This is a study of how exaggeration is often a major factor in humor, and that some of this is in the Bible. Exaggeration has both a positive and negative aspect to it, and we will see both sides.

1. LAUGHTER-BIBLEEXAGGERATION
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Proverbs 27:16 16restrainingher is like restraining
the wind or grasping oil with the hand.
New Living Translation
Stopping her complaints is like trying to stop the wind
or trying to hold something with greased hands.
In other words, it is impossible. We know, however, that it is not impossible,
and that means this is the use of exaggerationto make a point loud and clear.
There are many examples of such exaggerationin the Bible, and we will be
looking at some of them. Exaggerationhas both a positive and negative side to
it, and in this study we will see both sides. It can be funny and it canbe folly.
STUDYLIGHT RESOURCES
Adam Clarke Commentary
Whosoeverhideth her hideth the wind - You may as well attempt to repress
the blowing of the wind, as the tongue of a scold;and to concealthis
unfortunate propensity of a wife is as impossible as to hush the storm, and
prevent its sound from being heard.
The ointment of his right hand - You can no more concealsucha woman's
conduct, than you can the smell of the aromatic oil with which your hand has
been anointed. The Hebrew is very obscure, and is variously translated.

2. Coverdale thus: "He that refrayneth her, refrayneth the wynde; and holdith
oyle fast in his honde." That is, he attempts to do what is impossible to be
done.
Albert Barnes'Notes onthe Whole Bible
The point is the impossibility of concealmentor restraint. A personcannot
hide the wind, or claspit in his hands. If he takes an unguent in his right
hand, the odor betrays him, or it slips out. So, in like manner, the “contentious
woman” is one whose faults it is impossible either to hide or check. The
difficulty of the proverb led to a different reading, adopted by the versions,
“The north wind is rough, and yet it is called propitious”; it clears off the
clouds and brings fine weather.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible
Whosoeverhideth her hideth the wind,.... Whoeverattempts to stop her
brawls and contentions, to repress and restrain them, and hinder her voice
being heard in the streets, and endeavours to hide the shame that comes upon
herself and family, attempts a thing as impossible as to hide the wind in the
palm of a man's hand, or to stop it from blowing; for as that, by being
restrained or pent up by any methods that can be used, makes the greater
noise, so, by all the means that are used to still a contentious woman, she is but
the more noisy and clamorous, and becomes more shameful and infamous;
and the ointment of his right hand, which bewrayethitself: or "will call" or
"calls"F8,and says, in effect, Here am I; for the smell of it, which cannot be
hid when held in a man's hand, betrays it; and the fasterhe holds it, and the
more he presses and squeezes it, and the more it is heatedhereby, the more it
diffuses its savour, and is known to be where it is; and so all attempts to stop
the mouth of a brawling womandoes but cause her to brawl the louder.
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

3. hideth — or, “restrains” (that is, tries to do it); is as fruitless an effort, as that
of holding the wind.
the ointment of his right hand — the organof power (Psalm17:7; Psalm
18:35). His right hand endeavors to repress perfume, but vainly. Some prefer:
“His right hand comes on oil,” that is, “cannottake hold.” Such a woman
cannot be tamed.
Keil & DelitzschCommentary on the Old Testament
This verse stands in close connectionwith the preceding, for it speaks ofthe
contentious woman:
He that restraineth her restraineth the wind,
And oil meeteth his right hand.
The connectionof the plur. subject ‫הינפצ‬ = quicunque eam cohibet, with a
sing. predicate, is not to be disputed ( vid ., Proverbs 3:18 and Proverbs 28:16,
Chethı̂b ); but can‫צפצ‬ gain from the meaning of preserving, laying up, also the
meanings of keeping, ofconfining, and shutting up? - for these meanings we
have ‫אלּכ‬ and ‫רצע‬ (cf. ‫צרר‬ , Proverbs 30:4). In 16bit lies nearer to see in ‫יניני‬
the objectof the clause (oil meeteth his right hand) than the subject (his right
hand meeteth oil), for the gender of ‫יניצ‬ directs to ‫יי‬ ( e.g. , Ezekiel 15:6; cf. 6a,
where ‫נּכּדרי‬ is as to genderindifferent): it is fem., while on the contrary ‫ןנצ‬ is
generallymasc. (cf. Song of Solomon1:3). There is no reasonfor regarding
,giztiH htiw ,ro ,(dnah thgir sih htiw lio steemeh).succa laibrevda na sa ‫יניני‬
as a secondsubject (he meets oil, his right hand); the latter, in the order of the
words lying before us, is not at all possible. We suppose that ‫ּכרקי‬ , as at
Genesis 49:1, is equivalent to ‫הרקי‬ (Ewald, §116c), forthe explanation oleum
dexterae ejus praeconemagit (Cocceius, Schultens)does not explain, but only
darkens:and oleum dexterâ suâ legit , i.e. , colligit (Fleischer), is basedon an
untenable use of the word. As one may sayof personto person, ‫ךרק‬ , occurrit
tibi , Numbers 25:18, so also ‫ּכרקי‬ ( ‫הרקי‬ ), of a thing that meets a man or one of

4. his members; and if we compare ‫תּכרקל‬ and ‫ירק‬ , then for 16b the meaning is
possible:oil meets his right hand; the quarrelsome womanis like oil that
cannot be held in the hand, which struggles againstthat which holds it, for it
always glides out of the hand. Thus also Luther: “and seeks to hold oil with
his hand,” as if he read ‫ץנקי‬ . In fact, this word was more commonly used as
the expressionofuntenableness than the colourless andsingular word ‫ּכרקי‬ ,
which, besides, is so ambiguous, that none of the old translators has thought
on any other ‫קרּכ‬ than that which signifies “to call,” “to name.” The Jewish
interpreters also adhere to this nearestlying ‫קרּכ‬ , and, moreover, explain, as
the Syr., Targ., Aquila, Symmachus, Jerome, and the Venet ., ‫ןנ‬ , ‫יניני‬ ‫צ‬
according to the accentuationas genit. connected, e.g. , Rashi:he calls for oil
to his right hand, viz., as the means of purification from leprosy, Leviticus
8:14 [Leviticus 14:16]; and Aben Ezra: even when he calls for oil to his right
hand, i.e. , would move them to silence with the precious anointing oil.
Perhaps Proverbs 27:16 was originally an independent proverb as follows:
‫ריח‬ ‫צפצ‬ ‫היצ‬ ‫צפני‬
‫יקרּכ‬ ‫יניני‬ ‫ישנצ‬
He who layeth up riches in store layeth up the wind,
And he nameth them the fat of his right hand;
i.e. , he sees in them that which makes his right hand fat and strong ( ‫ןנצ‬ , as
at Psalms 109:24, opp. Zechariah11:17; cf. ‫ונןנׁשיי‬ , Isaiah 10:16, and
regarding Ἐσμούν, the Phoeniciangod of health, at Isaiah 59:10), and yet it is
only the wind, i.e. , something that is worthless and transient, which he stored
up ( ‫צפצ‬ , as at Proverbs 13:22, and in ‫נצנניי‬ , Obad. Obadiah 1:6). ‫ציה‬ is used
as it frequently occurs in the Book of Proverbs, e.g. , Proverbs 11:4, and the
whole proverb expresses by another figure the same as Proverbs 18:11. The
fact that ‫ציפצ‬ ( ‫חיר‬ ), Proverbs 25:23, and as a contrastthereto in the compass
sti tuohtiw neeb evah ton yam ,teop eht erofeb derevoh ,(htuos eht) ‫יניצ‬
influence on the choice of the words and expressionhere.
Wesley's ExplanatoryNotes

5. Whosoeverhideth her hideth the wind, and the ointment of his right hand,
which bewrayeth itself.
Hideth — Attempts to smother her passion.
Right-hand — Which being the greatinstrument of action, by its much
stirring, diffuses the savour of it.
John Trapp Complete Commentary
Proverbs 27:16 Whosoeverhideth her hideth the wind, and the ointment of his
right hand, [which] bewrayeth[itself].
Ver. 16. Whosoeverhideth her, hideth the wind,] i.e., One may as soonhide
the wind, or hold it from blowing, as hide her shame, or hush her brawling.
The wife should make her husband her covering, when she is abroad
especially;but many wives are so intemperate and wilful, that a man may as
well hide the wind in his fist, or oil in his clutch fist, as his wife’s infirmities.
Let this be marked by those that venture upon shrews, if rich, fair, well
descended, in hope to tame them and make them better.
Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible
Proverbs 27:16. Whosoeverhideth her, &c.— Whoso locks herup, locks up
the winds, and he will take hold of oil with his hand. Wat. See Hiller
Hierophut. p. 210. Houbigant renders it, He who will confine her at home may
confine the wind; for whatsoeverhe shall sealwith his hand [i.e. whatsoever
her husband would wish to keepsecret]she will bewray or divulge. The
Hebrew is very obscure;He who hideth her, hideth the wind, and the
ointment of his right hand shall cry out. "To attempt to keepsuch a woman in
the house, is to attempt to restrain the wind: and as one cannottouch
perfumed oil with the hand, but the odour will discoveritself; so it is fruitless
to endeavour to concealthe bad qualities of a quarrelsome woman; spite of all
endeavours, she will discoverherself." See Calmetand Schultens.

6. Matthew Poole's EnglishAnnotations on the Holy Bible
Whosoeverhideth her, i.e. attempts to smother or bridle her passion, that it
may not break forth to her shame, and to his owndiscomfort and reproach,
hideth the wind; undertakes that which is impossible.
The ointment of his right hand; which being the great instrument of action, by
its much stirring diffuseth the savour of it.
Whedon's Commentary on the Bible
16. Hideth her… bewrayeth itself — This verse is obscure and variously
rendered. The difficulty is chiefly in determining the root of the verb ‫,ּכרקי‬
(yikra,) translated “bewrayeth.” One root would give us call, callout, declare,
etc.;the other, happen, befall, encounter, etc. Different interpreters render
according to their idea on this subject. A few specimens may be given: “He
that refraineth her refraineth the wind, and holdeth oil fast in his right hand.”
— Coverdale. “Ointment which discovers itself.” — Boothroyd. “Concealthe
fragrant oil which is upon his right hand.” — Trench. “Comethupon oil.” —
Stuart. “Encounters oil.” — Conant. “It is altogetheras impossible for him to
keepthe wind from blowing, or to inclose a fragrant oil in his right hand so
that its perfume shall not be perceived, as to make her hold her tongue, or to
concealherbawling humour.” — Patrick. “He that hideth her, hideth the
winde, and she is as ye oyle in his sight that vttereth itself.” — Geneva Bible.
The proverb is understood to be a sequel to the one preceding.
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Unabridged
Whosoeverhideth her hideth the wind, and the ointment of his right hand,
which bewrayeth itself.

7. Whosoeverhideth her (striveth to hide or keepher back) hideth the wind
(which only howls the more that it is pent up), and the ointment of his right
hand, (which) bewrayeth(itself). He does the same as if he tried to hide the
odorous oil wherewith he has anointed his right hand, which betrays itself
(literally, cries out) by the smell. Maurer translates, 'And his right hand crieth
out for ointment.'-namely, to heal the scratches whichhis right hand gets
from her in trying to hide or restrain her. I prefer the English version. The
crying out of the ointment evidently answers to the clamour of "the
contentious woman." It is as impossible to stifle one as the other. She is as
closelyjoined to her husband as the ointment to the right hand on which it is.
She bewrays herselfby bawling, as the ointment does by its odour. Beware of
choosing a wife for her mere beauty or wealth; because if she is contentious,
the evil is not easilyremedied.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(16) Whosoeverhideth her hideth the wind—i.e., you might as welltry and
stop the wind from blowing as seek to restrain her.
And the ointment of his right hand, which bewrayeth itself.—Rather, perhaps,
and oil meeteth his right hand—i.e., if he puts out his hand to stop her she
slips through it like oil.
END OF STUDYLIGHT RESOURCES
Can you restrain the wind? No!Can you hide the smell of cologne – once it is
out? No! All those present know if the wind is blowing or whether you are
wearing cologne ornot. You cannot hide either of them. And if a man marries
an odious woman, neither can he hide her obnoxious ways. Those around him
know he has a difficult and painful marriage.

8. There is a womanin this proverb, indicated by the feminine pronoun “her.”
You do not want to meet her – and you surely do not want to marry her! She
is the contentious womanfrom the previous verse that cruelly drives her
husband crazy (Pr 27:15). The poor man cannot restrainor disguise her any
more than he can hide the wind or the strong scentof his cologne. Everyone
knows he is condemned for life with an odious woman.
The CreatorGod inspired Solomonto write this proverb. He made the woman
for the man, and He knew her better than all psychologistsand therapists
combined (I Cor11:9; I Tim 2:13-14;II Tim 3:6-7; I Pet3:7). Since Solomon
wrote for the benefit of his son(Pr 27:11), he warned often of the seductive
threat of the strange woman and of the marital threat of the odious woman.
Both women are worse than death (Pr 30:21-23;Eccl7:26).
The Bible is a library of divine wisdom. It deals openly with subjects often not
discusseddue to foolish ideas of etiquette. But God loves His children and tells
the truth plainly to save them from pain and trouble. When men talk among
themselves, they also tell the truth – they laugh and groan about irritating and
nagging wives. Of course, her husband cannot tell her, for she would set him
straight and send him to the couch for the night!
What is a contentious woman? She is a talkative womanthat must express her
opinions, correctdetails in conversation, questionmost everything, and make
constantsuggestionsno one askedfor. She is an irritating, quarrelsome, and
obnoxious person. She cannotthink, speak, oract graciously, because she
cannot identify or appreciate that virtue; she has an arrogant, haughty,
incorrigible spirit that argues, criticizes, and questions.
Few odious women think they are odious. Of course not! That is why they are
odious! They cannot recognize that the conduct they think is fine and helpful

9. is actually what angers and disgusts those around them. If you suggestshe
talks too much, she will defend herselfby saying her opinions are helpful and
useful – how can she be wrong to offer them? When hearing the Bible
preachedplainly, she assumes it must be for someone else.
How does this womangive herself away? Her husband is beat. He is neutered,
for this wretch stole his confidence, strength, and vitality. She talks too much,
so you only need listen for the woman with her mouth flapping. If she is not a
yacker, look for the sour face that rarely smiles and never warmly. She has no
real friends, for no one desires her painful presence. Hersocialinteraction
may only be the evil habit of being a busybody.
No man wants others to know he lives in a marital hell, so he tries to hide the
odious and repulsive characterofhis wife. This is what Solomon said was as
difficult as holding the wind or the scentof cologne in your hand. Both will get
awayfrom you! Both will be discoveredby those around you! It is impossible
to disguise or hide the hairy, grunting, and stinking sow when trying to
display the gold ring in her nose (Pr 11:22)!
Men use various techniques to hide their disgracefulwives. One man tries to
hide his contentious wife by avoiding public excursions with her. He works
late, finds hobbies, or just refuses to go out. Another may foolishly try to
deceive his friends by complimenting her to them (though they all know
better). One man will weaklysubmit to her overbearing demands and
questions to avoid a public squabble. And another will pamper her greedy
soul with anything in sight to buy a little peace and tranquility for himself.
Such women do not deserve husbands, and no man deserves sucha wife. Since
this despisedwretchcan disguise herself during dating, every man must learn
how to spot the telltale marks that reveal her cruel character(Pr 30:21-23).

10. They are simple. She talks too much, has a proud spirit, is forward to speak,
has opinions on everything, disagreesin public, gets visibly agitated,
complains about circumstances, andquestions everything.
Another way to avoid an odious woman is to learn graciousnessand virtue
and rejectall women lacking them, for a greatwife has both (Pr 31:10-31).
The best wayto spot a counterfeitis to know the genuine thing perfectly. The
best way to smell an odious woman is to know the sweetnature of a gracious
woman. Still afraid? A gracious womanis always adored by all (Pr 11:16).
The odious woman only thinks she is respected.
Some men are male versions of the same thing. They talk too much, complain
about everything, argue and debate no matter what is said, question accepted
opinions and decisions, and so forth. These men should be avoided in all social
unions as much as the odious womanshould be avoided in marriage.
Contentious persons that cause division and strife should be rejected, for they
are destructive of peace and pleasure (Pr 22:10).
There are severallessons.First, every man must test a potential wife and
believe the opinions of married men about her. Second, every young woman
should emphasize graciousnessandvirtue above other objectives in her life.
Third, every man married to a contentious woman needs to find an attic room
or wilderness retreat (Pr 21:9,19;25:24).
Fourth, every womantending toward the odious characterdescribedhere
should repent before God, her husband, her children, and seek to live
graciously. Fifth, you should warn any young man you know who is about to
marry an odious woman. Sixth, every man married to a gracious and loving
woman should thank God and take her out tonight!

11. The Bible helps men by warning them about odious women, but it also teaches
women how to be gracious and virtuous, if they will learn the lessonand apply
it (Pr 31:10-16;I Tim 2:9-10; 5:13-14;Titus 2:3-5; I Pet 3:1-6). However, most
pulpits today are too fearful to tell the truth about females in attendance, so
practicaland useful subjects like this are seldom or never dealt with. They do
not want to offend their odious attendees.
True churches are the bride and wife of Jesus Christ; Godarranged for His
son to marry them, and they will live forever in intimate bliss with Him in
heaven. Does this glorious Husband openly delight in you? Or is He ashamed
of your offensive ways? He threatened to spew the church of Laodicea out of
His mouth (Rev 3:14-19). He threatened to leave the church at Ephesus (Rev
2:4-5). Is He totally happy with your spirit and conduct?
http://www.letgodbetrue.com/proverbs/commentaries/27_16.php
Proverbs 27:16 (Listen, Not Restrain)
ONE “INSTRUCTIVE PROVERBA DAY”
TITLE: Listen, Not Restrain
Text: ReadProverbs 27:16
Date:10 April 2012
Written by: Conrade Yap
restraining her is like restraining the wind or grasping oil with the hand.
(Proverbs 27:16, NIV)
Following yesterday’s meditation on the quarrelsome wife, what we husbands
do about that? Again, let us remind ourselves that the text can be understood
2 ways. Firstly, it means what it says that a quarrelsome wife is difficult to
deal with, and husbands do well to love their wives to avoid this situation.

12. Secondly, the principle applies to BOTHgenders. Any breakdownin a
relationship is never one-way. Evena person who is only 10% at fault is
responsible. In relationships there is no such thing as a majority vote. In
relationships, grace is the key operative word.
This is the reasonwhy we cannotperform an-eye-for-an-eye method. Trying
to restrain a quarrelsome wife is futile. The proverb tells us that it is like
grasping oil with hand. It slips away. It is like restraining the wind. It goes
about its direction without us knowing where and when. Thus, instead of
trying to restrain, why not respond in love? Why not calm nerves down by
listening? Why not simply understand the underlying reasons for the quarrel?
Maybe, the best way to approacha quarrelsome wife is to listen intently,
gently, and lovingly until she stops. Voluntarily.
***************
Thought: “One of the nicest things you can sayto your partner, ‘If I had it to
do over again, I’d choose you. Again.'” (Unknown)
Time for Reflection:It is amazing how womenbehave when men give them
sufficient attention.
https://theologyatwork.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/listen-not-restrain//'
Garry de Vries, former Bible Teacher
Answered Nov13, 2018 · Author has 2.1k answersand 610.4kanswerviews
Yes I do, 110 % ! But why didn’t you also mention Proverbs 21:19 ”Betterto
live in a desertthan with a quarrelsome and ill-tempered wife” ?
It is easyto become self-centeredin the searchfor wisdom and to forget that
we are intended to live on earth along with everyone else. This is one reason

13. why you canbe sure that a man who claims to be wise but lives off on his own
somewhere as a hermit is not truly wise. On the other hand, true heavenly
wisdom is practical, it works in every day life in relation to others especially
when these relationships are tested !
Verse 15 and 16 warn that quarreling is most undesirable, and I would say
anti-christian. In fact, chronic failure to geton with other Christians is the
first symptom of ‘worldliness’. James, the brother of Jesus, exposesthe
problem of disunity through quarreling by asking a rhetorical question which
is couchedin the language ofProverbs 27:16 “What causesfights and
quarrels among you?” The answerto it is then provided by a question in the
secondpart of the verse “don’t they come from your desires that battle within
you. You want something but don’t getit ? which is phrased is such a way as
to expect the answer‘Yes’ (James 4:1,2f)
On the other hand, friendly debate canbe a goodthing and should be
encouragedas verse 17 indicates when it says “As iron sharpens iron, so one
man sharpens another.” Friendly debate can be tremendously stimulating.
Scholars and Artists and Preachers wellknow the advantage of peer criticism.
Loners canbe very dull and boring. They canoften lack penetration in a way
that the man who has debated with others does not. In friendship the sparks
sometimes fly, but that is all part of what is involved.
The Bible talks about quarreling with others and the appropriate biblical
response to those who disagree with our point of view: Eg— James 4:17 ; 1
John 3:18 ; Psalm7:11 ; Psalm 4:4 ; Proverbs 15:8 ; 16:32 ; 20:3 ; 29:22 ;
Ecclesiastes7:9 ; 2 Timothy 2:23–24 ;Galatians 3:21 ; Matthew 5:22 ;
Proverbs 30:33 ; 21:19 ; Colossians 3:7–9 ;Philippians 2:14–16 ; Proverbs
19:3 ; 25:24 ; 13:10 etc etc.
Postscript:If you are worried about the ‘political correctness’ofthe verse as
so many are these days (But I am not!) the Hebrew text is literally translated
as follows:
V15 — “drops that never ceaseona rainy day; and a contentious woman are
alike” V16 — “he who hides her hides the wind and his right hand encounters
(slippery) oil”

14. Bible verses about Exaggeration
(From Forerunner Commentary)
John 1:46-47
Without deceitmeans "simple, without subtlety, candid and sincere." Was
this a compliment or a mild sarcasm? Jesus may actually have been pleasantly
surprised.
All need to pay heed to His comment, in which He is teaching that "a real
Israelite is one in whom is no falsehood." Nathanaelrepresentedthe way a
true Israelite should be, a personwithout deceit, candid and sincere. Jesus
seems to be referring to the post-conversioncharacterofthe once-deceitful
Jacob, the ancestorofthe Israelites, whose name God changedto "Israel."
Before Jacob's conversion, Isaachad said to Esau, "Your brother came with
deceitand has takenawayyour blessing" (Genesis 27:35), yet afterward,
Jacobdealthonestly and fairly with others.
However, lying is such an integralpart of the fabric of our lives that we have
coined such expressions ofmild disbelief as "Is that so?" and "Do you really
mean it?" We expectadvertisers to exaggeratethe quality of their products.
We expectpoliticians to be crooked, to lie, to be evasive, to use their positions
to become wealthy, and to make under-the-table deals with contractors or
even crime figures. We expect policemento be "on the take" and businessmen
to give little in return for as high a costas the traffic will bear.
Indeed, the protestors of the 1960s justified the turmoil on the streets because
of their disillusionment with the obvious hypocrisies of leaders becoming
wealthy on a prolonged, senselesswar. During that same generalperiod,
Presidents EisenhowerandJohnson were caughtopenly lying at news
conferences. A web of intrigue and lies brought about PresidentNixon's

15. resignation. Even GeneralMotors misrepresentedOldsmobile cars with
Chevy engines!
People in government commonly lie "in the national interest," as the saying
goes. Manyhave testified that Bill and Hillary Clinton spent eight years
continuously lying about a wide variety of personalfailings, moneymaking
deals, and political intrigues they were involved in. The media took the Bush
administration to task on its obfuscations regarding the Iraq War.
British Prime Minister Winston Churchill servedhis nation most critically in
wartime, during which artful lying, calleddisinformation, is a common tactic.
He once said, "In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be
attended by a bodyguard of lies." Do we as a people think that no one is
listening?
John W. Ritenbaugh
The Ninth Commandment
James 3:14-16
I like to tell stories, and my family has told me more than once that I
sometimes exaggerate things. I always justified it as good humor and in fun. I
have come to learn, however, the exaggerations, boasts,orlittle white lies that
"spice up" stories or humor canoften hurt and damage others. Sometimes
someone hearing the story remembers the situation, and it was not as funny
or, from his perspective, happened some other way.
Boasting is usually successfulonly when another is put down, and though
everyone may laugh, the victim may be recoiling from what feels like jabs and
insults. Sarcasmand teasing often produce the same results. James refers to
boasting and lying as assaults againstthe truth. One may not realize how true

16. this is until he feels the sting of sarcasmdirectedtoward him. I love to tease
and be teased, but I am realizing increasinglythat people can become carried
awayin their words, violate the truth, and do severe damage.
An old saying runs, "Everyone loves a clown but no one wants to be his best
friend." Laughter helps people to relax and bond more closelytogetherin
shared experiences, but it is goodto learn to look around to see if someone is
no longer laughing. Many years ago, a dinner party with severalgoodfriends
also included a minister and his wife who had just been transferred to our
city. It was our first occasionto dine with them, and it was a very pleasant
evening. Mostof us, knowing eachother well, had a long evening teasing,
joking, laughing, and putting eachother down. We never noticedanything
amiss with the new guests.
The next week atchurch, however, we heard a sermon about the damages of
put-down humor and how it has absolutelyno place in a Christian's lifestyle.
The new minister talkedabout how even the most subtle humor can tear
relationships down and cause doubts about another's affectionor respect.
Such humor includes referring to one's wife as "the old ball and chain" or
"the biscuit-burner." Such names and teasing—as "goodfun" as they may
seem—diminish our friends and family, do not express the kind affectionwe
really feel for them, are not true, and thus are lies. A Christian should never
lie, not even in fun. All of us were shame-facedand sorry we had left such a
negative impression, and we apologizedto him, his wife and to eachother.
Test:Are we teasing and boasting to another's pleasure or his discomfort? Is
it true and factual? If it is not, it is a lie, and no matter how funny it is, it is
sin. Sarcasmbelongs in the same category:If it is not true, it is a lie. Even if it
is true, how are we expressing it? Does sarcasmexpress love, gentleness,
peace, and mercy? Can we tease one anotherrighteously? I would like to
think so, but I am still working on learning how. Without God's Spirit guiding
our words, our tongues remain subtle, merciless, and destructive weapons.
James concludes by telling us directly that these forms of speaking are not
godly wisdom, but "earthly, sensual, demonic. For where envy and self-
seeking exist, confusionand every evil thing will be there" (verses 15-16). The

17. fallout from communication basedon our human, selfishmotivations is
evident about us. The state of the world and the way it functions are often
actions and reactions of crushing blows of words. Governments, businesses,
sports teams, even schools, churches, and neighborhoods communicate with
eachother in wars of words. Our world—this "Information Age"—is
practically devoid of godly, righteous speech, relying on the sensual, material,
selfishpursuits that drive Satanhimself. How much does it affectus and our
communications with one another?
https://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Topical.show/RTD/cgg/ID/19
74/Exaggeration.htm
EXAMPLES OF EXAGGERATION
Numbers 13:32-33
So they gave out to the sons of Israela bad report of the land which they had
spied out, saying, "The land through which we have gone, in spying it out, is a
land that devours its inhabitants; and all the people whom we saw in it are
men of greatsize. "There also we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak are part
of the Nephilim); and we became like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so
we were in their sight."
Deuteronomy 1:28
'Where canwe go up? Our brethren have made our hearts melt, saying, "The
people are bigger and taller than we;the cities are large and fortified to
heaven. And besides, we saw the sons of the Anakim there."'
1 Samuel 21:11

18. But the servants of Achish said to him, "Is this not David the king of the land?
Did they not sing of this one as they danced, saying, 'Saul has slain his
thousands, And David his ten thousands'?"
Matthew 7:3-5
"Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice
the log that is in your own eye? "Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me
take the speck out of your eye,'and behold, the log is in your own eye? "You
hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly
to take the speck out of your brother's eye.
Matthew 5:29-30
"If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it
is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole
body to be thrown into hell. "If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off
and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your
body, than for your whole body to go into hell.
Matthew 19:24
"Again I sayto you, it is easierfor a camelto go through the eye of a needle,
than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
exaggeration
An overstatementofsomething, usually relating to its importance or value.
People exaggerate because offear, envy, pride or self-pity. Exaggerationcan
also be used positively to goodeffect, for example, in the teaching of Jesus
Christ.
Exaggerationof difficulties through fear

19. Nu 13:32-33 See alsoDt1:28; Dt 9:1
Exaggerationof the lifestyle of others through envy
Job 21:7-10 Job’s complaint that the wickedoften appearto prosper is stated
with exaggerationin order to make his point clear. See also Ps 73:3-12
Exaggerating one’s status orabilities through pride
Eze 27:3 See also Eze 28:2; Hos 12:8; Mt 8:19 pp Lk 9:57; Lk 22:33;Ac 12:21-
23; 1Co 4:8; Rev 3:17
Exaggerationof the achievements of others
1Sa 21:11 The reference to David as king by the Philistines may be an
exaggerationreflecting the greatsuccessand popularity of David among the
Israelite people. See also 1Sa 18:7; 1Sa 29:5
Exaggerationof troubles through self-pity
1Ki 18:22 See also 1Ki 19:10,14,18;Ps 12:1-2
Exaggerationof the appearance of others through admiration
These verses representexaggerationtypical in poetic descriptive passages:SS
5:10-16;SS 7:1-9
Exaggerationused by Jesus Christ as a teaching tool
Mt 7:3-5 pp Lk 6:41-42 See also Mt5:29-30;Mt 7:9-10 pp Lk 11:11-12;Mt
13:33 pp Lk 13:20; Mt 19:24 pp Mk 10:25 pp Lk 18:25
https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionary-of-bible-themes/5848-
exaggeration
Did Jesus EverExaggerate?
May 24, 2010 | Justin Taylor

20. Share
Mostof the time we intuitively recognize hyperbole—whena writer or
speakerconsciouslyoverstates something for emotionaleffect. For example, if
your kid says that everyone at schoolis laughing at him, or if your wife says
that you never take out the garbage, it doesn’tdo any goodtrying to prove
that there are exceptions to the statement. To do so misses the point.
But reading the Bible—especiallythe words of Jesus—canmake this a bit
more tricky. When is Jesus speaking hyperbolicallyand when is he to be
understood literalistically? [Note, I’m not using “literalistically” in a
pejorative sense in this context.]
Compounding the difficulty is that determining that a statementis hyperbole
is not an excuse to bypass the foundational, underlying truth being conveyed.
We must still allow the words to make their intended emotional impact.
In his new book, 40 Questions about Interpreting the Bible, Robert Plummer
provides some goodguidelines for identifying hyperbole (pp. 220-226). (He’s
drawing here from Robert Stein’s work, A Basic Guide to Interpreting the
Bible: Playing by the Rules.)
These are helpful in thinking through various verses, evenif you don’t agree
with every exegeticalexample.
The statementis literally impossible [e.g., Matt. 19:24; Matt. 6:3; Matt. 7:3-5]
The statementconflicts with what Jesus says elsewhere[compare Matt. 23:9
with Matt. 19:19;see also Matt. 6:6; Luke 14:26]
The statementconflicts with the actions of Jesus elsewhere [compare Luke
14:26 and Mark 7:9-13; John 19:26-27]

21. The statementconflicts with the broader teaching of Scripture (e.g., cf. Matt.
5:33-37 with 2 Cor. 11:31; Gal. 1:20; Phil. 1:8).
The statementis not always literally fulfilled in practice (e.g., Mark 13:2;
Mark 11:22-24).
The statement’s literal fulfillment would not achieve the desired goals (cf.
Matt. 5:29-30).
The statementuses a particularly literary form prone to exaggeration(e.g.,
proverbs, poetry, and prophecy; see 2 Sam. 1:23).
The statementuses all-inclusive or universal language (e.g., Col. 1:23;cf.
Rom. 15:20)
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/did-jesus-ever-
exagerrate/
I spent a goodmany of my growing-up years in the rolling hills and hollows of
southern Indiana. I married a girl from that land of caves and creeksand
trees who was fully immersed in the traditions and customs of that land. One
of her favorite lines that kept me and my New England relatives laughing was
"Where's it at?"--withthe at added to a wide range of sentences (where's that
car at?, where's that house at, etc.). I not only grew to love that girl and her
Hoosierways, but also grew to love the people and their expressions.
One of the things that I have learned since those early days is that all regions
of the country have their own colloquialisms, but the one thing that is
common is that all regions have a common way of dealing with uncomfortable
changes in the weather. Thatmethod is the exaggeratedand tall tales about
the weatherthat are so preposterous that everyone knows that the speakeris
not serious. Examples of statements of this nature are legion, but here are a
few:

22. It was so hot, farmers had to feed their chickens ice so they wouldn't lay hard-
boiled eggs.
It was so dry, I saw a cottonwoodtree following a dog.
It was so dry, a catfishcame up to geta drink out of my well.
We got12 inches of rain last year and I was lucky enough to be home that
night.
The other kind of thing that is typical of all cultures is first-person weather
stories--againso exaggeratedthat the listener knows that the story is bogus.
Some examples of this follow:
I saw a storm coming, hopped in my truck, and headed for home. I just beat
the storm to the house, but my dog was exhaustedfrom dog-paddling in the
waterin the back of the pickup.
I went into town after the big rain and saw an expensive hat in a puddle. I
picked it up and there was a man under the hat! "Are you O.K.?" I asked.
The man said, "yeah, I guess so, but I'm sure glad I'm on horseback."
All of us are familiar with these kinds of stories. Even though they are false,
we do not classifythose who tell the stories as liars. We understand by the
nature of the story and by the teller that the exaggerationis deliberate and
honest and has no malicious intent nor attempt to deceive.
https://www.doesgodexist.org/MarApr96/ExaggerationsWeather.html
There really is no way of expressing love to someone without exaggerated
language. If you eliminate exaggeratedlanguage, youare in trouble in any
courting, romantic relationship. “My dear Joan, the last time I kissedyou, the
stars beganto explode in the heavens and my heart skipped a beat. Can’t wait
to see you Friday.”

23. That’s exaggeratedterminology. Lets use more scientific terminology. “My
dear Joan, the last time I kissedyou, it was just like putting my lips on a piece
of raw warm leather.”
Well. Which is more accurate?Which is the one that is going to get you into
trouble? You have to be able to use language like this to express emotions.
And lots of Jesus’terminologyand expressions are exaggeratedterminology,
but they are known and they are shared and they are powerful.
Now through the history of the Church, most people have been able to detect
exaggerationon a kind of common sense intuitive way. Mostpeople know it.
There have been tragic examples, however, this has not been understoodand
people have plucked out an eye or cut off an arm and mutilated themselves,
because they misunderstood the nature of the saying.
https://www.biblicaltraining.org/blog/curious-christian/2-20-2013/did-jesus-
use-exaggerated-language
TentmakerBible Matters #16
Hyperbole (exaggerationfor effect)in the Bible and its Problems
By Gary Amirault
What’s in this article? The Christian Bible is full of figures of speechwhich
have not been brought into our translations accurately. One of these figures of
speechis hyperbole, to exaggerateoramplify something for effect. Due to the
way Christians are taught to read the Bible (literally), and the fact that many
of these figures of speechhave not been brought into English translations
saying they are figures of speechor what they meant, nor have Christians
been taught to look for them, nor have many translations pointed them out in
footnotes, many Christians misinterpret much of the hyperbolic language of
the Bible. Christians are generallytaught to read the Bible literally, only
looking for figurative language whenthe literal approach makes no sense. Yet
the Bible is full of over 200 different types of figures of speechwhich require a

24. non-literal reading to gain true meaning. There are severalfactors that make
it difficult for us to fully appreciate and try to understand the Bible using a
non-literal approach. This article addresses some ofthese points. Here are the
major points:
*Christians are taught exaggerationis a form of lying. God is not a man that
He should lie. Many of the figures of speechin the Bible border what we in the
Westcould considera lie, but not so from an Easternpoint of view.
*Many pastors use Rev 22:19 about adding and taking away from the words
of this prophecy and apply it to the whole Bible. This false teaching makes one
fearful to look for meaning beyond the literal text. The fact that there is a
textual error right within this very verse and those who put it in did not
receive the plagues, should be seriouslythought about. The error will be
pointed out later in this article.
*Personalspiritualizing opens up a Pandora’s Boxof private interpretations
which makes it difficult to teachand keepa church on the same page.
*MostBible translations have been literal translations which do not inform
the readerwhere a figure of speechmay have been employed in the original.
“The Companion Bible” by E.W. Bullinger published by KregalPublications,
does often note in the footnotes whena figure is employed in the King James
text.
*MostChristians are unfamiliar with the manners and customs of ancient
times making it difficult to understand the figures of speechthey employed.
*A literalist dispensationalisttheologyin a large part of the church has
kidnapped large portions of scripture placing their fulfillment in our times
when in fact they were fulfilled in the first century.
*We have been taught the Bible does not contain any contradictions. The fact
is many translations do contain contradictions. Furthermore, some passages
appear to be contradictions because we do not understand that a figure of
speechwas employed in the original which must be considered.

25. I am convincedone of the greatestproblems found among Christians is that
they are not taught how to properly read and study the Bible. A hurdle few
Christians ever jump in their understanding of Scriptures is the factthat the
original languages ofthe Bible contain ever 200 different forms of figures of
speech, many of which have NOT been brought into the modern languages in
which most people read the scriptures. This Bible Matters edition just briefly
touches on just one of those figures of speech(hyperbole) and the hurdles we
have to jump over in order to really understand what the writers of the
Scriptures were really trying to convey.
Becauseofthe way most Christians have been taught to read the Bible, the
figure of speechcalledhyperbole has usually been misread, leading to some
gross misinterpretation of the original authors’ meaning. Misconstruing the
meaning of the words of the original writers of the Bible is causing great
problems in the world today and has causedmany problems in the world
throughout the Church Age. If a Christian President of the United States, for
example, expects because ofhis understanding of the Bible, to have a battle of
Armageddon to occuron his watchin which certain countries or ethnic
groups are to be the goodguys and others are to be the bad guys, then he is
likely to make political and military decisions basedupon his beliefs. If you
believe the world is going to end in your lifetime and you teach this to your
children, this will dramatically effecthow those children will prepare for the
future.
Hyberbole is exaggerating something beyond the bounds of normality to catch
the reader’s attention. Sometimes truths canbecome mere clichés. Stating
those truths in a “biggerthan life” kind of way sometimes wakesa personup
– refreshes whathas been treated as common place. Jesus was a master of the
hyperbole. “Christ had even a literary style of his own.…The diction used by
Christ is quite curiously gigantesque;it is full of camels leaping through
needles and mountains hurled into the sea.” G. K. Chesterton.
According to E.W. Bullinger in his “Figures of SpeechUsedin the Bible,” the
meaning of the word hyperbole is from the Greek “’huper,’ over and above or
beyond and ‘bolee’a casting from ‘ballein’, to throw. Hence a casting or going
beyond, overshooting, excess. The figure is so called because the expression

26. adds to the sense so much that it exaggeratesit, and enlarges ordiminishes it
more than is really meant in fact. Or, when more is said than is meant to be
literally understood, in order to heighten the sense.”
Of the over 200 different types of figures of speechemployed by the writers of
the Bible, hyperbole is actually one of the more easyforms to figure out in the
Bible although many of them are not recognized.
Before we look at some examples of hyperbole in the Bible, let us look at
severalmindsets or worldviews or understandings about the Bible that many
Christians have been taught which cause many to “make the word of God of
no effect” or actually produce a negative effectin their lives and the lives of
those they influence.
Christians have traditionally been taught to read the Bible literally. Only
when we absolutelycannot make sense out of the passagein its literal form
are we allowedto look for a figure of speechin the Bible according to the
traditional way of reading the Bible. We are taught that the Bible is THE
truth, that it is the very “word of God.” We cantrust and believe what is
written. The Bible is literally true. We have been taught that a slight twisting
of the truth is a lie. Half-truths are lies. We are reminded of how Eve was
deceivedby Satanby slightly twisting the truth. Through this kind of
indoctrination regarding how to read and understand the Bible, our minds
become conditioned to steerawayfrom looking for symbolic meanings,
spiritual interpretations, allegoriesand various other forms of figures of
speech, which require more than just a surface reading of the text. I have been
in dozens of different Bible studies. The waythe Bible is taught in most of
them reminds me of how kids are taught in the earliestgrades in elementary
school. Young children are incapable of handling abstractthoughts so
memorization is what is most emphasized. Learning using abstractthought
comes laterin a child’s development. Christian adults in adult Bible studies
are taught like first graders – literal reading and memorizing.
To read and understand the Bible as it was actually written, that is, filled with
hundreds of different forms of figures of speechwhich should NOT be taken
literally, requires some serious study – study which most Christians (including

27. pastors)are not willing to do. Jesus saidthat Satanwas a liar and the father of
all lies. Many Christians, who have been taught to read the Bible literally,
categorize some forms of figures of speechas lies. Stretching the truth is
considereda lie in many Christian circles. Some hyperbole actually enters into
the realm of what we, in the West, would call a lie. The Semitic languages
(Hebrew being one of them) are exaggerative to an extreme. The Bible is
FILLED with these exaggerative expressions. Becausewe are taught to take
the text literally and because mostBible translations have used a literal nearly
word-for-word approachin translating, we are left with thousands of passages
of Scripture to which we have little to no accurate understanding – and the
understandings we have been taught by our teachers are often false.
A bookbinder who specializes in old Bible repairs will tell you that most
Christians spend most of their time in the last one quarter of the Bible. They
can tell this by the wearand the number of passagesthat are underlined or
have comments made in the margins by those to whom the Bible belonged.
The New Testamentportion of the Bible is far more marked up in most
Christians’ Bibles than the Old. Unfortunately, all the definitions and
meanings of things found in the New Testamentcome from the Old
Testament. Without a thorough understanding of what the figures in the Old
Testamentmean from an ancient Semitic point of view, we can’t really
understand the New Testament. Forexample, the meaning of the symbols in
the book of Revelationare found in the Old Testament, not in modern day
things like computers named “beast,” helicopters that look like locust or men
like Ronald WilsonReaganwho has six letters in eachof his names. Apart
from learning a few Bible stories about the creationof the world and a few
major characters like Abraham, Moses,David, etc., and reading the psalms
for devotionalpurposes, the restof the Old Testamentportion of the Bible
isn’t really studied too deeply in most Christian circles unless they are in a
denomination which still practices portions of the Mosaic Law like the
Seventh Day Adventists. These Mosaic Law centeredgroups, insteadof
learning the meaning of the types in the Old Covenant and applying them to
the New, end up getting stuck in the types and shadows ofthe Old and fall
from grace, if they ever receivedgrace in the first place. MostChristians,
when reading the Old Testament, glance overit, as reading laws that are no

28. longervalid and endless genealogiesthat are no longerrelevant. Boring stuff
that can’t compete with the various forms of modern entertainment to which
we have become addicted.
To understand the figures of speechburied beneath our English translations,
one must dig beyond the surface of the words on at leasttwo or maybe more
different levels. Christians simply can’t or won’t do that. They say “The Bible
says it, I believe it, and that settles it.” “I don’t have to understand it; I only
have to believe it.” This kind of mindset actually is the mindset that “twists”
the words of Scriptures into the lie.
Let’s take the Englishsaying, “It is raining cats and dogs” as an example. A
child who heard this for the first time would not understand that it is a
figurative expressionmeaning that it was raining very heavily. Someone
would have to teachthem that many words or phrases in the Englishlanguage
have multiple meanings and some words or phrases are not meant to be taken
literally. Every language has its own figures of speechand there are many
thousands of them. Learning the literal meaning of words and understanding
the syntax of a language will not unlock their realmeaning. One must be
taught the meaning of the figure of speechwhich often doesn’t make much
natural sense.
If we translate this Englishexpressioninto Chinese word-for-word, the odds
are that a Chinese person will not understand the sentence becausethe odds
are that this English figure of speechdoesn’texist in the Chinese language.
How would a Chinese person know this expressionmeans that it is raining
heavily? Someone familiar with English would have to explain it to them.
Then the next time the Chinese person came across thatphrase they could
read into the literal text its actualmeaning.
The same is true with the Bible which was originally written in Hebrew, a
little Aramaic, and Greek. There are over 770,000words in the Bible. This
book is literally FILLED with expressions which should NOT be taken
literally. One of the problems with knowing whether something should be
takenliterally or figuratively is that the Bible often deals with the
supernatural. Something that normally would be considereda hyperbole in

29. any other book may NOT be hyperbolic language at all. God does miracles
that defy the normal. Typically, we can recognize a hyperbole when a literal
reading of the text violates our senses andunderstanding of how things
normally operate. But the Bible deals with super normal things. People walk
on water, get raisedfrom the grave, getcaught up in the air on chariots, get
swallowedup in giant fish, etc. Therefore, it is all the more difficult to discern
the difference betweenan actual event or literal statementand a figure of
speech, especiallya hyperbole, an exaggerationofwords to make a point.
Speaking of giant fish, let me divert from our subject slightly to make this
even more complicated. According to Dr. George Lamsa, a man who grew up
in a village that spoke a form of Aramaic very close to that spokenin Jesus’
day, the Aramaic phrase “The word of the Lord came…” means the person
was in a vision. (See “Idioms in the Bible Explained and A Key to the Original
Gospels” by Dr. George Lamsa.)In other words, everything that happened in
the story of Jonahwas actually a vision, not something that actually
happened. However, if this is the case,it does NOT mean, the meaning of the
vision is not actually true – the meaning of the story may actually be more
true than the teaching that this story literally happened. The important thing
in the story, whether an actualevent or a vision, is what is God saying to us
today? Just because a passage ofscripture is a vision does not mean it is not
divine or inspired. It is still important. That Jonahmay not have actually been
swallowedby a whale shouldn’t diminish the messageofthe story any
whatsoever.
Normally, we know that a statementis an exaggerationwhenthe literal
interpretation violates our common sense logic and observationof how things
generallyoperate. But the Bible instructs us in many ways to ignore our
common and natural sensesand “believe what we can’t see.”Faithis believing
what we can’t see. Nothing is impossible with God. But what if someone
believes in their heart they can tell mountains to be thrown into the sea and it
will obey? God Himself speaks things as though they are, even though they do
not yet exist and we are taught to emulate Him. “Faith is the substance of
things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” So then, we must believe
what doesn’t make sense to our natural understanding. As a matter of fact,
the Bible warns us that our natural understanding is foolishness andan

30. enemy of God. Put all these things togetherand it becomes easyto see that
discerning what is a hyperbole or any other form of a figure of speechis much
more difficult in the Bible than in any other book.
Another obstacle one must overcome to gain the true meaning of Scriptures is
the factthat Revelation22:19 has been used, or should I say misused, to hold
Christians in fear of digging into the Bible too deeply:
“And if any man shall take awayfrom the words of the book of this prophecy,
God shall take awayhis part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city,
and from the things which are written in this book.” (Revelation22:19, KJV)
Since these words are found at the end of the Bible, they have been used as a
warning about messing too much with the entire Bible. Looking for symbolic
meaning or understanding figures of speechemployed by the writers of the
Bible are considered“adding to” or “taking away” from the things written in
the entire Bible. I personallybelieve John was referring only to the Book of
Revelation. What is quite remarkable is the factthat this very verse has been
“added to” and “takenawayfrom” in the King James Version as well as some
other translations. It is a well-knownfact among Bible scholars that the
foundational Greek Text of the King James “Authorized Version” was a later
edition of Erasmus’s Greek text which came to be known through an
advertising ploy of the publishers as the “Textus Receptus.” Erasmus, a
Catholic monk, did not have complete ancientmanuscripts with which to
make his printed Greek Textin the early sixteenth century. The Greek
manuscripts available to him lackedportions of the book of Revelation. The
last few lines of Revelationwere one of the parts missing. Since he was in a
time rush to get his text printed because anothergroup was also working on a
Greek text to be put into print form, rather than looking for a Greek
manuscript that containedthose lines, he merely went into a Latin manuscript
and translatedthat into his Greek text. That is where Erasmus found “the
book of life,” instead of what all the known Greek texts have as “the tree of
life.” I find it ironic that the verse used often to warn people not to add or take
awayfrom the Bible is actually a verse in which the “tree of life” was taken
awayand a “book of life” was added. Did Erasmus receive the plagues in the
book? Did King James and his translators who used Erasmus’s Greek text?
Are those who are using the King James Bible receiving these plagues? No,

31. they are not. Give thanks we serve a merciful God! This ploy of adding curses
at the beginning or end of writings of this nature was common during the time
of the writing of the New Testament.
It is most unfortunate, that most modern English translations do not note
these kinds of errors produced by those who give us translations into our own
common languages. Theyare afraid honesty in the arena of Bible translating
might cause people to disbelieve in the “BiblicalInerrancy Doctrines” which
they have peddled for hundreds of years. These various forms of statements
regarding the Bible’s inerrancy are either direct lies or carefully crafted
statements that hide the fact they know that Bible translations have errors –
ALL of them! They saythe original writings of the Bible were divinely
written. Fine, but we don’t have the originals. Church leaders write these
inerrancy statements in such a way that makes it appearthat the inspiration
on the originals has passedon to the translations themselves which is not true.
It is deceptive, that’s all there is to it. It misleads people into trusting their
translation more than they should. The fact is modern Bible translations
differ from one another in major doctrines. Anyone who honestly compares a
dozen or so English translations can’t help but see that. And yet tens of
thousands of seminary professors, Bible college teachers,pastors and
ministers of all kind give the impression all translations read the same on
major doctrines. This is categoricallyfalse.
One more problem with hyperbole and the Bible is that many of them deal
with times and cultures with which we are no longerfamiliar. What was
obviously a figure of speechto someone living 3,000 years ago in Shechem
may not be so obvious to someone living in London, England who is totally
unfamiliar with the manners and customs of the Semitic tribes of the Middle
East.
Personally, I have come to the conclusion, that if a Christian does not
determine to seek ourMakerwith all their heart, soul, mind and strength, if
one does not earnestly seek to have the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth as their
primary guide, if one does not purpose to take Bible study more seriouslythan
the entertainment that swallows up the majority of our leisure time, if one is
not interestedin understanding the intricacies of the art of language and does

32. not appreciate the tremendous powerof words (both in their creative and
destructive power), then they are very likely to misunderstand and
misrepresentwhat the Holy Scriptures actually say. I have been in scores of
Bible study classesin the United States. Sadly, our understanding of the
scriptures is somewhere below pathetic. The average American Christian
knows far more about stars from movies, TV and sports than about the things
of the Bible.
Exaggerationis hyperbole:
Hyperbole in the Bible presents some greatdifficulty for the average English
reader. The Bible states that “God is not a man that He should lie.” (Numbers
23:19)In Semitic languages(Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic, for example),
hyperbole is used so often and in such grosslyexaggeratedforms that for the
average Englishspeaking personit borders on lying. Years ago, I attended a
wedding in Israel. The man getting married had to negotiate the purchase of
food for the wedding with a localArab businessman. My friend invited me to
come along. He warnedme that the negotiations might getloud – that this was
part of the way they did business in the Arab culture. The hands beganto
start flailing during the negotiations and I thought they were going to get into
a fist fight. But when it was all over, the two shook hands and all was well.
The “heat” was just a ritual that was part of their culture. The Semitic
languages are full of “heat.” What makes it even more difficult is that God,
who is a consuming fire, communicates to mankind in this hot language. A
truly bigger than life God Who is supernatural speaks to us through an
explosive language that often sounds like what we Westerners are accustomed
to calling lies.
Here are some examples:
“And thou, Capernaum, which art exaltedunto heaven, shalt be brought
down to hell (Hades).” (Matt. 11:23) The entire city of Capernaum was never
in heaven and would never be brought to a place of Hell or Hades. This
phrase simply means that Capernaum was highly favored of God -- it was
exalted above all cities in the world because it saw the mighty miracles Jesus
wrought. But the trade routes that made Capernaum a prosperous city moved

33. causing the city to be abandoned. Soonthe entire city was beneath sand and
became “unseen,” whichis what the Greek word hades means. It was not until
the twentieth century that the city of Capernaum surfacedagain through
archaeologicalexcavation. Jesus propheticallypredicted the city would die.
“When you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right
hand is doing” (Matt. 6:3); “It is easierfora camel to go through the eye of a
needle than for a rich personto enter the kingdom of God” (Matt. 19:24); The
kingdom of God “is like a grain of mustard seedthat a man took and sowedin
his garden, and it grew and became a tree, and the birds of the air made nests
in its branches” (Luke 13:19).
Luke 14:26: “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and
mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own
life, he cannotbe my disciple.”
“I beat [my enemies]fine as dust before the wind” (Ps. 18:42);“A thousand
may fall at your side, ten thousand at your right hand, but it will not come
near you” (Ps. 91:7); “You are all togetherbeautiful, my love; there is no flaw
in you” (Song 4:7); The wicked“cannotsleepunless they have done wrong;
they are robbed of sleep unless they have made someone stumble” (Prov.
4:16).
“When you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right
hand is doing” (Matt. 6:3); “It is easierfora camel to go through the eye of a
needle than for a rich personto enter the kingdom of God” (Matt. 19:24); The
kingdom of God “is like a grain of mustard seedthat a man took and sowedin
his garden, and it grew and became a tree, and the birds of the air made nests
in its branches” (Luke 13:19).
Example: Matthew 23:24 “You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but
swallow a camel.” (NIV)
Let’s look at a few hyperboles in modern American English. I say “American”
because there are many hyperboles in the United States Englishlanguage
which do not occur in England or other Englishspeaking countries and vice-
a-versa.

34. This book weighs a ton.
She is always talking.
I could sleepfor a year.
This is the worstday of my life.
She is a hot tomato.
I calledyou a hundred times to come to supper.
Hyperbole versus reality:
“I am so hungry I could eat a horse.” (Hyperbole)
“I am so hungry I could eat until I couldn’t eatanymore.” (Reality)
Examples of hyperbole in the Bible that are often overlookedor
misinterpreted:
Speaking of King Hezekiah, “After him was none like him among all the kings
of Judah, nor any that were before him.” (2 Kings 18:5) But in 2 Kings 23:25
we read about King Josiahthat “like unto him was there no king before him, .
. . neither after him arose there any like him.” The Bible is either lying or we
have here a hyperbole. The Bible is filled with these kinds of exaggerations.
Secularhumanists and atheists who try to prove the Bible is full of errors use
hundreds of examples like these to prove the inaccuracyof the Bible.
Unfortunately, we, Christians, have given them ample ammunition because
we have not recognizedthat the Bible is filled with figures of speechwhich
must NOT be takenliterally. These atheistapologists are merely mouthing
back to us what is commonly taught in Bible studies every day. They see
contradictions in the Bible because we are not willing to acknowledgeplain
hyperbole.
Here’s anotherexample:
Speaking of God judging Israel by taking them to Babylon, we find in the
book of EzekielGod saying, “because ofall your abominations, I will do
among you what I have not done, and the like of which I will never do again.”

35. (Ezekiel5:9). Here we find God pronouncing a greatjudgment the likes of
which He will never do again. Yet Jesus informs us that there would be a
GreatTribulation upon Israelthat would supercede the Babylonian captivity:
“Forthen shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the
world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.” (Matthew 24:21)
Was Ezekiellying about what God said? Or is Jesus lying? Or do we have
here a figure of speechwe have not been taught to recognize? You see, many
of us Christians have unconsciouslyavoided looking carefully at these seeming
discrepancies in the Bible for fear of becoming unbelievers or being accusedof
“spiritualizing” the Bible.
When it comes to “rightly dividing the word of truth” the very people who
teachthe Bible must be read literally in order not to “twistthe truth into a
lie” often are the very ones who have “takenaway” precious meaning from
the scriptures.
https://www.tentmaker.org/Biblematters/hyperbole2.htm
Why You Needto Stop Exaggerating
Carrie Dedrick
“I’m starving.” -Americans, all the time.
“Everything hurts and I’m dying.” -Leslie Knope, Parks and Recreation
“I need coffee in an IV.” -Lorelai Gilmore, Gilmore Girls
What do these quotes have in common? They are all exaggerations. Theyare
taking simple statements, suchas “I’m hungry,” or “I’m sore,” and stretching
them into something extraordinary.

36. We hear exaggerations constantly;in the media, in pop culture, and we say
them ourselves. These statements are harmless, right? Everyone knows that
you’re not actually dying.
But our tendency to exaggerate the normal could actually be undermining the
messageof the gospel.
In the For the Church blog How ExaggerationCanUndermine Your Joy in
the Gospel, author and pastor Erik Raymond writes that we love the ability to
round-up through exaggeration. Butif we claim “everything is awesome,then
nothing is.”
He says, “First, exaggerationdiminishes our perception of reality. And
second, exaggerationdulls our sense of the spectacular. We are always
inflating or deflating with our exaggeration.”
We have become so used to the idea of sensationalizing everything, that the
Bible seems less amazing that it did thousands of years ago.
Raymond demonstrates this through the story of Noah. In Genesis 6:6 we
read, “The Lord saw that the wickednessofman was greatin the earth, and
that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”
Mankind was evil all the time. This is not an exaggeration. We wantto brush
this off like the overstatements we are so accustomedto today, but the Bible
does not exaggerate.It is the Truth. Mankind was evil and God’s perfect
creationhad turned wicked.
Later we read, “But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.” (Genesis 6:8)
Raymond writes, “That’s a big but right there. Like other conjunctions at key
points of the Bible (cf. Eph. 2.4), this is a statementof contrast. It is like the
waves of judgment being pushed back so that God’s people could be saved. It
is grace. And grace is always amazing.”
In our “everything is awesome”world, we have forgotten how amazing grace
truly is.

37. We, like Noah, have found favor in the eyes of the Lord. We receive God’s
grace “becauseJesus was blottedout for us. God does not withhold the
strokes that justice demands of us, no, he gives them in full measure to Christ
instead.”
“If you think the Bible’s portrayal of sin is exaggeratedthen you will think its
statements about grace are overstated. Friends beware of letting the air out of
the grace ofGod while inflating your own goodness.Our culture of
exaggerationaids and abets this and we must fight againstit,” Raymond
writes.
How do we fight it? Remember the difference betweencultural exaggeration
and the timeless Truth that is the Word of God.
Crosswalk.comcontributing writer Debbie McDaniellists these eight verses
that remind us our deepestjoy comes from the One who also grantedus grace.
McDanielalso offers the following prayer seeking Godand His grace:
DearGod,
At the start of eachday, help us to recognize you above all else. Enlighten the
eyes of our heart that we might see you, and notice how you're at work
through our lives. Give us wisdom to make the bestchoices, fill us with a
desire to seek afteryou more than anything else in this world. Let your Spirit
and powerbreathe in us, through us, again, fresh and new. Thank you that
you are greaterthan anything we may face in our day. Thank you that your
presence goeswith us, and that your joy is never dependent on our
circumstances, but it is our true and lasting strength, no matter what we're up
against. We ask that your peace leadus, that it would guard our hearts and
minds in you. We ask for your grace to cover our lives this day. We love you
Lord… we need you.
In Jesus'Name, Amen.
Carrie Dedrick is an editor of Crosswalk.com. Whenshe is not writing or
editing, she can usually be found teaching dance classes, running marathons,
or reading with at leastone adopted dog on her lap.

38. Brethren Archive
Exaggerations
by John Dickie
EVERY word of God is pure. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God,
and is therefore profitable." It is all inspired, all divinely fitted for man's
spiritual need, with eachportion of it perfectly adjusted to all the rest, that the
man of God may be thoroughly furnished unto all goodworks. At the same
time, so far as spiritual guidance is concerned, no words but the words of God
are to be accountedabsolutelypure, therefore "add thou not unto his words,
lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar" (Prov. xxx. 5,6). The intelligent
Christian, then, while on the one hand, he reverently listens to every word
which God is pleasedto speak to him, will on the other be tremulously careful
not to add to the heavenly words, lesthis own additions should mislead him,
and in the end he should receive, not the divine approval, but the divine
reproof.
Unless this spirit of reverent watchfulness be cherished, he shall be apt to fall
into a common practice, which unhappily is as natural as it is common, and
which succeeds in combining both the mistakes which have been already
referred to. This is, to creamthe Bible—to selectout of it what we may be
pleasedto accountits most precious portions; forgetting that "every word of
God is pure," and that the Bible as it has been given to us, is altogetherand
only cream. When this spirit of irreverent eclecticismis indulged, it ends by
furnishing the reader with a private Bible of his own—a book which in bulk,
may be very much smaller than the Book ofGod, and which in its spiritual
influence may differ as widely from the original Bible as one book can well
differ from another. The mutilated Bible not only lacks much that is to be
found in the other, but the missing portions are more than likely to be those
very portions which are most urgently needed by the irreverent compiler, for

39. his reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness. But the evil does not
end here. Those selectedfragments which go to compose the abridged Bible,
being now read apart from the connectedtruths which are essentialto their
profitable use, are sure to produce in the reader's mind, exaggeratedand
perverted notions of the subjects taught in them. These exaggerations become
virtual additions to God's Word; and in this way, the reader dishonours the
Bible nearly as much through the fragments of it which he idolatrously
misuses, as through those portions of it which he presumptuously neglects.
The history of the Book of God, and of its treatment at the hands of men, is
full of illustrations of this spirit of irreverent exaggeration. Notto refer to an
earlier instance, we find that, towards the close ofthe Jewish economy, the
entire religious life of the nation had for long been developedinto an elaborate
system of godless exaggerations.The entire system of Pharisaic religious-ness
was nothing better than such a setof unwarranted and extravagantadditions
to the law. At the first, these exaggerations hadtheir rise in a commendable
desire to preserve the law of God, intact amid the corrupting foreign
influences which were entering the nation from many quarters, especially
after the return from Babylon. The earnestleaders among the Jews, dreading
the influence of these innovations, sought to preserve the national religion by
putting what they called"a hedge" around the law, to protect it from the
threatened deluge of Gentile novelties. This hedge they fancied they had found
in an exaggerationofthe more prominent precepts. In order that the precept
itself might be reverenced, they demanded that a certainrange of territory
round about it should be accountedholy. Alas! this was the readiestway to
secure, not the devout observance ofthe precept, as they had de- signed, but
the systematic neglectofit; for these unwarranted additions gradually
increaseduntil the original precept was buried beneath the overwhelming
mass, and the divine kernelcame to be forgotten because ofthe exclusive
attention which was exactedby the worthless husk that had been wrapped
around it to preserve it. The supererogatorytithing of the mint-bed gave no
security that, a fortiori, the thought of robbing a widow should be abhorred.
It sometimes only enabled the dishonest devotee to perpetrate his spoilations
with an easierconscience;he fancied that his two-penny tithes of mint and
anise were so very meritorious, that he could well afford to draw a little on the

40. fund of merit by indulging occasionallyin devouring the house of the widow
or in robbing the patrimony of the orphan. They who beganby exaggerating
the preceptfor the sake of securing its authority, ended by making the
commandments of God of none effectthrough these very exaggerations.
And we may not imagine that since we are not JewishPharisees,we are free
from the same unhappy tendency. The tendency to exaggerateis universal. It
is not merely a Jewishbut a human infirmity; and the spirit of it may be
freely indulged while one is quite unconscious ofindulging it. What could be
plainer than our Lord's reply to Peter, when the latter askedhis Masterabout
John? —-"Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saithunto him, "If I will
that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me." And yet this
very simple statement, heard by guileless men, could not be repeated
correctly, as it seems;for when handed from disciple to disciple, it soon, like
some rolling snow-ball, grew into a huge exaggeration. "Thenwentthis saying
abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die." Yet Jesus said
not unto him, "He shall not die; but, if I will, that he tarry till I come, what is
that to thee?" (John xxi. 21-23.)
In the Apostolic Church we find the same spirit of exaggerationrife. Let the
mention of a single case suffice. The Apostle James felt it needful to write an
epistle which had for its principal objectto expose a very perilous but very
natural exaggerationofthe gospel. Paulhad taught—and the same Spirit
which spoke in Paul, had been similarly speaking in the other apostles—that
"to him that workethnot, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his
faith is counted for righteousness;evenas David also describeth the
blessednessofthe man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without
works." In the sense in which the apostle usedthese blessedwords, the
statementis true up to its widest extent of meaning; but exaggeration, as
usual, setto work on the inspired language, andanother apostle had to lift up
his voice in earnestwarning, "Wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without
works is dead?" Faith without works saves:yes—but take heednot to
misunderstand, for faith without works is dead.
In the age which followedthe apostolic, we see the same evil spirit of
exaggerationat work. Ignatius and some of the early fathers formed an

41. overweening estimate of the meritoriousness and the blessednessof
martyrdom; and this immoderate estimate continued to grow in the Church
until multitudes of men and womencommitted virtual suicide under the
mistakenthought that if they could only provoke magistrates to condemn
them to death, they were thereby earning a title to the brightest crownof life.
About the same time, a similar exaggerationofthe Christian duty of forsaking
an evil world began to prevail. Overlooking altogetherthe meaning of our
Lord's lastintercessoryprayer, "I pray not that thou shouldest take them out
of the world, but that thou shouldest keepthem from the evil." They allowed
themselves to intensify those precepts which callupon the people of God to
come out and to be separate from the unclean; till this exaggeration, which
commencedin one of the most holy tendencies of a gracious spirit, ripened by
degrees into all the moral horrors of medieval monkery.
Few feelings canbe esteemedto be more natural more amiable than the
veneration with which the early suffering Church cherishedthe memory of
her martyrs. The loving remembrance of a departed pastor's example and
counsels, appropriate and becoming in the case ofthose who had losttheir
leaderby a natural death, was doubly becoming in the case ofthose whose
pastors had "resistedunto blood." And yet this same loving remembrance,
useful and fitting in its own place, was gradually exaggeratedinto the formal
worship of departed saints, until, through this exaggeration, the superstitious
Romanisthas for long, come to have "lords many," and to recognize such a
host of subordinate mediators, that he gets bewilderedamid the crowdof
them, and fails to find his way to the "One MediatorbetweenGod and man."
Through a similar process, the simple and beautiful ordinance of the Lord's
Supper became gradually developed into the "unbloody sacrifice ofthe
Mass."
We need not add any more to these illustrations of the workings of this evil
spirit in bygone ages. It will be more profitable to remember that
exaggerationis as rife now as it ever was. It is at work everywhere;it is at
work always;and it is daily producing its invariably bitter fruits. Whence, but
from this come almost all those sectariandifferences which are so fiercely
contested, whichbreak up so sadly the unity of God's Church, and which

42. waste so recklesslythe precious energies that are urgently needed for better
purposes? One brother sees one truth to be very clearly revealedin the Word
of God; while his neighbour has got as firm a graspof quite a different truth.
No harm whateverneed arise from this difference, since eachof the truths is
alike true. If, then, in brotherly love and unity, A and B set themselves to help
eachother in their common explorations of the divine Word, the lack of each
will be happily supplemented by the abundance of each. But, alas!lowly and
loving behaviour like this has hitherto been the exceptionin the Church, not
the rule. A is much more likely to exaggeratethe truth which he holds; while
B is just as likely to exaggerate his. Now, though divine truth is always self-
consistent, and though no single article of faith, revealedin the Word of God,
will ever be found to contradictany other article, yet the exaggerationsof
these will be sure to come into deadly conflict, and the spirit of sectarian
contentiousness willthus arise. Hitherto the average A and the average B,
have comported themselves after this bitter fashion; nay, the two individuals
supposed, may be regarded in the light of representative men, whose
unbrotherly janglings constitute so large a sectionof the Church's history. On
reading the story of the past, or even on looking abroadover much of the
present, one often feels as Arnold touchingly expresses it, "When I think of
the Church, I could sit down, and pine, and die." And to what extent we are
all the victims of this unholy spirit of exaggeration, none can tell save He who
sitteth in the light and sees us as we really are.
A zealous temperament makes a man peculiarly liable to this vice of
exaggeration;and if the real be associatedwith a narrow intellect, the
tendency to exaggerate willreachits maximum. Possiblythe whole mental
activity of a man of this stamp may expend itself in the direction of pure
exaggeration. Hence we not infrequently meet with narrow-minded, warm-
hearted men who canscarcelybe credited with the possessionofa genuine
truth; for in their hands truth is speedily transformed into error. No sooner
do they become interested in any subject, than they begin to exaggerateit,
sometimes to the extent of caricature;forgetful that any divine truth continues
to be true, only while it is allowedto lie amid the setting of related truths in
which God has imbedded it, while it retains the proportional size and shape
which its Author has assignedit. But men of this temperament cannot

43. appreciate, much less canthey practice, this moderation of wisdom. Sure to be
in extremes, they either totally neglect, orelse they kill through positive
kindness. One of the shrewdestobservers ofcharacternow alive, says of
enthusiasm, "Its very essenceis a tendency to error and exaggeration."
Rabia, an early Mohammedansaint, lay sick. Two holy men of the same faith
came to visit her, and were standing by her couch. "We should always so
recognize the will of God in affliction," said one of the visitors modestly, "that
we shall be able to endure the affliction with perfect patience." "Nay,"
returned his companion, anxious to strike a still higher note, "since it is the
will of God that we should suffer, the sufferer ought to do far more than
endure it patiently; he should positively rejoice in the very affliction." Here
was a higher bid in that sort of sentimental auction, in which he who utters
the most exaggeratedsentimentalisms is entitled to have the victory and the
applause knockeddown to him; but Rabia, who was further advancedthan
either of her companions in this kind of saintlihood, quietly added, "Nay,
since it is God who afflicts, the afflicted one should so recognize his presence
as to be unconscious ofthe fact that he is under affliction at all." One
sometimes meets with the working of a similar mysticism nearer home; but it
is refreshing to turn from all these morbid exaggerationsto the perfectWord
of God, where the believing sufferer is comforted by the assurancethat he still
has enoughto rejoice in, even although he may be presently in heaviness
through manifold temptations; where he may hear even such a saint as Paul
confess, "WhenI came to Troas to preach Christ's gospel, and a door was
opened unto me of the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit because I found not
Titus my brother;" nay, where he may read this word so full of wonderful
comfort, "Jesus wept."
Indulgence in this spirit of exaggerationalways injures a man's self. It
seriouslyderanges the nicely adjusted harmony of truth as revealedin the
Bible; and in this way, it interferes with the important process ofthe man's
spiritual education. Nothing but the truth, the whole truth, the truth in its
divinely adjusted pro- portions, canmeet the spiritual needs of man. A truth
exaggeratedormutilated, or even a truth misplaced, becomes so far an error;

44. and error is always poisonous, while poison is always deadly, however
unconsciouslyit may be swallowed. It is saidthat though waterquenches
thirst, and though ice in certain casesquenches it still more effectually,
unmelted snow will not quench thirst at all; it will rather inflame it. Yet the
chemicalanalysis of water, ice, and snow gives precisely the same results for
each. How comes it then, that with so very slight an alteration in its form, the
waterwhich was able to quench thirst so delightfully, as water, canno longer
quench it as snow, while the same elements, in the form of ice, can quench
thirst perfectly? We cannot tell; but we learn from this what we learn
abundantly elsewhere,that the actionof a substance may be completely
changedby the slightestchange in the arrangementof its elements. Without at
all suggesting that the spiritual influence of Bible truths canbe quite so easily
altered by slight changes in the mode of their exhibition, we believe that there
is a certain analogy, in this respect, betweenthe action of physical substances
and of spiritual truth, and that the enthusiastic exaggeratorof certain
portions of the Word of God, indulges in his exaggerations to his own injury
and the injury of others. In order to honour his own exaggerationof a
favourite precept or a favourite doctrine, he has to neglector to disown other
doctrines which are equally divine. Having presumptuously made an idol out
of one of the divine words, he cannotavoid the profanity of offering up the
rest of the divine words in unholy sacrifice to his idol's honour. And no less
serious is the injury which exaggerationdoes to our fellows. When a man is
very deeply impressed with the importance of any given truth, and is desirous
of making others feelinterested in it, his very eagernessto persuade will—if
he be of an ardent temperament—furnish a sore temptation to him to over-
state. And yet these very overstatements will be apt to defeattheir own object.
If the truth advocatedbe itself an offensive one, the overstatementof it will
make it still more offensive; and the intelligent rejecterof it, when rejecting
the extravagances whichhe is sharp-sighted enough to detect, will be apt to
feel himself justified while he turns awayas wellfrom the substantial truth
which underlies the unwise exaggerations. Sometimesthis spirit is indulged by
amiable men, who are anxious to remove everything that they think to be
perplexing or offensive from the gospel, as addressedto the sinner. It would
be difficult indeed to overstate the greatness orthe freeness ofdivine mercy, if
only the connectedtruths were stated along with it; but these warm-hearted

45. advocates harp exclusivelyand indiscriminatingly on an exaggeratedgospelof
simple love, and this in a way which tends to lower the hearer's estimate of the
enormous heinousness ofsin, and of the extreme dangerand wickednessof
standing alooffrom the Saviour. The sole impression which is too often made
by such advocacyis, that there is no one thing in the universe so easilyto be
securedas the forgiveness ofsin, and this wheneverit may suit the sinner's
own convenience to acceptit. Now, when this, or anything resembling this, is
the principal impression produced—whetherit be by the preaching of priestly
absolution, or of an ultra-evangelicalgospel—the sin-loving heart is sure to
draw the practicalinference that sin is a very light matter indeed, and that a
man need not disturb himself too much either to avoid its commission, or to
procure its immediate forgiveness. ThatGod's estimate of sin is as different
from this as possible, we see in the cross of his beloved Son.
Woe to him who thus exaggerates;and woe no less to him who, sitting at the
feet of a foolish fellow-creature, puts his trust in these exaggerations. Truth
alone can bless or sanctify; error in all its measures is spiritually hurtful.
After the first victory of the American ConfederatesatManassas, Jefferson
Davis telegraphedthe goodnews to the Confederate council. This was well;
but, as a stroke ofpolicy, he ventured to overstate the numbers of the enemy,
and to understate greatlytheir own forces, designing thereby to increase the
courage and the self-reliance of his compatriots. The exaggerationwas
believed; and, like all untruths, injured those who believed it. At first, indeed
it immensely increasedthe popular enthusiasm; but along with this, it
increasedalso to a perilous degree, the people's contempt of their enemies,
and their self-conceitedconfidence in themselves. And so too, will all
falsifications of the divine Record, by exaggerationorotherwise, be sure to
recoilon the heads of the originator and his dupes; nor will it in the least
degree save either, that the original exaggeratorbelievedhis own lie. Let us
therefore be carefulnot to add to the words of God by such exaggerations,lest
he reprove us for doing so, and we be found to be liars.
The natural tendency of an exaggerationin any given direction is to produce
the opposite error. It requires a little time to work out its natural results; but
as surely as the momentum of the swinging pendulum will carry it as far
towards the right hand as it has been raisedon the left, so surely will one

46. man's too much will be followedby another man's too little. The law of action
and reactionis not more uniform in the physical world than in the moral and
spiritual. Sometimes indeed, the reactionwill take place in the man's own
experience;as Matthew Henry says, "Overdoing is the sure way to
underdoing." One of the most intelligent and influential of all the enemies of
the gospel, now in England, was once one of its most zealous propagators;and
in narrating the phases of his faith, he does not scruple to ascribe his present
position, in part at least to the recoilfrom an over-wroughtenthusiasm, which
was stimulated to the uttermost by the exaggerations ofinjudicious friends.
But whether the reactiontakes place in the experience of the individual
himself or not, it will be sure to take place in others. The superstition of one
age issues in the infidelity of another; nay, the superstition of 0ne-half of a
community tends to make the other half atheists. Over-severe discipline in a
father often makes the sonlicentious; and the stinginess of a parent, as is
frequently seen, naturally results in the wastefulness ofhis heir. On this
principle, our exaggeratedestimate ofany of the words of God will provoke
others to turn, not from the exaggerationmerely, but from the Word itself, in
disgust. In his "History of England," Lord Macaulaycalls attention to the
fact, that there were to be found in Scotland, in the seventeenthcentury, the
most striking samples of two opposite and extreme types of human character.
Punctilious conscientiousnesscouldscarcely be carried further than it was by
the ScottishCovenanters;unblushing dishonesty could scarcelyshow a more
brazen effrontery than it did in the contemporaryScottishstatesmen. The
historian connects the two phenomena in this way: "Perhaps it is natural that
the most callous and impudent vice should be found in the near
neighbourhood of unreasonable and impracticable virtue. When enthusiasts
are ready to destroy or to be destroyedfor trifles magnified into importance
by a squeamish conscience, it is not strange that the very name of conscience
should become a by-word of contempt to coolthe shrewd man of business.
None of us will feel the leastsympathy with the historian in estimating so
unworthily the great points contended for by our venerated fathers; but while
disowning his application of the principle in this instance, we acknowledge
that the principle here statedis as important as it is undeniably true. When
the iron is blunt, or, what comes to nearly the same thing, when the woodis

47. very hard, the workman needs to put forth the more strength; but the extreme
delicacyof such a work lies in adjusting the amount of the strength which
ought to be put forth. It is in such a case as this that wisdomis profitable to
direct. And under no circumstances cana man less easilyafford to dispense
with the "wisdomwhich is from above," than when he is setting before others
the truth of God's Word—"rightly dividing the Word of truth."
How many questions are there, keenly discussedamong us, in which truth is
both honoured and injured by eachset of combatants!Eachof the two
contending parties is right—chiefly, perhaps, in what it affirms; eachof them
is also wrong—its error being found chiefly in what it denies. But even the
measure of truth which eachparty holds is more or less perverted by partisan
exaggerationof it. The most satisfactorysolution, then, of not a few of these
questions, would be found in a point at which the two greatprinciples
contended for are seento blend in harmony; and in maintaining which point it
is necessaryto reduce to sobertruth all the exonerationwhich friendly
enthusiasm has added to either side. It has been said that all high truth is
composedof the union of two apparent contradictions;but, if so, how seldom
does an eager spirit reverently weigh the case, and patiently combine the
seeming contradictions, that thus he may attain the unmixed truth. The more
ardent a man's temperament, the more apt will he be to snatch hastily at the
one half-truth, or the other; and in proportion to the interest which he feels in
the half-truth thus hastily adopted, will be his vehemence in assailing the half-
truth which he rejects. Another class ofminds, less eagerbut scarcelymore
thoughtful, will look at both truths, and will attempt to reconcile them by
deducting the one from the other; and then they will contend vigorously for
the tertium quid which remains. But it is only a minority among readers who,
recognizing the absolute truthfulness of both statements, handle with
trembling reverence the holy words in which they are expressed;and who,
anxious to understand both statements while they do violence to neither, seek
to attain some lofty height at which the seeming discords are heard to blend
into a sublime and heavenly harmony. Yet this is the only satisfactoryway of
dealing with holy Scripture, every word of which "is pure." As an illustration
of what is insisted on, we may glance atthe two-fold teaching of holy Scripture
in regard to the nature of Christ. In one place it is affirmed that Christ is

48. God; in another place it is assertedwith equal distinctness that Christ is man.
Now, we can obtain possessionofthe full truth on this subjectonly by a
patient reconciliationof the apparent contradictions. We may not deny his
supreme divinity as Socinians do, who hastily snatch at the one half-truth; nor
may we forget his manhood as some of the orthodox do, who snatch as hastily
at the other half-truth; neither may we modify the one by the other, looking
on him as a being who is not quite so high as God, nor quite so low as man;
but we must think of the blessedSaviour as being both very God and very
man—God as absolute as if he had never become human—man as real as if he
had never been aught but man. In a similar way, ought we reverently to
handle every truth revealedto us in holy Scripture, patiently comparing one
inspired word with another, and learning to say, like our blessedLord, "It is
written again"
In reading the narratives of the apostle's labours, and in studying the epistles
which they have left behind them, one is struck with the unexampled
combination seenin these men, of two excellencieswhichare very rarely
indeed to be found in union. They display all the warmth of hearts ablaze with
zeal; while they equally manifest the most perfectsobriety of mind and
temperance of judgment. With all his holy fervours, we shall searchthe life of
Paul in vain for any instance of fanaticism, or even of enthusiastic
exaggerationof the truth. He was no extreme High Churchman, nor was he an
extreme Low Churchman—he was no extreme man on any side; else he would
never have written, as he did in Phil, i. 18, that he rejoicedin the preaching of
Christ, whatevermight be the motives of the preacher, and howeverimperfect
the testimony.
In this respect, the servants so far resembledtheir Master;the one faultless
model, which every Christian is set to copy. The more carefully we study the
inspired narratives of our Lord's life on earth, the more shall we be struck
with his unequaled breadth and symmetry of character. There is in it no such
thing as narrowness or exaggeration. He has every excellency, but he has it
only in its due proportion, with nothing defective and nothing overdone. To
many of his contemporaries, who witnessedhis life beside that of the eminent
religionists of the day, he must have seemedto be less religious—verymuch
less indeed, than many of the Pharisees aroundhim;—and so he was, for

49. Pharisaic religionwas a cluster of exaggerations,and from all these he was
absolutely free. His life lackedeverything like colour, simply because it had in
it all the prismatic colours;but these were so perfectly proportioned as to
form one blaze of pure white light. Science has taught us that white, instead of
being the absence ofall colour, arises from the blending of all the coloured
rays in a perfectly adjusted proportion. If one or more of these colours be
withdrawn, the light at once loses its whiteness, and bears a tint which is made
up of the remaining rays. All goodmen in all ages have presentedin their
characters, varying shades of colour, for even goodmen have always some
defect; and colour arises from the absence ordeficiency of one or more of the
colouredrays, or from what comes to the same thing, the excess ofothers. The
blessedcharacterofChrist alone presents us with the pure white of heaven—
not because it lacks anyparticular hue, but because it has every hue in its
perfectly harmonized proportion. It is exaggerationwhich gives to character
its strongestcolouring;and when a man cultivates these exaggerations,he is
not only apt to value himself on accountof them, but, as a consequence, to
undervalue others who may happily be free from them. If his character
blazes, we shall suppose, with the fierce red of zeal, he shall be tempted to look
on red as the true colourof a healthy Christianity, and to regard with
suspicionevery hue except his own fiery scarlet. A carefulstudy of the words
and ways of the Lord Jesus might correcthis mistake, for the characterof
Christ, when fully understood, shows not the faintesttinge of red; it shines
only with the pure white light. Of course, there is red in Christ's perfect
character, and by analysis we candiscern it; nay, there is more red in it than
there is in the characterof the most zealous of disciples; but we cannotfix on
the red as being his specialcharacteristic,for it is supplemented by all the
other prismatic hues, and through the perfectblending of the whole, the red is
lost in the radiance of the pure and heavenly white. And so too is it with all the
other strong points which make up human character. Theyare all to be found
in Christ in perfect harmony, with nothing defective and nothing exaggerated.
Let us learn our lesson. Like tiny mirrors, we canshine, not with inherent, but
only with reflectedlight; but, like mirrors, let us see to reflect the entire light
of Christ, in that harmonious blending of all the rays which produce, the
heavenly white. Whatever may be the amount of the light reflected, let the
quality be as perfect as possible.