Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Revdpickrel AT wmconnect.com]

In a message dated 9/5/2005 12:45:36 PM Central Daylight Time, 
peterkirk AT qaya.org writes:


> 
> Now I accept (as an MA in theology myself!) that there is some impact of 
> theology on interpretation of biblical passages. For example, if the 
> interpretation of a passage is uncertain between two possibilities, one 
> of which is in accord with the general theology of the writer and/or 
> those around him and the other which is not, it is reasonable to 
> conclude that the former interpretation is probably correct. The problem 
> comes when interpreters try to use their own personal theological 
> convictions as a guide to interpretation.
> 
> -- 
> Peter Kirk
> peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/
> 

Good Afternoon Capt. Kirk,

I myself find it very hard to leave out my own personal theological 
convictions.  That's why I follow these simple, basic rules when studying 
Scripture: 1) 
only one interpretation, 2) many applications, 3) all Scripture points to the 
Messiah, and 4) my interpretation and anyone elses must have total Scripture 
support by comparing Scripture to Scripture, spiritual things to spiritual 
things.  If I find my interpretation or anyone elses is not in harmony with 
total 
Scriptures it is shelved.  The Bible is the  best and most valid commentary 
on the Bible when studied properly.  Most don't care for Strong's Lexicon and 
I 
fell the same way about commentaries.  I owned six commentaries and in them 
were six different interpretations.  The Bible has the same (one) 
interpretation throughout with a long, thin line of God's redemption running 
through it.  
Ockham's Razor (all things being equal the simplist interpretation is 
correct) 
doesn't work either when searching for truth, it may help but still it misses 
the mark by not always arriving on correct interpretation.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Peter.

Rev. Doug Pickrel, Litt.D.
Tejas Valley
San Antonio, Texas