RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD:
Basic Principles of Bible Interpretation

Written by 40 men over a period of at least 1,600 years, the Bible utilizes the same idioms and symbolism are throughout-evidence that this is meant to be one unified message. Yet many today believe that one part of it is in radical contradiction with another. This could only happen if faulty assumptions were employed in the interpreting.

So how should we approach Yahweh's word? How can we recognize and avoid the pitfalls that others have fallen into?

Perhaps the most common way Scripture is misinterpreted is taking particular verses out of their immediate context. For example, Yahshua the Messiah says, "What goes into the man from outside cannot defile him." (Mark 7:18) If we had that verse and nothing else, we could surmise that it doesn't matter what we eat. But if we check the context, it's clear that He was only talking about eating with unwashed hands, and teaching that if one's heart is already defiled, washing one's hands before eating won't make one spiritually pure. Some of the Apostle Paul's statements are also taken to mean we may now eat any kind of food. But again, the context is about food offered to idols, not particular kinds
of meat. Why does this distinction matter? Because taking it the other way would require abrogating commands Yahweh had said were to be statutes forever.

A major foundational principle is: "To the Torah and to the Testimony! If they do not speak in agreement with this word, they have no light..." (Isaiah 8:20) Romans, Hebrews, and Galatians are especially often taken to say that Yahweh cancelled certain commands He'd given earlier. But if we've read Isaiah, we know that if that were the case, we could not trust them.

Yahshua Himself warned that we must not understand anything He would say to mean that He was abolishing the Torah, and that anyone who did teach that would be considered least in His Kingdom. (Mat. 5:19) The Covenant could be renewed with some adaptations or added features, but not done away with. Rather, the renewed version sets the earlier on a firmer foundation.

So we also mustn't take a verse (or whole book) out of the context of the rest of Scripture.

Just because part of it was written in Greek doesn't mean it is to be read with a Greek system of logic. Greek was simply a trade language that made it easier to get the message of the restoration of the "lost sheep of the House of Israel" to those scattered into many lands. It is much more helpful to consider how the equivalent phrases were used in
Hebrew than to study the ways words or phrases in the New Testament were used in other Greek writings. Bivin and Blizzard cite many examples of this in Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus. (The list of study materials on the back panel will also help, but of course the best way to understand is to learn Hebrew!)

How have the Jews interpreted Scripture? They're the ones who have preserved its language! (Not that they were always right; there was much political intrigue surrounding rabbinical authority too. But it does bring us 2,000 years closer to how the original audience heard it.) One helpful method they offer shows by an acrostic on the Hebrew word for "Paradise" that Scripture can be interpreted on several levels:

(1) Peshat: The literal, straightforward meaning is a given. Archaeology has shown ample evidence that the Bible's historical details are factual. When Daniel read that Jeremiah decreed 70 years of captivity, he expected it to mean literally 70 years, and it was-to the very day. He himself specified the exact day the Messiah would be revealed, and Yah-shua held Judah accountable for not recognizing it. So unless a passage is clearly poetic (Song of Solo-mon's "your neck is a tower"), none of the secondary interpretations preclude also taking it literally.

(2) Remez: Allusions to other Scriptures that use the same words in the original language. Though the contexts may be different on the literal level, the use of the same word often points to a hidden connection. The first usage of a word in Scripture sets the tone for a specialized meaning it may have throughout. The best light on the meaning of a term comes from how it was used earlier in Scripture itself.

So when we see Yahshua ask a non-Jewish woman at a well to draw water for Him, our minds should race back to the story of Isaac and Rebekah, and see Him is seeking His "Bride" among His estranged relatives (of which the Samaritans were one example). When He multiplies fish on land, we have to think back to Genesis 48:16, which says Ephraim and Manasseh will "multiply like fish in the midst of the land". When He tells His disciples to go as "fishers of men", we have to think back to the promise in Jeremiah 16:16. A thorough knowledge of what came before is a crucial prerequisite to study of the New Testament; if you do not know it well, Paul's writings in particular will only confuse you (2 Peter 3:16).

(3) D'rash: Inferences drawn by taking the historical events of Scripture as ethical precedents for our everyday lives: "What kind of 'giants' are you facing today?", etc. This is the type of interpretation the church emphasizes by far the most often-the spiritual application. But Scripture strongly suggests that belonging to Messiah usually means one has a literal connection to Israel too, not just spiritual. (Gal. 3:29)

Hebraic thinking is "both/and", not "either/or" -overlapping more than discrete; the Kingdom is "here now but not yet". Yahshua clarified the relationship between the covenants by saying we should indeed obey the letter, but not forget the much more important spirit behind it. (Mat. 23:23) When Paul says we serve "not in the letter, but the spirit" (2 Cor. 3:6; Rom. 2:29; 7:6), it is a Hebrew idiom for where to place the most emphasis; it doesn't exclude the other. (Acts 21:20; Rev. 12:17)

(4) Sod: "Mysteries"-not things that can't be understood, but deeper meanings hinted at by certain features of the text, often with a specialized reference only discovered later, like Jere-miah's 30 pieces of silver. When Matthew saw a Messianic prophecy in the verse, "Out of Egypt I called My son" (2:15), though the original context was about
Israel as a whole, he was interpreting it in a legitmately Hebraic way. Much of what Paul wrote was interpretation at this level; if it is taken as peshat, much confusion results.

What does it mean to "divide" the Word? It means that when we read, "No weapon that is formed against you shall prosper", we need to ask who it is speaking to. Not every command or promise is for everyone. Some are for men, others only for women or priests. Others are directed only to Judah or to the Northern Kingdom.

There are no scientific inaccuracies in the Bible when the language is understood properly, but it is intended more to inform us about its primary theme, redemption, than, say, astronomical facts.

The overarching context of all of Scripture is the restoration of the Man with whom Yahweh spoke face to face in the Garden, through the nation of Israel. Prophesying of the Messiah, the focal point of Israel, who accomplished our redemption, David said, "In the volume of the book it is written about Me". (Psalm 40:7) Each detail of the Bible somehow points to a characteristic of Messiah or what He came (and will come) to do,
which includes the restoration of the lost sheep of Israel to His covenant of holiness. If your interpretation doesn't ultimately relate to these, you may be missing the main point.

Recognizing Paganism Today

The modern celebration of Hanukkah (the Feast of Dedication mentioned in John 10) has come to be almost a Jewish substitute for Christmas, with gift-giving and other accommodations to our culture which did not exist in the ancient celebration. Then, it focused more on the victory of the Jews over a culture
that attempted to force pagan practices on them. (The history is related in the book of 1 Maccabees.)

Thus it is a special time of year in which to ask ourselves whether any paganism has sneaked into our own lives. Most of us would deny this right away, since we do not participate in obvious activities like horoscopes, palm reading, ouija boards, or Halloween activities. But when we study the question carefully, it becomes painfully clear that most, if not all, of us (even those who grew up in "Bible-believing" churches) have at some point participated in the worship of foreign deities without realizing it.

The "tares" in Yahshua's parable (Matt. 13) look exactly like wheat until harvest-time. They look so innocent that people hardly notice them. Thus it behooves us to be more aware of just how paganism took on the friendly face that deceives even those with the best of intentions.

Most of paganism has to do with manipulating the gods into giving humans victory in war, good crops, or safe passage through the afterlife. But every one of these somehow ended up being connected to fertility rites which included temple prostitution and vivid sexual imagery. (Fornication with the priests, a practice Eli's sons found appealing, was counted as intimacy with the god itself.) Valentine's Day preserved much of this, but it is not as well known that Easter and Christmas did too. (Credit for much of the information below goes to Alexander Hislop's The Two Babylons, Lew White's Fossilized Customs, Ralph Woodrow's Babylon Mystery Religion, and teachings by Joseph Good.)

Nearly all paganism seems to stem back to one source: Nimrod, the "great hunter" of Genesis 10, who appears in mythologies around the world under dozens of names (some of them being Osiris, Tammuz, Mithras, Bacchus, and Adonis). In brief, he found Yahweh's requirements too oppressive, and began
to teach men to worship the heavenly hosts instead. He was executed by someone righteous, probably Shem, and this caused great lamentation among his followers. It became a custom to weep for him. Those who wished to continue the religion Nimrod started had to go underground. This is the meaning behind the word "occult": it means "hidden", for it had to be practiced in secret, usually under cover of darkness.

Shortly after Nimrod died, his wife, Semiramis, revealed that she was pregnant, and she claimed that her son was a reincarnation of Nimrod. The promise of the "seed of the woman" (Genesis 3:15) was still remembered, and so it was claimed that this was that child. Statues of this mother and her "supernatural" child appear in every pagan religion, and were transferred, like so many other customs, into the church when it rose to power and paganism as such was again frowned on. They were renamed "Mary and Jesus". Seeking a broad base of power, Constantine's new state church, realizing people were not going to stand for not being allowed their holidays when they were used to them, recast the meanings of each of the practices. For the most part, the stories about the planetary gods were kept the same, and only
the names were changed or a thin veneer of Christian concepts were pasted over them. Pagan gods were just renamed with the names of the apostles, and the stories about countless goddesses worshipped in the New World were just changed to variations on the Blessed Virgin. Ignorance about when Yahshua was born made it easy to say that the day formerly known as Saturnalia or Baal's birthday was now to be marked as Jesus', thus, in the public's eye, fusing the true "seed of the woman" with the earlier counterfeit.

Christmas trees were originally a form of the decorated trees used in the groves forbidden in Jeremiah 10, where cutting of trees to bring into the house is also specifically prohibited. But the passage is dealing more specifically with the Abomination of Desolation; thus Christimas trees are associated with the False Messiah. Presents under the tree are just like the offerings to the baby born to Semiramis. The evergreen brought into the house was considered an altar. It was associated with reincarnation. Mistletoe is also connected to the sexual rites of Asherah. The star on top comes from worship of the "hosts of heaven", and the silver and golden balls on the trees were hung over 500 years before Yahshua's birth, to represent the planets. We even find tinsel in ancient depictions, especially from Mesopotamia. It stemmed from the worship of the Milky Way around the winter solstice. Jeremiah details what the "hosts of heaven" mean in idolatrous terms.

Yahweh is often called Israel's Master and Husband. The word "Baal" also means a husband, and was sometimes used of Yahweh in all innocence (though it has the connotation of being cruel and overbearing). This led to confusion in Israel because of the pagan use of the same word all around them. So the rituals became mixed up. Soon Yahweh was depicted in drawings as having a consort goddess like the other Baals. Bacchanalia, essentially a drunken orgy, became St. Valentine's day. The excuse was a perceived common theme of the love that Valentine showed for his wife while in prison.

You can recognize much pagan infiltration by the fact that it did not become church doctrine until long after the first century (aside from the more basic fact that it simply disagrees with Torah and the prophets). Other late-comer doctrines include Mary's perpetual virginity, her "immaculate conception",
transubstan-tiation of bread and wine into the actual body and blood of the Messiah, etc. They had to be gradually reintroduced because their pagan nature would be all too obvious to those better-versed in the truth.

Adding to Scripture is another major form of heresy (Deut. 12:32; Rev. 22:18), and deductions made through non-Hebraic forms of logic have led to questionable doctrines about Y'shua. We will do best to focus on what Scripture DOES say about Him, for it is rich with pure, unadulterated spiritual nourishment.

Some other common carry-overs into the church from paganism include marking oneself with ashes before Lent, which itself came from the practice of wailing for Tammuz (Nimrod) for 40 days. (There are also parallels to the 40 days of repentance before the Day of Atonement--but if so, it was still taken out of its proper context.) Giving prominence to Sunday over other days of the week was a Roman custom long before Christianity was ever heard of, but Yahweh has stated in no uncertain terms, giving it far more press than any other of the ten commandments, that the Sabbath (the seventh day of the week) is the day He has chosen. The idea for nuns came from the vestal virgins, and monks from male temple prostitutes. These are more than just extra-biblical. They are outright obscenity once we know their history.

The matzevah (or "standing stone") started off as a neutral religious motif. Jacob and Moses set up some such pillars as symbols of Yahweh's direct intervention in their lives. But their association with phallic fertility symbols became so rampant that in general they were forbidden as savoring of idolatry (Deut. 16:22; Lev. 26:1; Isa. 17:8). Israel was also to destroy the Canaanites' matzevoth (Ex. 23:24; 34:13). One common type of matzevah was the obelisk (which look like the Washington Monument). It was definitely a
phallic symbol. That was how people could tell which buildings were pagan temples. In the Byzantine period, many of these buildings were simply converted into churches--"as is". The obelisks were put on the roofs, and became steeples! So does this mean they were redeemed and again put to holy use?

There is nothing inherently evil about adding new feast days to commemorate special acts of Yahweh in history (for Hanukkah and Purim are just that), but we have to test the fruits of anything "added". The date for celebrating the resurrection was intentionally divorced from Passover. No one was even
allowed to worship on the date when the Jews did so, which was based on Yahweh's own command. This immediately proved this church council's true colors. He very clearly specified that we are not to worship Him in a way that imitates pagan practices. (Lev. 20:23; Deut. 12:4) Throughout the Torah
and the Psalms He tells us how He does want to be worshipped. There is more than enough there to keep us occupied. There is nothing of any substance in the added days that was not already there in much less diluted form in the holy days He Himself commanded. (Even the birth of Yahshua has fairly
solidly been traced to Sukkoth, or the feast of Booths.) And when "new" holidays are only an excuse to perpetuate former practices, we know they are an abomination to Yahweh.

The new "resurrection day" was rescheduled in relation to the vernal equinox, preserving the date when the festival named for the Babylonian fertility goddess Ishtar already fell. (This name was preserved as
"Easter"--mentioned in Scripture only in a negative light as Astarte/Ashtoreth and later known also as Diana of the Ephesians. The one place the King James uses "Easter" in the New Testament actually says "Passover" in the original!) Of course we want no such association, but even mentioning the names of pagan deities is an abomination to Yahweh. (Exodus 23:13)

The same goes for names substituted for Yahweh's. In American English, "God" is pronounced exactly like the Hebrew name for "fortune" (Gad, as used in Isaiah 65:11), which was considered a personal deity, and thus is one of those beings whose names Yahweh said should not even be heard upon the lips
of His people. (Ex. 23:13; cf. Deut. 12:3) "Lord" is really another translation of "Baal", and the English word itself stems back to a deity associated with pig-farmers, so we definitely do not need to have it in our
liturgical or prayer vocabulary!

That doesn't leave many "kosher" (acceptable) titles, does it? But there are some other names of foreign deities that appear everywhere in our language without our realizing it. Who are we giving credit to when we say, "Unfortunately..."? The word "opportunity" also stems from "fortune". "Future" was another deity worshipped by pagans, so his name should not be found on our tongues either. "Destiny" is yet another. "Chance" is a concept foreign to those who believe in Yahweh's sovereignty, and it was actually the philosophy of Amalek, His sworn eternal enemy! And how about "luck" and all the concepts that go along with that? These are really all forms of bowing down to Fear, which is why King Saul ended up consulting a medium when he had upheld Yahweh's commands so well earlier in his life. (Fear is also what led the Babylonians to avoid voicing the names of their deities, lest they get their attention while they were in a bad mood. The House of Judah carried this practice back from exile and avoided speaking Yahweh's name, even though He is not capricious like the gods of other nations. Yahweh frequently says He wants us to call on Him by name.)

It doesn't take us long to conclude that the only way to avoid speech that is not even inadvertantly profane is to use the terms Yahweh Himself approved. Zephaniah said that one day Yahweh would restore His people to a pure language, and he links this with calling on Yahweh's own name. (3:9) In
mercy toward the scattered "lost sheep of the House of Israel", He allowed the New Testament to be disseminated in a trade language that most of the world in that day could understand, to make returning to Him less of a formidable prospect. Don Richardson has argued for "redemptive analogies" in
various cultures being used to communicate the Gospel when no other point of connection seemed to be made. But this is at best only a transitional step. When we remember that linguistic diversity, as beautiful as it can be, was the result of a curse brought about because of disobedience, we have to ask which language we will be restored to. Well, all the names prior to Babel make perfect sense in Hebrew. He revealed Himself and the terms by which His truth was to be understood in that language as well. So we are safe in knowing that He approves of the words in that language.

Yahweh overlooks the times of ignorance, but there comes a time to repent and leave those things behind once we realize what they are. (Acts 17:30) Keeping up these horrendous Christo-pagan mixtures (called syncretism) now that they are evident is inexcusable. We are here to teach people truth, not
perpetuate earlier errors "just so the masses can understand". The masses have had their day to hear; now it is time to get serious about really becoming what Yahweh intends us to be.

A "strong delusion" is coming. It will "deceive, if possible, even the elect". (Mark 13:22) Thus it is not going to be something blatantly wicked. It is going to appear good, and it will probably even claim this is "the return of Christ" since this has become so widely known by many who have a surface familiarity with the Bible. So we need to be able to immediately recognize subtle differences. A man who claims to be "God" is certain to be identified with the caricature of Messiah so widely-accepted in the church. From Isaiah 40:18ff; 44:9-20; 45:20; 46:5-7, it even appears likely that the "abomination of desolation"--an idol to be set up in the rebuilt Temple (Daniel 9:27; 12:11; Matt. 24:15)--is a crucifix. So we need to know the
difference between the cruciform and the meaning Paul intends when he says his glory is in the cross. (It is the event of Yahshua's redemption that he is speaking of. Many types of crosses now sold in Christian bookstores go back to Egyptian forms of paganism, and even have the same roots as the swastika.)

A detector of counterfeits does not spend much time studying counterfeits, but becomes intimately acquainted with the real thing, so that he can readily spot anything that deviates from it. Above all else, we must study the commands and teachings that Yahweh actually gave, instead of using up precious time learning the ways of the nations. (Jeremiah 10:2)

We have to learn to think as Hebraically as possible, understanding time in terms of an upward spiral of repeating events rather than linear history, an overlapping flow of seasons instead of the discrete, disjunctive, "digital", cut-and-dried "stop-start" Greek concept. We need to learn how the Hebrew
writers of the New Testament interpreted the earlier Scriptures rather than letting present-day philosophical trends reinterpret them. We need to know what calling Yahshua "Elohim" did and did not mean.

Again, this means learning Hebrew as best we can--knowing the range of meaning of the words in that language, not assuming they cover all the same connotations as the words in our language, for this sets the parameters for what the New Testament can and cannot mean. I will not say it is easy, but it is possible. We have not because we ask not. "If anyone lacks wisdom, let him ask of Yahweh who gives generously and does not shame [us for asking]..." (James 1:5) Our very spiritual health and purity depend on it.