Context | Knowable Word

Context Matters: Jesus Came to Give Abundant Life

March 2, 2020 By Ryan Higginbottom

Perhaps you’ve heard that Jesus didn’t just come to give life, he came to give abundant life. You may have seen teachers urge that Christians should not be poor, should not be sad, should not be sick, should not be lacking in any blessings God can give. After all, how does a less than existence match up with an abundant life?

When we learn to read the Bible properly—not as a series of isolated words and phrases—we find that some familiar phrases take on entirely new meanings.

The Audience

Jesus uses the “abundant life” phrase to a group of Pharisees in John 10. Importantly, these Pharisees gathered after a controversy surrounding Jesus’s healing of a blind man.

In John 9:1–7, Jesus comes across a man born blind. He anoints the man’s eyes with mud, tells him to go wash in the pool of Siloam, and the man comes back with sight. This starts several rounds of questioning from the Pharisees directed at both this man and his parents. No one wants to proclaim Jesus as the Messiah for fear of the Jews (John 9:22).

However, the man’s life has been changed so dramatically, he cannot help himself. He tells the Pharisees that this man is clearly from God, and the Pharisees cast him out (John 9:33–34). Jesus seeks out the man again, and he confesses Jesus as Lord (John 9:38). The purpose of the healing is realized; the miracle points back to Jesus.

Jesus, the Good Shepherd

Jesus launches into an extended figure of speech that leaves the Pharisees confused.

Jesus first tells the Pharisees about the shepherd of the sheep. The sheep will follow the shepherd, because they know his voice. But they will not follow a stranger with a strange voice (John 10:1–6).

Since this first use of a sheep/shepherd metaphor is confusing, Jesus reloads. He uses different metaphors.

So Jesus again said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. All who came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture.” (John 10:7–9)

And then we arrive at the verse in question.

The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. (John 10:10)

It’s quite natural, after hearing this, to ask: What does it look like to have life abundantly? John (and Jesus) anticipates this question, because the answer comes quickly.

I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. (John 10:11–15)

Having an abundant life means having a good shepherd!

Plenty of employees can perform simple tasks for the sheep, but they don’t care for the sheep at all. They will save their own skin when the wolf howls. But Jesus is so, so different. He is the good shepherd. He knows his sheep, and he lays down his life for his sheep.

Notice that nowhere in this passage do we see a discussion of money, large houses, swimming pools, or everlasting youth. The way Jesus uses this phrase has nothing to do with material possessions or anything doctors or therapists can offer. He intends something much better.

The Greatest Treasure

Jesus came to give himself for his sheep. He calls his sheep, and they perk up their ears and follow him because they recognize his voice. With the good shepherd the sheep will find pasture, shelter, and safety.

Jesus is quite comfortable at the center of this metaphor. Both his healings and his figures of speech point people back to him.

Many sheep are used to thieves and wolves in the field. But with a good shepherd, the sheep have a guide and friend who loves them. He knows them, and they know him. And this—this is abundant life.

Context matters.

For more examples of why context matters, click here.

Context Matters: Leave the Dead to Bury Their Own Dead

February 28, 2020 By Peter Krol

Perhaps you’ve heard some of Jesus’ cryptic sayings, such as “Let the dead bury their own dead.” What are we to make of such a mysterious sentence? How shall we go about trying to puzzle it out?

Context matters. When we learn to read the Bible properly—and we don’t just take a guess at the meaning on our own—we’ll find that the clues are right there in the passage waiting to be found.

The Text

The command comes in response to a man who considers following Jesus. The man asks to be allowed to go first and bury his father. Then Jesus speaks the words under consideration: “Leave the dead to bury their own dead.”

This brief scene occurs in both Matthew 8:21-22 and Luke 9:59-60. For the sake of this post, I’m looking at Luke’s version. Because Matthew may have a different use in mind for this scene, I might analyze his version in another post. For this season, however, my head has been in Luke. So I’ll camp there.

Some Options

A number of options have been proposed for how to interpret this command.

Some describe an ancient Jewish practice of “second burial,” where a family would return to the tomb of a loved one a year after burial and rearrange the placement of the bones. They suggest that, because Jesus would presumably never contradict the 5th commandment to honor one’s parents (Ex 20:12), Jesus must be ordering the man to forgo this practice of second burial. “Leave the second-burial dead to bury their own first-burial dead.”

Others claim that the first “dead” in the verse refers to the spiritually dead. And a Christian ought to delegate the responsibility for burying their (physically) dead parents to those who are not Christians. “Leave the spiritually dead to bury their own physically dead.”

Still others suggest that the man’s father was not yet dead, and the potential disciple was merely making excuses not to follow Jesus. “Leave off the excuse of needing to care for the aging.”

Another idea is that the phrase means either that God must come first before all else, or that we must accept that what is done is done. “Bury your priorities and your past as though they were dead, and put me first.”

Still others propose that the command is not relevant to Christians today, but was only for the first apostles. Jesus’ call to them then was so strict as to preclude their responsibility to care for aging or dying parents. But his call on us today is not as strict. “Leave the dead apostles to leave the dead to bury their own dead.”

How are we to choose from among these options? Surely we won’t get the answer by closing our eyes and reflecting on the options until one of them feels right. There have got to be clues in the text itself.

Help from the Structure

In Luke’s account, we’re given three brief scenes with potential disciples, all in a row. The first (Luke 9:57-58) and third (Luke 9:61-62) both take initiative with Jesus and announce “I will follow you.” However, with the second potential disciple, the one we are considering, Jesus makes the first move: “Follow me” (Luke 9:59). This pattern sets up a simple three-part structure:

“I will follow you wherever you go.”
- “Follow me… But as for you…”
“I will follow you, Lord, but…”

The first and third potential disciples are idealists. They’re quick to make promises about what they will do. The first is a broad idealist, offering to follow Jesus “wherever.” And the second one is a narrow idealist, offering to follow Jesus under one small condition (“let me first say farewell to those at my home”). But both remain idealists who need a dose of reality: We won’t have the greatest of accommodations (Luke 9:58), and we need to be singly focused on the kingdom (Luke 9:62).

But the structure of the paragraph points a flashing neon arrow at the second potential disciple. Being at the center of the concentric structure, we ought to expect the punchline to fall there.

And so it does. Not only is Jesus the one to take initiative, but he also closes the vignette with a clear call: “But as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:60). So in some way, “burying the dead” is in tension with “proclaiming the kingdom of God.” If burying the dead will get in the way of proclaiming the kingdom, then leave the task to the dead.

In brief, then, the structure helps us to see the main point: Go and proclaim the kingdom. But it doesn’t yet help us to grasp the precise interpretation of the phrase “leave the dead to bury their own dead.” We need more help.

Help Before and After

The train of thought in the larger passage may come to the rescue.

The paragraph before the one we’re examining (Luke 9:51-56) launches a major division in Luke’s gospel (see my post on how to navigate the middle of Luke). In that paragraph, James and John ask if Jesus wants them to call down fire on a village that didn’t receive him (Luke 9:53-54). Clearly he doesn’t, because he rebukes them and moves on to another village (Luke 9:55-56). So now is not a time for unflinching judgment.

The paragraphs after the one we’re examining (Luke 10:1-24) show Jesus appointing “seventy-two others” (so not including the Twelve) to go ahead of him (Luke 10:1) and proclaim the kingdom of God (Luke 10:9, 11). For this particular mission, they are to take no supplies and stop to greet no one (Luke 10:4). In other words, they are to leave possessions and ordinary politeness behind. This mission is far too urgent.

So the train of thought takes the following track:

Now is a time not for judgment but for patience—Luke 9:51-56
Now is a time for single-minded and urgent proclamation of the kingdom—Luke 9:57-62
Here are your marching orders for this season of patient yet urgent proclamation—Luke 10:1-24

Conclusion

I don’t think we have reason to believe that “leave the dead to bury their own dead” is intended by Luke as a code or metaphor for something else, as though we need to figure out who exactly the first “dead” are and who the second “dead” are. I also don’t see support from the context for even a precise definition for the saying.

Luke’s purpose here is not to tell us what to do with our dead. His purpose is to paint a picture of the urgency of proclaiming the kingdom of God. In particular, the urgency they had then of proclaiming Jesus’ approach toward Jerusalem to bring that kingdom (Luke 9:51, 53).

In painting this picture, Luke portrays a man who wants to bury his father. And Jesus wants the man to leave the situation alone for now so he can proclaim this urgent kingdom message instead. Somewhat like a modern father of a preschooler, late for a family gathering, telling his daughter to just leave her baby dolls to have their own tea party; we only need to get in the car! She would be missing the point if she began dissecting the question of whether dolls really have the ability to have their own tea parties without her.

So the weight of our interpretation ought to land on the proclamation of the kingdom instead of on deciding allowable burial practices.

Now, while the passage clearly has a particular setting (proclaiming Jesus’ imminent arrival in Jerusalem), I wouldn’t go as far as to say that this means the passage has no application to today (as with the last option on the list above). All Scripture is profitable for teaching and equipping. We can identify principles here for application, but we need to be careful not to read the instructions as though they had been delivered directly to us. There was something unique about Jesus’ journey toward Jerusalem, for which those 72 folks had a particular urgency. We likewise face an analogous urgency in our proclamation of the kingdom, but the instructions don’t always directly apply. For example, it may now be appropriate for missionaries to raise support (contra Luke 10:4; see Rom 15:24, Phil 4:15-18).

Context matters.

For more examples of why context matters, click here.

Context Mattered to Jesus, part 3

February 17, 2020 By Ryan Higginbottom

In the third and final temptation of Jesus, the devil takes him to a high mountain. He promises Jesus “all the kingdoms of the world and their glory” if Jesus will simply fall down and worship him.

On one hand, this sounds like an easy trap to avoid. Temptations don’t get much more obvious than worship the devil.

But for Jesus, this temptation is real. As the Son of God who will ascend to heaven, Jesus is destined for kingship, power, and glory. But the path is incredibly hard. It involves humiliation, suffering, betrayal, and a horrendous death.

Satan is proposing a way around the hardship, a back door to the main stage.

Resisting with Scripture

In response to the devil’s offer, Jesus counters with clear teaching from Scripture.

Then Jesus said to him, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’” (Matthew 4:10)

This command is found in Deuteronomy 6:13. Here’s the larger context.

And when the Lord your God brings you into the land that he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give you—with great and good cities that you did not build, and houses full of all good things that you did not fill, and cisterns that you did not dig, and vineyards and olive trees that you did not plant—and when you eat and are full, then take care lest you forget the Lord, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. It is the Lord your God you shall fear. Him you shall serve and by his name you shall swear. You shall not go after other gods, the gods of the peoples who are around you—for the Lord your God in your midst is a jealous God—lest the anger of the Lord your God be kindled against you, and he destroy you from off the face of the earth. (Deuteronomy 6:10–15)

In response to his first temptation, Jesus’s use of Scripture showed that he was putting himself in the place of Israel. This raised the question, Will Jesus obey?

In the second temptation, Satan tempts Jesus to test the Lord, to call forth an unnecessary, dramatic rescue. Jesus turns this away as well, knowing that God is with him and that his delivery will come after the grave.

In this final temptation, Satan continues the pattern. He asks Jesus to claim now what he will receive later. To avoid the pain and rejection associated with his upcoming ministry, and to end up with glory, Jesus only needs to worship the tempter.

But Jesus refuses. He obeys. He will not forget the Lord, who brought his people out of the house of slavery and who will once again liberate his children. He will not go after another god, for he knows the Lord is in his midst—the Lord is with him. Jesus knows that the Lord is jealous and that his anger can be kindled to destruction.

Jesus is the Better Israel

We know what happened to Israel after Egypt. They grumbled, they didn’t obey the Lord, and they followed after other gods. Eventually, they went into exile because of their rebellion and idolatry.

Jesus stands where Israel fell. He walks the path from his baptism to his cross and he trusts the Lord with every step. In this encounter with the devil, Matthew shows Jesus’s intentions and first steps, and he invites careful attention to the Savior’s life and words.

Context Matters: Always Prepared to Make a Defense

February 14, 2020 By Peter Krol

Perhaps you’ve heard that, as a believer in Christ Jesus, you must always be prepared to make a defense for the hope that is in you. And for good reason. 1 Peter 3:15 has inspired countless books on apologetics, as well as instruction on how to enter the moral and philosophical debates surrounding objections to the Christian faith. Is that what Peter had in mind?

Context matters. When we learn to read the Bible properly—and not merely as a collection of isolated instructions—we’ll find that some commands make even more sense in light of what came before.

The Command

We find the command in 1 Peter 3:15:

“…in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you…”

I often hear the verse quoted just like that, landing on the key phrases “always prepared to make a defense” and “a reason for the hope that is in you.” But we ought to notice that this is only part of a sentence.

The sentence begins with: “Have no fear of them, nor be troubled…” (1 Pet 3:14b). And the sentence ends with, “…yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame” (1 Pet 3:15b-16).

And look at the next sentence: “For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God’s will, than for doing evil” (1 Pet 3:17).

If you read my recent post on “the weaker vessel” in 1 Pet 3:7, I imagine many bells should be ringing for you. You can’t miss the connections to the larger context.

The Argument

While I encourage you to read that full post, let me summarize Peter’s argument in this section of the letter (1 Pet 2:11-4:11).

Peter’s main idea in the whole section is that we must resist our natural desires to do evil, and choose to do good instead (1 Pet 2:11-12). A major reason for doing this is that we might win over, to the glorification of God, those who are currently doing the wrong thing by maligning us (1 Pet 2:12b).

Peter then particularizes the instruction to the power structures of society (1 Pet 2:13-17). Wherever you are in the hierarchy, you have an opportunity to influence others to join you in giving glory to God. Peter offers three examples:

Servants can win over harsh masters by doing the good of honoring them through lawful submission (1 Pet 2:18-25).
Wives can win over disobedient husbands by doing the good of honoring them through lawful submission (1 Pet 3:1-6).
Husbands can extend honor not only up the chain (to the emperor – 1 Pet 2:17) but also down the chain, toward their wives, the “weaker vessels.” Doing this enables them to win their wives, who are co-heirs of grace, to a lifelong partnership of prayer.

In 1 Pet 3:8, the author now generalizes the instruction to “all of you.” He continues applying the same principles; he’s just no longer discussing specific power structures. We are to do good and not evil (1 Pet 3:9-11; 4:1). We do this, even when people hate us for it (1 Pet 3:13-14, 16-17; 4:4), so we might win them to the glory of God (1 Pet 3:9, 12, 16; 4:5-6, 8-11).

Comparisons to Earlier Examples

Let’s refocus on 1 Pet 3:14-16.

When Peter says “have no fear of them,” we ought to think about the command to fear God (1 Pet 2:17), and the command for servants to be subject to their masters “with all respect” (a commentary will inform you that “respect” and “fear” translate the same Greek word in this passage). We ought to think of the “respectful” conduct of godly wives (1 Pet 3:2) who don’t need to “fear” the intimidation or mistreatment they might receive from disobedient husbands. The fear in 1 Pet 3:14 is the fear of slander or persecution for doing what is right in God’s sight.

When Peter says to give “a reason for the hope that is in you,” this is in direct contrast to the instruction to the “weak” to win their husbands without a word (1 Pet 3:1). In other words, when you’re with those doing the wrong thing, don’t try to win them by nagging them. Win them by being the most respectful, pure, and gentle person in the room. When they ask why you’re doing that, then speak.

When Peter speaks of “the hope that is in you,” he’s reconnecting you to your spiritual ancestors, like Sarah, who “hoped in God” (1 Pet 3:5).

When Peter speaks of being “slandered,” and of “those who revile your good behavior,” he’s connecting right back to the example of Jesus (1 Pet 2:23) and the larger situation of dealing with those who “speak against you as evildoers” (1 Pet 2:12).

The Point

So what is Peter getting at in 1 Pet 3:15? Having already covered good and godly behavior within society’s hierarchy (1 Pet 2:13-3:7), he now carries over the same principles to all relationships. Whether you’re in the public square, or with extended family members, or around school-fellows or co-workers, the same principles apply.

Do what is right. Use your freedom as a child of God to serve God and not cover up the evil around you. Don’t nag people or present yourself as “holier-than-thou” or “too good for this crowd.”

Christians should be the most gentle, most respectful, most honoring people to be around. If you fear God and honor him in this way, it is inevitable that others will try to take advantage of it. They will attack you and call you all kinds of names. They will presume upon your motives and malign your intentions. Your gentleness and respect will make them feel so ashamed of themselves that they must take it out on you through ridicule, dismissal, or outright persecution.

When that happens, don’t fear. It shows that you are blessed by God. Don’t fear their intimidation or social media lynching. Continue honoring Christ the Lord, by reserving to him the most prized place in your heart.

And when a few courageous ones ask how you can put up with all of the scorn, you’ll be ready to explain it. You’ll be prepared to explain your hope in King Jesus, who similarly suffered, albeit only once, for sins, that he might bring us to God, having died in the flesh but now raised from the dead by the Spirit (1 Pet 3:18).

Apologetic Conclusion

So what does this mean for apologetics—a more direct, initiated, and formal defense of the faith?

By all means, please do it. That is a fine application of this text, as long as you do it with gentleness and respect (1 Pet 3:15b). And please don’t live in such a way that you’ll end up undermining your own words (1 Pet 3:16).

But apologetics are not the only application here. Nor, most likely, even the primary application Peter had in mind. Not all Christians can succeed at philosophical argumentation. But all must succeed at living righteous and respectful lives, thereby generating opportunities to bear witness to the suffering and kingship of the Lord Jesus.

Context matters.

For more examples of why context matters, click here.

Context Mattered to Jesus, part 2

February 3, 2020 By Ryan Higginbottom

After Jesus was baptized by John, he was led by the Spirit into the wilderness for a showdown. Because he was hungry after a 40-day fast, Satan suggested he turn stones into bread. In the previous post in this series, we looked at the way Jesus turned back this temptation by quoting from Deuteronomy 8.

Satan then took Jesus to the top of the temple in Jerusalem and proposed a free fall. The devil quoted from Psalm 91, indicating that God had promised to protect Jesus no matter what. We have already examined this misuse of Scripture in detail, so in this article we will take a close look at Jesus’s response.

The Context of Jesus’s Response

In reply to the devil’s temptation, we read this.

Jesus said to him, “Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.’” (Matthew 4:7)

This quotation comes from Deuteronomy 6:16. The larger context is worth discussing at length. In the midst of a second giving of the law, God gave his people instructions for their new life in the promised land they would shortly enter.

You shall not put the Lord your God to the test, as you tested him at Massah. You shall diligently keep the commandments of the Lord your God, and his testimonies and his statutes, which he has commanded you. And you shall do what is right and good in the sight of the Lord, that it may go well with you, and that you may go in and take possession of the good land that the Lord swore to give to your fathers by thrusting out all your enemies from before you, as the Lord has promised. (Deuteronomy 6:16–19)

Note that the primary example of Israel testing the Lord is at Massah. This narrative is found in Exodus 17:1–7.

God brought Israel out of Egypt and through the Red Sea. He protected, provided for, and liberated his people in miraculous ways. But when they faced a water shortage at Rephidim, the people quarreled with Moses and grumbled against him. Moses feared he would be stoned (Ex 17:4)! Finally, God provided water from the rock at Horeb when Moses struck it with his staff.

It’s easy to see how Israel complained about God. How exactly did they test him? Moses tells us.

And he called the name of the place Massah and Meribah, because of the quarreling of the people of Israel, and because they tested the Lord by saying, “Is the Lord among us or not?” (Exodus 17:7)

One of the foundational aspects of the Exodus story is that God heard the cries of his oppressed people and vowed to free them. With numerous and precious promises, God told Israel that he remembered his covenant and would be their people (Ex 6:2–8). He traveled with them as a pillar of cloud and fire; they knew his awesome and mighty presence with them (Ex 13:21–22).

And yet, the people doubted their God. They thirsted and thought God was either absent or uncaring, both of which thoughts they had more than ample evidence to dismiss.

We’ve now dug down two layers—how exactly is this related to Jesus’s temptation?

A Fuller Meaning

One on level, Jesus’s meaning is clear. Satan wants Jesus to test God’s willingness to rescue him. Jesus refuses. The sort of rescue Satan proposes is artificial and boastful; God promises his protection for those who love him, not as a form of theater.

But the full context of Jesus’s reply gives even more weight to his meaning. Jesus will not forget his Father’s promises or his presence. He will not doubt God’s ability or willingness to provide exactly what is needed at the proper time. And, of course, he will need to trust the Lord for the greatest rescue of all time.

That rescue will not happen at his arrest, his imprisonment, his trial, or his execution. And it certainly will not happen at the devil’s prompting, as though it were a birthday party magic trick.

No, Jesus knows the Father’s love and the Father’s plan. He trusts God in his mission and his timing. And he looks forward to his dramatic, rumbling, stone-splitting rescue from the grave on Easter morning.

Jesus will have angelic aid at his great rescue, but to agree to the devil’s terms would be to trade a precious, valuable, family heirloom for a cheap, plastic, vending machine imitation.

One Final Temptation

We have one temptation remaining, and Jesus used the Bible again to refuse the devil. Please join me next time in the final article in this series.

Context Matters: The Weaker Vessel

January 31, 2020 By Peter Krol

Though it may be unpopular to say it out loud in public these days, the Bible commands husbands to show honor to their wives “as the weaker vessel” (1 Peter 3:7). The reason for this is dramatic (“since they are heirs with you of the grace of life”), and the cost of failure is steep (“so that your prayers may not be hindered”). So it behooves husbands to ensure they understand what is expected of them. And the context should help.

Context matters. When we learn to read the Bible properly—and not merely as a collection of isolated instructions—we’ll find that some of the commands have more to say than we may have realized.

Likewise

The first observation we ought to make regarding the command to husbands in 1 Peter 3:7 is the first word, “likewise.” We must ask a critical interpretive question: “Likewise to what?” That is, what is this command to husbands like? How is this command similar to that which came before?

So we back up in the text and examine the commands to wives in 1 Peter 3:1-6, regarding subjection to husbands, doing good, and not fearing. Because these instructions also begin with the word “likewise,” we must again ask “likewise to what?”

Backing up further, we have a paragraph filled with commands to servants (1 Peter 2:18-25) to be subject to masters and do good regardless of what suffering it may bring. The incentive for such subjection and good behavior is the example of Jesus Christ who himself bore our sins. But what provoked these instructions to servants?

Going back another paragraph, we find the broad command to “Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution” (1 Pet 2:13-17), and to silence those who call us evildoers by proving ourselves good-doers. But we should observe that this paragraph is not the first one to introduce these ideas either.

Moving back just one more paragraph, the author directly addresses his audience as “beloved” (1 Peter 2:11-12). And he urges them to act honorably and enable those who consider them evildoers to see their good deeds.

Pulling the Section Together

Looking ahead, we see the next use of the address, “beloved,” comes in 1 Peter 4:12. And the verses following the command to husbands (1 Peter 3:8-4:11) all continue the larger theme of doing good and not evil, with respect to how we treat one another. The rest of the letter’s body (1 Peter 4:12-5:11) shifts from exhorting people to do good to shaping their perspective when suffering for having done such good. All this data suggests that 1 Peter 2:11-4:11 is a unified section of the letter.

In the section under consideration (1 Peter 2:11-4:11), we can map the train of thought as follows:

1 Peter 2:11-12: Reject your natural passions to do evil. It is honorable to do good, for it shows the glory of God to those who might seek to accuse you of wrongdoing.
1 Peter 2:13-17: It is especially important to do the good of subjecting yourself to human authorities. Your good will silence the ignorance they demonstrate when they label your religion as evil. Use your freedom, not to cover up the evil coming at you, but to voluntarily serve God. This looks like honoring everyone, especially the emperor. Such honor will also play out in your love for other Christians and your fear of God.
1 Peter 2:18-25: Let’s get more specific. Servants, do the good of obeying masters, regardless of whether they themselves are good or evil. When you suffer for doing good, that is, by submitting even to harsh masters, you are following in the footsteps of Christ. Be mindful not to do anything sinful simply because your master commands it. But when you obey every command that doesn’t require you to sin, God will give you the grace to endure whatever treatment may result from it.
1 Peter 3:1-6: Another specific case: Wives, be subject to your husbands. The “likewise” assumes that such submission comes along with the same qualifications that were issued to servants: Don’t obey anything that would require you to sin. But by doing the good of submitting, you might even win over a husband who is not obeying the word. (Note: this hope is not only for women with unbelieving husbands, but for any woman whose husband—professing faith or not—is disobeying God’s word at any particular point in time.) Such submissive good-doing is what makes you both beautiful and precious in God’s sight.
1 Peter 3:7: Husbands are “likewise” to live with wives in an understanding way and show honor to them “as the weaker vessel.”
1 Peter 3:8-4:11: Though we could continue following the train of thought paragraph-by-paragraph, I will summarize the rest by simply observing that Peter now generalizes his larger instruction to “all of you” (1 Peter 3:8). After addressing three particular cases (servants, wives, and husbands), he generalizes the principle of good-doing to all Christian brothers and sisters toward one another.

The Argument in Summary

So Peter’s main idea in the whole section is that we must resist our natural desires to do evil, and choose to do good instead. A major reason for doing this is that we might win over, to the glorification of God, those who are currently doing the wrong thing.

Peter then particularizes the instruction to the power structures of society. Wherever you are in the hierarchy, you have an opportunity to influence others to join you in giving glory to God:

Servants can win over harsh masters by doing the good of honoring them through lawful submission.
Wives can win over disobedient husbands by doing the good of honoring them through lawful submission.
Husbands can extend honor not only up the chain (to the emperor – 1 Pet 2:17) but also down the chain, toward their wives, the “weaker vessels.” Though wives are called to submit, husbands are called treat their wives as the co-heirs they are of the grace of life. To honor them as they would an emperor. Live with them in an understanding way, so they don’t have to fear either your strength or the consequences of their obedience to God.

Beloved brothers who profess faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, this means that if you are doing the good God requires of you toward your wife, she ought not find herself too often in a position of having to win you over without a word. Make it so she can submit to you with joy and not with fear, because she feels so deeply understood by you, even when you have to disagree with her.

The Cost of Failure

And what is the cost of failing to husband your sister, your bride in this way? Hindered prayers.

But what does that mean, in the context of the argument?

I believe Peter is saying that you will cease to function as true partners, co-heirs of the grace of life with your wife. You will stop praying together.

And this state of affairs does not glorify God. It goes against the overarching instruction (1 Peter 2:11-12), which has the purpose of winning people over, influencing them to glorify God with us.

You husband, can win your wife to the glory of God by understanding her. By showing her the same honor you would show an empress. By praying together with her.

Context matters.

For more examples of why context matters, click here.

Context Mattered to Jesus

January 20, 2020 By Ryan Higginbottom

The temptation of Jesus is a fascinating exchange. In this brief passage we find four explicit quotations of Scripture and deep theological themes.

In my last article I wrote about the way Satan misused Psalm 91 when he tempted Jesus to throw himself from the top of the temple (Matt 4:6). We saw that Scripture quoted out of context can be used for evil purposes.

I’m grateful to Seth S., one of our blog commenters, who suggested we look at the other side of this face off. He proposed we examine Jesus’s use of the Old Testament in his resistance of Satan in the wilderness.

This proved too much for a single post, so I will begin the task today and continue it in my next article.

Temptation to Produce Bread

Let’s set the stage. Matthew 3 ends with Jesus’s baptism, and Matthew 4 begins with his temptation.

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” But he answered, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’” (Matthew 4:1–4)

Satan tries to appeal both to Jesus’s hunger and his identity. Surely the Son of God could produce food for himself when he is hungry. Why not do it right here and now?

Jesus’s reply is worth studying in depth.

The Context in Deuteronomy

In all three instances of temptation, Jesus quotes from the book of Deuteronomy to turn away the devil. In the case of Satan’s appeal to turn stones into bread, Jesus looks to Deuteronomy 8.

And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord. (Deuteronomy 8:3)

Finding this verse is important, but we must also know its context.

The book of Deuteronomy is a second statement of the law to the people of Israel, given with an eye toward their upcoming entrance into the promised land. In this book, God reminds Moses what he has done for the nation of Israel, and he charges them with obedience in the future.

Jesus in the Place of Israel

There are several details in Deuteronomy 8 worth noting.

Israel is supposed to remember the way God led them for 40 years in the wilderness (Deut 8:2).
God humbled Israel in the wilderness, testing them to know what was in their heart, whether or not they would keep his commandments (Deut 8:2).
God humbled Israel and let them hunger, feeding them with manna, so that he would make them know that man does not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from God’s mouth (Deut 8:3).
God disciplines Israel in the way that a man disciplines his son (Deut 8:5).
Israel must keep the commandments of God because God is bringing them into a good land, a land with plenty of bread (Deut 8:6–9).

This context helps us to understand Jesus’s purpose.

Jesus has been led by God the Spirit into the wilderness for 40 days (Matt 4:1–2). He voluntarily went hungry for these 40 days (Matt 4:2). Jesus knows he is the Son of God, because he just heard his father say these exact words (Matt 3:17).

And, crucially, by resisting the devil’s first temptation, Jesus shows that he knows man does not live by bread alone; he does not need to learn this through the same discipline Israel faced.

Through examining the context of Matthew 4 and Deuteronomy 8, we discover some profound truths. Jesus has voluntarily put himself in the place of Israel. Furthermore, he has taken the first step in obeying God in this role by showing he depends on God—he does not need to turn stones into bread.

This sets up a crucial question both for the rest of the interaction with Satan and for the rest of the Gospel of Matthew: Will Jesus keep the commandments of the Lord? Will Jesus trust God to bring him through the wilderness and into the land of plenty, rejecting all other gods?

Conclusion

As Christians who know the rest of the Bible, we know the answers to these questions. But Matthew is framing the launch of Jesus’s mission with the themes of obedience, sonship, and substitution.

Be sure to come back to read my next article, when we continue to look at Jesus’s quotations of Scripture to deny the devil’s advances.

Quoting Scripture Contrary to Its Purpose is Devilish

January 6, 2020 By Ryan Higginbottom

*Temptation of Christ* (1663), Philips Augustijn Immenraet, public domain

Have you ever tried to hammer a nail with a hand saw? When was the last time you flipped a pancake with a whisk?

Using tools or utensils for unintended purposes just doesn’t work.

Context Matters

When it comes to the Bible, proper usage is even more important, because we are dealing with God’s word.

We have devoted many articles on this blog to the importance of context in the Bible. We have called attention to numerous examples of the proper use of Scripture, respecting the location of phrases and verses within paragraphs, chapters, and books.

But we can learn through both positive and negative examples. So today, we’ll look at a Bible quotation used out of context. And we won’t just look at any example, we’ll look in the Bible itself at an example of the misuse of Scripture.

The Temptation of Jesus

After Jesus is baptized, he is led by the Spirit to be tempted by the devil (Matthew 4:1). Jesus rebuffs Satan’s three-part temptation by quoting the Bible at each turn. (This narrative is found in both Matthew 4:1–11 and Luke 4:1–13. I’ll use Matthew’s version.)

This section of Scripture is often used to illustrate the value of knowing the Bible. Memorizing God’s word is a mighty tool in resisting temptation. This is all very good.

But in one of Satan’s temptations, he quotes the Bible, and that is worth exploring.

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.’”(Matthew 4:5–6)

The devil cites Psalm 91:11–12 and, taken as quoted, the verses are compelling. God seems to promise protection in angelic form, without a qualification in sight. If we stick to Satan’s words, his case is persuasive.

Exploring Psalm 91

Jesus’s reply to the devil is simple, coming straight from Deuteronomy 6:16.

Jesus said to him, “Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.’” (Matthew 4:7)

How exactly is what Satan offers a test of God?

Instead of a blanket promise of safety, Psalm 91 is about God’s protection for those who seek their shelter in him. This thread runs throughout the psalm.

It is he who “dwells in the shelter of the Most High” that will “abide in the shadow of the Almighty” (Psalm 91:1).
The psalmist replies to this promise by calling God “My refuge and my fortress, my God in whom I trust” (Psalm 91:2).
The psalmist says that “Because you have made the Lord your dwelling place,” “no evil shall be allowed to befall you” (Psalm 91:9–10, emphasis mine).
God says, “Because he holds fast to me in love, I will deliver him; I will protect him, because he knows my name” (Psalm 91:14).
Finally, this “holding fast” to God takes a specific form: “When he calls to me, I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble; I will rescue him and honor him” (Psalm 91:15).

Psalm 91 does not offer a safety net to rescue everyone from the consequences of reckless behavior. Rather, God promises his protection to those who make him their dwelling place. To those who call to him. To those who hold fast to him in love.

Consider the Text

In the title of this article, I claim that the quoting of Scripture contrary to its purpose is devilish. I mean, very simply, that this is a tactic of the devil.

Not everyone who quotes Scripture in this way is evil or is possessed by a demon. But we should be sobered as we observe this strategy. The Bible can be used as a tool to accomplish evil purposes. The words of God are not a magical incantation of righteousness.

This understanding should affect the way we listen to sermons, digest proof texts, and read theological arguments. Let’s give ourselves to a careful study of the Bible, that we might recognize and avoid this devilish error.

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.

Context Matters: Abstain from All Appearance of Evil

January 3, 2020 By Peter Krol

Perhaps you’ve heard the injunction to avoid the appearance of evil. You won’t find the phrase in most modern English Bibles, as it’s a holdover from the King James translation of 1 Thessalonians 5:22. The ESV commands us to “abstain from every form of evil,” and the CSB simplifies it further to “stay away from every kind of evil” (1 Thess 5:22, CSB). This verse could be called upon to support just about any set of personal prohibitions, including interacting with someone of the opposite sex, dining at a tavern, choosing one’s friends, and forming political alliances, to name a few.

But is that what the Apostle Paul had in mind?

Context matters. If we learn to read the Bible for what it is—and not as a collection of independently assembled proverbial sayings—we’ll discover that some of our most familiar passages don’t actually mean what we’ve always assumed.

A Study in Contrasts

When we read the verse in context, we ought to observe that it makes up the second half of a contrast:

“Hold on to what is good. Stay away from every kind of evil.”
1 Thess 5:21b-22

So the staying away from every kind of evil is a companion to the holding on to what is good. The “evil” in view here is the opposite to the “good” that is likewise in view. We are to “hold on to” the one and “stay away from” the other.

What further clues can we find to help us understand precisely what sort of “good” and “evil” Paul has in mind?

A More Foundational Contrast

Moving back just slightly farther, we find another contrast. This one is more concrete.

“Don’t stifle the Spirit. Don’t despise prophecies, but test all things.”
1 Thess 5:19-21a

This one is a little more complex, but still poses no problem for the astute observer. Here we have two things not to do: Don’t stifle the Spirit or despise prophecies. And one thing to do: Test all things.

We ought to see how “stifling the Spirit” is parallel to “despising prophecies.” So the spiritual stifling Paul has in mind is the despising of prophecies. And because the entire paragraph is about church life (1 Thess 5:12-22), it doesn’t seem likely that Paul is describing enscripturated (written) prophecies, but the verbal prophecies being made in the course of ancient Thessalonian church life.

And how does Paul want people to express their dependence on the Spirit? How can they show their regard for those verbal prophecies? Is it by shutting off their minds and swallowing wholesale whatever is spoken in the name of the Spirit?

No: “Test all things,” he commands. The church will express its dependence on the Spirit of God, and its high regard for prophecies, by testing them all. By examining them in light of the enscripturated Word. By evaluating their consistency with the rest of God’s revelation. By making distinctions between true and false prophets, true and false prophecies, things to be heeded and things to be discarded.

The Punch Line

And upon such evaluation of the prophecies made in the church, the people are commanded to “hold on to what is good” and “stay away from every kind of evil.”

So the contrast between “good” and “evil” follows directly from the “testing” of the prophecy. Not every prophecy is legitimate. Not every claim to speak on behalf of God’s Spirit is to be taken seriously. Each of them must be tested.

And those that prove to be “good” are to be held on to. Those that show themselves to be any “kind of evil” are to be stayed away from.

Conclusion

Paul’s command here is similar to Jesus’ instruction to “be on your guard against false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravaging wolves. You’ll recognize them by their fruit” (Matt 7:15-16a).

We’ve been given an objective set of criteria by which to distinguish between true and false prophecy. We ought to cling to the first while staying away from the second. Jesus and Paul are in harmony on this matter.

And “abstain from all appearance of evil” has very little to do with how other people perceive your behavior in any given situation. It has more to do with whom we listen to and whose instruction we choose to heed. Stay away from those prophets and prophecies who are not in line with that which is good, right, and true.

Context matters.

Thanks to Daniel Tomlinson for the idea for this post. Click here for more examples showing why context matters.

Why Was Baby Jesus Laid in a Manger?

December 13, 2019 By Peter Krol

“And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.” (Luke 2:7)

This time of year, the words roll right off the tongue. And every child’s first question is: What is a manger? When the teacher explains that it is a feeding trough for animals, the astute youth then wonders: Why was the baby laid there?

Now enters the ancient and hallowed tradition of Nativity speculation. Since we’re supposed to reflect on this narrative for a few weeks each year, we need some way to fill in the gaps left by the gospel narrators. And so we wax eloquent about Mary and Joseph’s poverty. Or the pathetic rejection they faced by the innkeeper. Or the influx of tourism to Bethlehem on account of the census. Or the astonishing degradation to which the Son of God submitted himself in setting aside, for a time, his heavenly glory in order to clothe himself in earthly humiliation—all to win a people for himself.

And every one of these speculations might be true. But in connecting such historical and theological dots, let’s please be careful not to neglect the main reason Luke gives for including this detail in his narrative.

Luke’s Purpose

If we read Luke like a book and not simply as a Christmas photo shoot, we’ll realize that we’re only in chapter 2. It was not all that long ago in the book that Luke made his purpose quite clear and explicit:

“…it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.” (Luke 1:3-4)

Luke writes an orderly account of the early Christian movement, so the Roman official Theophilus can be certain about the things he’s heard about it. This is Luke’s purpose: to provide enough evidence to enable Theophilus to be sure about what he’s heard.

But what is it that Theophilus has heard, of which he ought to be certain? The main point of Luke’s gospel is something along the lines of: “The hope of Israel, God’s plan of salvation for the world, has arrived in Jesus.” (You can find my case for this main point here.) It is on account of this hope that Paul is on trial (Acts 26:6-7), and the facts surrounding this hope ought to lead, Luke believes, to Paul’s exoneration before Caesar from the charges brought against him by the Jews (Acts 24:5-6).

So Luke wants his reader to be certain about this hope, with the aim of exonerating Paul from all charges.

The Manger

Now how does this overall purpose help us to understand why Mary laid Jesus in a manger? I confess it will not be all that helpful in understanding why this woman laid her baby in the manger (we’ll need to employ our venerable Nativity speculation to close that gap). But it will help us in every way to understand why Luke saw fit to tell us she had done so.

Just follow the manger through the passage:

The narrator declares: “And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger” (Luke 2:7).
The angel proclaims: “And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger” (Luke 2:12).
Finally, the narrator recounts: “And they went with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby lying in a manger (Luke 2:16).

Do you see the flow of thought? Mary lays him there. The angel tells the shepherds they will know they have the right baby when they see him lying there. Then they go to see for themselves, and yes, they find him there, just as they had been told.

So can the shepherds be certain of the things they were taught? Can they be sure that this is the right child?

“And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.” (Luke 2:20)

Conclusion

Luke’s reason for mentioning the manger is that it provided for the shepherds corroboration of what the angel said. The detail of the manger serves a clear narrative and persuasive purpose to show the fact (the baby was laid there), the prediction (the angel said they’d find him there), and the testimony (they did in fact find him there, just as they were told).

So why was the baby Jesus laid in a manger? In Luke’s narrative world, it was so that Theophilus (and by extension, you and I) could be certain that these shepherds were eyewitnesses to the birth. They are among the many eyewitnesses from the beginning (Luke 1:2) whom Luke has researched and included in his account to promote certainty. And just as they could be certain, from the sign of the manger, that they had located the right baby, so also you and I can be certain of the same.

And what is it, precisely, of which they and we can be certain regarding him? What is the hope of which they can be certain?

“For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 2:11)

This child is the one. He is the one to rescue us (Savior). He is the Messiah, the Chosen One (Christ). He is Yahweh (the Lord) in the flesh.

This advent season, let us, too, “go over to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has made known to us.” And may we, too, return, “glorifying and praising God for all [we have] heard and seen, as it [has] been told [us].”

« Previous Page