How to Study the Bible III – Aim for Interpretive Leverage
Vern Peterman · Nov 6, 2016
How to Study Bible (2016), No. 43
Holly Hills Bible Church
https://www.hollyhillsbiblechurch.org/teaching/messages/4926541495531

Transcribed from the recording by SermonAudio, so expect the occasional misheard word.

What we're addressing this time around is, we're calling it Aim for Interpretive Leverage. And what do we mean by that, interpretive leverage? Fancy term. One of the things that we're talking about there is being able to have a number of new insights based on one insight.

And we did that, for instance, when we looked at the seven churches of Revelation. If you resolve and understand clearly who are the angels or messengers of the seven churches, well, if you understand it thoroughly and clearly for one, you've understood it for seven. If you understand who the overcomers are, for the messages to the seven churches. If you understand that clearly, then you apply that to all seven. And in truth, that also clarifies 1 John chapter 5 and the last four chapters of the book of Revelation.

So you get multiple points of clarification, multiple points of insight from clarifying the one set of issues for all seven churches. In one of the major works that they've been called, for example, Letters to Seven Churches, when in reality they're not in the form of any letters of New Testament times.

And messages is probably a better way to describe them. So that would be an example of where we've had interpretive leverage in our previous studies. And so when we say interpretive leverage, what we mean is we get one insight in multiple passages. are then better understood. Multiple passages are better understood because of one set of insights.

That's kind of like the revealed truth or mystery that Paul does in scripture. He reveals one truth which opens up a lot of scripture. Yes, and that would be a good example. We're not going to cover it this morning, but it would be a very good example. The Bible is very consistent on this point. A mystery is always what? A revealed truth. A truth that was previously unknown, but has now been revealed.

That's different from the way that we often use the word mystery. We usually use the word mystery as something that is hard to figure out and even remains a mystery or is a mystery until the very end. That's how we often use the word mystery. The Bible, from the Old Testament on into the New, uses the word mystery as a truth previously not revealed but now revealed.

Whereas a mystery in the New Testament culture was something that was kept mysterious except for a select few. What we find, especially in the Apostle Paul, is that he goes out and publicly and openly proclaims mysteries. Things that were not previously revealed, but are now revealed.

So, we have this idea of interpretive leverage, that is, you get a certain insight and you're able to carry that out in multiple places. And so once you get clarity on a particular point, then you're able to extend that to a number of different places, passages, and parts of scripture. All right, so one of them that we introduce, we give examples here, and these are some examples. They're not the only places where you get interpretive leverage. One of them is the word pair, ume. It looks like aw-me, right? But it's ume, and it has a particularly specific and absolute meaning.

Now, do you believe in absolute truth? By the way, many Christians do not, to this day, believe in absolute truth. The word paraume, it's two letter words, right together, It expresses every time absolute truth. And it means, and it's throughout the New Testament, it means absolutely not, no exceptions. It means not the slightest chance. It means not even remotely possible. Now is that absolute truth? I think so. That's absolute truth. And it's a pair of two-letter words, ume, that Jesus uses, Paul uses, and it continues on through the New Testament on into the book of Revelation.

And so my reason for pointing it out is that it is an absolute truth statement in a negative. And it does so in a way that is contrary to English grammar. If we have a double negative, is that proper in English? It's not proper in English. In Greek, it's not only proper, but that's the absolute statement, umē.

It occurs 79 times in the New Testament. So lots of times. Jesus uses umē. Paul uses ume, on into the last book of the Bible, Revelation, ume. You'll find it many times, almost 80 times, 79 to be exact. And that's just in the New Testament. You may find it a number of times in the Greek Old Testament, which we've introduced earlier this year. So here's an example, John 10, 27 and 28.

My sheep hear my voice, I know them and they follow me. I give eternal life to them and they will never perish and no one will snatch them out of my hand." Now, key points here. Never is ume. It is they will absolutely not perish. Absolutely not. There's not even the slightest chance that they will perish. And it is not even remotely possible that they will perish.

Do you get that? And then perish is middle voice. That doesn't come out necessarily in the English. So what do we mean by middle voice? What's that mean? We initiate the action, and the action has a result that comes back upon us. So what we have there in expanded and explained, right below, Jesus is therefore saying that eternal life is something that he gives constantly to his sheep. so that there is not even the slightest possibility that they can lose that eternal life so as to perish in hell even of their own doing. So can you lose your salvation by something you do or don't do? Not even remotely possible. Yes?

I have a friend who is a Nazarene at work. I get the idea that they believe they can make the choice to Here's the deal. In our church history elective, which we had a few years back, the Nazarenes are a break-off from the Methodists, the Methodists are a break-off from the Anglicans, the Anglicans are a break-off from the Roman Catholic Church, in which you could lose your salvation. So it's by church tradition that, yes, the Nazarene church believes that.

Believes you can lose your salvation. They do believe God has the power to keep you saved, but only if you choose to stay saved. They say nothing in the world can cause you to lose your salvation except yourself. Well, this says no. This says no. It is not even remotely possible that you of your own doing can perish.

The bottom line is, what they're teaching is contrary to this very verse we're looking at right here. It's true that that's what they teach, it's based on how the church was originated, but it's contrary to the Greek grammar that we're looking at right now. So yes, you will find in most of Christendom you can lose your salvation. Most of Christendom, and I say Christendom, most of Christendom you can lose your salvation. The Bible, and even Jesus himself, does not and did not teach that. There is not even the slightest possibility that they can lose that eternal life so as to perish in hell even of their own doing. Can't happen.

Yes? It seems to me like that would be coordinated with legalism and control, that if you don't follow all these rules... Well, yeah, and let's look at it. Calvinism You have all the Reformed churches that follow Calvinism, and one of the things we've said here is that if I use literal interpretation, I don't need an ism. I don't need even dispensational ism.

And a literal understanding of John 10.28 says that it's not even remotely possible, it is absolutely not possible, that I can lose my salvation even of my own doing.

By the way, they're teaching on 1 Corinthians 15 downstairs. Great passage. Paul is writing to the believers in Corinth, and he has already written in chapter 1 that they are sanctified in the perfect tents. We're going to read that here shortly. even though some of them are losing faith in the resurrection. See, they're still saved. Isn't that amazing? That's just amazing. But that's what 1 Corinthians says. You guys are sanctified in the perfect tense.

Completed past action, ongoing results, long in the future, implying permanence. You are saved in the perfect tense, even though some of you are losing faith in the resurrection. And by the way, that was the standard Greek cultural teaching, that there is no bodily resurrection. And so people were slipping into the worldly thinking.

The reality is that once having believed that, they're saved. They're still sanctified whether they believe it or not. Whether they believe it or not. And that's one reason why, you know, a number of us will have people who we love, who once believed, and now no longer claim it. They're still saved. And pray for them not to be saved again, but for them to return.

A couple of things. You all know Randy, right? His younger brother was once really angry because we told him, you're saved and you're not getting out of it. And now he looks back and says, I'm glad that you held to that and I'm glad that I understand it now.

I have a friend in the Carson City area. His name is Rick. He went away from the Lord for seven years. Just completely rejected Christianity for seven years. He came back. I believe he was still saved. All that time. He's not re-saved. And by the way... He didn't have to get re-saved. He didn't have to get re-saved. He just had to come back into fellowship and understanding. Right?

And by the way, a lot of people who believe in loss of salvation will go to Hebrews 4-6 and talk about loss of salvation, but that passage says it's impossible for them to be restored again. So it says, if you believe that that means loss of salvation, that passage says you're never getting there again. You've lost it forever. Well the Calvinists say if you turn away, you're never saved. That's right, and so what they have is backdoor loss of salvation, essentially, right?

And so what we're saying is, not happening. If you have believed, even if you do like my friend Rick, and walk away from the Lord completely, and completely disavow, even if you do like the believers of Corinth did, some of them did, I mean, their falling away was bad. Some of them died. Some of them later believed, like the culture did, in no resurrection, still saved. It's impossible for us to lose our salvation of wrongdoing. Can't do it.

Yes. And it's interesting, I guess I learned this from your teaching and stuff, but we don't always feel that way. So you have to accept that. Yeah, it's not a basis of feeling, is it? No. It's facts. It's what are the spiritual facts. That's what saves and that's how we live. Our culture and much of Christendom preaches about feelings. That's not what the scripture does.

Alright, so let's look at this here. In the book of Hebrews, at the bottom of page 1, it says, make sure that your character is free from the love of money. By the way, that means love of silver, literally. Being content with what you have, for he himself has said, I will never, that is umme, desert you, nor will I ever forsake you."

And this is quoting from Deuteronomy 31.6. So twice. So let's see what that says. Being content with what you have for he himself has said I will never, it is not remotely possible that I will desert you. It is not remotely possible that I will ever forsake you. Is there any chance that God will forsake us or desert us? Not a chance. It is absolutely impossible for God to desert or forsake us.

Yes? So, from this I understand that one of the important questions that you can ask someone kind of going through trials and thinks that they're away and everything, ask them, did you ever believe? Did you ever believe? Did you ever believe in the five steps of resurrection and the death and resurrection and everything? And if they say, well, yes, I did. Okay, we have a basis. And so if you really did, you know, even though you are struggling in a way right now, your salvation is here.

Don't worry about that at all. Don't wrestle with that at all. Don't get in some kind of an eddy current. Don't get in some kind of a loop where you're sitting there worrying about am I still saved or did I somehow lose it. Forget it. You're saved. It's a done deal. It's God's job. it's not even remotely possible that you're going to lose your own salvation. Not happening. Nobody on the outside is going to do it either.

That's what the rest of the verse says, and the next verse says. That just proves that it's not about us at all. No. It's about God's plan and evil. I believed at one point in time, God says, that's it, I'll take care of everything from then on out. I'll take it from there. And our place is not to sit there and wonder if I really got saved. And that's, in truth, what the Calvinists would have us sit there and worry about and threaten us to. Was I ever saved? Did I lose my salvation?

Jesus says, don't worry about it. God says, don't worry about it. The calendar's big scripture is I believe 1 Corinthians 13, 5, examine yourself to see whether you're in faith. That's what they say everybody has to do. One of the big problems that I find in so many people today, they say that they believe, but they don't believe that Jesus was actually part of the trinity are God. They believe that he was a good teacher. They believe that he was a prophet. They believe that he was special. They believe that he was like Mohammed or Joseph Smith or all these other different people. Did he really grasp the fact that he was God? It is possible for a person to have wrong belief at the outset, isn't it? It is possible. And so in that sense, there may be a question, are you really saved? But that is different at the outset.

If they believe in something that is not true of Jesus, for example, the Muslims, they believe that there was a Jesus. His name is Isa. They believe that a different person was on the cross. So is that saving? No, it's not a saving faith. They believe that there was a Jesus, they believe that a different person was on the cross that wasn't Jesus. That's not a saving faith. Let's take a look at the top of page two. Here is a verse that is often looked upon as a threat, and in fact it is a comfort for believers.

Revelation 3.5 says, He who overcomes, and one of the things we covered is overcomers, those who believe, right?

He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments and I will not, this is ume, literally it's a race or literally blot out his name from the book of life and I will confess his name before my father and before his angels." So is it a threat that your name will be blotted out from the book of life? No, it's an assurance that your name will absolutely not be blotted out from the book of life. How did you get your name in that book? You believe. Is there a possibility that your name might be blotted out? Absolutely not. Isn't that great? I can't mess it up. Yeah?

Actually, it was put in there before the foundation of the world, right? Well, and that's something that we could study. It's a little bit beyond what we're going to get into. But one of the things that we have assurance of is that we were in Christ, chosen in Christ, before the foundation of the world. Before God said, let there be light, we were chosen in Christ.

Okay, so this word ume, or word pair, ume, it actually has, though there are individual strong numbers for each word, there's actually a strong number for the word pair. 3364, and it is an absolute statement. Sometimes Christians will be asked, and other people will be asked, do you believe in absolute truth? This is an absolute statement, stated by Christ himself, there in John, and here in Revelation, as well as in other places in the New Testament. It is a statement of absolute truth.

There is not the slightest chance that it's messed up. And it occurs 79 times in the New Testament and even in the Old Testament. So use it for interpretive leverage. That is, once you understand, oh, this is an absolute true statement with no possibility of any exception. I can take that and use that dozens of times. throughout the whole Bible.

And I have assurance from Jesus himself, John 10, 28, and here in the book of Revelation, Revelation 3, 5, that if my name is in the book of life, it's not disappearing. It's not getting blotted out. I can't mess it up. Nobody else is going to mess it up. Isn't that great? That's wonderful news. It's wonderful news, isn't it?

Okay, here's another one that we give on page two in the example of sons of or children of. And by the way, I've done that in the plural, but in fact I could also look at it everywhere it's in the singular. If I don't have a statement that this is a genealogical or physical descendancy, For example, here is Simon of Cyrene, and he has sons Alexander and Rufus. So that's a genealogical descendancy. If it's not that, then I'll find it throughout the scripture, and it means like in character and close in relationship. Like in character and close in relationship. And I can use that throughout the whole Bible.

So positive connotation examples would be, here's Galatians 3.7, therefore be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham.

Galatians 3.26, for you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. So what does that mean, that you're sons of God?

Yes, and by the way, if you're a female, does this somehow not include you? No. Because what's the meaning? It means like in character and close in relationship. That's the meaning, not pointed to just gender, right? 1 Thessalonians 5, 4, and 5. But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day would overtake you like a thief, but you are all sons of light and sons of day. And by the way, that take you like a thief is another cultural expression that's used throughout the New Testament. 1 John 3, 1 and 2 is quoted there.

See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us that we would be called children of God, and such we are. For this reason the world does not know us, because it did not know Him. Beloved, we are now children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.

When I was going through the Greek translation class in seminary, which is right at the tail end, and I was still a candidate here at Holy Hills, I was translating this and I got to a place when I was done translating where I couldn't see the screen. My eyes just teared up incredibly and I just couldn't see the screen at all. Why? that would be called children of God. And that's one of the passages where bestowed is in the perfect tense.

We're going to see that in just a minute. It's a completed past action, ongoing results, on into the future, implying permanence. And the reason that I cheered up at this, I thought, it's been bestowed on us permanently. It's not going to be taken away.

In the Roman Empire, it was completely legal for a father to kill his children at any time, even on into adulthood. We have one account where a father went in, where a son was in the midst of a bunch of his companions, and the father went in and slaughtered his son right in front of his friends. and nobody did anything. Why? Completely legal for the father to do that.

Yes. It wasn't legal to do that to an adopted son. It was not legal to do it to an adopted son or a son in which you had taken the legal steps to declare him as your child. That's what this is. We're called children of God. And so this has double, by the grammar, perfect tense, and by calling children of God, we are now children of God declared, right?

There's no way it's going to get undone. And so that's why I cheered up. That's why I got to a place I couldn't even see the screen. I looked at it and I said, wow. God says, I'm calling my children and I'm not going to back off. I'm not going to decide differently later. I'm going to permanently bestow upon you this great love and make a public declaration that you are my children. And I will never renege on it. And that's why I teared up.

John is telling these people something that they had, in the physical world, they had no assurance of. It was actually fairly uncommon for there to be adoption of sons. It was fairly uncommon for a father to publicly declare, you know, this is my child. And once they did that, it was then illegal for them to take their children out. But up until that time, it was completely legal. They could back off on it and take them out, even as adults. This has double declarations.

Nope, I'm not backing off on it. Yeah? The ESB and the HCSB both have given instead of bestowed. I like bestowed better. Well, and I think that's where it's fine to have the different translations. And frankly, I think that the New American Standard and the ESV are a couple of pretty good modern translations. But in the end, I want to understand what the original language says. And also, not just because I know Greek, but also because I understand the context of the culture.

This was such a phenomenal statement. Right here. I mean, people would read that and they would just... Wow! God really loves me. He's always going to love me. He's not going to back off on it. And by both the grammar and the cultural understanding, I understand that God really, really, really loves me forever. Nothing is going to change that. That's why I cheered up. I looked at it, I said, from the grammar, from the culture, I understand what John's saying. And that's just phenomenal.

The people didn't have an understanding in their physical realm that their father really loved them. If he hadn't done the adoption of sons or publicly declared that he'd accepted them, they didn't really have assurance that their father wouldn't take them out. But here, by both the grammar bestowed and by the double declaration, we are children of God. That was an emphatic statement.

John was being very clear. The father has a quality of love that is completely, entirely irreversible. We are like in character and close in relationship permanently. Now, we're completely using up our time here, but for good purpose. So you'll have positive statements throughout the Bible.

You also find negative statements. Here's Ephesians 2, 1-3, and you were dead in your trespasses and sins. By the way, that's a positional statement. You were positionally dead in the trespasses and sins. And Jesus makes statements that underscore that. Paul makes other statements that underscore that.

In the first Corinthians elective they're going to be encountering some of those statements in the weeks ahead here. You are dead in your trespasses and sins in which you formerly, by the way the word formerly is translated from pate, is in the New Testament always used of unbelievers who become believers.

You were formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit which is now working in the sons of disobedience." Okay, what's that sons of? Like in character and close in relationship, right? Among them, we too all formerly, here's the same word, live in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature, what? children of wrath, like in character and close in relationship to wrath, even as the rest. Then there's sometimes both negative and positive connotation in the same passage or verse.

The example we give is 1 John 3.10, for by this the children of God, who's that? That's us, right? Children of God and the children of the devil, like in character and close in relationship, are obvious, anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother." Alright, top of page three.

So this is perfect Kent's verbs, and I've already kind of jumped ahead in that first John 1 passage there. Perfect tense verbs are not that common in the New Testament. When they are used, they are almost always used for a particular purpose. What does a perfect tense verb mean? Continuance. It is a completed past action. ongoing results, on into the present and on into the future, implying permanence unless the immediate context says otherwise.

So it is something we really don't have in our own language, in English, unless we use a lot of explanatory words. And by the way, that perfect tense meaning that, when I say implying permanence, it may not mean that in other Greek language outside the New Testament. But in the New Testament, that's the observation that we see.

So here is, for instance, here's John 19.30.

Therefore, when Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, it is finished. And that's in the perfect tense. Completed past action, ongoing results on into the present and the future, implying permanence. It is a word that means pay in a number of contexts, and I believe it also means that here. So Jesus said one Greek word, tetelestai, on the cross. It's all paid. And is it paid forever, or paid just temporarily? It's all a complete past action paid, with results in the present and ongoing on into the future, implying permanence.

So, when Christ paid the price on the cross, is that something that's going to be reversed in about five minutes? No. No, it's not. He didn't die on the cross. He didn't say, to tell us die, in order for it to just be good for a few minutes, or a few hours, or a few days.

So, when you see something is in the perfect tense, it's for a specific reason that that has been chosen. And unless you see it in the context reversed, then occasionally it will be. But unless you see it in the context reversed, it means something that is completely done, and it has effect now, and it's on into the future implying permanence.

So here's Colossians 2, 13, and 14, which doesn't have a perfect tense, but it does have the idea of payment. So when we are dead in our transgressions and the uncircumcision of our flesh, he made you alive together with him. having forgiven us all our transgressions, having canceled out the certificate of debt concerning the decrees against us." So that's the idea of what Jesus is saying to Telestai, it's all paid. Canceled out the debt note.

Alright, so let's see examples of the perfect tense. Here's Romans Excuse me, Romans 5, 1 and 2. Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into grace into which we stand, perfect tense, and we exult in hope of the glory of God. Okay, this in which we stand, are we going to just stand there for a few minutes in grace? No. in which we stand perfect tense. Completed past action, ongoing results in the present and on to the future, implying permanence. Are you going to go back under the law in five minutes? You shouldn't. What's that? You shouldn't. Yeah, you shouldn't. There is a completion and finality in that statement, because it's perfect tense.

This grace in which we stand, we continue to stand, and we will always stand. When we go to heaven, are we going to go back under law? No. When we come back with the Lord during the Millennial Kingdom, and He'll rule over the earth under the principle of law, are we going to go back under the law? No. In which we stand, continue to stand, and we'll always stand.

So the justified is in perfect tense, what is that, present? Ongoing action? I'll have to take a look at it. Just a guess. Yeah. This is Romans 5.1. Yeah, you can look that up, Craig. Meanwhile, we'll go on to 1 Corinthians 1, 2, and 3. To the church of God, which is a quorum, those who have been sanctified, perfect tense. Now, they've been sanctified, what does that mean? Set apart and made holy, right?

Now, do they have problems in their position, excuse me, in their condition? Yes. They have problems so bad, he's going to tell them in chapter 3, you guys are fleshly. He's going to tell them in chapter 11, some of you have died. Your behavior is so bad. God has had to take you out. He's going to tell them in chapter 15, some of you guys are not believing in the resurrection anymore. But he tells them in chapter 1, they've been sanctified in the perfect place.

Isn't that something? Isn't that something? It's amazing. Have they got problems? Lots of them. Is he going to tell them in chapter 6? you guys are approving and saying it's okay for this guy to be sleeping with a stepmother. Is that a problem? That's a really big problem. Did they lose their salvation over it?

Nope. That's something. That's really, really amazing. Here's 1 Corinthians 15 20, but now Christ has been raised. Perfect tense. What did you find out about that? Justify it. Justified is an aorist passive participle, so it's being used adjectivally. Right, so justified is a past tense statement, but it's not the perfect tense. So it's aorist? It's an aorist participle. Past tense statements are aorist indicative or aorist participles. So, in this way, here, Christ has been raised, and it is permanent of effect.

I don't know if that's in the perfect tense, but anyway. So, Galatians 2, 19 and 21, for through the law I died to the law, and by the way, that's not perfect tense, that I might live to God, I have been crucified, perfect tense, with Christ. Is my crucifixion with Christ somehow going to be negated or changed in five minutes? Am I somehow, God's going to go, eh, not so sure about that.

No. It is not ever going to be changed. It is a permanent effect. into the present and on into the future. I have been completely and entirely crucified with Christ with effect even now and on into eternity. It is not going to be changed. So the impact of these perfect tenses is huge. Here is the Hebrews 10 and 14. This is on page 4.

By this will we have been sanctified, perfect sense, through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. So what is the effect of that being sanctified? Is that something that comes and goes? Is that something that might be reversed? By this will we have been sanctified. Done deal. Forever. Now, look at this. This is amazing.

Verse 14, for by one offering is perfected, perfect tense, for all times those who are sanctified, but this is in the present tense, those who are being sanctified, in your position It's a done deal. It was a done deal for these people that he was writing to, who were having a spiritual hearing loss. They were becoming dull of hearing. He told them that earlier in Hebrews. But he says, you guys, you believed, so you positionally were sanctified, even though you've regressed spiritually. That's right, in the same passage. He has perfected, perfect tense for all time, those who are being sanctified.

It's one reason why this next year we're going to be offering an elective that will talk about, for the first quarter, about knowing the Lord and then what God is doing as a process in the life of believers for six months, and then we're going to be talking about what God's doing in the life of the church body for about three months. But understanding what are the processes that God has in place for believers. And so it's important to understand that. What position do we have, but what's God doing right now? Alright. Next thing. Yes.

You can see why a lot of people come away with a Calvinistic point of view as far as being saved. He died for the whole world, but there are some people who before the foundation of the earth were saved. Others weren't. But yet he died for all the people in the world. We won't have time to go into it now. But let me just make this statement. Calvinism, Arminianism, and Opentheism. Opentheism is God doesn't know the future, right?

All three of them agree on one thing. They agree on one thing. And it's amazing, they would be startled to think that they agree. They agree on the idea that I can understand all of what God is doing in my own human mind. And what I would say, instead of that, is that we cannot understand it that God's ways are higher than our ways. That the attempt to try to understand it and comprehend it in my own human mind ends up resulting in reductionism. I have to end up reducing what the Bible teaches. down to something I can understand. And in that case, all three of them are unbiblical.

Calvinism locks in with that understanding on God's sovereignty. Arminianism locks in with that same understanding, I can understand it all, on man's will. Opentheism locks in on God doesn't know the future. But, aside from that difference, they all agree. All three of those views, those isms, agree that I, as a human being, can understand how God does the whole salvation thing.

And it's reductionism and it's unbiblical. And they frequently will end up adopting a reduced set of laws from the Law of Moses, and they will frequently end up then having a reduced understanding of grace. Now, let's look at the examples, because we've run completely out of time. One is an example, the cultural understanding of humility. And let me just jump to it here.

In the Greco-Roman, that is the Greek and Roman culture, common throughout the Roman Empire, It was considered to be a character defect to be humble. Being proud and focusing on oneself and being arrogant was considered normal and healthy. Among the Jews, they did not have quite the same understanding, but they had something similar. They had a ranking system among the Jews, and it came into place in lots of different things. They had a ranking system that was so ingrained that even after Jesus multiple times addressed it at the Last Supper, guess what the disciples were arguing about?

Which one is the greatest? Isn't that amazing? That's just astounding. At multiple times he'd say, you know, unless you come as a little child. And he'd put a child right next to him, you know. And he'd talk about humility. At the Last Supper, after talking about it with them for three years, they're arguing, at the Last Supper, Jesus is hours away from being crucified, they're arguing over which one of them is the greatest. Isn't that amazing? That's just astounding. But it tells you how deeply culturally ingrained that concept was. How do I rank with other people?

So, what you find is that among both the Greeks and Romans, and among the Jews, although slightly different, Humility was not valued. So what you find is Jesus and the Apostles repeatedly talking about humility. Repeatedly talking about humility. By the way, why didn't the Greeks invent modern science? You know why they didn't? One of the very great reasons, it's not the only one, why they didn't invent modern science is they looked upon experimentation as beneath them. So they failed to develop modern science. And it wasn't until Christianity became a part of the culture of Europe that different Christians They weren't all the same kinds of Christians, but different Christians became the origin of modern science.

Because why? It didn't happen, even though the Greeks had a lot of things going in the right direction, it didn't happen because of this principle. As you interpret the Bible and you look at different things, that's something to keep in mind, both the Gospels and on into the rest of the New Testament. Humility had to be taught. It had to be exampled, because neither the Jewish nor the Greco-Roman, the Greek and Roman culture, underscored the need for humility, and said the exact opposite. Yes? Isn't that a primary part of the sin nature? Because if you look at Genesis, after the fall, that's when you see it appearing. Well, and the sin nature will even exhibit false humility.

Right? I'm terrible, I'm bad, all that stuff. That's not Christian either. Right? That's not Christian either. Okay, one more. Don't you dare tell me thank you. Okay? I could only find, and if you find another example, that's fine. I could only find one instance, and then I'm on page 6 here. Romans 16, 3 through 5, Prisca, or Priscilla, Akula, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, who for my life risked their own necks, to whom not only do I give thanks. It's the one instance I can find. If you find others, please feel free to let me know. But that's the one instance I see direct thanks to a person. Other than that, about 130 times I see expressions of thanks in the Old and New Testament directly to God. I thank my God for you is the examples that we have here out of Paul's writings.

Why? It's because in the Greek and Roman culture, particularly, if I were to thank you, that would bypass crediting the gods. And so to thank you directly would often be seen as calling a curse down upon you from the gods, who would be jealous for credit. So that's one of the patterns that you'll see in the New Testament and the Old Testament, is because of the thoughts that directly thanking a person was actually calling down a curse on them. You'll see a repeated pattern, Old and New Testaments. The only exception I can find is that Romans 16 passage. a repeated pattern culturally of thanking God because I wouldn't want to imply that I was thanking you directly because that would be calling down a curse of the gods upon you. So if you said thank you to somebody, they might be furious and scared because all of a sudden you're calling a curse of the gods on them.

And the gods would do who knows what because I said thank you. So these cultural insights are one of those things where I can have then multiple understandings. Why is Paul saying, I thank my God for you? Here is, for instance, the Philippians. Paul has received a monetary gift. He has received Epaphroditus, who was sent there to serve as Paul's servant.

And so he writes four chapters a thank you letter that doesn't say thank you. I thank my God for you, right? I thank my God for you. So he would say that, I thank my God for you, but he wouldn't dare say thank you. And so you'll see that throughout, especially the New Testament, but even in the Old Testament. You'll see thanking God, but you will very rarely see a direct thank you. Because a direct thank you, in our culture, we say, well, that is a blessing kind of statement for the person. But in that culture, it was typically looked upon as a cursing. Which is why you'll see lots of thanks to God, and even I thank my God for you, repeatedly, but not thank you. As far as I can tell, just one exception. So anyway, these are examples of interpretive leverage.

You understand one thing, and all of a sudden you have multiple places in the Bible where you can use that to understand the Bible better. So this is great stuff. This is really good stuff. So that's interpretive leverage, and I've given examples, there are more of them. I have not exhausted them. But there are lots of places where you learn one thing, and boy, now that I've learned that, I can apply it in dozens, sometimes even hundreds of places. Isn't that great? Yeah, it's good stuff.

Let's pray, because we've got people who are starting to press their noses up against the glass here. Okay, we thank you, Lord, for your word. We thank you for the things that you have set of insights that we can have where we understand one thing and then we have multiple places where we can apply it and get great understanding and insight. And so we pray these things Lord in Jesus name, giving you thanks in Jesus name, Amen.