Biblical Concept: But it isn’t Bible Study
BUT IT ISN'T BIBLE STUDY
By Bernard Ram
(This article appeared in Eternity Magazine,
Feb., 1960)
Scene I
I hurried to
the morning hour hungry of soul. It would be the "Bible" hour.
Amidst the high-pressure appeals of the conference for personal witnessing,
world missions. and consecration, this would be one glad hour in which we would
shut out the appeals of man and contemplate the inexhaustible Word of
God. The Scriptures were opened and read. My soul now drew near, eager
for the exposition of the Word of God. But down my open throat was stuffed
another sermon! It was a good and proper sermon, but it wasn't Bible
study. The speaker wheeled back and forth like an eagle over the text,
but he never came to rest upon it, I left the hall as hungry as I came and
quite sure that the speaker could not
distinguish between-a sermon and a Bible study. Sermonizing is not Bible
study.
Scene II
The honorable
reverend stood before the audience and announced that he had the responsibility
for the Bible study and would we all turn to a certain passage in the Old
Testament. I thanked the Lord for a man who took his Bible study
seriously, and eagerly anticipated a fruitful 45 minutes of real Bible
exposition. After the text was read there issued a torrent of words
exhorting us to five different things. God knows that we needed at least
ten exhortations, but God also knows that the relationship of' the text to the
exhortations was completely accidental. Although I left the auditorium
completely equipped with exhortations my added insight Into
the text was zero. Whipping up three or four good exhortations from a
text is not Bible study.
Scene III
I crouched low
in the pew. It was eventide Bible hour and I was praying for grace to endure
another sermon or a fist full of miscellaneous exhortations falsely known as
"Bible" study. The first paragraph of the speaker brought me
snappily out of my crouch. I was not going to get various and divers exhortations but real, honest, undiluted Bible study!
He opened the Bible and went after the text!
But at the
third paragraph I was dismayed. From Bible study we slipped into
exegesis. "The jussive means this" was followed by "the
aorist participle means that." The housewives present did not know the
difference between the jussive and lemon juice and their blank faces were
rather faithful counterparts of their minds at this moment. For the first
time in their lives the laymen heard the word "aorist" and surmised
it was one of the pagan gods of the Hittites. Next, we were hurriedly pulled past
the opinions of Robertson, Denney, Cullmann and Broadus. By this time
most of the little group was wool-gathering or daydreaming or thinking how to
damn with faint praise in the post-benediction chit-chat. Academic exegesis
is not Bible study.
Scene IV
I mingled with
a crowd of university students as we retreated from the hot sun into the cool
auditorium. Certainly, this crowd would put the speaker on the spot and
force him to give out with good Bible study. The reputation of the Bible
teacher preceded him like the runners preceded the ancient chariots. Away
from the warm southern sun I sat smugly in my seat and said to myself, "
this is it--real Bible study!" At last, no sermons, no sheaf of
exhortations, but Bible study.
The great
Bible teacher strode across the platform, like a great musician and putting His
Bible upon the pulpit waited for the audience to quiet down before he played
the first note. The concert began. Like the
lingers of' the pianist race up and down the keyboard,
so his fingers raced through the Bible finding the relevant verses.
Plunk, ping,
plunk! It did not take long before I realized that we were not having
Bible study but a party line. The Bible was the keyboard and the teacher was
playing his own tune upon it. The melody was not that of the Scripture
but one imposed upon it by the Bible teacher. When the last
embellishments were over, and when we were assured with a certainty the papacy
could envy that we had the truth we were
dismissed.
I did not feel
blessed nor fed nor led deeper into the Scriptures. I felt brainwashed.
I felt my share in the priesthood of the believers as it pertained to Bible
study had been violated by the arrogant dogmatisms of
a party line. Propagandizing is not Bible study.
Scene V
Every church
has its Bible study time at the prayer service. Here there is no urgency
to evangelize or exhort. The Pastor may unhurriedly open the Sacred Text
and feed the flock from its riches.
But as I
watched the good man I almost cried. He announced his passage for the
study and went to work--but what work! In his attempt to explain the text
he was like a chicken with defective pecking aim. The poor hen pecks all
around the corn but never hits it. She squints with her beady eye, she
cocks her head, and then she pecks - and misses. She over-shoots or
under-shoots.
So the poor man of God
does everything but explain the text. I got 30 minutes of various and
divers unrelated and uninspiring pious observations. Each observation was
a worthy one. But each passage
itself remained untouched. We had been all around the text but never in it.
Pious observations are not Bible study.
Now, the
tragedy is that Bible study is so simple, yet so elusive. It is unfortunate
that there is so much tamping around the Scriptures with no real Bible
study. Let me set down a few principles of what I believe constitutes
real study of the Bible.
First,
Bible study is in the language of the people, and in a fairly common translation.
Bible study intends to acquaint Christians with the contents of the Bible in their
language, and in the Bible they read. An expert Bible teacher will know
his Hebrew and Greek and will have consulted the authoritative works of
reference. But when he stands before his class all this must be veiled or
cloaked. The bones of his basic research must not protrude. He must
translate all his learning into the common language. Some reference to the
original languages is not objectionable but the main burden of the study must
rest upon the English language and a common translation.
If Bible study
is to have staying power it must be in the common language and in a common
text. The people will grasp the content of Scripture only as it is taught
to them in the language in which they converse, pray, read and sing.
Exegesis is
for the scholars and Bible study is no substitute for scholarly exegesis.
But academic exegesis is not for the popular platform. Here God's people
must he fed in their mother tongue.
Second, the
actual goal of Bible study is to convey the meaning to the people of a set
number of verses. Unless a manageable length is determined in advance
the Bible study will be frustrating. Too much will have to be said in too short
time. Care must be taken to limit the scope of the study unless the
teacher is giving some sort of general survey.
Third, the
Bible teacher must attempt to convey the essential meaning of the text or
passage. This is by far the most difficult task in Bible study--this
is Bible study! Here is where the men are separated from the
boys. Here is where fuzzy thinking is unfortunately put upon
public display; or where real skill in handling the Word of God, blesses the audience.
It is the
presupposition of all interpretation of documents that the authors of these
documents intended to set down a meaning in writing. Therefore, if
sufficient pains are taken the meaning of the author may be
recovered. All interpretation of documents--be it a fragment of
the pre-Socratic philosophers or a page from some medieval mystic--has as
its goal the recovery of the meaning of the author.
Bible exegesis
is the recovery of the meaning of the writers of Holy Writ; Bible study has the
same goal only is less technical and less scholarly, and more popular and more
devotional. The heart of Bible study must always be the matter
of meaning. The first question of
Bible study is not: “‘What is devotional here?” nor “What is of practical
importance here?” nor "What is inspirational here?" but “What does
this passage mean?”
If the Bible
teacher has no sensitivity to the question of meaning, there will be no real
Bible study, but only a series of pious observations or a quiver full of
exhortations or some interesting but pointless story-telling. The one trait
all great teachers of Scripture have in common is their sensitivity to
the meaning of the text.
Fourth this
means sensitivity to words. The good interpreter never looks a word without a
question mark in his mind. He may consult his Greek lexicon, or his
Webster's dictionary, or a commentary, or a concordance. But he fusses around
among his books till the word upon which he has fixed his attention begins to
glow with meaning.
An experienced
doctor has a wonderful sensitivity in his fingers. He has spent a
lifetime feeling lumps, swellings, growths, tumors, and wens. He knows
their textures, their shapes, and their peculiarities. Where our fingers tell
us two things, a doctor’s fingers might tell him a dozen things. Just as a
doctor's fingers have a feel for lumps and growths so a Bible teacher must have
a feel for words. He must pass the fingers of his mind over their shapes,
textures and peculiarities.
Fifth, this
means sensitivity to phrases, clauses, paragraphs and idioms. A good Bible teacher
is restless; he takes nothing for granted. He is the detective whose victim is the
meaning and the words in their various combinations of phrases, sentences,
and paragraphs are the clues. Out of the various configurations of the words he
delves for the meaning. He looks for the train of thought
(i.e., the sequence in meaning) and tries to follow it throughout
the passage. He works, digs, meditates,
ruminates, and studies until the meaning of the text shines through.
It is right at
this point that the poor teacher fails. He is content with his efforts
even though his thoughts are vague, and his impressions are indistinct.
As soon as he gets a good exhortation or practical application
he is content and rests at that point. He does not sit with a restless
mind and dig and sweat till he has achieved the meaning of the text. He
does not reconstruct the brief of the Biblical text so that he can recite it to
his audience. Failing to recover the essential meaning of the text, all
he can do is offer a series of religious observations or a sermon in the place
of a Bible study.
Sixth, the
good teacher, to the contrary, keeps up a running flow of questions about
meanings. What does this word mean? What is the import of this
phrase? Is this expression an idiom? What figure of speech is this?
What is the connection of this verse with those before and after it? Who is
this man? What is this city? What Jewish custom is behind this practice?
Where else in Scripture is this person or this theme treated? And certainly the good teacher will surround himself with those
books
which can answer these kind of questions.
Seventh,
Bible study always includes the relevant application of the text to the lives and
times of the hearers. The Scriptures are the milk for babes in Christ
and strong food for the men in Christ. Bible study is feeding the people
of God. But this feeding looks in two directions: (1) it looks to the
truth of Scripture as it is in itself; and (2) it looks to the actual concrete
situation of the listening audience. The meaning of Scripture must
be meaningfully applied to the lives of Christians if Bible study is to be
a meaningful activity.
A good Bible
teacher will make the proper doctrinal application. He may call attention
to the doctrinal importance of a passage. If, for example, he is
discussing 11 Corinthians 5 he can readily explain the great doctrines of
reconciliation and atonement found in the chapter. Or, he may show how a
cult or a sect abuses the doctrinal content of a passage, or he may indicate
hold the passage rebuts some view of a cult or sect.
A good Bible
teacher explains the correctives for our spiritual life or Christian
work found within the passage. If the section is about prayer
he will point out how our present practice of prayer needs the correction of this
passage.
A good Bible
teacher calls attention to the comfort and encouragement for
God's people found in the text. It may be the invitation to prayer, or the
certainty of the divine hearing. It may be the power of the
intercessory work of Christ, or the enabling of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, or the consolation of the
providence of God.
Eighth, a
good Bible teacher calls attention to the devotional elements of the text.
He shows wherein we should love God, or why we must follow Christ. He
dwells upon the wonders of God's love, or Christ’s death or the Spirit's
ministry to the saints. He attempts to excite our love and adoration, and
seeks to lead us to a deeper spirit of consecration.
In conclusion,
I feel that I have experienced a good session of Bible study:
a. When I felt
that the teacher took me right into the text and not around it.
b. When I felt
we interacted with the text itself and not with the party-line beliefs of the
teacher.
c. When I felt
that I had a better understanding of the text than when I came into the
session.
d. When I felt
that the time was basically spent in meaning and not in a miscellany of
religious platitudes.
e. When I have
felt doctrinally rebuked, challenged, comforted, encouraged, and practically
instructed.