The error of Biblical Interpretation by "Genre."

[ScottA]

Many pastors and church leaders have been taught that the Bible is "literature." Here is an example of what is commonly taught:

The Bible is a work of literature. Literature comes in different genres, or categories based on style, and each is read and appreciated differently from another. For example, to confuse a work of science fiction with a medical textbook would cause many problems—they must be understood differently. And both science fiction and a medical text must be understood differently from poetry. Therefore, accurate exegesis and interpretation takes into consideration the purpose and style of a given book or passage of Scripture. In addition, some verses are meant figuratively, and proper discernment of these is enhanced by an understanding of genre. An inability to identify genre can lead to serious misunderstanding of Scripture. The main genres found in the Bible are these: law, history, wisdom, poetry, narrative, epistles, prophecy and apocalyptic literature.

Indeed the Bible includes many different genres. The problem however, is that the Bible is not a work of literature, but rather a work of the spirit of God. Being in literary form does not make it a work of literature. By definition all other written works in literary form, are different. In other words, what God has inspired to be first written in literary form, but is finished by the promise of God written in the hearts of people is not at all "literature" by nature. Not at all.

As such, genre teaching is only good as a means of elementary explanation of what God has done first in literary form--which was simply a tool or form of media and communication--not a biblical law to be imposed within the Church as a limit, as if "All scripture is" not "given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness", as it is written. Therefore, beyond the elementary use of genre teachings, are to be considered the teachings of men and not of God. Such teachings should be rejected as being against the finished work of God, which is both begun and finished in by the Spirit; and should be rejected as anti-Christ, as it is Christ who has sent the Holy Spirit.

Beware!

 

[Robert Gwin]

Many pastors and church leaders have been taught that the Bible is "literature." Here is an example of what is commonly taught:

The Bible is a work of literature. Literature comes in different genres, or categories based on style, and each is read and appreciated differently from another. For example, to confuse a work of science fiction with a medical textbook would cause many problems—they must be understood differently. And both science fiction and a medical text must be understood differently from poetry. Therefore, accurate exegesis and interpretation takes into consideration the purpose and style of a given book or passage of Scripture. In addition, some verses are meant figuratively, and proper discernment of these is enhanced by an understanding of genre. An inability to identify genre can lead to serious misunderstanding of Scripture. The main genres found in the Bible are these: law, history, wisdom, poetry, narrative, epistles, prophecy and apocalyptic literature.

Indeed the Bible includes many different genres. The problem however, is that the Bible is not a work of literature, but rather a work of the spirit of God. Being in literary form does not make it a work of literature. By definition all other written works in literary form, are different. In other words, what God has inspired to be first written in literary form, but is finished by the promise of God written in the hearts of people is not at all "literature" by nature. Not at all.

As such, genre teaching is only good as a means of elementary explanation of what God has done first in literary form--which was simply a tool or form of media and communication--not a biblical law to be imposed within the Church as a limit, as if "All scripture is" not "given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness", as it is written. Therefore, beyond the elementary use of genre teachings, are to be considered the teachings of men and not of God. Such teachings should be rejected as being against the finished work of God, which is both begun and finished in by the Spirit; and should be rejected as anti-Christ, as it is Christ who has sent the Holy Spirit.

Beware!

The truth is Scott, the Bible is authored by Jehovah as you pointed out by Scripture, He authored it through holy spirit, penned by His witnesses that He inspired through holy spirit, and for His witnesses. It is His words in which Jesus said were truth. It is the only book on earth that is inspired of Him.

 

[Mr E]

Many pastors and church leaders have been taught that the Bible is "literature." Here is an example of what is commonly taught:

The Bible is a work of literature. Literature comes in different genres, or categories based on style, and each is read and appreciated differently from another. For example, to confuse a work of science fiction with a medical textbook would cause many problems—they must be understood differently. And both science fiction and a medical text must be understood differently from poetry. Therefore, accurate exegesis and interpretation takes into consideration the purpose and style of a given book or passage of Scripture. In addition, some verses are meant figuratively, and proper discernment of these is enhanced by an understanding of genre. An inability to identify genre can lead to serious misunderstanding of Scripture. The main genres found in the Bible are these: law, history, wisdom, poetry, narrative, epistles, prophecy and apocalyptic literature.

Indeed the Bible includes many different genres. The problem however, is that the Bible is not a work of literature, but rather a work of the spirit of God. Being in literary form does not make it a work of literature. By definition all other written works in literary form, are different. In other words, what God has inspired to be first written in literary form, but is finished by the promise of God written in the hearts of people is not at all "literature" by nature. Not at all.

As such, genre teaching is only good as a means of elementary explanation of what God has done first in literary form--which was simply a tool or form of media and communication--not a biblical law to be imposed within the Church as a limit, as if "All scripture is" not "given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness", as it is written. Therefore, beyond the elementary use of genre teachings, are to be considered the teachings of men and not of God. Such teachings should be rejected as being against the finished work of God, which is both begun and finished in by the Spirit; and should be rejected as anti-Christ, as it is Christ who has sent the Holy Spirit.

Beware!

I guess one's perspective is determined to a degree by how they define or understand 'inspiration.' It means "spirit in." You are in-spirited by God who guides or inspires by His spirit in you.... and so you write what 'the word' or spirit of God lays upon you. And it absolutely does come in different 'genres' to different folks in different ways at different times. The poet or the musician can be every bit as much of a theologian as the preacher or professor. The way each of these might write down their understanding of those things they receive will be vastly different. To ignore these differences is to ignore context. Beware of that. I'm otherwise missing your point entirely.

 

[Wrangler]

Indeed the Bible includes many different genres. The problem however, is that the Bible is not a work of literature, but rather a work of the spirit of God. Being in literary form does not make it a work of literature.

Not sure why you deem these mutually exclusive. It seems you want to deny the book has a genus.

Jesus is a man. You say Jesus is not a man but rather a work of the Spirit of God. Again, both apply. They are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Mr E]

Not sure why you deem these mutually exclusive. It seems you want to deny the book has a genus.

Jesus is a man. You say Jesus is not a man but rather a work of the Spirit of God. Again, both apply. They are not mutually exclusive.

To me, it's a dull point. Scripture, by definition-- is literature. You could say it's not merely literature, and I could agree with that.

To be blunt.

 

[ScottA]

I guess one's perspective is determined to a degree by how they define or understand 'inspiration.' It means "spirit in." You are in-spirited by God who guides or inspires by His spirit in you.... and so you write what 'the word' or spirit of God lays upon you. And it absolutely does come in different 'genres' to different folks in different ways at different times. The poet or the musician can be every bit as much of a theologian as the preacher or professor. The way each of these might write down their understanding of those things they receive will be vastly different. To ignore these differences is to ignore context. Beware of that. I'm otherwise missing your point entirely.

Further explanation:

What prompted my run-in with this so-called teaching of interpretation of scripture limited by "genre" against the fact that "all scripture is inspired by God and profitable for doctrine", etc...was my offering help to my pastor after he preached a sermon including much against those who don't stand up and wave their arms in worship, saying things like, "some of you stand there with your hands in your pockets."

In love and in truth ("no offence, but") I privately emailed that the problem of less than exuberant responses was rather a symptom of being lulled to slumber. After which I offered an example regarding the passage that he was preaching on, of how the power of God might be revealed to get the response he was after, rather than the watered-down message that he gave. Again, reluctantly, in love, and with scripture. He was offended, and unexpectedly came back with a "teachings of men" explanation of how he could not preach from the book of Nehemiah as being inspired, because it was "historic" by genre and only to be taught as such. I then reminded him that "all scripture" was "inspired by God and profitable for doctrine", etc., and he wanted to meet with me and a couple of elders to clarify the matter. Then the fangs came out, with defenses of longstanding seminary, and church teaching against my "all scripture" biblical explanation, as if "all" did not include all that was only considered "historic" for 2,000 years. Then I reminded them that "false teachers" within the church and "great apostacy" were foretold tainting much of the teaching within the church, and yet during the same time the promise of being "lead unto all truth" by the Holy Spirit was also to be, which prompted me according to my own spiritual gifts from God and was in complete alignment with what Jesus and the scriptures prescribed--that "all truth" would come (just as the pastor's own gift was to preach). After which ensued a 3-against-1 tag team against everything I had very nicely presented as my spiritual gift and contribution as a member of one body "knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share." Then like ravenous wolves they all but through me out.

Thus, by their witness, it is apparent that this so-called "genre" teaching is not at all biblical in spite of the scriptures being written in many different genres, but is rather a teaching of men by seminary and church rule, and is actually against the scriptures, specifically against Christ who outlined the course of things for these times contrary to the way that many are taught within the church.

 

[ScottA]

Not sure why you deem these mutually exclusive. It seems you want to deny the book has a genus.

Jesus is a man. You say Jesus is not a man but rather a work of the Spirit of God. Again, both apply. They are not mutually exclusive.

God having created this world and also the kingdom which is not of this world, does indeed demonstrate mutual exclusivity. For which Paul wrote that a worker approved of God need not be "ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

As such, Jesus not only performed many miracles, but being a man and also God, is a miracle of God, the propitiation which brings salvation to those who believe who were before condemned.

 

[Wrangler]

God having created this ... and ... that, does indeed demonstrate mutual exclusivity.

Not even a little bit does it demonstrate mutual exclusivity. Not even a little bit.

The word Bible means book.Usually, literature is contained in books. So, to say a particular book is not literature is just playing word games.

I'll withdraw from your thread now.

 

[ScottA]

Not even a little bit does it demonstrate mutual exclusivity. Not even a little bit.

The word Bible means book.Usually, literature is contained in books. So, to say a particular book is not literature is just playing word games.

I'll withdraw from your thread now.

Whether you read this or not...the point is not that the words are not "written in a book"-- they are. But rather that they are so much more, and more by the spirit of God than mere "literature." Indeed, distinctly more--exclusively, as heaven is more than this world, and as God is more than man who was and is only made in an image dimly.