Category Archives: Eisegesis

Eisegesis Unplugged – John 10:10

Posted by Dan C. on

The Passage

“The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly..” – John 10:10

This passage is a favorite of preachers who would have us believe that while Satan wants to steal, kill, and destroy,the material blessing and prosperity God promises the child of God, physical prosperity and blessing should be normative in the lives of believers.

There are several ‘companion’ passages that are used to further support the prosperity gospel, but I will leave further research to the spiritually curious reader of this short article. Back to our passage.

What is John 10:10 really talking about?

We can find the answer to that question by asking two additional questions and them examining the context of this wonderful passage of warning and promise:

  • Who is the ‘thief’?
  • What is meant by ‘abundant life’?

Who IS the thief?

The verses around our passage provide the identity of the ‘thief’. Jesus wrapped the spiritual truth that He is the true shepherd around the easily understood concept of sheep and shepherds. It was common at the time for herds of sheep to be kept in walled pens with a single gate, guarded by a gatekeeper whose duty was to only permit the real shepherds to enter the pen call the cheep and and lead them out to pasture. Jesus told his listeners:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber. But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.” – vv. 1-5

The ‘thief’ is a false shepherd and stranger who enters the sheepfold by whatever means he can other than the gate the true shepherd (Jesus) uses. It shouldn’t be difficult to see the analogy being drawn in these passages.

The Tyndale New Testament Commentary summarizes the passage that leads up to John 10:10:

“Those who are really “His own” listen to His voice. They recognize that He has been sent from God, and are ready to follow Him as the good Shepherd, who by His sacrificial love rescues His flock from evil and death, and leads them into the best of all pasturage where they can enjoy a richer and a fuller life (9,10).

The sheep are God’s people. Shepherds are pastors, preachers and teachers entrusted with the care and feeding of the ‘sheep’. True shepherds of God’s flock preach and teach sound doctrine based on carefully exegesis and exposition of Scripture, ‘drawing out’ and explaining the meaning of the text.

False shepherds look and sound like the real thing, but they twist scripture to suit their own ends, robbing the flock of genuine truth, killing true peace and joy, and destroying the faith of those who believe their false promises. They are false teachers who are nothing more than ‘wolves in sheep suits’ selling spiritual snake-oil to the masses.

What is really meant by abundant life?

The Expositor’s Bible Commentary says this about John 10:10:

“Jesus’ main purpose was the salvation (health) of the sheep, which he defined as free access to pasture and fullness of life. Under his protection and by his gift they can experience the best life can offer. In the context of John’s emphasis on eternal life, this statement takes on new significance. Jesus can give a whole new meaning to living because he provides full satisfaction and perfect guidance.”

Barclay’s Daily Study Bible adds,

“Jesus claims that he came that men might have life and might have it more abundantly. The Greek phrase used for having it more abundantly means to have a superabundance of a thing. To be a follower of Jesus, to know who he is and what he means, is to have a superabundance of life. A Roman soldier came to Julius Caesar with a request for permission to commit suicide. He was a wretched dispirited creature with no vitality. Caesar looked at him. “Man,” he said, “were you ever really alive?” When we try to live our own lives, life is a dull, dispirited thing. When we walk with Jesus, there comes a new vitality, a superabundance of life. It is only when we live with Christ that life becomes really worth living and we begin to live in the real sense of the word.”

To summarize:

John 10:10 should not be used as though it gives some promise of an improved physical life for the Christian – your ‘best life now’. Such a view, in light of the context, is shallow, and falls well short of the deeper truth of the passage. Just as real sheep have a wonderful abiding relationship with their shepherds, Christians have a precious relationship with their Savior, and a ‘superabundant’ spiritual life in Him.

Now What?

If you have bitten the poisoned apple of prosperity teaching, or if you have been tempted to bite because of the circumstances of life, pause and think for a moment of all of those who through the centuries have been martyred for their faith and are even now being driven from their homes and killed for their confession of Christ. Think about believers who live in seemingly unending poverty, malnutrition and disease in third world countries. You don’t even have to send your thoughts to the third world. Just look at the ordinary Christians all around experiencing the ‘tough stuff of life’ who nonetheless exhibit joy and peace that can only be explained by resting safe in the True Shepherd’s arms.

As for the wolves in sheep suits? I have a word for them. Nothing profound or prophetic, but just a bit of advice I heard somewhere:

“If you can’t preach it everywhere, don’t preach it anywhere!”

Share

Eisegesis Unplugged – Matt 12:31-32

Posted by Dan C. on

To refresh your memory:

Eisegesis (from Greek εἰς “into” and ending from exegesis from ἐξηγεῖσθαι “to lead out”) is the process of misinterpreting a text in such a way that it introduces one’s own ideas, reading into the text.

What follows is from an actual forum thread about the Eternal Security of the Believer:

The passage in question:

“Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.” – Matt 12:31-32

The ‘no kidding’ comment from  an adherent of the ‘you can ‘jump’ out of the Father’s hand’ school of thought:

“This passage indicates that the unforgivable sin of blasphemy can be committed only by someone who was a true Christian or truly saved.”

In context, we have Jesus speaking to some Pharisees after he cast a demon out of a person and they (the Pharisees) said it was by the power of Beelzebub that Christ did it. the blasphemy charge was directed to those who rejected Christ! Wondering how anyone could make such a ridiculous claim?

Well……there was a ‘companion passage’ from Hebrews:

“For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance..” – Heb 6:4-6

The ‘companion’ verse is of course only about genuine believers and taken ‘together’ they ‘prove’ that a genuine believer in Christ can blaspheme the Holy Spirit, remain unforgiven, and of necessity end up in Hell. Never mind that the passages are set in two completely different contexts, one is the opposite of the ‘point’ being made, and the other has been fought over for a couple of centuries.

What we have here is an all to common attempt to prove what someone ‘needs’ to believe about the Eternal Security of the believer (it’s not possible) to support the concept of ‘self-determining’  free will.

It’s not the first time someone has approached scripture in order to ‘prove’ a particular point. I do however think this one rather ‘clumsy’, especially with the Matthew passage turned upside down like that. I have never heard that  passage used to prove only Christians can blaspheme the Holy Spirit. I think I’d have a better shot at ‘proving’ that Ezekiel’s Wheel was the Starship Enterprise.

Eisegesis Unplugged – Jeremiah 29:11

Posted by Dan C. on

The Passage

For I know the plans I have for you, declares the LORD, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope. – Jeremiah 29:11

I’m old enough to remember a particular radio spot about a superhero, in which the phrase “He’s everywhere, he’s everywhere!” introduced each little episode of his interesting adventures. Today’s contribution to the ‘Eisegeses Unplugged’ Series has it’s own version: “It’s everywhere, it’s everywhere!”

This passage has been claimed as universal promise for each and every Christian, in evangelical circles across the land. It’s also used quite frequently in by those engaged in ‘wooing’ people to Christ. But is that the original context in which it was used? Who spoke those famous words, to whom, and why? Let’s take a look.

These are the words of the letter that Jeremiah the prophet sent from Jerusalem to the surviving elders of the exiles, and to the priests, the prophets, and all the people, whom Nebuchadnezzar had taken into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon (v 1).  . . .  “Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, to all the exiles whom I have sent into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon (v 4). . . . “For thus says the LORD: When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will visit you, and I will fulfill to you my promise and bring you back to this place. For I know the plans I have for you, declares the LORD, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope. Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will hear you (vv 10-12)

The passage under discussion was originally spoken via letter to children of God from Jerusalem, living in exile in Babylon because of their unfaithfulness and idolatry, reminding them that the exile would not last forever, but there was hope for the future. that’s the context.

Please don’t misunderstand me, I believe that God does have plans for all of His children, and that God offers us all relief from the ‘stuff’ of life that we face. However, I don’t think it’s wise to claim universal individual ‘promises’ from passages of scripture into which we tend ‘fit’ our own aspirations and dreams.

The Eisegesis

The ‘eisegesis’ involved with this passage, along with many others, is at least 1) reading into the context that which is not there and 2) the fleshly tendency to define what we want God’s provision to look like. And if we never experience what we think we have been promised, the enemy has a field day with our faith, if not the assurance of our salvation.

Oh, I almost forgot. There’s also the little issue of those throughout the history of the church who might disagree with the ‘wonderful plan’ idea. You can start with the disciples and move forward in time. Don’t forget the Apostle Paul, Fox’s Book of Martyrs, many who served on the mission field (Jim Elliot comes to mind), Richard Wurmbrand , and those whose torture, persecution and death are reported almost daily in this, the ‘enlightened’ 21st century.

Once again, we report, you decide.

Eisegesis Unplugged – Romans 8:38-39 & John 10:27-29

Posted by Dan C. on

We have three passages to consider today, all of which are familiar to many of us, that are commonly used to oppose the doctrine of the Eternal Security of the believer. In fact, they were all used recently in another online forum thread in a single comment.

Passage 1:

”For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” – Romans 8:38-39

Quote 1:

“ ‘Anything else’ refers to powers other than one’s own will.”

It actually says, “…anything else in all creation…” It begs the question: “Did God create human will?”

Passage 2:

”My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.” – John 10:27-29

Quote 2:

“Being ‘unsnatchable’ does not disallow a person from choosing to jump out of the ‘Father’s hand’.”

According to Strong’s, ‘snatch’ (KJV uses ‘pluck’) means “to seize (in various applications): – catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).”

Voluntary ‘jumping’ is not in the text. “…no one can snatch them…” What does ‘no one’ mean?

Passage 3:

”In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.” Eph 1:11-14

Quote 3:

”what is “predestined” is God’s plan to choose or elect anyone who desires to be “in him” or to satisfy GRS.  Thus, being “marked in him with a seal” does not abrogate MFW”

A ‘therefore’ or ‘thus’ needs to follow a correct statement. The ‘predestination reference is probably to:

“For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—“ Eph 1:4-5

In the above, it states clearly that God chose and predestined ‘people’ and not a ‘plan’.

_______________________

The author of the above post makes no claim to absolute truth and also realizes that there is another implied doctrine underlying the above alleged refutations of the Eternal Security of the believer. That however, is another discussion for another time. For now, just focus on the question “What does the Bible really SAY?

‘Eisegesis’ Unplugged – Revelation 3:20

Posted by Dan C. on

Revelation 3:20

Might as well begin with an “oldie but a goodie’, and possibly a ‘greatest hit’ and future member of the Eisegesis Hall of Fame (EHF). It used to be one of my favorites!

The passage:

“Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me.“ (NIV)

This single passage might just be the inaugural member of the EHF! It has been used in gospel presentations for years, most often after the “Romans Road” is travelled. If you are unfamiliar with it, The Romans Road to Salvation consists of 6 6-10 passages from the Book of Romans that accurately present the problem we all face (sin) and God’s solution to the problem. Once the prospective convert knows the problem and God’s solution, all that is left is how to appropriate the solution. Rev 3:20 is the perfect verse! The explanation goes like this:

clip_image002‘Jesus is standing forlornly at the door of your heart, wanting to come in and dine with you, but you must open the door! There is but one door latch and it’s on the inside, where you live, and Jesus can’t enter no matter how desperately He wants to!

I even heard a local pastor, whose sermon was about Nehemiah and the rebuilding of the Jerusalem wall and city gates, tell the congregation of several hundred that there was one gate that God could not open, the door to the human heart. I also cannot dispute that there have been many genuine decisions for Christ after hearing about the ‘one-way door’.  But we still ask the question:

“Is that what the passage really means? Lets take a look.

Revelation Chapter 3 is a continuation of Chapters 1 & 2, in which the Apostle John, in a vision on the Lords day, was commanded to record what he saw and write letters to seven churches of what he saw about each of them. Our passage is from one of those letters to a Christian church:

“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:

These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth. You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked. I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see.

Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent. Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and he with me. (vv 14-20, NIV)

The text immediately preceding ‘The Greatest Invitation for Salvation Ever Written’ clearly depicts Christ standing at the door of a church that appears to have shut Him out. Jesus plea is that if even one member of that church would open the door, He would enter and dine with him.

The picture we paint in our ‘invitation’ is not the picture painted in the context of the passage of scripture from which it was extracted. I have no idea who first changed the meaning of this passage or when it happened. But I do know that the picture of Jesus standing at a one-way door and asking to be let in supports the idea that after all God has done to make salvation possible through the death of His Son, human decision is the ‘determining’ factor in anyone’s actual salvation.

I won’t jump into ‘that’ particular debate here. Nor will I begin a discussion about ‘evangelical ethics’. I’ll just say that there was a time when I thought it was a really great invitation, and if the passage really meant what we would like it to mean in our zeal to see souls saved, I would still be using it! At some point though, the fact that the a passage of scripture was often ‘quoted’ and given meaning not in the original text. That bothered me.

Will it bother you who read this, or will it seem like this is an ‘how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” moment? I don’t know. Am I saying that it should bother you? Nope. But it should say ‘something’. What exactly it does say  is between you and God.

‘Eisegesis’ Unplugged – Introduction

Posted by Dan C. on

Does the Bible really SAY that?

A definition is is in order before anything else is said, so this from our friend, Merriam Webster:

eis·ege·sis

noun \ˌī-sə-ˈjē-səs, ˈī-sə-ˌ\

plural eis·ege·ses\-ˌsēz\

Definition of EISEGESIS

: the interpretation of a text (as of the Bible) by reading into it one’s own ideas

Origin of EISEGESIS

Greek eis into (akin to Greek en in) + English exegesis — more at in

First Known Use: 1892

Another source offers us this:

Eisegesis (from Greek εἰς “into” and ending from exegesis from ἐξηγεῖσθαι “to lead out”) is the process of misinterpreting a text in such a way that it introduces one’s own ideas, reading into the text. This is best understood when contrasted with exegesis. While exegesis draws out the meaning from the text, eisegesis occurs when a reader reads his/her interpretation into the text. As a result, exegesis tends to be objective when employed effectively while eisegesis is regarded as highly subjective. An individual who practices eisegesis is known as an eisegete, as someone who practices exegesis is known as an exegete. The term eisegete is often used in a mildly derogatory fashion.

Eisegesis isn’t always a bad, because one’s own ideas might be a reasonable interpretation, or logical and otherwise biblically sound inference. Eiesegis, when what is ‘read into’ scripture is completely foreign to the actual text, is in contradiction with the larger context(s) of scripture (section, chapter, book, etc.), or otherwise changes the actual meaning of what has been written (even subtly), is just plain ‘bad, on several levels.

So What?

What does it matter if we ‘fudge’ a little if our motives are to lead people to Christ, help others feel better about themselves, or encourage Christians in their walk? Well, hopefully that will become self-evident as we provide some examples in subsequent “Eisegesis Unplugged” episodes.

The purpose of ‘Eisegesis Unplugged’ is to encourage readers and lovers of scripture to focus first and foremost on what it actually says and means, as written by those whom God inspired. And since the Holy Spirit is the actual author, ultimately we are talking about the authority and integrity of God’s Book, and the Honor of His Name .

The practical, here and now benefit?

When we know what scripture really says and means, we can recognize what might be ‘questionable’ and as a result apply the Berean principle and test what we are being told or taught (if we are not doing so already). For those of us who engage in ‘scriptural gymnastics‘ now and then, even with the ‘purest’ (in our minds) motives, perhaps there will be a realization that it is absolutely not necessary to engage in such God-dishonoring activity!

Enough for a short introduction to “Eisegesis Unplugged”. Subsequent posts will deal with actual examples of uses of scripture that should cause us to ask “Did the Bible REALLY say that?”

Disclaimer: The author of this, and subsequent blog posts with the same theme, makes no personal claim to having all truth. There is nothing ‘personal’ intended by contained herein, although statements made by persons known to the author might be included (even his own).