Principles for Bible Interpretation

Transcript

GRM 970
09/17/2006
Principles for Bible Interpretation
Selected Verses
Gil Rugh

An area that I want to cover in light of… particularly material that is coming up in our study of 1 Corinthians… but in light of just general issues that face the evangelical, Bible-believing church in our day. I want to talk about the matter of hermeneutics or the interpretation of the Bible. And these are going to be some miscellaneous observations on the matter of hermeneutics, which simply means interpretation and the principles of interpreting the scripture.

We believe the Bible is the Word of God. The next step is understanding the Word of God. You know, I was thinking, everything hinges on interpretation. It’s one thing to declare you believe the Bible is the Word of God, but then people will follow-up and say, everybody has their own interpretation. I can’t tell you the number of people who have said to me as I talked to them about the Bible, well, that’s your interpretation, as though everybody has a right to have their own interpretation of the Bible. Life doesn’t work that way. For example, I used to live on a street that the speed limit out in the street that ran in front of our house was 25 mph. Periodically they would set up a speed trap, sometimes right on the corner. Our house was on the corner and I could pull up my chair and have the joy of watching those caught in their transgressions.

Now if someone is stopped and the officer said, speed limit is 25, you were doing 45. That’s breaking the law. And the person, says, well, that’s your interpretation, officer. No, that’s not my interpretation, that’s what the sign says, 25. Well, officer, I understand that sign to be taken a couple of ways, because you know figures can be reversed and inverted and changed, so I think the person who put that sign together really had in mind the speed limit goes from 25-52. But instead of wasting money on two signs, they just put one and you’re expected to know it could be between 25 and 52. And I’m sure I’m right, because look, most of the people here are going a lot faster than 25. So we can assume they understand it the way I do. You say, well, wait a minute, that won’t stand. You go to court on that, it won’t work. But I stand (not me, of course, I wouldn’t do it), but the person stands in court and tells the judge. The judge says, the speed limit is 25, you were doing 45, you broke the law. No, judge, that’s your interpretation. We say there is only one interpretation that is correct and one that will stand.

And basically that’s the way we function in life, that’s how we can communicate. Every day of your life you talk to people with the assumption that you communicate and understand. You give your children instructions with the assumption they understand. We can communicate. Yet somehow when people come to the Bible they just think, it can mean anything to anyone. I was speaking to a theology class at a secular school here in town, well, not totally secular but in name, but they have different convictions than I have. And as I got into the presentation the professor got a little bit agitated and finally he just blurted out, but that’s your interpretation. I say, well, I think it’s the only interpretation of what this passage says. His view, when we read the passage, was I could interpret that twelve different ways. Which means what? The passage basically says nothing; everybody can make it say what they want to say. Now think about it, the God who created us, has chosen to communicate to us, but He has done it in such a confused way that everyone gets something different out of what he says. That’s not very good communication. Then when you stop and think about it, it’s irrational to think that the God who created us to communicate would communicate with us in such a way.

Now there are certain things that I am going to assume that we’ve talked about at other times and in other studies. We cannot cover everything every time. And one is that the Bible is the Word of God. Two passages, one in the Old Testament, Isaiah 40. Isaiah 40, and here God is having Isaiah draw a contrast between man and God, between what man is and does and says and the character of God and His revealed Word. Isaiah 40:6, a voice says, call out. And he answered, what shall I call out? All flesh is grass and all its loveliness is like the flower of the field. The grass withers, the flower fades when the breath of the Lord blows upon it. Surely the people are grass—we’re here for a time and gone, we’re transitory, our lives here go quickly. Verse 8, the grass withers, the flower fades, but the Word of our God stands forever. And the significance of that means it will stand unchanged forever. If it’s something that changes with every generation, means something different to everyone who reads it, the Word of God doesn’t stand forever, because it’s the word of man that matters. It’s not what God says in His Word, but what I say about what is in the Bible that matters, my interpretation is what is significant. Turn over to the New Testament to 2 Timothy, all the way in the back of your New Testament. We’re going to jump back and forth in a variety of passages today. II Timothy 3:16, all scripture is inspired by God. And that word translated inspired is basically God-breathed, breathed out from God. In other words, He spoke it out. All scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

Over 2,000 times the Old Testament uses expressions like ‘thus saith the Lord.’ Again, for our purposes today we’re not going to elaborate on the fact: this is the Word of God. If there is a God and He chooses to keep Himself secret, we have to live our lives as though He weren’t there. If there is a God and He has revealed Himself, the most important thing is that we come to understand what He has said. Now if He has revealed Himself and is to have any meaning to us, He will have to reveal Himself in an understandable way. But the fact that the Bible is the Word of God carries with it the indication that we are expected to understand it.

We have to look at several passages. Go back to the Old Testament again, the book of Deuteronomy. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, the fifth book in your Old Testament and go to chapter 4. Deuteronomy 4:1, “Now, O Israel, listen to the statutes and the judgments which I am teaching you to perform.” Now you’ll note the connection. God is teaching and instructing them, giving them His Word so that they can obey it, do it, perform, keep it. Look at verse 2, “You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.” You see God not only has spoken, but He has spoken in a way that we can understand and obey. Now if what God says means something different to everyone, then how are we to obey it? Everyone would be doing something different and crediting it to what God said. If you’re familiar at all with the Old Testament, you’d see that God holds Israel to obeying the Word as He gave it, not as they understand it, as He gave it. They are responsible to come to understand it in the way He intended it to be understood. They are not free to give it their own interpretation.

Look over in Deuteronomy 11:32, “you shall be careful to do all the statutes and the judgments which I am setting before you today.” You are expected to do it, and we know the instructions given in the Law and how Israel was required to do exactly as God said. You’re close, turn over to Deuteronomy 12:32, “Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it.” It was so clear that God could say, there can be no alterations, no changes, no adding to it, no taking away from it; just black and white, exactly as I have said it. That’s how you are to understand it, that’s how you are to implement it in your life. If we can have four different interpretations, well, at least three of those interpretations have added or taken away from something that God intended to be understood there. Now they’re warned about that.

You’re in Deuteronomy, just go over to the next book, Joshua. We’re studying the book of Joshua together on Sunday nights. Go to Joshua 1:7, “Only be strong and very courageous; be careful to do according to all the law which Moses My servant commanded you; do not turn from it to the right or to the left.” You’ll note that no variation, no moving off this way or this way. Verse 8, “This book of the law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it.” You meditate on the Word, you think on the Word, you contemplate the Word, so that you are sure you understand it correctly, and you live according to it. There is no conception that anyone would have a different interpretation. There is only one correct interpretation.

Turn over to the New Testament, 2 Timothy 2. You’re going to get some practice today. Paul’s last letter, he’s passing on instructions to Timothy. You will carry on the ministry that Paul has had, along with others. And look in 2 Timothy 2:2, “The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” You see, there is an expected continuation, a continuity. What Paul taught, Timothy is to teach. What Timothy is to teach, faithful men are to teach. So that 2,000 years later we gather here and for example, study Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, or Paul’s letter to Timothy. And we are to teach it exactly as Paul taught it. It means exactly what Paul intended when he wrote it, it hasn’t changed with the passing of the millennium. It means exactly what it meant when Paul wrote it 2,000 years ago. That’s the only message Timothy is free to pass on, and then the faithful men are told to pass on. It’s the truth as it was given.

Look over in 2 Timothy 4:2, we looked at 2 Timothy 3:16, “All Scripture is inspired by God.” 2 Timothy 4:2 commands, “preach the word. ” “Preach the word… reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.” Note, “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine,” sound teaching, healthy teaching. “But wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.” You see, there is a fixed truth that is unchanging. The danger is that professing believers in the church will turn away from that truth and thus believe error, turn aside to myths. The truth of God is unchanging, it is fixed, it is objective, not subjective. It is true because God said it, it means what God says, not what I might want it to say, or adjusted to say.

Look in Titus 1. He’s giving instructions concerning the appointing of elders in the churches at Crete. Verse 5, I left you in Crete to appoint elders. He gives the qualifications of elders. Coming down to verse 9, in addition to the other qualifications, they must be men who are “holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching.” They are to hold fast the faithful Word in accordance with the teaching. This is a fixed set of objective truth that has been revealed, so that they “will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict.” This is the responsibility of elders, not only to exhort in sound doctrine, but to stand and oppose and refute those who contradict sound doctrine, the teaching of the Word of God.

Go over to 2 Peter 3. Peter is writing about the writings of Paul. Peter had read some of Paul’s letters, he recognized they were inspired scripture, they were God-breathed. In verse 15 he refers to Paul as “our beloved brother, Paul.” He’s written according to the wisdom God gave him. Verse 16, “as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand.” Now he doesn’t say they are open to various interpretation. Peter doesn’t say, which I would interpret differently perhaps than Timothy interprets them. These are just things that are to be understood as Paul intended them to be understood, but some of them are more difficult to understand, “which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.” You see, what Peter says here, if you don’t understand Paul’s letters as Paul intended them to be understood, you are twisting and distorting the scripture to your own destruction. There is only one correct interpretation. Now some of these things are hard to understand, but there is no allowance for you to come up with your own ideas, your own interpretation. You can’t distort and twist the scripture, you have to understand it as Paul wrote it.

Back up to 2 Timothy 2:15, “be diligent,” “be diligent.” Command here. Word that means to be zealous, be eager, take pains with something, make every effort. This is to be your zeal, what you apply yourself to, you take pains with. “To present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.” Doesn’t mean it won’t be work to study the Word of God. Doesn’t mean we won’t have to work and apply ourselves and make every effort to understand it. But to be approved to God, you have to understand it as He intended it to be understood. Well, isn’t it arrogant to say that your interpretation is right and other people’s is wrong? I mean, this is the great offense today. Not that you have belief, but you believe your beliefs are right, and everybody else’s are wrong. The fact is the Bible is right and everybody else is wrong. It’s not my interpretation of the Bible that is right, it’s what the Bible says is right. Well, how do you know for sure, how are we going to settle it? You have your interpretation, I have mine. How many times have you been to a Bible study and they say, well, what do you think this means? Well, that’s all right to give your observation, but sometimes we say, what does this mean to you? Well, that’s different. I may ask you, what do you think this means. I’m asking, you’ve studied this and wrestled with it, what is the conclusion you’ve come to, what did Paul mean when he wrote this. But the subjective idea, what does it mean to you, it doesn’t matter. What does it mean to me? I’ll say, I’m going to tell you what this passage means to me. I don’t care what it means to you, Gil. I care what it meant when Paul wrote it, when God gave it. That’s what matters. It’s an objective standard, not a subjective.

How do we come to the objective? Basically we interpret the Bible what we call literally, normally, which means we interpret it historically, grammatically. Keep those two, write it down on your piece of paper, write it down on the flyleaf of your Bible, write it down on the bulletin, “literal interpretation,” which means historical, grammatical interpretation. Put a box around it. We’re going to show how some people add things to that and they come to different interpretations. We’re talking about hermeneutics. Hermeneutics means interpretation, the principles of interpretation -- what do you follow, how do you interpret the Bible, how do you come up with the right understanding? You interpret it historically, you interpret it grammatically. Important to understand this. We want to understand it historically in the context of the day in which Paul wrote it, what did Paul mean as the Spirit directed him to write the letter to the Corinthians. Not what does it mean to us today. What did it mean to Paul as he penned it?

My example on the speed limit sign. Pretty obvious today, we know that if the speed limit says 25, doesn’t mean somewhere between 25 and 52, you can reverse the numbers. But what about in 2,000 years? People are looking at pictures in the old archives from somewhere, they say here’s a sign that says 25. And here’s a man and it says he was tested and he was going 45. That sign probably meant in those days… you know, you can’t take it literally… it probably means that you could go anywhere from 25 to 52. You say, well, that would account why so many people were going in the 40s. That’s a good explanation. The problem is, it’s wrong, because the only thing that sign means is what it meant today when it was there. Its meaning won’t change in 2,000 years, it still means you can only go 25 mph on this street today. That’s its historical meaning. For someone to change that 2,000 years later is dishonest and say, well, you know that sign really meant 2,000 years ago in light of other things, it probably means 25 to 52. You may believe that strongly 2,000 years later, but the fact is that sign meant only go 25 or less.

Well, somehow the Bible, you know the Bible was completed 2,000 years ago. Now with 2,000 years coming past we say, well you know the Bible doesn’t mean what Paul said, it’s open to a variety of interpretations. So we not only interpret the Bible historically in its historical setting back then, grammatically according to the rules and principles of grammar, but there are other things we have to add. We interpret the Bible historically, grammatically, literarily. I mean, we’ve come with a study of secular literature to understand that certain books aren’t intended to be understood literally.

Turn over to Revelation 1. As an example, we have what is called apocalyptic literature. There is certain genre of literature, certain kinds of literature. The book of Revelation, the Apocalypse, where we get the name “apocalyptic”, you know that’s a style of literature. We’ve studied secular work and they are similar to Revelation, they never are intended to be taken literally. So I interpret the Bible historically, grammatically and literarily (not literally, now). And according to other kinds of literature like it. So I find other writings that we would call apocalyptic and they’re fanciful, they’re mystical. We say, well, then, that’s the way the book of Revelation ought to be interpreted. Wait a minute, we interpret the book of Revelation historically in its historical context as John intended it to be understood, grammatically according to the principles of grammar. This is what is expected.

Look in Revelation 1:3, “Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed,” or keep, “the things which are written in it; for the time is near. The only book in the Bible where a special blessing is pronounced if you’ll read it, study it, listen to it and then put it into practice. And it is clearly implied you should understand it. How can you understand it? Interpret it historically, grammatically. You say, well, it is not intended to be taken literally, not historically, grammatically. But you know… Well then all of a sudden it can mean a variety of things to a variety of people. Read some commentaries on Revelation that don’t interpret historically, grammatically and you're just all over the place because it can mean whatever you want to read into it. And so it becomes a message of the interpreter rather than the author.

Turn over to the end of the book of Revelation, Revelation 22:7, Christ is speaking, “behold, I am coming quickly. Blessed is he who heeds,” or keeps,” the words of the prophecy of this book.” You’re supposed to understand them. It’s a prophecy. How were the prophecies of the Old Testament fulfilled regarding the coming of Christ to earth? Literally, historically, grammatically. Micah said, He would be born in Bethlehem, a little nothing of a town. Where was He born? Bethlehem. How would you know that’s what Micah meant? Well, study it historically in its historical context. We can understand and find out where Bethlehem was. Grammatically, according to the rules of grammar. And that’s exactly how it came out, and on we go.

Isaiah 53 regarding the suffering and death of Christ, how was it fulfilled? Historically, grammatically. You interpret Isaiah 53 historically, grammatically, and you come to the New Testament and you find out that’s exactly how it was fulfilled. We know that’s what God intended when He gave the prophecy. Because the book of Revelation that is apocalyptic literature was never intended to be taken literally. Who said? Remember God said don’t add to it or take away from it, don’t alter it in any way.

While you’re in Revelation 22, verse 18, ‘I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written therein.” I mean, the words, these are the words that God spoke. We believe in verbal inspiration, the very words of the Bible are inspired. That’s why we use a translation that as much as possible follows the words as they were given in the Bible. Because our goal is to have it as God gave it, and then to understand it according to what He meant when He gave it. We have to go back in history. Some people… We’re going to come to the role of women in 1 Corinthians 11. That’s one reason we have to remind ourselves of interpretation. Some areas of interpretation become more tense than others, because some people, when it comes to these matters, follow historical, grammatical, cultural interpretation. They’ll say, well, what the Bible says in 1 Corinthians 11 and 1 Timothy 2 related to specific events in a certain culture at a certain time; they are not meant to be taken literally for us today. Now you probably see there is a problem with that, because just what part of the Bible was not written in a different culture than ours. First thing, it was completed 2,000 years ago. Secondly, it has its source and origin in other parts of the world in a totally different culture. So you can just decide what you want to interpret literally or historically, grammatically, and what you don’t. And you can just discard because it’s cultural and so women in that day were expected to be subservient, to obey their husbands, and so the Bible reflects that culture, but God never intended that to be binding.

Well, you know there’s another writer who says Jesus is called deity in the New Testament, divine. You know the Roman emperors were called deity. The Roman emperors declared themselves to be God, they were worshipped. No one thought that the Roman emperors created the world, that’s just a cultural expression. You have to… Well, the thing is there is no stopping this. We have to interpret the Bible historically, grammatically -- stop. Not historically, grammatically, literarily; historically, grammatically, culturally.

Another area. (I was going to take you to some other verses, but let me say another area). You can interpret the Bible historically, grammatically, theologically. In other words, we come to the Bible with a preconceived idea of what it ought to say in a certain area, we’ve determined what our theology will be and now we’re fitting everything into our theology. No, we come to interpret the Bible historically, grammatically, each passage. That’s why we move through the Bible, book by book, as our general rule. I see involved in my role as the pastor here, who has the privilege of teaching you the Word of God as an entire congregation week after week, to set a foundation and the parameters of our handling of the Word of God. Not only the content, but through handling the content, to set the pattern for how we handle the Word of God. So we move through the Bible as God has laid it out book by book. Start at the beginning of the book of 1 Corinthians and move through to the last verse. That’s not the only way to study the Bible.

So that’s just the foundation for us, so that our goal is to study what has God said in this passage, in this historical context, in its grammatical significance. What does this passage mean? Now I have to be careful that I don’t read my preconceived theological convictions into this passage. Let me read you an example from an evangelical writer that you would recognize, but I’m not going to mention his name. I have great respect for him. He’s dealing with 1 John 2, and the issue is: did Christ die for the sins of the world or did He only die for the sins of the elect only? You’re familiar with this discussion, usually called ‘limited atonement’ or ‘particular redemption’. So after quoting 1 John 2:1,2 and particularly in verse 2 where it says, “and He Himself,” Christ, “is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.” This writer’s comments are, “ ‘For the whole world’, this is a generic term, referring not to every single individual, but to mankind in general. Christ actually paid the penalty only for those who would repent and believe. A number of scriptures indicate that Christ died for the world,” and he lists them. “But most of the world would be eternally condemned to hell to pay for their own sins, so they could not have been paid for by Christ.” You see what he’s doing -- he’s not really interpreting 1 John 2 here, he’s reading into 1 John 2 his preconceived, preunderstanding. So he’s bringing what he’s determined other passages say about Christ and His death, and now I’m going to impose that on this passage.

What I have to do is study this passage for this passage. Christ died for our sins, believers, and for the sins of the whole world. What does he mean? What is the historical context of this passage? What is the grammar of this passage? I look at the surrounding verses in this context. I may look at how he uses the word “world” in this letter, 1 John, as I move out now from the immediate context to the context of this letter. I have to understand what it says here, not bring my preconceived theological ideas to this passage and make this passage fit. The goal is not to see if I can come up with a theology and then make all the passages fit. This goal is to study the Word of God in each passage in its historical, grammatical context, not its historical, grammatical, theological.

Now it’s true as I come out from this passage and I get done with my study of this passage and its historical, grammatical context, I will compare it to other passages after I have done my work on this passage. I had a professor in school who was a great help on this. Had to prepare sermons in his class. And you know as students do, we’d get our concordance and so on and we’d do a study and we’d get all these verses and it would always come back with red ink: I want you to study this passage, what does this passage mean? What we want to do is, I have my preconceived idea what this passage would mean, now I have all these other verses, you know, ‘proof texting’, that will prove… Well, wait a minute, let’s study this passage. Otherwise I develop a theology and impose it on scripture, so I’m interpreting the scripture historically, grammatically and theologically. Well, I can come up with a distorted view because I begin to press the passages into the theology that I’ve already determined, rather than studying that passage and then coming out of it. Now when I’ve done that study, then I want to compare it to other scriptures. And if I do have direct conflict, then I have to come back to the scriptures that seem to conflict and work through each of them. I want to be careful

I was reading in some other areas of theology recently, and I’m impressed that how often writers support their view with preconceived theological ideas, sometimes called ‘preunderstanding’ or ‘analogy of faith’. Come back to Jeremiah, look at Jeremiah. I like to read the Puritans occasionally. I was reading one of the Puritans, his name is John Owen, and John Owen… If you read the Puritans, I’m not recommending you do, depends if you like their writing, they are very verbose, they can say in 1,000 words what someone else could say in ten. And I find it enjoyable reading being a preacher, being verbose goes that way. But you know I’m also impressed, as I was reading John Own, of how much his preconceived theology determines his interpretation of a number of passages. One of those I’m going to use as an example, Jeremiah 31. We’re talking about the new covenant here. Jeremiah 31:31, “ ‘Behold, days are coming,’ declares the Lord, ‘when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.’ ” Now immediately his preconceived theological position determines where he’s going with this, because for him the new covenant is the covenant of grace. As covenant theologians, the covenant theologian is one who bases the interpretation of the Old Testament on what he calls a ‘covenant of grace’, God’s covenant of redemption, which covenant is never identified biblically if you interpret it historically, grammatically. But they impose it on the Old Testament, and then make it the defining guideline for interpreting the Old Testament. In other words, the Abrahamic Covenant is the covenant of grace, the Noahic Covenant is the covenant of grace. The new covenant in Jeremiah 31, that’s the covenant of grace. These are all the new covenant, and God is bringing His people to Himself in covenant relationship. So when you read the new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah… we come to the New Testament, we know Israel rejected Christ, so the house of Judah and the house of Israel just represent the people of God and ultimately the Church.

So down in verse 33… Now that’s not my interpretation, that’s his, don’t get confused. “This is the covenant,” verse 33, “I will make with the house of Israel after those days… I will put my law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” He says now this refers to the Church, because there is only one people of God and Israel as a nation has been replaced by the Church. “They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they will all know Me.” Now this can’t be, everyone will know the Lord, because obviously, look around, everyone doesn’t know the Lord. So all this can mean is, all of God’s elect will know the Lord.

Now wait a minute, that isn’t what this passage is teaching. That is a historical, grammatical, theological interpretation. I come to this passage determining there is one covenant, the covenant of grace. So the new covenant is the same covenant as the Abrahamic Covenant or the Noahic Covenant. It was a covenant started in eternity past and reflected in Genesis 3, I will put enmity between his seed and your seed. The Bible doesn’t say that. Well, it comes out of a predetermined theological position. Now I’m going to interpret all the Bible through that. So Israel isn’t Israel, Israel is just a reflection of the people of God, and the Church is just the people of God, because there is only one people of God and there is no distinction between Israel and the Church, or the Church and Israel.

And where it says, verse 34, “they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them… for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.” That can’t refer to everyone, because look around, everyone is not saved. Well, part of his problem is, he hasn’t interpreted the Old Testament historically, grammatically. There is a coming kingdom over which Christ will rule on the earth, and everyone on the earth will know Him. And this writer then proceeds to list all the other passages in the Old Testament, not every one, but a whole list of them, where they’ll all come up to Jerusalem to worship Christ. He says that can’t be interpreted literally, because all the earth is not coming up to Jerusalem, look around. Well, they won’t today, they won’t until Jesus Christ is enthroned at Jerusalem, ruling over the kingdom. It says, the knowledge of the Lord will cover the earth as the waters cover the sea. Well, that can’t mean the knowledge of the Lord will cover the earth as the water cover the sea, because look around. Most people don’t know about the Lord. Well, wait a minute, if you interpret that historically, grammatically, that’s where he’s referring to a future time when Christ will rule over a kingdom on the earth.

So you see what happens, you take a preconceived theological idea or belief and you begin to impose it on scripture and you reinterpret scripture in light of your predetermined theological conviction. Now we do have theological convictions, but they must come out of a historical, grammatical study of each of the passages of the Word. If we took certain passages and say, that’s the standard. Example, I read you one evangelical writer, he says the world can’t mean the world in 1 John 2, when Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the world. The world can’t mean world. You know why? His predetermined theological position is, Christ only died for the elect. So that’s my theology. So therefore, every time it says He died for the world, it can’t mean the world, because I’ve already decided He only died for the elect. Well, wait a minute. I have to interpret each passage in its historical, grammatical context and then after I’ve done that, I back up and see how it compares.

So I can’t interpret the Bible historically, grammatically, theologically; I interpret it historically, grammatically each passage. Then when I have done that I come back and do my comparison more broadly. We have to be careful of that, especially as a new teacher, somebody just learning to teach. The first thing we do is go to a concordance and get all the passages that seem to relate to this idea, or you can get a topical Bible and list all the verses on this topic. And there is a time for theological studies, topical studies. But I appreciated the professor I had, he said you just can’t run around the scriptures, you must have done the interpreted historical, grammatical interpretation of each of those passages you’re going to use, so you know each of those passages is interpreted properly and thus fit into your system. The problem with many people is they just run around and throw out verses, going through a list.

I mentioned John Owen, I don’t necessarily recommend you read him, his writings run to sixteen volumes and anywhere to 450-650 pages. And long sentences. I’m reading along saying, a simple sentence (this is an aside, it’s free, no charge). You know if you have a simple sentence you say, John hit Bill. John’s the subject, hit is the verb, Bill is the object. Well, the Puritans will write that and say John, whose ancestors were born in Ireland, his father lived in a sod house and his mother was a McGillicutty, and through the death of so and so and they go on and on. I counted, this is small print, close together, one of his sentences ran 29 lines -- 29 lines of print, one sentence. I’m reading this and saying, what is he talking about here? What is the subject of this? Where is the verb in this? If you read more and more you do get into the passage. But that’s not unusual. I just periodically stop and say, 19 lines, one sentence; whole half page, one sentence. So you know, John Owen at any rate.

But you know what he likes to do? He’ll just mention this is so: Christ only died for the elect, He didn’t die for the world. Then he’ll list 25 verses. The problem is, if I take the time to go through those verses, 24 of them don’t have anything to do, if they’re interpreted properly, with the subject he’s trying to prove. So we have to be careful that we just don’t get overwhelmed with other details. You know, they throw these verses out, ell, I have 32 verses to support my position. Well, I’ll be happy if you just have one that is interpreted correctly, because if the Bible says it, that’s true. You know, all the New Testament doesn’t develop and give you information on the virgin birth of Christ, but that doesn’t mean it’s not true. I don’t have to have 47 verses on the virgin birth to prove it. I only need one verse that is interpreted, when it’s interpreted grammatically, historically, teaches that. Then it will fit, when I’ve done that, into the broader, overall context of scripture. It gives unity and harmony.

Don’t misunderstand, there is a place for comparing verses, but you have to first do the exegetical work of properly interpreting each of these passages. Otherwise, we’re aware people can prove anything from the Bible, and we hear spiritual life teaching: Jesus went up on a mountain to pray, and you know when you’re having trials that seem like the mountains of your life and things you can’t surmount, you know what you need to do on that mountain? Go to prayer. Well, it’s a good idea to pray in the difficulties and trials of your life, yes. Does Jesus going up on a mountain to pray have anything to do with the mountains of difficulty in my life, being a motivation to pray? Absolutely nothing. He didn’t interpret historically, grammatically; it’s interpreted subjectively. What does it mean to me? He’ll say, well, you know I was going through a crisis and I opened up my Bible and there I read, they will not teach again each man his neighbor and each man his brother, and I realized I didn’t have to be worried about teaching my neighbor the gospel. I didn’t have to worry about telling my brother about Christ. Well, wait a minute, that has nothing to do with that passage. Oh, yes, the Lord gave it to me. You know we throw out this language like the Lord gave it to me on that occasion. What do you mean the Lord gave it to you? I mean this is God’s Word, it is for all of us, but there is not some unique interpretation for you and some unique meaning.

What about application? There is a place for application. It’s not in the interpretation. There is application, that comes as a result of our proper interpretation. First I interpret that passage historically, grammatically and know what it means in its context, meant as the author wrote it and is properly interpreted grammatically. There may be a proper application of that. We saw that in our study of idol worship. We may not be involved in a society where they offer literal sacrifices in a literal pagan temple. But the principles Paul draws from that of demons involved in false worship are applicable to us. And he’s going to go on as we conclude chapter 10, he’s going to give direct commands and instructions that apply to us, and we’re to do all to the glory of God. We’re all to build up other believers. Well, certain of these things are clear. But it doesn’t change the fact, when Paul wrote that he’s writing about these kinds of sacrificial animals, the food that comes from animals sacrificed to idols. That’s a historical, grammatical context. Now the application of that has to be consistent with what it said, and there may be a variety of applications. There is only one interpretation, that’s what the Bible means. We turn it around and begin to do our application, we preach the application as what the passage meant. The passage means what the passage means.

You say, well, I think it might have said, this is what I am to do in this situation. That’s okay if that’s consistent, that doesn’t mean that’s what the passage meant as Paul wrote it. That may be a proper application of that passage in your situation. I’m not saying, there isn’t a place for application. Application is different than interpretation. It’s common among evangelicals today to include application in the interpretation, which is reading back now what I think for today into that passage. That passage means what that passage means, but there is application of it. All scripture is given by God and is profitable for us to learn from it. Israel in the Old Testament, I mean, Israel was an earthly nation, living in a certain environment, had certain sacrificial rules, certain rules of life. Now they were written for our benefit that we can learn from, but I first have to interpret them in their historical, grammatical context. Otherwise we’re all over, people get inconsistent. They want to take portions of the Old Testament and use them this way and this way. They say, you don’t interpret the Bible literally, you don’t keep the Mosaic Law. No, because if you interpret the Bible literally, historically, grammatically you find the law was given for a period of time, God said it was. When you interpret these passages in their context, he said it has come to an end, and so on. So we just can’t get loose and free in our handling of the scripture.

All right, we follow an objective view of scripture, not a subjective. We follow historically, grammatically, it means what it says. Now in this context come to 1 Corinthians 2 and we’ll wrap this up. The Holy Spirit is the one who gave the Word of God. We don’t have time to go, but 2 Peter 1:21 says, holy men of old spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. That the prophets were considering what the Holy Spirit was saying through them, concerning the suffering of the Messiah and the glory of the Messiah which was to follow. So all scripture is God-breathed. Now that makes this a supernatural book, that’s why I don’t compare it to apocalyptic literature. The Bible is unique because it is the only supernatural book on the face of the earth. I don’t go to secular books, secular apocalyptic writings to understand the book of Revelation. The book of Revelation is a unique book. The Bible is a unique book. I don’t add this whole idea we have to expand ourselves and now we bring this study to our study of the Bible. Now we have greater understanding. No, we don’t. We have to understand grammatical principles and we can read so we can understand. We have to learn something of the historical context and what it was, but it doesn’t take a doctorate in theology or a doctorate in philosophy or a doctorate in extra-biblical literature to understand the Bible. The Bible is a supernatural book.

Look at 1 Corinthians 2:10, we studied this a few months ago in our study of 1 Corinthians. Verse 10, “For to us God revealed them through the Spirit.” There is the work of God revealing Himself and what cannot be known by natural means to man through the ministry of the Holy Spirit. You can’t know them any other way but through what the Spirit has revealed. Now verse 12, “Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God.” So God reveals Himself, we have that revelation contained in this book. But fallen, sinful man still cannot understand what God has said, because he lives in the darkness of his mind, the emptiness of his mind. He is spiritually blind. Paul talked about that in 2 Corinthians 4, the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, lest they should see the light of the glory of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I shake my head, how can they not see something that is so simple and clear? Because they live in darkness, spiritual darkness.

But we have received the Spirit of God. So now it’s a gracious work of the Spirit to enlighten our minds to believe and to indwell us now to give us understanding of God’s truth. Verse 14, “a natural man,” a soulish man, a man apart from the Holy Spirit, “does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.” So that comes now as we come to the Word of God. I want to apply myself zealously, diligently to the study of the Word of God, that I might be a workman approved, handling accurately the Word of God.

Well, I have the Spirit of God, so I just open up my Bible and the Spirit of God enables me to understand it. Well, that wouldn’t take any painful labor, wouldn’t take any work and effort on my part, any diligence. I just open it up and read it and then I have a whole list of sermons here just out of that. I can see this application and this idea. Well, wait a minute. The Spirit of God directs me as a believer as I study it, and as I study, it the desire to understand it as God intended it to be understood. We have a pattern for that in how the writers of the Bible understood previous scripture, how Christ understood the Old Testament when He referred to it, when He applied it, how Paul used it, and so on. So it’s not like we’ve just created this, it’s the pattern set down in scripture, the only interpretation of the Old Testament as we study, and how it’s given. The Spirit of God enables me to understand it as I teach it to you. Some people may sit here and it might be interesting to some people, but it’s good to be religious, it’s good to be here and nothing is really going in, nothing is taking hold, life is not changed by it.

It’s a work of the Spirit. And I study the Word to have the Spirit of God give me understanding and I apply historical, grammatical principles to this book. Seek to understand it, then as I seek to explain it, it’s the Spirit of God who takes that truth as it’s taught and carries it to the heart and enables you to understand it. Some may say, well, I don’t get anything out of the teaching. Well, it may be a problem with the teacher, or it may be on the part of the listener. I mean, we understand here, is the Word of God being taught? Why aren’t you getting anything? Maybe there is something missing. Maybe the missing ingredient is the Holy Spirit, because the natural man cannot accept, he does not accept the things of the Spirit of God. They are foolishness to him, he can’t understand them. It’s like you have a person who has no physical sight and you say, look at those flowers. And you might tell them 45 times to look at them but he still can’t see them. You can’t make him see them, he has no ability to see. The unregenerate man lives in a world of spiritual darkness, he is spiritually dead. And only as he hears the truth and by the grace of God the Spirit of God opens those blinded eyes to believe does transformation take place. And then as a process of growth the Spirit of God takes up residence. That’s why we as newborn babes long for the pure milk of the Word that you might grow in respect to your salvation. That’s the process.

Foundational. This is one thing that got me on my study into hermeneutics again in the last weeks, along with anticipating 1 Corinthians 11 on the role of women, and 1 Corinthians 12-14 on the gifts of the Spirit, that we all have to come from the same foundation. I’m always disturbed when I hear people who were at Indian Hills and now they’ve gone into a different theological system. What’s changed? If we’re interpreting the Bible according to historical, grammatical principles, that’s what it means. That’s what it meant when Isaiah preached it, that’s what it meant when Paul taught it. Its meaning is fixed, it’s unchanging. Not one jot, one tittle could pass from the Law until all had been fulfilled just as it was. It’s not just there so there can be a variety of interpretations. It’s there to mean what it means, to accomplish what it will accomplish. I hope that if the Lord leads you to another church, to another place, remember if you’re in Texas the Word of God has to be interpreted historically, grammatically. If you move to Europe, the Word of God has to be interpreted historically, grammatically. Well, you know, there is something to be said for historical, grammatical, theological and even literarily. Well, you will be drifting down the river who knows where, who knows over what falls, because there is only one way that you can really truly know what God has said. And we only need one way, and that is literally taking the Word of God for what it says and allowing the Spirit of God to give us understanding.

Let’s pray together. Thank You, Lord, for the beauty of Your Word. We are in awe to think that You, the sovereign Almighty God created all, rules over all, has spoken and we are privileged to be entrusted with that revelation. We are held accountable to know and understand what You have said. Our greatest privilege becomes our greatest responsibility, to listen to You, the living God, to pay careful attention to what You’ve said, to be diligent to examine it, to study it, to carefully interpret it so that we might obey it. Lord, may we be on guard against those who would make any alteration in Your Word, to add to it, to take away from it, to change it. It is the unchanging Word from the unchanging God. The enemy of our souls would delight to bring confusion to the church. Lord, we thank You for Your Word, we thank You for Your Spirit. I pray that we will be faithful in the handling of the truth and the passing on of the truth until Christ comes. We pray in His name, amen.