Against The Majority Interpretation

Over the years I have had those of a contrary opinion from mine, on various bible texts and subjects, make the argument that my view was a minority view. My reaction to such a statement is to say, first, "so what?" I then ask the question "are you saying that the majority is always right?" Most of the time they will say no. Well, then, why even make the argument? In logic this is called "ad populum," being a fallacy that occurs from using an “argumentum ad populum” (Latin for “argument to the people”). It is an argument that says something is true and right by an appeal to what most people think, like, or believe, instead of justifying our position with evidence.

I believe in several texts and subjects against the majority view. I believe the truth may be in the minority and I can give examples of it from both the bible and from the history of Hebrew and Christian tradition. If it were true, then I would be a Catholic and not a Protestant. 

In my numerous writings on many subjects, and texts connected with them, I have taken a minority view on several subjects. Let me list a few of the major ones and make some comments about each one.

1) Adoption (huiothesia in five texts, all by apostle Paul)

2) Weak vs. Strong Brothers (Romans and Corinthians)

3) The Two Witnesses of the Apocalypse

4) How Christ is the Chief Cornerstone

5) What is meant by the day star arising in the heart before the day of the Lord

I could list more, but these are five areas where the majority of interpreters got it wrong and only the few got it right.

On item number one, most see "adoption" (huiothesia) as God making someone else's child his child by a legal process, but I do not. My series (which would form a book) shows that this is not what the Greek word means, and is not what Paul meant.

On item number two, the overwhelming majority think the weak brother is a born again Christian who is a novice in the faith and the strong brother is one who is well versed in scripture and is strong in mind and conscience. However, I am sure that the weak brother is no Christian at all, but was a friendly Pagan. I have a lengthy series proving my thesis.

On item number three, I believe that the two witnesses are Elijah and the apostle John. Very few hold the view that the apostle John is one of them, but I think the weight is far greater for him than Moses, Enoch, or other. I have also written proving this, although I never finished the series to add further proofs.

On item number four, I show that by "chief cornerstone" is not a reference to one of four corners in a foundation, but to a building that has five corners, such as we see in the pyramid of Giza, the fifth corner being the one at the top. J.A. Seiss held this view, and so have some others, but it is the minority view.

On item number five, Peter's statement that the day star would arise in the hearts of believers "before the day dawn" (II Peter 1: 19) is interpreted to be some experience by believers after conversion but I see it as what will happen in the hearts of the last generation of believers who will be alive when Christ returns.

Of course, I say, in closing, that when a person takes a minority view, he should be cautious about going against the consensus and should not do so without assurance that it is right to do so.