"Rule of First Mention"

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#1
this thread is inspired by a comment i saw on another thread...

the 'rule of first mention' is a hermeneutical principle that some christians use in interpreting the bible...the idea is that a word used in scripture is generally defined by its first usage... i don't know what the origin of this 'rule' is but i don't see it being commanded anywhere in scripture itself...

personally i would be concerned that this risks a lot of 'out of context' interpretation of the biblical vocabulary...

i think that a more reliable hermeneutical principle would be a 'rule of proximity' or 'rule of nearest mention'...

opinions anyone?
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
55,247
25,718
113
#2
I think context might be more important. The first time a word is used or even the closest use in terms of physical proximity within the text may either or both be in such different contexts that the meaning would be different.
 

Sac49

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2016
582
30
0
#3
I agree. I think context is more important. If we were to use the rule of first mention then just think of what verses might change according to that. I can only imagine the messed up theologies that would transpire from that. Certain words have different meanings according to the context in which they are used.
 

HQ

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2014
196
6
18
#5
World view is important as well. Many old testament passages get misinterpreted by modern-day readers because they don't look at the world through the same lens that the ancients did.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
3,992
927
113
#6
Yea this is all about understanding the fruit, you go to the root.

God bless
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,540
3,503
113
#7
this thread is inspired by a comment i saw on another thread...

the 'rule of first mention' is a hermeneutical principle that some christians use in interpreting the bible...the idea is that a word used in scripture is generally defined by its first usage... i don't know what the origin of this 'rule' is but i don't see it being commanded anywhere in scripture itself...

personally i would be concerned that this risks a lot of 'out of context' interpretation of the biblical vocabulary...

i think that a more reliable hermeneutical principle would be a 'rule of proximity' or 'rule of nearest mention'...

opinions anyone?
It's about comparing Scripture to Scripture.

The first mention principle allows the Bible student to let the Bible define itself. When a word or phrase is first mentioned in Scripture, the meaning through context will stay true for that word throughout Scripture. Words are important to God, not just meaning. Let me give you an example. Let's say I was reading in 2 Corinthians 4 and I have no idea what the word vessel means.

2 Corinthians 4:6-7 "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to [give] the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. 7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us."

I find the first mention of the word vessel in Genesis 43:11, "And their father Israel said unto them, If [it must be] so now, do this; take of the best fruits in the land in your vessels, and carry down the man a present, a little balm, and a little honey, spices, and myrrh, nuts, and almonds:"

Here, we are given that a vessel is something that carries something from one place to another. The vessel here carries the best fruits in the land. So I go back to 2 Corinthians and see that we have in ourselves the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ. We are the carriers of that knowledge in this world.

Most first mentions are located in Genesis, the book of beginnings, the book of Job(oldest book), and Matthew, the first book in the new testament. I use this principle frequently when I come across a word that either I don't understand, or I want further explanation.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,540
3,503
113
#8
I agree. I think context is more important. If we were to use the rule of first mention then just think of what verses might change according to that. I can only imagine the messed up theologies that would transpire from that. Certain words have different meanings according to the context in which they are used.
Example please...
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#10
It's about comparing Scripture to Scripture.

The first mention principle allows the Bible student to let the Bible define itself. When a word or phrase is first mentioned in Scripture, the meaning through context will stay true for that word throughout Scripture. Words are important to God, not just meaning. Let me give you an example. Let's say I was reading in 2 Corinthians 4 and I have no idea what the word vessel means.

2 Corinthians 4:6-7 "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to [give] the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. 7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us."

I find the first mention of the word vessel in Genesis 43:11, "And their father Israel said unto them, If [it must be] so now, do this; take of the best fruits in the land in your vessels, and carry down the man a present, a little balm, and a little honey, spices, and myrrh, nuts, and almonds:"

Here, we are given that a vessel is something that carries something from one place to another. The vessel here carries the best fruits in the land. So I go back to 2 Corinthians and see that we have in ourselves the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ. We are the carriers of that knowledge in this world.

Most first mentions are located in Genesis, the book of beginnings, the book of Job(oldest book), and Matthew, the first book in the new testament. I use this principle frequently when I come across a word that either I don't understand, or I want further explanation.
i would consider the example you gave to be a 'trivial' example in that the meaning of 'vessels' was not in question...

a more convincing example to show the value of the 'rule of first mention' would be an example where the principle aids in understanding a difficult passage...
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#11
another issue is just thought of is...what if the 'first mention' is obscure? a misunderstanding of the meaning of the term in its first mention could lead to misunderstandings in other locations in scripture in which the meaning should have been self explanatory...

maybe the principle should be a 'rule of clearest mention'
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,780
2,940
113
#12
In Hebrew, it seems to be fairly solid.

Just curious - where did you get your Hebrew training? Because I studied the language in seminary. We read a lot of the Old Testament and studied the words, the context, etc. I never heard of a "first mention" principle. But I do see why so many are mislead, if they are using that as a basis for doctrine.

For one thing, the Bible was not written in the order it occurs in the English Bible. A Hebrew Bible has very different order for the way the books are placed. 1 & 2 Chronicles, were among the last books written, and appear at the very end of the Hebrew OT. In English, they follow 1 & 2 Kings, because there are similarities. Although, reading 1 Chronicles right now, and none of the other 4 books of 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 & 2 Kings have anything like the endless and confusing genealogies that 1 Chronicles starts with.

Anyway, let me know who you trained under for your Hebrew, Disciple Mike. I am very curious to know!
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,780
2,940
113
#13
I studied hermeneutics in one seminary, and Hebrew in another. I took other courses for transfer credit in a third seminary. All these seminaries used the same principles for interpreting the Bible, and NONE of them used this fictitious "first mention" principle.

Here are some recommended books to study if you want to know how to interpret Scripture.

Introduction to Biblical Interpretation by William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr.

Reading the Good Book Well: A guide to Biblical Interpretation by Jerry Camery-Hoggatt

And a very simple, but excellent starter book:

How to Read the Bible for All its Worth
by Gordan D. Fee and Douglas Stuart.

(Not directing this to the OP, who I am sure has lots of information on properly interpreting the Bible.)
 

Sac49

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2016
582
30
0
#14
Just a question but arent some of the oldest Biblical manuscrits written in Aramaic also?
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#15
I studied hermeneutics in one seminary, and Hebrew in another. I took other courses for transfer credit in a third seminary. All these seminaries used the same principles for interpreting the Bible, and NONE of them used this fictitious "first mention" principle.
the closest thing i have found in any of the references i trust is the 'analogy of scripture' method in an older reference work called 'the treasury of scripture knowledge'...

but 'analogy of scripture' recommends taking -all- passages relevant to a word or concept into account and does not assign priority to the scriptures in any particular order...
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,780
2,940
113
#16
Biblical Aramaic was the form of Aramaic used in the parts of the books of Daniel, Ezra and a few other places in the Hebrew Bible. Not to be confused with the Targumim.

Here is a list of undisputed and suggested places where Aramaic appears in ancient manuscripts. This represents only a small sum of the actual OT writings.

[h=3]Undisputed occurrences[edit][/h]
  • Genesis 31:47 – translation of a Hebrew placename, Jegar-Sahadutha Strong's #H3026
  • Jeremiah 10:11 – a single sentence denouncing idolatry occurs in the middle of a Hebrew text.
  • Daniel 2:4b–7:28 – five stories about Daniel and his colleagues, and an apocalyptic vision.
  • Ezra 4:8–6:18 and 7:12–26 – quotations of documents from the 5th century BCE on the restoration of the Temple in Jerusalem.
[h=3]Other suggested occurrences[edit][/h]
  • Genesis 15:1 – the word במחזה (ba-maħaze, "in a vision"). According to the Zohar (I:88b), the word is Aramaic, as the usual Hebrew word would be במראה (ba-mar’e).
  • Numbers 23:10 – the word רבע (rôḇa‘, usually translated as "stock" or "fourth part"). Joseph H. Hertz, in his commentary on this verse, cites Friedrich Delitzsch's claim (cited in William F. Albright' JBL 63 (1944), p. 213, n.28) that it is an Aramaic word meaning "dust".
  • Job 36:2a – Rashi, in his commentary on the verse, states that the phrase is in Aramaic.
  • Psalm 2:12 – the word בר (bar) is interpreted by some Christian sources (including the King James Version) to be the Aramaic word for "son" and renders the phrase נשקו-בר (nashəqū-bar) as "kiss the Son," a reference to Jesus. Jewish sources and some Christian sources (including Jerome's Vulgate) follow the Hebrew reading of בר ("purity") and translate the phrase as "embrace purity." See Psalm 2 for further discussion of the controversy.
 

Sac49

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2016
582
30
0
#17
So basically doesnt this make the "Hebrew" argument "it seems solid" kind of pointless as not all of the manuscripts we have are written in Hebrew? If it does "hold water" then shouldnt the same be said about the Aramaic also?

I dont know either Hebrew or Aramaic so if we use the "rule of first mention" it should match both Hebrew and Aramaic correct?
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#18
this thread is inspired by a comment i saw on another thread...

the 'rule of first mention' is a hermeneutical principle that some christians use in interpreting the bible...the idea is that a word used in scripture is generally defined by its first usage... i don't know what the origin of this 'rule' is but i don't see it being commanded anywhere in scripture itself...

personally i would be concerned that this risks a lot of 'out of context' interpretation of the biblical vocabulary...

i think that a more reliable hermeneutical principle would be a 'rule of proximity' or 'rule of nearest mention'...

opinions anyone?
I don't know squat about hermeneutical principles. Never even dawned on me they existed, until you just said they do. (And now I'm having a duh-now moment. Of course they exist!)

But it is a rule of writing said differently. The writing rule is "The first use of the word, particular when defined, sets the terms for that word in the rest of the writing." That doesn't mean it can't be used later on as a metaphor, but to use it as a metaphor, one must first understand the meaning of the word.

The example of this in the Bible is "day." The first time it was used, it was also defined. (Genesis 1:4-5 -- [FONT=&quot]And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.[/FONT]) So later on when it said a day is like a thousand years, (Psalm 90 and 2 Pet. 3:8), day had been defined before, so there is no confusion it is a metaphor.

So, not so much commanded in scripture. More of a good way to communicate.
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#19
another issue is just thought of is...what if the 'first mention' is obscure? a misunderstanding of the meaning of the term in its first mention could lead to misunderstandings in other locations in scripture in which the meaning should have been self explanatory...

maybe the principle should be a 'rule of clearest mention'
Well, some of the words still are very obscure. It has been been 2000 or more years since first written, those languages are all but dead, and it has been translated, but I don't get where that changes anything. Can you give an example? (Again. I've got no background in studying hermeneutics, so this doesn't mean I can answer your question. I'm just trying to understand your question. I'm not in this to argue. I'm interested in learning.)
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#20
Well, some of the words still are very obscure. It has been been 2000 or more years since first written, those languages are all but dead, and it has been translated, but I don't get where that changes anything. Can you give an example? (Again. I've got no background in studying hermeneutics, so this doesn't mean I can answer your question. I'm just trying to understand your question. I'm not in this to argue. I'm interested in learning.)
an example of obscure mentions being used to interpret the meaning of the word in other verses would be the whole 'nephilim' debate...