Yep. I really dared to ask that question. Folks the book that everybody thinks they know probably doesn’t say what you think it does. In the last few years, I have been made aware of many fallacies and interpretive blunders that completely miss the point, often on purpose. Some errors are the result of false assumptions, some faulty interpretation, and some false translations. Some even hit on the core issues of the person and work of Christ.
Popular View Wrong
The popular view is often the wrong view or interpretation. Let’s take something simple.
Proverbs 22: 6. “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”
This verse means exactly the opposite of what you’ve been told. The false interpretation is based on a wrong understanding of the word “he” in the first clause. For reasons I can’t fathom, the word “he” is assumed to be God. It is not. He in this clause refers to the child not God. It means “if you allow a child to grow up doing what he (or she) wants to do, when they get old, they won’t depart from doing what is right in their own eyes”. In other words, if you won’t discipline a child when they are young, they will persist in their stubbornness when they get old. The point of the verse is that parents should break their children of bad habits not let them have their way or they will grow up into worthless and unproductive adults. Only parental discipline can drive the sin and rebellion from a child.
Dr. Spock convinced a whole generation of baby boom parents that “spare the rod and spoil the child” was a good and desirable outcome. Again, this verse means the opposite.
From Proverbs 13: 24, the actual text is, “He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.”
The popular understanding is the opposite of what people thought they knew about the Bible.
Eschatology Assumptions
Walter Martin used to say that “A text, without a context, is a pretext, usually for error.” Dr. Martin was ironically guilty of this error when it came to eschatology. He brought a preexisting grid to Scripture that wasn’t there and then spent tremendous energy trying to find it on the pages of the Bible and recontextualizing the verses that didn’t fit. I like Walter Martin and recommend his book, Kingdom of the Cults, but his premillennial dispensational assumptions were wrong then and are still wrong now.
I’m now going to pick on two passages with which I’m sure Martin and I would disagree.
Matthew 24 beginning at verse 36
36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. 37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. 41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
This section is always put forth as a Rapture passage, but is it?
It will be like the days of Noah (Noe). People will be doing evil things like eating, drinking, and marrying and giving in marriage. Yep, folks will just be living their lives ignorant of the threat they are under and the trouble about to hit them. They knew not until the flood and then people are taken away, just like the Rapture, right? Wrong.
Ya’ll always miss this part, who was taken in the days of Noah? The bad guys not the saints. In the days of Noah, the saints were on the Ark, and the bad guys were taken away by the flood waters. Likewise, when the end comes, two will be in the field, the bad one is taken, and the good one is left behind.
The meek inherit the earth not heaven. Ring a bell anyone?
For dispensationalists, the coming judgment is a worldwide event. However, it is not. In Matthew 24: 16 “Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:” Yep, you can literally run away to avoid the coming judgment.
Oh, trivia question, how many Christians died in the siege of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.?
Answer: zero. They saw the signs that Jesus predicted and left when the Romans were ready to surround the city. Bet you never learned that in Sunday School.
On two different occasions before the crucifixion, Jesus predicts that you (people in the first century) will see him coming on the clouds of heaven.
“And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” Matthew 24: 30
And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. 64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Matthew 26: 63b-64
Oh, lest you think there is any misunderstanding of Jesus’ claim of coming on the clouds of heaven, look what happens next.
Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death. Matthew 26: 65-66
So, the High Priest would see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven and so would those that heard the Olivet Discourse. Jesus is claiming this was a first century event not one preceded by nations deploying thermonuclear weapons, Cobra helicopters, literal barcodes on hands and foreheads, and all the other wacky stuff claimed about the end times.
Jesus quotes the Old Testament frequently. Clearly the High Priest knew the citation that Jesus quoted and what it means. So where is it found?
“I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.” Daniel 7: 13 & 14
This is the passage from Daniel. Please note the following,
Jesus called himself “the Son of Man”
Jesus said he would be seen coming on the clouds. Clouds should make your mind go back to The Cloud in Exodus.
Then notice the direction of travel, Jesus is going up to the Ancient of days which is clearly God the Father.
This is clearly the Ascension of Christ not the Second Coming. The direction of travel is up to the Father, not down to the earth.
Take a look at Psalm 2. This psalm is about the crucifixion, verses 1 – 3. God’s reaction, verses 4 – 6, and the rest is about the Father giving the Son all the kingdoms of the earth.
While not explicitly explained, the rulers of men would know that Jesus was seated at the righthand of the Father, ruling the nations. His judgment of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D. was his vindication that he is ruling now. Jesus promised that “this generation” (the generation of people hearing his words) would not pass away until his words would be fulfilled.
These words are simple and easily understood unless you have preconceptions about what the text says. If your understanding needs verbal and textual gymnastics to fit your construct and then you will never come to the truth.
Purposeful Misinterpretation of the Bible
Sadly, over the years, there has been purposeful tinkering with the texts of the Bible. There are two types of willful changes.
First, some translators refuse to translate a passage correctly because it doesn’t agree with their presuppositions of what the text should say. For example, translators often refuse to translate the Greek word Mello or on the occasions when they translate it, they change the meaning of the word because they can’t make sense of it. It means something is about to happen. Greek time texts are often made future by translators when they are actually true in the present or completed in the past and are being completed or applied in the present.
Second, some passages have been altered to change the meaning to minimize supernatural elements or keep them from applying the Christ. Does your version of the Bible have unicorns, Lilith, satyrs, dragons, shades, and other creatures in it. The Hebrew text does or did. Does your Bible have a young woman will conceive or a virgin will conceive? Folks, rabbis began tinkering with the Old Testament text in the Second Century to reduce the number of Jewish converts going into the Christian Church. Many Christians now defend these changes as the correct translation. King James Bible folks, I’m talking about you. Tradition trumps textual fidelity. Yet another thing that makes claims of Sola Scriptura a hollow claim.
Does your version of the Bible translate Deuteronomy 32: 8 as “children of Israel” or “Sons of God”?
“When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.”
Children of Israel is the altered version, sadly some Christians will fight tooth and nail to defend that bastardized text.
I can cite more examples, but my point is that if you pick up any English translation, it has problems. I’m not saying the Bible is untrustworthy, just that you might exercise a little bit of humility when quoting it. Chapter and verse breaks are not always in the correct spots either. Almost all punctuation has been added by translators too. Usually, they do a good job with that but there are exceptions.
Just one quick example of the challenges of translating Greek. The word “the” in Greek can be written in 24 different tenses. These include, past, present, future, male, female, neuter, singular and plural. My list does not include all the time tenses, but I’m trying to illustrate the complexity of the language.
So, use of the word “the” in Greek could be past, female, and plural; all at the same time. Conversely, the word “a” like a rock, a house, a man, is not in the Greek but always added by translators. Greek has definite article “the” but not indefinite article “a”.
Thus, Jehovah’s Witnesses lie when they translate John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was a God.” The KJV gets it right with “… the Word was God.”
Oh, lastly, on the subject of translation, English words change meaning over time. For example, “Keep”, “Let”, “Prevent” all appear in the KJV but mean the opposite nowadays as they did 400 years ago.
Conclusion
My overall point is to have respect for the text and use the tools that we have available to mine the Scriptures for Truth because not everything handed to you on a silver platter is right. Ronald Reagan’s admonition to “Trust but Verify” is true in more parts of life than just negotiating Soviet nuclear treaties.