Sjolander Road Fellowship

Declaring the God of Unconditional Love

Using and interpreting scripture



Isaiah 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little


In a recent Bible lesson the presenter quoted the verse above in support of the way he roamed over the Bible linking a verse here and a verse there to logically build up his understanding of a particular issue. In so doing this teacher vividly demonstrated the normal way the church understands and uses the Bible. The divine text is treated like a jigsaw puzzle which must be pieced together through the correct usage of human logic. The very length and complexity of the Bible essentially forces its students into such an approach. A 2000 page book given by divine revelation and prescribing essential truth must logically be linked in some very important ways. Thus the church has always been on a mission to provide the logical framework which provides those linkages.


In this way the church has faced a conundrum over the centuries. They claimed a divine revelation but recognized a need for human interpretation thereof. The words are of divine origin but the understanding requires human ingenuity. Is the product of the totally divine and the totally human still divine in nature? On the one hand, the church claims to be the divinely inspired interpreter of scripture, but concurrently sub groups who claim the label Christian make counter claims and arrive at different interpretations. Such differences demand an explanation from the institution which insists it is God's agent on earth to deliver divine truth to all mankind.


In the final analysis, no matter how one explains the differences in interpretation, what becomes perfectly clear is that the necessity of human interpretation of the Bible means that the result of that interpretation can no longer be considered divine. It has been reduced to personal opinion, perhaps reinforced by long standing tradition, and nothing more. A revelation which must filter through the mind of man cannot perfectly reflect its former divine nature.


A much more logical way to achieve divine revelation would be the very way those who wrote the Bible supposedly received theirs, right straight from the mind of God, a direct transmission of the message with no external linkages necessary. Unless the church admits that such intuitive insights into divine truth are possible, they cannot reasonably talk about divine truth. Of course, such an admission simultaneously destroys the church's very reason for existence.