How to Read The Bible
- Thread starter WaveRunr
- Start date
-
- Tags
- hermeneutics
- Status
reaganmarsh
Puritan Board Senior
Excellent approach.
Dearly Bought
Puritan Board Junior
I find the following section from the Directory for Family Worship helpful in terms of guiding the reading of Scripture,
Reformed Irish Man
Puritan Board Freshman
Hi Jonathan,
I find it helpful to keep in mind the entire forest as I look at individual trees. In other words, I find it helpful to have a broad understanding of what scripture teaches in my mind as I look more closely to individual verses.
Reading and becoming familiar with a reformed confession (in my case the 1689) can provide a broad understanding of the major doctrines of scripture. As you read scripture you can have these broad truths in the back of your mind and they will help you to interpret verses in light of the whole counsel of God's word.
For example. I find when reading scripture and I come across a word like 'covenant', my mind is brought to chapter 7: 'God's Covenant'. This provides a broad explanation of God's covenants which assists me in my interpretation in the immediate context.
Also, you can read a confession and look to the proof texts and see how the authors of the confession interpreted scripture.
I find it helpful to keep in mind the entire forest as I look at individual trees. In other words, I find it helpful to have a broad understanding of what scripture teaches in my mind as I look more closely to individual verses.
Reading and becoming familiar with a reformed confession (in my case the 1689) can provide a broad understanding of the major doctrines of scripture. As you read scripture you can have these broad truths in the back of your mind and they will help you to interpret verses in light of the whole counsel of God's word.
For example. I find when reading scripture and I come across a word like 'covenant', my mind is brought to chapter 7: 'God's Covenant'. This provides a broad explanation of God's covenants which assists me in my interpretation in the immediate context.
Also, you can read a confession and look to the proof texts and see how the authors of the confession interpreted scripture.
There is plenty of good advice in the above posts. I recommend reading Scripture as you would other books. Start at the beginning, and follow the story through. Don't be afraid to read from the beginning as a Christian, that is reading even the OT as Christian Scripture.
There is more than artificiality in trying to read the OT as if one were not a Christian, but instead some sort of proto-believer, as (for example) Abraham might have been; thereby to insinuate yourself into his experience, and see matters with his eyes. You cannot possibly reconstruct all that Abraham knew, believed, was taught, had revealed to him, etc.; any more than you can make him a Trinitarian Christian with a fully realized crucified Lord in his mind.
What you know of Abraham in any case is mediated to you by the pen of Moses, who lived and wrote a minimum of three-hundred-plus years after father Abraham. It was a Jewish failure (fully realized by the days of Paul the Apostle) to try to make Abraham a Torah-keeper. Paul, in writing Galatians, indirectly chides his own party, the Pharisees, for starting to read the Scripture at Exodus 20. Consequently, they misread God's covenant-relationship with Abraham as if it had a character identical to that of Sinai.
What the Pharisees of Paul's day should have done was start reading the book at the beginning, without ignoring who they were--Mosaic Covenant people. Such reading would have made them more sensitive both to their own identity and heritage; besides showing them something of what God was doing with the world, and their place in the timeline of it. A Redemptive-historical read, one that recognizes the universal hope of a Coming One who stands at the center of God's purposes with mankind.
Recognize that God intended you to be able to read (and then re-read) the ancient text with Christian eyes; and be able to see in those beginnings not an obvious conclusion, but the shadings of it. What's the point of an epic trilogy, if the climax of the plot is spelled out in "spoiler-alert" terms in the first few pages?
There are several interlocking parts of the OT literature. I'm not ignoring the many interwoven themes, I'm simply focused on the parts, parts which are not broken off at the NT introduction, but which are fulfilled in the last stage of covenant.
There is the historic part. One follows the story from Genesis to Jesus.
There is the prophetic part. One follows the revelation and preaching concerns of the divine spokesmen, arriving eventually at Christ.
There is the worship part. One follows the development of devotional expression through the OT to Christ and the NT. I think the Psalms are central to this subject.
There is the discipleship part. One follows those who "call on the name of the Lord," from the days of Seth (Gen.4:26) to the disciples of Jesus.
That's just four major aspects and I'm sure more could be stated, but in each case mentioned one can find development of a hope in the promised Messiah who will fulfill that hope. Promise Made; Promise Kept. I'm not suggesting that one can or should want to carve up the material into bits that belong to this or that part. The text is too complex for such a division. A text that forwards the historic storyline may also refer to prophetic speech or description of discipleship.
The vital thing to realize is that when one arrives at Christ, his disciples and the NT, the religion of the faithful does not change. They, at least, don't seem to have any self-awareness that they have left the faith of their fathers--despite what their enemies and detractors sometimes accuse them of. They write using the religious language they have steeped in (most of them) for decades, their OT birthright. The forms have changed, but not the focus. The "in-group" has shifted, but not the general "shape" of the true Faith. That which began as a seed in Genesis has begun to flower.
Hope this is helpful.
There is more than artificiality in trying to read the OT as if one were not a Christian, but instead some sort of proto-believer, as (for example) Abraham might have been; thereby to insinuate yourself into his experience, and see matters with his eyes. You cannot possibly reconstruct all that Abraham knew, believed, was taught, had revealed to him, etc.; any more than you can make him a Trinitarian Christian with a fully realized crucified Lord in his mind.
What you know of Abraham in any case is mediated to you by the pen of Moses, who lived and wrote a minimum of three-hundred-plus years after father Abraham. It was a Jewish failure (fully realized by the days of Paul the Apostle) to try to make Abraham a Torah-keeper. Paul, in writing Galatians, indirectly chides his own party, the Pharisees, for starting to read the Scripture at Exodus 20. Consequently, they misread God's covenant-relationship with Abraham as if it had a character identical to that of Sinai.
What the Pharisees of Paul's day should have done was start reading the book at the beginning, without ignoring who they were--Mosaic Covenant people. Such reading would have made them more sensitive both to their own identity and heritage; besides showing them something of what God was doing with the world, and their place in the timeline of it. A Redemptive-historical read, one that recognizes the universal hope of a Coming One who stands at the center of God's purposes with mankind.
Recognize that God intended you to be able to read (and then re-read) the ancient text with Christian eyes; and be able to see in those beginnings not an obvious conclusion, but the shadings of it. What's the point of an epic trilogy, if the climax of the plot is spelled out in "spoiler-alert" terms in the first few pages?
There are several interlocking parts of the OT literature. I'm not ignoring the many interwoven themes, I'm simply focused on the parts, parts which are not broken off at the NT introduction, but which are fulfilled in the last stage of covenant.
There is the historic part. One follows the story from Genesis to Jesus.
There is the prophetic part. One follows the revelation and preaching concerns of the divine spokesmen, arriving eventually at Christ.
There is the worship part. One follows the development of devotional expression through the OT to Christ and the NT. I think the Psalms are central to this subject.
There is the discipleship part. One follows those who "call on the name of the Lord," from the days of Seth (Gen.4:26) to the disciples of Jesus.
That's just four major aspects and I'm sure more could be stated, but in each case mentioned one can find development of a hope in the promised Messiah who will fulfill that hope. Promise Made; Promise Kept. I'm not suggesting that one can or should want to carve up the material into bits that belong to this or that part. The text is too complex for such a division. A text that forwards the historic storyline may also refer to prophetic speech or description of discipleship.
The vital thing to realize is that when one arrives at Christ, his disciples and the NT, the religion of the faithful does not change. They, at least, don't seem to have any self-awareness that they have left the faith of their fathers--despite what their enemies and detractors sometimes accuse them of. They write using the religious language they have steeped in (most of them) for decades, their OT birthright. The forms have changed, but not the focus. The "in-group" has shifted, but not the general "shape" of the true Faith. That which began as a seed in Genesis has begun to flower.
Hope this is helpful.
Free Christian
Puritan Board Sophomore
I would agree with Simon, though not that I don't think the others advice is good either. After reading your post Simon I realised I often did that unconsciously 
Andres
Puritan Board Doctor
- Status