How to Read the Bible in English

Trevor Peterson 2003

1 Basic Tools
The first and most basic tool of Bible study is, of course, the Bible itself. Since this is a course in English Bible, we will not discuss Hebrew or Greek editions, or those abominations called interlinears. Suffice it to say that these tools are useless without adequate linguistic training. Fortunately for English readers, there is a next best alternativean overwhelming array of English translations, versions, paraphrases, and retellings, most of which are based in some way on the original language texts. Careful comparison of different versions will usually reveal most of the problem areas (and most of the reasonable solutions). Your comparisons will be more useful, however, if you have a general idea of what kind of Bibles youre using. Some of the relevant issues are: underlying original language texts, traditional background, translation strategy, and date. Well tackle them in reverse order. Date here refers to when the translation was written. Check the preface and the copyright date(s) for information on both when the translation was first written and when it was last revised. The kjv, for instance, was written in 1611 but has been updated many times since, mainly for changes in spelling. The English language has changed significantly since 1611, as can be seen even in the latest editions. If you decide to use the kjv, youll probably want to have access to the Oxford English Dictionary, so you can check older meanings of words. Translation strategy refers to the approach used by the translator(s). The Living Bible (as opposed to the nlt), for instance, is a paraphrase. It was written primarily by clarifying the asv in more modern English. The Book was a later paraphrase, and The Story was a retelling that didnt even use verse numbers, because the material was so heavily re-worked. These types of resources may be more enjoyable for casual reading, but they are not 1

normally all that helpful for study. Most actual translations are produced from Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic documents. Even the nkjv, which is a revision of the kjv, was produced through direct reference to the original language texts. Some translations are described as formal equivalence versions like the nasb, kjv, nkjv, nwt try to translate word-for-word wherever possible. Where the word order makes no sense in English, it is adjusted as minimally as possible. Where an idiom is unintelligible, a looser equivalent is chosen. But generally, they hold strictly to the configuration of the originals and strive for a consistent correspondence between words. Others, such as the niv, nrsv, cev, strive for what is called dynamic or meaning-based equivalence. This is sometimes described as meaning-for-meaning translation. Instead of trying to translate individual words as consistently as possible, they try to say what the original says in a way that would be normal for modern English-speakers to say the same thing. Traditional background refers to the goals of the translators with regard to already existing versions. The nkjv was intended to be a revision of the kjv. The niv was intended to be altogether independent. The nrsv is a revision of the rsv, which is a revision of the asv, which is adapted from a British counterpart, which was a revision of the kjv. The nasb is also a revision of the asv, but with different translation strategy. The underlying original language texts are the hardest factor for the English reader to deal with. The earliest English versions were based on the standard Latin text of the Western Church. Shortly before the Protestant Reformation, the fall of Constantinople sent Eastern, Greek-speaking Christians into exile. They brought with them Greek texts of all sorts, but particularly for our interests, the Greek Bible that they used in their churches. This development sparked an interest among Western scholars in philology (the study of languages and texts). Greek became standard fare in Western education, and Hebrew increased in popularity among biblical scholars. Early Reformers like Martin Luther in Germany and William Tyndale in England wrote translations of the Bible in their vernacular languages. They used contemporary copies of the Greek New Testament (GNT) of the Eastern Churches and the Hebrew Bible of the Jewish Synagoguesa version called the Masoretic Text (MT). Over the following centuries, more and earlier manuscripts were discovered, especially of the GNT. Most of these manuscripts were very close to one another and are collectively called the Majority Text (MajT). A few manuscripts were very early and showed some significant differences from the MajT. In later Bible versions these earlier manuscripts have taken a more prominent role, while the KJV and NKJV 2

are still based on the Greek manuscripts that were available in the 16th c. Most versions have continued to use the MT tradition for most of the OT, but many have adopted other readings where the MT seems incomprehensible or unlikely. In such cases, they have used other, earlier Hebrew manuscripts (mostly from the discoveries at Qumran) or ancient versions Greek, Latin, and Aramaic renditions of the OT. One of the most useful tools after the Bible itself is a concordance. Many Bibles come with a small concordance in the back, but an exhaustive concordance is worth the extra investment. An exhaustive concordance allows you to look up all the places where a word appears in the Bible. This is a useful thing to have if you want to do a topical study or if you want to get a sense of how a word is used in biblical passages other than the one you are studying. There are, however, a few limitations to a concordance. It can only look up individual words, so if you want to find love of God, youll need to look up every occurrence of love or God. It also looks up only by specific words. If you want the general concept love of God, perhaps a useful passage speaks of Gods compassion, but because it doesnt use the word love, you wont find it. Finally, every concordance is specific to the version for which it is written. Many versions do not have a concordance written for them, and it can get expensive to accumulate all that do exist. At some point, you will probably want to get some Bible software. Most packages come with multiple Bible versions, which saves you the trouble of having to buy all of them for comparison. More importantly, most software packages allow you to perform concordance searches for any version included, and on multiple words at a time. They also allow you to search the concordance for an underlying Greek or Hebrew wordprobably the one area where I would recommend using original language tools without specialized training. If, for instance, you are studying love of God in a particular NT passage, and you want to make sure that all of the other passages you look at use the same Greek word for love, you could search on the underlying term, and although some of the verses that come up may have words like compassion or mercy, they all use that same Greek word. By looking at the passages in English, you can begin to get a sense of how the Greek word can be used and what the range of possibility is in the passage youre studying. Many software packages also come with a topical index that will allow you to search for related terms. http://www.biblestudytools.com/ and http: //olivetree.com/bible/ have handy Bible search engines with different versions. http://onlinebible.net/ is a shareware program that usually only costs whatever it takes to distribute it. PC Study Bible is a good, bal3

anced tool for anyone who is not an expert in languages. Logos produces not only Bible software but one of the most extensive collections of digital books in theology and biblical studies. I use BibleWorks, and many of my colleagues like Gramcord. In addition to the Bible itself and a concordance, you will probably want a good Bible dictionary. This involves some technical terminology. A theological dictionary generally contains word studies of different Greek or Hebrew words. A Bible dictionary is arranged by English terms and covers a wide range of topics associated with biblical studies, including introductory matters, biblical characters, history, geography, culture, and theological terms. A Bible dictionary can be as small as one handy volume or as large as several volumes. Some are more conservative in their approach, some more liberal. But most of the material that you find in a Bible dictionary will not tend to differ significantly. The most important thing to look for is that the entries include bibliographic data (lists of other sources to consult). Like any dictionary or encyclopedia, this is a good starting point, but you should be able to keep goingto look more closely at some resources that deal with your topic more fully. A good bibliography will help you do this. Finally, it is good to have access to some useful commentaries. Understand that there are different types of commentaries, written for different purposes. Some are more devotional. They may include interesting illustrations or thought-provoking questions; but they will probably be light on background information to help you better understand what youre reading. Some are nothing more than published sermons. They often contain more detailed information than devotional commentaries (depending on the style of the preacher), but they rarely have much in the way of technical or bibliographic notes. When I speak of a useful commentary, I have in mind the type that includes such notes. If you are studying a specific passage, a commentary is a handy place to startjust look up the passage in question, and see what it says. But because the commentators scope is broader (the whole book or more), it may not address your question as fully as you might like or need. Good notes can point you to other resources that will be more helpful. The difficulty with commentaries is that buying such detailed works (usually published with a separate volume or more for each book of the Bible) can get expensive. I would recommend buying a good, intermediate commentary set on the whole Bible (like the Expositors Bible Commentary), then adding at least one in-depth commentary for any book you choose to study at a given time (like NICOT/NICNT). If you have access to a good library, you might not need to do this, so check around first. In any 4

event, you will probably need to use a library to follow up with sources you find in the footnotes to your commentary or Bible dictionary. In this area, you can use the limited library here at Bethany, the Oyer Memorial Library, which services Washington Bible College and Capital Bible Seminary, or the major university libraries and Library of Congress.

2 Interpretation
There is a plethora of words that have found their way into the vocabulary of biblical studies, all quite close to one another, all dealing in some way or another with interpretation. One such term is exegesis, which is generally applied to the study of an original language text (as opposed to translations) and normally understood to extend no further than strict application of linguistic (grammatical and lexical) analysis. This line is becoming harder and harder to hold, as the field of linguistics itself develops and encroaches on other areas of study. Hermeneutics generally refers to the study of interpretive method, including but not limited to exegesis. The term can apply to any literature, but in later usage it is generally isolated to religious material. Even what we mean by interpretation is not always clear. Some use it to refer to the pursuit of the authors intended meaning, others to an exploration of the readers own reflection on literature. The field of semiotics (study of signs) and associated postmodern literary theories have called into question almost every traditional model of interpretation. A popular term to use these days is simply reading, since that is undeniably what we are doing when we try to engage in interpretation or exegesis or hermeneutics, and all of these other things, whether we realize it or not, are implicit in the act of reading. At a very basic level, reading is the simple task of looking at printed signs on a page and converting them to audible signs that in turn trigger meaning in the mind of the reader. This process is not intuitive but must be learned through rules and experience. The elements involved are not easy to pinpoint, as their interplay generally happens without critical thought. Better reading comes through further rules, models, and experience. Social setting, family background, personal traits, and peer influence can all affect the way that a person reads, both in terms of the readers own influences and perceived influences on the writer or text. At the same time, texts have the potential to affect the readerto counteract other influences and shift perspective. An often-used descriptive model is that of horizons. The reader comes with a horizona set of parameters and expectationsand 5

encounters a text with its own horizon. When readers buy into what a text says, their horizons shift slightly, bringing them closer to the horizon of the text. The next time the reader encounters the same text, the horizon is different, and the process happens all over again. Gadamer describes this shifting of horizons as the hermeneutical spiralevery time the reader returns to the text, the two horizons come closer and closer together. But what if the reader does not buy into the horizon of the text? What if the contrast is allowed to stand and becomes a point of reflection? Much of hermeneutics relates to how a reader handles this disparity in horizons. What I mean to accomplish here is by no means to fully explain the process of good reading. For that matter, I dont see it as possible for one person to completely ascertain the best reading strategy for every situation and every person. I can give you some strategies that I have found in my journey, but you may already have some of your own that I have not yet encountered. Hopefully we can learn something from one another in the process. One major factor to keep in mind is the array of genres in the Bible. Without anyone telling you to, you probably read software license agreements (if you read them at all) differently from magazine articles or novels. The reason is that these are different genres that we encounter in everyday life. The Bible, although it is all combined into one book (usually), encompasses a wide range of literary genres. Books like Psalms and Proverbs are poetic, while most of Leviticus and Deuteronomy are prose; Ecclesiastes falls somewhere in between. Job and Proverbs are wisdom literature, Isaiah and Jeremiah are prophetic, much of Exodus is legal, most of Genesis is narrative, and most of the books have direct or indirect speech scattered throughout. There are genealogies, inventories, building instructions, religious rituals, praises, laments, covenants, and parables. All of these different types of genres have their own qualities and literary features. Some of the material fits multiple genres, such as proverbs, which are poetry and wisdom, and many of which probably originated as short, oral sayings but exist now as part of a compilation. Sometimes there is enough of a particular genre contained in the Bible to observe common characteristics; sometimes it is helpful to look at similar literature in the surrounding cultures. But it is always a good idea to keep in mind whatever you do know about a particular genre when reading, and often commentaries will contain discussions of major characteristics. (At the same time, it is important to realize that genres are a tool for categorizing texts and to be cautious about forcing them into set patterns.) Another feature to observe is the shift of speaking voices in a text. Some6

times this is not an issue, as in a monologue or perhaps a letter. But even something like a psalm, which we might assume is all written from one perspective, can exhibit shifting speakers. (In fact, poetic texts like psalms are most notorious for shifting speakers without telling you what theyre doing!) Obviously, narrative will tend to involve many different speakers. Often the speakers are clearly identified, but sometimes they are not. Look for clues in what is said, that will help point you to likely speakers. Sometimes it helps to lay out the text like a script for a play or movie. That way you can identify speakers, scene changes, non-verbal components, etc. It might even help to act the whole thing out! Look for rhetorical clues. Count all the verbs and identify their subjects. Are they stative (describing a state) or fientive (describing an action)? Are they active or passive? Where is the action in the passage concentrated? Do the same with nouns. Are they abstract or concrete? What does that tell you about the nature of the passage? Especially in poetic texts, but in others as well, can you observe a particular mood? Is the speaker depressed, excited, incredulous, etc.? Is there a notable shift in mood? What reasons are stated in the text for the mood and what might have changed it? Try to identify some structure to the passage. In narrative, you can often find structure in conjunction with your script layout. Where would you put a scene change in the narrative? Does the location or time change? Are new characters introduced? Do any characters leave? What about larger divisions that might correspond to acts? In more didactic (teaching-oriented, such as letters or speeches) passages, look for shifts of topic. One thing to keep in mind is that the paragraph divisions you find in your English Bible are a guess. The original language texts do not have any such divisions. Are you satisfied with the way your Bible divides the material? Are there other ways it could be done? Compare some other editions and see how they divide the passage. Look at how a few commentaries outline the passage. If youre feeling especially adventurous, try outlining the structure of the passage yourself. Put main ideas out to the left and indent subordinate clauses. You might even want to diagram some sentences, if you know how. Once you have a sense of the structure, identify the main idea of each section. How do smaller sections relate to one another? What do they have in common? Group them into larger units and identify the larger main ideas. Once you think you have a decent outline, read back through the passage and see if it makes sense. How is the passage used elsewhere? If its an OT passage, is it cited anywhere in the NT? What does the NT writer do with it that you would expect? What does he do that you wouldnt expect? Are there hymns, cho7

ruses, or poems that you know use the passage or some of its ideas? Are there books or stories that build off of it? Any advertisements or newspaper articles? What about artwork, much of which is inspired by ideas taken from Scripture? On another level, try to think of other literature or artwork that you can relate to the passage, even if there is no direct citation. Are there paintings or songs that come to mind when you think about the speakers mood or experience? Do a little brainstormingyoud be surprised what can come to mind. Try reading from different perspectives. Put yourself in the shoes of the speaker, or the speakers enemies, or a rather unconcerned bystander, or a king, or a beggar, or an animal, or anyone else who might turn up in the text or in the world it presupposes. Try on some modern identities. How would an atheist read the passage, or an agnostic, or a liberal, or a conservative, or a politician, or a film producer, or a child, or a senior citizen, or a member of Bethany Community Church? (These are by no means all of the possibilitiesuse your imagination!) If you have the time and ambition, maybe you could even find some of these different types of people and run the passage by them. Remembereveryone brings something different to the table, and one of the best ways to see our own biases is to gather more perspectives. What, then, do we do with all of this informationthese different ideas, perspectives, insights, etc.? Well, one thing is to keep reading. Keep coming back to the text with whatever youve gathered. But presumably youre reading for a reason. In all of this thinking about the text, dont forget to think about yourself. What are you looking for? What is your reason for reading in the first place? If youre teaching others, what do they want or need to find? What are you trying to give them? There is a danger in coming to the text with too much of your own agenda; there is an equal danger, however, in coming to the text with the assumption that you have no agenda. This is where trying on some different reading perspectives can help. But dont be afraid to ask the questions of the text that you want answered. Throughout most of this discussion Ive been assuming that you are studying a given passage rather than a topic. Generally speaking, there is a lot to be said for this approach, since it gives you the chance to see what a passage has to say that you may not have thought to ask. But sometimes you will want to talk about a topic in Scripture. You might pick a key passage that comes to mind as a starting point and use some of the techniques we have discussed to jump elsewhere. (Concordance studies are great for this type of thing.) If you cant think of a key passage, you 8

might jump right into the concordance by looking up key words that come to mind. Try a thesaurus, if you dont find the words you were looking for. Maybe they have relevant synonyms or antonyms that appear in Scripture. A topical Bible can also be useful, since it does much the same thing that a concordance would do, except that it is organized by topics rather than specific words. Of course, like anything else, you will be better equipped to find topics in the Bible as you get better acquainted with the Bible itself. When it comes to teaching others, be realistic about your abilities. Often, the key to teaching someone else is that youve put in more time on a topic than they have. Define your topic carefully, and if discussion veers too far off the topic, dont be afraid to say so and bring it back to what you intended to cover. On the other hand, if you dont mind exploring rabbittrails yourself, you can prepare for a lot of the sidetracks by letting the text take you where it will in your preparation. Allow other people to contribute their own thoughts, and relate yours to them. If they say something you meant to say, be glad that theyve saved you the trouble and go on. If they say something you disagree with, it might not be a bad idea to politely table the issue until you can investigate further and bring back some sort of response. But keep in mind that everyone comes with a different horizon, and if your audience doesnt leave agreeing with everything youve said, thats okay. At least youve given them something different to think about, and they will have to make their own decisions about it. Above all, whether reading for personal benefit or to teach others, enjoy yourself! You should never be afraid to admit ignorancewe all have something to learn from the Bible, and usually the more you learn the more ignorant you feel!

References
[1] Osborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1991. This is one of the more comprehensive treatments of both theory and practice of hermeneutics, although it has a number of shortcomings. The approach is not as rigid as Robinsons, and greater account is given to the difference between genres. Still, much of their methodology is the same. [2] Robinson, Haddon W. Biblical Preaching: The Development and Delivery of Expository Messages. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980. Dont let the 9

title fool you. Most of this book is an explanation of Robinsons very structured approach to biblical interpretation. The method fits best the structured arguments of Pauls letters, although he (and others who have adapted the same system) extends it to any biblical genre.

3 Introduction
Definition: Introduction is a technical term in biblical studies that refers to the stuff you would generally find in the introduction to a commentary. The best way to learn what the term means is to look at a few samples; but generally, this section includes issues like authorship (who wrote the book), date (when the book was written), audience (the intended readers of the book), canonicity (why/how the book is in the Bible), and an outline of the contents. What makes the field somewhat tricky is that, even though its name suggests treatment of these issues before getting into the specific contents of the book, its questions and conclusions generally build upon a thorough knowledge of the book and related material. There are also issues that relate to multiple books and cannot be placed easily into a commentary format. These issues are called general introduction, since they apply to more general features of the biblical material; other issues are called special introduction, since they apply to specific books. Relevance: The issues included in introduction may seem superfluous to some people. God wrote the whole Bible and wrote it for all people everywhere, and since he is eternal, what difference does it make when it was written or how it got there? In a sense, these observations are legitimate, and there is a place for simply reading what is there as communication from God to the individual. But from the Bible itself down to the most current scholars, there is always an acknowledgment of the human role in production of Scripture. This human element is always played out in time and space, and that means when something is written, who writes it, to whom it is written makes a difference. And if the Bible did not fall out of the sky in a leather-bound edition, we do have to stop and ask how we know which books belong. All of these factors can have an influence on the way that we read. Sources: The easiest starting point for addressing some of these introductory issues is the closest to handthe Bible itself. Does the book under consideration or any other biblical material specify its author? Does it 10

say anything specific about the time of writing or the intended audience? Does it say anything on its own behalf regarding canonicity (divine origin, prophetic authority, etc.)? Do any other biblical writings make remarks relevant to its canonicity? Try to distinguish between remarks that pertain to the writing process or the written product as such and those that refer to material contained within the book. For instance, if God speaks to Elijah, that does not tell us anything about whether 1 Kings is inspired or not. An uninspired book could contain truth revealed by God, just as an inspired book could contain falsehood (like the recording of the serpents words to Eve in Genesis). Likewise, Elijahs interaction with Ahab may indicate the timing of his ministry in Israel, but it says very little about when 1 Kings was written. The biblical material is only a starting point, because it tends to be sporadic and incomplete. Many books give no explicit indication of authorship or date. Very few books say anything directly pertaining to the issue of canonicity. What is said often has debatable interpretation or requires more information to be useful. There are no absolute dates given in the Bible. (By absolute, historians generally mean a date that fits our current BCE/CE or BC/AD system. It would be a bit silly to look for anything like a BCE date in the Bible!) Where dates are given, they are in terms of reigns of kings or key events. Historians do the best they can to arrange all of this material according to a more universal chronology, but there are differences of opinion on a lot of points. There are even more differences of opinion on how to answer some of these questions when a biblical book provides little or no help. How much can we determine from looking at the type of material contained in a book? Is it possible that a given book was written by more than one person over a long period of time? Some good places to start looking for questions and answers are works specifically on Bible introduction, Bible dictionaries, and commentaries. Works on history can also provide useful background for placing a book in its chronological setting. See the bibliography for some suggestions.

References
[1] Carson, D. A., Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992. This is the only NT introduction with which Im personally familiar. The authors are conservative, but they interact to a certain extent with other material.

11

[2] Archer, Gleason Jr. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Rev. and exp. ed. Chicago: Moody, 1994. This is probably the most conservative treatment in print. [3] Eissfeldt, Otto. The Old Testament: An Introduction. Translated by P. R. Ackroyd. New York: Harper & Row, 1965. This work is somewhat outdated but quite standard as far as mainstream biblical scholarship goes. [4] Harrison, R. K. Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969. This massive tome is probably unsurpassed for its breadth of treatment. Almost as conservative as Archer, Harrison also interacts with a wide range of scholarship current in his day. An inexpensive reprint edition is now available from Prince Press (check CBD). [5] Hawthorne, Gerald F., Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid, eds. Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity, 1993. I have not used the other volumes in this series, but this one is quite good. The treatment is Evangelical, but extensive coverage is given to even the most radical viewpoints.

4 Old Testament
I put Old Testament in quotes, because it is important to stop and think about our use of such terms. When Protestants use the term, we generally mean (whether we realize it or not) the same thing as the Hebrew Bible. Our translations are based on the Hebrew text known as the Masoretic Text (MT), which is the same text used in Jewish synagogues. The order of the books may be different, but the contents are the same. For them, it is the only Bible, so it is simply the Bible, the Hebrew Bible, or the Scriptures. (It is also called the Tanakh, which is an acronym of the three divisions described in the next paragraph.) Some scholars prefer to call it the Hebrew Bible in general use, since the term is acceptable to Jewish and Christian readers. The order of books in the Hebrew Bible generally follows a three-fold divisiontorah, nviim, ktuvim. Torah refers to the first five books of the Bible in any languageGenesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. (Im using the English Christian names for the booksthe Hebrew names are usually different.) Torah is often translated into English as law or instruction. (It can also refer to the oral torah, which is not part of the 12

Bible but has been written down in the Jewish collection known as the Talmud.) The next division is the Hebrew word for prophets. Nviim includes two sub-divisionsthe former prophets and the latter prophets. The former prophets correspond loosely to our collection of historical books Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings. The division between 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings became a fixture after the Hebrew text was translated into Greek. Because Hebrew does not use letters to represent vowels, it is more compact. With the more expansive Greek writing, scrolls became too large to manage and had to be divided. This is also true of 1 and 2 Chronicles. The latter prophets look very much like our prophetic booksIsaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve (the Minor Prophets, as we call them). The third major division simply means writings and includes everything else that we consider to be part of the OT. Psalms usually comes first, followed by Proverbs and Job in variable order. Also included are the Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles. (Ezra and Nehemiah are usually combined into one book.) The term Old Testament is a Christian label that distinguishes this collection from the New Testament. Although it is interchangeable with Hebrew Bible for Protestants, it is generally offensive to Jewish readers and means something different in Catholic and Orthodox churches. The configuration of the OT that we find in most European Bibles comes from the Greek and Latin Bibles that preceded them. The Latin version known as the Vulgate continues to function as the primary authoritative Bible in the Roman Catholic Church, while the Greek Bible is still used in the Greek and Russian Orthodox churches. Other traditions include the Syriac-speaking (Syrian Orthodox, Assyrian, and others), the Coptic in Egypt, the Ethiopian, and the Armenian churches. All of these traditions have an ancient version of the Bible in their own language. There is variation as to which books are included, but most include the bulk of the Hebrew Bible, usually with some additions. Books such as the Wisdom of Solomon, 1 Maccabees, and a longer version of Daniel are found, mostly in Greek at the earliest stage we possess. The definition of OT canon (the books that belong in it) was left somewhat fluid until the Protestant Reformers raised the issue of scriptural authority. Since that time, the Roman Catholic Church has officially included the Hebrew canon (in the Christian sequence) plus Tobit and Judith (after Nehemiah), Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus (after Song of Songs), Baruch and Letter of Jeremiah (after Lamentations), and 1 and 2 Maccabees (after Malachi). Early Protestant Bibles retained these books in a separate section, but most have since dropped them. 13

The early versions are valuable for their testimony to the textual tradition, especially regarding the OT. Apart from the Dead Sea Scrolls, most of our Hebrew manuscripts are from the Middle Ages, and differences between the ancient versions and the MT may point to variant readings that predate the translation process. This is a complicated area of study, since both the Hebrew text and the version have a history of transmission from one copy to another. You should be generally aware of the relevance, but without specialized training, you will have to leave the debates to the commentators. Perhaps more useful is the consideration of differing sequences of books. Apart from the different books that are included in some canons and not in others, the order in which the books appear differs significantly between the MT and the Christian versions. What role the order of books in the canon plays in our understanding of the biblical material is still debated, but it is worthy of some contemplation.

References
[1] Wrthwein, Ernst. The Text of the Old Testament: An Introduction to the Biblia Hebraica. Translated by Erroll F. Rhodes. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

5 New Testament
Just as the use of the term Old Testament requires some explanation, the corresponding New Testament is not altogether straightforward. As a label, New Testament refers to the canonical books that follow (chronologically) the life and death of Jesus. Conceptually, the distinction between New Testament or New Covenant and Old Covenant suggests a dispensational transition from Gods old covenant with Israel to the new covenant in Christ. What this labeling can obscure is the question of when the New Covenant really takes effect. The books included in the NT are generally agreed upon by the major Christian traditions. The Book of Revelation has been questioned for its entire history, but its omission seems in many cases to have been a practical matter. Because of its often confusing material, it has generally not been found as useful for direct application. The earliest manuscripts that we have of the NT books are all in Greek, although the Syriac tradition does seem to be quite old and perhaps not altogether dependent upon the Greek. The Gospel of Matthew is often suspected of having been written in Hebrew or Aramaic and later translated 14

into Greek, but there is no hard evidence for this idea. (The difficulty is in trying to distinguish between a Greek translation from a lost Semitic original and a Greek composition heavily influenced by Semitic culture.) There are some quite late Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts of Matthew, but there is no clear evidence to show that they are not translations themselves. Otherwise, the Greek of the NT generally shows Semitic influence, as well as terminological background from the GOT. Because the GNT manuscripts are much closer in time to the originals than is the case with the OT, less weight is given to the other versions, although the Old Latin, the Syriac, and the Latin Vulgate are generally consulted by scholars. Because the study of the NT requires the same basic elements as that of the OT, they will not be elaborated here in as much detail. The historical and geographical background overlaps significantly with that of the OT. The Greek empire is significant for both, as is the Persian to a certain extent. Everything that pertains directly to the OT itself provides potential background for the NT. The geography is essentially the same through the Gospels, with some changes due to political developments. One difference is the westward thrust of missionary activity, especially that of Paul and his associates. Historically and culturally, classical Greek and Latin literature becomes more significant, while Babylonian and Assyrian influence fades. Egypt maintains a significant role, but with a different face, as a major center of Greek culture and thought. The scope of NT literature is also somewhat different. Obviously, the corpus (the body of literature in question) is smaller than that of the OT, and there are fewer major genres. There is comparatively little poetry, prophetic material, or wisdom literature, and much of the NT comprises apostolic letters. There is still a significant proportion of narrative and dialogue, and both have apocalyptic literature (Daniel, parts of Zechariah, and Revelation). Parables appear more frequently, but there is no ritual and nothing quite like OT legal material. Most of the reading strategies already mentioned apply in one way or another to NT literature, although it should be noted that the use of the OT by NT writers is a significant element that surpasses any parallel in OT material. For the NT writers, almost everything can be traced in one way or another to OT ideas. Much is meant to be continuous with the OT; what is new is fulfillment of OT prophecy. The NT writers lived and moved in an OT world, and nothing can substitute for a solid command of the OT material in trying to understand them.

15

References
[1] Aland, Kurt, and Barbara Aland. The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism. Translated by Erroll F. Rhodes. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989. This is the companion volume to Wrthweins work on the OT. It is a standard, by two scholars whose names are associated closely with the major editions of the GNT. [2] Keener, Craig S. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1993. This series provides useful background information, but instead of a topical arrangement, it is organized by verse. (Of course, that means the author determines what is relevant to a given passage, but at least for a while, he will probably know better than you anyway!)

6 Context
We often speak of reading something in context or taking something out of context. What can be a bit confusing is that we dont always mean the same thing by our use of the word context. At least three types of context are relevant to biblical interpretationphilological, geographical, and historical. (And if thats not complicated enough, the three tend to be inter-related.) Philological context refers to the linguistic and textual milieu against which the biblical material is understood. This in itself is no easy field to explore. In the narrow sense, it can refer to the positioning of a passage at a particular point in the Bible. The text that surrounds it is its context, but of course that can be taken to different extentsthe paragraph, the chapter, the book, the division of books, the testament, the whole Bible. To continue exploring, the Bible is one collection of literature within a literary world. Later Jewish tradition gives us Rabbinic literature; broader Semitic culture leads us to Ugaritic, Aramaic, and Akkadian texts contemporary to the biblical texts and the events they contain. Beyond the Semitic cultures, the Near East was dominated during biblical times by the Persian, Greek, and Roman empires. Naturally, we would expect literary and linguistic crosspollenization between these cultures and that which produced the Bible. In later times, the Bible has made its way into hundreds of languages and cultures. Since this is a course in English Bible, we must consider the reality of the vernacular Bible as a cultural element. Probably very little of 16

Western culture has had any direct relationship to the Hebrew Bible, but the Latin Vulgate and the modern European versions have engaged with their cultures in crucial ways. Modern German is a unified language in large part because of Martin Luthers Bible. William Shakespeare was consulted on the production of the King James Version. The Western writing and speaking tradition has been profoundly influenced by significant Bible versions, and this influence undoubtedly shapes the way that we read. Here is where I put my plug in for learning biblical languages. Understandably, not all have the opportunity or means to do so, but it cannot be replaced by anything else. Translations can never capture everything that is in an original text. But students of the English Bible must augment their resources through extensive reading. At least you should become familiar with major texts of the ancient world (in translation) and with your own English literature. Part of better reading is reading better. Expose yourself to a variety of literary styles. Take a class on literary criticism. Watch for biblical influence in the articles you read, the shows and movies you watch, the music you listen to. Talk to people you know who dont go to church about their views on the Bible. What do they know about it, and how? If you want to learn about a person, you talk to the people they have known, whose lives they have touched or who have touched their lives. The same is true of a work like the Bible. The second type of context is geographical. The Bible is written against a Near Eastern backdrop. Whether in captivity in Babylon, conquering in Canaan, or traveling about the Eastern Mediterranean, the biblical characters, writers, and earliest readers find themselves at home in this world that most of us have never seen. Take some time to acquaint yourself with the territory. If you can visit the Middle East, do so. If you cant, get some good atlases, look at pictures, read about travels through that part of the world. Find out about the plants and animals of the regionthey appear often in poetic imagery but mean nothing if you cant picture them yourself. Get a sense of distance. How far did the exiles have to go? What could be seen from the Temple Mount? What was the terrain like? Where was water available? The more you can immerse yourself in that world, the better grasp you will have on what is said and what is not said in the text. Finally, there is historical context. What we mean by history may need some explanation. History is not just a series of events. If it cannot be known after the events are over, it will never become history. History requires something that remains, usually written or oral materials of some sort. This is how the distinction is made between history and prehistory. Prehistory pertains to what only archaeology or paleontology can 17

reveal to us. When written texts are added, we have the possibility of history. The earliest writings we have are in cuneiform script, so called for its production with a wedge-shaped stylus on clay tablets. This was the script used to write Sumerian and Akkadian, which existed side-byside in Mesopotamia, even though they are otherwise unrelated linguistically. Akkadian was the Semitic language of Babylon and Assyriaa distant cousin of Hebrew, in which much of the Bible was written. Not long after, we find Egyptian texts that used a different writing system called hieroglyphics. Eventually, probably sometime around 2000 BCE, Semites living in Egypt appear to have developed a simplified writing system that represented each consonant with a single sign. It is this system that eventually gave birth to the major alphabetic systems, including the Latin script, which we use today. Early forms of writing in Mesopotamia and Egypt were cumbersome and required years of training. Literacy was limited to the elite scribal classes. Still, writing became an integral part of daily life. With the decipherment of these ancient scripts, we have been able to look at epic tales and religious rituals, as well as receipts of sale, contracts, and laws. The work of the historian is to study the material from these ancient texts alongside archaeological findings and try to reconstruct the shape of long-dead cultures and forgotten events. Within the relatively short time since these texts have become available to us, our knowledge of the ancient world has exploded. Where before we had almost nothing but the Greek classics and the Bible, we now have access to whole cultures that were barely known to exist. While all of this discovery has provided biblical scholars with a wealth of historical context, it has also raised some critical questions about the nature of the biblical material. What do we do, when the evidence seems to disagree with the Bible? Is the Bible wrong? Have we simply not read it right? Have we misinterpreted the other material? Is it possible that were just missing some pieces that would help us sort it all out if we had them? What must be made clear is that, as much as has been discovered, we still have only very small pieces of the historical puzzle. Most of it is outside of the immediate area where the major biblical events take place. Only a fraction of what actually existed has survived, only a fraction of that has been discovered, and only a fraction of that has been adequately analyzed. The more we uncover, the more we have to re-think. This is not to say that we should simply sit back and say the Bible is right, no matter what is discovered. But the fragmentary nature of historical investigation does mean that results are far from conclusive. In the meantime, we do the best that we can with what we have and keep pressing on. 18

References
[1] Bright, John. A History of Israel. 3d ed. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981. I believe there is at least one edition more current, but this is the copy I happen to own. Bright represents what has been called the biblical archaeology movement, associated closely with the work of W. F. Albright and his students. In the broad scope of biblical scholarship, it is a relatively conservative position that accepts much of the biblical material as more or less historically accurate and finds general confirmation in archaeology. If the so-called minimalists (see below) respond directly to anyone, it is generally to this group. As far as they are concerned, no one more conservative qualifies as legitimate scholarship. [2] Cleave, Richard L. W., ed. The Holy Land Satellite Atlas. 2 vols. Nicosia, Cyprus: Rhr Productions, 1999. This up-to-date satellite atlas contains detailed maps for different historical periods, divided regionally across the area known as the Levant (chiefly Israel). It includes vertical satellite images, as well as oblique (images taken from an angle) and aerial photographs, with extensive written remarks on historical, geographical, and biblical matters. The set also includes an application on CD-ROM to view much of the same material more interactively. [3] Davies, Philip R. In Search of Ancient Israel. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 148. Sheffield: Sheffield, 1992. This is a seminal text for what has been called (pejoratively) the historical minimalist position. I include it here not as an endorsement of its contents but because of its significance in the study of biblical history. [4] Frank, Harry Thomas, ed. Atlas of the Bible Lands. Rev. ed. Maplewood, NJ: Hammond, 1997. This is a very basic Bible atlas. Its price is probably its greatest asset, but in the absence of anything better it can be a handy tool. (It is also fairly easy to transport, so there is less obstacle to regular use.) [5] George, Andrew. The Epic of Gilgamesh: The Babylonian Epic Poem and Other Texts in Akkadian and Sumerian. London: Penguin, 1999. This is the most up-to-date English translation of the earliest literary epic discovered. 19

[6] Gottwald, Norman K. The Tribes of Yahweh: A Sociology of the Religion of Liberated Israel, 12501050 BCE. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1979. Repr., Sheffield: Sheffield, 1999. Where Mendenhall left off (see below), Gottwald pushed further into sociological theory. Later scholars generally disagree with their conclusions and much of their methodology but acknowledge their pioneer work as laying a foundation for further work. [7] Hoerth, Alfred J. Archaeology and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998. This book discusses archaeology particularly in relation to Israelite history from a conservative perspective. There is a companion volume for the NT. [8] Mendenhall, George E. The Tenth Generation: The Origins of the Biblical Tradition. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973. Mendenhall took things in a little bit different direction from Bright and is known as one of the first biblical scholars to move in the direction of sociological models. [9] Merrill, Eugene H. Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987. This book takes a very conservative approach and is more an exposition of the biblical historical books than anything. It also ties in some archaeological issues and establishes an absolute chronology. [10] Parpola, Simo, and Michael Porter, eds. The Helsinki Atlas of the Near East in the Neo-Assyrian Period. The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project. Finland: Casco Bay, 2001. This project uses navigational maps published by the USNIMA and places as accurately as possible the locations known from Akkadian texts of the Neo-Assyrian empire. Its scope is the Near East, except for Egypt. The atlas is a work in progress, but it represents the most current knowledge based on the hardest evidence we have. [11] Pritchard, James B., ed. The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures. Vol. 1. Princeton University Press, 1958. This book and its sister volume are abridged from longer, more expensive works by the same editor. They contain English translations of many of the more important ancient Near Eastern texts. [12] Roth, Martha T. Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor. 2d ed. Society of Biblical Literature Writings from the Ancient World 20

6. Atlanta: Scholars, 1997. This series publishes transcriptions and English translations of major texts. The scholarship is generally more current and more detailed than Pritchard, but for the purposes of the English reader that may not be necessary. This particular volume includes the famous laws of Hammurabi. [13] Sasson, Jack M., ed. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. 4 vols. Farmington Hills, MI: Scribners, 1995. Repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2000. This collection of essays, now published in two massive volumes, covers a wide range of topics associated with the history and culture of the ancient Near East. At the much more affordable price charged by Hendrickson (dont buy the original set), its a worthwhile investment. [14] Snell, Daniel C. Life in the Ancient Near East, 3100332 B.C.E. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997. This book has much the same scope as CANE but is generally less technical and more cohesivea handy synopsis of ancient Near Eastern culture, including but not limited to Israel. [15] Yamauchi, Edwin M. Persia and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996. Yamauchi is one of the better-known conservative historians in the field. This work focuses on the Persian empire and its influence on the biblical world.

7 Sample Study
Lets try out some of this stuff on a sample verse: sent messengers to summon Balaam son of Beor, who was at Pethor, near the River, in his native land. Balak said: A people has come out of Egypt; they cover the face of the land and have settled next to me. (Num 22:5, NIV) If we think through each word of the verse, right away some questions arise. Who is this Balaam? What river is meant, and why is it capitalized? Whose native land is meant? Who is this people that has come out of Egypt? Why should Balaam care that they have settled next to Balak? Where is Balak? Other things to think about after comparing with some major English versions (kjv, nasb, nrsv) include: How does this verse relate to v. 4? Where is Pethor? What does behold mean? What exactly is this people doing? Most of the words in this verse are quite common, but the personal and place names are worth checking in a concordance, to see if they appear 21

elsewhere. Amaw, which appears only in the NRSV, is not found outside this verse. Pethor is mentioned in Deut 23:4, specifically in connection with Balaam, where it is located in Aram-Naharaim (niv) or Mesopotamia. Beor is almost always mentioned as Balaams father, except in Gen 36:32 and 1 Chr 1:43, where he is the father of Bela, an Edomite king. There is no particular reason that they would have to be the same person, although it is interesting that Bela looks somewhat similar to Balaam. As for Balaam himself, a good deal can be found out by searching for his name. Most occurrences are in Numbers 2224, which is the main episode in which we seem to find him. He reappears in chap. 31, where he is killed (v. 8; cf. Josh 13:22) in a war with the Midianites and implicated (v. 16) in the events of chap. 25 (cf. Rev 2:14). In Deut 23:45; Josh 24:910; Neh 13:2; and Mic 6:5, the events of the main episode are briefly referenced. 2 Pet 2:1516 and Jude 11 also set him up as an example of wicked men. The New Oxford Annotated Bible notes this passage (vv. 520): Balaks two missions to obtain the services of Balaam who was in Pethor, located south of Carchemish which is on the Euphrates. In antiquity Babylonia was famed for the art of divination. Apparently, then, the exact location of Pethor is known (or at least guessed). The note also connects Babylonia with the passage, even though its not specifically mentioned in the passage, so that connection may be worth pursuing. Divination would be good to look up in a dictionary. The immediate context reveals some answers but also raises more questions. V. 1 tells us that the people in question is Israel, and they are camped in the plains of Moab across the Jordan from Jericho. Balak is the king of Moab, which is somehow connected with Midian (v. 4). Perhaps more context would give even more relevant information, but this is at least enough to fill in some gaps. For relevant Near Eastern literature outside the Bible, as well as historical and geographical context, our next stop is the Bible dictionary.

7.1 Versions
He sent messengers therefore unto Balaam the son of Beor to Pethor, which is by the river of the land of the children of his people, to call him, saying, Behold, there is a people come out from Egypt: behold, they cover the face of the earth, and they abide over against me: (kjv) So he sent messengers to Balaam the son of Beor, at Pethor, which is near the River, in the land of the sons of his people, to call him, saying, Behold, a people came out of Egypt; behold, they cover the surface of the 22

land, and they are living opposite me. (nasb) He sent messengers to Balaam son of Beor at Pethor, which is on the Euphrates, in the land of Amaw, to summon him, saying, A people has come out of Egypt; they have spread over the face of the earth, and they have settled next to me. (nrsv)

23