Lk.11:28 “blessed are those who hear the word of God, and observe it.”

Rev.1:3 “Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy [...]”

1 Tim.4:13 “give attention to the public reading of Scripture [...]”

Acts 17:11 “Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things were so.”

2 Tim.2:15 “Be diligent [KJV `Study'] to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth.”

Ps.119:11 “Thy word I have hid in my heart, that I may not sin against Thee.”

Ps.1:2-3 “But his delight is in the law of the Lord, And in His law he meditates day and night. And he will be like a tree firmly planted by streams of water, Which yields its fruit in its season, And its leaf does not wither; And in whatever he does, he prospers.”

The Navigators illustrate this by saying that as the thumb can touch all the fingers, we can meditate on the Word as we do any of the first four. Meditation is a key to revelation. A new Christian needs to hear and read the Bible more than they need to study and memorize it. This is so that they become familiar with the overall message of the Bible.

Kies een bepaald onderwerp en ga het na door het volgen van tekstverwijzingen of door een concordantie te gebruiken.

Het bestuderen van het leven van een persoon in de bijbel, bijvoorbeeld het leven van Jozef in Gen.37-50.

Het bestuderen van een bepaalde passage, of een alinea, hoofdstuk of boek.

Wat staat er? Wat staat er in de grondtekst? Wees voorzichtig met definities. Lees er niets in, wat er niet echt staat.

What do the verses around it say? "Context is king" is the rule -- the passage must make sense within the structure of the entire passage and book.

Wat staat er in andere verzen over hetzelfde onderwerp, in de rest van de bijbel? God spreekt zichzelf niet tegen, dus zal onze interpretatie de test van vergelijking met ander schriftgedeelten moeten kunnen doorstaan.

Find these verses:

Let's say you wanted to do a study of the word "redemption." First you would look up that word in the concordance and look up references listed for it. Then you could look up related words and references listed for them, e.g. "redeem, redeemed, ransom," even "buy" or "bought."

What if you noticed a contradiction in the KJV between Mt.7:1 “Judge not lest you be judged” and 1 Cor.2:15 “He that is spiritual judgeth all things.” Maybe there are two different Greek words here, both being translated "judge" in English? (We're using Strong's from here out.)

Op dezelfde manier kunnen we de betekenis van een naam in het Grieks of Hebreews vinden.

Zoek de volgende namen op en schrijf hun betekenis erbij:

Jn.20:17 "Touch me not" (KJV) sounds harsh, doesn't it? Sounds like Jesus doesn't want to be touched now that He is risen, that He is too holy or something. But that doesn't seem right, so let's look it up in Spiros Zodhiates' The Complete Word Study New Testament (AMG Publishers, 1991).

Definition: Turning to John 20:17, above the word "Touch" we see "pim680." The letters give us a code for the part of speech, and the number refers to Strong's dictionary reference. Let's look up the definition (p. 879). "680. Haptomai; from hapto (681), touch. Refers to such handling of an object as to exert a modifying influence upon it... Distinguished from pselaphao (5584), which actually only means to touch the surface of something. " Now look up "pim." The grammar codes in Zodhiates come right after Revelation; on p. 849 we see that pim stands for "present imperative active (80)". On p.857, "Present Imperative. In the active voice, it may indicate a command to do something in the future which involves continuous or repeated action or, when it is negated, a command to stop doing something. " This is a negative command, so it is to stop doing something that is already occuring. So, what have we found?

Mary is already clinging to Jesus, and he is saying to stop holding him!

In James 5:14, Elders are told to pray and anoint someone who is sick. What is this anointing?

Definition of aleipho (218) - "to oil" (Strong's); but we also have another Greek word translated "anoint", chrio (5548) - "to smear or rub with oil, i.e. to consecrate to an office or religious service" (Strong's). Since it's a verb, consider the tense also, "apta" aorist participle active. "The aorist participle expresses simple action, as opposed to continuous action...When its relaitonship to the main verb is temporal, it usually signifies action prior to that of the main verb." (Zodhiates p.851)

So what's the difference between aleipho and chrio? Look back over the cross-references and the definitions, and sum up the difference: "aleipho" is a practical use of oil and "chrio" is a spiritual

As an illustration (although the word is not used) of the practical use of oil at that time, when the good Samaritan cared for the man beat up by robbers he poured oil and wine in the wound. So oil had a medicinal use in Jesus' day.

Laten we eens toepassen op wat we zojuist geleerd hebben door deze woordstudie n.a.v. Jakobus 5:14 "Is er iemand bij u ziek? Laat hij dan de oudsten der gemeente tot zich roepen, opdat zij over hem een gebed uitspreken en hem met olie zalven in de naam des Heren." Is dat zalven geestelijk of praktisch? Het is praktisch!

And the tense in Greek, the aorist participle, would be better translated "having anointed," so the order is the anointing first, then the prayer ("in the name of the Lord"refers to the prayer, not the anointing). James 5 is saying that the elders should give the sick person medicine and pray for him in the name of the Lord. Doesn't that express a beautiful balance of practical and spiritual in our God!

In een voorgaande les behandelden we Joh.3:5 "geboren ...uit water en geest." Wat is volgens de context het water waarover het hier gaat?

Water baptism is not under discussion here, which would be a big switch from the subject being discussed by Jesus and Nicodemus. Watch out for a sudden change of topic, it may be a clue that your interpretation has been derailed! The water is the amniotic fluid, "born of water" = natural birth.

1 Cor.14:34 “Let the women keep silent in the churches” has to be taken within the biblical context of 1 Cor.11:5 “every woman [...] while praying or prophesying [...]”

Acts 2:38 “And Peter said to them, "Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins [...]"”. Is this teaching baptismal regeneration? If this was the only verse of scripture we had, we would have to conclude that. But in the light of the clear teaching elsewhere that regeneration happens by faith in Christ, we have to interpret it otherwise. Peter is urging baptism as a way for his hearers to respond to the gospel. If baptism were the pathway to being born again, how could Paul write 1 Cor.1:17 "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel"?

“3 days & 3 nights” (Mt.12:40) have led some to come up with a "Wednesday crucifixion theory," esp. the cult of Armstrongism. How could Jesus die on Friday afternoon and rise Sunday morning yet "be raised on the third day" (Mt.16:21)? Exact meanings of "three" or "days" won't help explain the apparent contradiction.

We need an historical tidbit: Jews counted any part of a day as a full day, as we would count buckets of water (if there were six and one-half buckets of water, we would say there were 7 buckets of water even if one was only partly full). So to the Jewish mind, any part of a day counted as a full day, and days started at 6 p.m. and ended at 6 p.m. Friday from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. = day 1. Friday 6 p.m. to Saturday 6 p.m. = day 2. Saturday 6 p.m. to Sunday 5 or so a.m. = day 3. Interpreting within the cultural context keeps us out of trouble.

Gen.15:7-21. The historical context is that cutting animals in two and then walking between the pieces was the normal way of entering a contract in Abraham's day. Both parties walked between, taking the pledge that dismemberment would happen to them if they didn't live up to their part of the contract. But in this case only God goes thru, making it a unilateral covenant.

“evil eye” in Mt.6:23.

Rule 1, definition of "evil" and "eye" - no help here. Rule 2, context: seems to confuse us even more. It doesn't seem to fit with what goes before and after! This should tip us off that we aren't understanding it rightly!!

What we have here is a Hebrew idiom, “evil eye”. Let's look up other uses of this idiom: Mt.20:15 "Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with what is my own? Or is your eye envious [lit."evil"] because I am generous [lit. "good"]?" We find that having an "evil eye" is a Hebrew idiom for being stingy or envious. Now go back to Mt.6 and notice how this understanding ties in so perfectly to the context.

Is.59:1 “The Lord's hand is not short;”

Deut.33:27 “Underneath are the everlasting arms.”

References to body parts of God are used by Latter-Day Saints to prove that God was once a man just as we are. Once they convince people of that, they go on to teach that we can become God just like He is! At a lecture he was giving, a group of Mormon elders challenged Walter Martin (author of Kingdom of the Cults) with an enumeration of verses like these. Dr. Martin then asked the Mormons to read one more scripture: Ps.91:4 “He will cover you with His feathers; And under His wings shalt thou trust”. W.M. said, “By the same rules of interpretation that you just proved God to be a man, you just proved that He is a bird”. The Mormons had to laugh as they realised the ridiculousness of their position.

The parable of the widow with the unrighteous judge in Lk.18:1-8. This story illustrates one lesson: boldness in prayer. If we draw it into an allegory, what do we have?

De betekenis wordt op allerlei manieren geweld aangedaan: God is onwillig om de rechten van weduwen te beschermen, gebed "kwelt" Hem, enz.

The parable of the unrighteous steward in Lk.16:1-9. What is the point of the parable? Is it an allegory?

The steward is commended for only one thing, his shrewdness in using what he had to prepare for a time when he wouldn't have it. But he is not commended for his unethical behavior in cheating his master.