What do you think?
Rate this book
Not Like Any Other Book
Faulty Bible interpretation lies at the root of every major mistake and 'ism' assailing churches today, and countless Christians are asking for the old, traditional and proven way of handling the Bible to be spelled out plainly. A new approach to interpretation has also gripped many evangelical seminaries and Bible colleges, an approach based on the ideas of unbelieving critics, stripping the Bible of God's message, and leaving pastors impoverished in their preaching. This book reveals what is happening, providing many brief examples of right and wrong interpretation. The author shows that the Bible includes its own rules of interpretation, and every believer should know what these are.
161 pages, Paperback
First published December 21, 2004
11 people are currently reading
18 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
November 18, 2012
Not as well known as other volumes on the subject, but a timely expose on ridiculous ideas that have infested Biblical scholarship and renders them unable to grasp the riches of God’s Word. I love this book!
June 14, 2021
"God has given us a supernatural and self-consistent book, sufficient for all the needs of His people, and so perfect that provide we observe the rules of honesty and diligence, we may come to right conclusions. Any failure will always be due to us, not to God's Word." - page 75
A brief response to and critique of the modern (i.e. Historical Grammatical) approach to Biblical exegesis with a positive presentation of an alternative.
Note, Peter Masters opponent here is NOT Historical Critical interpretation that pulls the Bible apart into a variety of sources BUT Historical Grammatical interpretation that focusses too narrowly on the human author and original context of each text.
Peter Masters argues that as the Bible is written by God and hence is utterly unique we must use its own rules of interpretation - derived from it - rather than employing methods we would use in studying other texts our interpretation of the Bible must be shaped by a Biblical way of thinking.
Some key points that are brought out are:
1. The meaning of the Divine Author is primary over the meaning of the human Author.
2. All scripture should be interpreted in light of all scripture; in particular: New Testament texts can aid understanding of Old Testament texts.
3. Many Old Testament passages contain pictures intended for application today (Romans 15:4)
4. The full meaning of the Divine Author may go beyond what the human Author could understand (1 Peter 1:10-12) of note here is that Christ is clearly to be seen in many OT texts where the original human Author may not have fully seen him.
5. Jesus' parables and miracles should primarily be understand as teaching messages about salvation
6. Biblical study should be a prayerful and spiritual activity, not a merely academic exercise
7. The Bible should be seen as a guide for all of life not just salvation
Strengths:
a) Very accessible book - you could give this to any christian
b) Positive and good outline of how to study the Bible AND how the Bible teaches us this.
c) Principles are worked through into practicalities: chapter 11 gives a helpful outline of how to study a text of the Bible and the first appendix offers an outline of how to prepare a sermon in line with Peter Masters' approach
d) Consistency with the past is highlighted - Peter Masters notes that what he is proposing is consistent with the work of Spurgeon, Calvin and Augustine.
Areas that some may wish were improved:
a) Several modern teachers and books are criticised anonymously - Peter Masters is warning about serious dangers in the field of Biblical interpretation but in choosing not to name any names he is holding back from enabling his reader to know who is promoting these problems.
b) In a brief section on knowing when a Biblical command applies today he states that a passage which "records or commends immoral behaviour" is not binding today noting that anything contradicting the 10 commandments should not be imitated, this idea is not developed and no texts are given as examples; broadly it can be understood that he means we should not imitate the evil recorded in historical narratives which are there as a warning/picture of sin/explanation of why judgement is deserved etc. But this could have been explained better.
c) Towards the end of the book the interpretation of the book of Judges is held out as a particular example of the failings of modern interpretation and Peter Masters presents his own understanding of the book of Judges; many people may agree with the rest of the book but disagree with some of what is said in this section.
d) At one point Peter Masters states that the entire Bible was written by God in eternity past, whilst true in some sense, many may see this statement as overly simplistic/a slight overreaction to modern naturalism.
A brief response to and critique of the modern (i.e. Historical Grammatical) approach to Biblical exegesis with a positive presentation of an alternative.
Note, Peter Masters opponent here is NOT Historical Critical interpretation that pulls the Bible apart into a variety of sources BUT Historical Grammatical interpretation that focusses too narrowly on the human author and original context of each text.
Peter Masters argues that as the Bible is written by God and hence is utterly unique we must use its own rules of interpretation - derived from it - rather than employing methods we would use in studying other texts our interpretation of the Bible must be shaped by a Biblical way of thinking.
Some key points that are brought out are:
1. The meaning of the Divine Author is primary over the meaning of the human Author.
2. All scripture should be interpreted in light of all scripture; in particular: New Testament texts can aid understanding of Old Testament texts.
3. Many Old Testament passages contain pictures intended for application today (Romans 15:4)
4. The full meaning of the Divine Author may go beyond what the human Author could understand (1 Peter 1:10-12) of note here is that Christ is clearly to be seen in many OT texts where the original human Author may not have fully seen him.
5. Jesus' parables and miracles should primarily be understand as teaching messages about salvation
6. Biblical study should be a prayerful and spiritual activity, not a merely academic exercise
7. The Bible should be seen as a guide for all of life not just salvation
Strengths:
a) Very accessible book - you could give this to any christian
b) Positive and good outline of how to study the Bible AND how the Bible teaches us this.
c) Principles are worked through into practicalities: chapter 11 gives a helpful outline of how to study a text of the Bible and the first appendix offers an outline of how to prepare a sermon in line with Peter Masters' approach
d) Consistency with the past is highlighted - Peter Masters notes that what he is proposing is consistent with the work of Spurgeon, Calvin and Augustine.
Areas that some may wish were improved:
a) Several modern teachers and books are criticised anonymously - Peter Masters is warning about serious dangers in the field of Biblical interpretation but in choosing not to name any names he is holding back from enabling his reader to know who is promoting these problems.
b) In a brief section on knowing when a Biblical command applies today he states that a passage which "records or commends immoral behaviour" is not binding today noting that anything contradicting the 10 commandments should not be imitated, this idea is not developed and no texts are given as examples; broadly it can be understood that he means we should not imitate the evil recorded in historical narratives which are there as a warning/picture of sin/explanation of why judgement is deserved etc. But this could have been explained better.
c) Towards the end of the book the interpretation of the book of Judges is held out as a particular example of the failings of modern interpretation and Peter Masters presents his own understanding of the book of Judges; many people may agree with the rest of the book but disagree with some of what is said in this section.
d) At one point Peter Masters states that the entire Bible was written by God in eternity past, whilst true in some sense, many may see this statement as overly simplistic/a slight overreaction to modern naturalism.
December 9, 2023
A very good warning of the hermeneutical decline that has been ongoing since the days of Spurgeon but which is being increasingly embraced by many (if not most) conservative churches in the English-speaking world. It briefly covers specific errors of the modern hermeneutic and then provides some counter methods along with short justifications for those traditional techniques.
The book suffers, somewhat significantly, from its near complete lack of footnotes/endnotes and references to specific authors & books of the modern hermeneutic. Presumably intended to keep the book focused on ideas rather than attacking individuals, this has a tendency to make the first several chapters read as a screed without firm basis in reality and the reader is left wondering who exactly advocates for the modern approach outlined in the first chapters. The later part of the book improves significantly by turning its attention towards what the author advocates as the proper approach. Two major benefits of this book are its clarity on what it means practically to embrace the older hermeneutic which is open to types, analogs, and allegories in interpretation (it does not mean seeing allegory everywhere or abandoning the "literal" interpretation even when it sees a passage as allegorical) and its quick walk through the book of Judges. There, modern interpretations see the judges as primarily flawed men; Masters takes them as primarily Godly men whom we malign by deeply misreading the text. (I make no claim either to align with Masters on this point nor to reject him.)
Don't expect to come away from this book with a strong grasp of the nuances of the hermeneutical debate or even of how to practice the historic method of interpretation; the book is doing too much in too short a space to be an instruction manual of that sort. Do expect to have a better idea of what to be on guard for and to gain a gentle jolt in the direction of the traditional method. Probably follow this book up with something more in depth (I have had Craig Carter's "Interpreting Scripture with the Great Tradition" recommended to me).
The book suffers, somewhat significantly, from its near complete lack of footnotes/endnotes and references to specific authors & books of the modern hermeneutic. Presumably intended to keep the book focused on ideas rather than attacking individuals, this has a tendency to make the first several chapters read as a screed without firm basis in reality and the reader is left wondering who exactly advocates for the modern approach outlined in the first chapters. The later part of the book improves significantly by turning its attention towards what the author advocates as the proper approach. Two major benefits of this book are its clarity on what it means practically to embrace the older hermeneutic which is open to types, analogs, and allegories in interpretation (it does not mean seeing allegory everywhere or abandoning the "literal" interpretation even when it sees a passage as allegorical) and its quick walk through the book of Judges. There, modern interpretations see the judges as primarily flawed men; Masters takes them as primarily Godly men whom we malign by deeply misreading the text. (I make no claim either to align with Masters on this point nor to reject him.)
Don't expect to come away from this book with a strong grasp of the nuances of the hermeneutical debate or even of how to practice the historic method of interpretation; the book is doing too much in too short a space to be an instruction manual of that sort. Do expect to have a better idea of what to be on guard for and to gain a gentle jolt in the direction of the traditional method. Probably follow this book up with something more in depth (I have had Craig Carter's "Interpreting Scripture with the Great Tradition" recommended to me).
February 1, 2016
A delicate take on hermeneutics. Thought provoking.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews