Comparing Scripture with Scripture

0:02 Looking at our world from a theological perspective. This is the Theology Central podcast making Theology Central. Good morning everyone. It is Saturday, December the twenty first, twenty twenty four. It is currently ten fifty one am Central Time, and I am coming to you live from the Theology Central studio located right here in Abilene, Texas. Well, what is about to occur is another example of well twenty twenty four right, what I am about to do, what is going to happen over the next forty five minutes to an hour, is really symbolically, it really captures, It captures really everything twenty twenty four has been about. Twenty twenty four started. It was going to be about a lot of different things. I had a lot of different things.

0:57 I wanted to focus on a lot of things I wanted to do, and slowly but surely, everything else fell by the wayside and what became the dominant focus was our sermons two point zero app sermon challenge. That began to dominate everything. It began to drive everything because I was telling you to listen to random sermons. I was listening to random sermons. We were reviewing random sermons, and those that listening that reviewing of sermons then would lead to all kinds of different teachings and discuss discussions, sometimes being disgusted, but discussions that that's what it led to, and hopefully, behind the scenes on the other side of this microphone, hopefully many of you who participated in the Sermons two point oh app sermon challenge, it led to maybe a discussion with people you knew, maybe discussions with family members, church members, maybe just a discussion with yourself.

1:56 But it led to thinking, discussing, struggling, meditating, It led to a lot of just in depth concentration and thought about wherever that sermon led us. Now, in many cases it led us to you know, and I hate to say it, try it. I don't want to use the word correct, but it led us to say, Okay, this sermon put forth this idea, this hypothesis. We disagree with this hypothesis. Now, let's stop criticizing. Now, let's work and build a hypothesis, an interpretation that we think is more accurate and more in line with scripture. And it led to that, over and over and over and over again so many times. Well, here we are on December the twenty first, fast approaching the end of this year in many ways, the end of the challenge and what has happened. Well, yesterday we reviewed a sermon, and now we returned back to really that sermon, and it's going to draw I have this next entire hour. It could drive really weeks and months of discussion because one sermon that that's that's what one sermon can do. Now and I and I and I've talked about this all year. I still am very conflicted, right because on one hand, I'm it has been very discouraging, very frustrating that you listen to sermons

3:29 and then you have to spend twenty seven hours really trying to correct don't again, I don't like to use that word. You have to you have to really go back and almost restudy the passage for you know, twenty seven hours to ensure that well, that it's handled in a more accurate way. I'm trying to be nice. I'm trying to be nice, but it's just frustrating. You listen to a sermon, You're like, what in the world was that? What were they doing with that scripture? What were they saying? So that's frustrating, right, he because you would hope that you could just listen to sermon after sermon after sermon after sermon, and it basically like, well, I may disagree with a little bit here, a little bit there, but for the most part, yeah, that was great. But we have found over and over and over that it doesn't lead to well, a little disagreement that leads to a completely like wait, what was that? And then when we go do our study, it's completely opposite to what we heard.

4:28 That is discouraging and frustrating, but at the same time, at the same time, there is something kind of awesome about that that one sermon, like one sermon, when thirty minute sermon, forty minute sermon literally can lead to twenty seven hours just choosing a random number, and twenty seven is not even really hyperbole, but it could lead to twenty seven hours of teaching, of disc discussion, of struggling to try to come up with a better way to handle the text, like one sermon can lead to hours upon hours, weeks upon weeks of discussion and study and hermeneutics and interpretation. I mean, that's a great thing, right, I mean, if you consider the millions upon millions of sermons available on the sermon's two point zero app and if each one can lead to hours upon hours upon hours, weeks months of study, well then that means no matter how much you disagree with the sermon, no matter how frustrating it may make you. If if the end result is you spent twenty seven hours in that same text because of that sermon, then no matter how much you disagree with it, no matter how frustrated it makes you.

5:51 On one hand, you kind of have to go thank you for putting that sermon there. Oh, it drove me absolutely crazy. I took three trips to the liquor store. But overall, and that's a joke for those who are new to listening, all right, But at the same time, you want to just say thank you because as a result of your sermon I created, you know, just think of everything we did with say Saw eighty three, all the stuff we're doing with Isaiah forty. Just go through all the different things we did. It was because of these sermons. Because those churches took the time, money, and effort to put their sermons online. They literally led me you as a listening audience, and hopefully in your own study, to hours and hours and hours of contemplation and study and meditation on the very text itself. So because of a bad sermon, we'll just use that term. I know that's subjective, but a bad sermon may actually lead to more study and more understanding. So in some ways, do I get frustrated or do I'm like, do I send an email going, hey, look your one thousand percent disagree with I don't have no clue what you were doing, But thank you because as a result of your sermon, I spent twenty seven hours in that passage of scripture.

7:13 Thank you, right, I mean like, in some ways, I guess you could look at it from a negative perspective, but there is a positive in it, correct, I think there's a positive? Well, we kind of have Again, this could be viewed as negative, but I'm gonna try to view it as positive, right, I'm trying to. I'm really doing a lot of time and contemplating everything that happened in twenty twenty four and really just considering was this all worth it when it was all said and done? And maybe I'm trying too hard to justify or try to find the positive in it, because you don't want to feel like you wasted an entire year. But I do believe that that's positive. I just don't know how many people on the other side of the microphone perceived it or how they utilized it. But if it leads to that, that's a good thing. Right. So yesterday we reviewed a sermon on the General Laws of Bible Interpretation or General Laws of Biblical Interpretation, and we listened to part one. This is in a series of an entire series on Biblical interpretation, and I want to I do want to listen to all thirty six messages. I do want to listen to all of them. I don't know.

8:27 I don't know if I'll ever review all of them, because that would be I mean, that would be forever to try to review all of them. But I definitely may reference the series multiple times. But I do want to listen to them all. But we listen to General Laws of Biblical Interpretation Part one yesterday, and let me just say, wow, it it was very frustrating. So what we're gonna do is we're gonna go back. We're gonna listen to a little bit of it because there is a Yesterday we focused on that sermon's use of Second Peter Chapter one, Verse twenty Second Peter Chapter one, verse twenty, which reads, knowing this verse that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. And we listen to how a sermon teaching us the laws the general laws of biblical interpretation. We listen to a sermon on the general laws of biblical interpretation use Second Peter chapter one, verse twenty, and then use it in a way that was an example of isagesis not exit Jesus, and a complete misinterpretation of the passage, which was somewhat fascinating, ironic, and a little maddening. Right, Hey, here's a sermon about how to interpret the Bible, and I'm going to demonstrate how and then actually just actually does it the incorrect way.

9:56 There was another passage referenced in the sermon, and they use this passage almost to state that this is like the main principle and Bible study. And we're gonna talk about that one. So yesterday we looked at Second Peter one twenty, and I think I did a very good job of breaking it down and explaining how it should be interpreted. We looked at how it's been interpreted, you know, in church history, the different ways that's been looked at. I think we did a pretty good job. I think we did. Now I could turn it into an entire sermon on Second Peter one twenty and correct that forever and really maybe you know, do even more with it. But I think we did a pretty good job. So now we need to focus on First Corinthians chapter two, because well they use a verse there, and we're gonna so we're gonna listen to the beginning of this sermon again just kind of let them set up their basic especially with First Corinthians two, and then we're just gonna have a lengthy discussion about everything about First Corinthians two.

10:56 You are going to then hear a little bit of my argument with Ai, because I argued with Ai about how Ai was trying to handle First Corinthians chapter two, verse thirteen, And you'll hear a little bit of that, So I or not hear it, but well you'll hear me read it, and we'll just see where this goes. So again, this is a perfect example. This really captures the whole thing we've tried that really, I had no idea that twenty twenty four was going to go the way it was going to go. I really didn't. I mean, when I came up with the idea, oh the Sermon's two point oh app sermons challenge, this will be fun. I had no idea that it was actually just going to like take over, right, It's like I'm moving in, I'm going to possess, possess the podcast has been possessed by well the Sermon's two point oh app. It really has taken over the entire podcast. I mean, and no, I never intended that to happen, but I should have, knowing my personality, I should have known that was going to happen. I really should have, because there's no way I was going to be able to listen to sermons and just be like, okay, just move on, just move on.

12:12 Just no. I become obsessed. I become possessed with the idea, Okay, wait a minute, anybody can criticize, We've got to do more than just criticized. So I should have known it was going to turn into hours and hours of discussion and struggle and all the different things that turned into. I could have managed it a little better. But at the same time, I think it came across as pretty real and authentic. So I don't know, but here we go. Let's go back to the sermon we reviewed yesterday. We review the entire thing here, we're just going to review the beginning of it so that we get to the First Corinthians two passage, because that's where we need to go.

12:57 So are you ready? Here we go. Having first turn to Secrepedter Chapter of one. Secrepedter Chapter one. There's a lot of confusion today among those who name the name of Christ. Satan is using some of this confusion to keep those who are lost blind to the truth of the Gospel. There are many believers who are ignorant of the whole counsel of God, especially as it relates to Church truth. And much of the confusion that prevails today stems from faulty interpretation of the Word of God.

13:40 So please note he's making a dogmatic assertion that there's a lot of confusion today and there's a lot of Christians who are ignorant. They're ignorant of the Word of God. They don't understand how to interpret scripture, and this is keeping them from understanding, you know, important doctrines. So Christians are Christians don't understand how to interpret the scriptures. Now, I find it interesting and a message where it's making the claim that other Christians don't know how to interpret the Bible, that there was a complete, perfect example of the misinterpretation of tewod Peter chapter one, verse twenty. Come on, someone's gotta find humor in that. I mean, I can't be the only one who thinks, you know, isn't it ironic?

14:25 I mean, come on, don't you think isn't it? I mean, come on, yes, I'm making a musical reference, all right. I mean, come on, hey, Christians out there are ignorant Christians out there don't know how to interpret the Bible, and now I'm going to demonstrate how to not interpret, how to interpret Second Peter chapter one, verse twenty in an incorrect way. That's hilarious to me, right, I mean, that's that's good entertainment, right. I mean, I'm not trying to be mean. I'm just saying it's it's kind of funny, all right. But let's see, now, what we want to get to is the First Corinthians passage. Usually it stems from people just not getting in and study in the Word of God, period, but if they are going about it the wrong way can also cause confusion as well.

15:17 I remember we talked about this yesterday. He put forth two concepts, right, basically, two concepts is one Christians just don't study and that leads to all the problems. Or they don't really know how to study, they don't really understand biblical hermeneutics, they don't understand proper Bible study methods. And I said, which one do you think it is a lack of study or the wrong concepts? Right? Which? And I think that the issue is I think, really if you have to take a step back, Christians don't even agree on the principles themselves. And we talked about kind of like what I thought there was a deeper issue, but he kind of puts forth that this idea, Hey, if you're a Christian out there, the problem is you either are ignorant and how to study, how to interpret, or you just don't study. And well, okay, let's continue.

16:13 In many differences over doctrine that are rooting in the methods of biblical interpretation that are used, and so it's absolutely necessary to be grounded in the basic principles of correct Biblical interpretation. And over a number of weeks, that's what we are intending to do here tonight. We're going to take a look at the general laws of Biblical interpretation. Will begin with it and take a look at the part of the supreme rule. The supreme rule is interpret scripture with scripture. Okay, now, I want you to write that down. According to him, the supreme rule is compare scripture with scripture.

16:58 That is the supreme role of Bible study. That it's the supreme rule of hermeneutics is to interpret scripture with scripture. You will hear this anytime you listen to any series on Bible interpretation, Biblical interpretation, how to study the Bible, They're always going to tell you that the supreme rule is interpret scripture with scripture. Okay. Now, we listened to this sermon yesterday and his attempt to it interpret scripture with scripture. We showed you some of the problems with that, just random cross referencing, taking a verse that seems to be connected, making them more connected than they actually are, and all the problems that can actually lead to. Now, I got no problem with someone standing up saying the supreme rule of Bible interpretation, of Biblical interpretation is interpreting scripture with scripture. Where my problem begins is when people go to the Bible and try to find a verse and say this verse teaches this supreme principle of interpreting scripture with scripture. He tries to argue that, for or Second Peter chapter one, verse twenty, knowing this verse that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation, he tries to insinuate. He tries to say that that passage is teaching this concept of scripture with scripture, and it is not. It has nothing to do with that.

18:19 That's not what the passage is about. That's not the context. It is literally an as is said Jesus. He's reading it into the text. So this is he's getting ready to demonstrate how not to handle the scriptures, which is again somewhat hilarious. And he's going to also use Second Corinthians chapter one or so, yeah, second second Corinthians, I'm sorry, First Corinthians chapter two, verse thirteen as another passage that he is going to insinuate. He's going to declare teaches interpret scripture with scripture. And I'm going to argue First Corinthians two thirteen does not teach comparing scripture with scripture.

19:02 It's not what it's about that's being read into the passage of scripture, all right, and that is Maddie. And let me just be very honest with you, Okay. The way he's teaching, I was taught the exact same way in Bible College, after Bible College seminary, I was taught these exact same how to how to interpret these passages. And it ticks me off that I didn't catch it back then. It ticks me off that I didn't go, wait, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. No, no, no, no, no, we're doing ice to Jesus, we're reading this into the text. And really, the first time I started realizing things were not working the way I had been taught when I was a student at a Catholic university. And this idea of no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

19:56 While immediately the Catholics, the priest ever, was like, hey, that's all you Protestants do. I do private interpretation all day, every day, twenty four hours a day, seven days a week. And immediately it made me go, wait a minute, I got to rethink how to understand Second Peter, Chapter one, verse twenty. Well, then I begin to realize wait a minute, This has nothing to do with Bible interpretation. This is talking about the origin of God's revelation. No, okay, no, we're not handling the scriptures right. So then I didn't catch on immediately, but then slowly but surely, I begin to question the use of First Corinthians Chapter two, verse thirteen being about comparing scripture with scripture. So again, let me make it clear, I got no problem that you declare the supreme role is compare scripture with scripture. My issue is when you go to a scripture to try and try to claim that scripture is teaching that principle when the scripture isn't. That's problematic.

21:02 And I wanna use his basis for this tonight. Send Peter chapter one and let's be picked up in verse number sixteen, Verse twenty is what we're gonna use. But let's look at verse sixteen downs just so we understand what Peter's talking about here. Peter says, well, we have not followed cunningly devised fables when we may have known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eye witnesses of his majesty, for he received from God, the Father, Honor and Glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent Glory. This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased.

21:49 Remember Peter, Peter and some of the other disciples were up on the mount of Transfiguration to see that, see that actually happen, And he says in verse nineteen, he says, we have also a more sure word of prophecy, where until you do well, that you take heed as into a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn and the day star arise in your hearts. Knowing this first, here's our text for a night. Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. Okay, So for prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

22:41 You ever heard somebody say, well, you know, you can believe that that's what it says, but I believe it says this. Well, the thing is is what does it really say? Okay, It's not a matter of what you think it says. It's not a matter of what I think it says. It's a matter of what does it say, because what it does say is the truth, and that's what we need to be. And I completely agree with him. It's not what he says it means. It's not what I say it means. It's what the text actually says it means. And when this text says that, knowing first that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, this is not giving you how to interpret the Bible. Because what he's about to say is no private interpretation means you don't take any verse out of context. That's not what this is about, all right, I'll just read from the study Bible that I have right here in front of me. Although some have taken this phrase to mean that no individual Christian has the right to interpret prophecy for himself or herself, the context and the Greek word for interpretation indicates another meaning for the verse. The Greek word for interpretation can also mean origin, and the context of verse twenty one, it is clear that Peter is speaking of Scripture's origin from God himself, not the credentials of the one who interprets it. There is no private source for the Bible.

24:05 The prophets did not supply their own solutions or explanations to the mysteries of life. Rather, God spoke through them. He alone is responsible for what is written in scripture. This passage is not about you interpreting it. It is about the origins of it. Those who wrote the scriptures were not doing so from their own private interpretations about God or spirituality. They were moved by the Holy Ghost and wrote what God breathed through them to write. The origin of scripture is not from someone's private interpretation. The origin of scripture comes from God alone. That's what this passage is about. Has nothing to do with our interpreting of it. It's the origin of it. Has zero to do with that none. And okay, so we talked about this all yesterday. All right, so let's continue.

25:01 Concerned with and first, for instance two thirteen Paul said, which things also we speak not in words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth Comparing spiritual things with spiritual. Comparing spiritual things with spiritual is what I wants you to get. We are to interpret scripture with Scripture is its own best interpreter. A passage of the Bible should be interpreted by comparing it with other parts of the Bible. And that's why in the first couple of sessions, you know, I talked to you about some good tools to have on hand to be able.

25:45 So please see what he did. He read First Corinthians two thirteen, which things also we speak not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, comparing spiritual things with spiritual Then he just immediately inserted into that meat, into that text. It's the meaning that this teaches comparing scripture with scripture. It does not teach. Comparing scripture with scripture. Has nothing to do with First Corinthians two thirteen, just as interpret us interpreting the Bible has nothing to do with Secrepater one twenty. This is all of this is reading into the text. So what we're gonna look at in this hour, we're gonna look at First Corinthians two thirteen, and we're gonna look at it and look at all the different ways that's interpreted, and we're gonna challenge some of the ways that's interpreted and then try to formulate a new understanding. But the first thing I did, all right, well, I didn't do it yesterday. I did it today. I took the sermon that you we were just listening to. We reviewed all of it yesterday. You can go back and you can go listen to that sermon to listen to my entire review.

26:45 But I decided to take the transcript of the sermon and hand it to Ai and said, okay, Ai, go do your thing, analyze, critique, interpret. Here is the sermon. Tell me what you thing right? So AI gave me its unfiltered opinion of the sermon. Here we go. The sermon, the sermon transcript demonstrates the irony and problem you highlight. Now, the problem I highlighted was, isn't it ironic and problematic that a sermon that is intending to teach people how to interpret the Bible interpret scripture the way it does in the sermon in this sermon itself? So I pointing out a isn't it ironic when a sermon about Bible interpretation actually misinterprets the Bible? So AI said that this sermon that I provided, the one you were just listening to, demonstrates this irony. A message designed to teach proper Bible interpretation methods employees questionable interpretive practices itself. I want you to hear that again. This is how Ai describes that sermon.

27:57 You were just listening to a message design to teach proper Bible interpretation methods employees questionable interpretive practices itself. Specifically, it uses Second Peter one twenty and First Corinthians two thirteen as proof text for the principle of interpreting scripture with scripture without adequately demonstrating that this principle is actually taught in those passages. Well, it cannot demonstrate that that principle is taught accurately or is actually taught in those passages, because those passages are not teaching that principle in any way, shape or form. So I said, okay Ai, please provide analysis of the sermon's approach. So AI starts with Second Peter one twenty, and it characterizes Second Peter one twenty as the way it was handled in that sermon that you were just listening to as a miss apple colication, Ai said. The sermon argues that Second Peter one twenty teaches the principle of interpreting scripture with scripture by emphasizing that no prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation. However, the context of Second Peter one twenty through twenty one clearly refers to the origin of prophecy. It comes from God, not human initiative. That's what it's referring to. Rather than providing a hermeneutical rule for Bible study. By reading the

29:30 principle into the verse, the sermon commits isa Jesus imposing meaning on the text, rather than exe Jesus drawing meaning from the text. So the sermon is guilty of doing is to Jesus. It's reading into the text, instead of doing exe Jesus, which is pulling from the text or drawing from the text. So the principle that he was articulating, he was reading in to it. He came up with the principle, told you the principle, read it into the text, and then you are supposed to believe that it's actually found in the text. It's only found there because it was put there. The text itself does not teach the principle in any way, shape or form. Okay Ai. Then I asked Ai about First Corinthians to thirteen and light of this sermon, and guess what. Ai classified it? Once again as misapplication. The sermon uses First Corinthians two thirteen to assert that scripture teaches comparing spiritual things with spiritual It interpreted as comparing scripture with scripture. However, the phrase comparing spiritual things with spiritual is more likely about explaining or communicating spiritual things to spiritual people as guided by the Holy Spirit. The context of the passage emphasizes divine revelation and wisdom, not hermeneutical techniques. The sermon critiques private

31:02 interpretation and emphasizes the need for context and proper methods, yet its own interpretation of proof text rely on isolating phrases from their context to support a preconceived principle. I want you to hear that. Again, the sermon critiques private interpretations and emphasizes the need for context and proper methods, Yet its own interpretations of proof text rely on isolating specific phrases from their context to support a preconceived principle. You can take your preconceived principle, isolate scripture and find that principle there, but you're reading it into the text.

31:52 This undermines the entire sermon, the entire credibility of this As far as teaching correct interpretive practices is underminded by utilizing incorrect interpretive practices. Now this raises some questions. Sometimes, as Christians, we can teach, we can recite, we can know, we can even pass a test on proper hermeneutics. But here's the thing. We can know them, we can recite them, we can memorize them, we can answer the question on a test. But in many cases we don't actually practice the very correct hermeneutical principles that we know. Knowing hermeneutics is far different than doing Knowing correct hermeneutics as far different than doing correct hermeneutics. When a sermon fails to apply the principles they teach, they risk reinforcing the poor interpretive habits among the listeners. For example, by misusing proof texts, the sermon models the very issue it's criticizing. It also seems, and this is another problem we can confuse. There can be confusion between valid principles and biblical basis. The principle

33:28 of interpreting scripture with scripture is valid and a valuable hermeneutical approach, but it needs to be taught with proper biblical support. Using a misapplied proof text creates confusion about where the principle comes from and how it should be used. So it can be a valid principle, but you've got to use a valid text to teach the valid principle. If you preach the valid principle without a valid biblical basis, you undermine the text itself. All right, So I got I got a lot more here that I asked AI about.

34:17 But I decided, you know, I'm not going to go through all of that, so I backed all the way up. Then I'm gonna go way back up here because I linked the discussion ensued, all right, So I started it this way. I'm like many pastors and even in Bible colleges and in seminaries. Fet Corinthians two thirteen is used to teach the concept of an interpreting scripture with scripture. Is that concept actually being taught by the verse or is this concept being read into the verse. Now, and let me make it very clear. I have gone to Bible college after Bible college, seminary after seminary, and I have been taught over into over and over. First Corinthians two thirteen. Compare scripture with scripture over and over and over.

35:04 I've been taught that all right. I've even taught it myself for years. Right. Whenever I would teach Bible study methods and I would teach cross referencing, I would use First Corinthians two thirteen as a support as a proof text to prove scripture doing good cross referencing. Guess what I think. Well, I'm going to argue and put forth the hypotheses that First Corinthians two thirteen should not be used to support that idea. It's a valid principle and it should be utilized in Bible study comparing scripture with scripture. It's just not taught here. So I asked Ai, what do you do? So AI first quoted the verse to me, instead of using the King James, use the ESV. And it quoted it this way. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom, but taught by the spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. Now that just changes everything, doesn't it. And we impart this in words, not taught by human wisdom, but taught by the spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. Interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. That has nothing to do with comparing scripture with scripture. This is about how that the apostles and Paul, they were taught by the spirit of God. This would be direct revelation, right, that

36:35 God was speaking, speaking through them, breathing through them to write inspired scripture, and then they interpreted spiritual truths to those who were spiritual. They were given spiritual truth in a way that we are not right because God was speaking directly through them, breathing through them. Scripture was being written, especially by the apostle Paul. Then they would interpret those truths apostolic authority, et cetera. And then they would communicate that to those who were spiritual. That's if you go just with the ESV translation, you immediately like, wait a minute, there's something else going on here, not just simply hey, this this passage is about interpreting scripture with scripture. So then I asked Ai, okay, give me give me the contextual over you put this in. Sometimes give me the proper context, so Ai said. Paul is addressing the Corinthian believers about the source and nature of spiritual wisdom. In the Broader Passage for Corinthians two six through sixteen. He contrasts human wisdom with divine wisdom revealed by the spirit.

37:48 This verse specifically speaks of the way Paul and others communicate God's wisdom, not using human rhetoric, but through spirit inspired words. They can a spiritual truths right now, just immediately, just listening to that contextual context. This is not about interpreting scripture with scripture. This is not in anywhere, it's not even addressing that. So then I'm like okay Ai giving an analysis of First Corinthians two thirteen. So it broke it down this way, not taught by human wisdom, but taught by the spirit. Paul emphasizes that the truths he and others proclaim come directly from divine revelation, not human reasoning or philosophy. This refers to the inspiration of scripture and the spiritual role and revealing God's wisdom. Look at it for which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth. Paul and the apostles were receiving divine revelation.

38:55 This fits perfectly with tewod Peter Oneture is given by private by private interpretation. It's its origin is divine the writers were not just coming up with things on their own. It wasn't human wisdom. It was God's wisdom being breathed through them and being written down, And we refer to that as the inspiration of scripture. It is infallible, it is inspired. That's the point here. So if you want to do cross reference, you would correct. You would take First Corinthians two thirteen, connected to sewod Peter one twenty and say this is referring to that the origin of scripture is divine. It comes from God, not man's wisdom, not man's private interpretation. There is a correlation interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. Now the Greek word translated as interpreting right, which carries the idea of comparing, explaining, or dissert learning. The phrase suggests the process of explaining or applying spiritual truths in a way that is understood by those who are spiritually receptive. This is the idea that they that because they were given this divine revelation, then they would then take those spiritual things, compare them, or again, as the word would be, it says interpret

40:29 verse thirteen. It says comparing spiritual things with spiritual things. All right, some will translate that interpreting spiritual truths. Well, it's the idea, is the idea of comparing, explaining, or discerning. So they would then take these spiritual the spiritual truth that was taught by God, given to them by divine revelation, and then they would they would explain, they would teach, they would give these spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. That's the concept here. So does this verse teach the concept of interpreting scripture with scripture? So I asked Ai specifically, all right, well, you've given me kind of a context, you've kind of broken the verse down, you'ven analyzed it. Well, I just need to know, I need to just I need you to be very direct with me. Does the verse teach the concept of interpreting scripture with scripture? So?

41:28 AI was like, okay, I'm going to give you first arguments for that interpretation that it does teach interpreting scripture with scripture. So AI starts by trying to prove that using arguments that other people would make. And this is what it gives me. Some interpret interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual as a method of comparing one spiritual truth with another. This could be seen as an early reference to the principle of using scripture to clarify scripture, assuming that the spirit's teaching involves harmonizing the entire of God's revealed word. Now, that's not really what you can see. There is Even when AI tries to give you the argument that other people give, it's not really an argument.

42:10 It's just an assumption. It's just we are assuming, we are bringing our presupposition to the text that this teaches, comparing scripture with scripture. There's nothing there to really justify the claim. There's nothing textually that would prove this. There's nothing even in the words that are used that would prove this concept this Now, so then AI, I was like, okay, so I just need you to be more upfront here. Well, then AI states. The verse does not explicitly address the method of biblical interpretation or hermeneutics. I'm like, I know. Instead, it focuses on how spiritual truth are communicated and understood.

42:55 Paul emphasizes the role of the spirit and revealing and explaining divine wisdom, not the process of comparing scriptural text. The context is not about how to interpret scripture, but about the spiritual and conveying divine wisdom. The spiritual truths are interpreted or applied to the spiritual those in dwelt by the spirit, rather than the text being cross reference with other texts. So it's those who have received divine revelation, especially in this historical context, giving then to those who are spiritual that divine revelation, because those who are not spiritual, they're not going to receive it. They're not going to care. They they're not they have they're not saved, they don't care.

43:38 This is conveying spiritual truth, divine revelation to those who are spiritual, in a sense, to those who are saved. Right, So I so AI, and I got a lot more there. Ai tries to kind of do the whole whole concept that it's the spirit that gives us understanding, it's the spirit that gives us discernment, it's the spirit that helps us understand the scriptures, right, and try to do a little bit of that. And I immediately challenged DAYI, and I said, well we'll wait a minute, Wait a minute. It is absolutely obvious that the spirit isn't revealing and explaining divine truth to believers today due to the to the fact of complete disunity and millions of different interpretations on basically every verse in the Bible. So how then should First Corinthians two thirteen be applied today, if it even should be? All right? Now, I think the point here is this is Paul speaking to the church at corinth in their context, and in their context, the Word of God has not been completed, The New Testament has not been completed. God is still speaking in very unique ways at the time of First Corinthians. He's speaking directly, the inspiration of scripture is occurring. Divine revelation is being given.

45:05 A completely different thing. Then, after what happens once the Bible is completed? So Ai then said, this your observation, speaking of my observation about disunity and differing interpretations among Christians is an important critique of how First Corinthians two thirteen is often applied. If the spirit's role in revealing and explaining truth is taken as a present day guarantee, then the lack of unity and clarity raises significant theological and practical questions. So Ai said, let me provide you a nuanced approach to understanding and applying the verse today. So AI acknowledges that, look, within Christianity, there's no agreement.

45:48 I mean, what are we seeing. We just saw someone say I'm going to do a sermon. We listen to someone preach a sermon on how to interpret the Bible and completely mishandle Second Peter one twenty. Here's the thing. They would tell you that they handled Second Peter one twenty correctly, I'm saying they handled it incorrectly. They would tell you that they're handling First Corinthians two thirteen correctly. I would say they're handling it incorrectly. So there is not even agreement just right there, and one sermon, there's completely disagreement on it. What does that prove to you? If the Spirit is speaking and guiding and leading, well, then guess what. Either you've got to decide that one of us don't have does not have the Holy Spirit, so one of us is not saved. I guess you could go that direction, or maybe you have to agree that the way this actually works is not some mystical.

46:42 The spirit gives me information is that we take the Bible and we use proper rules of reading, comprehension and reading interpretation to discern the meaning of the text, and based off what we heard in that sermon, that was not done isa Jesus occurred, not exed Jesus. Things were being read into the text, not drawn from the text. And even AI when it steps away and looks at it just from a logical perspective about basic rules of reading interpretation, it agrees that the verses are that is of Jesus was occurring, because that's exactly what was occurring. So AI told me this reevaluating the context and original application.

47:28 So it's going to it tries to reevaluate the context and the original application. So here's what it gives me. Paul is referring specifically to himself. Amen, okay, great, because look at first Corinthius two thirteen, which things also we speak. Paul is referring specifically to himself and the other apostles who were uniquely inspired by the Spirit to proclaim God's wisdom. These truths they communicated were not derived from human reasoning, but we're directly taught by the Spirit. The context suggests that Paul is speaking primarily about the process of divine revelation to the apostles, which culminated in the writing of scripture. Yes, that's what this passage is about, and it fits perfectly with Second Peter chapter one, verse twenty. Now, if we go back here, you'll see that this is how this whole thing works. Go back to First Corinthians, chapter two, verse six. Howbeit we there's the We again speak wisdom among them that are perfect, yet not the wisdom of the world, nor of the princes of this world that come to not now, please note we speak wisdom among them that are perfect. Now there's no perfect person. This is speaking wisdom among those who are saved, because in Christ we are perfect in our position.

48:56 Right. But we there's we again, Paul and the apostles speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world, unto our glory, which none of the princes of this world knew, for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory. All right. So clearly the lost world don't know these They don't know, they don't understand these things, because if they would have, they wouldn't have been crucifying Christ. Okay, all right, But as it is written, I have not seen nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man. The things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his spirit. For the spirit searcheth all things jay the deep things of God. See, there's many things we cannot grasp or understand. Some things have to be given by divine revelation. Right, divine revelation is worked. God reveals what we we could not just understand on our own, or grasp or even find out on our own. God has to reveal it. Well. God gave his divine revelation to those who wrote the scriptures. It was revealed to them.

50:16 Nobody was there at creation, nobody was an eye witness to God. In the beginning. God created the heavens and the earth. But God divinely revealed that to the writer of Genesis, which we believe to be Moses. Right, the things Paul reveals, we may not be able to grasp or understand that, but it was divinely revealed to Paul. That's divine revelation given. Listen given to people, and divine revelation that specific, special, specific divine revelation was given to the apostles to the writers of the Bible, and that divine revelation ceased with the completion of the scriptures. All right, now, look at verse eleven. For what man knoweth the things of man, save the spirit of man, which is in him.

51:08 Even so, the things of God know no man but the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God, that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak. See, this is all about Paul and the Apostles, not in the words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth. Comparing spiritual things with spiritual things. They are taking the spiritual things that they have been given and given it to those who are spiritual. That's the context here. With the completion of the Biblical canon, the process of direct divine revelation has ceased. The spirit role today is not to reveal new truths. That's not what he does. Now.

51:53 Some will say he illuminates, and we can get into a whole argument about that, because again, if he's illuminating, well then why what is the illuminating Because we still can't come to an agreement on anything all right, So that is what that is what this And I've got plenty of other notes, and I asked AI about fifty other questions, but that is what this text is about. So let's do this. So in conclusion, and I asked AI this all right, because I well, it gave me two conclusions, because I asked for further clarification. The first conclusion it gave me was this one Corinthians two thirteen should primarily be understood in referring to the spirit's work and inspiring the apostles and ensuring the accurate transmission of God's revealed wisdom and scripture. This verse does not promise perfect unity or infallible understanding in this life. Instead, it points to the necessity of humility, diligent study, and focus on the central truths of this life. All right, So I then ask, so in conclusion, first Corinthians two thirteen cannot be used to teach the idea that the Bible itself teaches that the Bible of self teaches compare scripture with scripture has a key principle and Bible study. So then AI said, correct, And first Corinthians two thirteen. In conclusion,

53:25 First Corinthians two thirteen cannot be legitimately used to teach the idea that the Bible itself promotes interpreting scripture, with scripture as the key principle and Bible study. The verse, when understood in its proper context, is focused on the role of the Holy Spirit inspiring the apostles to communicate divine truths, not on hermeneutical methods of interpreting scripture. So what do we have here in a different conclusion? Won't go back to First Peter or Second Peter. I'm sorry, Second Peter, chapter one, verse twenty. Second Peter chapter one, verse twenty. Knowing this first that no prophecy of the scriptures, so none of the scriptures is of any private interpretation.

54:18 What does this mean in its context? It means no scripture was created, written, or originated by the private interpretation of the writers themselves. They didn't come up with these ideas, was that their private interpretations they were look at the very next verse, for the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. The origin of scripture is divine, not from the mind of men, not from their private interpretation. That's what Second Peter one twenty is about. Has nothing to do with comparing scripture with scripture, has literally nothing to do with that.

55:03 And anyone who says that it is is misapplying and mishandling, and they're doing is of Jesus, not exo Jesus, ex of Jesus. What do we learn? Scripture has a divine origin. It did not come someone didn't make up their ideas. It's not their interpretations of God. It's not their interpretations of what God said or did. It's the actual word of God. Next one Corinthians, Chapter two, verse thirteen. Which things also we speak the we there is the Paul and the apostles, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth. They were not teaching and giving what man's wisdom created or man's wisdom came up with. What they were giving was that which the Holy Ghost teacheth. The Holy Ghost spoke directly through them. They were given divine revelation. And then what they were they to do? They were then to compare spiritual things with spiritual Well, well, if we go in fact, I'm going to look here, I'm going to look here, I'm gonna go to First Corinthians two thirteen, going to go to the anti linear comparing. Is this Greek word Strong's g forty seven ninety three, soucrino, soucrino, socrino.

56:42 This idea of comparing spiritual things with spiritual it's the idea to uh, to interpret, to compare, all right, to combine with appropriate expressions, and it carries the It carries a lot of different I carry is the idea that the concept here is they received it. Now they're taking these spiritual concepts and guess what they're doing. They're giving them. They're to those who are spiritual. In fact, if we look up First Corinthians two thirteen, I'm gonna do this, just add more concept, more context. Here, give me one second.

57:26 Here we go First Corinthians to thirteen. All right, I'm going to read this in every translation, First Corinthians to thirteen. This is what we speak, not the words taught us by human wisdom, but in words taught by the spirit. Explaining spiritual realities with spiritual taught words. Now that's the inn iv So it handles it in a slightly different way. Hey, we have been taught spiritual realities, and we are going to explain them using spiritual words, the New Living translation.

58:10 When we tell you these things, we do not use words that come from human wisdom, and instead we speak words given to us by the spirit, using spiritual words to explain spiritual truths. So in other words, hey, we were given spiritual things, and we're going to speak of this in a spiritual way. We're not going to do this through earthly wisdom, our human you know, technique, or manipulative technique. We're going to speak of it in a spiritual way. That's completely different than comparing scripture with scripture, which one Corinthians two thirteen is not talking about in any way, shape or form. The esv as we impart these words not taught by human wisdom, but taught by the spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.

58:55 So we now we have two ideas. They're received divine revelation. They are going to give that divine revelation using spiritual words and spiritual wisdom, not using fleshly wisdom or fleshly techniques or second way of understanding it. They receive divine revelation and they're going to speak these spiritual things to those who are spiritual, to those who would be receptive to actually hearing it and pursuing an understanding of it. The Brean Study Bible. And this is what we speak, not in words taught to us by human wisdom, but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words the Brian literal, which also we speak not in words taught of human wisdom, but in those taught of the Spirit, communicating spiritual things by spiritual means. So this is do you see the two concepts. Now, if we go back to the entire we read the entire context, right, we read the entire context. And if you look here at the very next verse, verse fourteen. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for their foolishness unto him, neither can you know them, because they are spiritually discerned. Now, verse fourteen could make an argument that wait, comparing spiritual things with spiritual is we're going to take these spiritual words that we were taught by the spirit and we're going to give them to who are spiritual. Because the natural man receiveth not

1:00:28 the things of the Spirit of God. See, that's why the ESV kind of goes the direction it goes, all right, so we get the do we have the basic idea? I think we have the basic idea? Tewod Peter one twenty one Corinthians two thirteen. None of those passages are giving us hermeneutical principles and how to study the Bible, how to interpret the Bible. That it's not teaching scripture with scripture. None of that is being taught in these passages of scripture. To do so is your doing is to Jesus, not exted Jesus. Now I went through all of that relatively quick. But just what I want you to see is, wait a minute. There was far more to these verses than what we heard in those sermons and that sermon. And that's the problem, isn't it, Because sermons, the very nature of sermons actually takes you away from the text. It blinds you from the text. It keeps you from the text because you actually work on the text.

1:01:34 Is this tedious work which we just spent sixty one minutes doing. Now, if you go to church and your pastor does what I just did for sixty one minutes, you look around the next week, there's not going to be half. The people are not going to come back. They don't want that. People claim they want to go to church to study the Bible, No they don't. If a pastor just did what we did for sixty one minutes, nobody would come back. They want sermons, they want it to be about them. They want application, they want it, they want it all put together. But to get to the text is messy, and it's difficult, and you struggle with this and this and this. The concept of the sermon I think has done more damage to actually understanding the scripture. Maybe sermons are the number one culprit and destroying understanding of Biblical passages. But it is ironic that a sermon on how to interpret the Bible literally demonstrated misinterpreting Second Peter one twenty and First Corinthians two thirteen.

1:03:04 There we go, I'll stop right there. Who that was a lot of work. I hope that. I hope it all made sense. I hope it did. I was going through that really really, really fast. But if we need to, we can break it down in a far better way. I could organize it a little bit better if it need If need be, I definitely could. But I think we did. I think we did a relatively decent job there. I think we did relatively decent job. But it just demonstrates that. Look, if you talk to any Christians right many cases, they are very good at reciting basic hermeneutical principles. It's the thing is they don't apply them when it actually comes to preaching and teaching. Because we just heard a sermon that destroyed the meaning of on Peter two twenty and destroyed the meaning of First Corinthians two thirteen.

1:03:54 Ladies and gentlemen, that is not acceptable. All right, we'll stop right there. I want to do more, but yeah, I want to kind of go back and then try to slow down a little bit, go a little slower, right, read some of that a little slower. I know, I was like flying like one hundred words per minute. But hopefully it all worked out in the meantime. We'll stop there. Thank you so much for listening. I hope uh. Well, it's the holiday weekend going into the holiday week. I hope it's great for everyone. I hope it works out as well as it can for you. For those that this is a difficult time of year, you find yourself depressed, past trauma, filling alone. Please please grab onto things that just try not to compare your situation with anybody else a's you get to just let everyone else's situation be whatever.

1:04:54 They forget their situations. Grab onto those things that bring you happiness and joy for yourself. Grab on to that. Make the most of what you have. Don't look at what you have and say, well, other people they got all these people and they're gathering here and they've got family. You may be somewhere alone. Embrace in a censure you being alone, and make the most of it. Do exactly what you want to do. Enjoy yourself, right, so make the most out of it. I know that doesn't necessarily make all your feelings better, but yeah, if you can. You know, don't if you're looking at social media, looking at everyone post all their pictures about their get togethers and their families and they're talking about all the fun they're having and everyone's getting to just kind of put your fingers in your ear and go la la la la la, la, la la la la. Get off social media and just say, okay, what do I have? And then grab onto what you have and embrace it and make the most of it. Okay, make the most of it, and if you would like, you can look up that series we talked about, and we just played a part of the sermon on Bible interpretation thirty six sermons. Go buy you a notebook, get you a Bible, get you some eggnog. Okay, And if it's just you, just go to town, have fun examining all their principles and dissecting it and thinking about it, or just listen to other stuff.

1:06:21 And if that doesn't, just do whatever you want to do for fun. All right. I really do feel bad for people who find themselves in very difficult circumstances this time of year. I definitely understand. I could go through all different things that's happened in my life around this time of year. So yeah, so yeah, there's much more I'll say, but well I could say, but I'll just stop right there. Everyone, have a great day. God bless