Class 4 - Defining Terms
Inductive Bible Study: Part 1 • Sermon • Submitted • Presented
0 ratings
· 4 viewsNotes
Transcript
Housekeeping
Housekeeping
Turn messaging notifications on
Get familiar with the class workshop
A look at our groups
A look at the passages
Who wants Craig?
Homework
Homework
Read from Inductive Bible Study
“Unit 1: Introduction: Sizing up the Task” (p.1-4)
“Bridging the Gaps: Facing the Challenges to Understanding” (p.4-5)
“Gaps Related to History” (p.6-14)
Interact with this summary from page 4. The Bible is an ancient, human book and it is the divine and relevant Word of God.
List the two biggest historical gaps you will have with your passage for this summer.
If you have time, watch "June 5, 2022 ARICM 2022 Sunday PM”
The sermon is from minute 1:28:50-2:09:10
Baptisms 31:37-44:12
Closing 2:09:10-end
https://www.youtube.com/live/5I4gZ9Nn9Co
5. Use the Faithlife Study Bible to read the “introduction” for the book/books you are studying. Pay close attention to the author, audience, context, and structure of the book. Be ready to share something simple you learned.
Answers:
Road Map
Road Map
Inductive Road Map
Inductive Road Map
Hermeneutics > BIBLE > Exegesis > Theology (Biblical and Systematic) > Doxology
The Exegetical Scale
We tend to be eisegetical by nature (in our sinful anthropology)
We believe we are intrinsically knowledgeable and able to reason all on our own (like a young person who understands what you’re teaching them without listening to everything you have to say)
Our hearts are deceitful above all things, Jeremiah 17:9
We tend to trust in our own understanding, Proverbs 3:5-6
We also have a tendency to believe that “faith” can take the place of good exegesis
Proof-Texting is not Exegesis
Proof-Texting is when you use isolated scripture passages or quotes out of context to support a specific viewpoint or argument, often without considering the broader context or intended meaning of the text.
We could call this “Textjacking” - When you use a passage to communicate what you want to communicate.
Why does “textjacking” exist?
We want to prove a moral directive:
Leviticus 19:27 “You shall not round off the hair on your temples or mar the edges of your beard.”
Isaiah 7:20 “In that day the Lord will shave with a razor that is hired beyond the River—with the king of Assyria—the head and the hair of the feet, and it will sweep away the beard also.”
10 Therefore, behold, I will bring evil upon the house of Jeroboam, and will cut off from Jeroboam him that pisseth against the wall,
His moral directive was that there is a difference between men and women and if you pee sitting down you’re a compromiser and effeminate. True men only pee standing up.
In our culture, “We’ve got a bunch of pastors who pee sitting down.” “We have a bunch of pastors and leaders who don’t stand up and piss against wall like a man. And I’m gonna tell yousomething, that’s what’s wrong with America. You don’t like it? You don’t like an old fashioned Bible that tells you what being a man is all about?”
What’s interesting about this guy and the oily guy is that after they make their eisegetical point with a proof text, they both make an appeal to “old time religion” or an “old fashioned Bible” like a trump card for their argument.
We want to motivate or give self help:
1 Chronicles 27:28 “Over the olive and sycamore trees in the Shephelah was Baal-hanan the Gederite; and over the stores of oil was Joash.”
Jeremiah 29:11 “For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.”
2 Chronicles 7:14 “if my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”
We want to make an appeal for political support:
Leviticus 19:34 “You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.”
We want to prove our systematic theology:
36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. 37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. 41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left. 42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. 43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up. 44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh. 45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season? 46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. 47 Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods. 48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; 49 And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken; 50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of, 51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
What we say should always be biblical:
We don’t use the Bible to prove what we’re saying (even if what we’re saying is a biblical truth).
We say things to demonstrate what the Bible is saying (even if we don’t like it).
Inductive (Method)
Inductive (Method)
How does Köstenberger explain Inductive and Deductive?
Without getting bogged down in the theoretical, it’s important at this point to consider the merits of inductive, or evidence-based, study vis-à-vis (in relation to) deductive, or assumption-based, study.
Bible study and Theology includes both, but at different times for different reasons.
Inductive begins with details (particulars) and moves to assertion (universals)
Deductive begins with an assertion (universals) and moves to details (particulars)
Specifically, Inductive Bible Study aims to move from the text in its context to an understanding and application. The steps of this method include Observation, Interpretation, and Application.
And as we trace our own personal histories of preaching, teaching, and writing, we’re quite certain that there are cases where we, too, have not allowed the Bible to speak for itself, where we have imposed our own understanding upon the text before discovering its meaning through the process of inductive p 38 study. Nevertheless, we’re convinced that induction, as a driving force in Bible study, is superior to deduction and can produce more accurate and reliable results.
Homework
Homework
Finish if you haven’t already reading:
“Unit 1: Introduction: Sizing up the Task” (p.1-4)
“Bridging the Gaps: Facing the Challenges to Understanding” (p.4-5)
“Gaps Related to History” (p.6-14)
Reread “Induction v Deduction” [p. 35-38] (It may make more sense the second time around after we have talked about it.)
Consider the two biggest historical gaps you noted about your summer passages. Do some light study into those gaps and be ready to communicate something you learned that helps you “bridge the gap” and understand a little more about what was going on.
Work on answering the following questions for the book/books you are teaching from:
Who was the author?
Who was the audience?
When was the book written?
What is the primary purpose of the book?
