So today we're going to be started again here in 2 Timothy. I want you to recall that last week we were admonished by Paul to always persevere in the gospel, to never give up on our great promise keeper. Now this week we're going to be looking at Paul's admonishment to the church to always handle the Bible correctly, that is accurately. And what we're going to be learning today are some techniques that you and I can use so that we will interpret the Bible correctly, but we're also going to want to develop an attitude of love and pursuit for the truth. Bob has mentioned that numerous times. We have to have a love for the truth if you and I are going to be those who want to interpret the Bible for what it says. So let's begin straight away for the sake of time where Paul here in verse 14 is telling the congregation at Ephesus not to wrangle about words, specifically His words. 2 Timothy 2.14 Paul said, "...remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless and leads to the ruin of the hearers." Now, I want you to first note the command that Paul gives to Timothy. Remember, Timothy is a pastor. He functions as a pastor in the congregation of Ephesus. And he wants Timothy to remind the congregation of something. Now the term remind there is in the present tense. The significance of that is it probably has to do with ongoing action. In other words, whatever Timothy is commanded to do, it's not just to be done once or twice. He's to continuously remind them is the idea. What's he to remind them of? Well, these things. Well, that's helpful. What are these things? Well, I think it's a reference back to what Paul has just taught in 2 Timothy 2, 8 through 13. Let me remind you of that. 2 Timothy 2.8, what did we learn? We learned about the gospel. The gospel is centered on the person and work of Christ. And so certainly Timothy is to remind the congregation of the gospel. But after verse 8, remember verses 9 through 10 was about Paul's example of perseverance in the gospel. That no matter what persecution came his way, he kept preaching it. Timothy was to remind them of that. But remember last week, we saw that we are also to follow Paul's example and persevere. Never give up on the promise keeper. Persevere in the gospel. He's to remind them of that. So, succinctly, these things is the gospel and persevering in the gospel. Timothy is to continuously remind them of that. And second, notice he's also to do what? He's to solemnly charge them in the presence of God. Now, this solemn charge is literally, in the Greek, it's before the face of God. Why? Because ultimately, you and I answer to God alone as the church. But what is he to do? He's to solemnly charge them not to wrangle about words. Now, to me, what you see in blue there is the crux of this whole passage. If we want to get this passage right, we have to understand what Paul means, not to wrangle about words. What's interesting is the term wrangle about words only occurs twice in our New Testament. It comes from Logo Makeo. And in fact, I think it's a term that Paul developed just for the problem that was in Ephesus. Now you're going to see the term not only here in 2 Timothy 2.14, But also, in just a moment, I'll show you it's in 1 Timothy 6.4. But the idea is that many scholars have in their minds today is wrangling about words is where Paul doesn't want us to split hairs over theological issues. But that is not what Paul is saying. The wrangling about words has to do with rejecting the false teachers who were claiming that Paul's unambiguous word was somehow ambiguous. So this isn't about two Christians having a theological debate. This is about wrangling over words as if Paul wasn't clear in what he said. It's a rejection of Paul's apostolic authority and his doctrines by the false teachers. Now, let me give you some examples. The Apostle Paul throughout the scriptures taught that there's going to be a future bodily resurrection. You're going to see today that the false teachers were saying, no, the resurrection had already occurred. Now, that's not beating around the bush. That's not splitting fine hairs of theology. That's a direct attack on the apostolic word. The apostle Paul taught that under the new covenant, you can eat any food you want. What were the false teachers claiming? That you couldn't eat any food. Again, that's not fine hair splitting. That's just saying that the Apostle was wrong. The Apostle said under the New Covenant, if you want to get married, you're free to get married. What were the false teachers saying? No, you can't. So again, this isn't splitting hairs over fine points of theology. But rather, it was an attack on the apostolic word the clear teaching of the Word by these false teachers. Now, what does it lead to if you attack the apostolic Word? Notice, it's useless to wrangle about His Word. You have to accept it as true. And if you don't, it's going to lead to what? To ruin. Now, the term ruin there is, in the Greek, where we get our term in English, catastrophe. It leads to a catastrophe. In fact, in 2 Peter 2.6, the catastrophe is the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. So, you can say that if we reject the words of the apostles and follow after these false teachers who are clearly denying the clear, unambiguous word, it's going to lead to judgment. That's what the Apostle Paul is saying to us. Now again, I want to prove to you that this wrangling about words is not just hair splitting. So I want you to turn, if you haven't done that, to 1 Timothy 6, verses 3 through 4. And again, what I'm doing with that is I'm proving to you that the wrangling about words wasn't just prohibiting Christians from debating fine points of theology, but instead Paul wanted us to reject the false teachers who were coming up with a different doctrine altogether. That's the point. So notice here, 1 Timothy 6, 3-4. Verse 3, Paul said this, ìIf anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness,î notice verse 4, ìhe has conceded and understands nothing but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and dispute about words." Let me stop there. That phrase, dispute about words, is the noun form of the same term you see here, wrangled about words. Again, it only occurs twice in our New Testament. 1st Timothy 6.4 and right here 2nd Timothy 2.14. So what's the point? Well notice in 1st Timothy 6.3 at the beginning of that sentence, if anyone advocates a different doctrine, that was the issue. So you can't say this applies to a Christian who holds to a pre-trib position and he's going to debate a person who holds to a post-trib position. And after all you can't have that debate because you can't wrangle about words. No, that is not how it applies. That is not what it means. These were false teachers teaching completely different doctrine. That's the idea, and the church must not tolerate it. Now, here we come from what we should not do negatively, but to what we should do positively. Listen to what Paul says, verse 15. He says, Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth. Now, here Paul wants Timothy, and by extension all pastors, teachers, elders, anyone who's involved with the ministry of the Word, to be diligent. Now, the term be diligent there, spudatso, means that this is going to require intense effort. Yes, the teaching of Scripture is considered by Paul to be a laborious act, something that we have to pour ourselves into and have to exercise great diligence in getting it right. Now, notice the purpose of it. If you are diligent, you will present yourself approved to God as a workman. The term approved there, dokimos, literally means that you've been tested by God and you've been approved by him. Now, how is a teacher, pastor, elder, lay person who handles the word to be approved? Well, if you teach the word accurately. The implication is if you mishandle and are not diligent in the Word, you're going to be disapproved by God. And this is why, dear ones, we see that this will lead ultimately to shame if you mishandle the Word. Dear ones, think of James 3.1, where James said, ìNot many of you, brethren, should want to be teachers, knowing that we will incurî what? ìa stricter judgment.î It's a weighty thing to handle the Word of God, and He will take those who know what the Scriptures say and hold them accountable if they are not diligent and faithful in teaching the Scriptures for what they say. Now, I want you to notice here, the way that we are to be diligent is, notice he says in the underline, accurately handling the word of truth. The term accurately handling there comes from the Greek term meaning to cut straight. In other words, the main goal of the pastor, the teacher, the elder is to cut straight and not deviate left or right from what the scriptures have clearly said, what they have clearly spoken. So the only way a pastor, elder, teacher, layperson is going to be approved by God is if they handle the Word of God accurately. One thing I think is interesting in America, American evangelicals often reward busy pastors but not accurate ones. One of the concerns that I had is when I left the airline industry back in 2004, as an airline pilot I was very concerned about accuracy. But all of a sudden I go to a seminary that's postmodern. Bob had fought against it when he was still there. And by the time I showed up, it had been completely apostate. And the postmoderns assume that you couldn't know truth. So therefore, why would accuracy be important if you can't even know what's true? Well, I was aghast. As if somehow that we're preaching and it's just open to suggestion by human beings what is right and what's wrong. As if God hasn't clearly spoken, as if he somehow muddled our clear Scripture and the doctrines contained therein. So, brothers and sisters, pastors and teachers must be those who first and foremost desire to teach accurately what the Scriptures say. That's what we must reward. We have to reward not busyness. We have to reward not a pastor who has a great sense of humor, although that's not bad. It's never bad to have a good sense of humor, but my point is that the main goal of every minister in the Word is to be accurate. If we are not accurate, we have failed. That's the point. Now, notice here, Paul turns here to the warning about the errors of the heretics in verses 16 through 18. Paul says, But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness, and their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, men who have gone astray from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already taken place, and they upset the faith of some. Now, dear ones, I want you to notice here, Paul does not want us to partake in the worldly and empty chatter. Now, the term worldly is describing the teaching of the false teachers. In the Greek, that comes from a term, babalos, which means profane. So false teaching will never lead to godly living or righteousness. It leads to that which is profane. Paul also describes it as what? Empty chatter. The reason it's empty is because it's not true. It's not connected to the world as it really is. And therefore, it doesn't lead anywhere. Now, what's interesting, he uses a term with deep sarcasm. Notice in the box, Paul says, it will lead to further ungodliness. Now, the term there, will lead in the box, it comes from proko-tope-tope. Say that five times fast. What it means is literally to progress. Now the reason I'm laboring this point is I think Paul was playing on a term that the heretics in Ephesus were boasting in. They were boasting in being progressives. They were going to progress beyond what the scripture said, beyond what that aged foolish Paul was saying in their eyes, and they were going to progress towards a utopia here and now. But what Paul does is he turns that term on them and says, no, you're not progressing towards heaven on earth. You're progressing only in what? Ungodliness. That's what false teaching leads to. It doesn't progress anywhere good, but only in ungodly living. That's sarcasm, I think, Paul intended for us to see. Now, notice in verse 17, this talk and the false doctrines will spread like gangrene. If it is not stopped, it'll keep spreading to others. Now here Paul mentions two men that were teaching the false doctrine, Hymenaeus and Philetus. And I want us to pause for just a moment and think about how big of a downer it must be to be two men that are listed in the Scriptures forevermore as those who contradicted the words of Christ. Now, these two men are mentioned but you and I serve the true God who is all-knowing. And this should be a stark reminder to everyone listening here today and everyone listening online that ultimately God will not hold guiltless those who will not listen to his apostle, his apostles in the words of Christ. So what we do with God's word ultimately counts forever. If you will believe it, You'll believe unto eternal life, but if you reject it, scoff at it, try to progress beyond it, you will perish. That's how serious it is. Now, notice in verse 18, what were Hymenaeus and Philetus teaching? In red it says that the resurrection had already occurred. Now, as I've been thinking about this for months and months, I was thinking, how would they get away with that? If they're claiming that the resurrection had already occurred, take just very little evidence to prove that that was not the case? Jim died over there and he's still in the grave. Where's this resurrection? The reason I point that out is I think it proves they were teaching probably not a physical resurrection, but a spiritual one. And I think what we have here in Asia Minor, Ephesus, all over the places, I'm going to show you in the next screen, the next slide, is you have an incipient form of Gnosticism brewing. where everything spiritual is wonderful and everything physical is evil and bad. So they believed that God would never give us a physical resurrection because that's somehow deficient. Therefore, it's spiritual and it's now. And therefore, they were attacking the great promise of a bodily resurrection. Dear brothers and sisters, God did not create us to be ethereal beings, ghost-like figures who will just drum a harp on a cloud. You know, like you always see the pictures of the little angel who's got his wings flappin', and that's what happens to us after we die. That's not the biblical model. You're gonna be given a physical, resurrected body. And these false teachers were attacking just that, leading whole houses astray, leading them away from the true promises of Christ, for their worldly and godless banter. Now, let me talk a little bit about this progressive heresy that we see in Asia Minor. I want to talk about it because it will help us interpret what was going on in Ephesus and why they were claiming the resurrection had already occurred. What I'm claiming is that in Ephesus, in Asia Minor and the surrounding areas, they had an over-realized eschatology. What in the world does that mean? Well, eschatology has to do with the last things. Typically talking about the coming kingdom, the resurrection, etc. Well, over-realized means they believed it was already here. They believed that they were already in the kingdom or by their works they were creating it so it would exist shortly. That's the over-realized eschatology. Now, let me prove that this is indeed a bigger problem than we often think about as Christians. Think about it. We learn today, what were these false teachers in 2 Timothy 2.18 claiming? The resurrection had already occurred. Well, this isn't new to them. Remember in 2 Thessalonians 2.2, jot that verse down. Paul wanted to warn those at Thessalonica not to follow false teachers who claimed that the Lord had already come. Remember, as if the day of the Lord had already come? That was another heresy. Well, the day of the Lord contains the resurrection. So it's not only in 2 Timothy 2.18, but also 2 Timothy 2.2. There was heretics in Thessalonica claiming the resurrection had already occurred. Think about 1 Corinthians 15, 12. Paul says, and I'm paraphrasing, somebody says, how is it that you rascals are saying there is no such thing as a resurrection when I'm preaching to you that Christ has been raised from the dead? So at Corinth they were saying that there's no resurrection. Thessalonica they were saying that the resurrection had already occurred. In Ephesus they were saying the resurrection had already occurred. 2 Peter chapter 3, what's Peter warning about in Asia Minor? False teachers are saying Christ is never coming back a second time. So do you start to see that in Asia Minor and the surrounding areas there really was a belief that the resurrection had already occurred or that it wouldn't occur at all? Why? Because they were living in their spiritual kingdom already. Now, let me give you some further evidence. I'll put up number two and three together. These false teachers in Ephesus that Timothy was contending with, they were teaching more than likely that you can only eat what I would say pre-fall food. Now, I put that in question mark because I don't know if I can prove that it's pre-fall. But I can prove to you from Scripture that they were coming up with dietary restrictions. Now, why do I think it's maybe pre-fall food? Just a suggestion. I think because they believe these heretics are living in the kingdom, they want to eat food that's consistent with prior to the fall. After the fall of Adam and Eve, that's when death comes. That's when animals start being eaten. They want to live as if you're back in the garden, only fruits and vegetables. Why? Because there's going to be no more death on God's holy mountain. That's the belief that they had in their mind. Now, why did they forbid marriage? Well, they did so because they believed they were in the kingdom. And I think here, they're distorting the words of Christ. Remember, in Matthew 22, you had the Sadducees who came to Jesus and they wanted to try to prove that the resurrection was impossible, the afterlife. And so in Matthew 22, these Sadducees come to Jesus and they say, you know, if it's true this resurrection, how do you line that up with the fact that if a woman is married to a man, and that man dies, she has to be married to the brother. It's called the Leverite marriage rule in Deuteronomy 25. And then once he dies, then she's gonna be married to the next brother, and then the next brother, and the next brother, and their conundrum to Jesus, well, whose brother is she gonna be married to in the kingdom? And the Sadducees use that to try to prove the belief in the afterlife is absurd. What did Jesus say to counter that? Matthew 22 30 said you don't know the power of God nor the resurrection because in the kingdom people will be like the angels in the sense that they will neither be married nor given in marriage the false teachers believe that kingdom was now that's why they're forbidding marriage that's the idea They're spiritual. They've already arrived in the kingdom. Let me show you that they were teaching this very thing. Turn your Bibles to 1st Timothy 4, 3. 1st Timothy 4, 3. Please turn your Bibles there. 1st Timothy 4, 3. And what you're going to see is that these heretics were indeed tying men's hands so that they had to eat certain foods and not allowing men and women to get married. 1st Timothy 4.3, Paul describing the heretics, he says, they're men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. There it is. Clearly attacking the apostolic doctrine. Let me come up with points four and five, and I'll explain why I think this ties into an over-realized eschatology. They didn't believe that the gender roles mattered anymore. And they also didn't believe that sexual immorality was a problem. In fact, they encouraged it. Why? Because they were in the kingdom. They were like the angels. They were spiritual, and everything that you do physically doesn't matter. This is why Paul had to say in 1 Timothy 2.12 that he did not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. Why? Because they were trying to usurp the gender distinctions, much like you have in our society today. To them, they wanted no gender distinctions at all. Notice here, sexual immorality didn't matter. That was ultimately the goal. The goal of these heretics is so that they could encourage people to have the same type of licentious lifestyle they did. And so that's why Paul said it doesn't lead anywhere good. The false doctrines never lead to greater godliness. but to rebellion and immorality. Brothers and sisters, this all occurred because false teachers wanted to progress beyond the Bible. And I want you to think about today, in our progressive age, the irony is that three of these false doctrines are still espoused. Yes, the doctrines of today will say, no, there's no resurrection. The progressives will say that gender roles don't matter and sexual immorality doesn't matter either. And what this should serve as a reminder of is that any time the apostles' words are transgressed and that people progress beyond them, it's not going to lead to heaven on earth, but it leads to Babylon. It leads to hell on earth. We've seen the idea in the Soviet Union. They promised a great kingdom and a utopia, and it led to millions dying. In China, they thought they were going to bring a utopia, and over 70 million died at the hands of Mao alone. Wherever the utopia is tried by progressing beyond the words of the apostles, it never leads to the kingdom. It leads to destruction. Dear ones, that's why Paul was concerned He wanted the church to remain firm in teaching the gospel, the gospel that leads to salvation, the gospel that leads to godliness. Okay, now, I've got a couple of application points for you here this morning, two that go together, I think. Number one, all believers in Christ must strive to accurately handle the Word of God. That flows directly from the text. With that, number two, all believers must have a love for God's Word. Now, why? Well, because you're going to pursue getting good at what you really love. Think about if you were in high school and you really love golf, you probably got good at it. If you love baseball or cooking. By the way, I love eating. I'm good at it. So, if you're a good cook, I'm with you. I'm your other hand. We go hand in hand like M&Ms. But you get good at what you love. And so if we love the Word of God, if we want to pursue it, we're going to be those who handle it accurately. But if we don't love it and we don't pursue it, then we'll start being those who handle it inaccurately and read into it what we want to be there. rather than what it says. And so what I want to do today is I want to begin talking about some concept as to how do we interpret the Word of God correctly. That's what Paul admonished Timothy and by extension all Christians to do. How do we do that? Well, I'm going to teach you some theology. That's one of the goals that Bob and I have had over the years is to teach the church theology. Let's begin with a term some of you are probably familiar with, perhaps others are not. But let's build our theological vocabulary. One of the reasons I want to do that is if you're reading theological literature, you will see these terms come up. Hermeneutics, let's start there. What is hermeneutics? It's something every one of us should be engaged in. It is the discipline about the art and science of biblical interpretation. And the whole goal and endeavor of hermeneutics is to come into contact with the intent of the biblical author, understanding what the author meant, and therefore coming to a valid interpretation. And so at the heart of hermeneutics, the art and science of biblical interpretation is something that we call exegesis, interpreting out of the Bible what is actually there. Now, notice the term exegesis. It comes from a verb, exegemi, which is actually used in John 118. Bob has mentioned this just not long ago, a couple months ago, where the son is the one who explains the father. He exegetes him. He explains who the father truly is. In the same way, we as the interpreter are trying to understand what the text is actually saying, what's actually in the Bible. Now, what we want to avoid is eisegesis. Eisegesis is where we read into the Bible what we want to be there. That's where we read into the Bible our biases, and we're reading into the text something that's not there at all. Let me give you an illustration. a heretical pastor that I know of in the Twin Cities area. And I became familiar with some of his works because of a distant relative. And one day I was just looking at one of his messages just to see what he was teaching. And it was a message out of Colossians 2. And remember in Colossians 2 where it talks about Jesus nailing to the cross the debt that was against us in decrees. And it's all about how Jesus' atoning work on the cross gets rid of any attack that the demonic realm can bring against us. Why? Because we no longer are considered lawbreakers before God. That's what the text is about. This man took that text, Jesus nailing our debt to the cross, finishing it once and for all, and he turned it into a polemic against capital punishment. It had nothing to do with Paul's point. But do you know why he read into the text that very concept? It's because that's what he wanted to hear, and that's what his audience wanted to hear. They wanted a Bible that would back their politics. And so he distorted the Apostle's word. He progressed beyond it. And he said, I don't care what the Apostle says. I don't care that he's a personal spokesman for Christ. I'm going to read into it what I want. Now, dear ones, it's not just the Bible that the progressives do this. The postmodern generation does this with other literature as well. Think about the Constitution. How hard is it, really? Bob and I can interpret a text from thousands of years ago in a different language, and yet we have scholars at the Supreme Court who can't do it with English? A couple hundred years ago? Think about the Heller case. How many in here are familiar with Heller? Supreme Court decision where there was a retired police officer simply wanted to own a firearm in Washington, D.C. He could not. Why? Well, because they wanted to take his Second Amendment rights away. It goes all the way to the Supreme Court. In a five to four decision, the majority of the court said, no, you have a right to keep and bear arms. But the minority report They took the phrase, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, as a liberty that only the state has. Now let's think about that for just a moment. The phrase, the right of the people, occurs five times in the Bill of Rights. Every time, it's referring to what? An individual's right. So isn't it strange that all of a sudden the Second Amendment, it doesn't mean clearly what the text means. the right of the people all of a sudden becomes the right of the government? As if the government needed a bill of right to protect their right to keep and bear arms? They've always had that right. So, dear ones, why did they read into it with that interpretation? Because they don't like what it says. Just like the progressives, what they do with the Bible. exegesis of the Bible is the preeminent task of the pastor, the elder, the teacher of any lay person who's handling the Bible. If we don't get our exegesis right, we're done. Nothing else matters. Dear ones, think about the troubles that we have in America today. Much of the troubles we have stem from millions of people doing eisegesis, reading what they want into the scriptures, rather than pulling out what's actually in the scriptures. And the result of it is you have millions of people that are no longer connected to reality. They are completely disconnected from the world as it really is. They're living in a world of their own imagination by the millions. Why? Because they did eisegesis and not exegesis. and they heaped up teachers who would do the same. That's the critical issue. Think about Ronald Reagan. He famously clipped about his political opponents. He said, it's not that they're dumb, it's just that they believe so much that isn't so. That's the problem with a lot of Americans, because so much eisegesis has been done. It's not that they're dumb, it's just that they believe so much that isn't so. that was never revealed, that they wanted to be true, but really isn't. Now, why do we put up so much scripture? Why do we put it up on the screen for you week after week? One of the goals that we have is not to bore you, but to help you reason with us through the scriptures, so that we're not just telling you what the text says, We're allowing you to be Bereans and weigh in and say, yeah, I can see where that follows. And week after week, we're going to logically look at what the text says, how to interpret it, and go through it verse by verse by verse. What that does is it eliminates the biases that I inherently have, and Bob has, and all of our teachers. We're men too. But when you have to handle the text verse by verse, It keeps your biases at bay. Now, let me give you five concepts that I think should be in our minds if we want to be those who accurately handle the Word of God. One of the first concepts that I think we have to have in our minds is that we can't know what God hasn't revealed. Now, that's a principle that all of us should affirm. Remember Deuteronomy 29, 29, that's where Moses said, the things that the Lord has not revealed belong to the Lord alone, but the things that the Lord has revealed belong to us and our children forever. One of the implications of that text is we rely upon what God has revealed to know anything at all. And to go beyond what God has revealed leads us into sorcery or occultic activity. trying to get hidden information that God has not revealed. That's prohibited. And that's why I have Galatians 5.20 listed. In Galatians 5.20 you see one of the sins of the flesh is sorcery. What is sorcery? It's trying to get secret information that God never revealed. So here's what I want you to think about. When it comes to God's revelation, He reveals truth about Himself and His world in two different aspects of revelation. The first type of revelation is what we call natural revelation. And oh yes, natural revelation is true according to special revelation, the Bible, Romans 1.20. So, from the created order, we can know some true things about God, that He's eternal. We can know some true things about this world. We also, from the divine revelation, the scriptures, we can know the path of salvation. But if something isn't revealed through our observations, natural revelation, or through our Bible, which is special revelation, it's secret things that we have no right to look into. And so that's why our theology should never be, well, how many angels did God create? Let's focus on that for a whole hour. Well, let's not because that wasn't revealed. Or what's the last name of the Antichrist? I don't know. It wasn't revealed. So our focus as a church has to be on what God has revealed and not what He hasn't. I've heard many Bible studies. I've heard many sermons on conjecture. on things that were never revealed at all. Why? Because, again, people seek eisegesis rather than exegesis. Think about this. The second point, the author grounds the meaning of the text. Now, this sounds simple. I know most of you say, well, why is that a big revelation there? Well, because it's under attack today. The postmodern generation reverses that and says, no, the reader grounds the meaning of the text. The problem with the reader grounding the meaning of the text is the text, of course, can mean anything then. You lose control. And it's actually immoral to attack the intent of the author. Think about how immoral it would be. You sit down at a restaurant. It says $6.75 for your patty melt. You order your patty melt. It was in clear English. The waitress comes up later. She says, that'll be $6.75 with tax. And you say, well, that's just your interpretation. Well, wouldn't that be a little immoral? And by the way, if you press the point, men with guns will come. And they'll say, no, you owe $6.75 for that patty melt. But yet, that's exactly what people are doing with the Word of God. is if God is going to say, oh, do you want to distort the meaning of the text? Do you want to read into it something that's not there? Well, be my guest. No. If you wouldn't do it with the waitress ordering the patty melt, you may not want to do that with the Holy One of Israel. The author grounds the meaning of the text. Now, you and I are going to come to 2 Timothy 3, 16 through 17, so let me read to you the 2 Peter passage. 2 Peter 1, 20-21. I'm going to read that to you. What I want you to hear is that God is the ultimate author of the Scripture, and therefore He's the one who grounds the meaning of the text. 2 Peter 1, 20-21, it says, But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation. Why? He says, For, verse 21, For no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." God is the author and therefore you're not entitled to your own interpretation. Your interpretation must correspond to what God has grounded in the text itself. Okay, third principle for the sake of time, we'll keep moving here. The text can never mean what it never meant. This is a great principle. The text of Scripture can never mean what it never meant. The reason I have Kahn up on the screen there in Isaiah 9, there's a man named Jonathan Kahn. How many in here have ever heard of him? He's written a book called The Harbinger. I think he's got sequels out of that. Well, I've got a big problem with what he's taught because he tries to make the Bible mean what it never meant. Bob has a great article refuting Jonathan Kahn. Now, we would affirm with Jonathan Cahn the need for America to repent. But even there, Jonathan Cahn isn't clear. What does national repentance for America look like? I'll tell you what it looks like biblically, that individuals repent and come to faith in Jesus Christ. But Cahn makes it look like you and I as Americans have to resubmit to the Mosaic Law. No, that is not right. Now, I want you to see where he tried to make the Bible mean what it never meant. Do you know that in his first book, The Harbinger, he tried to take the attack that happened on America on September 11th, and he tried to claim that the prophecy in Isaiah 9 was really about that. Turn your Bibles to Isaiah 9.10. I'm going to show you the evidence. Isaiah 9.10. Please turn your Bibles there. And as you're turning to Isaiah 9.10, Again, Jonathan Cahn tried to claim that this applied to America because Americans were boasting, and therefore Isaiah 9 applies to us. But I'm going to show you that that is impossible and very dangerous. Isaiah 9, here's the passage that he applied to America. Notice it says, the bricks have fallen down, but we will rebuild with smooth stones. The sycamores have been cut down, but we will replace them with cedars. So notice, stop there, there's a boasting. And by the way, there was real boasting in America that we would rebuild after September 11th. I've got no qualms with that. But this passage in Isaiah 9, Jonathan Cahn tried to claim that that was about America, America boasting after our towers fell on September 11th, and that all the judgments listed therein are for us. But keep reading, let's read one verse after this, verse 11. Notice, it's about Israel. It says, therefore the Lord raises against them adversaries from resin, that's Syria, and spurs their enemies on. Notice verse 12, the Arameans on the east, that's the Syrians, and the Philistines on the west. and they devour Israel with gaping jaws. In spite of all this, his anger does not turn away, and his hand is still stretched out." Dear ones, this is about judgment upon Israel. Do you and I have Syrians to the east and Philistines to the west? Now, again, we're not allegorizing this. You might say, well, yeah, we do have that on the west and east coast. This is not an allegory. This is to be taken literally. Are you with me? And notice he mentions Israel. So all of a sudden, Jonathan Cahn says, hey, by revelation, I think this applies to America. Well, it never did. So let's ask ourselves, if it never did refer to America, can it now? No. Let me show you the danger in applying this passage to America. Turn to the beginning of Isaiah 9. Isaiah 9.1, I'll prove one powerful point, I think, that'll show the danger in doing this. Look at Isaiah 9.1. Now as you're turning to Isaiah 9.1, I hope your page is still open at Isaiah 9. Remember one chapter earlier, God was saying because of the sins of Israel, He's going to send Assyria against them. Now listen to what He says. This is the good news. He says, but there will be no more gloom for her who was in English. This is Isaiah 9.1. It says, in earlier times He treated the land of Zebulun, that's one of the tribes, and the land of Naphtali, another one of the tribes of Israel, he treated them with contempt. But later on he shall make it glorious by the way of the sea on the other side of Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles." Stop there. What God was saying through Isaiah the prophet is because you were the first to experience the judgment of the Assyrians, you of Naphtali and Zebulun around Galilee, the northern part of Israel, the great blessing is you're going to be the first to see the Messianic light dawn. When Messiah comes on the scene of history, you're going to be the first to see it. In fact, notice in verse 2, that's exactly what he says. Isaiah 9-2, the people who walk in darkness will see a great light. Those who live in a dark land, the light will shine on them. That is quoted verbatim in Matthew 4-15 because it's when Jesus began His ministry in Capernaum that was fulfilled. Those who were the first to receive judgment by the hands of the Assyrians were the first to see the messianic light, the Jews around the Sea of Galilee. Now, did Jesus first come to America? Were we the first ones to see the messianic light? It's in the same text that Kahn is using for America. Do you see how dangerous it is? If you start playing the games that Kahn does, you can make the Bible mean anything. Brothers and sisters, the Bible can never mean what it never meant. And if we take handling God's Word accurately seriously, we have to take a stand against that type of eisegesis. Okay, fourth point. The text has only one meaning, but it has many implications. That's what Bob and I do. We do the meaning of the text, and then we break out the applications at the end. One meaning, many implications and applications. Let me give you an example here from Ephesians 4.28. In fact, I'll just interpret the first part of the verse, because it's easy. Ephesians 4.28, Paul said, He who steals must steal no longer. There, the Apostle Paul is just reaffirming the eighth commandment, thou shalt not steal. What does it mean? Well, it's simple, you can't take other people's stuff. Now, that's what it means, but are there implications that are logically connected to the text? Yes, there's many. This is why we shouldn't take other people's words without citing them, because we don't want to steal their idea. This is why we should pay for our music when we download it, because we don't want to steal someone else's intellectual property. But this is also why Marxism, for example, is wrong. Do you know Karl Marx wants to abandon all private property? He wants to abandon all private property, and yet we have people who voted for them in this last election. Apparently they're ready to give up all the private property. But when it says, Thou shalt not steal, that's predicated on you being able to own something. Let me illustrate it this way. How many ever saw the movie Dr. Zhivago? Anybody ever seen that? I have tried ten times, at least ten, to see it. I always fall asleep at some point. It's like three hours long. But I'll tell you one part I remember. Do you remember Dr. Zhivago? He's living in Russia during the Bolshevik Revolution, and he goes to do work in the country, and he comes back to his place in the city and he sees all of these Bolsheviks taking his couches and his furniture out of his house, his apartment. And he looks at one of them and he says, what are you guys doing with my stuff? And these communists say, your stuff comrade? Why? Because in communism you can't own anything. And therefore, what purpose would be the commandment, thou shall not steal? It makes no sense. So, do you see why Marxism doesn't line up? There's another reason why Marxism doesn't line up with the biblical worldview. Again, the idea that you can own something is not the meaning of Ephesians 4.28, but it is an implication of it. Do you see the distinction? One meaning, many implications, and applications. Okay, let me leave you with this last one. We must bridge the hermeneutic gap by historical and grammatical rules. You and I are reading, when we're reading the Bible, we're reading something that's dated thousands of years ago. It's other people's mail. It happened in a different culture. So how do we interpret it? Well, we have to understand the history, the culture, the grammar, the syntax, and as always, context is king. Again, history, culture, grammar, syntax, and context is king. If we will do that, let me give you an illustration. Let's use Matthew 18, 18. How many have ever heard of false teachers who will go around and they'll pray and they'll say, I bind Satan, I bind this demon, I bind this, I bind that. Well, they're using binding and loosing from Matthew 18, 18. But they're using it in a way historically that the Jews never did. To the Jew, binding and loosing had to do with what you were morally obligated, bound, and what you were morally free to do, loosed. It wasn't about taking demonic or angelic beings and manipulating them. So we have to understand the culture and the history. Think about Matthew 20, 17, very simple example. Jesus, it says, is going up to Jerusalem. Now, if I read that like a Minnesotan, I say, oh, he must be going up north, you know. Why? Because we say you go up north to get to the cabin, or you go down south to look at the Hormel plant. Because we have maps, and the maps are oriented north is on the top, up, and south is down. So we say you go up north or you go down south. But in the Bible, and I think by the way this is more accurate, they spoke not geographically, but topographically. They weren't going up north. He was going up in elevation to get to Jerusalem. My point is, if you read it like a Minnesotan and don't understand how they use their language, you're going to come up with a wrong interpretation. Now, let's talk about grammar. Grammar, Titus 2.13. Great promise that you and I are looking forward to the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus. When a Jehovah Witness comes to your door, you can use grammar and tell them that the God and Savior has to be the same person. Why? Let me tell you a little story. There was a man named Granville Sharp. He was an abolitionist. He fought against slavery. And to be a better defender, and to be a better proponent of the anti-slavery movement, he decided to learn Greek and Hebrew. He taught himself this. Well, he developed a grammatical rule that's still in effect today. And the rule says this, anytime you have an article, substantive, chi, substantive construction, the two people are the same. In this case, what that means is God and Savior are the same person. So when the Jehovah Witness comes to your door and they say, no, I don't believe Jesus is God, well, the grammatical rule of Titus 2.13 says that Jesus is God. He's both God and Savior. It's one person. We're just using grammar. We're using syntax. We're reading in context to come up with a valid interpretation. Brothers and sisters, the reason we do these things is because we want to know what God has said, and we don't want to read into our own biases into the text. That's the whole goal of hermeneutics. Now, with this hermeneutics, I'm gonna leave you with this. It's only as good as your love for the word. As I mentioned earlier, you always will get good at what you really love. If you love football, you'll probably get good at it when you're in your youth. When you get old, you can't get good at it anyway. I pull a hamstring past 20 yards. But you get good at what you love. And so we have to have a love and a pursuit of God's Word. Let me give you an example of this. Do you remember in John chapter 6, Jesus taught some difficult things to the Jews that were around him? For example, he said that he was the bread from heaven, John 6, 31. He said in John 6, 44, no one can come to me unless the Father draws him. In John 6, 53, he said you have to eat my flesh and drink my blood. Of course, those are metaphors for faith. But the Jews that were around him said, this is difficult. And it's the Jews that didn't love His word that decided, I've had enough. I'm not pursuing, interpreting, and understanding this anymore. And you see this reflected in John 6, 60. This is the wider group of disciples outside the 12. It says, therefore, many of His disciples, when they heard this said, they said, this is a difficult statement. Who can listen to it? We're not going to pursue this. We're not going to try to get this right. This is absurd. And they didn't love it, and therefore they left it. They didn't pursue ever interpreting Jesus' words again. Now contrast that with the inner 12. Jesus, remember, looks at them. Are you also going to depart? What was the answer by Peter, John 6, 68? Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. What Peter was saying is we love your word. We might not understand it all the time, but we're going to pursue it. We're going to wrestle with it. We're never going to try to deviate from it. We're going to follow you. That's the mindset that we as the church have to have. Why? Because we are the ones who are called to accurately handle His word. Accurately handling the word of God isn't just for the pastor. It's not just for the elder. It's not just for the teacher. It's for every Christian. Because when you and I accurately handle the word of God, It brings to bear edification for God's people, and it brings great, great glory to God. Brothers and sisters, let us be those who handle accurately and correctly the Word of God. Let's pray. Heavenly Father, Lord, we do thank you that you have given us this wonderful deposit of your scriptures, once and for all handed down to us through your saints. Lord, we do pray that we would endeavor to correctly interpret the scriptures all the days of our lives. We do pray, Lord, that we would be convicted by the words therein, that we would not be just hearers of the word, but we would also be doers, Lord. I do pray also for our upcoming holidays, Lord, that you would give us opportunity to preach the gospel to our loved ones and friends and family, so that they too can have forgiveness of sins and everlasting life. Give us opportunity, regenerate hearts before us, prepare a way We pray these things in Jesus' name. Amen.