by Richard Koffarnus
The Restoration Herald - Feb 2025
As we have maintained since the beginning of this column, there are passages in the Bible which are difficult to understand and/or challenging to harmonize with other, similar biblical texts.i These problem passages provide critics with convenient stumbling blocks with which they can undermine a Christian’s faith in Scripture while reinforcing a skeptic’s doubts.
For example, a blogger once scathingly announced, “The Bible Implies that Pi is Three. Deal With It.” His issue was with 1 Kings 7:23, “Now he made the sea of cast metal ten cubits from brim to brim, circular in form, and its height was five cubits, and thirty cubits in circumference.”ii As everyone knows, if you divide the circumference of a circle by its diameter, you get pi, 3.14. However, the text of 1 Kings 7 says the circumference of the sea was 30 cubits and the diameter was 10, giving a value of only 3 for pi! Was the Bible wrong? The blogger thought so, while his readers went to great lengths to try to explain the “error.”
What none of them considered was that a common biblical Hebrew idiom (a figure of speech) involves rounding up numbers. For example, the expression “40 years” is often used for the reign of Hebrew kings or other significant events.iii In each case, a part of a year would be rounded up to a whole year. Unlike our culture, where we usually round up if we are dealing with a half year or more, but round down if it is less than six months, the Hebrews always rounded up. Thus, when Jesus said, “as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth,”iv He was using idiomatic language to say He would be dead for parts of three days (Friday night, Saturday, and Sunday morning), not for 72 hours. Similarly, the author of 1 Kings approximates the dimensions of the basin, rounding them off to 30, 10, and 5 cubits, respectively. Part of the rationale for this rounding is that ancient Hebrew uses letters for numbers, lacking Arabic numerals. Expressing fractions as decimals would have been impossible.
The point is, if we are going to critically evaluate difficult Bible passages, we should begin by looking at a passage from the standpoint of the author, not from our position 2,000 or more years later. With that in mind, let’s lay down some basic rules of biblical interpretation which we will follow as we examine these passages.
One. Identify a text’s type of literature to grasp its meaning.
In the Old Testament we find law, history, wisdom literature, poetry, and prophecy. In the New Testament we have gospel, history, parable, epistle, and prophecy. Each has its own unique characteristics. History uses more literal language than figurative. Poetry, parable, and prophecy use more figurative language.
For instance, Psalm 137 was written during the Babylonian Captivity (c. 586-537 BC). Verses 7-9 call for God’s vengeance against the Babylonians for destroying Jerusalem, and against the Edomites for urging them to do so. Verse 9 says, “How blessed will be the one who seizes and dashes your little ones against the rock.” This is called an “imprecatory psalm” because the psalmist calls for judgment on the Babylonians in return for their cruelty toward Jerusalem. Skeptics read verse 9 literally and conclude that God is some blood thirsty monster who wants to see innocent children bludgeoned to death! However, this interpretation treats verse 9 as a prescription of what God wants to happen to the Babylonians and ignores the rest of Psalm 137 and its genre as an imprecation. In fact, the psalmist is calling for justice against the Babylonians in language expressing what they did to the Israelites. The intent, in very graphic language, is parallel to Jeremiah’s prophecy of the destruction of Babylon (Jeremiah 50-51) by the Persians: “For the destroyer is coming against Babylon, and her mighty men will be captured, their bows shattered; for the Lord is a God of recompense, He will fully repay” (Jeremiah 51:56). There is no expectation here of child sacrifice to appease a bloodthirsty God.
Two. Interpretation should be based on the author’s intended meaning and not on the reader’s subjective views.
Once you determine the author’s meaning, the rest is application to the reader’s situation. This should be so obvious as to be incontestable.
However, as I have pointed out in previous columns, Postmodernism claims that words and texts have no inherent meaning, nor do they receive their meaning from their author. Rather, through a process called “deconstruction,” each reader supposedly brings his own meaning to the text, and every meaning is equally valid.v For example, while Paul clearly denounces all homosexuality and lesbianism as “degrading passions,” “unnatural,” and “burn[ing] in their desire toward one another,”vi some Postmoderns have dismissed this passage as referring only to exploitive same-sex relationships, such as rape or prostitution, and not to supposed loving, consensual, non-exploitive same-sex relationships. Thus, by a subjective slight-of-hand, Paul’s clear declaration against same-sex sin is stood on its head!
Three. Consider the context of the passage to help understand its meaning.
Context can include the literary, political, social, religious, and historical setting of the writer and his writing. If we ignore its context, we can easily misinterpret a text, which results in “proof-texting,” taking verses out of context to “prove” a doctrine not actually supported by Scripture.
An example of this problem involves the “Parable of the Marriage Feast” in Matthew 22:1-14. In this parable, Jesus compares the kingdom of heaven to a king who invites many guests to a wedding feast for his son. Some of the invited ignore the invitation. Worse, others kill the servants sent to invite them. Enraged, the king sends his armies to destroy the murderers. Then he sends other servants to gather people from all over for the wedding. Here is where the parable gets difficult. In verses 11-13, the king sees a guest not wearing appropriate wedding clothes. Outraged, the king orders the guest to be bound hand and foot and cast “into the outer darkness.”
Critics complain that the parable is extremely unfair. The guest was compelled to be there and may not have owned clothes worthy of a royal wedding. The king was clearly being cruel to the poor man! Worse, an LGBTQIA+ minister argued that the guest intentionally defied the king to protest his forced attendance at the wedding. The guest was a hero, standing up for the powerless!vii
These misinterpretations are easily corrected by observing the context of the parable. First, in its historical and cultural context, the host of a Jewish wedding in that era would provide the guests with suitable garments for the occasion. There was no excuse for any guest to be improperly dressed. Second, the textual context (Matthew 21:23-22:14) contains three parables, including the marriage feast, given in response to the temple priests challenging Jesus’s authority. The message of all three is the same: God will take the kingdom away from those who reject the Messiah—even religious leaders—and give it to those who sincerely repent and follow Him. There is nothing cruel about God excluding those who do not wish to accept His Son.
Four. Let Scripture interpret Scripture.
Difficult Bible passages can usually be explained by clear ones. Thus, we might be inclined to agree with the universalists that everyone is going to be saved if we only read Romans 5:18, “So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men;” 1 Timothy 2:5, 6, “For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all;” or 1 John 2:2, “And He [Jesus] Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.”
Since Jesus has brought justification, paid the ransom, and offered Himself as the propitiation for everyone’s sins, what more could be necessary for our salvation? The answer is found in John 3:14-18 (emphasis added):
As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
By dying on the cross, Jesus paid the penalty for our sin and removed the need for the Father to punish us. However, the application of His saving work to each person requires that each person believe in Him. Furthermore, Jesus makes it abundantly clear that not everyone will believe.
Five. Interpret the Scriptures literally unless there are compelling reasons to believe that they are figurative.
These reasons may include a context which calls for figurative language, a genre of writing, such as psalms, which commonly uses idiomatic language, or a text which is illogical or self-contradictory if taken literally. Also, keep in mind that every language has idiomatic expressions which have become so common that they can turn up in even the most literal texts.
I have heard more than one preacher claim that Lamech, a descendent of Cain, was such an evil guy that he killed both a man and a boy for hitting him (Genesis 4:23, 24). In reality, this passage is an example of Hebrew parallelism, where the author repeats each line in slightly different way for emphasis:
Adah and Zillah (You wives of Lamech).
Listen to my voice (Give heed to my speech).
For I have killed a man for wounding me (And a boy for striking me).
Lamech was a bad enough person—he killed one person and was the first polygamist on record—without making him a double murderer!
From the second century on, some Christians, especially in Alexandria, Egypt, sought to interpret the Bible using the Quadriga or “fourfold allegorical method,” borrowed from Greek philosophy. In this approach, every passage in the Bible was thought to have four layers of meaning: the literal (what the passage actually says), the allegorical or typological (where key elements of historical passages represent important New Testament spiritual concepts), the tropological (the moral of the story), and the anagogical (the eschatological application to the end times or the second coming of Christ).
For example, 2 Samuel 5:5 says that David reigned in Jerusalem for thirty-three years. Someone interpreting this verse using the Quadriga would say that the literal meaning was that David had a long reign in the historical city of Jerusalem. The allegorical meaning might be a reference to the church that Christ would establish. The tropological meaning might be the need for the saints to be of one mind in service to God. And the anagogical meaning might be the new heavenly Jerusalem.
Clearly, the allegorical method is wide open to almost any interpretation one might imagine. That is why the Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin rejected the Quadriga in favor of our common-sense rules.
Six. Remember that many commands, directives, and duties were made to an individual and not to all people.
When God tested Abraham’s obedience by commanding him to sacrifice Isaac (Genesis 22), we understand, first, the command was given only to Abraham, and second, God expressly prohibited His people from making such sacrifices in Leviticus 18:21 and Jeremiah 7:31. Study the context of such commands, etc., to determine whether they are specific or general.
As we move forward in future columns dealing with problem passages in the Bible, we will use these rules to help resolve the problems and get to the intended meaning of the Scriptures.
~RH
(Endnotes)
1 Previously we have resolved problem passages dealing with the anointing of Jesus (March 2021), the Virgin Birth (December 2021-February 2022), and the Star of Bethlehem (December 2022-January 2023).
2 The New American Standard Bible (2003) is used throughout. The “sea” was a large basin used for ceremonial purification.
3 See Exodus 16:35; Judges 13:1; 1 Kings 2:11, 11:42.
4 Matthew 12:40
5 See Restoration Herald, “Postmodernism: The Anti-worldview Worldview,” May-June 2022.
6 Romans 1:26, 27.
7 Emily Papke-Larson, “Called Queer, Sacred & Defiant: Matthew 22:1-14.” Sermon preached on October 11, 2020.
Richard Koffarnus is retired Emeritus Professor of History and Theology at Central Christian College of the Bible, Moberly, MO.
Some of the comments you hear on TV, social media, radio, etc., centers around this thought, “God saved President Trump’s life.” If that is true, why didn’t God save the life of Corey Comperatore — the fireman who was assassinated by the rogue gunman? When I hear the statement, “God saved Trump’s life/turned his head” my mind immediately goes to the wife and children of Comperatore and the other injured victims. What must they think? Was President Trump’s life more important than their injured or lost lives? No, of course not.
Let us look at the subject of interpreting providence, and what do we mean by providence? Providence is that which is directly influenced and affected by the hand of God. There are three reasons why events happen. 1) God causes them. 2) Nature affects them. 3) The freewill choices of people. All events can be categorized under these three causes.
So, after January 20, 2025, we are in anticipation of many things we have been promised by the incoming president. Reducing prices and inflation. Closing our borders. Rolling back DEI, LGBTQ. On transgender rights he would end “boys in girls’ sports,” a practice he insists, is widespread. But his policies go well beyond standard applause lines from his rally speeches. Among other ideas, Trump would roll back the Biden administration’s policy of extending Title IX civil rights protections to transgender students, and he would ask Congress to require that only two genders can be recognized at birth. Reductions in burdensome regulations. Targeting the elimination of the federal involvement in our nation’s education. Eliminating the green new deal. Improving the defense of our country.
Sounds great, doesn’t it? Well, as much as these things sound good and make us feel better about the direction of our country they are not enough. While the new administration may be able to improve our physical life, our society still has a spiritual problem. As described in Romans 1:21-32 “For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their reasonings, and their senseless hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and they exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible mankind, of birds, four-footed animals, and crawling creatures.
Christian apologists have long said that the three greatest miracles of the Christian faith are the creation of the universe, the incarnation of Jesus Christ, and His bodily resurrection from the dead. To these a fourth awesome miracle could be added—fulfilled Bible prophecy.