BIBLE INTERPRETATION: CONTEXT (PART 2)

Continuing the subject of the various contexts one must consider in interpreting a passage of Scripture, there are various questions one should ask concerning the particular book of the Bible you are in:

WHAT kind of book is it that you are reading? Literary Context

Biblia = books, not book = a library As in a library, each genre of book must be read differently. You wouldn't approach a history book as if it were a sci-fi novel. Special hermeneutics are needed for each genre. Keep in mind that the genre of some books is hard to pin down. Is Jonah a straightforward book of prophecy, an historical account, a fable, a parable or a satire? Or look at the Song of Songs. It has been called poetry, play, collection of erotic love songs, pagan funerary songs, allegory, fictional short story, (auto)biography, wisdom literature, and pastoral literature. And it also contains dreams, including nightmares.

WHY was the book written? Thematic Context

Usually, if you read a book at one sitting, you can get a reasonable idea of its main theme. Let'sconsider the Epistle to the Hebrews. One repeated idea is the superiority of Jesus to OT authorities such as angels, Moses, high priest, etc. This idea is confirmed if you look at how the overall book is organized. Those duplications within the same book provide a tip-off to the overall structure of the book, which in turn helps to identify the book's main point of emphasis or theme.

The Structure of Hebrews

I. Introduction: God's New Revelation (1:1-3b)

    II. Angels and their Message (1:3c-2:18)

        III. Israel Tested in the Wilderness (3:1-4:13)

            IV. Apostasy and Confidence (4:14-6:20)

                V. Old and New Priesthood (7:1-28)

                V'. Old and New Sacrifice (8:1-10:18)

            IV'. Apostasy and Confidence (10:19-12:2)

        III'. Perseverance and Testing of Believers (12:3-29)

    II'. Exhortations (13:1-21)

I'. Conclusion: God's New Revelation (13:22-25)

If there were a center to this structure, that would be where the book's emphasis was located. Since there isn't, the most important passages are the beginning and conclusion of the book: God's new revelation. On the other hand, if you treat V and V' as one large section – this leads to exactly the same conclusion. From any of these approaches you can arrive at the consensus opinion: the author wrote it to a Jewish Christian audience to reiterate the importance of standing firm in the faith and not reverting to Judaism.

It is often not easy to figure out the overall literary pattern of a book, but here is a rough guideline that may help you at least pinpoint the most important passages. Often the main point will be found toward the center of the book. As you are reading through a book, look for passages with similar language, events, or themes. Go forward and backwards from there to see if there are other passages that match up to one another. Take the Book of Esther as an example. Here is the center portion of the book.

G. The Scepter is Extended to Esther (5:1-4)

    H. Haman is Summoned (5:5a)

        I. Esther’s Feast for King and Haman (5:5b-8)

            J. Haman with his Friends (5:9-14)

                K. The Plot Turns (6:1-11)

            J'. Haman with his Friends (6:12-14)

        I'. Esther’s Feast for King and Haman (7:1-10)

    H'. Mordecai is Summoned (8:1-2)

G'. The Scepter is Extended to Esther (8:3-4)

The center of the book is a passage you might be tempted to skip over since it just describes the king having a sleepless night and turning to a book in his library to put him to sleep. But the plot hinges on this seemingly trivial event which is full of coincidences. It demonstrates that the hidden hand of God is always behind human affairs, and that is the main point of the book, not the heroism of Esther and Mordecai.

WHERE are the events taking place? Where was the original audience located?

Geographical Context

A Bible atlas or maps in your study Bible are useful tools for following historical events, especially for following the various battles in the OT or the travels of Paul or learning the background of the cities that Paul writes to. Knowing the location may give you additional insights, but I'll admit that you will probably need a commentary or good study Bible to point them out. Look at John's letter to the Laodicean church:

“I wish that you were either cold or hot...but because you are lukewarm..., I am about to spit you out of my mouth” Revelation 3:15-16 One standard interpretation (God would rather have you totally opposed to Him than being a wishy-washy follower) never seemed to make sense to me. But try looking at it as an obvious metaphor based on drinking water.

The two nearest cities to Laodicea were Hieropolis and Colossae.  Hieropolis was known for its hot springs. People would drink the water for its therapeutic value. On the other hand, Colossae was surrounded by snow-capped mountains and would get their cold drinking water when snow melted. Laodicea had to pipe in its water supply from a spring over a great distance so by the time it arrived, any helpful minerals had precipitated out, it was lukewarm and practically undrinkable. By this understanding, cold = bracing, refreshing—not indifferent.

4. Parallels within the Same Testament. This is the next broader context is to consider.

Clear passages interpret obscure ones.  Common sense: Don't start with statements in the Book of Revelation and use them to explain Paul's teachings. Be suspicious of teachers and teachings that practice this method.

True Parallels: Samuel-Kings and Chronicles, Isaiah 36-39 and II Kings 19-20, Four Gospels

Close Parallels: Exodus, Numbers and Deuteronomy; Ezra and Nehemiah; Acts and Paul's Letters; II Peter and Jude

Helpful books in this regard are Harmony of Samuel, Kings and Chronicles, Harmony of the Gospels (Beware that some versions will only contain the Synoptic Gospels and omit John), and Harmony of the Life of St. Paul. The latter matches up passages in Acts with appropriate passages in Paul's letters.

                                                   Galatians 2:1-2 // Acts 15:1-3

“Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up in response to a revelation.” The historical account in Acts indicates that the revelation was one given to the church at Antioch, not necessarily to Paul only. “And they delegated Paul and Barnabas and others to go.” In turn, Galatians adds to the account in Acts by explaining that Titus was one of the “others” who are mentioned there.

                                               I Corinthians 15:32 // Acts 20:17-31

Paul says in I Corinthians that he fought with wild beasts in Ephesus. This is confusing, but the Acts account indicates that Paul is probably speaking metaphorically of those who opposed the gospel there such as Demetrius the silversmith. This is confirmed in Acts 20:29 where Paul calls the enemies of the church “savage wolves.”

Finally we come to the broadest context of all: the whole Bible.

6a. Whole Bible: OT provides background for NT

A great recent 1200-page commentary by Beale and Carson entitled Commentary on the NT Use of the OT clearly demonstrates that the NT is filled with OT language and allusions. It is very hard to grasp what the NT authors are saying at times unless you recognize these allusions. A good study Bible will contain cross references that point them out.

Here is one classic example: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Matt 27:45-46 The standard interpretation of this passage uses Habakkuk 1:13a to explain it. That OT passage states that God cannot look on evil and therefore, people reason that God had to turn His eyes away from Jesus as he was on the cross carrying the sins of the world.

But is that really what the Habakkuk passage means? We have to look at it in its own context first.

The whole verse reads, “Your eyes are too pure to gaze on evil, and you are not able to look on wrong. Why do you look upon the faithless ones and remain silent while the wicked swallows one more righteous than he?” The last half of verse shows that God can indeed “look” at evil so that can't be what the first half means. NEB says, “You who can not countenance wrongdoing.” Jerusalem Bible: “you cannot look on at tyranny.” NIV: “You can not tolerate wrongdoing.”

Even more damning for the use of Habakkuk to interpret Jesus' words on the cross is the fact that a number of other translations render this verse in an entirely different way. The prophet asks, “Why do you make me see wrongdoing and look at trouble?” (KJV, RSV, NRSV, TEV, Living Bible) In either case, the Habakkuk passage has no obvious relationship to Christ's words.

One gets an entirely different perspective by simply realizing that Jesus was directly quoting the first verse of Psalm 22. Since the books in the OT were generally known by their opening word(s) and the Psalms were not numbered in Jesus' day, there is a good chance that Jesus was pointing His audience to the whole of Psalm 22 for an explanation of what was happening to Him. That is especially likely since a person on a cross would have had very little breath to talk with. Look at verses 1-18 which describe the Psalmist's present situation contrasted with the last half of the psalm for a description of how God rescued him. You will see that this is not necessarily a total cry of doubt and despair. Especially note the underlined phrase.

Verses 1-18

I am poured out like water

My mouth is dried up like a potsherd

A company of evildoers encircles me

They stare and gloat over me

And for my clothing they cast lots

Verses 19-31

But you, O LORD, do not be far away! O my help, come quickly to my aid!

For he did not despise or abhor the affliction of the afflicted; he did not hide his face from me, but heard when I cried to Him.

All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to the LORD

And proclaim his deliverance to a people yet unborn, saying that he has done it.

Keep in mind also that reuse of OT language by NT writers may indicate that the same event is being talked about, a similar event (principle of multiple fulfillments), or just the use of common phraseology. It is sometimes difficult to distinguish between these possibilities so we should remain open minded on the interpretation. More of this when we study the subject of prophecy in a later lesson.

6a. Whole Bible: NT fulfills or clarifies the OT.

The relationship between the Old and New Testaments goes in the opposite direction also.

“Not all Israelites truly belong to Israel, and not all of Abraham's children are his true descendants.”

“You have heard that it was said...” Matt. 5:21, 27, 33, 38, 43

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill."  Matt. 5:17

“God has shown me that I should not call anyone profane or unclean.” (Acts 10:28b)

“Not all Israelites truly belong to Israel, and not all of Abraham's children are his true descendants.”  (Rom. 9:6-7)

“In speaking of a 'New Covenant,' he made the first one obsolete. And what is obsolete and growing old will soon disappear.” (Hebrews 8:13)

These are new revelations that supersede the OT teachings in many ways. So that must be kept in mind if one tries to directly apply a passage in the OT to ourselves without first seeing if the NT has anything to say about the subject.