Bible knowledge -- required?

I would love to devote a year to studying the Bible without anyones notes or commentaries. I'd have several versions and concordances and lexicon.

 

Something hit me as I was driving to cover a game tonight and that is the way folks are introduced to "Bible" Study these days. I know a lot of Baptist churches anyway have "newbie" classes that basically indoctrinate a new Christian with how "Baptist" believe with all the proof texts and what not. So they come out knowing what "Baptist" believe and what they should now believe, but they really couldn't say who, what when, where, why and how.

And it seems to me that when peolpe are interested in "Bible" study (meaning searching the Scriptures without a sermon or Lifeway book, etc) they are intersted in proving a point and so they want to study the Bible to prove their point.

Somewhere along the line the general folks stopped being Scripture testers and became sermon ingesters. One thing leads to another and here we are today.

 

GE:

You pose these questions as opposing while in fact one cannot study the Bible without listening to other Chriatians and to learn from them.

I do not the 'principle', 'the Bible and the bible only' because it is never that, but always, the Bible and I only.

 

J Jump:

"Somewhere along the line the general folks stopped being Scripture testers and became sermon ingesters. One thing leads to another and here we are today."

GE:

Cannot agree with you more!

I go farther, that somewhere along the line the general folks stopped being Scripture testers and became Version ingesters. One thing leads to another and here we are today. Despite it's not the 'general folks' to blame, but the assumed and assuming masters in Bible study.

 

hillclimber1,

bmerr here. I highly recommend purchasing and using a Bible without "study notes" at the bottom of every page. So much false doctrine is floating around in the study notes, it's scary. Most people, (myself included, at one time), content themselves with merely reading the "study note" at the bottom of the page if they don't understand a verse, instead of seeking out what else the Scriptures maight have to say on a certain subject, not knowing a thing about the men and women who supplied the study notes in the first place. They might be maniacs!

I stick to a couple of KJVs, (one for work and travel, and a larger one with wide margins for home and worship), neither of which have anything more than some cross-references between columns of text, a small concordance, and a few maps in the back. Any commentaries or other study helps are separate. It's wonderful.

The crutch of "study Bibles" has probably done more harm than good overall.

In Christ,

bmerr

 

It was a very good example of "one man's opinion" for sure.

In Christ,

Bob

 

GE:

"there is nothing which can replace knowing the original document itself! "
It's right here 'Gehor-SAMkeit' - 'listening to others - begin, in understanding the Bible.
I have memorised passage upon passage from the Bible (French, Afrikaans, German, and English). It did help me unconsciously in that the realisation became the longer the stronger, it helps me nothing in truly understanding what I learnt by heart - meaning by memory purely. To get to 'knowing the original' itself, I had to consult others who have gone the same route as I before, and have made a very good job of their finding out! See! how it changed my whole 'understanding' or 'knowing' of these very same passages as though for the first time I was confronted by them!

 

'Gehor-SAMkeit' - 'listening to others' = 'obedience' - begin, in understanding the Bible.