A Home for Complexity Approach to Bible Study

[def]

I need a home to bring out ideas on complexity approach to Bible study.

 

[tdidymas]

I need a home to bring out ideas on complexity approach to Bible study.

I read your other thread on this subject to get a context for what you're talking about. The end result idea is possible, only if people are accountable to each other (mutual submission), because most Christians are still sinful in many ways, in addition to the fact that there will always be spiritual babies to take care of, as well as the need for evangelists. So I'm not quite sure what is motivating you to this subject (as if it were a new idea?) or to calling it "complexity approach". It seems to me that what people need is motivation to study, because most people are lazy and want to take shortcuts. On the other hand, offering "shortcuts" to understanding is the nature of teaching (of which I am one).

IMO what people need the most is a full understanding of the gospel and how it applies to the individual life. When people mature psychologically from this, they tend to help the kingdom more than hinder it, so in a way, to some degree, the end result is always happening. Some of the helps to Bible study are also hindrances, because people tend to focus only on those methods, rather than have a well-balanced approach that includes all methods.

Finally, nothing is really better than simply reading the scripture enough times to get familiar with it enough to understand the context in which it is written. I heard that Martin Luther taught the literal approach - that is, that the Bible should be read the way it was written. This means the context, genre, style, etc. ought to tell us how to interpret specific passages - I guess one could call it the "literary method" or perhaps "grammatical method." However, there still has to be some historical context from extrabiblical sources to help in this endeavor. So, if this is what you mean by "complexity approach" then I'm in, as long as it doesn't include liberal methods like "historical biblical criticism".
TD

 

[def]

I read your other thread on this subject to get a context for what you're talking about. The end result idea is possible, only if people are accountable to each other (mutual submission), because most Christians are still sinful in many ways, in addition to the fact that there will always be spiritual babies to take care of, as well as the need for evangelists. So I'm not quite sure what is motivating you to this subject (as if it were a new idea?) or to calling it "complexity approach". It seems to me that what people need is motivation to study, because most people are lazy and want to take shortcuts. On the other hand, offering "shortcuts" to understanding is the nature of teaching (of which I am one).

'Most people are sinful' - Besides sin, people also blame Satan, lack of skills, wrong methodology, not really born again, wrong Bible, etc.

'Most people are lazy' - God has the same view, calling them sluggards and slothful (see Proverbs).

what people need the most is a full understanding of the gospel and how it applies to the individual life. When people mature psychologically from this, they tend to help the kingdom more than hinder it, so in a way, to some degree, the end result is always happening. Some of the helps to Bible study are also hindrances, because people tend to focus only on those methods, rather than have a well-balanced approach that includes all methods.

'what people need the most is a full understanding of the gospel' - people interpret the Bible differently, one can have a full mis-understanding of the gospel.

Finally, nothing is really better than simply reading the scripture enough times to get familiar with it enough to understand the context in which it is written. I heard that Martin Luther taught the literal approach - that is, that the Bible should be read the way it was written. This means the context, genre, style, etc. ought to tell us how to interpret specific passages - I guess one could call it the "literary method" or perhaps "grammatical method." However, there still has to be some historical context from extrabiblical sources to help in this endeavor. So, if this is what you mean by "complexity approach" then I'm in, as long as it doesn't include liberal methods like "historical biblical criticism".
TD

I hold the belief that if a hypothesis is correct, new information and insights will strengthen the hypothesis. If it is wrong, it will be torn apart. The number of denominations emerging from the Reformation suggests to me that people are adjusting views to fit into the hypothesis.

Complexity approach is a way of studying a complex problem or system, as oppose to the reductionist way. Historical grammatical approach has been around a long time, and it has got us no where. Albert Einstein said insanity is .....

 

[tdidymas]

'Most people are sinful' - Besides sin, people also blame Satan, lack of skills, wrong methodology, not really born again, wrong Bible, etc.

'Most people are lazy' - God has the same view, calling them sluggards and slothful (see Proverbs).




'what people need the most is a full understanding of the gospel' - people interpret the Bible differently, one can have a full mis-understanding of the gospel.


I hold the belief that if a hypothesis is correct, new information and insights will strengthen the hypothesis. If it is wrong, it will be torn apart. The number of denominations emerging from the Reformation suggests to me that people are adjusting views to fit into the hypothesis.

Complexity approach is a way of studying a complex problem or system, as oppose to the reductionist way. Historical grammatical approach has been around a long time, and it has got us no where. Albert Einstein said insanity is .....

I differ with your opinion that the HG approach has gotten us nowhere. What hinders spiritual growth is not HG style study, but rather personal opinions and egos. What makes you think your "new information and insight" approach will change anything, since it appears to me that it would facilitate such opinions?
TD

 

[Dave-W]

I need a home to bring out ideas on complexity approach to Bible study.

I submit that studying an eastern text from a western viewpoint, no matter how complex, will ultimately fail.

Adopt an eastern mindset.

 

[def]

I differ with your opinion that the HG approach has gotten us nowhere. What hinders spiritual growth is not HG style study, but rather personal opinions and egos. What makes you think your "new information and insight" approach will change anything, since it appears to me that it would facilitate such opinions?
TD

Happy Birthday TD. I agree that spiritual growth is hindered by personal opinions. An objective method will minimise, if not eliminate, personal opinions.

 

[tdidymas]

Happy Birthday TD. I agree that spiritual growth is hindered by personal opinions. An objective method will minimise, if not eliminate, personal opinions.

The only objective method I know of is the study of scripture alone, with inclusion of historical information (history, not tradition). We can read early church fathers, for example, just like we can read interpretations and opinions of leaders today, but must evaluate what is said against the scripture. It means we can't be lazy and settle for another man's interpretation. We must be familiar enough with the whole of scripture that we are able to see what the scripture actually teaches. I recognize this is a tall order, and a lifetime project. If you're looking for shortcuts, I can't think of one.

So it begs the questions, since I wasn't able to answer them on the other thread:
1. What is your idea of the complexity approach?
2. How will your complexity approach minimize personal opinions?
3. Are you looking to formulate a study process for others, or is it for your benefit mainly?
TD

 

[def]

The only objective method I know of is the study of scripture alone, with inclusion of historical information (history, not tradition). We can read early church fathers, for example, just like we can read interpretations and opinions of leaders today, but must evaluate what is said against the scripture. It means we can't be lazy and settle for another man's interpretation. We must be familiar enough with the whole of scripture that we are able to see what the scripture actually teaches. I recognize this is a tall order, and a lifetime project. If you're looking for shortcuts, I can't think of one.

So it begs the questions, since I wasn't able to answer them on the other thread:
1. What is your idea of the complexity approach?
2. How will your complexity approach minimize personal opinions?
3. Are you looking to formulate a study process for others, or is it for your benefit mainly?
TD

1. Complexity (CT) is a framework for investigating complex systems and problems. Bible interpretation is a complex task, and using the framework is a logical choice.
2. CT focuses on relationships. For example, you see a couple moving to a house next door. You have an 'opinion' they are married, but CT will observe their interactions to confirm.
3. Yes to both parts of the question.

I have put my ideas into a book and have published it as an ebook under the title "Complexity Theory Connecting the Gospel'. It can be downloaded at Smashwords for free.