Two Prerequisites for Reading the Bible (or, Can We
Determine When Someone Has Misread the Bible?) by David McClister
Reprinted from The Palmetto Reminder http://www.home1.gte.net/david1mc/index.htm
The word of God is perfect and absolutely true. We can rely upon it with the utmost confidence. But that does not mean that our understanding of God's word is perfect or absolutely correct. Sometimes we read with biases that in subtle ways distort our reading of God's book. The danger, of course, is that we are lulled into a false sense of security. We think we understand God's word well enough, but that's because the same biases that distort our understanding of God's word also operate when we evaluate our understanding of God's word. We all know many examples of this from the denominational world around us. Many people believe they have read the Bible correctly when in fact they have not. It happens to them, and it can happen to us as well.
As soon as we say this, however, we are faced with a quandary. How can I know that my reading of the Bible is correct? Could it be that the denominationalist who disagrees with me is correct and I am wrong? Are we left with a situation in which we can only say that we can never know who is right or wrong concerning the Bible? This is exactly the stance many in the religious world today have taken. Under such a view it becomes reprehensible to debate or to identify anyone as a false teacher. According to this way of thinking, there are no right or wrong readings of the Bible, only different ones.
Surely this cannot be the solution. If it is, it means that the Bible must be the most poorly written book in history. If one person says, "I think the Bible teaches that all people are born guilty of sin" and another says he believes the Bible teaches just the opposite, they cannot both be right, can they? Or does the Bible teach contradictory things (which is the view of the Bible's critics)? If you believe that the Bible is the word of God, then you must believe that God is certainly capable of expressing Himself in a way that is understandable to us. And you must also believe, then, that the Bible does not contain contradictory statements. So when two people draw opposite conclusions from their reading of the Bible, they both cannot be correct. [Note: this does not mean one of them must be right, for they may both have reached different false conclusions and thus both of them may be wrong; but if one of them is correct, the other cannot be.]
Trust in the understandability of the Bible, then, is the beginning of all discussion about it and is the first prerequisite for reading the Bible. If that conviction is not shared by all participants in a discussion, there will never be any hope for settling anything from the Bible. But if we all agree that God can and has spoken in His word plainly enough for us to understand it, then we should be able to reach a conclusion about what it does or does not say -- should, I say, if we leave prejudices behind. From my experience, often the reason two people disagree about what the Bible says is not that the Bible is unclear, but that someone is trying to find a way to harmonize the Bible with something else. The Bible speaks plainly enough when we let it speak by itself.
This brings us to the second prerequisite for reading the Bible: common sense. The whole idea of God giving us a book to read assumes that the reader (man) has the basic sense to understand it. If the Bible is understandable, and if God gave it to us, then we must have the capacity to understand it. It would have been foolish for God to give us a book He knew we could not understand, and I do not think God has been foolish. Furthermore, if the Bible is meant for everyone, and if God spoke through common people (as His book indicates), then common sense should be sufficient to understand the Bible. Special rules of logic or interpretation are not needed.
It is precisely here that we must avoid an ever-present danger. It is one thing to trust God's word, and quite another thing to trust in human reason. Yes, we use the faculty of reason with which God endowed us to read His book. There's no other way to read it! However, we must always keep God's perfect book and our reason (which can be imperfect) separate. Trust the former, but be suspicious of the latter.
As soon as we all agree that the Bible is understandable, however, we are immediately faced with another problem: parts of the Bible are admittedly very hard to understand (and an apostle of Jesus himself admits this in 2 Peter 3:16). This is not because God (in His word) is unclear at times, but because we are creatures of limited intellect compared to God. Also, there are some subjects about which we get much information in the Bible, and other subjects about which the Bible says precious little and only leaves us wondering. On some subjects the Bible is only a partial revelation, and on some subjects the Biblical data is overwhelming. The Bible nowhere claims to be the complete contents of the mind of God - that could not be contained if the universe were full of nothing but books! The Bible is instead all God wants to tell us. He has chosen not to tell us much about some things. We must trust the wisdom of the divine restraint and concentrate on what God has told us. As tempting as speculation about the unsaid things may be, we must be content to affirm no more, or no less, than what the Bible says for itself.
What if something in the Bible seems perfectly understandable to one person, but unclear to another? Several scenarios may be possible. Perhaps the one who thinks the matter is clear has oversimplified something that is actually quite complicated or vague in the Bible. Or maybe the one who thinks it is unclear is trying to harmonize the Bible with some other idea. That is, either one of them may be misreading the Bible. But common sense will be the route by which both can escape. If a person is willing to allow common sense to guide him in his reading of the Bible, he will understand it and he will be able to agree with others who do the same. It is when we place obstacles or agendas in the path of common sense that we end up with different understandings of what the Bible says.
Is it simplistic and naïve to trust in the understandability of the Bible and in common sense? Some would no doubt think so. I must admit, however, that I know of no other starting-point for reading not only God's book, but reading any book. Any author writes with the confidence that what he writes communicates his mind and that people of common sense can receive it sufficiently for there to be meaningful communication. This article is itself an example of this very thing. If an author cannot express himself well, he makes real communication impossible; and if one who reads lacks common sense, then the communication process likewise halts. But if we believe that God is capable of expressing Himself competently, and if we believe we are endowed with common sense, then we should all be able to understand the Bible alike.
If we disagree over what the Bible says, it is because someone is saying more than the Bible says for itself, or less, or that someone has not looked carefully at everything the Bible says on a subject, or someone is trying to make the Bible square with something else. The problem, however, is not on God's side of the line.
Living Below Your Means by Rubel Shelly
Reprinted from The Fax of Life (http://www.faithmatters.com)
The way we feel about and deal with *money* must be an important issue in our spiritual lives. Otherwise, why would Scripture say so much about it? Against the tendency of preachers to address the subject only when the church is behind budget or launching a building project, there probably needs to be more teaching on such practical issues as materialism, generosity, and ethical behavior with money.
One of the most practical things most of us would do well to understand is this: *It is perfectly acceptable to live below your means.* In fact, most people know it isn't smart to live above their means. That is the surest path to debt and fiscal irresponsibility.
The typical American hasn't always been so overspent and stressed
out by conspicuous consumption. There was likely a time in your
adult life when you could have put everything you owned into a
car and driven into the sunset.
Now you'd need a good-sized truck -- and probably professional
movers. You spend more now on insuring your "stuff"
each year than you once thought you would need in order to live.
I've read that Texans have an expression to describe the person with a splashy lifestyle but no financial stability behind it: Big hat, no cattle. An aphorism covering the spiritual dimensions of the same phenomenon could be: full hands, empty heart.
Stanley and Danko's "The Millionaire Next Door" claims that three out of four millionaires drive cars more than a year old. Half have never spent more than $29,000 for an automobile or owned a wristwatch that cost more than $235. By contrast, it is not unusual for someone with a leased $75,000 Mercedes or who takes lavish vacations to have practically no substantive wealth or investments. You can make bold-if-false statements about yourself with today's easy credit.
Parents, company executives, and church leaders would have far greater credibility at all levels if they adopted and modeled four sound financial habits that reflect biblical teaching: (1) Enjoy being generous, (2) Avoid debt, (3) Get rid of things you aren't using, and (4) Learn the contentment of letting what you have be enough.
People who live in times and situations of prosperity should not feel guilty over their good fortune. Instead, we should give thanks to God. Then we need to take the harder next step of honoring him with responsible stewardship of his good gifts.
Given the alternative, it is wiser and more spiritual to live *below* your means.