Category Archives: Bible study

Book. Chapter. Verse.

1 Reply

Book. Chapter. Verse.

That’s one of the basic concepts I like to teach to Bible readers. To help them think about context, I encourage them to think book -> chapter -> verse.

I’ll admit upfront that’s an oversimplification. But for new readers, it’s a handy way to be reminded of context, because they see it every time they’re given a verse reference. When I read “John 3:16,” I can immediately see that the book is John, the chapter is 3, and the verse is 16. So I teach new Bible readers that, as they seek to interpret a verse, they should first think about the book and the chapter.

For John 3:16, I want to look at the Gospel of John, and it’s structure. That’s a challenge for new readers, but they need to see the idea. I encourage them to think about what a gospel is, why the gospel of John is different from the others, who John was and who he may have been writing to. Questions of that sort.

Then I encourage them to look at chapter 3, and it’s place in the gospel. What’s going on in chapter 3? How does it tie chapter 2 and chapter 4 together (or does it?). Those questions.

Now they can look at the verse itself and consider it’s place in the chapter. How does verse 16 relate to what comes before and what comes after?

That won’t answer all questions about context. But it will get new readers started on the road to exploring the subject and seeing how it moves us from surface-level reading to a deeper understanding of the text. And it’s a concept that they have illustrated right in front of them, every time they look at a scripture reference.

New Bible readers don’t need a concordance

1 Reply

I’ve mentioned that when I was growing up, I thought the epistles were compilations of proverbs, short sayings basically unconnected to one another. I had always heard a verse quoted from here and another from there; I didn’t realize that the epistles were letters with main themes and logical arguments. In other words, I knew nothing about context.

A lot of new Bible readers are the same way. Maybe they’ve seen Bible verses posted here and there on social media. Possibly someone has studied with them some and has used chains of verses in those studies. However it happens, many people view the Bible as the collected sayings of holy men, rather than an anthology of books written by and for God’s people.

I’ll mention that I have a growing distrust of memory verses. Memory verses rarely lead you to think in context. They get you to focus on individual words stripped of context. They’re a bit like some of the quotations you see from famous people; ripped from their original place in a work of literature or a speech, these quotes are often made to say things that the person they are attributed to never intended.

In Bible times, memorization was not uncommon, but it was typically the memorization of entire books of the Bible, rather than individual verses. That allows the learner to think in terms of sections and paragraphs rather than individual words and sentences.

With new readers, we need to steer them away from island hopping their way through the Bible. Don’t hand a new reader a concordance. Hand them a reading plan, one that reads the Bible book by book.

Dipping my toes in the waters of the lectionary

1 Reply

(I try not to bore you with too much behind-the-scenes technical info. Let me just say that not everything is working as it should. For now, I can post, and you can comment; that’s the most important stuff, right?)

The other day I talked about the Christian calendar. Along the way, I mentioned that I’ve been following the lectionary. Let me comment on that.

  • To me, the lectionary is basically a structured Bible reading plan. At its core, it’s merely a listing of Bible verses to be read at a certain time.
  • At a deeper level, I think the lectionary provides me with a community to read and study with. It’s a broad community, made up largely of people I don’t know. Their views are widely divergent, which in this case I view as a good thing. I need to hear the views of people I disagree with, not just those that see things as I do.
  • The lectionary leads me to places in Scripture I wouldn’t necessarily go. I don’t mean interpretations, but parts of the text that I might not read otherwise. I’ve found the same to be true when teaching through a book or even teaching a book that I’ve never taught before. (Paul wisely observed the other days that there are holes in the lectionary’s selections; this is very true, as is true of every systematic approach to teaching Scripture I’ve seen)
  • So far, I haven’t seen much interest in those that fill in when I’m not preaching. However, the lectionary would provide continuity should they choose to follow the readings.

A couple of resources that I use are lectionarypage.net and textweek.com. Take a look at those pages if you want to learn more about the lectionary.

Studying the Bible until it hurts

Leave a reply

bible studyWhen comparing ancient manuscripts of the Bible and trying to reconcile the differences between those manuscripts, one rule of thumb is that the hardest reading is often the original one. That is, one can see why a scribe would “correct” a text that says something difficult, but it’s less likely that they would take a simple statement and make it harder.

To some degree, I think the same applies to biblical interpretation. Not that we should seek obscure meanings or secret codes within the text. What I’m saying is that I trust someone’s conclusions more when I realize those conclusions aren’t necessarily what the person wants them to be.

It’s a bit like some news I heard the other day. A study found that a certain medication greatly reduces the risk of heart disease. The study was funded by the company that makes that medication. That makes me less likely to accept their findings as valid.

Years ago, when speaking about a now-defunct publication, one of my friends said, “It’s like they’re saying, ‘Yay, the Bible finally says what we always wanted it to say.'”

I often hear someone say, “Here’s a great study about this topic.” Usually what they mean is that the study agrees with their position. Rarely are they enamored of the methodology; they like the outcome.

We need to be willing to study the Bible until it hurts. We need to follow Jesus not because he makes us feel warm and fuzzy inside, but because he challenges us to re-examine every aspect of our life. We need to dig into the Bible until what we read makes us think, “Surely it can’t mean that.”

I’m pointing the finger at everyone else, but especially at me. It’s time for some painful Bible study.

Frameworks and outcomes in Bible study

7 Replies

I’m not sure that I know how to build off of yesterday’s post and explain what’s going through my mind. I’ll try.

When we go out to teach people about the Bible, we are also teaching them a philosophical approach to the Bible. Part of conversion has to do with them accepting our theoretical framework.

People who present commands, examples and necessary inference as a hermeneutic framework need to find people who accept that framework. When they do, they have a much better chance of convincing them via their syllogisms. If not, people won’t be moved to change their lives based on arguments they don’t understand or don’t agree with.

Once you find such people, you can then continue to shape them using arguments based on the same framework. In the same way, any challenge to that approach to the Bible is a major threat, for it removes the way these teachers know how to instruct and motivate. If I accept that 1 Corinthians 16 is not laying out the universal mechanism for churches to take weekly collection, then how am I going to get people to give money to the church, if I only know how to work off of the commands, examples, inferences framework?

Going way back to the discussion that started all of this (instrumental music), it’s easy to see why our approach to the Bible is so important. If we can’t agree on the process, it’s going to be hard to agree on the outcomes.