Interpretation | Knowable Word

How Nineteenth-Century Americans Used the Bible to Support Both Slavery and Abolition

March 25, 2022 By Peter Krol

You might be aware of the fact that many Christians used the Bible to support southern slavery in early U.S. history. Did you also know that many people used the Bible to support abolition? How is it possible that groups of people can all believe in the basic truth that the Bible is God’s word, communicating truth to us, and yet reach opposite conclusions on such huge issues?

We can see the same thing playing out with respect to many other issues today: customs for worship, preaching, and church life. Doctrines surrounding sacraments, church government, salvation, and the moral law. Political issues such as immigration, financial policy, and foreign intervention. Social issues such as abortion, race relations, homosexuality, and gender ideology. On nearly any issue, it is not difficult to find people who claim to believe the Bible, who also make use of the Bible to support contradictory positions from one another.

Why is that? How can the same book be used for so many contradictory perspectives?

An Answer Worth Considering

While there is a complex range of factors contributing to such a complex situation, there is at least one factor we ought to give more attention to: How are people reading and understanding the Bible? What assumptions do they bring to this ancient book that shape the very methods by which they employ it in support of one position or another?

For example, one person presumes that the most literal, surface reading of a given text ought to be the most persuasive reading. Another person wants to string together a collection of verses that all appear to address a particular topic. Another focuses on their systematic theological system as the governing framework for reading any part of the Bible. Another wants to read the text the same way the heroes of old (or a subset of heroes of old) read it. Yet another wants to read the Bible in tandem with other ancient or modern texts that seem to be saying similar things.

My point is simply that we must not only observe the fact that someone makes use of the Bible to support a position. We must also take note of how they are using the Bible to support a position.

A Conversation Worth Your Time

The thing that spawned these reflections within me was a conversation I just listened to, published by the Mars Hill Audio Journal as one of their Friday Features. The host, Ken Myers, interviewed historian Mark Noll regarding his research on how nineteenth-century Americans went about using the Bible in support of either slavery or abolition in their debates. For now, you can find the interview here. I recommend listening to it as soon as you can, as I cannot promise how long it will remain on their site.

Noll discusses how Christians on both sides of the slavery debate resorted to “proof-texting” to make their case, yet the pro-slavery side tended to be better at it (i.e. more persuasive). Many of the proof-texted arguments in favor of the institution of slavery had no clear rebuttal, and as a result many abolitionists were forced to confess that, while the Bible permits the institution of slavery, they just couldn’t support the American expression of it. This led the pro-slavery camp to instill fear that abolition was simply the beginning of the slippery slope toward denying biblical authority at all.

There were a few shining (abolitionist) stars along the way, however, who were able to demonstrate abolitionist conclusions from biblical texts, through careful contextual study of those texts, tracing the unfolding revelation of God over time. In that day, however, proof-texting was believed to be the best way to arrive at truth, so such careful theological and contextual arguments often went unnoticed or unregarded.

I am confident I am not doing full justice to Noll’s research. So again, I commend to you the recording of his conversation with Myers for more detailed nuance and explanation. I commend it to you highly, as an example of why it is crucial that we not merely quote Bible verses but study them in context so as to grasp the larger arguments of the original authors. How we study the Bible matters.

Do Your Best

March 18, 2022 By Peter Krol

My third commandment for commentary usage is:

You shall make every effort to form interpretive conclusions or questions about interpretations before consulting a commentary.

Is this because I think you won’t need any help?

The Short Answer

No.

A More Nuanced Answer

I’m not suggesting that you utterly bar yourself from the insights of commentaries early in your Bible study process. Last week, I suggested that different kinds of questions need different methods for finding the answers. That’s why this third commandment says that you shall make every effort to form interpretive conclusions or questions about interpretations before consulting a commentary.

In other words, if your question is more observational in nature, then go ahead and consult a commentary. Find quickly those answers ye seek. Do you just need a map? Do you need a historical tidbit? Do you not remember a proper name? Is a particular term unfamiliar to you? Just do it. Take a look; get some help.

This third commandment focuses on the process of interpretation, after observation (or in light of it). And my exhortation to you is to learn how to do the work for yourself. Paul told Timothy to “do your best” in his handling of Scripture (2 Tim 2:15). The standard for evaluation is not getting everything perfect, but for personal progress to be visible (1 Tim 4:15).

So to make progress, you need to learn how to wrestle with the text. You need foster your curiosity and learn how to investigate. You need to gain more confidence from the text than from the experts.

So I encourage you to do your own work first. Observe and interpret, all the way up to the point where you have a guess at the author’s main point. Once there, you’re in the best position to read and consider what others have said about your text. You’ll have firm footing from which to evaluate what they say, testing everything, that you may hold fast to what is good and reject what is bad (1 Thess 5:20-22).

Six Reasons You Should Have Your Own Interpretive Ideas Before Consulting a Commentary

“The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him” (Prov 18:17). The first commentary you read will likely seem to be right. Unless it’s not your first time reflecting that deeply on the text.
Commentators often disagree with one another. Why shouldn’t you be able to disagree with them when necessary?
Commentators often change their minds from their earlier writings to their later writings. They are constantly re-evaluating and re-thinking their conclusions based on new insights into the text. So why shouldn’t you do the same with their conclusions?
It is more important for you to make progress in your ability to handle the word than for you to have perfect answers for any given text. If you can get answers only by reading a commentary, what happens if you lose access to your commentaries? Or can’t find a decent one for the next book you study?
If you teach, people will ask you questions the commentary may not have answered. If you haven’t learned to answer your own questions from the text, how will you help others learn how to do that?
Over-reliance or premature reliance on commentaries comes dangerously close to establishing those commentators as a high priestly class through whom your relationship with God is mediated. Jesus died to tear the veil and give you access to the very mind and heart of God through his word.

For the Record

And less you misunderstand my perspective, let me repeat: Once you have a guess at the author’s main point, consult some commentaries! You should welcome the help. It would not be wise to cut yourself off from the trained insights of others to guide you toward even further progress. Do your best.

The Danger of Quoting Verses

March 16, 2022 By Peter Krol

Brandon Smith has a helpful piece on the danger of what he calls “stacking verses,” where we quote verses in isolation for inspiration or to support a particular point.

Some modern examples include Instagram posts and coffee mugs that quote Philippians 4:13 or Jeremiah 29:11. In both cases, these verses appear to promise material, physical, or even eternal blessing from God. However, in both cases, the context of the passage reveals that these verses are a promise of provision amid suffering.
Stacking up these verses might be innocent for some, but this is also the root of the dangerous prosperity gospel that has infiltrated the global church. From as early as Jesus’s ministry to our world today, verse-stacking has plagued the church and brought about countless negative consequences.

The devil quoted a Bible verse to Jesus, attempting to persuade him to test his Father. Ancient heretics had plenty of Bible verses to support their hell-bound doctrines. Sadly, many continue the same practice today.

The problem is not merely in quoting individual verses. It is the danger of quoting verses independent of their context and misaligned with the original author’s intention. Smith provides two interpretive convictions that will help us to avoid much of the danger:

The Bible is a coherent theological book before it is anything else.
The Bible is a canon—a set of 66 books that serve as the rule or measuring rod of our theology.

You should check out his piece to see how he fleshes this all out. I commend his article to you.

Check it out!

Commentaries are Not for When Bible Study is Hard

March 11, 2022 By Peter Krol

A few weeks back, I proposed ten commandments for commentary usage. Those commandments arose from further reflection on the maxim “not whether but when.” I would now like to take a few weeks to expand on each of the “commandments.”

Commandment #1 (“You shall not avoid or ignore commentaries from belief in self-sufficiency to study the Scriptures”) was thoroughly addressed in the “not whether but when” post, so I will not delve into it any further. Let’s now pick up with commandment #2:

You shall not pick up a commentary as soon as Bible study is “hard.”

The Problem

I’m not embarrassed to admit it: Bible study is hard. If we have ever communicated otherwise on this blog, I repent in dust and ashes.

The Bible was written long ago, to people in cultures very different than ours. It was written in languages no longer spoken to address situations no longer extant. The worldviews and assumptions of the Bible’s authors were radically distinct from those held by most today. Even the Bible’s “easier” terminology consists of concepts that prompt very different images today than they would have prompted to the original authors and audiences (for example: church, faith, preach, law, gospel, righteousness, wisdom, salvation, etc.). The Bible’s poetry uses metaphors in a very different way than we use metaphors today. The Bible’s narratives refer to places most of us have never been to. The Bible’s discourses refute arguments people often aren’t arguing about any more.

I’m trying not to overstate the differences, because it is certainly the case that very little has changed in terms of the general human plight and human experience from ancient to postmodern times. But the fact remains that we need a lot of help to understand the people, cultures, situations, concerns, and arguments of the Bible.

A Multi-Faceted Solution

Before running immediately to commentaries when Bible study is hard, I find it critical to distinguish between the different kinds of interpretive questions that can arise.

What? questions define the terms. (“What did he mean?”)
Why? questions uncover the author’s purpose. (“Why did he say that?”)
So What? questions draw out the implications. (“So what does he want me to do about it?”)

In general, the first category of questions often complete your observation. This category involves questions such as:

What is Passover?
Where is Ephesus?
Who was Abraham?
What OT passage is this NT text quoting from?
What is propitiation?

And for such “what” questions—where you simply need to get something defined, clarified, referenced, or mapped out—a commentary or study Bible may be your best ally. Go right ahead and work to close that knowledge gap between the original audience and yourself, by checking out a helpful resource that can quickly put you in their shoes. There is not much reason to hold back from using commentaries on such questions.

But the other categories of questions warrant a different approach. When you have a “why” question (such as “why does the author say such and such?” or “why does he tell this story in this way?”), you are better off not running to commentaries too quickly. The “why” questions are the heart of interpretation, and their main purpose is to help you figure out the author’s main point or primary argument. If that is hard for you to do, you are in good company. But the solution is not to find “the answers” in a commentary or study Bible. If you do that, how will you be able to evaluate whether that commentator’s answers are true (strong, reasonable, probable, wise) or not? Your best help is to learn how to follow the argument of the text itself. That will give you the best measuring rod against which to evaluate competing interpretations given by others.

And when you have a “so what” question, working toward the implications and applications for you or the people you want to teach, no commentator will know your situation better than you do. Sure, commentaries can help suggest broad ideas or topics for potential application. But they won’t be able to connect the text to your life, today. When your “so what” questions are hard to answer, the best solution is further reflection on the main point, along with prayerful reflection on how to correlate it with the rest of Scripture, and especially with the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Bible study is hard. And using commentaries just because Bible study is hard might not be the solution you’re looking for. In fact, it has the potential for grounding you deeper and deeper in a web of presumption from which you struggle to get untangled.

Commentaries: Not Whether But When

February 11, 2022 By Peter Krol

Against Commentaries?

One common objection to the OIA method of Bible study is that it trains people to think they can interpret the Bible on their own, in a vacuum, apart from history, tradition, or scholarship. Just me and my Bible; that’s all I need. And the more exciting and novel my interpretation, the better.

I can understand when folks feel they must register this objection. On this blog, we’ve certainly gone out of our way to advise against becoming a commentary junkie. We’ve labeled them “false authorities.” We’ve likened them to gasoline, which is poisonous if you drink it straight instead of sloshing it into a working engine.

And sadly, some folks have heard us advising them to avoid commentaries altogether. Despite recommending them, listing them among our main tools, and labeling avoidance of them as the #1 mistake with respect to them.

By No Means!

So let me affirm with frank directness: I’m not sure I could study the Bible well without commentaries. I commend, with utmost fervency, the practice of utilizing them. And I believe that the person who has access to quality commentaries but refuses to make use of them is playing the fool.

So I agree that rejection of commentaries is an error to avoid. However, my experience has bellowed at me that a far more frequent commentary error is not their disuse but their misuse. In the name of staying connected with Christian tradition and avoiding me-and-Jesus-ism, masses of otherwise thoughtful followers of Jesus engage repeatedly in the unexamined and unreflective commentary binge. All rise! The expert has entered the room and is about to divulge The Truth.

Therefore, the flag we’ve chosen to wave on this blog—more than its sibling flag which likewise deserves to waltz with the wind—is the flag of suspicious caution toward commentary usage. The flag of “but what does the text say?” The flag of “observe and interpret the text and don’t merely observe and interpret the commentary.”

Not Whether But When

In short, my recommendation regarding commentaries boils down to the maxim: not whether but when.

I do not dispute whether we ought to make use of commentaries. By all means, yes, yes, yes! In fact, find a few commentators you have especially benefitted from, and buy everything they’ve written. John Stott is one of those for me. As is Douglas Sean O’Donnell, David Helm, and James B. Jordan. I’ve been recently persuaded that Dale Ralph Davis could potentially join this little club of mine, so I’ve begun snapping up his wares whenever I find them on sale, though I have yet to actually read him. Just take note: Whether you would agree 100% with any commentator’s conclusions is utterly beside the point. But more on that in a moment.

The main issue, as I see it, is not whether but when. When do you read your commentaries? When do you shift your gaze away from the text to attend to what others have said about the text? When do you go rooting for help with thorny issues, or looking for answers to your sincere questions?

And that “when” question is intimately connected to its why. Why do you read your commentaries? If it is to figure out what the proper interpretation of the passage is, we need to do some more work. If it’s because you feel stuck and you still need some good material to lead your next small group, you’ll be better off going back to basics. If it’s because you’re just not sure you can be trusted to understand or teach the text, and you need more expert affirmation to instill confidence, then we need to talk further about whose approval matters most to the student or teacher of the Bible (2 Tim 2:15).

The Implications of Interaction

Here is a simple suggestion: We ought to read commentaries for the same reason we ought to have small groups: Interaction. We need community to study the Bible. And that community can come through the written works of scholars just as much as through the spoken conversation of a small group of people.

And if commentaries are most helpful in getting us to interact with others over the text, commentaries are therefore most beneficial when they are treated as conversation partners and not as the definitive word on a passage. For this reason, I’m not terribly concerned with identifying “good” or “bad” commentaries, in the sense of “which ones line up with my denomination or interpretive tradition?” And I don’t have to buy into everything a commentator says or stands by. If the role of a successful commentary is to further the conversation by driving me into closer examination of the text, I can benefit just as much from a commentator I agree with as from a commentator I disagree with. Sometimes, I’ve even learned more from liberal commentators (who can be shockingly honest about what they observe in a text and about what questions they have about it) than from conservative ones (who sometimes don’t observe as closely when a dearly held theological tradition may be at stake).

As a result, my personal definition of what makes a commentary good or bad is: How much that commentary stimulates me to examine the text more closely and understand the author’s argument more clearly. Whenever I find commentaries that do this to a high degree, I add them to my list of recommendations.

Watch Your Timing

So when is the best time to read a commentary? Not first thing, and not in the first nanosecond a question or roadblock occurs to you, but after you have studied the passage for yourself. How far should you have gone in your study before you read a commentary? I speak for myself and not as a command from the Lord, but I have attempted to discipline myself to refrain from employing commentaries until I have a concrete guess as to the author’s main point in the passage.

Crafting a main point is a major milestone in the OIA process, as it represents the climax of the interpretation phase. From there, we want to connect that main point to the person and work of Jesus Christ before we move into application to head, heart, and hands, inward and outward. But before I start landing strong gospel connections or getting into application, I want to invite skilled conversation partners into the discussion to help me shape and hone what I’ve come up with.

And I devour commentaries that will improve my own observation and interpretation of the text, by showing me how to observe and interpret that text more effectively than I have done myself.

Conclusion

Please understand that the OIA method of Bible study is not about getting away from 2,000 years of history and coming up with novel interpretations all by oneself. Commentaries are crucial, as long as we use them the right way and at the right time.

The Bible’s One Story

January 26, 2022 By Peter Krol

Hugh Whelchel tells the story of the entire Bible as a play in four acts: Creation, Fall, Redemption, and Restoration. He then says:

This four-chapter gospel is not just a way to read the Bible. It’s the framework through which we live our lives. Everyone sees the world through a unique view or perspective, a worldview. As Christians, we see the world through the perspective of the Bible. Think of the four-chapter gospel like a set of prescription glasses that helps us focus our actions and decisions on God’s great story of his creation. When we live with a blurry prescription for a long time, our eyes adjust. Life out of focus becomes routine, and we struggle to realize we could be seeing something more. With a new set of glasses, everything becomes clearer. The four-chapter gospel is just that – the sharpest, most complete view of life that is true for all of humanity. It serves as the most accurate prescription to view and understand the world.

Sadly, we often truncate this story merely to the acts of Fall and Redemption, which leaves us with a thin and uncompelling narrative or explanation for human existence. But the story God has given us in Scripture is a beautiful, glorious story that far outshines all others. Whelchel’s piece is well worth your consideration as you aim to keep the big picture in view.

Check it out!

Song of Songs: The Intoxication of True Love in its Time

January 14, 2022 By Peter Krol

When the Lord God made the heavens and the earth, there was only one thing that he declared was not good: the man’s being alone. So God promptly invented romantic love, and his word is very clear about how such love works. It begins with the problem of loneliness, which is not a result of sin but simply a result of being a created being. It proceeds when boy meets girl, and things start to feel really awkward. And the only way to make progress is with poetry, song, and celebration. The World’s Greatest Song (aka The Song of Songs) is here to help.

Literary Markers

The poetry in the Song of Songs flits about from character to character, as the woman, the man, and the daughters of Jerusalem all lift their voices in an intricate back-and-forth befitting the subject matter. As a result, the poetry can appear quite mysterious and dense. Thankfully, the poet makes use of two refrains that serve, with minor variations, as paint blazes on the trail to help us follow his train of thought.

Each refrain occurs three times in the book. The first refrain is “I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, that you not stir up or awaken love until it pleases” (Song 2:7, 3:5, 8:4). The second refrain is “My beloved is mine, and I am his” (Song 2:16, 6:3, 7:10). These two refrains provide the chief applications to the unmarried (do not awaken) and the married (join in mutual possession). And in addition, they help us to mark many of the book’s divisions.

In addition, the flow of most of the poems moves from separation to union (or reunion). The arcs of each section follow this general pattern where the lovers begin apart from one another and move toward one another to be together.

Walkthrough

The chief audience for the Song of Songs is the virgin daughters of Jerusalem, who are addressed all throughout the book. In this way, this book is something of a complement to the book of Proverbs, whose chief audience is the young men of Israel. This doesn’t mean that men have nothing to gain from the Song, but it helps us to understand why the woman is in the spotlight for much of the book.

After the book’s title (Song 1:1), we’re immersed right into the intoxicating nature of love, which is better than wine (Song 1:2-4). Then in the first main poem, the couple delights in the playful back-and-forth of getting to know one another and finding ways to spend time together as their attraction develops (Song 1:5-2:3). As they draw close, however, and move into a place of profound intimacy (Song 2:4-6), the woman emerges from the chamber to warn the virgins of Jerusalem not to awaken such love in themselves until the time is right (Song 2:7).

The second poem (Song 2:8-3:5) focuses on the wooing and courtship, but completely from the woman’s perspective. She describes the man coming to see her (Song 2:8-9), before quoting what he says—or what she hopes he’ll say?—to win her heart for life (Song 2:10-15). She longs for them to achieve mutual possession of one another (Song 2:16) but must still say goodbye at the end of the evening and send him back to his home (Song 2:17). This leads her to dream of what life would be like without him—a reality she cannot bear to accept (Song 3:1-4). Upon consummation of their love for one another, she emerges once more to adjure the maidens of Jerusalem not to awaken such love until the time is right (Song 3:5).

The third poem (Song 3:6-5:1) opens with a question: Who is this coming up from the wilderness, perfumed with myrrh and frankincense? (Commentaries will point out that this question is identical in wording to Song 8:5, and is most likely asking who and not what.) We will get the answer momentarily, when the naked woman is covered in myrrh and frankincense (Song 4:6). But first, the poet wishes to take a gander at the lavish and luscious bed of Solomon, “inlaid with love by the daughters of Jerusalem.” Yeah, that bed has every appearance of a seedy honeymoon suite in Las Vegas, where the “love” comes and goes with each new addition to the harem. But in contrast to the polygamous, cheap lust of Solomon, the undefiled sexuality of the Song’s couple is a glorious paradise. No shame. No fear. No violation. Sheer beauty and delight (Song 4:1-5:1). It was worth it to wait for this.

The fourth poem (Song 5:2-6:3) describes the sanctifying effect of conflict. The opening scene shows that the honeymoon has definitely come to an end, as the couple’s miscues lead to sexual tension and disappointment. But conflict is part of God’s plan to make relationships stronger than they were before. That sanctifying strengthening occurs when the daughters of Jerusalem compel the woman to answer two questions: What makes your man so great (Song 5:9-16)? And where is this relationship heading (Song 6:1-3)? In other words, now that you’ve had this fight, should we expect divorce papers? Is it all over?

The fifth poem (Song 6:4-10) provides a brief intermission highlighting the woman’s uniqueness.

You are beautiful and awesome (Song 6:4-7)
- Many queens, concubines, and virgins (Song 6:8)
  - My dove is unique and pure (Song 6:9a)
- Many queens, concubines, and virgins (Song 6:9b)
You are beautiful and awesome (Song 6:10)*

The sixth poem (Song 6:11-8:3) highlights the exclusivity of this relationship, despite the many things and people that might pull them in different directions. She goes down to check him out (Song 6:11-12), but the daughters of Jerusalem want her to return to their friend group, putting her in a tug-of-war between her friends and her lover (Song 6:13). He wins her with his praise and passion (Song 7:1-9), achieving mutual possession of one another (Song 7:10). Then the two of them celebrate their continued passion in both field (Song 7:11-13) and village (Song 8:1-3). Such fiery passion requires careful guarding, so as not to awaken it before the time is right (Song 8:4).

The final poem (Song 8:5-14) states the conclusion of the matter, reflecting on the principles that undergird the rest of the book. It is here that we learn what true love is, as defined by God, in contrast to the cheap lust of the world (as exemplified by Solomon himself). True love recognizes its own power—which is strong as death—and isn’t naive about the control it can have over a human heart (Song 8:5-7). True love esteems the virtue of virginity, as the unmarried wait for the right time and hold out for a godly partner (Song 8:8-10). True love repudiates cheap lust. Solomon is welcome to have his thousand-piece harem, but this woman’s vineyard is her own, to be given to one and only one (Song 8:11-12). True love anticipates something even better, as the book concludes with a final bit of flirting, suggestion, and innuendo for what is yet to come in the relationship (Song 8:13-14).

Conclusion

Church history is filled with the debates over whether to read this book as an allegory of God’s love for his people or as a literal picture of human marriage. Frankly, I’m not convinced we have to choose only one of those options. If it’s not about human marriage, then the metaphors of God’s relationship with his people would make no sense at all. And if it’s not also about God’s relationship with his people, then Paul, Hosea, and Ezekiel (among others) wouldn’t have gone there. This book gives us much wisdom for dating, marriage, sex, and conflict. And in so doing, it shows us the paradise of knowing Christ and being known intimately by him.

Interpretive Outline

Title – Song 1:1
Intoxicating attraction – Song 1:2-2:7
- Climax: Do not awaken love – Song 2:7
Springtime courtship – Song 2:8-3:5
1. Her perspective on his wooing of her – Song 2:8-17
  - Climax: Mutual possession – Song 2:16
2. Her dream (nightmare?) of life without him – Song 3:1-5
  - Climax: Do not awaken love – Song 3:5
Undefiled sexuality – Song 3:6-5:1
1. Not worth admiration: Solomon’s bed – Song 3:6-11
2. Worth admiration: Naked, unashamed intimacy – Song 4:1-5:1
  - Climax: Command to eat, drink, and be drunk with love – Song 5:1
Sanctifying conflict – Song 5:2-6:3
- The honeymoon is over – Song 5:2-8
- What makes this person so great? – Song 5:9-16
- Where is this relationship heading? – Song 6:1-3
  - Climax: Mutual possession – Song 6:3
Dazzling uniqueness – Song 6:4-10
Committed exclusivity – Song 6:11-8:4
- Her insecurity overcome by his desire for her – Song 6:11-7:10
  - Climax: Mutual possession – Song 7:10
- He wins the tug-of-war with her friends – Song 7:11-8:4
  - Climax: Do not awaken love – Song 8:4
True love – Song 8:5-14
- Recognizes its own power – Song 8:5-7
- Esteems the virtue of virginity – Song 8:8-10
- Repudiates cheap lust – Song 8:11-12
- Anticipates something even better – song 8:13-14

*I am grateful to my colleague Ryan Shreckengast for showing me the structure of this poem.

This post is part of a series of interpretive overviews of the books of the Bible.

The Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard

January 12, 2022 By Peter Krol

In Matthew 20:1-16, Jesus tells a famous parable about the owner of a vineyard who hires workers all throughout the day, paying them all the same amount at day’s end. What is the point of this parable?

Jonathan T. Pennington seeks to answer that question, not by digging deep within his own speculations, nor by staring at the sky. He examines historic traditions of interpretation from the context.

In the history of the church, there have been many attempted explanations of this parable. Some suggest the five different hirings represent five stages of world history during which God has called people to Himself, or different stages in life that one may become a Christian. The point, then, is that God is gracious to all and welcomes all into His kingdom, no matter when they were called. Some say the parable is a picture of God’s future kingdom where all saved people receive heaven, no matter how much they have worked for God. The broadest and maybe most popular interpretation is that this parable is simply a picture of God’s incredible and marvelous grace and generosity—the gospel in a nutshell.
Each of these interpretations has some truth in it. But there is something more to be seen. The key is to pay attention to the context that Matthew gives us for this parable.

I encourage you to read his brief piece for another clear example of why context matters.

Check it out!

Arise, My Love — Part 2: Interpretation

December 10, 2021 By Peter Krol

In a previous post, I pulled back the curtain on my observation of Song of Solomon 2:7-3:5, yielding the following structure:

Song 2:8-9 – her (daydreaming?) delight in the voice of her beloved
- Song 2:10-15 – the contents of her beloved’s voice
  - Song 2:10-13 – Arise and come away
  - Song 2:14-15 – Come out and catch up
- Song 2:16-17 – her declaration of mutual possession with her beloved
Song 3:1-4 – her dream of seeking and finding the one her soul loves
- Song 3:5 – her oath for the other young women not to stir up love yet

Now I’d like to show you how I move further into interpretation and application.

Her Daydream

The chief goal of interpretation is to arrive at the poet’s main point. And to grasp the main point of the entire poem, it helps to first grasp the main points of each of the stanzas. So I investigate each stanza with the chief goal in mind: What is the main idea here?

Song 2:8-9: Why is her leading statement regarding “the voice” — and not the character, presence, or intimacy — “of my beloved”? Apparently, she is very much looking forward to what he will say to her in Song 2:10-15. What she daydreams about is those things he will say to her. But in these introductory verses, the emphasis is on the distance between them. He comes … He stands behind … gazing through … looking through … A barrier of miles separates them at first. And even when he arrives at her home, a barrier of brick and mortar continues to separate them. So she wants him close, but he can’t get too close yet.

Photo by **Maksim Kolykhanov** from **Pexels**

Song 2:10-13: The bookends on his first stanza appear to be the main idea: “Arise, my love, my beautiful one, and come away” (Song 2:10, 13). Everything in between is in support, providing the reasons he believes will persuade her to come away with him. For him, it is no longer time to avoid awakening love (Song 2:7); the season for love is in full bloom. It’s as though he says [translated into modern jargon]: “I like you. Do you like me? Check one: YES or NO.”

Song 2:14-15: The second stanza of his speech continues his persuasion. First, he proves to be a patient and gentle suitor, cherishing her like a precious dove hiding within the cliffside. Second, he asks for help with finding the things that will spoil their vineyards. Commentaries inform me that the verbs in v.15 are plural, so he is no longer talking to her alone, but to a group of others — most likely the daughters of Jerusalem. And it doesn’t matter whether verse 15 is spoken by the man (as suggested by the ESV headings) or the woman (as suggested by CSB headings): either way, the point is that this couple invites others to hold them accountable and help them protect one another’s bodies (as “vineyards” have been metaphors of bodies thus far in the Song – Song 1:6, 2:14).

Song 2:16-17: She describes their relationship as one of mutual possession of one another (v.16), which sounds a lot like the arrival and consummation of marriage. However, in v.17, she wants him to “turn” and do his gazelle-thing on cleft mountains — at least until the morning comes. Some think the “cleft mountains” are a metaphor for her breasts. This makes sense, as his gazelle-ness on mountains is clearly a picture of marital bliss in Song 8:14. However, in Song 2:17, the main verb is the imperative to “turn.” And the reference to “mountains” connects back to where he came from (Song 2:8). So it’s more likely that, in contrast to chapter 8, in this poem she recognizes that marriage has not yet come. They are not yet married, and they must say goodbye at the end of their time together.

Main Point of Song 2:8-17: This relationship is not yet a marriage relationship, but it is clearly heading in that direction. She daydreams about his invitation to join her in the season of awakening love. But though it is spring time, it is not yet morning. They are beginning to “possess” one another (to treat one another differently from how they treat others), but they are not yet fully there. Separate togetherness is the unfortunate reality of their relationship (Song 2:8-9). He makes a risk request (Song 2:10-15). She has clarity on the desired, though not yet present, result (Song 2:16-17).

Her Dream

Song 3:1-4: We now move into a full-fledged dream, as she “seeks” him on her bed by night. She can’t find him in her bed (Song 3:1). She can’t find him in the streets (Song 3:2). She can’t find him among the night watchmen (Song 3:3). But when she finally finds him, she clings to him and refuses to let go (Song 3:4). Until she brings him into her mother’s chamber (apparently quite romantic and not awkward at all in that culture) — so her dream’s end goal is the full consummation of marriage. She doesn’t want to have to say goodbye at the end of the evening any longer!

Main point of Song 3:1-4: She aligns her dreams for the relationship with the direction in which it ought to head: toward marriage and the intimacy of the marriage bed.

Her Charge

Song 3:5: She puts the young women of Jerusalem under oath not to enter this season of love until the right time. She understands how difficult and stressful that can be, but she understands how much it is worth it.

Main point of Song 3:5: Forsake all counterfeits to such love (which is heading in the direction of God-honoring marriage).

Conclusion

I’ve written this post according to the stream of my consciousness as I worked to figure out the main point of each stanza. But I’ve arrived at the following interpretive outline:

Godly relationships pursue a clear and selfless direction – Song 2:8-17
1. The unfortunate reality of separate togetherness – Song 2:8-9
2. The risky request to join the season of awakening love – Song 2:10-15
3. The desired result of marital possession, which is almost but not yet here – Song 2:16-17
Align your dreams of romance with that direction – Song 3:1-4
Forsake all counterfeits – Song 3:5

How does all of this add up into a main point for the entire poem? Main point: A couple’s purpose in pursuing a romantic relationship ought to be the movement from separated togetherness to the mutual possession of marriage.

In a future post, I’ll walk through my thinking on connecting this main point to the gospel of Jesus Christ, and then applying it to today.

Advice About Hard Bible Passages from the Bible

November 8, 2021 By Ryan Higginbottom

Anyone who has spent time in the pages of the Bible knows that there are tricky passages between the covers. This can be discouraging, especially for those who are new to Bible study. Some have walked away from the Bible for this very reason.

One of the marvelous things about the Bible is that in it, God speaks to many of the challenges we face—including difficult passages in the Bible itself. We will look at one such section of Scripture in this article.

Hard Passages Exist

It’s nice to have Scripture confirm our suspicions—there are passages in the Bible that are hard to understand! Take it from the pen of the apostle Peter.

And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. (2 Peter 3:15–16)

It seems Peter had trouble understanding some of Paul’s writings. He wanted his friends to know that if they felt stumped by Paul, they were not alone.

Some portions of the Bible are gloriously clear (if not easy to obey), and other parts are not. This doesn’t mean there is anything wrong with the Bible or its readers, just that the communication of divine truth is sometimes a challenge. We should not be frustrated when we run across difficulties in our Bible study. Saints have had similar challenges stretching all the way back to the apostles.

Twisting Hard Passages

Peter writes plainly about what some people do with these difficult passages. The “ignorant and unstable twist [them] to their own destruction.”

Those who are unstable will twist these difficult passages, and their interpretations and conclusions will be damaging. Think about how serious that is: Twisted interpretations can destroy. Before taking up positions of defense and warning, we should pause and pray for those who use the Bible this way. They deserve our compassion, as they are headed down a chilling road to a horrible end.

Not everyone who comes to the Bible does so with pure motives. Peter warns us especially of those who are ignorant (those who lack familiarity or experience in the faith) or unstable (lacking a foundation, easily jostled or disturbed). Christians should be watchful regarding confusing or challenging passages that they are not led astray by efforts to turn people away from the truth.

Take Care

Peter warns his readers, as “beloved” brothers and sisters, to “take care.”

You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. (2 Peter 3:17)

Peter’s caution is valuable information. When we know a road contains potholes, we can drive slowly and carefully or take an alternate route.

This error of twisting Scripture to evil ends can sweep people along like a racing river. These lawless people have a contagious instability—those who are settled and secure can find themselves unsteady and off balance. Peter’s alert here follows earlier warnings in the same chapter about “scoffers” who doubt the promises of God and “overlook” plain facts about creation and the flood (2 Peter 3:3–6).

It’s natural to ask how Christians should “take care” to avoid this disaster. Peter anticipates and answers that question.

Growth in Christ

Peter gives broad instruction to avoid being carried away in controversy, speculation, and error.

But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen. (2 Peter 3:18)

To combat twisted Scriptures, grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus. Understand his promises and his work for you; bathe in the good news of the gospel of his kingdom. Pursue him as Lord and Savior and Christ, and know that you are not alone—he is “our” Lord.

Jesus deserves glory now and to the day of eternity. The final chapter of Peter’s letter overflows with references to the “day of the Lord” and the “heavenly bodies” being “burned up and dissolved” (2 Peter 3:10). The great upheaval that is coming is a problem for those who are unstable, but those who know the promise-maker are “waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells” (2 Peter 3:13).

Remember the Patience of the Lord

The context of this brief word about hard-to-understand passages is a larger section about the patience of the Lord. Peter tells his readers to “count the patience of our Lord as salvation” (2 Peter 3:15). God is not slow to keep his promises, but rather he is “patient toward you” (2 Peter 3:9).

Doesn’t this make all the difference? The God of the universe is patient. Not only patient in general, but patient toward you! We should labor mightily to understand his word, but when we come across something confusing, we need not rush or panic. He knows our frame (Psalm 103:14); he is patient toward his children.

« Previous Page