If the Bible is God-breathed, why is it so easily misinterpreted?

[tonychanyt]

Right. For any communication, note that two parties are involved: the writers and the readers. It is fundamentally a communication problem, not unique to the Bible. In the case of Biblical communication, the process is significantly more complex. The Bible is often disputed, debated, and prone to misunderstanding, even among deonminations. Several factors contribute to this reality:

The Bible is about God. As an infinite being, our languages based on finite grammars can only describe him partially and our finite minds can only understand him imperfectly. For instance, doctrines like the Trinity, predestination, or the dual nature of Christ (fully God and fully human) involve profound mysteries that challenge human comprehension. Christians have been arguing about these concepts for millenia.

To complicate the process, the Bible was written over 1500 years in three languages. Over this long period, there were significant economical, cultural, and social changes. Each writer wrote assuming their own ecosystem and worldview. This places a heavy responsible for the translators to understand their writings based on the historical-grammatical context. Even with the best translators, there is no way to translate an ancient language into modern English perfectly. This is just the nature of the translation process itself. There is no way for contemporary readers to understand all the nuances written by the original writers. There is a big cultural and historical distance between the original writers and the modern readers.

Even worse, God decided to reveal certain truths progressively over time. These partial revelations often confuse people.

To communicate spiritual realities, the Bible often employed non-literal genres, including poetry, prophecy, parables, and apocalyptic visions. By nature, these were open to interpretation.

Some of the blame for misunderstanding the Bible can be placed on the readers' stubborn biases and presupppostions. People tend to read into a verse what they want to believe.

There were complications in every steps of this complex process of communication, from the original authors, to the scripture compilers, to manuscript copiers, to translators, to readers. We are talking about something that was written as early as more than 3000 years ago.

The Bible is disputed and misunderstood because it is a complex, multifaceted text written in ancient languages and cultural contexts, addressing profound theological truths through diverse genres and authors. While it is divinely inspired ("God-breathed"), its communication through human means makes it susceptible to misinterpretation due to linguistic, historical, and personal factors. However, these challenges also invite believers to engage deeply with Scripture, relying on the guidance of the Holy Spirit, sound scholarship, and humility to uncover its timeless truths. That's one reason why I proposed A Disciplined, Logical and Probabilistic Approach to Biblical Hermeneutics

 

[Richard T]

Right. For any communication, note that two parties are involved: the writers and the readers. It is fundamentally a communication problem, not unique to the Bible. In the case of Biblical communication, the process is significantly more complex. The Bible is often disputed, debated, and prone to misunderstanding, even among deonminations. Several factors contribute to this reality:

The Bible is about God. As an infinite being, our finite languages can only describe him partially and our finite minds can only understand him imperfectly. For instance, doctrines like the Trinity, predestination, or the dual nature of Christ (fully God and fully human) involve profound mysteries that challenge human comprehension. Christians have been arguing about these concepts for millenia.

To complicate the process, the Bible was written over 1500 years in three languages. Over this long period, there were significant economical, cultural, and social changes. Each writer wrote assuming their own ecosystem and worldview. This places a heavy responsible for the translators to understand their writings based on the historical-grammatical context. Even with the best translators, there is no way to translate an ancient language into modern English perfectly. This is just the nature of the translation process itself. There is no way for contemporary readers to understand all the nuances written by the original writers. There is a big cultural and historical distance between the original writers and the modern readers.

Even worse, God decided to reveal certain truths progressively over time. These partial revelations often confuse people.

To communicate spiritual realities, the Bible often employs non-literal genres, including poetry, prophecy, parables, and apocalyptic visions. By nature, these are open to interpretation.

Some of the blame for misunderstanding the Bible can be placed on the readers' stubborn biases and presupppostions. People tend to read into a verse what they want to believe.

The Bible is disputed and misunderstood because it is a complex, multifaceted text written in ancient languages and cultural contexts, addressing profound theological truths through diverse genres and authors. While it is divinely inspired ("God-breathed"), its communication through human means makes it susceptible to misinterpretation due to linguistic, historical, and personal factors. However, these challenges also invite believers to engage deeply with Scripture, relying on the guidance of the Holy Spirit, sound scholarship, and humility to uncover its timeless truths. That's why I proposed A Disciplined, Logical and Probabilistic Approach to Biblical Hermeneutics.

I like your schema quite a bit and I think studies have a place. Do you think that God purposely set scriptures in the bible so that he could later reveal revelation to those who would spend the time investigating with the help of the Holy Spirit? Paul for instance does not elaborate on a whole host of theological issues. Yes, some have better probabilistic outcomes than others but even a minority view could be the truth and I don't know how one could even measure the margin of error? I do like though that you mention the guidance of the Holy Spirit for your investigation.
Consider Jesus taught the law with "authority." Preachers/teachers/laypersons who have heard from God and meditated on the word may genuinely have God's heart on a matter. They too may teach with authority and in some cases even power. This seems the failing of contemporary seminaries. Too many (even Pentecostal ones) rely too much on the head and not enough on the spirit.
When Charles Parnham, founded a bible school in Topeka, Kansas they started with actions, each committing to give away all that they had. When they got to trying to figure out Acts 2, it may have started intellectually, but it became an experience of speaking in tongues that went worldwide. Some might argue that it was not a legitimate experience but it led to the Azuza revival, the formation of the Assembly of God and a host of seemingly positive things. The Roots of Azusa: Pentecost in Topeka
I'll defer a bit to this scripture of the four ways to minister. by revelation, knowledge, prophesy or doctrine. I guess what i am saying is that revelation and prophesy are underutilized by most.
1 Corinthians 14:6 (KJV)
6 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?

 

[tonychanyt]

Do you think that God purposely set scriptures in the bible so that he could later reveal revelation to those who would spend the time investigating with the help of the Holy Spirit?

Yes, this is part of God's method of progressive revelation. The Holy Spirit dwells in human spirit as a born=again experience only after the Cross.

Paul for instance does not elaborate on a whole host of theological issues. Yes, some have better probabilistic outcomes than others but even a minority view could be the truth and I don't know how one could even measure the margin of error?

Great question. The margin of error can be measured subjectively and rationally by Bayesian probability.

 

[Richard T]

Yes, this is part of God's method of progressive revelation. The Holy Spirit dwells in human spirit as a born=again experience only after the Cross.


Great question. The margin of error can be measured subjectively and rationally by Bayesian probability.

So who exactly is going to use Bayesian probabilities to examine theological issues? Is there even a single graduate level seminary that teaches quantitative methods that would incorporate Bayesian methods. I read it is growing more in popularity but it still is not the primary technique taught in most quantitative programs in the social sciences.

For those readers that might desire an explanation of Bayesian versus classical statistics, here is an article that does that well (page 70).
file:///C:/Users/Erin/Downloads/imfi_en_2012_03_Beck.pdf

 

[tonychanyt]

So who exactly is going to use Bayesian probabilities to examine theological issues?

In the last few weeks, I came across a few bible scholars using it—actually misusing it.

Is there even a single graduate level seminary that teaches quantitative methods that would incorporate Bayesian methods.

I doubt it. I have made a point to ask these people about it but none has heard of it. These are not people who like to calculate with numbers and equations.

I read it is growing more in popularity but it still is not the primary technique taught in most quantitative programs in the social sciences.

Bayesian probabilities show up in all sciences. It is indispensable in calculating your car insurance premium.

For those readers that might desire an explanation of Bayesian versus classical statistics, here is an article that does that well (page 70).
file:///C:/Users/Erin/Downloads/imfi_en_2012_03_Beck.pdf

You need to provide a URL address

 

[Richard T]

Thanks for the answers. I think most seminaries teach a research methods course, most other courses are not quantitative such a hermeneutics. Still, theology does seem to have some of their own methods, more of a literary analysis. While I actually have been thinking about uses of quantitative methods in theology I think the applications are limited. For instance, I am not sure how I could use statistics to help explain anything in the book of John. However, I could use statistics to address research questions on church growth. The latter has observational data that could be tested. Anyway, you got me thinking in this area. God bless