The so called Out of Context Defence has been used to justifyboth right and wrong Church Doctrines .However it seems to have supported most of the the wong doctrines and teachings in the church.

Of course , this is just one among many defences many Churches use before the ultimate nuclear weapon of excommunication or branding one demon possessed/children of the devil or reprobate .And it is easy for one to use these weapons because Jesus Christ and the Apostles also used them.

For example during the Protestant Reformation, the Catholic Church had no time to listen to long debates from the followers of teh rebel rpiests.They just held trials and executed those who opted to follow them.

However for the rebel priests most of them had trials where they debated tehological issues or wrote treatises  against the Papacy thus were excommunicated only if not executed .

So the Church has history of not being a good debater .Yet today as teh Atheist Movement and Agnostic and other AntiChristian groups rise seeking debate with Christians they always get the Out of Context Defence when they ask question concerning the Bible.

This is what we want to tackle and implore Christian Apologists to revisit this defence  that does not hold weight for the cause of Christ.

One reason why it does not hold weight is that the Bible is not a booko but a collection of Books .Out of context refers to the contents of a book.One cannot be out of context when he takes out a verse that comes from a collection of books.\

But this is what many Christian Apologists do … they first do not know how God arranged the Bible , or collection of bookos .

A look at how the Jews arrange scriptures and one sees a big difference between the Christian interpretation of the BIBLE and Jewish Interpretation.

The first five books make up one book called the Law , then you have the Prophets .It is these two classifications Jesus and the disciples use because the other scriptures such as Kings , proverbs and psalms were also written by prophets.

So to understand the Law all the verses of the Law should be read in context with the Law and to understand the Prophets you read it in line with the Prophets and the Law because the Prophets refer to the Law .

Then for the New Testament you have the Gospels , the Book of Acts and the Epistles of Paul, John , Peter and James.The Epistles are read in context with the Acts as the Gospels are read in context with the Law and Prophets.

So Christian Apologists are right that the collection of Books say one thing but are wrong to assert that the collection of books is one book.

Secondly the Out of Context defence is a tired line because Jesus and teh Apostlse spoke and wrote out of context . Jesus refered to verses in the Old Testament sometimes in full sometimes not in ful to explain out an issue not related to the text he referred to.

Paul uses various texts to justify his teachings…. these texts did not come from one book but many books that were just put into one volume .

So this leaves us in the thick of explaining out ourselves as Christians when pressed with many questions from outsiders .However as we defend Christianity , let us not fall into the trap of the Pharisees of if you cannot beat them , kill them.

to be continued.

Arthur Owiti