Author: Mark G. Knox

Mark Knox is an effective communicator and natural teacher who instructs with the purpose of lasting life-change. Teaching content that "takes root downward, bears fruit upward" has become his mission as he seeks for deep, clear understanding of concepts and practical application of principles. Mark has served in churches in various capacities...pastor, elder, teacher, youth pastor, worship leader. He is an educator with over 15 years of experience in middle schools in Florida and North Carolina. He has worked as a leader for companies such as Chick-fil-A, Wendy's, Ashland University, and Grandy's.

Bowing at the idol of free will

Posted on by Mark G. Knox in Christian Thought

Most Christians recoil in horror at any teaching about the sovereignty of God. Without any attempt to explain the Scriptures that are explicit in their teaching (Romans 8:29-30; 9:11, 16, 19-20; Ephesians 1:4-5, 11; etc.), they know that sovereign grace can’t be true because, you know, “free will.” This one-word retort (yes, I know that that’s technically two words, but it’s spoken as one term) is all the evidence they need.

In the mystery that encompases God’s sovereign choice of his elect on the one hand and the agency and responsibility of humanity on the other, it is always God’s dominion that is softened and mitigated, and it is always free will that is held as absolute.

This is the objection that is voiced in Romans 9:19 – “You will say to me then, ‘Why does he still find fault? [human responsibility] For who can resist his will? [human free will]'” We must protect our ultimate, autonomous, unadulterated, precious free will. And to this protectionist complaint, Paul doesn’t answer the question, because he knows the wicked heart from which it proceeds. This is not an honest question of a mysterious truth; it is a rebellious heart cry of substituting God’s reign for our own. And Paul responds appropriately in verse 20 – “But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, ‘Why have you made me like this?’ Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?”

When we “answer back to God,” we are following in the footsteps of our First Adam, who followed the lie of “Has God said…?” We are bowing at the golden calf of our autonomous free will as we reject the tablets of God’s revealed truth.

Oh may God rid us of this heinous rejection of his Word!

Article: Vote as though you are not voting

Posted on by Mark G. Knox in Christian Thought

Christians of late have too easily put their hope and trust in politics and politicians. This is true on both ends of the spectrum. Conservatives cast their whole lot with whoever promises to protect their property and guns, and liberals embrace the politics of the social gospel and trust the state to accomplish it. It’s as if we sing,

“My hope is built on nothing less
than who’s in the White House or runs Congress.”

Our identity has become much too entangled with earthly power. Do we not remember that “The king’s heart is a stream of water in the hand of the Lord; he turns it wherever he will” (Proverbs 21:1)? Have we forgotten that “our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Phil. 3:20)? Ought we not seek the true Power to direct our paths and provide our needs?

One of the best essays I’ve read on this matter is by John Piper, entitled “Let Christians Vote as Though They Were Not Voting, written in 2008, just before the election that put Barack Obama in the White House. For some much-needed perspective, click the link below –

Let Christians Vote as Though They Were Not Voting

Is it true that we learn better together?

Posted on by Mark G. Knox in Leadership

As a promoter of life-long learning, I am always interested in what others are saying about personal growth and development. I recently came across an artistic infographic on the subject of LLL. One of the concepts in this diagram was the oft-stated truism that “we learn better in groups.”

Not necessarily so. Like any truism, it’s only true to a point.

We learn large blocks of content better by ourselves

If you have to acquire a mass of information, this is best done by oneself. Even in a class lecture setting, it is up to the individual to listen, to take notes, to intake the content. You can’t listen as a group. If you are reading a text, you have to do so as an individual. Any time the acquisition of content is the goal, direct instruction or direct intake through reading by the individual is necessary.

Billy Joel once sang, “sooner or later you wind up asleep in your own space.” Likewise, in the intake of information, you wind up in your own mental space.

Now, you can process this information in a group, which further cements the content in the mind. Questioning and examining other viewpoints can be quite invaluable at this stage. But in the initial intake of information (or in learning skills), one has to be able to do it on her own.

Some people simply learn better solo

You can’t make the blanket statement that “we learn better in groups” and also maintain the concept that individuals have different learning styles.

Some people, through personality, mental wiring, and prior experience, are better learning by themselves. The dynamic of the group may not be conducive for such learners to learn at their peak.

Transparently, I am one of those learners. If I’m in a group setting where the leader instructs us to complete a group learning activity, I inwardly groan. “Just give me the information, and I’ll internalize it the best way for me.” It’s important to have the meta-cognition to know how you learn best. For some, that’s not in a group.

Again, I do like to process what I’ve learned in a group. Discussing concepts with others may reveal aspects that I haven’t considered. But for me, it’s not a necessity.

The problem with truisms

The problem with truisms is that when you attempt to apply them to every situation, they don’t always work. Developing an educational philosophy around the maxim, “We learn better in groups,” can seriously short-change the educational process.

I’ve been around enough middle school students to understand that, of course, they love to work in groups. But it’s not because the learning is better; it’s because they’re social creatures. As an educator, I made sure to balance group work with a good amount of individual work and direct instruction.

If we take this idea uncritically, we run the risk of creating an entire educational methodology around a platitude. The best education utilizes multiple techniques, including the old ways of direct instruction and individual study, to achieve learning.

Will the moral line hold?

Posted on by Mark G. Knox in Christian Thought

If secular, humanistic, materialistic philosophies have failed to prevent moral decay, on what basis do we think that other examples of immorality can be halted?

If the post-christian worldview that has gained ascendency since the middle of the 20th century wasn’t able to provide a hedge against such self-serving sins as sex before and outside of marriage, cohabitation without marriage, homosexuality and gay marriage, it will also be unable to keep further pleasure-seeking dominoes from falling. Whether we’re talking about polyamory, polygamy, or, heaven forbid, pedophilia as an “orientation” similar to homosexuality, there’s really no objective moral basis on which to deny such pleasures or declare them wrong.

10 years ago, the Harvard Medical Health Letter published an online article entitled, Pessimism about Pedophilia. In it, one of the summary points was, “Pedophilia is a sexual orientation and unlikely to change. Treatment aims to enable someone to resist acting on his sexual urges.”

The larger question that we will begin to see raised is this: if this is truly an orientation like other sexual orientations, why should we even talk about “treatment?” It’s only a matter of time before the humanistic implications will come home to roost, and these other things will vie for acceptance and normalcy.

There is literally no objective basis outside of God and the Bible to condemn anything.

Paul warned us of such times. “But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying it’s power. Avoid such people” (2 Timothy 3:1-5).

Will the moral line hold? Not on the basis of any thought that denies the existence of God and the truth and sufficiency of the Bible, any thought that loves pleasure rather than God.

Paul goes on in this passage to instruct young Timothy to “continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed,” reminding him of the God-given origin of the “sacred writings” (3:14-17). So, our first response to this inexorable march is to firmly align ourselves with the teaching of Scripture. All the evil in the world cannot prevent believers from following Paul’s example in his “teaching…conduct…aim in life…faith…patience…love…steadfastness…persecutions and sufferings” (3:10-11).

Paul’s further instruction is for us to “preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching….always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry” (4:2, 5). Our second response is bound up in preaching the gospel to a world that desperately needs it.

The moral lines may continue to fall. In the face of this, we must remain steadfast and preach the word.

God is sovereign, and we are not machines

Posted on by Mark G. Knox in Christian Thought

In the years that I have believed in the Reformed doctrines of grace, I have come to believe that what sets “Calvinistic” thinkers apart from others is the ability to embrace mystery. (A short video with John Piper helped start me on that understanding.) It is the Calvinist’s ability to exegete Scripture to say what it says without necessarily explaining the tensions contained therein.

So, for example, when we read in Acts 2:23, “this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men,” we have no problem holding in tandem the idea that an event occurred that the Sovereign God ordained for which wicked men are held accountable. It’s a mystery (not a contradiction) that we can’t reconcile; yet we affirm both truths because the Bible affirms both truths. And we let the mystery stand.

It’s only when we start to philosophically explain these truths-in-tension that we fall short. “God can’t control everything,” we say, “because that would go against free will and human responsibility.” I always find it amazing (maybe I don’t, really) that when we attempt to reconcile these truths, it’s always the greatness and glory of God that gets mitigated and softened, while we make human free will absolute.

Yet, even sometimes, Calvinists make the mistake of absolutizing sovereign grace truths to the point of becoming unbiblical in our expressions and emphases. We say things like, “I did thus and so because it was predestined,” as if we are afraid to speak naturally and just say, “I did it because I wanted to.” The Bible speaks naturally. It affirms that God “works all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph. 1:11), yet never speaks as if we are puppets or, in the words of Francis Schaeffer, “machines.”

Let’s look at a couple of Calvinistic truisms and how they can become distortions of biblical thought.

“Faith is a gift of God”

That the faith itself that we exercise in Christ unto salvation is a gift of God is a cherished truth of sovereign grace doctrine. “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Eph. 2:8-9). And while I cannot say that “this” and “it” grammatically point back to the word “faith” as their antecedent, I do believe that this verse clearly teaches that the whole of salvation (including our faith) is the gift of God.

Paul says in 2 Timothy 2:25, “God may grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth.” So it’s true that God completely eliminates any basis for self-determined boasting in our repentance and faith.

But sometimes, Calvinists have a hard time saying something as simple as “I believed.” We want to give God the glory for his work in salvation and to take no credit for ourselves. We forget that in giving faith as a gift, God doesn’t believe for us; we are not machines. We believe.

And sometimes we have a difficult time calling men to faith and repentance. What do we ask them to do if our emphasis is on God’s doing? The apostles’ call to sinners was clear: Believe! Repent! (as if it were their doing). There is no tension here. Paul has no problem telling us that “God was reconciling the world to himself” (2 Cor. 5:19), and imploring men to “be reconciled to God” (2 Cor. 5:20). Acts 13:48 holds these in tandem: “as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.” God appointed; they believed! Even as ultimately a gift of God, we exercise faith in Christ. We are not machines.

“No one seeks for God”

It’s hard to call this a truism, because it’s directly in the Bible (Psalms, Romans). Coming out of our understanding of the fallen and depraved state of mankind, we affirm that no one seeks God on his own. Indeed, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44).

But sometimes in our zeal for doctrinal purity, we again make ourselves to be machines. A new, young Christian giving her testimony shares how she was “seeking the truth,” and we pounce on her theological imprecision – “NO! You weren’t seeking truth!” Poor girl.

While affirming that no one seeks for God who has not been first sought by God, it’s OK to recognize that there’s a kind of seeking that men do that may eventually lead them to God. After all, we don’t know how long the Father sovereignly draws an individual to himself, and that too is not in a machine-like way. It can be a seeking for God. Paul himself used those words in Acts 17, when he told of God determining times and places for mankind “that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him” (17:27).

So then, let us hold fast to the great doctinal truths that affirm both God’s sovereignty and man’s humanity in a biblical way.

Why my questions didn’t cause me to deconvert, part 1

Posted on by Mark G. Knox in Christian Thought

I had the strange occurrance of listening to messages this week that were recorded in 2004, and several speakers quoted, cited, or applauded the teaching of Joshua Harris (I Kissed Dating Goodbye, Boy Meets Girl). It was somewhat surreal, knowing now that not only has Harris disavowed the marital/dating advise of those works, pulling them from being republished, he also divorced his wife and eventually left the faith.

Other well-known professors of Christianity have done the same and have been quite vocal in blog and social media platforms in explaining their now unbelief. Are they looking for validation? Acceptance from a new audience? Is it simply an explanation to those who were their fans?

Deconversion – biblically known as apostacy – is a complex situation, and each occasion has its own nuance. But there are common threads. Sometimes its intellectual or theological questions that overcome faith. Other times it’s the hypocrisy and lifestyle of other professing believers that cause someone to doubt the veracity of Christianity. Still others express a kind of lingering unbelief that overthrows faith, as if a Christian is only to experience unadulterated certainty at all times.

I’ve been a Christian for over 50 years, and I can confidently say that I’ve faced all these types of questions personally from time to time. So, why didn’t I deconstruct my faith? Why have I continued to “hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering” (Heb. 10:23)?

Intellectual questions

As a thinker, both theological and philosophical, I’d be naive to assume that there aren’t difficult concepts and Scriptures in the Christian faith. There’s scarcely a day that I don’t read some writer offering up objections to the truth claims of the Bible. And I always wonder, “What if he’s right?” But many of those who deconstruct their confession allow their questions to derail faith.

I understand this. There was a time during my college years, after 3 years of Bible college, that I began to feel that I’d been caught for too long in what I now understand was an echo chamber – people and books who simply reinforced what I already believed. And though I never came to a point of deconstructing my faith, I did want to put my faith to the test. So I enrolled in a school where there were more opportunities to “bump heads” with non-Christian thinking. I didn’t so much want to drift in my own thinking as certify that my worldview would hold up when challenged by secular and neo-orthodox thought.

And I was provided with plenty of opportunity to dialog with atheistic hedonists and religious deniers of Scripture. None of that was able to rattle my trust in the truth claims of historic, orthodox Christianity; in fact, my hold on the propositions of the faith was thereby strengthened. Iron sharpens iron.

There will always be intellectual, experiential, and relational questions with Christianity. But instead of pointing us toward deconversion, the questions ought to drive us deeper into the Word, deeper into the writings of those who have gone before. The idea that “no one is asking these questions” is patently ridiculous. The very act of questioning should be encouraged, and honest answers should be given to honest questions.

Francis Schaeffer, the leading intellectual Christian light of the late 20th Century, describes in his writings a personal “spiritual crisis” in his own life. After becoming a Christian from agnosticism, serving for many years as a church pastor, and teaching in Europe, he tells us, “I had to go all the way back to my agnosticism and think through the whole matter….I walked, prayed, and thought through what the Scriptures taught, reviewing my own reasons for being a Christian. As I rethought my reasons…, I saw again that there were totally sufficient reasons to know that infinite-personal God does exist and that Christianity is true” (True Spirituality, xxix).

Bottom line, if you have questions, and truly want to resolve them biblically, there are sufficient answers to be found. There is no necessity to deconvert. Ask your questions, read the thinkers who, like you, had questions. Reconfirm in your heart and mind that Christianity is true.

I will write about questions related to the hypocrisy/behavior of Christians and that lingering sense of doubt in future posts.

J.I. Packer, 1926-2020

Posted on by Mark G. Knox in Christian Thought

J.I. Packer, an English-Canadian evangelical theologian, died today. His clarity of writing was unsurpassed. Knowing God is perhaps his best-known work and was required reading for one of my theology classes. My copy, now over 40 years old is pictured here.

As I said, it was required reading for a class, but because there weren’t any specified reading assignments, many of us blew it off during the spring semester, hoping that the prof wouldn’t remember it. Alas, at the end of the term, he reminded us of the requirement, and many of us (including me) had to sign pledge cards that we would complete the reading over the summer. This I did, and it became one of the enduring titles I’ve read in my lifetime. It’s a Top 5 book of all time for me.

Two chapters in particular left a lasting impression on me. “The Heart of the Gospel” crystalized my understanding of the biblical concept of propitiation and its necessity to having a correct understanding of the atoning work of Christ.

“God’s Wisdom and Ours” highlighted for me the role of suffering in the life of a believer and how the wisdom of God is not necessarily understanding the why of a given trial, but trusting in God’s sovereign plan for our lives.

And speaking of the sovereignty of God, his Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God is indispensible for answering objections to the doctrines of sovereign grace.

His voice will be missed, but hopefully never silenced in the Church.

What is biblical literacy?

Posted on by Mark G. Knox in Christian Thought

“Apollos…was mighty in the Scriptures.”

Acts 18:24 (NASB)

“Wow, she sure knows her Bible.”

Perhaps you’ve said that about someone, or heard it said. What was it that triggered that response? Was it the command of details about the Bible? Was it a demonstration of extended memorization? Was it the ability to bring additional passages to bear on the discussion? It could have been any, or all, of these.

The fact is, Christians tend to admire someone who can prove themselves knowledgeable in the Bible. Furthermore, many wish that they themselves were more so. If biblical literacy is to be valued and pursued, it would be helpful to determine what it means to be literate in the Scripture.

Far too many Christians are happy with just a cursory knowledge of the Bible. This is more than sad; it can be dangerous. Since there are so many worldviews and doctrines vying for our attention, it would be easy to fall into error without a working knowledge of Scripture.

Often, we are satisfied to find a verse-of-the-day and pop it like a vitamin pill and then spend the rest of the day thinking worldly thoughts. And we wonder why we are weak and ineffective.

On the other hand, our goal for biblical literacy is to go deeper. Whether you go to a Bible college or seminary, attend instructional workshops and classes at your church, or engage in personal study on your own, you should be seeking to dive into the text of Scripture with a mind to understanding the deep truths found therein. This may not be easy, but it’s easily the most rewarding. As John Piper has said in reference to reading, “Raking is easy, but all you get is leaves; digging is hard, but you might find diamonds.”

Apollos, a man of the Word

In Acts 18:24, we are introduced to a Jewish believer named Apollos. He is described as “eloquent” and “competent” in the Scriptures (ESV). The word for “competent” in the ESV is perhaps better rendered “mighty,” as in the NASB, or powerful in handling the Word. In other words, he knew his stuff, and furthermore, he was effective in communicating to both believers and scoffers alike.

I believe he is a model of a biblically literate man. We can glean several characteristics about what it means to “know” the Bible through the text that follows.

Skill

In verse 25, we read that Apollos had been instructed in the way of the Lord. This shows us the value of training and both formal and informal education. A student of the Bible must be willing to submit to this training.

Sometimes this means that you must learn new skills in order to dig deep. First, a student of the Bible must be well-versed in language and grammar. As a written document, the Bible opens its truths to those willing to examine the meanings of words and the relationships between phrases and clauses. Linking words such as “for” and “therefore” are the unsung heroes of biblical literacy. Grammar is important.

Secondly, learning to understand literary forms such as poetry and extended metaphor will also enrich your study. You can hardly read the Psalms or Revelation without an appreciation of figurative language. You read and study an epistle differently than you do an historical book.

Finally, having an understanding of the basic tenets of logic and argument will help you draw sound conclusions and avoid errors in reasoning in your study. One unfortunate unintended consequence of dividing the Bible into chapters and verses (verses have only been commonly used for about 500 years) is that we often think of the verses in a vacuum outside of their context, and we lose sight of the overall argument being made. Worse, we may misuse a verse to make it say what it doesn’t. Dan Brendsei wrote, “Scripture is not just a collection of energy packets; it’s a five-course meal. It’s not just a bunch of pearls on a string; it’s a chain strong enough to pull you out of any trial.” In order to obtain a full grasp of a passage of Scripture, you must be able to follow the argument in the “chain” of verses and derive sound logical conclusions.

Accuracy

We also read in verse 25 about Apollos, “being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus (emphasis added).” Perhaps nothing is more basic to biblical literacy than the ability to understand the Bible correctly. Paul instructed his young disciple Timothy, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15). He contrasts this accurate handling of the Word with the warning to “avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness” (v.16).

Interestingly enough, we are told in subsequent verses in Acts 18, that Apollos himself was limited in his knowledge – he only knew the baptism of John – and needed further instruction from Priscilla and Aquilla in order to fill out his understanding. But even before that correction, he was described as an accurate teacher. Further truth, or in our case, learning more and more of the Bible and comparing Scripture with Scripture, will make our knowledge correct.

Reason and Synthesis

Apollos, after correction from Priscilla and Aquila, was of great help to the believers. In verse 28 we read that he “powerfully refuted the Jews in public, showing by the Scriptures that the Christ was Jesus.” This follows one of the recurring themes in the book of Acts, namely the need to prove to the Jews first that Jesus of Nazareth, whom everyone then knew about, was in fact the promised Messiah (Greek word, Christ), something the Jewish leadership opposed. Apollos was able to do this by “showing by the Scriptures.” Now, there’s not one solitary, handy verse in the Old Testament that could do this. Apollos would have to show, passage by passage, line by line, what the prophecies concerning the Messiah were, what he would be do, how he would have to suffer, and then he would have to demonstrate how Jesus of Nazareth was the fulfillment of those prophecies. This would be extremely encouraging and helpful to young believers who were in danger of skepticism.

This is what is known in education circles as synthesis, the act of putting parts together to form a whole. Just as in Bloom’s Taxonomy, this is one of the higher order thinking skills. Comparing Scripture with Scripture is not only helpful in our accurate understanding of the passages, it also enables us to formulate a theology and a creed according to that understanding.

Boiling it down to a statement

So, what can we say about this question, what does it mean to know the Bible? If we take these entities of skill, accuracy, and synthesis, let’s say this –

A biblically literate person is able to apply the skills of language, literature, and logic to passages of the Bible, comparing one with another, so that the reader is able to accurately determine the meaning of a passage and to grasp its place in the greater story that God is telling.

Biblical literacy is not becoming a “Bible nerd,” but it is a means by which you may grow in godliness as you grow in the knowledge of our Lord.

The set heart of Ezra

Posted on by Mark G. Knox in Christian Thought

The return of the Jews from captivity

“For Ezra had set his heart to study the law of the LORD and to practice it, and to teach His statutes and ordinances in Israel.”

Ezra 7:10

The Old Testament book of Ezra chronicles the return of Jews to their homeland in Canaan from Babylonian captivity, the first group under the leadership of Zerubbabel in 538 BC, and then later a second group under Ezra the scribe. Ezra in particular called the people, who had lived under secular Babylonian culture for over 70 years, to a renewal of holiness and submission to God’s law.

Ezra was described as “skilled in the Law of Moses” (7:6). And his heart for the people is told to us in 7:10 – “For Ezra had set his heart to study the law of the LORD and to practice it, and to teach His statutes and ordinances in Israel.” What Ezra was returning to accomplish for the Lord and his people consumed him. He set his heart on this. There are three infinitives here to tell us what captured his soul, and what ought to capture ours.

1 To study

It was Ezra’s devotion, first of all, to study the law of the Lord. As a scribe, this was to be expected, to not only reverently copy the manuscripts by hand but to become utterly versed in their content. By the time of Jesus, the scribes (along with the Pharisees and Sadducees) were highly thought of in Israel. And though our Lord regularly railed against the hypocrisy of these groups, Ezra rather supplies us with a noble example.

We live in a time that needs more Ezras, men and women who are not afraid to do the hard work of studying the Bible, who are willing to go deep and tackle theological issues. Unfortunately, our time is more characterized Amos’ prophecy – “’Behold, the days are coming,’ declares the Lord GOD, ‘when I will send a famine on the land— not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD'” (Amos 8:11). Has there ever been a time of more opportunity to study God’s Word and less actual biblical understanding?

2 To practice

Ezra’s second passion was to put the truth of God into practice. Indeed, to know God’s word and not obey it was the hypocrisy of the Scribes and Pharisees of Jesus’ day. But Ezra, as an early example, was of more noble character.

All too often, we are content to have an interest in the things of God, but it is superficial. When the commands of Scripture come to us, we choose to obey the ones that don’t shatter our comfort levels; others we ignore or explain away. Study after study shows that professing Christians have no discernable difference with non-believers in areas like divorce, attitudes toward honesty, and sexual behavior. Shouldn’t we be noticably different than the world?

3 To teach

Finally, Ezra had a fervor to teach the Word in Israel. This was a great need as the Jews had been in captivity in a secular society for over 70 years. They would have forgotten much of the statutes and commands of the Law. And just as during the time of the end of the Exodus (Deuteronomy, the “second reading of the Law”), the people needed to hear again from the Lord.

This happened as recorded in Nehemiah 8, where we find that Ezra read from the Law from “monring until midday” (Neh. 8:3), and the people were attentive. Then Ezra and a numbger of the Levites “helped the people to understand the Law, while the people remained in their places. They read from the book, from the Law of God, clearly, and they gave the sense, so that the people understood the reading” (8:7-8). In other words, they held Sunday School!

Many believers don’t think of themselves as teachers. But we are all enjoined to teaching, whether it’s our children, younger believers, or even the church at large. The readers of Hebrews were chastised – “though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the basic principles” (Heb. 5:12). How many of us feel inadequate to teach because we haven’t done our own study?

Where is your heart set regarding the Bible? I pray that we will be people who are known…for our studying, for our practice, for our teaching.

Why I don’t often ask myself, how do I apply this?

Posted on by Mark G. Knox in Christian Thought

Read any Bible study guide, or any book on how to study the Bible, and you’ll invariably see a directive to ask, how do I apply this passage to my life?

I’m going to go a little counter-cultural here and admit that when I study the Bible, I rarely ask that question of myself.

It’s not that I don’t think the Bible has a practical application; it’s not that I don’t try to apply the truths to my life. I just don’t rush to answer that question. Here’s why –

1 I want to grasp the meaning of the text.

If we rush to the practical application, we can short-change the interpretation stage. This is perhaps the most important step in your Bible study. If you don’t determine what the text says and what it means, then any application you may come up with could be misguided at best, or just plain wrong at worst.

Understanding the text takes work and it takes time. There’s the observation of the text – making note of which words and phrases are repeated or emphasized, seeing the flow of thought in the text, determining word meanings, comparing the passage to others in the Bible. All of this is a concentrated endeavor and is not to be rushed. It can take multiple sessions with a text.

2 I want to savor the richness of the text.

Sometimes, it is in the repeated mulling over of the text that a deeper understanding comes. This is called meditation, and it is commended to us throughout Scripture, most notably in Psalm 1:2 – “his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night.” Meditating on the Word, the over-and-over rehearsing of the text in your mind, can open up connections and implications that a quick once-over just cannot do.

A number of years ago, I was memorizing long passages in Ephesians. As I would repeat the text, each day adding a new verse, connections from one part of the epistle to another became clear. For example, in chapter 1 we read that God was “making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ, as a plan for the fulness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth” (1:9-10).

Later in chapter 3, Paul speaks of the “mystery [that] was made known to me by revelation” (3:3). He continues, “This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (3:6). As I contemplated this later passage, I was able to make the connection to chapter 1 and have a greater understanding of what it means for all things to be united in Christ. This only came after extended meditation on the text.

3 The Bible is a much better applier of truth than I am.

For me to assume that I am the determining factor of whether or not my study and meditation of the Bible will affect my life is seriously short-changing the power of the Word of God. “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12). The Bible is not passive as I read; it is “living and active.” Reading and studying the Bible can cause me to say, “Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the Scriptures?” (Luke 24:32) To feed on the Word and then to ask how I might apply it is like eating a 4-course meal and then asking how I might get the proteins and nutrients into my system.

It is the Scripture (coupled with the ministry of the indwelling Holy Spirit) that will convict me of my sin and instruct me in the way I should go. This happens as I store up the Word in my mind and heart. It may be that in that moment, the weight and import of that passage may not resonate. I don’t sweat that. In time, the Spirit will bring it to remembrance and bring it to bear on my situation. I know this is so because the Bible teaches that this is the ministry of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:11b-12), and I know this to be so because I’ve seen it happen time and again in my life.

I fully understand that it is possible that I might become a student of the Bible and miss seeing Christ. But as I pray, “Open my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of your law” (Psalm 119:18), the Bible itself is its own best instructor in how to apply its truths to my life.