One of the things we said early on was to stay in the book you are studying!  The only time to compare the Gospels is when you are studying an event or phrase in particular.  Below is a good example.  Who were all those women who stood at the foot of the cross?
            Comparing the three verses below reveals a wealth of information about more than just who they were.  List them and then match them up and this is what you will find:
 
Matt 27:56                              Mark 15:40                             John 19:25
 
Mary Magdalene                    Mary Magdalene                    Mary Magdalene
 
Mary, mother of                     Mary, mother of                     Mary, wife of Cleopas
James and Joses                         James the Less and Joses                          
 
Mother of the sons                 Salome                                    His mother’s sister
   Of Zebedee
 
You now see that Mary the wife of Cleopas, was the mother of the apostle James the Less.  By comparing Mark 3:18, we find that Cleopas might also have been called Alphaeus.  Luke 24:18 shows us that Cleopas was also a disciple of Jesus, or she was possibly married twice, but it was not at all uncommon for men to go by two names. 
            We learn that James and John’s mother was named Salome, and that she was Jesus’ aunt, his mother’s sister.  This helps explain why John was so special to him (probably the baby cousin), and why James and John, and their business partner Peter, were so often by his side when the others were not.  (But it leaves us wondering why Andrew, Peter’s brother, was not!) 
It also shows that Aunt Salome wasn’t entirely out of line in expecting that her two sons, Jesus’ only blood relatives among the apostles, might be his first and second (lieutenants? Vice-presidents?) in the kingdom, and why Jesus gave the care of his mother to his youngest believing cousin.  And that points out that Jesus considered the spiritual connection more important than the physical because at that time he had at least four brothers who could have cared for their mother, but none of them yet believed.
            Try this one now:  Look up every list of the apostles you find, even partial lists.  Look up the meaning of names.  It is amazing that Matthew the publican and Simon the Zealot could tolerate one another, and that points to the unifying power of the gospel.  The apostles varied from blue collar fishermen to the more urbane Nathanael, who looked down on anyone from Galilee. 
            Almost all of them had two or even three names:
Simon, Peter, Cephas
Thomas, Didymus (“Twin,” which leaves you wondering where his brother was)
Matthew, Levi
Bartholomew, Nathanael (a presumption)
Simon, Zelotes (more a description = Zealot)
Thaddeus, Judas, Lebbaeus
            Some of those names were Aramaic, some Hebrew, some Greek (I’ll let you look that up yourself).  The Aramiac names were mostly translations from common Hebrew names.
James = Jacob
John = Jonah
Simon = Simeon
Judas = Judah
(Mary = Miriam, which explains why there were so many Marys.)
            It’s actually pretty amazing what you can list about those men when you gather the meager facts together, a whole lot more than you think, like where they came from, who their parents were, etc.  I'll leave that one to you.
 
Dene Ward   

I know you do it.  Even when you are participating in one of those “read the Bible through in a year” programs you do it.  Who in the world wants to read through So-and-so-jah begat So-and-so-iah verse after verse until you can hardly see straight?  But you need to do it once in awhile. 
            That’s how you find out that Samuel was not a hypocrite for condemning Saul’s sacrifice when he made sacrifices several times himself.  1 Samuel 1 says that his father was an Ephraimite, but the genealogy in 1 Chron 6 will show you he was an Ephraimite by location only—he was a Levite living in Ephraim.
            That’s how you find out that Joab was David’s nephew, the son of his sister Zeruiah, which probably accounts for why he put up with so much from the rascal.
            That’s how you find out that David’s counselor Ahithophel, was Bathsheba’s grandfather, which puts a new spin on that story, and probably explains why he put his lot in with Absalom when he rebelled.  And all that is just the beginning of the amazing things you can discover when you read genealogies in the Bible.
            We also tend to overlook things like Deborah’s song of praise in Judges 5.  It’s just a poem, right?  We already read the important part in chapter 4.  Read chapter 5 some time.  You will discover exactly how God helped his people overcome Sisera’s army—he sent a storm that bogged down their chariots in the mud.  Foot soldiers do much better than chariots in a storm.  You will discover that the elders of Israel were applauded for a change—they actually did their jobs and did them willingly.  You will find out that several tribes did not help with the fighting and were roundly condemned for it.  You will find God’s opinion of Jael’s actions—no more arguing about her character after He inspires Deborah to say, “Blessed above women shall Jael be.”
            And here’s one I found recently, not a genealogy but another kind of passage we often ignore—the conversation and ensuing verses in 2 Samuel 12 after Nathan uttered those scalding words, “Thou art the man,” which is where we usually stop reading.  That's all that counts, right?  Let's see.
            Verse 9--“You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword.”  David may have only ordered Uriah’s death, but God considered it exactly the same as doing the deed itself. 
            Verse 13--“The Lord has put away your sin.  You shall not die.”  Understand this--there was no sacrifice for adultery and murder because the sinners were summarily stoned.  That is what David expected, and the punishment God put aside.  Read Psalm 51 now.  David’s forgiveness happened immediately after his confession and repentance (v 12), but he repeatedly asks for it in the psalm which was written sometime later.  He understood the grace of God like never before.  Now that is godly repentance.
            Verse 15--“And the Lord afflicted the child.”  We keep trying to find ways out of statements like this, but they keep popping up.  Remember this:  God is in control.  He knows what He is doing.  There is a reason this child could not live, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t continue to live.  More on this in a minute.
            Verse 20—After the child died, David “went into the house of the Lord and worshiped.”  Why?  We could come up with a ton of reasons.  Ultimately I think he was showing his acceptance of God’s will, and sincere appreciation for the mercy he knew he did not deserve.  What do you think?  This one can keep a class going for several minutes' worth of discussion, and a whole lot of soul-searching.  Would your first inclination after a tragedy—and punishment--be to worship God?
            Verse 22--“Who knows whether the Lord will be gracious and allow the child to live?”  First, this proves David’s faith in prayer.  He knew it was possible for God to change His mind simply because one of His children asked Him to.  Second, it shows that faith does not mean you know you will get what you prayed for.  Who knows? David asked.  No one does, except God.  Faith knows He is able to grant your petition, not that He will.
            Verse 23--“I will go to him.”  David believed in the innocence of his child.  He did not believe that child was born with Adam’s sin hanging over his head, totally depraved and unable to get out of it without the direct operation of the Holy Spirit or some rite involving water.  His child was clean and innocent and he looked forward to seeing him again because he was also sure of his own forgiveness.
            Whoa!  Did you know all that was there?  I didn’t either, and this was at least the tenth time I have studied this story in depth (I thought).   What else are we missing? 
            The next time you do your Bible reading, think about what you are reading, even if it’s just a list of names or a poem or directions for how to build something.  God put what we needed to know in His Word.  Don’t you go deciding that you don’t need to know some of it.
 
…from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work, 2 Tim 3:15-17 .
 
Dene Ward
           

After reading them for so many years, I can skim a recipe and garner all sorts of necessary information in that quick once-over.  Not just whether I have the ingredients, but how long it will take, what I can do ahead of time, what equipment I will need, the substitutions I can make if necessary, and whether I can cut it in half or freeze half of it.  Sometimes, though, a recipe needs a closer reading.
            I made a vegetable lasagna once that turned out well, but was way too big.  I took over half of the leftovers to my women’s class potluck and it got rave reviews and several requests.  So I went home and started typing the two page recipe containing at least two dozen ingredients.  The typing required a careful reading of the recipe so I wouldn’t give anyone wrong amounts or directions, and as I did so I discovered that I had completely forgotten one ingredient and had missed one of the procedures.  Just imagine how good it would have been if I had done the whole thing correctly.
            Too many times we try to read the Bible like I read that recipe, especially the passages we think we already know.  I have said many times to many classes, the biggest hindrance to learning is what you think you already know.  Today I am going to prove it to you.
            Have you ever said, or even taught, that turning the water to wine was the first miracle Jesus ever did?  I know, it’s what all the Bible class curricula say.  Well, it’s your job to check out those lessons with your own careful reading.  Most of the time that means reading far beyond the actual lesson text.  This isn’t even hard to see, but you do have to think about what you see.  Some time today when you have the time—okay, make the time—read the following verses.
 
John 1:45-51—Jesus tells Nathanael that he saw him before it was possible for him to see him.  This was enough of a miracle that it brought a confession from Nathanael: “Rabbi, you are the Son of God, you are the King of Israel”, v 49.
2:11--“This is the first of his signs” (water to wine)
2:23--“Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed on his name when they saw the signs that he was doing.” (Notice, this is an unknown number of signs,)
4:16-19—Jesus tells the woman at the well all about her life, a life he could not have known about except miraculously.  She would later tell her neighbors, “Come see a man who told me all that ever I did.  Can this be the Christ?” v 29.  She certainly thought she had seen a miracle.
4:46-54—Jesus heals the nobleman’s son, which John labels “the second sign that Jesus did.”  What about John 1?  What about 2:23?  What about Samaria?
 
            For years I read “first” and “second,” knowing full well about the other signs before and between them, and didn’t even think about what I was reading. I was reading it like a recipe, a quick once over because I already knew the story.  Now, having seen all the passages together, you can see that “first” and “second” in John 2:11 and 4:54 obviously do not mean the simple chronological “first” and “second” you might think at first glance.  You need the entire context of John to figure it out.
            Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name, John 20:30,31.  Right there John tells you not only why he wrote his book, but that he simply chose certain signs to discuss in detail.  If you do a careful study of the entire book, you will discover that he chose seven, each making a particular point about the power of Jesus that proves his Deity.  No, I am not going to list them for you.  You need to take up your Bibles and figure it out for yourself so you know firsthand.   
            When John says “This is the first,” and “this is the second,” he is simply referring to the list of seven he intends to discuss more fully.  Turning the water to wine was the first on his list, NOT the first miracle Jesus ever did, and all you have to do is read earlier in the book to see at least one more—Nathanael’s.  In fact, you cannot even count the number he did in between the “first” and the “second,” 2:23.
            So, be careful what you believe.  Be even more careful what you teach because that could affect many others.  Pay attention to the details and don’t pull events and verses out of context.  Do you want to know why so many false doctrines spread?  Because people read the “proof texts” like a recipe, a quick scan instead of a careful reading, if indeed they read them at all.
            Don’t skim the Word of God.  Give it the attention it deserves.   
 
And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 2 Pet 1:19.
 
Dene Ward

I started taking piano lessons when I was about seven years old.  It was not “formal” training in a studio, but just a few lessons from a friend of my mother’s to see if I was interested.  I still remember the first lesson, the first book I had, and the first tune in it.  “C-D-E made a boat; round and round the pond he’d float.”
            A few months later this friend told my parents I needed a “real” teacher.  Frankly, I think she was just fine as a teacher.  I learned the keys, the notes, and how to count in a few short weeks, but she insisted so off we went. 
            My next teacher had recitals.  I still remember that first recital too, and I can still play my first recital piece:  “Arab Horsemen” by Hazel Cobb.  Those horsemen were a long way from the guy named “CDE” and his boat.  Instead of one hand playing three notes, I had both hands running over six octaves on the piano, and a whole page played with my arms crossed!
            As I sat in the student row waiting my turn to play I saw other students wringing their hands or wiping sweat off their palms onto their skirts or pants.  What was the problem, I wondered?  It never dawned on me that they were nervous about playing in front of people.  I wasn’t nervous.  I knew my piece and could play it flawlessly.  What was the big deal?
            A few years later we had moved and the new teacher entered me in a talent competition in the County Fair.  Once again I was mystified by the nervous entrants around me.  I had a great piece and knew it inside and out.  I had spent three hours one particular day analyzing every note, every nuance of phrase, and every dynamic marking.  I got up and played it, and won a blue ribbon. 
            The next year I entered another competition.  This time the piece was more difficult.  It was written only a year or two before by Aaron Copland, a contemporary American composer.  It did not make much sense to my classically oriented ear.  Going from this note to the next seemed totally at random to me and I had a difficult time memorizing it.  But the rules for that category said I had to play it.  
            For the first time in my life I was not comfortable waiting my turn.  Then when I got up to play, it happened--I went totally blank.  I could not even start the piece.  The judges were kind.  They let me look at the first line.  Then I walked back to the piano and my daily practice automatically kicked in.  I played it perfectly, and aced the Beethoven rondo that followed.  In fact, Beethoven felt like an old friend at that point.
            Ever since that day I have experienced what everyone else does—performance anxiety.  I played a solo professional recital once and was sick to my stomach about five minutes before I walked on.  That one time when I forgot what to play has never left me.  From then on I knew I was as mortal as anyone and I always wondered when it would happen again.  Actually it did happen once in the middle of my senior recital, a requirement for a degree in music education.  I was playing a sonata and made up about four bars on the second page of the first movement before Haydn’s music found its way back into my hands.  Good thing you get points for covering up a slip when you perform.  I still got my A.
            Can you imagine how those apostles felt when Jesus, the one they had always counted on to have the right answer at the right time suddenly left them?  He knew what would happen and gave them this promise:  And when they bring you to trial and deliver you up, be not anxious beforehand what you are to say but say whatever is given you to say, for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit, Mark 13:11.  Can you imagine a more comforting promise?  I suppose that is why I have always had difficulties with those who claim that Paul misspoke in Acts 23:3, and that he had to apologize.  Don’t they believe that God kept His promise to these brave men?  Try reading what Paul said with the same tone Elijah must surely have had when he spoke to the prophets of Baal in 1 Kings 18.  It wouldn’t be the first time that God used sarcasm through the voice of a man.  Either that or He broke His promise to Paul; you can’t have it both ways.
            Wouldn’t it be great to have that promise today?  But wait a minute--in a way we do.  Those men did not have the written word.  Paul himself promised that one day the gifts that allowed one to prophesy a part and another to prophesy another part would be done away because the entire revelation would be “perfect,” complete in all details (1 Cor 13:8-12.  That is what we have—the whole shebang.
            So why do we experience performance anxiety when someone asks a question, or when it comes time to speak up in the face of false teaching?  Is it because we are just a little anxious about choosing exactly the right way to say it, or is it because we didn’t prepare ourselves with daily practice, analyzing and memorizing?  One is understandable, the other is inexcusable.  We may not have all the answers on the tips of our tongues as they did, but we have the source of those answers if we will just take the time to look.  “I don’t know, but I can find out,” may be a better testimony than acting like we do know it all.  It tells our friends, if an ordinary guy like him can find it, so can I.
            Those 13 men never knew when they would be called upon to speak up for God.  We don’t either.  Start practicing what to say; start considering all the possibilities. God has given you what you need, but it’s up to you to make use of it.
 
I will hope continually and praise you yet more and more.  My mouth will tell of your righteous acts, of your deeds of salvation all the day for their number is past my knowledge.  With the mighty deeds of the Lord God I will come; I will remind them of your righteousness, yours alone.  Psalm 71:14-16.
 
Dene Ward
           
 

One day recently, just to see what would happen, I googled one of my past devotionals, the one called “Chloe and the Green Beans.”  Now if I understand what the Google search engine does, it searches the internet to find places where all those words are used in more or less the same place.  Sort of like a Bible concordance lists all the passages that contain a certain word.  I was amused by what Google came up with.
            “But Chloe doesn’t like green beans…”
            “Chloe Green bought some beans.”
            “Joan Rivers spills the beans about celebrities including Tom Green and Chloe Kardashian.”
            “Chloe Intense—a new perfume with notes of rose, amber, pink pepper, and tonka beans”
            Finally on page 8, I found my devotional, “Chloe and the Green Beans.”
            I never dreamed that those words—“Chloe,” “green,” and “beans”-- had been put together in so many different ways. Some of those are from blogs, some articles, and some ads.  Do you think the “Chloe” in all those snippets referred to the same Chloe?  Of course not.  And then I thought, that is exactly how some people try to study the Bible—they google it, in method if nothing else.  They see a word in one passage and then simply look for it in another, assuming it means the same thing, regardless of the fact that different authors are writing about different topics to different audiences many, sometimes hundreds of years, apart.
            They see the words “the coming of the Lord” and “judgment” and decide that, even though one is in Isaiah and one is in Matthew and one is in Peter, they must all be talking about the same “coming of the Lord”—which they inevitably view as the final Day of Judgment.  They see similar language in the book of Revelation and decide the same thing, regardless of John saying, “These things must shortly come to pass.”
            They also completely ignore to whom the words were originally written and what they meant in the context of the time and circumstances.  For example, when you said the phrase, “the promise” to a Jew, you would create a far different understanding than you would to a Gentile.  Jews who heard or read “the promise” would see it in their minds in all caps on a flashing neon sign.  They had been looking for “THE PROMISE” for thousands of years.  Remember that when you read passages like Acts 2:39, which was originally spoken to a Jewish audience.
            Things also become skewed when you forget that the Bible was not written in English.  Just because the same English word is used in two different places, does not mean it is the same Hebrew or Greek word.  Just as English has many words for “bread” that limit its meaning (biscuit, loaf, bagel, scone, muffin, etc), those people had different words for things that might have been translated into one English word.  Did you know that in the Bible there were several Hebrew or Greek words used for queen?  One meant “a daughter of royalty.”  Another meant “queen-mother.”  Still another simply meant “the king’s wife.”  A really strange one meant “the moon.”  Yet they are all translated “queen” in our language.  That one is not too important, but there are other words that make a much larger difference in your understanding of the scriptures, and that is why you must learn how to use a concordance, either on a computer program or a real book. 
            What started out as simple curiosity that afternoon at the computer reminded me of some important things about Bible study.  Be careful with the word of God.  It isn’t a comic book, so it takes some thought.  It isn’t a thriller, so you sometimes have to make yourself plow through it.  It isn’t a romance, so you may find things in it you didn’t really want to find, like the fact that you need to change your life.  In the end, though, it’s worth every minute of study you put into it.
 
But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God's word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God… For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, 2 Cor 4:2,5,6.
 
Dene Ward

A long time ago I accidentally learned what to do about all those New Testament quotes from the Old Testament:  LOOK UP THE ORIGINAL STATEMENT!
            Let’s look at a quote or two.
            ​You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’” (Matt 15:7-9)
            I heard that passage quoted all my childhood and applied to religious denominations.  They were making laws that were not in the Bible and so they were guilty.  Then the preacher would list things like “once saved, always saved,” instrumental music, and quarterly communion.  I used it too when I talked to my friends at school because that’s the way I had always heard it used.
            Then one day after I was grown and teaching classes, I decided to look up the context of Jesus’ statement and was I in for a shock when I saw that he was addressing it to the scribes and Pharisees—conservative parties of his own people, the Jews.  He was NOT addressing it to pagans who worshipped incorrectly at all.  So then I went back to Isaiah where, Jesus tells us, this statement was originally made.
            And the Lord said: “Because this people draw near with their mouth and honor me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment taught by men, therefore, behold, I will again do wonderful things with this people, with wonder upon wonder; and the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the discernment of their discerning men shall be hidden.” (Isa 29:13-14)
            Like Jesus, Isaiah is talking to God’s people, a people who have given nothing but lip-service to God.  They go to the Temple on feast days and Sabbaths, anxious for it to all be over so they can get back to “real life,” cheating in their businesses, afflicting the poor, and focusing all their attentions on self-indulgence.  They have polluted the true worship with idols in the Temple, priests who no longer teach the Law, and prophets who preach for hire.  They want to be more like the nations around them than like the Father who protected and provided for them.  God says they have broken the covenant and He is about to destroy them.
            Do you think those Jewish leaders missed what Jesus was saying about them by using this passage?  Of course not.  Do you understand now why they were always so angry with him?  He did not avoid confrontation and he had no problem speaking plainly, plainly enough that they knew exactly what he meant.
            Now notice again who these people were:  the conservative parties of God’s people who were trying their best to follow the Law exactly.  Do you know anyone who fits that description today?  And do you think we don’t have any problem with the same things they did?  Then think again.  I grew up knowing people who carefully compartmentalized their religion.  What they said and did on Sunday had nothing to do with how they lived the rest of the week.  “I’ve been baptized,” became their mantra.  I was blessed to have parents who showed me that faith is about every aspect of your life, not just Sunday mornings, otherwise I might be in the same situation.
            Do you think we don’t have trouble teaching “commandments of men?”  Have you ever heard things like, “You can’t wait on the Lord’s table without a tie on?”  How about, “Women are not allowed to wear pants here,” or “You have to say amen at the end of your prayer or you will not be allowed to pray the public prayer.”  And just like those first century Pharisees we sometimes make a bigger deal out of people breaking our Man commandments than we do God’s.
All that just because I finally checked the context of two passages, the New Testament quote and the original Old Testament passage.
           Here’s one you can work on yourself.  Jesus told a vineyard parable in Mark 12:1-12.  It was not a direct quote but was a strong allusion to Isaiah’s vineyard parable in 5:1-7.  Jesus was speaking to the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders, people who certainly knew the book of Isaiah.  Make a two column chart and find the comparisons between those two parables.  Once you do, you will understand why, when Jesus finished his, those men wanted “to arrest him.”
          Did you ever wonder why the New Testament is so much shorter than the Old?  Maybe it’s because God didn’t think He needed to say things twice!  He expected us to look at these quotes and their originals and figure a few things out ourselves.  And when you do that, you will learn more than you ever knew there was to learn.
 
And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. (Luke 24:27)
 
Dene Ward

Everyone has heard the admonition, “Look for the context when you study.”  Certainly understanding the topic at hand goes a long way in understanding what is being said about it.  But we often overlook another type of context.  In fact, it may be the reason for the vast majority of incorrect ideas about Biblical narratives.  All those pictures we put out for the children to color to fill up the last five minutes of class time are usually so Biblically incorrect it makes me cringe. 
            The context we need to work on most is the historic, geographic, and cultural context.  For example, read a bit in one of those Customs and Manners books (Wight and Edersheim come to mind, but there are other newer ones), or find those sections in any good commentary—just about the best use for a commentary—and you will discover this:  young Jewish women at least up to and including the first century, were married off at puberty.  Even if, as some say, puberty was a bit later back then, you still have fourteen year olds getting married.  In fact, MacArthur tells us in Twelve Extraordinary Women that at least in Mary’s time, they entered into a one-year betrothal, the kiddushin, at 13 and married at 14. 
            Now go back and restudy all those old stories.  Think about Rebekah leaving home to go marry Isaac, who was at that time 40.  Think about those two sisters, Leah and Rachel, and their marriages to Jacob.  Do you realize that if you start at his death in Egypt and work your way back, that Jacob was 84 when he married them?  Both those patriarchs married very young teenagers.
            Every time I point this out, I have one or two in my classes who sit there, stunned.  “But we put people in jail for this,” one woman said.  Yes, and it is a lesson to us not to judge that culture by ours.
            It’s also a lesson not to judge our young people’s capabilities by theirs.  We do not raise our children to be able to begin adult life at 13 or 14.  We don’t expect that level of commitment from them and we don’t teach them how to make a lifetime commitment that early.  Even the young men in later times than those patriarchs married as teenagers.  They learned a trade and were able to support a family by 15 or 16.
           And now that you understand the ages, imagine a 14 year old Mary riding that donkey in full labor.  Then having her baby on a bed of straw.  (Jesus was “laid in a manger” not born in one!) 
           Think of Hagar, Sarai’s handmaiden.  If they had not given her to another servant in marriage already, it was probably because she was too young before then.  For Sarai to come up with this idea, Hagar had probably just reached that magic age of puberty.  It wasn’t exactly a secret in those days when that happened.  When she had Ishmael she may also have been as young as 14 or 15.
           You can do that with so many other things.  Just one tiny fact can change how you have always pictured something in your mind.  What about weaning?  Usually between 3 and 5, but sometimes as late as 8.  If I were Hannah, I would have kept Samuel with me as long as possible. 
              But then think about Ishmael at the feast of Isaac’s weaning—he would have been 17-19 because he was 14 when Isaac was born.  When you see that passage about Hagar “casting him” under a bush, don’t picture a little boy.  He was practically grown, probably larger than she was!
            I could go on, but that should be sufficient to illustrate the point.  Context is a whole lot more than a chapter or two, and it will enlighten your studies for years to come.
 
Dene Ward

            Before we get too far along in these study tips, you need to examine yourself to find out what works for you.
            Over the years I have come to realize that, for me, words are nothing but a mishmash, incomprehensible and unmemorable, if I don’t organize them somehow.  My mind needs graphics.  If I can see a list or make a chart, everything suddenly makes sense.  Otherwise, it’s hopeless.  So I read and read and read, and always keep a half dozen pieces of scrap paper next to my Bible.
            For example, I was studying John 8:12-59 one time, and though I figured out that this was a pivotal time in Jesus’ relationship with the Jewish rulers, I still saw nothing but a bunch of words.  So I read it about 5 times.  The second time I began to see a few things.  The third time I saw a few more.  About then I started my lists.  By the fifth time I was ready to complete them.  When I finished I had a four lists:  questions the Jews asked Jesus; accusations the Jews made about Jesus; accusations Jesus made about the Jews; and, personal claims Jesus made about himself.
            I had written them verbatim out of the Bible, so my final task was to put them in everyday language—something that would resonate with me about what exactly was going on.  Then I went back and read the chapter again.  Oh my!  I had never realized the tension in the crowd and the danger Jesus was in.  And I had never realized his audacity either.  Suddenly that passage came alive for me.  It was easier to comprehend and easier to apply.  And isn’t that the point of study?
            A word of encouragement here that you will need:  Sometimes you make some amazing discoveries when you do this.  But sometimes you will work like crazy making a list or a chart or a progression or however it is your mind works, only to see no amazing discoveries at all. 
            For example, I was studying the oracles of the nations in Jeremiah 46-51.  After only a couple times through I realized I had an easily chartable bunch of facts there.  So I made my three column chart:  the nation, its sins, and the judgment God was sending.  It took a couple of hours to wade through that poetic and highly figurative language, but I made it and had a two page chart, in longhand, to look through.  What astounding things did I find in it?  Not much.  But I did see this:  several sins were listed again and again.  This is what I learned from that chart:  God has absolutely no truck with nations (or individuals for that matter) who are proud, arrogant, self-satisfied idol worshippers.  Tell me that doesn’t describe what this country has become.  And tell me we don’t have the same failings in ourselves at times, especially relying on things and people other than God.  We need a strong army, we need insurance policies and IRAs and huge portfolios.  Then we will be secure.  No, not so much.  God is still in control.  For all that work, though, it wasn’t a huge dividend to come up with.  But I did know for sure what was in those chapters.
            So take some time now and decide how you learn, how you remember, how you process information.  Sooner or later I will share some of the charts and lists I have come up with as examples, but let’s not get the cart before the horse.  Just because it works for me doesn’t mean it will work for you.  You know you best.  Find out what works and use it.
           
In the way of your testimonies I delight as much as in all riches. I will meditate on your precepts and fix my eyes on your ways. I will delight in your statutes; I will not forget your word. (Ps 119:14-16)
 
Dene Ward

I used to prefer studying the Old Testament.  It was so much more interesting.  I am afraid I always thought the Gospels a little “ho-hum.”   Then I actually sat down and started studying—and discovered my error.  The Gospels are a great place to study.  Unfortunately, it is where a lot of folks make a huge mistake.
            The first three, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, share many of the same narratives, but if you have read them at all, you know that they often contain different details.   While skeptics seize upon this fact to discredit them, they studiously ignore what every crime novel and crime drama aficionado knows—when the stories are exactly the same between witnesses, the police know something isn’t right, most likely criminal collusion.  Their very differences are testimony to the Gospels’ accuracy.  But that isn’t my point today.
            Each gospel writer wrote to a different audience and with a different aim in mind.  Probably the most obvious is that Matthew wrote to Jews to prove that Jesus was the promised Messiah, the King of God’s restored Kingdom promised over and over in the prophets.  He begins his account with the genealogy of Jesus, something important to all Jews, and without which none of them would have even begun to entertain the thought of who this Jesus person might be.  He carries that genealogy through Joseph.  Though we know that Joseph was not Jesus’ biological father, establishing him as the legal father was important to show he was in the royal line of Judah, with the legal right of inheritance.
            Matthew uses more than fifty direct quotations from the Old Testament and even more allusions to connect Jesus to the Jewish prophecies, than any other gospel writer.  Even in the gospels themselves we read about the false Messiahs running around during the first century.  Matthew more than any other writer did his best to ground his readers in the idea that Jesus alone fulfilled prophecy and had the credentials to be the promised Christ.
            Each gospel writer had his own purpose based upon his time and audience.  When you are studying one of the gospel books, you will completely lose this if you insist on bringing in every other account of the same incident as you go along.  Matthew chose his events and his details to accomplish something.  Don’t make it all in vain.  Look for the clues.  Remember the audience.  Get out of Matthew what Matthew intended you to get.  You are NOT smarter than an inspired apostle.
            There may be a place for a Harmony of the Gospels study, but if that’s all you ever do, constantly flipping over to the other gospels “to get all the facts” you will miss something significant.  If the Holy Spirit had not intended that we study them separately, resisting the urge to flip, He would have written one all-inclusive gospel.  Again, we are NOT smarter than the Holy Spirit.
            Having said that, let’s say you are studying, not a whole gospel, but a single event in the gospels.  Now is the time to compare all accounts.  I like to make columns, one for each book that contains the event, and then write down the verse citation and exactly what is said or done there.  You will be surprised at even the minute differences. 
          You would do well to ask yourself, “Why did Matthew say this and Mark something else?”  For example, in Matt 9:18, Jairus is called “a ruler” while Mark calls him “one of the rulers of the synagogue” (5:22).  Why would Matthew leave out the identifying phrase?  Remember who Matthew is written to—Jews.  What ruler would they automatically think of?  Mark on the other hand is written primarily to a Roman audience.  They had all sorts of rulers, and might never have thought of a ruler of the synagogue.
            Also, Matthew specifically says that Jairus “knelt” before Jesus, while Mark and Luke talk about “falling before him.”  The latter speaks of desperation, the first of humility and respect.  For a ruler of the synagogue to kneel before Jesus would be a powerful testimony of Jesus’ identity to a Jewish audience.
            So once again, here is the basic rule:  If you are studying a book, stay in the book.  Find out who it was written to and ask yourself why this event and these details would matter to that audience.  What is it that the writer wants you to learn?  Study the various events in the same book and look for connections between them.  Keith recently discovered just by doing this that Matt 19 is not about divorce and remarriage, which is all anyone ever seems to mention.  Look at all the events in that chapter and you will see that it is about what you should be willing to give up for the kingdom’s sake:  your sexuality, your self-esteem, and your material possessions.  You keep hopping around and you won’t see it.  You lose sight of the purpose of the book—the King and his kingdom—and you won’t ever get it.
          If you are studying an event in particular, by all means, compare accounts so you can get all the facts.  Just don’t ever think you know more than an inspired writer and the Holy Spirit who directed him.
 
Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. (John 20:30-31)
 
Dene Ward

The term “hermeneutics” comes from the god Hermes, the messenger and interpreter of Jupiter to man.  As such, it is a fitting word to describe the principles by which we interpret any piece of written material, especially the one from God.  The textbook I told you about yesterday gives a list called “Helps in Understanding the Bible.”  I think it is a remarkable list because we can all do these things.  It isn’t difficult.
            First, Professor Dungan says we should use plain old common sense.  I often find myself thinking that scholars try to muddy the waters just so they will be the only ones who really know what’s going on, but this one makes the specific point that the Bible was given to the common man to help him in his every day life, so it had to be practical.  Common sense in interpreting it is expected.
            Then he says something else you seldom see from a Biblical scholar these days, at least the ones on the Discovery and History channels—if you want to interpret the Bible correctly you must believe in its Divine inspiration.  I have often thought, “If you don’t, why bother?” and evidently the author agrees.
            He follows this with something that will be less popular—to interpret the scriptures you need “mental industry.”  By that he means the willingness to work at it, to expect something besides an easy-read comic book or pulp fiction.  Didn’t Jesus speak in parables for precisely that reason—so that the ones who cared enough to work at it would, and the rest, the unspiritual, would just ignore it?  You have to wonder about the sincerity of someone who always wants the easy way out.
            When I read the next one, I questioned him for the first time:  “spiritual purity.”  Not that I don’t believe we need to keep ourselves pure, but how can that help or hinder our understanding?  His reasoning reminded me of those same parables and the reason Jesus taught them.  “The gross mind will not apprehend the pure teaching of the Spirit of God.  Men may hear but not understand and in answer to the carnal wish, God may send a strong delusion, and the god of this world may blind the eyes of the unbelieving.”  That quote, alluding to Paul’s statement in 2 Thessalonians 2, makes excellent sense.  If I cannot understand the Bible, maybe it is because I don’t like what it says.  That passage should also scare me just a little.
            We are also told that we need a “correct translation.”  So many of these points build on one another.  If I want an easy read, I will probably wind up with an incorrect translation, and that desire for a no-work/easy-read probably says a lot about my lack of spirituality to begin with.
            Then he points out perhaps the most obvious thing:  if we want to understand the Bible, we should expect to understand it.  Would we ever read any other book expecting NOT to understand it?  In fact, I have put down books for that very reason—in trying to be “artistic” they have simply become incomprehensible.  The Biblical writers were not worried about “art.”  They all expected their readers to be better informed when they read their epistles.  “When you read this, you can perceive my understanding” Paul told the Ephesians (3:4).  The writer of my textbook says the Bible is “a sensible communication from God.”  To believe otherwise, turns God into a cruel and petty tyrant. 
            If you are having trouble figuring out what the Bible is all about, maybe you should check yourself against this list.  God wants a relationship with his children.  When my boys were young, they knew exactly what they could and could not get away with.  They knew exactly what was expected of them in any given situation.  They knew all of that was for their good, because we loved them more than our own lives.  Why would we ever think anything less of God?
 
Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. John 8:42-43
 
Dene Ward