What Qualifies as a Bible Study...?

[Josheb]

What qualifies as a Bible study suitable for and useful for an internet Christian discussion forum?


I've noticed some post a question without further comment (or scripture) and some quote many verses and add a line or two of content. Some post commentary that doesn't appear to have any correlation to verses quoted (assuming verses have been quoted), giving the appearance a Bible study is about one's personal opinions on the verses. Few use other scripture to inform a text quoted in a Bible study. Given the variety just described it does not seem there is much consensus on what constitutes a Bible Study, or what a Bible study useful for a discussion board should look like. Rather than copying and pasting some definition, explanation, and/or description out of reference source, how about the members of this forum provide just one or two principles or practices they believe should be present in a discussion board's Bible study board (as opposed to a Bible Study occurring in a congregation's Sunday School, a small group gathering, or a sermon series) and what they believe the goal should be relevant specifically to a discussion board Bible study.









Peripherally, I am also curious about how much discussion the members of this forum want in a Bible Study board because some forums have Bible Study boards in which the "study" is not open form discussion. In those forums the "studies" are intended for educational purposes only and in most of them anyone can post their "study" under those auspices.
.

 

[Josheb]

I'll start. I believe a discussion board Bible study should contain and will be most helpful to a forum's members when it...

1. Contains scripture
2. Provides some modicum of commentary or explanation how that text was intended by its original author and would have been understood by its original readers
3. Provides some application of that understanding or meaning to contemporary life

#4? 5?

 

[Arial]

I'll start. I believe a discussion board Bible study should contain and will be most helpful to a forum's members when it...

1. Contains scripture
2. Provides some modicum of commentary or explanation how that text was intended by its original author and would have been understood by its original readers
3. Provides some application of that understanding or meaning to contemporary life

#4? 5?

I think an internet Bible study should have as its main objective, finding out what the author meant. What he was saying. That of course would entail 1 and 2 above. 3. could come later.

• Bring out the historic and cultural and situational context before engaging with the text.
• Most Bible studies on a form are topical and often are engaging with a single quote. Therefore, other scriptures on the topic or passage need to be examined. What is clear interpreting what is not clear.
• Make sure no contradictions are created by an interpretation.

 

[Josheb]

I think an internet Bible study should have as its main objective, finding out what the author meant. What he was saying. That of course would entail 1 and 2 above. 3. could come later.

• Bring out the historic and cultural and situational context before engaging with the text.
• Most Bible studies on a form are topical and often are engaging with a single quote. Therefore, other scriptures on the topic or passage need to be examined. What is clear interpreting what is not clear.
• Make sure no contradictions are created by an interpretation.

All of which are very good answers. The challenge is that a Bible study can be quite extensive, but an extensive study of even a small passage can exceed the practical limitations of a discussion board thread. Long versus short.

Are (or should) discussion board Bible studies be open for discussion (comment and inquiry)?

 

[Josheb]

So far...

1. Contains scripture
2. Provides some modicum of commentary or explanation how that text was intended by its original author and would have been understood by its original readers
3. Bring out the historic and cultural and situational context before engaging with the text.
4. Most Bible studies on a form are topical and often are engaging with a single quote. Therefore, other scriptures on the topic or passage need to be examined. What is clear interpreting what is not clear.
5. Make sure no contradictions are created by an interpretation.

Maybe provide some application of what's learned from the above to contemporary life.


Anyone else? #6? 7?

 

[JesusFan]

So far...

1. Contains scripture
2. Provides some modicum of commentary or explanation how that text was intended by its original author and would have been understood by its original readers
3. Bring out the historic and cultural and situational context before engaging with the text.
4. Most Bible studies on a form are topical and often are engaging with a single quote. Therefore, other scriptures on the topic or passage need to be examined. What is clear interpreting what is not clear.
5. Make sure no contradictions are created by an interpretation.

Maybe provide some application of what's learned from the above to contemporary life.


Anyone else? #6? 7?

Also manage to incorprate into the study when and where appropiate the exegesis out and from the original languages texts

 

[makesends]

From my POV, at least, I have little interest in a Bible Study thread where the OP lays out his/her text, attempted exegesis, etc to such length as to turn into "wall of text". If I want to learn from somebody else's study, I don't generally do so by engaging with people I debate with after reading their long post. I do it by reading authors whom I have experienced in the past to have valid and well-derived doctrine. If I want to argue with someone, I might read their exegesis, and debate points, but generally, I don't see that as useful here.

In short, I don't have the time to spend to understand most people's study. For that, I go to people whom I have learned to trust for teaching. It is kind of like the fact that I don't go to peruse Christian bookstores anymore. If I go there at all, it is for a specific book.

I want to hear the thesis, and a general outline of the reasoning, and if the next few posts interrupt before getting into the meat of the points, to ask questions about this or that, I'm willing to wait, and hear them out, if the conversation hasn't descended into contentiousness or self-derived (anti-orthodox) personal interpretations.

I do a lot of scanning. My eyes are too bad and my ambitions too lazy to read everything, or to engage with everyone who thinks they have something to say. Particularly the "impressive" ones who delight in unorthodox interpretations or only delight in their own focuses, putting exclamation marks at the end of 'important' statements!

 

[Hazelelponi]

Are (or should) discussion board Bible studies be open for discussion (comment and inquiry)?

On a discussion board? Yes, absolutely.

As @makesends noted, when people want formal instruction, they go to trusted scholars, commentaries, pastors, and theologians. But when they come to an online discussion board, they come precisely to ask questions, test their understanding, compare interpretations, and see whether what they believe actually holds up under scrutiny.

A Bible study thread on a forum will naturally involve more dialogue than monologue. Unless it’s an echo chamber, real discussion will always be longer than the opening post. That’s part of the value: people bring in passages, counterpoints, alternate readings, and the thread becomes a place where Scripture is examined together rather than merely announced from above.

And honestly, if everyone already agrees and no one interacts, it stops being a “study” at all — it becomes a reposting of material people have already read from the actual scholars. The richness of a forum Bible study lies in the very thing the medium enables: interaction, inquiry, and sharpening one another.

Seeing things talked through — carefully, respectfully, and openly — is essential for learning. That’s the whole point of a discussion board.

 

[Josheb]

From my POV, at least, I have little interest in a Bible Study thread where the OP lays out his/her text, attempted exegesis, etc to such length as to turn into "wall of text". If I want to learn from somebody else's study, I don't generally do so by engaging with people I debate with after reading their long post. I do it by reading authors whom I have experienced in the past to have valid and well-derived doctrine. If I want to argue with someone, I might read their exegesis, and debate points, but generally, I don't see that as useful here.

In short, I don't have the time to spend to understand most people's study. For that, I go to people whom I have learned to trust for teaching. It is kind of like the fact that I don't go to peruse Christian bookstores anymore. If I go there at all, it is for a specific book.

I want to hear the thesis, and a general outline of the reasoning, and if the next few posts interrupt before getting into the meat of the points, to ask questions about this or that, I'm willing to wait, and hear them out, if the conversation hasn't descended into contentiousness or self-derived (anti-orthodox) personal interpretations.

I do a lot of scanning. My eyes are too bad and my ambitions too lazy to read everything, or to engage with everyone who thinks they have something to say. Particularly the "impressive" ones who delight in unorthodox interpretations or only delight in their own focuses, putting exclamation marks at the end of 'important' statements!

So..... if we to word that in what is preferred or what to do, instead of what isn't valued or what not to do, the alternative would be....


Keep content in the opening post succinct (brief and clear).


Yes?

 

[Josheb]

On a discussion board? Yes, absolutely.

As @makesends noted, when people want formal instruction, they go to trusted scholars, commentaries, pastors, and theologians. But when they come to an online discussion board, they come precisely to ask questions, test their understanding, compare interpretations, and see whether what they believe actually holds up under scrutiny.

Oooooo..... while I appreciate your point of view, I do not believe that is what all people want or why they come to discussion boards. On multiple occasions I have had posters explicitly state their intent is to teach and NOT to learn. SOme are openly resistent to the premise a respondent to their op might have anything of value to contribute or that their op may need additions, amendments, or corrections. Those sentiments often occur in Bible studies. I might even place the Bible Study boards third in the order of boards most likely to conatin rancor (behind the Trinity and the Soteriology/Arm v Cal boards in most forums. This is why some forums do not permit discussion of Bible studies. They are to be read and not disputed. Discussion invariably leads to dispute, so it is not permitted.

A Bible study thread on a forum will naturally involve more dialogue than monologue. Unless it’s an echo chamber, real discussion will always be longer than the opening post. That’s part of the value: people bring in passages, counterpoints, alternate readings, and the thread becomes a place where Scripture is examined together rather than merely announced from above.

I assume your pastor occasionally preaches a sermon series that is a Bible study and that sermons are not occasions where discussions are permitted. In forums where there are members who are pastors those members often approach everything they post as a "sermon," or content that isn't open for discussion because they are a pasotr and everyone else is not. They don't say it but they mean shut and read. Most may not consider a Bible study op that way, but some do. Others put a great deal of effort into preparing and posting a Bible study op so even if they aren't dictating and are open for discussion they may not be

And honestly, if everyone already agrees and no one interacts, it stops being a “study” at all — it becomes a reposting of material people have already read from the actual scholars. The richness of a forum Bible study lies in the very thing the medium enables: interaction, inquiry, and sharpening one another.

Seeing things talked through — carefully, respectfully, and openly — is essential for learning. That’s the whole point of a discussion board.

I am, again, inclined to agree but many forum members (most of them in this forum) are experienced believers who know scripture well and know how to study scripture in many different ways effectively. The need for a Bible Study board is minimal. Given that lack...


What qualifies as a Bible study suitable for and useful for an internet Christian discussion forum?




This op is about formulating a list and not extended commentary on how an internet forum Bible Study should be conducted after the op is posted (or the intent driving a Bible Study op). This op will have served its purpose when a list has been accomplished, not an instruction manual, or directives on the author's motives. If we manage to come to some consensus that criteria should implicitly cover the concerns expressed in your post.

Just saying.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Just saying.

You asked.

They don't say it but they mean shut and read.

I will remember to read and shut up, right?

 

[John Bauer]

When people … come to an online discussion board, they come precisely to ask questions, test their understanding, compare interpretations, and see whether what they believe actually holds up under scrutiny. … People bring in passages, counterpoints, alternate readings, and the thread becomes a place where Scripture is examined together rather than merely announced from above.

This is exactly my intent and purpose when engaging a theological or Bible study.

 

[makesends]

So..... if we to word that in what is preferred or what to do, instead of what isn't valued or what not to do, the alternative would be....


Keep content in the opening post succinct (brief and clear).


Yes?

Succinct is good, but how thorough can that be? It would be hard for near-exhaustive exegesis to be succinct, I think.

 

[Josheb]

Succinct is good, but how thorough can that be? It would be hard for near-exhaustive exegesis to be succinct, I think.

Remember we're discussing an internet forum's discussion board's Bible study and, in particular, its opening post. How "near exhaustive" do you think an op should be in a Bible Study board?

From my POV, at least, I have little interest in a Bible Study thread where the OP lays out his/her text, attempted exegesis, etc to such length as to turn into "wall of text"........... In short, I don't have the time to spend to understand most people's study........... I want to hear the thesis, and a general outline of the reasoning, and if the next few posts interrupt before getting into the meat of the points, to ask questions about this or that, I'm willing to wait, and hear them out..............

That does not sound like the description of a "near exhaustive exegesis." Do you want succinct, thorough, or near exhaustive in an internet discussion board Bible study op? Care to clarify? Any specific points to add to the current list?

1. Contains scripture
2. Provides some modicum of commentary or explanation how that text was intended by its original author and would have been understood by its original readers
3. Bring out the historic and cultural and situational context before engaging with the text.
4. Most Bible studies on a form are topical and often are engaging with a single quote. Therefore, other scriptures on the topic or passage need to be examined. What is clear interpreting what is not clear.
5. Make sure no contradictions are created by an interpretation.
6. The hermeneutic spiral is applied working outward from a specific text through its surrounding text and contexts (?)
7. The opening post should succinct but thorough (?)

Maybe provide some application of what's learned from the above to contemporary life.





.

 

[Josheb]

Let me clarify this op for further potential contributions. I am not asking what a Bible study looks like outside of an internet discussion board. I'm not particularly interested in criteria we think should apply to all discussion board Bible Study boards. This op is concerned specifically with criteria applicable to this forum's Bible Study because the ops in this board are very diverse, there doesn't appear to be any shared viewpoint on the matter, and the members here may (or may not) have a particular set of preferences. What principles qualify for inclusion in a Bible Study board's op for us, and what might be the purpose of posting a Bible study in this forum?

 

[makesends]

Remember we're discussing an internet forum's discussion board's Bible study and, in particular, its opening post. How "near exhaustive" do you think an op should be in a Bible Study board?

That does not sound like the description of a "near exhaustive exegesis." Do you want succinct, thorough, or near exhaustive in an internet discussion board Bible study op? Care to clarify? Any specific points to add to the current list?

1. Contains scripture
2. Provides some modicum of commentary or explanation how that text was intended by its original author and would have been understood by its original readers
3. Bring out the historic and cultural and situational context before engaging with the text.
4. Most Bible studies on a form are topical and often are engaging with a single quote. Therefore, other scriptures on the topic or passage need to be examined. What is clear interpreting what is not clear.
5. Make sure no contradictions are created by an interpretation.
6. The hermeneutic spiral is applied working outward from a specific text through its surrounding text and contexts (?)
7. The opening post should succinct but thorough (?)

Maybe provide some application of what's learned from the above to contemporary life.





.

Often, if not usually, in an enjoyable/useful Bible Study, (outside an online forum), what is dealt with does not begin in exegesis. It is something someone thought of, often not even orthodox, or, at least, not often spoken of, that someone sees as perhaps valid. They describe it, best they can, and even ask for better descriptions. In Sunday School class, I have made a statement, we discussed it, then assigned facets of the exegesis to different members (volunteers, usually) to complete before next Sunday. It is never exhaustive, but it can be pretty good. Very often, and I accepted it, it is adopted from somebody else's work, due to the fact that none of us were/are authoritative nor altogether logical in our own study, and/or are somewhat lazy or pressed for time. In this way the members learned what is and is not a good hermeneutic, how to differentiate between what is assumed true/axiomatic and one's 'worldview' vs what can be logically derived. (Thus, also, the difference between inference and deduction, and how dots are connected in a valid manner.)

Notice in so many threads here how what the OP considered valid Bible study, (because, after all, they did connect the dots and came up with what enthralled them), the dots were from notions inferred upon false (or incomplete/unsure) premises (no better than guesswork).​

​

I'm not saying this needs to be like that Sunday School class. But that nobody (or least I) has time to peer review all of anyone else's work. I'm not sure how to handle this. For my part, I'll just try to keep quiet, but for dealing with glaring errors, and try not to do my usual exultation over side notes that affirm the thesis. (I'm not clinical, )

 

[Josheb]

Often, if not usually, in an enjoyable/useful Bible Study, (outside an online forum), what is dealt with does not begin in exegesis. It is something someone thought of, often not even orthodox, or, at least, not often spoken of, that someone sees as perhaps valid. They describe it, best they can, and even ask for better descriptions. In Sunday School class, I have made a statement, we discussed it, then assigned facets of the exegesis to different members (volunteers, usually) to complete before next Sunday. It is never exhaustive, but it can be pretty good. Very often, and I accepted it, it is adopted from somebody else's work, due to the fact that none of us were/are authoritative nor altogether logical in our own study, and/or are somewhat lazy or pressed for time. In this way the members learned what is and is not a good hermeneutic, how to differentiate between what is assumed true/axiomatic and one's 'worldview' vs what can be logically derived. (Thus, also, the difference between inference and deduction, and how dots are connected in a valid manner.)

Notice in so many threads here how what the OP considered valid Bible study, (because, after all, they did connect the dots and came up with what enthralled them), the dots were from notions inferred upon false premises (no better than guesswork).​

​

I'm not saying this needs to be like that Sunday School class. But that nobody (or least I) has time to peer review all of anyone else's work. I'm not sure how to handle this. For my part, I'll just try to keep quiet, but for dealing with glaring errors, and try not to do my usual exultation over side notes that affirm the thesis. (I'm not clinical, )

What might be your short list of the principles you'd like see present in the opening post of a Bible study in this forum's Bible Study board?

 

[makesends]

Remember we're discussing an internet forum's discussion board's Bible study and, in particular, its opening post. How "near exhaustive" do you think an op should be in a Bible Study board?

That does not sound like the description of a "near exhaustive exegesis." Do you want succinct, thorough, or near exhaustive in an internet discussion board Bible study op? Care to clarify? Any specific points to add to the current list?

1. Contains scripture
2. Provides some modicum of commentary or explanation how that text was intended by its original author and would have been understood by its original readers
3. Bring out the historic and cultural and situational context before engaging with the text.
4. Most Bible studies on a form are topical and often are engaging with a single quote. Therefore, other scriptures on the topic or passage need to be examined. What is clear interpreting what is not clear.
5. Make sure no contradictions are created by an interpretation.
6. The hermeneutic spiral is applied working outward from a specific text through its surrounding text and contexts (?)
7. The opening post should succinct but thorough (?)

Maybe provide some application of what's learned from the above to contemporary life.





.

7. It's true that "thorough" can mean a well-made outline/description of paths of study, but not exhaustively demonstrating each path. Thus, succinct.

 

[makesends]

What might be your short list of the principles you'd like see present in the opening post of a Bible study in this forum's Bible Study board?

The usual. Quote/text; thesis/theses; reasonable hermeneutical paths, maybe with some assignment of importance vs other paths, and overlap; identification (if possible) of outstanding assumptions AS assumptions, valid or otherwise. My question results, though. How long do 'the member states protest and debate the logistics and terms of the summit meeting'. But, I'm probably overthinking this, complicating it unnecessarily.

 

[Josheb]

7. It's true that "thorough" can mean a well-made outline/description of paths of study, but not exhaustively demonstrating each path. Thus, succinct.

The usual. Quote/text; thesis/theses; reasonable hermeneutical paths, maybe with some assignment of importance vs other paths, and overlap; identification (if possible) of outstanding assumptions AS assumptions, valid or otherwise. My question results, though. How long do 'the member states protest and debate the logistics and terms of the summit meeting'. But, I'm probably overthinking this, complicating it unnecessarily.

Can you put it in a bullet point and put the bullet point in your own words?