Today I’ll take a break from my “Serve It Up” blog series.

A paraprosdokian (from the Greek “beyond” + “expectation”) is a figure of speech in which the latter part of a statement is unexpected. It’s a rhetorical term used to describe an unexpected shift in meaning. For example: “Nostalgia just isn’t what it used to be.” Sometimes these thought-shifts are intrinsically humorous, and you can see why comedians make much use of paraprosdokians (whether they’re familiar with the term or not) in their performances. Satire can be powerful. There is the surprise effect, and often an added double meaning for good measure.

But I’m not laughing today as I think about our brothers and sisters who are suffering in the aftermath of Wednesday’s horrific shooting at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina. Quite tragically, the mass shooting resulted in nine deaths. I agree wholeheartedly with Charleston Mayor Joe Riley when he describes the midweek murders as “unfathomable and unspeakable.”

Each life mattered. Cynthia Hurd had worked for 31 years for the Charleston County Public Library. The library system closed all 16 of its branches Thursday and rightly honored Cynthia with these words: “Cynthia was a tireless servant of the community who spent her life helping residents, making sure they had every opportunity for an education and personal growth. Her loss is incomprehensible.”

Each of the other eight lives also represents profound sadness and grief for many families and many friends, and even for an entire community now trying to cope with such unexpected, instantaneous loss.

Friends, our world is broken. Only what the Bible says about sin, and its consequences, can explain weeks like this. A gunman walks into a church sanctuary and opens fire. 100 rounds of ammunition and a pipe bomb. Nowhere to run, and nowhere to hide. A calculated attack, and the worst attack on an assembled congregation in American history. Lord, dear Lord, have mercy.

At meetings earlier this week I saw again the famous 1993 photograph by Kevin Carter that won the Pulitzer Prize. The Sudanese girl and the vulture. That shot always haunts me. It reminds me of the wisdom expressed by Rebbetzin Heller of Neve Yerushalayim College in Jerusalem: “We avoid pictures from the Holocaust because we don’t want to cry. But only tears open all the gates of heaven.”

Our Lord wept with those who suffered (John 11:35). God’s Word implores us to “weep with those who weep” (Romans 12:15).

Our nation is splintered by political division, weakened by moral disintegration, and endangered by spiritual meltdown. We face threats from within and without. The gospel of Jesus Christ is our only hope. Please extend a hand of gospel friendship to someone who needs it. Please love as Jesus loved.

If I might share my own paraprosdokian before I close: Maybe we have to be torn apart to be glued together.

Pastor Charles

We’re still in the kitchen, friends. I hope you can stand the heat.

If you haven’t been following the blog, we’re trying to cook up a fantastic smorgasbord of the best approaches to sound exegesis. We want to do the finest job we can of determining what a text of Scripture really means, so that we can teach it right – and live it right.

I want to pause today just to remind you of something very important in the pursuit of solid hermeneutics: Important Bible truths are not hidden, so look for the simplest interpretation.

I know this seems very close to the umbrella principle of literal interpretation that we covered earlier – and it is – but it’s worth spending one day on the priority of simplicity. You and I must always keep in mind that the major doctrinal (and theological) truths of our faith are plainly seen in Scripture, and often repeated throughout the Bible. Theologians sometimes refer to this principle as the perspicuity, or clarity, of Scripture. Leave it to a theologian to choose a complicated word for “clarity!”

Sometimes we’re intrigued by the Bible’s more obscure passages, and indeed those can make for delightfully exhilarating dinner conversation. But, when it comes to the most central truths of Scripture, you can rest assured that these important truths are not hidden in unclear passages. Nor are they hidden in difficult figures of speech.

When it comes to essential Christian doctrine, we never want to major on the minors. Why not? It always gets back to the character and nature of our God. Our Lord should never be charged with trying to hide His truth from all but the wisest and brightest and most educated. God’s purpose in giving us His Word is to reveal truth, not to conceal truth.

The implicit, therefore, should be interpreted by the explicit. That which is assumed to be implied in Scripture is to be interpreted in the light of that which is fully developed and formulated. In other words, interpret the obscure in light of the clear! R.C. Sproul expresses it like this: “The basic rule is the rule of care. Careful reading of what the text is actually saying will save us from much confusion and distortion. No great knowledge of logic is necessary, just the simple application of common sense.”

So if our interpretation of a text does not construe its meaning in the simplest, least complicated, most natural and straightforward manner, then – all things being equal – our  interpretation is probably invalid.

Just for your consideration … I’ve heard (and read) multiple times that angels are sexless. Where does the Bible actually say that? Jesus explained that in heaven (“in the resurrection,” technically) there will be no marrying or giving in marriage – that we will be “like angels in heaven.” That implies that angels do not marry, but it does not necessarily imply that angels are genderless.

Is it possible that God could call angels to remain unmarried for other reasons? Of course. So it would be imprudent to build a teaching on a possible implication, especially if that teaching is unconfirmed by the rest of Scripture. Watch out for doctrinal leaps that cannot be proven from the text! “No marriage” does not necessarily mean “no gender.” I could argue that the many references to angels as males flatly contradicts the idea of genderless angels.

Let’s let the Bible speak for itself. Sometimes it’s just that simple.

There are scrumptious riches to be acquired for the diligent student who will humbly and carefully open the Bible as before the Lord, and who will meditate on – and delight in – the major teachings of the Scriptures.

Please stick with me on this journey. Keep a positive attitude, and be willing to study diligently in order to “present yourself to God as one approved” (Second Timothy 2:15). If we always keep the sunny side up, we won’t find ourselves scrambled.

Pastor Charles

Thanks for hanging in there with me as we continue to whip up a super-savory recipe that will highlight the very best flavors of hermeneutical cuisine.

Last time we focused on the “plain sense” principle of literal interpretation: going after the meaning of a word, phrase, or sentence by first considering how it’s most often used in customary, ordinary, or “normal” conversation (or writing).

Today I want to take up what might be called the “narrow-to-wide” principle. Said another way, it’s often best to study the Bible inductively. That means that we seek to interpret the narrower context of a passage before attempting to tackle its wider context. We want to understand the immediate surroundings (the immediate context) before we concern ourselves with the broader context. That’s what we mean by “inductive”: moving from the smallest unit to the largest unit.

If we lean too heavily on study materials – instead of the text – too soon, we run the risk of interpreting a phrase in one part of the Bible as it’s interpreted in another part of the Bible, but not as that word is in fact being used in the passage in view. For example, we don’t want to interpret a word used by Paul the way it’s used by John before we’ve taken into account the verses immediately surrounding the word used by Paul. That might be putting the cart before the horse, because each Biblical writer – like each one of us – used language a little (or a lot) differently.

Think about regional distinctions and dialects. The King’s English and contemporary American slang. Expressions from the countryside and the latest urban jargon. Even when the same language is being used, words can take on extraordinarily different meanings depending on their context.

There’s a little difference between “price tag” and “name tag”, and a world of difference between “Tag, you’re it!” and “hashtag”. And “hashtag” doesn’t mean now what it meant when I was in college. And, just for the record – in case you’re wondering – Charles is a #coolpastor.

And there’s a colossal difference between #coolpastor and CoolWhip. Someone please stop me. I’m getting dangerous.

When we understand a passage within its immediate context, then we can move to its larger context. The narrow must then be related to the rest of Scripture, as well as to the historical, social, and cultural settings of the passage. And always remember this: no part of Scripture should be interpreted in such a way that it contradicts the teaching of the whole of Scripture.

“Scripture interprets Scripture.” We might call that Hermeneutics 101.

The whole of Scripture can be understood by interpreting it part by part. No person can digest the whole of the Bible at once. But no part of the Bible is isolated from the whole (or isolated from its historical and cultural context). So in an amazing dependence upon the Holy Spirit, we interpret God’s Word from part to whole, and from whole to part.

We want both the microscopic perspective and the telescopic perspective. Both ingredients are essential. So we move from the immediate context of a passage to the broader section of Scripture where it’s found, to the whole chapter, to the whole book, to the cross references, to the corpus of books by the same writer, to the particular Testament, to the whole Bible. And then we move back.

All the pseudo-Christian cults – without exception – present portions of the Bible OUT OF CONTEXT. That’s how poisonous wrong interpretation can be, and where it can land us. Danger. Danger. Danger. Don’t get caught in that messed-up mixer – it will beat the life right out of you!

By God’s grace and for His glory, you and I will enjoy the richest of fare as we feed on the living Word of the living God. Hungry yet?

Pastor Charles

So here we go again on this journey of learning to rightly divide the Word …

What are we claiming when we say that we interpret the Bible literally?

Bill Maher, no fan of evangelicals, has said that the Bible was “written in parables. It’s the idiots today who take it literally.”

Come on now, Bill. That’s not what we mean by “literal.”

As always, definitions matter. So let’s define what we mean by a “literal” interpretation of the Bible. “Literal” does not mean that we ignore the obvious. For example, if we come across a figure of speech – or any other figurative language or non-literal genre – we interpret accordingly. As a matter of fact, we search for those markers so that we can do the best possible job of interpretation. This is God’s Word that we’re studying, after all! And the Bible is filled with all kinds of literary styles. Not just parables, but psalms and proverbs and poetry and historical narratives and didactic letters and apocalyptic revelations and all kinds of other delectable delights. Just like the best food, the Bible is rich, rich, rich!

Since the days of the Protestant Reformation, the “literal” sense of Scripture has everything to do with interpreting according to the original writer’s intention. (I mentioned this briefly last week.) In his introduction to his commentary on Romans, written in 1539, John Calvin put it like this: “The chief excellency of an expounder consists in lucid brevity. And, indeed, since it is almost his only work to lay open the mind of the writer whom he undertakes to explain, the degree in which he leads away his readers from it, in that degree he goes astray from his purpose, and in a manner wanders from his own boundaries.”

Friends, this really matters. We better get this right. You and I must submit to God’s powerful use of language – and praise Him for it – as we never want to eclipse or overrule God’s truth by our own ignorance and pride.

Hank Hanegraaff comments: “If Genesis were reduced to an allegory conveying merely abstract ideas about temptation, sin, and redemption devoid of any correlation with actual events in history, the very foundation of Christianity would be destroyed. If the historical Adam and Eve did not eat the forbidden fruit and descend into a life of habitual sin resulting in death, there is no need for redemption. On the other hand, if we consider Satan to be a slithering snake, we would not only misunderstand the nature of fallen angels but we might also suppose that Jesus triumphed over the work of the devil by stepping on the head of a serpent (Genesis 3:15) rather than through his passion on the cross (Colossians 2:15).”

So, you see, the literal interpreter of Scripture does not search for hidden meanings in the Bible. Rather, he or she looks for the obvious and plain sense of the text. The literal interpreter does not seek to read “in between the lines.” Rather, he or she reads the sacred text in order to determine its plain and simple meaning – in light of the normal meaning of the words, the context, and the commonly accepted rules of grammar. As someone has said: “When the plain sense makes good sense, seek no other sense, lest it result in nonsense.”

And that makes sense. (I mean that literally.)

Pastor Charles

When it comes to God’s Word, you and I have been invited to a succulent feast.

I love Paul’s reminder to Timothy (Second Timothy 2:16): “Avoid irreverent babble …” Those are good words, reminding us of the dangers of not-so-good words when it comes to our spiritual health. Especially in matters pertaining to God’s Word, you and I must never settle for junk food.

Those words of the Apostle Paul are right on the heels of his closely-connected admonition in the previous verse, with which you may be more familiar: “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling (dividing) the word of truth.”

Today there is a widespread misconception about the Bible – a mistaken notion that you and I need to make sure to avoid – and that’s the idea that one passage of Scripture can have multiple meanings. So I think that I’ll begin a blog series about sound hermeneutics, if you’ll indulge me. If you’re unfamiliar with that word, “hermeneutics” is the process of interpreting the Bible. It includes all the rules, principles, theory, and methods of interpreting Holy Scripture.

An important dimension of the critical task of hermeneutics is what we call “exegesis.” Exegesis is the process by which we discover the original meaning of a text of Scripture. The original meaning of the text is fundamentally important for us because THAT is the true and only meaning of a passage of Scripture.

Here are some important questions that you may want to start asking as you begin your study of any portion of God’s Word:

• Who was the writer?
• To whom was the writer writing?
• What are the significant words in the passage?
• What are the significant grammatical constructions?
• What are the significant verb tenses?
• What is the cultural and historical context?
• How was the text interpreted by the author’s contemporaries?
• What was the writer’s intended meaning?
• Why was the writer saying what he said?

You see, friends, we have our work cut out for us! But this is also great fun, and incredibly spiritually energizing. Soul food. Yum!

While it is true that from one meaning of a particular Bible passage we may derive a number of relevant and personal applications, the true and only meaning of the text remains unchanged. And we can be certain that any “application” that conflicts with the text’s original meaning is erroneous. You and I are always seeking to learn the original meaning of the text as intended by the original author for the original hearers.

That’s an appetizer for now. Lord willing, there’ll be more good food to chew on soon …

Pastor Charles

I won’t write much today except to tell you that our FBC Paducah family has continued to serve our community this week. Despite the unseasonably chilly tee-off time, yesterday’s Sunrise Golf Tournament at the Country Club of Paducah afforded our guys the opportunity to help raise much-needed funds for Sunrise Children’s Services. Since 2009, A&K Construction has helped Sunrise raise more than $250,000 through this event.

We are privileged to partner with Sunrise as they provide foster care, residential treatment, and community-based services across the Commonwealth of Kentucky. On multiple fronts, they are a light shining in the darkness.

Our friend Phil Justice did his usual outstanding job of rallying over 30 teams for a great day on the golf course for an even greater cause.

It’s fun to love kids in need. It’s fun to LovePaducah.

Pastor Charles

Saturday was such a blessing for me as I soaked in (literally and figuratively) all the real-life community service that our church family was doing, in and around Paducah, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I was splashed by our students washing cars. They were having a blast – and blasting each other with a surprise soaking along the way – while delighting some of our neighbors with a clean ride.

And, talk about getting your hands dirty, a number of our church guys were installing new wiper blades, replacing old bulbs, checking tires, rejoicing through various and sundry oil changes, and completing all kinds of other acts of kindness related to a free multi-point auto inspection that was offered to single moms, widows, and others who needed some practical help (that can be otherwise cost-prohibitive).

And, right in the middle of those morning showers that just wouldn’t let up (car wash shenanigans aside), others from FBC Paducah were greeting and welcoming guests to The Lower Town Arts and Music Festival. In the rain. Smiles and all.

And, just when you thought it couldn’t get any better, we had more love being given away in the form of nearly-new clothing for children. Lots of great items to help families with growing kids get a jump on summer.

Young and old, we were all in it together.

I was so proud (hopefully in the most noble sense of that word) that I could barely stand it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. It was truly a remarkable day.

Why are we doing these things?

• We want to equip and mobilize our people to put faith into practice (James 2:17).
• We want to reach those who are presently isolated from Christ’s gospel (Genesis 12:1-3).
• We want to help our church family display God’s mercy and justice (Micah 6:8).
• We want to minister from a heart of humility, with our arms open to the poor (Proverbs 19:17).
• We want to demonstrate particular care for the fatherless and widows (James 1:27).
• We want to embrace internationals as we pursue racial and ethnic unity (Galatians 3:28).
• We want to love all people after the example of Jesus, serving Him by serving them (Ephesians 6:7).

We are the body of Christ. We are making disciples across every border and boundary.

Paducah is our city. And we love Paducah.

Pastor Charles

If you’ve been reading my blog for long, you know that – from time to time – I like to take up the matter of truth. What is the nature of truth? What does it mean for something to be “true”?

My hope is that you and I will stay sharp in our understanding of truth, as we serve the God who is Truth (John 14:6), and the God who has tasked us with making right and responsible judgments in regard to all the compelling and competing truth claims which bombard us on a daily basis (John 7:24).

When it comes to all the truth claims that are out there, how can we characterize them? Let me take a stab at this.

A. “Virginia became a state before Nevada.”

A statement of historical fact. A simple test: Does it correspond with reality? In this case, yes it does. True.

B. “The concert begins at 5:00 p.m.”

A statement of specific detail. The same test should be applied in this case.

C. “Among the three sides of a right triangle, the square of the hypotenuse (the side opposite the right angle) is equal to the sum of the squares of the other sides.”

A statement of mathematical fact. You may remember the  Pythagorean theorem form your own study of geometry.

D. “Nothing can’t create something.”

A statement of great generality. (I borrowed this term “great generality” from Dr. Bob Korn, who earned his undergraduate degree at Princeton and who specialized in artificial intelligence at the University of Wisconsin.)

This is a summary of the First Law of Thermodynamics regarding matter or energy. Though I’m no scientist, I’ll weigh in: true. But please forgive my double negative in D.

E. “Schindler’s List is a better movie than Ghostbusters.”

A statement of preference. When Greg Koukl was with us in March, he called this an “ice cream” statement. It’s a personal comment that represents my taste in movies – my favorite flavor – but it’s something that may not be “true for you.” When it comes to our personal styles and preferences, we’re free to disagree, and nobody is really “wrong” in a factual sense. We can even laugh at the nonsensical nature of funny movie lines like this one “from Dr. Strangelove): “Gentlemen, you can’t fight in here! This is the War Room.”

You can see why allowing for subjective “truth” in this category is harmless – but that would not be the case in the previous four categories. You might miss your train, or (far worse) you might get hit by the train because someone told you that trains and pedestrians can occupy the same tracks at the same time. (Maybe the Pauli exclusion principle really does matter.)

F. “We are all one with the universe.”

A statement that is untestable, scientifically. We can’t evaluate a claim like this in a test tube. What evidence would we weigh? (Disney’s Pocahontas is not enough.) Those of us who view the Scriptures as authoritative look to the Bible to test the accuracy of this kind of claim, and – apart from such a truth source – to debate this topic is absolutely meaningless.

G. “You shall not kill.”

A statement of morality. This presents no problem if you believe that God has the right to define truth, but it’s a big problem if you’ve bought into the popular notion that the only person to be feared is the person with the audacity (and ignorance) to announce that any behavior is wrong. (Even most “ethics” professors have succumbed to this craziness.)

Maybe these categories of truth claims will help us in our discussions of truth in days ahead. Being able to identify a claim will help us understand it.

Enter “Chrislam”. We’ll use William Lane Craig’s word to describe what is basically this: The Bible and the Quran fit together nicely, so let’s just syncretize Islam and Christianity. (We won’t let any outmoded notion of truth get in the way of these “two great religions” becoming one.)

Actually, attempts to unite Christianity and Islam are as old as Islam itself. In the late 6th century, Muhammad – who is described variously as a Tsabi and as a Hanif – was married to a Nasrani (a Jewish-Christian) named Khadija bint Khuwaylid by her cousin (the cousin was a Nasrani bishop). The bishop had encouraged his followers to seek refuge among the Nasara (Alexandrian Christians) of Abyssinia, and had – by the 630’s A.D. – established in Medina a “peaceful society” consisting mainly of Nasara and his own sect of Hanifs.

Postmodernism continues to tell us that truth is not absolute. We know better. A truth that is not absolute may be politics, but it is not truth.

“… whatever is true … think about these things” (Philippians 4:8).

So go pursue the truth, my friends. Love the Truth! Feel free to enjoy a plateful of jumbo shrimp this afternoon, but please don’t sign up for any lectures on Chrislam. (You’ll get that later.)

Pastor Charles

How should we “do” worship? Sometimes there are about as many answers to that question as there are people. Some of our friends want to recapture evangelicalism’s former “glory years” by holding on to the past. Others want to revamp just about everything we do around here in order to reach the youngest generation of adults.

Most certainly, reaching young adults is a noble pursuit. Let’s do it! According to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, at least 25% of those whom we generally label “millennials” claim no religious affiliation whatsoever. This makes their generation the most faith-disconnected generation in American history.

But how will we do it?

Will it be all about “branding” and “market share” and “trendy”? Will “edginess” and “hip” and “decaf mocha breves” (admittedly my favorite) really impress for the long haul? Those words may have their place in our conversations about attracting young adults, but they must not drive the train.

The gospel of Jesus must drive the train. The glory of God. And the family of faith – the church – as the community where both are experienced. For real.

It is the gospel alone that will disclose the secrets of the millennial’s heart (or anybody else’s, for that matter), and it is that same glorious gospel displayed in authentic worship (regardless of music preference or style!) that will cause him or her to “fall on his face and worship God, declaring that God is certainly among you” (First Corinthians 14:24-25).

Rachel Held Evens, herself a millennial, writes in The Washington Post (April 30): “You can be dazzled by a light show at a concert on any given weekend, but church is the only place that fills a sanctuary with candlelight and hymns on Christmas Eve. You can snag all sorts of free swag for brand loyalty online, but church is the only place where you are named a beloved child of God with a cold plunge into the water. You can share food with the hungry at any homeless shelter, but only the church teaches that a shared meal brings us into the very presence of God.”

Millennials want authentic. Millennials want genuine. Millennials want real. Just saying.

Evens wisely calls us to recapture “those strange rituals and traditions Christians have been practicing for the last 2000 years.” And she graciously reminds us: “They don’t need to be repackaged or rebranded; they just need to be practiced, offered and explained in the context of a loving, authentic, and inclusive community.”

Beloved church family, we still have to tell the truth about Christian doctrine. We still have to call sin “sin.” But that includes telling the truth about our sin, and not striving so hard to create such a trendy “worship environment” that we leave behind the things that matter most (and always did). I think that our young blogger friend is right to remind us to keep it real along the way.

Pastor Charles

Warning of the dangers of delivering the human “conscience into bondage,” John Witherspoon rightly observed in 1775: “There is not a single instance in history in which civil liberty was lost, and religious liberty preserved entire.”

Sometimes God calls us to stand up and be counted. But today I’m asking you to kneel instead.

We find ourselves at a significant crossroads in American history, and in fact we may be witnessing the large-scale rejection of – at least in terms of the laws of our land – the institution of marriage as it was ordained by Almighty God. And as it has been understood for thousands of years. Will the United States Supreme Court allow states to define marriage in a traditional sense, or will these justices continue to advance de jure the current cultural trajectory that – in my opinion – threatens to further unravel the very fabric of American society?

“For the Glory of God and the advancements of the Christian faith” (The Mayflower Compact). How far we have fallen!

Oral arguments before the high court begin tomorrow, April 28, 2015. The justices will hear arguments over an extended 150-minute session. Then they will begin deciding the fate of same-sex marriage bans in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. I don’t need to tell you that the implications of this decision will be national in scope and global in impact.

Everyone concerned about religious liberty in America should be in prayer. Please pray for our Supreme Court justices by name (First Timothy 2:1-4).

Samuel Alito                  Stephen Breyer                Ruth Bader Ginsburg           Elena Kagan         Anthony Kennedy              John Roberts (Chief Justice)         Antonin Scalia          Sonia Sotomayor            Clarence Thomas

I would urge you to pray particularly for Justice Ginsburg and Justice Kagan, who have already performed same-sex marriage ceremonies – that God would grant these two women the grace to see the issue before them with objectivity and clarity. Or that they would do the honorable thing and recuse themselves from the matter before the court.

I’m making two requests. Please allot to this matter to at least ten minutes of prayer every day for the next seven days. Additionally, Carson Chapel will be open tomorrow from 1:00 until 2:00 p.m. for all of you who would like to come here to pray as a church family.

Pastor Charles