Group thinking: Reading the Bible with new eyes is not easy to do

A big determinant of your hermeneutics is the people you sit next to in church. Calvin, Barth, Bultmann, and Meredith Kline have all trickled down to you a little, but they don't hold a candle to the influence of Joe, Steve, Liz, and Mary. Hermeneutics, in other words, is mainly taught incarnationally.

Nobody knows this, of course. We all think we're just believing what the Bible says. But as the fish is the last to know he is in water (because of the ubiquity of the water), so each church swims in its own soup, that only an outsider can see. Without anyone ever having to lay out the rules of interpretation, we assimilate the views of the group we inhabit, with the precision of a child's mimicry of his parents' accent.

I am not talking about the meaning of this or that verse, though it comes down to that. I mean the expectations we bring to the Bible before we ever crack it open, before the pastor opens his mouth. He can preach "More faith!" till kingdom come. He can wax eloquent on "Him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think" (Ephesians 3:20). It is no match for the collective weltanschauung, through which it has to filter. His words will land like a snowflake hits a pond and melts into oblivion.

The dullest of us is a sophisticated hermeneutician, able to hold two competing realities at the same time. (A dog cannot do that.) If a pastor isn't incarnating absolute trust in Christ when outside the pulpit, his words in the pulpit will be "like a lame man's legs, which hang useless" (Proverbs 26:7). If no one in the flock has ever encountered a man "filled with all the fullness of God" (Ephesians 3:19), when they read the verse, they will dumb it down automatically. It will become poetics:

"You are to them like one who sings lustful songs with a beautiful voice and plays well on an instrument, for they hear what you say, but they will not do it" (Ezekiel 33:32).

I am presently fighting tooth and nail to understand the Bible. Trying to read like a child when you've lost your childhood is not easy at first—like Nicodemus said, can a man enter a second time into his mother's womb? But here are a few good hermeneutical habits I am cultivating, as I pray daily for new eyes:

• Whenever possible, read a verse as applying to myself (e.g., "Be filled with all the fullness of God"—Ephesians 3:19).

• Do not assume, without good reason, that a teaching is meant only for the early church (e.g., "Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy"—1 Corinthians 14:1; "Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord"—James 5:14).

• Do not assume, without good reason, that a blessing is meant only for the future, at Christ's return (e.g., "that you may know what is the hope to which He has called you, what are the riches of His glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the greatness of His great might that He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead" —Ephesians 1:18-20).

• Prefer, unless there is good reason, the plain meaning of a passage, over the poetic or deflated (e.g., "Now to Him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, according to the power at work within us"—Ephesians 3:20).

• Err on the side of expecting too much from God (e.g., "Whatever you ask the Father in My name, He will give it to you"—John 16:23).

God wants us to understand His Word. He can make a flower grow through the cracks in a city sidewalk. But it's much easier to have the eyes of your heart enlightened when you're surrounded by other people with good eyes; hermeneutics is communal. Still, you can always be the first one in your pond.

Actually a good article.

When trying to read as if the passage applies to oneself, it must be remembered that although the entire Bible was written for our learning (1 Corinthians 10), it was not all written TO me.

Pay attention to the distinctions and divisions that the Holy Spirit deliberately set forth (1 Corinthians 10:32).

If I am reading the book of Leviticus, for example, I might appropriate a spiritual lesson from any verse in the book. But FIRST OF ALL, I must recognize that there are hundreds of literal instructions there that were not written TO me as a New Testament Christian to carry out and practice literally.

There are instructions there for the Nation of Israel that made them separate from the other nations of the world; to preserve that nation intact until such time as the Seed of the Woman, Christ, would come into the world THROUGH that nation.

More specifically, the dietary laws given to Israel (Leviticus ch. 11) for their health and preservation might also be a good idea today, nutritionally. There are many who attempt to abide by these limitations for health reasons. Fine.

I know of a pastor who built a children's home and tried to practice Old Testament dietary law in the home for the purpose of keeping the children healthier while they were under his stewardship. It worked quite well.

But the minute I try to apply the laws of Leviticus chapter 11 to my congregation legalistically, I encounter the Apostle Paul, a Jew himself, writing to a pastor of Gentiles, “ . . . a doctrine of devils . . . commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For EVERY creature of God is good, and NOTHING to be refused, IF it be received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.” (1 Timothy 4:1-5)

Israelites were under law to REFUSE pork, and shrimp, and rabbit, etc., LITERALLY. When I read Leviticus, I must be careful just how I make an application to myself.

We have yet to meet any ministers of the Gospel of Jesus Christ applying Matthew chapter 10, or Luke chapters 9 and 10 to themselves in any sense that accept the words just as they say.

Yes, avid reader of the Bible deduces a hermeneutic. Yes, church members seem to absorb their church's particularly hermeneutic, often without question, as the fish accepts the water.

But the Scriptures should not be interpreted according to what the words are PRESUMED to say, but by what they actually do say. And if this is followed, then it will put definite boundaries on applying any give passage to one’s self.

The question must be asked about any Biblical injunction, “Specifically to WHOM did the Holy Spirit write the passage, and what are the characteristics of those people that are different from our characteristics? What is it about the specific calling or commission of those people that is different from our calling and commission?

The differences don't have to be guessed at; the same Scriptures delineate the differences. These differences and divisions must be observed.

Since the Scriptures tell us to “rightly DIVIDE the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15), then we must expect that those RIGHT DIVISIONS are also laid out in the same Bible.

There are DIVISIONS in the Bible.

What does God require from the Gentile world? Or better, how is the Church of God supposed to deal with the Gentile world?

What does God require from the Nation of Israel, AS A NATION? And is God specifically dealing with ISRAEL AS A NATION TODAY? (Read Romans chapter 11)

What does God require from the Church of God as the Body of Christ?

Divisions. They exist.

We read the WHOLE Bible. It was written for our learning. Every verse has a specific doctrinal import, or a specific instruction to be carried out. Somebody had to, or has to, carry out the instruction. But is that someone ME? Each verse may have dozens of spiritual applications to our Christian walk.

The Scriptures cannot be broken, and whatever spiritual application I might see must not break the Scriptures; it must be consistent with the Scriptures. It must be consistent with the division of the Scriptures that God wrote TO ME as a New Testament member of the Body of Christ.

I went to an Assembly of God church for nearly 20 years, starting with a week after I became a Christian. I really tried to get into the tongues thing, but it never worked for me. And then one of the “messages of wisdom” spoken in front of the congregation turned out to be utterly false. Interestingly, it was the only quantifiable one ever uttered the entire time I was there.

I also really wanted to believe in the Pre-tribulation view that was dominant, but the more I studied, the more convinced I was that it was wishfull thinking at best. I became a very strong mid tribulationist or “Post-tribulation, pre-wrath”.

But I have attended several different churches since then and have a hard time plugging into any of them. I play bass for worship at each one that I end up attending, but I still feel “separate” from the rest of the congregation.

Honestly, I did at the AG church as well. I went on camping trips with other men, watched football sundays, etc. Yet I enjoyed none of those things. I was just trying to get along.

I had long talks with my former pastor, who is now my best friend about this whole “what is the function of the church” thing and he ended up writing a book about it called “And no religion too: thoughts on the spectator church”. Here’s a link to it: http://edwardgoblebooks.com/

I am still trying to work this whole “church in the US” thing out, but I just try to be a Christian around whoever I happen to be around. If they are a brother as well, that’s great! We have something in common beyond what we already discovered we have in common.

And no more camping/fishing trips.

IS ACTS 15 CONSISTENT WITH ROMANS THROUGH PHILEMON?

Is it consistent to teach brethren among the Gentiles “except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye can not be saved”? (v. 1) Or, “it [is] needful to circumcise them, and to cammand them to keep the law of Moses” (V. 5, 24) ?

No.

Is it consistent to have “certain of the sect of the Pharisees” in the local church? (v. 5)

No.

Is it consistent that God “put no difference between [Jews] and [Gentiles], purifying their (the Gentile’s) hearts by faith.” (v. 9)?

Yes.

Is it consistent “that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ [Jews] shall be saved, even as [Gentiles] (V. 11) ?

Yes.

Is “abstain[ing] from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood” consistent (v. 20, 29) ?

Yes.

Without anyone ever having to lay out the rules of interpretation, we assimilate the views of the group we inhabit, with the precision of a child's mimicry of his parents' accent.

True...And very few churches I beleive tell the congregants to open the scripture and 'prove all things'...Prove IN THE SCRIPTURES whether I tell you truths...

Many churches will tell you, 'I'll do the thinkin', you do the doin''...That's where the blind are leading the blind...

Don't forget the first verse in the run, the 'key' to understanding and believing the scriptures...

Eph 1:17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:

Eph 1:18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,
Eph 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
Eph 1:20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.