Critical Thinking

Revised: August 2025

Bad arguments lead to bad conclusions, so it's not a bad thing to exercise some discernment.

Critical thinking can prevent you being too easily swayed or misled.

You can look past the rhetoric and into the substance. You can carefully analyse what is presented to you, with a bit of effort. Critical thinking does not mean that you need to be a radical sceptic. Radical scepticism precludes learning and wisdom, as it never allows one to believe anything and always doubts everything – even some things that are obvious or reasonable.

So, refine what you have been taught in the crucible of wisdom:

Be tolerant.

Welcome divergent views and engage in the debate with gentleness and respect.

Be a seeker of truth.

When you study the Bible, you are on a mission - seeking insight, uncovering, and understanding objective truth. Truth isn’t some relative true-for-me-but-not-for-you mishmash, but something real, even if the insight undermines your cherished or long-held position (or that of your church).

Be bold and confident.

Be willing to go out on a limb and disagree – even when those with whom you disagree are in positions of authority. 

Be analytical.

We should not just accept everything we hear, read, or are presented with on Sunday. Properly constructed arguments soundly based on Scripture in its context, with solid reasoning and logical, sensible inferences, are needed.

Be curious.

Be willing to be a truth-sleuth and follow the trail wherever it leads. This is necessary when challenging ingrained thinking—both your own and others'. To find new insights (new to you, at least) or replace incorrect ideas, you will need to look.

Be discerning and careful.

If you're going to truth-sleuth and set out to look for illumination, continually evaluate everything in the light of scripture – but not in the light of what you think, or you hope, scripture is saying. Not everything you hear or read will take you down the path of increased wisdom.

Critical thinking skills are valuable in life, especially when studying scripture. There’s a science to Biblical interpretation—it’s called hermeneutics. Hermeneutics is a fancy (and short) way of saying “the method, processes, and rules (or guides) we use to determine and understand the meaning of Biblical text”. It’s not an exact science, and different people with diverse theological positions support various hermeneutical approaches.

One important thing to remember is that Christians who interpret the Bible will always find challenges to their understanding and limits to their knowledge. If you recognise that you are seeking to come to grips with things written by God Himself and that Scripture has a divine author, you are off to a good start.

Treat the Word of God as a precious treasure. You will discover it is both complex and straightforward, plain and obscure, a source of joy and frustration as well as commendation and condemnation. It is, in short, the revelation of a transcendent, holy God to finite, sinful creatures and, as the KJV says beautifully and intimately (Ps 119:105), “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path”. Also, Isaiah reminds us (Isa 40:8) ​that “the grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever.”

My hermeneutic (my approach to bible study) is based on the well-accepted principle of taking scripture literally. That is, scripture is literature, but literature that comes from the Spirit of God. Literal interpretation asserts that a biblical text is to be interpreted according to the “plain meaning” conveyed by its grammatical construction and historical context. Hermeneutics is what we use to bridge the gap (sometimes a deep, vast, and chasm-like gulf) between our minds and the mind of the Spirit, who authored the Word through the biblical writers.

For those who believe that the Bible contains the words that God intended for us to have (i.e., the Bible is inspired), then hermeneutics can require a few skills and a proper attitude. We also need some help.

A thorough knowledge of the original languages and ancient history, as well as the ability to compare Scripture with Scripture, is indispensable. However, many who want to study the Word don't know the original languages, so it is necessary to trust that the Bible versions we have access to were compiled by those who possess the knowledge required. It’s an area that is not without controversy. However, unless we are going to learn and develop a workmanlike level of skill in biblical Greek and Hebrew for our own use, then we must trust those who possess those skills.

The same can be said for ancient history. I’m not an ancient historian, but many have the highest skills and knowledge in this area, so I will, for pragmatic reasons if for no other, defer to their knowledge and skill. Now, I will say that my trust is conditional and sometimes fragile. I have read too much that has been written by the most erudite scholars, that, on reflection (and further digging for diamonds of truth), has left me cold.

Trusted commentators, interpreters and scholars are worth their weight in gold. So, being able to discern who will be a trusted mentor and source of knowledgeable assistance in your quest to know your Saviour and God more intimately and profoundly is something you must work on. Always, always, always be diligent in comparing what they say (or what they imply, or what they don’t say) with what you see in scripture. But here’s the trap – they may be right, and you may be wrong.

There are rewarding approaches to studying scripture and learning its secrets, and some techniques will lead you to places you really ought not to go. Don't always assume that what you have been taught (even by the most respected or well-thought-of teacher) is to be accepted without thought and without you checking it yourself. However, I doubt your interpretations will always be better. I have heard plenty of teaching that is unscriptural and unhelpful. The irony is, of course, that you need to check what I am saying as well. I trust you will find it faithful to God's Word, logical and defensible.

We must acknowledge our own limitations and biases. Within the Revival Fellowship, we perceive everything through an incredibly thick, distorting lens. I call it the Revival Fellowship Narrative. Please review the information in the box below. I would say that the Revival Fellowship is not the only organisation to have such a lens; it is common, but in the realm of faith and doctrine, the Revival Fellowship's lens is hard to remove or refocus.

Back to Hermeneutics. If we can’t get into the details of the original languages or ancient history by ourselves, there’s one thing we can all do—and that is to compare scripture with scripture. We can all read; the more we read the scriptures, the better we can grasp the entire story.

As a tool for Bible interpretation, hermeneutics employs a three-pronged approach that, when combined, can provide a comprehensive understanding of what the Spirit is saying. The three are the historical setting, the message (the actual words), and the conveyed doctrine or concept. I suggest starting with Ligonier Ministries and this short article, and then exploring further from there.

Just remember: if you think we in the Revival Fellowship are completely competent at Bible interpretation and that we have a solid grasp of all we need for salvation and “walking in the Spirit”, then you are starting with an attitude that will trip you up time and again. That version of “Revival Thinking” will keep you from learning many things that will enhance your understanding of God, our Saviour, and your own place in His plan.

Revival thinking and our Revival understanding of Scripture can stifle our usefulness. The value of diligently studying theology is too often neglected. We cannot effectively engage in a confused, multi-faith, multi-moral, anything-goes world without the Spirit’s illumination as we exercise our minds in the study of the Word.

Be wary, be humble

 

However, don't think any subjective interpretation or "out there" teaching you can come up with is okay. If you are not prepared to bend your opinions, values, and ideas to what the Bible says and what Jesus teaches, then you make a mockery of what biblical authority means and what it means to submit to the Lordship of Jesus Christ.

The Word exposes and explains our sins, contains God’s promises, commands, and judgements, and gives examples to follow and examples not to follow. We should take note. 

In my view, it is essential that we, as people of God, know and teach the Word of God accurately and thoroughly. I am not saying that we must wholly know and understand God’s word—that's not possible. However, when we teach and present what we believe is a word from God’s Word, we must be knowledgeable about the subject matter we are discussing.

If we are speaking to those who are unsaved, if we are talking to the saints in our fellowship in a meeting or if we give an opinion about scripture or offer some advice to a saint (or a sinner, for that matter), and we are claiming that what we say is based on what the Bible says – then we have a responsibility to make sure that when we say Thus says the Lord… (so to speak) that we are accurately reporting what the Bible actually says.

In his book Scripture Twisting, James Sire writes:

Christians who respect biblical authority have a special burden to ‘read right’. …none of us is absolutely right about what God’s Word really means. That is why we must return daily to the Bible—reading and rereading, thinking and rethinking, obeying what we grasp, correcting our earlier readings as new insight is given to us, constantly crosschecking our grasp of Scripture with our pastor, our fellow Christians and with the historic understanding of Scripture by orthodox Christianity.

The Church’s narrative (or, more appropriately, metanarrative) functions similarly to any organisation’s narrative. The metanarrative explains and rationalises our stance and doctrines within the fellowship. This metanarrative is the fellowship’s formative, foundational ideas, beliefs, and concepts. It's the stories we tell each other.

Our church's narrative is a pervasive (and somewhat elusive or invisible) influence on every story told about "The way things are", "The way things should be", and "The way we do things around here". The fellowship's narrative is the lens through which all our vision occurs. Having a narrative is to be expected and is not necessarily a bad thing. Still, those who look through the narrative's lens without question or due concern for discovering God's truth - His message to us - are unknowingly looking through a broken, cloudy lens, perceiving the imaginary as real and seeing the mistaken as God-given truth.

Not so long ago, one of our Pastors (a very pragmatic man) said, "I'd rather have bad doctrine and plenty of blessing...than good doctrine and no blessing." Digging deeper, you find those who hold to this doctrine (that doctrine doesn't matter) use feelings and experiences to guide their theology. If God blesses us, we must be on the right track, heh? It's a false and misleading view - a nonsense statement.

Good theology may generate fewer blessings or preclude blessings altogether in some parallel universe, but not in this world. The universe in which bad theology may perversely cause more blessings or guarantee it is not the universe in which you want to live.

However, in the real world, where we operate, blessing and doctrinal astuteness do not always or necessarily coincide. God may bless a fellowship like ours that struggles with theology and embraces a radical vision of salvation. God may be sympathetic to our needs even though we separate ourselves from all others who are indeed our brothers and sisters. (Even though we do not recognise them as true Christians.)

Suppose there is a "blessing", and God meets our needs as individuals, a local fellowship group, or a fellowship as a whole. That is not an indication, one way or the other, of God's approval of our wayward views and theological listlessness. God will "bless" even when we are less than we should be. Who would ever be blessed if He waited for our perfection before He blessed us?

On reflection, what the Pastor meant by "blessing" is related to "bums on seats" (more people in the door), experiences of the so-called miraculous, the peace that comes from all saying the same thing without friction, and the meeting of felt needs. (Felt needs are the nebulous wants, wishes, hopes and changes that a person - often inaccurately - deems necessary for their life).

Suppose visitor numbers increase, and perhaps there's a more significant response to the Gospel we preach. As recipients of such "blessing", we ought not to think that our Father necessarily approves of all we do or that He agrees with our doctrine or theology. It simply means He has decided to involve us in some of His successes for His own reasons.

Suppose having visitors to our church, performing baptisms, and witnessing God's life-changing presence and power are signs of God's approval. Surely, then, we must use that same measure to measure God's support of other fellowships and churches.

 

Many other churches and groups (with entirely different views on what we call core, fundamental, must-have doctrines) are blessed. Using the "blessing" ruler, shouldn't we say their approval rating with the Creator is also pretty good?

Using "blessing" to measure our alignment with God's will and requirements is not the most effective approach. Scripture stands above "blessing", it stands above experiences, and it stands above pragmatism (doing something just because it works). Scripture, not our perceived blessing, ought to be the arbiter and judge of our doctrines, beliefs, and practices. No matter how "blessed" we may be, we still need reformation until we align with the Word of God.