Perspective Digest 5/1 (2000), 77-88  

A 14-point Program to Avoid
TWISTING SCRIPTURE

BY SAMUELE BACCHIOCCHI, Ph.D.

Samuele Bacchiocchi is Professor of Theology at Andrews University in Berrien Springs, Michigan. He is the author of many papers and books. His e-mail End Times Newsletter is available on request.

It all started with my afternoon mail ....

Throughout its history the Christian Church has suffered from persecutions without and heresies within. Most heresies have resulted from twisting Scripture to support preconceived teachings. No church, including the Seventh-day Adventist, has escaped unscathed. Every mail seems to bring a missive from a self-anointed proclaimer of truths ignored by church leaders. Independent ministries worldwide send out their papers, magazines, and books.

Recent arrivals in my mail include papers distorting the very heart of the gospel, a book written by a former Adventist minister who denies the Sabbath truth and attacks the church as "cultist," dismissals of the sanctuary doctrine, differing views on Sabbath observance-all in all, more than enough bad exegesis to dismay a teacher of biblical interpretation.

What distresses me most is the arbitrary way in which the authors use the Bible "cafeteria style," picking up a few texts that seem to support their theses and ignoring a host of others that would demolish it. And the authors are likely getting applause from readers as ignorant as they of how to interpret Scripture.

If the Bible is what it claims to be, God's Word to sinful humanity, we must take seriously the task of interpreting it correctly. Erroneous interpretations may lead to more Jones-towns and even such bizarre suicides as those recently reputed to be the door to an incoming spaceship! Another misreading has sent thousands rushing to Jerusalem to greet the expected Messiah....

A church that does not study is prone to deception. A church that studies but ignores principles of biblical interpretation is exposed to an even more subtle form of deception. A church that utilizes correct principles but depends on human wisdom is also in great danger. Our church's great need is to approach God's Word prayerfully, seeking the Holy Spirit's guidance as we employ correct principles of interpretation. What are they?

The Misunderstood Book

In teaching college students how to approach Scripture, I begin by emphasizing the need for a correct approach to Scripture, look at different methods used, and then set forth 14 basic principles of biblical interpretation. Picture yourself behind a desk in my classroom. I'm at the blackboard, chalk in hand. You're about to learn not only how to evaluate such publications as I get in my afternoon mail but also how to discern what God wishes to communicate to you through His Word. (Remember that students who don't pay attention or take notes seldom get an "A.")

The Bible, I begin, is probably the most misinterpreted book in the world. Written in a different culture, in languages other than our own, it is filled with literary imageries and symbols unfamiliar to most of us today. Differing translations further our difficulty in understanding it. No wonder more than 2,000 church organizations, most claiming to have "the truth," trace their heritage to its pages.

But let us take heart. Biblical interpretation is a science based on clearly defined principles derived from the nature of the Bible itself. Some would also call it an art, because the interpreter's inner being determines the quality of the interpretation.

The Self-Authenticating Book

When my students have digested these points during several classes and much discussion, I proceed to the foundations of biblical interpretation. There's the uniqueness of the Bible, which contains, recorded in human language, God's revelation of His will for our faith and practice. This fact demands that the Bible be interpreted not by tradition, philosophy, or science, but by its own internal witness. The Bible is self-authenticating.

Further, the 66 books of the Bible - its canon - are not merely a memorial to the history of God's people, but also a witness for the present and future life of the church. Thus we must seek to understand not only how God communicated to an ancient people but also how He confronts us today through its pages. To accomplish this, we must distinguish between permanent biblical principles and applications of principles that may vary from culture to culture.

The Protestant principle of sola Scriptura affirms that the Bible is the only basis for defining our faith and practice. It is based on recognition of the Bible's inspiration, unity, canonicity, and supreme authority. Jesus exemplified this principle when He explained "the things concerning himself" (Luke 24:27, KJV), beginning from Moses and continuing through the rest of the Old Testament. Sola Scriptura is the reason Adventists view the Bible and not Ellen White as the ultimate authority for defining doctrine.

In practice, I point out, the principle of sola Scriptura is largely ignored. Both Catholic and Protestant churches interpret the Bible in the light of the historical teachings of their church leaders or confessional statements. To depart from traditional interpretations is seen by many as rejection of "the truth" hallowed by tradition. To be true to sola Scriptura, we must allow the Bible to be its own interpreter. By this I mean that one portion of the Bible interprets another. The fullest meaning of scripture can be found only when all the relevant passages are brought together.

This principle is violated by those who choose the texts that support their views, and ignore the rest – a practice that is a major cause of doctrinal conflicts both inside and outside the Seventh-day Adventist Church. A fitting example is the so-called “new covenant theology,” which is being used to negate the continuity of the law and of the Sabbath in particular.

Finally, in this prelude to the basic principles of interpretation, I emphasize objectivity, which in its absolute form is virtually impossible. Calvinists, Lutherans, Catholics, -- and, yes, Adventists – approach the Bible with a mindset conditioned by traditional interpretations. In a sense, we are talking to the Bible rather than listening to it. Our goal should be to understand what the inspired writer is saying rather than reading our own presuppositions into the text.

The 14 Basic Principles

And so, several weeks into the semester, we come to the 14 basic principles. If you have a question, hold up your hand, -- or better, in this case, write to me.

1. Read the text with an open mind.

I said “open mind,” not “empty mind.” Come willing to learn, your attitude that of the boy Samuel: “Speak, for your servant is listening” (1 Sam 3:10, NIV). We must not seek to read our ideas into the text, which is called “eisegesis.” Exegesis, to the contrary, means to bring the meaning from the text. Seek the Holy Spirit’s guidance to discover not only its meaning but also its applicability to our life today.

2. Ensure a correct text.

How can we determine what a text says when Bible versions themselves differ on what the original language means? Further, the translation that sounds best to you may not be the most accurate. I would suggest that you (1) compare good translations, which often complement one another; and (2) recognize that no translation can capture every nuance of the original text.

A prevailing misconception is that the KJV is the most accurate translation. Some churches allow only this version to be used for worship. But in reality, in respect to certain doctrines, it is close to the worst. This version has contributed to such heresies as the immortality of the soul and eternal torment in hell. For example, the Hebrew word sheol meaning “grave,” occurs 65 times in the Old Testament. The KJV translates it as hell 31 times. Other translations, such as the RSV or the NIV, transliterate Hebrew words like sheol, thus allowing the reader to determine its meaning.

3. Seek to understand each word in the text.

Words are the smallest unit of a sentence. Their meaning cannot be determined only on the basis of etymology; context may be definitive. What do we do when a word is used only once in the Bible? For example, sabbatismos in Hebrews 4:9. We turn to extra-biblical literature. There studies show that the term consistently denotes literal seventh-day Sabbathkeeping. Thus the correct translation of the Hebrews passage is: A seventh-day Sabbathkeeping has been left behind for the people of God."

Another example is the term cheirographon ("handwritten record"), which occurs only in Colossians 2:14. The word has been interpreted to refer either to the ceremonial law or moral law, whichever is allegedly nailed to the Cross. Recent studies reveal that the term was used to denote the "record book of sins" or a "certificate of sin-indebtedness." This meaning fits well within the immediate context, where Paul discusses the extent of God's forgiveness (vs. 13). His use of the wording "and this he has removed out of the middle" (vs. 14) furthers the forgiveness metaphor. "The middle" was the position occupied by the accusing witness in the court or assembly. In the context of Colossians, the accusing witness is the "record book of sins," which God in Christ has erased and removed from the court.

By this daring metaphor, Paul affirms the completeness of God's forgiveness. Through Christ, God has "canceled," "set aside," and "nailed to the cross" the writing record of our sins, which was "against us" The legal basis of the record of sins was the binding statutes' or "regulations" (tois dogmasin). What God destroyed on the cross, however, was not the legal grounds (law) for our condemnation but the written record of our sins.

Do I see a hand up? "But wasn't the 'written document' nailed to the Cross the ceremonial law?" A great question! In fact, the term law (nomos) does not occur a single time in the whole Epistle of Colossians, because Paul is not addressing abuse of the Mosaic law, as he does in Galatians, but rather a gnostic philosophy that taught salvation through the mediation of angels and "elements of the world" (Col. 2:8). Paul challenges this heresy by reassuring the Colossian believers that since Christ has provided complete redemption and forgiveness, there is no reason for them to seek the help of inferior mediators.

What's that? The bell has rung? All right. Your assignment for next time: Bring examples of Bible words used in a non-literal way.

4. Determine the literary nature of a word or phrase.

Words in the Bible, as in modern literature, are often used symbolically, metaphorically, or typologically. For example, the phrase "Horn of salvation" or "horn of my salvation" (2 Sam. 22:3; Luke 1:69) is a metaphor used to characterize God as a "Great Saviour." The metaphor derives from the horns of animals that connoted strength and power (Ps. 132:17; Jer. 48:25).

Christ's offer of His "rest" in Matthew 11:28 is a symbolic imagery derived from the typological meaning of the Sabbath rest. By offering it, He nourished the centuries-old hope of Messianic redemption.

Another example of symbolic language is found in Revelation 7:15, which literally translated reads "The One seated upon the throne will erect a booth over them with his presence." In the wilderness (Lev. 23:43) God's people dwelt in temporary shelters, or "booths." The Revelator uses the image of God sheltering His people there, with His glory manifested in the cloud and pillar of fire, to assure His children that they will be sheltered by His glorious presence during the final tribulation and in heaven.

5. Seek to understand the whole sentence.

In this step, we move from the single word to the sentence and, as we will note subsequently, to the unit, to the book, and to the whole Bible. To interpret a sentence, we must consider its grammatical and syntactical construction. Grammatically, one needs to define the subject, the tense of the verb, the object of the sentence; syntactically, the relationship of words to one another. The syntax of a verb pays attention to the tense, the voice, the stem, and so on. In interpreting poetry we must remember the correspondence of thought in successive lines, known as parallelism. The basic thought may be repeated, contrasted (Ps. 59:1), or paralleled (Ps. 55:6). The parallelism may be within lines and between lines. (Now, don't you wish that you'd paid more attention to your seventh-grade English teacher!)

6. Seek to understand the unit.

A text's meaning often is clarified by the theme of the unit, which may consist of one or more paragraphs. A good example of interpreting a text in the light of its larger unit is Romans 6:14, perhaps the most frequently quoted Pauline text to prove that Christians have been released from observance of the law. The text reads: "For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under the law but under grace" (NRSV). The common interpretation of this text is that Christians are no longer under the Mosaic law as a rule of conduct because their moral values derive from the principle of love revealed by Christ.

The problem with this popular misinterpretation is that it ignores the immediate and larger context of the text, in which Paul contrasts the dominion of sin with the power of God's grace. "Under law" simply means that Christians are no longer under the dominion of sin and, consequently, under the condemnation of the Law. The grace of Christ has liberated them from both. Paul goes on to say that believers should not transgress the Law simply because God's grace has "set [them] free from sin" (Rom. 6:18, NRSV). It is only the sinful mind that "does not submit to God's Law" (Rom. 8:7). Christians, on the other hand, have the mind of the Spirit, who enables them to fulfill "the just requirement of the law" (Rom. 8:4), the moral principles of which still govern them. Thanks to God's grace, believers become obedient from the heart to the teachings (Rom. 6:17).

7. Determine if the unit is descriptive or prescriptive.

The Bible teaches us principles explicitly through positive commands and implicitly through positive and negative stories. Thus we must determine whether a passage is descriptive of what people did or prescriptive of what God wanted them to do. A good example is the story of Noah becoming drunk (Gen 9:20-24). Does this incident teach that God approves of the use of alcoholic beverages or demonstrate the negative consequences of drinking them? This descriptive passage teaches us that drinking weakens the moral sensitivity of even good people.

8. Discover the historical and situational context of the passage.

Since the books of the Bible originated in a historical context, they can be understood only in the light of that context. A good example is Jesus’ offer of living water made in the context of the drama of the water-drawing ceremony that took place at the Feast of Tabernacles. “On the last day of the feast [of Tabernacles], the great day, while Jesus was standing there, he cried out, ‘Let anyone who is thirsty come to me, and let the one who believes in me, drink. As the Scripture has said “Out of the believer’s heart shall flow rivers of living water”’” (John 7:37, 38, NRSV).

That morning was rich in symbolism and high drama. A special procession led by a priest who carried a golden pitcher, started from the Temple. A band of liturgical flutists enhanced the wonder of the ceremony with their cheerful music. When the procession reached the pool of Siloam, the priest filled his pitcher with water. The cortege timed its progress to arrive back at the Temple just in time for the morning sacrifice on the altar of burnt offering. The priest's arrival was greeted by a threefold blast of trumpets, as he, in turn, was joined by the priest who carried the wine for the drink-offering. The two ascended the "rise" of the altar, where they placed two silver basins, one filled with the water from Siloam and the other with wine. As the priests began pouring, the Temple music began, and the people chanted, "With joy you will draw water from the wells of salvation" (Isa. 12:3, NRSV). Then they chanted, antiphonally, to the music of flutes, the "great Hallel," consisting of Psalms 113 to 118.

Most probably it was at this moment, as they prayed for the Lord to send salvation, that Jesus cried out, "'If anyone thirsts, let him come to me, and drink"' (John 7:37, NKJV).

9. Consider the theological meaning.

After understanding the passage grammatically and historically, we must understand it theologically, remembering that no part of the Bible was written in a theological vacuum. On the contrary, each passage contributes to understanding the progressive revelation God has given, and each must be placed in the context of a developing theology.

An example is Christ's inaugural Nazareth address, when He read and commented upon a passage drawn mostly from Isaiah 61:1 and 2 (also 58:6), which says, "'The spirit of the Lord is upon me, Because he has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives And recovery of sight to the blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed, To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord’” (Luke 4:18, NKJV).

By citing this passage, drawn mostly from Isaiah, Jesus presented Himself to the people as the very fulfillment of their Messianic expectations, which had been nourished by the vision of the Sabbath years. He affirmed: "'Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.’”

What theological contribution does this passage make to our understanding of the Sabbath? How does it fit into the theme of promise and fulfillment? Proponents of the so-called "New Covenant Theology" claim that the Sabbath "type" finds its fulfillment in Jesus, the Antitype, and therefore its obligations have ceased. It is alleged that He replaced the Sabbath with a new day of worship. Most Adventists would answer, of course, that Christ, through His redemptive mission, fulfilled the promised sabbatical rest and release in order to make the day a fitting channel through which to experience His blessings of salvation.

A careful study of His gospel ministry reveals that He intensified His redemptive ministry on the Sabbath by bringing physical and spiritual restoration to chronically sick people, and thus made the day a fitting memorial of God's creative and redemptive love.

10. Compare Scripture with Scripture.

After examining the text in its immediate and larger context, the next step is to compare it with the entire testimony of Scripture on a particular topic. Biblical doctrines must not be developed out of isolated statements. And we must remember that God's revelation is progressive. For example, in the Old Testament we find only hints of the doctrine of the Trinity. Thus any Old Testament text suggesting plurality or unity of the Godhead must be interpreted in the light of the fuller revelation of the New Testament.

A number of issues troubling the Adventist Church might be closer to resolution if this basic principle of interpretation were followed. Among them: the ordination of women, which in some forums has had only a cursory examination. Whatever the conclusion, we would be closer to fulfilling God's creation design for the harmonious functioning of humanity. And such issues as the one I spent my Sabbath afternoon examining would surely be eliminated as worthy of lengthy scrutiny. Particularly we could expect end-time scenarios based on futurist assumptions to be readily discarded.

11. Seek to harmonize apparent contradictions.

Yes, students (remember, we're in the classroom), the Bible contains numerous apparent contradictions. The proper method of biblical interpretation insists that we seek to understand them, not by fabricating artificial harmonizations but by seeking rational resolutions. God, we should recall, is a God of sense rather than nonsense.

You can start with the following apparent contradictions in Paul's statements about the law. He says: The law is good and has been fulfilled in Christ and also that it is bad and has been abolished in Christ (see Ephesians 2:15 and Romans 3:31). In Romans 7:6 he says "we are discharged from the law" (NRSV), but a few verses later writes that "the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good" (7:12). In Romans 3:28 he maintains that a person is "justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law," yet in 1 Corinthians 7:19 he says that neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but obeying the commandments of God.

How can Paul view the law both as "abolished" (Eph. 2:15) and established (Rom. 3:31); unnecessary (Rom. 3:28) and necessary (1 Cor. 7:19); Eph. 6:2, 3; 1 Tim. 1:8-10)? Yes, I could give you the answers, but you'll benefit more if you dig them out for yourself. Consult Principles Nos. 6 and 10     and proceed.

12.   Distinguish between the principle and its cultural application.

Principles are permanent; the cultural application can vary in different cultures. A good example is the Sabbath commandment, which contains both a principle and a cultural application. The principle is: "Every human being has the right to rest on the Sabbath." In Bible times the cultural application required that servants, strangers, and even the cattle also were to rest. In our time the cultural application of this principle requires that we not engage the services of others on the Sabbath. Failure to distinguish between the principle of Sabbath rest for all and its cultural application has led some to mistakenly argue that the Sabbath is not a permanent institution for humanity but a cultural institution intended only for the social needs of the ancient Jews.

13.   Allow Bible scholars to evaluate your interpretation.

As was true of my Sabbath afternoon reading documents, far too many Christians are propagating new "truths" that have not been evaluated by scholars in their church.

We must remember that the task of biblical interpretation belongs not only to the individual Christian but also to the church at large. This corporate principle demands that we be sensitive to what competent fellow believers have to say about our interpretation of Scripture.

In the Seventh-day Adventist Church, a member who believes he or she has discovered new truth may bring it to the local church board for examination. The board, in turn, or the individual, may pass the matter on to the local conference committee. Church policy outlines avenues that can lead to consideration by the General Conference Committee and even be discussed by the General Conference in session. One might hope, and even pray, that members who promote new "truth" follow these procedures and thus spare themselves and the church much embarrassment. Or the result may be what the introduction to Seventh-day Adventists Believe. . . A Biblical Exposition of Fundamental Doctrines suggests: In publishing this summary the church took steps to assure that it would not come to be viewed as an unchangeable creed. . . . Revision of these statements may be expected at a General Conference session when the church is led by the Holy Spirit to a fuller understanding of Bible truth or finds better language in which to express the teachings of God's Holy Word."

14.  Don't expect interpreting the Bible to be easy.

If it were, we would not be plagued by so many conflicting interpretations espoused by hundreds of denominations and scores of individuals within the Adventist Church itself. Discerning truth requires an open mind, receptiveness to the Holy Spirit’s guidance, self-discipline, and willingness to master history, archaeology, culture, grammar, and language skills. But the effort is rewarding. It enables us to come to come to a fuller understanding and experience of biblical truths.

The Bible is God's revelation of His will. We dare not abuse this gift by forcing our preconceived ideas onto the Bible or by shoddy scholarship misinterpreting the ideas we draw from it.

You've been an attentive student. You've finished the course. Go to your further studies echoing the words of the boy Samuel: "'Speak, for your servant is listening.’”