Scripture vs Theology

0:02 Looking at our world from a theological perspective. This is the Theology Central podcast, making Theology Central. Have you ever been having a discussion with someone about the Biblical text, about something in the Bible, about how to interpret this verse, or interpret this verse, or what does this mean? Maybe you're having a lengthy discussion about Isaiah chapter forty. Maybe you're having a lengthy discussion about James chapter one, verses nineteen to twenty seven. Maybe you're having a discussion about Hebrews chapter six. Because these are texts that we have discussed here on this podcast. But have you ever been discussing it with someone? And maybe sooner or later, the discussion kind of turns more into a debate. They see it this way, you see it this way, and both people are arguing, And have you ever decided, you know, you just almost want to throw up your hands. Maybe you make this decision, maybe you just want to say it, maybe you just feel it. You just want to scream, hey man, look, your theology is showing. Your theology is showing I'm sorry, your theology is showing. That means we cannot have this discussion anymore. There's no point. Let's just forget this let's just give up. I'm sorry, but your theology is showing. Now many people will be like, well, thank you very much. I'm glad my theology is showing, because theology is important. Theology is the most important thing. Theology, theology, theology, theology.

1:33 I want to be known for my theology. Many people may see that almost like hey, that you're saying something positive about them. I see that now. Is if someone says, I'm sorry, but your theology is showing, I see that as a negative thing. Now we're going to discuss that well right after, I guess I give you a proper introduction. Good morning everyone. It is Monday, November fifth, twenty twenty four. It is currently nine fifty nine am Central Time, and I am coming to you live from the Theology Central studio located right here in Abbylee, Texas.

2:15 Now, I know it may sound a little strange. That the host of a podcast called Theology Central would even insinuate, would even hint that if someone's. Theology is showing, that's a bad thing. But in this particular situation that I'm describing, it is a bad thing. See, when people are. Talking about the Bible, when you're talking about how to interpret scripture. The last thing I want to see is your theology. I don't want to see your theology. I want to see the text. We need to be discussing the text, not your theology. And my concern is is that, over and over again, over and over again, what drives Bible interpretation is not the text. It's not context, it's not history, it's not culture, it's not language, it's not grammar.

3:12 What drives interpretation, over and over and over is people's theology. And once their theology is showing, then the text becomes lost. The text gets hidden because your theology overshadows the text. That to me is a problem. Even though I do a podcast called Theology Central, well, I want theology to be central, but guess what theology should be developed from the text. Theology should not be what determines how you read the text. And I hope that this discussion will be somewhat beneficial. Now, if you've been listening at all, you know we've had some important conversations about Isaiah chapter forty. In fact, we're doing a study of Isaiah chapter forty all the way to Isaiah chapter fifty five. Forty to fifty five. We're dealing with that entire section. Why because I have grown sick and tired of hearing sermon after sermon after sermon after sermon that goes to Isaiah forty or Isaiah forty three, anywhere in Isaiah, really just forget just Isaiah forty to fifty five, anywhere in the entire book. They just open it up, and next thing you know, they insert us into the text, They insert the church into the text. Soon Israel is lost, the historical context is lost, and it becomes about you.

4:36 It becomes about me and how to live the Christian life. And then they take promises that clearly aren't meant for us, and they say they're meant for us, and I get sick of that right over and over and over and over. I get sick of it so that I'm like, Okay, we're going to get to the text. Then we stumbled upon a sermon on James chapter one, nineteen to twenty seven. Once again they were saying things. I'm like that, I don't I think that's what the text is saying. So we worked on that over and over and over. I hear sermon after sermon after sermon, and here's what happens. You probably can do this, someone could play a sermon. You have no idea the name of the church, You have no idea what their theological system is.

5:19 You have no idea. You start listening, not always, but typically within maybe five to fifteen minutes. Once they give you the text and then they start talking, you'd be like, oh, well, you know that church is reformed? Are you know that church's dispensation all? You know that church is all millennial. You know that church is pre millennial. You know that church is lordship salvation. You know that church is calvinistic. You know that church is not calvinistic. Almost within fifteen minutes you hear their theology. Now they're telling everyone today, we're gonna study the Gospel of John. Today we're going to study the Book of Romans. And they sound so sincere, and they sound so oh spiritual. We're going to study the word of God. We're going to preach the word of God. But in reality, all they do is just reinforce.

6:09 They just take the text simply to reinforce the philological system everyone already holds to. Because it's their theology that you're studying, not the actual text. You can all you can listen to a sermon and almost immediately determine the theology. And once you determine the theology, like if I if I look first at the name of the church, Oh, it's Presbyterian, they're going to be an Isaiah. Well, I know what they're getting ready to do. It's going to be this allegorical spiritualize it. Okay, it's going to be the church. Okay, I know what they're going Oh, this is this church. Well, I know what they're going to do. Oh it's I know what they're going to do. The minute you kind of know the church, you almost know how they're going to interpret the text because they always interpret it according to the theology of the church, the theology of the denomination, and that that's just no. Your theology should not be determine how you and theology should not be the thing that determines how you interpret the text.

7:07 Once you determine how you interpret the text, is the text, the language, the grammar, the history, the context. And my my perspective is if you truly stay true to the text, if you truly stay true to the text, you're gonna find yourself in conflict with with every single philological system out there. Every you're gonna find your if you truly try to stay true to the text, you're gonna take off the reform people. You're gonna take off, the non reform people. You're gonna take off the Calvinists, the non Calvinist, your lordship, non lordship, you're gonna take off everyone. Because I don't think if you truly stay true to this to I don't think if you truly stay true to the text, you're ever going to find yourself in agreement fully with any system of theology. I think you're gonna constantly find yourself in conflict. I really believe that now there may have been time in my Christian life that it was like theology, theology, theology, theology. I mean, most of my education is in theological studies, so obviously I love theology.

8:19 But at some point you're like, well, wait a minute, Wait a minute. One of the things we constantly say is non Catholic says scripture alone, scripture alone. Oh, we talk a big game, we say all the right words. It's almost just a cliche. The scripture is the final authority for belief and practice. Oh we it's but it's all just a show. It's just a facade. It's it's not true in a practical sense. What is the authority is yours, your theology and you as an individual, You, as an individual, you interpret the Bible. How do you interpret the Bible? Typically, buy a theological system that you have been taught. You now read that into the text, you interpret it, and then you say this is the right way, and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong because you think your interpretation is right.

9:10 You basically think your interpretation is infallible. And then you go judge everyone else and declare who's a heretic and who's not a heretic. Really, the individual, the philological system is the authority, not the Bible. And so when we were doing all of the work yesterday, if you were listening, I spent two plus hours trying to develop a new interpretation of James one nineteen through twenty seven. And what you start realizing when you get into some of the difficult parts in the Book of James, Well, how come there's this interpretation and this interpretation, and this interpretation and this interpretation, Because no matter what the text you're studying, there's always multiple interpretations. But have you ever noticed something, Well, this interpretation belongs to this system of theology, and this interpretation belongs to this system of theology, and this interpretation belongs to this system of theology. Different interpretations are almost always associated with a specific philological system. If you believe in lordship salvation, if that's your theological structure, you're going to interpret James. You're going to interpret First John a very specific way. If you are not lordship, you're going to interpret James and First John and a completely different type of way. If your lordship, you're going to interpret the Sermon on the Mount one way. If you're not lordship, you're going to interpret a completely different way. Now why is it that for some weird reason? What And I

10:41 know we could get into an argument, well which comes first, but I'm going to say it. I think what determines how text are interpreted is more the philological framework, the theiological system which someone holds. I mean, if you really think about it. In Christianity, if you really just come on, just beyond this with I mean, be honest with yourself, be honest with me, be honest with everyone. Right when you become a Christian, you are given, you're taught a philological framework you're taught this is what we believe about baptism, this is what we believe about suff You are taught that very little, especially in discipleship. Are you rarely taught? You know what? Forget the theological system, forget that.

11:23 What we're going to do is we're going to focus on reading and studying the Bible based off Bible study methods that are more observational than they are interpretive. And here are the observational tools and the observational skills. This is how to teach you how to do an observational outline, how to do it even doing a chapter summary method, how to read and do an observational outline, and that over all the different methods is about observing the. Text, the texts, the text, the text. Most Christians either one don't even know most of the Bible study methods, and if they know them, they. Rarely do them. And this is what will happen.

12:05 Almost inevitably, you'll have someone start arguing with you about the text, right, and you'll say, okay, come out, come out, come out. All right, So this is the text we're arguing about. Maybe it's Romans, maybe it's James. Okay, great, So we're in this chapter. At the very minimum, I know you've done at least a chapter summary method on it, right, I mean, at the very minimum, I know you've done that, correct, So show me your chapter summary method. Oh you've not done that. We at the very least, I know you've done at least this or this, like you can have. You've done a word study, or you've done a book background, you've done a you can start asking some of them, and almost almost in every case, they have done none of the Bible study method. Yet they're sitting there telling you you're wrong. You're wrong, you're wrong, and you know what you want to say, you know what you may desire to say, you know what you probably should say.

12:56 Maybe you should stop talking because right now you're theology is showy. You are arguing your theology. You're not arguing the text. And then what people will do is, if they get mad, they'll go get a book from their philological system and a book or a commentary and they'll say, see the scripture right here, this scripture proves it. No, that scripture proves it because you're interpreting it and light of your philological system, how can you not see that? But it's very difficult to get people to acknowledge that. So this is a problem. Basically, what happens if we're honest with ourselves, we have this scripture versus theology, theology versus scripture.

13:42 Now, the church is very good at. Disguising this and making it sound like their theology is scripture and scripture is their theology. But if you really break it down, no again, And I think the giveaway is, well, when people become a Christian, what are they taught? First? I mean, just just walk around your church. I mean I always tell people to do this, Just walk around and ask them. Okay, tell me how you study the Bible? Come on, what is your Bible study methods? Now you can ask them and at fact, if you really want to, kind of do it. And I'm more like, you know, this is kind of setting them up. Hey, what do you believe about this? What do you believe about this?

14:24 What do you believe about this? They'll give you what they'll tell you. They'll be more than happy to say, oh I believe this, I believe this, I believe this, I believe this. Great, you believe all these things? Okay, Now, do you have any notebooks that would demonstrate your study that led you to this conclusion. You won't have notebooks that led them to this conclusion. You will have their conclusion that now determines how they read the text. It's I'm telling you this is the way it works in christiendom. You can deny it, you can tell me I'm wrong. It is the truth. The people sitting in the pew rarely do any meaningful study. But they're the ones who will say, you're wrong, You're wrong, You're wrong, you're wrong, you're wrong, you're wrong. I disagree, Well why are you? They'll be on social media, arguing, arguing, arguing.

15:14 Sometimes you want to just say. Stop talking. Did you study the text? And sometimes I'll oh, I study the text? What did that? What does that entail? That means? What did you do? Oh? You read MacArthur's book. Oh you read R. C. Sprull, or you read Martin Lloyd Jones. Oh great, you didn't study the text. You studied what the people who's on your theological team had to say about the text. That's not studying the text. So you say, okay, what Bible study methods do you know? Go, how do you do a thematic study? How do you do a topical study. How do you do a word study? How do you do a chapter analysis study? How do you do a chapter summary? How do you do a book background?

15:57 How do you do a biographical The most likely they can't even tell you the steps. They have no clue. Yet they'll be the ones that'll be so dogmatic about what the text says and will tell you you're wrong. Where did they get that from? From their favorite preacher? They listen to. Theology, I will say, not just often, but most of the time drives Bible interpretation. Theology I will say this, theology doesn't just drive Bible interpretation. I will go so far to say theology determines Bible interpretation. Again, you can just start playing a sermon for me. I can just close my eyes listen. Go oh that's a Presbyterian church.

16:52 Oh wait, dads, that's an independent fundamental Baptist church. Oh that's dispensational. Oh they're premillennial. Oh wait their lordship. Wait almost you can. It's almost. It's easy to do because you know what and if you see the name of the church, or you look and see what kind of church they are, and you look at the text, they're they're preaching, I can almost just go ahead and write out the outline, this is how they're going to interpret the text. And almost not always, but in most cases it turns out to be pretty close to the case, which. Is kind of that's kind of sad, but that's the way it works. Now, this tendency, I will say, you can call it Bible interpretation. You can say theology drives Bible interpretation. You can I think theology determines Bible interpretation. But I think this tendency is especially evident in how different traditions handles texts like what we saw in James Chapter one, James chapter two, or any other seemingly problematic passage. They will do is they'll, they'll, they'll, they'll, They're going to interpret that problematic passage according to their systematic theology. Now, how does theology determine interpretation? I in some ways I want to just say theology drives it, but I think I want to be almost more assertive and more dogmatic. Theology

18:22 determines interpretation. I think number one, it's because it gives you a pre existing framework which shapes your reading. You have a pre existing framework. Your theology is your pre existing framework which now is going to shape your reading. Typically, Christians come to the Bible with a philological system already in place, whether it's Calvinism, whether it's Arminianism, whether it's dispensationalism, whether it's covenant theology. Because when you become a Christian, you. Are given the system. It's like, welcome to Christianity. Here's your system. Now. It may not even if they don't give it a name.

19:04 Even if the church is not very philologically defined, there is still a system. Texts are then interpreted to fit that framework, rather than letting the text speak on its own terms. This is what happens. You become a Christian. There is a pre existing framework which is going to shape your reading. Christians come to the text with their philological system intact. The texts then are interpreted to fit that framework, rather than letting the text speak on its own terms. This is the problem. So you can go, don't bother, don't bother. I know how you're going to interpret the text. Don't bother, don't bother, because we don't really care about the text. You have a feel because and look at I understand. As pastors, you have no choice. Right, you get to pick your theological team, and you've got to interpret the Bible according to that theological team from this point forward, or you'll get fired. You'll tick off.

20:20 Someone in the church. And if someone in the church starts changing their theological system, they're gonna start disagreeing with you now about how you interpret the Bible. If they if they're on your theological team, they're gonna be like, yeah, good, good good. The minute they. Start shifting, or you start shifting, there's conflict because everyone is coming at it from their philological framework, the text gets lost reform theology. Let's just give some examples. We'll emphasize sola fide faith alone. So james discussion of faith without works isad is often explained in ways that align with Paul theology, even though James appeared to be emphasizing something practical. In other words, if you go to James and your theology is this, you're going to interpret it this way. If your theology, we could get all.

21:12 Kinds of examples. Lordship's gonna see it. We can just it. Just it goes on and on and on and on and on. Presbyterians, you know, next thing you know, you're baptizing babies and you're like, They're like, you just don't know how to read the Bible, or maybe your theology is reading it into the Bible where others will be like, where do you even find this? We go on, I mean, just lose salvation. Don't lose your salvation. Ohkay, Israel not Israel, Church, not the church, all this kind of stuff. This, this proved, this proves your salvation. This you know, you don't have to prove your salvation just it just never ends. So pre existing framework shapes reading. Or we could say this, Christians come to the text with a thiological system already in place.

22:09 The text are then interpreted to fit that framework, and they do this rather than letting the text speak for itself. We have to destroy the pre existing framework. Whenever we study the Bible. I say this all the time. I use this illustration. Some people think it's too violent sounding, but I use it to try to shock people into doing this. We're getting ready to study this text, all right, Take your pre existing framework, take your system of theology. Okay, I know it's fluffy. I know you like to refer to your theological system as fluffy, and you like to pet fluffy, and you love fluffy. Fluffy is your favorite theological system. Well, guess what.

22:54 We're getting ready to study the Bible. So now that we've arrived at church, Okay, you got it. Okay, everyone pick up their fluffy because everyone calls it fluffy and they're holding fluffy. But I love fluffy. Fluffy's my favorite theological system. Well, you gotta take Fluffy out back, and you got to put it down. You gotta put it down. There's a gun waiting for you back there. You gotta shoot Fluffy. Fluffy has to die. No, No, that's horrible. Look, not a real dog, Fluffy. Your theological system has to die. Why because we're about to study the Bible. Keep your stinking framework outside of the church. Leave it in the parking lot here. We're gonna study the text. Now, guess what that at times is going to be in conflict with Fluffy. That at times is going to be in conflict with your favorite theological system. And even if it's not in conflict with you want to see the text.

23:48 You don't want me just to lay your theological system upon the text. But you know what the reality is. Even though Christians say, oh, I want to study the Bible, they don't want to study the Bible because if they did, it would get offended and get ticked off because it probably doesn't go with our little philological system. The pre existing framework's got to go. It's got to be burned to the ground. It's got to be shot, it's got to be killed. It's got to go away, it's got to be buried. And then you study the Bible. Now, after you study it may fit perfectly with your theological system. Then you can run outside and try to revive fluffy. But the next time you. Study the text, Fluffy's got to go. Anytime the Bible is being studied, your philological system has to be set aside. Now, this can bring about a fear of contradiction. Interpreters often prioritize maintaining consistency across scripture, even at the expense of the natural reading of the text. So what happens over and over and over is, wait, we got to be consistent.

25:03 So we interpret this, so we interpret this, and so you have to follow some kind of consistency. But true Bible studies sometimes guess what the natural reading of the text may go. Oh, man, I don't know if that works or does that work? Does that not work, and you're going to be willing to deal with and face that uncomfortableness, that apparent contradiction. You have to be willing to do this. You've got to be willing to do this. Embrace the apparent contradiction, Embrace the uncertainty. Don't fear it, Embrace it, love it, enjoy it. So the pre existing framework has to be burned to the ground. This fear of contradiction has to be replaced with accepting possible contradiction, accepting unanswered questions. Accepting it may not make any sense.

26:10 A third issue is in confessional commitments. Those who are bound by a denominational or a confessional statement may feel obligated to interpret scripture in a way that aligns with that tradition. And that's kind of what happens. Well, this is our confession, when now you have to interpret the Bible in accordance with that confession. I love confessions of faith. I love the creeds. What I don't love is when the confession or the creed becomes the way I interpret the Bible. Whenever I study the Bible. I don't care what the confession says.

26:50 I don't care what the Creed says, I don't care when I'm studying the Bible. Now, after I'm done studying the Bible, I may compare my interpretation to this Confession or to this Creed and see if there's agreement or disagreement. The Creeds and the Confessions are awesome and should be studied and should be known. They don't determine how you interpret the Bible. You can't. You just cannot allow that to happen. So we have the pre existing conditions or pre existing pre existing conditions medical terms, pre existing framework. It is a pre existing condition, right, it's your theology, and it's going to corrupt and impact your interpretation of Bible.

27:35 I guess I could build a new illustration there, but a pre existing framework. We got to get rid of the fear of contradiction and embrace uncertainty. Embrace contradiction. You got to your commitment should be to the Text before it is to any confession or any Creed. And I love the Confessions and Creed. Some people think that when you say things like that, that you're at war with the Confessions or Creeds. No, I tell everyone to read it and study it. The catechisms, the create all of it. But your loyalty is to the text. And what did we see how many reform churches preaching on Isaiah forty They kept referencing what the Heidelbird Catechism because the Heidelbird Catechism references Isaiah forty when.

28:17 It talks about comfort. Well, I don't care that the Heidelberg Catechism references Isaiah forty and applies that comfort to us. The Heidelbird Catechism isn't the word of God. The word of God, so I need to understand Isaiah forty, verse one and how Isaiah understood it, and what it meant, and how what it meant at the time. Based off its context. It's text, not how the heidel Bird Catechism uses it, or in some cases misuses it. I don't care if it's Luther. I don't care. If it's Calvin, I don't care. I don't care if it's Augustine. I don't care who it is. I want to read the church fathers, I want to know them, but they don't determine how I the text. I don't care if I end up going out.

29:04 I'm in conflict with MacArthur R. C. Sproull, Martin. You name the famous path. I don't care if I'm in disagreement with them, I don't care. They don't determine truth. And so many times people just go and you can tell when you get into an argument with someone about the text. Next thing you know, they're sending you this stuff and you're like, dude, you just you just plaged your eyes half of MacArthur's commentary. You're just you're just rewriting it. Do you have any original thought on your own? Did you do any actual study on your own? Can you actually engage the text? Or all you can do is just parrot the things you've heard. You're more committed to your favorite preacher, you're more committed to your theological system. Now, this sometimes leads to what some may refer to as pastoral concerns. Logical interpretations are often shared by the practical implications they produce. Now, this is a different problem. We'll see if we interpret the text this way, it could lead to this issue or this issue or this issue.

30:14 So sometimes the pastor will go, well, if I do this, well, this could create concern, or this could create the You've got to start being worried about pastoral concerns, and you got to deal with the text. Who cares if it makes everyone in the pew man? Who cares? If it makes everyone in the pew uncomfortable? Who cares if it makes everyone in the pew walk out of the church. Who cares? You either care about the text or you're worried about Oh wait, this could impact this, and this could impact it. Stop worrying with the pastoral concerns. So pastors may downplay or over emphasize something based on their pastoral priorities. They have pastoral priorities are like, well, I gotta do this and I don't want this, because they're trying to balance making sure everyone stays in the church happy and with there nobody will get mad and take their ball and go home. Well, the minute you start doing that, you gotta please little Johnny.

31:12 Your little Johnny's gonna get upset. Well, then guess what, Then everyone in the church can just acknowledge it's all a big game. It's basically politics. Pastors have to walk this fine line or are they gonna take everyone just forget? Then? You know what, can we just throw the Bible in the trash can and just say we're just here to have a little bit of spirituality because nobody really cares about the text. If you have to kind of ooh, well, I. Got to do this with the text. I gotta do this with the text because I got to make sure I'm maintaining doing this for the church. Then the church becomes the priority, not the text. Your theology becomes the priority, not the text.

31:55 So we have this framework that's got to be destroyed. We have this fear that we got to get over with, and we got to embrace contradiction, embrace complexity, embrace not having answers. We gotta stop being so committed to a confession or a creed and be more committed to the text. And this pastoral concern. Oh, I can't do this. I can't say this, I can't do this. I can't do this because you gotta. I Now, look, it's easy for me to say I'm kind of basically, you know, in a sense, done with that whole world. I'm basically done with that whole world. I understand. If you're right there in the middle of being a pastor and your livelihoods dependent upon it, you're gonna go, well, you know, I'm gonna do this. I'm gonna do this I'm gonna do this because I gotta keep everyone happy.

32:39 I gotta maintain That's just that's just that's just garbage, man, that's just h That's just that's I can't stand that. Now. Why does all of this happen? Why does all of this happen? Right? Those are some of the issues. Why does all of this happen? Well, because I know this is going to be shocking to everyone. Scripture is complex. The Bible. I know this is gonna now. Look, as someone who's spent most of my entire adult life pursuing philological education.

33:21 This is what you're going to have to realize. The Bible is not a systematic philological not a systematic theology textbook. The Bible is not a systematic theology textbook. It is not. It's a collection of writing addressing various context addressing various audiences, having different purposes. This diversity creates tensions. Faith works, law, Gospel, Old Testament, New Testament, Israel, Church promises this, that covenants all of these different things. Theology seeks to resolve this and make it systematized and make it simple, and so you learn the system. The system attempts to take this complexity and simplify it. But by simplifying the complexity, what you tend to do is then the theology overshadows the text.

34:22 And so then you just simply read the simplicity of the theology into the complexity of the scripture. And what gets lost is the scripture. Scripture is complex. You've got we've got to embrace its complexity. We got to embrace Well, wait a minute, Wait a minute. Okay, wait, so we in Isaiah? Okay, wait, so this is about people in Babylonian captivity. So I know I love this idea of comfort, but is that comfort really for me? And wait? Is Israel the same as the Church? And wait? Wait, the new covenant that's made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah, why don't we continually apply this to us Over there? In Ezekiel it talks about giving people a new heart. Well, wait a minute, that's referring to Ezekiel, and once they get the new heart, they go into the land. What don't I have to separate that from us? Wait? Wait a minute, So the sermon on the Mount seems.

35:06 Okay, how do we interpret that? Wait? Okay, wait, Well, the reality is we all continue to send and wait. The reality is we pray to a god who supposedly in charge. We got to deal with the complexities and the problems and the and the questions that are raised from and all systematic theology will try to give you a simple way to resolve it. But that simplicity destroys the complexity of the text. And that's why pastors will say a lot of people think this is so complex, a lot of people think this is difficult. They'll do this with the Book of Revelation. I don't know why people think it's really quite So it's really quite simple because you're about to just give me page after page of some philological interpretation of the book, and you're just going to you're not gonna worry about the complexity.

35:54 You're gonna be like, this is what. The text says, this is what the text means. Because you're quoting from this common carry this commentary, this commentary, you're just reading the commentary you studied into the text. You're not dealing with the complexity of the text. So scripture is complex. So this leads people do they look to a systematic theology to resolve that complexity, which then causes the problem I think another reason this happens is human beings. They like simplicity, they like consistency, They like something to be coherent. They have this need. Humans have these needs that I think sometimes actually are contrary to the actual study of the text. Humans will naturally seek some form of consistency. So when a passage appears challenging a philological system, that's what they will go to. Say, the text is too challenging, but a philological system, a commentary will give you a simple interpretation. That's what they will turn to. So in many cases, people will turn to kind of a philological system that harmonizes or simplifies it, even.

37:19 If that means. Basically hurting or overshadowing or almost hijacking the actual meaning of the text. People want they want an answer. They want it simple. They don't want complex, they don't want questions, they don't want unresolved issues. They want it to all make sense, and they want it in three points and they want to be out by noon. I think a problem is that human beings have certain needs, wants, and desires, and that trump's actually studying the text. They go to the text to get some of their needs met, and if their needs is for answers and for simplicity, and for not all this complexity. They'll find they'll take whatever they need to make the text say whatever they need to say so they feel better. Everybody just wants to be They just want to feel better. Well, I'm sorry when you study the text and you don't always feel better.

38:19 You don't always have your nice little wrapped up answer. You know, no, Sometimes you're like, I don't know what in the world just happened. I have no idea, I have no idea. They want the sermons to be simple three points. Typically they want a very simple outline. They don't want the pastor to get into all the complexity. It's too convoluted, it's too difficult. I just give me a nice little sermon. Well, you gotta stop worrying about people stink in needs and get to the text. So scripture is complex, we say what happens? People have these needs. The needs trump the text. A lot of people live in a philological echo chamber. Many interpreters operate within philological bubbles, relying on commentaries, traditions, schools of thought that reinforce their existing views. This limits engagement with alternative interpretations and you know what this does. It destroys engagement with the actual text.

39:18 You don't actually engage the text. You read the text in light of your favorite philological system because you live in that echo chamber. You live in that bubble. So you just read everything of that into the Bible. You've got to burn down the philological echo chamber. You got to get to the text. Well, guess what happens. A lot of people have a fear of uncertainty. Allowing the text to challenge a theological system will feel destabilizing. People will feel destabilized, they'll feel confused.

40:06 So it's easier to simply interpret the text in a way that reaffirms the system that everyone agrees with. To grapple with unresolved tensions is just going to make people feel unstable. It's going to create fear of uncertainty. They're not going to know what to believe, they don't know what to do, and they're going to get mad. They'll get they'll get defensive, they'll get ticked off, and you get Look, you can go back and listen to a lot of my sermons, especially when the church was bigger. I mean, I'm constantly challenging presuppositions, constantly challenging. You know, they're fluffy, and then you've heard even during sermons sometimes arguments are pushbacks that would occur in the past because people don't like that instead of just embracing it, like, man, this is so awesome to be in the church where we're questioning and challenging. All of a sudden, it's the defensiveness and argument to argument their argument.

41:01 They are giving an argument. They're becoming argumentative if I can speak correctly today. And you're just like, well, well, wait a minute, we're just now studying the text. Did I miss something you spent you know, you were at home all week studying the text. You haven't even looked at the text all week. But now you're showing up. You're ready to argue, even though you don't have any clue what you're talking about. Or you're back there looking up in your you know MacArthur study Bible looking to see what he said in his commentary. Do you want to study the text or not? Well, many don't want to study the text, so they go find a church where they get they're nice, little, it's certain, it's comfortable, it's nice, it feels because they don't really want to be in a place where they study the text.

41:50 Now, I could just take James chapter two. I could show you how Reform theology would interpret it, how the Holiness Tradition, Wesleyans or Methodists would interpret it, and I could show you how Catholic Church would interpret it. Every system of theology has a completely different interpretation of James Chapter two. Not interesting? Well, guess what wherever team you are on, you're going to interpret it based off the team. You don't know if you're even actually studying the text anymore. You're just looking to see what your team says. And that's why what happens. Pastor, I'm looking for a good commentary. Can you recommend me a good commentary? What is he going to do? He's going to give you a commentary that reaffirms the philological system that you are already a part of.

42:38 And you're never going to get to the text because everything you read is going to tell you this is what the text means, and you don't know because you've never gotten within fifteen hundred miles of the actual text. So is there anything that can be done about this problem? Well, I know it sounds cliche. I know it sounds like a bumper sticker answer, but maybe we could start with the text and not with our theology. How about you began interpreting by letting. The text speak within its historical and literary context and resist the urge to impose your theological framework immediately. How About do actual study of the text, do a Bible study method, Actually read it over and over and over.

43:28 Do an observational outline, not an interpretive outline. How about don't look at any commentaries. How about just live with the text. How about acknowledge what your theological system is. I'm like, okay, we're getting ready to study this. Okay, you name the book. If it's Romans, if it's First John, you know the theological framework that has that has so impacted how you've interpreted First John or James or Romans your entire Christian life. You've been taught a certain way to it. How About you go, I'm going to acknowledge, here's my philological system, here's my philological framework, and you in your mind mentally take that theological system behind the building and put it down. And then you're like, I'm going to come back to the text, and you don't care.

44:15 You don't care if the text. If your interpretation of the text contradict your theology, you don't care. If your interpretation of the text contradicts your church, you don't care because you're not bound. By any of that. At least in the non Catholic system, you're supposed to be bound by this. I don't think we really believe that, but we at least claim that. Right. How about we begin interpreting by letting the text speak for itself within its historical literary context and resist the urge to impose philological framework on the text. Am I saying that theological and work as bad?

45:00 No. After you come up with your interpretation, you can then go compare it to Fluffy and you can be like, oh well, I got a problem here. Disc seems to contradict this. What do I do? What do I do? What do I do? What do I do? What do I do? What do I do? What do I do? What do I do? What do I do? What do I do? So start with the text, get back to the tech. That's what we have to do. Number two, how about we recognize and acknowledge our biases. We all come to the text with the biases. We all come to a text with presuppositions. Every interpreter brings a bias to the text.

45:51 Recognizing these biases can help mitigate. Their influence. If you recognize to start with the text, not your theology. But you've got to acknowledge that theology. You've got to acknowledge that biases that you're bringing to the text, You're approaching the text with it. You've got to acknowledge it. If you will acknowledge that, then it will at least help possibly let you see, Oh, my biases is showing, my theology is showing. So start with the text, recognize your biases, and recognize your thiological system. Here's a third one. How about allow for tensions. Not every tension in scripture needs to be harmonized. Acknowledging the tension can lead to our rich ethological reflection. You don't not everything he's going to have a nice little answer.

46:47 Not everything's going to be harmonized. Not everything's going to work, Not everything's going to fit together. Sometimes you're going to be left baffled, confused, frustrated, and you're just going to have to embrace that. How about prioritize Exejesus over semantics or systematics. Maybe I should say it that way, not semantics. That wouldn't even make sense, right, prioritize exegesis over systematic systematics. I think systematics. That's how I should say it. I'm coming up with the idea of curve you know, while I'm speaking Exo Jesus over. Let's do it this way.

47:35 Prioritize exegesis over systematic theology. There, let's do it that way. I guess you could call it systematics, but let's just call it systematic theology. Then it's clearer, right, It makes more sense that way, exegesis over systematic theology. No. I love systematic theology. I love it, love it, love it. Most of my degrees in theological studies, so I've read systematic theologies. I love them. Now, there was probably a time in my Christian life that they were probably determining how I interpret the text more than the text itself.

48:16 Systematic theology is important. I'm not against it, but it should arise from exegesis rather than systematic theology dictating how you do exegesis, how you interpret the scriptures. Does that make sense? Systematic theology is great, but it should arise from your study of the text, your exegesis exegeting the text, taking it apart, interpreting it, studying it, observing it. That should give rise to your theology. So you've got to have and it says study exegesis over systematic theology. Bible study should be more important than systematic theology, and especially in a non Catholic system, your theology should arise from your study. Your theology should not dictate how you interpret in your study. You should avoid bending the text to fit your pre existing existing philological system. Now, the thing is, it's very hard to see when you're doing that. You just read it and go, well, that's what it says. Like a Presbyterian can go to a text say that's infant baptism, and I could be looking at it going what in the world are you talking about? Now, neither one of us thinks we're bending the text. Someone is bending the text because either infant baptism is there

49:48 or it's not there. Both cannot be right. So someone is bending the text, who whom. So we have to start with the text, not with our theology. We have to recognize and acknowledge what are the philological biases. That we're bringing to it. We have to allow for tensions, and then we have to prioritize exegesis study over systematic theology. And then I think we have to engage with diverse perspectives. Reading interpretations from other traditions broadens understanding and it challenges your assumptions.

50:44 You've got to hear different perspectives. That's why do we do the sermon reviews, because the key is you get to hear their perspective. You get to hear my perspective as a listener. You listen to one broadcast, you get two perspectives. Now, those perspectives may be confusing. It may be maddening that there's so much disagreement, and it can be maddening. Let me make it very clear, it can be maddening. I mean sometimes you hear my frustration. Why is it every. Stink in time I listen to a sermon, it's like, I don't agree with this, I don't agree with it. Oh why did I just review this sermon? But then I reviewed another sermon. That sermon said. That sermon is wrong. That sermon said that sermon is wrong, and I think both of them are wrong for crying out loud? Can there ever be agreement? But you know what, the more perspectives you hear, it may actually help you determine and see where theology might be driving these interpretations. Sometimes, the more different perspectives you hear and read, you'll start going, well, wait a minute, what is going on here? Why do they interpret it this way? And why do they interpret it this way? You know what you'll discover. Sometimes what you'll discover is that theology is driving the interpretations, not the text. So those are some things that can be

52:17 done about it. Here's some things I think we can remember. I think there are some things we could remember. Theology should be a guide. It is not the master. The text is the master. Theology is a guide, but the text has to be the master. Theology may help us understand scripture, but it does not control its meaning. Your theology does not control its meaning. It may assist, it may help. It may give you something to take the meaning of text and bounce it off of and check it with, but it does not determine the meaning. Good theology is built on scripture, not the other way. Theology is built on your interpretation of the scripture. Your interpretation of the scripture is not built on your theology. I think that's something we have to remember. Theology is the guide, it's not the master. The scripture is the master. I think another thing we have to consider is faithfulness to context.

53:25 When you have something like James two, James one, the text has to be allowed to speak in its context. You've got to allow Isaiah forty has to be allowed to speak in its context. Hebrew six has to be allowed to speak in its context. You know what the context is for all of that, James, Isaiah forty or Hebrew six. It's not your church, it's not your life. It's not now, it's then, it's them, it's not here. Now you and I know that you may not like that. And that may ruin your nice little sermon, because you've got to make it all about us, and you've got to give us three little points of application. Theology is a guide, not the master. Scripture is the master. Be faithful to the context and don't take the context and just do.

54:30 Whatever you want with it. And I think that's just another thing we can say. We just have to acknowledge the complexity of it. All two thousand years of church history, nobody can agree literally on anything, So what can you do? Nobody likes to embrace that complexity. It makes people nervous. So what do you do. You find a church that teaches a certain way, you acknowledge that's the way is taught, and then you interpret the Bible that way, and then you just act like everyone else who doesn't see it that way. They don't know how to read the Bible. They're blind, what is wrong with them? They're stupid, they're heretics, they're. Idiots, or or or.

55:13 I know this is going to come as a shock. They're interpreting it according to their theology. And so now it's your system versus their system. And guess what gets lost when people are debating their systems the texts, and it's hard to get to the text because as soon as you start arguing with someone, they just pairrot their system. Now I started saying this in my church, and I think it offended some people and may have contributed to a number of people left. Don't come with me arguing with me about anything unless you have first done to study.

55:57 So many times in whatever we're getting ready to study, I would be like, Okay, this is going to be controversial, but here's what you have to do before you come argue with me. I need you to come and show that you've. Looked up every use of this word. You have done this, You've done a chapter summary, you've done this, you've done an observational outline. If you have done these things, then you can come to me. But if you haven't, there's no point in arguing because you're arguing on the basis of not doing study. So that means you're probably arguing from the basis of your presupposition or your theological system that you're bringing to me. Well, then I'm just going to be me trying to use the text to argue against your theological system, and we're never going to get anywhere because you're not going to be able to see the text because you're so blinded by your theological system.

56:41 And guess what, nobody ever wanted to do the work. I know, shocking, isn't it. They still wanted to argue, They still wanted to tell me that I'm wrong. But I didn't want to come back and say, well, you know, here's my notebook. I did everything. I did all the work. Nobody wants to do the work. And if they did argue, almost inevitably, I could be like, oh, that's interesting you googled that, huh, because I can google it and look, I can look at that I've found the same paragraph. Wow, shocking. So you just want death by Google? You just want death by who can look up the best quotes from the best books. Is that how we're gonna do our theological disagreement? Wow? So let me guess You're gonna go find books that agree with your lordship or your a millennialism, and I'm gonna go find books that don't agree with it.

57:30 Which books are better? But nobody's actually studying the. Text scripture versus theology. The reality is theology has won and scripture has lost. Now, am I saying throwout theology? Absolutely not? Am I saying throw out confessions of faith or creeds? Absolutely not? We need systematic theology, we need the confessions, we need the creeds because after we've spent our time working, working, working, working on the text, then we can look over and go, hmm, wow, this is problematic. These people all say that I'm wrong. Okay, Now I got to go back and try to figure out what I did wrong?

58:12 Why am I wrong? What happened? Am I wrong textually? Or am I just wrong? Because I now am in at odds with this theological system. And let me tell you, if you become more committed to the text than you are a system, you're going to find yourself really unwelcomed in any church. The church doesn't want that. You're going to be an outsider. The institutionalized church is not going to be the place for you, because the church is not a place where people are hungry for the text. They come to the text simply to reinforce the theology they've already been taught. That's all Bible study is is simply to reinforce the theology of that particular institution, that particular denomination. Bible study and preaching is simply to reinforce what you already the system that everyone's already accepted. And if everyone will just play along, there's harmony, there's unity, and everything is great.

59:09 But if you're like, well wait a minute here, I got an issue. Be gone now. He said, well, should a church have a theological system? It should? It should. I got no problem with that. Should have a confession of faith. I'm full support of that. But everyone in the church should be like, however, our commitment is to the scripture, So whenever we get ready to open our Bibles and we are going to study whichever Romans Hebrews. We're not going to worry about what our system of theology says, what our confession says. We don't care about any of that. We're going to study the text. Now. Is that perfect? I'm not saying it's perfect.

59:52 There's still going to be problems even with what I'm suggesting. Why Because we're sinners, so we're going to become selfish and arrogant, and we're going to have all of the same kind of issues. But that's why I try to come up with a new interpretation of James, because I'm not bound by any of that. So I can go to church and say, James Chapter one, nineteen to twenty seven, we're gonna spend two plus hours trying to come up with a new interpretation. Well, we already have an interpretation. I don't care what any I don't care what any creed says, Confession of Faith says, any commentary says. I don't care what our theological team says. I don't care. I'm not bound by any of that. And if I'm going to be bound by that, then there's no point studying the Bible. You say, well, what's the sermon on?

1:00:35 Well pick a text. Okay, Well here's what just is where to act like a Catholic priest. Well, here's what the church says, here's what our theological team says, it serves as basically a magister of authority. Well then I just well just go back to a Catholic church and. Just listen to fifteen minute homilies that basically tell me what the church says it's supposed to mean. Well, great, wonderful. No actual engagement with the text. We condemn Catholics for that. All we do is play a better game where we pretend we're engaging the text when reality we're just looking at the text through the lens of our theological belief system.

1:01:18 And I'm just as guilty of this as anybody else. Scripture versus theology, theology versus scripture. It's a problem. You may not want to admit it, but it's a problem. All right, Thanks for listening, everyone, have a great day. I hope that went well. I hope so. Man. At the beginning, my voice was having some technical difficulty, so that did not make it pleasant. But I think we did pretty good. There. Now here's what we're going to do.

1:02:02 It's sixty two minutes. As soon as I end this. As soon as I'm done, I'm going to hit the stop button and then I just fill out some basic metadata and then this is uploaded. It's a spreaker, which then sends it out to all of the podcasting apps. I had to do some editing of our RSS feed today. I won't get into all the reasons why, but I had to because this thing that keeps track of all of your statistics, it's going away. So now spreakers like, you've got to get this out of your RSS feed or your RSS feed is going to be broke. But when you edit your RSS feed, don't make one mistake, because if you do, your entire RSS feed is broken and none of your content's going to make it to any of the podcasting apps. Well, I had to do the editing this morning. I have no idea. I just I just grabbed a large section of it and delete and just like okay, save, I'm good, am I did I do it right? Have no idea. So as soon as I upload this, if it does not show up on all of the podcasting apps within about ten to fifteen minutes. Then I have completely broken my RSS feed and then I'm going to just then I don't know, I'm going to then quit, give up, and just I don't know, do something drastic. Now, for those using the church one app Sermonadio, completely different. I upload it directly to that platform, so that'll that'll be good to go, and it has its own RSS feed, so that RSS feed will still work. But let's hope that the uh,

1:03:32 the other theology central RSS feed the main one. Let's hope it works. So we're going to find out here in just a few minutes, So thank you for listening. Just remember. And this war between scripture and theology, if we're going to be non Catholic, then we got to find a way to let the scriptures win. And if the scriptures win, you're going to find yourself in common inflict with pretty much other Christians and the Church. Yeah, that's not good. God bless