27. Analysis and Synthesis
Analysis and Synthesis
Chapter 26 The scientific method is applicable to scripture. First we trace scattered facts and truths, and then gather them up and arrange them. Like things are put together under a common designation, a process, based on similarities of nature and feature, attributes and characteristics, structure and relations, with a view to discovering what general law pervades them all, and supplies a broad basis for inference and deduction. This, the Baconian method of inductive philosophy which revolutionized scientific study is the true principle in scripture research. In any department of study two processes are fundamental, the analytic and the synthetic, the former of which separates, and the latter combines. Both are needful. We take apart, to learn what are the component parts, their individual peculiarities and features; then we put together in new combinations based upon common characteristics and resemblances. In Scripture, as in nature, many things are grouped together which are not homogeneous, of like nature; though associated, not assimilated. Analysis discovers deeper affinities and adaptations and so prepares for new arrangement and combination founded on agreements and differences. For example, we examine a narrative, prophecy, poem, discourse, or epistle, to learn its content; then rearrange that content according as we discover what belongs together historically, logically, doctrinally, practically. The order of thought is more important than the order of time; and logical connection and sequence, than that of occurrence and utterance. The first illustration of this principle is found in the Bible as a whole. This “Volume of the Book” is an aggregate of over sixty, and these again have subdivisions, indicated or implied. What is nearby in the collection may be far apart in purpose and intent; and what is far apart may belong together. Only diligent search will find those subtle affinities and adaptations which guide to the higher unity and community of nature and design. Thus Bible study is constructive not destructive; it does not dissect the body of truth, to leave it in scattered and lifeless fragments, but coordinates its contents in a system, somewhat as bones, knit, bound, compacted by ligaments and nerves, are formed into a living organism. To discover essential likeness or substantial agreement is to find also mutual relation, and bring scattered facts and truths into unity and harmony; lesser factors are also seen to contribute to the completeness and symmetry of some larger fact and truth, somewhat as minute fragments combine in mosaic work or a stained glass window, evincing artistic design. The Divine Author of Scripture evidently meant that only such meditative, comparative study should open up the hidden treasures of His Word. He might have made Holy Scripture a systematic treatise, but He chose rather to intersperse, throughout, hints upon all important practical subjects, inciting to search. If we would get the complete testimony of the inspired Word we must collate, compare, and combine. How seldom all the particulars of the same event or occurrence are found in one place or continuous narrative. In all the historical books of the Old Testament, there is this interdependence. In the Pentateuch, the later books supplement the history of the earlier and supply additional facts. To understand the story of the kingdom we must compare the six historical books from First Samuel to Second Chronicles. So Ezra, Nehemiah and Esther are interrelated as pictures of the captivity. In the four Gospel narratives, even when the same event is narrated or the same discourse recorded, each writer tells us what impressed his mind or memory most, or best suited his special province or purpose; and hence the help of a harmony of the gospels, combining the four into one, so that we get all particulars at a single view. Paul’s Epistles must be read side by side with the Acts, for each throws light upon the other. No words can do justice to the surprising wealth of instruction, information and suggestion which this double process of analysis and synthesis yields. In this section we adduce some few examples of the results of such study in the illumination of Scripture topics.
First of all, as the Bible is the Book of Salvation, it is needful for us to know how salvation becomes ours. Here comparative study shows that it is by an act so simple as not to need definition. We find, scattered throughout the whole Scripture, a group of short and simple words, such as “look,” “hear,” “taste,” “take,” “come,” “trust,” “choose,” etc. All of them are alike in this, that they refer to a receptive act or attitude, something by which we take or receive or appropriate. If something is to be seen we take it in with the eyes, by looking; if to be heard, with the ears, by hearing; food we take in with the mouth, by tasting; a gift we take with the hands; a walk, with the feet; a friend, with the heart; a choice, with the will. What no one of these words would fully convey, together they perfectly express; that Salvation is God’s gift, and that what is needed and all that is needed is to take it; with the whole being in a receptive frame, eyes, ears, mouth, hands, feet, heart, will, ready to accept what He bestows. All legalism is thus barred out. Salvation is not a wage to be earned, a reward to be merited, a prize to be sought, or a crown to be won; but a gift to be taken. The benefit of analytic study is very obvious in examining the various books of the Bible. For example, how readily Genesis divides into three or four main parts, and under four representative heads: Adam, as Head of the Race; Noah, as its second father; Abram as the father of an elect family, and Jacob, as the progenitor of the twelve tribes. The Books of the Kingdom, analyzed, suggest five main divisions: under Samuel, who marks the period of transition from patriarchal and judicial to regal; under Saul, David and Solomon, with a reign of forty years each, and very marked epochal eras; then the period of the rupture of the kingdom under Rehoboam and Jeroboam. The Epistle to the Romans becomes a new book when the four main sections are clearly perceived: first, universal condemnation under law; second, free justification under grace; third, sanctification by the Spirit, and fourth, self-dedication as the outcome of all the mercies of God. The help of analytic study is very obvious in homiletics, supplying the natural outline of discourse and developing the hidden beauty and riches of individual texts. In John 5:31-47; John 8:13-18; John 15:26-27, we find as nowhere else the complete statement of the witnesses to our Lord Jesus Christ; only as we rearrange them, in chronological order, do we see their completeness:
The written Scriptures, prophetic and historic.
John the Baptist, His forerunner.
The Father, in many ways, with many voices—pre-eminently at the Transfiguration.
His own witness, in His words and works.
The Witness of the Holy Spirit, first at His baptism, and conspicuously at Pentecost, etc.
His Resurrection.
The believers’ testimony.
The Perversions of worship may be learned by a similar study.
Four Risks connected with worship are historically illustrated in the Old Testament, all teaching a different lesson and warning against a peculiar peril:
The golden calf at Sinai (Exodus 32). The risk of Symbolism—sensuous helps and visible representations of deity.
The Brazen serpent (Numbers 21:1-9; 2 Kings 18:4). The danger of Sacramentalism, undue exaltation of the appointed means of Grace.
The Ephod of Gideon (Judges 8:24-27).The peril of Sacerdotalism—or the magnifying of priestly robes, offices and functions.
The House of Micah (Judges 17; Judges 18). The snare of externalism and formalism, ceremonialism, irregularities tolerated because of outward conformity.
It cannot be accidental that all the prominent dangers, connected with religious worship, are thus hinted in these successive historic scenes. All visible helps in approaching God tend to idolatry, and endanger the purity, simplicity and spirituality of worship; we may unduly reverence the channels appointed to convey blessing, mistaking them for the grace they convey; we may pay homage to priestly pretensions and ceremonies; and substitute the mere machinery of worship for real conformity to the will of God.
Comparison and analysis of two passages on the Body of Christ, in Romans 12, and 1 Corinthians 12, likewise reveals the marked features of the duty and privilege of service:
No one has all gifts; therefore, there is no room for pride or boasting.
No one is without some gift; therefore, no room for idleness or despair.
Gifts differ; therefore no room for envy, jealousy or interference.
God Himself distributes; therefore, no room for complaint or discontent.
All gifts are needful; therefore no room for neglect or indifference.
All gifts derive power from the Giver; therefore, no room for weakness and inefficiency.
“Judas, by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place” (Acts 1:25), being analyzed, suggests:
As to sin: It is a fall downward, with increasing rapidity, with no power of self-recovery, and a gravitation toward hell.
As to penalty: Every man has his own place; largely makes his own place; ultimately finds his own place; consciously feels it to be his own place.
In Luke 9:46-62, there are six successive exhibitions of a wrong temper or disposition, with as many tender rebukes or admonitions of our Lord. It is very curious to observe also that these six are naturally divisible into two groups of three each; the former three being manifested by professed disciples, marring their character and conduct; and the latter three, by proposed disciples, hindering their acceptance and obedience. Furthermore, it would be difficult to find any form of such wrong or unseemly frame of mind, not here comprehended. The first group have to do with disciples:
The ambitious, “reasoning which should be greatest.”
The intolerant, “forbidding, because he followeth not with us.”
The vindictive, proposing to “command fire from heaven,” etc.
The second group concern candidates for discipleship:
The selfish, evidently seeking some temporal advantage.
The procrastinating: “Suffer me first to go and bury my father.”
The vacillating: “Putting his hand to the plow,” etc.
These morbid and misleading tempers must be studied in the light of our Lord’s treatment of them. To the ambitious, He commends the spirit that finds greatness in being least. To the intolerant, He answers that no man can at the same time do a miracle in His name and lightly speak evil of Him. To the vindictive, that they know not the malignity of their own spirit, nor the benignity of their Master’s. To the selfish, He refers to His own poverty and self-denial. To the procrastinating, He answers by the present and pressing need of a dead world, of the Word of Life. To the vacillating, He answers that a straight furrow needs in the plowman a steady eye on the goal. This is but one example of the wealth discoverable in a single passage of Scripture by careful analysis and synthesis. Where the inspiring Spirit Himself suggests an analysis, we may safely adhere both to His own divisions and order of thought. A conspicuous illustration is 1 Thessalonians 5:23 :
“Your whole spirit, and soul, and body.”
Here man’s threefold constitution is hinted, and the order of rank. To keep this idea in mind solves many perplexities. The discrimination, for instance, between “soul” and “spirit” is most instructive. In dying, our Lord, and Stephen after Him, committed his “spirit” to the Divine keeping, and with uniformity the “spirit” is used of man’s highest self (compare Matthew 5:3; Luke 1:47; Romans 1:9; 1 Corinthians 7:17; Galatians 6:1; Ephesians 1:17; Ephesians 4:23, etc.). So likewise the adjectives, formed respectively from these words, and so hard to render into English, as in 1 Corinthians 2; 1 Corinthians 3; 1 Corinthians 15, etc., where what is soulish or psychical is so distinct from what is pneumatical or spiritual.