Answers | Knowable Word

How to Find Answers to Your Questions

May 26, 2023 By Peter Krol

When we study the Bible, most of interpretation consists of asking and answering questions. The questions themselves arise from our curiosity over our observations. But the answers? Do you know where to find those?

The Most Important Place to Look for Answers

At this point, conventional wisdom lists a number of resources and reference works that ought to be in a Christian’s library. I’ll get to such a list soon, but don’t let it distract you from the better portion.

The most important place to seek answers to your questions is in the text itself. Some of you reading this find this conviction self-evident and obvious, and you have already made a habit of seeking answers in the text. But for many others, it will take more practice. Seeking answers in the text itself is a habit that must be formed, and sometimes bad habits are very slow to die.

For example, I recently listened to podcast discussing the creation account of Genesis 1. The teacher based most of his instruction on the proposition that Genesis 1 is in the form of poetry. His evidence for this assertion arose from the assessments of scholars, comparisons with other ancient texts, and his philosophical framework regarding eastern vs. western worldviews.

The problem was that he never supported his primary assertion with evidence from the text itself. Now I’m open to discussing the question of the genre of Genesis 1. And all of the external evidence certainly matters. But that which trumps all of the external evidence is internal evidence from the text itself.

Genesis 1 does not present clauses in parallel lines like other Hebrew poetry does.
Genesis 1 does not use similes, metaphors, or emotive language the way other poetry does.
The Hebrew syntax of Genesis 1 uses verb forms and verb sequences standard to the narratives of Scripture. The same sort of syntax employed in most of the rest of the book of Genesis, which is clearly (and commonly agreed to be) made up of narratives.

Such evidence from the text supports a conclusion that Genesis 1 presents itself as narrative (even historical narrative), just as the rest of the book does. Now this evidence in itself does not guarantee that the events of Genesis 1 must be in a strict chronological sequence, since biblical narratives often rearrange chronology in order to communicate a particular message. But the evidence does strongly suggest that we ought to read the chapter as narrative and not as poetry.

Answers Addressed in the Text

So when your noble curiosity generates questions regarding your observation of the text (questions such as, what genre or text type is this?), your best instinct to cultivate is an instinct that searches the text itself for the answers. Search and search and search.

Let your questions drive you deeper into observation. Let observation and interpretation swirl round and round like a cyclone, in ever tighter loops.

You may be surprised to find how many of your questions can be answered within the text, if you only learn how and where to look. When such examination of the text becomes habitual, you will improve dramatically at being able to defend your conclusions and persuade others.

Answers Assumed in the Text

One obstacle for us today is when the biblical author assumes the answers to your questions. He wasn’t writing to you or me. He had his own audience. So he wasn’t trying to anticipate your questions, but those of his own audience.

This means that there is quite a bit of background information that’s not stated explicitly but nonetheless affects interpretation. For example, the author of Genesis 1 presumes prior knowledge of which “God” is the one engaging in the work of creation. Is it Yahweh, Astarte, Baal, Zeus, or last season’s winner of American Idol? Learning from external reference works about the author and audience of Genesis would help to clarify the answer to this question somewhat quickly.

For another example, comparisons to other ancient creation stories will yield great benefit. What makes this God in this story different from the Gods of Gilgamesh’s epic, or Enuma Elish? Some of these contrasts would have been obvious to those living in ancient times, but we can miss them on account of centuries of distance.

How to Determine When an Answer is Assumed

In the name of “the answer is assumed,” we run the risk of justifying just about any conclusion we can find in a reference work. How do we determine whether the answer is truly assumed, or we are simply importing it where it doesn’t belong?

This process isn’t a perfect science, but the key issue is: Do you have good reason to believe the original audience would have made this assumption? The more reason you have to believe that, the stronger will be the answers you find in reference works.

So ask: Would the original audience already have the necessary background knowledge? Would they have truly been familiar with this parallel text, cultural artifact, body of knowledge, etc.?

If so, then it makes sense to look up your answer in a commentary, study guide, or Bible atlas. We have a wealth of tools available to us today to help us get into the mindset of the original readers. Let’s make good use of them.

When to Let it Go

But if you can’t find the answer addressed in the text, and you don’t have good reason to believe it was assumed, you probably need to make like Elsa and let it go.

Resist the urge to close the knowledge gap simply with systematic theology, denominational tradition, or prior experience. Theology and tradition are important, but they fit best not while interpreting (answering interpretive questions) but while correlating (after determining the author’s main point). We must understand the present passage on its own terms, in light of its original audience, first, before we attempt to connect it to teaching found elsewhere in the Bible.

One exception to the principle in the previous sentence lies with certain implicational questions. Because implicational questions bridge the gap from interpretation into application, they often work best after we’ve determined the main point. So it may make sense to make use of reference works to help draw out those implications and stimulate our own reflection concerning them.

So how do we find answers to our interpretive questions? By shoving our noses back into the text for deeper observation. When further observation suggests that the answer would have been assumed and self-evident to the original audience, we’re then justified in pursuing external resources to help us better understand the mindset or culture of that audience. However, if we don’t have good reason to believe the answer is either addressed or assumed in the text, we’re best off letting the question go until another passage takes it up. There’s no shame in setting aside a particular question for a brighter day.

Identifying Behemoth and Leviathan in the Book of Job

June 18, 2021 By Peter Krol

Kevin (2007), Creative Commons

In Job 40-41, God introduces Job to two new characters. Behemoth is a powerful beast with strong legs (Job 40:16), a stiff tail (Job 40:17), and a carefree riverside existence (Job 40:20-23). Leviathan dwells in the sea (Job 41:1, 7), breathes fire (Job 41:18-21), and crushes hunters (Job 41:25-29). Who are these two creatures?

I grew up hearing that these chapters prove both 1) the existence of dinosaurs, and 2) the co-habitation of humans with them. The Bible shows that archaeology and paleontology are worthwhile pursuits. Hurrah!
Later I discovered that many interpreters in church history have considered Behemoth and Leviathan to be poetic exaggerations of the hippopotamus and the crocodile. Some translations even footnote the titles as such (for example, NASB, NRSV).

Both identifications miss the point of the text. Take note of God’s train of thought over both of his speeches:

Job, you’ll never understand the behavior of mountain goats or ostriches. And you will never domesticate the lion, the wild ox, or the war-horse. Stop justifying yourself…And by the way, you can’t control the hippo or crocodile, either. But I can.

That one certainly doesn’t work. The dinosaur interpretation does a little better:

Job, you’ll never understand the behavior of mountain goats or ostriches. And you will never domesticate the lion, the wild ox, or the war-horse. Stop justifying yourself…And by the way, you can’t control these two dinosaurs, either. But I can.

Both interpretations, however, miss a few key facts:

God’s first speech covers the entire natural creation (Job 38:4). Reading from the beginning, you’ll notice a remarkable similarity to the order of things in Genesis 1. The resemblance is complete enough not to warrant revisiting the created order in the second speech.
The main question in God’s second speech is whether Job can not merely be angry at his suffering but actually bring it to an end (Job 40:9-13). If so, that would justify Job’s putting God in the wrong and saving himself from his own situation (Job 40:8, 14). Of course, Behemoth and Leviathan show this idea to be ludicrous.
Job’s final response comes from a completely blown mind. “You can do all things…No purpose of yours can be thwarted…I have uttered what I did not understand…Now my eye sees you…I despise myself…” (Job 42:1-6).

The second speech advances the first, giving Job (and us) a picture of God’s supreme control, not only over the natural creation, but even over supernatural suffering and evil. Behemoth and Leviathan represent these things in Job’s life. Unlike Job, God can, in fact, bring suffering and evil to an end. Satan could not snap a thread of Job’s garment without God’s explicit permission (Job 1:12, 2:6). And Satan cannot resist the snapping of his own neck if God wills it.

Let him who made [Behemoth] bring near his sword! (Job 40:19)

Who then is he who can stand before me? Who has first given to me, that I should repay him? Whatever is under the whole heaven is mine. (Job 41:10-11)

God gives Job a taste of this power when he brings Job’s earthly suffering to an end (Job 42:12-17). And when God gives Job exactly twice what he lost (compare with Job 1:2-3), he plays the part of a thief who must repay double (Ex 22:7-9). Not that God is a thief, mind you; but he takes the place of a thief along with his blame.

Sort of like another divine warrior who had power to bind Satan (Mark 3:27) and triumph over the rulers and authorities through the cross (Col 2:13-15). And he did it, playing the part of a thief (Mark 15:27). He will one day destroy every ferocious beast (Rev 19:20-21), Satan (Rev 20:9-10), and death itself (Rev 20:14).

When Paul runs out of words to describe God’s unsearchable justice and unfathomable wisdom, he turns to the speech about Leviathan in Job 41 (Romans 11:33-36). Paul must have realized that speech was getting at something bigger than hippos and crocodiles.

Job, you’ll never understand the behavior of mountain goats or ostriches. And you will never domesticate the lion, the wild ox, or the war-horse. Stop justifying yourself…And by the way, you can’t ever bring your suffering to an end. But I can.

Bible Study Leaders Should Not Have All the Answers

August 5, 2019 By Ryan Higginbottom

Picture it. There’s a pause at your small group Bible study, and one of your friends asks a question. In that moment, all the heads in your group will likely turn in one of two directions.

Do the group members look up, at the leader? Or do they look down, at the Bible?

No Bible study leader can have the answer to every question. After all, leaders are finite and there are a myriad of potential questions, both relevant and—ahem—less relevant.

But even though leaders can’t logistically have all the answers, I don’t think that should even be a goal. As an ambition, that’s harmful for at least two reasons.

Bad for the Leader

When a leader plants the seed that they will have all the answers for their group, it bears bad fruit.

It can make the leader fearful of questions that emerge in their group or resentful of those who ask. After all, the leader might think, questioners are causing more work and giving another opportunity for the leader to fail.

This mentality can also lead to a misplaced trust. If a leader is good at anticipating questions and answering them in the moment, they might start to depend on their preparation, intellect, or persuasiveness instead of on the Lord.

Finally, when a group expects their leader to have all the answers, it can lead to pride. A capable leader who rises to this challenge may enjoy the attention they receive as their reputation grows.

Bad for the Group

There is clear spiritual danger for a small group leader when they are expected to answer every question. But this setup is unhealthy for the group as well.

A group structured in this way may start to trust in their leader instead of their Lord. Their confidence and assurance in the faith may rise and fall with the ability and mood of their small group leader. We must avoid this error and anchor our assurance to the rock-solid work of Jesus.

Members of this sort of group may also flounder when faced with studying the Bible on their own. Because they are not challenged to answer questions from Scripture, they may become content with the cotton candy of light, spiritual aphorisms instead of rich, filling meals from God’s Word.

This type of group may also experience stunted growth. Vibrant, healthy small groups often grow and split, as an apprentice from within the group (ideally) emerges. But if a leader is expected to have all the answers, this puts unreasonable weight on potential apprentices. That expectation also eliminates opportunities for group members to learn and grow into that role.

Guard Against Gurus

To train, lead, and empower small group members, leaders should guard against the urge to be a know-it-all or Bible guru.

There is one easy step to ensure a small group is focused on the Bible and not on its leader. This short response to any question will point people in the right direction.

“Good question. What does the text say?”

This is the simplest way I’ve found to point my friends back to the Bible. When I hear a question, I turn either to the questioner or to the whole group and invite them to look back at the text.

Sometimes the text at hand doesn’t answer the question, but other passages do. (A leader needs to decide whether or not that answer is worth chasing down.) Sometimes the question isn’t addressed in Scripture at all. But as much as possible, I want to point my group members away from my answers and into God’s Word.

The Danger of Being a Pastor

Within small groups, there’s a particular danger in being a pastor or anyone else with a seminary degree. I’ve seen how people defer to these leaders. They are often expected to give answers even when they’re not the leader of the group.

To them I offer the same advice I’m giving to small group leaders (as well as my sympathies). You shouldn’t have all the answers. As much as possible, resist being the crutch for your friends. They won’t learn to ride their bike until you let go and urge them to pedal.

Citing Other Resources

Finally, we should note that in the face of legitimate, difficult questions, it’s okay for small group leaders to admit they don’t know the answer. It’s also okay for leaders to a refer to resources that have helped them understand the Bible.

But even the best commentaries should not be appealed to as authorities themselves; commentaries should make the case for their interpretation from the text. And if a leader is not persuaded from the text by a commentary, “I don’t know” may be the best and most honest answer to give.

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

How to Interpret: Answer Questions

November 16, 2012 By Peter Krol

This week I’ll unpack the second of 3 steps for interpreting the Bible.

Step two was Answer the Questions from the Text:

Once you’ve asked your questions, answer them. There’s one critical rule, though: answer questions only if they are answered (or clearly implied) in the text (Prov 30:5-6).

Don’t go on rabbit trails. Don’t use minor details to make the text say what you want it to say. Don’t build a whole theology from one verse. Instead, answer only those questions that are either assumed or addressed in the text. Let the rest go.

Two kinds of answers are “in the text”:

Some answers are assumed in the text. The original audience would have known these answers, but they’re lost on us because of the thousands of years that separate our lifetime from theirs. We need websites or Bible dictionaries to help us understand what scholars have learned about ancient cultures. We can also reference related Scripture passages to illuminate the one at hand.
Some answers are addressed in the text. The author made these explicit for his audience.

From Luke 2:1-21, here are some examples of answers assumed in the text:

What was it like to experience upheaval for a census?
- Some in Luke’s original audience may have remembered this very census that occurred during Quirinius’s governorship. We should look it up. (On the link, scroll down to point (2) “Census of Quirinius.”)
What does it mean that Jesus is called “Christ”?
- We need help from passages like Psalm 2:2 to provide the necessary background.
How long was Joseph and Mary’s trip from Nazareth to Bethlehem? How did people view shepherds at this time?
- Most of the original audience would understand what it was like to travel from Galilee to Judea, or to interact with shepherds. We need tools like websites or Bible dictionaries to help us understand such things.

Here’s an example of answers addressed in the text:

Why does Luke contrast Jesus’ glory with that of the Roman rulers?
- Because God deserves the highest glory (Luke 2:14). He is saving the world through Christ the Lord (Luke 2:11).
So what does Luke want us to do about Jesus?
- In contrast to the Might of Rome (Luke 2:1-2), Mary treasured up these things (Luke 2:19), and the shepherds gave God highest praise & glory (Luke 2:20). Luke implies that we should have similar responses to Jesus.

Finally, here are some possible questions not assumed or addressed in the text. We ought to let them go (at least for now):

Did Mary walk or ride on a donkey?
Was Jesus born in a stable or a cave?
Do angels have wings?
Who are those “with whom he is pleased” (Luke 2:14), and what does this tell us about predestination?

What other answers to your questions can you find in the passage?

3 Steps for Interpreting the Bible

October 31, 2012 By Peter Krol

Misunderstandings stink. I once got cussed out on the phone because of one.

The guy who did the cussing thought I’d scheduled an event on a certain date in order to purposely exclude him from attending. Well, he had misunderstood, and I wish he’d asked more questions before jumping to conclusions.

If he’d asked, I could have given more information (for example, I had no idea this fellow was unavailable on the proposed date, and I primarily chose the date to avoid conflicts with other events).

It is possible to misunderstand the Bible, but with careful interpretation it’s also possible to rightly understand it. God’s Word is a Knowable Word.

Interpretation is the second of three steps in the Bible study process. We’ve seen why we should interpret the Bible. We’ve seen two things that will hinder interpretation. But how do we interpret?

These three steps will help you to interpret any passage of the Bible.

1. Ask Questions of Your Observations

If you’ve observed well, you’re ready to interpret.

Take your observations and ask questions of them. Lots of questions. Tackle those observations from every direction.

Be as inquisitive as possible. Get better at asking questions, and you’ll get better at interpreting the Bible.

Note that your questions should be about your observations of the text. Don’t ask just any old questions. Don’t feel the need to be particularly clever. Your job is not to innovate, but to uncover. (Note how the disciples didn’t observe well, and so asked the wrong questions in John 21:22-23.)

2. Answer the Questions from the Text

Once you’ve asked your questions, answer them. There’s one critical rule, though: answer questions only if they are answered (explicitly or implicitly) in the text (Prov 30:5-6).

Don’t go on rabbit trails. Don’t use minor details to make the text say what you want it to say. Don’t build a whole theology from one verse. Instead, answer only those questions that are either assumed or addressed in the text. Let the rest go.

3. Determine the Author’s Main Point

As you answer all your questions, pull them together into a big picture. Your job is to understand the main thing the author is communicating through the passage (2 Pet 3:15-18).

Most theological disagreements among Christians take place when people focus on things other than the main points of passages. I’m not saying that theology is bad (in fact, it’s very important). I’m simply saying that it’s important to focus on the main points of the Bible and not on secondary, questionable, or implied points (Matt 23:23-24).

Missing the main point means misunderstanding the text. And misunderstandings stink.

Over the next few weeks, we’ll unpack each of these steps in greater detail.

Which of these steps seems most obvious to you? Which one is most difficult?