Perhaps most Christians have had the experience of listening to a sermon and thinking: ‘I agree with what he is saying, but I am not sure he is explaining the text rightly.’ This is not what Peter complained about in his second epistle when he spoke of the ignorant and unstable who twist the Scriptures to their own destruction (2 Pet.3:16). In that case, the teaching is wrong and the Bible is twisted to teach what it most certainly does not. I encountered yet another example of this recently when a state politician sent me an email which cited Matthew 7:12 (the Golden Rule about doing unto others as you would have them do unto you) in order to support the homosexual lifestyle.
Many a preacher has waxed eloquent on John 3:16 about God’s agape love for the world being gracious, self-sacrificing, pure and everlasting. This can be compared to phileo love which is merely the kind of affection that we might expect between friends. No doubt, what the preacher says about God’s love is largely true, but how he got there is cause for some concern. Demas’ love for this present world is said to be an agape love (2 Tim.4:10). There is probably some sort of distinction between the two words in some contexts, but often they seem to be synonyms. The Father loves the Son in agape terms in John 3:35, but in phileo terms in John 5:20.
Who has not heard Christ being referred to as ‘the founder and perfecter of our faith’ (Heb.12:2), the One on whom we are to rest totally for our salvation, the Lamb whose sacrifice pays our debts in full? It is all good theology but in Hebrews 12:1-2, the author is pointing to Christ as the supreme example of faith, to conclude the honour roll of faithful saints in Hebrews 11. The context is dealing with example, not substitution.
In a series on revival, Martyn Lloyd-Jones gave five addresses on Genesis 26:17-18 to tell of the need to remove rubbish first, in preparation for renewal. He then refused to accept that the text was not quite appropriate. The Mizpah benediction between Jacob and Laban – ‘The Lord watch between you and me, while we are absent one from the other’ (Gen.31:49) – has concluded many a church service on a note of warm and encouraging fellowship. In the context, however, it is uttered because Jacob and Laban do not trust one another, and are calling on God as witness and judge.
We are comforted by the knowledge that Jesus said that ‘where two or three are gathered in My name, there am I among them’ (Matt.18:20). The phrase ‘in My name’ tends to automatically trigger off thoughts of prayer, as in John 14:13. Christ is no doubt present at small prayer meetings, but the immediate context for Matthew 18:20 concerns church discipline. The church is said to be ‘called out’ from the Greek word ‘ek-klesia’. The true church does indeed consist of the elect (Acts 13:48), but the unruly mob in Ephesus is also called an ecclesia (usually ‘assembly; Acts 19:32).
In John 14:2, Jesus says that He will go and prepare a place for His disciples and come again. Is He speaking of going to heaven or going to the cross? And is His coming again a reference to the Second Coming or His resurrection? The latter possibility is probably true in both cases. The KJV tells us to abstain from every ‘appearance of evil’ (1 Thess.5:22), which preachers have often taken to mean that we should avoid what even looks like it is wrong, even if it is not objectively contrary to God’s law. That is, in fact, taught elsewhere in Scripture (e.g. Rom.14:14-23), but in 1 Thessalonians, Paul is telling us to avoid every evil that manifests itself to us. Psalm 139:7-12 can be used by the preacher to warn the sinner that there is no escape from the omnipresent God of the universe, and true as that is (e.g. Heb.4:12-13), in Psalm 139 David is drawing strength and solace from the fact that God is everywhere, and that we can never be where He is not.
None of this is meant to discourage us or to make us suspicious of all our understanding of Scripture. In each of the above cases, the theology is quite correct, and the reason why it can so easily be attached to the wrong text is usually because what the text is thought to be teaching is actually taught elsewhere in Scripture. Nor is this meant to deny that the one text can have many applications. God told Israel to be strong and courageous because He would never leave nor forsake them (Deut.31:6). This is repeated in a similar context to Joshua (Josh.1:5). David, however, cites it to encourage Solomon to press on with the building of the temple (1 Chron.28:20) while Hebrews says that we ought not to be covetous but content with what we have because God will never leave nor forsake us (Heb.13:5). So, the lesson is that we need to read and hear with care, taking note of the context, in order that we would rightly handle the word of truth (2 Tim.2:15).