IN CONTEXT OR OUT OF CONTEXT?

Apart from being a history buff, one reason why I like to use historical information in my study of Scripture is because I believe that there is at times some misunderstanding concerning our lives as Christians because we try to assign exhortations that we are to be following which applied only to the original audience or take commands that are specific to a particular audience and we make them time-less truths.  The canon of Scripture was closed by the end of the 1^st century A.D. This means that most of the Bible was not originally written to us, that is the authors had in mind the hearers of that day and probably were not aware that their words would end up being read and interpreted all over the world. 

Much preaching today concerns itself with the particle application of the Scripture that it is like the Bible is treated as a lake from which to fish application for the Christian of this day. What is lost is proper interpretation and exegesis.  Exegesis is a textual criticism, an investigation into the history and origins of the text; the study of the historical and cultural backgrounds for the author, the text, and the original audience. Other analysis includes classification of the type of literary genres present in the text, and an analysis of grammatical and syntactical features in the text itself.

Three rules for hermeneutics, (the biblical interpretive process, encompassing all forms of communication), are as follows: 1) context; 2) context; 3) context.  Before we can tell Christians of this century how the Bible applies to them, we must understand as best as possible what the Bible meant to the original audience.  If we come up with an application that would have been foreign to the original audience, there is a strong possibility that we did not interpret the passage correctly.

Once we understand what the text meant to its original hearers, we have to determine how wide split is between us and them. That is the differences in language, time, culture, geography, setting and situation?  We have to take all this into account before we can make an application.  Remember that each passage has only one correct interpretation though a range of applications. One application may be closer to the correct interpretation than another, if so then it is the better application for that text.

Look at the David and Goliath story in1 Samuel 17, the details many times are skimmed over and a sermon goes straight to the application.  There is allegorizing of Goliath into tough times and situations we may face and attempts are made to allegorize the five smooth stones.

Maybe the smooth stones are mentioned because David knew that “smooth” stones fly through the air faster and are more accurate then ragged edged stones. (A bullet is more accurate when fired from a rifled barrel than from a smooth bore barrel).  Why five? Maybe he wanted more in case he missed on the first or second shot. 

Even though allegorizing Goliath into tough, difficult and intimidating situations in one’s life that must be overcome by faith does make engaging sermons, it is doubtful that the original audience would have gotten that message from this story. How did the original audience understand it?  To know means determining the overall purpose of 1 Samuel as a book. Without going into a detailed exegesis of 1 Samuel 17, let’s just say it’s not about defeating the giants in your life with faith.

That may be a distant application, but as an interpretation of the passage, it’s alien to the text. God is the hero of the story and David was His chosen vehicle to bring salvation to His people.  The story contrasts the people’s king (Saul) with God’s king (David), and it also foreshadows what Christ (the Son of David) would do for us in providing our salvation.  We must go back to 1 Samuel 8 where the people were demanding a king, and God tells Samuel to go ahead and anoint a king, that the people were not rejecting Samuel but were rejecting God.

Another example of interpreting and disregarding the context is John 14:13-14.  Reading this out of context would seem to indicate that if we ask God anything (unqualified), we will receive it as long as we use the formula “in Jesus’ name;”  but here Jesus is speaking to His disciples in the upper room on the night of His eventual betrayal. The immediate audience is the disciples. This is a promise to His disciples that God will provide the resources for them to complete their task. Jesus is comforting them because He will soon be leaving them. Can Christians apply this today? Absolutely, of course! If we pray in Jesus’ name, we pray according to God’s will and God will give us what we need to accomplish His will in and through us.  The response (answer) we get will always glorify God.  It is a far cry from a “carte blanche” way of getting what we want. Listen to the preachers and evangelist that preach on planting “seed”.  Here we are taught that we are to submit to God’s will in prayer and that God will always provide what we will need to accomplish His will.