Truth Magazine

By Bobby Witherington

“. . . how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I wrote before in a few words, by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)” (Eph. 3:3, 4). “Therefore do not be unwise, but understand what the will of the Lord is” (Eph. 5:17). “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). 

These Scriptures are a few among so many which stress the fact that it is possible for one to “understand” the will of God, or that it is possible for a person to “know the truth.” However, even among those who regularly study the Scriptures, there are multitudes who do not know the truth. In fact, there are vast numbers who are described by 2 Timothy 3:7, “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” Moreover, the apostle Peter alluded to the writings of the apostle Paul, some of which is “hard to understand,” concerning which he said “those who are untaught and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures” (2 Pet. 3:16).

Hence, on the one hand, we have the plain affirmation by Paul that we can know what he knew if we read what he wrote and, on the other hand, Peter stated that some who read what Paul wrote “twist” those “things . . . to their own destruction.” Moreover, as we have just documented, Jesus said, “You shall know the truth,” and Paul said some are “never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.”

Rest assured, in these verses, Peter, Paul, and Jesus did not contradict one another! By reading the Scriptures, we can come to a knowledge of the truth, but many who continually read the Scriptures never come to a correct understanding of the same. Of course, there are many reasons for this, one being the fact that some simply do not “love” the truth (2 Thess. 2:10), and therefore read the Scriptures in order to prove their own presumptions — not with a fervent desire to actually learn what the Bible teaches.

However, in the judgment of this writer, most people who read and yet fail to come to a knowledge of the truth are not intellectually dishonest. But clearly there is something terribly lacking in their method of Bible study! It is one thing for an intelligent person to read the Scriptures, and it is something else for a person to read the Scriptures intelligently. If it is to be understood, the Bible, like any other book, has to be studied intelligently. Regardless of the curriculum, certain common-sense principles of interpretation must be utilized — one of which is “the law of context,” sometimes called “the law of frame of reference.”

But What Do We Mean By “Context?”

“Context” is defined as (1) “the parts directly before and after a word or sentence that influences its meaning . . .” (2) “. . . the immediate environment, attendant circumstances or conditions; background” (World Book Dictionary). Hence, generally speaking, “context” denotes the “immediate environment” in which a Scripture appears — especially, the verses which precede or follow a particular verse. More- over, “context” may also include the paragraph, or chapter, or the overall subject matter of the book in which a Scripture appears. Also, the broader context may very well include the particular covenant of which a reference is a part, and on occasion may even be affected by the prevailing culture at the time a given Scripture was penned. In other words, “context” may include the “immediate environment” (the Scriptures before and after), or it may include a much broader background. However, most of our difficulties in understanding a given text are due to a neglect to properly analyze its “immediate environment.” And this is the area which will receive the greater emphasis in the remainder of this article.

Examples Which Illustrate the Value of Context

1. Mark 10:9: “Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” Based on this Scripture, a mother of Siamese twins reportedly refused to allow surgery to separate the children, and she justified her refusal by citing this passage! However, in context, the Lord was referring to “a man” whom God has “joined to his wife” — this is the union which Jesus said “let not man separate.” This verse, taken out of context, could be misused so as to prohibit surgery to separate Siamese twins, or even splitting wood with which to build a fire!

2. Matthew 19:14: “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.” A large number of people cite this reference when they are called upon to justify infant baptism. However, “baptism,” either for infants or adults, is not mentioned even once in this entire chapter. What is mentioned is the fact that some brought “little children” to Jesus that he might “put His hands on them and pray.” In this case, neither the text nor the context says a word about infant baptism.

3. 1 Corinthians 1:17: “For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel . . .” Baptist preachers (and others) often cite this verse in order to prove that baptism is not a requirement for salvation. However, the purpose of baptism is not the object being considered in the “immediate environment” (context) of this passage. Contextually speaking, there were “contentions” among some at Corinth, some saying “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” Paul knew that the validity of baptism is not determined by who does the baptizing, and he did not want to be a party to their partyism. Moreover, Paul’s principle mission was “to preach the gospel” — it was not to baptize. He had baptized “Crispus and Gaius” and “the household of Stephanas,” but he was thankful that he had personally baptized only a few at Corinth, “lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name.” However, the fact remains that all who obeyed the gospel at Corinth had heard, believed, and were baptized (Acts 18:8)! Moreover, even in the context of 1 Corinthians 1:17 Paul revealed that in order for one to be “of Christ” (a Christian!) two things had to occur: (1) Christ had to be crucified for that person, and (2) that person had to be baptized in “the name” of Christ. Hence, the seven verses before 1 Corinthians 1:17 gives the context for that verse, and they also necessarily infer that one must be baptized!

4. Matthew 5:48: “Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.” Some read this verse and conclude that the Bible contradicts itself. They point us to Romans 3:23 which says “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” and to 1 John 1:8 wherein we are told that “if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” They then tell us that “no one is perfect,” so they conclude that Jesus either commanded the impossible or else the Bible is self-contradictory! However, this is another instance in which context is ignored. Granted, each one of us should strive for sinless perfection. But sinless perfection is not the subject under consideration in the context of this verse. Go back to verse 43 and you will note that Jesus said, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’” However, in contrast to what others had “said,” Jesus said, “But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to them who hate you, and pray for those who spite- fully use you and persecute you” (v. 44). Then in verse 45 we discover the reason for such admonition, it being “that you may be the sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.” You see, contextually speaking, the perfection herein required is that we develop the quality of love which God possesses — the kind whereby we are able to love both our neighbors and our enemies.

Concluding Thoughts

There are many other verses which could be readily cited — verses which are taken out of context and used to teach error. Without further comment, we could cite Acts 16:31 from which some mistakenly conclude that one is saved by faith only, or Acts 2:29-31 which certain false teachers use to teach the doctrine of premillennialism concerning the reign of Christ, or Galatians 6:10 which some brethren misuse to teach local church support of human institutions. And the list goes on.

Someone has observed that “a text considered apart from its context becomes a pretext.” And so it does. God’s “word is truth” (John 17:17), but truth handled inaccurately (cf. 2 Tim. 2:15) results in error believed, preached, and practiced. Hence, we conclude by urging one and all to examine every passage in the light of its context. In view of the length of eternity, and the value of souls, too much is as stake for anyone to do otherwise!

By Daniel H. King 

The Bible And History

The Bible is a literature which is filled with written depictions of occurrences which are said to have happened along a time line from the very beginning of the universe through the first century A.D. Those events which are re- corded in the Old and New Testaments may be reckoned as being either truly historic happenings, or imagined and mythical in their essential nature. While some moderns consider a few of the incidents which we read about in the Book of Books to be imaginary, most will admit that almost all that we find therein is historical. And even those parts which they question are suspicious only because they may not be otherwise established to have occurred other than the fact that they are found in this particular literature. (Moreover, this particular literature is always more suspect than any other.) The same may be said of many ancient documents which have not been, and may never be, validated by external proof. The interesting fact is that many historical incidents which are claimed to have happened in biblical time, and are recorded in the Bible, have now been externally attested by the study of ancient Near Eastern documents uncovered through the activities of modern archaeologists. They are attested as genuine history by contemporary documents, most often from non- Israelite sources.

So, the material which we discover between the covers of this Book claims to be thoroughly historical in nature. This basic fact of the biblical writings is extremely well recognized, as the following quotations show: “For what is the OT from the Christian point of view — and from no other point of view can it be rightly understood — but the record of God’s gradual revelation of himself to Israel in his purpose of redeeming love with a view to the establishment of his universal kingdom? The Incarnation was to be the culminating point of that revelation and that purpose” (A.F. Kirkpatrick). “The Bible is through and through of historical nature and spirit” (G.H.A. Ewald). 

The book of Hebrews commences with the following “history-centered” words: “God, who at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son.” The revelation of God happened in time, that is, in real history. And because the sum and substance of this literature claims to be the revelation of God, the nature of this history is particularly important. As one writer put it: “Unless the Bible is infallible, there can be no moral obligation to accept the facts which it records; and though there may be intellectual error in denying them, there can be no moral sin” (Froude, Theological Difficulties). Taking the opposite angle from Froude, since he denies the infallibility of Scripture, but accepting his line of reasoning, we would suggest the following: Since the Bible is infallible (cf. John 10:35), there is a moral obligation to accept the facts which it records, and there is moral sin associated with denying them. So, the Scripture rather naturally makes demands upon its readers, and such demands as may not easily be ignored! The historical element of the Bible is both quintessential proof of its infallibility and often its greatest liability, to some the reason for questioning its infallibility, for like any other ancient document it provides a record of many events which may not otherwise be capable of external validation.

Encounter With God

There is one more important element present in this idea of the revelation of God in history. It is that the Bible does not represent mere history, or “naked” history. Scripture portrays the meeting of man with God in time. Men like Abraham, Moses, David, Isaiah and Paul, meet God in the biblical narrative as it were “face to face.” Emil Brunner compared God in the act of revelation to “a tall man, (who) stoops down to a little child and lowers Himself upon His knee, so that the child may look into His face” (Offenbarung und Vernunft, 413). Ultimately, of course, this is illustrated in the appearance among the sons of Adam, of God in the person of his Son Jesus Christ: “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” (John 14:8, 9; cf. 2 Cor. 4:6; Col. 2:9). The Bible is the ultimate historical meeting between man and God, not just of Abraham and God, or of David and God, but of you and God, and me and God. We meet with God in our own historical setting and cultural milieu, through the retelling of our spiritual ancestors’ experience as it is recorded in the Book.

Some modern scholars have attempted to study the biblical materials as pure history, and subtract from it the spiritual dimension. This is so because they view them- selves as secular historians and the Bible as part of that history which they wish to study and to comment about. But what they seek to do is impossible. The Bible is not secular history. The remarks of Floyd Filson are helpful in this regard: “The commonly accepted procedure in writing history is to describe the human situation in the light of the natural world. This method recognizes that man is more than an animal; he is gifted with intellectual and spiritual capacities that make him truly human. But history on this view is the story of human experience, and religion is described as man’s experience in the observable world of nature. All of this is undoubtedly an integral part of history, but it is a question whether this is the whole of it. Our story deals mainly with Biblical material, and for the Biblical writers, God is the chief actor in history; his will and action are decisive. Can we do justice to the Bible history if we reject or ignore or are neutral toward its central faith and outlook? Can we adequately describe Biblical history in a way that excludes God’s role?” (A New Testament History: The Story of the Emerging Church xi).

These things being true, it is most important indeed to appreciate both the nature of the Bible as essentially religious and historical, and the nature of the history itself as real and understandable. As we suggested earlier, part of it is even verifiable by means of external sources. The Bible is no more entirely religion than it is entirely history. It is tragic, therefore, when we do not value this historical element in the Bible and see how indispensable to the rev- elation it is, and how inescapable a study of it is to the fullest comprehension of the message of the Word of God. It truly brings to life the ancient writings and makes them seem “contemporary.” It makes of the biblical world a real place peopled by flesh-and-blood individuals like ourselves, with their hopes and dreams, anxieties and fears. The stories come alive on the page and teach us lessons that are eternal in both their application and their importance.

A word of caution must, however, be always in the mind of the student of the historical aspect of the Scripture. As a discipline it should not be pursued in its own interest or for its own sake. It needs to be remembered that the definitive purpose of the Bible is not to recount history but to bring man into an encounter with God. That is what the Book is about. So long as history and the historical in Scripture is studied as an adjunct and aid to the most complete appreciation and discernment of the principal message, then it is kept in its proper place and is valuable. The study of Greek is precisely parallel. The student of Greek who specializes in the Koine language of Scripture, but who in the course of his concentration upon the linguistic nuances of the NT literature — misses the opportunity to know Jesus of Nazareth — he has failed entirely. This is true of every other academic pursuit which deals with what is in the Bible. The principal purpose and the principal Person of this Book is so crucial to one’s own soul and the very reason for his being that a purely scholastic or pedagogic approach to it is a relative waste of time.

A Few Historical Illustrations From the Old Testament

The people of Israel constituted a covenant community based on God’s acts in history. The tie that bound this people together had deep roots in history and specially as God had dealt with certain personages of her historic past. It was not merely a history of great ancestors in whom they could take pride. Rather, it was a history of God’s relations with these men and women. God had chosen, redeemed, judged, disciplined, forgiven, taught, and trained them. All this was done in history, with all the events connected therewith occurring in real historic circumstances, and set in a cultural and historical “background.”

Most of such things may not be “essential to salvation,” that is, the things which it brings out or sheds light upon may not be matters upon which our souls depend, but they are certainly important for deeper appreciation of what is going on in the text and what may be described in the text. That said, we reiterate our belief that an appreciation for the historic implications of what we read in the Bible, and an understanding of antiquity, particularly Near Eastern antiquity, is essential to the fullest enjoyment of Scripture. How could it be otherwise? 

A few brief illustrations of how history and the general background and setting of Scripture may illuminate the Word of God, will prove helpful for those who may not otherwise understand. We shall enlist the aid of several cases which have proven helpful and interesting to this author in his own study of the book of Genesis. 

The period of the patriarchs, described in the book of Genesis, has always proven challenging to the modern Bible student. During that period the characters did a number of things which have left us shaking our heads and wondering, “Why?” Archaeological work in one of the cities of the ancient kingdom of Arrapkha, called Nuzu, between the years 1925-41, yielded large numbers of literary texts which bore directly upon many of the interesting customs of the patriarchal age. The people of Nuzu were Hurrians, the Horites of the Bible. Several parallels came immediately to the attention of the researchers.

First, there was the biblical story of Abraham’s adoption of his slave Eliezer as his heir (Gen. 15:2-3). At Nuzu it was a custom for a childless couple to adopt a son to serve them as long as they lived and bury and mourn over them when they died. In exchange for these services, he was designated as heir of all their possessions and lands. The Lord says in Genesis that Abraham and Sarah are to have a legal heir instead of the slave (15:4). This also coincides with Hurrian law, which states that if the adopter should beget a son after the adoption, the adopted must yield to the real son the right of being the chief heir.

Second, there is Sarah’s strange act of providing her husband with Hagar in her barrenness (Gen. 16:2), as well as Rachel’s giving of Bilhah to Jacob for the same reason (Gen. 30:3). Hurrian marriage contracts found at Nuzu actually require that the wife who fails to bear children, provide her husband with a handmaid who will bear them. When Sarah wanted to cast out Hagar from Abraham’s household, the Bible says that the patriarch himself hesitated to do so (Gen. 21:10-12). In fact, this was expressly forbidden under Hurrian marriage law.

Third, Esau’s sale of his birthright to Jacob (Gen. 25:30-34) has always appeared to be a very strange idea when considered from a modern standpoint. At Nuzu, however, there are several examples of contracts involving the sale of birthrights to others. On one tablet, an individual named Tupkitilla exchanges his inheritance share for three of Kurpazah’s sheep. He got a much better price than Esau!

Fourth, in Genesis 31, Laban insists that Jacob take no wife in addition to his daughters (v. 50). This prohibition against a bridegroom taking another wife was often found in the marriage contracts discovered at Nuzu. Evidently many fathers-in-law had precisely the same concern for the welfare of their daughters as did Laban. Laban’s gift of a handmaid to each of his daughters at the time of their marriage (Gen. 29:24, 29) is also paralleled in the Nuzu texts. Apparently this was done in the event that the daughter could not provide children for her husband. Jacob’s servitude to Laban in exchange for his daughter’s hand in marriage is also paralleled in Hurrian society. One contract at Nuzu shows a man who sells himself into slavery to the master if he will provide him with a wife. In his instance, Laban had to be satisfied with a mere seven years for each of his daughters. Rachel’s theft of her father’s gods was never fully understood until the Nuzu material was interpreted. Under Hurrian law, the possession of the family gods carried with it more than a mere religious significance. It also signified leadership of the family with respect to the ancestral estate. In essence, it was comparable to a modern deed of ownership to the family property! This is what Rachel had stolen when she took the household gods, and this explains Laban’s relentless pursuit and eager search for his most treasured possessions.

These four examples are indicative of the nature and importance of the thousands of other comparably illumined texts from Genesis and the rest of Scripture. Old Testament study has been enriched greatly by the historical studies which have arisen out of discoveries from the Egyptian Execration Texts, the Mari Texts, Tell el-Amarna, Ras Shamra (Ugarit), and numerous cities in Palestine. Entire books have been written on each of these areas of investigation, along with many more like them, which have shed enormous amounts of light upon incidents which are related in the course of telling the story of the Hebrew people. With our space limitations we cannot go on relating them, even though it is our inclination to do so. This field is so rich in resources that no student can ever take in all there is to learn!

What is the importance of all this? Does it actually have application for the understanding of the text of Holy Scripture, or is it simply academic exercise? G. Ernest Wright, biblical archaeologist and Old Testament scholar, made the following observation: “It is very likely that the exposition of the Bible by a person widely trained in the literatures of the ancient Near East will differ in perspective rather mark- edly from the exposition by one who knows nothing of the biblical environment. . . . The type of literature, its author- ship, its historical setting, its personality interaction within history, and above all a sensitivity for the biblical world which produced the literature all these are necessary if we would really understand the Bible” (“Historical Knowl- edge and Revelation,” in Translating and Understanding the OT, ed. by H.T. Frank and W.L. Reed, 292, 300). This being true, it is important that we have a grasp of this field and do sufficient study in the area to understand at least the more significant instances of historical illustration of the biblical text.

New Testament History

As to the New Testament, we are confronted with the identical challenge. Because we want to know what Scrip- ture meant to those to whom it was first given, we make a great effort to learn all that we may about those to whom it was first given. This way we may make the proper applica- tion of the principles and teachings of the text of Scripture to our own daily lives and our contemporary situation. As Dr. Alan Johnson has written, “Historical/Cultural matters take us into a wide variety of areas and details. In the NT alone matters of political, economic, social, geographical, religious, and philosophical background, and a great many details of culture, such as clothing, homes, and food, clamor for attention as we assess the precise intent of the biblical materials. No one person could possibly master all the background materials now available; and even if one could, he would have to admit that there are gaps which perhaps never will be filled in” (“History and Culture in NT Interpretation” in Interpreting the Word of God 129). We must make some time for general reading in the introductory works of this field, or else we and our hearers will be the poorer for it!

What A Wonderful Time To Be Alive!

There is so much to learn! Never has there been, in the history of Bible investigation, such riches of knowledge at the behest of the eager Bible scholar! Let us enjoy the fullest appreciation of Holy Scripture and the fullest possible understanding of its message, by the thoughtful study of the historical and cultural aspects of biblical backgrounds. But, let us ever keep in mind that the purpose of this rev- elation is not the mere collecting and admiring of what is ancient, even if it has a direct bearing upon the Bible. It is rather to learn of “Him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth . . .” (John 1:45). Let us never fail of this purpose!

By Leon Mauldin

Before the creation of the heavens and the earth, before time began, God had a plan. He planned to create this universe and the earth to be inhabited by man (Isa. 45:18). He designed a plan by which man could be saved; that plan was the redemption that would be in his Son Christ Jesus. Though all have sinned, and the wages of sin is death (separation from God), the sin- less Son of God would die on the cross as a sacrifice for all of us. Although God’s plan was complete, much time would pass after the creation before Jesus would come to this earth. His coming, and the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, is the theme of the Bible. 

“But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son . . .” (Gal. 4:4). Time was required for God to prepare man for the coming of his Son. Time was needed to teach that sin is not to be treated lightly, that it is ugly, destructive, and costly. This was seen in the continual shedding of blood of the animal sacrifices during the Old Testament period. Since God’s plan called for Jesus, who was Deity, to become flesh, time was required to develop a nation, and a lineage, though which Jesus would be born. 

As you study each book of the Old Testament, keep in mind that God never lost sight of his purpose. If you are studying the Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph), these are not merely interesting stories. Throughout this period God was looking ahead to the coming of his Son. These men are in the Bible because they had an important role in God’s plan.

The following outline demonstrates the flow and continuity of Scripture:

• Creation (and Pre-flood)

• Flood (and Post-flood)

• Patriarchal

• Egyptian Bondage/the Exodus

• Wilderness Wanderings

• Conquest

• Judges

• United Kingdom

• Divided Kingdom

• Judah Alone

• Captivity

• Return (and Rebuilding)

• Silent Years

• Life of Christ

• Establishment and Growth of the Church

• Letters

Genesis lays a foundation for what is to follow in the rest of the Bible, Old and New Testaments. In six literal days God created the earth and all things in it. Man was created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26). God gave Adam and Eve a law, which prohibited their eating of a certain tree. When they yielded to temptation and violated that law, sin entered the world, and consequently they were banished from the presence of God (Gen. 3:23-24).

The ray of light that shines in that dark picture is God’s statement to Satan: “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel” (Gen.

3:15). This is so important because it is the first promise of Christ! He is the seed of woman (born of the virgin Mary), who would “bruise the head” of Satan (see Heb. 2:14). Again, a long time would pass, and many events would occur, before that promised Seed would come.

Genesis 5 lists the generations from Adam through Seth down to Noah, because that is the lineage through which Jesus would come. The flood occurred because the point was reached that every intent of the thoughts of man’s heart was only evil continually (Gen. 6:5). Genesis 11 records the descendants of Noah through Shem down to Abraham.

This brings us to the patriarchal period of Bible history. Abraham was given three important promises: that God would make of him a great nation (the Israelites), that he would give to that nation the land of Canaan, and that through his seed (Jesus) would all the families of the earth be blessed.

The remainder of Genesis is concerned with how God developed that promised nation, through Abraham, his son Isaac, Isaac’s son Jacob, and his twelve sons. After Joseph was elevated to being ruler of Egypt, Jacob, his sons, and their families moved to Egypt, and from that family, God developed that promised great nation. But first Israel underwent a period of slavery in Egypt. At God’s appointed time he chose Moses to lead his people out of Egypt. To accomplish this it was necessary first for God to send the ten plagues. This was done to let Pharaoh and the Egyptians know that the Lord was the true and living God, and that he was all-powerful (Exod. 7:5). Also, these plagues were judgments against the gods that the Egyptians worshiped (Exod. 12:12).

Israel left Egypt, and made their way to Mount Sinai. It was here that they actually entered into covenant relationship with God, to be his people, and to obey his law (Exod. 19-24). The tabernacle, which was central to their worship, was built. The Aaronic priesthood was established (Leviticus). Then the march began toward Canaan. At Kadesh-Barnea, just south of Canaan, the people became fearful and rebelled (Num. 13-14). This began the next period of forty years of wilderness wandering, during which all of the soldiers, except Joshua and Caleb, died.

Joshua then led Israel across the Jordan to receive the promised land. A key verse is Joshua 21:43: “So the Lord gave to Israel all the land of which He had sworn to give to their fathers, and they took possession of it and dwelt in it.” As time passed the Israelites were influenced by and attracted to their immoral neighbors. They soon forsook God, and worshiped the Baalim and Asherah. God would punish them by allowing an enemy to oppress them. When Israel would cry out to God, he would raise up a judge, who would deliver them. There would be peace during his lifetime, but after the judge died, this cycle would start again. This is the message of the book of Judges.

The events narrated in the book of Ruth occurred dur- ing the judges (Ruth 1:1). The book reinforces what we have seen about the theme of the Bible as the conclusion reaches back to Judah’s son Perez, and traces the lineage through which Jesus would come through Boaz, and his son Obed, who was the father of Jesse, the father of David (Ruth 4:18-22).

Samuel’s judgeship marked the transition to the United Kingdom, with three kings, Saul, David (of the tribe of Judah), and Solomon (David’s son), each of whom reigned forty years. A key passage is 2 Samuel 7:11-13, where God promised to raise up David’s descendant and establish his kingdom. This was a promise of the Christ who was to come, and of his kingdom. Peter refers to this promise in Acts 2:30-31, and emphatically affirms the fulfillment in Christ.

Solomon’s apostasy is described in 1 Kings 11:1-8. Consequently, the kingdom divided at his death into Israel to the north, with Jeroboam as the first king, and Judah to the south, with Solomon’s son Rehoboam reigning. Jeroboam made many unauthorized changes in worship: the time, the object, the place, and the persons who officiated as priests. That false system of worship would continue in Israel until its destruction in 722 B.C. by the Assyrians. This portion of Biblical history is not only the record of the kings, but this is also the history of the prophets. 1 Kings 18-25 continues with the record of Judah alone. Then Judah was destroyed in three successive invasions by the Babylonians, and was taken captive (seventy years).

The prophets had also foretold of the return to the land of Israel. The first was under Zerubbabel — 536 B.C. (Ezra 1-6). It was during this time that the temple was rebuilt. The second return was under Ezra in 458 B.C. (Ezra 7-10). Nehemiah led in the third and final return from the Babylonian captivity, in 444 B.C. The Old Testament closes in anticipation of the coming and work of John the Immerser, who would herald the coming of the Lord (Mal. 3:1; 4:5).

This brings us to the silent years, the intertestamental period. Though no additional Scripture was being revealed, remember that God rules in the kingdoms of the world (Dan. 4). Daniel gave very specific prophecies of the Medo Persian, Grecian and Roman powers. He, more than any book in the Bible, deals with that period of history between the Old and New Testaments. These nations would all make contributions to a state of readiness for Christ’s coming.

The New Testament record takes up right where the Old Testament leaves off. Luke tells of the announcement, which broke the silence, that aged Zacharias would have a son, John, who would “make ready a people prepared for the Lord” (Luke 1:17). Months later, the same angel told Mary that she would miraculously conceive a son, Jesus, the Son of God.

The ministry of Christ divides into seven periods. These are: (1) Preparation, (2) Early Ministry, (3) Great Galilean Ministry, (4) Retirement, (5) Perean, (6) Final Week, (7) Post-Resurrection Appearances. This is the record of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. 

The book of Acts takes up where the Gospel records leave off, with the carrying out of the Great Commission. The hope of all the ages was to be realized. Salvation had been brought down! Acts 1:8 concisely foretells the path the Gospel would take: the apostles would be witnesses first in Jerusalem (Acts 1-7), Judea and Samaria (Acts 8-12), and to the uttermost part of the earth (Acts 13-28). Wherever the Gospel went, the message was the same. Men were declared to be sinners, and Jesus Christ was held up as their only hope. Those who obeyed from the heart were saved from sin, and added by the Lord to his church (Acts 2:26-47; Rom. 6:17, 18). 

Romans through Revelation were letters, written to individual Christians and churches, with instructions regarding all things that pertain to life and godliness. Those who had been saved from past sins were told how to maintain their salvation, and ultimately to receive that salvation which is ready to be revealed at the last time (1 Pet. 1:5). That is the theme of the Bible. Hallelujah! What a Savior!

By Rick Christian

The Bible, God’s book, is emphatic in instructing us to study. “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). There must be a constant hungering and thirsting (Matt. 5:6) after the perfect law of liberty (Jas. 1:25) that we may grow spiritually (2 Pet. 3:18). The motive for such diligent effort is the salvation of our souls (“Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls” — Jas. 1:21), and recognition that in the final day I will be judged by Jesus’ words (“He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day” — John 12:48).

What a noble example we find in the Bereans who “. . . searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11). They respected the word of God enough to spend time in the open word. Oh for such reverence and respect today such as prompted the people of Ezra’s day to stand up when the book of God was opened in their presence in Nehemiah 8:5. This kind of action recognizes the word as to its origin, from God, and who we are in relationship to it. David said in Psalm 136:23, speaking of God, “Who remembered us in our low estate. . . .” That’s why he could say in Psalm. 56:4, “In God I will praise his word, In God I have put my trust.”

Sadly, not everyone handles aright the word of truth. By this there are found hindrances in their study. Some, for example, may read but don’t study. They may very well have read the Bible from cover to cover several times. But, to ask them about what they read, they don’t know. Why? They didn’t study. Some get the Bible and read but they don’t ever intend on understanding anything they read. Jesus said in John 8:32, “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” Jesus said you can know what the truth is! Paul said in Ephesians 3:3, 4, “How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ).” The apostle Paul said we could understand. Thus, God expects us to understand his word! “Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is” (Eph. 5:17). There may be others who read the Bible but with the wrong attitude. Let’s examine some essential attitudes to proper Bible Study: Honesty, Sincerity, Submissiveness, Application To Self, and Open mindedness.

Honesty

In the parable of the sower in Matthew 13:3-9, 18-23, the sower went forth and sowed seed and that seed, the word of God, fell on four different soils (hearts). Of the four soils (hearts) only one received that word properly. This was the heart which was good and honest (Matt. 13:23). This heart has a love for the truth and does not take pleasure in unrighteousness (2 Thess. 2:9-12). It is honest in that it is fair and truthful. In our study of the Bible, God’s book, we must be fair and honest in our examination of Scripture. As we allow God to speak to us through his word we take a good and honest look at ourselves in respect to our relationship to God. With a poor and broken spirit (Matt. 5:3) and contrite heart (Isa. 66:2), we meekly (Matt. 5:5) submit ourselves to do the will of God. Honesty in study is not reading the Bible to prove a preconceived doctrine. Honesty is studying to find the doctrine of God and a willingness to submit to it. A good illustration of this is what James wrote in James 1:23-25, “For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.” Is an individual really being honest with himself as to his physical appearance if he looked in the mirror and saw a big glob of barbecue sauce on his face and didn’t wipe it off, but walked away from the mirror acting like his ap- pearance was fine because it had been on there for days? What should he do? Wipe the sauce off! The same is true in spiritual things! If we are honest in our study, when we behold a stain of sin which we have possibly been practicing for years, honesty is not finding an excuse to leave it there but doing what God commands to clean our life up.

Application To Self

Did you ever study the Bible, or listen to a sermon and hear a passage of Scripture or series of Scriptures which applied specifically to you but you didn’t make the application to yourself but thought, “Boy, I sure am glad so-in-so is here because they really needed that!”? Friend, it is possible they did need that, but did I need that too? If we are honest in our study we will first apply it to self. Paul wrote Timothy in 1 Timothy 4:16, “Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.” In 2 Corinthians 13, Paul reminds the brethren that all the time they were spending in examining Paul as to whether or not he was a genuine, bonafide apostle or not they had forgotten someone, “Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves.” Friend, it wasn’t until the prophet Nathan told David, “Thou art the man” in 2 Samuel 12:7 that David got the point that he was the one Nathan was making reference to in the short parable he taught to convince David of his sin he had committed with Bathsheba. David surely thought this story would not apply to him and even pronounced sentence upon the other! David’s anger that was kindled against “the man” (v. 5) was now changed as he took a good and honest look at himself. “And David said unto Nathan I have sinned against the Lord.” 

Sincerity

 

Sincerity in study is most important. Sincerity is an interesting word. When Jesus stated in the sermon on the mount, “Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God,” the word pure comes from the same root word from which we get our word sincerity and it means without wax. It has the idea of a sculptor who is shaping out a rock and makes a mistake and sticks wax in to gloss the thing over. You see, the idea from the spiritual standpoint is, its sincerity, without wax, there’s not a flaw in it, it’s real, it’s not something glossed over. 

Sincerity in study involves putting that which is studied to action. Jesus said in John 14:15, “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” Friend, if we sincerely love the Lord, then we will keep what he says to be true. The epitome of insincerity is hypocrisy. This individual only pretends to love God and his brethren for when opportunity arises, the behavior is such which violates the previous so-called pure activity. Remember, sincerity is without wax. If we love the truth we will practice it purely. Isn’t it interesting what the good and honest heart of Matthew 13 which received the word of God properly did? “. . . Which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty”(v.23). If I am sincere in my study I will actively exercise God’s commands to bear fruit of what I have read and understood. I will be holy in my manner of life. I will be kind in my speech, always having it seasoned with salt not gossiping nor slandering another’s good name. I will be reverent in worship. I will not play like I’m a Christian but I will be truly committed to the Lord, remembering and applying what I’ve studied. Remember, “And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in he name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him” (Col. 3:17). I am reminded of what Joshua bid the people of God during his day in his farewell address in Joshua 24:14, “Now therefore fear the Lord, and serve him in sincerity and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the Lord.”

Open Mindedness

The final point I would like for us to consider is the importance of being open minded. I heard a preacher say one time that we don’t need to be so open minded that our brains fall out. I emphatically agree. There is a limit to our open mindedness, for we must be lovers of truth and haters of every wicked way. But there is a need for open mindedness in study of the Bible. The apostle Paul spoke of matters of indifference in Romans 14 and he stated that each must be persuaded in his own mind (v. 5). In these matters, we move by faith and not by doubt (v. 23). As I study on these matters of indifference or opinion, I need to certainly have conviction, moving by faith, but I must exercise open mindedness in my study recognizing that it was solely a matter of opinion. Suppose I was not open minded. I might bind my opinion on another thus causing that brother to stumble or fall which is a specific violation of Romans 14:21. I have witnessed brethren being so dogmatic in their convictions on various matters of indifference that they weren’t open minded enough to receive those who differed with their matter of judgment. Paul says in Romans 14:3, “Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.” When studying matters of indifference we should be open minded enough to consider our conviction in light of the Scriptures as well as our brothers in light of the Scriptures that we may receive one another consistent with what Romans 14 teaches.

Those who submit to the Lord must be poor in spirit as already stated in this article. Thus, they cannot be arrogant. Many a close minded people exemplify this kind of attitude. They will not open their minds up to see the truth even in matters of doctrine. Jesus spoke of those in his day who had ears dull of hearing and eyes they have closed (Matt.

13:15). They were not open minded to the truth but were set in their Jewish ways. When we close our hearts to the truth, we shut ourselves off from every opportunity of absorbing lessons which will course our path to heaven and open our hearts up to prejudice and stereotyping.

I close with the words of Jesus in John 5:39, “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.”