Problems With Proof Texts - Introduction

Many times, when people are discussing, and particularly when they are defending, what they believe the Bible teaches about a subject, they engage, consciously or unconsciously, in "proof-texting." Proof-texting is the use of certain, usually short, passages–often only a single verse–pulled from a biblical book without respect for its context.

The problem with proof-texting is that it gives their selected verse(s) a meaning that is somewhat, or entirely, different from what the original author intended. The Bible is written in such a way that most verses cannot be correctly understood in a stand-alone fashion. The context of a particular verse, who wrote it, the time period in which it was written, to whom it was written, under what circumstances and for what purpose, etc. is needed in order to arrive at what the author most likely intended to convey. 

To reiterate: A proof-text is a passage of scripture presented as evidence for a theological doctrine, belief, or principle. Proof-texting is the practice of isolating quotations from a biblical text to support an already established theological position. Such an approach to scripture does not often lead one to a better understanding of the original intent of the text’s author. Rather, when the cited passage is approached with curiosity, an open mind and a desire for understanding, there is at least a possibility, and often a probability, that new, deeper and perhaps even radically different understandings can be gleaned, thus rendering it useless as a proof text. 

I agree with blogger and Bible student, Tim Chastain, that there are two main issues with the practice of proof-texting:

1.     Proof-texting is based on a faulty presupposition about the nature of the biblical texts. The presupposition is that the biblical texts are word-for-word the truth of God that is applicable to all people, everywhere, and for all time. Therefore, what difference does the context make? The thinking of the proof-texter is that the Bible means what is says and says what it means, because God's providence oversees the transmission and translation of his word, so that even in our modern English translation, a verse means what it says and says what it means.

2.     Proof-texting almost always ignores context which results in conclusions that have little, if anything, to do with the original author’s intent. [Have I said that before? If so, there's a reason.] While we cannot interview the biblical authors to ask them exactly what they meant, if we are careful, honest and humble, we can, at least, suggest some reasonable possibilities. Only once we've made an honest stab at understanding the author's original intent, do we have any hope of understanding how the passage applies (or not) to believers today.

In numerous posts to follow, I will examine often used proof-texts  that have been, and continue to be, utilized by Christians and ministers to give credence to some of the foundational doctrines of fundamentalist and conservative evangelical Christianity. My goal is to suggest meanings that take into account the original language, the challenges of translation, and the immediate context in which the passage is found. By doing so, I hope to demonstrate respect for how ancient these biblical texts are, and that they often represent diverse perspectives. Thus, to 21st century Christians, many passages communicate ambiguity rather than clarity.