55. Ii. ERRORS FROM ITS DISREGARD: TEXT-MANGLING

But it is taken from the Minor Prophets, where it forms part of Divine threatening of judgment:

"Thou shalt eat, but not be satisfied; . . .

Thou shalt take hold, but shalt not deliver . . .

Thou shalt sow, but thou shalt not reap;

Thou shalt tread olives, but thou shalt not anoint thee with oil;

And sweet wine, but shalt not drink wine" (Mic. vi. 15; compare Zeph. i. 13).

Not only are these words thus wrested from their proper context and meaning; but, by so doing, they are set in flat contradiction to Amos ix. 14, where exactly the opposite prophecy is given by way of blessing:

"They shall plant vineyards

And drink the wine thereof."

On the other hand, there are texts which are of such universal and eternal application, and which so touch the conscience, that they could not fail to be of untold blessing to thousands, if they were chosen for this purpose.

How seldom, if ever, do we see such passages as these plainly printed and prominently exposed:

"The LORD seeth not as man seeth."

(I Sam. xvi. 7.)

or

"Man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart." (I Sam. xvi. 7.)

or

"Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD?" (I Sam. xv. 22.)

or

"To obey is better than sacrifice, And to hearken, than the fat of rams."

(I Sam. xv. 22.)

The governing principle in this matter should be that, what is put out for general observation should be in perfect harmony with, not wrenched from, its context, and universal and eternal in its application.

14. *Text-garbling* differs from *Text-mangling* in that a passage is not only taken out of the context in which God has set it, but it is placed in *another context* in which He has not set it. This, to say the least, is an act of the grossest impertinence.

There are some writers who are specially addicted to this habit, and string a number of texts together as though they occurred exactly in this order in God's Word. True, the references may be given with each verse: but unwary readers may not notice or heed this; hence they will read on from one to the other as though they are reading the words as God has given them. There is one book, especially, in our mind, which does this, and leads many to do this "daily," every day of the year: but whether in each case it gives daily light is another matter.

If it comes to merely stringing texts together, this can easily be done; we could say:

"Judas went and hanged himself" (Matt. xxvii. 5).

This shows the absurdity to which such a principle can be reduced.

We do not deny, of course, that it is *possible* for a well-taught and well-read spiritually-minded student of the Word of truth to do this with effect. Great light may be thrown often on a passage by putting it alongside another, thus letting one Scripture be its own Divine comment on another. That is quite a different thing altogether from the ill-considered practice of dislocating a passage from its own context and putting it into another. What we are speaking of is the *habit* of garbling Scripture by bringing texts together, regardless as to whether such displacement affects in any way the special interpretation which they have in their own respective contexts.

iii. TRUTH FROM REGARD OF CONTEXT

It may be that, with due regard to this point, the truth and teaching of each of two such passages may be enhanced. But the practice is one which requires much spiritual discernment, great care, long experience, special knowledge of the context, extensive knowledge of Scripture, and a recognition of the principle involved in the important distinction between interpretation and application, dealt with in Canon X. below. iii. EXAMPLES OF TRUTH AND TEACHING RESULTING FROM A DUE REGARD TO THE CONTEXT.

We come now to another part of this subject, as to the context being essential.

What we have said above is negative and destructive rather than positive and constructive. We have shown some of the mistakes arising from a disregard of the context; and have seen some of the evils resulting from this dangerous practice.

We now have a happier branch of this subject, viz., we have to show some of the advantages of giving heed to the context; and the blessing, truth, and teaching resulting from a careful observation of the context, not only in the removal of difficulties, or in the explanation of so-called "discrepancies," but in the manifestation of the perfections of the Divine Word. We shall divide this branch of our subject into two parts-

- (a) The Nearer Context, and

- (b) The Remoter Context.

From one point of view, the Word of truth, coming as it does, as a whole, from one and the same Divine Author, is its own context. That is to say, a particular passage is to be regarded not only in the relation it bears to its own nearer or remoter context; but, in the relation which it bears to the Word of God as a whole. It may not be intended to teach science, chronology, or history, either Assyrian, Babylonian, Palestinian, or Egyptian, as such; but, everything that it records will be in perfect harmony with whatever is true of any or all of these. Scientia means knowledge, and nothing in

Scripture will be found to contradict what we really know, which is true science. Much that goes by the name of "science" is only hypothesis; and, in much more, supposition is so mixed up with knowledge that the result is vitiated.

All must be brought to the bar of the Divine Word. That Word as a whole is the context for its every part. All that is outside the two covers of the Word of God must be judged by what is within. We must not reverse this process and judge what is within by anything that may come to us from without.

With this understanding we will look at a few illustrations, which show how certain passages may receive light; how certain difficulties may be removed, how new beauties may be revealed by having regard to this, our fourth canon or principle, that the context is always essential.

Let us take, first, passages which are illuminated by