If someone disagrees with my interpretation of the Bible and says “That’s your interpretation,” I simply respond, “It certainly is. Have you a better interpretation to offer?”
There are some very straightforward, common sense “Rules of Interpretation” that are valid not only for the Bible, but for literature in general, law, and even the weather report!
Here are the rules:
1. Interpret literally in all cases unless the text or context clearly demonstrates that other than a literal interpretation is required and intended by the author.
2. Interpret literally unless the resulting interpretation is an absurdity, or in the case of the Bible, an interpretation out of harmony with and contradictory to the teaching found elsewhere in the Bible. But be very careful what you identify as an absurdity. It may be that what seems to be an absurdity is actually the truth as taught by the Bible, and that it is your own opinion, or what you have been taught by others, that is the absurdity in the light of the full teaching of the Bible.
3. When you come across figurative expressions in the Bible, look for the literal truth they are intended to convey or emphasize. There are many different figures of speech in the Bible. I have indexed nearly 200 different figures of speech found in the Bible in my Bible study reference work, The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge.
4. Do not read into a text a meaning which would be entirely foreign to or outside the culture of the writer who wrote the document. Thus, it is highly unlikely that the Bible writers speak of modern inventions like trains and automobiles. How about flying saucers? Most likely not. On a more controversial theological note, the reference in Revelation 1:10 to “the Lord’s Day” cannot be a reference to the Sabbath or the Seventh Day of worship, for the expression “the Lord’s Day” acquired this meaning and usage much later. Rather, the Greek expression we translate “the Lord’s Day” at Revelation 1:10 is the equivalent of the Hebrew expression “the Day of the Lord,” and, indeed, what God revealed in the book of Revelation that pertains to prophecy future to the time of the author John takes place during the Day of the Lord.
5. Do not read into a text a meaning which could not have been known to or understood by the audience to whom the document was originally addressed.
6. Interpret a particular passage in harmony with ALL other passages which may have a bearing upon the subject. This is exceedingly important. You cannot cherry-pick your evidence. All relevant evidence must be taken into account to come up with the correct interpretation. Groups like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Roman Catholics, Calvinists, Seventh Day Adventists, the Church of Christ, and many others flagrantly violate this rule and come up with very mistaken interpretations of the Bible. To successfully find ALL the relevant passages about a subject, you MUST do Real Bible Study and make full and careful use of such tools as an exhaustive concordance to the Bible (Strong’s Concordance is a good choice) and a source of full and complete cross references to every verse in the Bible (such as The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, or Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible). If you haven’t made full use of these resources don’t kid yourself into supposing you have properly considered ALL the passages pertaining to the subject, issue, or doctrine you are considering.
7. Be sure to include all relevant passages upon a theme before determining the interpretation of any particular passage. This principle is violated by every denomination or religious group. Jehovah’s Witnesses think they understand such Bible terms as “soul,” “spirit,” “hell,” and other terms more accurately than others do. Their problem is that they have failed to make a full induction of all the evidence before arriving at their conclusions about the meaning and use of these terms in the Bible. I have presented a full induction of all the evidence on these issues in The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge and Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible starting at the notes at Genesis 2:7.
8. Interpret a difficult passage in the light of those passages on the same subject which are clear.
9. Interpret a passage with careful attention to the exact words used in the original Hebrew or Greek text of the passage. As a start, make use of Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance to the Bible which identifies the original words numerically, coded to the Hebrew and Greek Lexicons contained in the back of the concordance.
10. Interpret a passage according to the grammar of the original language text, Hebrew or Greek.
11. Interpret a particular passage in the light of its immediate context, what comes before and after the verse being studied.
12. Interpret a passage in the light of its cultural and historical context and setting. Some study Bibles are very helpful in this regard. But they must be studied with care, because they are often guilty of slanting the available evidence to favor their denominational position rather than presenting the straight truth out of the Bible. This is especially true with regard to the mode of Christian baptism practiced in the New Testament itself. All modes (sprinkling, pouring, immersion) are valid because the original language words for baptism in the Hebrew and Greek languages are non-modal words. But for a denomination to claim that their favored mode is the exclusively correct mode taught in Scripture is a very serious error. For example, there are no provable examples of immersion as a mode of the baptism of persons for religious purposes in either the Hebrew or the Greek Scriptures.
13. Interpret a passage in the light of its position in the purpose as stated or implied by the writer.
14. Interpret a passage or a subject in the light of its position in the purpose as given by God in His revealed Covenants, particularly the Abrahamic Covenant (starting at Genesis 12:2) and the Davidic Covenant (starting at 2 Samuel 7:10). Failure to understand these two covenants and their bearing upon Bible prophecy as given in the rest of the Bible has led to many very mistaken ideas currently promoted by Jehovah’s Witnesses, Roman Catholics, most Calvinists, Seventh Day Adventists, and the Church of Christ, all of whom are utterly at odds on the subject of Bible prophecy compared with what the Bible actually teaches.
15. Do not interpret one statement in the Bible in a way which makes it contradict another part of the Bible. All the parts must agree without contradictions. There are no proven contradictions in the Bible when the Bible is properly understood and rightly interpreted. This principle furnishes a good test of the correctness of your interpretation or understanding of the Bible. When you come up with a contradiction, that is the signal you must go back and study deeper into the Bible to resolve the contradiction. Often, when reading and studying the Bible, when you learn something new, the new understanding will correct a prior misunderstanding you might have had.
Did I “step on your toes”? I intended to.
If you have questions about this post, submit a comment below.
I do approve all relevant comments, whether I agree with them or not.
When I was a kid, I was always interested in such things. Like it!
Dear Jackie Evancho,
I went to your link and enjoyed your singing!
It would be the most beautiful thing in the world to learn you are really interested in the Bible.
Not only a beautiful thing, but indeed this is absolutely the most important thing.
this is a great article ! i heard one say once that there is only one interpretation and many applications! many times our denominations, background, taking our own ideas to gods word cloud our understanding thats why we need the rules of interpretation to arrive at the correct meaning of scripture! i cor 1.13-15 is so important “comparing scripture with scripture” and dependance on the holy spirit as is promised in jn 16.11-15!! i also like the how the lord interprets literally the promises of the of old test to himself in lk 24/44-45! the the holy spirit is teacher through his word! thank yu brother
Dear Ken,
As I continue to study the Bible for myself, I find I have had to “unlearn” many things I was “taught” by well-meaning but misinformed Bible teachers, including some of the very best and greatest teachers like Dr. R. C. Sproul and Dr. John MacArthur! Both of these remarkable and wonderful Bible teachers have gone far astray in their teaching of the Bible when they have tainted their teaching with ideas drawn from outside the Bible itself (such as the writings of St. Augustine and John Calvin). Just a week or so ago I heard Dr. Sproul speak of “this is the Reformed understanding of the Bible” during his radio program, Renewing Your Mind. Clearly, neither he nor Dr. John MacArthur are truly engaging in the kind of Real Bible Study I am talking about here.
You are certainly correct that our background, the teaching we have received, sometimes clouds our understanding of God’s Word, the Bible.
Solving this problem is the purpose of this site.
I hope many will learn how to do Real Bible Study!
I fully agree with your observation that our Lord Jesus Christ provides a perfect example of how to interpret the Scriptures. I wish I could have been eavesdropping so I could have heard exactly what Jesus taught to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus!
I responded to a Roman Catholic poster on the Internet who claimed to demonstrate that the Bible gives over twenty Biblical reasons why we cannot go by the Bible alone. I answered every one of his challenges straight from the Bible. Until then, he had claimed no “Protestant” had ever answered his arguments.
The Roman Catholic poster claimed only the Roman Catholic Church “has the rest of the story.”
I challenged him to provide even ONE SENTENCE from our Lord Jesus Christ that he has that I do not have in my New Testament. His answer? Absolute silence.
Then I challenged the Roman Catholics on that discussion forum to provide me an Internet link to what Jesus specifically said in detail to the two disciples on the Emmaus road, teaching Jesus repeated later to the whole group of disciples, as recorded in Luke, chapter 24. I said, surely the “one true church” was present when Jesus presented this teaching. Surely the “one true church” that “has the rest of the story” did not lose this most important information!
No response, or at least, no link was ever furnished.
One of the Roman Catholic participants in the discussion thread was honest enough to admit there was no such link available.
I have what that information must have been. I have carefully placed the information in at least two places in my books The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge and also Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible.
I placed cross references to the Scriptures Jesus must have referred to at Luke 24:26 and also at 1 Peter 1:11.
Both passages provide the outline summary of what Jesus taught: “the sufferings of Christ” and “the glory that should follow.”
Bible prophecy is astoundingly clear that this is the proper order of events in Messianic Prophecy presented in the Hebrew Scriptures, and provides the absolute proof that Jesus Christ and no other is the promised Messiah.
This provides the answer to our mistaken Jewish friends who argue that Jesus could not be the Messiah they were expecting because there are so many Messianic Prophecies He did not fulfill. Clearly, what Jesus did not fulfill at His First Coming is reserved for fulfillment at His Second Coming, “the glory that should follow.” This sequence is absolute, for it is presented in the context of individual Messianic Psalms as the predicted sequence of these prophesied events. You’ll see that when you check out the cross references for Luke 24:26 and especially the references given for 1 Peter 1:11.
If you have not studied out these cross references at Luke 24:26 and 1 Peter 1:11 you have a great blessing awaiting you for when you do search the Scriptures on this theme!
one of my life vs is rom 10/17 faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of god wanted to share that i have been using the new treasury of scripture knowledge since 1992 and now the nelson cross reference guide to the bible and have found they have helped me grow spiritually and trust in the lord more than any other books with the bible. encourage any reading this website you will be blessed isa 55/11!
I read books for a while but now I changed it to great blogs. Your place is one of the examples why I decided to pay more attention to internet because they are much more updated than books and these days information is generated very fast.
Though I suspect your kind comment is actually generic spam, it does make a valid point.
Some blog writers such as myself are specialists in the field they blog about.
You will learn things here about Bible study and the Bible that you won’t find in any study Bible or any single book, unless it is a book I wrote!
I would not give up on reading books, though. Especially the greatest Book in the world, the Bible.
Reading the Bible will do your soul a world, actually an eternity, of good, if you understand it and believe it.
The Bible is understandable if you start at the right place to read it. I suggest starting with the gospel of John in the New Testament. Read it over and over until you feel you’ve almost got it memorized. At that point you will understand it well enough to believe and receive the benefit it promises.
Concerning point 4 above, you say you position is controversial: “On a more controversial theological note, the reference in Revelation 1:10 to “the Lord’s Day” cannot be a reference to the Sabbath or the Seventh Day of worship, for the expression “the Lord’s Day” acquired this meaning and usage much later. Rather, the Greek expression we translate “the Lord’s Day” at Revelation 1:10 is the equivalent of the Hebrew expression “the Day of the Lord,” and, indeed, what God revealed in the book of Revelation that pertains to prophecy future to the time of the author John takes place during the Day of the Lord.”
First, you are equating “Lord’s Day” with “Day of our Lord”. We find the latter here, Joel 2:11,31, Zeph 1:14, Malachi 4:5. In the NT, the Greek used for Day of the Lord is hēmera tou kuriou or hēmera kuriou as in 1 Cor 5:5, 2 Cor 1:14, 1 Thess 5:2, 2 Peter 3:10, which is different from Rev 1:10 which is kuriakē hēmera. Second is the context. Rev 1:9 speaks of John on the Isle of Patmos, and then in v. 10 he gives the time, “on the Lord’s day”. We have place and time, not future. Note, I’m using your point 11 above, looking at the immediate context of v10 which is v9.
It is true that the term “Lord’s day” in the time after when the book of Revelation was written took on a a new meaning. Example is the Apocryphal Gospel According to Peter where the “Lord’s day” referred to the day of his resurrection. However, this document being written 75-100 years after the book of Revelation can not be used to define the term. It is best to use scripture to define the day, not documents written long after the book of Revelation.
No where in scripture does sunday ever have any religious connection with the Lord. Repeatedly, scripture recognizes the seventh day, the Sabbath, as the Lord’s special day. He blessed it and sanctified it, Gen 2:3. It was a memorial to creation, Exo. 20:11. God specifically called it, “my Holy Day”, Isa. 58:13. And Jesus declared himself to be “Lord also of the Sabbath”, Mark 2:28. Thus, the phrase, “Lord’s Day” is interpreted in accordance with evidence prior to and contemporary with John’s time, it appears that there is only one day to which it can refer, and that is the seventh-day Sabbath.
I believe I am using many of your points in real bible study in my reading, and could argue all your points apply.
Dear A. Way,
You have written perhaps the very best response ever posted on my blog!
I very much appreciate your taking the time to carefully study what I have posted, and the time you took to write a challenging response.
I like how you were able to relate what you assert to the rules of interpretation I have listed. That shows me you actually read those rules with understanding.
Even recognized Bible scholars are divided in their interpretation of Revelation 1:10.
Most interpret this verse to suggest it refers to the Sunday or so-called “Christian Sabbath.” Of course, the only Sabbath known to Scripture as a day of worship is not the first day of the week, but the seventh day, which we call Saturday.
There is no such thing as the “Christian Sabbath” known to Scripture. There is not a word of the Sabbath ever having been changed to another day.
Now, one could argue from these facts that the proper day of worship for Christians who want to go by what the Bible actually teaches can only be the Sabbath. Some denominations, like the Seventh Day Adventists, and less well known, the Seventh Day Baptists, follow this argument as the Scriptural position.
That this is not the Biblical position is readily seen if we consider what Paul has written in Romans 14:5, 6–
Rom 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
Rom 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
Paul states that the day one worships or otherwise holds in esteem is not material. Each person is free to practice according to his own mind. Paul’s point earlier in the passage (Romans 14:1) is that those who maintain scruples about what should or should not be eaten, or who have scruples about the day of worship, are actually the weaker brethren in the Lord, and that “We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak.”
Jesus himself, in terms of what is actually recorded of His words in the New Testament, never once mentions the Sabbath commandment as a command, though he several times mentions some of the other commandments.
There are absolutely no examples in the New Testament of Christians meeting for exclusively and specifically Christian worship on the Sabbath, not one.
There is not a single line devoted anywhere in the New Testament epistles to exhorting Christians to be faithful observers of the Sabbath.
There are many commands given in the New Testament, even in the epistles, but not once is the keeping of the Sabbath one of them.
Going back to Revelation 1:10. The reference cannot be to Sunday worship, for Sunday was never the Sabbath. Sunday is never in Scripture called the Lord’s Day. Scripture clearly specifies that the Sabbath is the seventh day, not the first day of the week. The seventh day of course is our Saturday, commonly understood as the Jewish Sabbath. The Sabbath was never changed to Sunday in terms of what the Bible itself teaches.
Some writers refer to Sunday as the “Christian Sabbath,” leaving Saturday to be the “Jewish Sabbath.”
The Sabbath is in Scripture an exclusively Jewish institution. It does not pertain to the Gentiles or non-Jews, and most certainly in the New Testament does not apply to Christians.
Poor Robinson Crusoe on his deserted island, reading those three good Bibles, even if he were still there yet, would never have found anything about a “Christian Sabbath” in those plain text Bibles.
Interpreters who insist that Revelation 1:10 must refer to the day of worship are of course bringing to the text the background of what they already believe, and take this position to maintain that belief.
In the context of the whole book of Revelation, and what transpires in the visions John was granted, it is most obvious, even to a casual reader, that those events take place in “the day of the Lord.” Therefore, in the light of Revelation 1:19, which provides the divinely inspired outline of the book of Revelation, those events in the day of the Lord belong to what is there called “the things which shall be hereafter.”
First, I agree that there is no evidence for Sunday as a Christian Sabbath. I also agree that there is conflict in the interpretation of Rev. 1:10. Using pt. 11 of you interpretation guide again, Rev. 1:10 is in context of Rev. 1:9. Place and time. The time seems to be a time present for John, not future in v10.
You said, “The Sabbath is in Scripture an exclusively Jewish institution. It does not pertain to the Gentiles or non-Jews, and most certainly in the New Testament does not apply to Christians.”. Exodus 20:8-11 says that the Sabbath applied to all, sons, daughters, servants and even animals. Also the stranger “within your gates”. This would include the gentile.
Gen 2:3 says the seventh day was blessed and sanctified. To those that think the Sabbath was instituted at Sinai (Exodus 20:8-11), this is incorrect. In fact one of the first things the Israelites did after leaving Egypt was to remember the Sabbath. The Sabbath in this context was a celebration of freedom. In fact, the people were instructed to not work. They were slaves in Egypt and never had relief from work. (Exo 1:13-14). To not work was strange for them. God gave them food to eat, manna (what is it?), and it fell on the 6 days, but not on Sabbath. (See all of Exodus 16). What was this signifying? God was their faithful leader. And this was before the commandments were given at Mt. Sinai (Exodus 20). Moses was not instituting something new with the Sabbath, he was restoring that which was forgotten.
One might ask, did Abraham keep the Sabbath? Gen. 26:5 says Abraham “obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” What commandments, statues and laws? We know that murder is wrong, Gen 4:8. Yet before this murder, there was no explicit commandment recorded. Genesis 6:5 shows that man was wicked. A knowledge of God’s requirements are implied. When God calls Moses in Egypt, God is “the God of your father, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob”, Exodus 3:6. Moses’s role belongs in the context of resumption and restoration, not a beginning. In fact God is keeping His promise to Abraham, Exo. 3:15; 6:5.
In Isa 56:1-8, the Sabbath is a centerpiece of a vision of inclusion, or all people. It is part of the restoration in Isa 58:12-14. It might be a interesting question on how one can command someone to take delight in the Sabbath! 🙂 The Sabbath is also a feature of the earth made new, Isa 66:23, where all flesh will worship God.
The Sabbath is prominent in the healing ministry of Jesus. (John 5:1-9; 9:1-14; Luke 13:10-17; Mark 3:1-5). Christ rested in the tomb on Sabbath! (John 19:14, 31). And compare John 19:30 with Genesis 2:3.
As for changing a Christian Sabbath from the 7th day to the 1st day, Dan 7:25 comes to mind.
For the subject of Revelation, Revelation 14:12 says, “Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and hold fast to the faith of Jesus.” What commandments?
There is so much more to say and explore. Cross-references do help in studying the Bible.
One more point – I’m still working on figuring out Paul. I do note that Paul wrote letters, not gospels. They have been often read as gospels. A gospel implies an open-ended readership by all. A letter is targeted to a smaller group of individual. Paul’s letters are often geared to specific situations. We also can not take Paul’s letters as though it is an independent statement, wholly complete. Prior knowledge of the gospel is assumed because Paul is writing to established churches. That is that Paul’s letters are not where the only knowledge of Jesus was to be found.
Romans 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
This is actually remarkable. Paul started out using force to keep the religion of the Jews, persecuting the Christians. Now Paul is saying, let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind! No force, no coercion. How do you command someone to call the Sabbath a delight any way? You can’t. You can’t command love! I am coming to see the Sabbath as an acknowledgment of God as Creator, and Redeemer, Healer, Restorer. The Sabbath is a sign of freedom, as seen in Exodus 16. If one keeps the Sabbath because of a sense of obligation merely, because we are commanded to do so, what joy will that bring?
Dear A. Way,
You allude to Ex 20:8-11 in your first comment above as one passage which includes non-Jewish persons.
Here is the passage:
Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Exo 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
Note very carefully that the stranger (or foreigner) is specified and restricted by the following clause: “that is within thy gates.”
So in the land of Israel, even the non-Jew was required to obey the Sabbath commandment. The commandment certainly did not apply to non-Jews outside the land of Israel. If the command were intended to be of universal application, there would appear to be no reason for the clause “that is within thy gates.”
Again, following Rule 11 regarding keeping the context in mind, Exodus 20:1, 2 state:
Exodus 20:1 And God spake all these words, saying,
Exodus 20:2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
THEREFORE, the Ten Commandments, including the Sabbath commandment, were addressed specifically to those whom God had just very literally (Rule 1) removed by stupendous miracles from literal Egypt and delivered them out of the “house of bondage.”
Being resident in Israel is likewise specified in the repetition of the law found in Deuteronomy,
Deu 5:14 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thine ox, nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou.
Deu 5:15 And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.
The Sabbath commandment is once again addressed specifically to those who had as a nation been literally delivered out of Egypt.
Indeed there is much more to say and explore. You are right, Cross references do help in studying the Bible.
Thank you for continuing the discussion. I hope to share more soon by way of response and further discussion on this important topic.
Thank you again for your blog site. You will notice when I did include exodus 20:8-11, I put “within your gates” in quotes, in recognition of that fact. Put again, the commandment did apply to non-Jews, and that was the point, albeit in Israel. A significant fact is that the Sabbath did not start with a commandment written by the finger of God on Mt. Sinai. In fact, the first word of the Sabbath commandment is “Remember”. The Sabbath had already figured strongly in Exodus 16. And then of course we have Genesis 2:3 which goes back to creation.
Dear A. Way,
I believe Scripture is most clear that the writings of Paul in the New Testament are an integral part of the New Testament, and MUST be considered as divinely inspired Holy Scripture, the Word of God, as much as the rest of the Bible.
One proof related to this is that in Acts 9 we read the call of Paul by God after Paul’s miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus.
Act 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
Act 9:16 For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name’s sake.
God states, or perhaps we may say our Lord Jesus Christ states concerning Paul, “for he is a chosen vessel unto me.” Therefore, it is most clearly affirmed in a non-Pauline writing that Paul received a divine commission directly from God by God’s authority.
Second, the Scriptures in the New Testament directly affirm that Paul’s letters are Scripture.
2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Note Peter’s comparison of Paul’s letters, which some in his day found hard to understand, and some that were “unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”
So, though Paul indeed wrote letters not gospels, yet Paul by divine inspiration asserts,
Rom 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,
Rom 1:2 (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)
Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
Rom 1:4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
Rom 1:5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:
And a bit further in Romans chapter 1, Paul states,
Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
Perhaps in some ways it might be truly said that Paul in his letters preaches more of the Gospel of Jesus Christ than the Gospel Records themselves do.
But it is most important to recognize that we must accept the whole Bible, and not pick and choose those portions we like to favor as having more authority or validity than the rest! That would be violating Rule 6 regarding not “cherry-picking” the evidence.
Admin – I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I am not “cherry-picking”. I do not deprecate Paul as some do.
Consider: Romans 14:5 KJV One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. Is this saying to not keep the Sabbath, keeping with the theme of the tread? No. It is saying, let everyone be persuaded in their own mind. Paul’s stance on the Sabbath is very open. No force, no coercion. Does this make Paul weak? Not at all. I’m not ashamed of the gospel. (Rom 1:16) It is the power of God for salvation for both Jew and Greek!
Paul makes one of the most clear statements of Jesus’ divinity in the NT. Col. 1:15-17. Paul paints Jesus as not only the savior, but the creator. What is the symbol of creation? Gen 2:3, Exo. 20:11. Who is the creator? Jesus. Who is Lord of the Sabbath? Jesus. Mark 2:28, Luke 6:5. Would the symbol of the savior and the creator be different?
Paul also brings out the the cosmic conflict. Col. 1:20; 2:15.
One thing for sure, the Jews did not understand the Sabbath. Jesus showed a completely different view of the Sabbath. (See John 9:16; Matt 12:1; Mark 2:27; Luke 6:2) Many of His healing acts were on the Sabbath. (John 5:9; Matt 12:10; Mark 3:4; Luke 13:14; 14:1)
Dear A. Way,
Thank you for your kind clarification regarding your stance on the Apostle Paul and his writings.
I was away for the day taking my mother-in-law to a local city like I do each month, and only now returned to my computer.
I have enjoyed looking up the Scripture references you have furnished, and plan to study them further.
Paul makes a number of very significant statements pertaining to the Law of God, the Law of Moses, and Sabbath observance, and related matters.
Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
This statement in Colossians 2:16 teaches the same principle Paul advocated in Romans 14:5, 6. Those who wish to worship on the Sabbath day as it was instituted in the Hebrew Scriptures, our Old Testament, are free to choose to do so.
Those who wish to choose another day, whether Sunday, or every day, are likewise free to do so.
Such matters are clearly not essential to salvation, are not salvation issues, so believers are free to differ in their practice.
Those who choose to maintain Sabbath worship as it was instituted in the Old Testament must be careful not to judge adversely those who choose to do otherwise is what Paul clearly teaches in Colossians 2:16.
Paul likewise affirms in Romans 14:1-5 that those who choose to be more scrupulous in these matters of ritual observances of whatever kind must not be condemned by those who have learned to enjoy their new freedom in Christ and no longer concern themselves about these issues.
In context, Paul equates the Sabbath issue with the commands of both the Law of God written by God on the two tablets by His own hand as well as Mosaic Law with what Christ did for us on the Cross:
“Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.”
Before, when I was saying I was trying to figure out Paul, here is part of what I was talking about. In Colossians, Paul may be arguing about the invasion of outside thought such as gnosticism. Also, in Col. 2:16, which sabbath is Paul talking about? Is it the ceremonial Sabbaths, or the 7th Day Sabbath or something else creeping into their worship? We can not neglect the context. Col. 2:16 is in the setting of Col. 2:8 which reads: “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” You can not say that the OT weekly Sabbath is a “hollow and deceptive philosophy” based on “human traditions and the basic principles of the world” to quote the Col. 2:8 in the NIV.
In the Book of Colossians, Paul is concerned about creation, Col. 1:15-17. Christ is the Creator. And the Sabbath is the pinnacle of creation week. And Christ is the restorer, the re-creator, Col. 1:20. This is an interesting verse which many I think overlook! Christ is bring ALL things back, including heaven and earth, reconciling them to himself. The NEB translates this: “through him God chose to reconcile the whole universe to himself, making peace through the shedding of his blood upon the cross – to reconcile all things, whether on earth or in heaven, through him alone”. This theme continues in Col. 2:15, which is right before our verse in question. There is a unity in creation and redemption. The weekly Sabbath is the sign of creation. Gen 2:2, God finished his work, and rested on the seventh-day. John 19:30, Christ said, “it is finished” and died. And then rested in the tomb on the seventh-day.
Col. 2:14 – what was nailed to the cross? Was it the entire 10 commandments? Or only one, the Sabbath commandment? Or was what was nailed to the cross the philosophies of men, Col. 2:8?
There is no Biblical basis for keeping any day other than the seventh-day as a Sabbath. I will affirm as did Paul in Rom 14:5, “let everyone be persuaded in their own mind.” In my mind, if any one tries to use force for observance of any particular day, they are no using God’s methods.
Dear A. Way,
Thank you again for a very good comment.
I believe that when we consider the full New Testament teaching, particularly in the writings of Paul, that Paul intended to convey the message that all Law has been “nailed to the Cross.”
The Bible, especially in the Old Testament, presents two means of salvation: one means is to perfectly obey the Law–all of it. The other is to be declared and accounted righteous on the principle of our faith.
James alludes to this when he speaks of breaking one law as being equivalent to breaking it all, “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all” (James 2:10).
What was nailed to the Cross was all legal requirements for true righteousness in Christ. We no longer practice law of any kind, Mosaic or otherwise, in order to attain righteousness. The Law is the principle of death, because no one except our Lord Jesus Christ has ever been able to keep it.
Those who depend upon keeping law in any connection with salvation do not have salvation.
That does not mean we are “lawless,” or that we fall into the error and heresy of antinomianism. We are obligated as believers to keep the commandments of Christ (1 John 2:3-6), of which the Sabbath Commandment for believers in Christ forms no part.
At Colossians 2:16, the Greek text has the plural for Sabbath, but by a common figure of speech, the plural is put for the singular. It no doubt has reference to all Sabbaths, including in particular the Seventh Day Sabbath of weekly Jewish worship and observance.
Nowhere in the New Testament is the Jewish Sabbath said to be an obligation for Christians.
There is not a single example of Christians meeting for specifically Christian worship to be found anywhere in the New Testament on the Sabbath.
From a commentary on Colossians: Sabbath in Colossians 2:16, this may represent either a genuine plural of the Greek sabbaton or a transliteration of the Aramaic shabbata’, a singular form. Hence sabbata, though grammatically plural in form, may and often does represent a singular (Matthew 28:1). Either form may be adopted here, for the interpretation of the passage does not depend upon whether the reading is “sabbath days,” or “a sabbath.” The type of sabbath under consideration is shown by the phrase “which are a shadow of things to come” (Colossians 2:17). The weekly Sabbath is a memorial of an event at the beginning of earth’s history (Genesis 2:2-3; Exodus 20:8-11). Hence, the “sabbath days” Paul declares to be shadows pointing to Christ cannot refer to the weekly Sabbath designated by the fourth commandment, but must indicate the ceremonial rest days that reach their realization in Christ and His kingdom (Leviticus 23:6-8; 15-16; 21; 24-25; 27-28; 37-38).
You said: “We are obligated as believers to keep the commandments of Christ (1 John 2:3-6), of which the Sabbath Commandment for believers in Christ forms no part.” Then, what are the commandment of God? You can summarize them in 2 – Love God, Love man. (Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18; Luke 10:27). Considering the 10 commandments, the first 4 describe the first of the great commandments, the last 6 the second.
What is the purpose of the Sabbath? It is a constant reminder of who God is, the creator, the sustainer, the redeemer. Exodus 20:8 – Remember the Sabbath day. Jesus kept the Sabbath. Luke 4:16, 31. We have many acts of healing on the Sabbath day. God finished the work of creation and rested the 7th-day, that is OT. Jesus finished the work of redemption and rested the 7th-day, that is NT.
You said, “Nowhere in the New Testament is the Jewish Sabbath said to be an obligation for Christians.” That is an argument from the negative, because there is nothing canceling this commandment out of the “ten”. The history of the Christian church shows that 7th-day Sabbath keeping has been present in some form nearly constantly since the time of Christ. I recently read how Patrick ( aka St. Patrick ) kept the 7th-day Sabbath.
The OT condemned meaningless Sabbath keeping, Isaiah 1:13. Yet Isaiah talks of right keeping of the Sabbath, Isaiah 56:6; 58:13. Isaiah also talks of keeping the Sabbath in the earth made new: Isaiah 66:22, 23. Keeping the Sabbath from a legalistic point of view gives one the wrong view of God and can work against our salvation. No works of law can save us. There is nothing we do to save ourselves. We are saved by only by Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. And that said, His death was not a legal payment. But that is another discussion.
Dear A. Way,
I believe from my intensive study of the subject of the Sabbath in Scripture that the commentary you cited regarding Colossians 2:16 is mistaken.
The commentary asserts, on the basis of Colossians 2:17, “Which are a shadow of things to come,” that Paul is not including the weekly Sabbath in this statement.
The commentary suggests that: The type of sabbath under consideration is shown by the phrase “which are a shadow of things to come” (Colossians 2:17). The weekly Sabbath is a memorial of an event at the beginning of earth’s history (Genesis 2:2-3; Exodus 20:8-11). Hence, the “sabbath days” Paul declares to be shadows pointing to Christ cannot refer to the weekly Sabbath designated by the fourth commandment, but must indicate the ceremonial rest days that reach their realization in Christ and His kingdom (Leviticus 23:6-8; 15-16; 21; 24-25; 27-28; 37-38).
The Sabbath is not merely a memorial of an event at the beginning of earth’s history.
In the New Testament the inspired writer of the book of Hebrews asserts at Hebrews 4:9, “There remaineth therefore a rest [margin, sabbath] to the people of God.”
Further, Hebrews 4:10, “For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.”
This is the main point. Paul, in Colossians, is warning his readers not to get involved in ritualism, ceremony, sacerdotalism, or asceticism, as seen by Paul’s caution, “Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not;” (Colossians 2:20, 21).
Paul most definitely includes “Sabbath observance” as a matter of legalism which must not be imposed as an obligation upon any Christian believer.
I notice that your commentary source in its citation of cross references to Leviticus 23 very improperly leaves out the beginning of Leviticus 23, verses 1-3, which, if included, would defeat the argument advanced. Those verses do refer to the weekly Sabbath, in a manner that associates the weekly Sabbath with all the other required observances in Israel detailed in the rest of the chapter.
The point is, the Sabbath is no longer obligatory in any way for anyone who believes and trusts in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation. Such legal requirements under the Law have, upon the death and resurrection of Christ, been forever abolished for members of His body, His church.
The Sabbath observance is surely still in force for natural Israel, and will be observed during the Reign of Christ upon this earth when He forever occupies the Throne of David for those in their natural bodies living on earth ever after, as seen in the reference to Sabbath observance in the Millennial description at Isaiah 66:23.
When the issue arose about what parts, specifically, of the Law of Moses Gentile believers were to be required to obey or keep (Acts 15:19-20, 23-29), a list of four matters was promulgated. Certainly, here is the place in Scripture where, if it were intended by God for Gentile believers to keep the Sabbath, it ought to have and would have been included in the list among “these necessary things” (Acts 15:28).
For Gentile believers in Christ the Sabbath is not included in that twice repeated list.
For those who truly believe the Bible, that must forever settle this issue.
To add the Sabbath back into that list as among the “necessary things” from the Law of Moses to be observed by all Christians is to add to the Word of God.
Paul makes it strikingly clear that all LAW has been nailed to the Cross in Colossians 2:14, “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” Paul then commands, “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath” (Col 2:16).
Considering the Ten Commandments, I would suggest for consideration that the Fourth Commandment enjoining the observance of a particular day is the only commandment on the list that stipulates any kind of a ritual observance.
This likely is the reason for the absolute silence of our Lord Jesus Christ who is nowhere in the New Testament record said to have ever enjoined observance of the Sabbath. The Fourth Commandment is not mentioned as a command anywhere in the New Testament.
The principle of Law and obedience to Law is the opposite of Grace, and Paul in the book of Galatians warns most sternly against departing from faith by following the Law. Rather, Paul says in his writing that those who are true believers in Christ are under no condemnation, “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made us free from the law of sin and death” (Romans 8:2).
The Ten Commandment Law is specifically named in the New Testament as “the Law of Death.” Paul wrote, “But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law” (Galatians 5:18).
If you place yourself under the Law, you are “entangled again with the yoke of bondage” (Galatians 5:1), and “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace” (Galatians 5:4).
You are most correct when you state, “His death was not a legal payment.”
To think that Christ paid for our sins by His death on the Cross is to fall prey to the mistaken Penal Satisfaction Theory of the Atonement.
Robinson Crusoe on his lonely island with his three good plain text Bibles would never discover that notion about the Atonement of Christ in any of them.
To admin: You said we are “obligated to keep the commandments of Christ, of which the sabbath for believers forms no part.” This confuses me, because Jesus told the people they were to “do all that the scribes and pharisees tell you, but don’t follow their example, because they say, and do not” (Mt. 23:2-3). The pharisees were definitely telling the people to keep the sabbath, so… (Jesus also said he had not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it, and something about till heaven and earth pass away, not one jot or tittle shall be removed, and something about whoever teaches men to break the least commandment in the law being the least in the KOH, Mt. 5:17-19). I’m not sure how that all applies, but in Mt. 24:20, Jesus said to pray that your flight during the coming tribulation be not in winter or on the sabbath… so I’m thinking he was thinking that the keeping of the sabbath would still be in effect. Jesus said that the sabbath was made for man… (Mk 2:27), so I thought it was because man needed a weekly day of full rest and focus on communing with God. I fail to see how Jesus’ death and resurrection changed that need.
It seems strange to me that people who want to say “we’re not under the law” of Moses, point to the ten commandments and say that only the fourth one is void, yet they generally are in full agreement with the law where it pertains to congregants tithing to their churches. It also seems strange that we have just suddenly had a correct understanding of scripture within the last generation, because all preceding generations of Christians have kept the sabbath, and taught it. I’m old enough to remember the blue laws being in effect. Those were nice.
Jesus said that the scribes and pharisees made the “commandment of God” in the Mosaic Law of none effect with their man-made traditions, (Mt. 23 somewhere), and he also quoted Isaiah saying “In vain they worship me, teaching for doctrine the commandment of men” (Mt. 15:3-6) and then he disabuses them of the idea that eating with unwashed hands defiles a man, vs. 17-20. Those traditions of men all mixed in with the law of God made a big mess, and confused the people about what they were to do.
Dear J. Smith,
Thank you for stopping by and posting a comment here.
The Sabbath commandment is never once given in commandment form in the New Testament. Therefore, it is of no obligation to Bible believing Christians. Some churches do observe the Seventh-day Sabbath, and this is their choice and right, but that choice must not be imposed on others, or even insisted upon as being the true New Testament teaching. This accords with what Paul has commanded in Romans chapter 14.
If you read Romans 14 carefully, you will see clearly that it is the weaker brethren in the faith who are concerned about the two types of scruples Paul discusses in this chapter. One area of scruples had to do with what foods can and cannot be eaten. Under the Mosaic law, the Jews had specific restrictions about the food they could eat. Under the New Testament, Christians are under no restrictions regarding the kinds of food they may choose to eat. This is taught by Jesus himself in Mark chapter seven, where he states it is not what enters a man that defiles him, but what comes out of a man’s mouth that defile him. This is taught most explicitly by Paul in 1 Timothy 4:3.
The tithe is not obligatory for New Testament Bible believing Christians, though there are many pastors and churches that declare it is. A Bible believing Christian can surely tithe, but it is not a command. Jesus said we are to give as we are able (Luke 11:41,42 and marginal reading in the KJV).
All these matters are just so much distraction to get people away from the truth of God’s Word. Those who insist on a Seventh Day Sabbath for Christians, or the tithe, are going in a direction contrary to the teaching of Paul in his epistles, which constitute that portion of the New Testament especially written to guide the Bible believing Christian.
No one who reads a plain text Bible on their own for themselves, focusing first on learning the New Testament, and what it teaches about doctrine, prophecy, and Christian living, will make the Ten Commandments, or the tithe, or what foods to eat a matter of emphasis, because those things are not the emphasis of the New Testament, particularly the portion of the New Testament which was written to instruct non-Jewish believers.
By the way, those who choose to worship corporately on the First Day of the week, or Sunday, are not merely following man-made traditions. This was the documented practice of all the churches established by the apostles according to the history recorded in the New Testament. The earliest Christian writers whose writings have survived until now written after the completion of the New Testament likewise state unequivocally that Christians met for worship on the First Day of the week, our Sunday as a practice taught them by the Apostles of Christ.
I don’t really think the New Testament can be fully understood apart from the Old Testament… we have the same God: he didn’t change who he was between the Old and the New Testaments. The question of the Sabbath is something that has bothered me for years. The above discussion of the matter was helpful in considering the question. I think Leviticus chapter 16 (about observing the Day of Atonement once a year) and the instructions for keeping certain yearly festivals was eye-opening in regards to understanding what Paul meant in Col. 2:16 when he said not to let anyone judge you in regards to meat, drink, or in respect of holydays, new moons, or of sabbath days. He’s not talking about the weekly Sabbath there, but of those days in the Old Testament which were designated as sabbath days, of which the Day of Atonement is one. Surely that day did not fall on a weekly Sabbath every year: it is celebrated on the 10th day of the 7th month of every year, which will be a different day of the week depending on what year you’re looking at, correct? Yet they call that a sabbath day. I’ve been looking at these articles; they will undoubtedly explain the idea better than I can:
http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_law_hays.html
http://www.daytonavisit.com/sabbath/topic101.htm
http://www.ibr-bbr.org/files/bbr/BBR_2002a_01_Charles_Mat5_Righteousness.pdf
When you actually look into what Paul is objecting to when he says we’re not under the law, he is talking about ceremonial observances and circumcision (and the Sabbath does not come under either of those headings, to my mind): kosher foods, Jews refusing to eat with Gentiles, etc. He even says in Col. 2:20-22 that he’s talking about those things that are “after the commandments and doctrine of men,” (the same thing Jesus accused the Pharisees of when he said with their man-made rules they made the commandment of God of no effect, regarding their obligations to helping their parents – sorry, I don’t have my Bible with me here, so I can’t give you the scripture reference), and not those things that are the laws of God.
The prophet (king) David said, “The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yes, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover, by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.” Psalms 14:7-11 (He didn’t clarify that that was just until the Messiah came, and then the law would be bunk and twaddle.) The observance of the Sabbath is not a ceremonial law that went out the window when Jesus came…
Oh, it’s Matthew 15:3-9, where Jesus says, Why do you transgress the commandment of God by your tradition… and “but in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Jesus quoting Isaiah, so evidently, it was nothing new for men to be perverting the word of God with their own rules).
Dear J. Smith,
Thank you for a very interesting content-filled post!
For now, let me address your very last sentence:
First, you are right to say that the Sabbath is a ceremonial law.
Therefore, when Christ died on the Cross, he fulfilled all types pertaining to his First Advent.
We do not have animal sacrifices anymore during this Christian dispensation. Neither do we have a single command in the New Testament urging us to keep the Seventh-day Sabbath. Further revelation given to Paul (recorded in Galatians 4:8-11) fully proves that the Sabbath is no longer to be observed by Christians as a matter of keeping the Fourth Commandment. Paul wrote Galatians, you will recall, to correct the false teaching of the Judaizers who had plagued and misled the Christians of Galatia. To fall into their error would be to fall from grace, and be in danger of losing one’s salvation, which is why Paul writes with such concern, “lest he had bestowed labor upon them in vain.”
Second, the Fourth Commandment did not “go out the window” when Jesus came, for he did not detract from God’s law, but fulfilled it (Matthew 5:18). But once His sacrifice on the Cross was complete, the Law was abolished as a matter for those who believe in Him for salvation. This is hard for those caught up in legalism to accept, for they have not properly engaged in Real Bible Study, but in echoing the teachings of their denomination and its literature. No one going by the Bible alone and in its entirety will come up with the Sabbatarianism taught by them.
I’m not echoing any denomination’s teaching, for I’ve never attended any fellowship that teaches the keeping of the Sabbath, and I most assuredly did come to the general conclusion that the Sabbath was intended to be kept, through repeated independent study of the scriptures and questioning of God. I spend a lot of time in the gospels with Jesus and come and go from there, returning regularly for more Jesus. Yes, all scripture is given by God, but I figure the words coming out of God’s mouth directly (Jesus’) trumps, so to speak, all other scripture. If there had not been an addendum (Paul’s writings) to what Jesus said, you would find it very difficult to defend your present stance, because I don’t see it taught in the gospels at all. I am still looking into all this, but until I am sure one way or the other, I will err on the side of caution and keep the Sabbath, and I keep it on Sunday, since that is the custom in this country. I will say that I foresee that the natural consequence of not keeping the Sabbath is the dwindling and death of many of the churches across this nation, because if Christians are free to do whatever they want on Sunday, they will, and church attendance will drop steeply. Actually, that’s already happening.
Concerning Paul, on his last trip to Jerusalem before he is captured and taken to Rome, he visits James and the other elders who tell him that many Jews there are believers and they are all zealous for the law, “but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.” What’s to be done? He’s told to join 4 others in their (Nazirite) vows so “that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law.” (Acts 21:18-25 NKJV). The NIV Bible says, “Then everybody will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the law.” vs. 24. And Paul says…nothing. Isn’t that in fact what he has been telling both Jews and Gentiles? This is the time to take and stand, and he says nothing? In Acts 28:17 he says he says “I have done nothing…against the customs of our ancestors…” Besides boot them out the door, you mean? Something is not right here. There is a misunderstanding somewhere.
What is abundantly clear from both the initial article on interpretation of scripture is that all honest people are right as long as they follower the proper methods of interpretation. And that is obviously nonsense. In all of the words, a single point comes through, no body can be certain about any scripture. And yet God has a message that he want every single human being to know.
Dear Alan,
If anyone will follow the rules of interpretation as I have given them here in the October, 2010 archives, the result will be a correct interpretation of Scripture.
Any time one person’s interpretation differs from another person’s interpretation, if the interpretations result in a contradiction, either both interpretations are wrong, or one or the other interpretations are wrong, for they cannot both be right if they are contradictory.
But I would like to hear more of what you have to say on this important subject. Feel free to continue this discussion!
And thank you for visiting my Real Bible Study site. There is much to read and learn here, so feel free to read more and comment more.
Pingback: How to Correctly Interpret the Bible | Real Bible Study