Come and Break Bread

This is part of an ongoing series. Here are links to days 1, 2, and 3.

In the coming days I will (eventually) get into the details of inductive Bible study (with some printable study tools) but there are a few topics I’m going to cover before I zoom in.

First off, I should probably define inductive Bible study since everything I will be talking about is within the framework of the inductive method. So, here we go:

There are essentially two ways that we can approach the Bible: deductively or inductively.

In the deductive approach, one comes to the text with a thesis and then seeks out passages to support their thesis. (You already have an opinion on a topic so you look for verses to support your opinion.) One has already, to a certain extent, drawn conclusions before reading the whole text of Scripture in context. The problem with this approach is that verses get taken out of context as one is dictating to the Scriptures, rather than letting the Scriptures speak.

Biblical scholar John Stek spoke of this when we wrote:

“Many of us do not know how to listen to the voice of God in Scripture, because we are trained to view the Bible as a series of verses strung together like pearls on a string, each having its own meaning in itself. We were trained to resort to that treasure trove whenever we felt a need for something from it, plucking the gem that satisfies our quest at the moment.

Ideally, we respond receptively to God’s message. But usually we do not come to the Word ready to listen. Isolated verses have become “God’s will” for us in the circumstances, or they serve as magic words that we use on God to try to manipulate him, or as levers that we employ to get what we want from God. When this is done to rationalize hate-filled motives, the gospel itself is violated. But even when it is done with good intentions, we hamper ourselves from truly hearing God’s word.”

In the inductive approach, one lays aside preconceived ideas and first lays a groundwork of observations. Conclusions are drawn from what one has observed and a thorough examination of the content becomes a basis for one’s conclusions. This approach seeks to let Scriptures speak for themselves and studies the Scriptures in context*. A methodology for how to do an inductive Bible study will be forthcoming in this series.

*There are multiple layers to reading or studying a verse in context. Examples of reading a verse in context would be looking at the 10 verses before and after that specific verse, looking at the whole section or chapter in which the particular verse is found, reading the entire book in which said verse is found, looking at the verse in light of everything else that particular author wrote, looking at that verse in light of the Testament in which it is found, and finally reading the verse in the context of what the whole Bible says, and thus interpreting it accordingly (asking “what does this say and mean in light of what the surrounding context is saying?”). Reading the Bible in context means you let Scripture interpret Scripture. If you are struggling to understand the meaning of a particular word or verse you can look at the context in which it is found to help uncover its meaning.

One way to begin to look at Scripture inductively is to read a book in one sitting instead of using the “string of pearls” approach mentioned above. It wasn’t until after the Reformation that publishers added verse numbers and chapters in their attempts to make books of the Bible easier to reference. The original authors and audiences did not isolate verses or even chapters or sections like we often do today, and to read it in such a way is to read it in a way the author did not intend. For example, if you received a letter*, would you turn to the middle of it and just read a few lines and call it good? Of course not— it wouldn’t make sense and you’d be missing a lot of important context surrounding those few lines. Yet that is exactly what we do when it comes to the Bible. (*Much of the New Testament is made up of letters.)

The awesome fruit of studying the Bible inductively is that in allowing the Scriptures to speak for themselves and shape your thinking, you develop a solid Biblical worldview. To get the most out of the inductive approach and to develop an overall context— or overview— of the Bible, you’ve really got to read it! If you’ve never read through the whole Bible, consider making it your summer goal? The entire Bible can be read aloud in less than 100 hours. If the longer books intimidate you, consider listening to them. Or if your summer is looking pretty busy, there are a variety of 1 year Bible reading plans here.

PS— A neat resource that I recently came across is the Community Bible Experience. This is a Bible reading program that takes you through the Bible whole books at a time and is to be done in a community… our church has a few small groups going through this right now, and I’m hearing great things about it! Here is their introduction video:

See the introduction to this series here.

Did you ever wonder how we got the Bible?

Early Christians originally referred to the Bible as Biblia, which means “The Books.” Why? Because the Bible is actually 66* books. But early Greek Christians wanted to stress that these multiple books, written by different authors and across centuries, is truly one cohesive book, or “the Divine Library” as one 4th century historian called it, so they began to call it “The Book,” or, The Bible.

So, what was the criteria for a book to make it into The Book? The term for the books that made it into The Bible is “canon”. Canon in Greek meant a “measuring rod” or “ruler”. It was a carpenter’s term for judging something straight, so it started being used as a metaphor to describe those books that were considered to be spiritually superlative.  There was some criteria for determining what was canon and not all books were accepted in one fell swoop. The Old Testament was passed down from the Jewish tradition and Jesus showed his acceptance of  the Old Testament scriptures as God’s Word to man when he said, “Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35) and “Everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled (Luke 24:44. That implies that he accepted as scripture the writings that make up our Old Testament.)  So Christians received the Old Testament from the Jews and eventually officially declared it as canon. The books of the New Testament were included as canon at different intervals. The criteria for including them was as follows:

• They had to have a self-authenticating quality— they exercised, and still do, an unparalleled power upon the lives of men and women (they have a God-breathed power to change the reader’s life).
• They had to be consistently used and accepted in Christian worship services (reputable, held in tradition, and not obscure).
•  Most fundamentally, they had to have ties to an apostle or at least a man who had direct contact with the circle of apostles.

Throughout the first few centuries AD there were false teachers trying to infiltrate the church and vying for attention as they taught and spread messages contrary to the Gospel, so that is what prompted the early Christians to determine what was canon in order to silence the confusion and chaos these false teachers brought. The canon was fixed/closed by 397 AD.

“In one sense, Christians created the canon. Their decisions concerning the books were a part of history. In another sense, however, they were only recognizing those writings that had made their authority felt in the churches. The shape of the New Testament shows that the early churches’ primary aim was to submit fully to the teachings of the apostles.” ¹

*The Protestant and Catholic Bibles differ slightly. The Catholic Bible contains 12-15 (depending on how they are grouped) additional Old Testament books, called the Apocrypha. Most Jews considered them useful but not canon, and early Christians differed over the question of the Apocrypha. Believers in the eastern part of the Roman empire, (living in closer proximity to Jews), tended to agree with the Jews, while in the West, Christians under the influence of Augustine received the Apocrypha as canon. During the 16th century Reformation, most Protestants accepted the view of the early eastern Christians. Though Jesus and the apostles spoke of the law, prophets and psalms, they never quoted Apocryphal books.

¹ Shelley, Bruce. Church History in Plain Language. 2nd Edition. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1995, page 66.

Until next time…