Paul, today's question comes from Jim, who is reading New Morning Mercies for the first time,

and he has a bone to pick with you about the August 3rd entry. He was just introduced to you

and this devotional by his friend, and he's very grateful for it, but in reading it with

his friend, it triggered a conversation about the word idol. Your August 3rd entry begins with

this. The purpose of the cross is to completely decimate your loyalty to the most seductive

and powerful of all idols, the idol of self. Again, Jim wants to express his gratitude and respect

for you, but he is not okay with the way that you use the word

idol, and it's not just you. He says it's many modern preachers and Bible teachers who use the

word idol metaphorically, and Jim's interpretation is that scripture only uses the word idle to

describe a physical object. He believes that the correct methodology for interpreting the Bible is that we

should read it literally, that is, with a natural, literal sense of the language, taking into

consideration the genre and context. He says, the Bible teaches that idols are physical objects.

This current teaching reaches beyond that. So if someone can give a new meaning to

one biblical term, what stops someone else from creating meanings for other terms? What hermeneutical

principles protect us from error here? So questions for you, Paul, are both about your definition

and use of the word idol specifically, but then

more broadly about hermeneutics and a literal or metaphorical, biblical method of interpretation.

Well, in answering this question, I want to say that I actually like being taken to task

for something I speak or right.

I think that I will never get it right till I'm on the other side.

I am very aware that I'm still learning.

I'm a student of God's Word.

...