NBST 515-DB Forum-Case Study 1
To interpret the Word of God as best as possible, one must be led by God's Holy Spirit.
Those who wrote the Word of God were all inspired by God through His Holy Spirit Guidance. 2
Timothy 3:16 (NIV) reads, All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking,
correcting, and training in righteousness. In John 16:13 (NIV). One reads, but when he, the Spirit
of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. When reading God's Word, one must be
under the guidance of God's Holy Spirit to not misplace the intent and the essence of the
meaning of God's Word. "Christians should study the New Testament so that they will avoid
misinterpretation based on preconceived ideas and misplaced reliance on the Holy Spirit."1
This is precisely where Daniel gets his interpretation of God’s Word wrong. He had a
preconceived idea of what the Word meant to him, and he did not go in deeper to study the
historical foundation for the proper “understanding and applying its teachings.”2 There is a
chance that going into any church today will give Daniel's interpretation of what the Book of
Revelation says in Rev. 3:15-16. As Daniel wrongly claims, “that was then, and this is now” gives
the support to take extra time, study the time distance and better understand what Scripture is
saying. In the video Negotiating Distance in Biblical Interpretation, Dr. Stacy says that to
"understand the Bible today, we're going to have to negotiate some distances to get from there
to here.”3
Sharon did go the extra mile to negotiate some distance between our time and what was
then their culture, region, and geography. As Sharon took her time to dive deep into the culture,
1 Walter A. Elwell, and Robert W. Yarbrough, Encountering the New Testament: A Historical and Theological Survey
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013). 17.
2 Ibid.
3 Robert Wayne Stacy, “Negotiating Distances in Biblical Interpretation,” course video
region, and geography of the time when John wrote the Holy Spirit’s inspired word, she learned
that Laodicea was built for its position at a key road-junction, but it lacked “a natural water
supply, and had to obtain its water from some other source lying to the south.”4 The
lukewarmness of the Laodicean church may have been an allusion to the city’s water supply
coming from Hierapolis. Also, geographically that place was dried and hot most of the year, and
cold water was most valuable as a “source of refreshment, and the mention of ‘cold water’
inevitably brings to mind associations of that kind.”5 According to its local situation, Laodicea
must’ve been prosperous in many areas but did not provide "neither the refreshment of cold
water for the weary nor the healing properties of hot water for the sick; its lukewarm water
would be useless for either purpose, nauseous in taste and only fit to be ‘spewed out of the
mouth”6
Jesus's main message to the church was being lukewarm rendered the church useless.
Everyone present at the time those words were spoken could see the meaning of the words as
they understood the geography of the place, the culture they lived in.
Understanding the original context of all biblical context is important to ensure that one gives
the best biblical explanation and the closest interpretation to its original context.
4 Rudwick, M J S., “The Lukewarmness of Laodicea (Rev. iii. 16).” Tyndale House Bulletin 3:2-3. https://search-
ebscohost-com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=IsdarAN=ATLA0001590398&dite=ehost-
live&scope=site.
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
