Knowable Word

Helping ordinary people learn to study the Bible

Copyright © 2012–2026 DiscipleMakers, except guest articles (copyright author). Used by permission.

You are here: Home / Archives for Observation

How Should We Handle the Unnamed in Scripture?

By

Tim Mossholder (2019), public domain

Names and titles are important in the Bible. Paying attention to these details is a key step during the observation stage of Bible study.

Adam named his wife “Eve” because “she was the mother of all the living” (Genesis 3:20). As God made his covenant with Abram, he changed his name to Abraham, “for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations” (Genesis 17:5). The angel told Joseph in a dream that his son should be named Jesus, “for he will save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). In these examples we have an explanation for each name, but there are scores of other named figures in the Bible where the name sheds light on some part of their story.

But, as you may have noticed, not every character in the Bible has a name.

If names are so important, why does it seem like some names in the Bible are missing? And, practically, how should we approach passages in which unnamed characters play a key role?

Let’s take a look at two examples.

The Redeemer in Ruth

My pastor just finished preaching through the book of Ruth, so we were confronted by the unnamed redeemer in chapters 3 and 4. Ruth and Naomi are aware that Boaz is a redeemer for Elimelech, Naomi’s deceased husband. However, there is a closer redeemer—a closer relative—who should receive the option to redeem Elimelech’s land and family name before Boaz is given the opportunity. (See Ruth 3:9–13; 4:1–6.)

For a character that spends so much time on the page, it seems strange that this redeemer isn’t named. And yet, this seems like an intentional choice by the author. Boaz tells this relative that when he serves as a redeemer for Elimelech, he will acquire Ruth, and any children he has with Ruth will bear Elimelech’s name (Ruth 4:5). This man refuses, saying he does not want to “impair [his] own inheritance” (Ruth 4:6).

This closer redeemer refused to lay down his concerns for another. He wanted to preserve his own name and inheritance. So, the author of Ruth serves up some poetic justice by omitting his name from the Biblical record. (This same reasoning may lie behind the fact that we know so few of the names of those building a tower in Babel in Genesis 11.)

The Believing Criminal

While not occupying as much of the biblical story as the reluctant redeemer in Ruth, some of the people who played important roles at the crucifixion are also unnamed.

Jesus was crucified between two criminals. One criminal mocked Jesus, but the other showed evidence of faith in Jesus as the king who could save. Jesus responded, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). Wouldn’t it be nice to have the name of this believing criminal?

However, Luke gives us all the information we need about this man: He is a convicted criminal who confesses Jesus. Luke’s Gospel is full of Jesus extending invitations to the poor and the forgotten, to those outside the boundaries of polite Jewish society. The religious leaders put Jesus to death, and the last person to trust Jesus before he dies is a condemned criminal. We don’t need his name, because Luke has made his point: Jesus is the king and savior of the world, welcoming all who believe.

Why Are Some Unnamed?

When a character in the Bible is unnamed, one of two things is true. That name is either unknown by the biblical author or withheld from us. But since God is sovereign over the writing and preservation of his word, we can be confident that we are not lacking anything we need.

Those who are named in the Bible, are named for a reason. And those who are unnamed in the Bible, are unnamed for a reason. Though we may be missing their names, we often still know the most important things about them—their actions, their characteristics, or their roles. The biblical authors use these details instead of names to contribute to their main point in writing.

When we lack a name in Scripture, we shouldn’t react with frustration, grumbling, or speculation. It’s a good excuse to sharpen our observation skills as we try to understand how the biblical author is using this character in the story.

Arise, My love, My Beautiful One, and Come Away

By

I am very grateful to the Lord for the rich diversity of literature contained within the Bible. Not only do we have the narratives of Israel’s history and Jesus’ ministry, or the discourses of the law and letters, but we also have the wildly foreign yet lovely verse of the prophets and poets. Let me pull back the curtain for you on my own process for Bible study.

Right now, I’m studying Song of Songs 2:8-3:5 and trying to find my way. What clues can I find to show me how this text is organized, so I can follow its train of thought?

First, I notice the repetition of the label “my beloved,” from the woman regarding her man (Song 2:8, 9, 10, 16, 17). They are somewhat spaced out and appear likely to trigger a new thought or idea.

Second, I observe that the man never speaks in this passage as an independent character (as he does before and after this in the book). Instead, what we have is the woman’s report of what he says (Song 2:10: “My beloved speaks and says to me…”). Or is this more about what she wants him to say? She appears to be dreaming in Song 3:1-4 (especially see Song 3:1); could Song 2:8-17 be something like a daydream?

Photo by Scott Broome on Unsplash

Third, though Song 2:10-15 is all one speech by the man (at least according to the ESV editors; the CSB suggests that the man’s speech ends with verse 14), I observe the verbatim repetition of “Arise, my love, my beautiful one, and come away” (Song 2:10, 13). That repeated phrase wraps verses 10-13 like bookends, suggesting that Song 2:14-15 contain a second stanza within his speech.

Fourth, the poem reaches a clear climax in Song 3:5, when she puts the daughters of Jerusalem under oath not to stir up love.

All of this yields the following group of stanzas:

  • 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

So much for an observational outline of the poem. What about an interpretive outline? What is the point of each stanza, and how does the train of thought move from one stanza to the next?

That will require more work, so I’m back at it. At least I have some handles on the text to guide my questions and answers.

10 Truths About the Holy Spirit from Romans 8

By

Mateus Campos Felipe (2019), public domain

Romans 8 is a favorite chapter of the Bible among Christians, and for good reason. It is encouraging, memorable, and oh-so-quotable.

But because it is so beloved, it is easy to lose the main ideas of the chapter among the glorious promises. To be specific, what would you say Romans 8 is all about?

The Frequency of the Spirit

When we start to observe the text of Romans 8, one phrase jumps out. The Holy Spirit is all over this chapter!

A quick count reveals that the word “spirit” appears 22 times in Romans 8. This is the most that word appears in any chapter of the English Bible! (I made these counts and comparisons using the ESV.) This was unexpected for me, because I don’t often see people reach for this chapter to teach about the Holy Spirit.

Is the Holy Spirit the main subject of Romans 8? In his post on Romans 8:28, Peter provided an outline of much of this chapter, so I won’t repeat it here. Even if the Spirit is not at the center of this chapter, he is indispensable to its main ideas.

What Can We Learn About the Spirit?

I thought it might be instructive to exercise our observation and interpretation muscles in a brief look at Romans 8. While focusing mostly on the occurrences of the word “Spirit” in this chapter, I’ll list some truths that are relatively straightforward from the text.

  1. The Spirit is the “Spirit of life.” In contrast to the “law of sin and death,” which condemns, the Spirit’s law sets us “free in Christ Jesus” (Rom 8:2).
  2. The Spirit is opposed to “the flesh.” Christians walk according to the Spirit, not the flesh. They live according to the Spirit and set their minds on the things of the Spirit instead of living according to or setting their minds on the things of the flesh. The flesh brings death, but the Spirit brings “life and peace” (Rom 8:4–6).
  3. Those with the Spirit belong to God. Those with the Spirit are “in the Spirit.” Without the Spirit of Christ you do not belong to God. Having the “Spirit of Christ” and having Christ in you appear to be the same thing (Rom 8:9–10).
  4. Those with the Spirit will rise from the dead. If you have the Spirit that raised Jesus from the dead, that same Spirit will give you the same result (Rom 8:11).
  5. We need the Spirit to “put to death the deeds of the body.” The parallel structure of Romans 8:13 also implies that putting deeds to death by the Spirit is what it means to live according to the Spirit.
  6. All who are led by God’s Spirit are God’s children (Rom 8:14). Part of what it means to have God’s Spirit (Rom 8:9) is to be led by God’s Spirit.
  7. The Spirit we have received is the “Spirit of adoption.” This Spirit is contrasted with a spirit of slavery which leads to fear; the Spirit of adoption produces affectionate cries (“Abba!”) to our Father (Rom 8:15).
  8. The Spirit testifies that we are God’s children. The Spirit “bears witness” along with our spirits that we are children of God. And as children, we are “heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ” (Rom 8:16–17).
  9. We have the first fruits of the Spirit. Having the Spirit in this way causes us to groan inwardly along with the creation, as we await our adoption as children of God (Rom 8:23).
  10. The Spirit intercedes for us. In our weakness, we don’t know how to pray as we should. But the Spirit helps us, praying with groans that are too deep for words. Because the Father knows the mind of the Spirit, he receives what is in our hearts (Rom 8:26–27).

Observation Leading to Understanding

Observation is necessary but not sufficient for understanding the Bible. It is a means, not an end. Observing the Bible is like gathering sticks for a fire: Without the wood, there’s nothing to burn; but the sticks themselves produce neither heat nor light.

But these observations and interpretations about the Holy Spirit help us toward the main point of Romans 8. We see how the Spirit marks and indwells God’s people, identifying them as his beloved children. This relationship with God produces suffering with our fellow heir (Jesus), but glory with him as well.

Observation is a Means, Not an End

By

When it comes to OIA Bible study, observation is the method’s beginning, not the method’s end. I find people can often get distracted from this point in one of two ways.

Image by F. Muhammad from Pixabay

Distraction #1: Ending with Observation

When you develop the skills of mature observation, you can start to feel like a superhero. You’ll start seeing things the people around you don’t take time to see. You learn to identify parts of speech, sentence structure, and train of thought. Skilled observation can be quite thrilling, and it tends to receive praise. This is a good thing, because careful observation of God’s word ought to be something people find praiseworthy.

But the danger is that the thrill and the praise become your food and drink. When you train your senses to observe the Scriptures closely, you will probably start finding things that nobody in your immediate circle has found before. And you can quickly form an addiction to the dopamine released in the process.

This may result in doing even more observation, getting better and better at it. People start looking to you for insight, and they ask you for the final word on any questions they have. Sometimes this delight in observation can provide an escape from the painful labor of interpretation, or the uncomfortable humility required for application. You can also avoid having to draw conclusions about anything the text might mean, or any ways it may be speaking into your culture or community, by keeping your sights trained simply on what it says.

Perhaps this distraction resonates with your own proclivity. Or maybe your struggle goes in a different direction.

Distraction #2: Failing to Make Use of Observation as a Means

Maybe you are more tempted to skip observation to get to the good stuff faster. Your understanding of “the good stuff” could be focused on either interpretation (we have to get our doctrine in order, after all) or application (what good are we if we are not practical, right?). Either way, you try not to get bogged down by grammatical minutiae or pesky questions about big picture and train of thought.

Maybe you come to the Bible under the expectation that it must move you to some specific and inspiring action steps right here and now. Or maybe you teach others, and you feel you have failed if they don’t deliver something mind-blowing and practical quickly enough. Maybe you’ve trained yourself to spend more time looking up cross-references than discovering the structure and climax or chief conclusion of the text at hand. Maybe you’ve presumed that good teachers should aspire to preach or teach 300 sermons/sessions on Romans, and so you’re constantly bouncing away from your abbreviated text in order to fill the air space with fully fleshed-out theological or ethical reflections.

Conclusion

The answer to the second distraction is to realize (and believe in your bones) that without observation, you cannot interpret or apply. At least, not in alignment with the will of God recorded in Scripture. Observation lays the foundation for all else. If your observation is poor, your interpretation won’t be any better, and your application will fall to the ground. Any power your conclusions or instructions might have comes more from your personal persuasiveness or charisma than from the Spirit of God.

The answer to the first distraction is to realize (and believe in your bones) that your purpose in Bible study is not to impress people or thrill yourself. Your purpose is to help people—beginning with yourself—know God through his Son Jesus Christ and be transformed into the image of Christ by the Spirit who inspired this text. Observation lays the foundation for all else. If observation is your end game, it’s like living your spiritual life on a cement slab in a half-acre plot, without erecting the rest of the house. You’re ready for a tempest to rise against you, but the wifi doesn’t really work.

With trained and habitual observation, we plug into the power of God found in Scripture. We’re thereby locked and loaded for productive interpretation and application to help lead people to their Creator and King.

What Should We Make of Paul’s Shipwreck Narrative?

By

When our church’s team of preachers decided to preach through Acts, I knew chapter 27 would be a doozy (notice how I cleverly ignored this chapter in my interpretive overview of Acts). I have always been confused by this chapter and its role within the book, and though I’m sure compelling sermons have been preached on this text, I have yet to hear one of them. I’m used to hearing otherwise fantastic preachers punt on this chapter, in the name of practicality, to talk about “weathering the storms of our spiritual lives.” So the extraordinarily detailed travelogue of Acts 27 is reduced to a parable and a few minor observations (typically surrounding verses 23-25) seeking to inspire us toward deeper trust in Christ—a wonderful thing to be inspired toward, of course!

Therefore, since I’m in charge of managing our sermon schedule, I made sure to assign Acts 27 to someone else. Pro tip: When you don’t know what to do with a text, require a friend or colleague to deal with it instead. This resulted in one of the most exciting “aha!” moments in my Bible study this year.

Photo by Olga Tsai on Unsplash

A Key Structural Observation

The sucker fortunate fellow to receive the assignment was a good man and marvelous student of the word named Tom Hallman. Tom eagerly set himself to observe the text inside and out, to give him the raw materials for a series of interpretive questions. Our practice is that our team of preachers gives feedback on every sermon before it is preached. We collaborate in two phases: the study of the passage and the delivery of the sermon. So in that first phase, Tom regularly laid before us the fruit of his study for comment and evaluation.

And Tom made a key structural observation that shed tremendous light on the passage for me. In following the narrative’s plot, Tom observed that the main conflict centers on the centurion’s failure to listen to Paul’s counsel in Acts 27:11. This led Tom to recognize a few arcs within the plot:

  • Acts 27:9-20: Paul speaks, and the centurion pays more attention to others. The result is that all hope of being saved is abandoned.
  • Acts 27:21-44: Paul speaks, and the Romans start listening to him. The result is that all are brought safely to land.

These observations of the primary narrative tension and its accompanying resolution gave us hope that we could sift through the flood of details to discern the author’s main point in this chapter.

Further Dialogue

As we discussed it further and kept staring at the text to observe it more closely, we eventually realized that there were not two arcs but three. Paul actually makes three sizable speeches (Acts 27:10, 21-26, 33-34). He also speaks in Acts 27:31, but that briefer statement does not have the same appearance of introducing a new scene. It is a response to what’s happening in the moment (Acts 27:30).

So we’ve actually got three main speeches from Paul. Do we correspondingly have a clear resolution with each one, to make three complete arcs? This question drove us back into the text.

And sure enough, there it was. So plain and obvious we couldn’t believe we had missed it or ever believed this passage to be opaque to us.

  • Acts 27:9-20: Paul speaks, and the centurion pays more attention to others. The result is that all hope of being saved is abandoned.
  • Acts 27:21-32: Paul speaks, and no-one immediately rejects him. But eventually the soldiers heed him. (The centurion and soldiers both hear Paul’s words in Acts 27:31, but only the soldiers are mentioned as acting on them in Acts 27:32.) There is no immediate “salvation,” but only a sense of “let’s wait and see; we hope this works.”
  • Acts 27:33-44: Paul speaks, and all are encouraged and choose to eat (Acts 27:36). The result is that the centurion has heard enough, and he now wishes to save Paul (Acts 27:43). “And so it was that all were brought safely to land” (Acts 27:44).

These three arcs showed us that the primary tension revolves around whether the Roman centurion (prominent enough to be named in the text—Acts 27:1,3) will listen to Paul or not. And in particular: Will he listen to Paul with respect to salvation? This salvation goes in two directions: Paul wants to save the centurion—along with everyone else on the ship; the centurion, in the end, wishes to save Paul.

In the first arc, Julius will not listen to Paul, and all hope is lost. In the second arc, the soldiers listen to Paul, and it is as though the centurion is watching and deliberating before rendering judgment on this most unusual prisoner. In the third arc, the centurion fully listens to Paul and doesn’t want him to die.

Conclusions About the Text

I’m not weirded out by this chapter any more. It fits cleanly within the book’s main idea that the world’s salvation cannot be stopped. It also masterfully advances Luke’s primary agenda to petition for Paul’s exoneration before Caesar. “Julius was uncertain at first, and unwilling to listen to Paul. But he has been convinced that this Paul is who he says he is, and he refuses to let anyone execute him. Caesar: Why wouldn’t you do the same?”

And not only that, but Acts 27 also serves Luke’s secondary purpose to lead all of Abraham’s children to salvation through the Savior, who is Christ the Lord. “Julius was uncertain at first, and unwilling to listen to Paul. But many have been convinced that this Jesus, whom Paul preaches, is who he says he is. Don’t just stand there watching others listen and find rescue. Noble reader: Why wouldn’t you do the same?”

Conclusions About Our Study Methods

If Luke can have two simultaneous purposes in mind, so can I. While I wanted to help you observe and interpret Acts 27 along with me, I also wanted you to see how I got there. And the events that took place this past week in my dialogues with Tom highlight a few conclusions. First, Bible study needs to be a community project. Second, structure conveys meaning. And third, the most important tool for observing the structure of a narrative episode is plot structure.

Show, Don’t Just Tell

By

It’s a key principle of educational philosophy: Show, don’t just tell. Communicating ideas is a good thing. But it’s even better if you can show your work, present persuasive argumentation, explain it clearly, and illustrate it vividly. The show-don’t-just-tell principle has many applications for teachers and leaders of all stripes. And I would like to zero in on one particular application of the principle to any who seek to teach the Bible: Show them how you arrived at your conclusions so they can repeat the process for themselves.

crop unrecognizable woman holding vase with pink ranunculus
Photo by Алекке Блажин on Pexels.com

Last week, I suggested that the best response you can hope for from those to whom you teach the Bible is, “What a great text, that shows me our great God!” Now I propose that one of the most important means for producing such a response is to show your work, and not merely tell them your conclusions. Here are some examples.

  • You can tell them that God loves them. Or you can show them the “for” in John 3:16 and show them the logical connection in the verse between the first clause and the second clause. Now they can forever see for themselves that God sent his son, not because he was mad at the world, but because he loved it.
  • You can tell them that the Christian life is hard, but that it will be worth it. Or you can show them the context of Romans 8:28, how the “good” all things work together for is the “good” of conformity to the Son’s image (Rom 8:29)—which is a promise not of a healthy and wealthy life, but of crushing pain yielding to resurrection glory (Rom 8:17-25).
  • You can tell them the story of God’s great power demonstrated over Egypt in nine plagues. Or you can show them the structure of three groups of three plagues, each group with a unique emphasis, proving Yahweh to be the judge, the divider of peoples, and the destroyer of worlds. Once you have shown them this structure, they won’t be able to un-see it when they read these texts in the future.
  • You can tell them that chapter divisions are not part of the inspired text and should be taken with a grain of salt. Or you can show them Isaiah’s repeated refrain that clearly links the four stanzas of Isaiah 9:8-10:4 into a single poem, forcing us to read the text across the chapter break. “For all this his anger has not turned away, and his hand is stretched out still” (Is 9:12, 17, 21; 10:4).

Now I am not saying that Bible teachers should show all their work. There are always more observations to be made than can be included in a sermon or Bible study. We can’t include everything, and we ought not explain everything that happened to excite us in our preparation. One key principle I communicate when I train teachers is this: Do only as much observation as you must do in order for them to see how what you’re saying is rooted in the text. As soon as they have seen it from the text, move on. Explain it. Illustrate it. Show them Jesus. Apply it.

But sadly, teachers often show too little of their work. They may move their people to tears or inspire them to take drastic action. But ask those people after the sermon or discussion why they should take such action, or how this Scripture moved them so, and too often they can’t explain it. It just “is.”

Let’s show them a better way.

What Does “All Israel Will Be Saved” Mean?

By

In Romans 11:26, Paul makes a statement that has baffled interpreters for generations: “And in this way all Israel will be saved.” New Testament professor Jared Compton has attempted to explain the key phrase, “all Israel will be saved,” in this brief piece.

Compton approaches the topic through a series of four interpretive questions:

  1. What does he mean by “saved”?
  2. What does he mean by “Israel”?
  3. What does he mean by “all”?
  4. What does he mean by “will be”?

To be frank, I would probably disagree with Compton’s answers to a few of these questions. But I’m eager to link to his article anyway because he models some excellent Bible study skills in the process of seeking to answer his (insightful) questions. He engages with the text. He observes carefully. He reckons with the context of Paul’s argument in the chapter and this section of Romans.

Even if I might disagree with a few of the answers, based on further observation and investigation of the same text, I have much trust that Compton would be a fellow with whom one could have a productive debate on such things. One who isn’t committed to a particular theology despite the text, but one who may arrive at a set of theological conclusions precisely because of the text. I am happy to send you his way to consider his careful handling of this challenging topic.

Check it out!

Finding repeated words and themes

By

My two-year-old son David has entered the stage where he’s quite the chatterbox. As soon as I get home from work, he’ll happily tell me everything that’s on his mind. Here’s an only-mildly-edited recent quote: “David and Mama and Jimmy go to the pool and I SPLASH in the pool and Mama splash David in the pool and I have green ball in the pool and… and SPLASH SPLASH SPLASH green ball in the pool. Daddy, may I have please go to the pool now?”

So here’s your quiz: what’s on David’s mind?

How did you know?

While usually not quite as pervasive as the rambling thoughts of toddler, one of the easiest techniques to use in doing good Bible study is that of observing repeated words and themes. Authors didn’t have bold and italics back then, so a common way to emphasize a point was to repeat it multiple times. It’s like saying, “Hey, don’t miss this!”

One of my favorite passages that makes generous use of repeated words is Amos 4. Consider these verses:

[6] “I gave you cleanness of teeth in all your cities, and lack of bread in all your places, yet you did not return to me,” declares the LORD.

[7] “I also withheld the rain from you when there were yet three months to the harvest; I would send rain on one city, and send no rain on another city; one field would have rain, and the field on which it did not rain would wither; [8] so two or three cities would wander to another city to drink water, and would not be satisfied; yet you did not return to me,” declares the LORD.

[9] “I struck you with blight and mildew; your many gardens and your vineyards, your fig trees and your olive trees the locust devoured; yet you did not return to me,” declares the LORD.

[10] “I sent among you a pestilence after the manner of Egypt; I killed your young men with the sword, and carried away your horses, and I made the stench of your camp go up into your nostrils; yet you did not return to me,” declares the LORD.

[11] “I overthrew some of you, as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and you were as a brand plucked out of the burning; yet you did not return to me,” declares the LORD. 

(Amos 4:6-11 ESV, emphasis mine)

Note how often the phrase, “yet you did not return to me,” declares the LORD, comes up. That’s the author’s (and God’s) way of saying, “This is really important! This is what I want you to do!”

Another repeated theme is the varied forms of judgment. The LORD is deliberately using all kinds of pain to get the attention of Israel so they might return to Him: starvation, dehydration, frustrated work, disease, defeat in battle, death, and even fire from heaven! Sadly, it seems that Israel persisted in running from Him time and again. It’s repeated often so we wouldn’t miss the repeated theme – even though Israel did.

Want to try looking for more repeated words and themes?

  • Consider Colossians 2:6-15. Notice how many times “in Him” / “with Him” appear. What is Paul trying to get across to the Colossians?
  • Consider Genesis 1. How did God go about creating? What is the author trying to tell us about the works of God?
  • Consider 1 John 3:11-24. See how many repeated words you can find!

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. 

Catch the Differences

By

Earlier this week, I completed my 11th annual speed read of the Bible. This time, I used a detailed chronological reading order I’ve never used before, which enabled me to catch on to some things that have escaped my notice before. Of course, the purpose of reading large portions of Scripture is not to notice every detail. But the pathway you take through the Bible can certainly help to freshen up some things.

For example, read the following selections of Scripture, one right after the other, and see if anything jumps out at you, as it did for me.

And they were on the road, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was walking ahead of them. And they were amazed, and those who followed were afraid. And taking the twelve again, he began to tell them what was to happen to him, saying, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and deliver him over to the Gentiles. And they will mock him and spit on him, and flog him and kill him. And after three days he will rise.” 

Mark 10:32-34

And as Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples aside, and on the way he said to them, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem. And the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death and deliver him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified, and he will be raised on the third day.”

Matthew 20:17-19

And taking the twelve, he said to them, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written about the Son of Man by the prophets will be accomplished. For he will be delivered over to the Gentiles and will be mocked and shamefully treated and spit upon. And after flogging him, they will kill him, and on the third day he will rise.” But they understood none of these things. This saying was hidden from them, and they did not grasp what was said.

Luke 18:31-34
Can you spot the differences? Image by Dmitry Abramov from Pixabay

There are, of course, many differences in the accounts, from Mark’s narration of the disciples’ amazement and fear, to Matthew’s passive voice “he will be raised,” to Luke’s hiding of the saying such that they didn’t grasp it. Each of these differences provides a clue into the narrator’s unique intentions.

But what struck me the most this time around was the differences in how Jesus is “delivered over.” If you didn’t catch the difference, go back and read the passages again, paying special attention to whom Jesus is delivered over to, and in how many stages.

What does Luke’s distinct account suggest about his intentions in describing this passion prediction? How does this fit with Luke’s larger treatment of the Jews in both Luke and Acts?

Acts 4 and 5: Similar Narratives with Distinct Emphases

By

“If your observation is poor, your interpretation won’t be any better.” Acts 4 and Acts 5 provide a good case study to illustrate this mantra of mine.

These two chapters of Acts (or, to be specific, Acts 4:5-31 and Acts 5:17-42) appear quite similar on the surface. In both episodes:

  • Jesus’ apostles draw crowds for doing miraculous signs and wonders (Acts 3:11-12, 5:14-16).
  • The high priest and his associates imprison Jesus’ apostles for preaching and healing (Acts 4:1-3, 5:17-18).
  • There is a hearing with testimony from the “offenders” (Acts 4:5-7, 5:27-28).
  • The apostles are compelled to bear witness to the resurrection and exaltation of Jesus (Acts 4:10-12, 5:30-32).
  • The priests warn the apostles to speak no longer in this name (Acts 4:18, 5:40).
  • The apostles contrast obedience to the priests with obedience to God (Acts 4:19-20, 5:29).
  • The apostles end up more motivated and more courageous to continue their proclamation (Acts 4:31, 5:41-42).

Because of these similarities, teachers and small group leaders may feel stuck when studying Acts. Should we skip over the second episode? Should we repeat the same lesson and applications? How do we prevent the study from feeling like deja vu for participants? What more can we cover the second time ’round that we didn’t address the first time?

When a biblical narrator repeats similar ideas in this way, especially in such quick succession, he may have numerous reasons for doing so. One reason could be simply to establish a matter on the testimony of two witnesses (Deut 19:15). But in almost every case, the narrator also gives clues that he has a different point to make with each episode. We can use the same skills we employ to avoid unhelpful harmonization to grasp Luke’s points in these two chapters of Acts. Let’s hear each episode and observe them doggedly.

Public Domain

Plot Structure to the Rescue in Acts 4

Since we’re dealing with narratives, one of the most useful tools is that of plot structure. Let’s go back over each of the two scenes with the concepts of conflict, climax, and resolution in mind. To keep things somewhat focused, I’ll be looking only at the arrest/hearing scenes and not the healing scenes that provoked them.

In chapter 4, Acts 4:5-6 describe the setting. The conflict (tangible narrative tension) enters in Acts 4:7, when the priests ask, “By what power or by what name did you do this [heal the man lame since birth and proclaim resurrection from the dead]?” The chief conflict here is the conflict between names, which represent both delegated authority and factual power. What is the name that gives you either the ability (power) or the right (authority) to do these things?

Luke masterfully foreshadows this conflict of authoritative names even as he establishes the setting: “…with Annas the high priest and Caiaphas and John and Alexander, and all who were of the high-priestly family” (Acts 4:6). Do you see what he did there? Do you see how sneaky he was in getting you to consider all those powerful and authoritative names?

The tension only increases as Peter tackles the question head-on:

  • “by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth…” (Acts 4:10)
  • “there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12)

The wannabe Names, however, can’t have any of this. Luke narrates twice their resolve to prohibit proclamation in this unapproved name of Jesus (Acts 4:17, 18). They then release Peter, John, and the formerly lame man, but the narrative hasn’t climaxed yet. The question remains unresolved: Which name will prove to be the true power here?

It is only after the disciples return to their friends (Acts 4:23), pray together to the Sovereign Lord who made heaven, earth, and sea (Acts 4:24), and ask him to embolden them even while continuing his signs and wonders through the name of his holy servant Jesus (Acts 4:29-30)—only then does the conflict finally resolve. At this profession of complete trust in the name of Jesus, the place where they had gathered was shaken, and the Holy Spirit fills hem afresh with a new measure of boldness (Acts 4:31). The shaking and the Spirit are narrative evidences that they’ve been clinging to the right name. That the power of this name to preach the resurrection cannot be stopped by a few pretenders to the Jewish priesthood. What were their names again?

Luke’s emphasis in this first scene, evident through the nature of the narrative conflict and climax, is on the vindication and authority of the name of Jesus over that of the Jewish priests.

Plot Structure in Acts 5

The conflict, climax, and resolution of Acts 5 take us in quite a different direction.

Acts 5:17-18 provide the setting, where a jealous High Priest & Co. (unnamed!) locks up the apostles. And not only Peter and John this time, but, presumably, all of them. Yes, there is implicit conflict in both the jealousy and the arrest itself. But the actual narrative conflict arises in Acts 5:19-20, when an angel shows up to bust his boys out of the slammer. The priests want them in prison; the angel (and, in light of what follows, we can add: God) wants them in the temple. The conflict: Where do you want these guys to be?

The tension increases (hilariously) the next day as the priests send for their prisoners for interrogation, and they can’t find them (Acts 5:21b-25)! Nobody remembers seeing them leave, and the cells remain locked. They were so careful to place these troublemakers just so, but then they went and lost their prisoners!

They hear of the apostles’ presence in the temple (incidentally, isn’t it the priests’ job to be there?), and resolve to bring them back in. But they must do so with much sensitivity and caution, lest they get themselves killed by the crowd (Acts 5:26). Luke strongly suggests that the apostles could have resisted this re-arrest, had they chosen to stay put in the temple, and the temple officers could have done nothing to physically apprehend them. The priests are clearly losing their ability to contain these unruly preachers.

I’ll simplify my analysis by suggesting that the conflict is finally reversed (i.e. reaches its climax) in Acts 5:39, where Gamaliel’s advice is simply to trust God to decide which movements he wants to grow or demolish. The priests take his advice (Acts 5:39b), but not really (Acts 5:40). They still want to have some control over deciding when and where this Christian movement can operate. And their intimidation has the opposite effect to what they intend (Acts 5:41-42).

Conclusion

All you need to do is set aside your familiarity and take a closer look. Observe, observe, observe. Take note, especially in narrative, of the details of conflict, rising action, climax, and resolution. As you do, the distinct emphases of similar episodes will surface themselves.

Then you can teach or lead discussions on Acts 4 and Acts 5 without covering exactly the same ground. First (Acts 4), you talk about the only name that has the authority to forgive and the power to heal. Then (Acts 5), you explore the fact that opposition to this name will want to contain it but never succeed.

But if your observation is poor, your interpretation won’t be any better.