THE
TESTIMONY

Home | About | Subscriptions | Contact us | Search
New this month | Back issues | Other publications | Other sites
Back to Bible Study special issue contents

THE IMPORTANCE OF CONTEXT

Geoff Walker

THE BIBLE, though consisting of sixty-six books, is, all together, the revelation of God’s purpose with His created earth and His created population of it. In this sense, it is one book. As it stands it is a complete revelation of that purpose, having a beginning, a development and an end. All parts of it are relevant to the whole, and the context of every part is the whole Scriptural revelation.

At the beginning this purpose is stated, as would be expected from any treatise. God had created the earth with all its varied features, and finally man. The obvious first question for the reader has to be, What for? The answer, properly and immediately supplied in the account in Genesis, was to the effect that man was to rule for God over the earth He had created (Gen. 1:26,28).

This theme of man ruling the earth for God dominates the whole of Scripture, and has its most specific allusion in Hebrews 2:5-8, which refers back to Genesis 1 via Psalm 8, demonstrating that Jesus is ultimately THE MAN. In the course of the development of the theme, the future of Adam and his seed in fulfilment of the role as ruler of the earth, and the triumph of the seed of the woman, is fully examined.

The importance of recognising that every part of Scripture fits into this context is exemplified in two wide-ranging considerations:

It is true to say that all Christadelphian doctrine depends on this broad context. It is important, therefore, that this wide context should be appreciated.

Each Testament has its own context

Both Old and New Testaments have their own contexts; the Old looks forward to the coming of the Man who will rule the earth; the New records his birth and the consequences. The Old is characterised by the calling of Israel as a nation, and the New by the calling of the Gentiles, this time without a national identity. Two examples are shown below of the mishandling of context in both Old and New Testaments by some groups of ‘Christians’ whom we may meet.

1. Old Testament

There are some sects which enforce among their members a strict observance of the sabbath law, although the commandments of Christ make no such demand. There is clearly a lack of appreciation of context here. The sabbath law was particularly concerned with the behaviour before God of a nation in a land, and therefore with natural Israel. Spiritual Israel live in a different context, subject to commandments made directly to them. 

2. New Testament

A much more common failure of awareness of context comes in the insistence of many around us that the direct influence of the Holy Spirit is available to Christians today. Allusions in the New Testament to possession of the Holy Spirit are read as if they were written directly to twentieth-century readers. Yet these allusions were written to people in different circumstances from our own, when the newly-formed ecclesia had no New Testament recording the teaching of Jesus and the apostles, no experience of life in Christ, nor instructions concerning ecclesial management.

The writers of the New Testament, writing for believers who lived in specific circumstances and at a particular time, did not only give good general advice such as would be relevant to believers of all subsequent ages. Sometimes they addressed their readers personally, knowing to whom they were writing and the circumstances in which they lived.

And, indeed, the whole of the New Testament was originally written to tell those who lived in the first century about the gospel message coming to the Gentiles, and to highlight the part played by the Holy Spirit in that work. These writings are of enormous value to us as fellow-believers of those to whom it was written; but we, in our very different circumstances, cannot apply everything said as if it were written directly to us. The various books of the New Testament should always be read with the time and circumstances in which they were written in mind—that is, in the context of the New Testament as a whole.

Take an example of an apostle’s writing concerning the Holy Spirit, often taken to teach that Spirit influence received directly from God can bring strength to the inner man: "... that He [the Father] would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with might by His Spirit in the inner man; that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith..." (Eph. 3:16,17). This must be understood in the wider context of the giving of the Holy Spirit in the first century. The spirit was in the midst of the Ephesian disciples in the form of various gifts which they had received, with which they were to strengthen each other, and Paul’s words would surely be understood by them as referring to that experience.

This understanding of Ephesians 3:16 is confirmed by looking at its context, which concerns this Holy Spirit work in taking the gospel to the Gentiles and the bestowal of the gifts on them (3:1-10; 4:1-13). Note here that the work of the Holy Spirit was to lead to the formation of a "perfect man" (4:13), the Christ, the theme of all Scripture (see above).

More limited contexts

Having noted the importance both of the wide message of the whole of Scripture and the particular contexts relevant to Old and New Testaments, we can turn to narrower contexts to guide the understanding in more particular ways. 

Help in doctrinal exegesis

Still on the subject of the Holy Spirit, let us consider Peter’s words at Pentecost: "... and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off" (Acts 2:38,39).

These words are often taken as evidence that the Holy Spirit as dispensed in the first century is available for ‘Christians’ of all ages. If it is shown that miraculous gifts are manifestly lacking today, then some claim that other beneficent aspects of the Holy Spirit in bestowing wisdom, joy and comfort, fulfil that promise for believers today. But consider the context. The promise comes at the end of Peter’s speech, which commences in verse 14, and should not be taken in isolation.

The bestowal of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost had enabled the apostles to speak in the many different languages of the Jews and proselytes gathered in Jerusalem, to the amazement of those who heard. To them, Peter explained the implications of this phenomenon. It was the fulfilment of a prophecy through Joel: "this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel..." (v. 16).

There are two sections to his speech, the second beginning in verse 22, but the second section continues from the first, identifying Jesus of Nazareth as the Lord through whom the salvation spoken of in Joel 2:32 was now available for "whosoever" (Acts 2:21) would call on his name. And it was this Jesus who had "shed forth" the Holy Spirit which they saw and heard (v. 33). The conclusion is reached in verse 36: "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ".

Peter’s words in verse 38 obviously follow straight on from his speech. That speech began with the proof that what the apostles had received was the Spirit promised in Joel; it ended with the promised Holy Spirit being identified with "[what] ye now see and hear" (v. 33); context demands that the promise of verse 39 is the promise made by Joel of a shedding of the Holy Spirit on the people, in the way described.

Peter thus limits the giving of the Holy Spirit to the time defined as "the last days" (2:17). For first-century Jews and proselytes the last days would be the end of their own times—of the Jewish nation. Thus the outpouring of the Spirit had its context in the great apostolic preaching work before the destruction of Jerusalem. It was given, that is, for a relatively short time—to the Jews who heard and saw this outpouring, and their children, in line with Joel’s "old men" and "sons and... daughters" (Joel 2:28). It would also be given to Gentiles, "all that are afar off" (Acts 2:39), but still within the time limitation given of "the last days". 

Help in interpreting prophecy—Zechariah 3

Time and circumstance are all-important when interpreting the vision of Zechariah 3 concerning Joshua the high priest, the angel of the Lord and Satan. The time was the second year of Darius, King of Persia (1:1,7). The circumstance was the call to the returned exiles from Babylon to recommence building the temple (Ezra 4:24; 5:1). The effect of the giving by Zechariah and Haggai of their prophecies was an immediate return to work (5:2). Our understanding of this vision must take this into account.

The work of Satan at that time was the hindering of the building of the temple; he must represent the adversaries who had forced the Jews to stop. The Jews would be well represented by their high priest in the vision; in referring to this vision, Jude calls Joshua "the body of Moses" (Jude v. 9), again an apt symbol of Jewry.

Thus, context helps the understanding of the vision. Joshua being granted a change of clothing by the angel of the Lord would symbolise forgiveness for the unfaithfulness of Jewry in neglecting the temple (see Hag. 1:4-14; 2:14-18; Zech. 1:3). If we ignore the immediate context, and see in Joshua a type of Jesus, it cannot be understood why this vision had the effect it did on the Jews; and we are presented with a Jesus whose sins need forgiveness. 

Help in interpreting prophecy—the Olivet Prophecy

Both the time and the circumstances of the utterance of this prophecy must be taken into account. Jesus had just informed the Jews, "your house is left unto you desolate" (Mt. 23:38). His disciples were concerned; Jesus spoke directly to them to allay their worries. The ‘you’s and ‘ye’s of the chapter must have had direct reference to them. Suggestions that there may be further fulfilments of this prophecy, or parts of it, do not sit easily against this context.

It is quite unreasonable to lift single statements out of this speech, such as "ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars" (24:6), or "this gospel... shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come" (v. 14), and apply them directly to the present, while ignoring other less easily applied verses. However, notice that verses 29-31 of the prophecy are not related to the immediate experience of the disciples, and refer to "they"; but verses 32-34 are again spoken directly to the disciples: "So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things...".

Help in behaving properly

James’s epistle presents another case where an appreciation of context must be helpful. James was writing to believers in a very different situation from our own. His readers lived in times which were perilous, resulting in many widows and fatherless children, and the killing of the "just" (1:27; 5:6); there was trouble between rich and poor, the rich oppressing the poor and the poor envying the rich (2:6; 3:14); and even the availability of Spirit-gifts posed problems, when possessed by some who would use them on their own "lusts" (4:3).

Although space forbids a thorough analysis of the epistle, it should be clear that James was offering specific advice for those in particular circumstances, and not just general practical exhortation. For example, chapter 3 cannot be just a general warning on the use and influence of the tongue; it is inconceivable that James, writing in a crisis situation, would consider so general an approach. The advice, "be not many masters" (v. 1), suggests there were those among his readers who wished to be teachers, but were peddling the "wisdom" that "descendeth not from above" (v. 15), and were "blind leaders of the blind", as Jesus described some (Mt. 15:14). This would bring a much more specific bearing to the chapter; if God’s Word is to have its full effect in us, its context must be taken into account and its original intention understood. Then the proper lesson may be learnt.

Immediate contexts

The immediate context of a passage quoted can be most helpful in determining its true meaning. The Trinitarian may use "I and my Father are one" (Jno. 10:30) to prove that God and Jesus are one person (whatever that sentence may mean to them). But the preceding verses in John 10 reveal that Jesus was declaring to the Jews that both he and his Father were shepherds, and that there was such unity of purpose between them that sheep safe in his Father’s hands (v. 29) were safe in his hands also. The idea that the Father and Son were one person does not appear in the context at any point.

Ephesians 2:18 is often used as though it refers to the efficacy of individual prayers if made through Jesus, saying that approach to the Father is only possible when made in this form. However, the context shows that this is not what the verse is saying. The previous verse is about the preaching of Jesus to both Gentiles and Jews. This preaching was accomplished by the apostles in Jesus’s name: "Through him we both [Jew and Gentile] have access by one Spirit unto the Father". It was this Spirit-inspired preaching of the apostles by which Jew and Gentile were brought close to the Father as sons in one family, as succeeding verses show.