The Danger of Reading Scripture Through a System

We all bring beliefs to the Bible. We have heard sermons, learned from teachers, and formed opinions. Some of those beliefs may be correct. Others may need to change.

When we organize those beliefs into an overall explanation of the Bible, we have what people call a theological “system.”

Having an organized understanding can help us. But what happens when a passage does not seem to fit?

Do we examine our understanding? Or do we make the passage say what our system needs it to say?

That question applies to everyone—including the writer of these studies.

When people heard more than Jesus said

Read John 21:18–23.

Jesus had spoken about Peter’s future death. Then he told Peter to follow him.

Peter noticed the disciple whom Jesus loved and asked what would happen to him.

Jesus answered with an “if.” If Jesus wanted that disciple to remain until he came, that was not Peter’s concern. Peter’s responsibility was to follow Jesus.

A report then spread among the believers that this disciple would not die.

But John corrects that report. Jesus had not said the disciple would not die.

Notice the difference:

What Jesus said: If he wanted the disciple to remain, that was his decision.
What people concluded: The disciple would not die.

The conclusion went beyond the statement. An “if” had become a promise.

We do not need to accuse those believers of dishonesty. But we do need to notice their mistake.

People can repeat an explanation until it becomes familiar. That does not mean the explanation matches what Scripture says.

Read the whole conversation

John’s correction also shows why context matters.

Jesus was telling Peter to follow him. Peter asked about someone else’s future. Jesus brought Peter’s attention back to his own responsibility.

If we pull Jesus’ answer out of that conversation, we can miss its point.

Before using a verse to support a belief, ask:

What is the writer discussing here?

Read the paragraph. Notice what comes before and after it. Then consider how it fits the rest of the book.

A sentence should be understood as part of the message in which it appears.

Remember the first readers

The Bible’s books were written to real people in real situations.

Revelation, for example, was sent to seven named churches in Asia. John expected people to hear it read aloud and respond to its message. He described himself as sharing in their suffering and endurance in Jesus (Revelation 1:1–11).

Those churches faced actual problems.

Christians in Smyrna faced suffering and imprisonment. In Pergamum, a faithful witness named Antipas had been killed. Some churches were tolerating false teaching (Revelation 2).

That is where our study should begin.

Before asking whether a vision describes today’s news, ask:

What was John communicating to those churches?

This does not mean every event he described had to happen during their lifetimes. A message can help its first readers while speaking about their future.

But an explanation of Revelation must account for the people who first received it.

We cannot know exactly what every first reader thought. We can examine what John wrote, the situations he addressed, and the response he called for.

Let the passage explain its pictures

Revelation uses pictures to communicate its message. Sometimes it explains those pictures directly.

In Revelation 1:20, the lampstands represent churches.

In Revelation 20:2, the dragon is identified as the devil and Satan.

Those explanations give us clear reasons for understanding the images that way.

But knowing that the dragon represents Satan does not automatically tell us what the thousand years mean.

We still have to examine that question.

Someone who believes the thousand years describe an exact length of time must explain why. Someone who believes they represent a period symbolically must also explain why.

Neither person settles the question simply by saying, “My way takes the Bible seriously.”

Both need to show how their explanation fits the passage.

Do not make a passage prove too much

Read Acts 15:1–21.

The disagreement concerned Gentile believers—people who were not Jews. Did they have to be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses?

Peter described how God had received Gentiles. James then quoted Amos about restoring David’s fallen tent and Gentiles seeking the Lord.

James used that passage to support receiving Gentile believers without requiring circumcision.

That is an important conclusion. We must account for James’s use of Amos when we study the prophecy.

But does Acts 15, by itself, answer every question about Israel’s future?

We would need further evidence to make that larger claim.

A passage can establish something important without answering every related question.

Give people who disagree a fair hearing

Before criticizing someone’s interpretation, we should understand it.

What do they actually believe? Which passages do they use? How do they connect those passages?

We should explain their position in a way they would recognize.

Then we can examine the disagreement:

Does the explanation fit the paragraph?
Does it account for the first readers?
Does it depend on something the passage never says?
Does the evidence support the conclusion?
Is there a passage that challenges our own understanding?

Disagreeing with someone does not give us permission to question their honesty or claim to know their motives.

We can challenge an explanation while treating the person fairly.

Our understanding must remain open to correction

The goal is to understand what the biblical writers communicated.

That requires us to separate three things:

What the passage says.

What we conclude from it.

What we are still unsure about.

Drawing a conclusion is part of Bible study. But we must explain how we reached it. We should not present a possibility as a certainty or an assumption as something God said.

John 21 gives us a clear example. John corrected a familiar report by returning to Jesus’ actual words.

We must be willing to do the same—even when the belief being corrected is our own.

What do you think?

You do not need to agree with this page to study with us.

If you disagree, tell us which statement you question. Show us the passage you believe we have misunderstood or overlooked, and explain how you understand it in its context.

We will ask the same questions of our explanation that we ask of yours.

Our purpose is to understand Scripture more accurately. If the evidence shows that we need to change, we should change.

Read first. Conclude later.

Return to HOME page

Return to STUDY page

Return to YOUTUBE to send questions or comments. We welcome both. https://youtu.be/P-qGgZGVCHw