In part 1 of this series we looked at prooftexts from the Old Testament. In part 2 we looked at prooftexts from the New Testament. At this point you may be wondering, “So what’s the big deal?” People will misinterpret things, so what?

What’s the Big Deal?

Clearly, misinterpretation occurs often within the Church. Does that mean that the church is apostate or heretical? Not really, but it does mean that we make mistakes. Many of these mistakes go unnoticed and never cause any real damage. But other mistaken interpretations can sink in, take root, and spring up as dangerous beliefs and bad practices. Consider how many people have watched a loved one pass away, even though they prayed in groups for God to heal them, and, this unmet expectation shattered their faith (see Matt. 18:19-20 in Part 2). Or consider how many people think that the Bible instructs them to fear Satan, and as a result, they have developed a paranoid superstition over Satan’s abilities despite the fact and assurance of God’s sovereignty (see Matt. 10:28). And even well intended misinterpretation such as the evangelistic use of Revelation 3:20, can cause trouble. If people are won to Christ through misinterpretation what precedent does that set for their continued growth in prayer and Bible Study? Can men willfully disrespect God’s Word and still respect God?

Sound interpretation is important. What good is an inerrant Word if we disregard the available correctives to keep our interpretation on target? And even though God can guide and preserve orthodoxy, we should not be so presumptuous as to assume that the Holy Spirit will always make up for our interpretational mistakes, especially when we should already know better than to make those mistakes. God has provided man with an inspired inerrant Word, and He has provided enough resources (natural and spiritual) to access and apply it. We are in no place to deal half-heartedly with such a precious revelation as God’s Word. If we dare to willfully or negligently misinterpret God’s word, we’re flirting with bad theology. And to indulge in bad theology is to flirt with idolatry.

Basics of Interpretation

What are some of these correctives to help us interpret Scripture? Below are a few keys principles to keep in mind as you study God’s Word.

  1. Context, Context, Context
    Respect historical, cultural, circumstantial, and textual context (that is, the larger passage). These help keep your interpretation oriented and anchored.
  2. The Bible can never mean what it never originally meant.       
    As a general rule of thumb, we shouldn’t try to find meaning in the text that the original author would have never intended. Any given passage will have only one meaning. That is the normal mode of communication. This meaning may have endless applications, there can many implications and layers to that meaning, like double entendres and word plays, or multiple sub-points, metaphors, but the entire meaning that it once had is the one meaning it always has. Without this boundary line there is little defense against the various interpretations offered by cult groups, critics, and heretics.
  3. When we share common particulars with the audience being addressed God’s word to them is the same as it is to us.
    This rule deals with how to apply the text. Where our particulars differ from that of the original audience, then we cannot directly apply that element of that passage of Scripture. But when those particulars are the same between us and the original audience (to whom the text is addressed) then we can draw the same general application as them. Jesus told believers back then to “love your neighbor as yourself,” and since we too believe in Jesus and fit in that general audience, we too should “love our neighbor as ourselves” (Mark 12:31).
  4. Scripture interprets Scripture.
    The Bible is a big book and for most topics there are at least a handful of passages that will apply in some manner. Consider the overall Biblical message by comparing verses and passages within Scripture. And where new or unfamiliar passages arise, let the already understood passages serve in the sound interpretation of the rest of Scripture.
  5. Let the clear passages predominate.
    Some passages will stand out as clear and accessible. Let these passages provide guidance in the interpretation of related, but more difficult passages.
  6. If the plain sense makes sense, seek no other sense, lest you end up with nonsense.
    Much of Scripture is readily understandable to the honest reader. Let Scripture speak out clearly as much as possible and seek no other sense unless the Scriptures themselves defy such a ready interpretation.

Conclusion

If you have found yourself setting off the Christian metal detectors by innocently retaining potentially harmful misinterpretations, then hopefully these principles will help you in future study. But you will probably find out soon (if you have not already) that even the best interpreters can benefit from some outside resources. For a good introduction to interpretation see How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stewart.[1] For some free Bible study software see the free version of Logos, or other free bible programs at www.e-sword.org and YouVersion/Bible.com. You may also want to invest in some more specialized resources as well like paid-versions of Accordance or Logos.[2] These materials range from free, to costing an arm and a leg. But, whatever the cost, they may yet prove to be of eternal value.

In closing, it must be said that though interpretation can be very difficult, most of its difficulty is simply our impatience and pride. But we can still solve most of our mistakes in interpretation by patiently and humbly searching out the meaning of a text as we suspend our immediate impressions and test our possible understandings. True, many passages will remain debatable and even mysterious. But on the whole Scripture is clear enough for us to believe, practice, and communicate the true Biblical Christian faith. As guardians of the faith, we should be like the security personnel at Laguardia airport taking our job seriously. Keep the big picture in mind, including all the various dangers, so that you take seriously your job as a guardian of the faith. God’s Word is weighty and powerful. Handled poorly it can be a disaster, but handled wisely it is the very power of God to change the world.

 

Endnotes

[1] 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993). A good introduction to literary hermeneutics is Leland Ryken, How to Read the Bible as Literature . . . and Get More Out of It (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984). Also good is, Grant R. Osborne’s The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Downer’s Grove, IL: Intervarsity, 1991). This edition would probably have benefited from collaboration with specialists in philosophy and related fields, but overall this text is strong. Unfortunately many evangelical texts disqualify themselves from safe recommendation because they deny objective Biblical interpretation. For more on this issue see Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Is there a Meaning in This Text? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), 1-195 and Thomas A. Howe, Toward a Thomistic Theory of Meaning [Master’s Thesis] (Charlotte, NC: Independently Published, 2000).
[2] The standard Greek Lexicon is Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (2000). The standard Hebrew lexicon is the Koehler and Baumgartner, Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament [HALOT] (2002), followed by slighter older and less comprehensive Brown, Driver, and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon (1992). the standard English-language concordance is James Strong, ed. The New Exhaustive Concordance (1985). Some other helpful sources for commentary on difficult or misrepresented Scriptures include Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe, When Critics Ask: A Popular Handbook on Bible Difficulties (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992); and Walter C. Kaiser and others, Hard Sayings of the Bible (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity, 1996).


Recommended resources related to the topic:

Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)
The New Testament: Too Embarrassing to Be False by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3, and Mp4)
Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)
Oh, Why Didn’t I Say That? Is the Bible Historically Reliable? by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp4, Mp3 Download.
How to Interpret Your Bible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide
How Philosophy Can Help Your Theology by Richard Howe (MP3 Set), (mp4 Download Set), and (DVD Set)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

John is a licensed minister with earned degrees from Charleston Southern (BA), Southern Evangelical Seminary (MDiv), and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (ThM, PhD). His doctorate is in philosophy of religion, minoring in ethics. As a new addition to Crossexamined in 2023, John brings a wealth of experience to the team including debating atheists, preaching the Gospel, teaching apologetics in schools and churches, publishing books and articles, and creating websites. John is also a teaching fellow with Equal Rights Institute and president of Pella Pro-Life in his hometown of Pella, Iowa. There he resides with his lovely and brilliant wife Hillary Ferrer, founder of Mama Bear Apologetics. Together they specialize in cultural apologetics with an emphasis on family-based apologetic training.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/3r0C5qp

 

In part 1 of this series, we looked at a few Old Testament passages that people often misinterpret. In part 2 we shift to the New Testament. It’s worth noting that sometimes the error is just an innocent mistake. It’s not always from bad intentions, or false teachers, or heretical theology. Sometimes there are malicious forces at work here, but often it’s just well-meaning people getting confused about what the Bible says. The list of verses below is just a sample of commonly misinterpreted texts. There are many more too choose from, but I’m willing to bet that if you are a church-goer you’ve heard at least one of these misinterpretations before.

Matthew 7:1

Judge not, lest ye be judged.

This is perhaps the most quoted verse of Scripture surpassing even John 3:16. The love of God is succinctly portrayed in the one-verse Gospel message of John 3:16 and this was considered a beautiful redeeming truth to be shared and enjoyed – perhaps more than any other verse until now. In recent times, the most prized message in Scripture is more often to abstain from “passing judgment.” So Matthew 7:1 has risen in popularity. But this anti-judgement verse does not promise freedom from judgment. For all will eventually be judged by God (Revelation 20:11-15). Nor does it even disbar judgment between believers (Matt. 18:15-20; 1 Cor. 5:12-13; 1 Tim. 1:20). Rather, in context, this verse cautions against hypocrisy. The immediate passage following this one chastises hypocrites who attempt to remove a speck from another man’s eye when all the time there is a plank in his own (Matt. 7:1-5). This verse communicates a boomerang effect to one’s actions consistent with the rest of the Sermon the Mount – and this verse is part of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7).[1]. Scripture encourages Christians to judge sin, at least among believers – “let judgment begin with the church” (1 Peter 4:17). Now, Christians shouldn’t be condemning other people to hell, or acting on their own initiative (individually) to disbar people from becoming Christians. In those senses Christians “shouldn’t judge.” But Matthew 7:1 isn’t saying to never judge anyone else, it’s saying to never judge in this hypocritical and condemning ways. We should still use judgment to exercise church discipline, to administer righteous verdicts and punishments, to recognize and extinguish sin, to distinguish between truth and error, discern between wise and unwise, and identify good and evil.

Matthew 10:28

And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

The problem that rides on this verse is that Satan gets too much credit. One may think, from this verse, that Satan is the one to fear, the one who can “destroy both soul and body in hell.” This misunderstanding seems to be more the product of poor theology than malicious exegesis. For the One who is truly Lord over Hell is not Satan but God (1 Chron. 29:11-14; Ps. 103:19). God is sovereign over everything—hell included. Satan is but a prisoner; God is the warden (Job 1:6-12; Rev. 20:1-3, 10). God is to be feared above all else, above even Satan.

Matthew 18:19-20

Again I say unto you, that if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

This little passage is one of the most victimized in all of Scripture. First, this verse is often used to justify all shades of “health and wealth” theology, namely the belief that God must give believers whatever they ask (no matter how self-centered it may be) as long as they ask God in groups. The second offense is a little more innocent. Christians often quote verse twenty as an invocation of God’s presence be it at prayer meetings, worship services, or whatever else. The answer to both of these problems is, again, context. Matthew 18:15-20 is about church discipline. And the reason the numbers “two or three” are mentioned is because those are the numbers of witnesses that would testify in the case of a legal or religious offense. To prevent “he said she said” arguments, two or three witnesses were brought forth to establish trustworthy testimony (Deut. 17:6; 19:15; 2 Cor. 13:1; 1 Tim. 5:19; Hebr. 10:28). Moreover, since only God has the ultimate authority to judge (Deut. 32:39; Rom. 12:19), any human judgment over other men was to be done with God’s conferred authority. And in these verses we see God conferring His authority for judgment only to groups of believers, that is, to a church, the “body of Christ.” God’s presence to creation is a universal fact (Ps 139:7-12; Jer. 23:23-24; Acts 17:27-28). So, He hardly needs to be invoked at prayer meetings or at church services (recognized, yes, but not invoked). His presence is mentioned here in reference to His conferring authority to believers for the exercising of judgment within the church.

Revelation 3:15-16

I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

These verses do not mean that God prefers spiritual coldness (disbelief, hostility, inactivity, uselessness) to lukewarm spirituality (hypocrisy, casual Christianity). That interpretation would mean that God wills disbelief (or hostility, inactivity). Thus God not only permits disbelief, but He prefers it. That is, He wants it. This idea is dangerous enough in that it suggest that God is guilty of evil, but it also presents a stiff challenge to Scriptures such as 1 Timothy 2:4 which says, “[God] wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.” Such a misinterpretation also suffers contextual blindness. John was addressing the wealthy Church of Laodicea which was inconveniently located south of Heiropolos, known for its therapeutic hot springs, and north of Colossae with its cold refreshing waters.[2] Laodicea, not having an adequate water source of its own brought water in from these outside sources. Thus the water they acquired was lukewarm and dirty by the time it reached them. John, therefore, is drawing the contrast between the therapeutic hot springs and the revitalizing cold springs–both good options–and between these two is the feted lukewarm water of Laodicea.

Revelation 3:20

Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

This verse is usually treated as an evangelistic invitation, however the context reveals that John is still talking to the Church at Laodicea. That is, John is addressing believers. This knocking and calling is not unto salvation, for that much is already assured to these believers. Instead the invitation is to a deeper fellowship with God.

Stay tuned for Parts 3 in this series!

Endnotes

[1] This boomerang affect is visible in Matthew 6:14-15, “For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” (See also Matt. 7:2, 12).
[2] Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation Rev. Ed. in The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 109-10.


Recommended resources related to the topic:

Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)
The New Testament: Too Embarrassing to Be False by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3, and Mp4)
Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)
Oh, Why Didn’t I Say That? Is the Bible Historically Reliable? by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp4, Mp3 Download.
How to Interpret Your Bible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide
How Philosophy Can Help Your Theology by Richard Howe (MP3 Set), (mp4 Download Set), and (DVD Set)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

John is a licensed minister with earned degrees from Charleston Southern (BA), Southern Evangelical Seminary (MDiv), and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (ThM, PhD). His doctorate is in philosophy of religion, minoring in ethics. As a new addition to Crossexamined in 2023, John brings a wealth of experience to the team including debating atheists, preaching the Gospel, teaching apologetics in schools and churches, publishing books and articles, and creating websites. John is also a teaching fellow with Equal Rights Institute and president of Pella Pro-Life in his hometown of Pella, Iowa. There he resides with his lovely and brilliant wife Hillary Ferrer, founder of Mama Bear Apologetics. Together they specialize in cultural apologetics with an emphasis on family-based apologetic training.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/3r0C5qp

Years ago, on a trip to Washington DC I found myself going through a few different airports and learning a life lesson along the way. The flights led me through several security checks. I had no problem with the baggage scans and the metal detectors till I got to LaGuardia airport in New York. I was stopped. I had forgotten about a small pocketknife on my key-chain. Not being a terrorist, or John Wick, I don’t think of a one-inch blade as a weapon. My pocketknife was confiscated. It was no big loss, but it was enough to teach me something. One airport let that pocketknife slip by unnoticed. But in New York they spotted it instantly. In New York they knew the threat of terrorism. Their sensitivities were keen, their awareness raised. They knew that a few box cutters can be used to highjack a plane and kill thousands. I miss my little pocketknife. But I’m glad that the airport security was as tight as it was. New York is safer because of it, and so is America.

What was the difference between those airports? They all knew that terrorism still happens, and plane crashes are a real threat. They all had undergone the same security regulations training. They all had to adopt heightened security standards since 9/11. They were all big enough airports, seeing thousands of passengers every day. But in New York they took their job a little bit more seriously. They had to. The danger was not only real, but obvious, and – since this pocket-knife incident was around 2002 – 9/11 was still a fresh memory, painted in somber living colors of gray dust and red blood.

In the Christian church how often do we allow dangerous elements to slip under our radar? What bad interpretations of the Bible have we adopted because we did not let their imminent threat rouse us to action? As tragic a disaster as 9/11 was, more hangs in the balance when it comes to Biblical interpretation. Here eternal souls are at stake. Here whole denominations are tottering. Here is where God’s voice is most clearly heard. But, in spite of the gravity of this issue, God’s Word is still constantly mishandled, even among well-meaning Christians. Let’s look at a few examples. As you’ll see, Biblical apologetics is not just for counteracting cults. It’s useful for some church house-cleaning too.

The Danger with Prooftexts
Correctly interpreting the Bible is an exercise in humility. We should approach the Bible, with the humble posture of a teachable student, willing to learn, and wanting to hear what God has to say. It doesn’t matter what we would prefer to hear. God’s message is the reference point, and that’s what we’re trying to reach. Sometimes, however, people pull a single verse or passage out of context, to make it “mean” something it probably doesn’t mean. That’s called “prooftexting.” Any verse or passage used that way is called a ”prooftext.” Sometimes people resort to prooftexting on accident. But other times, people use prooftexts to put words in God’s mouth, to make God say something He never said. When God’s words are taken out of context, they can be distorted to say most anything. That’s the danger of prooftexting.

We’re going to look at a few prooftexts from the Old Testament. Then in Part 2 of this series, we’ll look at prooftexts from the New Testament. Finally, in part 3, we’ll offer guidance to correct against prooftexting errors. I encourage you to look these passages up in their original context and read the surrounding verses. See if you can identify what the verse more likely means and how people might miss that target.

1 Chronicles 4:9-10[1]

“Now Jabez was more honorable than his brothers, and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, ‘Because I bore [him] in pain.’ 10 And Jabez called on the God of Israel saying, ‘Oh, that You would bless me indeed, and enlarge my territory, that Your hand would be with me, and that You would keep [me] from evil, that I may not cause pain!’ So God granted him what he requested.”

Perhaps you read the book, The Prayer of Jabez. It was popular a few years ago, and it’s resurfaced now and again. The book was easy to read, simple, and seemed to offer a straight-forward method for lining one’s life up with God’s blessing. It wasn’t quite “health and wealth” theology, but it was close enough that a lot of people liked it for the same reasons. Stepping back a bit, we can see that, first, the story is descriptive, not prescriptive. In other words, the story describes what did happen not necessarily what should happen, especially in our day and age.

Second, the passage is much too brief an interjection to support the volumes of theologizing that have been put upon it. If the passage was enriched by a greater historical or circumstantial context or perhaps prescriptive in nature, then more could be said of it. But as it stands, there are only two verses in Scripture which deal with Jabez (1 Chron. 4:9, 10) and one verse that mentions a city by that name (1 Chron. 2:55).[2] That’s not a lot to work with.

Third, the common interpretation that Jabez’s prayer is somehow special in its profound insights on blessing is undermined by the facts that Jabez could equally have been blessed for his being “honorable” or for his being an otherwise cursed person under a name that means “pain”, for God has always had a heart for the “nobodies” and the “underdogs.”[3] The prayer may have been mentioned to demonstrate how God blessed Jabez in spite of his words rather than because of them.

Fourth, perhaps the most troubling thing about the way this passage has been handled is that it’s used as a magic formula, as if there are magic prayers that unlock God’s stored up blessings. The text makes no suggestion that this prayer is prescriptive nor that it mechanically brings about the desired effect. Prayer for Jabez works just as it does for us. Prayer is a relational activity that should be God-centered and the results are guaranteed only to fit what God wants, whether or not people agree.[4]

Psalm 118:24

“This [is] the day [which] the LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.”

The passage is often cited as a reminder that God makes every day and we should be glad about this fact. One might hear this verse quoted, perhaps in hymn form or in a prayer, bright and early Sunday morning as a commencement for the day’s worship service. But this verse is not referring to just any day, but one day in particular. If we examine the larger passage we can find another memorable line in verse twenty-two, “The stone [which] the builders refused is become the head [stone] of the corner.” This memorable verse would be repeated by the Apostle Peter hundreds of years later in 1 Peter 2:7 with specific reference to the ministry and work of Christ as a foundation for the building of the church. Furthermore, Psalm 118:22 suggests that this “day” refers to the day of salvation, and indeed the larger context of Psalm 118 agrees with this interpretation.[5] The Psalmist is celebrating God’s work of salvation and, in verse twenty-four, the particular day in which it occurs. This is the day of salvation, the LORD has brought about salvation, and that’s cause for rejoicing.

Proverbs 29:18

“Where [there is] no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy [is] he.”

The word hazon interpreted as “vision” is often misunderstood to mean a “vision” in the sense of goal-setting, vision statements, and strategic planning in the corporate world. That is, people need to have a clear “vision” of their goal so they are inspired to work harder, work together, overcome obstacles, and achieve that goal. Whatever truth there is to that sense of “vision” that’s not what this verse is about. Nevertheless, in church settings the idea is usually that chaos erupts when the church does not have a set ministry plan, a singular vision of ministry agreed upon by the head pastor, church leaders, or the denomination.

I’m not trying to dismiss the value of goal-setting and clear vision statements for your church or business, but that’s just not what this verse is about. The word here is hazon, and it refers to divine communication to prophets.[6] In context, the “vision” here is about divine revelation through a prophet, namely, God’s revealed law (Scripture). This sense fits best with parallel structure of the verse.[7] The first line tells of perishing for lack of vision.[8] But the second line of the verse explains the object of this vision – what are they looking at with their “vision. It says, “But he that keepeth the law, happy is he.” This vision refers to seeing God’s law, specifically God’s standard as revealed through the prophets. And for those who do not have the law, they can’t keep the law, they don’t benefit from it, and they suffer and perish without it.

Isaiah 53:5

“But He [was] wounded for our transgressions, [He] [was] bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace [was] upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed.”

This verse, or at least the last line of it, “by His stripes we are healed,” is often quoted in reference to physical healing from diseases and disorders. This passage, however, is talking about eternal salvation. Usually the common error in cases like this is to flatten out one’s soteriology (theology of salvation) reading eternity into every earthly deliverance. But here the opposite is done. Isaiah 53 is one of the clearest Messianic and soteriological passages in Scripture. The nature of Christ’s eternally redemptive work is explained in this prophecy. To reduce this passage to physical healing is to say that Christ died on the cross so you wouldn’t have lower back pain. Or Christ rose from the grave to deliver you from migraines. But the whole thrust of this passage is that the Messiah is not simply assuming the pains and sufferings of the world on her behalf; He is bearing the load of her sin-punishment. In summary, the thrust of this entire chapter is that Christ dies a substitutionary death for the atonement and spiritual redemption of men. To be fair, Jesus does heal people – that was a major part of his earthly ministry. But full and final healing isn’t guaranteed for all believers until heaven. That completed sense of healing is still in view here, as Christ isn’t just delivering people from the wages of sin (justification), and from slavery to sin (sanctification), but also delivering believers ultimately from the presence of sin through glorification in heaven. Isaiah 53:5 does not however guarantee that Christians will be, in this life, physically healed by Christ’s suffering. Were a person to make an argument from Scripture for physical healings today, he would do better finding his support elsewhere.

Stay tuned for Parts 2 and 3 in this series!

Endnotes
[1] Since many misinterpretations have ties to the KJV, or at least were first proliferated under the KJV-popular era, all Scripture verses are from the KJV unless otherwise noted.
[2] James Strong, Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (Lynchburg, VA: Old Time Gospel Hour, 1890, reprint ed. N.D.), 534.
[3] This point hardly needs defense. Nonetheless for God’s Word as it concerns the care of the poor, destitute, and otherwise “lowly” see: Ex 22:25-27; 23:11; Le 19:9, 10; 23:22; 25:25-28, 35-37, 39-43; De 14:28, 29; 15:2-14; 24:12-21; 26:12, 13; 1Sa 2:7; Ne 8:10; Job 5:15, 16; 31:15; 34:18, 19, 28; 36:6, 15; Ps 9:18; 10:14; 12:5; 14:6; 34:6; 35:10; 37:21, 26; 41:1-3; 68:10; 69:33; 72:2, 4, 12-14; 74:21; 102:17; 107:9, 36, 41; 109:31; 112:4, 5, 9; 113:7, 8; 132:15; 140:12; 146:5, 7; Pr 22:2, 22, 23; 28:27; 29:7, 13; 31:9, 20; Ec 5:8; Isa 1:17; 11:4; 14:30, 32; 16:3,4; 25:4; 29:19; 41:17; 58:7, 10; Jer 20:13; Eze 18:7, 16, 17; Da 4:27; Zep 3:12; Zec 7:10; 11:7; Mt 5:42; 11:5; 19:21; 25:35, 36; Mr 14:7; Lu 3:11; 4:18; 6:30; 7:22; 11:41; 12:33; 14:12-14; 16:22; 18:22; 19:8; Ac 20:35; Ro 12:8, 13, 20; 1Co 13:3; 16:1,2; 2Co 6:10; 9:5-7; Ga 2:10; 6:10; Eph 4:28; 1Ti 5:9, 10, 16; Heb 13:3; Jas 1:27; 2:2-9, 15, 16; 5:4; 1Jo 3:17-19. Naves Topical Bible (No Bibliographical Data given) in Gramcord [CD ROM] (Vancouver, WA; Gramcord Institute, 1998), “Poor.”
[4] The intimacy of the Psalms, which themselves tend to be as much prayers as songs, bear witness to the personal and relational nature of prayer. And it is a plain fact that prayers often go unanswered or at least answered with a “No.” But God also accomplishes everything He intends to accomplish (1 Chron. 29:11-14; Ps. 104:27-30; Isa. 14:24, 26-27; 55:11). Therefore prayer is only guaranteed to bring about the desired results when those desired results align with God’s plans. Furthermore, the only prayer in the New Testament era that can be argued as a formulaic prescription is the Lord’s Prayer found in Matt. 6:9-13 and Luke 11:2-4. But even this appears more to be an outline rather than a formulaic prescription, for of all the prayers to be found in the rest of Scripture, nowhere else is the Lord’s Prayer repeated verbatim.
[5] “Salvation” refers here both to temporal salvation (earthly deliverance) and eternal salvation. Psalm 118 is rich with imagery of God’s immanence and direct earthly salvation. Indeed, temporal salvation is the predominant kind suggested in Psalm 118 but in verse nineteen the setting begins to shift saying, “Open to me the gates of righteousness: I will go into them, [and] I will praise the LORD, 20 This gate of the LORD, into which the righteous shall enter. 21 I will praise thee: for thou hast heard me, and art become my salvation.” This reference to “gates of righteousness,” like the “gates” in Psalm 100:4, suggest God’s abode. And the Petrine interpretation of Psalm 118:22 as seen in 1 Pet. 2:7 bolsters this interpretation. Indeed the Psalmist believes God to be his savior in warfare, but also His savior unto heaven. For more on the ancient Hebrew expectations of the Kingdom of Heaven see Alva J. McClain, The Greatness of the Kingdom: An Inductive Study of the Kingdom of God (Winona, IN: BMH, 1987).
[6] Allen P. Ross notes, “The word hazon refers to divine communication to prophets (as in 1 Sam 3:1) and not to individual goals that are formed . . . . The prophetic ministry was usually in response to the calamitous periods, calling the people back to God– hazon meaning revelatory vision should be retained. If there is no revelation from God, people can expect spiritual and political anarchy” (Allen P. Ross, Proverbs in Expositor’s Bible Commentary Vol. 8 [CD ROM] [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997], Prov. 28:19).
[7] Parallelism is the pairing of related lines for literary affect be it emphasis, contrast, development, cause and affect, question and answer, etc. For excellent studies on Hebrew parallelism see James L. Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and Its History (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ., 1981); and Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Poetry.
[8] The term for “perish,” para means to “let go,” “unbind,” or “uncover” and is variously rendered as “unrestrained” (NASB), “cast off restraint” (NIV, ASV, NKJV), or “made naked” (Young’s Literal). Francis Brown, S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs, The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon: With an Appendix Containing the Biblical Aramaic, Reprint from the 1906 ed., 7th printing (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003) 828, Strongs #6544.


Recommended resources related to the topic:

Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)
The New Testament: Too Embarrassing to Be False by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3, and Mp4)
Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)
Oh, Why Didn’t I Say That? Is the Bible Historically Reliable? by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp4, Mp3 Download.
How to Interpret Your Bible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide
How Philosophy Can Help Your Theology by Richard Howe (MP3 Set), (mp4 Download Set), and (DVD Set)

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

John is a licensed minister with earned degrees from Charleston Southern (BA), Southern Evangelical Seminary (MDiv), and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (ThM, PhD). His doctorate is in philosophy of religion, minoring in ethics. As a new addition to Crossexamined in 2023, John brings a wealth of experience to the team including debating atheists, preaching the Gospel, teaching apologetics in schools and churches, publishing books and articles, and creating websites. John is also a teaching fellow with Equal Rights Institute and president of Pella Pro-Life in his hometown of Pella, Iowa. There he resides with his lovely and brilliant wife Hillary Ferrer, founder of Mama Bear Apologetics. Together they specialize in cultural apologetics with an emphasis on family-based apologetic training.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/3r0C5qp

NT Greek Scholar, Dan Wallace stated, “As a Protestant I cherish the NT teaching on the priesthood of believers—that each Christian has the right to his own interpretation, but also that each Christian has the responsibility to get it right.” Well said. But how do we do that? Here is a simple acrostic that can help you remember some key principles when seeking to decipher the proper interpretation: I.N.T.E.R.P.R.E.T.A.T.I.O.N.

Inspect other translations to discover textual difficulties

By comparing different translations you’ll notice textual variants amongst the translations that will reveal problems to sort out. Take for example 1 John 5:7-8 where debate exists regarding the Comma Johanneum which refers to the addition discovered in the KJV/NKJV. Critical scholars tend to view this passage as an addition to those texts to reinforce trinitarian theology. I won’t solve the debate here but only use this as an example of the types of resolutions you’ll be left to sort out when comparing translations.

Never impose current definitions and cultural customs on ancient definitions and customs

That’s because words may vary from context to context. You don’t want to consult Webster’s English Dictionary to learn what the Hebrew word for covenant means, but instead you’ll want to consult a Bible dictionary.

Tease out the main viewpoints for the passage you’re studying

You can do this by exploring various commentaries from authors holding to different interpretative positions. If you’re studying Judges 11:29-40, you’ll soon discover that there is a debate on whether Jephthah literally sacrificed his daughter or whether her virginity was sacrificed. By weighing the options, you can make a better-informed decision even if in the end, you remain unsure.

Evaluate and be able to critique heretical intepretations

Perhaps the best example of this is found in John 1:1. Jehovah’s Witnesses notoriously have butchered this verse in their New World Translation by translating the logos, i.e., the word, which refers to Jesus, as “a god.” Ironically enough, they argue that since the Greek lacks an article before the word logos that it can’t refer to God. And yet, in the same chapter they ditch their own rule of thumb when the article is missing in other cases, e.g., as in the case of John the Baptist, there’s no article, but they don’t translate the verse as saying, “There was a man sent from a god” (1:6). The problem is Jehovah Witnesses have forced their theology on the text instead of deriving their theology from it.

Recognize the time frame in which your passage was written

It’s important to remember this, especially when it comes to the application stage. If you fail to understand what commandments hold today versus those that no longer do you may find yourself applying parts of Scripture that are no longer necessary, like avoiding bacon when under the New Covenant you’re free to feast on that BLT (see Acts 10:15).

Purchase a good Bible software program to assist you in your studies.

Personally, I use Logos. What’s so great about having a Bible software program is the speed by which you can track down information. Gone are the days when I was preparing for ministry where the serious Bible student had his desk covered with all his various tools for study. Now at the tips of my fingers I can have a report produced within seconds of endless research.

Review various tools such as a Bible dictionary, commentaries, and word study aids

A good Bible software program will have all these resources, but if you opt out of that route you will at least want the tools listed above. Each is designed to help you faithfully interpret Scripture.

Evaluate the meaning behind metaphors, parables, apocalyptic imagery, and other figures of speech

This is where you’ll really sharpen as a student of Scripture. As you learn to distinguish various figures of speech and not just interpret them in an overly wooden sense, you’ll acquire a finesse regarding the use of biblical language.

Tap into the Spirit of God for wisdom to interpret accurately

Fortunately, when it comes to studying the Bible, we aren’t left to ourselves. No, as believers, the Holy Spirit is there to assist us in grasping spiritual truth (Jn. 14:26; 1 Cor. 2:10-14).

Aim to align your thoughts and feelings with God’s Word

It’s not surprising given the context we live in that there are some things in the Bible that are hard to relate to. When that happens, it’s important not to grant a favored status to our current way of doing things. But rather it’s our duty to understand the Word in the world it was crafted. If our thoughts and feelings struggle to absorb the truth of God’s Word, it can help to do more background work so we can better understand the original intent. What we don’t want to do is impose an alternative meaning to the text all because our thoughts and feelings couldn’t stomach the original point.

Trust that you’re dealing with God’s word

Here we’re reminded that as believers we are committed to biblical authority (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pt. 1:20-21). That means when we study the Bible, we recognize the difference between a ministerial and a magisterial approach to Scripture. The former approaches the Bible as a servant who sits under the authority of Scripture whereas the later approaches the Bible as one who stands in authority over it. The former is what we’re after when it comes to interpretation as believers.

Interpret difficult verses in light of clearer verses

Another way of stating this point is to interpret Scripture with Scripture. At least as much as you can without forcing various unconnected parts to fit together. Sometimes it’s helpful to interpret verses that are less clear with verses that are clearer. Take Acts 2:38. Many have interpreted this verse to mean baptism is necessary for salvation. But given clearer passages like 1 Corinthians 1:17 how might we avoid that conclusion?

Oppose building major doctrines on isolated unclear verses

A classic example of this is 1 Corinthians 15:29 which states, “…If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?” This is one of those verses which boasts many interpretations, and it is so isolated without other proof texts to back it up we’re left basically in ignorance this side of heaven. And yet, the Mormon Church has built an entire salvific industry on baptizing people for the dead by featuring massive Mormon ancestry databases. To build such an elaborate doctrine on one isolated verse with no clear interpretation should be avoided at all costs.

Nail down the author’s intended meaning by summarizing it into an interpretive sentence

Having worked through both the observation and interpretation acrostics you should now be ready to identify a working interpretation of your chosen text. In many ways both acrostics are simply observatory tools aimed at arriving at a faithful interpretation. Once you’re ready you can capture your interpretation by boiling it down to a digestible sentence. Space prohibits me from writing out examples, but you’re essentially answering the question, “What is this passage talking about?” Your answer is hopefully a sound interpretation of the text.

Now that you’ve arrived at an interpretation, you’re ready to answer the application question, “How does it work?” To assist you with an answer, in my next blog I will walk you through our third and final acrostic—application.

  • Inspect other translations to discover textual difficulties
  • Never impose current definitions and cultural customs on ancient definitions and customs
  • Tease out the main viewpoints for the passage you’re studying
  • Evaluate and be able to critique heretical interpretations
  • Recognize the time frame in which your passage was written
  • Purchase a good Bible software program to assist you in your studies
  • Review various tools such as a Bible dictionary, commentaries, maps, and word study aids
  • Evaluate the meaning behind metaphors, parables, apocalyptic imagery, and other figures of speech
  • Tap into the Spirit of God for wisdom to interpret accurately
  • Aim to align your thoughts and feelings with God’s Word
  • Trust that you’re dealing with God’s Word
  • Interpret difficult verses in light of clearer verses
  • Oppose building major doctrines on isolated unclear verses
  • Nail down the author’s intended meaning by summarizing it into an interpretive sentence.

Recommeded Resources Related to this Topic

How to Interpret YourBible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide
Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (mp4 Download)
The Top Ten Reasons We Know the NT Writers Told the Truth mp3 by Frank Turek
Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)
Oh, Why Didn’t I Say That? Is the Bible Historically Reliable? by Frank Turek DVD, Mp4, Mp3 Download.
Living By the Book by Howard Hendricks (Book, Full DVD set, and Condensed DVD set)
How to Read the Bible for All It’s Worth by Gordon Fee and Doug Stuart (Book)
The New Joy of Discovery in Bible Study by Oletta Wald (Book)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bobby serves as lead pastor of Image Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, and is well known for his YouTube ministry called, One Minute Apologist, which now goes by the name Christianity Still Makes Sense. He also serves as the Co-Host of Pastors’ Perspective, a nationally syndicated call-in radio show on KWVE in Southern California. Bobby earned his Master of Theology degree from Dallas Theological Seminary, his Doctor of Ministry in Apologetics from Southern Evangelical Seminary, and his Ph.D. in Philosophy of Religion from the University of Birmingham (England) where he was supervised under David Cheetham and Yujin Nagasawa. Bobby’s also written several books including: The Fifth Gospel, Doubting Toward Faith, Does God Exist, and Fifty-One other Questions About God and the Bible and the forthcoming Christianity Still Makes Sense to be published by Tyndale in April 2024. He’s married to his lovely wife Heather and together they have two grown kids: Haley and Dawson.

 

Imagine arriving at the lake each Sunday at 10AM to capture the mad skills of a gifted fisherman as he captures your lunch for the day. In doing so, do you think you’d learn to fish for yourself by simply marveling at his skills? Not likely. Sure, you’d learn some ins and outs about the sport, but you wouldn’t learn to fish for yourself. That’s because fishing is learned through participating not mere spectating. As the saying goes, “Give a man a fish and you’ll feed him for a day but teach a man to fish and you’ll feed him for a lifetime.” It turns out that fishing is not only caught but taught. Similarly, when it comes to studying the Bible, many of us are like the spectator discussed above. We show up each week at 10AM for church, we marvel at the expositional skills of the pastor as he unpacks for us the weekly Word, yet we leave, bereft of our own skills to study the Bible. In many ways, Bible study methods should be discipleship 101 and yet there’s no shortage of Christians who’ve attended church for years without a single crash course on how to study the Bible. So here it is. A three-part crash course designed to equip you to study God’s Word on your own. To do this, I will devote three blogs to help you develop an approach to Bible study by using three words every serious student of the Bible is familiar with, namely, observation, interpretation, and application.

When it comes to Bible study, observation asks the question, “What do I see?” Interpretation asks the question, “What does it mean?” And application asks the questions, “How does it work?”

Observation: What do I see
Interpretation: What does it mean?
Application: How does it work?”“

It’s been said, “The difference between a good Bible student and a great one is the great one simply sees more. In this blog series I’ll introduce you to three acrostics using these key words to hone your Bible study skills. Beginning with observation, here’s how it looks, acrostic style: O.B.S.E.R.V.A.T.I.O.N.

Observe Prayerfully

The Psalmist captures this idea nicely when he writes, “Open my eyes that I may see wonderful things in your law” (Psalm 119:18).  Similarly, as we delve into God’s Word it’s good to ask the Lord to open our eyes to accurately understand Scripture.

Begin by Seeing the Big Picture

You can do this by reading the passage you’re studying several times to get a feel for the lay of the land. What you’re in search of is the overarching idea. The point of the passage. The big idea.

Select the Style of Literature

This is important. Not all Scripture is to be approached in the same manner. That’s because the Bible is comprised of various genres such as narrative, history, law, poetry, wisdom, prophecy, gospel, epistle, and apocalyptic. If you approach historical sections as metaphorical or apocalyptic portions as overly literal, you’ll soon find yourself in theological trouble when you arrive at the interpretation stage.

Explore any Commands to Follow

It’s helpful to know if the passage before you has any commands to follow, but also crucial to remember where you are in the Bible as it relates to the given command. That’s because some commands no longer hold. If you aren’t careful, you may find yourself feeling bound to commands that already served their purpose but are no longer required. This is especially true as it relates to the Old Testament dietary law that was clearly eradicated with the inauguration of the New Covenant.

Record any Warnings Given

Warnings are evident throughout Scripture. All the way from Adam’s warning in the Garden of Eden to not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:17) to the warning in Revelation to not add to God’s Word (Revelation 22:18-19). When the Bible issues a warning, observe it. Warnings are God’s way of trying to protect us. Therefore, stay alert.

Venture to Find Promises Proclaimed

This can be tricky, so be careful. Not every promise is recorded directly for us. We’ve all seen the abuse of Jeremiah 29:11, which refers to God’s promise to prosper His people after their time in captivity is fulfilled. Many of the people who would’ve heard this original message died in Babylon never to see it come to fruition. Knowing how to apply promises is crucial, especially to protect people from being disillusioned by God all because they claimed a promise that wasn’t intended for them.

Ask and Answer Questions of the Text

Perhaps you remember your six interrogative friends from grammar school. If not, no worries. These friends of old are Who, What, Why, Where, When, and How? We want to ask those questions of the passage we are studying. Who is it talking about? What is the big idea? Why was it written? How does it apply? You get the point.

Target Key People and Places

Here you’re looking to discover who the author is, who the recipients are, e.g., are they Jews, Gentiles, or both? You also want to discern the place from which the book was written and the location it was written to. Identifying key people and places will help you put the pieces of the puzzle together so you can capture a clear picture of the passage before you.

Inspect for Contrasts, Comparisons, and (Apparent) Contradictions

The contrasts may be between light and darkness, or sin and holiness, or truth and error. Comparisons might be between the rich and the poor, or the wise and the foolish, or a leader and his followers, or perhaps between heaven and hell. Regarding apparent contradictions, there are lots of them, but none of them lacks an explanation, so be encouraged.

Overview your Discoveries in Light of the Context

Here it’s important to remember that every text has a context. For example, consider Proverbs 5:15 says, “Drink water from your own cistern, flowing water from your own well.” Absent of context we’d never know that this is talking about enjoying sexual intimacy with one’s own spouse versus drawing sexual satisfaction from another person’s spouse. Wells in the ancient world were privately owned. You weren’t to steal another person’s water, but drink from your own well. So too in marriage, we’re to stick to our own spouse. Enjoy our own well. You see, context is key.

Note Words that are Repeated and Emphasized

Doing this will help you unlock what the passage is about. For example, turn over to Psalm 150 for a quick read and you’ll see what I mean. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to recognize that the key word is praise, which clearly indicates the theme of the Psalm.

If you want to practice your observations let me encourage you this week to take this acrostic and read Philippians once a day over the next week, while jotting down your observations. You’ll be amazed at what you discover. And more importantly, you’ll be ready for the next stage, which is interpretation. But for that acrostic you’ll have to wait for the next blog. Till next time.

O.B.S.E.R.V.A.T.I.O.N., in review:
Observe Prayerfully
Begin by Seeing the Big Picture
Select the Style of Literature
Explore any Commands to Follow
Record any Warnings Given
Venture to Find Promises Proclaimed
Ask and Answer Questions of the Text
Target Key People and Places
Inspect for Contrasts and Comparisons & Apparent Contradictions
Overview your Discoveries in Light of the Context
Note Words that are Repeated and Emphasized

Recommended Resources Related to This Topic

How to Interpret Your Bible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide
Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (mp4 Download)
The Top Ten Reasons We Know the NT Writers Told the Truth mp3 by Frank Turek
Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)
Oh, Why Didn’t I Say That? Is the Bible Historically Reliable? by Frank Turek DVD, Mp4, Mp3 Download.
Living By the Book by Howard Hendricks (Book, Full DVD set, and Condensed DVD set)
How to Read the Bible for All It’s Worth by Gordon Fee and Doug Stuart (Book)
The New Joy of Discovery in Bible Study by Oletta Wald (Book)


Bobby serves as lead pastor of Image Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, and is well known for his YouTube ministry called, One Minute Apologist, which now goes by the name Christianity Still Makes Sense. He also serves as the Co-Host of Pastors’ Perspective, a nationally syndicated call-in radio show on KWVE in Southern California. Bobby earned his Master of Theology degree from Dallas Theological Seminary, his Doctor of Ministry in Apologetics from Southern Evangelical Seminary, and his Ph.D. in Philosophy of Religion from the University of Birmingham (England) where he was supervised under David Cheetham and Yujin Nagasawa. Bobby’s also written several books including: The Fifth Gospel, Doubting Toward Faith, Does God Exist, and Fifty-One other Questions About God and the Bible and the forthcoming Christianity Still Makes Sense to be published by Tyndale in April 2024. He’s married to his lovely wife Heather and together they have two grown kids: Haley and Dawson.

We’ve all heard the story of the prodigal son in Luke 15. The boy cashes in early on his inheritance only to squander it all away. Eventually he comes to his senses and returns home. And yet, what we read is the shocking celebration of grace personified through the father’s response. In the distance, this long awaiting father, captures a glimpse of his broken son. The son left in a rich man’s clothes. Now he returns in rags. He left with his chin in the air, prideful and arrogant. Now his head is hanging down in sorrow and shame. He left rejecting his father. Basically, wishing him dead, for the sake of receiving an early inheritance. And now, when he sees his son returning, what does the father feel? Compassion.

The root of this word compassion literally means “innards.” What the father felt, he felt so deeply that even his innards, his intestines, registered it. He agonizes on the inside at what has become of his son. He’s viscerally moved not with anger, but shockingly, compassion. We’d understand if the father stuck his head out the door and yelled to shame him, “You sure you want to come back here, boy?” But no. The father is stirred in his innards with compassion.

The Kezazah Ceremony

According to Kenneth E. Bailey, author of The Cross & The Prodigal, explains how on returning home, the prodigal son likely faced the prospect of something called the Kezazah ceremony. The Kezazah was a ceremony that a Jewish village would have in exactly this situation: someone had left home, rejected the community’s principles, lost all his or her possessions to the gentiles, and then returned. The villagers would break pottery at the feet of the individual, symbolizing that they were no longer in community with the returning person. They were breaking relations with him. It was a way of shaming the individual, of making him feel completely empty. Importantly, the ceremony would take place on the outskirts of the village before the individual could make his way back home.

A Running Embrace?

With this picture in mind, look what happens when the father sees his son. “But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion, and ran and embraced him and kissed him” (Luke 15:20, NIV.) He doesn’t just run. He races. That’s what the word means there. Why is this significant? Because an older man in this Middle Eastern culture, especially the head of a wealthy household, would never run. To do so would be shockingly undignified. To run, a man would have to take the long robe that he was wearing and tie it up above the knees. His legs would be exposed, making him look utterly shameful. Even today in the Middle East men will not expose their legs this way. But here is this father figure, this royal figure, who takes his robe and ties it up, and he runs through the village to the outskirts, exposing the nakedness of his legs and shames himself for the sake of gracing his son.

Editor’s Note: From an apologetics standpoint, this Kezazah ceremony is remarkable. It’s a known feature of ancient Judaism, tracing back to the Talmud (Ketubot 28b). In the story of the Prodigal Son, this insight gives one more line of historical evidence testifying to the historicity of the Gospels, the teaching value of this story, and the Jewish cultural context for interpreting the Bible. – John Ferrer

Why Did His Father Run?

And why would the father risk his reputation by running to his son? To protect him from the Kezazah Ceremony! He runs to get to the son before the rest of the community gets to him. He wants to protect him from the broken pottery, the rejection, and the statement by the community that it has broken relations with the son. He wants to show his son that he is not rejected, that the father will heal the son’s shame, and that he can return home. On reaching his son, the father “embraced him and kissed him” (Luke 15:20b). In unimaginable grace he embraces and kisses his son. He doesn’t care that the son smells like pig manure. He throws his arms around him and welcomes him home.

Perhaps like this runaway, you’ve been a bit of a prodigal yourself lately. If so, don’t you think it’s time to come to your senses? Return home, my friend, because a compassionate Father awaits you. While many churches are happy to further shame the sinner through their own version of the Kezazah ceremony, we can rejoice knowing the heartbeat of God is for His church to be a healing center, not a shaming center.

 

Other Recommended Resources On This Topic

How Can Jesus Be the Only Way? (mp4 Download) by Frank Turek
I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Paperback), and (Sermon) by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek
Was Jesus Intolerant? (DVD) and (Mp4 Download) by Dr. Frank Turek
Jesus vs. The Culture by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp4 Download, and Mp3
Person of Interest: Why Jesus Still Matters in a World that Rejects the Bible by J. Warner Wallace (Paperback), (Investigator’s Guide).



Bobby serves as lead pastor of Image Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, and is well known for his YouTube ministry called, One Minute Apologist, which now goes by the name Christianity Still Makes Sense. He also serves as the Co-Host of Pastors’ Perspective, a nationally syndicated call-in radio show on KWVE in Southern California. Bobby earned his Master of Theology degree from Dallas Theological Seminary, his Doctor of Ministry in Apologetics from Southern Evangelical Seminary, and his Ph.D. in Philosophy of Religion from the University of Birmingham (England) where he was supervised under David Cheetham and Yujin Nagasawa. Bobby’s also written several books including: The Fifth Gospel, Doubting Toward Faith, Does God Exist, and Fifty-One other Questions About God and the Bible and the forthcoming Christianity Still Makes Sense to be published by Tyndale in April 2024. He’s married to his lovely wife Heather and together they have two grown kids: Haley and Dawson.

The following question comes from one our Crossexamined Community members.

“Why did God allow the Bible to be written in a way that gives Christians an opportunity to misunderstand it?”

This question intrigues me because it’s a universal problem. Everyone who’s ever tried to dig into the Bible has found it difficult sometimes to understand what God is saying. And some passages are so difficult that theologians across Church history can’t agree on what they mean.

Of course we could all benefit from learning how to interpret the Bible correctly. Sometimes we struggle over a passage and it would be easy to understand if we just knew a few basic principles for interpretation. But even if you had the best education and years of practice, there are still some passages that will baffle you. No amount of schooling will be enough. God’s word can still be difficult.

Moreover, this interpretive problem points to a theological problem. If God’s word is so easy to misinterpret and so hard to understand, then what does that say about God? Is God just playing games with us? Is this some big game of “keep-away” and He’s eluding us, refusing to let us understand what He’s saying? That sounds like a capricious, mischievous God. Not a good look.

1. Much of the Bible is Easy to Understand

First, we should note that a lot of the Bible is straightforward, fairly easy to understand, and there’s no real challenge in figuring out how to rightly apply it. That’s important to remember, so we have a sense of balance between the easy and hard parts of the Bible. Jesus was able to translate the Gospel message so that an uneducated foreign woman – the woman at the well – was able to understand exactly what He meant (John 4). God can, and does, communicate in ways that anyone, with ears to hear, can understand Him.

But one chapter earlier, Jesus was confusing the well-educated Pharisee, Nicodemus (John 3). Pharisees were some of the most educated and biblically literate scholars in their day. To this day, we don’t know if Nicodemus ever grasped what Jesus meant by “born again.” Sometimes, God communicates in ways that challenge and confound the most educated among us. Other times, God speaks clearly, His words cutting like a knife so that everyone understands what He’s saying.

2. Sometimes We’re the Problem

We also should admit that often the problem isn’t in the Bible. A passage can be straightforward and easy-to-understand. But if we don’t like what God is saying to us, we might play dumb, thinking we aren’t responsible to follow directions that we don’t understand. But playing dumb is a dangerous game. If you keep acting dumb, eventually you won’t be acting. I call this phenomenon: “sin-stupid.” When people suppress God’s truth long enough, their conscience is seared (1 Timothy 4:2), their hearts become hard (Romans 2:5), their spiritual discernment gets dull, till they can’t understand things that used to be obvious. Repeated unrepentant sin makes people stupid over time.

Or perhaps we aren’t rebelling against God or suppressing His word. We might just be a little lazy or distracted, and we aren’t paying close attention to see what God is saying to us. If God’s word were on billboard, we at least need to stop speeding, stop multitasking, and slow down enough to read what He’s telling us. God’s word might be easy enough to understand, but if we’re just sprinting past, paying little attention, then we’re liable to misinterpret Him. That’s not God’s fault. That’s ours   .

3. God Has Other Purposes Besides Clarity

At the heart of this question is the assumption that God wants to be understood. And, yes, God relates with mankind in ways that invite us to know Him more, understanding who He is, how He works, and what He wants. But we cannot assume that God’s only purpose in communication is clarity.

Sometimes God speaks in riddles, or indirectly, or in downright incomprehensible ways. If God was aiming primarily at being clear, then He’s failed. But we have no good reason to think that clarity is God’s only aim here. Indeed, we have reason to believe He’s trying to be murky and confusing to some people.

4. God is Sorting Out the Followers from the Fans

Jesus famously explained his use of parables saying they were not just to clarify kingdom principles among believers but also to confound non-believers (Matt 13:10-17).

“The disciples came to him and asked, ‘Why do you speak to the people in parables?’

He replied, ‘Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. This is why I speak to them in parables: ‘Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.’” (Matthew 13:10-13; NIV)

Scripture has some passages for easy-reading and some for difficult-reading. And this is an intentional sifting method to bless those believers who have “ears to hear” without rewarding non-believers with kingdom insights that aren’t fit for them.

5. God is Beautiful, Not Basic

Another reason for these difficult passages is that God isn’t a “bread-and-water” God. He’s not basic. He could have made a world without tastes, and colors, and smells, and experiences. But He included all that stuff because He’s an artist, an aesthete. Likewise, God’s word isn’t reducible simply to information, any more than food is reducible entirely to fuel. It’s designed for an aesthetic interaction. It’s a beauty to be enjoyed. It’s an encounter to be experienced. Just as food is more than calories, so God’s word is more than information. It has flavor, and texture, and ambience so that there’s more to imbibe than just raw information. If Scripture were just about information transfer, then we could hurry through it. Get the info and go. But Scripture is to be experienced, and that means ruminating on it sometimes. Let the flavors simmer a bit.

6. God Promotes Wisdom

Sometimes the difficulty we face in God’s word is a matter of wisdom. By that I mean, there’s supposed to be a wrestling match with the language and ideas in Scripture, a struggle to pry wisdom from those obtuse words. The struggle is part of the path to wisdom. Without the struggle people might gain some head-knowledge, but they’re liable to miss the deeper application of wisdom. Plus, as Jesus explained, not everyone will understand the hard language sometimes. So, the challenging parts of the Bible can be a filtering mechanism that way, separating the wise and foolish, the teachable from the unteachable.

7. God Promotes Personal Growth

Besides wisdom, and aesthetics, there’s also personal growth to be found as we struggle through God’s word. If everything was laid out for us easy-peasy, then we might never face the kind of resistance-training needed to get strong. Then we’d never grow strong enough to live out the tasks God has for us.

In sum, there is more to God’s purposes than just being clearly understood. Sometimes God speaks in ways that keep his Kingdom truths out-of-reach, out of the “wrong hands” so to speak. For disciples, the difficult passages in Scripture slow us down so we can relish experiencing God’s word, chewing and savoring what He’s saying. The same passages can also lend a sense of mystery, so that in searching for the answers we can find wisdom along the way. And they can present obstacles for us to press into, and struggle over it. There we can gain strength and grow through the experience.

Yes, we can still learn what God has said through Scripture. But beyond mere head knowledge, God imparts character, wisdom, and beauty through His written word. Thanks for the great question Crossexamined Community!


If you want to find out more about our
Crossexamined Community
you can sign up
here for your own free trial.

 

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)
The New Testament: Too Embarrassing to Be False by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3, and Mp4)
Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)
Oh, Why Didn’t I Say That? Is the Bible Historically Reliable? by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp4, Mp3 Download.
How to Interpret Your Bible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide
How Philosophy Can Help Your Theology by Richard Howe (MP3 Set), (mp4 Download Set), and (DVD Set)

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

John is a licensed minister with earned degrees from Charleston Southern (BA), Southern Evangelical Seminary (MDiv), and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (ThM, PhD). His doctorate is in philosophy of religion, minoring in ethics. As a new edition to Crossexamined in 2023, John brings a wealth of experience to the team including debating atheists, preaching the Gospel, teaching apologetics in schools and churches, publishing books and articles, and creating websites. John is also a teaching fellow with Equal Rights Institute and president of Pella Pro-Life in his hometown of Pella, Iowa. There he resides with his lovely and brilliant wife Hillary Ferrer, founder of Mama Bear Apologetics. Together they specialize in cultural apologetics with an emphasis on family-based apologetic training.

By Bob Perry

The church service at our suburban Cincinnati non-denominational church had barely ended when I started receiving text messages from friends. All of them shared some version of the same question my wife and I were asking each other about the sermon we had just heard from a visiting preacher: “What in the world was that?!” The simple answer was that we had unknowingly let a wolf in the sheep pen.

The sermon was delivered by a man who on the surface was someone we could trust. He was a professor from a reputable Christian university, with master’s degrees in both Divinity and New Testament Studies and a Ph.D. in Philosophy/New Testament Exegesis. He had preached at our church on several occasions over the years. His sermons had never been notably good or bad. But this Sunday morning was different. He had more than a message to deliver.

He had an agenda.

Scripture Twisting

The visiting preacher’s message was based on Ephesians 2:11-22, a text that starts with a “therefore” connecting it to the previous passage. That means it’s sandwiched between Paul’s explanation of Christ’s person and mission at the beginning of Chapter 2, and his clarification in Chapter 3 that the Gospel is also meant for the Gentiles.

The unmistakable point of this passage is that the Law, which had excluded non-Jews, had been superseded by the grace we receive through Christ’s sacrifice. It’s about Spirit-vs-Law, grace-vs-works. It’s a call to unity wherein Paul was exhorting his readers to recognize that the Gentiles were no longer “foreigners and aliens” but are fellow members of God’s household. He was clarifying a theological point about the unifying nature of salvation and the shared solution to our human rebellion and hostility toward God.

Changing the Subject

Our guest preacher acknowledged all this in passing. But four minutes into his message, things took an insidious turn. His focus subtly shifted from the solution for man’s hostility toward God to the reality of human beings’ hostility toward one another. Suddenly, we were hearing about diversity, inclusion, “minority status,” and the human inclination for conflict.

He had changed the subject. His goal had not been to exegete the passage in question; it had been to deliver a cultural message.

Once the subtle change of subject morphed into the central point, we were treated to a lecture about a lack of diversity in the demographics of typical suburban midwestern community churches like ours. We were warned about Evangelical Christianity’s bent toward a toxic “Christian Nationalism.” These topics were lead-ins to the message he really wanted to deliver. That came when he began reading us letters he had received from his diverse list of friends in response to a query he had offered them: “What do you want white American Christians to understand about Christians like you?

The specter of division is built right into his question. And it didn’t take long for it to bear fruit.

Critiquing People They’ve Never Met

Though he later denied knowing much about Critical Race Theory (CRT) or having any intention of talking about it, the letters he read could have formed a bullet point summary of its tenets. They included the declaration that “it’s not enough for white Christians to be ‘”non-racist,” we need them to be ‘anti-racist,”’ and the demand that “we need white brothers and sisters to not only acknowledge their own racist tendencies, but to also confront and challenge the racism of family, friends, co-workers, and church folk.” We were called on to “reimagine and reinvent systems that make it more difficult for African Americans to realize the American dream.” And we were “comforted” in learning that a woman who had never met a single person in our congregation had assured us, “I do not hate you. I just pray that one day I will be able to wholeheartedly forgive you.”

It isn’t hard to imagine the damage this thirty-minute cultural hand grenade caused when it detonated inside our church. So, it pays to stop at this point and reflect on the claims and assumptions built into these serious accusations and ask how they are in any way related to the text in Ephesians 2:11-22.

They aren’t. And that’s the problem.

Eisegesis -vs- Exegesis

Our visiting preacher wasn’t exegeting the meaning of the text or drawing an application from (ex in Greek) it. He was imposing his own predetermined view into (eis in Greek) the passage. That’s called eisegesis. It’s the opposite of exegesis.

No doubt, racism is a blight on society. We all need to talk about it. But making generalized assumptions about the actions and attitudes of entire groups of people we don’t know, and segregating “white Christians” from “Christians of color,” are not good alternatives for seeing every human as being made in the image of God.

Racism was his topic of choice that day. Unfortunately, the method he used to address it is a microcosm of a trend that is metastasizing inside the church. Our congregation saw it in real-time. But the more dangerous kind of eisegesis happens slowly and insidiously.

Creeping on the Sheep

The tentacles of “wokeness” are slithering into our churches under the guise of social justice, inclusivity, tolerance, and love. But the head of the hydra is the same as it’s always been. It’s the human propensity to interpret God’s word through the lens of self.

One of the main features of our guest preacher’s sermon was the repeated exhortation to accept his point of view based on the experiences of others. Though the logical flaw in that practice is obvious – alternative experiences can make the opposite point – it turns up again and again inside the church.

Unlike the full-frontal assault our congregation faced, the more common approach is subtle. And that’s what makes it so dangerous. Alisa Childers recently exposed it stealthily baked into a wildly popular churchwide youth curriculum. It’s easier to access young minds in their formative stages when parents aren’t in the room.

When Your Guard is Down

Christian colleges are no different. Astute students expect to confront the all-too-typical atheist professor at the State University. They arrive at school with their antennae up. But some choose to avoid that kind of opposition by attending a Christian college. It seems like a safer environment. Parents and students assume the faculty and staff at a Christian school will be the type to critique the culture from a biblical point of view instead of the other way around. So, they enter with their guard down.

But the fences around Christian colleges don’t keep out bad ideas. Remember, our visiting preacher had been a professor at one for many years. How many young minds had been influenced by his eisegetical methods during that time?

Maybe those who engage these issues in these ways are doing so with pure motives. Maybe they’re simply mistaken. We can be charitable and allow that possibility. But that doesn’t mean we have to be passive when it happens. Beware the wolves in sheep’s clothing. They’re not going away. And they’re finding new ways to sneak into the sheep pen.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Is Morality Absolute or Relative? by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp3 and Mp4

When Reason Isn’t the Reason for Unbelief by Dr. Frank Turek DVD and Mp4

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bob Perry is a Christian apologetics writer, teacher, and speaker who blogs about Christianity and the culture at truehorizon.org. He is a Contributing Writer for the Christian Research Journal and has also been published in Touchstone, and Salvo. Bob is a professional aviator with 37 years of military and commercial flying experience. He has a B.S., Aerospace Engineering from the U. S. Naval Academy, and an M.A., Christian Apologetics from Biola University. He has been married to his high school sweetheart since 1985. They have five grown sons.

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/3kzw4hz
An earlier version can be found in Salvo Magazine at: https://salvomag.com/post/dances-with-wolves

By Jonathan McLatchie

Rabbi Tovia Singer is an orthodox Jewish rabbi and the founder and director of Outreach Judaism. He is widely known for his counter-missionary polemics and his criticism of the New Testament presentation of Jesus as the Hebrew Messiah (see his two volume set, Let’s Get Biblical: Why doesn’t Judaism accept the Christian Messiah? [i]). In a recent series of videos published on Rabbi Singer’s YouTube channel, he responds to remarks made by Professor R.L. Solberg following their recent debate in Nashville, Tennessee on whether Jesus is the promised Hebrew Messiah. In this and subsequent articles, I want to address some of the claims made by Rabbi Singer in this series of videos that I hold to be in error. In this article, I will address the most recent video in this series, which is provocatively titled, “Colossal contradictions in the Gospels!” In this video, Singer advances two supposed instances of contradiction between the gospel accounts, one relating to the timing of Jesus’ passion, and the other relating to the resurrection. Let us address both in turn.

On What Day Was Jesus Crucified?

In the video, Tovia argues that John has Jesus crucified on the eve of Passover, contrary to the synoptic gospels that have Jesus crucified on the first day of Passover. The motivation for this redaction on John’s part supposedly is that John wanted to have Jesus crucified on the eve of Passover, when the Paschal lambs were being slaughtered, since Jesus is thought by John to be the fulfilment of the imagery associated with the Passover lamb.

Rabbi Singer reads John 19:14 as indicating that it was the day of preparation for Passover. However, this is not a necessary translation of the genitive word for Passover, πάσχα and in fact English translations usually render this expression “day of preparation of the Passover.” In fact, this term (‘day of preparation’) is also used by Mark (15:42), who defines it as the day before the Sabbath. This accords with John 19:31, which says, “Since it was the day of Preparation, and so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away.” Verse 42 also indicates the hurriedness of the burial of Jesus in a tomb that was close at hand, since it was the Jewish day of Preparation. Therefore, John concurs with Mark that Jesus’ death took place the day prior to the Sabbath. This is what he means by “preparation.” Though he adds that this Sabbath was a high day, this most probably means that it wasn’t any ordinary Sabbath day, but rather a Sabbath during the feast of unleavened bread — that is to say, it was a particularly special feast day.

Singer also misreads John 18:28, where the Jewish leaders are concerned about entering Pilate’s dwelling, lest they be defiled and thereby become unable to eat the Passover. According to Singer, this undermines the contention that the Passover Seder had already been consumed. Singer apparently misses that, supposing them to be concerned about the Passover Seder, their worry would make no sense since their defilement would expire at sundown (and they could partake of the meal after washing). Therefore, their worry must concern some meal other than the Seder. And, in fact, the initial Seder, or supper, that commences the Passover celebration is not the only ritual meal that is eaten during Passover. There is even another ritual meal, the chagigah (“food offering”), that is consumed during the following day. This is supported by Numbers 28:18-23, in which we read,

18 On the first day there shall be a holy convocation. You shall not do any ordinary work, 19 but offer a food offering, a burnt offering to the LORD: two bulls from the herd, one ram, and seven male lambs a year old; see that they are without blemish; 20 also their grain offering of fine flour mixed with oil; three tenths of an ephah shall you offer for a bull, and two tenths for a ram; 21 a tenth shall you offer for each of the seven lambs; 22 also one male goat for a sin offering, to make atonement for you. 23 You shall offer these besides the burnt offering of the morning, which is for a regular burnt offering.

Verse 18 indicates that the food offering was to be offered on the first day of unleavened bread (which would be the fifteenth of Nisan), the same day — as the Jews reckon days — that the Seder was consumed. Verse 23 indicates that these were to be offered in addition to the regular morning burnt offering, which implies that the Chagigah was eaten during the day time. The first century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus indicates multiple times that the Jews used the term “Passover” to refer to the entirety of the feast of unleavened bread:

  • “As this happened at the time when the feast of unleavened bread was celebrated, which we call the Passover…” Josephus, Antiquities 14.21
  • “As the Jews were celebrating the feast of unleavened bread, which we call the Passover…” Josephus, Antiquities 18.29
  • “And, indeed, at the feast of unleavened bread, which was now at hand, and is by the Jews called the Passover…” Josephus, Wars 2.10

Therefore, John’s account in fact dovetails perfectly with Mark’s. The concern of the chief priests could not have been about the initial Passover seder, since their defilement would have expired at sundown and, following washing, they would have been able to partake of the seder in the evening. The seder was already over, having been consumed the previous evening, and they must be concerned about some other meal in Passover, most likely the chagigah.

Rabbi Singer claims that John 13 does not concern a Passover seder. However, this again is false. We read in John 13:1-2:

Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart out of this world to the Father, having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end. 2 During supper…

In Greek, the text does not say that the supper was before the feast. Rather, it says that before the feast, Jesus loved his disciples to the end. D.A. Carson notes rightly that “there is nothing in the words themselves to discourage us from taking the clause as an introduction to the footwashing only, and not to the discourses that follow the meal.” [ii]

Indeed, the most natural reading of the reference to the supper in John 13:2, in light of 13:1, is that the last supper was in fact the Passover meal. Craig Blomberg concurs [iii]:

Verse 1 thus stands as a headline over the entire passion narrative (cf. Ridderbos 1997: 452). Because Passover began with a supper-time meal as its most central ritual (and 1 Cor. 11:20 speaks of the Last Supper explicitly as a deipnon), to hear then that the supper was being served (v. 2) would naturally suggest that the Passover had begun (Ridderbos 1997: 455; cf. Michaels 1983: 230; Kleinknecht 1985: 370–371; Burge 2000: 365–367), not that this was some separate supper prior to the Passover (as for Casey 1996: 20–21). If there is still any doubt, as Cullen Story (1989: 317) explains, ‘The presence of Judas, Jesus’ prediction of his betrayal, Judas’ departure from the table (implicit in the Synoptics, explicit in John), the affirmation by Peter of unswerving loyalty to Jesus, and Jesus’ prediction of his denial—all of these circumstances together form solid lines of connection between the meal in John 13 and the Synoptic account of the holy supper.’ Almost certainly, then, John intended his audience to understand that he was beginning to describe events that took place on ‘Maundy Thursday’ night, as part of the Passover meal, just as they would already have learned in the oral kerygma.

Though Singer appeals to John 13:29 where some speculate that Judas has been charged with getting what they need for the feast, this argument doesn’t work either since the feast of unleavened bread continues for another week, which easily could be the meaning of the phrase ‘the feast’ in this context. One might object to this that, if there were indeed Passover night, the shops would not have remained open. However, as D.A. Carson notes [iv],

One might wonder, on these premises, why Jesus should send Judas out for purchases for a feast still twenty-four hours away. The next day would have left ample time. It is best to think of this taking place on the night of Passover, 15 Nisan. Judas was sent out (so the disciples thought) to purchase what was needed for the Feast, i.e. not the feast of Passover, but the Feast of Unleavened Bread (the agigah), which began that night and lasted for seven days. The next day, still Friday 15 Nisan, was a high feast day; the following day was Sabbath. It might seem best to make necessary purchases (e.g. more unleavened bread) immediately. Purchases on that Thursday evening were in all likelihood possible, though inconvenient. The rabbinic authorities were in dispute on the matter (cf. Mishnah Pesahim 4:5). One could buy necessities even on a Sabbath if it fell before Passover, provided it was done by leaving something in trust rather than paying cash (Mishnah Shabbath 23:1).

Another aspect of John 13:29, curiously omitted by Singer — which actually supports my contention that this meal was in fact the Passover seder — is the disciples’ speculation that Judas had been charged by Jesus to give something to the poor. Carson notes that “it was customary to give alms to the poor on Passover night, the temple gates being left open from midnight on, allowing beggars to congregate there. On any night other than Passover it is hard to imagine why the disciples might have thought Jesus was sending Judas out to give something to the poor: the next day would have done just as well.” [v]

In addition to the foregoing considerations, two undesigned coincidences confirm that the last supper in John 13 is the same meal as spoken of in the synoptic gospels. In the parallel account of the last supper in Luke 22:27, Jesus says, “For who is the greater, one who reclined at table or one who serves? Is it not the one who reclines at table? But I am among you as the one who serves.” What does Jesus mean by this phrase, and to what could he be referring? When we turn over to John 13:4-5, we learn that Jesus on this same occasion gave the disciples an object lesson in servanthood: “[Jesus] laid aside his outer garments, and taking a towel, tied it around his waist. Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet…” This act (not reported by Luke) casually dovetails with Jesus’ statement in Luke 22:27 (not reported by John) that, though he is the greatest among them, he nonetheless acts as their servant. One may ask, however, why Jesus washes the disciples’ feet on this particular occasion. Luke 22:24 gives us a detail not supplied by John that provides us with some relevant background: “A dispute also arose among [the disciples], as to which of them was to be regarded as the greatest.” Luke, then, reports the occasion that gave rise to Jesus’ object lesson in servanthood, but not the object lesson itself. John reports the object lesson but not the occasion that gave rise to it. The accounts dovetail so casually and artlessly that it supports that these are in fact the same meal, and rooted in historical memory.

The Mary Magdalene Problem

Tovia also gives another alleged discrepancy regarding the resurrection accounts, where he points out that, according to Matthew, the women all met Jesus (Matthew 28:9-10), whereas in John it looks like Mary, in her report to Peter & the disciple whom Jesus loved, has no idea what had happened to Jesus’ body (John 20:1-2). One would predict, supposing those accounts to be both anchored in historical memory, that Mary must have left the larger group of women prior to their encounter with the risen Jesus. Indeed, I can hardly see any other viable way of harmonizing those accounts. But this is precisely what is suggested by a close reading of John 20:2: “So she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know (οὐκ οἴδαμεν) where they have laid him.” The use of the plural verb there suggests that she had in fact left the larger group of women and that there had in fact been others with her (which comports with the synoptics). This harmonization is not owed to us by the text, supposing them to be in conflict, but the fact that the only viable harmonization is suggested by a close reading of John suggests that these accounts are in fact based on historical memory, being independent accounts that dovetail.

According to John, Mary Magdalene ran back immediately upon noticing the stone rolled away and surmising or seeing the tomb empty (there may have been one or two other women with her, we don’t know). Notice that Matthew does not say that the angel appeared to Mary Magdalene, but rather that he spoke to the women. Thus, it was the women other than Mary Magdalene who left the tomb together as described in Matthew and, while going to tell the disciples, saw Jesus on the way. Matthew says that plural women left the tomb and that “they” saw Jesus on the way but does not expressly say that Mary Magdalene was with them at that time. Again, he may just not have known that she had left the group already, but he does not explicitly say either way. John knew since he was one of the two disciples (along with Peter) to whom Mary Magdalene reported the empty tomb and missing body of Jesus.

We can pick up Mary Magdalene’s story as reported by John. She ran back to get Peter and John immediately upon seeing the stone rolled away. They came back to the tomb with or slightly ahead of her. By this time the rest of the women have already seen the angels and left. They may even be seeing Jesus on their own route back into the city while Peter, John, and Mary Magdalene are on their way back to the tomb. It must be borne in mind that the old city of Jerusalem was a maze. There is no reason at all to expect that these groups would have run into each other. Mary Magdalene (as explained in John) still believes Jesus is dead at this point. She hangs around after Peter and John have looked at the tomb and left in puzzlement. She peers back into the tomb and the angels reveal themselves to her, but she does not understand. She turns around, grieved, and sees Jesus and has the dialogue with him of which we read in John 20. She then goes back to tell the disciples more about all of this. All this time she is not with the other women. When the other women have seen Jesus, they run and tell at least some of the disciples, though they might have to wait for Peter and John to get back from their tomb visit. Of course, we also do not know for sure that all of the disciples were staying together. The other women may actually have gone to see a different set of them in some different location.

Conclusion

In summary, though the alleged discrepancies offered by Rabbi Singer require some investigation to untangle, closer inspection — and more careful reading of the relevant texts — reveals the arguments to be unfounded. The solutions that I have offered to these challenges are not strained or forced harmonizations, but rather are suggested from within the texts themselves. As the nineteenth century Anglican scholar T.R. Birks once noted, “the very test of historical truth…is found in the substantial unity of the various narratives, their partial diversity, and the reconcilable nature of that diversity, when due allowance is made for the purpose of each writer, and the individual character of their separate works.” [vi]

Footnotes

[i] Tovia Singer, Let’s Get Biblical! Why Doesn’t Judaism Accept the Christian Messiah? Volume 1 (RMBN Publishers, 2014).

[ii] D. A. Carson, The Gospel according to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans, 1991), 460.

[iii] Craig L. Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel (England: Apollos, 2001), 187–188.

[iv] D. A. Carson, The Gospel according to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans, 1991), 475.

[v] Ibid.,

[vi] T.R. Birks, Horae Evangelicae, or The Internal Evidencce of the Gospel History (London: Seeleys, 1852), 269-271.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Can All Religions Be True? mp3 by Frank Turek

How Can Jesus be the Only Way? Mp4, Mp3, and DVD by Frank Turek

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Dr. Jonathan McLatchie is a Christian writer, international speaker, and debater. He holds a Bachelor’s degree (with Honors) in forensic biology, a Masters’s (M.Res) degree in evolutionary biology, a second Master’s degree in medical and molecular bioscience, and a Ph.D. in evolutionary biology. Currently, he is an assistant professor of biology at Sattler College in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. McLatchie is a contributor to various apologetics websites and is the founder of the Apologetics Academy (Apologetics-Academy.org), a ministry that seeks to equip and train Christians to persuasively defend the faith through regular online webinars, as well as assist Christians who are wrestling with doubts. Dr. McLatchie has participated in more than thirty moderated debates around the world with representatives of atheism, Islam, and other alternative worldview perspectives. He has spoken internationally in Europe, North America, and South Africa promoting an intelligent, reflective, and evidence-based Christian faith.

Original Blog Source: https://bit.ly/3meSo0c

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ custom_padding=”|||” global_colors_info=”{}” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Text” _builder_version=”4.19.5″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”]

How many times have you heard me cry out

“God please take this”?

How many times have you given me strength to

Just keep breathing?

Oh I need you,

God I need you now.

Though I walk through the shadows,

And I, I am so afraid.

Please stay… please stay right beside me,

With every single step I take.

These beautiful lyrics are from a 2013 song named “Need You Now by Tiffany Arbuckle Lee. But you probably know her by the name “Plumb.” In case you don’t know of Plumb, she was active until about 2018, and her songs regularly played on Christian radio. I remember listening to this song when I had a two year old, tears in my eyes knowing the feeling of this type of desperation.

I think anyone with a two year old gets this type of desperation, am I right?

She was inspired to write the song due to her suffering from debilitating anxiety when she was younger and the difficulties in her marriage. I remember hearing on the radio about the tough times that she was going through in her marriage. I recall thinking at the time how hard that must be for her to share something so personal. She shared how she and her husband had overcome so many obstacles. They were reconciled, were stronger than ever, and everything was made beautiful out of the ashes.

Until it wasn’t.

She and her husband are no longer together, and Plumb has been very quiet on the music scene. It’s now 2023, and she hasn’t released a single since 2018. It seems a lot has been going on for the singer in the last five years. I follow her on social media and didn’t really notice a lot from her until June 2022, when she made a controversial post about Roe Vs. Wade being overturned. She stunned her followers by implying that this isn’t something we need to be happy about and that the Church sometimes talks more about what we’re against than what we’re for. Granted, I have to agree to a point. But I would draw a hard line here and say that it would be exceedingly strange not to speak against killing innocent children, as this is exactly what many Christians believe abortion is!

It would be like a Christian speaking against child abuse, but then someone throws a rebuke at us, saying that because we’re Christians, we need to speak about what we’re for, not against. Is there actually a way to speak about the realities of abortion outside of speaking against it? Isn’t this precisely why it’s called “pro-life,” not “anti– Abortion”? But I digress.

She posted later in the year how she and her husband were officially done. I could tell it was a tough few years for her. She probably feels like she was in a toxic relationship that has left a wake of pain and confusion. No doubt this changed a lot for her. But it was the post from Wednesday, January 04, 2023 that stopped me in my tracks. It says:

Thx @walkingpastor for sharing this #richardrohr post…its a new year…begin again. I am. Asking questions Ive been intimidated to ask. Being more open minded. Wanting to learn things Ive been lazy to learn. Making space to love God and others well. Thats it. 3 years ago my life fell completely apart. In the process, deconstruction happened w/o me even realizing it at first. Its been a long road. This year…I am starting a journey to piecing back together a new me. Its not all gonna just magically happen in 2023…but its the year I am starting to begin again. And again. And…again. #GraceForSelf.

Richard Rohr. Deconstruction. I Am.

“Not Plumb!” I thought to myself! Another Christian singer has fallen for the Progressive Christian serpent speak. I thought about this post and prayed for days afterward for her and for those who have no idea of the consequences of these words. Though she hasn’t given many details in this regard, it would seem that Plumb is reading and aligning with the teachings of Progressive teacher Richard Rohr. This is an alignment with beliefs in a social justice gospel, inner divinity, a denial of many essential Christian doctrines such as the beautiful Atonement, that the Bible isn’t the Word of God, and much more. This made me sad.

“Two things happens when we hit rock bottom as Christians: We run from God, or we run to God.”

It seems it all started when her life fell apart, and I find that one of two things happens when we hit rock bottom as Christians: We run from God, or we run to God. They give up instead of look up. They look inward instead of upward.

I can’t sit here and say I understand her position or pain. But it seems that this was the turning point for her. How can someone who’s sung such beautiful lamented lyrics suddenly deny the God she claims to have sung for? Did she have someone to help guide and disciple her through this time? What questions has she been intimidated to ask? How well did she know her Bible? I naturally want more answers for clarification. The cultural climate is extremely aggressive toward Biblical Christianity. I think some are tired of running the race. I think some don’t want to be seen as being “against” the LGBTQ+ community. They want to seem loving, tolerant, open-minded, and non-judgmental. They are fatigued from fighting the good fight. So they stop fighting.

Christian, keep up the good fight. Cross that finish line, even if you have to crawl to it. Anchor yourself in God’s Truth.

There’s a God-shaped hole in all of us,

And the restless soul is searching.

There’s a God-shaped hole in all of us,

And it’s a void only He can fill.

I pray these words from her own song to remind her that deconstruction and Progressive Gospel will leave her empty and hopeless. Only Jesus can fill her void. He is the Living Water, the Bread of Life. I have been praying for her, and I hope you will join me.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Correct, NOT Politically Correct: How Same-Sex Marriage Hurts Everyone (Updated/Expanded) downloadable pdf, PowerPoint by Dr. Frank Turek

Legislating Morality: Is it Wise? Is it Legal? Is it Possible? by Frank Turek (Book, DVD, Mp3, Mp4, PowerPoint download, PowerPoint CD)

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Melissa Dougherty is a Christian Apologist best known for her YouTube channel as an ex-new ager. She has two associate’s degrees, one in Early Childhood Multicultural Education, and the other in Liberal Arts. She is currently pursuing her bachelor’s degree in Religious Studies at Southern Evangelical Seminary.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]