Rules for interpretation
Rule - Introduction [∞] Discussion
The prophets of old packed away the mystery. [1] [2] As they wrote, God concealed the mystery in their words using prophetic riddles. [3] [4]
Modern prophets unpack prophecies with the help of the Spirit to solve the prophetic riddles. [6] They validate what the Spirit tells them, by these rules. |
|
Since God’s word is established forever [1]; a metaphor/shadow means the same thing everywhere is it used.
The use of free-for-all allegory in other theological works has been properly criticized because allegorical or metaphoric meanings produced in this manner have no way to be verified; how do you know it is true?
Such a phenomenon is impossible for men to produce and therefore when we observe it occurring, we can have confidence that it is God’s intended meaning. Consequence of lack of Divine meaning: The resulting interpretation is likely to be free-for-all allegory and eisegesis. |
Since the riddle of Samson [1] tells us Christ is the answer to all the prophetic riddles;[2] if the shadow (prophetic riddle) doesn’t look like Christ, it isn’t a good shadow. This keeps us focused.
If we don’t see Christ in the scriptures, we have missed the primary purpose of the scriptures. [5] And if Christ is not central to a proposed interpretation, it is to be rejected. This rule alone separates the mystery[6] from Gnosticism[7], Kabbalah[8] and Midrash [9]. Consequence of lack of Christocentric meaning: You miss the point of the scriptures in revealing God through Christ. |
|
Since we are to let every man be a liar and God be true [1]; outside references are not required to solve the riddles and see the shadows. This keeps us devoted.
If we reference historians, document critics, or scholars, it will be to add color to the discussion, and more often than not, to refute popular myths they perpetuate.
|
|
Our assumptions about scripture and the rules we use to guide our interpretation effect the ultimate meaning that we get from scripture. It is important to evaluate those assumptions and rules to ensure that they permit the scriptures to speak for themselves rather than permitting us to impose our own meaning upon them. My assumptions and convictions are these:
The rules are discerned using the same methods as discerning the mystery, so it should be expected that those practicing literal methods may disagree with how the rules are determined. That doesn't matter. The mystery needs to be evaluated to see if it is self-consistent as well as if it produces verifiable, meaningful, and orthodox [6] results. Consequence of not doing self-examination:: The measure of truth becomes the individual and the standard changes to meet your own goals. |
|
Since God has said that not a jot or tittle will pass away [1]; until one knows why each jot and tittle is there, a complete understanding has not been derived. This keeps us humble.
It is a shameful behavior to decide a matter before it is heard. [4] Consequence of lack of humility The scriptures are wrested or twisted to mean what you want them to mean.
|
|
Since man shall live “by every word” [1] [2]; a doctrine is not sound until it sums up and includes all that God has said about it. [3] This keeps us searching.
A doctrine must sum up and include everything the Bible says about it in the literal and hidden layers. Consequence of lack of completeness Conclusions may be premature. [4] |
|
Since every word concerning life and death must be established by two or three witnesses [1]; every shadow/symbol must have at least two supporting scripture witnesses.
Shadows are not the product of a wild imagination and are therefore verifiable by the scriptures. When a shadow has two or three witnesses, it should be regarded as a tentative meaning. This rule does not permit three verses to be the end of discussion, but specifically forbids a single verse from becoming definitive. Consequence of lack of rigor: Conclusions may be premature and/or wrong. |
|
If one skims through the rules without comprehending them, or like Naaman hears the instruction but is insulted at their apparent simplicity [1], the results of exegesis will look like the free-for-all allegory of others that we all reject.
The rules must be used rigorously to discern the truth of scripture. |