Mentoring Men for the Master

MISTAKES IN INTERPRETING THE BIBLE

The Bible is the Word of God and as such cannot have any errors.  But this does not mean there are no difficulties in it.  As Augustine wisely noted, “If we are perplexed by any apparent contradiction in Scripture, it is not allowable to say, the author of this book is mistaken, but either the manuscript is faulty, the translation is wrong or you have not understood.” (St. Augustine, Reply to Faustus the Manichean).

  1. Interpreting the Text out of Context. “A text out of context is a pretext.”  Once can prove anything from the Bible using this approach.  Ex:  The Bible says “There is no God.” (Psalm 14:1), but in context there is the preceeding word, “The fool has said in his heart.”
  2. Basing a Teaching upon an Obscure Passage. Ex:  The Bible speaks of the “baptism of the dead.” (1 Cor. 15:29), but the whole New Testament says true baptism is for true living believers.  The Bible says God answers prayer (Jer. 33:3; Matthew 7:11) but the Bible also says God does not answer some prayers (James 4:3; Prov. 1:23ff).
  3. Forgetting that the Bible Was Written by Human Authors. The Bible was not verbally dictated but written by human beings who employed their own literary styles, but kept from error by the superintendence of the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21).  David wrote from a shepherd’s perspective; Paul wrote from a highly theological perspective.
  4. Presuming the Bible Contains Error Before Even Opening It. The Bible, like any other book, should be presumed to tell the truth as it declares it is (John 17:17).  Negative critics begin with just the opposite presumption.  No wonder they conclude the Bible is riddled with errors.
  5. Confusing Our Fallible Interpretation with God’s Infallible Revelation. Sometimes a biblical teaching rests on a word or phrase, or even the difference between the singular and plural (Gal. 3:16).  But while the Bible is infallible, human interpretations are not.
  6. Interpreting the Bible through The Lens of One’s Theological Perspective. The Bible sets forth the “Sovereignty of God” in many places, and some interpret the Scripture through that lens; but many Scriptures teach human responsibility and to twist those passages to conform to sovereignty does great injustice to the Scriptures.
  7. Interpreting Scripture through The Eyes of Some Theological Giant or Professor We Adore. Ex:  When some people speak of Jesus Christ they are not speaking of Jesus Christ, but John Calvin.  Illus:  I encountered a brother who lectured me for 10 minutes on the “5 points of Calvinism,” after which I asked him, “Are you a Christian?” to which he replied, “You’re crazy, you cannot believe the 5 points and not be a Christian, “to which I replied, “Well you’ve talked for 10 minutes and not mentioned the name of Jesus Christ once.”
  8. Assuming that The Unexplained Is Not Explainable. No one can explain everything in the Bible.  So it is a mistake for the critic to assume that what has not been explained ever will be explained.  When scientists discover an anomaly in nature, they do not cease exploration but uses the unexplained as a motivation to find an explanation.  Ex:  For years scholars said the walls of Jericho never fell, but archeology later discovered the walls so clearly fell  that a very liberal professor said, “I have finally come to believe the walls really fell.”  To which I replied, “I know that encouraged the Lord greatly.”  Ex:  Campbell Morgan, “When I come to a passage I do not understand, I just bow my head and worship God, being convinced more than ever that the Bible is God’s Word and requires more understanding than mere humans possess.”
  9. Neglecting to Interpret Difficult Passages in The Light of Clear Ones.   James appears to teach that salvation is by works (James 2:14-26), whereas Paul taught clearly that salvation is by grace alone, not of works (Ephesus. 2:8-9; Romans 4:5).  However, James did not contradict Paul.  Paul speaks about justification before God (by grace through faith), whereas James speaks of justification before men (who cannot see our faith but only our works.)
  10. Demanding that New Testament Citations of the Old Testament Always Be Exact Quotations. However, this approach forgets two things:
    1. That every citation need not be verbatim. It was then perfectly acceptable to give the essence of a statement without using precisely the same words.
    2. The writers of the New Testament quoted from the Septuagint, Greek translation of the Old Testament.
  11. Assuming that Divergent Accounts Are False Ones. Ex:  Matthew 28:5 says there was one angel at the tomb, John says there were two (20:12).                                                                          These are not contradictory.  Matthew did not say there was only one angel.  One has to add “only” to make Matthew contradict John.
  12. Failing to Note that The Bible Uses Different Literary Devices, such as Poetry (Psalms), Metaphors (James 3:6; 2 Cor. 3:2; Psalm.1), Hyperbole (John 21:25) and even Satire (Matthew 19:24; 23:24). The Bible says the believer rests under the shadow of God’s “wings,” but that does not mean God is a feathered bird. (Psalm 36:7).  The Bible says “God awakes” (Psalm 44:23) as if God were sleeping, when “awake” is a figure of speech indicating God’s inactivity before He is aroused to judgment.  Ex:  One cynical  relative accosted me with the question, “How on earth can “rivers of living water” flow out of me?”  (John 7:38), having no thought the words were “figures of speech.”
  13. Presuming that The Bible Approves What It Records. The Bible is true but it records some lies.  Ex:  Satan’s (Genesis 3:4), Rahab’s (Joshua 2; 4), Solomon 1 Kings 11:3, and sins.
  14. Assuming that The Bible Uses Scientific Language. Written for the common man, the Bible uses what we would call unscientific language.  “The use of…non-scientific language is not unscientific.”[1]  It is merely pre-scientific.  So it is no more   unscientific to speak of the sun “standing still” (Josh. 10:12-13) than to refer to the sun “rising” (Josh. 1:16).
  15. Just Assuming that Round Numbers Are False. Round numbers are just that – round numbers.  Three and fourteen hundredths can be rounded off to three (2 Chron. 4:2, NIV).  The Bible uses round numbers often (1 Chron. 19:18; 21:5).
  16. Forgetting that Only The Original Autographs Are Without Error, Not Every Copy or Translation. One earnest guy said to me, “I don’t see why you preachers fuss about various translations; the King James was good enough for Paul and it’s good enough for me.”  Knowing this brother, I did not make the effort to correct him.  God only uttered the original Scriptures; what we have are manuscripts of the originals, and inspiration does not mean that every copy of the original is without error.  Ex:  1 Cor. 13:5 says, “Agape love is not easily provoked,” but in the best copies we have the adverb “easily” does not appear.  Thus the coppiests were probably thinking the totally positive statement could not be true and tuned it down with “easily.”  While scholars have, through great labors, given us good copies, they are not without minor errors.  Ex:  2 Kings 8:26 gives the age of King Ahaziah as twenty two, while 2 Chron. 22:2 says forty two.  The latter cannot be correct because he would have been older than his father.
  17. Not Understanding that Later Revelation Supersedes Previous Revelation. It is easy to forget the principle of progressive revelation.  God does not reveal everything at once.  Therefore, some of His later revelation will supersede His former revelation.  Ex:  When God created the human race, He commanded that they eat only fruit and vegetables (Gen. 1:29).  But later after conditions changed after the flood, God commanded that they also eat meat. (Gen. 9:3).
  18. Ignoring The Fact that The “Natural Man” without The Holy Spirit “receives not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to them, neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Cor. 2:14). Ex:  One might think if a church was filled with “PhD’s” that church could have the best Sunday School on earth.     The PhD in itself qualifies no one to interpret the Bible.  He may interpret “the letter” of Scripture, but “the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life.” (2 Cor. 3:6).  Illus:  When I left the pastorate to return and earn my PhD my closest friend said, “I hate for you to get your PhD.”  I asked, “Why?”  and he said, “Because I fear you will lose all your fire and become just another “Dr. Sounding Brass” or “Professor Dry as Dust.”  But when I returned this same person heard me preach and said, “PTL – you haven’t lost your fire, but preach better than ever.”  I took this to be the finest compliment I ever received.
  19. Trying to Interpret The Word of God While Not Loving The Word of God. The written Word and Living Word are inseparable. Thus the Apostle John writes that if one denies that Jesus came in the flesh (through the virgin birth) he has the “spirit of Anti-Christ.” (1 John 4:3).  Our higher institutions, including famous seminaries, have professors who deny the virgin birth, the deity of Jesus, the inspiration of the Scriptures.  Some university professors teach religion who are atheists.  I think I have sat under some.  Such men have no more ability to interpret the Scriptures than I have to fly a jet plane.
  20. Attempting to Interpret The Scripture Without Prayer, much prayer and more prayer.
  21. Seeking to Understand Mysteries God Has Not Revealed.  “The secret things belong to the Lord our God; but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.” (Deut. 29:29).    Ex:  God has not revealed the “day and hour” Jesus will return to earth (Matthew 24:36), yet hundreds have set dates for His coming throughout history.  Ex:  In 1988 one man wrote a book entitled 88 Reasons the Rapture Will Occur in 1988 and sold 3,500,000 copies.  I went to Israel with 150 evangelicals in 1991 only to meet a Psychiatrist who called me aside and said, “Jesus told me that He would come on January 19, 1992.”  Yet the error persists and even in 2010 men have predicted the time of the Second Coming.  In 1995 a business man came forth when I was preaching and said to me, “I am the Messiah.”  This happened to me in the city of Wilmington.
  22. Confusing General Statements with Universal Ones. Some critics seize upon verses which offer general truths and then point with glee to exceptions.  Ex:  The Book of Proverbs 16:7 says, “when a man’s ways please the Lord, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him.”  This obviously was not intended to be a universal truth.  Paul was pleasing the Lord and his enemies stoned him (Acts 14:19).  Another example:  “Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it.”  (Prov. 22:6).  However other Scriptures show that this is not always true; in fact some godly persons in the Bible had very wayward children (David).  “Proverbs are not designed to be absolute guarantees.  Rather, they express truths that provide helpful advice and guidance by which an individual should conduct his or her daily life.”[2]
  23. Using Historical Experiences as Imperatives Today. Ex:  We read history to understand the life of God’s people in the past, but we should not read    the experience of the past as absolute imperatives for us today.  Rather we should go to the didactical portions of the Scriptures, namely, the epistles to know what is binding on us today.  For instance, Acts 2:4 states that “All were filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues,” and many take this verse as an imperative for every Christian.  However, Paul in his letter to the Corinthians declares that all do not speak in tongues (1 Cor. 12:30).  Later in his Ephesians   epistle, Paul commands that every Christian be filled with the Holy Spirit (5:18) but makes no mention of speaking in tongues as imperative (Ephesians 5:19ff).  One zealous church I knew read the history of the Israelites marching around Jericho 7   times, and they marched around their city 7 times. This church is non-existent today, evidently collapsing because of its bizarre action, not commanded in Scripture.  Alas, many religious groups experience the same fate, all the time believing they have biblical warrant for their aberrations.
  24. Mixing The Old Covenant with The New Covenant. 20:10c declares that “the adulterer and adulteress shall surely be put to death.”  But in John 8:11 we read that Jesus said to the adulteress woman, “I do not condemn thee, go and sin no more.”  This does not mean that Jesus abrogated or replaced the moral content of the Old Testament law.  “He neither gives a new law… but rather explains the true significance of the Moses law…”[3]   In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus explains how grace under the New Covenant has brought all the moral requirements of the law to their highest meaning (Matthew 5-7).  The Apostle Paul assures us that  the “righteous requirements of the law” are fulfilled by the Holy Spirit within the believer (Acts 8:2-4
  25. Perhaps The Very Worst Mistake in Interpreting The Bible is to make the verse say something that it does not say at all, though it may appear to do so.   “The Bible says if you confess your sins God will forgive you (1 John 1:9).”  These familiar words are often quoted as a formula for salvation.  But the presence of “we” in this verse makes it clear that John was not addressing the unsaved     but the saved.  We re not saved by merely admitting our sins but by believing the gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

Conclusion:  In the light of these aforesaid mistakes, I would urge students to take courses in hermeneutics, biblical interpretation, and obey the command of God in 2 Tim. 2:15, “Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman who need not be ashamed, rightly diving the word of truth.”  Such an approach may obliterate some old sermons but which indeed need to be put to death before they do great damage to the hearers.

[1] Geisler, Book of Bible Difficulties, p. 22.

[2] Ibid.  Geisler, p. 25.

[3] MacArthur, Bible Commentary, p. 1130.