Breaking "the Fourth Wall" in popular Bible reading

Was the Bible written to me, personally? Should I take every verse or story in the Bible personally? In this video, I discuss what I call the "Broken Fourth Wall" hermeneutic which is, I believe, one of the reasons there are such big differences between how the average non-Catholic Christian and Catholic Christians interpret and apply Scripture. It is also, I believe, a big reason why many non-Catholics refuse to accept certain doctrines like a visible Church, apostolic succession, and the authority of Bishops, etc.
Find more at www.kennyburchard.com

[@KennyBurchard]

On reflection if I shot this video again I would differentiate between unbroken and broken 4th wall instead of 3 Walls vs. broken 4th wall but it was a pretty spontaneous video to get the big idea out while I was having it.

[@cathyhachey8341]

Thank you Kenny. This is very helpful! I love the insight on how to understand the basis of scripture and how literally scripture can be taken vs. how it is truly intended.

[@horak77]

Yes! This makes 100% sense.

[@joselitonaranjo3234]

Thanks Kenny!

[@HarleyGirl75]

Exactly what I used to do when I was a Protestant Christian.

[@KennyBurchard]

Me too!

[@bjphillip]

Wow. This helps me a lot. Thank you

[@KennyBurchard]

Great!

[@gregbradburn]

Thanks for this Kenny. This was very much my life for many years and goes to the heart of disagreements with my evangelical friends. How would you suggest approaching this though. Because I don’t see my evangelical friends seeing a problem with breaking the 4th wall. Sure, we’ve identified the reason we come to different interpretations but I don’t see that we’re any closer to resolving that.

[@atrifle8364]

The problem involves reading comprehension and ego. Read something closer to mortgage documents, it's not hard to at least see the Catholic view in the NT However Protestantism trains people to take a letter clearly addressed to some guy named Timothy, ignore 100% of the context, and apply 2 sentences at random to themselves. It's hard thing to get them to say "No, let's start by assuming that this a letter to Timothy." We have to start with the disappointing and humbling news that maybe Paul didn't have them personally in mind and that matters.

[@KennyBurchard]

Hi Greg. Yeah it was my life too and now on the other side of it it is more clear to me than before. I think as a starting place we can simply point out the interpretive approach and try to get them to agree that it is different and since it is different we can make thre observations. 1. We cannot agree on the meaning of a text if we employ disparate hermeneutics. 2. The fact that such differences are possible when 2 Christians are looking at one text is a strike against Sola Scriptura. 3. Since these are true, we might look at the witness of the early Christians to see if they agree with one or the other interpreter. In the case of these texts all the early witnesses will appeal to authority vested in the apostles and their successors. You can also say in terms that may foster more contemplation and dialogue: We Catholics read the Bible in its original context. You seem to be doing something different from that. This will sound like a strike at the heart of a “Bible only” Christian who doesn’t think they do that. Simply point it out and rest on the solid witness of the Church. Leave the burden of proof on later novel interpretations.

[@KennyBurchard]

@@atrifle8364yeah I agree. To be fair to anyone who sat under my teaching ministry (especially in the early years), I unfortunately encouraged and even modeled this flawed hermeneutic, and people sadly embraced it.

[@atrifle8364]

​@@KennyBurchard- It's tough because that way of interacting with the Bible is built into the framework of the culture. Even Luther's original "epiphany" is more or less taking sentences out of Romans out of context. He had a lot less excuses though than people almost 500 years later. He was trained Catholic and was completely aware of passages in James, etc that contradicted his own somewhat electic theology. Most modern Protestants are trained decontextulized sentence reading approach from Day 1. Despite many self assurances on their Biblical knowledge, it's quite clear many spend their most of their time in a few select parts of Scripture. In that there is a great deal less culpability. But those practices makes the conversation much difficult, even when I have a letter from James clearly addressing a general audience as foolish for believing in faith alone. It's undoing an unquestioned process/approach.

[@gregbradburn]

@@KennyBurchard the ironic thing is many protestants will argume against breaking the 4th wall in other passages. For example, I've heard reformed folks say that applying Jeremiah 29:11 to ourselves and claiming that promise for ourselves is taking the verse out of context because God was specifically addressing that to Israel in exile.