Proof-texting

‘Proof-texting’ is a term that is virtually unknown in the Family, yet it is the method of biblical interpretation that is almost always used. Without exception, every one of the Family’s controversial doctrines are explained and justified in Family publications through the use of ‘proof-texts,’ and if there is any method of Bible interpretation that can be said to be taught in the Family (taught by example and observation, not by explicit teaching), then it is proof-texting.

What is proof-texting, and what are the dangers surrounding this method?

Definition

A proof-text is a verse or short passage from the Bible used by someone as part of his proof for a doctrinal belief he wishes to substantiate to others. However, since verses and passages may rely extensively on the context in which they appear for correct interpretation, pulling these out of their context and having them stand alone in a “proof” can, at times, be very misleading. In addition, a set of such proof-texts can completely ignore other passages which, if added to the mix, might well lead to an entirely different conclusion. Someone who relies strongly only on a list of proof-texts in order to make a doctrinal argument may have a very weak case for his argument. Noting that a religious teacher relies heavily just on proof-texting is viewed in theological circles as a very negative evaluation. (Dewey).

Proof-texting in the Family

Examples of proof-texting abound in the Family. One of the most extreme instances is the use of Matthew 16:19 to ‘prove’ the existence of a powerful spiritual entity known as the ‘Keys of the Kingdom’ which are supposedly available for the performance of miracles.

Matt 16:19 “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” NASU

The problem, of course, is that the reference in Matthew neither explicitly nor implicitly indicates such a spiritual entity, and it is not mentioned anywhere else in the Scriptures. Hence, this major Family doctrine has one verse only for its biblical foundation. Even in this sole verse, a plain reading of the passage shows that Jesus was using the word ‘keys’ in its common figurative meaning of ‘ability, power, knowledge, authority.’ Jesus used the same word of the lawyers, who most certainly did not have access to a spiritual power.

Luke 11:52 “Woe to you lawyers! For you have taken away the key of knowledge. You did not enter in yourselves, and those who were entering in you hindered.”

For more on the Family doctrine of the keys of the kingdom, click here.

Another example of major Family doctrines supported through proof-texting is in the use of John 13:34-35 to justify the sexual aspects of the Law of Love.

John 13:34-35

34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”

A quick glance at the context will reveal that although Jesus’ words have powerful practical application for all Christians, it is certain that Jesus was not referring to sexual love. How do we know this? As soon as we examine the passage that surrounds this verse (the Last Supper discourse (John 13-17) we see that Jesus gave the command to ‘love one another’ to His eleven remaining disciples, who were all male! Therefore, sexual love is one meaning that this particular reference cannot have. It is also invalid to assume that a general application of the verse might cover sexual relations, when there is absolutely nothing in the entire Last Supper discourse that points towards such an application. To the contrary, Jesus had explicitly told His disciples that illicit sexual relations was defiling, a sin in the same category as murder!

Matt 15:19-20 NASU

19 “ For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders. 20 “These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile the man.”

Likewise, when Jesus said that all the law and the prophets depended on the commands to love God and each other (Matt 22:37-40), He was talking to a group of Pharisees. Jesus most certainly did not command them to love their neighbours sexually!

The Family also uses Galatians 5:14 to justify the sexual aspect of the ‘Law of Love’.

Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this: “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.”

A study of the context reveals that it is impossible to use this verse to justify sexual relations between Christians, as only five verses later Paul specifically condemns such ‘sexual freedom’ as a work of the flesh, contrary to the spirit of God.

Gal 5:16-19

16 I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness,

Gal 5:19 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; NIV

When examined in context, it can be seen that every one of the verses used to justify the sexual aspect of the ‘Law of Love’ could not possibly have justified sexual freedom between Christians. The original readers of those verses (the original recipients of the Gospels of John and Matthew, and of the letter to the Galatians) were obviously not authorised to engage in sexual relations with each other. Therefore, the Family interpretation of these and many other verses depends on a meaning which the original text did not have. In other words, the doctrine of sexual freedom is not in the Bible. Rather, it is completely external to the Bible, and its proponents have imposed their own meaning onto texts that in many cases actually meant the complete opposite. This is known as eisegesis.

The word eisegesis is a theological term used to describe an approach to interpreting a passage in the Bible by “reading into” the passage a meaning that is not evident at all by the passage itself, or the context in which it appears in the Bible. Thus eisegesis is usually perceived as a negative term, and indicates that the person using the method of eisegesis is not being intellectually honest. Instead, he is coming to the passage with a pre-conceived notion on a particular doctrinal matter, and wishing to force the passage to fit that preconceived notion. The opposite of eisegesis is exegesis. (Dewey).

Contextual Bible study

Proof-texting ignores the context of the passage or chapter in which the particular verse is located, as well as other passages related to the same topic. It also ignores the literary and historical contexts in favour of a concept that sees scripture as a string of vaguely related thoughts, each with inherent truth.

The primary rule of biblical interpretation is “context.” This cannot be emphasized too strongly. If the Bible student would merely let a passage speak for itself within the context of the paragraph, chapter, or book, the majority of all errors in interpretation would be avoided.

The problem is our bias, or our subjectivity. Many times we approach a passage thinking we already understand it. In the process we read our own meaning into the passage. This is called eisegesis. (Eis is a Greek preposition meaning “into.”) But interpreting the Bible correctly demands that we listen to what the text itself is saying, and then draw the meaning out of the passage. This is called exegesis. (Ex is a Greek preposition meaning “out of.”) If we let a passage be defined by what it and the surrounding verses say, then we have taken a large step toward interpreting the Bible properly. Only by watching the context carefully and by letting the passage speak for itself do we give Scripture the respect it deserves. (Nelson).

A short explanation of the different kinds of context that should be examined in Bible study is found on the page on this web site, Basic Bible Interpretation.

The propagation of false doctrine

The dangers of proof-texting are not confined to personal misinterpretation of scripture. When those misinterpreted scriptures are used with all the emotional power at a preacher’s disposal, a God-fearing, yet uninformed congregation may be led into error. In the Family, a church comprised of whole-hearted, enthusiastic people who are for the most part biblically illiterate, the danger is extreme.

In fact, it may be said that almost any false doctrine can be supported by coming to the Bible in search of supporting scriptures. Thus, Christian snake handlers justify their doctrines using Mark 16:18 and Mormons get baptised for the dead because of 1 Corinthians 15:29.

There is great danger, for example, in treating the Bible as a “treasure chest of golden truths,” a “grab bag of promises and comforts,” a compilation of “riddles and secrets” or a “talisman with magical power” (Longman).

The ‘treasure chest’ and the ‘grab bag’ concepts separate the verses of the Bible into individual, unconnected entities, linked only by the modern user’s personal opinion. While ‘promise boxes’ of comforting Scriptures may have their use, the Bible is not a promise box consisting of thousands of individual verses dissociated from each other. In fact, in many cases crucial biblical meaning can only be derived through an understanding of the way that verses relate to each other, to the book in which they are contained, and to the Bible as a whole.

The ‘riddles and secrets’ concept implies that only those with special knowledge can understand the mysteries of the Bible. Now, while it is true that there is much in the Bible that cannot be understood without the benefit of outside help, and it is also true that there are portions of the Bible that will probably remain a mystery even with the assistance of teachers and scholars, it is also true that the vast majority of the Bible has been written in such a way that it is comprehensible to those who take the time to study it properly. There are no life-changing, major theological or practical doctrines which are so mysterious that they can only be revealed by a teacher’s expertise or through special revelation. In other words, if the only way a doctrine can be supported is through reference to the teaching of an ‘enlightened’ or ‘knowledgeable’ teacher, then that doctrine is probably incorrect. Similarly, if a Bible teacher bases an interpretation of a particular Bible passage on a special revelation from God, that interpretation is also probably wrong.

The ‘talisman with magical power’ concept often feeds a self-centred desire for power or other material benefits obtain through superstition, and may even border on the occult.

Extra reading

Please take the time to read through the following articles, all of which are external to Make Straight Paths.

Rightly Interpreting the Bible by Ron Rhodes.

Rules for Interpreting the Bible.

Scripture Twisting Methods by James Sire.

The Holy Spirit and Hermeneutics by Daniel Wallace.

How To Read The New Testament Letters by Robert Bradshaw.

Recommended books

The following books are all available at Amazon.com:

A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules by Robert Stein

Exegetical Fallacies by D.A. Carson

The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation by Grant Osborne

How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart.

Introduction to Biblical Interpretation by William Klein, Craig Blomberg, and Robert Hubbard

Scripture Twisting : Twenty Ways the Cults Misread the Bible by James W. Sire.

Reading the Bible with Heart and Mind by T. Longman.

Conclusion

At best the practice of proof-texting is testimony to a lack of a thorough Bible knowledge. At worst, it violently shreds the Bible into disconnected modules, each of which may be used at will as weapons for a particular cause. Proof-texting forcibly rends Bible passages from their original location, and in so doing removes them from much of their meaning. In fact, in many instances, to remove a passage from its context not only warps, but destroys the meaning intended by the Holy Spirit-inspired author.

Christians in general, and Family members in particular would do well to refrain from peppering their theological arguments with scores of vaguely related Scriptures, as though truth is understood through sheer weight of numbers. In other words, the truth of a doctrine is neither proved nor disproved by the quantity of Bible verses one can quote. To the contrary, each verse should be examined in context, in order to allow the Bible to put forth its own doctrines. The Bible should be allowed to speak for itself, but this will only happen when it is examined in context, as a whole, as God’s complete revelation. Proof-texting centres Bible analysis on the individual teacher or student. Contextual Bible study returns the focus to God.

References

Dewey: Field Guide to the Wild World of Religion, P. Dewey, 2005, Wasteland Press, Shelbyville, KY.

Nelson: ‘Bible Interpretation’, Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 1986, Thomas Nelson, Nashville, TN.

Longman: Reading the Bible with Heart and Mind, T. Longman, 1997, NavPress, Colorado Springs.

Home