This from my book: Good News For Jehovah's Witnesses
INTERPRETATION
DIALOGUE
1.
How confident are you that Jehovah's Witnesses interpret the Bible
properly?
2.
Are Jehovah's Witnesses able to recognize interpretive abuse?
Before
we discuss any doctrinal issues, I would like to distinguish between
what I believe is proper versus improper interpretive practice....
so you know what I can accept as biblical and what I can't accept.
Basic Guidelines for
Validating Doctrinal Claims`)
i.
There must be at least one scriptural reference that can be
cited for support of any doctrinal claim or position.
ii.
Scriptural references must not be tampered with added
to, deleted from, or have words substituted or meanings
altered.
iii.
Scriptural references are considered arbitrarily linked unless
it is shown that subject or content is clearly related.
iv.
Interpretations of biblical passages must take into consideration,
context, including textual, situational cultural
and historical contexts.
3.
What do you think of these guidelines?
4.
Do you think applying these guidelines might reduce doctrinal error?
5. How do Jehovah's Witnesses
interpret Matthew 13:44?
Again the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hidden in a
field; the which when a man has found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he
hath, and buyeth that field. Mt.13:44
-
Imagine you are approached one day by two young elders who see this passage as support for the Mormon religion. They explain that Joseph Smith
discovered a treasure in gold plates while walking in a field in Up
State NY in the year 1827. He immediately buried/hid these plates, but
later after fully dedicating himself to God's kingdom, he
returned to unearth them. They add that these plates were then
translated into what we know
today as The Book of Mormon. Then you are asked to compare Mt. 13:44
with Eze. 37:16 regarding the stick/book of Joseph.
6.
Would you say this interpretation is Bible-based?
7.
Can you identify any problems with the interpretive methodology
employed in this interpretation?
8.
How would you attempt to set them straight on this passage?
Here
is what I would do:
a.
First I would introduce the four basic guidelines
I showed you. I
would use these four guidelines to demonstrate that their explanation
of Matthew 13:44 is not based on proper interpretive practice; that
they are in fact guilty of interpretive abuse not only for ignoring
context and arbitrarily linking an unrelated passage, but also for
tampering with (impregnating) the text by superimposing their own
church history, names, dates and places onto the Bible. (eisegesis
vs exegesis)
b.
Secondly, I would apply the sound biblical interpretative practice of
letting the Bible interpret itself.
I would explain that this parable is 1 of 4 field parables spoken to
the multitudes from a boat. Unlike Jesus' vineyard parables that
apply specifically to Israel, these field parables pertain to the
church and actually foresee the development of the church through
history until the harvest. Then I would show them from the parallel
passage in the fourth chapter of Mark, that all field parables are
related (see
Mk. 4:13)
as to interpretation. The
interpretive keys to the field parables are all provided in Matthew
13 by Jesus Himself, as follows.
CORRECT
INTERPRETATION:
The field = the world [verse
38]
The
man in field = Son of Man [verses 24, 37 ]
The
treasure = Good Seed/ Children of the Kingdom/Church [verse 38]
The
Son of Man gives everything he has to purchase field/world to acquire his
hidden treasure (hidden even from the prophets - verse 17) the
church.
9.
Do you agree that these elders have gone beyond what is written when
they teach that Matthew 13:44 is about Joseph Smith and the Book of
Mormon? [Yes]
10.
Do you think that my pointing out their interpretive abuse might help
the elders to see that their teachings here are extra-biblical and
and entirely erroneous?
11.
Do you think that sound exegesis might correct them and serve to
change their minds about this parable?
My
take is this: Because their primary faith is in their church
leadership and not in the Bible - neither pointing out their
interpretive abuse, nor providing sound exegesis is likely to
convince these elders that their teachings on this passage are
unwarranted or wrong. Besides, if they changed their thinking, they
would inevitably be labeled apostates, disfellowshiped and shunned by
friends and family and ultimately, in their thinking, God Himself.
12.
Do you agree with me that the elder's teaching on this passage is not
biblical; that it is derived by interpretive abuse and merely
represents the speculations of men?
13.
Looking at how your religion interprets scripture now: can you explain several verses in Revelation to me? Revelation 8:1-2; 6-7
And
when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven
about the space of half an hour. 2 And I saw the seven
angels which stood before God; and to them were given seven
trumpets .....6 And the seven angels which had the seven trumpets
prepared themselves to sound. 7 The first angel sounded,
and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were
cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and
all green grass was burnt up.
14.
Do you believe that the first trumpet sounded already?
[?]
15.
Do you know when and where the first trumpet blast originated?
“Revelation
Its Grand Climax at Hand” p. 172 reads:
“When
the sounding of the seven trumpets got under way in 1922, the Bible
Student convention at Cedar Point, Ohio, (Rev. 8:7) featured a
talk by the president of the Watchtower Society, J. F Rutherford,
based on the scripture, “The kingdom of heaven is at hand.””
16.
How do Witnesses know that the first of the seven trumpets got
underway in 1922? Is 1922 a biblical date?
17.
How do Witnesses know that the first of the seven trumpets got
underway at Cedar Point, Ohio? Is Cedar Point Ohio mentioned or
alluded to in the Bible?
18.
How do Witnesses know which talk inaugurated the first trumpet?
19.
Is this what the Bible teaches or is the WTS explanation of
Revelation 8 beyond what is written?
20.
Do you see why I can't accept this interpretation?
LET
ME ASK YOU: Is it possible that your entire religion is founded on similar, if not identical interpretive abuse?
TRUMPET SOUNDING SUMMARY
“1.
1922 Cedar Point, Ohio: A challenge to Christendom's leaders
in religion,
politics, and big business to
justify their failure to bring peace, prosperity, and happiness.
Messiah's Kingdom is the panacea.
2. 1923 Los Angeles,
California: The public talk, "All Nations Now Marching to
Armageddon, but Millions Now Living Will
Never Die,"
called on peace-loving "sheep" to abandon the death-dealing
sea of humanity.
3.
1924 Columbus, Ohio: Ecclesiastics
indicted for self-exaltation and
refusal to preach Messiah's Kingdom. True Christians must preach
God's vengeance and comfort mourning humanity.
4. 1925
Indianapolis, Indiana: A message of hope contrasting the spiritual
darkness in Christendom with
the bright Kingdom promise of peace, prosperity, health, life,
liberty, and eternal happiness.
5. 1926 London, England: A
locust-like plaguing of Christendom and
its clergy, exposing their rejection of God's Kingdom, and hailing
the birth of that heavenly government.
6. 1927 Toronto,
Canada: An invitation, carried as by armies of cavalry, calling on
people to forsake `organized
Christianity'
and give heart allegiance to Jehovah God and to his King and
Kingdom.
7. 1928 Detroit, Michigan: A declaration
against Satan and
for Jehovah, making plain that God's anointed King, enthroned
in 1914,
will destroy Satan's
evil organization and
emancipate mankind.”
