Knowable Word

Helping ordinary people learn to study the Bible

Copyright © 2012–2026 DiscipleMakers, except guest articles (copyright author). Used by permission.

You are here: Home / Archives for Peter Krol

Analyzing the Rich Man and Lazarus

By

Peter Gurry has an interesting post at the Gospel Coalition entitled “Is the Rich Man and Lazarus a Parable?” While the post does address that question, it also does much more.

Gurry tackles the account in Luke 16:19-31, demonstrating a number of excellent OIA skills. He observes how the characters are named and portrayed. He considers the surrounding context. He asks great interpretive questions and answers them from the text. He draws vibrant application from the passage.

I encourage you to read the article to see another example of good Bible study skills (even though he doesn’t use the terminology of OIA).

Check it out!

Remember the Risen Christ

By

In 2 Timothy 2:8, Paul issues a brief command, remarkable for its profound simplicity. “Remember Jesus Christ” is both the most important and most difficult thing a person could do. And what are we to remember about him?

James Emery (2007), Creative Commons License

“Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, the offspring of David, as preached in my gospel, for which I am suffering, bound with chains as a criminal. But the word of God is not bound!” (2 Ti 2:8–9).

There are five things on Paul’s list:

  1. Risen from the dead—he really died, and he really rose. Not just in the hearts and memories of his followers, but bodily.
  2. Offspring of David—heir to the promised eternal throne of God’s kingdom.
  3. Preached in the gospel—something and someone we simply can’t shut up about. The best news you’ll ever hear.
  4. Occasion for suffering—when you preach the risen Christ, you will suffer and be bound as a criminal, like he was. But fear not: After dying with him comes resurrection with him (2 Tim 2:11).
  5. Impossible to stop—the word of God is not bound. Many have tried to squash this message, but that has only catalyzed the explosion.

Of course, we ought to remember the risen Christ at all times and not only on Easter. But Easter gives us a timely opportunity to remember the risen Christ once again.

Jesus’ resurrection confirmed the passing of the present age, and it signaled the invasion of the age to come. This historic event, which changed everything, is dynamic enough that one explanation of it could never capture its effects. That’s why the four gospel writers have at least four different points to make when they recount the resurrection.

Perhaps this weekend would be a good time for you to remember Jesus Christ. Dig into each gospel and discover anew what Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John each had to say about the center of human history, the risen Christ.

Are All Who Laugh or Have Wealth Cursed?

By

Luke 6:20-26 appears to make no qualification whatsoever:

  • Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God…Woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation.
  • Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you shall be satisfied…Woe to you who are full now, for you shall be hungry.
  • Blessed are you who weep now, for you shall laugh…Woe to you who laugh now, for you shall mourn and weep.

We may be inclined to race to Matthew’s parallel passage so we can qualify the text with “poor in spirit,” “hunger for righteousness,” etc. But that would violate a fundamental principle of observing and interpreting Luke’s intended message for his audience.

So what should we make of these extreme statements?

In a recent episode of the Ask Pastor John podcast, John Piper masterfully demonstrates why context matters. He takes up this question on this text, and he observes the context of Luke’s argument to help us understand and apply these verses as Luke intended.

The podcast would be a great use of 11 minutes of you day. Check it out!

Great Bible Study Models for Women

By

I have the privilege of serving a terrific campus ministry organization, DiscipleMakers. This blog and my book arose from the training we offer college students in Bible study, which I wanted to make available to a wider audience. But I’m not the only one who can show you how to do this.

For one example, I am delighted by Ryan’s help with this blog. He’s an old friend who learned this stuff at the same time I did, and I’ve learned a lot from his insights into the OIA method.

And for another example, I am happy to commend to you the models found in the videos below. These videos were recorded at the recent DiscipleMakers Women’s Conference, which had the theme of worshiping together as pilgrims (the Psalms of Ascent). Each main session talk from one of my colleagues masterfully models a different aspect of the OIA method.

Now these talks did not have a stated purpose to teach the skills in bold type. They were just normal talks given to explain a psalm to the women who attended the conference. But I share these talks with you to show you how important OIA skills are for effective ministry of the word.

Heather Smartt (Psalm 121) excels at observing the text carefully and making specific and concrete application, directly connected to the text:

Faith Thomas (Psalm 124) models how to observe and interpret the themes of a passage and make satisfying connections to the gospel:

Beth Dripps (Psalm 126) demonstrates the importance of relevant historical context to illuminate interpretive answers that are assumed in the text:

Megan Royes (Psalm 131) is an expert in illustration both to make the text pop and to speak application compellingly to the heart:

It is my privilege to serve the Lord with these ladies, and with many more men and women like them. I am happy to commend them to you as model Bible students worth imitating. If one my descriptions covers a skill you could develop further yourself, I recommend you watch the corresponding video to see how it can be done well.

For more teaching like this, check out our recordings archive here.

How to Use the Law Properly

By

Colin Smith has a stimulating piece at Unlocking the Bible about how to use the Old Testament law properly. According to 1 Tim 1:7-8, the Old Testament law is good…if we use it properly. So how do we do that?

Smith first proposes a few negatives:

  • Don’t use the law for self-justification.
  • Don’t use the law for self-sanctification.

Then he states his case positively:

  • Read the Old Testament forward.

In other words, use the law to show you more of Jesus Christ.

I would differ with Smith’s use of Jesus’s “you have heard it said, but I say to you” sayings, but I believe his point can still be substantiated from other Scriptures (Rom 10:4, 2 Cor 1:20, etc.). And I would also mention that the law is useful in showing us the way of love, which is both Paul’s aim (1 Tim 1:5) and Jesus’ greatest commandment (Mark 12:29-31). But Smith’s reflections are still quite useful and worth pondering.

Check it out!

Congratulations to All Who Took Up the Bible Reading Challenge

By

38 people completed this year’s Bible reading challenge and submitted entries for the drawing. The evaluations of the speed reading process ranged from “It was difficult and required a lot of discipline” to “It was AWESOME! I would recommend total immersion to anyone!”

I found one response particularly noteworthy: “What a blessing!! It was my first time actually reading the whole thing, and reading it quickly helped in retaining the details and timeline of events.” I’m impressed that someone had the stamina to read the entire Bible for the first time this quickly!

A few repeat entrants commented that they were able to complete the reading faster this year. The increased familiarity with both the Bible and their reading habits enabled them to make more of it in less time. That’s what I have also found to be the case, as this year was (again) my fastest time, yet, I believe, without any loss in comprehension.

Special congratulations to Becky and Jonah who were selected to win this year’s prizes. For the other 36 entrants: Fret not. Your reward is even greater in heaven. And we’ll see what we can drum for prizes next year so you can try again.

“I cling to your testimonies, O Lord; let me not be put to shame! I will run in the way of your commandments when you enlarge my heart!” (Psalm 119:31-32).

3 Rules for Using Commentaries

By

The Logos Talk blog has a great, brief article with “3 Rules for Using Commentaries.” These rules are similar to the “4 Mistakes When Using Commentaries,” which I posted in 2012. But the Logos post goes into more helpful detail.

The 3 rules are:

  1. Bring opinions to the commentary.
  2. Bring questions to the commentary.
  3. Bring out a variety of commentaries.

These are great rules. If we don’t bring our own opinions, we allow the commentary to do our thinking for us. If we don’t bring our questions, we may spend a lot of time looking up irrelevant information. And if we don’t bring out a variety of commentaries, we’ll be simpletons, easily persuaded by one man’s opinion.

My favorite part of the article is when the authors describe their seminary professors, who prohibited commentary usage until the students had done their own work first. The reason?

They wanted us to converse with commentaries, not merely listen to them.

Great advice! Check it out!

Can You Tell the Difference?

By

At the prodding of my co-blogger Ryan, I’ve recently been pondering the centuries-old practice of citing Bible verses to support theological statements (theological proof-texting). We’ve done our fair share of it on this blog. But perhaps you can help me further think this practice through.

Andy Chase (2009), Creative Commons

Please read the excerpts below, and let me know (comments, contacts, or emails are fine): What is the difference in how they use the Scripture?

I’m not asking about the difference in theology; that will be clear enough. My question is one of methodology. How does one excerpt’s manner of using proof texts differ from another’s? I believe they do, in fact, differ. The question for us to consider is: How?

Excerpt #1:

The Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance and equal with the Father, did, when the fullness of time was come, take upon Him man’s nature, [John 1:1, 14; 1 John 5:20; Phil 2:6; Gal 4:4] with all the essential properties, and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin; [Heb 2:14, 16-17; 4:15] being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin Mary, of her substance. [Luke 1:27, 31, 35; Gal 4:4] So that two whole, perfect, and distinct natures, the Godhead and the manhood, were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion. [Luke 1:35; Col 2:9; Rom 9:5; 1 Pet 3:18; 1 Tim 3:16] Which person is very God, and very man, yet one Christ, the only Mediator between God and man. [Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tim 2:5]Source VIII.II.

Excerpt #2:

Jesus’ opposers accused him of making himself equal to God. (John 5:18; 10:30-33) However, Jesus never claimed to be on the same level as Almighty God. He said: “The Father is greater than I am.”—John 14:28.


Jesus’ early followers did not view him as being equal to Almighty God. For example, the apostle Paul wrote that after Jesus was resurrected, God “exalted him [Jesus] to a superior position.” Obviously, Paul did not believe that Jesus was Almighty God. Otherwise, how could God exalt Jesus to a superior position? —Philippians 2:9.

Source

Excerpt #3:

Then the devil took him to the holy city and set him on the pinnacle of the temple and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down, for it is written, ‘He will command his angels concerning you,’ and ‘On their hands they will bear you up, lest you strike your foot against a stone.'”

Source

Excerpt #4:

Jesus said to him, “Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.’ ”

Source

You’ll see that excerpts 1 and 2 form a pair, and excerpts 3 and 4 form a pair. Each excerpt makes a point and uses one or more Bible verses to support that point. Each pair uses the same Bible to make contradictory points.

But I ask: What is different about about how the quoter in each pair uses the Scripture? How is their methodology for proof-texting distinct from one another?

If we’re not careful with our methodology for proof-texting, we run the risk of using the Bible to serve our own ideas, rather than conforming our ideas to those of the Bible. Or, as I believe English preacher Dick Lucas has said, we use the Bible the way a drunk uses a lamppost: more for support than illumination.

Can we identify a methodology for proof-texting that assists conformity of our ideas to the text rather than conformity of the text to our ideas?