The Plain Reading of the Bible…and Wrong Interpretation
God is not hiding the truth about His sovereign Lordship over all things (Ps 103:19; 115:3; 135:6; 1 Tim 6:15). He has graciously revealed that which He wishes for us to know about Himself on the pages of Scripture (special revelation). He has also sent His Holy Spirit of truth into the heart of His elect (Jn 14:17; 15:26; 16:13; Eph 1:13; 1 Jn 4:6), redeemed, whom He has caused to be born again (Jn 3:1–8; 1 Pet 1:3), granting them repentance and faith (Acts 5:31; 11:18; 2 Cor 7:10; Eph 2:8–9; Phil 1:29). He gives them the mind of Christ, which helps them to discern truth from error (1 Cor 2:16).
There are groups of well-meaning Christians who claim an interpretation of the Bible, “with the plain reading of Scripture.” They frown upon those who work diligently at exegesis of the original languages. They dismiss those who study hermeneutics, and who construct rules for proper interpretation of the Bible.
We must advocate for the clarity of Scripture. God has inspired men to write the words that are organized to say exactly what God intends them to say (2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:20–21). Words form sentences, and sentences become paragraphs. Paragraphs are organized into chapters, which lead to parts and divisions, even genres of books.
The organization and affirmation of the canon of Scripture (Old Testament and New Testament) was also a gracious work of God’s Spirit for the Hebrews and in the churches of the early centuries of the New Testament era (the apocryphal writings were inappropriately added by the Roman Catholics in response to the 16th century Reformation).
The problem of hermeneutics (Bible interpretation) has led to innumerable wrong views of what the Bible is saying. We know there can only be one intended meaning of terms, sentences, and paragraphs, etc.
One man says, “I decided to be saved by my own free will choice.” When he is shown John 1:13, that it is not by the will of man, he moves to another verse to support his presupposition. He clings to a system of theology he was taught, which may or may not be correct in part or in whole.
He presumes things that are not true about God because he does not correlate one text with another text and another text. With one text to prove his position, he remains satisfied (John 3:16; 2 Peter 3:9; 1 John 2:2 are notorious “proof texts”). There are a large number of Bible passages to support the clear statement of Matthew 1:21, where Jesus is named “Jesus” for one reason: “He will save His people from their sins.” Another will come along and claim that Jesus is the Savior of the whole world, because He is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (Jn 1:29).
The versatility of kosmos (“world”) now comes into the discussion. Those who are naïve about the number of meanings behind the use of this word, will make “world” mean whatever fits their presupposition. They will say it is common sense that “world” means “world;” or in other cases, “all” means “all.” “God so loved the world…that’s everybody,” they say. When God’s love fails to save great swaths of humanity, they have to add their own ideas to their system, “whosoever believeth,” they say. Now salvation is no longer a grace from God, but a choice of dead men in sin.
Now “faith” becomes the issue. Is faith a work of man or a work of God? One claims it is a gift of God (Eph 2:8–9; Phil 1:29), even a fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22). Another one objects to try and keep his system of belief in tact. He has to have men self-generate faith themselves, like the tree that plants its own mustard seed, instead of the gardener. All of this is to preserve a man-centered soteriology and theology.
Eisegesis is when a man reads his own ideas into a Bible passage. 2 Peter 3:9 is a classic passage for imposing one’s idea or system onto the text, “The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.”
Reading one’s idea of universal redemption by Jesus on the cross, into the interpretation of this passage will invariably change the meaning of words like: “you,” “any,” “all.” In this verse, “you” either means the church, who Peter is writing to, or it means everyone, everywhere, and at all times. “Any” could mean “all people everywhere and at all times” or “any of God’s elect whom He has predestined to salvation (Eph 1:4–5).” “All” is either these elect or absolutely everyone. Can common sense solve the dilemma? We prefer context or correlation.
These are just the tip of the iceberg that will sink the simplistic notion of “a plain reading of the text of the Bible.” There is no such thing. This is proved by the shallow reading of John 3:16 and the claim, “world” means world (everyone head for head). The lazy exegete will end up in gross error after gross error using “the plain reading” interpretive assumption.
Did Jesus die for the church or for the world? The Bible clearly answers that question, but there are large numbers of Christians in both answer groups. Obviously, they both cannot be using common sense, nor can they both be using good exegesis. The diligent work of Bible interpretation must be done. Plain readers of the plain text are notorious for not doing that work, nor listening to others who have done it. This is why their plain reading of the Bible leads them into wrong interpretation, which results in unsound doctrine.
David Norczyk
Spokane Valley, Washington
April 21, 2022
