There’s an expression used in discussing education: “teaching to the test.” With more and more states using standardized achievement tests, the fear is that teachers will only teach the things that are going to be tested, rather than trying to give the students a well-rounded education.
It’s my opinion that the same thing happens in our Bible study. On a personal level, we can find ourselves focusing on certain parts of the Bible that address the topics we feel are most important. At a congregational level, we can find churches that emphasize certain aspects of doctrine or that emphasize relational topics. Some concentrate on proper worship. Others look at the marks of a true church. Some focus on the gospels, others stick to the epistles. Some churches neglect the Old Testament; others neglect the central doctrines of the New Testament.
What we see to be most important will shape what we study and what we teach. Some will focus on head knowledge, others on correct behavior. Some will emphasize grace, others will focus on personal responsibility.
How do we ensure that we maintain balance in our teaching? How can we teach “the whole counsel of God,” avoiding the neglect of biblical topics? Do you have any suggestions?
It may not be full-proof; but teaching book-by-book, chapter-by-chapter, and verse-by-verse may help. It would take a little more effort to ignore some portions of Scripture.
Why not stick to what Jesus taught, Is the Master’s teaching not sufficient ? Or do we need an interpreter, who takes what the master said, and tells us what he really meant? In my opinion, that is what is wrong with both Church, and school. We are taught interpretations, not face value. And you know what they say about opinions and interpretations. They are like (fill in blank) everybody has one.
I agree with Terry. I’ve embraced an expositional style of preaching, and try to (with exception) to preach from the NT on Sunday morning and the OT on Sunday night, and teach from the NT on Wed. night Bible class (with a devo from the Gospels). Hopefully, this will ensure that my congregation is exposed to the “whole counsel of God.”
I remember when I was in school, a man spoke at the ACU Lectureship, lamenting the fact that many “sound doctrines” were falling by the wayside because of expository preaching. Basically what he was admitting was that much of what he taught could only be taught by stringing together proof texts.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
When people become dissatisfied with simply covering the same ground over again then they begin to learn more and grow more. And for those who remain satisfied with milk…that is a bigger problem.
Grace and peace,
Rex
I only get to preach about once a month, but when I do, I try to use a passage from the lectionary. (A good resource is textweek.com.) this forces me to look at passages I might otherwise skip over. Of course, this comes with its own selection bias – I almost never choose the Psalm – but I like to think that it’s a step in the right direction.
I think that it is helpful in a congregation to have various sources for the teaching (and I don’t mean outside of the Word of God). If the elders are teaching, other brothers are teaching, the ladies are also receiving teaching from one another and someone other than the preacher is teaching – the church receives various parts of the whole that is good. We are a small congregation and this is precisely what happens. One may emphasize the OT, another the NT, some will bring up questions others would not have thought of. This is the purpose of having a body, I think.
Robert: I have a friend that follows the lectionary every Sunday, although he confesses that he most frequently chooses a passage from the gospels.
Scott: That’s a good point. I try to do my reading on the Internet that way, intentionally reading from “liberals” and “conservatives,” etc.