BIBLE INTERPRETATION: HISTORY BOOKS (PART 2)

Understanding and Applying Biblical History

As I stressed in another lesson, always keep the context in mind: Historical, Cultural, Biblical, and Geographical. A very useful one-stop shopping resource that will address all these issues is a Bible dictionary. They contain articles on people, places, and the material culture of the Bible and come in a variety of sizes from compact dictionaries to excellent one-volume dictionaries (some profusely illustrated) to multi-volume sets.

Remember that the biblical context also includes the consideration of parallel accounts in the Bible. In that regard, I have always found Segal's (tongue-in-cheek) Law helpful to keep in mind:

“A man with one watch always knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never quite sure.”

There are two kinds of people – those who demand to know the exact truth and those who are able to live with a certain amount of ambiguity. The problem is that when there are multiple accounts of the same events in the Bible, they don't always agree 100% in the details. When that happens, various approaches to interpretation can be taken.

Use parallel accounts (Harmonization)

OT Example:

    “Again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, 'Go, count the people of Israel and Judah.'” (II Samuel 24:1)

    “Satan stood up against Israel, and incited David to count the people of Israel.” (I Chronicles 21:1)

1. Liberal or skeptical approach: They would conclude that one or both accounts are in error.

2. Scholarly: Chronicles was written after Samuel, and the author probably changed the actor from God to Satan because he was disturbed with the idea that God could incite anyone. If this sounds far-fetched, consider that “bless God” is often substituted for “curse God” in the Hebrew Bible.

3. Conservative: Wrestle with the apparent contradiction to get a deeper understanding. For example, this may be similar to the Book of Job in which God uses Satan to accomplish His will.

4. Fundamentalist (Extreme Harmonization): These must be describing two entirely different historical events As evidence, note that the Chronicles account only involves Israel while II Samuel includes Judah as well.

5. Chronological Bibles: These attempt to put together all the events and teachings in the Bible according to a consistent time line. These can be very useful tool for understanding the sweep of biblical history, but they tend to leave out any somewhat contradictory elements present in parallel accounts. For example, The Daily Bible interestingly ignores the Samuel account altogether and opts for “Satan,” as in Chronicles.

NT Example: (The Wording on the Cross)

    This is Jesus the King of the Jews (Matthew 27:37)

    The King of the Jews (Mark 15:26)

    This is the King of the Jews (Luke 23:38)

    Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews (John 19:19-20)

Approach 1: The differences don't result in any contradiction of facts but actually show that the four writers wrote independently of one another and used different sources (giving us more witnesses to the event).

Approach 2: John 19:20 states that there were actually three inscriptions: in Latin, Aramaic and Greek. Since the Gospels were written in Greek (or maybe Hebrew in the case of Matthew), we have the possibility that the three notices varied slightly in their original wording or were translated loosely later on into Greek.

Approach 3: The original may have read “This is Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews,” with each Gospel writer only quoting part of the inscription.

Why would they edit the inscription differently? Keep in mind that Mark usually gives the briefest summary account of the four. Also, John uses the phrase “Jesus of Nazareth” more than the other gospel writers, and this occurrence at the end of his gospel matches its appearance at the start of the gospel at 1:45 (the literary device of inclusio).

The other problem sometimes encountered with parallel accounts is one of chronology, the exact order of events.

The Temptation in the Wilderness

Let's revisit the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness. You can see that Matthew and Luke disagree in the order of the last two temptations. The reason is that throughout the Bible, events sometimes are grouped together thematically, not in the order of exact occurrence.

Matthew: ends with the promise of Satan to give Jesus “all the kingdoms of the world.” This is directly followed by Jesus preaching that “the kingdom of heaven has come” (Matthew 4:17), “proclaiming the good news of the kingdom” (Matthew 4:23), and bestowing beatitudes on those who possess the kingdom of heaven (5:3,10).

Luke: ends with a challenge for Jesus to jump off the pinnacle of the temple to see if angels would save him. This is followed by Jesus' first teaching in the synagogue which causes the people to try to throw him off a cliff, but Jesus is miraculously saved (Luke 4:29-30). Both these cases demonstrate that in the historical accounts there may be minor changes in chronology in order to make a smoother transition from event to event.

Here is a more extreme example from the Book of Judges of events being given outside their normal order: “A number of scholars have pointed out that chapters 19-21 are out of place chronologically, that, despite their placement at the end of the book, the events themselves would have taken place early in the period of the judges.” (David M. Howard, Jr., An Introduction to the OT Historical Books, p. 101) I won't rehearse all their reasons for saying this, but there are many. So why is it given at the very end of the book?

A. Conflict with Other Nations (Judges 1:1-2:5)

B. Israel Worships Foreign Gods (Judges 2:6-3:6)

                        C. Israel under the Judges (Judges 3:7-16:31)

B'. Israel Corrupts the Worship of Yahweh (Judges 17-18)

A'. Conflict within Tribes (Judges19-21)

So the order here is obviously literary, not chronological. 

 

Application of the Narrative Texts: Two Approaches

The actual understanding of the stories is usually fairly straightforward, so we need to also discuss 

their application to our lives as well.

A. Analyze the actions and words of the main characters.

    1. They may be given as good or bad examples. Paul talks about the Israelites' disobedience in the wilderness: “Now these things occurred as examples for us, so that we might not desire evil as they did.” (I Corinthians 10:11)

    2. Distinguish what is taught from what is merely recorded (i.e., the difference between prescription and description).

Examples of contrary examples in Acts:

James is killed by the authorities (12:2) vs.

        Peter is rescued from prison (12:3-19)

Paul refuses to leave town quietly after being mistreated (16:35-40) vs.

        Paul leaves in the night to avoid persecution (17:10)

Believer with incomplete knowledge does not need re-baptism (18:24-26)

        Believers with incomplete knowledge do need re-baptism (19:1-7)

Almost magical healings using handkerchief (19:11-12) vs.

        Attempt at magical exorcism fails (19:13-20)

    3. God's approval of an individual does not mean approval of all his/her conduct. Look at Gideon as an example. Some Christians follow his practice of casting a fleece. I like this quote in this regard: “God will tolerate our fleeces, but He cherishes our faith.”

    4. God is the only hero in the Bible. Rabbinical teachers sometimes went to great lengths to explain away the questionable behavior of OT characters such as Abraham or David. And it is still going on today. Abraham may not have out-and-out lied to Abimelech and Pharaoh, but he sure tried to mislead them. And then you have some Christian commentators who insist that Rahab was only an inn-keeper, not a prostitute. This approach might be appropriate to a works-based theology, but not a grace-based one.

    5. Examine the participant's choices in light of the current culture. What other options were open to the person at the time? Could Paul have successfully led a slave rebellion throughout the Roman Empire at the time if he disagreed with the institution of slavery (and we get hints from his writings that he did disagree)?

    6. Use the text to determine if the choices were appropriate: example of David and Bathsheba.

        a. Author's comment: “But the thing that David had done displeased the LORD.” (II Samuel 11:27)

        b. God's subsequent judgment on the person: The prophet Nathan confronts David with his sin (II Samuel 12:1-15)

        c. Consequences of the act: David disrupted one man's family so David's own family life went downhill from that point on. His newborn child dies, his son Ammon rapes his half-sister, another son Absalom has Ammon killed and rebels against his father.

B. The Second major way to utilize the narratives is to look at God's actions for theological truths (Theological Interpretation) . Two problem areas sometimes arise at this step.

    1. “Over-involvement” of God: Hardening Pharaoh's Heart (Exodus) Look at the progression here, which indicates that through Exodus 9:35 Pharaoh still had free will to act otherwise.

“I will harden” 4:21, 7:3 This is a prediction of future action, not a case of predestination.

“His heart was hardened” synonymous and alternating with “he hardened his (own) heart” -- 

next 7occurrences

“The LORD hardened” 9:12

“He sinned yet again and his heart was hardened” 9:34-35

“I will harden” or “The LORD hardened” – next 7 occurrences

    2. “Under-involvement” of God: The Book of Esther

As I mentioned elsewhere there is no mention of God or even prayer in the book. Does that mean these are totally random events taking place outside of God's control? Actually, YHWH is in the text four times, as noted years ago by rabbis, but it is hidden – which is the whole point of the book (God's providence).

    Hy' Wkl Hnsym Ytnw (1:20)

    Ybw' Hmlk Whmn Hywm (5:4)

    zH 'ynnW swH lY (5:13)

    kY kltH 'lW hr'H (7:7)

Rachel Sabua sees another possible instance of the “hand of God” literally portrayed in the Book of Esther. Six times in the Hebrew text the word for Jews, y'hudim, is misspelled with a double yod in place of one. Since the letter yod also means “hand” in Hebrew and the tetragrammaton is often abbreviated in Jewish prayer books by a double yod, this provides, in her mind, additional evidence that the intent is to show God's hidden direction behind the Jews' deliverance.

                                           Utilize Archeological Results Cautiously

Resources: Consult books on biblical archeology, but make sure they were published recently.

Biblical Archeology Review magazine

The Archeological Study Bible (Zondervan NIV)

There should be no ultimate contradictions between archeological findings and the biblical accounts, but the findings may influence how we interpret those events.A prime example of this is the excavation of Jericho (see my post on the battle of Jericho for details).

And there is, of course, an inherent limitation to the amount of information that we can learn from

archaeology.  For example, an inscription with Pontius Pilate's name on it was useful in disproving the 

earlier contention of skeptics that he was only a fictional character. However, that does not prove that 

he tried to prevent Jesus from being crucified.