Why would God leave the Bible open to interpretation?

[Justin108]

Very few would disagree on the interpretable nature of the Bible. Often, such as the case with Genesis 1, getting the interpretation wrong is no big deal. It does not harm us in any way to not know what exactly happened in Genesis 1.

But what about texts where a misinterpretation can have dire consequences?
To illustrate; Jehovah's Witnesses believe blood transfusions are against God's law. Other Christians interpret the supporting text for this differently.

Obviously, interpreting this text the wrong way can have dire consequences both ways.
- If Jehovah's Witnesses are right, then other Christians are guilty of disobeying God's laws due to their own misinterpretation of the Bible.
- If Jehovah's Witnesses are wrong, then they are risking the lives of themselves and their family by refusing blood donations.

If misinterpreting the Bible can have such dire consequences, why would God leave the Bible so open to interpretation? Do people who misinterpret the Bible deserve the consequences? Do Jehovah's Witnesses deserve to die if their interpretations are wrong? Do other denomination deserve to be punished by God for if their own interpretations are wrong? Surely, God could have made the Bible clearer in instances like this? Did God not foresee that future generations would misinterpret his message?

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 1 by Justin108]

Free will.

It's never been open to interpretation.

Consider this.

How many interpretations involve Jesus being God?

How many interpretations involve Jesus not being God?

[Justin108]

Free will.

What you think something means is not a matter of free will. Do Jehovah's Witnesses just choose to think blood transfusions is wrong? Why would they choose to believe that? How would this choice benefit them at all?

It's never been open to interpretation.

So when Genesis 1 says the universe was made in 6 days, it was 6 literal 24 hour days? Or do you interpret Genesis 1 to mean something other than 6 literal days?

Consider this.

How many interpretations involve Jesus being God?

How many interpretations involve Jesus not being God?

Some Christians believe him to be God incarnate while others simply think he is his son. Nowhere in the Bible does it actually state that Jesus is God. That conclusion is the result of interpretation.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 3 by Justin108]

What you think something means is not a matter of free will. Do Jehovah's Witnesses just choose to think blood transfusions is wrong? Why would they choose to believe that? How would this choice benefit them at all?

I think people resent God being God and so go their own way and reinterpret it.

So when Genesis 1 says the universe was made in 6 days, it was 6 literal 24 hour days? Or do you interpret Genesis 1 to mean something other than 6 literal days?

I'm a bible literalist and believe the world is only thousands of years old.

Some Christians believe him to be God incarnate while others simply think he is his son. Nowhere in the Bible does it actually state that Jesus is God. That conclusion is the result of interpretation.

How many other stories get misinterpreted? Does anyone think Darth Vader is the good guy or Harry Potter the bad guy?

If there was nothing at stake, if the Bible was not making claims on our lives, no one would be creating interpretations.

But coming back to my point, aren't most of the interpretations on the Jesus is not God side (anyone got a counter)?

[Justin108]

[Replying to post 3 by Justin108]

What you think something means is not a matter of free will. Do Jehovah's Witnesses just choose to think blood transfusions is wrong? Why would they choose to believe that? How would this choice benefit them at all?

I think people resent God being God and so go their own way and reinterpret it.

Are you suggesting that every single Jehovah's Witness resents God?

Do you think eating blood is against God's law?

I'm a bible literalist and believe the world is only thousands of years old.

As a Bible literalist, how do you explain the blatant inaccuracy of Matthew 24:30 - 34?

Matthew 24:3 - 34

30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

32 “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. 34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

Some Christians believe him to be God incarnate while others simply think he is his son. Nowhere in the Bible does it actually state that Jesus is God. That conclusion is the result of interpretation.

How many other stories get misinterpreted? Does anyone think Darth Vader is the good guy or Harry Potter the bad guy?

If there was nothing at stake, if the Bible was not making claims on our lives, no one would be creating interpretations.

But coming back to my point, aren't most of the interpretations on the Jesus is not God side (anyone got a counter)?

So because most people interpret it this way, it is therefore the right interpretation?

Do you think your interpretation of the Bible is 100% accurate?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 4 by Wootah]

Does anyone think Darth Vader is the good guy

Yes. If one reads the novelization of Episode III Revenge of the Sith, it goes into more detail on the tensions between the Jedi Council and Chancellor Palpatine. The Jedi Council go so far as to plot a takeover of the Senate, in the fear that the mysterious Sith Lord that Count Dooku claimed controlled the Senate himself in Episode II would target them.
Or one can say Vader became a good guy when in Return of the Jedi he throws the Emperor down the reactor shaft to save his son Luke.

It all comes down to Obi-wan's famous line "a different point of view".

or Harry Potter the bad guy?

Having long been a member of the HP fandom, there are plenty of people who think ill of the Boy Who Lived.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 1 by Justin108]

QUESTION: Why is the bible written in a way that is open to interpretation?

Few books short of a telephone directory are not open to intrepretation. Indeed there may even be some that can find secret codes in the numbers in a telephone directory. That said, while the bible's central message is quite clear, there it also includes language that is open to interpretation, why is this?

Bible Truth is not a right, it's a gift.

Jesus made an interesting comment regarding his own use of language. When he taught he often spoke through illustrations. An illustration is a story from which one or more meanings can be extracted. This is a useful teaching method to help people understand and remember a point but also a way of communicating deeper ideas which are not at first evident. A lot of Jesus' stories had double or triple meanings, the first being entertaining and easily understood and the deeper (often prophetic meanings) requiring specific explanations.

Notice Jesus response in this regard to his disciples recorded at Matthew Chapter 13 verse 10 - 14

"So the disciples came and said to him: “Why do you speak to them by the use of illustrations?� In reply he said: “To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens, but to them it is not granted.
For whoever has, more will be given him, and he will be made to abound; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. That is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations; for looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, nor do they get the sense of it. And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says: ‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see.

What can we see from the above verses? Evidently Jesus was deliberately obscuring information from certain people, and "granting" or giving the deeper meaning or interpretation to those of his choosing. General listeners would understand on a certain level, but the significance of what he was saying, in relation to the Kingdom (God's government, when it would be installed, ect) would only be granted a particular group.

QUESTION: So does that mean God arbitrarily prejudges people as being "unworthy" of spiritual Truth? or that he doesn't want everyone to understand the bible?

While God wants everyone to understand the truth, it is more important that they value the Truth. Satan has a magnificant understanding of scripture, but he doesn't love Truth nor is he willing to recognize or comform to those truths. Notice Jesus' words as to why certain individauls were being excluded from access to information?

MATTHEW 13: 15
For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’

Jesus here refered to the unreceptive heart of the majority of the people. He indicated that they "shut [their] eyes". If someone shuts their eyes, its a deliberate consciouse effort not to see something. Jesus didn't indicate that God had made them do this but rather that the people displayed an attitude that rendered them unworthy of further teaching. This reminds us of Jesus own advise to not throw pearls before swine (pigs). In other words, to not give what is valuable to those thta, because of their attitude and reaction, show they do not appreciate its value.

How do people demonstrate they are "worthy" of the gift of understanding bible truths?

Matthew 13:10 states "“To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens"? He was speaking to his disciples. His disciples had done two things

- made a committment to follow Jesus
- they sought him (Jesus) out privately, humbly asking questions, seeking to understand.

People that have made a comittement to finding the Truth and with the right humble attitude ask the right questions and let the answers mold their thinking will be rewarded with the Truth that sets them free. Those unwilling or too arrogant to make the effort to seek out the channel of through which Truth can be found, risk being judged by God as unworthy of the gift of understanding, what Jesus called "secrets".

How can I show God I want to find "the Truth"?

Jesus said, "Keep knocking" "keep asking" ... "seek and you shall find". We thus have personal assurance not one person that shows such humble sincere desire to understand the bible accurately will be forgotten. Millions today have not sucumbed to Satan's propaganda that there is no point in trying to find the correct interpretation of the bible beause such a thing does not exist. They have not given up, they have not become bitter, they have valued the notion of Truth highly. Jesus is no longer physically on the earth, offering to explain bible truths, but He has left his representatives, that literally go from door to door offering to explain the bible; those that listen have been rewarded with understanding.

CONCLUSION Why would God leave the bible open to interpretation? Because He wants to "grant" the understanding of its deeper truths only to those he judges worthy of such knoweldge because they have displayed a deep appreciation for Truth.



JW


FURTHER READING: A key to understanding the bible
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102012416

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

THE BIBLE , HERMENEUTICS* and ... BIBLICAL LITERALISM

* bible interpretation

[Redhawk]

Very few would disagree on the interpretable nature of the Bible. Often, such as the case with Genesis 1, getting the interpretation wrong is no big deal. It does not harm us in any way to not know what exactly happened in Genesis 1.

But what about texts where a misinterpretation can have dire consequences?
To illustrate; Jehovah's Witnesses believe blood transfusions are against God's law. Other Christians interpret the supporting text for this differently.

Obviously, interpreting this text the wrong way can have dire consequences both ways.
- If Jehovah's Witnesses are right, then other Christians are guilty of disobeying God's laws due to their own misinterpretation of the Bible.
- If Jehovah's Witnesses are wrong, then they are risking the lives of themselves and their family by refusing blood donations.

If misinterpreting the Bible can have such dire consequences, why would God leave the Bible so open to interpretation? Do people who misinterpret the Bible deserve the consequences? Do Jehovah's Witnesses deserve to die if their interpretations are wrong? Do other denomination deserve to be punished by God for if their own interpretations are wrong? Surely, God could have made the Bible clearer in instances like this? Did God not foresee that future generations would misinterpret his message?

Everybody and I mean everybody interprets the Bible to suit themselves. But this happy state of affairs did not exist for most of the history of the church. The Word of God became subject to wide popular interpretation only after the invention of the printing press in 1440. The first major publication using this technology? The Bible.

From the beginning it was God's intent that men should decide what to do with God's law and God's plan for living. The Bible is filled with contention on the part of men who thought they knew better how to live and how to rebel against God. There are also many stories about men who decided to march in God's parade instead.

This is called liberty. Freedom of choice - with all the consequences that come with it.

Following the institutionalization of the church by Roman Emperor Constantine, the priestly class seized property - real estate as well as spiritual. The Roman church gathered to itself rights and priviledges of the first international corporation and began to decide its own interpretation of the Bible (to keep the population under their authority). God's Holy Book was closed to interpretation for a thousand years.

The Protestant reformation, together with the printing press, opened the book again and put it in everybody's hands. Europeans suddenly realized that interpretation of God's Word was up to each man and each man was free to decide for himself.

But men do not always decide wisely.....and Europe was plunged into war justified by wayward religious interpretation.

Nevertheless it has always been God's design that men should choose for themselves. Why? God wants us to learn to love Him in return. It's the only thing that He cannot manufacture for Himself by Himself. It's the only thing we can really give to Him. Its why we are allowed to choose.

Those who attempt to strip man of his freedom - spiritual, mental, physical/political are not men of God. They are sons of the devil itself and want only slavery for mankind. Beware of these for they do not point to liberty of the spirit.

Interpretation leads to truth as well as confusion. It's up to each of us.

Choose wisely.

and that's me, hollering from the choir loft...

[postroad]

[Replying to post 7 by JehovahsWitness]
Your logic fails. The Disciples were as clueless and faithless as any of the Jews. Had Jesus not revealed himself again after the resurrection,explained the whole concept step by step and then given the divine understanding directly to their minds they would have spent the rest of their lives back at their previous vocations.

John 21:10-14New International Version (NIV)

10 Jesus said to them, “Bring some of the fish you have just caught.� 11 So Simon Peter climbed back into the boat and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn. 12 Jesus said to them, “Come and have breakfast.� None of the disciples dared ask him, “Who are you?� They knew it was the Lord. 13 Jesus came, took the bread and gave it to them, and did the same with the fish. 14 This was now the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after he was raised from the dead.

. This was the third time and they were still fishing.

[Justin108]

Bible Truth is not a right, it's a gift.

The Bible contains laws that, if broken, will will be punished for (I'm guessing). While some of these laws are morally obvious such as to not murder or steal, others are not as clear, such as blood transfusion (assuming your interpretation is accurate). Should we not have the right to know what is and is not against God's law? If a country existed that withheld its own laws from the public but still arrested those who broke these laws, would you not deem this country corrupt? Imagine you get a ticket for doing 120km/h in a 100km/h zone but there was absolutely no indication that this road had a 100km/h speed limit, would you accept this ticket? Or would you protest it because you had no way of knowing it's against the law to go 120km/h on this road?

In short; yes, since the Bible contains laws we will be punished for breaking, we have the right to the Bible (or at least the portions of the Bible telling us these laws)

Jesus made an interesting comment regarding his own use of language. When he taught he often spoke through illustrations. An illustration is a story from which one or more meanings can be extracted. This is a useful teaching method to help people understand and remember a point but also a way of communicating deeper ideas which are not at first evident. A lot of Jesus' stories had double or triple meanings, the first being entertaining and easily understood and the deeper (often prophetic meanings) requiring specific explanations.

Did any of these stories hold dire consequences to those who misinterpreted it? The OP specifically addresses interpretable texts that hold dire consequences to those who misinterpret it.

What can we see from the above verses. Evidently Jesus was deliberately obscuring information from certain people, and "granting" or giving the deeper meaning or interpretation to those of his choosing.

Of his choosing? So regardless of how hard we try, unless Jesus chose us to understand the text, we cannot unless Jesus chose us?

While God wants everyone to understand the truth, it is more important that they value the Truth.

A sensible first step is to have us know the truth before we can value it. If I didn't understand how money works, I would not value it at all. My valuation of money is dependent on me properly understanding currency. If I did not understand currency first, money would be nothing but paper with pictures on it.

He indicated that they "shut [their] eyes". If someone shuts their eyes, its a deliberate consciouse effort not to see something.

So every other denomination deliberately shuts their eyes to the truth? (other than Jehovah's Witnesses of course)

Jesus didn't indicate that God had made them do this but rather that the people displayed an attitude that rendered them unworthy of further teaching.

You're contradicting yourself. Before you said "Jesus was deliberately obscuring information from certain people, and "granting" or giving the deeper meaning or interpretation to those of his choosing" yet now you're telling me that we are the ones who choose to not properly understand these texts.

Let's examine this for a moment... why would anyone choose to shut their eyes to the "undisputed" truth that God forbids blood transfusion?

How can I show God I want to find "the Truth"?

Jesus said, "Keep knocking" "keep asking" ... "seek and you shall find".

How do you explain all the Christians who "kept knocking" but never found the "truth" that blood transfusion is against God's law?