This weekly feature is dedicated to Adventists who are looking for biblical insights into the topics discussed in the Sabbath School lesson quarterly. We post articles which address each lesson as presented in the Sabbath School Bible Study Guide, including biblical commentary on them. We hope you find this material helpful and that you will come to know Jesus and His revelation of Himself in His word in profound biblical ways.
Lesson 7: “How to Interpret Scripture: Language, Text and Context”
This week, the lesson discusses the uses and limitations of language; as it rightly points out, many words and phrases in one language do not necessarily translate well into another language; many times such translations result in misunderstanding.
The author gives some good examples, so let’s look at one: the word shalom. The lesson says:
The Hebrew word shalom is often translated as “peace.” But the meaning of the word is much deeper and broader than this. It can be translated as “wholeness, completeness, and well-being.” God’s blessing and graciousness keep us in a state of shalom, which is a gift from God (Num. 6:24–26).
Interestingly, the author is content to let the verses speak for themselves, acknowledging that it is God’s blessing and graciousness that “keeps us in a state of shalom” which is itself a gift.
And yet, in Adventist theology, although God gives us the grace and blessing, it is then up to the person to keep himself in that state by obedience to the Old Covenant Law—a Law which only condemns and which lacks the power to keep us right with God.
Look at Paul’s words in 2 Corinthians 3:7-9:
But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?
For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory.
In verse 7, the “letters engraved on stone” can be nothing other than the 10 Commandments. Even Adventist theology agrees that those are the 10 and uses that to claim that because they were engraved there by God’s own finger, they are eternal.
But look at verse 9. He calls those letters engraved on stone a “ministry of condemnation”. And in verse 8, he contrasts the ministry of condemnation (the old law engraved on stone) with the ministry of the Spirit.
Those words engraved on stone are the very words of the Old Covenant. As we are under the New Covenant, we are to look for teaching and direction in the New Testament, so let’s look at Galatians 3 where it is stated very clearly:
But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed.
Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith.
But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.
How much clearer could it be? Until faith came, we were in custody under the law which was our tutor to lead us to Christ for justification; but, now that faith came, we are no longer under the tutor. People go through all kinds of mental and verbal gymnastics to say that we are still under at least part of the Law, but that contradicts Paul; so once again, the clear message of the Bible is altered to support some of those “pre-conceived ideas” in direct contradiction to the entire purpose of this lesson.
In Wednesday’s lesson, Texts and Contexts, the author starts out with this: “Words in Scripture always occur in a context.”
He does a good job of pointing out that we start with the word, then the sentence, chapter and book of the Bible. In each expanding area, the word’s meaning and use is better understood and he gives a good explanation of the process. Sadly, this directly contradicts the Adventist love of proof-texting—lifting verses totally out of context just because they appear to say what they want it to say.
For example, in comments on the lesson for week 5, I showed how the Adventist doctrine of the Millennium is established by proof-texting; of all the verses they claim in support of the idea of the saved spending 1,000 years in heaven doing an audit of God’s bookkeeping, all but 2 of those verses were taken out of context, some because of just one word, and used to “prove” something that cannot be supported Biblically, when taken in context. The same thing is done with almost all of the 28 Fundamental Beliefs—if you actually read all of the supporting texts, in context, in most cases you cannot find true Biblical support.
It is disingenuous at best, and lying at worst, to claim to believe in sticking to the true context of verses, but at the same time, take words, phrases or verses wildly out of context to “prove” whatever you want to believe.
Another problem I see is found in a statement tucked into Friday’s lesson:
“And since it was the Spirit of God that inspired the Bible, it is impossible that the teaching of the Spirit should ever be contrary to that of the word.”—Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 9.”
When she wrote “teaching of the Spirit”, she was talking about her own writings. She is right that any teaching of the Spirit of God will never contradict the Bible, which is the Word of God; so if what she wrote is from God, it cannot disagree with the Bible. So, did she ever contradict the Bible? Let’s look at just one thing she wrote:
“O my brethren, will you grieve the Holy Spirit, and cause it to depart?” Selected Messages, bk. 1, p. 126.
Compare that to what the Bible says:
“And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not behold Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you, and will be in you” .John 14: 16, 17
She says that we can make the Holy Spirit leave us, but Jesus says that the Spirit will be with us forever.
In just this one example, from just this one discrepancy, we have ample reason to question the true identity of the spirit who taught her.
In Friday’s lesson, it is suggested that we read up on something called “methods of bible study”. It is an interesting read, but also quite frustrating as all the way through, it contradicts itself without any apparent realization that it is doing so. If you are interested in reading it, here is the site:
There are some interesting things in that article are worth discussing as the lesson quotes it as an authority. For instance, at the beginning, it exhibits the Adventist belief that the words of the Bible are not inspired, only the authors; who were then left to think up whatever words they thought would communicate the ideas God gave them:
“The Holy Spirit inspired the Bible writers with thoughts, ideas, and objective information; in turn they expressed these in their own words.”
This is actually a handy way to get around things you don’t like or that you wish the Bible said differently—blame the author of that verse for not carefully choosing words; but that is actually blaming God for not properly inspiring the writers of the Bible and it tends to lead to all sorts of contradictory, un-Biblical and even blasphemous changes to and insertions into the Bible.
Under a heading called: Principles for Approaching the Interpretation of Scripture we see:
“d. The investigation of Scripture must be characterized by a sincere desire to discover and obey God’s will and word rather than to seek support or evidence for preconceived ideas.”
But then, under the section titled: Methods of Bible Study, the Great Controversy theme is inserted as if it is Biblical and not at all a “preconceived idea”.
Further down, we come to this blatant statement:
“Seventh-day Adventists believe that God inspired Ellen G. White. Therefore, her expositions on any given Bible passage offer an inspired guide to the meaning of texts without exhausting their meaning or preempting the task of exegesis (for example, see Evangelism, 256; The Great Controversy, 193, 595; Testimonies, vol. 5, pp. 665, 682, 707-708; Counsels to Writers and Editors, 33-35).“
We have already seen how she contradicted the Bible in just the one example I gave (there are actually hundreds of them), and yet here, the committee who wrote this document put her on the level of the Bible as far as her being inspired. Her “expositions” on the Bible are to be considered as inspired as the Bible itself which, in reality, means that whatever she says must be true, even when it contradicts the Bible she is attempting to explain.
This habit of freely “interpreting” the Bible puts this document in direct opposition to the clear message of the Bible. Let’s look at just one example:
“In interpreting prophecy keep in mind that:
(5) In the New Testament application of Old Testament prophecies, some literal names become spiritual: for example, Israel represents the church, Babylon apostate religion, etc.”
This is blatant replacement theology which is in direct conflict with Paul’s assurance in Romans chapters 9-11 that God has not cast them out and is not finished with them as a nation.
I suggest that you read the entire document to get a fuller understanding of the true Adventist belief system, but only if you can tolerate such blatant self-contradiction.
In this week’s lesson, the author made such grand statements about using the Bible correctly, always in context, and as the basis for beliefs instead of a way to give support to preconceived ideas, all the while doing the exact opposite with no apparent recognition of the irony.
The lesson finishes with this:
“…. how far off humanity can get when it veers away from the Word of God and what it plainly teaches”
I would say, ‘how far indeed’!
- October 9–15 - October 7, 2021
- October 2–9 - September 30, 2021
- September 25–October 1 - September 23, 2021