Biblical Interpretation

[Ric2019]

I have been reading the Bible cover-to-cover using many English translations for over 30 years. It amazes me when I talk to others who read the very same words of scripture and interpret the scriptures in so many inconsistent ways. Ways that I am sure the divinely inspired human authors never intended.

It begs the question that "are the scriptures no better than an Oijii board with the scripture's meaning subjectively determined by the one receiving it?" Or do the scriptures contain objective truths that do not change?

I believe the scriptures contain objective truth even if I sometimes am unable to correctly interpret them.

I am of the mind that believes, as a general principle, every scripture has one correct interpretation and only one. However, a passage of scripture may have more than one application, which is something different than interpretation. Interpretation asks the question, "based on the historical and geographical context of the scripture being studied and based on the original auidence, what was the author trying to say?" Even though I might not always get to the right interpretation every time, that fact does not mean that there is not a single correct interpretation, which is why the role of God's Spirit helping to understand what has been written is so important.

 

[tourist]

There may indeed be only a single interpretation but only God knows what it is in most instances. Not every single passage applies equally, if at all, to everyone. I believe also that there are interpretation of scripture that were intended for just a few or a certain one as well as interpreted scripture that applies to everyone in general.

Be careful yourself that your interpretation of certain scripture is not itself slanted towards your own bias as a means to validate your narrative. This is called wresting of scripture but of course, this is just my interpretation or perception.

I am currently in my 5 reading of the entire bible and I am always amazed when sometimes I read a verse or passage and it reads like it was my very first time reading it and offers a fresh perspective or even a totally new direction.

You are correct that it is the role of the Holy Spirit to enlighten the reader on the true understanding of a particular piece of scripture, especially if the particular understanding is meant for that unique individual.

 

[Ric2019]

Be careful yourself that your interpretation of certain scripture is not itself slanted towards your own bias as a means to validate your narrative. This is called wresting of scripture but of course, this is just my interpretation or perception.

Thanks for the response. Actually, I initially learned the Bible with an "over-reliance" on others' teaching of what scripture said. It was not until I came to a point in my life to be totally transparent before God that I began to really understand the Bible and let the Bible speak for itself. My desire was, and still is, to be as objective as possible when I approach the sacred text.

Like Paul in Damascus after his conversion, I restudied the scriptures and what I had been taught in my youth. I started with hermenutics, textual criticism (I am not sure if it is called that anymore) and the Biblical languages. After arriving at my own convictions on the major topics of the Bible, I studied other theologies and doctrinal positions with the intent of testing my own understanding.

I don't claim to be 100% free of bias, but I do know what I believe and why I believe it. In interpretation, I try to adhere to exegesis over eisegesis.

 

[Deade]

Thanks for the response. Actually, I initially learned the Bible with an "over-reliance" on others' teaching of what scripture said. It was not until I came to a point in my life to be totally transparent before God that I began to really understand the Bible and let the Bible speak for itself. My desire was, and still is, to be as objective as possible when I approach the sacred text.

Amen to this. The hardest part of letting God teach me from His word was mt lifelong assumptions about what the Bible really said. It is hard to throw out everything you thought the Bible said and learn what it really says. Antichrist has had his way with our traditions.

 

[Bingo]

"The things of God are revealed by the Holy Spirit, and do not come from the heart of man.* Correct interpretation of the Bible is therefore impossible without the illuminating work of the Holy Spirit in the mind and heart of the believer. God's Spirit must enlighten human darkness - not as an addition to our wisdom, but as the absolutely essential source of the only true wisdom - first of all in order that we may be born again, and secondly so that we may understand His Word properly."
'Praise God'

 

[Deuteronomy]

Hi Ric2019, first off, I see that you are still pretty new around here, so welcome to CChat

I have been reading the Bible cover-to-cover using many English translations for over 30 years. It amazes me when I talk to others who read the very same words of scripture and interpret the scriptures in so many inconsistent ways. Ways that I am sure the divinely inspired human authors never intended.

I have posted out here (in online Christendom) for more than 20 years now, & I can say w/o hesitation that there are many, even right here at CChat, who will say the very same thing about your conclusions/interpretations of the Holy Writ (whatever they may be ).

It begs the question that "are the scriptures no better than an Oijii board with the scripture's meaning subjectively determined by the one receiving it?" Or do the scriptures contain objective truths that do not change?

There is nothing wrong with the Scriptures, obviously, it's the improper ways that we choose to interpret them that makes the difference. For instance, many approach the Bible with a preconceived notion, a presupposition about who God is, what He is like, how He needs to act, etc., because they need to fulfill their particular presupposition(s) which they 'know' is true. So they look for ways that the truth of the Bible can be bent a little to fit nicely with their presupposition(s), and they justify doing so with the assurance that their presupposition is correct (so for folks like this, it's the proper Biblical exegesis that must be wrong instead).

The Roman Catholic dogma of Mary, rather than Jesus, as the Immaculate Conception, comes quickly to mind.

I believe the scriptures contain objective truth even if I sometimes am unable to correctly interpret them.

I have a friend, who is a Conservative Jewish rabbi, who did his doctrinal dissertation on the Gospel of John (of all things ). I know of very few pastors or theologians who know and understand the Gospel of John better than He does, including things like who Jesus really is, the way of salvation that is taught there, etc. However, while he understands and can explain it perfectly well (and that as a Christian would do/IOW, from a Christian's perspective), my friend's problem is that he doesn't/will not believe or accept it as the truth.

I also know a professor, an atheist Jewish theologian and linguist in this case, who can do a proper exegesis of passages from either the OT or the New, as well. His problem is the same as my rabbi friend's problem however, because while he understands and exegetes the passages from the Bible correctly, he doesn't believe a word of it.

I believe what these two men taught me is somewhat profound, because they make it clear that a proper/consistent/orthodox exegesis of a verse or passage of Scripture is possible, even for a non-Christian (~even~ for an atheist, non-Christian), so it seems to me that we Christians must muddy the waters with the baggage we often insist on bringing to the table with us. I believe that's a big part of what gets some Christians in trouble, and what stops them from arriving at the God-intended meaning of certain verses/passages in the Bible.

Sadly, when confronted with a proper exegesis, one that they have had to admit to themselves is correct, I've heard them say things like this, "well, if that's what God is really like, then I want nothing to do with Him"

~Deut

 

[Ric2019]

Thanks for your response!

In my opinion, I think confusion reigns when Christians don't distinguish between interpretation and application. Many seem to want to skip or avoid interpretation and go directly to application disregarding what a passage is saying in context. It is that contextual understanding that helps us to make a meaningful personal obedient application of scripture that pleases and honors God. Exegesis is not the end all, but only the beginning. Exegesis alone does not honor God, obedience (application) to the Word does.

 

[Deuteronomy]

Thanks for your response!

In my opinion, I think confusion reigns when Christians don't distinguish between interpretation and application. Many seem to want to skip or avoid interpretation and go directly to application disregarding what a passage is saying in context. It is that contextual understanding that helps us to make a meaningful personal obedient application of scripture that pleases and honors God. Exegesis is not the end all, but only the beginning. Exegesis alone does not honor God, obedience (application) to the Word does.

Thanks! I agree with all of the points you just made.

Sadly, my two Jewish friends make your points for you, because for all of their outstanding scholarship/knowledge/understanding, which certainly includes their ability to make a proper interpretation of the Biblical text, they do not believe Him, or His words .. cf 1 Corinthians 1:18, 2:14, because they do not know Him.

I believe that Hebrews 10:26-27 was written about certain 1st Century Jews who participated in the life of the church back then, but who were, in fact, just like my two friends are today, men/women of remarkable understanding, who had a full knowledge of who Jesus really is (Lord & Savior), but they rejected the truth/rejected Him anyway

~Deut

 

[tumeric]

when interpretations and/or translations cause an unbeliever and/or believer to err or fall away should be the criteria for interpretations and/or translations of sacred script / doesn't PAUL write about this in some his letters???

 

[Ric2019]

There is a lot to be unbundled in your question.

First of all, let's talk about translations. A translation is a formal process of translating words or text from one language into another.
When applied to the Bible, some translations are literal and some are loose. But without English translations of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, many of us would not have Bibles that we could read and understand. The role of the translator is so important because they make decisions to handle situations where there are no word-for-word equivalencies between the languages. In some cases, proverbial expressions make no sense in English when translated literally. I realize that there are debates as to which translation approach might make for a "good" or "bad" translation. Typically these debates are around what sources are used for the translations, technical points of grammar, and/or how literal a translation is. But from my research, most translators feel we can be confident that our English translations are relaible renderings of the original languages. In fact, there is a whole field of study dedicated to just this issue. But back to your question as to, can a translation be responsible for misleading a believer. Sure, it is possible, as evidenced by Bible translations produced by certain psudeo-Christian cults. But I also recognize the role of the Holy Spirit to illuminate scripture so that it may be properly understood (interpretation) and then applied.

Now, let's talk about interpretations. An interpretation is simply explaining the meaning of something. Everytime you read a passage of scripture, you are making an interpretation of it whether you realize it or not. You are associating meaning to what you read. So, how do we know we are on the right track with our own interpretations. For me, there are several things I can do to check my own interpretations:

1. I am a believer who accepts the authority of the scriptures.
2. I use scripture to explain other scripture. Frequently, the clue to interpreting a passage is within the context of the passage being read, or in other instances, elsewhere in scipture. A good Bible concordance is invaluable in this process.
3. I have faith that the Holy Spirit will help guide me to understand what I read and what I need from it.
4. For me for a teaching to be considered Biblical, it must include everything (every passage ) that refers to the teaching, This helps to ensure that interpretation of a teaching is comprehensive and thus balanced.

I think Paul is more concerned about confronting "false teaching" that potentially leads believers to err, rather than translations or interpretations. In his letter to Timothy, Paul writes that the authorship and authority of scripture is ultimately God (2 Tim 3:16).

 

[tumeric]

was it not that a group of ROMAN CATHOLIC prelates who decided what the christian bible should look like / then was it not a group of protestant prelates decided what the christian bible should look like ???? as i am a free thinker about the written word , i could care little about what books should be at the top according to what the elite scholars of various religions choose as "' biblical "" . for me all scripture that "" inspires me "" for belief , love,and hope in JESUS THE CHRIST is sacred . because of the corruption that is so prevalent in todays christian activities that people are choosing not to join in public adoration and prayer .we must cease being hostile and denigrating toward other christian beliefs that are in brotherhood with the teachings of JESUS THE CHRIST and stop our unholy judgements

 

[Ric2019]

>> was it not that a group of ROMAN CATHOLIC prelates who decided what the christian bible should look like

Not really so. From a well researched view on where we got our Bible, check out:

https://carm.org/catholic/did-roman-catholic-church-give-us-our-bible

 

[tumeric]

as the apostles wanted to discredit those who were performing miracles in the name of JESUS THE CHRIST it was JESUS THE CHRIST who told HIS apostles that they who teach in HIS name are with HIM / as PAUL taught ---- we are a brothers as CHRISTIANS / SATAN loves a HOUSE DIVIDED