How do we (I) individually and corporately use and interpret the Bible?
by James F. Myer
I have added an "I" (in parentheses) to the subject, because it is my understanding that I am to speak out of my own experience in using and interpreting the Bible. I am not claiming to speak for anyone else. Nor is what I say intended to represent any one group. It is not that I claim to know everything there is to know about the subject, or that what I say will settle these matters once and for all. But neither do I expect to apologize for what I believe and what have become foundational pillars that undergird my faith.
Biblical interpretation or hermeneutics has to do with how we arrive at
the meaning of Scripture. It is likely this issue, as much as anything
else that led to the beginnings of the Brethren movement nearly 300 years
ago. Alexander Mack and his group came to quite some different conclusions
about what was the meaning of certain passages of Scripture when compared
to what was being said by other religious groups. Among some unique Brethren
conclusions are these-that we should actually wash each other’s feet during
communion; that we consider the Lord’s Supper to be a fellowship meal rather
than just the bread and cup communion; and that we have members of the
same gender actually kiss each other in what is called the “holy kiss.”
All of my early influences in the Church of the Brethren suggested to me
that the Bible is the Word of God. All the Sunday school lessons, all the
Bible study sessions, and all the sermons I heard-were presented with the
emphasis that God speaks through the written Word of God, and that the
Bible is the book where it is written. It was only after I was called to
the Christian ministry at age 22, and began to take the reading course
for ministry training, that I became exposed to other ideas. The benefits
of this course were that it opened my eyes to try and carefully discern
what can be some dangerous methods of biblical interpretation.
Whenever we read, study, and proceed to teach God’s Word, some interpretation
is required. In Nehemiah 8:8 we read, "So they read in the book of the
Law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand
the reading." The meaning of Scripture requires a correct understanding
of words and phrases. Since language and verbal expression is gradually
evolving, sometimes we need to be aware of how certain expressions were
understood years ago. Here is where the use of modem translations and paraphrases
and Bible dictionaries and commentaries, etc can be helpful. An example
of how various meanings can be taken out of one sentence can be illustrated
this way. A husband comes home from his job and while eating the evening
meal which his wife has made, he asks, "Where did you get this meat?" He
could have a number of things in mind by asking the question "The meat
tastes good;" or, "The meat tastes bad." He may be wondering if it was cheap
or expensive. He could be wondering if she bought it at the new store,
which just opened, or at the one they’ve been buying from for years. Sometimes
simple words can be understood in a multiple number of ways.
What are some guidelines that inform my use and interpretation of the Bible?
1. I try and read from the Bible every day.
I am an early riser (about 5:30 am) and my Bible reading and personal prayers
are usually over by 6:00 am. Then my wife and I read a portion of the Bible
together at breakfast time and we kneel together and take turns praying.
This practice of family worship was firmly implanted in my mind when growing
up in my parents’ home where the family altar was as regular as eating
breakfast. So, first of all I use the Bible by reading it regularly.
2. I accept the authority, inspiration, and dependability of the Bible.
By “authority” I mean that God’s Word is forever settled in heaven (Psalm
119:89). In Psalm 119 there are 176 verses, which make it the longest chapter
in the Bible, and all but three of the verses make a reference in one way
or another to God’s Word. The inspiration of the Bible is taught in 2
Timothy 3:16 where we read that “All scripture is given by inspiration
of God.” We are also taught in the Word that "No scripture is by any private
interpretation; holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit"
(2 Peter 1:21). God used human writers who were under an unusual level
of divine guidance. They were not free-lance writers and they didn’t need
to have a committee meeting to plan the project.
These approximately 40 different writers lived over a 1600-year period and avoided giving misinformation, wrong prophecies, and other misgivings-because the Holy Spirit was guiding the whole process through their lives. God the Holy Spirit “breathed” the Word into their minds. God’s Word is dependable. In Revelation 22:18-19, strong counsel is given against subtracting from or adding to, this Book. Since God’s Word is settled in heaven, we have no right to change it I accept the Bible’s accuracy and information even when I don’t completely
understand it.
3. I try and let the Bible speak plainly to me "just as it reads."
It is a process by which I try and allow God to impose the meaning of the
Word on me, rather than my imposing my understanding on God. Whenever we
read a recipe or the written assignment from a professor, we are obligated
to live by our understanding of those words. Most people learn to be very
literal when they read cookbooks. Students are supposed to he literalists
when fulfilling a written assignment. We are not free to do anything we
want to with the actual words of Scripture, if we want to be faithful with
God’s Word. Unless the text or context suggests something else, I accept
the Bible in a very literal way.
4. I try and study a text with the context and cultural background in mind.
We can read in the Bible that Judas "went out and hanged himself;" at another
place, "Go and do thou likewise;" and still another, "What thou doest do
quickly!" No one would accept that manner of stringing isolated texts together
to form what would be a ridiculous conclusion. I’ve used a number of different
types of preaching, but my preference is to give an expository message
on a passage of Scripture rather than using a subject and single verse
texts. This tends to force me to do more background and analysis, and see
the information that nestles close by; otherwise, I may focus only on a
single isolated text. The Bible is its own best commentary. We need to
see how an isolated text relates to what the rest of the Bible says on
the subject. One caution is that the Bible student can get so carried away
with all kinds of contextual and cultural considerations, that the central
force of the actual text is lost.
5. I try and notice rules of grammar such as figures of speech.
The Bible is full of real life-situation stories. Many of them actually
happened—others are used as parables, illustrations, or examples. When
Jesus called Herod a "fox" in Luke 13:32, surely He was not meaning that
Herod was actually a furry creature that walked on four legs and had a
bushy tail. He wanted to use graphic language to convey that anyone who
is sly enough to steal his brother’s wife, has some of the characteristics
of a fox. This is a figure of speech known as a metaphor, in which an object
will be called by a term which it resembles .Another example is seen where
Jesus said, "I am the vine, ye are the branches" (John 15:5) There are
hyperboles which are planned exaggerations for effect. There are metonymies,
parables, allegories, and euphemisms. Being aware that any of these can
be present at various places in the Bible, keeps us from being a "wooden
literalist" (just as dumb as a fence post) in taking everything as strictly
literal.
6. I understand both the Old and New Testament to constitute a unity of truth that represents a progression of divine revelation.
The high water mark of God’s self-disclosure is not in the Old Testament.
It is in the coming of God’s one and only Son, Jesus Christ. So, the Bible
sets forth a movement of God with the initiative coming from God and not
humans. God brings us up through the theological infancy of the Old Testament
to the maturity of the New Testament. This is why the Brethren have historically
said the New Testament is our only rule of faith and practice. The Old
Testament speaks in types and shadows; the New Testament gives their substance.
The Old Testament contains prophecies; the New Testament records their
fulfillment. The Old Testament is the schoolroom; the New Testament represents
the graduation. Since Jesus is the high water mark of God’s revelation,
we should try and understand the Old Testament through the eyes of Jesus
and what He said about it. This is not to suggest that the words of Jesus
are on a higher level of inspiration than the other New Testament writers.
Jesus simply did not address everything. Some was left for others to address.
7. I seek to study the Bible with the intent to obey it.
There is a connection between what I’ve done with obeying past understandings
and how much light I’ll be given in the future. There is a saying that
"Light obeyed increases light; light rejected brings night." In John 7:17,
Jesus said, "If any one will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine."
Here, a willingness to do, precedes greater knowing. In 2 Corinthians 3,
Paul clearly says it is impossible for the carnal mind to understand the
things of God. When someone is seen to take an adamant stand against the
very obvious, plain meaning of a text, it raises the possibility that such
a person is in need of a new birth experience and a consequent infilling
of the Holy Spirit to enable divine understanding to take place. I personally
really desire to be taught by the Holy Spirit, and want Him to correct
me whenever my carnal nature gets in the way of proper divine understanding.
8. I wish to be open to be taught by a wide range of voices when they give
evidence of having a high view of scripture.
Some of these will be lay people without any formal training in biblical interpretation-people who can see practical implications in applying the Bible. Some will be people highly trained in a study of original languages and in ancient history.
Others will be those who have sharpened their skills in expository delivery.
In other words, I desire to be taught by a wide community of believers
who have displayed a respectful and devotional approach to Bible study.
I want some room for personally confessing to wrong conclusions and some
time to pick up the pieces that come from forgiveness--and then move on.
These eight guidelines constitute most of the broad strokes of my own discipline in using and interpreting the Bible. Many smaller pieces could be added.
During the Annual Conference debate on homosexuality in 2002, a speech
was given by Warren Kissinger who worked for many years in the archives
in Washington, DC. His speech in essence (as I recall it) went something
like this: Years ago Brethren found biblical texts that taught against
women serving in the pastoral ministry, but we found a way around that.
Then we found texts that taught against the remarriage of divorced persons,
but we found a way around that. Now we are facing scriptural texts that
teach against homosexual practice. In light of what we’ve done with a number
of other biblical texts, we really shouldn’t have any trouble working around
these also. Is this an example of Brethren biblical interpretation in disarray?
Have we modern-day Brethren given ourselves too much liberty in handling
the Word of God? When we find something in the Bible that we don’t like,
do we proceed to find a way around it rather than adjusting ourselves to
its implications?
Years ago someone was critical of his straight-forward preaching, and said
to Billy Sunday, "You rub the fur the wrong way” Billy’s answer was, “Well-let
the cat turn around." Let’s consider what needs to be turned around in
order to again have unity in how we use and interpret the Bible.
The
preceding article was presented at the South/Central Indiana District Gathering
on November 1, 2003, in Kokomo, Indiana. It is used here by permission
of the author.