One size fits all?

[James_Lai]

Hello.

I was thinking of the following. There’s about 783,137 words in the King James Bible. We know some texts are repeated in the Bible or retold in slightly different ways, so if we condense the Bible to its unique contents, it will be, say, 80% or approximately 600,000 words.

Then we know that even in different words, there’s similar ideas, and we could extract just the core meanings that are repeated and we will get even less.

So this pretty limited amount of information expressed in a certain way contained in a book we then take and offer to ALL kinds of people and expect them to learn, understand it and use it for their benefit.

Do you think it’s the right approach?

People are different. Even among siblings, you might have a child with whom it’s best to be soft and patient, and another who should be encouraged with some good pressure, he or she would take it and need it. Different personalities.

Then we have different kinds of level of education, mindset, traditions, values, ways to communicate and interact etc. How do you expect the same very limited information have a similar effect? It won’t happen.

If we look at Abrahamic religions, we see that when a single book with theoretical doctrines and some practical commands is overlayed on different people at different times, we get some variable result.

Egyptian Islam is quite different with Indonesian Islam, for example. Or north African Judaism and Judaism developed in Germany. Christianity of Greece or Christianity of the American South.

Same book, completely different faith.

Wouldn’t it be more wise to create different approaches for each population? We do adapt the Bible for children, for example. You must have at one point owned a Children’s Picture Bible. So this idea isn’t foreign to Christianity.

What do you think? Is a single Book for all is bound to be a failure?

 

[musicalpilgrim]

The Bible has never let me down

 

[James_Lai]

The Bible has never let me down

View attachment 310794

Wonderful! Glad to hear.

It’s not about letting down someone. It’s about different kinds of people who will take the text quite differently. Do we want that?

 

[Sketcher]

Hello.

I was thinking of the following. There’s about 783,137 words in the King James Bible. We know some texts are repeated in the Bible or retold in slightly different ways, so if we condense the Bible to its unique contents, it will be, say, 80% or approximately 600,000 words.

Then we know that even in different words, there’s similar ideas, and we could extract just the core meanings that are repeated and we will get even less.

So this pretty limited amount of information expressed in a certain way contained in a book we then take and offer to ALL kinds of people and expect them to learn, understand it and use it for their benefit.

Do you think it’s the right approach?

People are different. Even among siblings, you might have a child with whom it’s best to be soft and patient, and another who should be encouraged with some good pressure, he or she would take it and need it. Different personalities.

Then we have different kinds of level of education, mindset, traditions, values, ways to communicate and interact etc. How do you expect the same very limited information have a similar effect? It won’t happen.

If we look at Abrahamic religions, we see that when a single book with theoretical doctrines and some practical commands is overlayed on different people at different times, we get quite variable result.

Egyptian Islam is quite different with Indonesian Islam, for example. Or north African Judaism and Judaism developed in Germany. Christianity or Greece or Christianity of the American South.

Same book, completely different faith.

Wouldn’t be more wise to create different approaches for each population? We do adapt the Bible for children, for example. You must have at one point owned a Children’s Picture Bible. So this idea isn’t foreign to Christianity.

What do you think? Is a single Book for all is bound to be a failure?

Wonderful! Glad to hear.

It’s not about letting down someone. It’s about different kinds of people who will take the text quite differently. Do we want that?

Even with that, you have the core text to bring some kind of unity to Christians in Greece and the American South. They'll have more in common faithwise than they will with Voodoo practitioners in the American South. Core principles get adapted to different societies - "love your neighbor" is going to manifest differently because your neighbor's needs and culture will be a bit different in the American South than in Greece. Different holy books for different regions, which seems to be the alternative you are suggesting, would only result in further fragmentation.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Hello.

I was thinking of the following. There’s about 783,137 words in the King James Bible. We know some texts are repeated in the Bible or retold in slightly different ways, so if we condense the Bible to its unique contents, it will be, say, 80% or approximately 600,000 words.

Then we know that even in different words, there’s similar ideas, and we could extract just the core meanings that are repeated and we will get even less.

So this pretty limited amount of information expressed in a certain way contained in a book we then take and offer to ALL kinds of people and expect them to learn, understand it and use it for their benefit.

Do you think it’s the right approach?

People are different. Even among siblings, you might have a child with whom it’s best to be soft and patient, and another who should be encouraged with some good pressure, he or she would take it and need it. Different personalities.

Then we have different kinds of level of education, mindset, traditions, values, ways to communicate and interact etc. How do you expect the same very limited information have a similar effect? It won’t happen.

If we look at Abrahamic religions, we see that when a single book with theoretical doctrines and some practical commands is overlayed on different people at different times, we get quite variable result.

Egyptian Islam is quite different with Indonesian Islam, for example. Or north African Judaism and Judaism developed in Germany. Christianity or Greece or Christianity of the American South.

Same book, completely different faith.

Wouldn’t be more wise to create different approaches for each population? We do adapt the Bible for children, for example. You must have at one point owned a Children’s Picture Bible. So this idea isn’t foreign to Christianity.

What do you think? Is a single Book for all is bound to be a failure?

Well, to some extent I agree. But the Gospel given by Jesus of Nazareth was never a mere 'book,' let alone a single, clear, comprehensive book. So, we have to realize that we all have to jump this hurdle first, I think.

 

[sandman]

Wonderful! Glad to hear.

It’s not about letting down someone. It’s about different kinds of people who will take the text quite differently. Do we want that?

That is what gets us in trouble and why we have so many different Christian religions.


Seeing how the Word of God fits together by allowing it to interpret itself is the approach we should all take. God does not tell us to interpret the Bible he tells us to rightly divide the Word of truth.

The intrinsic nuance of the Greek word orthotomeō translated “rightly dividing” in 2Ti 2:15 is….. one right cutting, all other are wrong.

We all divide the Word of God, the question becomes, do we rightly divided it. There are several basic keys to maintaining the integrity of the Word as we go through… things that must be understood or we will end up in someone else’s back yard trying to trying to eat fruit from a nonexistent tree.

 

[Lukaris]

While it is true that our Biblical understandings vary, there are also important ( & hopefully more ) that are helpful to our salvation. The ancient creeds ( Apostles, Nicene, Athanasian etc.) and the few surviving ancient church manuals like the Didache are instructive.


Didache

The Apostles' Creed | EWTN


The Nicene Creed — Greek Orthodox Church of Greater Salt Lake

 

[Martinius]

One could distill the Bible into a quite compact set of teachings. But would that be the Christian Bible alone, the Hebrew scriptures alone, or a combination?

Thomas Jefferson did that with the New Testament, creating a "sayings" bible that centered on what Jesus said and taught in the Gospels.

With the Hebrew scriptures, one could pull out the basic teachings (ten commandments), Proverbs and some of the Prophets. In the latter case, it might be necessary to separate out the references to the specific issues and people of the times from writings that have application to any time and place.

This would mean jettisoning all of Genesis and most of the rest of the Torah and the historical books. Most people don't really need to know the dimensions of the ark or about the various battles, treacheries, sexual depravity, and genocides, much of which God supposedly ordered and/or approved.

One can find, within the scriptures, the road to righteousness, enlightenment and faith. But it is obscured by a lot of other layers that are confusing and mis-leading, and which we spend way too much time arguing about, thereby ignoring the essentials. One needs to not just read and know the Bible, but actually live by its principles. That is where most of us stumble, as we are debating the words and verses, rather than living them.

 

[Occams Barber]

Hello.

I was thinking of the following. There’s about 783,137 words in the King James Bible. We know some texts are repeated in the Bible or retold in slightly different ways, so if we condense the Bible to its unique contents, it will be, say, 80% or approximately 600,000 words.

Then we know that even in different words, there’s similar ideas, and we could extract just the core meanings that are repeated and we will get even less.

So this pretty limited amount of information expressed in a certain way contained in a book we then take and offer to ALL kinds of people and expect them to learn, understand it and use it for their benefit.

Do you think it’s the right approach?

People are different. Even among siblings, you might have a child with whom it’s best to be soft and patient, and another who should be encouraged with some good pressure, he or she would take it and need it. Different personalities.

Then we have different kinds of level of education, mindset, traditions, values, ways to communicate and interact etc. How do you expect the same very limited information have a similar effect? It won’t happen.

If we look at Abrahamic religions, we see that when a single book with theoretical doctrines and some practical commands is overlayed on different people at different times, we get some variable result.

Egyptian Islam is quite different with Indonesian Islam, for example. Or north African Judaism and Judaism developed in Germany. Christianity of Greece or Christianity of the American South.

Same book, completely different faith.

Wouldn’t it be more wise to create different approaches for each population? We do adapt the Bible for children, for example. You must have at one point owned a Children’s Picture Bible. So this idea isn’t foreign to Christianity.

What do you think? Is a single Book for all is bound to be a failure?

If we must have Christianity (or religion in general) then the tendency towards dogmatic dogfighting is, from a secular viewpoint often a good thing.

Varying interpretations allow Christianity some room to change in the light of shifts in community values. A monolithic uniform interpretation means an unchangeable church which will get increasingly out of step with its congregation. The obvious examples here are attitudes to homosexuality and SSM. Doctrinal disagreement allows for a gradual shift towards accepting community values by opening up rigid, rule based attitudes.

Christianity has been fragmented almost from the start but has succeeded in spite of, and possibly because of, doctrinal disagreement.

The downside is not that Christianity disagrees within itself, but how Christians go about expressing this disagreement. Nastiness appears to be normal and killing each other has been a fairly regular event.

I often think Christians collectively are their own worst enemy.

OB

 

[James_Lai]

Even with that, you have the core text to bring some kind of unity to Christians in Greece and the American South. They'll have more in common faithwise than they will with Voodoo practitioners in the American South. Core principles get adapted to different societies - "love your neighbor" is going to manifest differently because your neighbor's needs and culture will be a bit different in the American South than in Greece. Different holy books for different regions, which seems to be the alternative you are suggesting, would only result in further fragmentation.

It’s a good point. Something common to unite people.

 

[James_Lai]

Well, to some extent I agree. But the Gospel given by Jesus of Nazareth was never a mere 'book,' let alone a single, clear, comprehensive book. So, we have to realize that we all have to jump this hurdle first, I think.

What was it? His oral sermons?

 

[James_Lai]

That is what gets us in trouble and why we have so many different Christian religions.


Seeing how the Word of God fits together by allowing it to interpret itself is the approach we should all take. God does not tell us to interpret the Bible he tells us to rightly divide the Word of truth.

The intrinsic nuance of the Greek word orthotomeō translated “rightly dividing” in 2Ti 2:15 is….. one right cutting, all other are wrong.

We all divide the Word of God, the question becomes, do we rightly divided it. There are several basic keys to maintaining the integrity of the Word as we go through… things that must be understood or we will end up in someone else’s back yard trying to trying to eat fruit from a nonexistent tree.

Do you think there’s the correct method of orthothomeo? What would it be?

 

[sandman]

Do think there’s the correct method of orthothomeo? What would it be?

I will give you what I got ...something I drew up for believers...maybe it, or some of it will be helpful.
I will post it in about an hour ...

 

[sandman]

Do think there’s the correct method of orthothomeo? What would it be?

BASIC RESEARCH KEYS:


The first key is laid out in John16:13a Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, it will guide you into all truth (or one truth)…..guiding doesn’t happen without you moving.


The second underline key to research is to ALWAYS “read what is written” . Not what you think is written, and not what you already believe is written…….. but what is written.

When the Bible states “about 120” {Acts 1:15} it is not 120 …it may be 119.99999 but it’s not 120.

The Bible interprets itself and fits together like an intricate jigsaw puzzle. It is up to us to see how it fits by rightly dividing the Word of truth. We do NOT interpret the Bible; we see how the Bible interprets itself with the various keys and principle of biblical research.

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

.


1.) IN THE VERSE

a.) 80% of the bible interprets itself in the verse where it is written.
b.) Words in the verse must be understood according to the meaning of the words at the time of usage.
c.) Difficult verses must be understood in light of clear verses ….relating to the same subject
d.) Any one verse must always be in harmony with scripture relating to the identical subject
e.) One scripture may not tell all the details; other scripture may add to it without contradicting each other. Scripture build-up {especially in the Gospels} helps to illuminate the complete message. One gospel may give an event from a certain perspective where another will fill in certain detail.




2.) IN THE CONTEXT

a.) If the Word does not interpret itself the verse, context will determine the meaning of the verse or verses in question.
b.) Context as related to whom it is written or the specific subject can be determined by either the immediate context, or remoter context.
c.) The context relating to the same or similar: subject must be kept within the administrative boundaries. You cannot correlate in part or in whole the same subject from two separate dispensations (administrations) unless they relate directly and are identical. Primary applicable when trying to mix or correlate the gospels with the Grace administration.


3.) PREVIOUS USAGE

When you have a word that neither the verse nor the context determines its interpretation, going back to the first usage of that word will generally illuminate its meaning. Checking the first use of that word (using a concordance) in the verse should determine its meaning; the meaning will remain the same throughout, UNLESS it is given a new definition in which case that will carry the consideration.


(Keep in mind….when searching for the first use of word…. the books of the Bible are not in chronological order)

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

LITTLE WORDS WITH BIG MEANINGS:

Prepositions and conjunctions are especially important when directing the flow of thought in context.
a.) The use of the article “THE” must be carefully noted especially when dealing with the subject of holy spirit
b.) The word “ALL” is used just as it is used today, context will determine its meaning, whether it is “ALL” without exception, or “ALL” with distinction.
c.) The use of “but” and “not” must be recognized for the degree of contrast or negation they signify in a passage

TIME WORDS must be carefully noted in regard to whether an event occurs in the past, present, or future. Some words like Then are subtle, but indicate a period of time

IN THE BEGINNING
The word beginning or in the beginning must be carefully examined to determine which beginning. At times this refers to Genesis, other times it refers to the beginning of an event in an administration; context will determine the value of the word. {i.e.} The day of Pentecost in the grace administration. 1 John chapters 1-3 is a classic example of beginning = Pentecost.



TO WHOM IS IT WRITTEN

The Bible is always addressing Jews, Gentiles, or Church of God …….


ALL THOSE LITTLE THINGS
Punctuation, capitalization, chapter headings, chapter divisions, and verse divisions were all added by translators. They are extremely helpful, but they are not “given by inspiration of God” The majority of these thing have been well supplied, but there are a good number of areas where they are inaccurate. Always rely on the context to determine the truth

CUSTOMS AND CULTURES
The Bible is riddled with references to the everyday customs of the time in which it was written. We should become familiar with the manner of life, idioms, orientalism’s, customs and culture to properly understand scripture.


FIGURES OF SPEACH
There are 219 figures of speech known in the world, 214 of them are used in the Bible. It is not imperative to know these, but helpful in research and study. E. W. Bullinger has documented these figures of speech with scriptural reference, which makes it easy to look up. Figures of speech are used by God to put emphasis on that particular passage or account.

One Last thing

The words that have been used to translate into English are not always as descriptive or informative as the Hebrew or Greek meaning, and can alter or change the dynamics of a scripture. For basic word study's, I would suggest using the resources of the Blue Letter Bible available online. As an example: the word Receiv(ed) in English has various meanings and wordforms in the Greek. Dechomi is to receive subjectively.... whereas Lambano is to receive into manifestation. The Blue Letter Bible is a great resource for checking out words.

 

[James_Lai]

While it is true that our Biblical understandings vary, there are also important ( & hopefully more ) that are helpful to our salvation. The ancient creeds ( Apostles, Nicene, Athanasian etc.) and the few surviving ancient church manuals like the Didache are instructive.


Didache

The Apostles' Creed | EWTN


The Nicene Creed — Greek Orthodox Church of Greater Salt Lake

Why the manual of faith - the Bible - isn’t sufficient to convey ideas that you need to create extra-Biblical summary to explain it?

Probably the Bible was never intended to teach a creed as it was made to be?

 

[James_Lai]

One could distill the Bible into a quite compact set of teachings. But would that be the Christian Bible alone, the Hebrew scriptures alone, or a combination?

Thomas Jefferson did that with the New Testament, creating a "sayings" bible that centered on what Jesus said and taught in the Gospels.

With the Hebrew scriptures, one could pull out the basic teachings (ten commandments), Proverbs and some of the Prophets. In the latter case, it might be necessary to separate out the references to the specific issues and people of the times from writings that have application to any time and place.

This would mean jettisoning all of Genesis and most of the rest of the Torah and the historical books. Most people don't really need to know the dimensions of the ark or about the various battles, treacheries, sexual depravity, and genocides, much of which God supposedly ordered and/or approved.

One can find, within the scriptures, the road to righteousness, enlightenment and faith. But it is obscured by a lot of other layers that are confusing and mis-leading, and which we spend way too much time arguing about, thereby ignoring the essentials. One needs to not just read and know the Bible, but actually live by its principles. That is where most of us stumble, as we are debating the words and verses, rather than living them.

Your post made me really think a lot.

I was always wandering of overall didactical weakness of the Bible. If we compare to some ancient books from other regions of the world.

I’m thinking, could it be because the authors didn’t really see a need to formulate a body of beliefs? Because their audiences were assumed to already have a good working knowledge? Probably different fir each book unless for those written around the same time and place. So much of the doctrine is outside the Bible?

And so we can only try and reconstruct it in bits and pieces here and there?

 

[sandman]

And so we can only try and reconstruct it in bits and pieces here and there?

Very very true ....And the more you research the more intricate it gets.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Hello.

I was thinking of the following. There’s about 783,137 words in the King James Bible. We know some texts are repeated in the Bible or retold in slightly different ways, so if we condense the Bible to its unique contents, it will be, say, 80% or approximately 600,000 words.

Then we know that even in different words, there’s similar ideas, and we could extract just the core meanings that are repeated and we will get even less.

So this pretty limited amount of information expressed in a certain way contained in a book we then take and offer to ALL kinds of people and expect them to learn, understand it and use it for their benefit.

Do you think it’s the right approach?

People are different. Even among siblings, you might have a child with whom it’s best to be soft and patient, and another who should be encouraged with some good pressure, he or she would take it and need it. Different personalities.

Then we have different kinds of level of education, mindset, traditions, values, ways to communicate and interact etc. How do you expect the same very limited information have a similar effect? It won’t happen.

If we look at Abrahamic religions, we see that when a single book with theoretical doctrines and some practical commands is overlayed on different people at different times, we get some variable result.

Egyptian Islam is quite different with Indonesian Islam, for example. Or north African Judaism and Judaism developed in Germany. Christianity of Greece or Christianity of the American South.

Same book, completely different faith.

Wouldn’t it be more wise to create different approaches for each population? We do adapt the Bible for children, for example. You must have at one point owned a Children’s Picture Bible. So this idea isn’t foreign to Christianity.

What do you think? Is a single Book for all is bound to be a failure?

"NO" to your question "Do you think it’s the right approach?" There is a reason for the "not on jot nor one tittle" proscription in the Bible.

Your mentality seems to ride on an intellectual consideration of God's Word, as though it is like any other religion's Holy Book.

 

[Occams Barber]

Your mentality seems to ride on an intellectual consideration of God's Word, as though it is like any other religion's Holy Book.

I'm not sure how James regards the Bible since he describes himself as a "Seeker", but for a non-believer the Bible IS essentially on a par with the holy books of other religions.

Unfortunately there is no reason to assume your beliefs about the Bible are shared by others.

OB

 

[disciple Clint]

Hello.

I was thinking of the following. There’s about 783,137 words in the King James Bible. We know some texts are repeated in the Bible or retold in slightly different ways, so if we condense the Bible to its unique contents, it will be, say, 80% or approximately 600,000 words.

Then we know that even in different words, there’s similar ideas, and we could extract just the core meanings that are repeated and we will get even less.

So this pretty limited amount of information expressed in a certain way contained in a book we then take and offer to ALL kinds of people and expect them to learn, understand it and use it for their benefit.

Do you think it’s the right approach?

People are different. Even among siblings, you might have a child with whom it’s best to be soft and patient, and another who should be encouraged with some good pressure, he or she would take it and need it. Different personalities.

Then we have different kinds of level of education, mindset, traditions, values, ways to communicate and interact etc. How do you expect the same very limited information have a similar effect? It won’t happen.

If we look at Abrahamic religions, we see that when a single book with theoretical doctrines and some practical commands is overlayed on different people at different times, we get some variable result.

Egyptian Islam is quite different with Indonesian Islam, for example. Or north African Judaism and Judaism developed in Germany. Christianity of Greece or Christianity of the American South.

Same book, completely different faith.

Wouldn’t it be more wise to create different approaches for each population? We do adapt the Bible for children, for example. You must have at one point owned a Children’s Picture Bible. So this idea isn’t foreign to Christianity.

What do you think? Is a single Book for all is bound to be a failure?

God seems to think that the book He wrote was sufficient for everyone, who am I to doubt His wisdom