For Iconoclast I think it will be helpful for me to explain my hermeneutic or parameters for interpreting the Bible. My method begins with the instruction of Paul (1THS 5:21) to “Test everything. Hold on to the good.” A truthseeker wants to know the truth, and is guided by the question: What is most true or closest to the truth? Learning truth involves subjective logic that is made as objective as possible by learning from other truthseekers, preferably via dialogue when possible.
As a result of seeking ultimate truth, I have come to value two NT teachings as key points from which to triangulate or use to guide my interpretation of the Bible, especially problematic statements. First, God loves and wants to save everyone (1TM 2:3-4); Christ died to show God’s love and the possible salvation of all (RM 5:6-8) including His enemies (ungodly, atheist, anti-Christ). Second, God is just (2THS 1:6a, cf. RM 3:25-26 & 9:14, DT 32:4, PS 36:6, LK 11:42, RV 15:3). Explanations of God’s Word should not impugn God’s justice and love for all people (JL 2:13, JN 3:16). I find this hermeneutic affirmed in the OT (PS 145:17): “The Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works.” Triangulate from God’s love & justness.
This principle leads me to conclude that even the wrath of God is an expression of His love and justice. The writer of Hebrews (12:4-11) indicates that divine wrath is intended as discipline or for the purpose of teaching people to repent of their hatefulness and faithlessness (PR 3:12, IS 33:14-15 RV 3:19). If a righteous explanation cannot be found for a passage of Scripture purporting to describe God’s will, then it should be considered as historical or descriptive of what people perceived rather than as pedagogical or prescriptive of God’s nature. Unrighteous rage should not be attributed to God.
The justice of God is a source of comfort and joy to those who have decided to accept His loving Lordship, but it is experienced as judgment or wrath by those who rebel against Him (IS 13:13, RM 1:18, RV 19:11). The fire that warms (purifies) also burns (punishes). Stating God’s requirement for salvation negatively: a person would do well (be wise) not to reject Him in order not to experience the miserable but just consequence (JN 3:17-18). Just consequences teach good behavior.
The method employed in this hermeneutic is additive or eclectic as taught by Paul (in 1THS 5:21), exemplified by Jesus (in MT 4:6-7) and illustrated by the transparent overlays of bodily systems found in some books on anatomy. I want to include all true assertions in the picture of reality without making a “Procrustean Body” by cutting off or ignoring parts that do not seem to fit, because the correct understanding must be self-consistent or else God would be tricky. The whole truth combines parts without sawing!
The Bible says God’s Spirit is love and truth (1JN 4:8 & 5:6), which means all love (agape, RM 6:5-8) in all people is God’s operation, and all truth in all cultures is God’s revelation. Thus, becoming a Christian theist does not mean rejecting what is good and true in one’s pre-Christian experience or culture. As the philosopher Hegel taught: when considering two different understandings (thesis A versus antithesis B), the truth may not be either one or the other but rather the proper harmonization of the two. (Both A and B = synthesis C.)
The Bible teaches (GN 1:3, JN 1:1-3) that both the world and inspired words are expressions of God’s Word/Logos, and thus scientific and spiritual truths must be compatible or else God would be tricky. So, while belief that God is love and Jesus is Lord is based upon the biblical revelation, knowledge also is gleaned from the natural sciences and common sense. While my interpretation of reality is based on the Bible, I utilize logical thinking, especially where the Bible seems silent, hoping that I am guided by the Spirit of Truth (JN 14:17).