By Kurt
Van Gorden
The student of Scripture should have a general
understanding of the Bible. More so, the prospective Bible teacher, preacher,
Sunday school teacher, missionary, or any Church leader should have a working
knowledge of the Bible. The following
tools are recommended for a richer and more rewarding time in studying God’s
Word.
We should use the many great works
of past Christian writers;, whose lives are a testimony of faithfulness to God
that is often unparalleled in modern times.
Men like Adam Clarke, who through the 1820s endured bitterly cold
winters and ill health while praying for hours for insight into God’s
Word. God preserved his life to write a
six-volume commentary after which he died a mere 30 days following its
completion. Others like Matthew Henry
and John Gill enslaved themselves to Christ’s ministry while producing books
that have blessed untold millions of Christians three hundred of years after
their death.
Commentaries: Commentaries are not to be shunned,
as is often the mistaken belief of the untaught Christian. It has been well stated by Christian
scholars of the past that there is no greater commentary on the Bible than the
Bible itself. We expand this view to
include Jesus. Jesus is the greatest
commentary upon both the Old and New Testament Scriptures. He told us the purpose and fulfillment of
all the former Scriptures concerned Him (Luke 24:44).
Jesus taught His disciples for a
period of four years. It is from His
Apostles that we draw our second source of New Testament information. The closest followers of our Lord Jesus
Christ were inspired of the Holy Spirit to give us the proper and clearest
understanding of His ways. Their
writings are cherished today by true Bible believers as fully inspired of God
and given to the Church for direction and doctrine. The inspiration of the Holy Spirit is evident in their writings
(2 Timothy 3:16). The Apostles were
guarded by the Holy Spirit from making mistakes in the words and works of
Christ (John 14:26).
The Apostolic fathers of the Church
are those who knew the Apostles, but were too young to have encountered the
Lord. Their insights and comments upon
the Scriptures are invaluable in Christian study because of their proximity to
the Apostles. Two such Apostolic
Fathers, Irenaius and Polycarp, were personal disciples of the Apostle
John. Their writings have been
translated in The Apostolic Fathers
(Jack Sparks, Nelson Pub.) and The
Apostolic Fathers (Lightfoot, Hendrickson pub.).
The pre-Nicene Church Fathers also
provide valuable insights into the teachings of the early Church. Their writings are translated in the Ante-Nicene Fathers (A. Roberts,
Hendrickson pub., 10 volumes). Each generation
of Christians stove to closely follow the Lord Jesus and His teachings. Several of the many great commentators who
are faithful to God’s Word are Matthew Henry, F. F. Bruce,
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, Robert C. H. Lenski, Adam Clarke, Albert Barnes,
Matthew Poole, John Gill, and J. P. Lange.
Some of the recommended multiple-volume commentaries by multiple authors
are the Expositor’s Bible, the Word Bible Commentary, New International Commentary, and the Tyndale Commentary. Some recommended single-volume commentaries
are The International Bible Commentary
(Bruce), Bethany Parallel Commentary,
Evangelical Commentary on the Bible
(Ewell), Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, Matthew Henry, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, and the New Bible Commentary (Wenham).
In our current age liberal
theologians have sown seeds of tare among the wheat. We need to be watchful of those in the past century who have done
their utmost to cast doubt upon God’s Word rather than esteeming it as
holy. In particular, watch for such
names as Julius Wellhausen, Emil Brunner, Karl Barth, Rudulf Bultmann, Fredrich
Schleiermacher, Raymond Brown, John Hick, Hans Kung, Reinhold Neibuhr, Karl
Rahner, Robert M. Grant, Bishop Spong, William Barclay, Norman Vincent Peal,
and James Hastings. Liberal
commentaries where caution should be exercised are the Interpreter’s Bible, the Jerome
Bible Commentary, and the Anchor
Bible Commentary.
Bible Dictionaries and
Encyclopedias: Generally, Bible dictionaries
and encyclopedias do not follow the same trend of liberal thinking as what is
found in modern commentaries. This is
due to defining terms rather than giving a theological discourse. There are, though, some biblical dictionaries
or encyclopedias that overstep their duty and speculate beyond mere
definitions. In brief, the way to discover
the bias of a Bible dictionary is to look up certain key areas of contention
between liberal and conservative Christians.
If one examines the topics of Creation, Inspiration, the writings of
Moses, the Gospel authorship, or the like, and finds slants toward the
Wellhausen theory (JEPD, the Jehovist, Elohist, Priestly, Deuteronomic authorship
of the Pentateuch), or doubt as to the Gospel writers, or advocating “Q
document” theories, theistic evolution, or if it refers to creation as a myth,
then rest assured that the volume in hand has a liberal taint. A few good conservative Bible dictionaries
are Zondervan’s New Compact Bible
Dictionary, the Holman Bible
Dictionary, The Illustrated Bible
Dictionary (J. D. Douglas), The New
International Dictionary of the Bible (Zondervan), the New Bible Dictionary (IVP), Nelson's
Illustrated Bible Dictionary, The New
Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Moody), and Smith's
Bible Dictionary. Some of the
better Bible encyclopedias are the Zondervan
Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, the New International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, and Baker’s Encyclopedia of the Bible. Some of the liberal names to watch for are Hasting’s Bible Dictionary, Hasting’s Bible Encyclopedia, and the Eerdmans Bible Dictionary.
Concordances: There are three favored
concordances often used for biblical research, i.e., Strong’s, Young’s, and
Cruden’s. Strong’s and Young’s are
particularly valuable because they give the root-word meaning for Hebrew,
Aramaic, and Greek along with a fair English equivalent. One must be warned, though, that simple
knowledge of Strong’s or Young’s Hebrew and Greek only supplies root word
definitions and has little to do with how these words are properly translated
in their grammatical context. One could
say, “Strong’s Concordance says this is the meaning of the Hebrew,” but the
root meaning alone gives us no insight upon the usage, grammar, or context.
Background books and
Bible handbooks: The biblical background gives
us insight into the history, archaeology, geography, topography, culture,
mannerisms, and customs. Most of books
on these subjects make good references for consulting various biblical
passages. These help us to understand
things like how Joseph was called the “husband” of Mary during their
betrothal. The Jewish custom of
betrothal was as solid as a marriage and could only be broken by a decree of
divorce. Background books help us
immensely in this area. Some of the
popular, thorough Bible handbooks are Halley’s
Bible Handbook, Eerdman’s Bible
Handbook, Unger’s Bible Handbook,
Boyd’s Bible Handbook, World’s Bible Handbook, and Holman’s Bible Handbook.
Translations and
interlinear texts: The various English
translations of the Bible are exactly what they say they are—translations of
one language into another. No English
version is any more holy or ordained than any other is. We do not have a commandment from God
telling us which English version has His sanction, therefore we must look at
the various translations and understand what, if any, differences exist between
them. There are basically three different
methods of translation for the Old and New Testaments—literal, dynamic
equivalence, and complete equivalence.
The literal translation is not a
simplistic word exchange for the languages involved. They take all things into consideration, such as the grammar,
context, history, and background. They
then produce a literal translation based upon the information within the text
and about the text. The King James
Version, even with its antiquated English, is a good literal translation of the
Bible. Probably one of the best is the
New American Standard Bible, even though it is criticized for lacking smooth
reading.
Dynamic translations result
from modern studies. They are not literal translations, but instead
they provide equivalencies in thought content while trying to maintain the
writer’s intent. The New International
Version and Today's English Version are examples of dynamic equivalence
translations. Students who desire an
easy-reading text that is trustworthy for the thought-content of the original
prefer these.
The complete translation is a
combination of these first two methods.
It remains faithful to the literal text, but keeps in mind the dynamics
of the languages involved. The New King
James Version is an example of a complete translation. Preference should be given to these translations
for the student who desires to use an English version with the certainty and
trustworthiness of a literal translation, yet with smoothness and clarity of a
dynamic translation.
Hebrew
and Greek interlinear translations are literally word-for-word equivalencies of
the languages, but they lack grammatical structures that may clarify the
meaning of the sentence. Jay Green, George R. Berry, I. Howard Marshall,
and Spirio Zodiates translate the better interlinear volumes.
© 2000 – Kurt Van Gorden