Introduction: “That is your interpretation!” Have you ever heard
someone say that when they disagreed with you? Lawyers are masters
of suggesting that something should be interpreted in a way much
different than was originally meant. We even have U.S. Supreme Court
Justices who refer to a “living constitution.” If you are now in your
“sunset years” and you look nothing like you did when you were 18
years-old, you perfectly understand the “living constitution” concept
of changing the original meaning. For some people “interpreting” the
Bible is an excuse to ignore what God plainly said. At the same time,
there are a number of texts in the Bible which seem to be in clear
conflict with other texts. There are passages that are difficult to
understand. What do honest, humble Christians do in those situations?
Let’s plunge into the Bible and see what it suggests we should do!
- The Logic of Hermeneutics
- Have you ever found something beautiful inside something
ugly? Give me some examples? (Polished rocks. Cleaned up
metal. Treasure found at the bottom of the ocean.) - The Greek term “hermeneuein,” from which we get the word
“hermeneutics” means “to interpret.” Hermeneutics,
interpreting, is a way of cleaning up or stripping away
the barriers to understanding. - Let’s look at this logically. If you had something
that you knew was precious, but it was covered with
something that was ugly, what would be required of
you to see the beauty? List what you think would be
necessary. - Would you have to have a desire to see the
beauty within? - Would want to call in an expert on properly
stripping away the ugly exterior? - Would it require hard work on your part?
- Would it require careful work so the original
beauty was not damaged? - Is this a fair comparison to what is required of us
to properly strip away the barriers to correctly
understanding the Bible? Let’s look at some examples. - The Lesson From the Eunuch
- Let’s read Acts 8:30-31. What did this man in the chariot
want? (He wanted to understand what the prophet Isaiah was
saying.) - What steps had this man taken to understand the words
of Isaiah? (First, he had the desire to know.
Second, he was reading the words so that he would
have a chance to understand them. Third, he asked
someone he thought might be an expert to help him.) - We picked up this story in the middle, so let’s go back to
the beginning. Read Acts 8:26-29. How did Philip come to
be near the Ethiopian eunuch just when the man desired
expert help? (The Holy Spirit led Philip to the exact
place.) - What lessons does this teach us about understanding
the Bible? (The Holy Spirit is an essential part of
interpreting. The Holy Spirit works through other
humans to help us understand.) - Read Acts 8:32-33. If you were the eunuch, and you were
reading this for the first time, would you understand it? - Just looking at the text, what would you guess it
meant? (It sounds like a cold-blooded murder.) - Read Acts 8:34-35. What did Philip supply to the eunuch?
Don’t just say “the answer.” Think about this, what did
Philip supply that stripped the uncertainty away from this
Scripture? (Philip supplied two things. First, the factual
context. Second, his expert knowledge about the situation.
The facts of Jesus’ life, as expertly explained by Philip,
uncovered the meaning of this prophecy given by God to
Isaiah.) - What additional lesson do we learn about interpreting
the Bible? (Context is important to a proper
understanding of the Bible.) - Our lessons are often on a topic, rather than on a
book of the Bible. What is the problem with the
topical approach to the Bible? (It is light on
context. You should always look at the context when
someone has the “proof text” approach. I try to
import context even when we are studying a topic.) - The Lesson in the Sheet
- Read Acts 10:9-10. Peter is about to be given a message
from God. What do you find in this story that you think
will help Peter understand the message? (Peter prays. As
in our last story, asking for the Holy Spirit to help is
critical to understanding the Bible.) - Read Acts 10:11-14. Recall that Peter was hungry. Who does
Peter think is providing the food? (God! He says “Surely
not, Lord!”) - When God tells you to do something, what excuse do
you have for saying “surely not?” (If you review
Leviticus 11:2-31 or Deuteronomy 14:3-20 you will
find that the Bible unambiguously says don’t eat
those things in the sheet.) - What is Peter’s problem? (He has a conflict
between the words of God. God’s message in the
past directly conflicts with God’s message now.) - Is Peter using principles of Bible
interpretation? (Not so far. He is just denying
the new revelation as being inconsistent with
the old.) - Read Acts 10:15-17. Why do you think this was repeated
three times? (So that Peter would not “interpret” this by
getting a little hazy on what was said in God’s most
recent message.) - Why would Acts 10:17 say that Peter was “wondering
about the meaning of the vision?” Isn’t it obvious?
He was hungry and the Lord said eat a reptile. What
is so complex about that? (Nothing is complex about
it. Unappetising, but not complex.) - Have you ever had someone come to you and say “This
verse in the Bible is clear. Why don’t you follow
it?” - Has Peter started down the path of Bible
interpretation? (Yes. Peter is wondering –
contemplating – because he has two messages from
God which directly conflict with each other. In
such a case you have to look deeper, and he is
starting to look.) - In American law we have a principle of
interpretation which says in cases of direct
conflict the most recent law is the controlling
law. Is that also true with the Bible? The “eat
a reptile message” was the most recent. (Peter
does not think that is a very strong principle
of interpretation. If he did, he would not be
wondering.) - Read Acts 10:18-20. Why did the Holy Spirit have to tell
Peter not to hesitate to go with these men? Did they look
like rough and dangerous fellows who might rob him? - Read Acts 10:27-29. Has Peter figured out the vision of
the sheet with the unclean animals? (Yes.) - Is the vision to be taken at face value? Or, is it
figurative? (Peter had a clear conflict in the
messages from God. When the men from Cornelius
arrived, Peter realized that God was not talking
about eating animals, but rather associating with
Gentiles.) - How did Peter figure that out? (Two things.
First, the context. The men showing up at his
house helped him understand. Second, the Holy
Spirit ( Acts 10:19-20) helped him understand.) - What new lessons about interpreting the Bible do we find
here? (Some Bible statements which seem plain turn out to
be a problem when we compare them with other messages from
God. In those cases we need to dig deeper. Some statements
from God are figurative and not literal.) - How many times are you digging deeper because the message
of the Bible does not conflict with another portion of the
Bible, but rather conflicts with your personal
preferences? Or, conflicts with your predisposition to
sin? (We should dig deeply into the Bible for all of our
beliefs. However, I hear people contradict the Bible or
excuse sin by saying “I was born that way.” “My parents
always did it this way.” No doubt everyone reading this
was born with, or developed along the way, some serious
and compelling sinful inclinations. I know I did. The true
Christian resists sin and does not celebrate or excuse
sin.) - Friend, when you find Bible texts you do not understand,
or Bible texts that seem to be in conflict, will you dig
deeply into the Bible? Will you determine to strip away
what covers the truth by seeking the aid of the Holy
Spirit, learning the context and consulting with Bible
experts? - Next week: Blessings of the Prophetic Gift.
