1. Free to Change
2. Freedom and Responsibility
3. My Kind of People
4. "Come Out And Be Separate"
5. Private Intepretation
6. A "Monkey-Wrench" Scripture
7. The Truth That Frees
8. Literary Devices
9. Fear of God
10. A Love Story
11. The Three Trees In Eden
12. Imputed Righteousness
13. Different Essentials For Different People
14. God's Sons In All Ages
15. Looking To Lust
16. Divorce Her!
17. "While Her Husband Is Alive"
18. "They Won't Let Me Preach!"
19. God's Perplexing Prophets
20. Religous Titles
21. Who Sinned?
22. "I'll Join Your Church"
23. The Church As The Route To Heaven
24. One Hundred Years Old
25. Can Our Churches Unite?
26. Can The Cause Of Sickness Be The Cure?
27. When Life Begins
28. Abortion: Law Or Principle?
29. Human Chattel
30. The Hope of Israel
31. The Great Temptation of Jesus
32. The Rich Man And Lazarus
33. My Hermeneutic
34. Is Immersion Proved By Example?
35. Who Gets The Credit?
36. Hook's Points
37. Heresy
38. I Am A Debtor

Other Books at Freedom's Ring

When I was a "ministerial student" in Abilene Christian College shortly before World War II, if anyone on campus had ever heard of hermeneutics, they kept it quiet! There was little sophistication then. Now, it is popular to speak about "our hermeneutic"___the method we use for establishing Scriptural authority for what we practice.

Whether you have heard of our hermeneutics or not, you surely have been taught that we determine scriptural authority for what we do by (1) direct command, (1) approved example, and (3) necessary inference. Most of us were bottle-fed on that formula.

That makes interpretation of the Scriptures easy, does it not? (Oops, we are not to interpret the Scriptures, we are cautioned, but just take them for what they say!) Just find the commands, which includes all imperative statements, instructions, exhortations, warnings, and advice. And find all the historical details, whether incidental or specified as examples, that are not given a negative connotation in the text to follow as precedents. Then read between the lines, as it were, to reach conclusions not expressed in the text but logically derived from stated facts, premises, or other supposed evidence.

Isn't that simple! Just follow that hermeneutic and we will all be united on the basis of truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth! You may even have to get help in order to misunderstand the Scriptures!

Wrestling with that sort of ideology, the sincerest of men have continued to debate and divide, especially in my lifetime. If demonstration is acceptable evidence, we have proved that such an approach to understanding will not work. Yet we hear continued insistence that we must follow that track, and we continue to fragment.

Let's face it: None of us is willing to follow those three rules consistently. We accept what seems to fit our understanding, and we reject or overlook teachings of the same classification that do not fit our mental picture. Let me point out just a few teachings to illustrate this.

COMMANDS: "Give to everyone who begs of you"; "Lend, expecting nothing in return"; "Judge not, condemn not" (Luke 6:30, 35, 37). "When you pray, say," the Lord's Prayer (Lk. ll:2; Matt. 6:9). "Think not that I came to abolish the law"; "Do not swear at all"; "When you pray, go into your room and shut the door" (Matt. 5:17, 34; 6:6). "When you give a dinner or banquet, do not invite your friends, etc. When you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind..." (Luke 14:12f). "Earnestly desire...that you may prophesy" (1 Cor. 14:1). "Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord" (James 5:14). "If any one is hungry, let him eat at home" (1 Cor. 11:34). "Let him who is taught the word share all good things with him who teaches" (Gal. 6:6).

Is that enough, or must I go on? A complete list of the directives in the New Testament Scriptures would be staggering. Do you keep all those commands? Do you know of anyone who even tries to keep them all? Books and commentaries have been written to explain to us why we need not feel obligated to obey all these directives. So, what does that do for our simplistic hermeneutic?

EXAMPLES: After Jesus had washed his disciples' feet, he said, "I have given you an example, that you also should do as I have done to you." He said also, "You ought to wash one another's feet." (John 13:14f). This is an example which Jesus commanded___doubly bound! Jesus gave the Lord's Prayer as an example and told his disciples to say those words when they prayed (Matt. 6:9; Luke 11:2). Have you been told not to use those words in prayer and that washing of feet in unnecessary?

We have the example of Jesus and his disciples participating in the Lord's Supper on a weekday. Have you been warned against following that example?

Paul gave "an example to imitate" to the Thessalonian disciples by working to pay his own way while serving among them (2 Thes. 3:7f). How many ministers and preachers bind that "approved example"?

Paul gave us an approved example of keeping rituals of the Law of Moses long after he became a disciple (Acts 21:17-26). Does that example establish Scriptural authority which we must obey?

In the only example of the appointing of elders, it was done by two evangelists accompanied by prayer and fasting (Acts 14:23). Are we not bound to follow this reasoning: (1) In the only approved example of the appointing of elders, the appointment was done by evangelists; (2) we must follow all approved examples to be saved; (3) therefore, elders must be appointed only by evangelists. Or, (1) They fasted and prayed when appointing elders in the only approved example; (2) we must follow all approved examples as authoritative; (3) therefore, we must fast and pray in the process of appointing elders.

If Scriptural authority is established by "approved example" (historical or incidental details), then we have a lot of revising to do in order to be consistent. But nothing in the Scriptures indicates that a historical or incidental occurrence sets a pattern that must be followed or limits us to that supposed pattern.

NECESSARY INFERENCE: If all the above is confusing to you, save a bit of bewilderment for the necessary inference hermeneutic. This involves our reasoning and logic. I don't know who established this method, but I suspect that we would have never needed it were it not for the perceived need to bind observance of the Lord's Supper every Sunday.

Our traditional illustration for that inference is "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy." It is reasoned that this command implies that they were to keep every Sabbath day, that those at Troas met on the first day of the week to break bread, and that one must necessarily infer that they broke bread every first day of the week (Acts 20:7).

"Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy" does infer that they were to keep each Sabbath, for an implication is a meaning expressed indirectly. The thing implied here is that any time a person failed to keep the Sabbath holy, he would be violating the command. Other teachings in the Law about Sabbath-keeping would even remove it from the area of implication.

How universally must we interpret that rule of implication? Paul commanded, "Contribute to the needs of the saints" (Rom. 12:13). Using the same reasoning that we use concerning the Sabbath, does that not imply that we must contribute to the needs of every saint, for when we fail to help one, we have violated the command?

An inference cannot be considered as necessary unless its disregarded conclusion brings us in conflict with an expressed directive, and in that case the force is in the command rather than the inferred conclusion.

We do not deal with inferences consistently. Jesus instructed: "When you fast, do not look dismal..." ( Matt. 6:16f). That clearly implies that we should fast, does it not? "Love your enemies" (Matt. 5:44) implies that we must have enemies. "Honor the king/emperor (l Pet. 2:17) implies that we should live under a monarchy. Do we bind the inferences drawn from those instructions?

ACTS 20:7

There is no command, example, or inference that disciples are required to participate in the Communion once and only once each and every first day of the week. In using Acts 20:7 as our proof-text, we have assumed that the breaking of bread is the Communion, and an assumption kills the validity of any premise!

"On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them..." Can it possibly be inferred that Luke and Paul gathered with them each and every first day, or that the disciples of Troas gathered to break bread each and every first day? Does it imply that they had been doing so previously and that they continued to do so afterward? No such inference is suggested.

If their meeting was according to the Jewish reckoning of time, they met on Saturday night to participate. Would that be acceptable today? If their meeting was according to the Roman time, they met on Sunday night but did not participate until Monday morning after Paul's midnight discourse. Would that be acceptable for us? The command, example, inference formula proves nothing relating to this text.

If Luke had indicated that this incident were recorded in order to emphasize some lesson, then we would be obligated to draw some inferences. In the absence of a stated purpose, let us ask why Luke reported it. It could be because this tells us of Paul's greatest miracle___the raising of a man from the dead! But we have overlooked the obvious purpose in order to uphold an unwarranted contention.

You may be protesting mentally that I am overlooking the rules by which we determine which command, example, or inference is binding on us and which is not. These questions must be asked as we study: Who is speaking or writing? To whom is it addressed? What is the context of the message? In what period of history did it apply? Is it universal or limited in its application? What were the customs of the land at that time? What do other portions of the Scriptures say on the subject? Is the language to be understood literally or figuratively? What is the meaning of the words used?

That simplifies everything, doesn't it? Countless volumes have been written to explain all those things, and we continue to lack a common understanding and to justify unholy divisions. We simply have not come up with a consistent hermeneutic. The tendency is to reject others who do not follow our hermeneutic even though we do not follow it consistently ourselves.

Our Problem

Our problem of interpretation begins with a legal concept of God's revelation and requirements for us. We have been more concerned about pleasing God by rituals than in establishing a personal relationship with him. Legalism demands patternism for if there is law, there must be a pattern to follow in order to fulfil it. Then, when we fail to conform to the pattern, we must restore that pattern. So, our infamous formula of legalism, patternism, and restorationism has resulted from our approach to interpretation. These have always been divisive and will always be so. The legalistic formula of command, example, and inference has been bent and twisted to justify each diverse course taken by those who try to follow it.

As I begin an attempt to set forth my hermeneutic, let me state an indisputable fact: Scriptural interpretation is not an exact science! Whoa, there! That leaves us dangling and unsure without foundation and conviction! No, not really. Stay with me a while longer.

We are all searching for truth and trying to understand it. Can we know and understand all factual truth? That is both impossible and unnecessary. Even though we have heard sincere claims that all truth relating to our salvation is in the Bible and can be known and understood, only a self-deceived person would claim to be aware of all the facts and to comprehend their meaning.

The Bible contains facts which reveal truth. Truth is more than facts; it is a person, a Divinity, who is the prime and living Reality. Jesus declared, "And this is eternal life, that they should know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent" (John 17:3). Although we cannot comprehend God without comprehension of some facts, the knowledge of information about him is not what it means to know God. If we must know all information about God in order to have eternal life, no one could receive it. The knowing of God is the experiencing of a relationship with him. That knowledge of communion with God can be enjoyed by relatively ignorant people. This revelation of God is not law nor is the personal fellowship with him attained through law.

Because all must know God in order to have eternal life, God has revealed himself to man even "beyond the sacred page."

1. God has revealed himself through nature. Especially, in Job, Psalms 19, and Romans 1-2, we see undeniable evidence that the Creator made himself known with his power and divinity through what he created. Those peoples who had no written, factual revelation of God could have a saving communion with God without the written revelation.

2. God has revealed himself in history in his dealing with man. The Bible is a record of God's dealing with man. It is true, but it is not that Truth which gives eternal life. It identifies him so that we can know him in an experiential relationship. This inspired revelation tells how that in different times God gave specific laws and regulations. These were not the liberating truth but were efforts to keep man in a spiritual relationship with God. God also made the Christ known in history.

3. God revealed himself in the incarnation. Jesus said, "He who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9). The New Testament writings are not that truth but they reveal him who said, "I am the Truth!" To know the Son is to know the Father for they are one. To those who revered the Scriptures as a compilation of facts and laws, Jesus chided, "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me; yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life" (John 5:39f). They knew the facts of the revelation but did not know God, the Truth! It was the fellowship with God through belief in Jesus that brought life rather than the thorough knowledge of facts and the flawless keeping of laws. Why has it been so difficult for us to grasp that? We, like they, still search the Scriptures as a book of law and information in an effort to gain life through our own understanding of facts and our keeping of a legal code with its rituals.

Revealed Through His Spirit

4. God has revealed himself to man, in man, and through man through his Spirit. Not only has he given us written revelation through the Spirit, he has seen fit to live in us individually as a temple. Are we temples of an inert, impotent Spirit, or of one who guides, supports, enables, and provides?

"To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good," Paul assures us. Then he adds, "All these are inspired by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills" (1 Cor. 12:7, 11). Each of us is a part of the body with a particular function, gift, or manifestation of the Spirit. In this sense, God reveals himself to each of us individually.

In the capacities that God assigns us, "our sufficiency is from God, who has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant, not in a written code but in the Spirit; for the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Cor. 3:6). After further discussion, Paul adds, "Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit" (2 Cor. 3:17f). This has to do with the way we are to know God, "For it is the God who said, 'Let light shine out of darkness,' who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ" ( 2 Cor. 4:6).

Although we might be inclined to think that God put his laws in a legal code on the pages of the New Testament writings, he has put them in our hearts instead. Even those who had no written revelation of God could still have the law written on their hearts, according to Romans l-2. All men have known to love God and man.

With the coming of Jesus another element was added to God's requirement: "And this is his commandment, that we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded us. All who keep his commandments abide in him, and he in them. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit which he has given us" (1 John 3:23f). "When we cry, 'Abba! Father!' it is the Spirit himself bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God..." (Rom. 8:15f).

The written revelation gives us grounds for our belief and love, and it guides and encourages the expression of it through teachings, commands, exhortations, and warnings. But the comprehensive law of God has been given to us individually by the Spirit, "because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us" (Rom. 5:5).

Such an infusion of the law of love was prophesied: "This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord; I will put my laws in their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach every one his fellow or every one his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for all shall know me, from the least of them to the greatest" (Heb. 8:10f). Through faith and love the disciple knows him___has eternal life___and has understanding of his law___his principle of action. This must be what John had in mind when he wrote, "But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all know," and "I write this to you about those who would deceive you; but the anointing which you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you; as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie, just as it has taught you, abide in him" (1 John 2:20, 26f). For the Ephesian disciples Paul prayed "that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of Glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened..." (Eph. 1:17). That goes "beyond the sacred page"!

Concerning any who would boast of having knowledge of proper information, Paul wrote, "If any one imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know. But if one loves God, one is known by him" (1 Cor. 8:2f). To be recognized by God, love is the vital factor which God sees rather than our being able to interpret what we consider as a code of rules and laws which we might suppose to be the law of Christ.

A Code Of Law

A code of laws cannot be kept perfectly because of our fleshly nature. Law brings death because it requires living perfectly in the flesh, but the Spirit gives life. Paul explains to those who walk by the Spirit instead of by law which brings death, "For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace." Then he continues, "But you are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if the Spirit of God really dwells in you. Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him." That indwelling Spirit leads us, "For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God...the Spirit himself bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God.." (See Rom. 8:1-17). Being led by the Spirit, we know God in the relationship of sons who have eternal life.

We do not need a hermeneutic which interprets law for we are not serving such a system which could only bring death. The effort to interpret the will of God for us by command, example, and necessary inference is an effort to interpret what is perceived as a code of law; the results are legalism, patternism, and restorationism.

My Hermeneutic

What, then, is my hermeneutic? First, we must begin with a hunger and thirst after righteousness which will be filled, according to Jesus' promise. Confessing our lack of understanding, we will ask God for wisdom which he has promised to give. Surely, our hunger will cause us to learn God's written revelation to the extent of their availability, our literacy, and our intelligence, even though different people in different circumstances have been very limited in these. In this sincere attitude the heart and life will be opened for the direction and working of the Spirit.

The Spirit apportions to each person according to his need and gives gifts for various workings. Since we are all different and God knows our difference in understanding and ability, he apportions to each one individually as he wills. His direction to you may not be the same as that given to me, for we are not all identical. I am convinced that Paul was also including us when he wrote, "So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit." Then Paul emphasizes the individuality of the gift and direction to each person, "The spiritual man judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. 'For who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?' But we have the mind of Christ" (1 Cor. 2:11-16).

This is our provision from heaven to perform the ministry which God gives us in the manner that he directs us individually without being judged by anyone and without judging others who follow different courses into which the Spirit has directed them.

This hermeneutic takes us out of the realm of evaluation of legal requirements and puts us into an individual living communion, fellowship, relationship, and knowledge of God. And that is the knowledge of God that gives eternal life.

This hermeneutic is the accepting of the grace of God and the attuning of our lives to him in response to his grace of justification and endowment of the Spirit in us. It is the individual freedom to interpret his will and guidance and to express ourselves in full-life devotion without trying to gain merit by keeping a system of laws or following forms correctly. It is being free to judge ourselves without judging others. It is the freedom to love God and man without reservation. It is to know God and to be known by him___to have eternal life!