Is it Possible for a Scripture to Have Multiple Meanings?

Is it possible for a passage of scripture to have multiple meanings? How does this affect our understanding of doctrine and theology?

The short answer is yes

https://www.britannica.com/topic/hermeneutics-principles-of-biblical-interpretation

Is it possible for a passage of scripture to have multiple meanings?

Absolutely; for example -
…”I will also sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean. I will cleanse you from all your impurities and all your idols. I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will remove your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes and to carefully observe My ordinances.…(Ezekiel 36:25-27). This prophesy was given to the nation of Israel, but it also refers to the born again experience. At the new birth, our sins are forgiven and cleansed, we are in Christ, a new creation, and the Holy Spirit is now dwelling in the believer.

One of the marvelous things about the Word is that the Holy Spirit will give you more light on a scripture that you have read 100 times.

Travis,
The living word will invariably be considered and related to based on the subjective disposition of the reader/hearer. While this wouldn’t change the objective value of the scriptures, it does appear to affect the subjective rendering of the word in that the more we steep ourselves in the word, the more that’s imparted into us, with hereto before opaque and placid passages of scripture are quickened and become alive in us as it were, relating to even the most nuanced experiences of the believers. It (the word of God) can be as hard as iron and as soft as silk offering both boundary as well as comfort.
(for me) The Lord has opened or given light to passages that had previously been hidden or obscured, with each time an opportunity is afforded to grow in the word as the word takes root and grows in us <

The implications are equally profound and perhaps that’s one reason why there are many admonitions to handle the word considerately, skillfully even. Many times in our zeal, we lack the discipline necessary to handle the word properly and as such actually injure our fellow members faith, rather than serving to build it up.

Something that had occurred to me fairly early on is that the word of God has quantative value in that (like the many facets of a diamond) no matter how you approach it, it’s inherent internal value is present even when we don’t have the understanding to appreciate it. Which is to say that the very passage of scripture that in one season may be convicting and restrictive, in another season may be found to be protective and life giving 🙏🏻

I believe one reason this is so, is due to the word being forever settled in heaven and as such isn’t limited to our understanding, rather our understanding is limited by the extent we accept and agree with what God has said. This is one aspect of the scriptures that (for me) never gets old… as anytime I get hung up on a passage, I simply ask for Him to open it and give understanding, believing that He will and He always does sooner or later. That seems to be directly related to my internal disposition, whether I’m willing to see it as He does. What’s deeply concerning is that we can also, as many throughout history have, use the word unrighteously and deceive ourselves and others 😳 just as the serpent used the word to tempt, deceive and beguile Gods children from the beginning by amputating passages from their original context and reforming them in ways that are abominable. Kinda like the current phenomenon of gender reassignment. We can sometimes lie to ourselves and mishandle the word, tho even here the word, in its proper form, also provides the remedy as a way of escaping the darkness of deception.

1 Cor 13 in many ways acts as a litmus test for whether we are "right” with God in that it tests the quality of the fruit we are producing…. at the end of the day is it a godly love… if so it is life giving if not it is the clanging of a gong or the creaking of a rusty gate -

Maybe slightly rephrasing the question might help, or maybe leaving it as open ended as it is would be best to see what everyone says. But I think I will say this to clarify the question.

There are prophecies in the old testament that have a bit of a double meaning. For example the Ezekiel reference. These are pretty well known examples and I believe we could point to any one of them and say, "That is one of the double meaning prophecies." In that respect, each of those passages only has one meaning, that being the immediate and prophetic double meaning of that passage. But we would never say that these passages also applied to the United States Presidential election in 2024 and at the same time apply to what my church is going to do in the next year, for example. Their meaning is limited to, well, their meaning.

So what about, let's say, New Testament passages? Does proper exigesis allow a particular verse or passage to have multiple interpretations and meanings, or is there only one truly correct interpretation? That is more what I am getting at.

I’m not sure if scripture can be read that way- ie so strictly. Paul said scripture is living and active. A verse may sting me today and provide solace next month. No one can tell me that I was wrong to be solaced because the scripture’s true meaning was to sting or vice versa.

I guess that sounds like scripture can be subjective which doesn’t sound exactly right but how else can you explain how some scripture affects people differently?

ADD: For example when Jesus said "it is finished” on the cross. One person reading that may be crushed with sorrow and another might run around the room with joy. Who is to say which response is correct?

Brother I think there is still shadows and typology within the New testament which would mean that there's one literal interpretation and then other applications that the holy spirit will apply and draw out of the text in a type of spiritual typological manner and there could be more than one application to a text.

A good example that the holy spirit has clearly revealed to many people would be Jesus making water into wine at the end of the feast and that he saved his best to last.

Speaks about the latter outpouring of the holy spirit that he saved to the end of this age that would become a great harvest and the fulfillment of the first fruits harvest of the first century and the first outpouring of the spirit.

People would set that harvest at different time frames but I would say that it began around the time of the moravian outpouring in the outpouring of the First awakening and it will continue and as the bride matures towards the end of the age because Christ is coming for a mature bride not an immature dirty harlot.

This looks to be a good example of a another clear application that David Wilkinson is using which could clearly have a literal fulfillment either in the future in a millennial kingdom after Christ comes back if that is the view you subscribed to

DRAWING WATER FROM THE RIVER OF LIFE by David Wilkerson\tReply To This Post |
Why are some believers full of peace and joy, radiating the glow of spiritual life and health to all they meet? Is it because they don’t have my problems? No! The truth is, they may have more than you””in fact, more than most people!

But these saints learned the secret of having roots in God’s river. If you are rooted in the river, you don’t need a revival; you don’t need showers of blessings; you don’t need a special outpouring; you don’t need a flood of sudden victory. And because you enjoy a constant hour-by-hour flow of life-giving water, you are not constantly moving from dry spell to blessing, from lows to highs, from revival to coldness. Spiritual famine doesn’t touch you; the scorching heat of apostasy doesn’t faze you because you are drawing water from the river of life!

If I had to choose between revival and roots, I’d take roots any day. For long after revival is gone, I would still thrive because of my roots, which would supply me daily with all I need. Ezekiel saw a river of life issuing from the sanctuary. "By the river upon the bank thereof . . . shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth new fruit . . . because their waters they issued out of the sanctuary: and the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medicine” (Ezekiel 47:12).

God showed this prophet a river coming out of His holy temple. As time went by, it swelled from a trickle to a river in which he could swim. Ezekiel saw a man measuring the growing stream of life, until it became "a river that I could not pass over: for the waters were risen, waters to swim in” (Ezekiel 47:5). You see, the early Church experienced water that reached the ankles; the Reformation had water reaching the loins. And in this day and age, the water has risen so much that we now have water to swim in!

On the bank of this river are many trees, all green and bearing fruit. And who are these trees? All those with roots of trust in Him. "And it shall come to pass, that everything that liveth, which moveth, whithersoever the rivers shall come, shall live: and there shall be a very great multitude of fish, because these waters shall come thither: for they shall be healed; and everything shall live whither the river cometh” (Ezekiel 47:9).

Travis that verse in ezk, is mentioned in Revelations as well so is also a New Testament reality that most would put in the future, wile David Wilkinson applied it to the past present, and future.

I really appreciate this line of questioning Travis, and have had similar questions myself through the years.

Where I am at today is that the writers (authors) of the Scriptures wrote from their personal experience, led by the Spirit, with their specific meaning and intent at that time. Each word intensely personal and written through intimate relationship with God the Father for those B.C., and Christ Jesus himself A.D., but all in the Spirit.

Fast forward to anyone in history who read the scriptures (even the early church who was reading the letters written specifically to their church in the various cities, before they were deemed "scripture"), and it seems apparent that interpretation and application can be as widely varied as the number of people that have read them!

But just because the interpretation and application of scriptures can vary, and even have widespread agreement among some people (i.e. denominations, creeds, etc.), that does not mean those people or groups are correct. It just means they agree.

What is often puzzling to me is how (seemingly) sincere Spirit-filled, Bible believing saints can often have such seemingly diametrically opposed interpretations of the same scripture.

I am often left groping with the following possible realities:

1. I am completely wrong and regardless if I think I have heard from the Spirit on a text, I have only heard in part, or not at all yet. I know this has often been true in my journey, because over the course of time as I get to know Christ better, the Scriptures come alive with new revelation, similar to what brother Fletcher shared.
2. People who have a different perspective, regardless if they think they have heard from the Spirit on a text, they have not, and they are wrong.
3. None of us have actually heard from the Spirit on the meaning of the text yet, and we are all wrong.
4. There are actually multiple true interpretations/meanings of a text, and somehow the Spirit is able to hold each of them in tension, with both (or however many) people all being right at the same time, with just difference facets of the truth. (I picture this possibility as if we are all looking at the same diamond, just a different facet of it)

I doubt this answers the question at hand really, but my aim is not to further muddy the discussion, just join with you all in seeking the Truth.

I really appreciate how you write, brother Travis. I sense a lot of humility in your posts, and that you are extremely careful in your choice of words. I thank the Lord for your example in that!

You wrote- "So what about, let's say, New Testament passages? Does proper exigesis allow a particular verse or passage to have multiple interpretations and meanings, or is there only one truly correct interpretation? That is more what I am getting at.”

Thanks for dialing it in a bit-
(For me) again it’s both 🤷🏽”â™‚️
Anyone who speaks truthfully has an intention to be taken in a specific manner so as to impart the truth they are hoping to express clearly.
So yes to only one true interpretation.

Yet are we not all members of the same body….Would we not take the imparted truth in such a way to suit our situation?
Much like how the liver, heart, kidneys, etc… use blood in different ways to produce different results but it’s the same blood and they are all at the behest of the head.

Even the gospels themselves represent an example of this as they are individually experienced and expressed, (not always exactly agreeing) yet they are all holy.

Now having said this, there are multiple warnings throughout the new covenant that we should take heed to and watch ourselves closely least at any moment we slip. But again that "slip” is gonna be different for everyone based on where they are in their walk/faith… we have to choose it, to go with Him- over and over and over….

When I first repented, was converted, baptized and saved, I didn’t know very much about God as a person. Tho I was raised in the church and had biblical knowledge, I didn’t know Him personally and as such the scriptures were obscured to a large extent. It was after more than a decade that I chose to really study out the scriptures and had some success. Tho at the end of the day, it’s the Holy Spirit that can give life to His word and reveal to us the intention of God for us from His word. Hence spiritual bread or heavenly mana, and as long as we feed on it it will produce fruit in our lives that brings glory to the Lord Jesus💯

Hi Travis,

That's a very good question! It's something that I (and probably many others) have thought about. I think that everyone agrees that we can gain something "new" or personal from Scripture in different ways.

One passage that I've thought about often in terms of eschatology is the "abomination that causes desolation." This is first referenced by Daniel in Daniel chapters 9 and 11.

Abomination #1: For many Bible scholars, this is a prophecy that directly addresses Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 171 B.C. (when the Greek king desecrated the Temple by sacrificing a pig there to Zeus).

Abomination #2: Yet, Jesus also referenced this passage in roughly 30 A.D. in a manner that referred to something that would happen AFTER that time. Many scholars connect the predicted destruction of the Temple with this "abomination" (Matthew 24:15).

Abomination #3: Others suggest that, despite the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., this refers to the "beast" described in the Book of Revelation who will be thrown "alive" (together with the False Prophet) into the Lake of Fire (Revelation 19:20).

While there are often debates about whether this refers to any ONE of these incidents alone, there is an argument to be made that this same prophecy refers to two or even all three of these possible "abominations" as prophecies.

In fact, there is a debate over which "holy place" is being referenced too. Is it the Second Temple (from the time of Ezra and Nehemiah)? Herod's Temple (repaired in late first century B.C.)? Does it refer to some other "holy place" (such as Jerusalem, Moriah or Zion itself) or the "holy ground" designation -- such as Mt. Sinai (Exodus 3:5) or the area near Jericho where the Captain of the Host of the LORD met with Joshua (Joshua 5:13-15)?

It's possible that this isn't a "multiple meaning" but a singular meaning found within multiple examples. So, there could be one overarching "abomination" that is seen manifest in multiple instances (such as Antiochus Epiphanes, Titus AND the beast of Revelation). After all, John mentioned that there have been "many antichrists" (I John 2:18) because it is a "spirit of antichrist" (I John 4:3) that influences those individuals.

Remember that "Babylon the Great" is the "mother of harlots" (plural) and of the "abominations" (also plural) of the earth (Revelation 17:5). Thus, the personification of such abomination could be a consequence of empirical power -- such as a statue with at four or five parts (i.e., gold, silver, bronze, iron and partly iron/partly clay) that represent ALL of the empires that conquered and subjugated the Promised Land.

In regard to your question, I think that this is a very distinct possibility. A singular "abomination" spoken of by Daniel that is manifest in this world as a figure within empires who comes out "conquering, and to conquer" (Revelation 6:2).

Moreover, I do think about the time that Elijah went to Mt. Sinai after having watched the LORD answer by fire on Mt. Carmel and watching it rain when he prayed during a drought. Elijah was afraid of Jezebel's fury and fled to Horeb. There, God spoke to him (twice) asking this question: "What are you doing here, Elijah" (I Kings 19:9-13).

You could look at this question several ways by emphasizing a different word:

WHAT are you doing here, Elijah?
What are YOU doing here, Elijah?
What are you DOING here, Elijah?
What are you doing HERE, Elijah?

Do you see how that can mean different things due to each specific word emphasis? In truth, this question could have four separate meanings within the same set of words.

One emphasized word ("WHAT") could focus on Elijah's purpose for fleeing. Another can be focused on Elijah ("YOU") himself. Another could focus on the rationalized action ("DOING") of Elijah. And, of course, the final could focus on the place ("HERE") since God had already chosen Jerusalem (and no longer Horeb -- since God did not ask Elijah to remove his shoes) to place his Name (Deuteronomy chapters 12, 14, 16, etc.). Of course, this same question could simultaneously and truly refer to all four emphasized words spoken to Elijah.

Amen! Well said and that is an excellent example 🙏🏻

A good example that the holy spirit has clearly revealed to many people would be Jesus making water into wine at the end of the feast and that he saved his best to last.

Speaks about the latter outpouring of the holy spirit that he saved to the end of this age that would become a great harvest and the fulfillment of the first fruits harvest of the first century and the first outpouring of the spirit.

I think what you said here is perhaps the crux of my question. I want to ask some questions to be considered here.

Does the Bible indeed say (clearly and in context) that turning the water into wine is a type of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit?

Several people said the Holy Spirit revealed this to them. How would we test to know if the spirit who revealed this was the Holy Spirit, a false spirit, or their own human mind (spirit)?

What happens if the Holy Spirit reveals to several different people a different typological meaning for the description of this event? Are they all equally correct?

Why would the Holy Spirit reveal different meanings for these verses to different people?

I am asking these questions for serious consideration. The reason is this. There are a lot of different doctrines going around out there. We see from the writings of Paul and the warnings of Jesus that false doctrines, false Christs, and false prophets would deceive people in the last days. Our pattern for this deception begins with Adam and Eve in the garden and Satan's twisting of what God said.

How do we know what God means?

Chris: Agreed, there are many passages in scripture (I am speaking specifically of the Eschatological passages) that are still beyond our ability to agree upon. In that sense, I think, we simply don't have the full picture yet. Perhaps we are all wrong in some way or another. But the future events will, sooner than later I believe, show all of us to what degree our own ideas agreed or disagreed with the actual meaning. But that presuposes, in my mind, that there is one actual meaning, and a lot of surmizing that is not accurate.

And in asking the original question, I was not referring merely to emphasis. We might emphasise different words in a sentence, but it does not change the meaning of the sentence. It merely shifts our focus as we consider what, you, doing, here, or elijah. But I think we all agree that God was making a point to Elajah and that verses 10-13 make that point clear to us.

My last reply to Gary, I hope, gets at the heart of my question.

Brother I think when it comes to drawing a spiritual principle from a text while being led by the holy spirit doesn't take away the literal teaching of the text nor does it add any new doctrine to the historical church but what it does is it emphasizes biblical doctrine.

Of the water turning into wine this is just emphasizing a teaching that many like Carter conlon , David Wilkinson and hundreds of teachers Methodist,holiness Pentecostal charismatics, all believed in a great harvest at the end of the age and the outpouring of the spirit coming into its fullness this has its roots within the scriptures from Old testament prophecy, and also typology and New testament scripture.

Just the scripture of Joel that was repeated by Peter alone is used as a prophecy that teaches that there will be a great outpouring upon all flesh, there are different views to the extent of this outpouring but that this outpouring will be a fulfillment of the first fruits harvest that we saw in the first century and sporadically throughout the church history.

This isTaught by the church through men like Jonathan Edwards, George Whitfield John Wesley and many others believed in a time of outpouring and they used bulk scriptures from the Old testament to prove this and so it's an historical church teaching to believe in a end time harvest.

Even the typology of the Old testament feasts indicate that there will be a future harvests that will be greater than the first fruits offering that began on the day of Pentecost.

When we come into the feast of tabernacles this will include a cleansing of the bride of Christ getting herself ready for the coming of the lord and then an in gathering which is represented by the feast of booths.

I'm not going to go through all the scriptures that one would gather and use to teach on the end time harvest but the apostle Paul clearly taught that there would be a great in gathering amongst the Jews.

Brother have you got any examples of what you were talking about so that we can understand exactly what you're talking about and where you're coming from I picked the first example that came to my mind about a spiritual meaning that comes from that first miracle that Jesus performed in Cana at the wedding.

I Also heard other people talk about the wine representing the blood of Christ people draw other spiritual truths out of some of the things that took place in the life of Jesus.

Bro Gary et.al.:

Drawing a spiritual principle or lesson from a particular passage is something we all do, or at least I hope we all do. It is possible to draw a principle from a passage that has nothing whatsoever to do with the passage. But a passage can teach us several different lessons. What happened to Daniel, for example, when he refused to stop praying and wound up in the den with the lions. We could draw out a principle that we ought to obey God rather than men. We could draw out a principle that we can trust God to protect us. We could draw out multiple principles or lessons, but that is not at all my question. My question goes to the actual meaning of a passage of scripture. No one would say that Daniel is a type of all of us and the lions are an allegory for the mean people in our lives. The account is a historical narrative.

I think the example you gave is a good example to illustrate what I mean by the question. You cited Joel's prophecy. Is Joel talking about the day of pentacost, or is Joel talking about a great, end-time outpouring and revival? We have actual scripture to tell us exactly what Joel meant. Peter said, "This is that which was prophesied by Joel." So Joel's prophecy has one meaning.

Or...can we claim multiple meanings for Joel's prophecy. Who determines those additional meanings? How do we know these multiple meanings hold any Biblical or spiritual water?

Can a passage of scripture mean more than one thing, or does it mean what it says, in the context it is written, agreeing with the context of scripture overall?

Another example I might give. Jesus told Peter, and later the entire group of disciples, that whatever they bound on earth would be bound in heaven and whatever they loosed on earth would be loosed in heaven. There are several different meanings for this passage being applied in the church at large today. I am not asking the question to get off in the weeds debating this particular verse. That is not the point. The point is, can all of these different meanings be equally valid? Or, is one of them right and the others wrong? Or, are they all wrong?

Can a passage of scripture have more than one meaning, more than one correct interpretation? Can a particular passage teach more than one doctrine? Not more than one lesson or principle drawn from it. That is entirely possible. That is more like Chris' comment about which word gets emphasis. I mean, are several different doctrines established by the same passage?

I hope that helps clarify the question. If three different teachers say, "The galatians 3 passages teach this or that", and if all three of those teachers say it teaches something entirely different, can they all be right?

It is a critically vital question because it is the very heart, in my opinion, of the issue of false teaching and false doctrine that we are warned about in these last days.

Is it impingent upon us to study diligently, pray, and discuss scripture for the sake of getting it right, and then being willing to change our personal beliefs to align ourselves with scripture?

Travis did you read David Wilkinson's message that I posted it shows that he is comparing a prophecy that many put in the New Jerusalem after his come down from heaven and applying it to the reformation.

So that would be an example of somebody doing it

God showed this prophet a river coming out of His holy temple. As time went by, it swelled from a trickle to a river in which he could swim. Ezekiel saw a man measuring the growing stream of life, until it became "a river that I could not pass over: for the waters were risen, waters to swim in” (Ezekiel 47:5). You see, the early Church experienced water that reached the ankles; the Reformation had water reaching the loins. And in this day and age, the water has risen so much that we now have water to swim in!

David Wilkinson

Rev 2 1Then the angel showed me a river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2down the middle of the main street of the city. On either side of the river stood a tree of life, bearing twelve kinds of fruit and yielding a fresh crop for each month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations.