Principles of Bible Study

I want to share my list of Bible study principles, things I have learned from the Church, from the Bible, and from my experiences over the years since God first began to call me.

This list does not necessarily contain every good principle.  You may find other good points in Church literature.  You can combine this list with those lists - it may be that I have some principles in this list that are not covered elsewhere.  This is intended to add to, not substitute for, good teachings from the Church in how to study the Bible.  No doubt many items in this list are duplicates of principles taught in the Church for years, but repetition is a good teacher.

These points are not necessarily in any particular order.

If you have learned of more principles you think should be included, feel free to suggest them in the comments.

Towards the end of this post I will make some comments about the Iran war, since that is an important event current in the news.



Build the Foundation


In preparation for studying the Bible, it is good to have a strong foundation.  You need to have a foundation for trust and faith in the Bible as the word of God.  You need a foundational assurance that the Bible is true and that scripture cannot be broken (Psalm 119:160, John 17:17, John 10:35).  God cannot lie (Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18).

I can briefly share my experience after God began to call me, for what it is worth.  Others may have had different experiences in arriving at faith in God's word.

When God first began to call me, it was through the old Plain Truth magazine that was published by the Worldwide Church of God when Mr. Armstrong was alive.  It was through the Church's literature, especially their booklet on, "Does God Exist?", that I was challenged on that question.  I was raised Catholic, and at age 16 I was an agnostic.  But at around age 19 or 20, with the help and encouragement of Church literature, I set out to prove if God existed or not.  I wanted the truth, either way.

I was able to prove God's existence by creation.  Science was a hobby of mine and I read much about it.  I knew that the universe did not have to be the way it is.  I knew that design choices were made, for example, the choice that physical space would be three dimensional.  I had not heard the term "fine-tuning" in those days, but I knew God must exist to make the choices of how the universe would be.  Later, when I learned about how the universe was fine-tuned for our existence and the argument by skeptics that we live in a multiverse with many universes and we must of necessity find ourselves in one that is fine-tuned for our existence, I also learned that the universe is fine-tuned for our observation of the universe, an example being the apparent same size of the sun and moon in the sky that allows scientists to confirm general relativity during a solar eclipse.  This is not necessary from a strictly materialistic point of view, but God wants us to be able to observe the greatness of His creation.

I also believed that consciousness is a proof of God because God must have created it and given it to us.  Science has no explanation for consciousness.

After I proved to my satisfaction that God is real, I set out to prove, again with the help of Church of God literature, if the Bible is God's word, God speaking.  It is.  I was able to prove through fulfilled prophecy that the Bible is inspired by God.

Later I added another proof of the Bible - the internal consistency of the Bible that cannot be plausibly explained as coincidence.  An example of that is the exact fit between the annual feasts and holy days and the meaning of the New Testament.  There is nothing in the Old Testament that indicates that Moses or anyone in his day understood the meaning of those days as we understand them today based on the New Testament truth.  So if they were not inspired and commanded by God, how could Moses or other human authors understand how to structure them to fit a future theology?

And the Bible with the plan of God is the only thing that makes sense of the world we live in today.

Once I proved that the Bible is the inspired word of God and is God speaking to us, there was one more step I had to take.  I had to answer, for myself, will I believe God?  Will I believe what God says about Himself, that He is righteous, that He cannot lie (Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18), and that His word cannot be broken (John 10:35).  In other words, now that I had God's word, will I trust God to tell me the truth in His word? Will I unconditionally believe Him?

I cannot say that I found proof that God is telling the truth.  I did not know how to prove that.  I simply made a decision, a commitment to God and to myself, to always believe Him.

So now I had the Bible for a foundation for everything in life.  And I had my foundation for all future Bible study.

It was not long after that that I was able to prove that the Worldwide Church of God at that time was the one true Church.  I began tithing and requested baptism.  I was invited to services and soon was baptized.

I outline my experience as an example that might help others, but others may have a different path to faith in God's word.  But one way or another, lay a strong foundation for believing the Bible as a preparation for future Bible study.

On the subject of proving the inspiration of the Bible by fulfilled prophecy, one of the major proofs is the fulfillment of the prophecy in Daniel that in the time of the end men would run to and fro and knowledge would increase (Daniel 12:4). Combined with the weekly cycle and the seventh day Sabbath (Genesis 1:3-31, Genesis 2:1-3, Exodus 20:9-11), the prophecy in Revelation that Christ will rule the earth with the saints for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:1-4), and the statement by Peter that to God a thousand years is like a day (2 Peter 3:8), it shows we are in the time of the end - the end of about 6,000 years of man's world - and that this prophecy has been fulfilled (and continues to be fulfilled).  We have witnessed an explosion in knowledge and transportation as never before in history.

Another prophecy, or set of prophecies, is the fulfillment of prophecy regarding the lost ten tribes of Israel.  The United States and British nations have fulfilled the prophecies for Manasseh and Ephraim in a remarkable way, beyond the likelihood of this happening to any nations at all.

Some critics will try to dismiss the fulfillment of these prophecies saying that the United States and British nations are not descended from Ephraim and Manasseh but are mixtures of non-Israelite peoples.  They use various arguments, some obviously ridiculous when you understand the prophecies and when you read Mr. Armstrong's book, The United States and British Commonwealth in Prophecy, the full-size version.

Some say that genetic testing shows that the American and British peoples are not closely related to the Jews.  I do not know what genetic testing shows, and I do not care.  I certainly do not take critics' word for this.  But suppose DNA testing shows that there is not a close genetic relation between the English-speaking people and the Jews.  So what?  To think that there must be a close genetic relationship misses the point.  God never said that there would not be mixing, only that descendents of Joseph would become a great nation and company of nations.  How much mixing occurs is not the point.  Whether the English-speaking people have Joseph as an ancestor is the point.

Joseph married an Egyptian woman and Judah a Canaanite woman who became the mother of one of his children, so the mixing started early.  But they still had descendents who became nations today.  Ephraim's descendents migrated to the British Isles and from there to Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. Manasseh's descendents migrated to many countries probably including Britain, Ireland, Germany, Italy, and others, and from there to the United States.  Was there genetic mixing along the way?  Maybe, why not?  But that doesn't change the fact that Joseph and his sons were their ancestors.



We Need God's Help to Understand the Bible


It is vital that we understand that we need God's help and inspiration to understand the Bible.  We cannot correctly understand the Bible by our own human intelligence and reasoning alone.  And when we understand the Bible, we should give God the credit and praise and thanks for His help.

Why?

Because Satan deceives the whole world. "So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him" (Revelation 12:9).  The whole human race is blinded to God's truth.  See Isaiah 6:8-9, Isaiah 29:9-13, Matthew 13:10-17, John 6:44, John 12:39-41, Acts 28:24-27, Romans 11:7-10, 2 Corinthians 3:14-15, and 2 Corinthians 4:3-4.  

We need God's Holy Spirit to understand spiritual matters.  "But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God" (1 Corinthians 2:10-12).  "But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Corinthians 2:14).

We need to realize that we must please God to receive the help we need to understand the Bible.

We do this by believing God's word and striving to obey God as best we can.  Then He can give us the help to understand.

We need God's calling, and He only calls a few (John 6:44).

This is why the majority of mankind is deceived by false religion or secularism.



Consider Both the Local and Universal Context


When studying a passage of scripture, it is important to get the context.  But also consider that God is using the words of the Bible writers to speak to us today.

I remember hearing someone say or reading someone write that the key to understanding the Bible is, "context, context, context".  That is not right.  Overemphasizing context is not the best approach to understanding the Bible.  It can lead to error.

The person who says, "context, context, context", is talking about what I call "local context", that is, the time and place and circumstances which the human writer is referring to.  But there is also a universal context of God speaking to us today, and that must be considered also.

By "local context" I mean the context in the time and the place and the circumstances that the human writer is talking about.

By "universal context" I mean the context of God using the words He inspires the human writer to write to speak to us today, which might be an entirely different set of circumstances and time and place than what the human writer had in mind.

Both need to be considered.

Sometimes the same words can have multiple meanings, depending on the local or universal context.  The main principle is, scripture cannot be broken and God cannot lie.

I will give an example.

One of the Church's long-time defenses of the Sabbath is the statement by Jesus that the Sabbath was made for man.  "And He said to them, 'The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath' " (Mark 2:27).  Notice that He did not say, "for the Jew".  This shows that the Sabbath is made for all mankind, including Christians from any ancestry, not just Jews.

But when Worldwide was changing its doctrine on keeping the Sabbath, I think I heard a critic of the Sabbath say (or read what he wrote), that the context indicates that Christ was speaking to the Jews, so it was understood that the Jews would know He was speaking of them - "man" would mean "Jews" to them because they were Jews.  So in that context, "man" and "Jew" would be the same - synonymous - it would not matter if Christ said man or Jew in that context, and we should understand that He meant Jew.  The Jews of that time would understand either way.

But that ignores the universal context of God speaking to us today.

God who filled Christ with the Holy Spirit and inspired His words and who also inspired the gospel writers who recorded His words knew that the Sabbath would be a controversy in our day and that sincere people would look to the Bible to see if we should keep the seventh-day Sabbath today.  And God inspired the word "man" for our sakes even if it didn't matter to the Jews whether Christ said "man" or "Jew".  God is telling us that He made the Sabbath for all mankind, not just the Jew.  That is the universal context.

That is why I say, look at both the local context and the universal context.  Sometimes only one applies and sometimes both apply, and that requires judgment which God will give to those who obey Him (Psalm 111:10).



Bible Authors Did Not Necessarily Fully Understand Everything God Inspired them to Write


Did the prophets and apostles who penned the books of the Bible always understand their own writings?

Daniel was given a vision, and he wrote of it.  But he said that he himself did not understand it.  "Although I heard, I did not understand. Then I said, 'My lord, what shall be the end of these things?' And he said, 'Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end' " (Daniel 12:8-9).  Yet, Daniel was wise and God uses him as an example of wisdom (Ezekiel 28:3).

Peter said that Paul wrote some things that were hard to understand (2 Peter 3:15-16).  Did Peter himself fully understand those parts?  He doesn't say.  But Peter did say that what Paul wrote in those cases was scripture, for he refers to "the rest of the Scriptures", saying, "...which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures" (2 Peter 3:16).  That does not mean that everything Paul wrote, every epistle (letter), was God's inspired word which cannot be broken, for not all of Paul's letters were canonized by John or by whoever canonized the books of the New Testament, for Paul refers to a letter of his that is not part of the Bible.  "Now when this epistle is read among you, see that it is read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and that you likewise read the epistle from Laodicea" (Colossians 4:16). That epistle from Paul to Laodicea is not part of the Bible.  There could be other writings of Paul and the apostles that God has not included in the Bible.

Sometimes a sentence can have more than one meaning.  Sometimes it can have one meaning or another, and we don't know which.  Sometimes it can mean two things, both of which are true.  Passages like this can be difficult to understand.

God promises that scripture cannot be broken.  Everything in the Bible is true when understood as God intends.  God cannot lie.  But God does not promise that the apostles and prophets would be perfect in their own understanding.  Paul wrote, "For we know in part and we prophesy in part" (1 Corinthians 13:9).  And God does not promise that an inspired author would always know the full extent of the meaning God is conveying to us today through that man's writings.

Moses wrote of God's instructions for the holy days.  He wrote of the two goats (Leviticus 16:1-30).  He wrote what God inspired him to write, but did he understand that the goat released in the wilderness would represent Satan and Satan being put away in a condition of restraint for the duration of the millennium?  Did he fully understand the meaning of the days of unleavened bread or the day of trumpets?  The Bible does not say how much he personally understood.  I think he must have understood the sacrifice of Christ to accept it for his own salvation.  But he may not have understood the full meaning of the holy days to the degree we understand those days today.  But God gave him detailed instructions and inspired the words he wrote for us today, and God made sure what he wrote is true.

When Peter wrote that to God a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like a day, what did he have in mind?  Here is the quote.  "But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:8-9).  Today, we use this to help understand the 7,000 year plan of God, but was that what Peter had in mind?  Maybe he was only trying to reassure his readers that God looks at the long-term big picture and desires all men to be saved.  Maybe he did not fully understand or know that God uses this to show us about the plan of God and that a thousand-years-for-a-day principle is about the plan of God.  I don't know how much Peter and the apostles knew.  They seemed to expect Christ soon, and they could add the chronologies of the Bible same as we can.  But we understand today.

Mr. Armstrong thought of God's law like the law of gravity - "if you break it, it breaks you" - something that worked out consequences almost automatically to bring blessings if we obey and curses and penalties if we disobey.  But Paul apparently understood the word, "law" in different ways, not always according to the way Mr. Armstrong used the term.  Paul had a different background.  People in that day did not necessarily think of gravity as a scientific law.

I haven't tried this, but if you look up the word, "law", in a big, complete dictionary (the kind you need muscles to lift), you are likely to see many definitions.  Words are like that.  One word can mean one of many things depending on how it is used.

Paul wrote that we are not justified by works.  "We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified" (Galatians 2:15-16).  

Also, "But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for 'the just shall live by faith' " (Galatians 3:11).  

Also, "You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace" (Galatians 5:4).  

But James wrote that we are justified by works.  "You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only" (James 2:24).  They are not contradicting each other.  They use that same term, "justified by works". in different ways.  But God is telling us something through both apostles, and scripture cannot be broken.

But did they themselves know this?  I heard one person say that James was trying to correct what he thought was an error in Paul's writings.  That is speculation, of course, but remember that John had not canonized Paul's and James's letters yet - he would do that later - so James did not necessarily know that Paul's statement that we are not justified by works would become part of the infallible word of God, the Bible, which cannot be broken.

But God is telling us something through the words of both apostles, and what God tells us is true.

There is an interesting pair of passages that I think helps us understand how God sometimes inspires the human writers who wrote the Bible.  Compare Jude with 2 Peter chapter 2.  Read those together.  The thoughts to some degree are parallel in a way I think that is unlikely to be coincidence.  And I don't think one writer copied from the other.  I think God inspired both of them with the same message, but each man chose the words and examples to illustrate each point.  Maybe God did this to show us how He inspired much of the Bible.  Same truth, but different words from different men, yet God controlling the process to make sure every word is true when properly understood.

So the human writers, while they certainly understood what they themselves had in mind and were trying to say, did not necessarily fully understand everything God is saying to us today through their words.  But God knows, and He can help us to understand everything, if we are willing to learn.

The human writers could to some degree chose their words, but God made sure every word is true, not necessarily the way the human writers fully understood.

This point ties in closely with the previous point on context.



God Does Not Use Figurative Language to Lie


One question comes up about various Bible passages, and that is, is God speaking literally or figuratively?

God cannot lie (Titus 1:1-2, Hebrews 6:17-18).

Using figurative language is not lying provided the person we are communicating with can know the language is figurative, not misinterpreting it as literal.  That is how we communicate today.  We use figurative language when we know our listener or reader will know it is figurative.  If not, we make it clear.

We say it is raining cats and dogs outside, or we say, I have a frog in my throat.  Those are well-known figures of speech that will not be misunderstood.  We are not lying when we use them, though they are not literally true.  Our audience understands.

But if the person we are speaking to misunderstands, we clarify.  Suppose a man is angry with someone and is telling you about it, and he says, "I'm going to kill him".  He is speaking figuratively, he only intends to be angry but not kill anyone.  But you misunderstand and think he is speaking literally.  The man speaking to you sees by the shocked look on your face that you are taking him literally, so he says, "I don't mean that literally".  He clarifies so you don't misunderstand.  He is not trying to deceive you with a figure of speech.

God does not deceive us with figures of speech but He uses figures of speech when we understand.

God told ancient Israel, "You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4).  The Israelites understood that "eagles' wings" was a figure of speech because they knew that they had walked out of Egypt.

The question comes up, especially in this world's traditional Christianity, are the six days of creation in Genesis 1:3-31 literal or figurative?  They are literal.  How can we know?  They would be understood as literal.  No obvious figurative language is used.

We have to be able to trust God to not deceive us by speaking figuratively when He knows we will take it literally.  Otherwise, anything in the Bible could be figurative and we would not be able to trust anything we read in the Bible.

If God uses obviously figurative language or explains the symbolism, it is figurative.  But if literal language is used and there is no indication in God's word that it is figurative, we should take it literally.

When Christ spoke of eating His flesh and drinking His blood, those who heard Him did not understand what He meant (John 6:51-60).  But they knew they did not understand.  They said, "This is a hard saying; who can understand it?" (John 6:60).  They did not misunderstand, thinking He was literally advocating cannibalism.  They knew this was a figure of speech, but they did not know what it represented.

When Christ spoke of destroying this temple and raising it up, he was not speaking of the physical temple but of His body (John 2:19-22).  The Jews thought He was speaking of the physical temple.  But He was not speaking for their benefit, but for the disciples and to us today.  And in the Bible account, the Bible makes clear the meaning, for it clearly says Christ was speaking of His body.



The Bible Interprets the Bible


Mr. Armstrong correctly taught us and the Church of God has long taught that the Bible interprets the Bible.  We should not interpret the Bible, but let the Bible interpret the Bible.  Clear scriptures and passages interpret unclear ones.

When any question arises, we should search out and gather all Bible passages on that subject and let clear passages interpret unclear ones.  Sometimes that means that we let literal, clear passages interpret figurative or symbolic passages.

We also should reference the teaching and traditions of the Church of God and its ministry.  They can help us understand difficult passages.  Always we should believe what we see in the Bible more than the Church or any man, but we should consider the teachings of the Church with an open mind.  And if we disagree, we should wait in faith trusting God to correct us if we are wrong or correct the Church in due time, even if not till Christ returns.  And in the meantime we should avoid discussing the issue we disagree about with other brethren, so not to cause division (Romans 16:17-18).



Is the Bible the Whole Word of God?


Is the Bible the complete package of the word of God?  Is some of God's word outside of the Bible?  I am not talking about inspired teachings of apostles or the ministry (1 Thessalonians 2:13).  Nor am I talking about non-canonical books some claim should be part of the Bible but are not.  I am talking about something else.

The question might seem shocking.  The book of Revelation says, "For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book" (Revelation 22:18-19).  And God tells us, "Now, O Israel, listen to the statutes and the judgments which I teach you to observe, that you may live, and go in and possess the land which the LORD God of your fathers is giving you. You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you" (Deuteronomy 4:1-2).  So how can there be any word of God apart from the Bible?

There is another part of God's word through which He speaks to us in the Church and to mankind as a whole, and the Bible endorses that and authorizes that as part of God's word.

God speaks to us through creation.

This is established both in the Old Testament and the New Testament.

God speaks to us through His creation, the natural world, the world of the sun, the moon, the stars, the galaxies, the universe, and life on earth in all its beauty and variety and complexity.  All creation teaches us that God, the Creator, exists, and all creation teaches us of His greatness - His wisdom and power.

Consider the proof of this in the Old Testament.

"The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows His handiwork.  Day unto day utters speech, And night unto night reveals knowledge. There is no speech nor language Where their voice is not heard. Their line has gone out through all the earth, And their words to the end of the world. In them He has set a tabernacle for the sun, Which is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, And rejoices like a strong man to run its race. Its rising is from one end of heaven, And its circuit to the other end; And there is nothing hidden from its heat" (Psalm 19:1-6).  I believe we have a song in our old hymnal based on this Psalm.  See also Psalm 50:6 and Psalm 97:6.

This passage is part of the Bible, and scripture cannot be broken.  God establishes the authority of creation as a way He speaks to us.  We can believe what creation tells us about God.

In the New Testament, Paul writes, "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse..." (Romans 1:20).  This is also part of God's word.  God is telling us, through Paul's writings, that creation speaks of God, and by creation we can know about God.

The truth that the created world teaches us is a way God speaks to us.  And just as God will not lie to us in His written word, the Bible, likewise He will not lie to us through the created world, the natural world.

I say this because I have read or heard of people claiming that fossils found in the earth are false evidence planted by Satan the devil to deceive us.  I do not think God would allow that.

What is discovered in the physical world is real, but scientists, being mostly atheists and atheistic in their approach and scientific method, misinterpret the physical evidence.  Physical evidence does not point to anything unless interpreted, and to obtain truth, that interpretation must be correct and accurate.  Right evidence with wrong interpretation leads to wrong conclusions.  Right evidence with right interpretation leads to right conclusions - truth.

How can we know more about God's creation?  Science can help, but we have to be careful.  Science does two things.  It discovers and reports evidence, and it interprets the evidence.  Their discovery and reporting of evidence - distant stars, galaxies, fossils in the earth, etc. - is mostly (not necessarily entirely) accurate.  Some scientists may falsify their research, but most are probably honest.

But it is in the interpretation of the evidence that scientists go astray.  For example, they interpret fossils and other evidence of past life to conclude that life in all its variety came about through evolution, not creation by God or the supernatural.  They deny intelligent design, not even letting it be taught in public schools (though the Declaration of Independence, the document that helped to found our country before even the Constitution existed, affirms that we are created by a Creator).  That is false interpretation, led by a spirit of atheism, leading to false conclusions.

I say this because I have heard someone, who denies the gap doctrine and thinks that the earth has only existed for about 6,000 years, say that he dismisses science and the evidence of science for an old earth because it is over his head, and he just wants to rely on God's word and ignore the evidence science has uncovered.  He misses the point of Psalm 19:1-6, Psalm 50:6, Psalm 97:6, and Romans 1:20 that God speaks to us through His creation - through the physical evidence science has discovered about the earth and the universe - and not just through the Bible.

Creation is part of the word of God, not just the Bible alone.

Just as the Bible interprets the Bible, so creation can interpret the Bible and the Bible can interpret the evidence of creation - it all has to fit.  One part of God's word interprets another part of God's word, and creation is part of God's word, how God speaks to us.  If we want to understand the creation account in Genesis, we cannot ignore what science has discovered.

And just as the Bible cannot contradict itself, neither can the Bible contradict the physical evidence of creation nor can the physical evidence of creation contradict the Bible.

But the evidence of the natural world, though reported accurately by science, is often not interpreted accurately by science.

You who study into this can form your own conclusions, but based on what I have learned, the physical evidence supports the gap doctrine, that there is a time period, possibly millions of years, between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.

Will we find evidence of miracles in the earth?

Not necessarily.  A miracle, by definition, is an exception to the laws of nature.  God can perform a miracle and then clean up the debris so to speak afterwards.  We won't necessarily see evidence.  

For example, a skeptic might point to the different species on different continents and say, how can these different species all be segregated in different places on the earth if they all came from Noah's ark?

The answer is obvious.  God gathered the different species to Noah to go on the ark.  There is no record that Noah had to journey all over the earth gathering various species from Australia, Africa, North America, South America, etc.  That was a miracle.  Noah did not have to travel all over the earth to find and gather every kind of animal.  The flood itself was a miracle.  The removal of the water must have been a miracle.  And the redistribution of the species to their original continents and locations of the earth must have been a miracle.  We should not expect to find evidence in the natural world of things God has restored to the way they were before the miracle.



Gather All the Passages on a Particular Subject You Are Researching


When you study a particular subject in the Bible, get all the passages you can get that relate to that topic.  Don't base your conclusion on only one verse.

The Bible interprets the Bible and clear scriptures interpret unclear ones.  But to let the Bible do this you need to find all the related scriptures for a topic.

There are a couple of ways you can find those.  You can use a printed concordance such as Strong's Exhaustive Concordance to find every verse that contains a certain word.  You can choose words that are closely related to your subject.

You can also use Bible software to search for and find all scriptures that use a particular word or term.

Church literature can also help you find important passages.



The Bible Does Not Contradict Itself


As you study the Bible, you are likely to sometimes come across apparent contradictions.

But the Bible does not contradict itself.  This has to be a matter of faith.  God says that He cannot lie (Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18).  His word is truth (Psalm 119:160, John 17:17).  Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35).  We either believe and trust God or we don't.  As part of our faith commitment to God, we need to commit to believing His word, the Bible, and that means believing that God does not contradict Himself.

Apparent contradictions are just that - apparent contradictions.  There are no real contradictions, but sometimes there seems to be a contradiction because of a mistranslation or because we misunderstand what the Bible is saying.  These can be resolved either in this life with further study or in the resurrection when Christ can explain everything to us.

Often the Church ministry can help us resolve any apparent contradictions because the Church of God has studied these things for a long time and because God has given them a teaching job and can help them to teach us the truth.  Sometimes they can make mistakes, and if we see their mistake we should not follow their mistake, but they can oftentimes help us.

But if we cannot resolve an apparent contradiction now, we need to exercise faith to believe that it can be resolved in time.

Critics of the Bible, atheists and secular historians and commentators, often point to things they think are contradictions in the Bible.  But they are looking for contradictions, and are glad when they think they find them.  They are not trying to resolve contradictions but to find fault with the Bible.  That is exactly the opposite attitude needed to understand the Bible.

We should strive to believe and trust what God says in the Bible.  If we find what seems to be a contradiction, we should look for ways to resolve it, trusting God that He cannot lie and He cannot contradict Himself.



Believe the Bible More than the Church of God and Its Ministry


I have written about this at length before so I will not spend too much time with this.

The Church of God is not infallible.  Church leaders, apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastors can and do make mistakes.  Mr. Armstrong made mistakes and he showed himself willing to admit error and correct his mistakes.  Not only that, but ministers and leaders are capable of sinning.  Therefore their writings and teachings and speaking cannot be trusted in the same way that we trust what God says in the Bible.

When we study the Bible, if we find something that seems to be in contradiction to what the Church and its leadership and ministry teach, or in contradiction to long-standing Church of God traditions and doctrines, we should believe the Bible, not the Church or its leadership and ministry, until we can try to resolve it with further study.  That further study can involve Church literature and sermons and if necessary discussion or correspondence with the ministry or its leadership.

We should have an open mind.  We should be teachable.  We should be respectful.  Yet, after all that, we may still see that the Bible says something different than the Church.  In that case, we must have faith in God more than man.  We must believe the Bible more than the Church.

And if that is the case, we need to wait for Christ to resolve the matter, and we can pray about it if it is important.

Christ can resolve such matters in any of three ways.  If we are in error, He can correct us by leading us by His Spirit to see our error.  In that case, we may come to agree with the Church over time.

If the Church is in error, He can correct the Church by leading the ministry by the Holy Spirit to see their error, and they can correct it.

Or, He may wait till He returns, and at that time He can explain everything.

In the meantime we should not create division by discussing our differences in front of or with the brethren.  We should not promote our ideas.  Leave it on the shelf.  Quietly and confidentially believe and obey God first and live in peace with the Church as much as you are able.  Don't bring the subject up, unless you have to.  If others bring it up in your presence, even if they ask you about it, you can politely decline to discuss it.

In some major issues, you may have to take a stand.  If a Church started teaching that the ten commandments are done away, I would not hesitate to openly take a stand with such a major point.  But in that case, do not be surprised if you are booted out for causing division.  Trust God to provide a place for you somewhere else, even though you may have to wait a while.

Be willing to learn whatever God teaches you in the Bible, even if that means that what He teaches you is a change from what the Church or Mr. Armstrong has taught in the past.

Some groups teach that Mr. Armstrong's teachings should never be changed, and that is wrong.

Some other groups may teach that the members should believe the ministry in how they interpret the Bible, and that is wrong also.  I heard one speaker, years ago, say that we should assume that the Church is right in how it interprets the Bible.  That is bad advice, I think.

Faith is part of worship, and we should have faith only in God not in man, not even the leadership and ministry of the Church.  Christ is head of the Church and He leads the Church both by the Bible and by the Holy Spirit.  But ministers and leaders do not always follow where Christ leads, and God will not take away free will.  So not every decision of a leader or minister is right and from God.

The Bible calls the Church, "the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Timothy 3:15).  But that is a figurative statement and must be interpreted by literal statements that say we should put our trust in God, not man, and that scripture cannot be broken.  To those who think this means the brethren should believe the Church more than what they see in the Bible, or to trust the ministry to correctly interpret the Bible for them, I would ask this:  Does this mean the Church is never wrong?  Does this mean leaders and ministers in the Church never make a mistake in understanding and teaching scripture?  Do they never misunderstand or misapply scripture?  Do they not make mistakes?

Now ask these same questions about the Bible.  Is the Bible ever wrong?  No.  Does God ever make a mistake in what His word says?  No.

Can you see that the authority and accuracy of the Bible is greater than that of the Church, its leadership, its ministry, and its traditions?

I don't mean we have to challenge, in our minds, every little thing.  There are many details of prophecy, for example, that I am not that concerned with, and I give the Church the benefit of the doubt that it is mostly accurate in the way in understands prophecy.  Those things do not affect how we live our lives.

But when we study the Bible, our attitude must be one of faith towards God, not towards the Church and the men who lead it.

We should be willing to learn new knowledge from the Bible and correct past mistakes when we find them.  The leadership of a Church of God fellowship should be willing to correct past traditions and teachings of the Church when errors are found, and it should be willing to learn new things from the Bible and teach them to the membership.

A leader who says, "I will not change or add doctrine, not even to correct past mistakes of Mr. Armstrong or to learn new doctrines from the Bible", is not following the Bible and Christ.  He is withstanding and resisting the word of God, not willing to learn what Christ has to teach him and not letting Christ through him teach the membership.  He is blocking Christ.

As I have pointed out in previous posts, a group that does this is not likely to be successful and fruitful in preaching the gospel to the world.  A position of believing Mr. Armstrong more than the Bible or believing the Church ministry and leadership more than the Bible can block success in preaching the gospel.

To be effective in preaching the gospel, we must say to the public, as Mr. Armstrong did, don't believe us, don't believe any man, believe the Bible, believe God.

But if we say that to the public while we tell our members, believe Mr. Armstrong, or, believe the Church of God leadership and ministry, we become hypocrites, and I do not think God will bless hypocrisy.

Mr. and Mrs. Armstrong were only successful in preaching the gospel to the world after they passed the test of believing the Bible more than any Church or tradition.  It was a way of life for them, and we should follow that example.  I think that is what Christ had in mind when He told Philadelphians to hold fast.  It is the way of life and example of Mr. Armstrong that Philadelphians are to hold fast to, not a list of doctrines.

And the message to "hold fast" is not for Laodiceans.  It is for Philadelphians.  Laodiceans do not have much to hold fast to.  They are told the opposite:  change, repent.  I find it almost humorous (it would be funny if it were not so sad) when a Laodicean says, "God tells us to hold fast".  No He doesn't.  You are reading someone else's mail.



Can God Teach a Lay Member Something through the Bible Before Teaching the Ministry?


Is it possible that God could reveal to you the lay member, through the Bible and through opening the understanding of the Bible by His Holy Spirit, some point of truth, new knowledge, that the ministry and the Church leadership does not have?  Could God reveal something to you before He reveals it to the leadership of the Church?

Yes.  There is nothing I have found in the Bible that says that cannot happen.

God did that with Mr. and Mrs. Armstrong when they were lay members of the Church of God or even before they were converted.  Mr. Armstrong was not an apostle, yet God revealed things to him that the Church of God Seventh Day did not know.  He was a lay member like you or me.

Why would God do that today?

To test us.

To test both us and the leadership and ministry, both.

Showing a lay member, by opening the understanding of a passage of scripture, some new knowledge, some new doctrine, can be a test for that member and for the leadership.  It is a test for the member because he may be tempted to discuss or promote what he has discovered with other brethren.  He needs to be quiet about it and not contradict the ministry.  It is also a test of faith - will he believe God more than the Church, or will he just assume that the Church is right, thus disbelieving God's word?  He must not fall into either ditch.  That is a test.

But if he brings it to the attention of the Church leadership or ministry (not always a good idea with a fellowship that has an intolerant leadership and ministry that will disfellowship a member simply for not agreeing), then it becomes a test for the leadership and ministry - will they believe what God says in the Bible and will they be humble enough to listen to a lay member and consider with an open mind what the Bible really says?  Will they be humble enough to admit error and change?  Will a minister let himself be corrected by a lay member?  That is a test of humility.

So never assume that God cannot reveal things to lay members before the leadership.  He did it with Mr. Armstrong and He can do it today to test us and humble us.

I have found nothing in the Bible that indicates God never opens the understanding of a reader of the Bible without first opening the understanding of the ministry on that point.  God may reveal something to a lay member first to test the faith of the member and his submission to the Church in not causing division and also to test the leadership and ministry of the Church to see if it accepts correction with an open mind, that is, test their humility. Remember the example of Mr. and Mrs. Armstrong.

Read the Bible.  Believe what God says.  Study it.  Have faith in God's word more than in the Church.  That is what we tell the public when we preach the gospel and we must do the same thing.  We must practice what we preach.

We should listen to what we tell the public.  We should listen to our own words. We should do what we tell others to do.



God Gives Understanding to those who Believe and Obey His Word


This is basic.  We need God's help to understand the Bible.  God gives that help through His Holy Spirit.  Without that help, Satan deceives us.

But to whom does God give that help?

God helps those who believe and obey Him.

"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; A good understanding have all those who do His commandments" (Psalm 111:10).

"And we are His witnesses to these things, and so also is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him" (Acts 5:32).

To understand the Bible, believe and obey God.  This is one of the most important principles of Bible study, maybe the most important of all.



Avoiding Deception - We Reap What We Sow


To understand the Bible, we need to avoid Satan's deceptions.  Avoiding deception and understanding the Bible are two sides of the same coin.

Satan tries to deceive us.  He deceives the world.  That is why traditional religion cannot understand the Bible.  We need God's supernatural help and inspiration to escape Satan's deceptions and understand the Bible.

God is merciful, but He is also a God of justice (Matthew 23:23).  He has a principle - what we sow we shall reap.

"Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap" (Galatians 6:7).

"I, the LORD, search the heart I test the mind, Even to give every man according to his ways, According to the fruit of his doings" (Jeremiah 17:10).

"You are great in counsel and mighty in work, for your eyes are open to all the ways of the sons of men, to give everyone according to his ways and according to the fruit of his doings" (Jeremiah 32:19).

"And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work" (Revelation 22:12).

Satan is the great deceiver.  He is a liar and the father of lies (John 8:44).  When we lie to others, we are following Satan's way of life, not the way of God, who cannot lie (Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18).

We want God to protect us from being deceived.  We want Him to protect us from lies.  But will He do that if we ourselves lie?  If we deceive someone else, will God not give us the fruits of our way and let us be deceived?  Will we not reap what we sow?  If we lie, will not God let us be the victim of lies?  Will God not give us a taste of our own medicine, as they say?

What are the fruits of lies?  Study the life of Jacob (Genesis chapters 27 through 31 and chapter 37).  Jacob lied to his father. Did God teach Jacob a lesson about lying after that?  Study his life.  God let Laben deceive Jacob about Leah and Rachel.  God let Jacob suffer for years thinking Joseph was dead because his sons lied to him.  God let Jacob be the victim of lies.  He let him be deceived.  It is as if God said to Jacob, "You believe in lying?  You deceived your father?  Ok, let's see how you like being lied to.  Let Me show you how much suffering lies can cause."

If you want to understand the Bible, practice the way of truth.  You don't have to answer every question.  You don't have to speak on every topic.  You can be silent if you have a good reason.  You can decline to answer.  But if you give an answer, make sure it is the truth.  Keep quiet or tell the truth.  Don't lie.  Don't follow Satan in the way of lying.

That is an important part of understanding the Bible.



The Iran War


As most of you know, on Friday, February 28, 2026 Israel and the United States began attacking Iran with air strikes against land targets and attacks against Iranian ships.  No ground troops have been sent in.  Previous to this, there were negotiations between the United States and Iran over the issue of Iran developing an atomic bomb.  Also, shortly before this war, there were mass demonstrations against the government of Iran by the general population of Iran.  Iran cracked down hard, killing thousands of protesters.

The negotiations broke down because the United States and Iran could not agree on the issue of Iran developing an atomic bomb.  The United States was determined that Iran give up us nuclear program, which Iran was not willing to do.

Another factor in the nuclear danger is the alliance between Russia and Iran.  Russia has anything Iran would need for the production of nuclear warheads and missiles to deliver them - technology, know-how, materials - whatever.  And Russia may be willing to trade those things to Iran in return for Iranian drones or weapons to use in the Ukraine war.

The leader of Iran was killed and a new leader took his place.

Right now, the United States and Israel are continuing to attack Iran with air strikes, and Iran is retaliating with missile strikes of its own against Israel and United States bases in the region.  A few Americans have been killed.

According to President Trump and various analysts, this air war is expected to last maybe four or more weeks.

You can look up the details of the above on the Internet.

Anything can change.

The situation is fluid and hard to predict, and I have more questions than answers. But here are my thoughts for what to watch for.

We are getting some support from some NATO allies, but not much, not like in previous wars in the region.

President Trump did not get agreement to go to war from Congress, and critics say this violates the Constitution.

Public opinion in the United States, from what I have heard or read in the last few days, is generally against this war.  The Democrats are mostly against it, and even some of President Trump's own supporters in the Republican party are against it.  But some of President Trump's supporters are in favor of it.

But the majority of the country is not in favor of it.  I saw one figure that only 25% of the American people approve of the war.  These figures are fluid and it is possible that approval will increase over time.  But President Trump does not have strong backing.

President Trump or his representatives initially said there were no plans for "boots on the ground", meaning the United States did not plan to send in an army as in previous wars against Iraq.  This could change.

The timing is obvious.  Iran continues its nuclear program, and demonstrations in Iran show that the government does not enjoy the support of its people.  This has been seen as a sign of weakness, so it has seemed that this might be a good time to strike Iran when it is vulnerable and stop its nuclear program once and for all.  Israel made it clear that it would attack Iran, and the United States knew that if that happened Iran would attack American bases, so the United States is attacking with Israel to destroy Iran's missile capability by destroying missile launchers and missile stockpiles.  The goal is also to force a regime change to a government less hostile to Israel and the West - less hard-line.

President Trump has called on the Iranian people to rise up and take over their government when the air war is completed.

Here is the problem.

President Trump is dealing from a position of weakness with American allies in Europe and with the American people.  They do not fully support this war.  This may be a reason why Trump has not initially planned for a ground campaign.  Politically, he may be able to get away with an air war, but ground troops are another matter.

But the Iranian people do not have the organization, the training, or the military weapons and supplies to overthrow the Iranian army.  They can demonstrate, but demonstrations alone do not replace a government.  The hard-line Islamic government is strong, organized, and well entrenched in all areas of power, especially the army.

No matter how hard the United States and Israel hit Iran with bombs and missiles and how many of their ships they sink, the Iranian army is still stronger than the demonstrators and the majority of the people of Iran.

I don't see how the Iranian people can take over their government without an outside army to help them.

And it will be hard to find support for such an army.

So either the United States sends in ground forces or it doesn't.  If it does, it would probably be doing it against the will of the American people and without the consent of Congress.  That is not likely to last. If it does not, the operation to replace the Iranian government with a friendly government will likely fail.

Here is how events can help move conditions forward as Bible prophecy predicts.

European leaders and people are watching this with the question in mind: can they rely on the United States as an ally to protect them?  If not, they have to develop their own strong military.

And even though they see the United States being strong right now, they may be about to see our weakness, especially when you compare this war with the two past wars against Iraq.

We did not, and maybe cannot, send in ground forces.  Not because we don't have them, but because the American people will not allow it.  And we need ground forces to win.

Maybe that will change.  Maybe the American people can be persuaded to support the sending in of an American army.  Maybe President Trump will do it without popular support or the consent of Congress.  Maybe he can get away with that.  And maybe they can succeed in defeating the Iranian army on the ground with the support of air power.  Maybe.  Or maybe not.

We had popular support for the American army in the first two gulf wars, the wars against Iraq.  But now?

Have the American people become so divided and so unwilling to make sacrifices to defend the interests of the United States and its allies that they will no longer fully support military action to defend themselves and their allies?

Europeans are watching.  They need to know.

They know that President Trump is temporary.  American presidents come and go.  But what is the state of the American people?  Have they lost their will to win?  Have they lost their sense of responsibility and willingness to sacrifice for what needs to be done?  Have they become so divided that they cannot act decisively?

The unwillingness of the American people to send their army into combat would be a long-term weakness.  It would signal to the Europeans that they need to build a strong military force to protect themselves because they cannot rely on the American people.

The fighting spirit of the American people, the spirit that helped us to win in World War I and World War II and the two wars against Iraq, as well as in many smaller wars, may no longer be there.  It has been diminished.  And we cannot even get along with ourselves.  The Europeans must see that.

So if we fail in Iran, the Europeans will see and respond.

Because, we will not fail for lack of military strength.  Our success with the air war shows that.  If we sent in a strong army, with the support of the Iranian people, we could definitely win.  But if we fail, we fail for lack of will.  We fail for not wanting to sacrifice and take risks.

If that has become the characteristic of the American people, what remedy is there?  That is what Europeans will ask themselves.

So if we fail to produce a regime change in Iran, to replace the radical government with a peaceful government, we will not only lose this war but we will lose the respect of the European leaders and people.  They will have to rely on themselves and build a strong military.

And then, in time, they can turn that military against us.