrace]

The Holy Spirit

John 16:13

But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.

Seek Him first.

This is a very poor argument, that Christians need not worry about understanding the bible, because the Holy Spirit will teach you. That's what bad preachers and Christians sect preach to keep their people ignorant.

Either the Holy Spirit lies to people, or not every Christian has it completely correct. If you don't have it all correct, you have no way of knowing what is and isn't correct. The Holy Spirit guides, but that doesn't mean you have no responsibility to become informed.

 

[Winken]

Thing is, who's interpretation is the correct one!?

ONLY the Holy Spirit.

 

[Winken]

This is a very poor argument, that Christians need not worry about understanding the bible, because the Holy Spirit will teach you. That's what bad preachers and Christians sect preach to keep their people ignorant.

Either the Holy Spirit lies to people, or not every Christian has it completely correct. If you don't have it all correct, you have no way of knowing what is and isn't correct. The Holy Spirit guides, but that doesn't mean you have no responsibility to become informed.

One cannot be preoccupied with thoughts that are less than Spiritual.

 

[Winken]

Hermeneutics is the set of principles by which Scripture can be interpreted as reliably as possible, without going back to the authors and asking them what they meant about some of the things they wrote which were difficult to understand. Interpretation of Scripture depends on a number of factors:
Who is the person writing?
Where did he live?
What is the historical environment?
What is the dominant culture?
Who is the intended audience?
Is it written for our education or for us to follow?
If it was written to and for Jews, do Gentiles have to comply?
If it is written to us for us to follow, does it take the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ into account?
Does our interpretation fit into the context of the passage?
Just because the Old Testament saints did things that were questionable, do we have to copy their behaviour?

These are important questions that have to be considered when interpreting any passage of Scripture. Just pulling an interpretation of a random verse out of its historical, cultural and intended context is not from the Holy Spirit. It is merely twisting the words of the Bible around to what we want it to say.

Shout it from the housetops, proclaim it in the city streets!!! Wish I had written it!!!

 

[Winken]

How do you personally discern that? Because this subject is not something new, its been happening even throughout biblical days.

Can't personally discern that. That is why we are gloriously occupied by the Holy Spirit! Yea!

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

As a point of humility, it is important to note to self that what ever conclusions you come to are not equal to scripture. Therefore, your interpretation may be invalidated, but scripture remains not so.

There is an advantage to creeds, confessions, and denominations in this regard though. For example, "my" interpretation, is not my own, that is it is a shared body of interpretations that can be traced back throughout Church history. So there is value in studying the history of interpretation and history of doctrines, and through such studies a person can test or validate or invalidate, confirm or correct their interpretations.

 

[Tree of Life]

As a point of humility, it is important to note to self that what ever conclusions you come to are not equal to scripture. Therefore, your interpretation may be invalidated, but scripture remains not so.

Any human interpretation is possibly wrong. When the interpretation has a great deal of tradition and consensus behind it, it's usually more plausible. But even then it is not infallible since "tradition" is not infallible.

There are some interpretations of Scripture which are infallible, however. This is when Scripture interprets itself - which happens often in the Bible. One Bible author may quote another and provide interpretation. Studying how the Bible interprets the Bible can help us to have good principles of interpretation.

My seminary taught me to think in terms of a range of exegetical certainty. With some things we are exegetically certain enough to hold ourselves and others to it. Others, we have less certainty - perhaps enough to hold ourselves to it, but not enough to insist upon it for others. Other things still, our exegetical certainty is very low. So we may have an opinion, but we realize that it's very difficult to know if we're correct or not.

 

[RadiantGrace]

One cannot be preoccupied with thoughts that are less than Spiritual.

What does this statement have to do with my post?

 

[Winken]

What does this statement have to do with my post?

It was intended to be supportive of your post.

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

After reading all these comments. Here is a scripture that talks about this dilemma.

James 3:1My brothers, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation. 2For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.

My point being. One measurement of something being the truth is the fruit it naturally bears. If the fruit in ones lives and in a local church is really not measuring up. Then perhaps its time to look where no one wants to look. The place where we think we are doing ok and does not need a great amount of examination. The basic gospel "truths" we hold. You know we are not just "born again" by the Holy Spirit. We are also born again by the truth. 1st Peter 1:23

It's the truth!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It is true that one needs the Spirit to properly interpret the Bible.
But folks also have to believe what their Bible says in their own language, as well.
Sometimes certain folk try to redefine the Bible to what they want it to say with a dead language that they did not grow up writing or speaking. Words can be easy to fudge or change with a language that is not their own with another man's biased religious dictionary. But usually regular dictionaries in our own language are not so biased like that. Personally, in addition to prayer, the context and looking at older dictionaries helps a man or woman of God to understand what God's Word is saying. For God is simple; He is not complicated. His words are simple and pure and good.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

It is very interesting that when approaching the interpretation of the Bible, people tend to leave their brains at home. God gave us a brain and the power to reason. It is not the act of reasoning and working things out with our minds which is the problem, it is the basis on which Christless folk base their reasoning. Christless folk are blinded to the truth of God by the god of with world.

However, when a person is born of God, he does not lose his power to reason. It became better, because he has quite a different foundation from which to reason. We can use our brains to interpret the Bible and to analyse different parts of the Bible based on the questions I have already given in my previous post.

The trouble is that many turn their brains off and depend on some sort of "impulse" which they say is the Holy Spirit. The difficulty with that is that nine out of every ten impressions come from the flesh, world, or the devil, so "impressions" are the least reliable way of understanding and interpreting the Bible. The fact is that the Holy Spirit is an intelligent Person and He leads people in intelligent and thoughtful ways. He expects us to think things out, ask the difficult questions, and to come to interpretations of the Bible that fit in with God's plans and purposes for mankind.

Anyone can make the Bible say what he wants it to say and then say it is the "correct" interpretation. It is not the "correct" interpretation at all - it is merely the interpretation he decides it is for his own best interests. Like the guy who fancied a girl named Grace, so he looked for a Scripture that showed that it was God's will for her to be the right one for him. He found it in the verse "Grace be to you and peace though our Lord Jesus Christ." This may sound ridiculous but you'd be surprised at how many use the Scriptures like that for guidance.

In many fundamentalist churches there is an anti-academic attitude, in that anyone who actually went to a Bible College or Seminary and gained a theology degree had allied themselves with the world's intellectual view of the Bible. In fact, Seminary-trained pastors, priests, and ministers came about in the Church because of the heresies that were growing in the Church through "lone rangers" putting forward their own "correct" interpretations of the Bible and of the gospel message. Being trained in sound doctrine protected the body of Christ from disintegrating through the damage caused by self appointed interpreters corrupting the gospel message.

Some come up with crazy interpretations of the Bible saying that God has given them a new revelation. I think that these interpretations are just pure nonsense, because the main thread of sound doctrine has not altered since the writings of the Church Fathers, and of those who have kept to the Nicene Creed in their doctrine through the centuries. The Westminster Confession is the foundation of sound doctrine, and those who depart from it put themselves on very unstable ground indeed, and put those they teach in real danger of falsehood and heresy.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

It is true that one needs the Spirit to properly interpret the Bible.
But folks also have to believe what their Bible says in their own language, as well.
Sometimes certain folk try to redefine the Bible to what they want it to say with a dead language that they did not grow up writing or speaking. Words can be easy to fudge or change with a language that is not their own with another man's biased religious dictionary. But usually regular dictionaries in our own language are not so biased like that. Personally, in addition to prayer, the context and looking at older dictionaries helps a man or woman of God to understand what God's Word is saying. For God is simple; He is not complicated. His words are simple and pure and good.

More modern translations of the Bible irons out a lot of those difficulties. Also, having a reliable commentary helps. I like Barclay's Daily Bible Study Series, because it explains Bible passages very clearly and gives a sound understanding of them.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

More modern translations of the Bible irons out a lot of those difficulties. Also, having a reliable commentary helps. I like Barclay's Daily Bible Study Series, because it explains Bible passages very clearly and gives a sound understanding of them.

There are many tools in understanding God's Word. However, I believe:

1. Prayer.
2. Context.
3. Looking at definition of words in English.

Are very helpful.
But yes, I do use Modern Translations and I do read Christian articles on a wide variety of studying different Christian topics.

Side Note:

If you are referring to this William Barclay, then I would not probably read his commentaries because he believes in Universalism.

William Barclay and universalism

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I spent the first twelve years of my Christian life in the Pentecostal movement, which had a lot of anti-intellectualism in it. This put me off doing formal theology study for many years. It is a pity because I could have started my studies 30 years before I did. In that movement there were many who claimed "new revelation" through "The Holy Spirit told me", and these turned out to be damaging nonsense and in many cases brought the Pentecostal movement into disrepute. Unfortunately, there are many areas of the Charismatic movement that still have the same attitudes.

I have read of lot a sound-doctrine commentaries and books, and some have been anti-Charismatic, but I have been able to "pick the meat from the bones" and have extracted the gold, silver and precious stones from them and filtered out the wood, hay and stubble.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

How do you personally discern that? Because this subject is not something new, its been happening even throughout biblical days.

Since there's a spiritual element to it that confounds logic ... it's important to have consensus.

 

[RadiantGrace]

I spent the first twelve years of my Christian life in the Pentecostal movement, which had a lot of anti-intellectualism in it. This put me off doing formal theology study for many years. It is a pity because I could have started my studies 30 years before I did. In that movement there were many who claimed "new revelation" through "The Holy Spirit told me", and these turned out to be damaging nonsense and in many cases brought the Pentecostal movement into disrepute. Unfortunately, there are many areas of the Charismatic movement that still have the same attitudes.

I have read of lot a sound-doctrine commentaries and books, and some have been anti-Charismatic, but I have been able to "pick the meat from the bones" and have extracted the gold, silver and precious stones from them and filtered out the wood, hay and stubble.

I enjoyed your posts and sharing of your experience of something I am beginning to understand. You seemed to have a similar thought with me - Christians are encouraged to leave their brains at the door and trust in the Holy Spirit. Don't bother with complicated theological issues, history, academic approaches to the bible - we should just trust in the Holy Spirit.

Being a Christian has become a pursuit of ignorance, of living in the dark out of fear of the complexities and uncertainties that are found when asking genuine questions, instead of living in stubborn assurance.

We are all limited in our intelligence and our capacities to understand and there is no shame in that. In this way, we know that God would not ask us to know or understand things beyond that. However, to deliberately limit our knowledge, of things spiritual or material, is not virtuous. It is cowardice.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

It is true that one needs the Spirit to properly interpret the Bible.

I really want to say yes, but I think the answer may be closer to yes and no, it depends. The Spirit produces belief in the Scriptures, generating an utmost value, utmost significance and reverence for the Scriptures in the hearts of believers. Unfortunately, it is also true that many non-believers have a greater intellectual understanding of Scripture than many believers. So one needs the Spirit, to have the proper heart for interpreting and receiving the blessings of the Spirit, such as the fear of the Lord, a life changing reverence for the Holiness of God and blessings such as confidence in the God of Scripture, which non-believers do not have.

But folks also have to believe what their Bible says in their own language, as well.

And that is a major problem today, too many play "choose your own adventure" with the Bible.

Sometimes certain folk try to redefine the Bible to what they want it to say with a dead language that they did not grow up writing or speaking. Words can be easy to fudge or change with a language that is not their own with another man's biased religious dictionary. But usually regular dictionaries in our own language are not so biased like that.

In general, I probably notice the least bias in dictionaries, especially religious dictionaries, especially in dictionaries like Strong's for example, all of which are of great value. It is more common to find religious bias in a secularized dictionaries especially pertaining to religious meaning. However, dictionaries like the first American dictionary by Noah Webster, have an intended Christian bias, that is to be applauded.

Personally, in addition to prayer, the context and looking at older dictionaries helps a man or woman of God to understand what God's Word is saying. For God is simple; He is not complicated. His words are simple and pure and good.

I am sorry, but could not help but notice the comment "God is simple", which is something my own dad might say, but...simply is not true. Take the Chalcedonian Creed (451 A.D.) for example, it states:

"Following, then, the holy Fathers, we all unanimously teach that our Lord Jesus Christ is to us One and the same Son, the Self-same Perfect in Godhead, the Self-same Perfect in Manhood; truly God and truly Man; the Self-same of a rational soul and body; co-essential with the Father according to the Godhead, the Self-same co-essential with us according to the Manhood; like us in all things, sin apart; before the ages begotten of the Father as to the Godhead, but in the last days, the Self-same, for us and for our salvation (born) of Mary the Virgin Theotokos as to the Manhood; One and the Same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten; acknowledged in Two Natures unconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the difference of the Natures being in no way removed because of the Union, but rather the properties of each Nature being preserved, and (both) concurring into One Person and One Hypostasis; not as though He were parted or divided into Two Persons, but One and the Self-same Son and Only-begotten God, Word, Lord, Jesus Christ; even as from the beginning the prophets have taught concerning Him, and as the Lord Jesus Christ Himself hath taught us, and as the Symbol of the Fathers hath handed down to us."

And we could go over other creeds the Nicene, Athanasian, Augustine's Trinitarian writings, other mountainous works on the attributes of God, and with all that we can know through Scripture and the great works by intellectual giants of the Christian faith, and as finite creatures still come to the conclusion that we do not and cannot know God exhaustively in all of His glory, that we see as through a glass darkly, and there remains mystery in God we will never comprehend this side of Heaven.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I really want to say yes, but I think the answer may be closer to yes and no, it depends. The Spirit produces belief in the Scriptures, generating an utmost value, utmost significance and reverence for the Scriptures in the hearts of believers. Unfortunately, it is also true that many non-believers have a greater intellectual understanding of Scripture than many believers. So one needs the Spirit, to have the proper heart for interpreting and receiving the blessings of the Spirit, such as the fear of the Lord, a life changing reverence for the Holiness of God and blessings such as confidence in the God of Scripture, which non-believers do not have.

No. An unbeliever cannot properly understand the Holy Scriptures without the Holy Spirit.
Jesus said to the disciples that the Spirit will guide them into all truth (John 14:26).
John said that the believers he was writing to did not need any man to teach them but they had an anointing (i.e. the Holy Spirit) to teach them all things (1 John 2:27).

And that is a major problem today, too many play "choose your own adventure" with the Bible.

Yes, but we have to pray for them and love them (of course).

In general, I probably notice the least bias in dictionaries, especially religious dictionaries, especially in dictionaries like Strong's for example, all of which are of great value. It is more common to find religious bias in a secularized dictionaries especially pertaining to religious meaning. However, dictionaries like the first American dictionary by Noah Webster, have an intended Christian bias, that is to be applauded.

Later dictionaries are becoming more intolerant against religion slightly. I like Webster's 1913 Dictionary here:

Online Dictionary and Translations

As for Strong's:
Well, I do not believe the work is inspired by God. It is handy sometimes but many of my deep studies did not involve the Strongs. I have a problem with folks using it sometimes because they act like they know Hebrew and Greek when nobody really knows these languages. They are guessing. Nobody alive today grew up speaking and writing Biblical Hebrew and Greek. It should not be the sole means by which we understand the Bible. For me it is a infrequent tool that I use.

I am sorry, but could not help but notice the comment "God is simple", which is something my own dad might say, but...simply is not true. Take the Chalcedonian Creed (451 A.D.) for example, it states:

"Following, then, the holy Fathers, we all unanimously teach that our Lord Jesus Christ is to us One and the same Son, the Self-same Perfect in Godhead, the Self-same Perfect in Manhood; truly God and truly Man; the Self-same of a rational soul and body; co-essential with the Father according to the Godhead, the Self-same co-essential with us according to the Manhood; like us in all things, sin apart; before the ages begotten of the Father as to the Godhead, but in the last days, the Self-same, for us and for our salvation (born) of Mary the Virgin Theotokos as to the Manhood; One and the Same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten; acknowledged in Two Natures unconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the difference of the Natures being in no way removed because of the Union, but rather the properties of each Nature being preserved, and (both) concurring into One Person and One Hypostasis; not as though He were parted or divided into Two Persons, but One and the Self-same Son and Only-begotten God, Word, Lord, Jesus Christ; even as from the beginning the prophets have taught concerning Him, and as the Lord Jesus Christ Himself hath taught us, and as the Symbol of the Fathers hath handed down to us."

And we could go over other creeds the Nicene, Athanasian, Augustine's Trinitarian writings, other mountainous works on the attributes of God, and with all that we can know through Scripture and the great works by intellectual giants of the Christian faith, and as finite creatures still come to the conclusion that we do not and cannot know God exhaustively in all of His glory, that we see as through a glass darkly, and there remains mystery in God we will never comprehend this side of Heaven.

I am not making a generalized statement about GOD. The semi colon was there to continue my line of thinking. The context of what I am saying is that GOD is simple in the way that He communicates to His followers. Remember, Jesus explained his parables to the disciples whereas He did not do that for those who did not believe.