Ignorance is no excuse.

Recently, someone I know was accused, in an informal debate, of making the Bible mean whatever he wanted it to mean and ignoring what it plainly said.

Now listen closely, have you ever said something but did not actually mean what you say? Why? Maybe you were using a figure of speech or exaggerating for effect or trying to get a reaction out of someone. Was the Bible not written down by men who also used these common elements? Especially, in the prophetic literature...you have lots of verses which are obviously not supposed to be taken at face value (i.e. Jesus is not a real lamb 'standing as if slain,' but we get the metaphor).

This is naturally followed by the next question; how do you interpret the figures not so obviously interpreted? But the fallacy in the question is easily exposed. The obviousness or not is a very subjective assertion; what is obvious to one may not be obvious to another. Thus we must go back to a principle which changeth not: that is that Scripture interprets Scripture.

The fact is that very little in Biblical exegesis does not rely on another passage from the Bible. Incredible as it seems, ignorance of what the Bible says in all of its boring glory does not allow for speculative interpretations nor does it excuse one for falsely accusing a brother who has the Biblical knowledge on which an interpretation depends when you do not...