Threads from Henry's Web

Category: Christianity

  • Bible Memorization and Reading

    When I wrote about different approaches in reading the Bible I left an important one out–memorization. I was reminded of this when writing an e-mail to some friends and quoting scripture. I quoted the KJV and wasn’t even aware of it until I’d completely quoted the text.

    So what does quoting the KJV have to do with the value of memorization? It goes back to my school experience. For four years of elementary school I attended a small Christian school that required regular Bible memorization. We didn’t do memory verses–well, we did a few of those two–but the bulk of the program was memorizing chapters or groups of chapters. These included Matthew 5-7 (The Sermon on the Mount), Psalm 78, Genesis 1:1-2:4, and Psalm 119 (all 176 verses). All of this memorization was from the KJV.

    Since that time I’ve learned to read Greek and Hebrew, and I include both in my daily devotional reading. I’ve read the Bible through numerous times in a variety of translations, and I’ve written any number of working translations of verses I’m studying. But I still remember most verses, even ones I never memorized, in the KJV.

    I’m not making an argument in favor of memorizing the KJV specifically. Rather, I’m suggesting that memorizing scripture and doing it early will tend to keep that scripture with you later in life.

    There was one aspect of this training that didn’t stick. They hoped that by making us memorize all this carefully selected scripture, they would guarantee that we’d stick with the doctrinal positions they held. That was one of the major reasons they included texts as well as chapters. We had four texts on the Sabbath, four texts on the state of the dead, and various other Adventist doctrines. It was also hoped that having memorized Genesis 1 we’d be protected against the wiles of evolutionary theory. They didn’t consider that one might love those words, and yet understand them very differently.

    Nonetheless I recommend memorization. In fact, to Greek and Hebrew students I recommend memorizing texts in those languages. I have much better memory for both words and constructions that are in passages I have memorized than I do otherwise. Even better, when I’m discussing the meaning of those words of constructions, I can easily cite the memorized text. I wish I had memorized more back when I was a student, but I still can remedy that.

    So I recommend memorization of selected texts as an aid to your Bible study, whether in English (or your native tongue, whatever that is), or in the original languages.

  • Listening to Whose Voice(s)

    Quote of the day:

    The sin of the church too often is to listen to the voice of those already in it. We let the comfortable voice of the familiar become the voice of God. Breaking free of that sin is necessary. But replacing one human voice with another is not the same as following Jesus.

    From: John Meunier

     

  • William Barclay Commentaries Dangerous

    So declare the Catholic bishops of Vietnam. I find it hard to see why, but that’s because I don’t think books that teach doctrine different from my own “dangerous.” I would call a couple of paragraphs in Barclay less than fully accurate, but there are some paragraphs that are positively brilliant, which is all one can expect from a popular, largely devotional book. If you’re wondering what I might call inaccurate, I do think he smooths the rough edges of some of the more difficult passages, and not always in full accord with the intent.

    But my point here is neither to criticize the Catholic church, nor to criticize or praise Barclay and his series of commentaries, but rather to note that this isn’t about any one denomination. Despite a slogan that includes “open minds,” I’ve encountered a number of cases in United Methodist churches where material from other denominations was deemed dangerous. In one case curriculum material written by a Baptist was deemed dangerous, because it, well, it was hard to tell. Mostly because it was Baptist.

    In another case, a young adult class was disbanded because they were reading and discussing dangerous books. A replacement class was formed that would hold the young people to the straight and narrow. The result? The class went from a full room to an empty room (yes, zero attendance) in less than a month.

    What I would say is dangerous in Christianity is a mindset that would consider Barclay’s commentaries dangerous. Debate the views, consider some of them wrong–absolutely. That’s good experience in discerning (Hebrews 5:11-14).

  • Approaches to Bible Reading

    I want to list some attitudes to Bible reading and some approaches with a brief discussion. I may choose to post some more on this. I think there is too much of an either-or approach to how one goes about reading the Bible. Different times may call for different methods and attitudes.

    • Fast Reading (Overview)
      When I returned to active church membership some years after I left seminary, I chose this approach first. I had kept up some reading so as not to use my language skills, but that was always short passages with focus on grammar and vocabulary. I chose to read the entire Bible (NIV at the time) as I would a novel. It was the book I kept by the bed. I completed the reading in 11 days. I find great value in this approach to help orient oneself in the canonical text, though it would be excessively confusing for someone not already acquainted with the text, I think.
    • Detailed reading (outlining, exegesis)
      This involves slower reading and spending time over specific texts. Most of my reading ends up here. I’ll read longer passages quickly, but some specific text will drag me in and then I’ll spend time dissecting the passage from all points of view.
    • Passage Overview, Multiple Readings
      One of my own approaches to studying shorter passages is to read the passage multiple times. This differs from the fast reading in that I choose a reasonable length passage along with a more temperate pace. Sometimes I read the passage in other languages (not original, usually modern, Spanish, German, French) to slow my reading. The longest passage I’ve done this was was the book of Ezekiel. Normally I choose something more like the Sermon on the Mount.
    • Original Languages
      Obviously this method is for those who know the languages. Here I vary my reading speed and approach much as I do in English. At the slowest level, I’ll go through the scripture indexes in the Greek or Hebrew grammars I have on my shelf and read the sections that cite the verse I’m reading. I might also prepare a personal translation. At the faster level I try to read several chapters in succession, and mark words or constructions I want to go back and look at in more detail.
    • Devotional Reading
      This is simply reading my Bible prayerfully, listening for what God has for me. This is one of the more difficult options for me; I slide into a more technical reading very easily.
    • Historical Reading
      Reading biblical books either as history or from a historical point of view. I find that Samuel-Kings and Chronicles reads very differently when seen devotionally rather than historically.
    • Literary Reading
      This is a fairly broad category. Think of Samuel-Kings. One might read this to study the history of Israel (historically), one might read it looking for theological points, one might read it devotionally (What is God saying to me here?), or one might look at it as literature, looking for characters, plot, and so forth. What type of literature? That’s part of the fun!
    • Critical reading
      Reading the text looking for sources, redactional issues, genre, canonical connections, and so forth. I don’t specialize in one or another of the tools of biblical criticism. I think they all have their place, and they also all have places where they don’t work so well. In my view Form Criticism is probably the most abused by being applied where it just doesn’t apply.
    • Liturgical reading
      Reading as worship or as preparation for worship. In my experience, this is largely lectionary reading. I like to read the lectionary passages for the week several times, and I also have occasionally, but not consistently, read from one or another daily lectionary. I would see this as an attitude to reading as well–reading the Bible as part of the church’s heritage and as part of the church’s worship.
    • Bible Year, or Reading the Bible Through
      Other than my 11 day thing under the first point, of course! Right now I’m trying a year’s reading from a booklet by Robert Murray McCheyne, More Precious Than Gold: READ THE BIBLE IN ONE OR TWO YEARS (Didasko Files),which tends to line up a chapter each from four different places in the Bible. I haven’t warmed to it very much thus far, but I’m going to try it for a while before I decided it doesn’t work for me.

    That’s the list for today. I’ve probably left out plenty, and have certainly left out details. I may blog some more about Bible reading. In the meantime I recommend two things: 1) Find and use a Bible reading method that is comfortable for you and 2) Make sure you use some methods other than the one you found in #1.

  • Alden Thompson: SDAs and the Charismatic Experience

    Ellen Gould White vor 1900
    Ellen G. White
    Image via Wikipedia

    Since I grew up as an SDA and later got involved in a somewhat charismatic stream within Methodism, I found this article by Alden Thompson pretty interesting. It’s not surprising, however, that the SDA movement, which arose in the mid 1800s, had some charismatic elements.

    The funny thing for me in reading this is that I did actually read the passages from Ellen White’s Testimonies when I was younger, and simply didn’t understand what some of those phrases meant, so I never made the connection.

    One thing that has puzzled and interested me since I left the Seventh-day Adventist church is the way in which Adventists tend toward the respectable side of religion even though they’re a bit out of the Christian mainstream. It seems as if SDAs prefer that in everything except their specific doctrinal distinctives they be seen as solid and respectable. Those who do not seek distinction from other Christian churches (and interesting split in the church in my view), tend to seek acceptance with conservative evangelicals, not mainline Christians who might be more willing to listen.

    (Note: I’m publisher of Dr. Alden Thompson’s book Who’s Afraid of the Old Testament God?, which will soon be released in a new edition. [Some slightly damaged copies are still available.] I’m also publisher of another book on the SDA experience, Finding My Way in Christianity: Recollections of a Journey by Dr. Herold Weiss.)

    Enhanced by Zemanta

  • Time Spent in Bible Study

    I’ve created a new poll. I’d like to get an idea of how much time people spend in Bible study, average, per day. This is not really aimed at Bible professionals (teachers, preachers, and such) and many of my readers come from those classes, so that will probably skew the answers again.

    This came up for me when we were discussing various things to study in our Sunday School class. One of the criteria class members specified was that they wanted something that didn’t require them to read during the week.

    I’ve had similar responses in Bible study classes and in various series I’ve taught for quite a number of classes. Class members will buy a study guide, but often need to get a Bible from the book case in the classroom, and the vast majority won’t read during the week, either from the study guide or from the Bible itself.

    With that attitude, there really isn’t much chance of alleviating Bible illiteracy.

    The poll is posted in the lower left-hand corner of this blog, as well as in this post.

    [poll id=”3″]

  • On Continuation of the Gifts

    I was interested to find this post by Craig Adams, looking at some quotes from John Wesley on the continuation of the gifts. I find myself in general agreement with what Wesley says here. The extraordinary gifts are possible, but not commonplace, nor are they required. The primary evidence of the Spirit is the sanctification of life, not some miraculous activity.

    Of course, in discerning the evidence of the Spirit through sanctification, one must always be careful of judgment (James 4:11-12).

    I’d connect this to what I wrote earlier on Speaking in Tongues and a Prayer Language.

  • Responding to Adrian Warnock on Arminocalvinists

    Jacobus Arminius
    Image via Wikipedia

    I’ve had Adrian Warnock’s post, An Arminocalvinist Spectrum, sitting in my starred items for some time, but I do want to write just a few words about it before I move on. But first, I want to note that Adrian Warnock is one of the Five Sites I Read Because I Disagree, and I’m on his list of top 60 referrers for 2010, even if only at #56. Glad I could contribute, Adrian!

    I’m also happy to see this issue divided into a spectrum rather than viewed as a simple, two-sided issue, because there are, indeed, substantial differences between various positions all along the line. I would personally have to say that I accept some points from #5 (Reformed Arminian), #6 (Strong Arminian), and #7 (Open Arminian), though not all points from any of them. But that is part of defining points on any spectrum–there are always people who fall between the points.

    As a follow-up, I would suggest reading Spectrum or Divide? A Response to Adrian Warnock, and Adrian’s response in turn here. Matt O’Reilly of Incarnatio, is a neighbor here in the Alabama-West Florida Conference of the United Methodist Church, though I have never actually met him.

    While I understand that some Arminians are embarrassed by open theists, I do think open theism at least grows out of Arminianism. I am attracted to, but not certain of, some elements of open theism. I think there are scriptures, particularly those that refer to God repenting, which sound quite open.

    What always bothers me in these discussions, though to his credit Adrian doesn’t bring it up until his point on open theism, is the belief that this is largely a debate about the sovereignty of God. I don’t even believe it deals with the nature of God’s sovereignty. It actually deals with the way in which God exercises his sovereignty.

    I’ve encountered this same issue in creation-evolution debates. The argument is that God is more glorified if he created the world in six literal days than if he used some mechanism that took more time, or in which God appeared more distant. But the question is not about God’s power, or about who has the choice. God clearly has the choice. God is sovereign no matter how he chose to create. Finite human beings have no concept of the power involved no matter what the method.

    When God works in salvation, it is totally a divine choice how to act. Whether God created human beings with the power to choose good, some of which remains, or God empowers them to make the choice through prevenient grace, or simply makes that choice in predestination, it is nonetheless God’s action in God’s time and it’s God’s sovereignty.

    It seems to me that the argument that God gets greater glory if he predestines all who will be saved actually tries to force a very human view of sovereignty onto God. Similarly, a claim that God is more glorified if he gives his creatures freedom is to force our human perspective onto God’s actions.

    The only question, it seems to me, is how God actually has acted. To be more precise, I should say how God has chosen to present his actions. Because I don’t think any of us understand this. Deeper than any conviction I have about Arminian soteriology is the simple conviction that we don’t really know–none of us.

     

    Enhanced by Zemanta

  • An RSS Feed for Dave Black

    Dave Black discusses RSS feeds, of which he has none:

    12:18 PM Yes, yes, yes, let’s hear it for RSS feeds!

    You may have bookmarked this blog, and/or other blogs and webpages. But you have no idea when new content is posted. So every now and then you click your bookmarks to see what is new. Sometimes nothing is new, and you’ve wasted a click.

    Impeccably good logic. Unless, of course, when you click on a bookmark and the site you visit is always publishing something new!

    But you can get an RSS feed of Dave Black’s blog. Really you can! Here’s how you do it:

    1. Got to http://page2rss.com
    2. Enter the URL for Dave’s blog, (http://daveblackonline.com/blog.htm)
    3. The site will give you back an RSS feed that will follow updates to that page
    4. Put that feed URL into your RSS reader

    For example, my reader currently shows the selection I quoted above as the latest update.

    I do update the Energion Publications (my company) book pages for the three of Dave’s books that I publish (with Dave’s permission), Why Four Gospels?, Christian Archy, and The Jesus Paradigm with relevant material from Dave’s blog, but that only gets a limited selection.

  • When Do You Get On Board?

    Christian Girl at College has an answer: Now!

    Oh, well… I can’t do that now. I’m too young; I’m not really in control of my life – my actions. I’ll change after college, when I’m on my own. It’ll be a big turning point. That’s the perfect time to start being the Christian I want to be.

    …

    As if that will be ever.

    Read the rest!