Main Point | Knowable Word

Love as One United Body in Christ

July 15, 2024 By Ryan Higginbottom

When I think of Bible chapters with long lists of commands, Romans 12 is one of the first that comes to mind. Once Paul gets to verse 9, it’s one imperative after another in a relentless stream that lasts until the end of the chapter.

As students of the Bible, we must not despair or turn away from understanding and applying passages like these. In a previous post, I suggested that we must connect lists of commands to the main point of the passage. I gave one example from 1 Peter 4, and in this post I’ll provide another test case in Romans 12:9–21.

The Context of the Book of Romans

The first eleven chapters of Romans make up Paul’s longest and most robust explanation of the doctrine of justification by faith. This is the glorious gospel which has captured Paul’s heart.

These chapters represent some of Paul’s most debated and contested writings, but Paul does not see them as dry and academic. He ends this first, lengthy portion of his letter to the Romans with a doxology.

Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
“For who has known the mind of the Lord,
or who has been his counselor?”
“Or who has given a gift to him
that he might be repaid?”
For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. (Romans 11:33–36)

Chapters 12–16 of Romans is Paul’s application of these doctrines to a specific church at a specific time. This is a pattern we observe in many of Paul’s letters, where the first portion is theological truths and the second portion is his effort to help people live out these truths.

Locating the Main Point

Scholars seem unsure about whether Romans 12:1–2 is a summary/introduction to chapter 12 or to the rest of the letter (chapters 12–16). In either case, these verses are critical for understanding the main point of Romans 12:1–21, which I believe is the larger context for Romans 12:9–21.

As always, the structure of a passage is key to finding the main point. While Romans 12:3–8 is a classic passage on spiritual gifts, reading it in context helps us determine Paul’s larger goal. The explicit teaching on spiritual gifts is found in Romans 12:6–8; this flows out of Paul’s instruction that the Christians in Rome should not think of themselves too highly because they are “one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Romans 12:5).

Notice that there is no transition between topics as Paul moves from verse 8 to verse 9. The easiest explanation is that the use of spiritual gifts was the first topic covered in the teaching about unity in Christ, and Romans 12:9–13 gives us the second topic. We can sum up this second topic using a command from verse 10: “Love one another with brotherly affection.”

Finally, Romans 12:14–21 is not a disconnected screed against revenge. This paragraph is still about the love that a united body should be demonstrating. “Live in harmony with one another” (Romans 12:16) is a better summary of this final paragraph.

I take the main point of Romans 12:3–21, therefore, to be something like this: Love each other as a united body in Christ.

Commands Help Us Apply the Main Point

The commands in Romans 12:9–21 pile up quickly. I count 13 commands in first five verses (Romans 12:9–13) and 17 commands in the final eight verses (Romans 12:14–21). We will be buried by these commands if we don’t read and apply them in light of the main point.

However, the connection between this list of commands and the main point of the passage also works in the other direction. These commands help us to understand and apply the main point of the passage!

Let’s take one sentence as an example: “Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good” (Romans 12:9). We shouldn’t meditate on that command in a vacuum but in light of the main point. This means that I must not only abhor evil in the abstract, but I must abhor any evil that affects the body of Christ (including the evil within me). I need to love my brothers and sisters enough to help them abhor the evil that might poison our unity and to hold fast to what is good for our body instead.

In the other direction, hating what is evil and holding fast to what is good are part of the way we understand exercising love as a united body.

Conclusion

We’re never meant to apply Biblical commands extracted from their context. (This is true even for the Ten Commandments!) This makes it all the more important to fight for the main point of a passage as we work to be faithful hearers and doers of God’s word.

Keep Loving One Another Earnestly

July 1, 2024 By Ryan Higginbottom

Priscilla Du Preez (2018), public domain

It can be overwhelming to read a list of commands in a passage of Scripture, especially if you want to apply that passage. What is a Bible student to do?

In my last post, I advised that the main point should be our guide—not just to interpretation, but to application as well. So when we encounter a long list of commands, our application should start with the author’s main point.

This can all sound very abstract without a concrete example, so today I will work through a passage in 1 Peter 4 which contains one of these lists.

The Commands

The excerpt I have in mind is 1 Peter 4:7–11. Here is the passage with the imperatives (commands) highlighted in boldface.

The end of all things is at hand; therefore be self-controlled and sober-minded for the sake of your prayers. Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins. Show hospitality to one another without grumbling. As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace: whoever speaks, as one who speaks oracles of God; whoever serves, as one who serves by the strength that God supplies—in order that in everything God may be glorified through Jesus Christ. To him belong glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. (1 Peter 4:7–11)

We have five commands in four verses. There are no new commands in verse 11, and I think “be self-controlled” and “be sober-minded” are two separate (but related) commands in verse 7. Though we do not see quite the density of commands here as we did in 1 Thess 5:12–22, Peter is not shy about stacking commands on top of each other.

The Main Point

In order to locate the main point of this passage, we need to know what we mean by “this passage.” What’s the structure here, and what is the larger portion of this letter into which this passage fits?

Some scholars consider 1 Peter 2:11–4:11 to be one large section. Some evidence for this is the use of “beloved” (to begin a section) in 1 Pet 2:11 and 1 Pet 4:12. Additionally, Peter writes about glorifying God in 1 Pet 2:12 and 1 Pet 4:11, so these may form bookends (an inclusio) for this section.

With this structure, 1 Pet 2:11–12 serves as a summary of the passage, given at the outset. Then our verses, which are largely about loving one another (1 Pet 4:8), should be read in light of Peter’s exhortations to “abstain from the passions of the flesh” and “keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable.” We can see the link from our paragraph to the beginning of the larger passage in 1 Pet 4:7—the references to self-control and sober-mindedness fit in nicely with the command to abstain from fleshly passions.

I take 1 Pet 4:8 to be the main point of this paragraph: “Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins.”

Connecting Commands to the Main Point

If 1 Pet 4:8 serves as the main point of 1 Pet 4:7–11, then the commands which show up in verses 9–11 are explaining exactly what “loving one another” should look like in the readers’ situations.

Loving one another—in a way that resists the passions of the flesh and which will cause unbelievers to glorify God—means showing hospitality without grumbling (1 Pet 4:9). It also means using God’s gifts (whether speaking or serving) to serve each other as stewards of God’s grace.

Revisiting the List of Commands

Let’s revisit the list of commands presented at the beginning of this post. One of the five commands is our main point (“keep loving one another”).

The other commands give focus and nuance to help us understand the command to love one another. As we learn to be self-controlled and sober-minded, this is not just for the sake of our prayers—it is also to clear the way to love. We love one another by showing hospitality and serving one another as stewards of God’s grace.

Applying Bible Passages that Contain a Deluge of Commands

June 17, 2024 By Ryan Higginbottom

When reading Scripture, I am often overwhelmed by two types of passages: genealogies and long lists of commands. I have trouble processing the large amount of information—it’s too much to think about, and I’m tempted to give up and skip ahead.

We may tackle genealogies at some point in the future, but this article will focus on lists of commands. I will introduce some general principles for handling these passages, and then in two future articles, I will walk through specific examples.

Locate the Main Point

Our observation and interpretation in Bible study should serve our efforts to state the author’s main point in a passage. Then, we should look through the lens of that main point when we turn to application.

This is a mistake I make when reading some of the epistles. When I come to a long list of commands, I think of them individually, out of context. Consider this passage near the end of 1 Thessalonians.

We ask you, brothers, to respect those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Be at peace among yourselves. And we urge you, brothers, admonish the idle, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with them all. See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone. Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil. (1 Thess 5:12–22)

I emphasized the imperatives in this passage by making them bold. I count 17 commands in these 11 verses! Considering these as individual commands is just too much—I want to throw my hands up and walk away.

However, these commands from Paul have a context. They are written at the end of a chapter which is at the end of a letter. Paul does not intend for us to scribble “Hold fast what is good” (for example) on an index card and stare at it when we open the fridge. We should connect this command to the reason Paul wrote it.

Finding the main point of a passage is hard, crucial work. Once we have that main point, it reorients us for the application to follow—we should apply the main point of the passage. This doesn’t mean we ignore the obvious commands of Scripture; instead, we understand them in the context of what the author is trying to communicate.

Rely on the Spirit and Seek Counsel

Connecting a list of commands to the main point of a passage isn’t a way to outflank obedience. We still have to stare that list of commands in the face. I’ve found it helpful to keep a few principles in mind.

There are no bonus points for speed. Often I benefit from slowing down and thinking through commands one at a time.

Consider the intended audience. Remember that most of the Bible was written to groups of people, not individuals. This should inform our application.

Seek the Lord. When I pray before (and during) a meditation on a list of commands, I often learn more about myself and am strengthened in God’s provision for me. It really is true that the Holy Spirit teaches us, directs us, and gives us wisdom (1 Cor 2:12-13, Eph 1:17, Rom 8:14).

Seek counsel from others. Our small groups and other trusted friends—specifically, people who know us well—are excellent resources to help us apply the Bible specifically.

Remember Jesus. When we keep the work and grace of Jesus front and center, this not only motivates us to obey but refreshes and renews us when we fail.

These general principles should be helpful as we learn how to handle an avalanche of commands in passages of Scripture. Look for two future articles which give concrete examples.

Hop Aboard the Train of Thought

June 7, 2024 By Peter Krol

When I write an article, I want to make a point. To make that point stick, I follow a series of steps. First, I try to capture your attention with the first sentence or two. Second, I introduce my thesis early. Third, I explain the thesis and apply it. Finally, I land the article with a strong sense of arrival (or liftoff, if I want to inspire you with a certain Bible study practice). Along the way, I pepper my writing with salty metaphors, everyday illustrations—like the time I explained how Bible study was like teeball—and clear conclusions. Therefore, I have something to say, and I want to set you up to hear it.

Nonfiction works this way: An author has something to say, but that author must bring the readers along for the ride. From the beginning of the work to the end, a journey of discovery unfolds. We call this journey the author’s train of thought.

The Bible works similarly, and our Bible study hits pay dirt when we hop aboard the author’s train of thought.

Why it Matters

Leon Rice-Whetton (2009), Creative Commons

The author’s train of thought outlines his main ideas. And his main ideas are, well, his main ideas. If you’d like to grow at fighting for the main point and reading passages in context, you’ll want to grow your ability to follow a train of thought. The tracks have been laid. Will you walk along them?

Example #1: Romans 4

Look at how Paul’s argument unfolds, and hop aboard for the ride:

Rom 4:1: What did Abraham gain in this matter [How did he get the righteousness of God (Rom 3:21)?]?
Rom 4:2-8: He didn’t get it by works.
Rom 4:9-12: He didn’t get it through circumcision.
Rom 4:13-15: He didn’t get it by law.
Rom 4:16-17: Therefore, he got it by faith!
Rom 4:18-22: Abraham’s faith = despite outward circumstances, being fully convinced God is able to do what he promises.
Rom 4:23-25: Our faith works the same way (believing God’s promise despite our circumstances) and achieves the same result (the righteousness of God).

What’s at stake for Paul in this chapter? How Jews can be made right with God. How it’s always been this way for them. How it’s no different now for non-Jews.

Looking at the immediate context, we see that Paul addresses key questions asked by the Jewish members of his Roman audience.

What about good works? (Rom 3:27-28)
What about circumcision? (Rom 3:29-30)
What about the law? (Rom 3:31)

And for Jew and Gentile alike, God’s righteousness remains available—not through good deeds, religious rituals, or law-keeping, but by believing him who raised Jesus from the dead (Rom 4:24).

Example #2: Hebrews 1-5

Hebrews hits us between the eyes with its train of thought. I can think of no other book that announces each point this clearly before explaining it. The announcements come as transitions from one major section to the next.

Big idea: God has spoken by his Son who sat down (Heb 1:1-4).
First point: Jesus became “as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs” (Heb 1:4).
- Jesus’ more excellent name (Heb 1:5-14)
- Jesus’ superiority to angels (Heb 2:5-18)
Second point: Jesus had to “become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God” (Heb 2:17-18).
- Jesus the faithful high priest (Heb 3:1-4:14).
- Jesus the merciful high priest (Heb 4:15-5:10).

The rest of the book continues in the same way, announcing the points before explaining them. The author scatters sections of application between major points. The main idea comes alive with each point: Jesus accomplished the work of salvation God sent for him to do. Therefore, he is “more” and “better” than the things God used to communicate salvation in the Old Testament. Hop aboard the train of thought when you study Hebrews, and you’ll find buckets of gold at the end of each rainbow.

Example #3: Job 4-5

It works for poetry as well. Look at the first speech given by one of Job’s friends, and track the thinking stanza by stanza.

Can I remind you of where your confidence should be (Job 4:1-6)?
You are guilty (Job 4:7-11).
You are mortal (Job 4:12-21).
You’re a fool (Job 5:1-7).
Seek your confidence not in yourself, but in God (Job 5:8-16).
Accept the Almighty’s discipline (Job 5:17-27).

Think about how Eliphaz moves from one thought to the next, and we can discover his underlying point: “Hardship is always a sign of God’s corrective discipline; therefore, Job, you’re despising God’s redemptive work in your life.” Of course, the larger context of Job makes it clear that Eliphaz is wrong (Job 42:7-8). But that doesn’t stop Paul from turning Eliphaz upside down to see if he can shake some treasure out of his pockets (1 Cor 3:18-19).

Conclusion

Of course, some passages won’t have much train of thought (think Proverbs 10-29). And narratives look a little different. But don’t miss this train, or your Bible study might not get where you’d like it to go.

Examples of Wrestling through the Prescriptive/Descriptive Debate

March 1, 2024 By Peter Krol

Last week, I brought up the debate that inevitably arises in a discussion of a narrative text: Is this passage prescribing something we should imitate (or avoid), or is it simply describing what the characters did in their setting? I proposed that we can often eliminate the need for such a debate if we focus on applying the passage’s main point. Commonly, the passage’s main point is clear enough to direct us in how to change; we don’t even need to decide whether a given detail or behavior in the text ought to be imitated or not.

Let me give two examples where the main point eliminates the debate (by rendering it irrelevant), and one example where it doesn’t.

Acts 15:36-16:5

In Acts 15:36-41, Paul and Barnabas have a sharp disagreement over whether to take John Mark with them on their second missionary journey. They cannot agree, so they split up and part ways. I’ve heard people use this passage to argue that parting ways is an unhealthy way to deal with conflict. And I’ve heard other people use this passage as an example of when parting ways is inevitable and perhaps even healthier than remaining together in constant strife.

So which is it? And it begs the question: Is this text even meant to prescribe a certain way of dealing with conflict (through either good or bad example), or is it simply describing what happened in the lives of those three men?

Notice that the narrative of this split comes immediately after the resolution of a major debate in the early church (whether Gentile converts to Christianity need to follow the law of Moses) and the delivery of the council’s verdict (Acts 15:1-35). And the very next scene (Acts 16:1-5) shows Paul circumcising a new protege on account of local Jewish sensibilities and the knowledge of Timothy’s Greek lineage on his father’s side (Acts 16:3). The narrator connects Timothy’s circumcision quite closely with the delivery of the Jerusalem council’s decision in that region (Acts 16:4).

That literary flow and context is a major factor leading me to conclude that the main point of Acts 15:36-16:5 is that the growth of Christ’s kingdom cannot be stopped, even when leaders must make trade offs in partners (Acts 15:36-41) and practices (Acts 16:1-5). In other words, partners and practices can change, but the grace of Jesus Christ remains the same.

So is the Paul/Barnabas split prescriptive or descriptive? In light of the main point, it’s both. And neither. The point of the text is not to provide direction on whether you ought to leave your church or split up a partnership (perhaps by demonstrating what sort of circumstances would warrant a split). The point of the text is to provide larger assurance that many things will change (and should change!) in service of the unchanging gospel of Jesus Christ.

So maybe you should leave your situation and maybe you shouldn’t. But maybe an even more important question this text wants you to ask is whether you (and not your environment) should change. Or your methods should change. Or your expectations or objectives. We don’t need to answer the prescriptive/descriptive question in order to apply this text in personal and profound ways.

Jonah 3

The prophet Jonah, fresh off his three-night stay inside a 5-star seaside resort, finally makes his way to Nineveh to preach what God commanded him to preach. His message is direct and to the point: “Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!” (Jonah 3:4). Is that the sort of message God’s preachers ought to be preaching to the church’s enemies?

Maybe. And maybe not. But perhaps that’s not the question this text pushes us to ask.

Jonah 3 tells the story of a salvation too strange for satire. It could not be more extreme. Jonah gets spit up by the fish. He walks only a third of the way into the bad guys’ HQ, preaching a single sentence of judgment (with neither an offer of mercy nor a demand for repentance). The response is immediate and ridiculously unlikely: All people repent. Word gets ahead of Jonah to the palace. The king immediately halts all civil operations and declares a national mourning. Even the livestock must wear itchy clothes and join the public prayer meetings.

The plot builds to the climax of verse 9: “Who knows? Maybe, just maybe God will relent.”

As the plot conflict finally resolves, God sees what the Ninevites have done, and he does, in fact, relent. He doesn’t do what he said he would do.

The main idea is that God saves the wrong kind of people. It has nothing to do with the merits of the people, the message itself, or the preacher who delivered it. It has everything to do with the God who loads his gun with mercy and keeps it on a hair-trigger setting.

So is Jonah’s preaching style and message prescriptive or descriptive? It really doesn’t matter, because the point is not to instruct God’s people in how to preach to their enemies. The point is to paint a dramatic and outrageous picture of God’s proclivity to show mercy. When we apply that main point, we might draw implications for preaching or evangelism. But it is not crucial that we figure out how to do (or avoid) what Jonah did.

Acts 2

And now for a closing example where the main point does not sideline the prescriptive/descriptive question. Should churches speak in tongues like the apostles on the Day of Pentecost, or not? Is the text prescribing such behavior, or is it simply describing a unique thing that happened that day?

In Acts 2:1-4, the proclamation of God’s works in different languages provides a sign that the Holy Spirit has come upon the disciples. The body of the chapter is organized by the answers to two questions:

What does this mean? – Acts 2:5-13
- Peter’s answer – Acts 2:14-36
What shall we do? – Acts 2:37
- Peter’s answer – Acts 2:38-40

Then a narrative conclusion exhibits the new creation community launched that day (Acts 2:41-47).

This structure emphasizes the Q&A that makes up the body of the chapter, where Peter explains what all the stuff happening in the narrative frame means. And the main point of that explanation is that the arrival of God’s Spirit is proof that Jesus is the King who has made salvation possible.

So, is the disciples’ speaking in tongues prescriptive or descriptive? This time, I can’t say that the question is beside the point. One person could argue that speaking in tongues is prescribed as a way of proving to people today that Jesus is the King who has made salvation possible. Another person could argue that speaking in tongues is no longer necessary; that unique event provided the proof that Jesus is the King who has made salvation possible. But both of those perspectives are trying their best to faithfully apply the main point.

Please note: I am not saying (and I wasn’t saying in the previous examples) that the main point answers the prescriptive/descriptive question. In the first two examples, I was saying only that the author’s main point makes the question irrelevant and unnecessary. In this third example, the main point actually makes the prescriptive/descriptive question highly relevant.

Much more work needs to be done in context, correlation, systematic and biblical theology to answer the question of speaking in tongues in Acts 2. But the main point confirms that the question itself is well worth asking.

Conclusion

Much of the time, it is not necessary for us to figure out whether particular behaviors in a text are prescriptive or descriptive. The text’s main point reveals an agenda to produce change in some other area, and we should focus on that area instead of our prescriptive/descriptive question. In these situations, when someone asks whether a narrative detail is prescriptive or descriptive, we can sidestep the question by asking instead: What’s the author’s main point?

But in a few cases, a text’s main point confirms the crucial importance of the prescriptive/descriptive question, and our time seeking to answer the question is well spent.

There May be a Clue at the End of the Letter

February 26, 2024 By Ryan Higginbottom

A good email is a dying art. Especially within a business context, clear and concise communication is crucial.

In particular, I love it when someone crafts their email subject line with care. This short text field exists to capture the purpose of the entire email. I have nearly laughed with joy when the body of an email is simply adding a few details to a well-chosen subject line. It’s sublime.

No one would argue that the Biblical epistles are the same as modern day emails. However, as written communication they share some qualities. As my co-blogger Peter has pointed out, because the writers of the epistles wanted to persuade their readers to believe or do something, they often included thesis statements throughout their letters.

The beginning of a letter is an obvious place for such a statement. But these writers occasionally ended their communication by returning to the same topic. This makes sense, and we often do the same—if I want to make extra sure that someone gets my point, I’ll include that at both the beginning and end of the email.

Examples

As we will see later, not every epistle ends in the way that I’m describing. But a number of them do! Here are three for our consideration.

1 Thessalonians

Our interpretive overview of this letter argues that Paul was mainly concerned with urging the Thessalonians on in faith, love, and hope. After noting how obvious these qualities were in them (chapter 1), Paul told them to excel still more in these same virtues.

At the end of the letter, Paul wrote this benediction (which might be my favorite New Testament benediction).

Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He who calls you is faithful; he will surely do it. (1 Thess 5:23-24)

We can see how Paul returned to the familiar note he had been hitting throughout the letter. His prayer and urgent desire for the Thessalonians was that God would perfect them in faith, love, and hope. This is what is meant by his use of “sanctify” and “blameless” in verse 23; in the context of the letter, he wanted their Christian virtues to be complete.

Titus

Paul’s message to Titus was straightforward: character and devotion to good works flow from a sound faith. Though this letter is short, Paul punctuated it with frequent mention of those works which a redeemed heart is glad to perform.

The end of the letter is no exception. Just before Paul’s final greetings, and just following some detailed personal instructions, Paul returned to his theme.

And let our people learn to devote themselves to good works, so as to help cases of urgent need, and not be unfruitful. (Titus 3:14)

Paul made sure Titus could not miss his main point.

1 Peter

Peter’s first letter was written to Christians scattered because of persecution. He was writing to give them hope in the midst of great trials, when they were “suffering for righteousness’ sake (1 Peter 3:14).

Like Paul, Peter’s benediction at the end of the letter was tender and bursting with pastoral wisdom. It was also, unsurprisingly, connected to the theme of the letter.

And after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you. To him be the dominion forever and ever. Amen. (1 Peter 5:10-11)

Peter touched on the suffering that his friends would face and also reminded them of their great, eternal hope.

Not all Epistles!

The structure of each epistle is different, and in some letters a summary at the end is absent. Consider Ephesians as a prime example. This letter splits neatly into two, with the first three chapters laying out important doctrine (“the calling to which you’ve been called”) and the last three chapters giving application (“walk in a manner worthy of this calling”).

The main doctrinal point Paul made in the first half of Ephesians is that God has a plan to unite all of heaven and earth under the Lord Jesus. The letter ended with the famous “armor of God” passage and then final greetings. While one can these greetings to the uniting all things in Christ, there is nothing so explicit as we see in our earlier examples. A summary statement or return to theme is simply absent from the end of this letter.

Finding the Author’s Main Concern

When studying any book of the Bible, we should find its structure to help us discern its main point. Because epistles are so driven by logic and arguments, statements of purpose or theme are more abundant than in other genres of Biblical literature.

So as you’re studying the epistles, if you’re having trouble finding the main point, you might find a clue at the end of the letter.

One Way to Settle the Prescriptive/Descriptive Debate

February 23, 2024 By Peter Krol

When I study a biblical narrative with a group of people, I find it inevitable that someone will eventually ask: “Is this prescriptive or descriptive?” In other words, is this passage prescribing particular behavior, which we ought to imitate? Or is it simply describing what the characters themselves did, but we ought not to do it ourselves?

It’s a great and important question.

medication pills isolated on yellow background — Photo by Anna Shvets on Pexels.com

Not Always Clear

Sometimes the answer is clear: A narrative’s villains are not being held up as models to emulate. So don’t betray your Lord like Judas (Matt 26:47-49), and don’t blame everyone else for your sin like Saul (1 Sam 15:12-16). And when the narrator includes explicit instruction to emulate a character, then we are on strong ground to do so: Avoid idolatry and immorality, unlike the people of Israel (1 Cor 10:6-11), and serve others like Jesus (John 13:12-17).

But sometimes the answer is not clear: Should we delegate authority and establish middle management like Moses (Ex 18:24-26)? Should we test our abusers to determine the sincerity of their confession, like Joseph (Gen 42-44)? Should we try to walk on water like Peter (Matt 14:28-30)? Should we follow Jesus’ instructions to the 70 he sent out to minister in his name (Luke 10:2-12)?

The prescriptive/descriptive question especially comes up when a person’s near-and-dear theology is at stake, either in affirmation or suspicion. Should we speak in tongues and heal people, like the apostles in Acts? Should we set out the fleece to discern God’s will like Gideon? Should we include the children of believers in covenant membership like Abraham?

General Guidance

The prescriptive/descriptive debate on any given passage is closely related to two healthy instincts. We must hold these instincts in tension and not choose one over the other.

The primary purpose of biblical narratives is to proclaim Jesus Christ (Luke 24:44-47; John 1:45, 5:39-40; 1 Peter 1:10-12; etc.).
Biblical narratives present characters as examples to either imitate or avoid (1 Cor 10:1-14; Hebrews 11; Hebrews 12:15-17; 1 John 3:11-13; etc.).

Those with deep commitment to axiom #1 will lean toward viewing biblical narratives as descriptive. Those committed to axiom #2 will lean toward viewing biblical narratives as prescriptive.

Throughout church history, debates have raged over whether to adhere to axiom 1 or axiom 2. But to affirm either one and deny the other is to make a sucker’s choice. We must adhere to both.

A Way Forward

But that only leaves us where we started. How are we to decide whether a passage is prescriptive or descriptive? Whether a character ought to be imitated or not? When should my church start casting lots to fill open leadership positions (Acts 1:26)? And when will our Christian generation learn that “grace” is not implicit permission for rampant divorce, abuse, or sexual immorality (1 Kings 9:1-9)?

I don’t have the final answer that will solve every instance of the question. But I do have a suggestion that—for most passages we study—might just eliminate the need for even asking the question.

Here it is: Focus on applying the passage’s main point and not incidental details.

Now I’ll immediately qualify that guidance by acknowledging that it is possible to apply sub-points, secondary points, or minor details in the text. However, when we do so, we are usually on shakier ground. It’s easier to get the application wrong, since not every detail in a text is equally applicable or even intended by the author to be applied.

In fact, seeking to apply minor details in the text undermines all the work we’ve done up to this point in our study. Why bother doing all that observing and interpreting, if not to understand the author’s main point? Why bother getting to the main point, if we’re just going to apply the passage any which way that seems right in our own eyes?

If the main point is—by definition—the main thing God wants his people to understand from the text, why wouldn’t we focus our application on putting that main point into practice? We could spend all our time applying secondary things and miss the most important thing.

In the next post, I plan to give some examples of how this approach often settles the debate. But in the meantime, I urge you to try it on your own. Study a narrative passage sometime in the next week. Do your best to determine the author’s main point. Then seek to apply that main point and see what happens. Does it make the prescriptive/descriptive question disappear?

I guarantee it won’t answer all your questions about whether particular characters or parts of the text are prescriptive or descriptive. But it will enable you to land on solid ground in your application, in a way that may be highly motivating and might just change lives for God’s glory. Try it and let me know what happens!

Piper on Finding the Main Point of a Chapter

February 7, 2024 By Peter Krol

The climax of the interpretation phase of Bible study is to determine the author’s main point. I have observed that skill to be one of the most difficult things for people to learn.

So here is some additional advice from John Piper. He describes his general process, using the metaphor of a 500-piece puzzle, and then he models it with the example of Psalm 8.

So, the point is to look at the pieces very carefully, to fit them together in midsize units, to jot down the main points of the midsize units until you have them all on a half sheet of paper, and then to think and think, and pray and pray, and think and pray and think and pray, and to organize and draw lines, and to try to fit them all together until they fall into place and you see how these five, six, seven, eight, nine points of the midsize units are in a flow that make one big overarching point. You will be surprised, if you take up pencil and paper and do this, what you will see.

Check it out!

You Better Believe It

December 1, 2023 By Peter Krol

Do you ever wonder if it’s worth it to keep going?

Let’s say you’re driving at twilight, to a place you’ve never been. You’ve gotten most of the way there without a GPS, but you’re not so sure about the road you now travel. Is it worth it to keep going, or should you stop to get better directions?

Your college experience hasn’t resulted in the grades or the friendships you expected. And the exorbitant costs only increase. Is it worth it to keep going?

Your career—or perhaps your marriage—has plateaued, and you find yourself doing more of the same, day in and day out. Is it worth it to keep going?

When it comes to the Christian life: This question is a crucial one.

Following Jesus comes with not only great blessing but also quite a high cost. Life is hard, and you have to give up a lot of time and stuff. Is it worth it to keep going?

Over the next few weeks, I plan to do a deep dive into Hebrews 10:19-39. And the main idea of this passage is that ‌you better believe it’s worth it to keep going.

In order to keep going as a Christian, there are three things in particular that you’d better believe, because without these beliefs, you just might end up throwing everything away. You better believe you have a confident entrance (Heb 10:19-25). You better believe there will be certain vengeance (Heb 10:26-31). And you better believe you’ll need constant reliance (Heb 10:32-39).

Why don’t you take a look at the text for yourself in the coming week? See how much you can observe about the commands, the conclusions, and the train of thought. Write down any questions you have, and we’ll see what answers we can get from the text over the next few weeks.

‌

No Need to Push; Just Blow

August 18, 2023 By Peter Krol

The climax of interpretation is to determine the author’s main point. And while there’s rarely a single, “correct” way to word the main point, some ways of phrasing it are more helpful than others.

Arrive at the Cliff’s Edge

As the climax of interpretation, the main point is the final rest stop before entering the territory of application. Your statement of the author’s main point represents the sum total of all your work to that point. The main point answers your most important why questions. And your main point ought to be 40-weeks-and-two-days pregnant with the answers to your most important so what questions.

As you craft your statement of the author’s main point, avoid the temptation to include everything the passage says. Your goal is not to include every thing but only to capture the main thing.

And the way you capture that main thing matters. Think of observation and interpretation as a high plateau covered in a dense forest. You’ve examined the trees, but you’ve grasped the way they fit together into that forest.

But at the edge of that forest is a cliff, dropping off into a vast canyon. That canyon represents application. And the closer your main point gets to that cliff’s edge, the better it is—both for yourself and those you lead in Bible study. Aim to get close enough to the cliff’s edge that you won’t need to push yourself or others too hard to get into application. All you have to do is blow, and you’ll all fall right into it.

In other words, your main point is the Roadrunner. Your goal in crafting a main point is to get that Wile E. Coyote (be he yourself or those you lead) out of the forest and up to the edge of the cliff. Even better, get him six feet out beyond the cliff’s edge. Once he realizes he’s there, all he needs to do is fall.

What This Looks Like

Your main point should be a clear, concise, and compelling statement of the truth of the text. You don’t want it to be obscure, such that nobody knows what it means. You don’t want it to be lengthy, such that nobody can hold it in mind. You don’t want it to be dry and dusty, such that nobody knows what to do with it.

You’re not inventing the idea; you’re only phrasing it in a compelling way. So your main point should clearly capture the truth of the text while also clearly implying a variety of applications.

For example, I could state the main point of Eph 4:1-16 as follows: “As a church, we must walk in the sort of unity worthy of God’s calling on us in Christ.” That would be true and accurate, scoring bonus points for using the very language of the passage. However, I can take the same truth and rephrase it in a more compelling way, getting myself and my people right up over the canyon of application: “Diversity shouldn’t divide the church.” Once I put it that way, I raise all kinds of questions about our church and what sorts of things we permit to divide us.

Let’s take Proverbs 30:1-6 for another example. I could state the main point as: “God’s Son and his Word communicate his truth and wisdom to us, providing refuge to the weary.” Or I could state it as: “You can find heaven’s wisdom on earth.” If we had more time to discuss it, I’m sure we could improve it even further.

One more example, from a narrative: 1 Kings 21. We could phrase the main point as: “God’s people were expelled like Amorites because their kings abused power and refused justice like Amorites.” That statement captures what this narrative gets at, especially regarding how it would have landed with the original audience. But perhaps another way to phrase the same truth for a modern audience (even if that “audience” is only myself) is: “Sellouts will be found out.”

No Need to Push; Just Blow

In each case, do you see how my rephrasing of the main point hangs us out right over the canyon of application? I won’t need to push myself or others into application. All I have to do is show how deep the canyon goes. And we’ll fall right in.

Each rephrased main point raises immediate questions about our current situation, need, or status. It begs us to ask more implicational questions. And it drives us toward proper belief, values, or action in service to Christ.

Next time you work on a passage, give yourself some time to think long and hard about the main point. Not only what it is but how to phrase it. See how far you can get yourself off the cliff of interpretation and out over the canyon of application. Of course, without actually turning the main point into any particular application. This takes quite a bit of thought, but the effort is extraordinarily rewarding. Your future self—entrusted with the business of applying this text to life—will thank you.