HOW TO APPROACH STUDYING THE BIBLE
Presuppositions and Method Overview

During a recent Sunday School class, a lovely lady made the comment that when we study the Bible, we should do so with no presuppositions, disregard the interpretations by others, and rely entirely on the Holy Spirit for our understanding.  Now, this lady has a high view of the Scriptures and is very orthodox in her beliefs, but having encountered many liberals who take a similar stance in their attempt to validate whatever meaning is convenient to justify their agenda at the time, I jumped in with both feet.  I immediately pointed out that presuppositional neutrality was a myth, and that we ignored the interpretations of the saints throughout history at our own peril.

So, which of us was correct in our assertions? After much prayer and contemplation over the past few days, I’ve come to the conclusion that, according to our respective intentions, we both were.  Discussions in class are usually time-limited, so we often don’t adequately explain our intended meaning.  I’m convinced that she was referring to the initial phase of study where we read the Scriptures and attempt to observe and interpret the author’s intended meaning.  On the other hand, I was referring to the entire process of Bible study.  I think we can clarify the issue with a brief overview on how to approach studying the Bible.
 

Table of Contents

Presuppositions

Before we get to the methods, we should say a few words about presuppositions.  As I inferred above, it is impossible to remain neutral with our assumptions.  Stating that we must have no presuppositions is a presupposition in itself, but even disregarding this fact, it is still impossible not to have presuppositions, some of which influences our findings while others actually guarantee the outcome of our investigations.  For example, we must either presume that miracles are possible or that they are impossible.  If our presupposition is that miracles are possible, then we might find certain passages containing miracles to be either true or false, or we can be left unsure.  If however, like most liberal scholars, we presume that miracles are impossible, then we guarantee that we will find these particular passages to be false.  So, the real issue becomes, which of our presuppositions can be supported by the facts.

Relating to the subject of presuppositions is the argument of faith vs knowledge and understanding.  Since the Enlightenment, most theologians take the position that we must first demonstrate the Biblical text to be reliable in order to justify our belief in it.  This is opposite to the traditional stance of the Church.  Saint Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD) held that we must first believe that we can know, that is, faith given from God is required in order to properly understand the Scriptures.  The motto of St Anselm of Canterbury, eleventh century theologian best known for his "ontological argument" for the existence of God, was fides quaerens intellectum (faith seeking understanding).  To Anselm, this "faith" was not a blind acceptance, but an act of making a conscious choice or decision to seek a deeper knowledge of God.  Finally, the approach of Swiss theologian Karl Barth, one the most important Christian thinkers of the twentieth century, was that we first believe, then we attempt to discover and explain what we believe.

 [TOC]    [Top of Page]
 

A Bible Study Method Overview

The following general approach has worked well for me over the years.  There are variances to this method that should work just as well.  In fact, I sometimes vary the method slightly depending on which book I’m studying, or if I’m doing a topical study etc.  For simplicity, we’ll outline a method for studying a particular book of the Bible.  We’ll also just do an overview of the method.  Detailed procedures can be found in our Bible Study Guide.

Now we come to the step to which my friend in class was commenting.  As we begin our initial reading, we should first read the entire book under the illumination of the Spirit, observing and interpreting the text without exterior materials, as my friend correctly stated.  We should then go back through the book verse by verse, asking the appropriate questions, doing any word studies, and building our interpretation in light of the context.  Only after we have done our own work should we check our deductions against the commentaries and other external sources.

Comparing our conclusions against others is a very important step.  The world didn’t begin with our generation and we don’t exist in a vacuum.  The great preacher Charles Spurgeon was especially critical of those who swore by the Spirit’s revelation during their own study of the Word, but would ignore this same Spirit’s revelation to others.  For two thousand years, the saints of the Christian Church have spent countless hours in fervent prayer and discussion, agonizing over similar issues that we continue to face today.  Their loyalty to the faith (many gave their lives as martyrs) led to much great literature throughout history.  Most important were the Creeds, Confessions and Catechisms of the Church.  These documents are summary statements of Christian doctrine and principle articles of faith which, while subordinate in authority to the Holy Scriptures, not only help explain the Word, but act as a safeguard against heretical interpretations.  Unfortunately, the teaching of these great documents has virtually disappeared from most modern churches.

Our external aids should not be limited to those from the past.  Paul writes in his letter to the Ephesians that God gave the Church pastors and teachers to build us up in the knowledge of Christ and help us become mature so that we will no longer be like infants being blown here and there by false teaching (Eph 4:11-16).  Thus, we are to avail ourselves of these resources.

We then begin the cycle all over again with the same or with another book.  With each study cycle, we bring additional knowledge to the table, but in another sense, we start anew in that our previous learning should be subject to revision if further study finds our previous deductions in conflict with additional Scripture and illumination.

In conclusion, we should first do our own work under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, but keep in mind that developing proper Bible interpretation skills involve careful and diligent work.  This requires an understanding of the original languages, the historical background of Biblical times, a working knowledge of theology,  grammatical aptitude, and a grasp of the whole context of Scripture.  Since all readers can certainly improve their skill level, we must always review our findings against Biblical commentaries, the traditional positions of the Church, and the understanding of trusted pastors and teachers.  In addition, all things short of the inspired inerrant Scriptures should always be subject to discernment.

 [TOC]    [Top of Page]
 

Unresolved Disagreements

While the Bible is quite clear on the essential documents of the faith, disagreements are common on minor points and more than one view is sometimes considered orthodox (for example, various views of the millennium).  As we study the Bible, interpretations will often conflict with that of an eternal source such as a commentary, handbook etc.

So, what should we do when we find ourselves in disagreement with others?  If it is a very minor point on which multiple interpretations are consistent with the whole of Scripture, we will usually just agree to disagree, or we can remain open to the various explanations.  In other cases, the disagreement can almost always be resolved (usually in favor of the traditional Church position) by consulting additional sources including your local pastor or teachers.

If our disagreement is on a major doctrine or important point of Scripture, we should do our best to resolve the differences.  We must approach any dispute with the right attitude and motivation.  The primary goal is not to win the argument, but to gain in knowledge of the truth because of our love for God.  We should not merely hold fast to a position just because "that’s my interpretation and I’m sticking to it".  We must be willing to explore additional external sources and to debate opponents of our position, particularly if our deduction conflicts with the traditional stance of the Church.  Before we initiate a Martin Luther "Here I Stand!" moment, we must employ every available process in an attempt to solve the conflict, including understanding how and why the Church historically and theologically arrived at her conclusion.  If however, we have honestly exhausted all available means and we still find ourselves in disagreement, we must then stick to our interpretation because, as Luther said at the Diet of Worms in 1521, to go against our conscience is neither right nor safe.

Some of the best advice I’ve heard on resolving disputes comes from John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion.  In one chapter, Calvin is writing about a disagreement with Augustine and others on a particular issue when he advises us not to be overly concerned if his opinion is not consistent with our own on this particular issue.  He writes that "We ought not to so value their authority [those involved in the dispute] as to let it shake the certainty of Scripture".  That is, we should never place a fallible source (including Church tradition) equal to or above the Holy Scriptures.  The Word of God alone is the ultimate authority on matters of doctrine and practice in the Church and in our lives.

 [TOC]    [Top of Page]