Comments on: Classic IM: While Weâ€™re Talking About Interpreting the Bible

By: Jeremy Janson

Jeremy Janson — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:08:23 +0000

And there are a few things required for the organization to work, like a reasonable respect for the authority of the particular people in charge of that particular church and a willingness to get beyond sin, both of which are pragmatic needs without which the church will simply not be a good place to be.

By: MAJ Tony

MAJ Tony — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 20:43:57 +0000

I’m guessing that’s just Patrick being facetious.

By: Ted

Ted — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:11:41 +0000

Duke, your reference to the ESV doesn’t exactly say that. Here is the verse in ESV:
“knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation.”

The “comes from someone’s own” (rather than “is of any private”) is made more significant if we look at the NIV:
“Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation.”

That is, Peter’s point about interpretation is in reference to the prophet (not to us in this case); that the prophet didn’t make it up all by himself. But, what the prophet conveyed to us from the Holy Spirit can and should be interpreted (by us, in this case) to arrive at what the Holy Spirit meant, and not necessarily what some authorities tell us. If we look at the following verse (vs 21, ESV) Peter follows through on that:
“For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”

Sorry if this is a little picky. The Bullinger book you recommend may be saying the same thing, but the incomplete ESV reference could cause a problem.

By: FollowerOfHim

FollowerOfHim — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:23:09 +0000

“I believe, though, that it is more important to remember that scripture constantly serves not to empower me, but to remind me that I am powerless.”

I needed this today. Thanks, MWPeak!

By: MWPeak

MWPeak — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 15:49:15 +0000

It is so easy to read a scripture and then say, “God told me …” to do this or that. And in the midst of my struggles, I would love to have a particular scripture speak directly to me. I believe, though, that it is more important to remember that scripture constantly serves not to empower me, but to remind me that I am powerless. And it is that reminder that I believe offends so many people, including those who attend church.

By: Duke Clarke

Duke Clarke — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:37:35 +0000

Since the scriptures say in II Peter 1:20 “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation” perhaps we should allow the scriptures to interpret themselves. A book written almost a century ago by E.W. Bullinger called “How to Enjoy the Bible” shows you simple principles on how God set it up in the scriptures for the scriptures to interpret themselves so we wouldn’t mess it up. You should at least give it a read if you want to be honest about it.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 05:37:24 +0000

How do we know this? For starters, do these Christian readers depart from the ancient creeds of the early church (The Apostles’ Creed, The Nicene Creed, The Athanasian Creed, The Definition of Chalcedon). Secondly, do they take Scripture as being divinely-inspired. Thirdly, do they generally follow the grammatico-historical exegetical method.

By: RonP

RonP — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 03:17:43 +0000

Being a pillar and foundatin of truth indicates the role of supporting and upholding the truth or truths that have been entrusted to the church by God — either through scripture or revelation from the Holy Spirit. The question that bothers my mind is this: How much have we as the church (be that Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, or otherwise) engaged in the practice of inventing or manufacturing truth when it suited our purposes to do so? And how much of that invented or manufactured stuff made it into the classification of sacred tradition throughout the course of Christian history? Of course, all that begs this question: Is the authority that Jesus passed on to the church such that when the church declares something as truth, it automatically becomes God’s will, even if that wasn’t part of God’s will or plan for the church prior to the church’s declaration? And claiming that a particular church’s declarations of truth have somehow always been in perfect line with God’s will is a camel that’s very hard to swallow for an honest student of both scripture and history.

By: Ted

Ted — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:40:50 +0000

Uhh, grasshopper, could you explain that one?

By: briank

briank — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:31:06 +0000

“3. The mark of a real interpreter is a respect for the fact of Biblical interpretation in every Christian tradition and community, and real humility for where he/she stands in the process.”
This was a big difference in the Radical Reformation with their hermeneutics. They took a look at scripture & as a community in prayer & sharing tried to understand the scriptures in thru the Gospel & love of God. I have been amazed how well their understanding has held up thru the centuries. They rejected the idea that Luthren or Catholic understanding had the monopoly on hermeneutics. I’m not saying that they never made mistakes, or that Luthren or Catholic hermeneutics are always wrong. But I think it shows us if we are willing to put our pride aside, Pray, look to our fellow brothers & sisters in Christ, & most importantly look at scripture thru the Cross we will come very close to God’s intended meaning for us. I guess mostly I believe if we can read with our hearts open to God’s Love we will be ok. Now – Theologians ATTACK!!!!, peace