Hermeneutics is the science of the correct interpretation of the Bible.

Context always rules in interpretation, whether you are studying a single word, one verse or a larger section of Scripture. Context is the setting in which something "dwells". If you take a fish out of water, it doesn't function well! This principle holds for any passage of Scripture which is taken out of context. The word "context" is derived from a Latin word meaning "to weave together"

J. I. Packer wrote that...

“The Bible appears like a symphony orchestra, with the Holy Ghost as its Toscanini, each instrument has been brought willingly, spontaneously, creatively, to play his notes just as the great conductor desired, though none of them could ever hear the music as a whole.… The point of each part only becomes fully clear when seen in relation to all the rest” (from God Has Spoken)

Words have meaning only as they are used in a context.  And that context is influenced not only by the immediate situation of the speaker or writer, but by the larger historical and cultural milieu that shapes and informs both who is communicating and what is being communicated. context is crucial for understanding the meaning of words.  And it is not just the literary context, the physical location within a sentence or paragraph as important as that might be to understand. For example, the English word “angel” has traditionally been used to translate the Hebrew word malak (as in Genesis 19:1). Yet in Hebrew the word malak means “messenger,” especially the envoy of a leader or king who communicates the king's wishes and represents the king (as in 2 Samuel 5:11). The word is translated simply “messenger” in the NRSV over 100 times. It has no inherent connection to any divine being. 

J. I. Packer adds these comments on the "Interpretation" out of context:

"We cannot arrive at a true understanding of God’s Word by detaching texts from their contexts to find personal meaning in them and be feeding them into the world of our private preoccupations and letting that world impose new senses on old phrases. A theological student whom later I knew as a senior friend had committed himself to starting his ministry in the north of England when he received a very attractive invitation to join a teaching institution in South Wales instead. He did not feel able to withdraw from his commitments, but one day he read in Isaiah 43:6 (Authorized Version), “I will say to the north, Give up”, and concluded that this was God telling him that he would be providentially released from his promise and so set free to accept the second invitation. No such thing happened, however, so he went north after all wondering what had gone wrong. Then he reread Isaiah 43:6 and noticed that it continued, “…and to the south, Do not withhold.” At this point it dawned on him that he had been finding meaning in the text that was never really there. Instead, the concerns which he brought to his reading of the text had governed his interpretation of it. To impose meaning on the text is not the way to learn God’s Law. Yet we constantly do this, and it is one chronic obstacle to understanding."

Next apply the principles that John Wycliffe (1324-1384) gave to help us to keep everything in CONTEXT (Context is the key for a good sound Bible Study),

"It shall Greatly Helpe Ye to Understand Scripture,
If Thou Mark
Not only What is Spoken or Written,
But of Whom,
And to Whom,
With what Words,
At what Time,
Where,
to what Intent,
With what Circumstances,
Considering what Goeth Before
And what Followeth."

Many people erroneously assume that "all" is consistently used of every human being without exception. That is, they use it in the absolute sense as allowing no exceptions. But in doing so they show an abysmal ignorance of both Greek and English grammar.

Grammatically "all" is used in only three ways: (1) As a pronoun. (2) As an adjective. Or, (3) As an adverb. But in whichever way it is used it cannot stand alone, but refers to the part of speech that it defines or modifies, and by which it is limited. Hence, in any context, it is limited in its application to that noun, pronoun, verb, adjective or adverb that it modifies. Now it is readily acknowledged that the word that it modifies is not always expressed. Sometimes the word is only implied, and the context must determine what it is. But never does the word alone mean or refer to all mankind without exception unless the governing word does. But many make the very serious mistaken assumption that "all" automatically refers to all mankind in many contexts. In most instances in the Bible the context itself will show that this word is limited in its application to a distinct class of beings. We must always allow the context to interpret the application of any given word, for if we do not, we shall be guilty of "going beyond what is written," and therefore teaching falsehood.

This principle is most often violated in these last degenerate times when so many have departed from the faith of Baptists of the past, in regard to the extent of the atonement of Christ. This incorrect view was relatively unknown among Baptists until about two centuries ago when "evangelists" and " soul-winners," both terms of rare usage in Scripture, came on the scene. These men seem to want to glorify themselves as great men of God when most of them are seriously defective on many of the elements of "The Faith that was once delivered to the saints" (Jude 3). This doctrinal compromise is often foretold as coming to past in the last days before the Lord’s return (2 Thess. 2:3; 1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 3:1-5; 4:3-4; 2 Pet. 2:1-3; 1 John 4:1-6). So much so, in fact, that Jesus Himself questioned whether at His return He would even be able to find "the Faith" (Greek) on earth (Luke 18:8). These men of shallow understanding of doctrinal truth are mainly to blame for making the extent of the atonement more extensively than Scripture does. And their extensive influence over others because of the prominence that the doctrinally unsound religious world gives them has led many to accept their views without studying the Scriptures.

The question as to whom Jesus came to save is not hard to determine if we but let Scripture speak. The very first reference to Jesus’ saving work—and first mentions are often the most defining—is in Matthew 1:21, which tells us why this One was to be called "Jesus." "For He shall save HIS people from their sins." That is clear enough, isn’t it? Nor is this out of harmony with other passages on the subject. When the subject of the propitiation—a sacrifice made to God to appease His wrath and to reinstate people in His favor, a term that no one doubts has to do with the atonement it is shown to be limited solely to believers (Rom. 3:24-26). None but believers have any part in this sacrifice that Jesus made for He is a propitiation only through faith.

And even clearer yet is the declaration that Peter was inspired to make as to the purpose for the Son of God being manifested to be the Redeemer in 1 Peter 1:18-21. ""Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers: but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times FOR YOU WHO BY HIM DO BELIEVE IN GOD..." For whom was He manifested as the Redeemer? For believers.

Not only so, but repeatedly John records that the Father gave to Jesus a distinct people to be redeemed and kept saved by Him. At least seven tunes in John alone reference is made to "those whom the Father hath given me." And though the Son of Man was given authority over all flesh, He was to redeem only those given to Him by the Father to be redeemed (John 17:2-3). And there are yet other texts that limit the redemptive work of the Son of God to the elect only.

Yea, and even that term that denotes substitution—"for"—which is sometimes associated with the word "all" —bears the same witness that it is not all mankind for whom He died, but rather all of the elect. Both the English "for" and the corresponding Greek huper have a two-fold signification. They mean first in the place of another, which might be applicable to all mankind but for the other signification. This word means also for the benefit of another, yet no sinner that dies impenitent gets any benefit from Jesus’ atonement. On the contrary his sorrow and suffering are intensified beyond imagination by his rejection. Let the honest Christian study any context where "all" is used of the Lord’s redemption and he will find that it never refers to all mankind, but rather that the context limits it to the Lord’s chosen people alone. It could not be otherwise, else we would find Jesus’ redemptive work conflicting with His intercessory work, which is an integral part of it, for He Himself said that He does not pray for any but those given Him by the Father to redeem (John 17:9).

Much of the false doctrine concerning a general atonement and a universal salvation stem from the failure to understand the limited nature of the words "all" and "world." In the case of "all" the misunderstanding stems almost entirely from ignorance of the grammatical usage of the word, and the substitution in the place of proper usage of the word, of a preconceived meaning and application of the word. Always and without exception "all" modifies a noun, pronoun, verb, adjective or adverb, and is limited to that word, and it is never used with "men" in a salvation context.

Having said all this, it is also necessary to notice another way in which "all" is used in Scripture. Most people assume without reason that it is always used absolutely—all without exception, but though it is sometimes so used, it is commonly used in a generic sense—all without distinction, that is, "all kinds." Many appearances of this word can only be understood in this sense, as in Matthew 3:5 where "all" cannot be understood in the absolute sense. See also John 11:47-53 where the "all" that would believe on Him could not be used in an absolute sense, for the Pharisees themselves were excepted. But the inspired comment on this shows that the "all" were the "children of God scattered abroad" the elect.

That this is generally the sense when redemption is in view is proven by what we read in Revelation 5:9. For there the redeemed are shown to be "all kinds," not all without exception, for the redeemed are from "every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation" —all kinds of people. Conversely, Revelation 20:11-15 shows great multitudes of people that are eternally lost and the reason given is that their names were not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world (v. 15. Cf. Rev. 17:8).

This view of the redemption of the Saviour works no hindrance to the work of evangelism of those that correctly understand it, for the command is to "preach the Gospel to every creature" that we have opportunity to (Mark 16:15). It is the Holy Spirit’s work alone to make application of the Gospel and enable one to believe it. But a correct view will hinder presumptuous sinners from thinking that they have a free pass into heaven regardless of how they live and however they may remain in unbelief. It is to be greatly feared that marry people, by making the Lord’s redemptive work broader than Scripture does, encourage sinners to continue in their unbelief on the presumption that Jesus died for them, when they give no evidence of being the ones for whom Jesus died. The universal statement of hope of everlasting life is given only to those that will believe on the Saviour. To all else there is the threat of the wrath of God.