How to Read the Bible
2 views
Skip to first unread message
don2...@gmail.com
Jan 7, 2008, 5:12:46 PM1/7/08
to Common Sense Christian Talk
I have a question. How do you guys study the Bible and still keep
things in context unless you read the entire book a couple of times
through first? Also, would it be better for a young Christian to read
the NT books in a different order so that it would not be as confusing
for them?
things in context unless you read the entire book a couple of times
through first? Also, would it be better for a young Christian to read
the NT books in a different order so that it would not be as confusing
for them?
James Spurck
Jan 7, 2008, 5:18:58 PM1/7/08
to Common Sense Christian Talk
My suggestion would be read them in the order as they were written ...
JM
Jan 7, 2008, 5:20:59 PM1/7/08
to commonsens...@googlegroups.com
Hi James!
I wanted to drop a quicky email to get you added to my add book. Also, so you will show in my gtalk.
Hope you and your family are well!
God bless,
j
don2...@gmail.com
Jan 7, 2008, 5:31:45 PM1/7/08
to Common Sense Christian Talk
Well, the problem is you have Acts summarizing the history of the
church which contains the entire church timeline along with the main
issues. Each of the epistles act as a microscope going into depth the
individual issues and challenges for individual groups within the
church movement. (Similiar to the books of Kings & Chronicles in the
OT being the timeline for the OT books.) I think this may cause some
confusion among new believers (and even "older" Christians) becuase
they don't realize that some of the books are talking to Jews and some
are talking to Gentiles. The Jews were incorrectly focusing on good
works (based on the OT thinking) and are being "converted" to
Christianity but wanting to hold on to their Judiasm while Gentiles
are being saved and encouraged to teach, encourage & love each other.
church which contains the entire church timeline along with the main
issues. Each of the epistles act as a microscope going into depth the
individual issues and challenges for individual groups within the
church movement. (Similiar to the books of Kings & Chronicles in the
OT being the timeline for the OT books.) I think this may cause some
confusion among new believers (and even "older" Christians) becuase
they don't realize that some of the books are talking to Jews and some
are talking to Gentiles. The Jews were incorrectly focusing on good
works (based on the OT thinking) and are being "converted" to
Christianity but wanting to hold on to their Judiasm while Gentiles
are being saved and encouraged to teach, encourage & love each other.
Jack Mercer
Jan 7, 2008, 5:46:40 PM1/7/08
to Common Sense Christian Talk
Hi Don!
First a few thoughts.
Many Christians I know seem to focus on study, quoting 2 Timothy 2:15
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not
to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
Study is good, GREAT in fact, and a part of our growth.
Many, though, ignore Paul's other instruction in 1Timothy 4:13 Till I
come, give attendance to READING, to exhortation, to doctrine.
A very common sense application. I remember when I was in college
when I would be pressed I would buy Cliff Notes on a particular piece
of literature that I was supposed to read and be accountable for. As
a result, YES, I would pass the exam, YES I would get a baseline idea
of what the book was about, and YES I could come up with enough
answers to appear knowledgeable about the book, but I was only fooling
the teacher and others. Never myself and never anyone who really knew
that piece of literature (for long). The story ended up meaningless
and disjointed, and I never had a clear perspective concerning what
the author intended. The Bible is God's word. Not part of it, but
all of it. All must be read to truly understand what the story is
about. That is just common sense.
In terms of reading order. The Greeks ordered books in the original
cannon based on the length of the book. In the Gospels, they grouped
Matthew first, John last because of the length of the book. The same
goes for the Paulinian epistles (Romans - Philemon), the General
Epistles (Hebrews - Jude) and then of course Revelation standing alone
by itself.
There are several systems of thought. It does not take great
scholarship to organize the Paulinian epistles in chronological
order. This may be helpful when reading the book of Acts in context
with a related letter Paul may have written to either a church or
individual. The book of John, for example, is supposed to have been
written around 62 A.D. which would been after Paul had written about
halp of his letters and yet it is placed fourth in the NT cannon.
All my life I have read the scripture in the order it was presented;
however, recently the book of Acts opened up as never before as I read
it along with Paul's epistles arranged in their chronological order.
To the best of our knowledge, the Paulinian epistles were written in
this order all after the Jerusalem Council:
Galatians 49 or 55 AD
I Thess 51 AD
2 Thess 51 AD
I Cor 56 AD
2 Cor 57 AD
Rom 58 AD
Col 61 AD
Philemon 61 AD
Eph 61 AD
Phil 61 AD
I Tim 63 AD
Titus 65 AD
2 Tim 66 AD
This was helpful at the time, and continues to be helpful in following
Paul's reasoning (in context with his past writings) and in view of
what God revealed to him at what particular time. (Can we assume that
Paul knew everything he was going to know after his brief foray into
the wilderness?)
Anyhow, it may be helpful to understand this as we go along. I am not
suggesting that people should change their Bible reading habits, just
that there may be things that help us in our "reading" and "study".
Final point, I have been urging new converts to begin their reading in
Luke, skip John, then Acts and the epistles. If you read it that way
you will understand why I advocate that. I do this as a teacher or
facilitator of others' learning, not as some authority. I did this
often with text books when I was teaching at the University, not
because I was discounting the text's order of priority, but in ways
that to assist the student in learning.
I hope this helps and I look forward to others' thoughts.
First a few thoughts.
Many Christians I know seem to focus on study, quoting 2 Timothy 2:15
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not
to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
Study is good, GREAT in fact, and a part of our growth.
Many, though, ignore Paul's other instruction in 1Timothy 4:13 Till I
come, give attendance to READING, to exhortation, to doctrine.
A very common sense application. I remember when I was in college
when I would be pressed I would buy Cliff Notes on a particular piece
of literature that I was supposed to read and be accountable for. As
a result, YES, I would pass the exam, YES I would get a baseline idea
of what the book was about, and YES I could come up with enough
answers to appear knowledgeable about the book, but I was only fooling
the teacher and others. Never myself and never anyone who really knew
that piece of literature (for long). The story ended up meaningless
and disjointed, and I never had a clear perspective concerning what
the author intended. The Bible is God's word. Not part of it, but
all of it. All must be read to truly understand what the story is
about. That is just common sense.
In terms of reading order. The Greeks ordered books in the original
cannon based on the length of the book. In the Gospels, they grouped
Matthew first, John last because of the length of the book. The same
goes for the Paulinian epistles (Romans - Philemon), the General
Epistles (Hebrews - Jude) and then of course Revelation standing alone
by itself.
There are several systems of thought. It does not take great
scholarship to organize the Paulinian epistles in chronological
order. This may be helpful when reading the book of Acts in context
with a related letter Paul may have written to either a church or
individual. The book of John, for example, is supposed to have been
written around 62 A.D. which would been after Paul had written about
halp of his letters and yet it is placed fourth in the NT cannon.
All my life I have read the scripture in the order it was presented;
however, recently the book of Acts opened up as never before as I read
it along with Paul's epistles arranged in their chronological order.
To the best of our knowledge, the Paulinian epistles were written in
this order all after the Jerusalem Council:
Galatians 49 or 55 AD
I Thess 51 AD
2 Thess 51 AD
I Cor 56 AD
2 Cor 57 AD
Rom 58 AD
Col 61 AD
Philemon 61 AD
Eph 61 AD
Phil 61 AD
I Tim 63 AD
Titus 65 AD
2 Tim 66 AD
This was helpful at the time, and continues to be helpful in following
Paul's reasoning (in context with his past writings) and in view of
what God revealed to him at what particular time. (Can we assume that
Paul knew everything he was going to know after his brief foray into
the wilderness?)
Anyhow, it may be helpful to understand this as we go along. I am not
suggesting that people should change their Bible reading habits, just
that there may be things that help us in our "reading" and "study".
Final point, I have been urging new converts to begin their reading in
Luke, skip John, then Acts and the epistles. If you read it that way
you will understand why I advocate that. I do this as a teacher or
facilitator of others' learning, not as some authority. I did this
often with text books when I was teaching at the University, not
because I was discounting the text's order of priority, but in ways
that to assist the student in learning.
I hope this helps and I look forward to others' thoughts.
James Spurck
Jan 9, 2008, 4:46:48 PM1/9/08
to Common Sense Christian Talk
One good reason to read Luke then Acts is that it is almost
universally agreed that Luke wrote both books!
universally agreed that Luke wrote both books!
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages