Helping ordinary people learn to study the Bible
Greg Lanier has a helpful piece on “Resurrected Saints and Matthew’s Weirdest Passage,” where he addresses some common questions on Matthew 27:52-53:
The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many.
Lanier asks:
He looks closely at the text in its context to provide reasonable answers.
Perhaps you’ve heard reference to a “Bible-believing” church, or perhaps you’ve been told the Bible is the “Word of God” and can be trusted. But why is it that we can trust this book? And why would churches stake their reputation on believing it?
While I could give many reasons to support the essential trustworthiness of the Bible, perhaps the most important reason is simply that Jesus trusted it.
Luke concludes his narrative of Jesus’ life with a brief discussion between the risen Christ and his disciples (Luke 24:44-49). And in this narrative, Jesus’ parting words are words of trust in the Bible’s reliability.
Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”
Luke 24:44
Jesus believes not only that the Bible speaks, but that it speaks about him. He refers specifically to the three divisions of the Hebrew Bible (what we call the Old Testament): the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms (the Psalms were the most identifiable part of the poetic books, or “Writings”). And the things written in these three sections are about him.
In addition, those are the very words Jesus himself spoke to them while he was ministering among them. So the Hebrew Bible speaks about Jesus, and Jesus has spoken those same things about himself.
But what exactly do the Hebrew Scriptures say about Jesus, which he underscored in his own teaching?
Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.
Luke 24:45-47
The message of the Old Testament can be summarized in four points:
This is what the Bible says. This is what Jesus himself says.
But that’s not all. This message must go out, but how?
You are witnesses of these things. And behold, I am sending the promise of my Father upon you. But stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high.”
Luke 24:48-49
Now that Jesus has affirmed the message of the Old Testament—which lines up with his own message about himself—he calls his disciples to do something new. He wants them to bear witness of these things as well. He will send the promise and power of the Father to help with this task (Luke’s next volume, the book of Acts, will tell us that the Father’s promise and power is the indwelling Holy Spirit).
So what is Jesus (and Luke) referring to when he speaks of the apostolic witness to these things? Certainly this includes the marvelous preaching that will take place over the next generation, some of which is recorded in Acts. But it has particular reference not only to the preaching but especially to the writings of these witnesses. Matthew, John, and Peter were almost certainly present when Jesus spoke these words. Perhaps James and Jude were as well. Paul would later receive a similar commission (Acts 26:16)
So Jesus relies on the witness they will speak and write, a witness which will be empowered and directed by nothing short of the Spirit of the Father. A witness that we call the New Testament.
Jesus came with a message to proclaim about himself—who he was and what he came to do. This message was enshrined in the Old Testament, and it would be reinforced by the New Testament.
So why can we trust the Bible? Because Jesus did. He trusted the Old Testament, for it spoke about him. And he trusted the New Testament, because it would speak about him. “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you” (Luke 24:44).
Though Jesus has ascended to heaven and no longer walks the earth in the flesh (at least, for a time), he still speaks to us through the words of the Old and New Testaments. He trusted them, and therefore so can we.
Luke ends his gospel with a masterpiece of a story that has captured our imaginations for millennia. And the story is so vivid and well-told that, if we’re not careful, its artistry can easily distract us from its chief message. I imagine you’ve heard speculation about whether the “other disciple” is Cleopas’s wife. And perhaps you’ve wished to be part of the greatest Bible study of all time on that 6-mile walk. Or maybe you’ve wondered how Jesus could simply vanish into thin air. And maybe you’ve been inspired by the eagerness of the two disciples to return to Jerusalem “that same hour,” after their long walk home on that long day.
These matters are all worth considering, and they are rightly in the corporate consciousness of those who read this story today. But allow me to model how a few key principles will help us to penetrate the outer edges of the story to better grasp its main point. (In what follows, I seek to apply the principles of narrative plot structure explained in this post.)
With even an elementary grasp on how plot structure works, you know to look for the introduction of conflict. Everything before that conflict is simply setting the scene.
So we read, beginning at Luke 24:13, and we’re told of “two of them” going to Emmaus, about 7 miles from Jerusalem. They were talking about everything that had happened. While they were talking, Jesus himself draws near and goes with them. None of this is tense. There is no conflict yet, so all these details provide the setting for what is about to transpire.
Then Luke goes out of his way to tell us, “But their eyes were kept from recognizing him” (Luke 24:16). Now the story finally feels tense. Now there is a sense of uncertainty, of conflict between what is happening and what they perceive is happening.
In particular, we see a conflict between the disciples and their perceptions (your English teacher may have called this “man vs. himself”). The issue this story wants to address is: Can they recognize Jesus? And if so, how?
Now don’t get distracted. I can observe as well as you can that the passive voice is used: “their eyes were kept…” But don’t let that distract you into speculation on divine sovereignty vs. free will, nor into questions about why God would prevent them from recognizing Jesus. Much of the purpose of the passive voice is to avoid such matters entirely. Narrators typically use passive voice when they wish to direct your attention away from the person doing the action. They want you to gaze instead simply at what is happening to the object(s) of the action.
Skimming through the story for now, we should look for the climax. Where is the conflict (they can’t recognize Jesus) reversed? Luke does all the heavy lifting for us here, making it as clear as possible: “And their eyes were opened, and they recognized him” (Luke 24:31).
So everything between verses 16 and 31 serves as “rising action.” The events recounted here are heightening the tension and magnifying the conflict. And the material in verses 32-35 provide the resolution (32-34) and new setting (35). Remember, our opening setting involved two of them walking away from Jerusalem discussing the events surrounding Jesus’ resurrection. On account of the conflict, rising action, and climax, we have reached a new state of affairs where these two folks are no longer asking and wondering, but telling of what happened. And more particularly, they can proclaim “how he was known to them in the breaking of the bread” (Luke 24:35).
So our simple identification of conflict and climax strongly suggests that Luke’s main point in this episode has something to do with recognizing the risen Jesus. Of course, that’s not quite enough to go on just yet (it’s only a short phrase and not a truth proposition that ought to be believed or obeyed). But it sets us in the right direction.
We can look within the story’s action to discover that the testimony of the Hebrew Scripture plays a major role in such recognition. And there is something more going on than simply identifying Jesus by name in a lineup (bare “recognition” of Jesus’ name or face). Luke is communicating quite profoundly that they failed to recognize resurrection as being fundamental to the person and work of the Messiah. And this was not a problem of education but a problem of faith and of biblical interpretation (Luke 24:25-26).
That’s as far as I’ll go for now. I don’t want to simply tell you what I think the main point is. That would defeat the purpose of trying to help you figure it out for yourself.
But I trust my reflections here have done enough to show you that their eyes, while on the text, had been focused in all the wrong places. Perhaps we ought to avoid the same error when we study these Scriptures ourselves.
Any Christian article or book worth our attention will be faithful to God’s word. And one way that writers strive for that faithfulness is to quote and refer to the Bible.
These quotes and references are often called “proof texts.” For any reader of persuasive Christian writing, these are crucial elements of an argument. Proof texts are not mere sprinkles on the cupcake.
Because the Observation-Interpretation-Application (OIA) framework offers a grid for all communication, it’s no surprise that it lends us a hand in this matter. Just as there are two ways to outline a Bible passage, proof texts also come in two varieties.
In observation proof texts, a writer refers to a verse or passage and the reader needs only to observe the Bible to verify that the text supports the point. For example, a writer might cite John 5:18 to help establish the claim that Jesus refers to God as his father.
When a writer uses interpretation proof texts, their reader must do some interpretive work with the verse or passage cited. In this category, a writer might refer to the parable of the prodigal son to support a statement about Jesus correcting the Pharisees’ notion of loving God.
These different kinds of proof texts show up in many varieties of Christian writing. Here are two examples.
Take a look at the sixth question and answer from the historic Heidelberg Catechism. (I have not included all of the catechism’s proof texts here.)
Q. Did God, then, create man so wicked and perverse?
A. No, on the contrary, God created man good[1] and in His image, that is, in true righteousness and holiness,[3] so that he might rightly know God His Creator, heartily love Him, and live with Him in eternal blessedness to praise and glorify Him.
The reference [1] points to Gen 1:31; this is an observation proof text, because that verse says that God called all that he created (including man) “good.” The reference [3] points to Eph 4:24; this is an interpretation proof text, because Paul is writing about repentance and putting on the new self, not (explicitly) the original creation of man. It takes some interpretive work to agree that the phrase “true righteousness and holiness” as used in Eph 4:24 is being used accurately and legitimately in the catechism.
Here are additional examples from Tim Keller’s book The Meaning of Marriage.
Keller writes this when discussing the permanence of marriage.
The problem is not with marriage itself. According to Genesis 1 and 2, we were made for marriage, and marriage was made for us. Genesis 3 tells us that marriage, along with every other aspect of human life, has been broken because of sin. (Keller, page 44)
The references to the first three chapters of Genesis are interpretation proof texts. We cannot pluck the conclusions Keller asserts from the surface of those texts.
On the next page, however, when describing Jesus’s sacrifice, Keller writes this.
Jesus the Son, though equal with the Father, gave up his glory and took on our human nature (Philippians 2:5ff). (Keller, page 45)
This reference to the second chapter of Philippians is an observation proof text, because the words Keller writes come almost verbatim from those verses.
Knowing there are two different kinds of proof texts can help us discuss the dangers associated with each. The lines here are not always sharp and the categories are not always disjointed, but some distinctions can be helpful.
A common error when using an observation proof text is to miss the passage’s context. Most errors associated with context involve a quick, surface reading of the passage. But the obvious reading of a verse may not be the intended or accurate reading. (See this page for a multitude of examples.)
Interpretation proof texts are, unsurprisingly, prone to bad or incomplete interpretation. Sometimes writers assume too much of their readers; sometimes they simply misinterpret the Bible.
Neither type of proof text is inherently good or bad. And while neither type is better than the other, interpretation proof texts are the less stable of the two. They require more work and more care.
As we read Christian writing which attempts to persuade, let’s be aware of these two kinds of proof texts. We can often identify which type a writer is using by context clues.
When a writer uses an observation proof text, their claim should be easy to verify. Look up the reference, nod your head (hopefully), and move on. When the writer uses an interpretation proof text, we will need to do some interpretive work to see if their claim is supported by the text.
Knowing the distinction between these two kinds of proof texts won’t solve all our problems. This will help us to be better readers, able to know when (or if) a writer’s ideas square with God’s written revelation.
Disclosure: The Amazon links above are affiliate links, meaning that this website receives a small amount of money if you make a purchase after clicking one such link.
Here is a helpful devotional showcasing the difference between meaning and application. The author looks at Elisha’s “death in the pot” story in 2 Kings 4:38-41 to show how to both interpret (arriving at the author’s main point) and apply (connecting that truth to our own lives).
How many meanings does a passage of Scripture have? Sometimes we read a text and our minds race all over the Scripture with seemingly related texts and many possible meanings. Two of the challenges we can sometimes bring to our reading, interpretation, and subsequent understanding of Scripture are: 1) forgetting what Scripture principally teaches; and 2) confusing a text’s meaning with its application.
Proverbs is all about getting us moving in the right direction, toward the Lord and away from ourselves. Job shows us how to keep moving in that direction when everything falls apart. Ecclesiastes completes the triptych of wisdom books, inspiring us to persevere in that journey, despite how frustrating it may be to do so.
Ecclesiastes does not present its divisions nearly as obviously as Job and Proverbs do. The book could almost be considered a lab report, where the wise man presents his findings to a series of inquiries. So the chief markers to look for are the first-person signals, such as “I saw,” “I turned,” and “I considered.”
But with that said, the book’s sections appear to be tightly organized around topics. And within those topics, what appears at first to be linear and uncoordinated ramblings are actually carefully arranged to increase the rhetorical impact.
For example, after the thesis of Eccl 1:2-3, we get a series of four metaphors (Eccl 1:4-7) followed by four interpretations of the metaphors (Eccl 1:8-11). Then we get a narrative reflection (Eccl 1:12-14) with poetic conclusion (Eccl 1:15), followed by another narrative reflection (Eccl 1:16-17) with poetic conclusion (Eccl 1:18).
Working through the book to find those tightly structured units, organized around a single topic, yields the following divisions*:
Even if I’m not exactly right on the exact divisions, the most important thing in studying Ecclesiastes is to follow the argument. It is ultimately a book of truth and wisdom, which seeks to persuade you of truth and poke you into action (Eccl 12:11). So what is that argument?
The book states its chief conclusion (Eccl 1:2) and process (Eccl 1:3) up front. The process of looking for “gain,” or profit, under the sun yields the conclusion that everything is “vanity.” “Vanity” is a squishy concept, which we must grasp if we are to follow the argument. From here, I will use the plainer word “frustration,” which presumes the arguments I offered in this post.
So what are we able to get out of life? Frustration. An endless repetition of old things that will never satisfy. Such frustration is illustrated and explained vividly (Eccl 1:4-11), leading to the twin conclusions that we cannot fix anything (Eccl 1:15), and more knowledge produces more pain (Eccl 1:18). Inspiring, huh?
But look at what happens if we run from these hard truths (these sharp, pointy sticks – Eccl 12:11)? More pleasure won’t make the truth any easier (Eccl 2:1-11). Nor will more education (Eccl 2:12-17) or more honest work (Eccl 2:18-23). You cannot retreat from life’s frustration into your muscle cars, romance novels, academia, or entrepreneurship. None of these things will help.
The best we can hope for is a supernatural joy (Eccl 2:24-25), given as a free gift of grace (Eccl 2:26) by an all-powerful God (Eccl 3:1-22). God has made it so that the world would be a frustrating place, all so we would fear him (Eccl 3: 11, 14). Even the continuous presence of injustice where we would expect justice serves this purpose, of frustrating our wildest dreams and humbling our arrogant hearts before the Majesty of God on high (Eccl 3:16-22).
So what does this mean for life on earth for those who would fear God?
First, we can avoid the dangers of going it alone (Eccl 4:1-5:7). We don’t have to be lonely (Eccl 4:1-6), we can get help (Eccl 4:7-16), and we find such things as we listen to God more than we speak to him (Eccl 5:1-7).
Second, we can be content with what our sovereign God chooses to give us. We know love of money will never satisfy (Eccl 5:8-17)—because only God gives lasting contentment (Eccl 5:18-20)—and we can beware the pain of dissatisfaction (Eccl 6:1-7). We can ask ourselves some hard questions about how much control money really gives us over our future (Eccl 6:8-12).
Third, we can take a realistic and joy-inducing view of suffering. We learn wisdom about what is worth taking to heart (Eccl 7:1-13) and what is not worth taking to heart (Eccl 7:15-24). This equips us to consider the crooked works of our sovereign God so we might fear him (Eccl 7:14).
Fourth, we can stop being so surprised by how sinful humanity is. Our joy in fearing God enables to see that sin goes very wide (Eccl 7:25-29) and very high up (Eccl 8:1-17), but has a clear endpoint (Eccl 9:1-12). Death, the wage of sin, has a profound equalizing effect on all humanity (Eccl 9:1-6, 11-12), which in turn has a profound impact on the daily choices God-fearers will make (Eccl 9:7-10).
Fifth, we’ll be persuaded of the high value of wisdom relative to folly, when we live in God’s world, which always plays by God’s rules, even when the foolish try to make it otherwise (Eccl 9:13-10:20).
Finally, these truths about a frustrating world will inspire us to persevere in trying anything (Eccl 11:1-6)—it just might work!—and enduring to the end (Eccl 11:7-8). We can rejoice now (Eccl 11:9-10) if we remember what is on its way (Eccl 12:1-8).
So of course, the frustration of life ought to inspire us to fear God and keep his commandments (Eccl 12:13-14). But make no mistake, this frustration and this fear have a symbiotic relationship. Not only does the frustration produce fear, but the fear also increases the frustration, which in turn elevates the fear yet again.
The book of Ecclesiastes shows us there are no pat answers in matters pertaining to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. He does whatever he pleases, which often will look to us like “time and chance” (Eccl 9:11). But his word never fails, his promises are sure, and his commandments are not burdensome. When he sets his affection on you, he gives you the gift of irrational joy in the face of such frustration. Don’t ever give that up or take it for granted, for Jesus died and rose so the pure life of the age to come could invade our present age of frustration.
Christians ought to respond to their world in a way unlike anyone else, and Ecclesiastes explains why.
*I’m grateful to Joel Miles for the insights that led to this map of divisions.
For more interpretive walkthroughs of books of the Bible, click here.
I have a love/hate relationship with the longest chapter of the Bible. I love it, in part, because I know I’m supposed to and, in part, because it speaks extensively of the the word of God, which I love. But funny thing: Loving the Bible and loving Psalm 119 are not always mutually indwelling sentiments.
The fact of the matter is that Psalm 119 has a lot of lines. And even more words. I can handle many lines and many words if there is a linear argument or a compelling plot. But Psalm 119 has neither, so it typically feels like floating amongst the stars—please suspend your disbelief while I pretend to know what that would feel like—or breaststroking my way through a lake of peanut butter.
The nice thing is that the mastermind responsible for this interminable poem had the courtesy to start every verse within a stanza with the same letter, and to move through the alphabet from stanza to stanza, perhaps to make it easier to memorize. So if you’re a native speaker of ancient Hebrew, you’ll have an easier go at it. The rest of us covenantal immigrants, however, receive no such assistance, beyond those funny Hebrew shapes and transliterated words at the heading for each stanza. Bring on the peanut butter; I have more laps to swim today.
I’ve tried counting the number of distinct terms used for the Scripture. I’ve tried counting how many times each term is used. I’ve tried labelling verses as either praise/encouragement or lament/suffering. I’ve tried many times to read it in one sitting, and I’ve tried reading it a stanza or three at a time.
None of those techniques have helped me to grasp the message of the poem, in such a way that I have any confidence to have understood it. The practice that has helped me the most has been to try identifying a single main idea for each stanza, so as to see how each stanza then contributes to the overall effect. In the last 15 years, I’ve made four attempts at writing down main points for each stanza. Each time, I adjust it further and gain more confidence that I’m closer to the true main idea than I was the last time.
I will now share with you the fruit of my labor in this poem from the last few weeks. (You can also find this on the second tab of my Psalms spreadsheet, which you can access any time through the blog’s Resources page.) I would not consider myself to have mastered this psalm yet, but I trust I’m getting closer. I can at least say the poem makes more sense to me now than it did a few months ago, so progress has been made.
This poem sheds much light on the person and work of Jesus Christ, when we recognize that he is the “I” of the psalm. And as we are conformed to his image, we ought to strive to similar trust in both the Bible and the God who delivered it to us.
I invite your feedback on anything I’ve written here. I am eager to improve my understanding of this glorious poem, to inflame greater love for it. “I will also speak of your testimonies before kings and shall not be put to shame, for I find my delight in your commandments, which I love” (Ps 119:47-48).
| SECTION | THEME/SITUATION | |
| א | Aleph | Blessed are those who walk in Yahweh’s commands (Ps 119:1-8) |
| ב | Bet | Young people remain pure by storing up God’s word while they can (Ps 119:9-16) |
| ג | Gimel | God must deal bountifully for the word to take effect (Ps 119:17-24) |
| ד | Daleth | The struggle for strengthening in sorrow, from the scripture (Ps 119:25-32) |
| ה | He | I need divine help to persevere in God’s commandments (Ps 119:33-40) |
| ו | Vav | God’s love for me arouses my love for his commandments (Ps 119:41-48) |
| ז | Zayin | I can trust God’s words in a way I can’t trust anyone else’s words (Ps 119:49-56) |
| ח | Cheth | I turn to the word because through it, I inherit Yahweh (Ps 119:57-64) |
| ט | Teth | Your word is good, and I do it, because you are good (Ps 119:65-72) |
| י | Yod | He who made me will complete his work in me (Ps 119:73-80) |
| כ | Kaph | I persevere through persecution because I long for you to do what you have said (Ps 119:81-88) |
| ל | Lamed | God’s eternal word is fully consistent with how God made the world to work (Ps 119:89-96) |
| מ | Mem | The student who loves the law surpasses his teachers (Ps 119:97-104) |
| נ | Nun | Your word guides all of life (Ps 119:105-112) |
| ס | Samek | God’s word shapes my thinking toward evildoers to be like God’s (Ps 119:113-120) |
| ע | Ayin | God’s love and God’s word give me every expectation of vindication (Ps 119:121-128) |
| פ | Pe | I’m desperate for light from your word (Ps 119:129-136) |
| צ | Tsadhe | Your rules are righteous, and I do them, because you are righteous (Ps 119:137-144) |
| ק | Qoph | Your word occupies all of me all the time (Ps 119:145-152) |
| ר | Resh | Your law gives me hope for deliverance from adversaries (Ps 119:153-160) |
| ש | Sin/Shin | I rejoice in your words, even under fire, for you see all my ways (Ps 119:161-168) |
| ת | Tav | I pour forth praise for the God of this Bible (Ps 119:169-176) |
The journey back to school this year has been a difficult one in the U.S.. Parents have made difficult choices about how and where their children will learn, and school teachers and administrators have faced some of the thorniest challenges of their careers. A global pandemic will do that, I guess.
I am a teacher myself, and the COVID chaos has tamped down my usual affection for the back-to-school season. Normally I love to gather supplies, feel a temporary sense of organization and schedule, and look ahead with excitement about what the fall has to offer. This year, however, I felt tired before classes began.
Despite my fatigue, I can’t shake the sense of early-fall possibility. Like the new year, this part of the calendar offers a new start.
Christians often start read-through-the-Bible plans in early January. We pour over schedules for books and chapters; some plans even build “make-up days” into each month.
We give a lot less attention to planning out our Bible study. This may be because our Bible study rhythms are tied to our church or small group. It may be because we have laid this important discipline to the side.
Today, I’m offering you a chance to plan out your Bible study. If you aren’t regularly studying the Bible, there’s no better time to start.
So join the children this fall. Head back to class. I invite you to design your own plan for studying the Bible this year.
In case you need a model, I’ve provided one below. There’s nothing special about my plan other than it’s already made. Feel free to modify mine or start from scratch.
If studying the Bible sounds overwhelming or like a task reserved for professional clergy, I understand. Some people write and talk about Bible study so that it seems academic, dry, and intimidating. It doesn’t have to be this way!
This web site (Knowable Word) exists to help ordinary people learn how to study the Bible. If you need a quick way to prepare for your class, you’ve come to the right place!
I’d suggest you start with our summary page and then dig into more details. There are three ingredients to the age-old method we promote: observe, interpret, and apply.
When we study the Bible, we must first observe what is written. We must take note of the details and how they fit together. Then we interpret the text. We try to understand the meaning of the passage, and we search for the author’s main point. Finally, we apply the truth of the Bible. If we remain unchanged, our Bible study is incomplete.
Since the academic year usually lasts for about eight months, I’ve designed the class below to last from early September though the end of April, with some time off around the holidays. This long view will allow me to suggest a long book—Isaiah—for our study. (If you are designing your own class, you could choose a different long book or opt for several shorter books.)
The plan below begins with three weeks to do nothing but read through Isaiah as many times as possible. The Isaiah portion of many audio Bibles is just less than four hours. This means that an average reader should be able to read all of Isaiah three times during those three weeks in just 35 minutes per day. Rereading a book is the best way to understand its structure.
In your whole-book survey, put together a book overview. Try to outline the book as you go. These initial readings should not be passive!
At the end of the plan, I’ve scheduled some time for putting your thoughts together. In a high school or college class, your instructor might assign you a paper at the end of the term. This isn’t just busywork; writing or presenting your findings is a great way to help you process and organize all that you’ve learned. If you have a blog yourself, consider writing about your “class.” (Send us a link here at Knowable Word so we can read it!) You might even consider writing a guest post on this blog.
Here’s the week-by-week schedule. Adopt and adapt and modify to fit your needs.
In a chaotic year, God is constant and sovereign. He has revealed himself in his word. Let’s take advantage of this time to draw closer to him.
If you give yourself to careful, regular Bible study over the next 35 weeks, imagine how much you’ll grow in your understanding! Imagine how much you’ll change!
Last week I observed a few things and asked a few questions about whether the parable of the ten minas (Luke 19:11-27) might have a different point than the parable of the talents (Matt 25:14-30). I’ve already discussed how Matthew’s parable fits into the context of the author’s larger argument. This week, I’ll walk through Luke’s train of thought to show how different his point is from Matthew’s.
I’ve already written on the main point of Luke’s gospel as a whole and on how to navigate its middle chapters (Luke 9:51-19:27). To save space here, I won’t repeat what I wrote there, but will assume you have caught up on that background.
The first thing I’ll point out is that the parable of the ten minas is the very last thing in Luke’s travel narrative. The very next episode has Jesus going up into Jerusalem on the back of a colt. So this parable concludes not only the fourth sub-section, which focuses on the timing of the kingdom—when will these things regarding the kingdom take place? It also concludes the entire travelogue. This parable is the capstone and climax of Luke’s meandering description of life in Jesus’ new kingdom.
In this fourth division of the travel narrative, the presenting question is “When will the kingdom of God come?” (Luke 17:20). And Jesus clearly responded that it “is in the midst of you” (Luke 17:21). I understand that the translation of that last phrase is hotly debated, but regardless of the variety of options, all suggest that the kingdom is here and now. It is tangible and present. Jesus goes on to suggest that, if you can’t see it now, you will not be able to see it in the future either (Luke 17:22). Though there are signs and suggestions for then (Luke 17:23-24), make absolutely sure you don’t miss the significance of what is taking place now (Luke 17:25).
So Jesus tells them how to prepare for it (Luke 18:1-8). He executes the admission and dismissal of its citizens (Luke 18:9-17). He paints a picture of the current behaviors of those who look ahead to eternal life (Luke 18:18-30).
So in short, Jesus acknowledges that there is surely something yet to come. But in this section of Luke, he resists the impulse to direct people’s gaze to the horizon. He’s redrawing their attention to the here and now.
Then in Luke 18:31, Jesus claims, on the way to Jerusalem, that “everything that is written about the Son of Man by the prophets will be accomplished.” This includes being delivered to the Gentiles, mocked, treated shamefully, spit upon, flogged, killed, and resurrected. The disciples simply can’t see it, however (Luke 18:34).
But a blind man can see it. Though his eyes cannot yet see, the eyes of his heart can see the Son of David (heir to the throne) passing by right in front of him (Luke 18:35-43). And astonishingly, Jericho’s chief tax collector wants to see it (Luke 19:3).
The sight of Jesus changes Zacchaeus forever. One greeting, a meal at his home, and a modicum of reflection was all he needed to turn his life around (Luke 19:8). This demonstration of repentance (compare with Luke 3:12-13) provokes Jesus to make a shocking declaration: “Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost” (Luke 19:9-10).
Jesus spoke all about feasting with Abraham in the kingdom (Luke 13:28-30). Those who cannot recognize the master of the house of Israel will likewise go unrecognized by him (Luke 13:24-27). And here he is, in flesh and blood. He grants sight to the blind and calls Zacchaeus by name.
Here now is the “salvation” he’s been talking about through the entire book. That “salvation” is the fruit of the kingdom, which is currently present among them. The Son of Man seeks the lost, just like a shepherd with a lost sheep, a woman with a lost coin, and a father with a lost son (Luke 15:1-32). Now that salvation has come today on the unlikeliest of candidates. That fact is what spurs the people’s anticipation that the kingdom of God will appear when Jesus gets to Jerusalem (Luke 19:11).
The air is electric, and energy is at an all-time high. They wonder if this is it, if this is what they’ve been waiting for. If salvation is really present, right in front of them, embodied as a rabbi from Nazareth who has an awful lot to say about the way things ought to be.
And let’s not forget what the prophets had to say about this moment in history. Jesus said the prophets would be fulfilled as he came to Jerusalem (Luke 18:31).
“Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me. And the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the Lord of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire and like fullers’ soap…
“Then I will draw near to you for judgment. I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, against the adulterers, against those who swear falsely, against those who oppress the hired worker in his wages, the widow and the fatherless, against those who thrust aside the sojourner, and do not fear me, says the Lord of hosts.”
Malachi 3:1-5
Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion!
Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem!
Behold, your king is coming to you;
righteous and having salvation is he,
humble and mounted on a donkey,
on a colt, the foal of a donkey…“My anger is hot against the shepherds,
and I will punish the leaders;
for the Lord of hosts cares for his flock, the house of Judah,
and will make them like his majestic steed in battle.“I will strengthen the house of Judah,
Zechariah 9:9-10:12
and I will save the house of Joseph.
I will bring them back because I have compassion on them,
and they shall be as though I had not rejected them,
for I am the Lord their God and I will answer them.
So when Luke brings the travel narrative to an end by having Jesus tell a parable about a God, the divine King, returning to inspect his people and temple to bring judgment on the shepherds of Israel—the words are loaded with centuries of anticipation. Who can stand before him when he appears?
It is no coincidence that the first thing Jesus does in Jerusalem is inspect the temple (Luke 19:45-46).
Luke has spared no expense to tell Theophilus that Jesus sat in judgment over his contemporary generation of Jewish leadership. He pronounces judgment on them time and again. This judgment is something in the future, yet to come. But it will not be long. It will take place within the current generation’s lifetime (Luke 11:49-51; 12:42-48; 13:3, 5, 9, 28, 34-35).
Subsequent to the parable of the minas, Jesus will continue presenting himself in the spirit and power of the prophets, proclaiming condemnation on the corrupt shepherds of Israel (Luke 19:41-44; 21:32). Like Jeremiah, he weeps over the fate of his generation. Like Isaiah, he describes political and social upheaval by means of apocalyptic language and cosmic metaphors.
So where does this data lead? I believe we have good reason to read the parable of the talents primarily as a description of the judgment that will take place at Jesus’ second coming (“That day”: Matt 24:36-25:46). The parable of the talents seems to direct our attention to “that day,” when humanity will be sorted for either eternal punishment or eternal life (Matt 25:46).
But the parable of the ten minas hits much closer. In context, it appears that Jesus speaks primarily of his first coming and what is about to happen to and through him at Jerusalem. The reckoning has come for the Jewish nation and its leaders. Those who have been serving faithfully, and who recognize their master, will be rewarded with cities (Luke 19:17-18). Those who have not, and who do not, will either have their deposit taken from them (Luke 19:24) or face the executioner’s sword (Luke 19:27).
For those reading this who are immigrants to the covenants of promise (Gentiles) and not natural-born citizens (Jews): Do not become proud. For if God was willing to wipe out a generation to make room for the Gentiles to enter, will he not do the same thing with another generation who presumes upon his kindness and drifts from loyalty to him (Rom 11:17-24)? Though the parable speaks primarily about something that’s already occurred (Jesus’ first coming), it still has serious and sobering ramifications for those who would serve the King in any generation.
Reading the Bible in its proper context is so important that I (apparently) cannot stop writing about it. I’ve explained the dangers of ignoring context, and I’ve shown that we can still share Scripture responsibly.
I know I am arguing for a more difficult path. Verse-of-the-day calendars are easier and more inspiring. Studying the Bible takes work.
I hear other objections too. For example, it’s possible to conclude something true from the Bible despite missing a verse’s context. What’s the big deal? Only a real stick-in-the-mud would get worked up about this, right?
In our Context Matters series, we have tackled passages where the popular interpretation can be found in the Bible, just not (as we argue) from that passage.
Many people take the “where two or three are gathered in my name” verse as a promise by Jesus to be present with a small group of his followers when they seek him. In fact, God promises in many places never to leave his children, but this passage is about church leadership and the removal of a member.
So, it is possible to arrive at a legitimate destination through less-than-careful means. But this should make us praise God for his grace, not continue on in recklessness.
When we share portions of the Bible with others, we are not only sharing our conclusions. We are sharing our method. We are teaching people how to use God’s holy word.
So, when we pluck out a verse and tack it to our email signatures, we’re modeling this behavior. We’re encouraging onlookers to use the Bible in this à la carte way. If we inspire people to walk blindfolded, some of them just might do so on a cliff. And quickly.
You might not see the effects first-hand. But using Bible verses out of context can have damnable consequences.
Jehovah’s Witnesses differ from Christians in important doctrinal matters, some of which are the direct result of ignoring Scriptural context.
This article is not intended to be a complete refutation of Jehovah’s Witness theology, so we will look at just two examples.
Jehovah’s Witnesses agree that Jesus is the Son of God but do not believe that he is God Almighty. Here is one of their arguments.
Jesus’ early followers did not view him as being equal to Almighty God. For example, the apostle Paul wrote that after Jesus was resurrected, God “exalted him [Jesus] to a superior position.” Obviously, Paul did not believe that Jesus was Almighty God. Otherwise, how could God exalt Jesus to a superior position?
As with many other doctrines, this interpretation depends in part on the translation Jehovah’s Witnesses use. A more common way to translate the relevant phrase in Philippians 2:9 is “God has highly exalted him.” But even if we put this quibble aside, we reach quite a different conclusion when we consider this passage in context.
Paul writes that Jesus “was in the form of God” but “did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped” (Phil 2:6). Instead, he “emptied himself,” “being born in the likeness of men” (Phil 2:7). So, Jesus refused to grasp his God-nature tightly, and as a humble servant he took on human nature.
Paul is not making an argument against the divine nature of Jesus in Philippians 2. He is showing that the sacrificial love he urges was demonstrated by God himself in the incarnation and life of Jesus.
In addition to theological matters, Jehovah’s Witnesses also play fast and loose with Scripture when it comes to ethical considerations. Consider the following argument they make for why they do not go to war.
Jesus’ disciples obey his command to be “no part of the world” by remaining strictly neutral in political matters. (John 17:16) They do not protest against military actions or interfere with those who choose to serve in the armed forces.
A quick look at the verse in question reveals that Jesus is giving a description, not a command. His disciples are “not of the world, just as [he is] not of the world” (John 17:16).
Further, Jesus is not praying that his disciples would stay out of political matters. In the previous breath, Jesus asks his Father, “I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one” (John 17:15). Just two verses later, Jesus prays, “As you sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world” (John 17:18). Jesus wants his disciples in the world, but protected.
It is not my goal to argue anything specific about politics. I simply observe that, while making their argument, Jehovah’s Witnesses yank this phrase entirely out of its context.
It might seem bold or encouraging to share a Bible verse out of context with your followers or friends on social media.
Please remember: There’s a better way! You are not only sharing God’s word, you’re showing others how to handle it. And handling the Bible out of context is a dangerous business, potentially leading to heresy and hell itself.
Can there be any doubt that context matters?
