Knowable Word

Helping ordinary people learn to study the Bible

Copyright © 2012–2024 DiscipleMakers, except guest articles (copyright author). Used by permission.

You are here: Home / Archives for Interpretation

4 Mistakes When Reading the Parables of Jesus

By

I recently wrote a piece on the parables of Jesus for the Logos Word by Word blog. It’s a pretty thorough look at what parables are, why Jesus used them, along with an exhaustive list of all of Jesus’ parables.

The final section offers strategies for overcoming four mistakes when reading the parables. The four mistakes are:

  1. Read them as abstract, universal stories for humanity.
  2. Read multiple versions of the same parable in the same way.
  3. Read them as stories for people today.
  4. Read them as though there was no Bible at the time.

Here is a taste:

In the act of persuasion, why not focus exclusively on logical argumentation, miracles, or Old Testament prophecy? Jesus uses all of those means, but what do parables contribute to the other forms of persuasion?

Jesus’s disciples ask this very question: “Why do you speak to them in parables?” (Matt 13:10). Jesus answers their question, but in a way that is sometimes wildly misunderstood. To grasp his two answers, we must grapple with the two Old Testament texts quoted by Matthew (13:10ff) and echoed by Mark (4:10ff).

Check it out!

Why it Matters that the Bible was Written to Specific People at a Specific Time

By

While the Bible was written for us (1 Cor 10:11), it was not written to us. When we read the Bible, we are reading someone else’s mail.

This is why context matters. It is not appropriate to isolate sentences and sentiments and use them to our own ends. We must grasp the author’s main point to his original audience. We must consider how that main point either looks forward to Christ or reflects back upon him. And only when we have done those things are we in a position to consider how the text ought to produce change in anyone’s life today.

Photo by Mr Cup / Fabien Barral on Unsplash

Historical Context Defined

We’ve spent much space on this blog giving examples of how the literary context matters. But that is not the only kind of context.

One other such context is the historical context. How does the historical situation of this text affect the way we read it? And by “historical situation,” I’m not referring to cultural practices or artifacts within the text. I’m talking about the real-life situation of the author and audience of the text. What was going on in the lives of the author and audience that caused this person to write this text to these people at this time?

We cannot answer that question with certainty—or even high probability—for every book of the Bible. But whenever we can answer it, we ought to make sure that answer guides us whenever we seek to understand a text.

An Example

Have you ever noticed the difference between how the books of Kings and Chronicles describe the moral character of King Abijah (Abijam) of Judah?

In the eighteenth year of King Jeroboam… Abijam began to reign over Judah… He walked in all the sins that his father did before him, and his heart was not wholly true to Yahweh his God, as the heart of David his father. Nevertheless, for David’s sake Yahweh his God gave him a lamp in Jerusalem. (1 Kings 15:1-4)

Then Abijah stood up…and said… “But as for us, Yahweh is our God, and we have not forsaken him… Behold, God is with us at our head, and his priests with their battle trumpets to sound the call to battle against you. O sons of Israel, do not fight against Yahweh, the God of your fathers, for you cannot succeed.” (2 Chron 13:4-12)

Both Kings and Chronicles go out of their way to label each king of Judah as doing either what is right or what is evil in God’s eyes. There are clear good guys and bad guys, good kings and bad kings. But when it comes to Solomon’s grandson Abijah, the authors of these two books just couldn’t get their assessments aligned.

The author of Kings definitely knew about the warfare between Abijah and the northern kingdom (1 Kings 15:6; see 2 Chron 13:2). But he chose to leave Abijah’s faith in God, as demonstrated in that warfare, out of his narrative. Why would he do that?

The historical context of these two books can help.

Different Audiences, Different Times

The book of Kings (1 Kings and 2 Kings make up one long book that happened to be divided into two scrolls) was written for the people of God languishing in Babylonian exile. The book tells the story of the kingdom, ending with Nebuchadnezzar’s conquest of Jerusalem and the deportation of the population to a foreign land. The book is not without hope, as the final paragraph describes the reversal of fortune for one of their last kings (2 Kings 25:27-30).

But when all is taken into account, the book of Kings answers the chief question of those stuck in Babylon without temple, priest, or sacrifice: How did we get here?

The book of Chronicles (again, 1 Chronicles and 2 Chronicles are one book kept on two scrolls) was written for the people of God who had returned to Jerusalem to rebuild the city and repair their lives. This book also tells the story of the kingdom, but it ends with a very different hope: Cyrus’s decree to return and rebuild (2 Chr 36:22-23). From the detailed genealogies of 1 Chr 1-9 to the lengthy liturgical sections (1 Chr 15-16, 22-29; 2 Chr 15, 19-20, 24, 29-31, 35), the book of Chronicles provides pertinent instruction and thrilling hope for those reconnecting to their past and reinstating the proper and authoritative worship of their God.

So when all is taken into account, the book of Chronicles answers the chief question of those who have returned from exile: How do we start things back up in the right way, without repeating the mistakes of our ancestors?

Employing Historical Context for Interpretation

How does this historical context help us to answer the thorny interpretive question of King Abijah? Was he good or evil? Faithful or disobedient?

The audience of Kings needed to hear of Abijam’s faults. The thrust of his life and rule was more like his father Rehoboam than his great-grandfather David. He was not undivided in his allegiance to Yahweh, and he carried the pride and insecurity of Rehoboam into a new generation. This was not pleasing to Yahweh, and it was one step along a lengthy slide into Judah’s abandonment of the covenant, leading to her demise and deportation.

But the audience of Chronicles needed a different message. They needed to know that Abijah was not as bad as he could have been. In fact, he had his shining moments. One such moment was when he publicly professed his faith in Yahweh and gave the priesthood its proper place: not as a magical totem but as an opportunity to lead the people toward covenant fidelity. Now that you are back in the land, you need to know that you, like Abijah, have a history of great sin against God. But if you bear fruit in keeping with repentance—demonstrating your faith through establishing a legitimate priesthood that leads the people to serve Yahweh above all gods—you, too, will find great success and security in the land you rebuild.

Conclusion

The historical context is an important piece of the puzzle we call Bible study. By placing yourself in the shoes of the original audience, you are more likely to grasp the intended message for them in their day. And when you have done so, you will unsurprisingly find the Bible becoming even more — not less — relevant to our lives today.

Does God Know His Plans for You, or Only for Exiled Israel?

By

Over the years, numerous readers have requested a “context matters” post on Jeremiah 29:11: “For I know the plans I have for you, declares the LORD, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.”

I have not provided one, partly on the ground that the misuse of this verse is well documented on many other websites. I have, instead, provided a satirical “context matters” post on the frequently overlooked life advice of Jeremiah 25:27. We can apply precisely the same reading strategy to Jer 25:27 that we generally apply to Jer 29:11, with an unexpectedly staggering result.

With that said, here comes Christopher Kou with a wonderfully sane treatment of Jer 29:11, which—wonder of wonders!—can be applied sensibly to Christians living today!

Although serious Bible students are not wrong to insist on a methodic approach to Scripture, including a consideration of the historical context in which it was written, the Old Testament texts are given to us for our instruction today (2 Tim 3:16). How, we may wonder, should we balance a sound reading of the Bible with more immediate application?

Kou does a great job pushing back on a knee-jerk overreaction to the contextless misuse of Scripture, in favor of a contextually nuanced what-it-meant-back-then, that then translates into a robust how-it-ought-to-change-us-today sort of application. I commend this work for your consideration.

Check it out!

Units of Thought in Poetry

By

The Bible’s poetry can seem so strange and foreign, until you realize how to follow their train of thought. Then you can see why so many of them are among the most moving and beautiful poems in the history of the world.

The trick is to learn to read them as poems and not simply as random collections of inspiring sentiments. Why is it encouraging to be assured that you will regularly traverse the valley of death (Ps 23:4)? Because you have a divine shepherd (Ps 23:1-4) who is a lavish host (Ps 23:5-6).

So how do we go about observing the structure of a biblical poem? How do we distinguish the stanzas or sections?

Photo by Trust “Tru” Katsande on Unsplash

Stanzas

The primary structuring device in a biblical poem is the stanza. A stanza is sort of like a paragraph in prose texts; it’s a collection of lines or sentences into a coherent unit of thought. So when seeking the structure of a poem, the first and primary goal is to divide the poem into stanzas.

Many modern Bible editions help immensely, since they put a blank space between stanzas for you. The main challenge is to figure out from the text whether your Bible’s editors are right.

For example, in Proverbs 3:13-35, every translation seems to have a different idea of where the thought-divisions occur. Though most treat Prov 3:13 as the start of a unit, the LEB includes verses 11-12 with the first stanza. There is some diversity as to whether to treat Prov 3:19-20 as its own unit or as part of what follows. Also, the ESV sees Prov 3:27 as the end of the stanza that begins with Prov 3:21, but nearly every other version considers Prov 3:27 as the start of a new stanza.

ESVCSBLEBNETNIV
13-1813-1811-1813-2613-18
19-2019-2019-3519-20
21-2721-2621-26
28-3527-3527-3527-30
31
32-35
Stanza divisions in Proverbs 3:13-35

How do we decide who is right? A few tools will help us make such a decision.

Refrains

The first and simplest structuring device in Hebrew poetry is the refrain. A refrain is a line or sentence that repeats at regular intervals to mark off units of thought.

Here are some examples of refrains:

  • “Restore us, O God, let your face shine that we may be saved” (Ps 80: 3, 7, 19) divides Psalm 80 into three stanzas.
  • “The Lord of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our fortress” (Ps 46:7, 11) divides Psalm 46 into two stanzas.
  • “Why are you cast down… Hope in God” (Ps 42:5, 11; Ps 43:5) divides Psalm 42-43 into three stanzas.
  • “For all this his anger has not turned away” (Is 9:12, 17, 21; Is 10:4) divides Isaiah 9:8-10:4 into four stanzas.
  • “Yet you did not return to me” (Amos 4:6, 8, 9, 10, 11) divides Amos 4:6-12 into six stanzas.

Inclusio

An inclusio is a word or phrase that occurs at the beginning and end of a passage. It is similar to a refrain, except that it occurs specifically at beginning and end, like bookends on a library shelf.

  • Some psalms use an inclusio at the beginning and end of the entire poem (e.g. Psalms 8, 103, 113, 118). That encompassing inclusio may help us to grasp the poem’s main idea, but it doesn’t help us break the poem down into subdivided stanzas or units of thought.
  • Other times, an inclusio marks off a stanza or unit of thought for us. For example:
    • “wisdom and instruction” repeated in Prov 1:2, 7—showing us that those verses all fit together as a unit of thought.
    • “gazelle or young stag on the mountains” bookends the poetic stanza in Song 2:8-17.

Metaphor Shifts

Often, a poet shifts gears in his thought when he shifts from one overriding metaphor to another.

  • In Psalm 23, there is a shift from the larger metaphor of shepherd (Ps 23:1-4) to the metaphor of host (Ps 23:5-6).
  • In Psalm 71, the poet seeks refuge in God (Ps 71:1-6), proves that enemies aren’t so scary (Ps 71:7-15), remembers God’s work in the past (Ps 71:16-18), and employs the past to provide hope for the future (Ps 71:19-24). The shifts in these metaphorical phases of life outline the poem’s train of thought.
  • In Isaiah 5, the metaphor of the vineyard dominates Is 5:1-7. Then the threat of curse (Is 5:8-23) turns into the metaphor of fire (Is 5:24-25), before the chapter concludes with the metaphor of signal or alarm (Is 5:26-30).

Grammar Shifts

Sometimes, the changes from stanza to stanza are evident through shifts in the grammar.

  • There could be shifts in subject, as in Psalm 24: God (1-2), God’s people (3-6), God together with his people (7-10).
  • There could be shifts in pronouns or audience, as in Psalm 29: speaking to heavenly beings (1-2), speaking about Yahweh’s voice (3-9), speaking about Yahweh’s enthronement (10-11).

Conclusion

To draw defensible conclusions regarding a poem’s main point, we must be able to identify the poem’s units of thought. Then we can show how each of those units builds a case and contributes to the main idea. The trick is that we can’t simply go with what “feels right.” We ought to have observable clues within the text that mark the divisions for us. Refrains, incusios, and shifts in metaphor may be among such observable evidence.

Back to Proverbs 3

So where does that leave us on the question of Proverbs 3:13-35? How do these tools help us identify the stanzas (see the chart above)?

Prov 3:13-18 has the inclusio of both “blessing” and the concept of finding or laying hold of wisdom. Prov 3:21-26 has an inclusio of “keeping” or being “kept.” That whole section of Prov 3:13-26 thus has a unified metaphor of finding and keeping wisdom. At the center of that section is a brief description of how Yahweh built wisdom right into the fabric of the universe at the moment of creation (Prov 3:19-20). This explains why it “works” that finding and keeping wisdom will result in great blessing.

Prov 3:27-28 has two prohibitions against “withholding good.” Prov 3:29-30 has two prohibitions against “planning evil.” The chapter ends (Prov 3:32-35) with a grammatical shift to four assurances (parallel to the four prohibitions) that Yahweh neither plans evil nor withholds good from the right people at the right time. In between those two four-verse chunks is a warning not to envy violent men (Prov 3:31)—those who constantly plan evil and withhold good from others when it suits them. So the entire section (Prov 3:27-35) sticks together under the larger metaphor of humanitarian dealings (love your neighbor as yourself).

So in the end, I agree with both the NET and the NIV (though the CSB is not far off). The NET is correct that there are two main units of thought. The NIV is correct that each of those main units has three subsections. We’d be greatly helped if there were a clear way to represent both the main stanzas and their subdivisions in the way our Bibles lay out the text.

Can Our Interpretation be Trusted?

By

John Piper answers a question about whether anyone can trust their own attempt to interpret the Scripture, especially the Bible’s moral teaching.

He divides his answer into two parts:

  1. What the Bible says about how to interpret its own teaching.
  2. What the Bible says about skeptics who aren’t sure they can trust anything.

I encourage you to consider his thoughtful responses to these two fundamental matters. Check it out!

Don’t Give Up: You Can Understand the Bible

By

Marshall Segal understands what it’s like to wrestle with the Scripture, trying to understand it.

I’ve battled to get through the census records in Numbers. I’ve labored through the kidneys, livers, and “entrails” of the Levitical laws. I’ve grown weary of the repetitive failures of Israel in 1–2 Kings. I’ve sometimes struggled to see what Hebrews sees in the Old Testament. Much of the imagery of Revelation is still a mystery to me. And so, I regularly find these clear and accessible words from Paul all the more meaningful and encouraging:

Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything. (2 Timothy 2:7)

In the remainder of the article, Segal reflects on the amazing truth of 2 Timothy 2:7. Yes, such understanding will come only from the Lord. But such understanding will not require less work on our part but more.

I commend this piece to you. Check it out!

A Parable on the Dangers of Speculation in Bible Study

By

Loic Leray (2019), public domain

Amy tossed her phone on the bed. “Any idea what happened between John and Zack?”

From across the room, her husband David answered, “What do you mean?”

“Well, John always gets invited to Zack’s birthday party. But not this year.”

David and Amy Goodwin’s eleven-year-old son John was friends with Zack Thomas, who lived in the neighborhood. Today was Zack’s birthday, so Amy had just texted Charlotte, Zack’s mother.

Charlotte’s reply was pleasant enough. But Amy was hoping for more. Over the past two weeks she had been expecting a colorful card in the mailbox, announcing some big production: paint ball, or ice hockey, or white water rafting. John loved Zack’s parties, so Amy thought her message would trigger a forgotten invitation for her son. No such luck.

“I don’t know of any problems between the boys,” said David. “Maybe Zack isn’t having a party this year.”

“Yeah, maybe,” said Amy. “It’s just that Charlotte’s text seemed so brief. I gave her an opening to mention a party, and there’s just nothing.”

“Can I see?” asked David.

Amy turned her phone toward her husband.

AMY: Happy birthday to Zack! Hope your new TWELVE year old has a great day! Any big plans?

CHARLOTTE: Thanks! Can’t believe he’s 12!

“I see what you mean,” said David. “But maybe she’s just short on time. You could be reading too much into something that isn’t there.”

“Maybe. I just think if that friendship was important to Zack, Charlotte would have said something—one way or the other. I hope John will be okay.”

Amy made a mental note to talk with her son about Zack. She knew John didn’t have any friends to spare.

A few weeks later, the Goodwins were heading over to the local pool on a Saturday afternoon. John, who wasn’t phased by any previous birthday drama, asked his father if he could bring Zack along.

“Great idea,” said David. “I’ll text Mr. Thomas.”

David pulled his phone from his pocket and tapped out a message.

DAVID: We’re headed to the pool. Do you want to join us? Or we can just pick up Zack on our way.

A reply pinged on David’s phone within 30 seconds.

JOSH: Sorry, we can’t. Charlotte’s parents are in town this weekend.

DAVID: No problem. Hope you have a good visit!

JOSH: Thanks. It will be a blast.

When they got to the pool, David relayed his text exchange with Josh to Amy.

“That’s a little weird, right?” asked David.

“What do you mean?” asked Amy.

“Well, I thought Josh liked his in-laws. But it sounds like he’s bracing for a hard weekend.”

“What? He said the visit would be a blast,” Amy said.

“No, he’s being sarcastic. Don’t you see? No exclamation point, no emoji. There’s no way he’s having fun,” said David.

Amy frowned. “You’re drawing a big conclusion from that little phrase. I’m not sure you’re hearing his intended tone.”

“I think it’s pretty clear,” said David. “I’ll have to stop by their house tonight on my walk. I bet Josh could use the interruption. We’ll throw the football in the yard for a while.”

We Love to Give Gold Stars

By

Kier in Sight (2021), public domain

People love stories, and the Gospels and histories are some of the Bible books we’re drawn to most. But interpreting these narrative books can be tricky.

Here’s one hurdle. We have an impulse to label every character. We want to know: Are they good or bad? Was this particular action praiseworthy or condemnable?

We pose these black-or-white questions because it’s much easier to have Biblical characters in stark categories when we turn to application. We should be like the good person, and we should not be like the bad person.

Most often, the Bible does not bow to our desires for quick labeling. Applying narrative texts requires the hard, slow work of wisdom.

Jacob vs Rahab

Let’s consider Jacob and Rahab. Jacob’s story reads like a winding path, so we feel a strong impulse to grade him in each scene.

Here is the beginning of Genesis 35.

God said to Jacob, “Arise, go up to Bethel and dwell there. Make an altar there to the God who appeared to you when you fled from your brother Esau.” So Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, “Put away the foreign gods that are among you and purify yourselves and change your garments. Then let us arise and go up to Bethel, so that I may make there an altar to the God who answers me in the day of my distress and has been with me wherever I have gone.” So they gave to Jacob all the foreign gods that they had, and the rings that were in their ears. Jacob hid them under the terebinth tree that was near Shechem. (Genesis 35:1–4)

Those foreign gods are curious! Did Jacob hide them under a tree so he could retrieve them? Or did he do it so there would be a defined marker of repentance?

The text doesn’t answer these questions. We are far more concerned about handing out (or withholding) gold stars than the Biblical authors were.

Compare this small incident in Jacob’s life with the story of Rahab, which begins in Joshua 2. Rahab was a prostitute living in Jericho, yet she hid the Jewish spies when they arrived to scope out the city (Josh 2:1–5). She lied about the spies to the king’s men, and this allowed the spies to return safely to Israel (Josh 2:23).

When Israel came to Jericho and “devoted all in the city to destruction” (Josh 6:21), Rahab and her family were rescued, just as the messengers had promised (Josh 6:22–23). Rahab was welcomed as an ethnic outsider into Israel (Josh 6:25), and the author of Hebrews praises her for her faith (Heb 11:31).

My point is not to contrast Jacob with Rahab. Rather, notice how the text directs us to view these incidents. The Biblical authors commend Rahab’s actions, many of which seem to violate Mosaic law. On the other hand, the Biblical authors are silent about Jacob and the idols.

The Dangers and Effects of a Grading Mindset

This is a discussion about interpretation. There is no harm in asking scores of questions related to observations of a Biblical text. However, we must be careful to answer only the questions the Bible itself answers.

When we obsess about the ethics of every action of a character in a Bible passage, we are likely to miss the main point. We should investigate why the author wrote this passage in this way; if they were not concerned with parsing the moral grade of a character’s actions, we should not be either.

Our desire to grade each character’s actions often leads us to speculation. We assume that people in the Bible will think, feel, or act like us (or like someone we know), and our subsequent conclusions can lead us off course. We must be mindful of when we are making good and necessary deductions and when we are in the midst of conjecture.

This Too Points to Christ

We want our characters (or their actions) to be good or bad, but the Bible does not bend to this binary. We want to point to a hero, to someone whose actions are consistently and thoroughly good so that we can listen to and follow them.

In other words, we want Jesus. He is the only person in whom there is no sin (1 John 3:5, 1 Peter 2:22). His actions were perfect, and his good works atone not only for our bad works, but for our bad thoughts, desires, and natures.

Like us, Biblical characters have flaws, some of which are on bright display. But those flaws are not the point of the passage as often as we think. When we fixate on these questions, we drift away from what matters most.

What to Do When the New Testament Quotes the Old

By

“Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel.” (Matt 1:23)

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matt 27:46)

“Not one of his bones will be broken.” (John 19:36)

“You are my Son, today I have begotten you.” (Heb 5:5)

Since the Bible had no verse divisions until the 16th century AD, we ought to consider what this implies about how to read and study the Bible. Ancient readers had no map or reference system to pinpoint particular statements. They could not speak with precision about a textual location such as Isaiah chapter 7 verse 14.

Instead, they referenced Scriptures by broad indicators such as:

  • “…in the book of Moses, in the passage about the bush…” (Mark 12:26)
  • “…the scroll of the prophet Isaiah…He found the place where it was written…” (Luke 4:17)
  • “the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah…” (John 12:38)
  • “he has somewhere spoken of the seventh day in this way…” (Heb 4:4)

They did not quote things the way we do. They did not have MLA- or APA-style citations, word-perfect precision, or bibliographical indices.

In fact, most people didn’t read their own copies of the Scripture. Most of what they knew about Scripture came through oral delivery, repetition, and memorization.

So if we read our Bibles only like 21st century students at institutions of higher education, we will not be reading them like 1st century commoners, or even nobility, receiving these remarkable works of literature from the hands of Jesus’ first followers.

What does this mean?

1. NT quotes of the OT are referencing passages, not verses.

Often there’s a verbal connection to the exact verses being quoted. For example, when Peter wants to make a point about being “living stones” (1 Pet 2:5) he grabs a few key statements with the word “stone” in them (1 Pet 2:6-8). But his goal is not to produce sound bytes fitting for a radio interview, or back-cover blurbs promoting a book. He believes the referenced OT passages have something of their own to say, building a theology of God’s stone-construction program, which Peter now interprets and applies for a new audience.

2. Don’t read past the OT quotes.

When a NT author quotes the OT, he believes the OT passage has an argument to make that he now commandeers for his own use. The quotes are not window dressing, with the real argument coming before or after the quote. No, the quotes are a fundamental part of the argument. The quotes contain the premises upon which the conclusion stands. We might misunderstand the conclusion if we haven’t identified the premises (in their original context).

3. Look up the OT quotes and study them in context.

To use the four quotes from the top of this post: “Immanuel” had a fulfillment in Isaiah’s day that illuminates why Jesus’ fulfillment was so much greater, and even unexpected (Isaiah 7-8). Jesus’ feelings of abandonment don’t capture the whole story of what happened on the cross (Psalm 22). Jesus’ death was more about the idea of Passover than it was about checking off a prerequisite prediction about bodily injury (Exodus 12). Christ’s appointment as high priest involved more than a particular pronouncement from on high; it involved lasting victory over the rebellious kings of the earth (Psalm 2).

4. Consider how the NT author employs the OT context and repurposes it for his audience.

Sometimes the NT author applies a timeless principle. Sometimes he makes a theological connection to the person or work of Jesus Christ. Sometimes he sees a shadow that has become reality. Sometimes he identifies a pattern of life meant to be followed.

5. What seems obvious may not be all that obvious.

When Jesus explains the parable of the soils to his disciples, he references Isaiah 6 (Mark 4:11-12). Many quickly conclude that Jesus is laying out a strategy for intentional deception by parable. This seems obvious if we look only at the precise words and statements being quoted. But go back to read Isaiah 6, in the context of Isaiah’s book of prophecy, in the context of all the prophets, and only then does it become apparent that Jesus’ parables are actually meant to remove deception, to make things crystal clear (something which Mark explicitly suggests—Mark 4:21-22). Jesus is not trying to make people blind. He’s trying to expose the fact that they are already blind because they worship blind and deaf idols and refuse to listen to him. They become like what they worship.1 We see in many other places that the parables were far more illuminating than obfuscating (Mark 3:23ff, 7:17-23, 12:12; Luke 12:41, 15:1-3, 18:1, 18:9, 19:11).

Conclusion

Bible study is for everyone, even ordinary people. But that doesn’t make it quick or easy. Let’s do good work so we can understand the meaning these authors intended to communicate to us, especially when the NT uses the OT to make its point.

Additional Resources

Nothing surpasses Beale and Carson’s tome, Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Baker Academic, 2007), which analyzes every NT quotation of and credible allusion to the OT. This reference work shows how important it is to look up OT quotes in their context.

The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers (Kregel Academic, 2018). In this book, Abner Chou explains how biblical writers made use of earlier scriptures. Along the way he gives many examples to prove that the quoting authors were concerned with the quotes’ original context, and Chou shows how the quoting authors appropriated that original context for their new purposes.

Thanks for visiting Knowable Word! If you like this article, you might be interested in receiving regular updates from us. You can sign up for our email list (enter your address in the box on the upper right of this page), follow us on Facebook or Twitter, or subscribe to our RSS feed. 

1I am indebted to G.K.Beale, We Become What We Worship (IVP Academic, 2009) for these insights about Jesus’ parables and Isaiah 6.

Amazon links are affiliate links.

Take Care With Idioms

By

A crucial presupposition we must make when studying the Bible is that, while it was written for believers in all ages (1 Cor 10:11), it was not written directly to us. We are reading someone else’s mail.

That means that we must be aware of and alert for idioms. Those turns of phrase that have a unique meaning in a particular culture but would make no sense when translated to another language. For example, if I describe my child’s theater performance as having “knocked it out of the park,” people in another time and place might presume something got broken or that the play was performed in an outdoor venue.

With the Bible, this issue works in both directions. Ancient authors used idioms, for which word studies will be no help. (Imagine looking up “knocked” and “park” up in a dictionary.) And at the same time, we cannot read modern day idioms back into the text, even if the words are the same.

For example, Alan Shlemon explains the fact that when Jesus told Lazarus to “Come out” (John 11:43), he was not inviting him to publicly identify as gay. This may be self-evident to some, but such basic principles bear repeating. We must seek to understand the Bible the way the original audience would have understood it. Only then can we draw legitimate applications in our day.

Shlemon’s piece skillfully draws out this principle with respect to some of the ways people read the text today.

Check it out!