Brad Klassen
@BradKlassen4
Followers
2,480
Following
157
Media
49
Statuses
2,587
Redeemed by Jesus Christ. Husband. Father. Professor of Bible Exposition, The Master's Seminary. Pastor, Grace Community Church
Joined August 2021
Don't wanna be here?
Send us removal request.
Explore trending content on Musk Viewer
満塁ホームラン
• 102342 Tweets
#ラヴィットロック2024
• 98301 Tweets
大谷翔平
• 92993 Tweets
Brighton
• 85568 Tweets
花火大会
• 78188 Tweets
#V最協S6
• 65008 Tweets
ALNP FANMEET IN HK
• 56915 Tweets
Vielfalt
• 50277 Tweets
#FNTHWIN
• 46038 Tweets
Täter
• 35981 Tweets
大谷さん
• 33335 Tweets
ケンタッキー
• 33057 Tweets
STRAY KIDS DOMINATE SEOUL
• 31755 Tweets
Slogan
• 28216 Tweets
悪役令嬢の中の人
• 27327 Tweets
CHRISTOPHER
• 18505 Tweets
カミナリ
• 15668 Tweets
Grande Motte
• 14575 Tweets
La Grande-Motte
• 14465 Tweets
韓国の女の子
• 11858 Tweets
If you get your theological discernment from Tucker Carlson and John Rich, you’re no different than those who interpret the book of Revelation through the lens of the morning newspaper.
111
66
524
(1/13) Every so often this diagram makes the rounds. On the one hand, I appreciate the concern it shows for sound doctrine. The interpretation of Scripture is not a free-for-all. I also appreciate the attempt it makes to show the role of secondary authorities in God’s economy.
25
74
238
Here's a thought:
In order to prevent the opening ceremony of the 2028 Olympics in LA from being an even worse display of vile hatred toward God, don't watch any of the rest of it.
#BoycottOlympics2024
12
30
160
Tyndale reserved his harshest criticism for the Scholastics who insisted that Aristotelian metaphysics were a necessary lens through which to interpret Scripture. He regularly calls it “philautia,” or “love of self,” because of its exaltation of man’s reason. He writes, (1/6)
5
30
156
Here is an excellent summary of dispensationalism from a proponent, rather than a misrepresentation from a critic. If you want to know more, Michael Vlach (
@mikevlach
) is the go-to source. Thankful for you, brother!
11
24
125
Chrysostom (347–407) on the need for the people of his church to interact directly with Scripture:
“Don’t wait for another teacher: you have the oracles of God. Nobody can teach you as they can" (sermon on Col 3:16).
3
40
125
(13/13) Again, I do affirm the role of secondary authorities. I must; the Bible itself teaches me so. But lesser authorities must never obscure the perfection, clarity, sufficiency, or necessity of the ultimate authority, God's Word.
Let’s do better with diagrams.
13
8
120
“My endeavor is to bring out of Scripture what is there, and not to thrust in what I think might be there. I have a great jealousy on this head; never to speak more or less than I believe to be the mind of the Spirit in the passage I am expounding.”
--Charles Simeon
2
20
106
(1/3) A good summary of the challenge to 𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘢 𝘚𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘱𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘢:
“We need only read church history to discover that when another source of authority is placed alongside Scripture as of equal importance, Scripture eventually becomes relegated to the background.
3
19
100
(1/5) The different eschatological views based off Revelation 20:1-6 very much represent different hermeneutical approaches. An example pertains to the two resurrections that are mentioned in vv. 4-5, each separated by Christ’s reign “for a thousand years.”
6
21
101
The truthfulness of a theological assertion is measured not by its originality, profundity, simplicity, or transcendence, but by whether it is demonstrably normed by the language of God's word.
3
18
99
Ordinary church folk are often scolded for their subjective, individualistic interpretations of Scripture. Such admonishment is needed.
But there is not a class of Bible readers as intent on reading their own ideas into Scripture as the academics.
5
23
96
Chrysostom on contentment with what God has and has not revealed:
"What he said I accept, into what he left unsaid I do not pry; what has been revealed I grasp, I do not busy myself with what remains concealed."
4
14
91
(1/5) Tyndale reserved harshest criticism for the Scholastics who insisted that Aristotelian metaphysics were a necessary lens by which to interpret Scripture. He regularly calls it “philautia” (“love of self”) rather than philosophy, because of its exaltation of man’s reason:
2
25
91
(1/6) The Apostle Paul’s primary word picture for the NT preacher is not “orator” or “philosopher,” but “herald” (𝘬𝘦𝘳𝘶𝘹). Why? First, because the preacher is not to be manipulative or results-driven (the orator), nor speculative, self-reliant, or creative (the philosopher).
5
23
90
“The true meaning of Scripture is the natural and simple one.”
—Calvin on Galatians 4:22
6
10
87
(1/5) There are two short but fascinating works by John Calvin (1509-1564) that summarize his approach to biblical interpretation, theological method, and exposition: one produced near the beginning of his writing career, one near the end.
2
20
81
(1/7) Why was Calvin so strongly committed to “clear” or “lucid brevity” in interpretation? As always, one’s hermeneutic is the outworking of one’s understanding of the doctrine of inspiration. And in contrast to the Alexandrian allegorizers . . .
3
9
82
(1/5) A statement in the epilogue of John’s Gospel provides important lessons about how tradition—even very early tradition—can get things wrong. John 21:21–23 reads,
“So Peter seeing him said to Jesus, ‘Lord, and what about this man?’
4
14
82
(1/6) Premillennialism was the predominant view of the earliest Church Fathers. What contributed to the departure from it? Two names warrant special attention: Origen and Tychonius. First, a word about Origen’s influence on the interpretation of Revelation.
6
13
76
(6/13)
#4
. The contrast between the two diagrams leads to the conclusion that the Bible lacks its own internal “guardrails” to protect interpreters from error. These guardrails are something that another authority must provide. How does this impact the sufficiency of Scripture?
1
6
78
(1/6) As helpful as ancient commentators can be, Calvin did not regard them as infallible. He felt compelled at times to disagree. Chrysostom was his favorite, but even with him Calvin will depart ways from time to time. Other early church fathers he believed were less helpful.
12
15
74
(1/5) “I hold it to be a most dangerous mode of interpreting Scripture, to regard everything which its words may be tortured into meaning as a lawful interpretation of the words. I hold undoubtedly that there is a mighty depth in all Scripture . . .
3
17
75
(3/3) “And if it is tradition, we get ecclesiastical dictation or clericalism. In each case the Bible, while still given lip service, is effectually superseded.”
—Lorraine Boettner
8
5
69
(1/6) An often-untold detail of John Calvin’s ministry is that his exegesis—particularly of the Old Testament—was harshly criticized by some of his Protestant contemporaries. Why? Calvin did not hesitate to break with traditional Christological interpretation.
3
18
69
(4/13)
#2
. Since the guardrails must be selected from among many options, who has the authority to make this choice? The individual interpreter? If not, then who has the authority to require this of the interpreter? The one who proposes the diagram in the first place? Hmmm.
3
5
69
A text of Scripture can never *not mean* today what it *did mean* when it was first written.
If this was not true, we would have no hope.
2
10
67
Probably Paul’s most disregarded assertion, yet an essential one for Bible interpretation:
“But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised” (1 Cor 2:14).
5
12
67
(3/13)
#1
. Which creeds and confessions? No one argues that 𝘢𝘭𝘭 of them function this way in any practical sense. It would be much more helpful if proponents would list the creeds and confessions they have in mind within those blue arrows. Until then, it is just theoretical.
3
5
66
(12/13)
#10
. Was faithful Bible interpretation possible before the selected creeds and confessions were universally published? If so, how, and why is that still not possible today? What has changed?
1
6
67
(1/2) A quick break from Luther. Who was John Calvin's favorite exegete? Not Augustine. It was Chrysostom. Why? Calvin explains,
2
9
64
(1/9) A final note on _Luther and Erasmus_. Luther denounced Erasmus not only for his allegorization and rationalism, but for how he sought to bind men’s consciences. At the end of the day, Erasmus didn’t appeal to biblical texts, he appealed to traditions.
2
11
63
“Disregarding the context is one of the greatest problems in Bible interpretation.”
—Roy Zuck
2
11
64
William Tyndale (1494-1536) condemned the Roman Catholic Church so harshly not because of some bad fruit in a few areas of doctrine, but because its theological method was corrupt. Speaking of its penchant for allegory-driven speculation he writes: (1/5)
3
11
63
(11/13)
#9
. The largest bodies of confessional Christians (Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodoxy, some mainline Protestants) would generally agree with this diagram, yet they are whitewashed tombs filled with spiritual death. Where did the diagram fail with them?
2
6
64
(7/13)
#5
. It is illegal to remove or tamper with guardrails on a freeway. Analogously, are the selected creeds and confessions to be treated—at a practical level—as unassailable? What of those who want to remove just a “pole” here and a “panel” there? Is it acceptable?
1
5
62
The clarity of Scripture goes hand in glove with the authority of Scripture. To the degree that you dismiss its clarity, you undermine its authority.
2
17
61
(8/13)
#6
. Are not the creeds and confessions themselves still interpreted? Do the current debates not show that even those who confess various creeds and confessions still disagree among themselves on certain nuances stated within these authorities?
2
5
63
@NamorPB
@DirkWalstead
The irony is that such proponents of the Great Tradition argue strenuously for the need to preserve the *words* of post-apostolic tradition, but ridicule those who seek to measure those words against the words of the apostolic tradition (NT).
3
6
61
(10/13)
#8
. How does this diagram differ from all the “guardrails” instituted by the scribes and Pharisees for the interpretation and application of the Old Testament? Did Jesus condemn them merely for selecting the wrong guardrails? For example, see Mark 7.
2
5
62
(2/3) “Whether that other source is reason, emotion, or tradition, the inevitable result is that it supplants Scripture and causes it gradually to fade away. If that other source be reason, we get rationalism. If it is emotion, we get mysticism.
1
3
60
(5/13)
#3
. What are the criteria for selecting which creeds and confessions are to be held as authoritative? If the answer is, “the Bible,” then the diagram fails to portray this adequately. If the answer is something else, that something needs to be acknowledged.
1
5
61
(1/5) As a teacher in Greek at Christ’s College, Cambridge, Joseph Mede (1586-1639) wrote an influential commentary on the book of Revelation, in Latin, called 𝘊𝘭𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘴 𝘈𝘱𝘰𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘺𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢 (𝘒𝘦𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘙𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯). It was premillennial.
4
14
57
(1/3) “The effective denial of biblical perspicuity is paraded as, or better contorted into, evidence of proper biblical humility. How, in the face of the Bible’s own claims to clarity, an assertion of its lack of clarity can be considered humble is astounding.
1
14
58
(1/3) Some claim the Reformers admired Thomas Aquinas. William Tyndale? Not so much:
“Then came Thomas de Aquino, and he made the pope a god with his sophistry; and the pope made him a saint for his labor, and called him doctor Sanctus . . .
5
11
60
(1/3) William Tyndale (1494–1536), the great English Reformer, certainly was not 𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦. Of the Roman Catholic Church he writes,
“Judge whether it be possible that any good should come out of their dumb ceremonies and sacraments into thy soul. . . .
2
7
59
(2/2) "The outstanding merit of our author, Chrysostom, is that it was his supreme concern always not to turn aside even to the slightest degree from the genuine, simple sense of Scripture and to allow himself no liberties by twisting the plain meaning of words."
2
6
56
“I do not like interpretations which are clever rather than sound.” – Calvin on 1 Corinthians 15:29
2
13
56
(5/5) “and it is a strange sight in these days to see expositors who are among the first in reverence of antiquity, complacently casting aside the most cogent instance of consensus which primitive antiquity presents.”
That last sentence is particularly striking.
4
1
57
(9/13)
#7
. Regarding the content of the creeds and confessions, what about the commentary (e.g., the “canons”) that goes with them? Are those part of the guardrails? For example, the canons of the 7th ecumenical council (2nd Nicene), which anathematized those who rejected icons?
1
5
57
(5/5) “Hardly any, except perhaps Chrysostom, seem satisfactory and sound on this point” (J. C. Ryle, _Expository Thoughts: Luke_, 383). Ryle makes this argument with reference to the interpretation of the parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37).
3
3
56
“It is written, ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.’”
—Jesus, citing Deuteronomy 8:3 in Matthew 4:4
1
7
57
(2/13) God has instituted the fellowship of believers (Acts 17:11) and the office of elders (Titus 1:9) as important means for the validation and invalidation of claimed interpretations of Scripture. However, I believe the diagram raises more questions than it answers:
2
5
56
(1/5) What can we learn from Christ use of the OT? Five affirmations:
I. Christ affirmed that the OT was 𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘥. Its words were the very words of God. It was not a mixture of divine here and human there.
1
18
54
(1/5) In his refutation of Erasmus’ claim that Scripture was obscure, Luther also argues that the claim of obscurity is often made not in response to what Scripture says, but in response to what it doesn’t. Here Luther makes a distinction every interpreter must heed:
1
8
52
(5/5) “A true disciple inquires not whether a fact is agreeable to his own reason, but whether it is in the book. His pride has yielded to the Divine testimony. Teacher, your pride is still unbroken. Break down your pride, and yield to the word of God.”
2
7
52
(1/4) Some of the last words of the apostle Paul:
"All Scripture is inspired by God and beneficial for teaching, for rebuke, for correction, for training in righteousness" (2 Tim 3:16).
1
12
53
(1/5) That the Protestant Reformation marked a dramatic shift in how the Bible was interpreted can be seen in the influences that led up to it. Take, for example, John Colet (1467-1519). Although he was part of the RCC, he criticized its abuses and idolatry.
3
13
51
“Now whatsoever opinions every man findeth with his doctor, that is his gospel and that only is true with him and that holdeth he all his life long, and every man to maintain his doctor withal, corrupteth the scripture and fashion it after his own imagination.” (6/6)
4
3
52
Charles Hodge: “The Bible is a plain book. It is intelligible by the people. And they have the right and are bound to read and interpret it for themselves; so that their faith may rest on the testimony of the Scripture, and not that of the Church” (_Systematic Theology_, 1.183).
1
7
53
“Literal interpretation of the Bible simply means explaining the original sense of the Bible according to the normal and customary uses of its language.”
--Paul Tan, 𝘓𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘐𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦, 15.
0
12
52
(1/4) In 1539, the Roman Catholic Cardinal Jacopo Sadoleto wrote to the residents of Geneva, exhorting them to reject allegiance to the Reformers and return to mother Rome. Part of Calvin’s apologetic was to remind Sadoleto what the RCC had done to doctrine:
2
15
50
(1/6) What Origen says next about the parable of the tares (Matt 13:24-30) and of Jesus’ interpretation of it (Matt 13:36-43) is most noteworthy. First, Origen acknowledges that his interpretation of the parable differs from how Jesus interprets it. He writes,
3
8
50
“The last day is hidden, that every day may be observed.”
0
6
49
(1/6) Origen (c. 185-253) did not take kindly to those who opposed his allegorizing. An interesting example is seen in one of his homilies on Genesis (no. 13). Origen believed it was appropriate to speculate about the causes for the election of Jacob over Esau.
8
11
49
(3/3) “I am hardly manifesting the doxological posture incumbent upon a student of Scripture. Denial of perspicuity is not humility; it is arrogance of the highest order” (Garner, “Did God Really Say?” 135).
Reread and ponder the last sentence.
3
7
50
(5/5) “Let us not merely neglect as doubtful, but boldly set aside as deadly corruptions, those pretend expositions which lead us away from the literal sense.” (Commentary on Galatians, 4:22).
0
4
47
(6/6) In the ongoing debate over the relationship of "Athens to Jerusalem," it would do us well to permit the meaning of this word picture to rule the discussion. Our task is not about cleverness, erudition, or sophistry. It is about clarity and faithfulness.
2
4
50
(1/5) After years of extremely difficult ministry in Burma without seeing any converts among the Burmese, Adoniram Judson—the Congregationalist turned Baptist missionary—thought for a moment that his language teacher would be the first one.
1
10
49
(1/4) I recently came across this statement from Robert L. Thomas (1928-2017), former professor of New Testament at The Master’s Seminary, and was reminded of God’s abundant goodness to me in placing me under a man like this in my seminary studies.
3
7
47
If you are looking for a reverent, exegetical approach to forming a theology of the Word of God from the greatest chapter in the Word about the Word, George Zemek’s commentary on Psalm 119, _The Word of God in the Child of God_, is a must!
3
3
47
The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, Article 1:
"WE AFFIRM that the Holy Scriptures are to be received as the authoritative Word of God. WE DENY that the Scriptures receive their authority from the Church, tradition, or any other human source."
0
7
48
(6/6) Origen's departure from a contextual, language-based hermeneutic leads to unorthodoxy. What is the antidote? A return to asking, “What did Jesus intend to communicate to His disciples by the words, grammar, and context He used?”
2
1
46
(1/4) In contrast to Solomon’s commendation of his own writing as the very word of God (Eccl 12:9–11), he warns his reader about an ever-lurking attitude of 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯—one that turns to other “books” to add to God’s word or provide what God’s word does not:
1
12
47
(4/5) “But I deny that its fertility consists in various meanings which anyone may fasten to it at his pleasure. Let us know, then, that the true meaning of Scripture is the natural and simple one, and let us embrace and hold it resolutely.
1
5
45
(1/4) Well before the advent of the printing press, John Chrysostom (347–407) encouraged his people to secure copies of Scripture to read for themselves:
“Hearken, I entreat you, all ye that are careful for this life, and procure books that will be medicines for the soul. . . .
2
11
47
(1/4) It is sometimes argued that the incarceration of Satan recorded in Revelation 20:1-3 describes a present reality—a state of affairs which we enjoy now in the church age. Yet when we read letters to the seven churches of Revelation 2:1–3:22, we find a different reality.
3
4
46
(4/5) “is a most dishonorable and dangerous way of handling Scripture. If anyone wants to see what absurdities such a mode of interpreting Scripture leads, he has only to read the commentaries of the Fathers.
3
3
46
(5/5) Third, John recognized that the text he was writing was to serve as 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘥 against which all recollections of the words of Christ were to be measured. He knew it was necessary to correct good-intentioned but fallible efforts at conveying truth.
2
2
45
(1/5) The assessment of English Reformer William Tyndale (1494-1536) of scholasticism and its fruit at the time of the Reformation:
“In the universities they have ordained that no man shall look on the Scripture, until he be noselled in heathen learning eight or nine years ...
1
12
45
(1/7) The apostle Paul’s unusual wording in 1 Cor 7:10–12 is sometimes cited as evidence of a distinction to be observed in the writing of Scripture—a distinction between the divine intent and the intent of the biblical writer. When carefully considered, it shows the opposite.
2
10
45
“They will say yet more shamefully, that no man can understand the scriptures without philautia, that is to say, philosophy. A man must first be well seen in Aristotle ere he can understand the scripture say they.” (2/6)
1
3
44
(1/4) This Friday (Oct 6) marks the anniversary of English Reformer William Tyndale’s martyrdom. I’m so grateful for courageous men like him. I’ll be posting some powerful comments from him in the days ahead. Here’s one for today:
6
12
46
(2/5) “and that in this respect it stands alone. But I also hold that the words of Scripture were intended to have one definite sense, and that our first object should be to discover that sense, and adhere rigidly to it.
2
3
45
(1/3) William Tyndale (1494-1536) on the purpose of Scripture:
“Though we read Scripture, and never stop babbling about it, if we know not its use, and why it was given, and what should be sought in it, it profits us nothing at all. . . .
2
13
45
(1/3) More to come on Irenaeus’s premillennialism. But for those who question the orthodoxy of premillennialism, here’s a summary by Philip Schaff:
“The most striking point in the eschatology of the ante-Nicene age is the prominent chiliasm, or millenarianism, . . .
3
11
45
(1/4) J. C. Ryle’s third chief conviction about future things:
“I believe that the grand purpose of the present dispensation is to gather out of all the world an elect people—and not to convert all mankind. . . .
2
12
43
(3/6) “The essential point about the report which they give is that it does not originate with them. Behind it stands a higher power. The herald does not express his own views. He is the spokesman for his master” (Friedrich, TDNT 3.687-8).
1
6
45
(1/3) J. I. Packer on Jesus’s view of the authority of Scripture:
“Jesus Christ constituted Christianity a religion of biblical authority. He is the Church’s Lord and Teacher; and He teaches His people by His Spirit through His written Word. . . .
1
11
43
“When they have this wise brawled eight, ten or twelve or more years and after that their judgments are utterly corrupt: then they beginneth their Divinity. Not at the scriptures, but every man taketh a sundry doctor [theologian] . . . (5/6)
1
2
43
(1/6) Some theologians insist upon the “rule of faith” as a necessary grid through which to interpret Scripture. The concept has a broad range of understandings, so when this language is used, clarifying questions are crucial:
5
12
44
(1/2) “Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I keep your word.” –Psalm 119:67
The psalmist testifies that a true theologian—one who not only studies but “keeps” God’s word—isn’t forged in comfort but on the anvil of hard blows.
1
9
43
(1/6) Another strong contextual argument against the belief that the millennium described in Revelation 20:1–6 depicts the current church age, and consequently, that Satan is currently “bound” (20:2–3), is found in Christ’s letter to the church in Pergamum (Rev 2:12–17).
4
8
43
(1/2) John Calvin, on the danger of speculation in Bible interpretation: “Indeed, we must always keep this in view, lest we end up floating about in the air: Lofty speculations are pleasant at first glance, but afterwards they evaporate. . . .
1
10
43
(3/5) “I believe that, as a general rule, the words of Scripture are intended to have, like all other language, one plain definite meaning, and that to say that words ‘do’ mean a thing, merely because they ‘can’ be tortured into meaning it . . .
1
3
42
(7/7) “and of the Holy Spirit in the production of scripture are so closely related [that] there is no practical way to distinguish them” (_Calvin’s Exegesis of the OT_, 36-37).
It was this understanding of inspiration that fostered his commitment to “lucid brevity.”
0
3
42
(2/5) Even putting aside the question of the meaning of “one thousand” (not the biggest issue), each must reconcile this span of time with a resurrection that comes before and one that comes after. Only the premillennial position treats “resurrection” literally in both cases.
2
2
42
After then summarizing several of Aristotle’s pagan beliefs and contrasting them with those of the life-giving Scriptures, Tyndale continues, “Yet ye drive them from God’s word and will let no man come thereto, until he have been two years master of art. . . (3/6)
1
3
41
(2/6) Second, the word picture suits perfectly because the message had already been given. There was no need for augmentation, subtraction, or revision.
Friedrich summarizes it well: “It is demanded that they (the heralds) deliver their message as it was given to them. . . .
1
6
42
(5/5) Luther recognized that the degree to which the speculation into the white spaces is permitted is the degree to which the authority of those speculating will be entrenched . . . and ultimately equal or supersede that of Scripture. Luther would have none of it.
0
1
42