Years ago, a televangelist claimed that another televangelist became sick after criticizing him.

“Touch not the anointed,” the first televangelist warned, alluding to 1 Chronicles 16:22 and Psalm 105:15. “If you raise your voice against the man of God, even if that man of God is wicked, sickness will come on you.”

However, no Scripture or general biblical principle inoculates spiritual leaders against criticism — especially not wicked ones.

Old Testament prophets took Israel’s leaders to task privately and publicly (e.g., 2 Samuel 12:7–10; Ezekiel 34:1–10).

The New Testament outlined procedures for holding believers, including leaders, accountable (e.g., Matthew 18:15–17; 1 Timothy 5:19–21; cf. Deuteronomy 19:15).

Moreover, no Scripture or general biblical principle teaches that people who criticize spiritual leaders will become sick.

Yes, Miriam’s skin became leprous when she and Aaron questioned Moses’ authority (Numbers 12:1–15). But that particular judgment was not universal. It was a one-off occurrence, not a repeated pattern. Aaron didn’t become sick, after all.

The televangelist’s claims were false. He misinterpreted Scripture. Worse, he twisted Scripture.

Twisted Intent

Christians use the phrases “biblical misinterpretation” and “Scripture twisting” interchangeably. In my opinion, however, the phrases are related but distinct. The latter is a kind of the former.

All Scripture twisting misinterprets the Bible, in other words, but not all biblical misinterpretation twists Scripture.

Both biblical misinterpretation and Scripture twisting share what James W. Sire — who didn’t distinguish them as I do — called “a methodology of misreading.” His book, Scripture Twisting, outlined ways cults misinterpreted Scripture.

Cults relied on faulty translations, used misleading rhetoric, took passages out of context, wrongly cited Scripture as evidence, engaged in bad reasoning, challenged biblical authority, and confused worldviews.

Similarly, in Exegetical Fallacies, D.A. Carson identified erroneous uses of word studies, grammar, logic, presuppositions, and history in the ways people misinterpret Scripture.

Of course, well-meaning Christians sometimes make good-faith errors of interpretation. We shouldn’t attribute malign motives to them. Their errors are intellectual. The errors of Scripture twisting are both intellectual and moral.

Consider what Peter wrote about how some misrepresented Paul’s epistles: “His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort (or “twist” in the ESV), as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:16, emphasis added).

The italicized words refer to spiritually immature believers, whose doctrinal understanding and moral formation were deficient. They were vulnerable to the corrupting influence of spiritually unscrupulous leaders (2 Peter 2:14; cf. verse 2).

Peter spared no words criticizing those leaders, who themselves twisted Scripture. He called them “false prophets” and “false teachers” (2:1).

Characterizing their teachings as “destructive heresies” and “fabricated stories” (2:1,3), Peter added that these leaders “blaspheme in matters they do not understand” (2:12).

The false teachers did such things because their lives were immoral. Consider how Peter described their character: “depraved conduct” (2:2), “corrupt desire” (2:10), “bold and arrogant” (2:10), “unreasoning animals, creatures of instinct” (2:12), “reveling in their pleasures” (2:13), “eyes full of adultery … experts in greed” (2:14), “empty, boastful words” (2:18), and “slaves of depravity” (2:19).

Scripture twisting combines methodological error and moral fault. More than that, it is bad character driving
bad interpretation.

Thus, Scripture twisting combines methodological error and moral fault. More than that, it is bad character driving bad interpretation.

Leaders who twist Scripture often seek to shore up their authority, excuse their misbehavior, or justify their deviation from orthodoxy. Scripture-twisting laity may hope to ingratiate themselves with a spiritual elite.

By citing 1 Chronicles 16:22 and Psalm 105:15, for example, the televangelist attempted to inoculate himself from criticism. He used the alleged sickness of his critic to warn followers against challenging him, lest they too get sick.

Meanwhile, this televangelist’s audience no doubt felt special following someone God seemingly protected in this way.

Motivations like a desire to gain power or access an in-group make Scripture twisting a recipe for spiritual abuse.

This is why we must oppose it. Scripture twisting harms people.

What to Do

How, then, do we respond to the problem of Scripture twisting? By addressing both its methodological errors and the moral faults that drive them.

First, pastors and other spiritual leaders need to teach sound Bible interpretation.

Paul’s exhortation to Timothy applies both to ministers and laypeople: “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).

Teaching good interpretation employs a show-and-tell model. Pastors show how to read Scripture correctly through sermons, Bible studies, devotional writings, and everyday conversations that follow sound rules of interpretation. Showing is implicit.

Telling is explicit, however. There are moments when pastors need to raise proper interpretation as a topic of conversation.

It might be part of a sermon as the pastor explains a difficult Bible passage. Or it might be a small group discussion in which the leader walks members through the process of exegesis and hermeneutics.

Books such as How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth by Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, or Introduction to Biblical Interpretation by Jacqueline Grey and Paul W. Lewis are good resources to consult. (The Sire and Carson books are also useful.)

Showing and telling good interpretation is the antidote to the methodological errors of Scripture twisting. It doesn’t solve the underlying problem or the moral faults that drive them, however.

Consequently, Christian readers need to practice self-examination and repentance.

We see this twofold movement of self-examination and repentance in Matthew 7:1–5, where Jesus addressed hypocrites who judged others while overlooking their own sins.

Jesus said, “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? … You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye” (verses 3,5).

People are typically blind to their own faults. Yet Jesus taught that all people have a responsibility to acknowledge and repent of their failings.

While doing so does not guarantee that we will interpret the Bible correctly, it does help us keep in check the sinful desires that can lead to interpreting Scripture in self-serving ways.

Finally, all Christians need to embrace accountability.

In 1 John 4:1, the elderly apostle wrote, “Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.”

Similarly, Paul wrote, “Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said” (1 Corinthians 14:29).

Both apostles described a process of corporate discernment. For John, the entire community tested the spirits. For Paul, other prophets weighed the prophecy.

I do not believe the apostles’ teaching in these verses can be squared with the televangelist’s use of “touch not the Lord’s anointed.” The apostles were teaching spiritual accountability. The televangelist was trying to avoid it.

For 35 years, I have served as a minister of the gospel. During the past 15 years, I have edited periodicals for other ministers. Every word I have ever published has been reviewed by editors and denominational officials. They saved me from errors in my writings, both small and large.

In biblical interpretation, as in editing, there’s safety in numbers. We are better when we read Scripture together.

This article appears in the Winter 2025 issue of Influence magazine.