I wonder how many readers I lost by adding those last three words to the title? I would leave them off, but I don’t want to be one of those “Shock and Awe” title-givers that misleads the reader.
I’m reading the book, “How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth.” The lack of the apostrophe in “Its” is purposely intended as a wordplay, so no worries.
That said, it is a great intro into good Bible study. They bring light to the fact that in overcorrecting for those ivory tower seminary types that sit around and only talk about ideas (Acts 17:21,) many people have totally written off the “experts,” and even have a hidden agenda that seminary is a hindrance to good Bible reading. I’ve seen this attitude point blank.
The book talks much of exegesis and hermeneutics. Exegesis is the first step in good Bible reading and study. It is precisely, “What did the text mean to the original audience?” Hermeneutics is, “What does this mean now for us?” What did it mean and what does it mean, respectively. The only safe control for applying the scripture to today, Hermeneutics, is good Exegesis. (Fee and Stuart 29) All cults come about by the application of poor Hermeneutics, because they didn’t have the control of good exegesis.
Many people steamroll the Bible and take any verse out of context as if it applies to them. The first example that comes to mind is one of the most often misquoted favorite verses or life verses. Jeremiah 29:11 says, “For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.” (NIV)
Many use this as if it were God’s personal promise to them. It’s not necessarily wrong to find hope in this, but it’s not God’s promise to you. It’s his promise to the exiled Israel in Babylon, 2,500 some years ago. The “you” is plural. The problem comes when you hope in this verse and then it’s not fulfilled. God didn’t promise this to you, so he doesn’t have to fulfill it, but if you believe he did make this promise, and then doesn’t come through, then you’ll have a problem in your basic beliefs about him. Thus a “small” misunderstanding of scripture becomes a major worldview/Godview problem that weakens your faith, all because of a misapplication of scripture.
You see, the verse right before this verse is “When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my gracious promise to bring you back to this place.” (Jer 29:10) So, Israel is captive in Babylon. Some day Israel will be restored, but all of the hearers of that prophecy will be dead by the time it comes to pass. Israel’s lineage will continue. Israel will be blessed someday. God says in this prophecy, “I will keep working through her to bring about my purposes… but you won’t see it. You’ll die a slave in Babylon. That’s what the verse meant to the original hearers. IT was a collective hope for their people, but not an individual hope for their own prosperity. That’s just one example of misapplying scripture without proper concern for who the audience actually was –improper exegesis.
What’s written above is very important, but not the original reason I decided to write a post today. I’m writing because I was blown away by something I read in the first chapters. The authors mention the importance of using good sources, and not secondary sources quoting from other secondary sources. Below is a story that contradicts something that I’d heard many times and took to be true, simply because secondary sources have kept the lie running for 1,000 years.
“For example, in Mark 10:24 (Matt 19:23; Luke 18:24,) at the conclusion of the story of the rich young man, Jesus says, ‘How hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!’ He then adds: ‘It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for the rich to enter the kingdom of God.’ Your will sometimes hear it said that there was a gate in Jerusalem known as the ‘Needle’s Eye,’ which camels could go through only by kneeling, and with great difficulty. The point of this ‘interpretation’ is that a camel could in fact go through the ‘Needle’s Eye.’ The trouble with this ‘exegesis,’ however, is that it is simply not true. There never was such a gate in Jerusalem at any time in its history. The earliest known ‘evidence’ for this idea is found in the eleventh century in a commentary by a Greek churchman named Theophylact, who had the same difficulty with the text that we do. After all, it is impossible for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, and that was precisely Jesus’ point. It is impossible for one who trusts in riches to enter the kingdom. It takes a miracle for a rich person to get saved, which is quite the point of what follows: “All things are possible with God.” (Fee and Stuart 25)
So, I encourage all of us to do better exegesis! And now the next time your hear that camel nonsense, you can gently correct the speaker.
Fee, Gordon D., and Douglas Stuart. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.