|
III. The Basic Mechanics of Bible Study After the simple fact of reading literature in order to begin to understand it, the next thing is to do some thinking about what you are reading. Always Read "In Context"
Exegesis - Basic Steps to Quality Interpretation As an example, let’s say that we want to understand what it means to “be born again” (John 3:3-7). Here is a rather thorough step-by-step process to follow. 1. Backgrounds (Gospel of John & passage) - when written, by who, to whom, historical & cultural influences 2. Book (context/outline) - Outline John’s Gospel - see the passage in the context of the structure of the whole book Both of the first two items can be handled by reading something like one or more of the following reference sources, F. F. Bruce, The Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans 1983), pp. 1-17. D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1991), pp. 21-103. Carson, D. A.; Moo, Douglas J.; and Morris, Leon. An Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), pp. 135-176 Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 4th (Revised) ed. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1990), pp. 248-350. 3. Paragraph (thematic identification) - identify the pericope (section) you want to study - sentences are partly understood by how they fit into paragraphs and chapters - Read all of John 3:1-21 before you “focus down” on your “target passage(s)” 4. Understand the Sentences (syntax) - John 3:3-8 "born again / born of water & Spirit" - here is where key words and grammar becomes important: (1) “unless” - identifies conditional circumstances (2) subject (who is the main character/actor) - “one” (anyone?) (3) verbs (what kind of action is discussed) - tense (past, present, future) - point or linear (event or ongoing condition) - mood (reality of the verbal action - Indicative/100%, Subjunctive/50%, Optative-wish/0%, also Imperative/command, Interrogative/question) - voice: Does the subject do the verb’s action (active), participate in the action (middle), or have the action of the verb done to them (passive)? “is born ” (vv. 3,5 - 3rd person, aorist, subjunctive, passive)[1] “from above / of water and spirit” - this spiritual birth originates from /is initiated by God (as a human father initiates a physical pregnancy) and is a single event involving water and Spirit/spirit in some way) 5. Understand the Phrases/words used - “born anew/again” & water/spirit - what is “birth” in common thought? (a visible & outward moment of passage into legal personhood/citizenship/recognition by others/ etc. - a recognized beginning point) - “born again” suggests a second “birth event” of some kind, initiated by God - “born of water and Spirit” suggests that water and the Holy Spirit are involved in this event somehow - was “born of water” ever used as a way of describing natural childbirth in first century A.D. culture? (never, so “born of water” probably does NOT refer to physical childbirth) 6. Find Parallel passages (other passages discussing the same event or concept) Use an exhaustive Concordance to look for other usage of the “born again/born of . . .” terminology: - Does John use this terminology elsewhere? a) John 1:12-13 - involves “receiving Jesus as the promised Messiah” and believing in His name, but it is not being “born of blood, fleshly will, the will of man.” b) being “born of God” is demonstrated by “practicing righteousness” (1John 2:29) and being unable to habitually practice sin (1John 3:9; 5:18). Brotherly love for other Christians is another proof of being “born of God” (1John 4:7), as is believing that Jesus is the Messiah (1John 5:1), overcoming the world (1John 5:4). - Does any other Biblical writer use this terminology? Peter said that God’s mercy causes people to be “born again” to a living hope (1Peter 1:3). Later, he associates “obedience to the truth” with purifying the soul for brotherly love “for” (equating/paralleling?) you have been born again from imperishable seed, God’s word preached to you (1Peter 1:22-25). Thus, Peter seems to be telling us that God’s word acts like a “seed” that results in ”obedience to the truth/hope/brotherly love.” Are there parallels to that idea? 7. Topical Studies (what does the rest of the Bible teach about the idea/concept?) - Is there alternate terminology used that might parallel this topic or describe it further? a) John’s “passed out of death into life/come to life” (John 5:24-25; Revelation 20:4) and “born of the Spirit” (John 3:6,8) b) Paul spoke of "born of a woman" (Gal. 4:4) and "born according to the flesh" (Gal. 4:23,29), but never "born again/water & Spirit." His closest parallel is discussion of "coming to life" from spiritual death (Eph. 2:1-9; Romans 6:3-11; Col. 2:11,12) and perhaps came closest to John’s phraseology with his comment to Titus about the "bath of regeneration and renewal by the Spirit" (Titus 3:5). c) From point 6, I was reminded of some other discussions of God’s Word acting like a seed that can bring spiritual life. That made me think of passages where we encounter the idea of the Gospel message portrayed as a seed that can bring spiritual life (depending on the soil - Luke 8:4-15), faith resulting from hearing the Word of Christ (Romans 10:14-17), and salvation coming through a message preached and believed (1Corinthians 1:21). I think there is a rather obvious parallel with Jesus’ agricultural allusions and the idea of God’s Word acting like spiritual sperm/spores - in fact, these words came from Greek words: sporos (2Corinthians 9:10; 1Peter 1:23) and sperma (1John 3:9). When scattered (proclaimed/ taught/ discussed) God’s Word acts like spiritual seeds/spores that land on various types of spiritual soil (hearts & minds - Luke 8:4-15) and the Holy Spirit tries to “fertilize” (convict - John 16:7-11) that Seed/Word when it lands on spiritual soil/hearts and minds. This is why the primary spiritual battleground is over ideas/concepts/thoughts/ beliefs (2Corinthians 10:3-5), for the enemy also has workers who are “over-sowing troublesome weeds” (dzidzania - that resembles wheat in the early stages) amongst the good seeds (Matthew 13:25). Hearing and believing the Gospel message (the seed that produces spiritual life) is probably the conditional element in the subjunctive statements (might/should - 50/50 reality) about rendering Satan powerless and freeing people from spiritual bondage (Hebrews 2:14-15) and binding the Devil to limit his ability to deceive the nations (Revelation 20:3). Jesus came the first time to “destroy the works of the Devil” (1John 3:8) and the Gospel message is powerful for destroying ideological “fortresses” that Satan builds in the thinking of cultures and individuals (2Corinthians 10:3-5). 8. History of Interpretation (How interpreters handled this passage over the centuries?) - Church Fathers (100-500 A.D.) virtually unanimous that “born of water & spirit” refers to the baptism event as the time of this spiritual “birth event,” with Acts 2:37-41 and Titus 3:5-7 clearly noting the connection of water and Spirit in the baptism/bath of regeneration event. Tertullian’s reference to the “fish” (Ichthus) symbol for Christians was “because we, like little fishes, are born in the water.” - Catholic (500-1500) - maintain baptism as the time of official “spiritual birth” until the 16th century Reformation. Roman Catholicism still holds baptism as important, for some sound Biblical reasons. - Protestantism (1500-Present) - hostile reaction to Catholicism brought on two general responses: (1) mainline denominations maintained Roman Catholic “original sin” and infant sprinkling as “baptism,” while (2) some of the Baptist groups and later “Evangelical” groups took the Zwinglian anti-sacramental view and totally disconnected the “sacraments” from having any real connection with salvation/new birth. To explain “born of water and Spirit,” these folks tend to either (a) spiritualize “water” as also meaning “spirit,” or (b) make it two births, “born of water” is natural childbirth and “born of the Spirit” is a later mystical salvation event when one truly “believes” (and says “the sinner’s prayer” or “raise their hand” as the “born again” event). 9. Modern Scholarship (How do current, reputable interpreters understand this passage) - Be sure to investigate a number of commentaries to get a feel for the most common views and reasons - F. F. Bruce: well aware of the history of interpretation and how the early church understood this, he regretted the reaction of some that refuse to recognize the baptismal allusion of this passage (Gospel of John, pp. 84-85) - D. A. Carson - appeasing his evangelical (faith only) constituency, Carson admits the possibility of a “secondary” inference concerning baptism, but argues against it being very plain (The Gospel According to John, pp. 187-196). * However, note that Carson’s theological objectivity is suspect on other points also, for an acquaintance of mine who took an exegesis class on the book of Hebrews under Carson said that he totally skipped the passage in Hebrews 6:4-8 (called a lunch break and then started at Hebrews 6:9) because it clearly discusses the danger of a Christian “falling away,” which either Carson or a number of his students do not believe is possible. Even world class scholars are capable of putting their own theological beliefs ahead of what Scripture teaches! ----------------------------------------------------- As you can see, following this method of exegesis can be time consuming, but it also yields a solid understanding of what a passage is teaching and is especially helpful for passages where there is (currently) a lot of popular disagreement over what is meant. Not all questions can be resolved, but many “theological issues” in later centuries were/are not controversial because Scripture is unclear and the original meanings are contradictory, lost, and/or unrecoverable Some Biblical teachings simply disagree with human theology as it has developed in many different groups and, rather than surrender to the Word of God, advocates distort and twist Scripture in an effort to support their own ideas (remember Acts 20:29-30; 2Peter 3:15-18). Interpreting Biblical passages is often much like issues of “interpreting the Constitution” - the problem is not figuring out what the Founding Fathers said and intended, but the problem is that some now have their own agenda that they want to “sanctify” as “Constitutional” and must discredit the original meaning and “distort” the words so as to seemingly “allow” or give the appearance of support for these new notions. ----------------------------------------------------- Charles E. McCoy January 24, 2006 [1] Grammatically deciphered, “is born” refers to an action upon a 3rd person subject (he, she), action that is a “point/ event” in one’s past, hinging on some variable, and the action is done to the subject. The Kingdom of God will only be seen/entered by those who have been spiritually regenerated by God, if they pledge allegience to/obey Jesus. The “spiritual birth/regeneration” event involving water and God’s Spirit was generally (if not unanimously) understood by the early church as Christian baptism (Acts 2:37-41; Titus 3:3-7).
Email Chuck at: chuck@severnchristian.org
|
The Number 1 issue is "always read in context" - always see
words/phrases as part of a sentence, within a paragraph, within a
document, written in particular time and place, at a particular
moment in the life of individuals and their cultural group, and in
the flow of the larger events of human history. Thus, as you read,
think of what you are reading as it fits within the various
levels/types of "context" (graphic right). Each of these “context
levels” has some impact on the meaning and correct understanding of
each portion of Scripture - sometimes one or more of these has a
MAJOR impact on the meaning.
