Tag: exegesis

The Value of Learning Biblical Hebrew

On By Jovan PayesIn Articles, Christian Leadership, Church Leadership, Hebrew Bible, Old Testament, Research Papers
college papers

In 2 Timothy, Paul encourages the evangelist Timothy to trust in “[a]ll scripture” as the “useful” source for transformative instruction which empowers God’s people to accomplish “every good work” (3:16–17 NRSV).[1] There is a reason to believe this reference to “scripture” is primarily an allusion to the Hebrew Bible.[2] Study of the Hebrew language, then, would be a necessary acquisition for the minister. The benefits of studying biblical Hebrew are vast and significant, ranging from practical to technical. The insights gained from the study of Hebrew allow the minister to provide biblical clarity for the benefit of their audience.

The Benefits of Studying Biblical Hebrew

There are several benefits of studying Hebrew but only a selected few will be set forward for consideration. The ultimate benefit and goal for any minister of the Hebrew Bible are “to learn to exegete the Hebrew text accurately in order to preach authoritative, relevant sermons.”[3] Studying biblical Hebrew improves the proficiency to preach and teach what amounts to two-thirds of the biblical canon, a literary world that is often a difficult foreign terrain for most people.[4]

Further, a knowledge of biblical Hebrew also liberates ministers from being dependent on commentaries, and other secondary literature, and helps avoid making arguments exclusively from scholarly consensus.[5] Instead, proficient knowledge of Hebrew will allow the minister to provide fresh and original messages that guide the church based on deep personal wrestling with the original languages.[6]

For the minister, there are several benefits from a technical (professional) vantage point. The minister ought to know their subject matter in deeper ways than the average Bible reader.[7] Silzer and Finley point out that much of the exegetical task is to understand how language works to convey meaning, in other words, semantics.[8] A steady daily program of working through biblical Hebrew, along with the right tools (lexicons, grammar, and other aids) will increase exposure and proficiency in how the language functions.[9]

Ideally, such would help mitigate against linguistic fallacies such as root, the figure of speech confusion, and totality transfer which reflect ignorance of how languages work.[10] Furthermore, the exegetical process helps the minister sort through technical questions which have no homiletic value but are required by the exegetical task. “The meaning of a sentence is not always obvious from the meaning of the individual words.”[11] This process to let context determine the meaning of words and phrases whether literal or figurative, ambiguous or clear ought to encourage humility (Jas 4:10), a much-needed “benefit” to the craft of preaching and teaching.[12]

The Task of Ministers to Clarify the Biblical Text

The insights gained from the study of Hebrew allow the minister to be in a better position to clarify the biblical text using languages and images their audience understands. This task emerges from various needs.

First, ministers are often asked to answer questions about translations and teachings.[13] The question “which translation is correct?” may seem a daunting one but it is actually an opportunity to help the person take their first steps into a larger world of Bible study. The minister must help to provide guidance and clarity in this sensitive but crucial area of Bible knowledge that all translations are interpretive aids to understand the original language of the text.[14] Finally, a minister who has adequate proficiency in biblical Hebrew will have the ability to address questions concerning the accuracy of certain proposed teachings or the need to correct inaccurate teachings.

Second, ministers must know when to bring out relevant insights from the text that English translations do not highlight but are quite helpful to see another level of depth to the pericope.[15] Wegner, for example, points to the phrase tōhu wābōhu which appears in the Hebrew Bible twice (Jer 4:23 and Gen 1:2).[16] It seems the prophet Jeremiah is using this unique phrase from Genesis (“a formless void” NRSV) to affirm that due to the sins of Israel, the earth is once again “waste and void” (NRSV). This intertextual insight would most likely have gone unnoticed without work in the Hebrew text.

Finally, and perhaps most significantly is the clarity that comes from a fresh and relevant application of the Hebrew text to the contemporary life of the congregation. Exegesis always has the singular aim “to produce a deeper understanding of biblical truth,”[17] the sermon for the contemporary setting must be shaped by these “freshly pressed” insights.

Conclusion

A knowledge of biblical Hebrew certainly provides practical and technical benefits for the minister who maintains a steady program to improve their proficiency in the language. Likewise, the insights gained from the study of Hebrew allow the minister to provide clarity when preaching and teaching.

This will often include addressing questions regarding translations, and teachings, or providing fresh insight from the Hebrew text hidden by an English text; and finally, by aligning the message to the contours of the exegetical work in the original language.

Endnotes

  1. All Scripture references are taken from the New Revised Standard Version unless otherwise noted.
  2. Paul D. Wegner, Using Old Testament Hebrew in Preaching: A Guide for Students and Pastors (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2009), 17.
  3. Wegner, Using Old Testament Hebrew, 13.
  4. Wegner, Using Old Testament Hebrew, 13–14; Peter James Silzer and Thomas John Finley, How Biblical Languages Work: A Student’s Guide to Learning Hebrew and Greek (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2004), 161.
  5. Wegner, Using Old Testament Hebrew, 15–16; David Ford, “Keeping up Biblical Languages while in the Ministry,” Foundations 14 (1985), 42; Douglas Stuart, Old Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors, 4th ed. (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2009), 181.
  6. Ford, “Keeping up Biblical Languages,” 42, 44; Wegner, Using Old Testament Hebrew, 15–17.
  7. Wegner, Using Old Testament Hebrew, 17.
  8. Silzer and Finley, How Biblical Languages Work, 160.
  9. Wegner, Using Old Testament Hebrew, 20–22.
  10. Silzer and Finley, How Biblical Languages Work, 162, 165; Stuart, Old Testament Exegesis, 182–83.
  11. Silzer and Finley, How Biblical Languages Work, 176.
  12. Silzer and Finley, How Biblical Languages Work, 180.
  13. Wegner, Using Old Testament Hebrew, 16.
  14. Wegner, Using Old Testament Hebrew, 15.
  15. Ford, “Keeping up Biblical Languages,” 42.
  16. Wegner, Using Old Testament Hebrew, 15.
  17. Ford, “Keeping up Biblical Languages,” 43.

Bibliography

Ford, David. “Keeping up Biblical Languages while in the Ministry.” Foundations 14 (1985): 41–44.

Silzer, Peter James, and Thomas John Finley. How Biblical Languages Work: A Student’s Guide to Learning Hebrew and Greek. Grand Rapids, Mich: Kregel Publications, 2004.

Stuart, Douglas. Old Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors. 4th edition. Louisville, Kent: Westminster John Knox, 2009.

Wegner, Paul D. Using Old Testament Hebrew in Preaching: A Guide for Students and Pastors. Grand Rapids, Mich: Kregel Publications, 2009.

An Exegetical Walkthrough of John 16:12-15

On By Jovan PayesIn Apostles, Articles, College Work, Exegesis, Gospel, Greek Grammar, Greek Studies, Holy Spirit, Jesus Studies, Johannine Literature, John, New Testament, New Testament Canon, Translation
4.png

The seventeenth-century “non-conformist” English pastor, Ralph Venning, is famous for immortalizing the following line regarding Scripture:

it is deep enough for an elephant to swim in, and yet shallow enough for a lamb to wade through.

No truer does this speak to both the complex richness and visual clarity of the Gospel of John. John is traditionally regarded as one of the last written books of the New Testament canon at the tail-end of the first-century CE. When compared to Matthew, Mark, and Luke, John is written in a style all its own — comparable only to the letters of John.

Of the significant unique features of John is the tightly bound chapters, known by many as Jesus’ Farewell Discourse (John 14-16). It is prudent to consider a few preliminary matters to appreciate the way John 16:12-15 delivers on the themes of John and the coming of the Holy Spirit with a view to some application for the modern church.

Genre and Interpretation

John, as the so-called Fourth Gospel, has presented itself with challenges of every kind. As Gary M. Burge observes, the study of what is a gospel genre and its interpretation has been an intense one, especially as it relates to the Gospel of John.[1] The nature of the genre of the gospel as a narrative is still in somewhat of a debate, and in particular how John’s structural stability or instability is appreciated and explained.[2]

The question about gospel genre speaks to what is its purpose and goal(s). This has troubled the academic community for some time. For example, a gospel is a biography but it is not what a modern person thinks of as a biography since so many anticipated features are missing. An examination of the early chapters of each Gospel reveals a thumbsketch history of Jesus’ “early years.” As Craig Blomberg demonstrates, modern perceptions of biography are misleading and resulted in earlier scholars questioning the historical value of the Gospels on false assumptions.[3] However, Blomberg continues, “when they are set side by side with various ancient sources, the Gospels compare quite favorably”:

Ancient historical standards of precision in narration and in selection and arrangement of material were much less rigid than modern ones. Few, if any, ancient works were written merely for the sake of preserving the facts; almost all were trying to put forward and defend certain ideologies or morals. But propaganda need not distort the facts, though it sometimes does. Of course, any genre may be modified, and there are uniquely Christian features in the Gospels.[4]

Craig Blomberg, “The Diversity of Literary Genres in the New Testament,” Interpreting the New Testament

Consequently, while scholars acknowledge the formal critical parallels between the Gospel accounts and other ancient historical and biographical documents, there are unique features in matters of content and emphasis.[5] Some students have even cautioned that there are significant variations even between the four Gospels based on their own internal agendas, sufficient enough to make Larry Hurtado caution, “it wise to treat them individually.”[6]

John on His Own

The Gospel of John bears features that stand uniquely against the Synoptics. This, however, does not suggest a contradiction. This proclivity of John to emphasize unique material does not disassociate itself with the themes of the Synoptics. For example, instead of a nativity narrative, there is an emphasis on the pre-incarnate narrative (John 1:1-14ff) serving as a prequel to their nativity storyline (Matt 2:1-23; Luke 1:26-52). Moreover, an emphasis upon miracle narratives and extensive dialogs and discourses, take precedence over parabolic instructions and pronouncements.[7] 

Despite the material that is unique to John, C. K. Barrett calls attention to the fact that events in John and Mark “occur in the same order.”[8] And while Barrett stresses that John most likely borrowed from Mark, Leon Morris responds that such features found to be common with John and the Synoptics “is precisely the kind that one would anticipate finding in oral tradition.”[9] In short, John is certainly unique in many significant ways, but it follows the same structure of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

A Broad Layout for John

John may be divided broadly into two thematically arranged halves (1:19-12:50; 13:1-21:25), despite some disagreement regarding the structural integrity of the fourth Gospel, due to certain aporia (i.e. any perplexing difficulty).[10] Jeffrey Staley suggests these tendencies are set forth in the prologue (John 1:1-18) and bolsters the viability of the approach taken here.[11] John 1:19-12:50 (“book of signs”) and John 13:1-21:25 (“book of glory”) are consequently the main divisions taken in this study.

The last nine chapters focus great attention upon the last few days of Jesus’ life,[12] where the focus is on the “Upper Room” and his “Farewell Discourse” (13-17), the crucifixion and resurrection narratives (18-21). Even more specifically, the text under consideration (John 16:12-15) finds its niche as the last of five discourses that speak of the Spirit as the Paraclete (John 14:15-17, 25-26; 15:26-27; 16:7-11, 12-15):[13]

Book of Glory 13:1-21:25

Upper Room/Farewell (13-16)

Prayer (17)

Crucifixion and Resurrection (18-21)

A Brief Exegetical Walkthrough

This paper sets out to examine John 16:12-15 as the last of five segments that place emphasis upon the Paraclete’s role in the ministry of the apostles; furthermore, to examine the nature of the Paraclete’s role in the early church, as set forth by Jesus, as an apostolic “Aid,” guiding them in the ways that pertain to truth.

Verse 12: I have many things left to say to all of you, but you are not able to endure it at the present time. (Author's Translation)[14]

Following George Beasley-Murray’s lead, the final Paraclete passage brings the discourse to a “climax” emphasizing the role the Spirit’s ministry.[15] The adverbial eti here takes the sense of “what is left or remaining”[16] and in concert with all’, which contextually appears to function as a transition marker placing emphasis on “the other side of a matter or issue,”[17] suggests that verse 12 begins to further demonstrate the importance of the Spirit’s coming presence. Eti and all’ are pivotal phrases for they describe the tension of the situation in which the disciples are to be found. Consequently, this climactic Paraclete discussion may be viewed in terms of two perspectives: the disciples’ and the Lord’s.

First, from the disciple’s perspective, one wonders how much more Jesus withheld from them during his personal ministry. However, earlier in this context Jesus clearly told them, “I did not speak about these matters to you, because I was among you” (John 16:4b). As a result of disclosing the impending future events, Jesus observes their plight and says, “pain has filled your hearts” (16:6b). The thought of loss and loneliness, without access to the presence of Jesus, made the disciples at that moment (arti) incapable (ou dúnasthe) to carry the burden (bastádzein) of what appears to be doctrinal and prophetic significance (14:26; 16:14). The anarthrous adverbial infinitival construction ou dúnasthe bastádzein stresses purpose; namely, the disciples do not have adequate capacity in order to “sustain the burden” of what Jesus has left to teach them.[18] Thus, in essence, because the disciples are currently unable to carry more weight (upon the sorrow?) in their hearts, there remains future spiritual growth.

Second, from the Lord’s perspective, he looks forward to a future event. This observation is made on the basis of the present lack of capacity of the disciples to carry the burden of what Jesus has to further instruct them in. If ou dúnasthe bastádzein arti is to be taken as a present reality, then Jesus looks forward to a future reality-event when they will have the capacity to bear his teaching. This is one of the blessings already referred to previously that flow from the arrival of the Paraclete (14:25-27; 15:26-16:11).

The Paraclete[19] is viewed as an “Aid” in John 14:25-27 as one who will “teach” the disciples and “remind” them of the teaching of Jesus eventuating in “peace”; in contrast to the “sorrow” that they are now experiencing (16:6). And with the arrival of the Paraclete, the disciples will have an “Advocate” for their defense from the world (15:26-27), and a “Counselor” to give guidance in accusing the world (16:8-11).[20] In each circumstance, Jesus says, “the Father will give you another Paraclete” (14:16), “the Father will send” (14:26), “but when the Paraclete comes” (15:26), “when he comes” (16:8), “when the Spirit of truth comes” (16:12). Hence, Jesus already anticipates a time when the disciples overcome both their sorrow and the corresponding incapacity to bear more of his teaching.

Verse 13: However, when that one has come – the Spirit of Truth – he will guide you in all the truth; for he will not speak from himself, on the contrary, to the extent of what he will hear, he will speak. And he will announce to you the things that are to come.

Preliminary to discussing the continued flow of thought from verse 12, there is a text-critical matter that needs some attention. Verse 13 bears two significant variants. The first is the dative construction en te aletheía páse (dative of sphere) following hodegései humas, which according to other textual traditions has an accusative construction eis pasan tèn alétheian (spatial accusative). The committee of the UBS4 textual apparatus has given en te aletheía páse a B rating; meaning, that they view the dative construction as is almost certain,[21] being witnessed by notable uncials Aleph1 (4th century), W (4/5 centuries). Meanwhile, the accusative construction is witnessed by notable uncials A (5) and B (4th century) with variation, and 068 (5th century). Along with early translations and early patristic witnesses, the evidence appears somewhat fairly divided. Bruce Metzger suggests, however, “the construction of eis and the accusative seems to have been introduced by copyists who regarded it as more idiomatic after hodegései”[22] than en with the dative.[23]

Despite the pain that filled each disciple’s heart, the disciples were directed to a future event – the work of the Spirit of Truth (16:13ff.). “However” (dè) marks that Jesus is developing a new topic (dè of “switch subject”).[24] Moreover, this contrast is temporal as demonstrated by hótan élthe (“when that one has arrived”). Furthermore, following Buth’s discussion on δὲ as a mark of switching subjects, it is proposed that the new subject is ekeínos, which refers to ho parákletos. Daniel Wallace proposes that this is a more solid linguistic connection between this pronoun and its antecedent (ekeínos = ho parákletos).[25] Consequently, tò Pneùma tès aletheías serves as an appositional phrase expanding and further defining ekeínos; hence the translation, “when that one has come – the Spirit of Truth […]” (John 16:13a). Instead of the present reality of pain that the disciples feel, Jesus focuses on the guidance that ho parákletos[26] will bring to the disciples.

Ancient sources point to a Jewish background the Spirit of Truth motif. This vocabulary was typical when admonishing obedient and moral lives by using concepts that are dualistic. For example, we find a proverbial discussion of “the spirit of truth and the spirit of error” with “the spirit of discernment” standing between them urging there to be a selection of truth (T. Jud 20). Observe the full quote:

Learn therefore, my children, that two spirits wait upon man—the spirit of truth and the spirit of error; and in the midst is the spirit of the understanding of the mind, to which it belongeth to turn whithersoever it will.  And the works of truth and the works of error are written upon the breast of men, and each one of them the Lord knoweth.  And there is no time at which the works of men can be hid from Him; for on the bones of his breast hath he been written down before the Lord.  And the spirit of truth testifieth all things, and accuseth all; and he who sinneth is burnt up by his own heart, and cannot raise his face unto the Judge. (italics added)[27]

Moreover, in the Qumran cache there is a discussion of God allotting two spirits to humanity, “the spirits of truth and perversity” in between which humanity must walk, again choosing between the two. As a result, walking with the truth is to “walk in the ways of light,” and the converse is true of walking with perversity – to walk in darkness (1QS 3:18-21). Again, observe:

[God] allotted unto humanity two spirits that he should walk in them until the time of His visitation; they are the spirits of truth and perversity. The origin of truth is in a fountain of light, and the origin of perversity is from a fountain of darkness. Dominion over all the sons of righteousness is in the hand of the Prince of light; they walk in the ways of light. All dominion over the sons of perversity is in the hand of the Angel of darkness; they walk in the ways of darkness. (italics added)[28]

These resonate strongly with the positive guidance the disciples will receive from the Paraclete.

The source of the Paraclete’s teaching is external to him, “for he will not speak from himself, “on the contrary” (all’), to the extent of what he will hear, he will speak.” Since earlier the Paraclete is said to be like Jesus (14:16-17), and Jesus also said that his teaching was not his own (3:32-35; 7:16-18; 8:26-29, etc.), it would make sense that the teaching of the Paraclete would originate from the Father. As F. Moloney observes, “neither Jesus nor the Paraclete is the ultimate source of the revelation they communicate.”[29] And his work is, in part, to remind the disciples of the teaching of Jesus (14:26).

In addition to this call to remembrance, “he will announce” (lalései) to them “things that are to come” (tà erchómena anangeleì), which presumably are the things that he will also “hear” (hósa akoúsei). Some view this last phrase (tà erchómena anangeleì) as eschatologically prophetic.[30] Others view it as instructional content yet to be expanded upon.[31] D. A. Carson proposes that this phrase has to do with “all that transpires in consequence of the pivotal revelation bound up with Jesus’ person, ministry, death, resurrection and exaltation.”[32] These matters, Carson views, are the subject of what we now call the New Testament Canon; consequently, this anticipates further canonical development by the new prophetic office – the apostleship.[33]

Verse 14: That one will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and he will report it to you.

Still looking to the arrival of the Paraclete (e.g. ekeínos), Jesus expands further upon his ministry – he will glorify Jesus. The word doxásei was often used in LXX to glorify God (2 Sam 6:20; 1 Chron 17:18), so also is used to describe one of the roles the Paraclete will have.[34] The term hóti has been ignored somewhat here among commentaries, where it could potentially be employed epexegetically; saying, “the Paraclete will glorify (honor) Jesus; namely, by taking the teaching that goes back to the Lord’s ministry and announcing it afresh to the disciples.” Such is not an unlikely view of the grammar; however, viewing hóti as causal (i.e. “because”) the sense changes slightly. Overall, the idea that the Paraclete’s glorifying of Jesus directly relates to him taking the teaching that was Jesus’ remains the same.[35]

This is borne out by Carson in three related ways. First, the Paraclete’s work is Christ-centric. Second, based upon the implication drawing from ek tou emou lépsetai “from what is mine,” Carson draws the conclusion that “the Spirit takes from this infinite sum and gives that truth to the disciples.” Third, Christ is the center of his teaching ministry, and it is through the Spirit’s work that Jesus is glorified.[36]

There is a rather important emphasis that should be laid upon the phrase ananggelei humìn. The term has to do with providing information; hence, may be translated “disclose,” “announce,” “proclaim,” or even “teach.”[37] What is contextually significant is that ananggéllōα carries an implicit understanding that it is a report of what one has heard.[38] Incidentally, the Paraclete will speak whatever he has heard (hósa akoúsei lalései 16:13), and here Jesus says that the Paraclete will take from what is his (Jesus), from where he will provide information to the disciples. Again, this highlights two matters: first, that the Paraclete will not speak independently; and second, the content of his teaching is all truth and Jesus. As Barrett observes, in John, ananggéllō (4:25, 5:15, 16:13-15) “is applied to the revelation of divine truth, and it is apparent that it is so used here.”[39]

Furthermore, Lawrence Lutkemeyer observes, that ananggéllō is “never” used in a predictive sense; instead, it is employed to report the way things were, are, or as they come into realization.[40] Therefore, what is under consideration is a reporting of the teaching and implications that flow from Christ and the Gospel message. This reporting is deposited within the pages of what is now the New Testament canon and serves as demonstrative proof that they have understood the Lord’s teaching.[41]

Verse 15: All things whatsoever the Father has are mine; for this reason I said, [hóti] “he takes from what is mine and will report it to you.”

When Jesus says, “All things whatsoever the Father has are mine,” it is in a sense logical to deduce that the content of what the Spirit is to announce or report to the disciples is under consideration. Carson again observes:

Therefore if the Spirit takes what is mine and makes it known to the disciples, the content of what is mine is nothing less than the revelation of the Father himself, for Jesus declares, All that belongs to the Father is mine (v. 15). That is why Jesus has cast the Spirit’s ministry in terms of the unfolding of what belongs to the Son: this is not a lighting of God, or undue elevation of the Son, since what belongs to the Father belongs to the Son. It is therefore entirely appropriate that the Spirit’s ministry be designed to bring glory to the Son (v. 14).[42]

D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John, Piller New Testament Commentaries

It is precisely because they share this content and revelation (dià toùto) that the Paraclete will draw out from what belongs to Jesus (16:14), and that he will only speak what he has heard (16:13). There is a very similar statement in Luke, but here it speaks in reference to Jesus as he was sent from the Father (Luke 10:16).[43] The parallel is striking to this context regarding the Paraclete, of which Jesus by implication is the first and the Spirit is the second (14:16).

Precisely because of this shared content and revelation (dià toùto), Jesus retrospectively points out that he had spoken certain words to them (eìpon).[44] And here, John employs the recitativum hóti, meaning that the use of this conjunction is designed to introduce a direct quotation and is usually left untranslated.[45] Often hóti functions as an indicator of direct discourse.”[46] It serves only “to call attention to the quotation,” thus it functions in the same fashion as do quotation marks;[47] hence, in the translation above, hóti is emboldened and bracketed to demonstrate the origin of the quotation marks. What Jesus points to then, is the role of the Paraclete, “he takes from what is mine and will report it to you.”

It is interesting to note that the first quotation, “he takes from what is mine” (ek toù emoù lambánei) is a present indicative as opposed to the future indicative in 16:14 (lémpsetai). The shift in the tense of activity to the present as Christ views the Spirit’s work retrospectively may point back to 14:17, where Christ apparently speaks in both present and future tenses. Jesus says, “You know (present) him, for he dwells (present) with you and will be (future) in you” (14:17b). However, to be fair, the UBS4 committee had difficulty deciphering between a variant here (giving it a C rating) that relates specifically to the tense of both verbs ménei and éstai. If the wording of 14:17 stands as the majority of the UBS4 committee suggests,[48] then the Spirit was already in some sense active in the apostolic circle, and will in the future be in them.

This reflects what is happening here. Jesus notes that the Spirit is, in some sense, already taking (lambánei) from the reservoir of revelation and that he will when the time is ready, report this information to them (ananggeleì humìn). There is little by way of academic support for this approach to provide a resolution for the tense change from lémpsetai to lambánei (except Moloney).[49] Barrett’s terse statement, “the change of tense (cf. lémpsetai, v. 14) does not seem to be significant,”[50] needs revision on the grounds that 14:17, assuming its textual basis is the weightiest available, transitions from present to future with reference to the Paraclete’s work as does the tense shift in 16:15.[51]

Endnotes

  1. Gary M. Burge, “Interpreting the Gospel of John,” Interpreting the New Testament: Essays on Methods and Issues, eds. David Alan Black and David S. Dockery (Nashville, TN: B&H, 2001), 357-70.
  2. Burge, “Interpreting,” 376-78.
  3. Craig Blomberg, “The Diversity of Literary Genres in the New Testament,” Interpreting the New Testament: Essays on Methods and Issues, eds. David Alan Black and David S. Dockery (Nashville, TN: B&H, 2001), 274.
  4. Blomberg, “The Diversity of Literary Genres,” 274.
  5. Blomberg, “The Diversity of Literary Genres,” 275.
  6. Larry W. Hurtado, “Gospel (Genre),” DJG 278.
  7. Hurtado, “Gospel (Genre),” 281.
  8. C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text, 2d ed. (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1978), 43.
  9. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, rev. ed., NICNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995), 45.
  10. Burge, “Interpreting,” 376-78.
  11. Jeff Staley, “The Structure of John’s Prologue: Its Implications for the Gospel’s Narrative Structure,” CBQ 48.2 (April 1986): 241-49.
  12. Burge, “Interpreting,” 382.
  13. C. H. Dodd takes note of the significant fact, that John 15.1 to 16.15 is a pure monologue, and is in fact, the longest monologue in the entire Johannine Gospel (The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel [New York, NY: Cambridge at the University Press, 1965], 410).
  14. The translations are the author’s unless otherwise noted.
  15. George R. Beasley-Murray, Gospel of Life: Theology in the Fourth Gospel (1991; repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 78.
  16. BDAG 400.
  17. BDAG 45.
  18. BDAG 171; Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 590.
  19. “The principal difficulty encountered in rendering parákletos is the fact that this term covers potentially such a wide area of meaning. The traditional rendering of ‘Comforter’ is especially misleading because it suggests only one very limited aspect of what the Holy Spirit does” (L&N 12.19). There are three semantic domains in which it overlaps: (1) psychological factors of encouragement, (2) definite communication aspects, and (3) intercessory aspects leading toward certain legal implications and procedures (L&N 35:16, fn. 4).
  20. Beasley-Murray, Gospel of Life, 71-72.
  21. Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2d ed. (1994; repr., Stuttgart, Germany: German Bible Society, 2001), 14*.
  22. Metzger, A Textual Commentary, 210; cf., Stanley E. Porter, Idioms of the Greek New Testament, 2d ed. (London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2005), 151-52.
  23. Interestingly, Stanley E. Porter discusses the morphological connection between eis and en, noting that eis “may have been formally derived from the preposition ἐν, through the process of adding a final sigma (ens), the nu dropping out, and compensatory lengthening of the vowel from e to ei” (Idioms, 151) As a result, there is evidence of a connection, observing that “eis in its basic meaning is concerned with the movement of the sphere toward and into” a location, “as if this were the action that resulted in the condition of en” (Idioms, 151). There is much, therefore, to agree with Barrett’s observation that: “The difference in meaning between the two readings is slight, but whereas eis t. al. suggests that, under the Spirit’s guidance, the disciples will come to know all truth, en t. al. suggests guidance in the whole sphere of truth; they will be kept in the truth of God […] which is guaranteed by the mission of Jesus” (Gospel According to St. John, 489).
  24. Randall Buth, “Oun, De, Kai, and Asyndeton in John’s Gospel,” Linguistics and New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Discourse Analysis, eds. David Alan Black, et al. (Nashville, TN: Broadman, 1992), 145, 151.
  25. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 331-32.
  26. That one who is ho parákletos will come as a guide in all truth, and it is only fitting then that ho parákletos is called “the Spirit of Truth” (tò pneùma tés aletheías). The two titles are complex conceptions; however, they appeal to certain Hebrew motifs that need some attention here. Without developing too deeply some of the backgrounds of each of these phrases, John employs the phrases ho parákletos (5 times) and tò pneùma tés aletheía (4 times) exclusively among New Testament authors. However, cognates are used by other authors.
  27. T. Judas 20, ANF 8:20.
  28. 1QS 3:18–21 as quoted in Craig A. Evans, Word and Glory: On the Exegetical and Theological Background of John’s Prologue, JSNT Supplement 89 (England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 147.
  29. Francis J. Moloney, The Gospel of John, SP 4 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1998), 441.
  30. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John, 490.
  31. George R. Beasley-Murray, John, 2d ed., WBC 36 (Nashville, TN: Nelson, 1999), 283; Rodney A. Whitacre, John, IVPNTC, eds. Grant Osborne, et al. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1999), 392-93.
  32. D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John, PNTC (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1991), 540.
  33. D. A. Carson, The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: An Exposition of John 14:-17 (1980; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1988), 149-51.
  34. Ceslas Spicq, “dóxa, doxádzō, sundoxádzō,” Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, trans. James D. Ernest (1994; repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), 1:376-78.
  35. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 459-60.
  36. Carson, The Farewell Discourse, 150.
  37. BDAG 59.
  38. BDAG 59.
  39. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John, 490; Carson, According to John, 540.
  40. Lawrence J. Lutkemeyer, “The Role of the Paraclete (John 16:7-15),” CBQ 8.2 (April 1946): 228.
  41. Andreas J. Köstenberger, The Missions of Jesus and the Disciples According to the Fourth Gospel: With Implications for the Fourth Gospel’s Purpose and the Mission of the Contemporary Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 173-74; Lutkemeyer, “The Role of the Paraclete,” 228; Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John, 490-91.
  42. Carson, According to John, 541.
  43. “The one who hears you hears me, and the one who rejects you rejects me, and the one who rejects me rejects him who sent me” (Luke 16.10 ESV).
  44. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 333.
  45. Matthew S. DeMoss, Pocket Dictionary for the Study of New Testament Greek (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2001), 107.
  46. James Allen Hewitt, New Testament Greek: A Beginning and Intermediate Grammar (1986; repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2004), 52.
  47. A. T. Robertson and W. Hersey Davis, A New Short Grammar of the Greek Testament, 10th ed. (1958; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1979), 364.
  48. Metzger, A Textual Commentary, 208.
  49. Moloney, The Gospel of John, 447.
  50. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John, 491.
  51. Moloney, The Gospel of John, 447.

Bibliography

Barrett, Charles K. The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text. 2d edition. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1978.

(BDAG) Bauer, Walter, F.W. Danker, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature. 3rd edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Beasley-Murray, George R. Gospel of Life: Theology in the Fourth Gospel. 1991. Repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995.

Blomberg, Craig. “The Diversity of Literary Genres in the New Testament.” Interpreting the New Testament: Essays on Methods and Issues. Edited by David Alan Black and David S. Dockery. Nashville, TN: B&H, 2001.

Burge, Gary M. “Interpreting the Gospel of John.” Interpreting the New Testament: Essays on Methods and Issues. Edited by David Alan Black and David S. Dockery. Nashville, TN: B&H, 2001.

Buth, Randall. “Oun, De, Kai, and Asyndeton in John’s Gospel.” Linguistics and New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Discourse Analysis. Edited by David Alan Black, et al. Nashville, TN: Broadman, 1992.

Carson, Donald A. The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: An Exposition of John 14:-17. 1980. Repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1988.

—-. The Gospel According to John. PNTC. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1991.

DeMoss, Matthew S. Pocket Dictionary for the Study of New Testament Greek.Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2001.

Dodd, C. H. The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel. New York, NY: Cambridge at the University Press, 1965.

Evans, Craig A. Word and Glory: On the Exegetical and Theological Background of John’s Prologue. JSNT Supplement 89. Library of New Testament Studies. England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993.

Hewitt, James Allen. New Testament Greek: A Beginning and Intermediate Grammar. 1986. Repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2004.

Hurtado, Larry W. “Gospel (Genre).” Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Edited by Joel B. Green, et al. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1992.

Köstenberger, Andreas J. The Missions of Jesus and the Disciples According to the Fourth Gospel: With Implications for the Fourth Gospel’s Purpose and the Mission of the Contemporary Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998.

(L&N) Louw, Johannes P., and Eugene Albert Nida. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains. 2d edition. New York: United Bible Societies, 1996.

Lutkemeyer, Lawrence J. “The Role of the Paraclete (John 16:7-15).” CBQ 8.2 (April 1946): 220-29.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2d edition. 1994. Repr., Stuttgart, Germany: German Bible Society, 2001.

Moloney, Francis J. The Gospel of John. SP 4. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1998.

Morris, Leon. The Gospel According to John. Revised edition. NICNT. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995.

Porter, Stanley E. Idioms of the Greek New Testament. 2d edition. London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2005.

Robertson, Archibald T., and W. Hersey Davis. A New Short Grammar of the Greek Testament. 10th ed. 1958. Repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1979.

Spicq, Ceslas. “dóxa, doxádzō, sundoxádzō.” Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by James D. Ernest. 1994. Repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996.

Staley, Jeff. “The Structure of John’s Prologue: Its Implications for the Gospel’s Narrative Structure.” CBQ 48.2 (April 1986): 241-63.

“Testimony of the Twelve Patriarchs.” Ante-Nicene Fathers. Vol. 8. American Edition. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. 1886. Repr., New York, NY: Scribner’s, 1903.

Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996.

Whitacre, Rodney A. John. IVPNTC. Edited by Grant Osborne, et al. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1999.

Shall We Dictate to Scripture?

On By Jovan PayesIn Articles, Hermeneutics, Interpretation, Spiritual Formation4 Comments

All who strive for a life of faith must recognize a fundamental principle of Divine religion: a life of faith is grounded and developed through the incorporation of the word of God into their lives. It is only until we harmonize our lifestyle with the influence of the inspired word, that we can find ourselves progressing towards spiritual maturity (2 Tim 3:16-17). If we do the former, the latter will follow.

It is the proclamation of the events leading up to the redemptive work of Jesus and the continued ministry of his apostles set forth in the written gospel message of the New Testament that is  “bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations” (Rom 1:5, cf. Rom 16:26). Paul puts the matter into focus in Romans 10:17 when he sets for the principle of faith: “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.”

The question considered in this piece is focused on our attitude to Scripture’s application to our lives. We are asking, shall we dictate to Scripture regarding how we ought to live, or will we humbly submit to its teaching?

God and His Word

In Scripture, faithfulness to the instruction of God is paramount from both Divine and human vantage points (Hos 4:6; Psa 119). From the Divine side, God has often warned his people from adding to or removing from what He has entrusted humanity with (Deut 4:2; Rev 22:18-19). Little wonder, then, that Peter once said that if anyone should speak, they should “as one who speaks oracles of God” (1 Pet 4:11).

When Joshua, the son of Nun, succeeded Moses as the prophetic leader over Israel and representation of the Lord’s will, God gave him this encouragement:

Only be strong and very courageous, being careful to do according to all the law that Moses my servant commanded you. Do not turn from it to the right hand or to the left, that you may have good success wherever you go. This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success. (Joshua 1:7-8 English Standard Version)[1]

As the representative of the Lord’s leadership among the Israelites, Joshua’s success depended upon his courage to live his life upon the line of faithfulness. Commentary on Joshua’s influence due to his faithfulness is found in the words of Joshua 24:31. This could only be accomplished after extensive meditation and determined application of the Mosaic law.

The opening Psalm of the Psalter echoes these sentiments quite vividly. Psalm 1 is described as “a blessing or beatitude that lays down the two ways of living, exemplified by the character of the just and the wicked.”[2]

Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night. He is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers. The wicked are not so, but are like chaff that the wind drives away. (Psalm 1:1-4)

The restatement of “meditation” of the “law” and the subsequent “prosperity” in the life of Joshua 1:8 is not coincidental. It is the foundation of a faithful life of obedience. To “fear God and keep his commandments” is the very fulfillment of the purpose of life (Eccl 12:13).

A millennium later, Jesus speaks to his disciples regarding the importance of abiding in his word. In the Gospel of John, Jesus affirms this principle quite clearly in John 8:31-32, where it is through abiding in his word (“the truth”) that individuals become free from sin. Later, at the close of his earthly ministry, Jesus appeals to the image of a vine and its branches with the emphasis upon the branches abiding in the life-giving vine in order to produce fruit (John 15:1-11).

The illustration stripped away from all metaphor, comes to a focal point in verses 9-11 where Jesus says:

As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love. These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full. "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you." (John 15:9-11)

As Barnabas Lindars summarizes, “the loving relationship of mutual indwelling is pre-eminently a moral union. Hence, love is shown by the voluntary keeping of the Master’s commandments.”[3] We see, then, that love of God is expressed in faithful obedience to the divine commands reflected in a moral and spiritual lifestyle.

God’s Word in Human Hands

From the human vantage point, the application of God’s word derives from “rightly handling the word of truth” (2 Tim 2:15). The significance of the word translated “rightly handling” (Grk. orthotomeo) is expressed by William E. Vine:[4]

The stress is on orthos; the Word of God is to be “handled” strictly along the lines of its teaching. If the metaphor is taken from plowing, cutting a straight furrow, the word would express a careful cultivation, the Word of God viewed as ground designed to give the best results from its ministry and in the life. (Link)

W. E. Vine, M. F. Unger, and W. White, Jr., Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (1984)

In order to properly apply Scripture to life, we must seek the true meaning of the biblical text. This is the human side of living by faith. In essence, God has given his word and expects humans to obey it in love; meanwhile, we must employ our minds to understand and apply his word (cf. 1 Cor 2:11-14; Eph 3:4).

There are several approaches many take to find out the nature of God’s will – that is, His desire or plan for a person’s life. Some randomly open the Bible and apply the first verse under the tip of their finger, and find some mystical application to their situation. Though insight is no doubt obtainable, this is not the most effective approach to incorporating God’s word into everyday life. Scripture was never designed to be approached in this fashion.

Others may have read through the whole Bible several times but still have not figured out what to do with the Bible. The pieces of the biblical puzzle are still scattered throughout their mind because they have never really studied the Bible – they have merely read the Bible as one would read a fictional title. Biblical literature was designed to be meditated upon, memorized, and rigorously studied. It is not literature to enjoy as a pastime or hobby.

We are therefore submitting for consideration the need to study the word of God in such a way that produces spiritual formation; as Paul has said elsewhere, “until Christ is formed in you” (Gal 4:19b). To do this, we must “attempt to hear the Word as the original recipients were to have heard it, to find out what was the original intent of the words of the Bible.”[5] This is the process of exegesis.

The word exegesis is actually derived from two Greek words, ek (“out”) and egeisthas (“to guide or lead”).[6] This is the process of drawing out “the meaning of the biblical text and explaining it.”[7] Biblical faith, and the obedience which is inherent in it, occurs when the meaning of Scripture is drawn out, that meaning is then articulated in meaningful ways, and then applied to contemporary circumstances. This is the noble handling of God’s word.

It is always easier to spout off some superficial interpretation of Scripture that is grounded in inadequate research than it is to produce a well-reasoned, well-understood explanation of a biblical passage or message. Bible study is for all, but it must be candidly acknowledged that there is a difference between the academic exegesis of the Bible and the exegesis usually explored by those untrained in biblical academics. This is an important distinction to address.[8]

Briefly, the non-academic must constantly rely heavily upon the “expert” scholar with the added difficulty of not being able to personally cross-examine “expert” research. However, more resources available today are written at the popular level for the non-expert so that, provided sufficient study, they may become more knowledgeable than ever before (biblical languages, cultural context, tools to study the forms of biblical literature, etc.).[9] This is a matter of mental industry and dedication (Ezra 7:6).

The opposite of exegesis is eisegesis, a word that likewise is derived from two Greek words, eis (“into”) and egeisthas (“to guide or lead”). Eisegesis is “the mistake of reading meaning into a text rather than deriving meaning from it.”[10] It may also be stated as reading into the text “meaning that one wants to get out of it.”[11] The point is: eisegesis is the exact opposite of exegesis. It is a hostile take over of the biblical teaching – intentionally or unintentionally.

In his work, From Scripture to Theology: A Canonical Journey into Hermeneutics, Charles J. Scalise uses the analogy of backpacking and camping to show the need for appropriate hermeneutics. Biblical “campers” must prepare for their trip, employing an important guidance tool for directing their theological travels – a map. The map is the biblical teaching, and it is, therefore, important to stay on the map for the right guidance.

Read carefully the following point Scalise makes contrasting exegesis from eisegesis. It should put the two Bible approaches into perspective:

Instead of Scripture functioning as the rule of doctrine, exaggeration of particular doctrines have sought to become the rule of Scripture. Proponents of a specific view have sought to read their particular opinions into Scripture (eisegesis) rather than letting the Scripture rule their view. Prooftexts have been claimed for an amazing variety of additions to and aberrations of the Christian tradition […] Christians who seek to claim authority for beliefs and actions supported by such scriptural pretexts are making maps where there is no biblical territory.[12]

C. J. Scalise, From Scripture to Theology (1996)

If exegesis is what we do to “stay on the map we are given,” then the opposite is to make, as Scalise observes, a map “where there is no biblical territory.” Shame on us should we fall into this hermeneutical snare. We should always be ready to be taught more accurately and adjust our understandings (our bearings) based upon the Map of Life (Acts 18:24-28).

God’s Word in Human Hearts

After considering the importance God places upon the observance of His word and observing the responsibility laid upon us to properly interpret the Bible, it would be a misfortune not to discuss the need to apply God’s word in the practical everyday life setting. Some seem to simply mentally enjoy the study and proclamation of God’s word, but fail to have the same zeal in the application of its spiritual instruction.

The biblical books were always composed in such a way that they are complete within themselves to teach and to be understood. For example, when Paul composed his letter to the Ephesians regarding “the mystery of Christ” concerning the inclusion of all nations – Jew and Gentile – into the redemption offered by God, he was confident that they would read the letter and perceive its instruction (Eph 3:1-7).

In order to apply God’s teaching to their lives in the most effective way, Christians must be personal students of the Bible. They must be people who hear the word, perceive it, give it space to grow and flourish. Their teacher must be God, and they must never settle for any scholar’s “explanation.” It is Jesus’ words that give life, not the words of the scholar, preacher, or teacher (John 6:68).

As Merrill C. Tenney once said:

[T]here is a danger of substituting the explanation for the text itself. Men read what Dr. X and Professor Y have to say about the text rather than let the text talk to them.[13]

M. C. Tenney, John: The Gospel of Belief (1948)

The Bible is fully capable of inducing belief and providing instruction for faithful living. Knowledge of “the book” prevents destruction, and it is for this reason that Hosea lamented for Israel. They failed to allow Scripture to instruct them and guide them (Hos 4:6).

We must allow Scripture to dictate our behavior in public and in private, at work or at play, “at church” or out “in the world” – wherever we are, we must stay conscious of our responsibilities to “do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God” (Micah 6:8 cf. Rom 12:1). To this point, the Lord spoke very clearly to his auditors (Matt 12:33-37). The genuineness of our faithfulness will become evident to those around us.

Jesus once spoke a parable regarding various souls in a field. It is recorded in three Gospel accounts (Mark 4:1-25; Matt 13:3-23; Luke 8:4-18). It was based on an agricultural backdrop, where a person scatters seeds in a field so that he could grow a crop. In this process the seed is tossed out liberally all around the field: “some here,” “some there,” “some over there,” and “some right here.”

Actually, Jesus set forth four places in the field – the pathway, the rocky soil, the thorny patches, and then the good soil. Each seed produced different results depending upon the soil it was embedded within. The seed that fell on the pathway was quickly devoured by the birds, the rocky soil produced superficial growth of the seed, and the thorn patches choked out the developing seedlings. Finally, the good soil developed seed exponentially, according to the ability of the seed to produce.

But when Jesus spoke this parable, the seed was to represent the word of God, and the different soils represent the different receptive hearts. One group (i.e. pathway) is so dense that the word of God will not penetrate their heart, others (i.e. rocky soil) have no real spiritual depth to them and the spiritual effects of the word only last temporarily, another group (i.e. thorn patches) were so occupied with the cares of life that there was no dedication to the word.

These three groups all have failed relationships with the word. But there are some (i.e. good soil) who have receptive hearts, they are tender and pliable before the God who created them and loved them. These are submissive to the word and develop spiritually, according to the person’s ability to develop spiritual vitality. These individuals allow the word to dictate the terms and conditions of their faith.

Finally, in connection with these thoughts, reflect upon the words of Paul as he speaks of the power of the Word of God:

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

God’s word should have full reign in molding the human heart. Heaven help those who desire to live in eternity with their God to be so minded.

Conclusion

Returning to the question which led to this study, shall we dictate to Scripture regarding how we ought to live, or will we humbly submit to its teaching? God has clearly shown that we must submit to his word in order to have a lifestyle representative of biblical faith. We must view the Scriptures are authored by God and, therefore, are capable to accomplish the task of spiritual formation.

God has always expected his word to be faithfully kept and never altered. We must exert great care in deriving our understanding from God’s word. And finally, the application is the only way to truly be the people that seek after God. Mere knowledge will lead to destruction, both knowledge and action are the keys to unlocking spiritual vitality in God’s way.

References

  1. Unless otherwise stated all Scripture quotations are taken from the English Standard Version (ESV) of the Holy Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2001).
  2. Roland E. Murphy, The Gift of the Psalms (2000; repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003), 18.
  3. Barnabas Lindars, The Gospel of John (1981; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 490.
  4. W. E. Vine, M. F. Unger, and W. White, Jr., Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (1984; repr., Nashville, TN: Nelson, 1996), 2:289.
  5. Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All its Worth, 3d ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2003), 23 (emphasis original).
  6. D. R. Dungan, Hermeneutics: A Text-Book (repr., Delight, AR: Gospel Light, n.d.), 1.
  7. Matthew S. DeMoss, Pocket Dictionary for the Study of New Testament Greek (Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2001), 54.
  8. Jack P. Lewis, “The Importance of Biblical Languages,” Man of God: Essays on the Life and Work of the Preacher, ed. Shawn D. Mathis (Nashville, TN: Gospel Advocate, 1996). Lewis specifically addresses the difference in ability between the minister who is a student of the word in its original language, versus the minister who simply preaches and studies from an English text. The former allows ministers to be more certain of their conclusions while the latter finds ministers encumbered with exegetical limitations. Basically, Lewis affirms, “If one is to be an expositor of Scripture, then he matures in that through a life-long study of the languages of Scripture” (162). The difference spoken of here equally resonates with the members of the congregations: it’s a matter of depth of personal certainty upon which a conclusion is drawn. Otherwise, heavy reliance upon “expert” opinion can be and often is costly.
  9. I have seen flaws on both sides of the debate. On the one hand, I have seen students that know more of their English Bible demonstrated in their deep faith and devoted life than some academics caught up in their theoretical debates on hermeneutics. On the other hand, I have seen students make many egregious errors because they press a biblical passage from an English Bible beyond its intended meaning – an error that could have been relieved by appealing to a more in-depth study of the passage.
  10. DeMoss, Pocket Dictionary, 50.
  11. Richard N. Soulen and R. Kendall Soulen, Handbook of Biblical Criticism, 3d ed. (Louisville, KY: WJK, 2001), 52.
  12. Charles J. Scalise, From Scripture to Theology: A Canonical Journey into Hermeneutics (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1996), 70 (emphasis added).
  13. Merrill C. Tenney, John: The Gospel of Belief – An Analytical Study of the Text (1948; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997), 21.

1 Peter 3:15: Do You have an Answer?

On By Jovan PayesIn 1 Peter, Bible Study, Christian Apologetics, Essays, New Testament, Publications, Spiritual Formation, Spiritual Growth, Theology, Words of TruthLeave a comment

It has long been observed that Christians must always be “prepared to make a defense” as to why we have “a reason for the hope” of Christ (1 Pet 3:15).[1] The high calling of God is a unique phenomenon (Eph 4:1; 1 Pet 4:4), so much so that those who are both antagonistic, and genuinely curious, about the Lord’s way will ask us questions. We must give them, in return, rational answers.

Before focusing attention on the Christian’s responsibility of knowing why there is hope, we must not overlook an implicit truth of this passage: confidence in the Lord and commitment to his doctrine are never to be divorced (Luke 6:46).

Christian Apologetics

Peter instructs Christians to give a “reason” for their faith and hope. What does this mean? The corresponding word for “reason” is apologia and it has a legal background, meaning the argumentation employed as a “verbal defense” in a court hearing.[2] From time to time, it will be demanded of Christians to defend their faith and explain why they live “differently” in contrast to the world. The apostles and early-inspired men of the first century likewise defended the Christian faith in two ways: (1) verbally (Acts 22:1; Phil 1:7, 16; 2 Tim 4:16) and (2) by means of literature (1 Cor 9:3).

The New Testament documents themselves often have a defensive purpose. One of the aspects of Luke’s two-volume work (Luke-Acts) is its defensive nature. By taking into account Paul’s judicial context in Rome, scholars have observed that Luke-Acts – as Paul’s defense brief – provides excellent testimony to the Greco-Roman world that the Lord’s way is a benefit to society and not a subversive politico-religious system as many claimed Christianity to be.[3]

The apostle John’s Gospel and his first epistle are both defensive documents, responding to different challenges that the early church faced. The Gospel establishes the rationale for our hope on the Christ as Deity (John 20:30-31); meanwhile, 1 John refutes misconceptions of how to live godly in the face of the docetic-gnostic teachers who infiltrated the church (1 John 2:1).

The apostle’s use of apologia demonstrates that the field of Christian defense is centuries old. This word is, in fact, the basis for our modern word apologetics. Its incorporation by Christians from the legal setting, where it was a “legal speech for the defense” to be delivered before the judicial authorities and subsequently published,[4] was therefore not a large leap (Acts 22:1; Phil 1:17). In fact, it partially explains the publishing of Luke-Acts, and fits well with trumped-up political hearings where Christians had to defend themselves verbally (cf. 6:10-15, 18:12-17, 22:1, etc.; Matt 10:19).

Besides biblical examples, from about 185-250 A.D. there was a series of apologies designed to “explain the origin, doctrine, and worship” (i.e. the historical basis) of the church to their contemporaries –antagonistic or supportive.[5] The works of Justin (his Apologies, Dialogue with Trypho), Athenagoras (Apology, On the Resurrection), and Tertullian (Against Marcion, Prescription of Heretics) are usually thought of in this light.

Christian Apologetics was not, however, limited to the study of science, philosophy, evolution, and creationism. These are topics that consume Christian Apologetics today; however, in the early church apologetics was more a defense of why Christians live the way they live. This is not a criticism of contemporary apologetics, but a call to provide a rational defense of Christian ethics – religious and moral. Before moving on, observe that historically emotions have never been the sole basis for a proper defense of one’s beliefs.

As the need arose in the first century, our responsibility to give reasons for our hope to our modern neighbors has not diminished. Antagonists and genuine inquisitors are constant factors in the Christian’s life; consequently, Christians must provide solid well-studied responses. Likewise, every generation carries the responsibility of preaching the gospel to a dying world (Matt 28:18-20).

To fulfill this work Christians must study the Bible, believe and follow through with its instruction, and teach it rigorously so that the next generation can continue in this Divinely given cycle (2 Tim 2:1-2).

The Need for Personal Bible Study

To be sure, there are many Christians who are diligent and capable Bible students; some, however, engage in superficial study and have rendered themselves incapable of giving a defense of their faith – or even passing it on. For this reason, it is important to recognize the value of congregational Bible study; but we must understand that congregational Bible study is only a foundation to be built upon. It should not be the only time Christians are exposed to God or His instruction.

Again, congregational Bible study is not a substitute for personal spiritual maturing (2 Tim 2:15, 3:16-17); neither does it replace the daily light needed for living before God (Psa 119:11, 105). To be truly blessed, Bible study must be a part of one’s meditation and life – “both day and night” (Psa 1:1-2). God’s guidance must come from personal contact with His revelation.

Principles for Proficient Bible Study

It is sufficient to say, then, that in order to be proficient in one’s faith true Bible study cannot be superficial. Spiritually nurturing Bible study includes, at the very least: ample time for study, rigorous mental industry, a respect for the text, and a patient and prayerful consideration of all the facts. We will introduce and briefly consider these points below.

Our consideration here is limited of course; however, the points below are so vital to effective study that books are devoted to the pursuit of implementing each of them.

1. There must be ample time for study

Time is a valuable commodity. In the business world the phrase “time is money” illustrates how valuable time is. With regards to Bible study, we might coin the phrase “time is life.” There is no substitute for having plenty of valuable time with the word of God.

Renewing one’s mind requires proper time with the word (Col 3:9-10). However, the media-based culture we find ourselves in makes it difficult for some to spend time with the pages of inspiration. Nevertheless, we must make the time available (Rom 13:14).

We must remember that it takes time to read the biblical passage, it takes time to understand how a specific passage fits into the rest of Scripture, and it takes time to examine both the context and words employed. Just as it takes time to mature through life, it requires time to mature spiritually (Psa 1:1-3).

2. There must be mental industry

This is not a matter of intellectual genius. This is a matter of determination, exposure, and focus. Here is an example: in 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 Paul reminds the church of the Gospel that they received and believed. Now notice verses 3 and 4:

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. (1 Corinthians 15:3–4)

This brief section of scripture yields an enormous amount of information. It is, as one scholar observes, a “busy” section of Scripture.[6] It is the basis of the Christian faith, the source of Christian evangelism, and the foundation to develop Christian spirituality.

As one determines to study the Scriptures, the level of exposure to biblical concepts increases. We must remain focused on the task of understanding the passage, noting unique phrases and points. For example, the phrase “in accordance with the Scriptures” above refers to a precise instance where Scripture has fulfilled prophetic passages regarding the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 2:24-36).

The next step, then, is to find what scriptures predicted these events (Isa 53:5-12; Psa 16:8-11). When these passages are found and studied in collaboration with the Gospel message, untold spiritual fortification will occur. But remember, this is a matter of mental industry, not of mental genius.

3. There must be respect for the nature of the text

In other words, we must recognize numerous aspects of a passage. There are, of course, numerous facets or angles that a passage may be studied, but some of the most significant ones are the context of the passage, the original purpose of the passage, the method used to prove the author’s point, and the covenantal context of the passage (e.g. Patriarchal, Mosaic, or Christian).

See our article “The Divisions of the Bible: A Starting Place”

For example, animal sacrifice was offered both during the Patriarchal and Mosaic systems; however, the ramifications of the New Testament covenant demonstrate that this method of atonement is no longer a viable way to forgive man’s sins (Heb 9:1-10:18). One cannot overestimate solid principles of interpretations.[7]

One more issue that must be considered separately is the acknowledgment that the Bible was not written in English. One must also respect the fact that the Bible English readers have is a translation of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek languages. This fact must never be ignored, ridiculed, or underestimated in the study of God’s word.

Jack P. Lewis expresses this caution in the following way:

In the ultimate analysis every significant Biblical question is to be solved on the basis of what a writer meant by a Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic expression.[8]

“Inspiration and Authority of the Bible,” Alternative 5.2 (1979)

Observing this one principle can sometimes help distinguish biblical truth from both liberal and legalistic conclusions.

4. There must be patience and prayerful consideration of all the facts

There is no value in jumping to conclusions. This is a fundamental principle to rational thinking. To understand the Bible’s teaching on a subject, we must take a slow and prayerful approach in coming to a conclusion. This way, one is as thorough as humanly possible.

James D. Thomas reminds us of the importance of thorough Bible study:

All facts must be considered. One white horse can ruin an hypothesis [sic] that all horses are brown, and one contrary fact can ruin any inductive-reasoning hypothesis, meaning that research must start again. This means that for perfect, absolute exegesis, every stone must be turned – every fact possible must be determined and taken into account, in order to complete scholarly research.[9]

Harmonizing Hermeneutics (Gospel Advocate, 1991)

No one of genuine concern wants to be wrong on what the Bible teaches. Therefore, we must be cautious and ready to see all the biblical evidence as slowly or quickly as it is analyzed.

In principle, it is what we find in Paul’s instruction to the Thessalonians:

"Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil.” (1 Thessalonians 5:19-22)

We must be patient and let the scriptural facts reveal themselves on their own terms.

Conclusion

Christians will always be called upon to share their hope with the world; no matter what generation it is. Providing answers so that people may understand the nature of the Christian faith is the true purpose of Christian Apologetics. In order to comply with the apostle Peter’s instruction, Christians must be diligent Bible students; however, this is not always the case.

While congregations are to be supporters of the truth (1 Tim 3:15), individual members must abide by the words of the Gospel (John 8:31-32). By engaging in proficient Bible study, Christians will have knowledge of their faith and hope, and therefore be able to share their faith.

Sources

  1. Unless otherwise noted all Scripture references are taken from the English Standard Version of the Holy Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2001).
  2. Barclay M. Newman, Jr., A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament (Stuttgart: Deutsche Biblegesellschaft, 1993), 22.
  3. Donald A. Carson, James D. Moo, and Leon Morris, An Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992), 196–97.
  4. G. L. Carey, “Apologists,” New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, ed. J. D. Douglas (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1974), 57.
  5. F. W. Mattox and John McRay, The Eternal Kingdom, revised ed. (Delight, AR: Gospel Light Publications, 1961), 67–87; Ronald S. Wallace, “Apologetics,” New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, 56–57.
  6. Wayne Jackson, “The Gospel in Miniature,” Christian Courier 43.1 (May 2007): 3.
  7. Wayne Jackson, A Study Guide to Greater Bible Knowledge (Stockton, CA: Courier Publications, 1986), 20–29.
  8. Jack P. Lewis, “Inspiration and Authority of the Bible,” Alternative 5.2 (1979): 6.
  9. James D. Thomas, Harmonizing Hermeneutics (Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1991), 87.

This is a reformatted version of the article originally published in The Words of Truth (Montgomery, AL: 6th Ave Church of Christ).