Context | Knowable Word

How to Share Scripture While Respecting Context

July 20, 2020 By Ryan Higginbottom

I’ve argued that the context of Scripture is so important that ignoring it is dangerous. One might conclude that I want people to share the Bible less often.

Nothing could be further from the truth! I want the Bible in the hearts and on the tongues of all people from pole to pole, and that won’t happen unless Christians share God’s word with others.

I don’t want the Bible to be shared less. I want it to be shared better.

Reminder: Context Matters

On this blog we have produced many arguments and examples of why context matters. We will not grasp the intended meaning of a Bible passage if we don’t understand how it fits into the larger picture.

Respecting context is particularly important when we talk about the Bible with others. In these situations we are not only communicating the meaning of the Bible but also the proper use of the Bible.

If we fling around solitary verses, this teaches others to do the same. And many, many bad theologies and heresies have resulted from this practice. (Stay tuned for more on this in my next post.)

Our Top Priority

When we talk about the Bible with our friends, we should labor to communicate what is true. So the first step in sharing Scripture with our friends is to study the Bible passage until we understand it.

Here at Knowable Word we advocate studying the Bible using the OIA framework. We have lots of articles, examples, and resources to help ordinary people learn how to study the Bible.

This will take time and effort. But the payoff will be worth it—we will have confidence that the Scriptures we are passing along mean what we claim.

Here are two suggestions on how to share Scripture while honoring context.

Suggestion #1: Share the Context

One way to avoid ignoring context is to provide the context. Instead of lifting a verse out of a chapter, send along the whole chapter.

Having already studied the passage, we will have a good sense of the literary unit in which the passage lives. This unit (at minimum) is what we should share.

Here’s our first example. If I had a friend who was burdened by the weight of his sins, I might want him to understand that salvation means we no longer fear punishment and hell. I would suggest he read 1 John 4:13–21 and pay special attention to verses 17 and 18. Instead of sending along a verse or two, I’d suggest those verses within their context, all of which my friend should be able to read in one sitting.

Suggestion #2: Summarize the Context

If it is not practical to share the entire context of a Bible passage, another approach is to summarize the context of the passage.

Here’s a second example. If I wanted to encourage a friend with the compassion and grace of Jesus, I might consider his conversation with the thief on the cross. Many people are familiar with Jesus’s final words to him: “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). In context, this is less a treatise on what happens to the soul upon death than an example of Jesus offering forgiveness to broken sinners who come to him.

To grasp the context, a person should understand the way Jesus loved and identified with the mocked and scorned throughout his ministry. When Jesus was at the height of his own humiliation, he embraced others who were hated and cast out. And in his final act, he took the place of those he loved—he became ridiculed for the ridiculed.

If I wanted to share this passage with a friend, I would not just quote the punchline verse. I would offer a few words (as in the paragraph above) about Jesus’s ministry and companions in Luke. I would also suggest that my friend read Luke 23:32–43.

In this situation, it isn’t reasonable to ask my friend to read all of Luke. But a short introduction and then the Bible text itself can work as a substitute.

Respecting Every Context

Most of the discussion above uses “context” to refer to the literary context of a passage—the author’s flow of thought and how the passage fits with what precedes and follows it. But we must recognize historical context (the occasion, author, and audience) and biblical context (how other Biblical authors refer or allude to it) as well.

This may result in different practices when sharing portions of the Psalms and Proverbs, for example.

Loving Those with Whom You Share

The way we share the Bible with a friend will depend on that friend’s background. Our communication will differ from a Christian to a non-Christian, from a new believer to a seasoned saint. All of this takes wisdom.

One of the most loving things we can do for our friends is to connect them with God’s word. As we pray for opportunities to do this, let’s work hard to share the Bible in context.

Context Matters: My God, My God, Why Have You Forsaken Me?

July 10, 2020 By Peter Krol

Perhaps you’ve heard Jesus’ cry of dereliction while hanging on the cross. “How great the pain of searing loss; the Father turns his face away” (Stuart Townend). Perhaps you knew that Jesus was alluding to David’s lament in Psalm 22. But what exactly was David’s concern, and why was it so devastating? And how did Jesus share that experience in his own crucifixion?

When we learn to read the Bible properly—not as an assortment of quotes and aphorisms—we find that some familiar phrases take on entirely new meanings.

David’s Crisis of Faith

In Psalm 22, David feels utterly abandoned by God (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”). The reason is that, as he looks around, he sees no evidence of God’s presence or activity to save (“Why are you so far from saving me?”). David cries and cries, but receives no answer (Ps 22:1-2).

David understands how these things work, and he seeks to console himself with the perspective of history. In Israel’s covenant with her God, there is a direct connection between loyal trust and deliverance.

In you our fathers trusted (Ps 22:4a).
They trusted, and you delivered them (Ps 22:4b).
To you they cried and were rescued (Ps 22:5a).
In you they trusted and were not put to shame (Ps 22:5b).

Those who trusted in God were rescued, and those who proved disloyal were put to open shame. This strengthens David to persevere in trust and believing loyalty (Ps 22:3).

“But I am a worm and not a man” (Ps 22:6). The problem is, it’s not working the way it ought. David has trusted and remained loyal, but he is still put to shame! He is mocked and scorned. His trust in Yahweh is now the very thing for which he is mocked (Ps 22:8).

What’s at stake here is that the connection between trust and deliverance appears to be broken. For generations, the Israelites had a pattern of abandoning God when things didn’t go their way. Will David do the same? Now that he has hard evidence that trust in God will not pay off? Will he change his mind and go back to Egypt? Will he grumble and complain? Will he turn to other gods?

In the rest of the psalm, we see David mature from a questioner (Ps 22:1-10) to a beggar (Ps:11-21), then to a preacher (Ps 22:22-26), and finally to a missionary (Ps 22:27-31). He withstands the test and survives the crisis of faith. With all outward appearances to the contrary, he proclaims that Yahweh remains worthy of fear (Ps 22:23), praise (Ps 22:25), and service (Ps 22:30).

Jesus’ Crisis of Faith

Though David felt that God had abandoned him, we can confidently conclude that this was not truly the case (2 Sam 7:9, 12-15). Yet for Jesus, such abandonment by the Father was in fact a reality. He faced his darkest hour alone (Mark 15:33-34), accompanied only by the sin of the world that had now become his own (2 Cor 5:21).

Once again, we must ask the question of historical habits: Will Jesus survive the crisis of faith? Will he fall to pieces, just like generation upon generation of Jews had done before him? Since trust in the Father is not paying out in deliverance, is it worth it for him to continue trusting at all?

This tension is all the greater when we observe Mark’s attention to the question of perseverance. Those who deride him dare him to come down from the cross (Mark 15:29-30). They doubt his ability to attain salvation for himself (Mark 15:31). They claim they will believe what he has said, only if he will come down (Mark 15:32). If he can’t save himself, they wonder whether Elijah will come to take him down from the cross (Mark 15:36).

But Jesus perseveres. He stays on the cross until all is finished, and he can proclaim that “he has done it” (Ps 22:31; see John 19:30). He remains loyal, even when abandoned by his Father. Because the Father despised and abhorred the affliction of the afflicted, and hid his face from him (Ps 22:24), all the families of the nations can now worship before him (Ps 22:27).

And though the answer was delayed three days, we know that he who cried out to his Father was eventually heard (Ps 22:24, Rom 1:4, Heb 5:7-9).

Conclusion

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” When you hear or recite the question, don’t allow it’s familiarity to dull your senses to the visceral conflict it betrays. Delight in this hero, who succeeded in every way where Old Covenant Israel failed. Behold the crisis of faith, the disillusionment, and the unbelievable temptation to come down from the cross to prove his worth. And rest assured that you will never have to experience such complete abandonment, because he already went through it once for all.

Tell the coming generations of his righteousness, and that he has done it.

Context matters.

For more examples of why context matters, click here.

The Dangerous Consequences of Ignoring Context

July 6, 2020 By Ryan Higginbottom

Perhaps you’ve read a post or two on this blog stressing the importance of Biblical context. You may have seen a whole catalog of articles showing how familiar verses and phrases may not carry the meanings intended by those who splash them on coffee cups and t-shirts.

Yes, context matters. We won’t tire of repeating this key to interpreting the Bible because ignoring context is not just misguided, it is dangerous.

We Miss the Truth

The obvious danger of neglecting context is that we lose the truth. But we dare not forget how devastating a loss this is. What do we have if we don’t have Biblical truth? We are a parched, dusty land with no hope of rain.

Context drives interpretation. So when we pluck out individual verses we have no chance of arriving at a proper understanding.

In the best situations, this leads to a true teaching through a bad process. (See here for an example.) In the worst cases, we end up with damnable heresy.

We Disrespect God

Imagine writing a letter to a dear friend. You haven’t been in touch for months, so your words stretch into the thousands. You write about children and parents, work and health, joys and sorrows.

Later you learn that your friend lifted one sentence from this letter and posted it on social media. Your friend gave you credit, and the quote didn’t make you look bad, but the meaning is gone. How would this make you feel?

Despite our best intentions, misusing someone’s words always disrespects the author.

God gave us his word to read as 66 books under one cover. When we discount Biblical context, we not only disrespect the original authors, we put ourselves above the Scriptures, insisting we know better how to present it than God himself.

Though perhaps distasteful, we need to name this error accurately. It is arrogance. And God does not think highly of the arrogant (see James 4:1–10, especially James 4:6).

We Mislead Our Neighbors

As Christians we are called to love our neighbors as ourselves, and part of this calling is pointing our neighbors toward God through Jesus Christ.

Whenever we rip verses from their Biblical context and slap them on hats or bumper stickers or (gulp!) church signs, we’re telling our neighbors that this is a proper way to handle God’s word. We’re encouraging them to pick and choose what seems good or inspirational from the Bible.

This misleads our neighbors about the nature of both the Bible and God himself, and it may encourage them in error.

The Bible in Context

Now that I’ve shown how delightful a companion I’d be on your next trip to a Christian bookstore, let me reassure you.

I’m not saying we need to quote the whole Bible or nothing. There are plenty of ways to share powerful, helpful passages of Scripture with a friend or neighbor while still respecting the context of those passages. (I will share some of my suggestions on this in my next post.) I am urging, however, that we must be careful.

God’s word brings us joy and encouragement and comfort. But it is a serious, weighty, and holy matter to have and communicate the very words of God.

After all, context matters.

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.

Maintaining Both Human and Divine Aspects of Scripture

April 8, 2020 By Peter Krol

Daniel Rowlands has a helpful piece about how to maintain both the human and divine aspects of Scripture. When we aim to read Scripture “in context,” we must keep in mind both the immediate literary/historical context of the human author and the canonical context of the divine author.

In each place there is the immediate context, but there is a broader context—the context of the entire revelation of God contained in the Bible. There are different human authors (i.e. Moses, Hosea, and Matthew), yet there is one divine author—God himself. There is an immediate context, and there is an overall biblical context—the overarching story of God’s mighty acts of redemption in Christ Jesus.

We do not have to choose between these matters in our study of Scripture. We ought to maintain both.

Check it out!

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 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 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 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].”

Context Matters: Peace on Earth

December 9, 2019 By Ryan Higginbottom

Perhaps you’ve heard that Jesus came to bring peace on earth, that the angels sang this very phrase when his birth was announced to the shepherds. You’ve got piles of cards (and maybe boxes of ornaments) bearing this phrase. And at this time of year, the words “peace on earth” invoke a warm, reflective mood, just right for hot cocoa and soft-focused photography.

But is this how we should read the divine birth announcement? Did Jesus really come to bring peace on earth?

We always need to pay attention to the context of our favorite verses and phrases. When we learn to read the Bible for what it is—and not just as a collection of slogans or choruses—we may find that it has a deeper or different meaning than we’ve assumed.

The Immediate Context

We begin with the immediate context of the phrase in question. In Luke 2, after the angels tell the shepherds about the birth of the Savior, we read this:

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!” (Luke 2:13–14)

The angels are not announcing a general, earth-blanketing peace. They announce and pray for peace “among those with whom he is pleased.” This is an important first qualification.

The Broader Context in Luke

There is certainly a need for peace at the beginning of Luke’s Gospel.

Luke deliberately calls attention to the political setting of his narrative in the first two chapters; he mentions King Herod (Luke 1:5), Caesar Augustus (Luke 2:1), and the Syrian governor Quirinius (Luke 2:2). Mary praises her God who has “brought down the mighty from their thrones” (Luke 1:52). During the Roman occupation of Jewish land, these markers and desires were pointed.

Additionally, many of the characters we encounter could use a healthy dose of peace. Mary is troubled by her angelic visitor (Luke 1:29) and so is Zechariah (Luke 1:12). Zechariah remembers the enemies of the Lord’s people when he prophesies over his son (Luke 1:71, 74), and he points forward to the work of the Messiah. At the end of the prophecy, we get a partial description of the peace about which the angels will sing.

And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High; for you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways, to give knowledge of salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins, because of the tender mercy of our God, whereby the sunrise shall visit us from on high to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace. (Luke 1:76–79)

Later, in the midst of a long string of teaching, Luke records a striking statement from Jesus about his purposes for coming.

I came to cast fire on the earth, and would that it were already kindled! I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how great is my distress until it is accomplished! Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. (Luke 12:49–51)

Jesus goes on to speak primarily about divisions within a family, but it is clear that universal peace is not one of Jesus’s immediate objectives.

There is one last cry about peace in Luke, as Jesus is approaching Jerusalem for the last time.

As he was drawing near—already on the way down the Mount of Olives—the whole multitude of his disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen, saying, “Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!” (Luke 19:37–38)

We can now tie off this thread of peace that runs in the background of Luke. The disciples hail Jesus as the king, and Luke captures their praise as an echo of the earlier angelic song. Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!

The Peace that Jesus Came to Bring

Jesus came to bring peace. But his peace is not the world’s peace. It is not for everyone, and it is not immediate.

Peace often requires confrontation, sacrifice, and suffering, and this describes much of Jesus’s time on earth. He came primarily to bring us peace with God, and that required his obedient life, his brutal death, and his resurrection.

But the thing about peace with God is that it spreads. The angels announced peace on earth among God’s people because that is a fruit that the Spirit of Christ brings. The church now is to be a glimpse of what the world will be. It happens slowly and imperfectly, two steps forward and one step back. But it happens.

Jesus came to bring peace. That peace is not for everyone, and it does not arrive in fullness now. But it is real and life-giving and earth-rocking. It is worthy of a sky full of angels.

Context matters.

For more examples of why context matters, click here.

« Previous Page