How important is context when reading the Bible?

How important is context when reading the Bible?

Ask some preachers like Steven Furtick, who seems to make every verse about him personally, and you might get the answer "not very".

Ask Joyce Meyer, who claims that believers can bring things into existence from nothing, and you might get the same answer (by the way, she is butchering Romans 4:17 where it says that God brings things into existence from nothing, not human beings).

Ask cult leaders who take verses out of context, and even use their "here a little, there a little" hermeneutic to connect them, and you may get the same answer.

As someone who has been fooled by such teachers in the past, I caution you against it. Get a good study bible, like the ESV Study Bible or Zondervan NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible, and carefully study the context of each book and section of Scripture. As well, get a book on the "big picture" of the Bible, such as Stephen Nichol's book Welcome to the Story: Reading, Living and Loving God's Word, and understand the storyline of Scripture, so that you aren't fooled by amateurs posing as teachers.

What is the storyline of the Bible? Who is the author of the book? Who is his audience? What is the occasion for the writing? What cultural factors does the passage involve? What do the verses surrounding it say?

I found a story that illustrates the importance of context:

A few years ago...

A friend of mine told me a story about how one Sunday morning, around 7:00 am, he was riding a subway into New York City. It was to preach at a church that was not too far away from its center. Being that it was a Sunday morning and that it was early and quiet, not very many people were riding in the car that he was in; just an elderly lady that was was crocheting something out of her bag, a Jewish Rabbi who was reading the newspaper, and a young business type who was probably going in to work to finish something not quite completed on Saturday.

As the subway was quietly moving along, it stopped at a station and in stepped a father with three small children. Immediately the morning calm was broken. As the unshaven and disheveled father slumped into his seat, all three of the children went running madly up and down the subway car, shouting, playing tag –making a real ruckus, and totally disrupting the quiet harmony of the morning.

After, a few minutes of this, the young business man turns to the father, and yells, “why don't you control your children?” All eyes were then turned upon him, as the father looked up and said, “Yes, you are right. They just came from the hospital where they lost their mother early this morning to her battle with cancer. I guess they don't really know how to handle it, and I am afraid, I don't either.”

In a moment everything changed.

The Elderly woman pulled the little girl over and they began an animated conversation with the lady showing her how to crochet; the Rabbi pulled one of the young boys over and together they began to read the comics --laughing at all the jokes and characters; the young business man, well, pulled the oldest one over and let him play on his gameboy. While the father was sympathetically given a little space so that he could grieve. It seemed in seconds, everything had changed, and a new peace prevailed.

But what had changed?

Context.

By knowing the context, everyone could now correctly deduce what the truth was. Without the context, everyone was left angry and disillusioned. So it is today, you will be asked to accept Scriptures on face value, without checking the context, or the intent of the passage. You will be asked to "just come along," which will mean forgetting the characters in the passage, and the audience or even the author who is speaking. You will also be asked to accept a number of things on face value, and you will even be asked to accept the words of teachers, ministers, and if possible, “prophetic angels of light.” Don't you do it!

You test out everything.

First, you test out all thoughts in the light of the Gospel. Then you test out what is being said, read or believed in the light of the harmony of scripture. Next, --well you get the idea, keep going don't just accept anything on face value.

I know that I am preaching to many in the choir, but let me solemnly warn you, --it is this accepting biblical things at face value that has led to more cults and heresies, than I believe any other factor, including false friendships. My prayer is that each of you grow in spirit and in the truth of the Lord Jesus
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For an example of Joyce Meyer and her misuse of context:


It might be interesting to hear the contextual factors that you consider when reading Scripture.

yes you are missing something

do a search on Calvinism...say the last 2 months or so....and edumacate yourself on what has been going on here

The OP is a hyper Calvinist and all the posts made are along that line of reasoning. It is an indirect method of creating credibility for the other threads.

Context is essential for understanding of any passage of scripture. Many create a pretext to support a preconceived conclusion before reading the scripture. We must rightly divide the scriptures to arrive at the truth. I hope we all agree that we need to arrive at the truth.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

He is not a hyper Calvinist. Quit lying on @UnitedWithChrist. ForestGreenCook is the hyper Calvinist on here. He denies the universal call of the gospel and says ppl can live in rebellion to God w/o repenting and be saved. No Calvinist adheres to those two stances.

Again your opinion differs from mine. If you are a five pointer you are hyper Calvinist.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

He is not a hyper Calvinist. Quit lying on @UnitedWithChrist. ForestGreenCook is the hyper Calvinist on here. He denies the universal call of the gospel and says ppl can live in rebellion to God w/o repenting and be saved. No Calvinist adheres to those two stances.

In my decades of Therapy work, I have come to respect the value of observing "Body Language". Just as a single obvious thing in that video, take a look at Hanks folded arms. LOL

That’s not hyper Calvinism my friend, but Calvinism. Hyper Calvinism denies the universal call of the gospel. Calvinism affirms the universal call. Hyper Calvinism denies repentance in the life of a believer is necessary. Calvinism affirms the necessity of repentance in the believer’s life. Hyper Calvinism denies the necessity of the gospel in the saving of the lost. Calvinism affirms that w/o the gospel, none can be saved.

Realize that if you give a coherent explanation regarding Reformed theology, free-willers are going to switch to ad hominem attacks in an attempt to discredit.

I am not a hyper-Calvinist and they don't even know what a hyper-Calvinist is.

Normal Reformed theology is hyper-Calvinism according to free-willers.

Realize that if you give a coherent explanation regarding Reformed theology, free-willers are going to switch to ad hominem attacks in an attempt to discredit.

I am not a hyper-Calvinist and they don't even know what a hyper-Calvinist is.

Normal Reformed theology is hyper-Calvinism according to free-willers.

It's funny UWC, my first reaction was to say 'how in the world did they ascertain that?', but after giving it some thought, simply for the sake of it, I believe that it can be construed as being analogous to the demise of the devil and of those who follow him. They will be sent off into isolation for their sins, ostracized from the Kingdom and left to inhabit desolate and barren areas. I don't accept this explanation as being intended by the author, but I say this just to demonstrate the precarious aspect of unbridled interpretation.
Is it more analogous to Christ's work of redemption, depends on one's soteriology? If one accepts either the scapegoat or penal substitution theories, then yes, otherwise not necessarily either.

I guess in essence, there are enough qualified and certified typologies in the Bible that one does not need to be deficient in their understanding of correct Christian theology, and thus, private interpretation needs to be both tempered and used only as an implicit supplement to an argument, not as the definitive or critical proof-text for their conclusion or doctrine.
Which, if I'm not mistaken UWC, that you already stated to a certain degree.

Do you really expect anyone to believe that statement?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

They’re the hyper Calvinists and don’t even know it. Ask them what happens to those who die never hearing the gospel and they go to Romans 1. That’s why the hyper Calvinists use as well in their “proof” that the gospel isn’t necessary. In their zeal to run away from Calvinism, they leap straight into the welcoming arms of...you guessed it...hyper Calvinism.

Do you really expect anyone to believe that statement?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

OK Roger..what is hyper-Calvinism and how have I represented that view on this forum?

PROVIDE EXAMPLES OR YOU PROVE YOURSELF A LIAR.

By the way, I will keep posting this until you comply.

First, define what hyper-Calvinism is, from an objective, reputable source, then supply examples CITING MY POSTS to show that I am a hyper-Calvinist.

And, don't do it from your imagination....I want to see the posts.

Yes..why are you calling me a hyper-Calvinist? I can think of two reasons: 1) you're ignorant of what true Reformed theology is, or 2) you are attempting to malign me in order to discredit my explanations of Reformed theology.

By the way, I am not angry. The individuals you would convince are already in your camp anyways.

Oh, so it was just to start stuff in this conversation, because why not? .

By the way, Norman Geisler is not an objective, reputable source. Guys like him are not Reformed. They are one-point Arminians.

They deny that the Father has elected certain individuals to salvation, the Son atoned for their sins alone, and the Holy Spirit applies this atonement to them alone.

I would argue that it is you who is ignorant of reformed theology. I have no need to endeavor to discredit you as you are doing a far better job of that than anyone else could possibly do.

Anger and hatred for the brethren is not a fruit of the Holy Spirit so I do not accuse you of either.

All five point Calvinists are hyper Calvinists. Hyper Calvinism is a view of predestination that would deny or minimize human responsibility to repent and believe the gospel because of the inability to do so in light of the doctrine of total depravity. Furthermore hyper Calvinism would deny the necessity of a universal offer of the gospel.

For the cause of Christ
Roger