Apart from telling us WHAT to Pray, the “Lord’s Prayer” shows us in at least three ways HOW to pray!
The “Lord’s Prayer” is a profound outline or guide for prayer. It is profound in that although it is so short it provides a framework for every necessary topic of prayer, and also in that it teaches us important things about the way we should pray about the things for which we ask.
The prayer is found in two places in the Gospels – in Matthew 6: 9-13 in its fuller form, and in Luke 11: 2-4 in an abbreviated form. This fact alone seems to prove that the prayer is a guide on essential topics to pray about, rather than a prayer with specific words to be learned and repeated by rote as some believe.
Looking at the longer form of the prayer in Matthew, there are seven specific petitions or requests directed to God; but in this article, rather than looking at those petitions individually, as is often done, let’s look at some of the overall aspects of the guide which can be helpful in teaching us how to pray.
• The Prayer and the Commandments
First, when we compare the overall structure of the prayer, we see that it is actually similar to the structure of the Ten Commandments: the first group of points relating more directly to our relationship with God, the second group of points to our relationship with others. There are even some basic but noticeable touch-points: “I am the Lord Your God …” – “Father in Heaven”; “You shall not take my name in vain” – “Hallowed be your name”; etc. This is not surprising, of course, because in both the Commandments and the Lord’s Prayer we are looking at the same things – our relationship with God and with others.
The dual stresses of the commandments and the model prayer are even clearer if we compare the words of Christ when he was asked which were the most important of all the commandments. Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (Matthew 22:37-40). When we understand this we see the Lord’s Prayer is not about asking for the things that we think will make us happy or that we want, but things that show our love for God and others. If the Ten Commandments show us how to love God and others, the Lord’s Prayer teaches us how to ask for help to do that properly.
Remembering this dual stress of the commandments and the prayer is truly important in helping us focus our approach to the Lord’s Prayer. Rather than seeing the prayer as an unrelated list of requests, we begin to see it as a prayerful “walk through” of key areas of our relationship with God and with others. That fact in itself gives us an important clue as to how Jesus’ prayer outline can be expanded, as we use it, to include all kinds of things relating to our spiritual relationship with God and the rest of His family. And we need to remember that dual aspect of the prayer’s focus. Humanly it may be easy to expand “Give us today our daily bread” by mentioning our many physical needs, but how much do we expand on requests such as “hallowed be your name”? Realizing the dual stress of the prayer helps us to better equally balance the things for which we pray.
• First Person Plural
Another basic thing to remember as we look at the model we are given is that there isn’t a single “I” or “my” in this prayer – only “you” and “us”, “your” and “our”. Considering how obvious this fact is, there seems to be a clear lesson – once again to focus our prayers on our relationship with God and with others.
Seen this way, the Lord’s Prayer is very different from the individual list of personal wants and needs we are all tempted to offer at most times given the problems of everyday life that we all face. There is certainly no problem in praying for ourselves, and the prayer outline does not deny us the ability to ask for the needs we have – it just puts our requests in the context of “our” needs, helping us to keep our minds on the fact that the problems of others are just as real – and sometimes much more serious – than those we face.
The Book of Psalms gives some great examples of this fact. Remember there are more prayers there than in any other book of the scriptures, and if you look at many of David’s heartfelt personal requests for help, they end with requests for others – for his people, for all of Israel (see Psalms 25:18, 22; 28:2, 9 for just two examples).
• Prayer Triage
When we kneel before God don’t dozens of things come into our minds – the many needs and concerns of our own lives and of those of family, friends and others we know. These many individual-level needs are in addition to things God shows us are even bigger needs – of worldwide scale. Sometimes it’s hard to know where to start and where to end. That fact underscores one of the great purposes of the model we have been given – putting things in the right context and priority. Think of the Lord’s Prayer as prayer triage. Jesus’ guide to communication with our Father sorts through all those clamoring thoughts and needs and puts our concerns and requests in the right order. Matthew 6:7-8 shows us that “… your Father knows what you need before you ask him”; but even though God already knows what our most urgent needs are, the prayer outline puts things in perspective.
Putting it all Together
As we saw at the outset of this article, the Lord’s Prayer is a guide to prayer. None of the recorded prayers of Jesus or the disciples after the time the outline was given follow the wording of the prayer (showing again that it is not a prescribed set of specific words to be prayed), although each recorded prayer in the New Testament stresses some aspect found within the guide. Perhaps we could say that while spontaneous – and especially urgent – prayers will often take their own form, the “Lord’s Prayer” provides a guide for those occasions when we wish to seek God in regular and complete prayer. Although God is doubtless more concerned with the content rather than the form of our prayers, the guide Jesus gave us covers all the main aspects of our relationship with God and with others; it constantly directs our focus outward to include the needs of others; and it helps us to bring order and priority to the requests we make. These three areas of guidance help us to keep in mind what regular prayer is all about.
Most readers of the scriptures are familiar with the “Great Commission” given by Jesus to his disciples after his resurrection. Many can recite it by heart: “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you … “ (Matthew 28:19-20).
While those verses are consistently quoted as the Commission, in reality they represent the final form of a number of commissions or “job directives” Jesus gave to his disciples during his ministry which often get lost in the rush to examine, ponder and discuss the “Great” commission. This is not to say that we should not focus on the final Great Commission, but that it can also be profitable to look back at some of the earlier commissions given during Christ’s ministry to see what we can learn there. For example, look carefully at the ones recorded in the Book of Luke:
Luke 9:2: “… and he sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal the sick.”
Luke 10:9 “Heal the sick who are there and tell them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’”
Matthew also records one of these earlier commissions:
Matthew 10:7-8 “As you go, proclaim this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’ Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons…”
The difference is obvious. The earlier commissions specifically included healing the sick – with an emphasis placed on that task almost equal to the emphasis placed on preaching the Gospel.
That emphasis is undeniably missing in the final Great Commission which appears to focus entirely on the work of evangelism without any direct mention of the sick. But does this mean the needs of the sick are no longer to be a vital concern for the Christian? In answer to that, perhaps we should remember that the Great Commission itself ends with the words “… teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:20, emphasis added), so from that perspective alone, the principles of the earlier commissions Jesus gave may still apply to us today as part of the “everything” Jesus had commanded.
Helping the sick was certainly part of the example Jesus set for us. He not only used physical sickness as a metaphor in his teaching (Mark 2:17) and as a sign of the divine nature of His work, but also He frequently healed and helped the sick purely as a matter of compassion, as we see throughout the Gospels. Godly concern for the sick also clearly precedes the Christian scriptures. Psalm 107:20 says, “He sent out his word and healed them,” showing David’s awareness of God’s compassion in this area – compassion which was expressed many times throughout the Old Testament, as well as in the work of the disciples who continued the New Testament ministry of Christ.
Now, this doesn’t mean that the situation has not changed at all regarding God’s commission to His Church. It seems clear that while God still can – and does – heal, He has not continued to do so in quite the same manner as He did when Jesus sent out disciples who routinely administered healings as an everyday part of their work (Matthew 10:1). But although we may not be empowered to heal today in the way the early disciples were, think about this in terms of the Great Commission: as individual Christians we may not be directly going into all the world, teaching and baptizing, either – yet we can support those who do these works, financially, in prayer and in other ways.
Even without the same command and power of healing given the early disciples, we can still – to the extent we are able, and with the same compassion – do the work of helping the sick mentioned in all the earlier forms of Jesus’ commission to his disciples. Although the evangelism of the Great Commission should indeed be a central focus point for us, we can still give our physical and prayerful support to those helping the sick, and many of us can also find opportunities to directly work to serve those who are victims of sickness and disability.
We can do this in various ways. While we may not have the power to heal, the Spirit of God does give the power of encouragement, support, and help. And we do have the opportunity to help – physically and spiritually – those who are ill just as much as we have the opportunity to be a witness to those who are well. One thing to keep in mind, however, is the great difference between acute and chronic illness. We can help those suffering the intense affliction of acute illness in a number of ways, difficult though that may be, but those suffering from chronic illnesses and disabilities often have different needs. In terms of practical help, we should remember that some who are dealing with long-term illnesses don’t just need short-term encouragement – they need practical encouragement to continue to lead meaningful lives, and help to find opportunities in which they themselves can help others.
Sometimes it is the sick and disabled who can best help those in the same position as themselves. Their experience and understanding of the problems can be far greater than ours. We can see this in the impact of the great variety of support groups for those suffering serious diseases and other medical conditions. But we can still help. Does someone you know need help to get to a support group? Help to find space to run one? This is just one example of the many possible ways we can help those suffering with long-term health and disability problems. It just takes a little thought to see how we can serve in each particular circumstance.
Although it may not be directly mentioned in the Great Commission, it should be remembered that helping the sick and disabled is nevertheless part of the scriptural background of that Commission. If we read Matthew 28: 19-20 to the end, perhaps we can see that serving the needs of the sick is also an important aspect of “everything” Jesus commanded. And that makes sense. Not only was helping the sick a constant part of Jesus’ own life, but also His words that “ … I was sick and you looked after me…” (Matthew 25:36) still apply as much today as they did when he spoke them as a profound lesson during his earthly ministry.
Was the Old Testament law of “an eye for an eye” a brutal law of revenge, or something very different? – And how can the answer help us understand Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount?
The principle of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”(Leviticus 24:20, etc.) is one of the most well-known laws in the Bible, but it is seldom fully understood. Known legally as the lex talionis or the “law of retaliation,” and referenced by Jesus himself in his teaching, most people see this law as an ultimately fair, though almost barbarically cruel, principle of revenge and exact restitution. But is this really what this law of “retributive justice“ is all about?
It is often said that the underlying concept of the lex talionis, equal restitution, is the basis of most modern law – that the punishment must fit the crime. But this is something of a misunderstanding. Biblical Israel was not the only culture of the ancient Near East to have such laws, and their purpose is well known. In the ancient Babylonian Law of Hammurabi (c. 1780 BC), for example, we find exactly the same legal principle that individuals should receive as punishment the same injuries and damages they had inflicted upon others:
“If a man has destroyed the eye of another man, they shall destroy his eye. If he has broken another man’s bone, they shall break his bone” (Code of Hammurabi, 196-97).
Babylonian law was complicated by the fact that crimes against those of different social classes required different punishments (something Biblical law forbade, Leviticus 19:15), but the legal principle of the talion itself was obviously identical in both cultures.
In the Mosaic law, the principle of an eye for an eye is commanded in three separate and slightly different situations:
Collateral Injury: If a pregnant woman is hurt by others’ struggling –and her child miscarries – the law of an eye for an eye is to be applied (Exodus 21:24).
Crime of Passion Injury: If men fight and one is injured in the struggle, the law of an eye for an eye is to be applied (Leviticus 24:20).
Premeditated Injury: If a witness testifies falsely against someone, the law of an eye for an eye is to be applied and the punishment is the penalty the accused would have received (Deuteronomy 19:21).
Notice that the first example given shows that the law is really intended to indicate an equivalent punishment rather than an exact restitution. A man who caused a woman to miscarry obviously could not be made to miscarry himself as punishment, and the Law of Hammurabi makes it clear that an equivalent is intended: “If a man struck another man’s daughter and caused her to have a miscarriage he shall pay ten shekels of silver for her fetus” (Hammurabi 209). The Jewish Rabbis commenting on the biblical examples always understood that an approximate equivalence was intended, citing, for example, that a blind man who blinded another cannot be punished with exact restitution. So normally, in ancient Babylonia or in Israel, the law was applied in equivalence – financial or other remuneration equivalent to the loss caused by the injury. It is certainly possible that the law was literally upheld in some cases, but this does not seem to have usually been the case.
This much is commonly realized. What is less widely understood is the underlying reason for the existence of the talionis laws and their real application. These laws were actually intended not to exact revenge, but to restrict revenge. They are not encouraging retribution, they are restraining it.
In most ancient Near Eastern cultures, crimes of injury were usually regarded as private matters of family concern and retribution. For serious offenses the retribution might be handled at the tribal level, and this type of vengeful justice frequently led to blood feuds between families and whole tribes which only grew as time went on (there are many biblical examples of this, beginning with Genesis 4:24). It is clear that the various expressions of the lex talionis originated to limit these destructive spirals, and once that is understood it is clear that the purpose of these laws was not to prescribe revenge, but to limit it. Each “eye for an eye” law allowed what we would call government control of what was otherwise usually a private matter, but the consequences of which could affect much greater parts of society through ongoing and uncontrolled blood feuds. The intent of the laws was to “cap” retribution at no more than the level of the original problem.
When we realize that the purpose of these laws was one of restraint rather than revenge, we can better visualize the application of the laws in their original setting and better understand their reference in the New Testament.
Jesus and the Lex Talionis
The importance of proper understanding of the lex talionis becomes apparent when we consider Jesus’ mention of the law: “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well” (Matthew 5:38).
Although these words of Christ are frequently cited as being an example of Christian pacifism (the view of Leo Tolstoy and many other writers and theologians), understanding the proper context of the law shows that Jesus’ words may well have intended something different. First, notice that the direct context of what Jesus said here was clearly a legal, not a confrontational context. Not only does Jesus cite the earlier law, but he counters its maximum application with two examples, at least one of which is taken directly from legal proceedings – a situation where someone might want to sue another.
If we presume that the lex talionis was a law allowing full and complete revenge, it is easy to think that is what Jesus is primarily talking about here. But revenge does not really fit the meaning of the law, as we have seen, and it does not really fit the example Christ gives of someone who might want to sue us for something we have done – there is no issue of revenge involved on our part. When we realize that the “eye for an eye” law was intended to restrict the degree of retaliation employed, we see that Jesus was going a step further and restricting retaliation even more.
Remember that Jesus’ statement on this matter occurs as one of several linked and similar statements made within the Sermon on the Mount (specifically Matthew 5). After reminding his hearers that he did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17), Jesus then gives several examples of this “filling full” the underlying meaning of the law. In each case he shows an earlier instruction in the law, then shows how the principle can be even better fulfilled by exercising even more restraint.
Where the law said “you shall not murder,” Jesus shows we should not even curse others in anger or we would be in danger of legal judgment (vs. 21) – adding another legal context reminder by saying “Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court” (vs. 25). He then shows that while the law says we should not commit adultery, we should be yet more restrained, not lusting in our hearts (vss. 27-28), even referring here to “gouging out an eye” (vs. 29). Next he shows that while the law allowed divorce for many reasons, he urges us to more restraint by allowing divorce only for adultery (vs. 31). After showing the same principle of restraint regarding oaths – of saying only a simple “yes” or “no” (vss. 33-37) – Jesus then addresses the lex talionis directly (vss. 38-42). He does this, as we saw, by saying that even though the law allowed for restitution up to “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” he instructs his listeners to be much more restrained.
The first example he gives is that of not resisting or retaliating for evil that has been done to us: “If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also” (vs. 39). A detail here may be important. Jesus specifically mentions being slapped on the right cheek, meaning that this would normally have to be a backhand slap from a right-handed person. The Rabbinic writings show that this kind of slap was a great insult in the world of ancient Palestine, and Jesus uses it not as an example of being attacked (which is rarely done by means of backhanded slaps), but more likely as an example of an insult (as we see in vs. 11 of the same chapter) liable to be later countered in court, just as his next example of someone suing for a person’s garment might also be legally countered – and in both cases he urges us to restraint.
The context throughout this section of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount in which the lex talionis is mentioned is, then, clearly a legal one, with courts, suing, judges, prison, certificate of divorce and other legal terms being mentioned over a dozen times in these few verses. There is actually no direct context or reference to warfare, immediate conflict, or principles of pacifism. Most of the issues Jesus discusses in these verses are in the post-event context of restraint in later legal retribution.
Toward the end of this section of the Sermon, Jesus also urges us to even go beyond restraint to more positive responses such as “If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles” (vs. 41) and “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (vs. 44). While these cases can be said to involve restraint, they clearly go even further, actively seeking the best for the person who has harmed or insulted us. This seems to be the ultimate goal to which Christ points us, just as the sermon itself ends with the words “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (vs. 48).
The Biblical lex talionis of “an eye for an eye” was, then, a law of restraint, limiting the amount of reciprocal damage done after (usually) accidental injury, not a law encouraging revenge. Jesus used this law in the Sermon on the Mount as an example of how even when the law allows us to do certain things, the principle of restraint can and should be utilized wherever possible – and even further exceeded by active love for the offending party.
Every Christian experiences answered prayer. Every Christian experiences unanswered prayer. It’s easy to appreciate the former and then to move on, but unanswered prayer sticks with us: the illness that persists, the job opening that doesn’t come, the ongoing difficulties we all face and may, in many cases, have prayed about fervently. We see this situation in the apostle Paul’s admission regarding a problem he prayed about unsuccessfully: “Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me” (2 Cor. 12:8). Apparently Paul’s prayers were unanswered in this case.
So why unanswered prayer? Only God knows the answer to this question for specific cases, but the Bible gives us at least three reasons, and it’s possible to think of at least one more that we should keep in mind. First, as the Bible often states, the prayers of the unrighteous go unheard (John 9:31); but this was clearly not the situation in Paul’s case, any more than it is for many who are sincerely trying to walk according to God’s commandments.
The apostle James gives an additional warning: “When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures” (James 4:3). Remember James was writing to believers, not to unbelievers, so perhaps we should examine our motivation whenever our prayer does goes unanswered. There are also doubtless times when God knows that it would not be good for us to answer a prayer affirmatively. Have you ever prayed something, then – because of new information or whatever – realized that what you asked for is not what you need or want? This has certainly happened to me, and as a result I try to remember that asking “Your will be done” is ultimately in our best interests!
But sometimes the problem is not with unrighteousness, or selfish motivation, or asking contrary to God’s will. There is also another situation which I believe may apply to Christians just as often as any of these last three reasons for unanswered prayer. Although it is not one for which we can cite a chapter and verse, the principle is nevertheless to be found in the Bible. But let’s illustrate it with a real-life example. Those of us who are parents know that when children have problems or needs they will often unabashedly ask for help as they think it is needed. When one of our sons was in grade school he came home complaining of being bullied by a bigger kid at his bus stop. He had every confidence that his parent would fix the situation, but thought the answer would be for dad to punish the bully and thus solve the problem. Needless to say, dad explained that that would not be the right way to fix this particular problem and simply talked to the offending child the next day. A simple request to stop the bullying was all that was needed.
Like sincere children, sometimes we just don’t understand what to ask for and may well be asking for something that is not going to be given in the way we ask. God knows our need before we ask it (Matthew 6:8); and Paul says “We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit itself intercedes for us…” (Romans 8:26). But that doesn’t mean God will answer exactly according to our request if we are asking for the wrong solution to the problem. Even as adults, we can be a lot like the child who asks for his or her solution to a problem and, as a result, we may not realize it when God works out the situation in a different manner from what we ask. No matter how sincere we may be, if we try to tell God how to do His job, we may find that’s the one way it won’t happen!
This is also true in the matter of timing. When we pray urgently for help that doesn’t arrive just when we think we need it, it’s easy enough to feel that the prayer was unanswered, but that’s not necessarily the case at all. We have to remind ourselves that we pray on our schedules and God answers on His. He doubtless knows when it will be best to answer our requests, but that doesn’t mean our prayers will never be answered.
You may not have noticed it, but there is a great biblical example of asking in a way that doesn’t stipulate what or when we think help needs to be given. In 2 Chronicles 20: 1-12 Jehoshaphat, one of ancient Israel’s few good kings, was told that a vast enemy army was heading toward Jerusalem. “Alarmed, Jehoshaphat resolved to inquire of the Lord, and he proclaimed a fast for all Judah … Then Jehoshaphat stood up in the assembly of Judah and Jerusalem at the temple of the LORD and said: ‘Lord, the God of our ancestors, are you not the God who is in heaven? You rule over all the kingdoms of the nations … here are men from Ammon, Moab and Mount Seir … coming to drive us out of the possession you gave us as an inheritance. Our God, will you not judge them? For we have no power to face this vast army that is attacking us. We do not know what to do, but our eyes are on you.’”
Notice that Jehoshaphat doesn’t ask for angelic armies to come to Israel’s aid; he doesn’t ask for plagues or whirlwinds to strike the enemy or any of the many ways we might imagine God could take care of the situation; and he doesn’t even ask for help now! His prayer ended with a simple “We do not know what to do, but our eyes are on you.” What kind of a prayer is that? you might ask. Jehoshaphat just mentions the situation and doesn’t even seem to ask for any specific help. Indeed, he does not. Nevertheless, Jehoshaphat ‘s prayer was answered. We are told that “The Lord set ambushes against the men of Ammon and Moab and Mount Seir who were invading Judah, and they were defeated” (2 Chron. 20:22).
Think about this. If Jehoshaphat had earnestly asked God for firestorms or floods or whatever to be unleashed upon his enemy, he might well have thought his prayer was unanswered. In this case his prayer obviously was answered, and quickly, but the point is that Jehoshaphat simply showed his faith and asked God’s help, leaving the details up to God.
Perhaps there is a lesson in this for us all. If we are living as we know we should, being right in the motivation for our requests, and letting God choose the best way to answer our needs, we can be sure that our prayers will be answered according to God’s will. We still have to accept God’s will in the matter, but we can pray “Your will be done” with confidence when we understand that God does have our ultimate happiness foremost in mind. When we remember that, and that God will answer as He knows best, we will also realize that we may actually have fewer unanswered prayers than we often think.
The English word “context” is derived from two Latin words meaning “to weave threads” (contextus, from con- ‘together’ + texere ‘to weave’) and so our word signifies that which is connected or woven together.
The expression “context is everything” applies in many areas of life, and it certainly applies in the study of God’s Word. Every beginning student of the Bible soon finds that many statements cannot be taken from their biblical setting and understood or used in isolation. On the other hand, even experienced Bible students sometimes forget the need to seek context in everything that is studied and especially in looking at difficult or puzzling verses. Context can be more than just reading the chapter in which a verse appears and there are, in fact, a number of different aspects or dimensions of context that all play a part in the successful understanding of scripture. As Miles Coverdale, sixteenth century translator of the English Bible, wrote:
“… it shall greatly help thee to understand scripture, if thou mark not only what is spoken or written, but of whom, and unto whom, with what words, at what time, where, to what intent, with what circumstance, considering what goeth before, and what followeth after.” — Miles Coverdale, Preface to the Bible, 1535.
This article looks at four of the most important aspects of biblical context with examples and suggested study helps.
Overall Context
The first and perhaps most important aspect of maintaining context is that of seeing and interpreting every part of the Bible in the light of the whole. Some verses, such as John 3:16, may be clear in isolation, but even then taking in the other verses relevant to this very clear statement expands our understanding and appreciation for its meaning. In many other cases overall context clearly is needed for proper understanding.
In 2 Kings 2:1 the Bible tells us that Elijah was taken up by a whirlwind “into heaven”. It is easy to misunderstand this statement without overall biblical context. But when we put other relevant scriptures together we see that from the biblical perspective, there are three heavens (2 Corinthians 12:2). Over nine hundred years after the time of Elijah, Jesus Himself said “no man has ascended up to heaven” (John 3:13), meaning the heaven of God. So 2 Kings is evidently talking about the “heaven” that we would call the sky or the atmosphere – just as the Bible speaks of the “dew of heaven” (Genesis 27:28, 39, Deuteronomy 33:28).
In the New Testament, the apostle Paul frequently stresses that salvation comes by faith alone (Ephesians 2:8,9: etc.), yet comparing this understanding with the writing of the apostle James who states that faith without works is dead (James 2:14-26), we get the whole picture. In fact, if we look further into the writings of Paul himself, we find statements which back this up. Take for example: “It is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous” (Romans 2:13). So overall context shows that we are saved by faith alone, but saving faith is never alone – living faith leads us to right behavior and good works.
Study Helps: For beginning students, putting everything together that the Bible says on a given subject can seem like a daunting task, but there are many study helps such as concordances and topical Bibles that make this task much simpler. Even the marginal references found in many bibles can be helpful in pulling important scriptures together for overall context.
Literary Context
It’s easy to think of the books of the Bible as being all essentially the same when it comes to studying its message. But the Bible contains many kinds of formats that we must keep in mind if we are to successfully understand what it is saying. Think of the phone book – it’s not all the same format: white pages, yellow pages, blue pages, all with their own format and different kinds of information. The books of the Bible not only have different types of literature – prose, poetry, messages, lists, etc. – within the overall book, but even within individual books. Take, for example, some of the things said in the Book of Psalms where David exclaims “Break the teeth in their mouths, O God” (Psalm 58:6). Such an example may be easy to see as poetic language which obviously is not meant to be understood literally, but when we remember that about 30% of the Hebrew Bible is written in poetic form it can help us better understand sections of the prophetic books, for example, where sections of narrative text are mixed with sections of poetic text. Older translations, such as the King James version, tend to obscure this fact by printing everything in the same format. More recent translations, such as the English Standard Version and New International Version, make a big difference by printing different literary formats in different fonts and layouts.
But it’s not just the Old Testament where this principle applies. Take for example, 1 John 1:2: “The Elder unto the well beloved Gaius, whom I love in truth. Beloved, I wish above all things that you may prosper and be in health, even as your soul prospers.” These verses are often taken out of context as though they indicate that prosperity and physical health are things to be highly sought in the Christian life and are of great importance. In reality this is just a common letter opening expression of that day and age, just as we might write something like “I hope this finds all well with you” at the start of a letter to a friend today.
Study helps: Different translations often help to clarify changes in format in the original texts, but not always. If wording is still unclear, try checking different commentaries on the book in question, though remember that commentaries, by their very nature, may give the personal views of their authors – so you may wish to compare several.
Immediate Context
Ecclesiates 7:28, out of context, makes a seemingly startling statement: “While I was still searching but not finding – I found one upright man among a thousand, but not one upright woman among them all.” At first sight this sounds like a very sad situation, but if we look carefully at the immediate context, we see that the section beginning in vs. 26 is talking about prostitutes who snare unsuspecting men. All Solomon is saying here is that although there may be “one in a thousand” men who resist such a woman (clearly using an idiomatic expression for a round number), he found not a single upright woman in this group. Other verses in this book – Proverbs 12:4, 31:10, etc. – show this is certainly not a condemnation of all women; and the Bible talks of many upright women, of course.
In the New Testament, a scripture with which most Bible readers are familiar is found in the Book of Matthew: “For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them” (Matt. 18:20). While this verse is frequently taken to mean gathering in church fellowship, the actual immediate context is about correcting someone for a problem (vs. 15-18), and asking God’s help in the process (vs. 19). The teaching here is quite different from how it is often understood out of context.
Study Helps: This kind of contextual setting doesn’t usually need tools, though good commentaries can sometimes help if the verse just isn’t making sense. Also remember your Bible’s marginal references – sometimes they will point to a similar section of scripture where the same point is explained more clearly.
Cultural Context
Sometimes only knowledge of the cultures in which biblical stories are set can help us to understand exactly what a biblical narrative means. In Genesis 15: 9-21, for example, in the story of God sealing his covenant with Abram, God instructed Abram to take various animals and sacrifice them, dividing them into halves in such a way that someone could walk between the halves of the carcasses. Genesis then states: “When the sun had set and darkness had fallen, a smoking firepot with a blazing torch appeared and passed between the pieces. On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram …” (Genesis. 15: 17-18a). This strange event is understandable when we realize that in many ancient Near Eastern cultures, land ownership “contracts” were sealed by the participants dividing sacrificed animals or walking between the parts of the animals. Without this cultural context the details of the story would be difficult to understand, but knowing the background helps us to see that God was simply utilizing the legal practices of the time in order to confirm his promises to Abram/Abraham.
In the New Testament, the story of the women who anointed Jesus’ feet and head (Matthew 26:6-13, Mark 14:3-9, Luke 7:36-50, John 12:1-8) can be much better understood in cultural context. When we understand that a “denarius” was the average wage earned by a laborer for a full long day of work, and that the perfume used by the women would have cost upwards of 300 denarii – almost a year’s wages (Mark 14:5), we begin to realize the sacrifice these women, who were not rich, were making in their gifts.
Usually cultural context does not affect our understanding of doctrine or principles of living, but it can frequently illuminate the biblical stories and make them more understandable and real to us.
Study Helps: Carefully selected background books can help with understanding cultural context, but many are very detailed and it can be difficult to find the information needed. This is an area in which the internet shines. Doing a search for “dividing animals in sacrifices,” “biblical sacrifices + ancient Near East” or just “Genesis 15: 17-18” may find information on the background for the example used here. It is often worth doing a quick online search for background information (being careful to evaluate the quality of the site, of course) when cultural context is not clear.
Keeping these four types of context in mind can answer a good many questions about the scriptures and make them seem less puzzling. They can also deepen our understanding of the scriptures and make them more meaningful to us.
Recent Comments