Home > Lutheran Confessions > How To Interpret The Bible For Yourself

How To Interpret The Bible For Yourself

January 28th, 2006
Marketing Advertising Blog — VuManhThang.Com

Hmmm…..is this what "sola Scriptura" [Scripture alone] means? Is this possibly where a lopsided regard for this one "sola," taken out of context with the rest lead? If it is is in fact possible to truly "interpret the Bible for yourself" do you really need a book to help? Perhaps what I’m concerned about is that with just one word you get to the real problem: How to Interpret the Bible BY Yourself.  How does this book support, or weaken, the teaching of Holy Scripture: "No prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." [2 Peter 1:20; KJV]

Link: How To Interpret The Bible For Yourself.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Categories: Lutheran Confessions
  1. Puzzled
    January 28th, 2006 at 21:07 | #1

    Ranald Macauley of The Round Church (formerly of L’Abri) once said at a conference that it is -sola Scriptura supra omne-. And that that is how the Reformers wrote in practice. Not nulla Scriptura. And the Book of Concord itself says that the Bible is our sole rule and norm for faith and practice.
    McCain: Yes, quite assuredly the Sacred Scriptures are the rule and norm for faith and life … and this is the point of “sola Scriptura” …. what my post however is raising is a concern that we not allow anyone to take that critical truth and then assume that because Scripture is the sole source and norm for doctrine that each individual is simply free to run with his or her own private interpretations of the Bible. This is then, in my opinion, how the Book of Concord, for Lutherans obviously, plays such a critical role in providing a “normed norm” that is….we together agree and confess together in harmony [which is what Concordia means] that this is what we confess to be the true interpretation of God’s Word…plus without the other “solas” — grace alone, faith alone and of course, the greatest one of them all, from which they all flow, “Christ alone” the “sola Scriptura” can not stand on its own. Many may say, “I follow only the Bible!” but deny many of its key teachings.

  2. Tim Kuehn
    January 28th, 2006 at 21:38 | #2

    I imagine it leaves out the difficulties of rightly interpreting Scripture, and how multitudes of people over the centuries have done this.
    There’s also the case of the inherent error that the various denominations bring to their understanding.
    Either way, it sounds like a dangerous book.

  3. Puzzled
    January 29th, 2006 at 15:35 | #3

    I wasn’t entirely clear, was I? You are right, I got off track. That is where the supra omne addendum comes in. Not Scripture all by itself, but Scripture over all, finally.

  4. Joe Burnham
    January 29th, 2006 at 22:47 | #4

    I enjoy most of what you say, but I’ve got to say that I think you missed the idea here. From what I can tell, you read the title of the book (specifically the word “for”) and attached your own definition to it without taking the book for what it is.
    As I read the review of the book, it’s essentially a hermeneutics text so people can read Scripture correctly for themselves. Shouldn’t that be something every pastor strives to witness within his congregation … God’s people reading and understanding God’s Word because they’ve been correctly taught the principles of interpretation?
    I’ll be the first to say that language matters, at the same time, so does context … thus the historical-grammatical method.

Comments are closed.