Back to Bible basics

Two incidents today have reminded me how much we assume we know about the Bible when the text doesn't actually say what we think.

I was trying to find a reading to accompany Jesus's prediction of his suffering and death. I was sure there would be something in one of the epistles which 'explained' the purpose of Christ's passion. But if there is, I'm blowed if I can find it. There are many allusions of course to the death of Jesus or the importance of the cross. But there doesn't seem to be a simple short passage that says "Jesus suffered abuse, whipping, desertion and crucifixion because..."

On the way to the district probationers committee, J asked what John Wesley meant in his sermon on the catholic spirit. "I do not say to love God 'above all things' because the phrase is unscriptural and ambiguous." (I may not have the quote exactly, but that's near enough.) In the following sentences he makes it clear that we should indeed love God with our whole being and long for him more than for anything. But Wesley was reluctant to employ a phrase not used in the Bible. I've checked. The words 'above all things' are indeed not scriptural.

Which is why studying the Bible is so important. It may well need re-interpreting for the current generation. But we need to interpret the Scripture itself rather than interpreting what we assume the Bible says based on a previous generation's own interpretation. Going back to the Bible stops the developing theology of the church from going too far off track.