The Bible Still Means What It Meant Then

The Bible Still Means What It Meant Then

By Doug Berleson | ASSISTANT DEAN OF BIBLICAL STUDIES AT FREED-HARDEMAN UNIVERSITY

Just because a Bible-reading practice is popular does not mean it is proper. In uncertain times, it is understandable that people open their Bibles in search of answers to current events. While looking for contemporary meaning in the text is an honorable pursuit, it is possible to find applications that the writers did not intend. Readers who allow their pre-understanding of God or the world to shape how they read Scripture can easily be misled. Our goal should be to discover what the writer intended and to understand the text.

There is a long history of people assigning meanings today that could not have worked in the original setting. Here are a few examples: In the mid-twentieth century, Louis T. Talbot, a religious leader claimed in an article entitled “Christ in the Tabernacle” that the brass tent pegs God revealed to Moses for use in the tabernacle (Exodus 27:19) represented the unrusting nails that kept Christ on the cross. Likewise, a Facebook post in 2025 by End time Ministries concluded that the reference in Daniel 7:4 to the ‘lion with wings as an eagle’ refers to the United States (the eagle) defeating Great Britian (the lion) in the Revolutionary War. Augustine (354-430 A.D.) once suggested that the innkeeper in the Parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:34 was the apostle Paul, while the inn itself was the church. A YouTube video entitled “How AI May Be Part of the End Times” suggests that 2 Thessalonians 2:4, where the man of lawlessness takes his seat in the temple, may refer to Artificial Intelligence.

These examples may seem extreme, but they highlight a serious issue. Readers of Scripture must be careful to rightly divide the Word of God by understanding what it meant to its first readers and how that meaning applies today. When we approach a biblical text, we are not seeking to confirm our presuppositions but to discover the writer’s intended meaning through the historical, literary and theological contexts.

CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT

First, we must consider the historical context of the passage. This raises several important questions: Who did God use to write this text, and to whom was it written? What were those first readers experiencing? Was it a time of conflict or peace? What covenant were they living under? As noted above, the Israelites would not have been thinking about the nails of the cross while building the tabernacle during the Exodus.

While the writer of Hebrews provides an inspired interpretation of the tabernacle and its furnishings (Hebrews 9:1–5), he does not connect the bronze tent pegs to the cross of Christ. More likely, the tent pegs were part of God’s design because they provided a practical and stable way to secure the structure, along with the sockets (Exodus 27:9–21), and could be easily transported. It does not seem that those who first heard Moses’ words would have thought about the nails used in Jesus’ crucifixion. If an application does not fit the historical context, we should be cautious about adopting it. While God certainly knows the future, His inspired communication was meaningful to its original audience.

Second, we must consider the literary context of the passage. This includes questions such as: Which testament is the passage in? What genre are we reading—law, prophecy, poetry, narrative, parable, apocalypse or epistle? Are figures of speech being used? Jesus told the Parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10 in response to a lawyer’s question, “Who is my neighbor?” (v.29). Parables were a common teaching method Jesus used to connect familiar situations to spiritual truths. In this story, the focus is not on the innkeeper but on the Samaritan who compassionately helps the wounded man, unlike the priest or Levite (vv. 33–34). While we can appreciate the work God did through the apostle Paul, it is unlikely that Jesus intended the innkeeper to represent Paul—especially since Paul’s conversion would occur years later. If the literary context does not highlight certain details, we should be cautious about assigning them symbolic meaning. Different genres communicate truth in different ways and recognizing those differences helps prevent misinterpretation.

A WAY FORWARD

The Bible was not first written to us. Every passage has a historical, literary, and theological context that must be respected if we are to understand what the inspired writer intended. Our assumptions about God or our own lives can cloud our judgment if we are not careful. We must learn to rightly divide the Word of God by seeking applications that align with the meaning understood by its first readers. We should resist the temptation to impose modern ideas onto ancient texts, especially when those interpretations could not have been recognized by the original audience. Let us approach Scripture with humility, allowing it to speak within its context rather than forcing it to address every contemporary concern in ways it was never intended to do. In doing so, we honor both the text’s message and the God who revealed it.