Submitted by Georgie Porgie
Any truly valid interpretation of Scripture must be based upon sound rules. These rules must then be applied consistently. The following are the most basic rules we attempt to always follow in our interpretation of Scripture. We do not feel at liberty to discard these rules when they lead us to a conclusion in contradiction to what ‘orthodoxy’ has taught us. We instead endeavour to allow the scriptures to speak for themselves and believe by faith whatever conclusions they may lead us to.
I It will be assumed that the 39 books of the Old Testament, and the 27 Books of the New Testament are the wholly inspired Word of God. “That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” 2 Tim 3:17.
II The Bible itself will always be used to define its own terminology, symbols, etc. No appeal will be made to any man-made dogma, theory, or writing, such as the apocrypha or psudopygrypha, to explain Biblical terms which are already clearly defined within the Bible itself.
III The proper interpretation of any given passage will be determined, not only by that with which it stands immediately connected, but by considering all scriptures which have bearing upon the subject throughout the entire Bible . The truth of any given subject can only be determined by bringing together all scripture which sheds light on that subject.
IV Every passage will be given as literal an interpretation as possible, unless such a literal interpretation would render the meaning absurd, or bring it into disagreement with other passages which speak in positive language.
V No interpretation will be given to any scripture beyond what the fair meaning of the text itself allows. For Example: Carcass cannot in any case be interpreted to mean immortal soul burning in hell.
VI All passages belonging to any particular subject must contain one or more of the peculiar features of that subject, by which it may be identified as belonging to that subject.
VII The truth of any doctrine must be determined firstly by those passages which speak in clear and positive language, and not those which are symbolic or parabolic in nature. No inference should be drawn from any symbolic or parabolic passage which would bring the passage into contradiction with those which speak unequivocally on the same subject.
VIII No doctrine will be derived based on a single passage of scripture, a mere inference, or an argument from silence. Any true doctrine will found throughout the entire Bible.
Fundamental Rules for Interpreting Scripture
1. Since Jesus spoke and the Bible writers wrote primarily for the people of their day, always consider the historical, geographical, and cultural setting of the passage you are studying.
2. Always consider the context of the unit, chapter, and book when interpreting a text. The meaning of each verse must agree with the theme of the unit, chapter, and book, as well as the overall teaching of the Bible.
3. When interpreting a passage or verse, make sure to study each sentence grammatically to get the correct meaning. Pay special attention to the verbs as they deal with actions.
4. Make sure to get the meaning of each text as intended by the Bible writer or inspired speaker before making application. This is called bridge-building and is important in giving Bible studies.
5. Difficult texts must be interpreted in the light of the clear teachings of the whole Bible. Therefore, study all that Scripture teaches on a given subject before coming to a conclusion on any single verse.
6. The New Testament must be interpreted in the light of the Old Testament and vice versa. The Old Testament is promise and the New Testament is fulfilment. Both complement each other.
7. For accuracy, use the best translations and, if at all possible, compare with the original text.
Here are the eight rules:
1) The rule of DEFINITION: What does the word mean? Any study of Scripture must begin with a study of words. Define your terms and then keep to the terms defined. The interpreter should conscientiously abide by the plain meaning of the words. This quite often may require using a Hebrew/English or Greek/English lexicon in order to make sure that the sense of the English translation is understood. A couple of good examples of this are the Greek words “allos” and “heteros”. Both are usually translated as “another” in English – yet “allos” literally means “another of the same type” and “heteros” means “another of a different type.”
2) The rule of USAGE: It must be remembered that the Old Testament was written originally by, to and for Jews. The words and idioms must have been intelligible to them – just as the words of Christ when talking to them must have been. The majority of the New Testament likewise was written in a milieu of Greco-Roman (and to a lesser extent Jewish) culture and it is important to not impose our modern usage into our interpretation. It is not worth much to interpret a great many phrases and histories if one’s interpretations are shaded by pre-conceived notions and cultural biases, thereby rendering an inaccurate and ineffectual lesson.
3) The rule of CONTEXT: The meaning must be gathered from the context. Every word you read must be understood in the light of the words that come before and after it. Many passages will not be understood at all, or understood incorrectly, without the help afforded by the context. A good example of this is the Mormon practice of using 1 Cor. 8:5b: “…for there be gods many and lords many…” as a “proof text” of their doctrine of polytheism. However, a simple reading of the whole verse in the context of the whole chapter (e.g. where Paul calls these gods “so-called”), plainly demonstrates that Paul is not teaching polytheism.
4) The rule of HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: The interpreter must have some awareness of the life and society of the times in which the Scripture was written. The spiritual principle will be timeless but often can’t be properly appreciated without some knowledge of the background. If the interpreter can have in his mind what the writer had in his mind when he wrote – without adding any excess baggage from the interpreter’s own culture or society – then the true thought of the Scripture can be captured resulting in an accurate interpretation. Oliver Wendell Holmes said, “Our only interest in the past is for the light it throws upon the present.”
5) The rule of LOGIC: Interpretation is merely logical reasoning. When interpreting Scripture, the use of reason is everywhere to be assumed. Does the interpretation make sense? The Bible was given to us in the form of human language and therefore appeals to human reason – it invites investigation. It is to be interpreted as we would any other volume: applying the laws of language and grammatical analysis. As Bernard Ramm said:
“What is the control we use to weed out false theological speculation? Certainly the control is logic and evidence… interpreters who have not had the sharpening experience of logic…may have improper notions of implication and evidence. Too frequently such a person uses a basis of appeal that is a notorious violation of the laws of logic and evidence.” (Protestant Biblical Interpretation, Boston: W. A. Wilde, 1956)
6) The rule of PRECEDENT: We must not violate the known usage of a word and invent another for which there is no precedent. Just as a judge’s chief occupation is the study of previous cases, so must the interpreter use precedents in order to determine whether they really support an alleged doctrine. Consider the Bereans in Acts 17:10-12 who were called “noble” because they searched the Scriptures to determine if what Paul taught them was true.
7) The rule of UNITY: The parts of Scripture being interpreted must be construed with reference to the significance of the whole. An interpretation must be consistent with the rest of Scripture. An excellent example of this is the doctrine of the Trinity. No single passage teaches it, but it is consistent with the teaching of the whole of Scripture (e.g. the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are referred to individually as God; yet the Scriptures elsewhere teach there is only one God).
8) The rule of INFERENCE: An inference is a fact reasonably implied from another fact. It is a logical consequence. It derives a conclusion from a given fact or premise. It is the deduction of one proposition from another proposition. Such inferential facts or propositions are sufficiently binding when their truth is established by competent and satisfactory evidence. Competent evidence means such evidence as the nature of the thing to be proved admits. Satisfactory evidence means that amount of proof which would ordinarily satisfy an unprejudiced mind beyond a reasonable doubt. Jesus used this rule when he proved the resurrection of the dead to the unbelieving Sadducees in Matt. 22:23-33.
Learning these eight rules and properly applying them will help keep any interpreter from making errors and will hopefully alleviate many of the disagreements unfortunately present in Christianity today. However, these eight principles are no substitute for the Holy Spirit which will, if you let Him, guide you in the truth [John 14:26]. If you receive Christ into your heart, God will give you the Holy Spirit freely as a gift [Acts 2:38]. I urge you, if you have not already done so, to examine the claims and the work of Jesus Christ and to receive Him as your Saviour.
Interpreting Scripture (Hermeneutics)
Hermeneutics is defined in one dictionary as “the art of finding the meaning of an author’s words and phrases, and of explaining it to others.” When applied to Scripture, accurate hermeneutics would require the scholar to:
• Study the context of the passage and the theme of the book.
• Look up the actual meaning of each word in the original languages.
• Note the verb tenses, the cases, and other grammatical determinants.
• Learn the cultural setting of the passage.
• Determine what the original readers understood it to mean.
• Check out cross-references to see how the words are used in other contexts.
• See how the first mention of the word or topic is presented in the Bible.
• Confirm an interpretation with two or three similar passages.
These are all proven study methods and good guidelines of interpretation. Here are some other additional factors of correct Biblical hermeneutics?
1. Spiritual Perception Over Intellectual Understanding
The first factor of interpreting Scripture is to approach it as an exercise in spiritual discernment rather than just an intellectual pursuit. Paul emphasized this in his letter to the Corinthian believers. “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (I Corinthians 2:14). Jesus Himself confirmed that Biblical understanding does not come from human reasoning but from spiritual enlightenment. He said, “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes” (Matthew 11:25).
The Holy Spirit is the One Who inspired the writing of Scripture, and He is the most qualified One to interpret its meaning to each reader. Jesus assured us that the Holy Spirit would indeed guide us into all truth. “Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth” (John 16:13).
This being the case, it is also reasonable to conclude that if a person who wants to interpret Scripture has sinful habits or practices in his life that grieve the Holy Spirit and quench His power, the Holy Spirit will not reveal the truth of Scripture to such a person. In fact, God warns that such individuals will take Scripture out of context to their own destruction. (See II Peter 3:16.) This result supports the axiom that a man’s morality will dictate his theology and his philosophy.
2. God’s Revelation Over Human Reasoning
In the final analysis, accurate Biblical interpretation is based on the revelation of Jesus Christ throughout the Scriptures. Nowhere is this more clearly demonstrated than on that walk on the road to Emmaus. The disciples had been personally taught by Jesus for three years.
However, they still did not understand the Scriptures from which He taught. They were distracted by the conflicting interpretations of contemporary scholars. It was not until Jesus began with Moses and all the prophets and explained how they revealed Him that they understood the true meaning of Scripture. “And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27). They later recalled, “Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the Scriptures?” (Luke 24:32).
The scholars of Jesus’ day carried out heated debates over the correct interpretation of Scripture, but Jesus counselled them to search the Scriptures on the basis that they testified of Him. “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me” (John 5:39).
3. Genuine Love Rather Than Justification of Selfishness
Since the Scriptures reveal the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ, it also follows that the primary theme of the Bible is the love of God and how we are to live out His love in our daily words and actions.
When a clever lawyer tried to involve Jesus in a wordy battle, He began his forensic sparring with the question “Which is the greatest commandment?” The reply that Jesus gave is a profound principle for Biblical interpretation. All the Law and prophets are based on the command to love God with all of our hearts, souls, minds, and strength, and to love our neighbours as ourselves.
Therefore, we must interpret Scripture on the basis of how it teaches us to love God and to love others. Love is the theme of the Bible. All good character qualities are simply practical expressions of genuine love. When the Pharisees used the Law of Moses to justify their harsh and unloving treatment of wives, Jesus reproved them for hardness of heart and took them back to the Creation design of one man and one woman becoming one flesh for the rest of their lives.
The lawyer who tried to engage Jesus in debate then tried to justify himself by asking, “Who is my neighbour?” to which Jesus responded with the parable of the Good Samaritan.
4. Christ’s Commands Over Man’s Theology
Every interpretation of Scripture is based on some foundational structure of reasoning. Jesus provides the structure of truth in the commands that He gave to His disciples during His earthly ministry, and they are the guiding lights for correct Biblical interpretation. They clarify what was written in the Old Testament and are further explained in New Testament teaching. Jesus promises that if we keep His commands before our eyes, He will reveal more of Himself to us. This was the great goal of Paul: “That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection” (Philippians 3:10). Jesus further promises, “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:31–32).
It is customary for a Bible scholar to base his interpretation of a passage on the theological position that he has accepted. The problem with this approach is that no theological system is totally without some human error, because it is not inspired. It is man’s explanation of Biblical truth.
This is not to say that theology is unimportant. Wrong doctrine leads to wrong behaviour. No one was more concerned about false doctrine than the Apostle Paul. He maintained a continual battle against false teaching. However, he did not base sound doctrine on the theological views of his day but on the words of Jesus Christ and that which leads to Christ like living.
He explains this in his epistle to Timothy. “If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself” (I Timothy 6:3–5).
5. One Interpretation and Many Applications
The Bible makes it clear that there is only one interpretation of Scripture. However, there can be many applications. It is the Holy Spirit Who guides us not only to the right interpretation of a passage but also to the precise application of Scripture to our daily lives. If our lives are in harmony with the Lord, we can expect the Holy Spirit to illuminate certain passages of Scripture for our personal application. When this happens, it is God giving us a “rhema” of Scripture.
In the New Testament, the Word of God is generally referred to by the Greek word logos. Jesus is identified as the Living Word (logos). However, there are many references that use the Greek word rhema to define the Word of God. A rhema is a precise direction of Scripture for a particular person or circumstance. When Jesus told Peter to cast his net on the other side of the boat, Peter replied, “Master, we have toiled all the night, and have taken nothing: nevertheless at thy word [rhema] I will let down the net” (Luke 5:5). Jesus did not tell every one to cast their nets on the other side of the boat—only Peter.
It is on the point of the Holy Spirit applying a passage of Scripture to a decision that critics often rise up and claim that this is not acceptable hermeneutics. Their quarrel is not with believers who know in their spirits that God is directing them by the witness of two or three rhemas, but with the Holy Spirit Who confirms the application of rhemas.
Jesus used rhemas in overcoming Satan’s temptations, and one of the passages He used affirms rhemas. “But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word [rhema] that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4).
6. Correct Divisions of Truth Versus Truth Out of Balance
Paul gave Timothy wise instruction in hermeneutics when he wrote, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (II Timothy 2:15).
Scripture is a living, powerful instrument in the hand of God. It functions on what appears to us to be paradoxes. In a similar fashion, the muscles in our bodies are only able to function by opposing tensions.
On the one hand, Scripture presents the Law of God, but then it contrasts this with the grace of God. Scripture teaches the need for justice, but then it counters this with mercy. We are told to cease from our own labour and enter the rest that is in Christ. At the same time, we are commanded to work for the night is coming when no man can work and to labour for the Lord. We have freedom in Christ. However, we are to make ourselves servants to all people.
If we emphasize only one side of God’s Biblical equation, we can certainly support it with verses of Scripture, but we will come out with the wrong answer. Truth out of balance leads to heresy. For example, if we emphasize the “rest” that a believer has and fail to give equal and primary emphasis to the “labour” of a believer, we will view any emphasis on working for the Lord as legalism.
Paul put labour and rest together when he wrote, “There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his. Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief” (Hebrews 4:9–11). Similarly, there is certainly freedom in Christ. However, if we focus on freedom, we will react to God-ordained authority as being oppressive and cultish.
Proper hermeneutics requires diligent use of all the above factors under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Avoid Scripture Twisting: Eight Basic Rules Of Bible Interpretation
1. Begin with what the passage says, but always ask, “What does the passage mean?”, not what it “says.”
2. Pay attention to the Greek and Hebrew, (For those without language training, an interlinear Bible used in conjunction with a Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words or Expository Dictionary of Bible Words is recommended).
3. Remember the context. Read verses in the context of the whole passage, the chapter and even the book. Finally, keep in mind the larger context of the New Testament or Old Testament.
4. The Bible is progressive revelation. This means that, generally, the New Testament specifically interprets the Old Testament.
5. Always interpret the incidental passage by the systematic teachings of that topic; consider all the passages dealing with the topic, A good topical Bible is a useful aid (e.g. Nave’s Topical Bible).
6. Interpret the unclear passages by the clear ones. A favourite ploy of the cults is to choose a difficult passage and build their unique doctrines on it.
7. Beware of novel interpretations, check various conservative commentaries on the passage. There is very little new under the sun. Many of the heresies of the cults have been dealt with thoroughly. Even though there are many Christian denominations, it is interesting that on the essential doctrines there is solid agreement. Always go beyond what the passage is saying to get at its intended meaning. Cult leaders are expert in isolating passages and imposing their interpretation on it.
8. Come to Scripture prayerfully, submitting to be taught by the Holy Spirit, allowing the Scripture to interpret itself and not be clouded by personal doctrinal presuppositions.
1. Pray! Pray! Pray! The Holy Spirit knows better then you do!
2. Always know what the verse actually says, not what you think you remember it saying
3. Take the verse in literary context, don’t just read what you want to read to prove your point and don’t forget the Bible is a mosaic of different kinds of literature meant to be read different ways.
4. Take the verse in cultural context, just like you saying “it’s raining cats and dogs” is not what you literally meant
5. Remember the Bible is a whole 66 books! Interpret all verses in relation the other 1000’s of verses
6. Check the other translations, The variations are complimentary and show the whole picture
7. The Bible was not originally written in English, go back to the sources
8. Theological presuppositions are bad, scripture determines doctrine, not the other way around
9. Check the Theologians’ opinions, The Ph.D, professor of heart surgery of Harvard is better then your uncle Ted’s heart removal service. Professional opinions matter! (but don’t assume they’re always right)
10. Assume nothing, be ready to learn, don’t give up. Remember, only God knows everything.
561 responses to “Hermeneutics And Exegesis”
@GP, Thanks for this well outlined article on Hermeneutics and Exegesis.
Yes, proper application of God’s Word is dependent upon proper interpretation of it. All exposition, preaching, and teaching must, therefore, be based on the appropriate exercise of the principles of hermeneutics, exegesis, and Biblical theology.
Back in 1710, did the majority (or any) of Christian denominations oppose slavery, promote the teaching of the Gospel to non-European people, support the concept of equal opportunity for women, support democratic rule or even encouraged most ordinary people to read the BIble? My understanding is that the order of those days in North Atlantic and New World countries was much influenced by ecclesiastical sources. So from which date did Christianity generally promote the approach to hermeneutics and exegesis given above?
Anonymous
Have you learned ANYTHING AT ALL from the article above by GP?
Could you not find any thing else to ask about?
What is the relevance of knowing the date that Christianity promoted the approach to hermeneutics and exegesis given above?
Would this knowledge change the hearts of men?
GP thanks for bringing this information to my attention. I certainly never heard it in either the Anglican or Methodist churches I attended in my youth while growing up in Barbados My Christian friends are here now telling me that this information is nothing new. That they have always heard these things in their church
If it is necessary to apply all these rules and ‘hermeneutricks’ and ‘exegcises’ in order to understand the bible I wonder what is the role of the Holy Spirit then?
Does this suggest that the Holy Spirit is unable to shed the necessary light on the word without this complex intellectual support?
When the bible says to simply “ask and it shall be given; to seek and ye shall find…” then – it probably intended this to mean those who had completed bible school … you think?!!
@GP
This article is a load on nonsense that contradicts the very bible to which you refer. Why don’t you write something on high blood pressure or something so that you really understand nuh?
What hermeneutics what??!!
Here is a different view…. by someone who understood these things, speaking to those who understood what he was talking about.
We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we speak of God’s secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. However, as it is written:
“No eye has seen,
no ear has heard,
no mind has conceived
what God has prepared for those who love him”
but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit.
The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man’s spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man’s judgment:
“For who has known the mind of the Lord
that he may instruct him?
But we have the mind of Christ.
What exegesis nonsense what??!!
It is noteworthy that in the passage you lifted out of context from 1 Corinthians 2 that you have ommited both the purpose and reason and historical background of this passage. Are verses 1-5 not relevant? To whom was Paul speaking? Why? What was the problem in Corinth. What was Paul doing in this speach? First one must interpret Scripture BEFORE APPLYING SCRIPTURE. The two ARE NOT THE SAME!
It is noteworthy that at Mars hill in Acts 17 that Paul was exegewting OT
It is noteworthy that Jesus on several occasions exegeted OT passages.
It is note worthy that he did this particularly on the road to Emmaus and that in his first sermon on the day of Pentecost that Peter exegeted a passge from the book of Joel.
It is noteworthy that several hundred OT passages from the OT are exegeted in the NT by Jesus, John, Mathew Peter, Paul , Jude James etc
What I have written, I have written.
I understand what I have written and so did the hundreds of authors I have read or men I have listened to also seem to have understood what hermeneutics and exegesis means.
For those who wanted to know what hermeneutics and exegesis means, I have explained it above. You can take it or leave it.
As for me, I am now to old and well taught by real Bible scholars to worry with the ramblings of a seed picker who believes that the Bible is to be understood by using two or three Scriptures that he takes out of context.
I have been into the homes of many Christians here and there in my travels, and it is interesting to note the books that they use to help them understand the Bible. that helps them in thier seeking and knocking. I have learned much from these believers and these books. I have yet to learn anything on the Bible on BU except from the writings of Zoe, or Dictionary who have both obviously been well read in these matters.
You all may now rant rave and ramble. You will however, find as millions the world over, that your reading, understanding and interpretation of the Bible will be facilitated by the notes above.
One wonders if the Holy Spirit didnt give this information to men.
One wonders if the work by Thompson, Ryrie, Scofield and others in thier study Bibles was accomplished without the Holy Spirit.
One wonders if the work of Strong, Weust, Barclay, Vine et al in thier concordances or Word Studies was accomplished with out the help of the Holy Spirit.
One wonders if all the commentaries were written by men who had not the Spirit. One wonders why all these aids were given. Does these aids not stem from the provision stated in Ephesians 4:11-12?
One knows that the Spirit does not and will not teach any who dont search or study the Scriptures. Praise God that I have had good teachers from my Sunday Schools days. Praise God for the iminformative notes from Radio Bible class and men like RB Thieme and JVernon MCGee. Else I would fall into the snare today.
You can carry on . Fool those whom you can. I have sought to obey the tenets of 2 Tim 2:2 as I shall do live later this evening to acompany of men and women who have STUDIED AND SEARCHED and OWN THE STUDY GUIDES AND BOOKS WHICH ALL SERIOUS STUDENTS OF THE BIBLE READ. This includes those who never finshed high school or went to University or Bible School.
A toast to the spirit of “BBB” Bajan Bible Bashers
Drink up, it isn’t fattening. Research shows one calorie of alcohol has less impact than one calorie of food. One theory is that in regular drinkers the liver develops a separate metabolic pathway to break down alcohol, with surplus energy turned mainly into heat, not fat.
I read everything but I don’t think a fairly basic thing is made clear at any time:
Who makes the rules? You?
@Bush Tea, Ya Ignorant man, of the biblical injunction and imperative, “Be diligent to present yourself APPROVED unto God, a worker who does NOT need to be ASHAMED, rightly dividing the Word of TRUTH.” (2 Tim. 2:15). emphasis added.
BT, It is very obvious that you have two problems:
1) You have not being ‘…diligent to present yourself approved unto God…” As you continuely make a MESS of interpreting His Word, in NOT *rightly dividing* the Word of TRUTH, therefore you are *ASHAMED* and,
2) You clearly do NOT have the leading and guiding of the Holy Spirit, otherwise you would NOT be constantly lifting verses of Scripture entirely out of *context*.
“But if anyone be IGNORANT, let him be IGNORANT.” (2 Cor. 14:38) emhasis added.
BUSH TEA, Ya ignorant man!
If one starts with the wrong premise the conclusion will undoubtedly be fallacious. Strictly literal interpretation of the Bible tells us that a snake was smarter than Adam and Eve and about a universal deluge which isn’t compatible with what we know about geology and biology. How can a literal interpretation be consistent with reality? How could Noah have gathered male and female of each kind [Gen. 7:15-16] when some species are asexual, others are parthenogenic and have only females, and others (such as earthworms) are hermaphrodites? And what about social animals like ants and termites which need the whole nest to survive?
One can apply all the Hermeneutics and Exegesis they want, however if your premise is wrong your inferences cannot be right. I think that in order for the Bible to stay relevant Christians will have to move towards an allegorical interpretation or once again as was the case with the flat earth, geocentric model of the universe, science will prove these literal translations to be illogical and invalid.
WARNING!
For we all haved sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
Question: Which ruleapplies?Hermeneutics or Exegesis
The word according to Zoe;
“BUSH TEA, Ya ignorant man!”
Mr Zoe, that was the most intelligent statement in your contribution above. You really should try the tactic of NOT posting anything- on the many occasions when you have nothing useful to say.
I am a BUSHMAN….. it goes without saying that bushmen are ignorant…in my case, I am also ‘igrunt’…. dat is why you and GP does ruffle my cage….
…and what ‘obvious that BT has two problems’ what?!?! I have many more that two problems, but you and GP are the least of them.
Look Zoe, if you, GP, Dick and who ever else enjoy your little game of hermeneutics and exegeses with your mutual, and self stimulation and back patting – why not continue to play with your little bible study and church groups -where all your loyal fans can bow down in awe of your big words and pompous attitudes?
Why come here on BU pushing nonsense that you cannot defend? Why expose yourselves by behaving like spoiled children? – you insulting and labeling; and GP getting on like some infant anytime someone challenges a posit of his?
If someone is prepared to post an article like this, should they not be prepared to defend it? Seems like you and your trinity boys think that this is a Sunday school class – we BUites are just supposed to accept what is said….. and clap too!!
Who died and left you people in charge of wisdom and intelligence?
None of you have answers to basic questions put to you by myself, Technician and others. Yet you claim to have this exegeses/ hermeneutics stuff down pat.
*What is God’s purpose for human life on earth?
*Why did God create the devil? and why is there so much suffering and evil in the world when God can easily resolve this?
*Why did Jesus speak in parables and confuse those to whom he spoke?
*What is the significance of the sabbath day?
Clearly, none of you have intelligent answers to these and other questions – but of course GP says that he does not ‘need to know everything’…. What is YOUR excuse Zoe?
Imagine I post a statement by no less a person that Paul – which clearly states that ONLY God’s spirit can interpret the things of God and that all of man’s knowledge (he means hermeneutics and exegeses LOL) is useless in understanding the wisdom of God.
….and wanna cussing me and saying it ‘out of context’.
By ‘out of context’ do you mean it does not fit with the nonsense that you seek to espouse? …. well EXCUSE me!
@Scientist,
I have always thought that ” Strictly literal interpretation of the Bible” was not rational.
“Faith” in God is what matters.
Hermeneutics and Exegesis. That level of Bible study will probably make GP and Zoe better Christians than the rest of us.
We are all individuals who must take personal responsibility for our relationship with God or not.
This is a soundly written piece on the basics of Hermenutics; which is done in Seminary.
It is not surprising to hear opposition, as the skeptic surely would not understand (or, want to understand) the depths one has to go to have a clear interpretation of scripture.
Yes, the Holy Spirit leads; but one must go beyond superficial reading of the Word to extract the ripened riches of the Holy Writ.
The Bilbe is no ordinary book. It is the only One I know of that one can read the same passages repeatedly over the years and be endowed with different thought. Or, in otherwords, one can read the same passages and come away with something new (but still related to the same passage).
This is especially applicable when one applies the rules laid out above.
Contrary to what some think, understanding the Bible is not brawn; it involves a high degree of intellectualism.
Whereas I can see how Zoe can get angry, I will not respond in that fashion. I happen to teach Bible classes attended by doctors, lawyers and other well educated men who have studied the Word of God from thier youth and who understand the word of God, and have used the principles I have listed in my original post, simply because these things are generally practised by serious Bible students all over the world. They also read many of the books I have read and have them in thier libraries.
These men are all themselves good teachers of the Word of God
You see I don’t come on BU to push anything or to defend anything.
I have shared how I was taught to study the Bible by simple folk and by well taught folk, and by reading books written by men who obviously studied the Word and listening to great teachers of the Word on radio and tv. You can accept it or reject it. But I dont have to defend anything.
I don’t post on BU to defend a thesis, because there is none on BU who are my teachers or can teach me anything about the Bible.
You can accept or don’t accept.
Because you don’t know or don’t appreciate principles of exegesis or hermeneutics it does not mean that many men and woman the world over do not. And I am talking about simple men and women too. I had no degrees or even A levels when I was first exposed to doing a Book Study or a chapter study or a verse by verse study (also called exegesis).
And I discuss what I want to discuss. Since you are not my examiner, and have never been my examiner in any subject, I do not have to answer any of the silly questions that you seem to think are so important.
They are important to you, but not to me. They are not necessary for salvation. They are not necessary for an understanding of any of the great doctrines of the Bible. I know that I don’t know everything. I know that I don’t have to know everything, because I have passed many an exam with out knowing everything.
I will not answer your stupid questions.
What I do know is how to exegete a passage. And I do understand the principles of Biblical interpretation accepted by millions of believers all around the world. And you will not change my system of learning and studying the Bible. And I will die obeying the tenets of 2 Tim 2:2 by sharing what I have learned.
You posted a passage from I Corinthians that deals primarily with Paul’s defense of his apostleship at Corinth. As part of the passage Paul taught certain basic truths that were first enunciated by Jesus in the Upper Room Discourse when he promise to ask the Father to send another comforter who would guide believers into all truth. Paul was thus exegeting a truth that was part of the apostles doctrine.
All believers know that the Holy Spirit is the Indwelling Resident Tutor as enunciated in 1 John 2:20 & 27. Do you think that Zoe and I do not know or understand the text you were quoting? Do you think that we cant list the proof texts that the Holy Spirit was given to believers? Will you teach us about Pneumotology now?
And I have not cussed you I asked you quite politely and reasonably to consider the source of men’s knowledge. Does it not all come from God? Is not the Holy Spirit God?. Do we have to acknowledge that we understand a rudiment or first principle that you have recently grasped and thus hold tenaciously to. Do you think that we are still at the milk drinking stage? Do you think that the Holy Spirit did not teach us the Word? Do you have a monopoly on the Holy Spirit?
Did Strong do his work that took 50 years without the Spirit of God. Does the use of Strong’s numbers help serious students of God’s word to note where the same word in the original text is translated by a different word in other places or not.
If you are satisfied with the level of your understanding, why do you think that we should be satisfied there with also?
You can carry on as you desire. But I don’t have to answer your pithy puerile questions. They mean nothing to me just as basic principles of Biblical interpretation mean nothing to you …. Even though these principles are paramount to men and women who study the Word the world over. Do you think that the things I have been hearing taught for 40 years is nonsense because you say so?
Well I prefer De Haaan John R Rice Oliver Greene Ironside Ryrie Thieme Mc Gee Barnhouse Campbell Morgan Stedman Pink Rogers Epp Burdick and all the great men of God, to the pithle you offer Sir.
@GP
Had a read and wondered if you could clarify the following.
Found the quote taken from the article interesting. Taken at face value know what it means but wondered if there isn’t some subjectivity which can come in determining what is absurd. People may have different interpretations based on backgrounds.
Coopers rule states When the plain sense makes common sense, seek no other sense but interpret every word according to its normal meaning unless it makes no sense.
Now that is what we do when we read the newspaper, BU, Skakespeare or any other litterature. I am sure that you would agree with that. We interpet as literally as we can.
So what about a camel going through the eye of a needle. Insuch a case we want to know what a needle is. In a case like this we might check a commentary. Or Vinesa or Weuest or Barclay or some one can help us with what is the word in the original or how was the word used in the papyri.
What does corban in Mark 7 mean? Perhaps the book “Maners & Customs might help.”
Why do people always go up to Jerudsalem and down to Jericho? That is a Geographical issue.
What is meant by the fact that Jesus must needs go through Samaria in John 4? What does need mean. What does the original word mean? Check the Strons’s number and see where that word is translated by another word elsewhere. Because Jesus could have gone in one of at least two ways to get where he was going, without going throuh Samaria. He actually went the shortest way; but not the route that Jews normally did because of their hatred of the Samaritans.
Who were the Samaritans? Why did the Jews hate them; and we can go on.
How can there be a different interpretation depending on one’s background. Is that how we interpret other books. Is that how we interpret the Advocate or Shakespeare. A text has one interpretation except certain prophecies which clearly have more than one partial fulfillment.
Example Joel’s prophecy concerning the pouring out of the Spirit as quoted and exegeted by Peter at Pentecost, had a partial fulfillment in Joel’s time, a partial fufillment on the day of Pentecost. How do I know this? Peter said so. We know that there is yet a future and complete fulfillment of this prophecy yet to come.
Re “or bring it into disagreement with other passages”
2 Peter 1: 20 teaches that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. The original text indicates that one must interpret passages in the light of other passages.
Example: the story of Cain & Abel in Genesis 4 has a relationship to discusions about either Abel (in Hebrews 11) and Cain in I John 3:12 and Jude 11. Abel obeyed God by faith and followed Gods intruction and is immortalised in the “hall of the faithfull” in Hebrews 11. Cain is described as evil and the father of apostates.
Is there not a relationship with the fall of man in Genesis 3 where our fore parents failed the tests described by John in 1 John 2:17 about the lust of the eyes, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life. Have not all men everywhere failed these tests of passion posessions and position or of appetite, avarice and ambition. Did Jesus not pass all of these tests as recorded in Luke 4 & Mathew 4?
Look at the Bible teachings about prayer. Do people get everything for which they ask or do they also have to ask in God’s will also.
To interpret an obsure text by another obscure text will always lead to error. You interpret texts about a topic about which you are unclear in the light of a text which is clearer, interpreted correctly in its context.
Context is very important.
Hope this helps a bit.
The Interpreter Needs to Recognize the Unity of the Holy Spirit and the Word.
The Holy Spirit and the Word agree (1 John 5: 7,8). The Holy spirit inspired the Word, and will NEVER contradict it. No person can claim illumination by the Holy spirit of any passage if that interpratation is in conflict with other passages of Scripture. The believer must DISCERN between the Spirit of TRUTH and the spirit of ERROR (1 John 4: 1-6) The spirit of ERROR can take a verse and purport it to say OPPOSITE of that which the Spirit of truth is saying, when in reality NO VERSE can be made to contradict another verse. The Holy Spirit WILL NEVER communicate to the mind of the believer any doctrine or meaning of Scripture which IS NOT already in Scripture itself.
The Literal Method of Interpretation.
As GP has given already, I’ll just amplify a bit more the basis of the soundness in using the Literal method, otherwise also know as the Grammatico-Historical method because, in order to determine the normal customery usages of Bible language, the accepted rules of grammar and rhetoric MUST be considered and the historical and cultural aspects of Bible times must be taken into consideration.
Therefore, the ‘Literal’ method assumes that the words of Scripture in their plain evident meaning are reliable; that Almighty God intended His revelation to be understood by all who believe; that the words of Scripture communicate what God wants man to know; and that God based the communication of TRUTH on the regular laws governing written communication, thereby intending for it to be interpreted by those same laws. This is not to deny the Holy Spirit’s involvement in both the production and the interpretation of the Bible.
The expression “literal sense” may be defined as: the usual, customary, and socially accepted meaning conveyed by words or expressions in their particular contexts. It involves that which a particular word meant to the original writer and readers. It recognizes that a word may have different meanings in different contexts and thus must be interpreted in the light of its contextual usage. It contends that though a word may possibly have several meanings, in any one particular usage it generally will have but one intended meaning.
However, and this is where a proper grasp and understand of Hermeneutics comes into play. The Literal sense does not exclude the figurative; nor does the Literal method exclude the spiritual meaning; and by ‘spiritual’ I do not mean ‘spiritualizing’ Scripture, as some have done to make it mean something other than what it says. The literal method, through rejecting ‘spiritualiztion’ readily admit the spiritual substance and nature of the Scriptures. The Bible, the Word of God, is a spiritual book, conveying spiritual truth, and therefore must be spiritually interpreted.
It is important to stress, that the “Allegorical” method of interpretation IS a very dangerous method, and extremely inadequate in the interpretation of Scripture. Allegorism obscures both the ‘literal’ and the figurative elements in Scripture. It does this by exalting the interpreter’s intentions and ignoring the author’s intended meaning, the allegorical method fails to reach the basic goal of interpretation, and must be rejected and discarded, as this erroneous method, allows the allegorists, to read into Scripture whatever they think or want to believe.
The following are six basic principles given by Ramm that are foundational to sound interpretation of God’s Word:
1) A word must be understood in terms of its sentence, and a sentence in terms of its context.
2) Scriptures dealing with similar topics should be compared, and in some cases a third Scripture would relieve the apparent contradiction between two Scriptures.
3) A clear passage is to be given preference over an obscure one, if they deal with the same subject matter.
4) Very close attention is to be paid to spelling, grammar, and figures of speech.
5) By use of logic, we can determine the application of Scripture to those problems in life, Scripture has not specifically treated.
6) The God of Israel spoke in the tongues of men, and this asserts that the God of Israel had addapted His revelation to its recipients.
By using the ‘literal’ sense as the basis for interpretation, sound exegesis will be more readily achieved. The study of language is one of the first steps toward solid interpretation.
Literal interpretation, with the historical background in plain view, is the foundation for sound doctrine.
An improper concept of Scripture, will lead to improper interpretation. The literal sense of Scripture is not to be viewed as the superficial sense, but rather as the all-important foundational sense.
SHOW SOMEONE WHO APPROACHES THE BIBLE UNBIASED?
Someone without preconceptions*…
Someone without the innate, inherent laws of “PRESUPPOSITION”…
Someone who hasn’t been tainted by an epistemological underpinning which act as blinders…
If any of us can fulfill the requirements of the following criteria as laid out in MILTON TERRY’s thesis – we are then FREE* to teach…
Biblical Hermeneutics: A treatise on the Interpretation of the Old and New Testament
MILTON S. TERRY – ISBN: 1-57910-225-5 ©1890
The Qualifications Of An Interpreter –
INTELLECTUAL QUALIFICATIONS:
Defective mental powers disqualify
Quick and clear perception
Acuteness of intellect
Imagination needed, but must be controlled
Sober Judgment
Correct and delicate taste
Use of reason
Apt to teach
EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS:
Geography
History
Chronology
Antiquities
Politics
Natural Science
Philosophy
The Sacred Tongues
Comparative Philology
General Literature
SPIRITUAL QUALIFICATIONS:
Desire to know the truth
Tender affection
Enthusiasm for the Word
Reverence for God
Communion with the HOLY SPIRIT*
When we come with our mental baggage that is packed with previous involvement with Scripture which prejudice our reaction to the periscope under consideration. The result is, oftentimes – only an interpretation that mirrors our own conceptualized biases born out of subliminal indoctrination and covert spiritual sophistry.
WE MUST ALWAYS ASK THE QUESTION –
“Whose hermeneutics does this justify?”
@Bush Tea: “Look Zoe, if you, GP, Dick and who ever else enjoy your little game of hermeneutics and exegeses with your mutual, and self stimulation and back patting – why not continue to play with your little bible study and church groups -where all your loyal fans can bow down in awe of your big words and pompous attitudes?
I have reason to believe your above was a rhetorical, but to speak to the elephant in the room…
The “BU Trinity” have an agenda to try to convince “onlookers” that they are “right” and correct, and everyone else are “fools” and “idiots”.
One might wonder why BU.David is so supportive…
Thank the “gods that may be” that there is alternative thinking available:
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/
@Chris
What are you recommending?
To ban the three persons?
Not to give their views prominence because you don’t agree?
BU has been built on the basis of accommodating all views. The day we depart from that position is the day we would have compromised what BU stand for.
@BU.David: “What are you recommending? To ban the three persons?
Not at all. (And there’s more than three.)
@BU.David: “Not to give their views prominence because you don’t agree?
Just in case it isn’t yet clear, I respect people more when they disagree with me.
@BU.David: “BU has been built on the basis of accommodating all views. The day we depart from that position is the day we would have compromised what BU stand for.
Agreed.
However, it cannot be denied that in recent months BU has become dominated by the “BU Trinity”. (Let’s not even talk about the musical chick.)
Are you in control David? Or are you riding a tiger?
Is BU to go down in history as breaking ground in free speech for the indigenous peoples?
Or simply a footnote as a Blog which came under the influence of outside forces?
@Chris
As always BU will reflect on all feedback given.
Bear in mind though the problem as you see it is located mainly on the religious blogs. Maybe you can explain what you mean by BU being dominated by outside forces.
Terrence
Thanks for your most erudite contribution to the discussion.
The issues that you have listed are clearly those that are generally required for the reading of any serious literature, besides the story books we read in low primer in the 50’s with things like ” THIS IS DAN. THIS IS A VAN. DAN IS A MAN. DAN IS THE MAN I THE VAN.”
The issues that you have listed are clearly those that are also required for a sound interpretation of the Bible.
The “BU Trinity” isn’t deceiving anyone but themselves. If one enters garbage into a computer how can one possibly expect to get a result that makes sense? By extension, if one applies logic that would even impress the great king Solomon to something primarily based on fiction and Jewish fairytales (adapted from Mesopotamian and Egypt myths by the way), free thinking people will know that while the method of analysis might be sound, the conclusions are flawed and nonsensical.
I don’t know of one christian who has read the bible in its entirety and then has chosen a denomination. It always happens in the converse manner; they read the scriptures with some preconceived ideas which causes their interpretation to be biased toward a particular denomination.
The bible says that man was made in God’s image, but I think man is constantly making God into his image. According to christianity, imagine an omnipotent being is encapsulated in the imperfection of a man. Further, God is ascribed human attributes such as resting according to the creation story. Logic can be applied to many other disciplines, but as it relates to the supernatural christians should stop humanizing God.
@BU.David: “Bear in mind though the problem as you see it is located mainly on the religious blogs. Maybe you can explain what you mean by BU being dominated by outside forces.
Two observations:
1. Why are there so many religious Blogs here on BU?
1.1. Please note that you, BU.David, are in sole control of what Blogs appear here on BU.
2. I would argue that the “problem as [I] see it” is *not* solely limited to the religious Blogs.
2.1. Many a serious non-religious Blog has been hijacked. (For example, the one about Haiti.)
I believe the term is “hmmmm”…
@All… Sorry…
My immediate above was one observation, one argument, one statement, and one question (in inverse order)….
i.e. F(&%$##@^&^% *)*^&%$^&%
Scientists writes
I don’t know of one christian who has read the bible in its entirety and then has chosen a denomination.
Isnt this because most folk who become Christians have read very little of the Bible previously? So what is your point?
Then he says ” It always happens in the converse manner; they read the scriptures with some preconceived ideas which causes their interpretation to be biased toward a particular denomination.”
This is nonsense and reflects only his experience or lack thereof. I was told to go read I John and John’s gospel since other areas might be harder to comprehend for a newbie.
You really dont waana start i the prophets do you? Made lots of sense to me.
You say and very correctly so that “The bible says that man was made in God’s image, but I think man is constantly making God into his image.” That is very evident on BU.
Hear him ramble some more “ According to christianity, imagine an omnipotent being is encapsulated in the imperfection of a man.”
Seems you got it wrong if you are describing the incarnation. The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus came in human flesh and lived perfectly as a man. That’s one of the basic things that the scripture teaches.
He says that God is ascribed human attributes such as resting according to the creation story. My question is do folk who make gods of wood or stone not ascribed human attributes to these false gods?
Some one asked : Why are there so many religious Blogs here on BU?
Why not? If you don’t like religious blogs, just don’t read them. Isnt that simple?
Why are they so many political blogs.
Some one said Many a serious non-religious Blog has been hijacked.
Many a serious religious Blog has been hijacked, as this one is about to be by the very same person that made these comments. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
This is my observation, argument, statement etc
Has he posted any thing of substance on this topic? Why is he here. Does he have anything of substance to offer on this subject?
re The “BU Trinity” have an agenda to try to convince “onlookers” that they are “right” and correct, and everyone else are “fools” and “idiots”.
Might the “BU Trinity” not reasonably conclude that there are those who would have these men silenced or banned altogether from BU?
Might the “BU Trinity” not reasonably conclude that there are those on BU whose intentions ae solely to convince “onlookers” that they are “WRONG” and INcorrect, and that they are the only “fools” and “idiots” who post on BU?
Might the fact that David is so supportive… be that he learns something from the posts of these so called “SSA” beings and members of the Bat Cave?
@Anon (read: an Anonymous Coward — too cowardice to stand behind what they say) said: “Why not? If you don’t like religious blogs, just don’t read them. Isnt that simple?
You don’t understand. Or perhaps you do.
Yes — of course… You most probably absolutely understand the methodology…
@All…
It’s all about signal vs. noise.
@BU.David…
It’s your Blog….
@C
As a high public profile pseudo scientific intellectual Buddhist agnostic who will probably change faith in a couple of years
what credibility do you believe you have ?
Subjective wouldn’t you say? How many religious blogs do you think would pass your muster?
and your point?
Have you been able to scope the “problem”? Is it a problem? Have you extrapolated from your personal position?
This is true but you neglected to include the point that other blogs have been hijacked by non-religious elements.
At the end of the day we use our best judgement, sometimes we get it wrong.
To your earlier point:
Nothing lives forever, you should enjoy it whilst we can. How about a comment on the blog Barbados Water Management In A Mess. Appears to be right up your alley.
If you don’t agree with Dictionary, Zoe, GP, Scientist et al ignore the religious blogs, what is so hard about that to do. It is obvious you guys will never agree so why flog a dead horse?
Better yet why don’t you submit a writing on your interpretation of the recent RIO ruling by the FTC?
Quoting the wise and understanding Christian, Dr, Georgie Porgie:
“Whereas I can see how Zoe can get angry, I will not respond in that fashion. I happen to teach Bible classes … You see I don’t come on BU to push anything or to defend anything … You can accept it or reject it. But I dont have to defend anything …
I do not have to answer any of the silly questions that you seem to think are so important. They are important to you … I will not answer your stupid questions.
And I have not cussed you … I don’t have to answer your pithy puerile questions. They mean nothing to me … the pithle you offer Sir.”
Wow! Don’t we all just WISH that we’d had such a wise and amazing teacher who would never resort to insults such as silly, stupid, puerlie.
May you go with your god sir, and may Santa Claus always bless you.
Having read your rant, I will always be thankful that you never had an opportunity to be so hypocritical right in front of my face in one of your “Bible classes”.
Be well.
@H
I’m No Robot
@K
This one is just for you….
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWH00CAgXUA&hl=en_US&fs=1&]
@C
my son says to turn your song down but he asks what it is
Fluke – Atom Bomb
click click
@K… Your son says to turn it down, but he’s interested enough to ask what is playing…
Yes, it is Fluke’s “Atom Bomb”.
Let me please present their “Mosh” — an amazing instrumental. This is dedicated to your son.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd_wibJtXBc&hl=en_US&fs=1&]
Anyway back to the matter
I don’t believe Zoe is qualified to talk about middles eastern issues when it’s outside Z’s universe and experiences
Surely Pastor Zoe, addressing Mr. Tea in messages above, speaks the truth.
For is it not SAID in Ecclesiastes 3: 1-8 that “there SHALL come among you a man whose initials SHALL be GP, and this man is my prophet and my sword.”
And is IT not said, with RANDOM capitalization, in the most beautiful book of the Old Testament, the Book of Ronnie “the Hat” Braithwaite (17:3-7): “A man called Georgie Porgie SHALL dwell among you, oh my children, and though you reject-eth his words he is NOT a dickhead. And you SHALL repent-eth your rejection of the truth he brings to you. And YES, I DO understand that I CAPITALIZE words in a manner that some WOULD call strange. But I AM on medication for IT and I SHALL be better at the weekend.”
And does Timothy not remind us: THAT’S a promise. Just UNTIL the weekend. It is ONLY a 24-hour thing” (emphasis in the original).
Pastor Zoe is surely right. It is imperative to DIVIDE the Word. I would go further: it is essential to SUB-DIVIDE the Word, to EXEGETE and CONSECRATE and LAMINATE the Word, to CORUSCATE and HIBERNATE and INSULATE the Word. For the Word is among us. And his name, my brethren, is Marcia Snellgrove.
Believe this or forever be ignorant. For it has already been made known to you. In the book of Dead-Illiterate-Desert-Nomad-From-The-Bronze-Age (17: 9) we learn that: “There will be a man, and he SHALL be called either John or Jesus or Georgie Porgie, and he WILL be attended by the not-too-bright Archangels Eric and Zoe, and you SHALL consider him a laughable fool, a charlatan bagman with a scam for idiots. But you WILL repent-eth your utter and complete disdain for his transparently comical, laugh-out-loud garbage. For is not Marcia Snellgrove among you?”
Hey, Zoe? God called while you were out. He left a message. You’re damned, apparently. I’m really sorry about that. I know how much you were looking forward to not being damned. My sympathies. Sincerely.
Bush Tea will not repeat Adam Sherman’s well written above, but surely GP must see that he has a serious problem. What kind of teacher is it that dismisses searching questions with such insulting language?
Is this his display of the characteristics of God’s spirit? of Love?
This is the point that a simple bushman has been trying to get GP to appreciate for months now. This is not about the kind of intellect that learns medicine or engineering. It is a spiritual thing that (and forgive me here Mr Bowman sir) IS AVAILABLE ONLY VIA A SPIRITUAL MEANS – GOD’S HOLY SPIRIT.
As to those puerile questions….. God has deliberately chosen the simple, foolish things of this world to confound the wise and powerful. Those ‘foolish’, ‘puerile’ questions put the sword to the mumbo jumbo stuff that you seem to think represents God’s truth and the Gospel (Good News) that Jesus brought to this world.
The following quote from one of GP posts here says it all for the bushman:
******************************************************************************************
I don’t post on BU to defend a thesis, because there is none on BU who are my teachers or can teach me anything about the Bible
*******************************************************************************************
If you truly believe this GP then you may well be beyond hope.
The fact is that the wiser one becomes, the clearer it becomes that there is ALWAYS more to be learned….. often from simple puerile bushmen and other idiots…
Hopefully you will reflect carefully on your whole approach to these exchanges and we could all benefit as a result.
@ David
Despite CH’s protestations, the one constant high point in this whole exercise has been the dedicated, professional, quality of the BU experience.
I really wonder about what kind of person you are……. in the face of constant pressures, increasing commitment, no personal reward or recognition, and occasional insults and taunting, you have remained a paragon of virtue and a beacon of quality.
Of particular note has been your saint-like response to Mr Jack Bowman’s ongoing attempt to insult and ridicule your choice of language….. a mere mortal would have quietly lost his contributions in some murky junk file….
By your selfless contributions and caring attitude you have been a far better teacher of the Gospel of Christ than any of the rest of us here on BU.
…even Chris must agree with this.
Quoting Mr. Tea:
“Of particular note has been your saint-like response to Mr Jack Bowman’s ongoing attempt to insult and ridicule your choice of language….. “.
Indeed. Saintly, I call it, Mr. Tea. Blessedly saintly.
Now, if we can just get the obvious scam-artist charlatan Georgie to grow up …
@Chris Halsall, Jack Bowman et al, who scoff at the Word of God, in their blinded, darkened, ignorance and overflowing folly!
“Treasures of WICKEDNESS profit nothing: but righteousness dilivereth from death.” (Prov. 10:2).
“The LORD will NOT suffer the soul of the righteous to famish: but casteth away the substance of the WICKED.” (Prov. 10: 3).
“Blessings are upon the head of the just: but violence covereth the mouth of the WICKED.” (Prov. 10: 6).
“The wise in heart will receive commandments: but a PRATING FOOL shall fall.” (Prov. 10: 8).
“In the lips of him that hath understanding wisdom is found: but a rod is for the back of him that is void of understanding.” (Prov. 10:13).
“Wise men lay up knowledge but the mouth of the FOOLISH is near destruction.” (Prov. 10: 14)
“Whoso DISPISETH the Word shall be destroyed: but he that feareth the commandment shall be rewarded.” (Prov. 13: 13).
So Bowman, et al, having joined the BU *Slanderous Satanic Snipers* SSS, Hell, like the grave IS NEVER full, you children of unrighteousness, ‘…their imaginations, and their FOOLISH heart was darkened”
“Professing themselves to be wise, they became FOOLS…being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciouness, full of envy…debate, deceit, malignity, whisperers, Backbiters, HATERS OF GOD, dispiteful, PROUD, boasters, inventers of EVIL things…without UNDERSTANDING…Who knoweth the JUDGMENT of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them…But after thy hardness and impenitent heart (BU *SSS*) treasurest UP unto thyself (BU *SSS*) WRATH against the day of WRATH and the revelation of the RIGHTEOUS JUDGMENT of God.” (Rom. 1: 21b,22, 29, 30, 31a, 32; 2: 5) emphasis added.
To the quiet, observers, you are witnessing right here on BU, some of what the Word of God, the Bible, expressly states will be the darkened, vile, hatred, of those who know NOT the Lord of Glory, and the vehement, attempt by some to have those of us, who share the Word of Truth, silenced, muted, stopped!
@ David, Thank you kindly, in Jesus Mighty, Majestic, Holy Name, for not being intimidated, by the scoffers of Almighty God and His Word, and for the privilege you have granted to those of us, who are not afraid, to declare His Word, in a world that IS rapidly falling apart, because of Godless insanity, folly, and spiritual darkness!
Let me reiterate
I don’t post on BU to defend a thesis, because there is none on BU who are my teachers or can teach me anything about the Bible. This just happens to be a fact.
I know where to go when I want to learn Bible, and its not BU. And the truth is that apart from the Greek and impiut by Zoe and Dictionary who both appear to be well read I have not learned anything knew on BU about the Bible, nor do I expect to.
Re “Hopefully you will reflect carefully on your whole approach to these exchanges and we could all benefit as a result.
There is nothing wrong with my approach and you dont plan to benefit from what I say. Your first response to this post is that it is nonsense! I am not the only one who learned the Bible this way. But its nonsense to you.
I am not going to ask you to reflect on your approach, because on BU you are not the subject of reproach and hate. But I am.
I am a fool. I am pompous. I use big words, and on and on.
But I thank God that in the same passage that speaks of God using the foolish things to confound the wise that he says NOT MANY noble etc and NOT ANY!
I thank God that I am God’s servant and that he is my master……not any of you on BU.
Whereas It is true that it is indeed a fact ” that the wiser one becomes, the clearer it becomes that there is ALWAYS more to be learned…..” it is also true that I can discern who can and who will teach me. Just as you decide d that my post is nonsense!
I have GOD to answer to at the bema or judgement seat of Christ. Not BU Bible novitiates.
I thank him for this.
Oh stop whining do GP!!
I said that the article was nonsense since it contradicts the very bible that you use.
I then went on to extensively quote Paul who was pontificating on the very issue.
Your only response is that the quote is ‘out of context’
What out of what context what??!!
Why don’t you explain what Paul was saying then….???
@ Adam Sherman
I will reiterate
I don’t come on BU to push anything or to defend anything …
You can accept or reject what I say and even call it nonsense.
You can post music and any other thing.
You can call for my banning
You can call me names.
But I don’t have to defend anything.
And I don’t have to answer any question that is not important to me….but that some think are important.
Why they think hermeneutics and exegesis is nonsense and not important. Are they not allowed to have that view? Have I asked them to defend their thesis, or what they are pushing?
I can only tell how I was taught and how I learned…. And how others have learned..
Now silly, stupid, and puerile are insulting, but to call my post nonsense is………..what, may I ask?
I accept that it is nonsense to him. Why cant you and he accept that his questions are silly, stupid, and puerile to me?
I am indeed grateful too that the likes of you have never appeared in one of my Bible classes. You see, Sir , I don’t teach Bible classes for milk drinkers Sir. I teach Bible classes for meat eaters! Folk in my Bible classes understand and use Hermeneutics and exegesis and have libraries with the approved books Sir.
Sunday school teaching is done by Sunday School teachers in our church group Sir.
@ Bush Tea
“If you truly believe this GP then you may well be beyond hope.
The fact is that the wiser one becomes, the clearer it becomes that there is ALWAYS more to be learned….. often from simple puerile bushmen and other idiots”
************************************************************************
One other idiot like me…………the hood. However, I much prefer to remain the idiot/fool that I am called than to be learned/intellectual and be like the three of the “BU trinity”.
Well said, Sir. However, your quote should also apply to GP’s two other sidekicks of the “BU trinity”. These three have gone to, and will continue to go to, any length to push their spin on the Bible and its teachings.
I would like to leave the following scripture on what happens to men like the “BU trinity when they puff themselves up with their supposed knowledge! Pay special attention to verse 22.
Romans1:16-22.
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 ** Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,**
@ GP
It is clear that you are more comfortable discussing religion with those who are “qualified”.
“doctors, lawyers and other well educated men”.
There are some on this blog who fall into that category.
Others, myself included do not and find your Hermeneutics And Exegesis too “complicated” but your medical articles were helpful and appreciated.
Mr Hood
Can you see that you are taking verse 22 out of its context?
What does the text say Sir?
Who make themselves wise and thus become fools. Now this is simple English comprehension. Clearly it is those who are
vs 18 ungodly and unrighteouus and who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Clearly it is those who
vs 21 are apostates; ie after knowing God they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
So you see that simple common sense and a knowledge and practice of English comprehension taught in primary schoo is part of Hermeneutics and exegesis.
Do you know me to be unrighteous, or apostate or a non g;lorifier of God or to be unthankful etc?
Please kindly determine whatthe text says then what the text means BEFORE you can attempt to APPLY the text. This is exegesis and hermeneutics Sir.
@Bush Tea, “None of you have answers to basic questions put to you by myself, Technician and others. Yet you claim to have this exegesis/hermeneutics stuff down pat.”
“What is God’s purpose for human life on earth?”
“Why did God create the Devil? Why is there so much suffering and evil in the world when God can easily resolve this?”
“Why did Jesus speak in parables and confuse those to whom He spoke?” “What is the siginficance of the sabbath?”
“Clearly, none of you have intelligent answers to these and other questions…what is YOUR excuse Zoe?”
Bush Tea, Your memory is somewhat failing you! These question that you refer to, 1. “What is the purpose for human life on earth? This question was dealt with in great detail way back over a year or so ago, on a thread that I think you started, and went beyond 1,000 comments, you might not have liked the Biblical answers that were offered, but it was answered1
Your second question, “Why did God create the devil?” I answered that question on another thread, I don’t remember which one it was, but, I remember giving you the Scriptures, that showed that God did NOT create the Devil, He created Lucifer, who rebelled and was cast down and became Satan, the Devil!
Your third question, “Why is there so much suffering and evil in the world, when God can easily resolve this?” I am sure at some time, this was dealt with, a most perplexing question!
Your fourth question, “Why did Jesus speak in parables…” As I remember, both GP and myself gave the Scriptural reasons why He did. You did not agree, but we did answer this question!
Your fifth question, “What is the significance of the sabbath?”
I dealt with this Sabbatarian controversy in another thread(s) on more than one occasion, in much detail, when refuting the SDA contention of Sabbath keeping, it is all there on BU archives!
It is therefore, not correct and honest, to say that these questions were not answered, as they were, either directly to you, or on another thread dealing with someone else.
There are some questions that are downright foolish, and even Paul advises to stay away from such stupid arguments.
BTW, I will give an exegesis on 1 Cor. 2: 9-16, tomorrow morning, which you obviously don’t understand. It is only by doing a proper ‘word’ study, (exegesis) that we are able to get beneath the English translation, and get to the core of the Greek, in order to correctly interpret what was meant; for those who are unable to understand what is fairly straightfoward, even in the English rendering, by obvious context!