How to Study the Bible

Now I hear from people all the time about this business of interpreting the Bible literally. People ask me or see you don't interpret the Bible literally.

Do you how to study the Bible next on Renewing Your Mind.

Genuinely shocked to hear that anyone does, that take the Bible literally in the 21st century.

Thanks for listening to Renewing Your Mind on this Tuesday.

I believe Dr. RC Sproul was going to tell us why we can trust the Bible, even in this skeptical postmodern Lutheran engaged in two critical public disputations Germany one was in August board when he was confronted in public debate with the Roman Catholic Church's leading theologian of the 16th-century Cardinal Gage at the and in that disputation cage you can masterfully really lured Luther into a trap and maneuvered Luther to the place where Luther had to admit publicly that his views differed from views set forth by various popes of the church and under his interrogation by cage. It didn't. Luther was forced to admit that in his judgment. Even the Pope can our later on when he had another dispute publicly at Leipzig with back Germany's most illustrated Catholic theologian. Again, Luther was backed into a corner when after certain comparisons were made with the Bohemian reformer from the century earlier. John Hus, it was shown that Luther found himself in a disagreement with certain decisions of church councils and their act was able to get Luther to admit publicly that in his judgment, even church councils could are popes can learn churches can learn the bishops in concert and are the Cardinals and counsel can our only the Scripture is without error, and of course what the church cast before Lutheran these days with this question. Who are you with such unspeakable arrogance that you do hair to differ from the teaching of popes and of church councils, but you see below, but they were asking that question of a man with cognition and with conviction and with affection, whose mind was held captive by the word of God. And so, along with the Protestant affirmation of the doctrine of Sola script Laura came some of the critical ancillary doctrines that followed in its wake, such as the legitimacy and the right to translate the Bible into the vernacular, but also crucial to the Reformation was the principle that Luther had defended their beer at Augsburg.

There in Leipzig. And finally, again at the forms with the principal of the right of private interpretation of the Bible. That's what I want to talk about tonight how we as individual Christians as private believers come to the text of the Bible and interpret it. Are there any guidelines that we have, to lead us away from error and into a sound interpretation of the Bible. Before I do that let me take a moment to look at the Roman Catholic Church's response to the Lucerne principal of private interpretation. One of the most important aspects of the church's counterreformation.

Rome's answer to Luther and Calvin and the reformers was the calling of an ecumenical Council that was held in Trento in Italy and is known now.

Historically, as the Council of Trent and the succession of that counsel, the church set forth its doctrine of justification and set forth its anathemas against the various Protestant teaching on that subject of the gospel, but earlier than that in the fourth session of the Council of Trent the church addressed the issue of the source of revelation and of the canonical Scriptures in the midst of that for session listen. Please do the following statements carved out by the church in counsel. Moreover, it says the same, only counsel.

Considering that not a little advantage will accrue to the church of God. If it been made known. Which of all of the Latin editions of the sacred books now in circulation is to be regarded as authentic ordains and declares that the old Latin Vulgate addition St. Jerome, which, in use for so many hundreds of years has been approved by the church in public lectures, disputation sermons and exposition held as authentic, and that no one dare or presume under any pretext whatsoever. The rejected here we have the authentication and canonization of the Latin translation of the Bible.

But what I'm really interested in what comes next with this.

Furthermore, to check on bridled spirits it. That is, the Council decrees that no one relying on his own judgment shall in matters of faith and morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, distorting the holy Scriptures in accordance with his own conceptions, presume to interpret them. Contrary to that sense which holy mother Church to whom it belongs to judge of their true sense of interpretation has held and holds, or even contrary to the unanimous teaching of the fathers, even though such interpretation should never at any time be published and those who act contrary to this, shall be made known by the ordinaries and punished in accordance with the penalties prescribed by law. Here in the fourth session. The church comes down heavily with both feet against the Protestant doctrine of the private interpretation of Scripture. But in this particular decree that I just read to you. We see what happened frequently during Trent that is that when the guns of the Roman church were aimed at the reformers.

In many cases they flat out missed their target that what they attacked were caricatures and strawmen that were never part of the affirmations or denials of the reformers.

Other times, the guns were trained accurately against Luther and Calvin and they hit their target.

But this one statement that I just read you reflects that confusion.

Let me read it again to you and see if you pick up on it. It says it decrees that no one relying on his own judgment shall in matters of faith and morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, distorting the holy Scriptures in accordance with his own conception stop right there and asked this question.

Would Martin Luther or John Calvin agree with that. Oh yes, they would because Luther and Calvin understood that the right of private interpretation of the Bible does not include within it the right to distort the Bible with the right and privilege of private interpretation always comes the sacred holy and awesome responsibility of correct interpretation, rightfully abiding the word of truth. Private interpretation is never a license to distort the Bible so that part of the for session. We agree and that what comes after that, then that gets us in trouble because it says no one has the right to presume to interpret them. Contrary to that sense which holy mother Church to whom it belongs to judge of their true sense of interpretation has hold or even continues to hold severe what the law is not only do we not have the right to interpret the Bible by distortion, but we never have the right to interpret the Bible in a way that is different from how holy mother Church has interpreted because of the church as interpreted the question of the meaning of Scripture has been settled once and for all and private interpretation never gives you a license to interpret the Bible in any way that would bring your doctrine in conflict with what the church of Rome teaches was at that point that Luther and Calvin, Zwingli, Baeza Bolger, dolorous got off the train and they said no. And the reason I said no is because church is not infallible, but the church's councils are, and we all are subject to error and none of us has the right to distort the Scripture now limits give you some basic guidelines about this. For now, that along with this principle of private interpretation was set forth by Luther and the reformers. The principal of interpreting the Bible literally. Now I hear from people all the time about this business of interpreting the Bible literally.

People ask me do you interpret the Bible literally.

In fact, that's not usually how they asked the question, they usually put it in the form of a statement followed by question. They say RC you don't interpret the Bible literally. That's the statement, followed by the question. Do you mean like, I can imagine that anybody in the 21st century in their right mind was gone beyond the third grade would be so ignorant and foolish as to interpret the Bible literally.

So that's the way it comes you don't interpret the Bible literally. Do you when people say that to me.

I never say no, nor do I ever say yes.

What do I say Owen someone says you don't interpret the Bible literally.

Do you my answers standard. I always get the same it is this of course I interpret the Bible like the one other way is there to interpret know there's a lot of confusion about what literal interpretation means when Luther and the reformers set forth the principle of interpreting the Bible. According to the census literally lists the literal sense.

Here's what they meant and what we mean that to interpret the Bible literally is to interpret the Bible the way it was written while so that when you come to the text of Scripture. You have to be able to discern that there are very many varieties of literary genre, present in the text, we see that the Bible was written sometimes in the form of letters, sometimes in the form of historical narrative. Sometimes in the form of parables.

Sometimes in the form of Proverbs. Sometimes in the form of poetry and there are different rules for interpreting poetry from interpreting historical narrative. For example, and we need to be aware of that. So to interpret the Bible literally means to interpreted according to the way it was written limited what that doesn't mean no one ever has the right to come to a historical narrative text of Scripture and turn it into some kind of moral symbolism.

19th century liberals were the past masters of this but I grew up in the church and I wasn't a believer church was exceedingly liberal arts pastor taught us about the miracles of Jesus and he taught us that at the wedding feast of Canaan. What happened was those great water jars had mixed with some of the sediment that had contained wine in it but there were basically water but the people are drunk so much wine that when they brought out this mixed up version. People thought it was the best wine of all because they were already in a stupor or he said they were drinking water and the meaning of the text. Is this that after all water is the best wine he borrowed from the German liberals. The idea of the feeding of the 5000. He gave two different interpretations. One was very crash the Jesus and his disciples had stored a cache of foodstuffs in the cave with a hidden opening and like a magician.

Jesus stood in his long flowing robe and if same magicians on this phase pulling scarves forever out of their slaves or sausages so there was a bucket brigade of loaves and fishes that the disciples had stored in the cave and they were passing it through this hidden opening through the back sleeve of Jesus and he's producing enough food to feed 5000 people. That was one interpretation we learned in church the other one was the real story was about the little boy who stepped forward with his lunch and he was willing to share in the real meaning of the text. Is this some of the people came with their lunches. Others failed to provide for themselves and when the crisis came at noontime and everybody was hungry Jesus in his masterful style of moral education was able to get those who had brought their lunches to share with those who didn't. So that was a miracle of ethics that so I was instructed of the meaning of the miracles like the death of God. Theologians Van Buren, for example, taught that what really the Bible was teaching was not the Jesus really came out of the tomb, but rather the disciples experience what he calls a discernment situation that is prior to the cross.

The disciples didn't really understand what Jesus was about. And when he died on the cross. They went into the short period of disillusionment and grief and mourning and then on Sunday, it dawned on them really what Jesus was about and so they said now we see it. And so, in the Scripture say that they saw Jesus, it didn't mean that he came within the field of their vision, or that there were experiences with the optic nerve brother was just simply a new insight Malaysian and that's how not to interpret the Bible. That is what we call dishonest exegesis because those people knew very well that the literary form in which those texts come to us were not symbolic, moralism's but that was presented to us in a genre of historical narrative. You can reject it if you want but you have no right to twisted the say that is saying something that never was saying when I was in seminary we had a Hebrew exegesis paper is an assignment. This is a higher critical school that I attended. I wrote on the historical narrative genre of the book of Jonah. With the exception of the prayer that is written in poetic form in the middle.

My professor who had gone to college graduate with honors went on to seminary graduate, there got his PhD in Hebrew studies in Old Testament and it taught in the seminary for 40 years or so got so excited with my paper. He not only gave me an a in the paper, but he said you must submit this for publication in some scholarly journal's wash to do that he says this is remarkably innovative exhibit never ever seen anybody argue that the book of Jonah was written largely in historical narrative form if it were viewed.

I said I can't do that cannot be sued for plagiarism. All life set forth in this paper is the classic Orthodox understanding of the book of Jonah. But this man in this entire education had never been exposed to orthodoxy. There is such a thing as liberal obscurantism. But again, it is not right to treat historical narrative as poetry or poetry as historical narrative, I listened to a debate on television once about prophecy fulfillment and one of the advocates of prophecy fulfillment was saying you have to interpret the Bible literally in the Bible talks here about giant lotuses that will come and ravage the land at the end time. That can only refer he said to attack helicopters. That's where you come to if you interpret the Bible literally. I said no if you want to interpreted literally in the way you're talking about literal what you have to look for or not Apache attack helicopters, giant locusts, I mean, but this is how we turn the Bible into a wax nose, twisting it, shaping it, distorting it to make it say what we wanted to say and that's what the reformers were trying to guard against.

At the same time they were trying to loose the Scriptures from the chains of the lecterns and let that roaring lion free. They also were very careful to set forth principles of divine interpretation. The most important one is the analog year scriptorium or the analog your fee date that we call the analogy of faith, the supreme principle of interpretation is holy Scripture is its own interpreter you interpret Scripture by Scripture to be careful in this day and age we have countless professors at evangelical seminaries who been trained in higher critical approaches to Scripture who if you asked him do you believe that the Bible is a word about leaving yes deeply was a spark. Yes, to believe it's inerrant yes, but they have adopted a method called atomism ATO M like atomic energy where you look at each little bit of Scripture independent from the rest of Scripture and they'll say to me. Don't tell me what Paul says about justification in Romans or in Ephesians, all I'm doing with it is what he says in Galatians was a way to there is not only an immediate context by which you understand Scripture, but there is the total context of the whole Bible.

And if we really believe that the Bible is the word of God and that God does not speak in a forked tongue that means I never can take one portion Scripture and set it in opposition to another. If I do a bell should go off in my head saying scroll you've either misunderstood. Galatians misunderstood Ephesians, Romans, because Scripture is interpreted by Scripture know a clear understanding of how to interpret Scripture is desperately needed in the modern church and the even as we face a global health and financial crisis, we need to be able to understand what God is said about suffering and today here on Renewing Your Mind. We've heard a clear call to uphold the Bible as the very word of God. Dr. RC Sproul's message was titled simply how to study the Bible. Our goal here at legionnaires to help Christians understand what they believe, why they believe it and how to live it out at home and at work best. The theme of our resource offer today. It's the new version of Dr. Strohl's book 5 things every Christian needs to grow in this book.

RC identifies five crucial disciplines that the Lord uses to strengthen us in our spiritual lives will be happy to send you this new paperback version. When you give a donation of any amount to ligand your ministries. You can call us at 800-435-4343 or you can go online to Renewing Your Mind.Ward. This book is a great resource if you're a Bible study work involved in a discipleship relationship with a family member or friend again.

It's titled five things every Christian needs to grow contact us with your gift of any amount here is what your ministries are web address is Renewing Your Mind.Ward in our phone number again is 800-435-4343 we interpret the Bible we have to be careful to assign the right meaning to certain words. Take for example the word saved in first Timothy chapter 2, so when the apostle says that women are saved by childbirth. Not saying that there are two ways of salvation. One is justification by faith. For the men for justification by having babies for the women we have to be careful of our understanding of the meaning of the words of the Bible will continue Dr. schools message how to study the Bible tomorrow here on Renewing Your Mind.

We hope you'll join us