Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Rightly Dividing The Word
Rightly Dividing The Word
Rightly Dividing The Word
by Mike Vinson
iswasandwillbe@gmail.com
Posted December 2001
The Bible is without question the most well known book in the history of this world. It is the
most revered book on earth. It has for decades consistently outsold every other book in the
world. Bible sales top 100 million every year. It always heads the best seller list.
While it is no doubt the most quoted and most popular book in the world, it is at the same time
paradoxically the least read and even less understood book of all time.
Why is a book so universally acknowledged as the Word of God, or at the very least the greatest
piece of literature in existence, so completely misunderstood or ignored?
God gives us His answer to this paradox. Within this answer we are given a key to unlocking the
scriptures. Notice this statement directly from the mind of God via the pen of the apostle Paul: …
the natural man receives not the things of the spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him:
neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned… (I Cor. 2:14).
Notice: …the things of the Spirit of God…are spiritually discerned. They are "foolishness" to the
natural mind. The natural mind may want to receive them but …neither can he know them
because they are spiritually discerned.
So no amount of writing, explaining or educating can give one an ability to receive…the things
of the Spirit of God…because they are spiritually discerned.
Education is not the gift of the Spirit of God. Take note what the educated leaders of the church
said of Christ, …How knoweth this man letters having never learned? Christ was not illiterate,
and the Pharisees acknowledged this fact. But they could not understand where his "knowledge
of letters" came from "having never learned" within their educational system. Christ was not as
the learned pharisee, the apostle Paul, brought up at the feet of Gamaliel. Yet at the age of
twelve, he was asking questions of the teachers in the temple at Jerusalem. And all that heard
him were astonished at his understanding and answers. (Luke 2:46-47)
So how did He come by this knowledge? We are given the answer in a response from Christ to a
statement made by Peter …You are the Christ the son of the living God. (Matt. 16:16) Christ's
response was Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood has not revealed it unto thee,
but my Father which is in heaven. (Matt. 16:17)
Apparently no amount of education gives one "spiritual discernment", only those to whom "the
Father reveals it." It is to just such people that this discussion is addressed; to those who know
through "Christ in them" (Gal. 2:20) that the Bible in the original Hebrew and Greek is the
revealed Word of God to man.
Now the apostle Paul made a statement to just such a man that has given rise to much discussion
and disputation over the years. Timothy was a young man whom the apostle Paul thought so
much of that he called him his dearly beloved son (II Tim. 1:2). As such, he admonished Timothy
to study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly
dividing the word of truth. (II Tim. 2:15)
Could there possibly be a connection between this "rightly dividing" and the "spiritually
discerned" of I Cor. 2:14? Surely the answer to this question and the godly understanding of both
of these scriptures is demonstrated for us in the scriptures themselves, in the examples set for us
by Christ and His apostles. Can anyone deny that the understanding Christ had of scriptures
should be our understanding? Would the apostle Paul "rightly divide" scripture in one manner
and then expect us to "rightly divide" it some other way? Surely not!
So now let us without any "idols of our hearts" (Eze. 14) examine how Christ, the writers of the
gospels and the apostle Paul "rightly divided the word of truth." Let us with an open mind search
for the examples given us of discerning "the things of the Spirit of God."
The best treatment ever given this subject, to the knowledge of this writer, is within the pages of
a 150 year old out-of-print book by one Andrew Jukes. The name of the book is The Mystery of
the Kingdom. Mr. Jukes takes note that Christ is called "the Word of God" (John 1:1). As such,
whatever applied to Christ in the flesh, will also apply to the written Word. Contrary to the
modern concept of Christ as having a halo around His head, nothing could be further from the
truth. The truth is Christ was so common looking that He could, and did, lose Himself in a crowd
of Jews of His time (Luke 4:28-30). Seeing Christ in the flesh alone no one would ever have
known He was the son of God. As we have related, this was only revealed to a few of that time,
not by flesh and blood, but by "my Father which is in heaven" (Matt.16:17). Christ was in every
visible way as common as any human who ever lived.
But there was much more to this Jesus, the "son of Joseph", than met the eyes. Casually seeing
Christ, one could never have discerned the boundless love within Him. One could never simply
by meeting and shaking hands with Him have been aware of the complete and total oneness He
was with the written Word. No one without a revelation from God would even have known that
this man was the supernaturally conceived and begotten Son of God.
No, outwardly, he was the perfect disguise for the creator of the universe. "He was in the world,
and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not" (John 1:10). "He came to His
own, and His own received Him not" (John 1:10-11). Anyone who did not 'need' Christ certainly
did not recognize who He was. Anyone who came to Christ measuring Him against their
preconceived idea that the Christ had to be a physically powerful man with the ability to throw
off Roman rule, was surely disappointed.
To the righteous of the day, He was a great disappointment, picking corn on the Sabbath, healing
on the Sabbath and then telling a man to pick up his bed and carry it on the Sabbath. To such,
Christ was a door shut tight, keeping God out of sight.
Now if this is all true of Christ, the Word in the "flesh" (John 1:1), then the same must be true of
the written Word. Is it true of the written Word? Is there really more to it than meets the eye?
Could it be that just as the Word in the flesh was hidden right out in the open, so the written
Word too, is right there for anyone to see yet none but those "to whom it is given" (Matt. 13:11)
see it? Could it possibly be so complex for the average person that simply reading the Words,
considering the context and believing what was written was not enough to grasp the deepest
meaning of what had been said?
• Get away from your kindred and from your father's house.
In line with, and as a result of these three promises to Abram, God says (vs. 3) "And I will bless
them that bless thee and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all the families of the earth
be blessed."
Verse 4 tells us Abram was still in Haran and departed from Haran when he was 75 years old.
Verse 5 says he took his wife Sarai and Lot, his nephew, and "they went forth to go into the land
of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came." Verse 6 says he passed through the land of
Canaan "…and the Canaanite was then in the land." Hence, the name "land of Canaan". Now the
Lord adds more detail to His promise to Abram. Notice verse 7 - "And the Lord appeared to
Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land:…", the land of Canaan.
The next mention of this covenant with Abram is in chapter 13:14 - "And the Lord said unto
Abram…Lift up now your eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward and
southward and eastward and westward: (vs. 15) for all the land which you seest, to you will I
give it, and to your seed forever. (vs. 16) And I will make your seed as the dust of the earth: so
that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then can your seed also be numbered. (vs. 17)
Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it unto
thee."
The promise now is somewhat altered:
• Instead of simply promising to make Abram "a great nation", he is told "I will make your
seed as the dust of the earth…"
• Instead of "to a land that I will show you", he is told "for all the land which you seest, to
you will I give it and to your seed forever."
But the most specific description of the land given to Abram, is in chapter 15:18: "In the same
day, the Lord made a covenant with Abram saying, unto thy seed have I given this land, from the
river of Egypt to the great river Euphrates."
In chapter 17:4, he is told: "As for me, behold my covenant is with you and you shall be a father
of many nations." This is where his name is changed from Abram to Abraham, which means "a
father of many nations." (vs. 6)
The last mention of the promises given Abraham is in Gen. 22 - "And Abraham stretched forth
his hand and took the knife to slay his son." Abraham had demonstrated to God that nothing
would become an idol to come between him and his God, not even his own son. (vs. 10-13).
Therefore the Lord says to Abraham "…because you have done this thing, and have not withheld
thy son, thine only son; (vs. 17) that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will
multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and as the sand which is upon the seashore; and thy seed
shall possess the gate of his enemies; (vs. 18) and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be
blessed; because you have obeyed my voice."
So here we have the promises in their final form:
• Abraham is to inherit the land of Canaan from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates.
• His seed is to be "as the dust of the earth", "as the sand of the sea" and "as the stars of
heaven."
• "Thy seed shall possess the gates of his enemies."
• "And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed."
"Thy seed" meant, of course, that these promises were passed on to Isaac and from Isaac to
Jacob. These are the "promises made unto the fathers" referred to by the apostle Paul in Rom.
15:8 and Gal. 3:29.
What do these promises mean to Paul? Do they mean, as we are told today, "Abraham's seed
according to physical descendants are to possess modern Israel, and we will be blessed if we
support them and cursed if we do not?
No, the message we are commonly taught today concerning Israel is nothing like the true
message of Paul. Paul, like Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter and James seemed to have a
principle of scriptural interpretation Christians, as a whole, do not grasp.
What did the promise "in thee shall all the nations of the earth be blessed" mean to Paul? He tells
us in Gal. 3:8: "And the scriptures foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith,
preached before the gospel unto Abraham, In thee shall all the nations of the earth be blessed (vs.
9) so then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham."
To Paul, the promise "in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed" (Gen. 22:18) had
nothing to do with physical descent. Paul took this as a statement concerning a spiritual
principle, the principle of faith in the word of God. To Paul the "thy seed" of Gen. 22:18 are
those in Christ. "And if you be Christ's, then are you Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the
promises" (same chapter vs. 29).
"Heirs according to the promises"? Is Paul saying that the Gentiles who accept Christ are to
inhabit Canaan "from the river of Egypt, to the great river, the river Euphrates"? Does Paul also
spiritualize the promised land? Well, yes, he does! Turn to Rom. 4:13: "For the promise that he
(Abraham) should be heir of the world, was…through the righteousness of faith. "Heir of the
world"? Where did he get that? What happened to "From the river of Egypt to the river
Euphrates"?
To Paul all the promises were primarily and ultimately spiritual statements having nothing to do
with the physical realm. They certainly had nothing to do with Abraham's physical seed and
descendants. Rom. 9:6 "…For they are not all Israel which are of Israel: (vs. 7) Neither, because
they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but in Isaac shall thy seed be called." What
does "in Isaac" mean? Does it mean physically descended from Abraham and therefore entitled
to the promises?
If it does, you are saying that the promises don't pertain to you, the adoption (maturing to the
point of carrying on the Father's business) doesn't apply to you. Instead, you are saying the
adoption and the promises apply to those who today, by the letter, are called "God's chosen
people", but who Paul calls the "son of the bondwoman" who he says "shall not be heir with the
son of the free woman" (Gal. 4:30).
If we believe that "Israel according to the flesh" is still "God's chosen people", we, like Esau, are
selling our birthright and believing that the son of the bondwoman (Jerusalem that now is and is
in bondage with her children) will be made heir with the son of the free woman. It is Hagar, the
bondwoman, who answers to Jerusalem that now is and is in bondage with her children (Gal.
4:25). Paul is not saying that the other Jewish apostles or any believing Jew who happened to be
in Jerusalem was in bondage. He is saying that being "of Israel" or "of Abraham" physically, has
nothing to do with being "the seed of Abraham" or "an heir according to the promise".
So who does God "count for the seed"; who are the "heirs according to the promise?" Let's go
right back to where we left off in Rom. 9:7 "…In Isaac shall thy seed be called" (vs. 8) That is,
they which are the children of the flesh, THESE ARE NOT THE CHILDREN OF GOD: but the
children of the promise are counted for the seed."
Who then are the "heirs", these "children of the promise"? "If you be Christ's, then are you
Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." (Gal. 3:29)
This agrees with Christ's statement in John 8:37 - "I know you are Abraham's seed: but…" (Skip
one verse and read verse 39)…"If you were Abraham's children, you would do the works of
Abraham…" (vs. 44) "You are of your father the devil…" Christ says they are Abraham's
children in verse 37 and says they aren't in verse 39. As Paul said in Rom. 9:6, "They are not all
Israel who are of Israel."
See how far Paul carries this spiritual approach to the scriptures in Rom. 9:2: "…I have great
heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. (vs. 3) For I could wish that myself were accursed
from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh." Does this not sound just like
Abraham when told that his son "according to the flesh" was not to be counted for the seed. His
immediate response was like Paul and many of us today. "Oh, that Ishmael (Jerusalem that now
is) might live before thee" (Gen. 17:18 and Gal. 4:25-30).
Continuing now in Rom. 9:4: "Who (natural Jews) are Israelites to whom pertaineth the
adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God and
the promises."
So the adoption and the promises "pertain to Israel" and yet Israel "according to the flesh" is "the
son of the bondwoman" (Gal. 4:30) and cannot be heir with the son of the freewoman. So to
whom now does the adoption pertain? Rom. 8:14 - "For as many as are led by the Spirit of
God, they are the sons of God (the seed of Abraham) (vs. 15) for ye (you Roman Gentiles)
have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the spirit of adoption,
whereby we cry, Abba, Father". (Gal. 4:5) - "…that we (Gentile Galatians) might receive the
adoption of sons". And Eph. 1:5 "Having predestinated us (Gentile Ephesians) unto the adoption
of children by Jesus Christ…"
Who then is Paul calling "Israelites to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the
covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God and the promises?"
Since Gal. 4 seems so hard for many to grasp, let's consider Eph. 2:11: "Wherefore remember,
that you being in time past (not at present) Gentiles in the flesh, who are called uncircumcision
by that which is called the circumcision in the flesh made by hands. (vs. 12) That at that time (in
the past) ye were without Christ, being (in the past) aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and
strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. (vs. 13)
But now in Christ Jesus you who sometimes (in the past) were far off are made near by the blood
of Christ." Just how near is near? (vs. 19) "Now therefore ye are not more strangers and
foreigners, but FELLOW CITIZENS (OF ISRAEL) with the saints, and of the household of
God."
Paul has just revealed that so far as God is concerned, Israel in the flesh has been replaced by
Israel according to the Spirit. He goes on in chapter 3 verse 2: "…Ye have heard of the
dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward: (vs. 3) How that by revelation
he made known unto me the mystery…"
Is this some extra-scriptural revelation of which Paul is speaking? Hardly! Standing before
Agrippa in Acts 26:22, he states clearly that he spoke "none other things than those which the
prophets and Moses did say should come. (vs. 23) That Christ should suffer, and that he should
be the first that should rise from the dead, and should show light unto the people and UNTO
THE GENTILES."
Two chapters later speaking to the Jews in Rome after "he expounded and testified the kingdom
of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses and out of the prophets,
from morning until evening" (Rom. 28:23). Of course, they rejected it, and Paul makes this
statement to them: (vs. 28) "Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God (the
adoption, and the glory, and the covenants and the giving of the law, and the service of God and
the promises) is sent unto the Gentiles, and they will hear it."
Continuing now with Eph. 3:3 - "How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery…
(vs. 5) which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto
his holy apostles (Paul here and in Acts 15 says the apostles agreed with Paul) and prophets by
the Spirit." What is this mystery (secret) revealed to Paul and the apostles? (vs. 6) "That the
Gentiles should be fellow heirs AND OF THE SAME BODY and partakers of the promise (not
separate promises) in Christ by the gospel."
Notice no Jew vs. Gentile; no body vs. bride; no heaven vs. earth inheritance, but rather "fellow
heirs". (Vs. 9) "And to make ALL MEN see what is the FELLOWSHIP OF THE MYSTERY
which from the beginning of the world has been hid in God who created all things by Jesus
Christ."
Any doubt about the oneness of the body of Christ should be shattered by these plain statements
by Paul as to who constitutes an Israelite. There are still those, though, who contend that there is
a "body" made up primarily of Gentile believers and a "bride" made up of Jewish believers. "You
can't be both a body and a bride" they say.
This is the equivalent of saying you can't be both a tree (which we are - Rom. 11:24) and a
temple (which we are - I Cor. 6:19). Paul does call us, the Gentile Christians, both a body and a
bride. In Rom. 12:5 - "…we being many are one body in Christ." In II Cor. 11:2 - "…I have
espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." Can one be a
"chaste virgin" presented to a husband and a "son"? Gal. 4:6 - "…because you are sons…"
Yes, God can and does give us, His children, many different, sometimes apparently contradictory
descriptions. We are sons and virgins. We are trees and temples. We are stones and lights. We are
soldiers and sheep, etc.
Paul concludes Galations with this summary statement. Gal. 6:15 - For in Christ Jesus neither
circumcision (being a natural Israelite) availeth anything, nor uncircumcision (being born a
Gentile) but a new creature. (vs. 16) And as many as walk according to this rule (of vs. 15) peace
be on them and mercy and upon the Israel of God.
Out of context?
We can see the spiritual application isn't out of context at all! The literal fleshly application is the
error. (II Cor. 3:6) "Who (God) also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the
letter, but of the spirit, for the letter (the fleshly, physical, literal, context oriented) kills, but the
spirit (as you have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren…) gives life." According to
Rom. 7:6, "But now we are delivered from the (letter of the) law that being dead ("the letter
kills") wherein we were held, that we should serve (the law of God - Rom. 7:22 and 25) in
newness of Spirit and not in oldness of letter."
Prooftexting?
It was Peter who was chosen to reveal to us in II Pet. 1:20 that "no prophecy of the scripture is of
any private interpretation. (vs. 21) For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but
holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."
The word 'private' in verse 20 is Strong's #2398, idios in the Greek. It appears 109 times in the
New Testament and is generally interpreted as 'apart' or 'his own'. So "no scripture of prophecy"
is to be taken 'apart' from other scripture or used on 'its own'. Why not? (vs. 21) "For (because)
the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were
moved by the Holy Ghost."
It all has the same author, the Holy Spirit, so it will never contradict itself if taken as a whole.
Psalms 119:160 says in the King James version: "Thy word is truth…" but the Concordant
version and many others recognize the proper translation of the Hebrew here is "the sum of thy
word is truth…" Psa. 139:17 - "How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God! How great
is the sum of them."
No prophecy of the scripture is of its own interpretation, but is to be taken in the context of the
rest of scripture. The principle referred to by Paul in II Cor. 13:1 - "In the mouth of two or three
witnesses shall every word be established" is especially true when using the Word of God. If you
have only one scripture with which to establish doctrine, there is no scriptural basis to the
doctrine. One isolated scripture is not enough.
Yet the average person cannot accept this principle of understanding the Word of God: (Isa.
28:13) "But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line
upon line; here a little and there a little; (prooftexting) that they might go, and fall backward and
be broken, and snared and taken." God's method of understanding His word is also His method
of keeping it hidden from those to whom it "is not given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of
heaven." Just as at the Red Sea, the same cloud that gave God's Israel (in the flesh) light by
night, was deep darkness to the uncalled Egyptians.