Loading summary
Transcript35 lines
- [00:00]
A
Foreign. Greg, let's get right into this with a question from Todd.
- [00:16]
B
Yes, ma'. Am.
- [00:17]
A
I've heard it said often that some things described in Scripture are descriptive, not prescriptive, like murder or polygamy. Should we view the believer's despair portrayed in Psalms or Job descriptively, prescriptively, or is there some middle way we should look at it?
- [00:34]
B
Well, just to distinguish between these two words, description is simply that description. Prescription is not telling us what is description, but what ought to be. So when we read about polygamy in the Bible, some people say, well, there's polygamy in the Bible. Yeah, but it's just describing what people do. It's. It's not saying we ought to do that. All right, it's simply describing it. Now, that's the distinction between the words. Then as an interpretive task, we have to decide, is this prescriptive or merely descriptive? And that depends on the passage. So I wonder if you, having clarified those two terms, reread the challenge or the question, is there a third way
- [01:25]
A
kind of thing, should we view the believer's despair portrayed in Psalms or Job descriptively, prescriptively, or is there some middle way?
- [01:34]
B
Well, no. Yeah. It is merely describing believers despair. As far as I can tell, it is not prescribing it. It isn't saying you ought to despair. That's what prescription is. This is what you ought to do. That's also what the word normative means. It means it ought to be the case, not necessarily that it is characteristically, but the normative guidelines of what we ought to do, the prescriptive ones. When we read in Jo and Psalms, in the despair of those people, we just get a clear human perspective of the struggle of life. Even when you know God, they're describing what life is like, it isn't saying this is what life ought to be like. It's telling us what life is like and how people deal with those kinds of difficulties, whether it's Job or the psalmist. Sometimes what we learn from the psalmist is we can identify with the same things that the psalmist is going through. So in the case of David, in Psalm 13, in particular, how long, O Lord, will you reject me forever? How long will you hide your face from me? How long will I take counsel in my heart, having sorrow in my soul all the day? I mean, I can read that passage and say, I get it. I feel the same way at different times. So he's being very candid in describing his struggles, his anguish. Now, it ends on a positive note. In that particular psalm, it's not very long. But nevertheless, when we see his candid dealing with God in the Psalms, then we can say, oh, yeah, he's real. He's like me. And so I know these verses because I've read them a lot in identification with him. And in the case of Job, there is something else going on because Job is being instructed at the end. So Job is going through all of this hardship, not knowing why he's going through the hardship, but not willing to distrust God in the midst of it. Though he killed me, yet will I trust him? Is Job's famous kind of response to the whole thing. But at the end, he's demanding, essentially, an answer from God, saying, why does this happen to me? And God says, who are you? I'm in charge, not you. Where were you when? I mean, the famous questions that God offers. Where were you when this? Where were you when? And then Job is humbled. So there is a prescriptive element there, descriptive of his challenges, but prescriptive, saying, when we go through these things, it's not wrong to approach God with these things, but we have to keep in mind there's a difference between us and God. God exists and we're not him, as some people put it. And so I think there is a prescriptive element there.
- [04:41]
A
Yeah, I agree. I think there are some prescriptive elements to their response to their despair. Or at least, at the very least, it's acceptable. So it's acceptable to respond in this way, even if it doesn't go so far in certain places where you would say you should respond this way. But we certainly learn things from, say, the Psalms. We see people being in despair, but then they look back over what God has done, and this happens over and over, and they consider all the things God has already proven his character to be. And then they say, and I will trust in you. So I think that's the kind of thing that is prescriptive. Or in the case of Job, Job doesn't give up on God. He continues to be faithful to God, even though he's challenging him and in pain and all these things. So those are certainly things that I think we can say are prescriptive.
- [05:37]
B
Yeah, like his statement, though he slay me, yet will I trust him? And this is how we ought to address our problems and issues as Christians. And when the ought comes in, that's a prescriptive element.
- [05:50]
A
But I don't think I would say that the despair itself, being in despair is something that's prescribed unless you're going to say you are all going to. If it was good enough for David, it's good enough for you. You are going to suffer. But I think only in that sense would I say that despair is for the suffering.
- [06:13]
B
Yeah. Jesus says, in this world you will have tribulation, but be of good cheer. So the first half is descriptive, the second half is prescriptive. In the midst of that, be of good cheer because I've overcome the world.
- [06:27]
A
All right. And on those lines, here's a question from Maddie. Are the Beatitudes found in Matthew 5 descriptive, prescriptive, or both?
- [06:35]
B
Oh, I actually think they are largely descriptive. So let's just go to them. Because he's saying, blessed are those who. And then has qualifiers for that. And so therefore he's describing how and in the way in which those who have certain qualities are experiencing certain things are blessed. Blessed are the poor. That's descriptive. Poor in spirit, actually. And for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are those who mourn. Descriptive. Why are they blessed? For they shall be comforted. That's also descriptive of something in the future, or whatever. Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit thee. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness. They shall be satisfied. Blessed are the merciful, they shall receive mercy. So this is a state of affairs, a current state of affairs, which results in some other state of affairs. So this is all descriptive. Then in verse 12, capping it off, after he says, blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Now Jesus wants us to count this as true. Keep in mind, when people do this to you, I know it's not fun, but you are actually blessed. And then the next verse, there's a prescriptive element. Rejoice, be glad. Why? For your reward in heaven is great. For in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. So the rejoicing be glad is prescriptive in light of the descriptive fact that certain things are going to fall to you, benefit you, in the midst of this circumstance.
- [08:29]
A
And it seems to me he's describing his people there, that those who are his are the ones who are humble. And I can't remember all the things in there, but gentle, gentle. And they'll be persecuted. And their time has come, because now Jesus is here, and now you are blessed, and you are going to receive all the things that are. That God has promised you. So, yeah, that's good, Greg. All right, let's go to the question. Let's go to the question from Michael.
- [09:03]
B
Glad to satisfy with that.
- [09:05]
A
How do we meditate on God's word just by reading it? How is meditating on God's word different from yoga?
- [09:12]
B
Eastern meditation is meant to kind of empty your mind of content to accomplish an end that is important in those Eastern religions. And it's to empty the mind for a certain purpose. Now, these are called asanas. These are spiritual practices to accomplish a spiritual goal. We don't do asanas. That's strictly speaking, I guess, if you say yes. Are there things that we do to accomplish spiritual goals? Yeah. Why don't you call that an asana? Because that's a term of art pertaining to a very precise kind of religious practice to get a very particular kind of spiritual end that has to do with the whole story that Eastern religions characterize as a story of reality. When it comes to biblical meditation, it's very different. I don't know the root words for these terms like in Hebrew or in Greek. Unfortunately, though, the translation is the same as the kind of things that is described in Eastern religions. When. When you look at the details, the details are entirely different. And I started to suggest the difference. In that kind of meditation, you are emptying your mind. In biblical meditation, you are filling your mind with something in particular that you chew on, so to speak. And my understanding is that the Hebrew words do invoke the image of a bovine animal chewing his cud, right? You kind of cough it up and you jump, munching on it for a while. And like those cows that are chewing away and they're laying on concrete and where do you get the grass? In any event, that's what you do here. You take a passage, and we've actually talked about this at different times, especially you when you memorize verses and then begin to repeat these slowly to yourself and talk about the Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want. Then you walk through that kind of slowly and you think about those things. One way to do that is to emphasize different words to kind of maybe give us a fresh take of that. The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want. He makes me lie down in green pastures. He leads me. Besides, he restores my soul. Just reflecting on those slowly does something to us as we kind of chew on that. And as that's meditation in a biblical fashion.
- [11:48]
A
On content.
- [11:49]
B
On content, substance, not nothing. In Eastern religions, when they give you a mantra, ay ying, ay ying ying, you say this over and over to kind of create an altered state of consciousness, to let Your mind be emptied out and get in touch then in some way with a cosmic reality. Now, of course, this fits with their view of reality. It's not true. It's inconsistent with the biblical worldview. There's no way to put them both together because they have completely different conceptions of the structure of reality and the nature of God. But that's the big difference. Do we empty our minds? And by the way, there are some Christians, so called spiritual practices that seem like that, and we've spoken against that for that reason. That seem like you're doing kind of the Eastern thing and you're emptying your mind of content maybe to be able to hear from God. And by emptying your mind now, you're getting in touch with a transcendent reality. It's the same kind of exercise, but presumably you're getting in touch with God. But this kind of thing is never taught in the Bible and there are all kinds of dangers in that approach. But it's content, Biblical, no content. Any other kind of meditation.
- [13:11]
A
So this question, how do we meditate on God's word just by reading it? I think if you read a passage of Scripture and then you sit there and you think about it, what does it mean? How does this go together? What's the train of thought here? What does this teach me about God? As you're thinking about that passage, I think it does go a little bit farther along than just reading it. I think it involves thinking about what it means and what it tells us about God. You might want to write down your thoughts and help you to stay on track so you don't go off and lose your train of thought. Memorizing is definitely a good way because you have to keep going over it and over it. And as you're going through the whole passage, you see many more things as you go over and over it. There was a man named James Gray who developed this way of mastering the Bible. And it was to read a book over and over and over, like many, many times in a row.
- [14:20]
B
Same translation, by the way.
- [14:21]
A
Yes. And as you do it, at first you might start to say, okay, this is boring. But then you start to take it in in a different way, see how things fit together in a different way. It starts to become part of you. And I think that's what meditation is about. So that would be an example of how you could read it over and over and over until it starts to become part of you. But again, this isn't trying to get something in addition to the text. This is Trying to get the text into you.
- [14:49]
B
Yeah, Right.
- [14:50]
A
You're not using the text to get some other thing.
- [14:52]
B
That's right. Yeah. It's not a Ying. You had mentioned before in an earlier broadcast about you had a season in your life where you would read half a gospel at a time, a bunch of times over and over to kind of try to absorb Jesus, the image of Jesus, the works of Jesus, the way he dealt with people and circumstances and stuff like that. And this is similar to what you're talking about here.
- [15:19]
A
And we all know that the things that we're reading or watching are shaping us. They shape the way we act. They shape the way just look at kids when they're acting out things that they watch on tv. And this affects all of us. So it will affect you if you're doing. If you're reading a lot and you're thinking about it. And by a lot, I don't mean necessarily. I mean time. I don't necessarily mean you. So maybe you read one small part over and over, as long as you know what it is in context. Like, I wouldn't read. I always recommend reading a whole book if you can, but some of the longer books, you just can't do that. But yes, I did use that James Gray method. It took me five years to get through the whole New Testament, but I would take one book of the Bible, of the New Testament and read it every day for a month. And it took me five years to get through, all because I had to break up some of the longer books into two sections. But it really does make a difference. And when you pair that with memorization, it makes a huge difference.
- [16:23]
B
Well, I think what's going to happen. I'm just reflecting on what happens in my own life now. I don't memorize Scripture, but I know a lot. And I think I know a lot just because of my exposure to it. I do always work with the same translation, so the same words are repeating over in my mind. And some of these words just have I read the new American Standard. I actually love the way it's worded, maybe because after 50 years I'm so used to it. But one of my favorite verses is 1 John 3:1. And he says, see how great a love the Father has bestowed upon us, that we should be called the children of God. And such we are. What a sweet. What a sweet reflection. And it's worth us reflecting on that. You know, if people were reflecting deeply on that once a day and not reading it just to get it out of the way. This is part of the liability of. Of having a pattern of reading regularly is that you do it in a perfunctory way and you're not paying attention to it. You have to read the words, and you have to pay attention to it for it have the impact. But if you do that, even if it's just a few verses. John MacArthur talked about this way of reading, too. You keep reading, pretty soon you just really grasp the whole and the parts that make up the whole. And it makes it a lot easier to remember the concepts and remember actually word reading of the passage without even working at memorizing it. At least that's been the case for me.
- [17:56]
A
So let's finish up this episode with a question from Billy. Okay, how should I respond to my sister who says the Bible gives us information about God? You can't read it again and again and say you have a relationship with God.
- [18:09]
B
Billy?
- [18:10]
A
Yes.
- [18:10]
B
All right. So now this is a little archaic, a habit that I'm going to mention, but sometimes you see this in movies. It used to be that when people communicated with each other that they wrote letters, they didn't text, they didn't send an email, they didn't phone, because those things weren't available. Servicemen in World War II would send letters and they'd receive letters. And when a serviceman sent a letter in World War II, or even the Civil War, we have these letters, and they're a great source of historical information about that period of time. But people who receive the letter, especially sweethearts, they save them. And what do they do? They read them over and over and over again because of the richness and satisfaction of hearing the words again from one who you love and who loves you. When I went in the army in 1969 for basic training, my high school sweetheart, and we had been going together for about two years, took a trip around the world, and she would write me letters and then post them from different parts of the world. It was a cruise, and I just couldn't wait to get that letter. And when I got the letter, I would devour it and then devour it again and again and again and again. So the enjoyment of reading something over and over and over again is not inimical to relationship. It's consistent with a loving relationship.
- [19:46]
A
Do you think? Would you say that it. I'm trying to put the best spin on what she's saying to him. It's hard to know if she's denigrating that aspect of it or if she's saying it's not Sufficient. How would you respond to? I think what you're responding to is the first have that it's not sufficient or no, that she's sorry. The second half that she's denigrating it and saying it's not, it's not consistent. It's just information about it's not part of the relationship.
- [20:19]
B
Oh yeah, see I am taking exception with that. I'm not saying it's totally sufficient. But there are people who are pen pals, right? I mean they don't do that hardly anymore, but people might know what that was. Where people had a relationship long distance by writing letters back and forth. CS Lewis had a letter relationship with Joy Davidman, who he ended up marrying twice as it turns out. You know who would say that this was like emotionally shallow because they were writing to each other and we have those letters. Lewis wrote so many letters that a lot of what we know about him is in the letters he wrote to other people. He had a very, very aggressive correspond that he answered letters when people wrote to him. So why would that just be shallow? That's not a real relationship. I don't understand that.
- [21:15]
A
You could be someone who just reads the Bible because you wanna know what the Bible says. Maybe you're not a Christian, maybe you don't care about God and in that case it's probably not going to do anything for relationship. But you certainly can't have a relationship without doing that because then you don't know who God is.
- [21:32]
B
I wonder if this, if you could study first aid to learn the details of how first aid is done. And that's an academic enterprise. Just for curiosity, how do you revive somebody? What if you had to revive people? You would read it a little differently and then you put it into play. And so maybe this is a different way of reading. Some people read it theologically and assessing or criticizing or whatever, but they are not using it for its life giving capabilities. And that's what Christians do with scripture. It gives them life. The Word is living and active. It is doing something in our lives. It's making a difference. Long for the pure milk of the Word in order that by it Peter writes, you can grow with respect to salvation. So there is a life giving element to that. It's not just academic.
- [22:25]
A
Well, thank you Todd and Maddie and Michael and Billy. What four questions today? Please send us your question. You can go and you just use the hashtag strask but you can also. And this is where we actually get most of our questions. If you just go to str.org and you look for our Strask podcast page, you'll find a link there. You can send us your question, and all we ask is that you keep it short a sentence or two. So it's roughly the same size as a tweet when tweets existed. Now they're ex posts and now they're long. So none of that really matters anymore. But that's just the format that we're using. So we would love to hear your question. If you've been thinking about it, send that on in. And thank you so much for listening. This is Amy hall and Greg Kokel for Stand to Reason.