Mike Winger

How misused: Misunderstood as primarily a geographical rather than missional directive, leading to a limited, localized understanding of 'making disciples of all nations' that absolves individuals from cross-cultural or international missionary work.

Scripture's answer: Yeshua's Great Commission in Matthew 28:19 is a missional command to 'go and make disciples of all nations,' encompassing both local and global outreach, emphasizing that discipleship is an active, ongoing process that transcends geographical boundaries and requires engagement with diverse cultures (Acts 1:8, Romans 10:14-15).

How misused: Misinterpreted as applying to matters of ethical food consumption concerning animal treatment and mass farming practices, equating it to disputes over culturally acceptable foods or specific religious observances, thereby dismissing the importance of Kashrut (biblical dietary laws). Also used to dismiss Torah observance (Sabbath, clean foods) as personal preference or 'weakness in faith' rather than divine instruction.

Scripture's answer: Romans 14 addresses disputable matters of conscience within the context of first-century Jewish and Gentile believers concerning food sacrificed to idols (1 Corinthians 8-10) and specific religious observance days, where adherence or non-adherence did not violate explicit biblical command (Romans 14:1-6). It does not abrogate the dietary laws of Kashrut established in the Torah, which remain binding for all disciples of Yeshua (Leviticus 11, Deuteronomy 14). The distinction between clean and unclean foods (kashrut) is not a 'disputable matter' but a divine instruction for health and holiness for His people. Likewise, the Sabbath (seventh-day, Saturday) is a binding commandment, not a matter of 'weakness in faith'.

How misused: Misapplied in cases of public figures and systemic cover-ups, suggesting it's the primary or only method for addressing sin, even when the sin is widely known and impacts many.

Scripture's answer: Matthew 18:15-17 outlines a process for confronting a sinning brother in a private setting to seek reconciliation. This process is for personal offenses and private sin. It is distinct from addressing public sin or systemic abuse within church leadership, which may require immediate public confrontation or reporting to civil authorities, especially when it involves significant harm or criminal activity (1 Timothy 5:20).

How misused: Cited to argue for the infallibility and sufficiency of Scripture, but within a context that implies the New Testament writings were not considered scripture until much later canonization councils, thus potentially undermining its immediate authority for early believers.

Scripture's answer: 2 Timothy 3:16 states that 'All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.' While 'all Scripture' at that time primarily referred to the Tanakh (Old Testament), the apostles' teachings and writings were already recognized as authoritative and divinely inspired by the early church (2 Peter 3:15-16; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Timothy 5:18 referring to Luke 10:7 as Scripture). The process of canonization was the *recognition* of inspired writings, not their *bestowal* of inspiration. The passage affirms the inherent divine authority of all writings considered Scripture, Old and New Testament alike.

How misused: Interpreted as exclusively referring to the quantitative spread of the gospel rather than qualitative or salvific impact, thereby dismissing claims of modern miraculous 'greater works' as fraudulent.

Scripture's answer: In John 14:12, Yeshua states, 'Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.' This promise implies a continuation and expansion of Yeshua's ministry through His disciples, empowered by the Holy Spirit. While it certainly includes the quantitative spread of the gospel, it does not exclude qualitative expressions of divine power, such as miracles, healings, and spiritual transformation, which were evident in the apostolic era (Acts 2:43, 3:6-8, 5:12, 19:11-12) and continue by the Spirit's work today.

How misused: Misinterpreted to support the claim that the fetus has only property value, not human life value, by implying that the RSV/NRSV translation of 'miscarriage' is the leading or most accurate interpretation, despite scholarly debate and the Hebrew word choice. This passage is then used to argue against the full personhood of the unborn.

Scripture's answer: Exodus 21:22-25 (specifically the phrase 'if men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life...') in the Hebrew text does not support the idea that the fetus is mere property. The 'mischief' (אָסוֹן - 'ason') refers to injury or death to either the woman *or the child*. If the child dies, the penalty is 'life for life,' indicating the child's status as a living human being. Translations that render 'miscarriage' for the child imply a lesser value, which is not strongly supported by the Hebrew and contradicts the 'life for life' principle applied if 'mischief' occurs to the child. Biblical understanding consistently values life from conception (Psalm 139:13-16, Jeremiah 1:5).

How misused: Interpreted as an explicit prophecy of Jesus, specifically in the phrase 'what is his name or his son's name?' rather than a rhetorical question emphasizing God's transcendence and ineffability.

Scripture's answer: Proverbs 30:4 is a series of rhetorical questions: 'Who has ascended to heaven and come down? Who has gathered the wind in his fists? Who has wrapped up the waters in his garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is his son's name? Surely you know!' This passage emphasizes the incomparable nature and mystery of YHWH, highlighting His divine attributes and creative power. While Yeshua is the divine Son of God (Colossians 1:15-17, Hebrews 1:1-3), interpreting this passage as a direct Messianic prophecy misconstrues its immediate poetic and theological context, which is primarily about divine transcendence and wisdom, not predictive prophecy of Yeshua's specific name or identity.

How misused: Misinterpreted to mean God creates evil. The verse states, 'I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the Lord, who does all these things.' This is used to argue that God is the author of evil, or to justify an extreme form of divine determinism.

Scripture's answer: Isaiah 45:7 affirms YHWH's sovereignty over all things, including that which humans perceive as 'calamity' (רַע - ra, often translated as disaster, evil, or misfortune). The context is YHWH's absolute control over creation and history, demonstrating He is the one true God, unlike the idols. It does not mean God 'creates evil' in the moral sense, but rather that He is sovereign over all circumstances, both good and bad, and can use even calamity to achieve His purposes. YHWH is morally perfect and cannot be the author of sin (James 1:13). The 'calamity' here refers to physical disaster or judgment, not moral evil.