All great ideas, Skye.

Is this something that has been floating in the back of your mind for some time, or is there a tipping point moment where you said, "alright, this needs to be codified!"?

I'm curious, what brought this about?

I actually developed this 5 years ago when a friend asked me to teach her class at Wheaton College. She wanted me to talk about how I go about teaching the Bible and what my sermon prep looks like. To make it simple (and fun) I developed this short list of "commandments" to keep in mind when reading/teaching scripture.

Skye,

Good list.

Just wondering how you reconcile Number II (We have a common temptation to get “behind the text” or discover what “really happened.) with Number IV (We must be careful not to read everything through the lenses of Western individualism. And we are wise to listen to how Christians in ages past have understood the teachings of Scripture.)?

How do we avoid reading our Western culture into the text if we don't "get behind" the text and find out what "really happened" in the culture of the writers and original readers?

Paul

Great guidelines here, Skye. While I agree with your point in #2, I have found that it often needs to be opened up for further clarification. In my local church experience I've sometimes noticed a discomfort with disciplines for deeper learning (ie scholars work/language study/archeology) in favor of individualistic interpretation only. Your description sounds very "both/and" on this though, & I find that to be helpful. Thank you for providing a great tool for thinking about Bible interpretation.

Great list. It's nice to see a clearly stated balanced approach. As I remember more than one of my seminary professors saying, "let us let the text be the text." !

Really good stuff.

I have no trouble reconciling #II and #IV. I find that most of the time, "getting behind the text" really just means ditching the layers upon layers of interpretations that have been piled on it over the centuries: Individualistic, materialistic, or libertarian; forgetting that the society it was written to wasn’t democratic or egalitarian or had freedoms we currently take for granted; Aristotelian or Platonic (or even Augustinian, Thomist, or Calvinist) lenses; and of course the many, many interpretations that forget that Jesus is not the philosophical successor of Yahweh, but is Yahweh.

Fact is, too often we Christians read a scripture through the lens of our favorite teachings about it. Archaeology and history will point us in the right direction, but you’re right: the scriptures can speak for themselves just fine.

Even simpletons like me can figure out what Scripture means with a humble heart, the ability to read and study, and the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit. I would add that God obviously wanted to use words to communicate with man and He has carefully preserved those words throughout history so that we could avoid being deceived by the teachings of fallible men. I am so grateful to be able to "...search[ed] the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." Acts 17:11.

This is fantastic.

I would say that there is connection from #2 to #5 as well. The history, etc. helps ground the text and the textual context in its larger context.

That work helps us properly frame the categories/concepts within the textual setting too.

That's precisely why those "other disciplines" are important.

Again, thanks for this list.

Here's No. 11, one I need: Don't over-chew the grape. Sometimes you just have to let it go.

Re: your first commandment, I am not clear how someone makes an idol of the Scriptures. It is the Word of God, God's revelation of himself and his gospel to people. I've been around the church for many decades, and I don't think I've seen anyone worshiping the Scriptures. Rather, people expect to hear and see God through them. In my experience, they are regarded as a tool. You don't mean that viewing the Scriptures as the final arbiter in matters of faith and practice is idolatry, do you? I've probably misunderstood you. Please explain.

I, too, was wondering about:

I. You shall not make for yourself an idol out of Scripture.

Great list. Phenomenal. I have taught many of these myself (especially #1!)

"To make it simple (and fun) I developed this short list of "commandments" to keep in mind when reading/teaching scripture."

That's pretty good, Skye. Always a good idea to have a reminder/governor on teaching scripture.

"I. You shall not make for yourself an idol out of Scripture."

I take it to mean people who treat scripture as an enabler for their very human world-views, and rationalize their actions using the scriptures as support for their unmerciful/ungraceful/unforgiving spirit.
Hence, the reason why a lot of self-professing "Christians" in the United States totally dig quoting the Laws of Moses and the OT in general to prove the sinful nature of man in others, but convienently forget the reason they are considered Christians in the first place...G-d's grace, mercy, and love.
In short, what we were given by G-d, we should give freely to others...without conditions of merit or obedience to the Laws of Moses.
However, unfortunately, a lot us just can't take that step of extending to others what was freely given to ourselves.
Thus, scripture becomes an idol to bludgeon people we disagree with while fooling ourselves and a few others into thinking how righteous we are for speaking cruel and unloving truth to others.

btw, I am guilty of this myself...I have a habit of ripping fellow believers a new one when they step out of line of the Gospel...I certainly don't show any love, nor mercy, and definitely no grace to my fellow believers...in fact, I find myself exhibiting more love, mercy and grace to non-believers...huh...hmm...I am the worst of hypocrits because I know what I am, and I don't struggle with it as much as I should.

Thanks for this. I agree enthusiastically with the direction, but I don't think your point about not going behind the text works. The very meaning of biblical words is a historical and cultural meaning ("what it meant back then"), and we know that meaning by going "behind the text." (historical, archeological research) You could actually say that the text comes from behind the text. When we affirm the sufficiency of scripture we ought to be affirming that it's message (once understood) is sufficient in relation to other claims. We ought not be affirming that no extra-biblical information is needed in order to arrive at that meaning. That will just never work and it's taking an enormous body of knowledge for granted.

Regarding #2. I believe that understanding original languages and historical context is very important in correctly interpreting biblical texts. But I've sat through a number of sermons or classes that are far more interested in what archeology or history or science has to say, and not enough about what the biblical text says.

For example...did Moses and the Israelites cross the "Red Sea" or the "reed sea"? Interesting question and it carries some geographic importance...but I'm not sure I need to spend 20 minutes of a sermon on the point when the message God actually wants to communicate is right there in Exodus...not in some scholar's book about the geography of the Sinai peninsula.

Some folks are more interested in talking about what they learned in books outside the bible than talking about the bible itself. That's the temptation that commandment 2 is addressing.

Skye

These guidelines are good for the most part. However the one on the honoring of the church needs to be honored only insofar as the writers agree with the scripture. Paul commended the Bereans because they studied the scriptures to insure that what Paul said was true. So have I found that many ones in the church have been wrong. I have found ones who have studied a subject out not in conformity with the Fathers and others, but was what the Bible said. Such an example as the genealogy of Jesus and the Biblical calender as well as prophecy. We can only be what God wants us to be with the Scriptures as we remember that we are to study to show ourselves as approved unto God not unto Men.
2 Tim 2:15. After all men have been wrong, but the Holy Spirit will open the Bible us as we study what the Bible says, and put every person to the test who gives us something from the Bible.

This is very helpful but I am always curious about statements like, "This is a particular temptation among evangelicals who hold a very high view of Scripture."

This may be true about evangelicals at the seminary level but most evangelicals I know can't find the book of Amos without being given a page number. It seems more accurate to say that most evangelicals have NO view of Scripture.

Thank you, Skye. I found these points helpful and liberating. It is, of course, important to know the Bible of God... but even more so to know the God of the Bible! Blessings.

Great list - love it.

I like VIII. LOL! We Christians in America are the most educated believers in history. No question about it. But I'm not sure we measure up well with what's happening in the Kingdom in the rest of the world. The way Neil Cole puts it is that we're educated beyond our level of obedience.

Also, just a thought on the Berean thing. The Berean Christians aren't being compared to the Thessalonian Christians. It;s the Berean Jews being compared to the Thessalonian Jews. So, it's not so much an encouragement to be overly bookish but a pat on the back to honestly searching unbelievers.

"For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring WORD OF GOD, for , All men are like grass and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall, but the WORD OF THE LORD stands for ever. And this is the word that was preached to you." 1Peter 1:23 to 25. "You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you posses eternal life. THESE ARE THE SCRIPTURES THAT TESTIFY ABOUT ME, yet you refuse to come to me to have life." John 5:39 . May God Bless you.