The book of Genesis is generally considered by scholars to be a book of history. Some consider the first 9 chapters to be mythological, as it covers creation, the fall of man, and the flood. But mitochondrial DNA proves that all men descended from a single woman, and geology proves that the earth was completely covered by water in the distant past. So there is no reason to treat any part of Genesis as mythological, especially considering the abundant historical evidence of the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob) and of the Egyptian empire documented in later chapters. The book contains significant prophecies; and, being the book of origins, there is much to learn about prophecy and how God communicates prophecy in this book.
The First Prophecy in the Bible
In my accounting, the first prophecy in the Bible is Genesis 2:2:
And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
The verbs are in the past tense, so it does not appear to be a prophecy. But in light of 2 Peter 3:8:
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
we understand that the seven days of creation (1 week) symbolize 7,000 years of man’s history on the earth. Therefore this seventh, or rest, day is a prophecy of the coming 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth where we will have peace and righteousness. According to Bishop James Ussher, the earth was created in 4004 BC. So we have already had 6,000 years of history, and we should expect the Millennium to begin soon.
If you listen to Bible prophecy teachers, you will hear reasons why it is important to teach prophecy. We are encouraged in the Bible to preach and teach “all the counsel of God” (Acts 20:27). Most preachers do not teach prophecy at all, other than the annual Christmas message that may include Isaiah 7:14 or Micah 5:2.
It has been claimed that the Bible contains anywhere from ¼ to 1/3 prophecy. Pete Garcia says the Bible is 1/3 prophecy. Some in the Calvary Chapel movement claim it is more than 1/3 prophecy. Bill Koenig claims the Bible is 26% prophecy. Jack Hibbs claims the Bible is somewhere between 27 and 31% prophecy. Tim LaHaye calculated the percentage of prophecy in each book of the Bible, and it summed to approximately 28% (Also see page 14 of this document by Dr. Ed Knorr).
These numbers are surprising to the average Christian who hasn’t read the Bible for themselves, because prophecy is preached on so rarely.
Fulfilled prophecy is one of the most indisputable proofs of God’s authorship of the Bible. More people would believe, and believers’ faith would be strengthened, if they understood the Bible’s perfect track record on fulfilled prophecy. Who other than God, who sits outside of space-time, can know the future with 100% accuracy?
Dr. John Walvoord says that most prophecies have been fulfilled. But scholars say that there are 321 prophecies in the Bible that are yet to be fulfilled concerning Christ’s return. How can we know if any of these prophecies are about to be fulfilled if we do not study them?
But what is the truth about the amount of prophecy in the Bible? Whose numbers should we believe? And how do you count whether a portion of the Bible is prophecy or not? And what is prophecy anyway? This post begins a series of posts that will answer these questions.
How much of the Bible is prophecy? The easiest way to count it would be to count by books. Some books of the Bible are prophetic, and some are not. In the Old Testament, the Major and Minor Prophets are generally considered to be the prophetic books. This makes 16 books. One book of the new Testament is prophecy- Revelation. This makes a total of 17 books. Considering that the Bible contains 66 books, we find that the Bible is 25.8% prophecy. This must be where Bill Koenig gets his 26% number from.
This post is a (long-delayed) continuation in the series of Systematic Theologies that is part of the larger series, “How to Study the Bible”. This will be the last post in the Systematic Theology series, but more posts are planned for “How to Study the Bible.” This article will discuss dispensationalism, which is more commonly known as premillennial dispensationalism.
What is dispensationalism?
Dr. Ed Knorr of the University of British Columbia describes dispensationalism in this way:
Dispensationalism—A system of theology that interprets Scripture literally and from the perspective of God’s interaction with humanity through successive ages. This view of biblical history maintains one plan of salvation in which God reveals Himself to man and deals with humanity in different ways in each successive period of their relationship or economy (dispensation) of time. [LaHaye, et al., 2001].
Dispensationalists believe that history is broken into eras or dispensations (Greek: oikonomia, meaning “administration” or “stewardship”):
Innocence (from Creation to the Fall of Adam & Eve, Genesis 1:1 to 3:7)
Conscience (from the Fall of Adam & Eve to Noah’s Flood, Genesis 3:8 to 8:22)
Human Government (from Noah’s Flood to Abraham, Genesis 9:1 to 11:32)
Promise or Patriarchal Rule (from Abraham to Moses, Genesis 12:1 to Exodus 19:35)
Law (from Moses to the Day of Pentecost, Exodus 20 to Acts 2:4)
Grace (from the Day of Pentecost to the Rapture (or Christ’s Second Coming), Acts 2:4 to Revelation 20:3)
Kingdom (from the Second Coming to the End of the Millennium, Revelation 20:4-6)
The 7-year Tribulation prior to Christ’s Second Coming is sometimes considered a separate dispensation. This is the 70th Week of Daniel. The “70 weeks” prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 was put on hold when Christ was rejected, ca. 30 AD.
Clarence Larkin describes the dispensations in more detail here (HTML) or here (PDF).
Does the Bible teach dispensationalism?
Paul writes the word “dispensation” (oikonomia) four times: 1 Corinthians 9:17, Ephesians 1:10, Ephesians 3:2, and Colossians 1:25. In three of these verses, Paul is referring to the administration that was given to him from God to preach the gospel of Grace and to establish churches. This is a clear reference to the current “Church age” or “Grace” dispensation. In the other verse, Ephesians 1:10, the “dispensation of the fulness of times” is a reference to eternity, when all temporal dispensations will end. Paul also makes a clear distinction between “law” and “grace” (though the term ‘dispensation’ is not used):
For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
The dispensations themselves are marked by clear pronouncements from God that He is changing the rules by which he deals with mankind. At the end of the first dispensation, Innocence, God pronounces the curse on man. Having eaten from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, man now has a conscience that will tell on him when he is doing evil. The second dispensation, Conscience, ends after the flood when God tells Noah and his family that they are now to use the death penalty to deter evil. The third dispensation, Human Government, ends with the covenant that God makes with Abraham. The fourth dispensation, Promise, ends with the giving of the Ten Commandments. The fifth dispensation, Law, ends with the coming of the Holy Spirit. At least three of the dispensations are synonymous with covenants (Abrahamic, Mosaic, New).
How does Dispensationalism affect Bible study/ interpretation?
Dispensationalism is a good framework of interpretation of the Bible because the Bible is intended to be used as an instruction book by man. The dispensations acknowledge that God has given different instructions to man at different times (Heb 1:1-2). God dealt with Israel in a very different way than how He deals with the Church today. Dispensationalism has an answer to those who claim that the “God of the Old Testament” is a different god than the “God of the New Testament.”
Dispensationalism teaches that there is only one way of salvation for all men (Acts 4:12). In the Old Testament, people trusted God and looked forward to a Savior who would take their sins away once and for all. Today men look back to the Cross and acknowledge that their sins have been expunged by that same Savior.
Advantages of Dispensationalism
Understanding of prophecy. There are many prophecies in the Bible (Old Testament and New Testament) that have not yet been fulfilled. For example, Israel shall rule over the whole earth. Knowing that the fulfillment of this prophecy is part of a future dispensation gives us confidence that the Bible is literally true. We do not have to resort to allegory to make sense of unfulfilled prophecies.
Hope for the future. Most of the prophecies of Revelation are horrible; they describe a world that is worse than anything that has happened in history. But they describe the time of the Great Tribulation, which is in a different dispensation. Since the Bible tells us that we (the Church) will be “saved from wrath”, we are able to “Comfort one another” as the Lord commands us to, knowing that our destiny is peaceful and secure.
Understanding current events. The Bible is relevant to us today because some commands that God gave in the Bible are still relevant nearly 2000 years later. Jesus said, “And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” (Luke 21:28). Many of the events that Jesus spoke of before this statement have occurred or are currently occurring. Thus we see that current events relate to Bible prophecy. The Bible is dynamically relevant to our daily lives. This causes us to study more carefully and with a sense of urgency.
Understand the distinction between Israel & the church. Probably the most important distinctive of dispensationalism is a proper understanding of the difference between Israel and the Church. They are two separate peoples, who live under separate dispensations, and have been given different promises, and have different destinies (at least for the Great Tribulation and the Millennium). Israel was resurrected as a political nation in 1948. One day they will become God’s chosen people again. We understand that we should love and support Israel because God loves Israel (Zechariah 2:8).
And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
– Romans 11:26
The Gospels and Dispensationalism
The synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, have a lot of similarities. But they are also unique. Matthew was written to Israel, Mark was written to the Romans, and Luke was written for the Greeks.
The Gospel of John has much unique content– John’s purpose was to write to the Church. It was written after the destruction of Jerusalem (in A.D. 70) and therefore did not need to address issues related to Israel, Jerusalem, and the temple. Dispensationalists believe that much of the teaching in the Synoptic gospels is directed toward Israel and is not binding on the Church.
What is hyper-dispensationalism?
Hyper-Dispensationalism (or Mid-Acts dispensationalism) is a belief among some dispensationalists that the Church (the dispensation of Grace, or “church age”) did not start until the conversion of Paul (in Acts 9) or Paul’s first missionary journey (in Acts 13). Perhaps some of these adherents have become confused as to the teaching of the churches in Acts, where gentile believers worshipped in synagogues and were required to abstain from consuming blood and meat sacrificed to pagan gods (Acts 15:20, 29). Rather than saying that this is not a New Testament church, it should be understood that it took time for the New Testament teachings to be established, mainly because most of the believers in the Acts church were Jewish, and they had obeyed the ceremonial law for their whole lives, and the idea of eating the meat of unclean animals was unthinkable. The leaders of the church in Acts 15 made a compromise for the sake of the Jewish believers. These practices are not relevant to today’s church because there are no public animal sacrifices, and most churches have no Jews as members.
There is also a view called ultra-dispensationalism where adherents claim that only the New Testament letters from Romans to Philemon are applicable to the Church age.
This is another article in a series on Belief Systems, or Systematic Theologies. It is part of a larger series on How to Study the Bible. As we study the Bible, it is important to understand it according to is plainest, most literal sense. As Chuck Missler says, we need to take the Bible seriously. A serious Bible student should seek to understand what the Bible is saying, according to how the author intended it, and according to the meaning of the words used at the time the text was originally written. If we impose a man-created belief system upon the Biblical text, we run the risk of misunderstanding what it says, and therefore misunderstanding who God is and what He requires us to do.
Origin of Calvinism
John Calvin (1509-1564) was a church leader at the time of the Protestant Reformation. He was influenced by the work of Martin Luther. His writings were very influential in the establishment of protestant churches as they broke free from the control of the Catholic Church. As such, Calvinism is also called Reformed Theology.
Calvinists claim that their teaching is in agreement with the teachings of the Catholic bishop, Augustine of Hippo (354-430 A.D.). Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion quotes frequently from the writings of Augustine.
Calvin and others of his generation made many disciples. These disciples went on to start churches and to spread his doctrine far and wide. Its influence was very strong through the 19th Century.
Some of the great Calvinist writers are John Owen, Jonathan Edwards, and C.H. Spurgeon. These are some of the greatest Bible scholars to live in the New Testament era. Their work is thorough, well researched, and replete with scripture references. They should be read by all Christians who have access to their work. In the past century, their work has been continued by such preachers as R.C. Sproul, A.W. Pink, and John Piper. I have learned more about the Bible from these authors than from any other teachers or preachers.
What Calvinism Teaches
As mentioned in a previous post, Calvinists believe in Covenant Theology. That belief system has one dominant thought: the Covenant of Grace. So Calvinist teaching is sometimes called the Doctrines of Grace. Calvinist teaching emphasizes the sovereignty of God over the free will of man, and that all men are predestined to either salvation or damnation from before the creation of the world.
To explain Calvinism briefly, the acronym TULIP is used:
Total Depravity – This is the idea that man is unable to do anything good without the illuminating power of God (Jeremiah 17:9).
Unconditional Election – This is the idea that God elects some people to salvation without regard to a person’s character, works, whether they be in the past or yet future (Romans 9:11).
Limited Atonement – This is the idea that Jesus Christ died for the elect, and not for all mankind. Logically this has to be true because Calvinists believe that God gets whatever he wills and that he is efficient in all his works, meaning that he would not do a work to save a person unless that person would actually be saved (Isaiah 46:10-11).
Irresistible Grace – This is the teaching that when God chooses to work in a man’s heart to draw him to Himself, it is impossible for that drawing power to be resisted by man. It is certain that everyone whom God calls to be saved will be saved (Acts 9:3-6, 15).
Perseverance of the Saints – This is the teaching that those whom God has saved (“the elect”) will continue to hold to their faith in God unto death. They may fall into sin, but they will repent before they die (John 10:28-29).
Some Calvinists believe in the doctrine of double predestination. This belief, known as Hypercalvinism, teaches that not only are the elect predestined (Romans 8:29), but that the damned are also predestined to Hell. There is no verse in the Bible that supports the teaching that those who reject the offer of salvation through Jesus Christ are foreordained to damnation. Those who perish in Hell do so by their own choosing. To teach otherwise would lead one to think that God is not good.
Sovereignty vs. Free Will
Calvinism’s view on man’s free will is a way to understand God given man’s limited cognitive ability, and our limited understanding of God. As such, it ‘puts God in a box’. While it seems reasonable to conclude that a God who has predestined everyone could not have created these predestined people to have free will, we must rely on what the Bible says:
For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.
For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
– Isaiah 55:8-9
When we try to understand exactly how God saves people, and what God is thinking when He chooses to save or not save a person, we are wading into waters too deep for us to stand in. We are not able to understand the details of why God does what he does. The Bible gives us abundant information about His thoughts and His desires. It is simple to understand that God has provided a way for man to be saved: God Himself became a man, and died as our representative, or as our substitute. But God has not explained everything to us about his plan of salvation.
The secret things belong unto the Lord our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.
– Deuteronomy 29:29
God reveals enough of Himself to us that we have abundant reasons to love Him and obey Him. But we “can’t handle the truth” regarding the interaction between our will and God’s sovereignty. Our minds are too simple and too small to comprehend it. God is so big and so powerful that He is able to sovereignly control who is saved without interfering with our ability to choose to follow Him. God is able to see all of time at once (Isaiah 46:10). He is able to arrange future events just as easily as we are able to type letters on a computer screen.
What are some specific Bible verses that Calvinists have generally misinterpreted?
As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
– Romans 9:13-15
Romans Chapters 9-11 are a parenthetical section that Paul inserts to explain God’s love for the nation of Israel. Though God has established the Church, he is not finished dealing with Israel. There are many promises that God has given to Israel that have not yet been fulfilled. Calvinists tend to understand Romans 9 with respect to salvation of individuals. This can lead one to believe that man doesn’t really have free will, since God seemingly saves whomever He wishes without regard to the merits of any person, according to v. 15. But when one understands that by “Jacob” God is referring to the nation of Israel, and that by “Esau” God is referring to the nations of Moab and Edom (and by inference to all Gentile nations), we no longer see God as being capricious and unpredictable regarding man’s salvation. Whether or not a nation is saved has no bearing on my salvation as a person. I am a citizen of the United States of America, but my eternal destiny is not dependent upon God saving the nation. He has already saved me; that is the only guarantee I need. America may cease to be a sovereign nation, but my relationship to God is secure.
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
– 2 Peter 3:8-9
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
– 1 Timothy 2.4
In the above verses, Calvinists have to redefine the meaning of the word “all” in order for the verses to fit within their limited atonement belief system.
Theological errors that can result from adhering to Calvinism
Its views on Israel:
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
And so all Israel shall be saved:
Rom. 11:25-26
Modern Calvinists typically believe that God finished his dealings with Israel as a nation in A.D. 70 when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans. They believe in Replacement Theology; that is, the Church has inherited the promises made to Israel that were not fulfilled by God. But the Book of Hebrews teaches that Israel and the Church are two separate groups of people, they have separate origins, separate covenants (Hebrews 7:22, see also Galatians 4:22-31), separate promises (Hebrews 8:6), and separate destinies (Hebrews 12:18, 22-23). God’s reasons for creating each group are also distinct.
Therefore they do not understand the importance of supporting the modern reconstituted nation of Israel, which was formally brought back into existence by the United Nations in 1947. This nation consists of the chosen people of God according to the Old Testament. God promised Abraham and David that they would possess the Promised Land forever. The events that we have seen take place over the past 120 years are signs that God intends to keep His promises to Israel (and not to transfer their inheritance the Church). This theological point is important. If we do not support Israel, and pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122:6), we are inviting God’s judgment upon ourselves.
Its Eschatology
Because of its views on Israel, Calvinism tends to have allegorical interpretations of those prophetic portions of Scripture that have not yet found their fulfillment. They tend to be post-tribulational in their beliefs, because they do not understand that the Tribulation represents a restarting of God’s relationship with Israel. As such, the Church cannot be on the earth during the Tribulation. Those who believe that the church has taken the place of Israel must necessarily believe that the Church will endure the Tribulation, if they want to believe the Bible.
Calvinists also tend to be amillennial in their eschatology, due to Replacement Theology. Augustine held to an allegorical view of the millennium, writing that the church would fulfill it instead of Israel. This view has been popular with Calvinists.
In Summary
Calvinism has a rich history within the Church, and the church owes its theologians a debt of gratitude for much excellent Bible teaching. But with the re-emergence of Israel on the world scene starting in the 20th Century, its Systematic Theology has failed to provide answers. Allegorizing scripture will always result in error (excepting Paul -see Galatians 4:24). It is vitally important to construct a Systematic Theology that agrees with a serious, literal understanding of the entire Bible in its various historical contexts.
This is the next post in a series on belief systems, or Systematic Theologies, that are used as a framework to understand the Bible as a whole. This series is part of a bigger series entitled How to Study the Bible.
Two Errant Variations of Covenant Theology
This post discusses Covenant Theology, which is another framework that is similar to Replacement Theology. It is not spoken of as often as Replacement Theology, but it is discussed here because it teaches Replacement Theology. As you become exposed to different theologies and belief systems, it is important to examine them and find out which one holds most closely to what the Bible actually says. We should never have to twist Scripture to make it fit our belief system.
Covenant Theology (a.k.a. Reformed Covenant Theology) includes 3 covenants in its primary teachings:
1. The Covenant of Redemption. This covenant was made within the three persons of the Godhead before the world was created. The covenant was the agreement that the Father would send the Son to be the savior of the world (1 John 4:14).
2. The Covenant of Works. This covenant was between God and Adam and Eve, described in Genesis 2:15-16. This covenant included the rules in the Garden of Eden regarding the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam broke this covenant and as a result it was replaced by the Covenant of Grace.
3. The Covenant of Grace. This covenant is introduced by the animal that was killed to provide clothing for man. This animal represents the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29). Everything that happens after Genesis 3 is under the covenant of Grace.
Covenant Theology does a fairly good job of explaining how salvation works, but it does not do a good job of providing a structure that organizes the contents of the Bible in a way to help understand its overall teaching. In fact, it falls so short of that goal that it should not even be called a Biblical theology. It is only a soteriology.
What does Covenant Theology Teach?
It teaches that there is only one method of salvation that has been in effect for all of human history: That faith in the Messiah is the only condition of salvation. Israel believed in a coming Messiah, and the Church puts its faith in the finished work of the Messiah on the Cross, his resurrection, and his promised return. The error of this theology is that it makes no distinction between Israel and the Church – both groups are considered to be chosen of God and both share in the same destiny. This is Replacement Theology.
Replacement Theology a commonly held belief and it is dangerous because it is used as a justification for the United States to abandon its support for Israel, and also to argue that Christians should not support the right of the nation of Israel to exist.
Different Versions of Covenant Theology
The Reformed, or Calvinist, view is described above. The Catholic view acknowledges and teaches the actual Biblical covenants, but interprets them to have been fulfilled in the Church, thus doing away with any need for God to restore, use, and bless Israel. The Catholic Church promoted this theology to direct believers’ focus away from Jerusalem and towards Rome as the source of authority. This happened as belief in Christ’s soon return faded, about 200 years after Christ’s ascension. Teachers like Augustine promoted an allegorical view of Scripture that explained away the need for Christ’s return to establish a millennial kingdom. Over time, Christians no longer believed that Christ would come to establish His throne in Jerusalem. The leaders in Rome declared themselves to be the voice of Christ and the source of church authority.
Verses that support Covenant Theology:
After Genesis 3, there is nothing that supports Covenant Theology. Galatians 4:24 speaks of “two covenants.” But these two covenants are the law and the Church, as seen the context of Galatians 3:1-4:23. One could say that the second covenant is the covenant of grace, but that phrase is not found in the Bible. The covenant of grace was hinted at in Genesis 3:15 (“The seed of the woman”), but this verse is a prophecy and the covenant did not come into effect until Christ’s resurrection and the giving of the Holy Spirit (John 14:17, 17:21-23). It is true that there has only been one way of salvation throughout human history, but the framework of Covenant Theology removes Israel from its rightful, distinct, and prominent position in Scripture. Dr. Arnold Fructenbaum states that 5/6ths of the Bible is about Israel. All Biblical theologies should give Israel a prominent place to the nation of Israel and the covenants that God made with her.
Regarding Replacement Theology, one could argue that these verses from Romans 11 support it:
v. 7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.
v. 11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
But by reading the entire chapter, it is clear that Paul is arguing the opposite, that Israel has been temporarily set aside to allow the Gentiles to be saved, creating a new nation of the church (1 Peter 2:9), the Bride of Christ:
I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid….God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. (vv. 1, 2)
v. 24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?
v. 26 And so all Israel shall be saved…
The olive tree is Israel. The church, a wild branch, has been grafted in. It obtains life from the Root of Israel, the Root of David, the Messiah. This does not mean that the Church has replaced Israel. The wild branch does not become a natural olive branch; it only obtains its life from the same Source.
Another verse that supports Replacement Theology is Acts 13:46:
Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
This turning to the Gentiles was only temporary. Paul spent the majority of the rest of his life ministering to the Gentiles. This verse does not mean that God has permanently disowned Israel. Israel will be saved after the fullness of the Gentiles has come in (Romans 11:25).
In the Parable of the Vineyard, we find a verse that also predicts that God will turn away from Israel:
He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
Luke 20:16
In the parable, the vineyard is Israel. The “God forbid” is a clue that Paul leaves us by including the same words in Romans 11:1. It is clear from Romans 11 that this abandonment of Israel was not permanent.
A Refutation of Covenant Theology
(These verses refute Replacement Theology) In addition to Romans 11, there are other verses that make distinctions between the positions of Israel and the Church in God’s kingdom.
A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.
Luke 2:32
Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
1 Corinthians 10:32
The above two verses show that both Jesus and Paul considered the church (a primarily Gentile body) and the nation of Israel (the Jews) two separate groups of people.
There are many promises in the Old Testament that guarantee that Israel will be restored to the head of the nations, and that it will exist forever. For example:
A Biblical Covenant Theology would include all of the covenants in the Bible that God established between Himself and His people. What are the covenants described in the Bible?
Edenic (Gen 1:26-30) God gave man dominion over the earth.
Abrahamic (Gen 12:1-3) God promised that Abraham would be the father of many nations, including Israel. All nations would be blessed because of Abraham.
Mosaic (the Law, or Old Covenant, Deuteronomy 11). God promised the nation of Israel that he would bless them in the land if they obeyed His commandments.
Davidic (2 Samuel 7:8-16) God promised that a son of David would always sit on the throne of Israel in Jerusalem.
New (Jeremiah 31:31-34) All of the above covenants were broken by man (With regard to the Abrahamic covenant, Abraham did not break the covenant; its promises are unconditional. But the land aspect of the covenant was broken through the disobedience of the nation of Israel). In the New Covenant, God says, “I will put my law within them” (i.e., Israel) so that they cannot break the covenant. All of the requirements of the new covenant (as well as all previous covenants) were fulfilled by Jesus. Because Jesus is a son of Adam, of Abraham, of Israel, and of David, he was qualified to fulfill the covenants. The New Covenant was initially directed toward Israel by Jeremiah but has since been made available to all mankind (John 3:16).
Five covenants are listed above, but many teachers acknowledge eight covenants. Dr. Arnold Fructenbaum has a good description of the eight covenants of the Bible here.
Clarence Larkin’s Clear and Accurate Illustration of the Biblical Covenants
A truly Biblical covenant theology acknowledges the prominent role that Israel plays in all of the above covenants, understanding that there are promises to Israel within some of those covenants that have not yet been fulfilled. Adherents of this theology anticipate God fulfilling His promises to Israel in the future. As you study the Bible, be careful that you let the Bible develop theology for you; do not impose someone else’s theology on the Bible.
This is the next post in a series on Systematic Theologies. Read the first in this series here. This article discusses Dominion Theology and two variants, Kingdom Now and the New Apostolic Reformation.
In the last post the dangerous biblical interpretation of Liberation Theology and its adherents was discussed. This post discusses another dangerous theology, known as Dominion Theology.
Here is a definition of Dominion Theology:
‘Dominion Theology’ is invariably postmillenial and adherents believe that the Church itself will have to set up the Kingdom of God upon earth before Jesus Christ returns. It is believed that Christ’s kingdom will need to be established by political, and even military means if and when that might prove necessary. So this is a highly political approach which advocates strong, ongoing, and ultra-conservative political activism. Essentially, a massive change in typical Christian attitudes is required.
– Robin A. Brace.
A Bible verse that supports Dominion Theology: Gen 1:28
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Dominion Theology understands this verse to apply not to mankind, but to the church, and that it applies not only to the land mass of the earth and to the animals, but that the church is to control all people of the earth as well. However, God did not give this command to the church. He gave it to Adam and Eve, and it has passed down to all mankind. It clearly refers to the land mass of the earth and all animals in it.
A variant of Dominion Theology is called “Kingdom Now” theology. This is popular among charismatic churches. The main differences are that “Kingdom Now” is less theologically deep and is dependent on modern-day apostles and prophets to lead the effort to convert the world to Christianity:
The church, it is believed, under the leadership of “restored” apostles, prophets and evangelists, must be prepared to take over the world and put down all opposition to it before Christ can return…”
– Brace
More information about Dominion Theology can be found at these links (here, here, and here).
New Apostolic Reformation
Bob DeWaay describes the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) movement here. Following is a quote that gives a brief summary of the history of the movement:
At the very beginning of the 20th century a man named David Wesley Myland used the term “Latter Rain” to describe the Pentecostal revival that was going on. He allegorized Joel 2:23 that spoke of God blessing the agricultural harvest in Israel to create a theory of church history. In Israel’s agricultural cycles, there were the spring rains (early rain) and the fall rains (the latter rain). Myland used this terminology and applied it to the Pentecost of Acts (early rain) and the one he claimed was again happening at Azusa Street and elsewhere (the latter rain). The key idea of these early Pentecostals was that the gift of tongues was being restored to the church and was going to issue forth into great power to evangelize the world.
– Bob DeWaay
The New Apostolic reformation was formerly known as the “Latter Rain” movement. It has similar beliefs as “Kingdom Now” but differs in that it believes all church members can participate in a restoration of the gifts of the Holy Spirit like speaking in tongues and performing miracles.
A Bible verse that supports NAR: Acts 3:21:
Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
Dangers of NAR and “Kingdom Now” theology
This kind of thinking is reflected in some popular Christian music. Jan Markell has a program that exposes some of this music (See Part 1 and Part 2).
The “win this nation back” type of thinking is influenced by Kingdom Now theology. The thought is that if we all get politically involved and speak up, we can change the culture of our nation and return to Biblical standards. It is good to desire a political and cultural reformation in any nation, but the Bible does not promise success. “In the world you shall have tribulation” (John 16:33) and “My kingdom is not of this world” John 18:36. We need to pursue reformation in a Christlike way. If we become argumentative, too political, or even militant, Christ will not be seen in us, and our efforts will fail. The goal is to make disciples, not to dominate the earth.
Refutation of Modern-Dday Apostleship
The definition of an apostle is one who has seen the risen Christ and was sent (commissioned) by Him personally. Many people claim, even today, to have seen Jesus in a dream and have been led to faith in Him as a result. But these people only claim to be believers, not apostles. Paul taught that preachers, teachers, elders, and bishops should be trained by church leaders to continue the succession of church leadership. Paul gives qualifications for elders in 1 Timothy 3. No mention is made by Paul of future apostles or prophets. Furthermore, the final verses of Revelation imply that the canon of Scripture is complete and it is not to be added to, and this implies that there is no more need for apostles and prophets.
Liberation Theology and Dominion Theology
These two belief systems are similar in that they both require human effort (works) in order to produce a cultural change on earth. But the goals of the two theologies are different. Liberation theology claims to bring about “salvation” while Dominion Theology claims to bring forth a millennium of peace. It is important to remember that salvation is by grace, not of works (Ephesians 2:8-9). In the same way, it is important to remember that we are not commanded to bring forth God’s kingdom on Earth by our own efforts. We are commanded to wait for Jesus’ return (1 Thessalonians 1:10). Also we are commanded to “occupy” until He comes (Luke 19:13). This word “occupy” in the Greek is a military term that means to hold the fort down. In application to us, we are to make a firm stand for Biblical truth, and we must remain faithful to the Bible’s teaching as we live our lives. But according to the Bible, we cannot use force to impose our beliefs on others.
Refutation of Dominion Theology
Jesus Christ is the one who will take dominion over the earth (Isaiah 60, 66:18). The church is His body; He is the head. The body cannot take physical dominion over the earth without the physical presence of the head being united with the Body. We are commanded to build the Church and protect it from its many enemies, but all church-building must be done in a Christlike way, full of love, joy, peace, patience, and kindness. We as the church wait for the day when the Messiah comes, and he will extend His dominion until the earth is filled with the glory of the Lord (Numbers 14:21, Habakkuk 2:14).
All of these belief systems are postmillennial. That is, they believe that through the effort of the church the world will be brought into a state of peace, love, and prosperity, and that Jesus Christ will not physically return until after that millennium is complete. However, the Bible says that the church will not be on earth during the Millenium. A later post will discuss postmillennial and premillennial beliefs in detail.
In the last days the Bible says that perilous times shall come (2 Timothy 3:1). There will be much deception (Matt. 24:4). There are many false theologies being preached and taught in subtle ways. We need to examine carefully what we hear, whether it be from a preacher, a politician, or a singer. Careful Bible study and exposure to good conservative Bible preachers will keep us from falling into many false teachings.
This is part of a series of posts on How to Study the Bible. This post will begin a new topic in Bible study, which is, ‘what are some ways of interpreting the Bible?’ This is also known as Systematic Theology.
Systematic Theology is a method or framework used to interpret the Bible. A good systematic theology is one that is rational, logically consistent, and is able to make sense of the entire Bible as a single story, or metanarrative. It is also used to develop a worldview.
In this series of posts, we will look at a few popular systems of theology, and find out where they came from, and what Biblical evidence they have for support.
Because of its current popularity and influence on modern culture, the first theology we will review is Liberation Theology.
Gustavo Gutierrez defined Liberation Theology (LT) as a:
“critical reflection on praxis in the light of the word of God.” Liberation theology has two basic principles: first, it recognizes a need for liberation from any kind of oppression – political, economic, social, sexual, racial, religious; second, it asserts that the theology must grow out of the basic Christian communities and should not be imposed from above, that is, from the infallible source book or from the magisterium of an infallible Church.
From this definition, we see that it is a critical theology. The word ‘critical’ when used in context of the Bible or theology means that it is a rejection of traditional historical teaching. We also see that there is a focus on ‘praxis.’ Praxis means practice, or in this case direct social action. This theology is a rebellion against Christian teaching that focuses on eternal, heavenly realities and does not seek to relieve affliction and oppression on earth. Another element of this definition is that it is not primarily defined by the Bible (an “infallible source book”) or church teaching; it is defined by the feelings and expressions of poor oppressed groups living in communities.
U.S. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez expressed her version of this theology when she was running for office. Liberation Theology has been popular with communists for the past 50 years, starting in Latin America, and also having roots in the Black Power movement of the 1960’s. The theology is closely linked to Marxism.
Liberation Theology focuses on the book of Exodus as an example of God liberating people from oppression. It focuses on Jesus’ words about caring for the poor and has particular love for Luke 4:18-19.
Jesus lived a life of poverty and LT teaches that true believers should follow in His steps by living in poverty as well. It is only by living in poverty that one understands the feelings of oppression, which gives justification to acting in ways to overthrow the social order so that poor people will gain material things.
Liberation Theology is closely related to Critical Race Theory (CRT). These ideologies are behind both the Black Lives Matter and Antifa movements. Here is a definition of Critical Race Theory from the Gospel Coalition:
Each individual is seen either as oppressed or as an oppressor, depending on their race, class, gender, sexuality, and a number of other categories. Oppressed groups are subjugated not by physical force or even overt discrimination, but through the exercise of hegemonic power—the ability of dominant groups to impose their norms, values, and expectations on society as a whole, relegating other groups to subordinate positions.
Liberation Theology and Critical Race Theory are related in that they seek to overthrow the social order by exerting force on oppressors and allowing oppressed peoples to obtain material and power that was held by the oppressor. CRT is also known as cultural Marxism. Both beliefs are focused on obtaining earthly power and material things. Victory, or salvation, is defined as freedom from oppression.
Rationality
CRT also challenges the idea of rationality: “The idea that objectivity is best reached only through rational thought is a specifically Western and masculine way of thinking.” This is similar to Liberation Theology’s dependence on the felt needs of the oppressed to define its direction of movement.
A Refutation of Liberation Theology and CRT
Liberation Theology is a theology that is not worthy of serious consideration because it is not based on the Bible; moreover, it is not even based in rational thought. Here are a few refutations of its primary beliefs.
What is sin according to the Bible? Sin is not equivalent to oppression. The Christian is historically, and biblically, the oppressed. John 16:33 says, “In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.”
Sin is defined in the Bible as a breaking of God’s law (1 John 3:4) – primarily an act against God. Sin’s effects on mankind are secondary to its effects on God’s relationship to man as an individual.
What is the proper response to oppression? Matthew 5:39 says, “But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.”
The proper response to oppression is forgiveness. As Matthew 18:21-22 says,
Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.
Matthew 18:22, KJV
Christians should not engage in any struggle or conflict in order to relieve oppression:
And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient”
2 Timothy 2:24, KJV
What is salvation? Salvation is not obtaining material goods or earthly power. Luke 12:15 says, “Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.” According to Acts 16:31, salvation comes from faith in Jesus Christ, in that he has forgiven us of all of our sins, that we have proof of His forgiveness by his resurrection from the dead (1 Cor. 15:20), and that we will receive deliverance from this evil world when He returns (Titus 2:13).
Salvation comes in three parts: Justification (in the past), Sanctification (in the present), and Glorification (in the future). The future state of glorification will not happen as part of this world system. It will occur as we are taken to heaven. We do not look to this world to obtain our salvation.
“Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight…”
John 18:36 KJV
Jesus taught his followers meekness and humility. LT teaches that suffering oppression qualifies you to act with pride and power. Therefore, Liberation Theology is not a valid method for interpreting the Bible, and it should not be used to develop a worldview.
The world is full of Bible translations. More new ones come out every year. This is true especially in the English language. How many English translations do we need? Why do people keep making translations?
If everyone believed and loved the Bible, there would be no need for so many translations—one every thirty or forty years would be plenty to keep up with changes in the language.
One of the main reasons for so many translations is that people who translate and publish Bibles have many different beliefs about the Bible. Some believe it is full of myths. Some believe in the New Testament but not in the Old. Some believe in the Old Testament but not the New. Very few Bible publishers believe the Bible is God-Breathed, plenary inspired, and inerrant (2 Timothy 3:16).
There are many systems of theology believed on in the world, and each system has its preferred translations.
Some Bibles claim to be based on the best (oldest) source documents. But what makes the oldest manuscript copies the best? And how do we know which document is the oldest?
Some Bibles have been published for the deliberate purpose of drawing readers away from the King James Version (KJV), making it easier to teach new age theology and ecumenism, drawing men away from a “Solus Christus” belief.
How do we determine if a Bible translation is good? Since there are so many unfaithful translators and unfaithful publishers, the first thing we can do is to insist on a word-for-word translation as opposed to a “dynamic equivalence” or “Paraphrase” translation.
Here is a chart that puts many popular translations on a spectrum:
Another chart can be found here (Note that I disagree with their grade level scores):
It is more difficult to insert one’s own theology into a verse if you are required to translate every word. But this criterion will not guarantee that you will select a good translation, because there is still a lot of freedom available in translating words.
Recommended Translation
KJV – King James Version
This version has had more impact on the English language than any other book, and for that reason alone it is required reading for English speakers. Many phrases and cliché’s still in use today will not be understood without learning their origin in the King James.
Advantages: Good for reading. Makes good use of alliteration and other literary devices to give the text an almost poetical sound. The “thees” and “thous” are an advantage because it makes it possible to distinguish between singular and plural pronouns, This distinction can drastically affect the meaning of a sentence. It is written at a sixth grade reading level. Some people claim that it is written at a college level, but that is because they count archaic words as college-level. At the time of its original writing, it was written at a sixth grade level. And if you tally the average word length, you will find it to be less than all popular modern versions. This translation was based on the Majority Text (Textus Receptus) in the Greek and The Masoretic Text (MT) of the Old Testament. The KJV was first published in 1611, but the most common version available for sale today is the third edition, originally published in 1769.
Disadvantage: Uses about 600 archaic words. But these words can be learned easily by purchasing a copy of this handbook for 49 cents.
This is a new translation, published in February 2020. It claims to be the most literal translation ever published, and faithful to the Majority Text. I have not personally read it, so I cannot comment on its faithfulness to the Greek. But Genesis and Exodus are available to read for free on Amazon.com. I found the first three chapters of Genesis difficult to read due to the literal rendering of the verb tenses from Hebrew. But most of the text was easy to read. It uses the transliteration “Yhwh” for the name of God, where most Bibles translate it “LORD” in all caps. Genesis chapter 5 contains sets of double brackets that show different year counts from the Septuagint. This is a confusing distraction. Also the last 12 verses of Mark are enclosed in double brackets, indicating that they are disputed because some [poor] texts do not include these verses. This is a distraction that casts doubt on the inerrancy of God’s word, but at least the verses are included in the body text. Also the text includes many full-page pencil-sketched illustrations that are not very well drawn.
In spite of these objections, this seems to be a good choice for those who want a faithful translation and do not want to deal with archaic words.
This Bible was published in 2014 and claims to be a faithful to the King James Version, simply modernizing the language. But it includes some of the defects listed below from the modern Bible versions.
This Bible was first published in 1965 by the Lockman Foundation. It is based on the corrupt Greek New Testament developed by B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, published in 1881 (This text is based on the ancient Alexandrian text favored by the Catholic Church). But I have found this Bible somewhat useful because it provides clarifying commentary in line with the text, saving the reader from consulting another resource (like a concordance). It suffers from most of the defects listed below, but the amplifications help to indicate the true meaning of verses where they have been added. This translation is especially good at emphasizing what is required for salvation (faith, trust, reliance upon Jesus as Savior).
Bad Translations
All of the following translations are based on the Westcott and Hort Greek New Testament. This Greek text was developed in an effort to attack the King James Bible and the majority Greek texts that it was translated from. Almost every modern Bible translation primarily uses this Greek text.
NIV – New International Version
This Bible was published in 1978, and a more popular edition came out in 1984. This article cites hundreds of defects in the 1984 edition. In 1997, the International Bible Society released a gender-neutral language version. This was widely criticized and then withdrawn. Then the translation called “Todays NIV” was published in 2002, containing the same gender-neutral language. The 2011 NIV kept over 97% of the changes introduced in the “Today’s NIV” edition.
ESV – English Standard Version
This Bible was published in 2001, and is a revision of the Revised Standard Version (1971 edition), which is based on the Revised Version of 1885, which was the first of the modern Bible translations based on the Westcott and Hort text. The ESV is preferred by many Calvinists. This is a word-for-word translation that has beauty and clarity, but the number of theologically significant deviations from the Majority Text is too high to merit a recommendation.
NASB – New American Standard Bible
This Bible was first published in 1960 by the Lockman Foundation, the producers of the Amplified Bible. The most recent version was published in 1995. This is an accurate, literal translation in modern language, but it suffers from many Westcott and Hort defects, as do all modern versions. A few examples of those can be seen at the bottom of this post. This translation is unusual in that the Lockman Foundation has strict limits on the amount of material that can be quoted from it without obtaining a license.
NKJV – New King James Version
This Bible was published in 1982 by Thomas Nelson. It is claimed by the publishers that they were faithful to the goals of the original 1611 King James translators, and they were only modernizing the language. But they chose to adopt many of the Westcott and Hort Greek text variations that are inaccurate and steer readers away from the simple salvation-by-faith message that is of the essence of the Bible. This version does not have as many defects as most modern translations, but it has enough of them that it does not get a recommendation.
NLT – New Living Translation
This Bible was published in 1996 by Tyndale. It is the most popular paraphrase translation. It has been revised several times, with the most recent one in 2015. I expect in the near future they will release a Kindle version that has automatic updates, á la Microsoft Windows.
The Bible Manuscript Society says, “New Age Bibles are how the New World Order conditions the people to carry out their will, to make sure that people do not read the original manuscripts of the Bible, do not use accurate and historically reliable translations of the Bible, and ideally do not read the Bible at all…”
Examples of defective translations in the modern Bible versions
NJKV This article by David Daniels explains some specific issues and verses that expose the weakness of the NKJV.
Several examples are listed below, comparing modern Bible versions to the KJV. These are not the most egregious errors, just a sampling among thousands of defects.
One of Daniels’ examples is Isaiah 66:5 :
KJV: “Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name’s sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.” [This means that the LORD shall appear, which shall occur at the Second Coming of Christ.]
NKJV: “Hear the word of the LORD, you who tremble at His word: “Your brethren who hated you, who cast you out for My name’s sake, said, ‘Let the LORD be glorified, that we may see your joy.’ But they shall be ashamed.” (Like the NIV, NASV, RSV and ASV, the Second Coming is wholly omitted from this scripture.)
Mark 10:24
NIV & NASB: “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God”
KJV: “Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!”
Luke 21:19
NIV “Stand firm, and you will win life.”
NASB: “By your endurance you will gain your lives.”
KJV: “In your patience possess ye your souls.”
In Luke 21:19, modern versions seem to indicate that works are required for salvation.
Luke 2:14
NIV: “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.”
NASB: “Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased.”
KJV: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.”
In Luke 2:14, Modern versions could be understood to mean that God loves some men and not others
Ephesians 2:8
NASB: For by grace you have been saved through faith
NIV: it is by grace you have been saved,
NKJV: For by grace you have been saved through faith
KJV: For by grace are ye saved through faith
Colossians 3:16
NIV: “singing to God with gratitude in your hearts.”
NASB: “singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God”
KJV: “singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord”
Grace is a gift given by God. Gratitude/Thankfulness could merely be works of the flesh.
Mark 6:11
NIV: “And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, leave that place and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.”
NASB: “Any place that does not receive you or listen to you, as you go out from there, shake the dust off the soles of your feet for a testimony against them.”
KJV: And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
In the above verse, an entire sentence has been removed from the words of the Messiah.
This list of ‘bad translations’ could be much longer. There are many other English translations available. An effort was made in this post to only comment on the most popular ones. There are other translations used by Catholics, Mormons, and Jehovah’s Witnesses that support their various beliefs, but they are all corruptions or perversions of the true Bible text.
There is no perfect translation. The purpose of this review is to point out those translations that make it easier on the reader to determine the meaning of the true, inspired, inerrant Word of God.
Books on Bible Translations by David Daniels:
Look What’s Missing is a quick reference guide that will show you some important verses and how they have been changed in various Bible versions.
Frequently when studying the Bible you will have questions as to its meaning. It can become frustrating if you don’t get answers. You could get a wrong answer and start to believe things that are not true about God or the Bible. How do you know if you properly understand what the Bible is saying? You need some resources you can trust.
A Bible commentary is one type of resource you should use. A commentary is a book written about the Bible that gives detailed exposition of its contents. It typically has background information about the setting, the author, and the people mentioned in each book. Some commentaries cover the whole Bible, some cover only one book. Frequently an author or group of authors will write a series of commentaries, covering the entire Bible or one testament.
Who wrote the best Bible commentary? God did. You can find His commentary in the Word of God itself. 1 Corinthians 2:13 says, “Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.” This means that we should compare Scripture with Scripture to understand what the Holy Spirit is teaching us. We should be like the Bereans, who “searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11).
C.S. Lewis said, “I take it as a first principle that we must not interpret any one part of Scripture so that it contradicts other parts. (Letters, vol. 3, 354)”
One of the easiest ways to begin a Scripture search is to look at words in their immediate context. Words define themselves in context. The immediate context includes the verse that the word is in, and the verse that comes before it , and the verse that comes after it. A verse will often define a key word by associating it with another word. For example, look at Proverbs 1:18: “And they lay wait for their own blood; they lurk privily for their own lives.” This verse consists of two equivalent statements, but the second statement adds meaning to the first. So if you want to know what is meant by “lay wait” in the first phrase, you have an answer of “lurk privily” in the second phrase. And if you want to know what “blood” means in the first phrase, you have an answer of “lives” in the second phrase. This is a simple example; sometimes you may have to look within the chapter, or earlier in the book to find a definition of a word.
Another way to access this commentary is through a concordance. To understand the meaning of a word, look it up in a concordance (For example, Strong’s Concordance, Bible Hub, or Bible Gateway). There you will find every occurrence of that word in the Bible. You can see how it was translated. Sometimes you will find multiple Greek or Hebrew words translated as a single English word. For example, the word “love” is translated from the Greek agapao (or agape) 158 times, but 19 times “love” is translated from phileo. In these cases, it is important to know the original language word in order to obtain the meaning of it.
One of the more important concepts in understanding Scripture is the law of first mention (also known as the law of expositional constancy). The law of first mention states that the Bible will establish the meaning of a word at its first mention in Scripture, and will not deviate from that meaning throughout the Bible. (There are some words that have multiple meanings. Sometimes those meanings complement each other, but sometimes they contrast with each other. I am not saying that all words have only one meaning, but it is a general rule that the law of first mention will provide help in understanding a word’s meaning.) For an example, let’s go back to Proverbs 1:18: what is meant by the shedding of blood? Why does blood have to be shed so often in the Bible?
(This is the transition point between reading and studying. When you stop reading and ask a question about what you are reading, you come to a crossroads. You can continue reading, or you can dwell on this verse and put forth effort to find an answer to your question. This effort is study.)
Here is the first mention of ‘blood’ in the Bible:
Genesis 4:10: And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground. Here we see the personification of blood – is has a voice that cries. It is as if blood has a life unto itself.
The next context in which ‘blood’ is found makes it clear:
Genesis 9:4: But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
In this verse, “life” is directly correlated with “blood”. In Leviticus 17:11, the significance of blood is written into the Law:
For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
The blood of a person represents the life of that person. The shed blood of a person is required to pay an atonement for sin.
Moving on to the New Testament, the book of Hebrews explains why the blood of animals was insufficient to provide an atonement:
Hebrews 10:1-4:
For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? Because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
These verses explain that the law provided animal sacrifices as a “shadow,” or symbol, of Jesus Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice. Animal sacrifices had to be continually repeated, and never provided any lasting forgiveness of sins.
Hebrews 9:11-12:
But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
Only the blood of a perfect, sinless, human being could be a sufficient atonement for a man’s sins.
This study is an example of how you can use a concordance to find all the occurrences of a word in the Bible, and then use those references to answer questions about the meaning and significance of the word in the Bible. This is also an example of how the meaning of Bible words does not change. Even though the Bible was written by about 40 different authors over 1500 years, it tells a single story with a consistent message. This is evidence that God is the author of the Bible (2 Peter 1:21).
Another Example of “Scripture Interprets Scripture”
Let’s take another example. This time, let’s look at the word, ‘eagle.’ This is a fairly simple word. We all know what an eagle is. It is a large predatory bird that is able to fly swift and high. It makes its nest in a high place. It is a symbol of freedom, it sits at the top of the food chain. But what is the Bible referring to when it mentions an eagle?
Suppose you are reading Isaiah 40 and you come across this verse:
But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint. (v. 31)
How is it that a person shall mount up with wings? And why is it specifically eagle’s wings, and not just a generic wing, or the wings of some other bird?
To answer the first question, ‘How shall a person mount up with wings?’ We do not have to go beyond the verse itself. The phrase, they shall run, and not be weary,’ is the answer. Those who wait on the Lord will not sprout literal wings; they will have endurance in life.
Now to answer the second question: Why eagle’s wings? What is special about the eagle? Let’s look at the first mention of ‘eagle’ in the Bible:
Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles’ wings, and brought you unto myself. – Exodus 19:4
God is likening himself to the wings of an eagle, when he delivered His people out of slavery in Egypt. God is saying it would have been no greater miracle for Him to send a squad of giant eagles to carry the Israelites out of Egypt, than the series of miracles that He performed, culminating in the parting of the Red Sea.
The eagle is type, or representation, of God. In Exodus, we see God comparing himself to the power and speed of eagles’ wings. God is able to take His faithful ones out of the reach of any man or nation.
The eagle can bear up the young eaglets on its pinions, which are the outer wings. This is basically what God did when He brought Israel out of captivity from Egypt and continued to bear her up in her wanderings in the wilderness.” – Jack Wellmann, Patheos.com
We see God comparing Himself to an eagle again in Deuteronomy:
Deut. 32:11 As an eagle stirreth up her nest, fluttereth over her young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings: So the Lord alone did lead him, and there was no strange god with him.
God refers to Himself as an eagle for several different reasons and one example is of His protective nature as in Psalm 91:1-4 “He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will abide in the shadow of the Almighty. I will say to the Lord, “My refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust. For he will deliver you from the snare of the fowler and from the deadly pestilence. He will cover you with his pinions, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness is a shield and buckler. ” Eagles represent sovereignty and supremacy and how fitting since God is the real ruler of kings and presidents (Dan. 2:20-21/5:18-21, Prov. 8:15-16, Rom. 13:1-2) but also, when the storms hit, eagles can fly far above the storms, indicating that God is never affected by conditions for He is also sovereign over nature.
These examples show that by using a concordance or online Bible study tools, you can quickly find out the meaning of God’s words without having to resort to a Bible commentary. And you can have more confidence in getting the right answer because you are allowing God to explain his own Word with His Word.
The Socratic Method, in its essence, is a teaching method that involves the teacher asking questions to the student. The purpose of the question is to cause critical thinking to happen in the mind of the student. This will cause the student to learn. In Bible study, the Bible (with the Holy Spirit) is the teacher. It’s easy to develop a habit to ask questions about the passage after you read. It will force you to think about and understand what you read.
Beginner Questions
Dr. Irwin Lutzer of Moody Bible Church teaches people to ask these three questions after you read a passage:
What can I learn about God?
What can I learn about myself?
Is there a promise I can claim?
Question 1 gets to the heart of what the Bible is about. It is a book about God. Every verse says something about Him. After all, He is the author (John 1:1). We read the Bible to learn about God.
Question 2 shifts the focus to us. We read for the purpose of life transformation (Romans 12:1-2). How do I compare to God? Where do I fall short (sin)? In what ways can I repent of sin and do better?
Question 3 is a great question because the Bible is full of promises. God promises many things to His people. Some promises are unconditional. Some are only for obedient believers, who are walking in righteousness. Don’t miss out when God promises something to you.
Intermediate Questions
Perhaps you will read through the Bible in a year and use the above three questions as part of your meditation and journaling time. Now you are ready for another challenge. Pastor Jack Hibbs of Calvary Chapel in Chino Hills, California recently published a series on You Tube called, “How to Study the Bible”. In it he teaches believers 8 questions to ask about each book of the Bible before you start to read it:
Who wrote it?
Who is it written to?
When was it written?
Where was it written?
Why was it written?
What does it say?
How does it apply to me?
How did it apply to them?
Pastor Jack is introducing the topic of Hermeneutics in this series. Hermeneutics is the study of how we come to an understanding of God’s Word. The first 6 questions are basic questions to understand the context of the book. This helps us to picture the historical scene in or mind, and begin to think like the original audience for the letter. The last two questions bring the information learned from the first six questions to a point: What difference does it make? What do we need to do to bring ourselves in conformity to God’s Word?
He also recommends the Bible Exposition Commentary (Old Testament Here) by Dr. Warren Wiersbe – a two volume set. This is not a study Bible; It is a large reference work that contains research and expert commentary on the Bible.
Pastor Jack does not give a nuts-and bolts method for doing Bible study in this video series. He just gives you a little taste of what it is like. You can feel his passion for the Bible. It’s contagious.
Advanced Questions
If you get excited by Jack Hibbs’ questions, you may want to dig a little deeper into the study of hermeneutics. The four questions below form the basis of the method called, “Crossing the Hermeneutical Bridge.” This process helps us to avoid giving a “private interpretation” (2 Peter 1:20) to any text. It grounds us in the meaning of the passage as it was originally understood and keeps us from going astray as we apply it to our lives.
What did the text mean to the biblical audience?
What are the historical and cultural differences between the original audience and us?
What are the theological principles in the text?
How can we apply these theological principles to our lives?
The first question is the same as question #8 in Jack Hibbs’ series, and can be answered by answering the first 6 of Hibbs’ questions.
The second question requires some background study on the culture of biblical peoples, usually the nation of Israel or the early church. There are language, artistic, and cultural differences. There are also different ways of thinking. The Bible is written with an eastern mindset. The eastern mindset is focused on patterns, stories, and characters. This is different from the western mindset that is characterized by sequential logic and a focus on material things.
The third question is where we boil down the text to a principle or a precept that God is communicating to us. If the passage is about God’s judgment, we should determine what sin caused the judgment, and how long did God wait before sending the judgment? Answers to these questions will lead to the theological principle that may be applicable to us.
The fourth question is the point of application, identical to question #7 in Jack Hibbs’ series. It is important to remember that the Bible does not contradict itself. The intended application for the biblical audience will never contradict the application God intends for you to glean from a passage.
Masters of the Universe Questions
If you have progressed this far, you have become an expert in Bible study. But Bible study never ends–there is always more to learn. The Socratic Method has six types of questions that can be asked to spur critical thinking. The six categories are listed below, with some examples of questions you can ask yourself about a given Bible passage.
Questions for clarification:
Why do you make that interpretation?
Questions that probe assumptions:
What could we assume instead?
How can you verify or disapprove that assumption?
Questions that probe reasons and evidence:
What is the parable of The Good Samaritan analogous to?
Why does Jesus speak in parables?
Questions about Viewpoints and Perspectives:
What is another way to look at it?
Can you compare and contrast the behavior of Peter and John before the crucifixion and after the crucifixion?
Questions that probe implications and consequences:
What are the consequences of that interpretation?
How does the parable of the sower affect our understanding of the parable of the wheat and tares (Matthew 13)?
Questions about the question:
What questions should I be asking about this passage?
The Bible is as deep and endless as God himself. You may understand the what is being said at the surface level. But there is always a deeper question to ask, and there are hidden meanings and messages for those who make the effort to search diligently. Questions are a good way to spur you toward thinking critically about the Bible. As you ask questions and meditate on them, by God’s grace you will become more like God.
Masters of the Universe 