Shotgun Hermeneutics
Oct 29th 2007Jeremy MyersBible Study & Theology
There is a tendency in many Christian circles to think that if a particular theological viewpoint can quote a lot of Scripture, it must be right. For example, in a recent book defending the Five Points of Calvinism (by David Steele and Curtis Thomas), the authors seem to think that if they just quote Scripture, they have proved their point. For each of the five points, they provide a theological explanation for the point, and then “prove” it by citing numerous pages of Scriptural proof-texts, without ever attempting an explanation of those texts. In the debate about three years ago between Bob Wilkin and James White, Dr. White used almost his entire opening statement to simply read Bible verses. The implication was that to prove Calvinism, all you have to do is read the Bible, and anybody is not a Calvinist, hasn’t read Scripture.
I call this shotgun hermeneutics. Those who use this tactic try to “blow you away” by the sheer number of verses they can quote which they feel proves their point. When you try to explain one or two of them to show that you are aware of these passages but have a different understanding, they will focus on all the other passages they quoted which you did not explain.
In my discussions, the dialogue generally goes like this:
Calvinist: My view is right because of Passages A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J. If you would simply read and believe the Bible, you would agree with what God has said.
Me: I have read and studied the Bible, and am aware of all of those passages you just quoted. I simply understand them in a different way. Let’s take the first one as an example. (I then proceed to explain Passage A.)
Calvinist: Well, that certainly is a creative way to understand Passage A. But we know your interpretation is wrong, because of Passage B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J.
Me: I wasn’t trying to explain those passages, but again, I am aware of them, and all of them can be understood in a similar way as Passage A.
Calvinist: No, they can’t be, because no one I’ve ever read has ever understood them that way. Here is what Piper, MacArthur, Sproul, and Calvin had to say about those passages. (They then proceed to quote their favorite authors.)
Me: But those are all Calvinistic authors. Of course they will agree with your interpretation.
Calvinist: Are you smarter or more godly than they are?
Me: No, of course not, but I do thin…
Calvinist: Then since they said that this is what those passages mean, and there are so many passages that teach Calvinism, Calvinism is the truth. After all, what about Passages K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, and T?
Me: Yep. Those are all in the Bible.
Calvinist: Hah! I knew you would be silenced by the logic of my system and the irrefutable evidence of my many Scriptural proofs. To God be the glory!
Me: Well, I’m not really silenced, nor am I convinced….
Calvinist: That’s because you’re a depraved heretic.
Me: Oookaay…I gotta go. See ya later.
Calvinist: I’ll be praying for your soul that you would repent from your darkness and be brought into the light!
If you have ever tried to discuss theology with someone who holds strongly to a particular system of theology, you know that this is how many of these discussions go.
Recently, I have noticed this tactic being used by some who disagree with me on various other issues. In their blogs and articles, they seem to imply that I have not read the Bible, and that if I did, I would see the truth of their position. They argue that when they read Scripture to me, I am silenced by the weight of Biblical evidence. When I attempt explanations of one or two passages they quoted, they say that my interpretation cannot be correct because of so many other Biblical passages which say something different, and furthermore, nobody they have ever read holds to my interpretation. Then I get called a heretic.
Shotgun hermeneutics and name calling is no way to proceed in theological discussion. To really get somewhere in theological debate, we must pick one passage at a time, and stick to it, camp upon it, walk around it, and work through it. Then, hopefully, we will arrive at two or three possible interpretations. Only then can we go to a second passage.
We do the same thing with passages A-Z. When all is done, we go back and reconsider all the evidence. You discard all interpretations that contradict other interpretations. Hopefully, you are left with only one possible interpretation. If not, you go back and try to decide which of the remaining views is the best.
This is the approach I used about 15 years ago to leave Calvinism. In the early 90’s, I was a five-point, hyper-Calvinistic, Lordship Salvationist. Then, a good friend challenged my thinking on James 2:14-26. I camped on that passage for a few months. I saw that my friend’s interpretation was one possible understanding. However, I wanted to reject that view, because of “all the other passages which contradicted it.” But he said, “That’s one option. Or maybe you are wrong on your understanding of all those passages too, and you need to study each one individually.” So that’s what I did. It took me about ten years, at the end of which time, every single point of Calvinism had fallen for me. I still read books and articles by Calvinists and those who disagree with my views. Why? Because if I am wrong in my understanding of a particular passage, I want to know. I hope you do too.
So don’t practice shotgun hermeneutics. Such a practice is not beneficial since all it does is take aim at other people’s heads in an effort to blow them away.
12 Comments »
Exiles
The Tangible Kingdom
The Multiplying Church
Perspectives
An Unstoppable Force
Stripped
Trey Morgan on 29 Oct 2007 at 8:03 pm #
Jeremy - I enjoy your blog very much. I love the spirit in which you write.
Blessings…
Jeremy Myers on 29 Oct 2007 at 11:06 pm #
Trey,
Thanks for the comment. I read your blog every day and am always challenged and encouraged by it. Keep up the good work.
Antonio da Rosa on 30 Oct 2007 at 12:19 pm #
The good ol’ rapid fire proof text — machine gun apologetics.
Funny, yet sad post. Very true.
Antonio
freegraceguy on 30 Oct 2007 at 2:10 pm #
Jeremy you have put into words something I have felt for a long time. Be Blessed!
Jeremy Myers on 30 Oct 2007 at 6:56 pm #
Antonio and Tom,
Thanks for the comments. You have a good start at your blog there Tom. I liked the “Friend of Sinners” post. Antonio, I laughed when I read the “machine gun apologetics” statement. That describes it quite well.
Jeremy
ChrisB on 01 Nov 2007 at 9:58 am #
A rather funny approach to the topic. Unfortunately I think more than just Calvinists to this. Lots of Christians rattle off context-free verses to prove a point and never stop to consider those passages in context.
The implication was that to prove Calvinism, all you have to do is read the Bible, and anybody is not a Calvinist, hasn’t read Scripture.
Does that not get just so annoying?!
Jeremy Myers on 01 Nov 2007 at 2:21 pm #
Chris,
You are absolutely right that many Christians use this tactic to defend their view. I am sure I have been guilty of it at times!
I checked out your blog and was encouraged by your post about looking for a church to serve in rather than a church that will feed you. Keep up the good work over there at Homeward Bound.
Jonathan Perreault on 03 Nov 2007 at 4:28 pm #
Hi Jeremy,
I love this post! So true and well written. You have put into words my sentiments after reading Dennis Rokser’s Fall 2007 GFJ article titled “Examining Lordship Salvation: Weighed In The Balances And Found Wanting Pt. 2″. While I do agree with Rokser’s basic conclusions, I believe he used “Shotgun Hermaneutics” and attempted to blow the heretics away with the sheer number of Scriptures he quoted! When reading his article, I kept asking myself: “Dennis, don’t you think after teaching the Bible for 40 years, John MacArthur is already quite familiar with these Bible verses, but just has a different understanding?!”
Jeremy Myers on 05 Nov 2007 at 9:49 am #
Jonathan,
Yes, I have often wondered if this is a big reason Free Grace theology has not made greater inroads in certain areas, and why men like MacArthur just ignore us. If all we do is list Bible verses, I would ignore us too!
Thanks for sending me your thesis. I will be reading it and thinking through it this week, and will probably have some questions about it.
Amanda on 16 Nov 2007 at 1:45 am #
It is so encouraging to read this post, as it confirms many things I have been discussing with the LORD lately. I have recently become very disgusted with the way theology makes so many people act when they are confronted by their beliefs, and you have described those reactions perfectly in your description of “shotgun hermenuetics.” While there are certain theologies that I know I agree with, and I don’t see anything wrong with allying one’s self with a theology, I have been impressed lately with the danger of being ultimately loyal to a theology, rather than to the Word of God. Because theologies are ways of describing what someone believes the Word of God says, and are therefore subject to the possibility of human error.
I will never again stand by a theology simply because it is what I am taught, or because the pastor of the church I go to believes it. I have realized the importance of testing EVERYTHING I hear against the Word for myself, and to do so repeatedly and with much prayer, because only then can I hope to know what the truth is, through the understanding of the Holy Spirit within me.
Thank you again, I’ll be reading your blog often I think.
P.S. I am a former member of Duluth Bible Church, and have been under Dennis Rokser’s teaching almost my whole life. I completely agree with Jonathon P.’s conclusion regarding Rokser’s article on Lordship Salvation. This “shotgun” approach is what Dennis uses every Sunday and every Wednesday in his messages, and is what he calls “verse by verse” study. While I appreciate the amount of Scripture he uses when he teaches, I do not always agree with the way he uses it, because more and more often, I am finding myself disagreeing with his conclusions, as I study the Word on my own. I’m so thankful that the Holy Spirit was able to show me how important it is to study the Word on one’s own, and not just accept unquestioning whatever comes over the pulpit.
Jeremy Myers on 16 Nov 2007 at 1:53 pm #
Amanda,
Thanks for the comment. I appreciate what you are doing over at your blog. I tried to comment but couldn’t figure out how. It looks like you have comments turned off…
I am glad you are practicing a Bible study method which studies the Scripture in-depth, rather than just accepting whatever a certain Bible teacher tells you to think. Keep in the Word!
Amanda on 17 Nov 2007 at 11:10 pm #
Jeremy,
Thank you very much for reading my blog, at least what I have so far, and for the encouragement and support.
I FINALLY figured out how to activate the comments on my blog, thank you for letting me know that they weren’t working, I didn’t realize it at first.
I’m looking forward to fellowshiping with you and discussing the Word in the future. God bless!