What Qualifies as a Bible Study...?

[makesends]

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

Lol, not sure whether that was sarcasm!

• Quote/text;
• Present thesis/theses;
• Suggest reasonable hermeneutical paths to pursue and to be brought to bear on the text, maybe with some assignment of importance vs other paths, and describe overlap of paths;
• Identify (if possible) outstanding assumptions AS assumptions (from which logic is pursued), valid or otherwise.

Maybe I can come up with it better by example. Give me some time, I'm always in the middle of something...

 

[makesends]

For Example:

• Quote/text:

Romans 5:1 "Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ."

• Present thesis:

The word, "Peace", there, is specifically referring to, not "the-peace-that-passes-understanding", (though it does pass understanding), but specifically, the peace between erstwhile enemies —i.e. between God and fallen humans.

• Suggest reasonable hermeneutical paths to pursue:
  • Immediate Context
  • Paul's mentality
  • Other similar passages as context
  • The whole of Scripture as context —quotes
  • The whole of Scripture as context —theme/themes (eg Gospel, covenant)
  • Study of the Greek terminology in the verse and contices
  • Orthodox Doctrine directly dealing with the subject of enmity and peace between God and fallen man.
  • Etc.
• Assigning importance to different hermeneutical paths:
  1. Immediate Context (specific)
  2. Paul's mentality (specific) overlap with larger context
  3. Scriptural themes (general) overlap with Orthodox Doctrine and larger context in the use of the terminology
  4. The use of the term, 'enmity' as implied with 'peace' elsewhere in Scripture (specific, general)
  5. Etc
• Assumptions:
  • God is the cause of existence, for his purposes alone
  • We, both the elect and non-elect, are fallen humans
  • Orthodoxy demands all sorts of descriptors of the means, mode and necessity of Salvation
  • The Bible is consistent with itself
  • We are capable, though human, of producing valid statements for consideration, Deus Volens
  • And on and on

 

[Josheb]

Lol, not sure whether that was sarcasm!

It wasn't.

• Quote/text;
• Present thesis/theses;
• Suggest reasonable hermeneutical paths to pursue and to be brought to bear on the text, maybe with some assignment of importance vs other paths, and describe overlap of paths;
• Identify (if possible) outstanding assumptions AS assumptions (from which logic is pursued), valid or otherwise.

Maybe I can come up with it better by example. Give me some time, I'm always in the middle of something...

You think every op in the Bible Study forum should do this?

 

[Josheb]

For Example:

• Quote/text:

Romans 5:1 "Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ."

• Present thesis:

The word, "Peace", there, is specifically referring to, not "the-peace-that-passes-understanding", (though it does pass understanding), but specifically, the peace between erstwhile enemies —i.e. between God and fallen humans.

• Suggest reasonable hermeneutical paths to pursue:
  • Immediate Context
  • Paul's mentality
  • Other similar passages as context
  • The whole of Scripture as context —quotes
  • The whole of Scripture as context —theme/themes (eg Gospel, covenant)
  • Study of the Greek terminology in the verse and contices
  • Orthodox Doctrine directly dealing with the subject of enmity and peace between God and fallen man.
  • Etc.
• Assigning importance to different hermeneutical paths:
  1. Immediate Context (specific)
  2. Paul's mentality (specific) overlap with larger context
  3. Scriptural themes (general) overlap with Orthodox Doctrine and larger context in the use of the terminology
  4. The use of the term, 'enmity' as implied with 'peace' elsewhere in Scripture (specific, general)
  5. Etc
• Assumptions:
  • God is the cause of existence, for his purposes alone
  • We, both the elect and non-elect, are fallen humans
  • Orthodoxy demands all sorts of descriptors of the means, mode and necessity of Salvation
  • The Bible is consistent with itself
  • We are capable, though human, of producing valid statements for consideration, Deus Volens
  • And on and on

I suspect an opening post that included half the information listed in that outline would exceed the 10,000 characters limitation. Can you find an op in this board that comes close to accomplishing the specifics this outline? Will you post and application of this outline for Romans 5.1 as an example?

 

[makesends]

It wasn't.

You think every op in the Bible Study forum should do this?

Nope. In fact, even that can go too long. I was just thinking 'out loud'. A suggestion at best.

 

[makesends]

I suspect an opening post that included half the information listed in that outline would exceed the 10,000 characters limitation. Can you find an op in this board that comes close to accomplishing the specifics this outline? Will you post and application of this outline for Romans 5.1 as an example?

I was saying that WAS the specifics I was suggesting for an OP; mostly, just an outline of pursuit/study.

 

[John Bauer]

A discussion-board Bible study needs a different center of gravity than a Sunday School lecture or a small-group devotional. The medium is dialogical, asynchronous, and text-driven, so the standard should not be quantity of quotation or length of commentary but clarity of argument with a transparent method. The question is whether the post makes a text-driven argument that others can evaluate.

1. Show how your claim arises from the passage. Quote the text, identify the key words or structure, and draw the conclusion that follows. If the connection between text and claim is opaque, then it’s not a Bible study.
   
   ​
2. Use other scriptures to interpret the passage. A useful study demonstrates how scripture interprets scripture. One or two well-chosen cross-references do more good than a long list with no reasoning.
   
   ​
   A forum Bible study should also rest on two basic interpretive rules that keep the work tethered to scripture rather than to private intuition:
   
   ​
   • Analogia scripturae – Use clearer passages to interpret less clear ones. A study should show how the chosen text fits within the plain teaching of other relevant texts.
     
     ​
   • Analogia fidei – No interpretation may contradict the doctrinal pattern taught across scripture as a whole. A study must cohere with the canon’s unified witness, not isolate a verse from the system of truth.
   ​
3. The goal should be to produce an interpretation that is open to scrutiny—something others can interact with, correct, or refine. A forum study is not a monologue but an argument placed on the table for discussion.

 

[Josheb]

A discussion-board Bible study needs a different center of gravity than a Sunday School lecture or a small-group devotional. The medium is dialogical, asynchronous, and text-driven, so the standard should not be quantity of quotation or length of commentary but clarity of argument with a transparent method. The question is whether the post makes a text-driven argument that others can evaluate.

1. Show how your claim arises from the passage. Quote the text, identify the key words or structure, and draw the conclusion that follows. If the connection between text and claim is opaque, then it’s not a Bible study.
   
   ​
2. Use other scriptures to interpret the passage. A useful study demonstrates how scripture interprets scripture. One or two well-chosen cross-references do more good than a long list with no reasoning.
   
   ​
   A forum Bible study should also rest on two basic interpretive rules that keep the work tethered to scripture rather than to private intuition:
   
   ​
   • Analogia scripturae – Use clearer passages to interpret less clear ones. A study should show how the chosen text fits within the plain teaching of other relevant texts.
     
     ​
   • Analogia fidei – No interpretation may contradict the doctrinal pattern taught across scripture as a whole. A study must cohere with the canon’s unified witness, not isolate a verse from the system of truth.
3. The goal should be to produce an interpretation that is open to scrutiny—something others can interact with, correct, or refine. A forum study is not a monologue but an argument placed on the table for discussion.

Can we amend that to say, "Use a small sampling of other exegetically relevant scriptures...."?

The use of other scripture could be lengthy. Other than that minor amendment, that's very well said.

 

[John Bauer]

Can we amend that to say, "Use a small sampling of other exegetically relevant scriptures"?

Certainly, for I did say, “One or two well-chosen cross-references do more good than a long list with no reasoning,” and, “A study should show how the chosen text fits within the plain teaching of other relevant texts.”

The use of other scripture could be lengthy.

Indeed, which is what my post was attempting to obviate with its solution-focused suggestion.

Other than that minor amendment, that's very well said.

Cheers, thank you.