Tag: analysis

book quote of the week
3 Outcomes of Thinking

3 Outcomes of Thinking

By |

Although there is almost nothing as basic as thinking, there are always ways to improve your thinking skills. This is especially important for Christians: you and I are called to read, meditate on, accurately interpret and apply Biblical texts that are often complex. Thinking well takes time and effort, but it is natural to try to short circuit the thinking process by moving too fast. One of my favorite secular authors who writes on how to think better is Edward De Bono. In one of his books I have been slowly working through, he helpfully lays out 3 distinct outcomes of thinking. Knowing which outcome you are seeking will keep you from trying to do all three at once and thereby make your thinking rushed or less clear.

There are many possible outcomes of thinking, but we can simply them into three types of outcome:

  1. Better map (exploration)
  2. Pin-pointing needs
  3. Specific answer
Edward De Bono, Teach Your Child How to Think pp 101

Getting to the desired answer takes time

When you sit down alone or with others to think or study, your ultimate goal is often some specific answer. Whether addressing a theological question or making a family decision, you and I very rarely think for no other purpose than to think. We have problems to solve, answers to discover, arguments to assess, decisions to make. However, when dealing with complicated questions or problems, the desired answer may take a long time to reach. If you spend hours or days thinking carefully through a topic and you haven’t reached a conclusion, is that effort wasted?

De Bono helps us out by giving two other outcomes of thinking beyond simply coming to an answer. Sometimes thinking about a topic gives you a “better map”. This metaphor points to the fact that sometimes you and I need to think about a topic just to understand it better. To make sense of the issues surrounding it. To understand what other people have said about it. By exploring a topic mentally, even if you haven’t come to a conclusion, you should have a better idea of the alternate options (or alternate interpretations in the case of most Bible study) and to simply learn more. Rushing to an answer or conclusion without actually exploring the topic can, in the end, cause you to make a poorly informed decision.

The other outcome of thinking besides getting an answer is “pin-pointing needs”. As you seek to answer complicated questions, oftentimes the process of thinking yields further questions to answer. Additionally, you may find that you don’t actually have the information you need to answer the question at hand. In this way, you can figure out what specific roadblocks exist that hinder you from reaching an answer. The key word here is specific. One the most beneficial outcomes of thinking in my experience is going from a general question or problem to specific, narrowed down information needs or further questions you must answer in order to come to a solution. Complicated and nuanced issues are unlikely to be solved in half an hour of reflection. But, in that time of thinking, you most likely can pin-point a “next step” to take to help answer that question.

Robust thinking leads to robust answers

Why is all this important? You and I live in a time and place where, through social media especially, opinions and propositions are being thrown out at lightning speed. However, the actual difficult problems facing us almost certainly cannot be solved in 280 characters. In our fast-food culture, it can be tempting to want answers now. You can be tempted to say “just tell me what I need to do so I can get started.” Such pragmatism is the enemy of careful thinking and nuanced analysis.

De Bono’s three outcomes of thinking is an excellent counter to the craving for quick, tweetable answers. Instead of focusing on solving a complicated problem as fast as possible, maybe you need to spend some time making a better map. Understanding the factors contributing to the problem. Or perhaps your goal should be to take a large, abstract problem and figure out more concretely what information you need to come to a robust conclusion. Ultimately, the goal is not to simply come out with “an answer”, but to actually have a defense for why that answer is true or why it will work.

Implications for the Christian life

1. Difficult theological questions require longer reflection

Meditating on God’s word uses all three of these thinking outcomes. Some days you might need to spend time simply reading scriptural texts to understand what God actually says. Other days, you might need to go find specific passages and analyze them to see what specific interpretive difficulties you must overcome. And ultimately, at some point you will have to come to a conclusion on what you think the Bible is teaching about a topic or in a specific passage.

However, just because the end goal is to know what God’s word is saying and to live it out does not mean you always reach this goal in the blink of an eye. For difficult passages and theological questions, don’t be afraid to take some time to prayerfully think it through. Be okay with leaving a text saying “I don’t know. I need to think about that more.” Rushing to a conclusion might make you feel better, but you might be missing something that you could have observed if you had taken more time to think or study. As a rule of thumb, the more uncertain a passage or the more viable interpretations of a passage exist, the longer you should take thinking it through.

2. Don’t just give people the answer. Help them think through it Biblically.

Just giving someone “the answer” oftentimes robs that person of actually internalizing the truth. Rather than rushing to give a conclusion, first give them the Biblical texts you need to answer the question. Sketch out a map for them to fill in. Or, if comparing different alternative interpretations, show them where the specific points of disagreement are. You can of course give them your personal conclusion, but by showing them the thought process you used to reach it, you make them better able to think through it themselves.

3. Theological disagreement should be specific with limited “straw manning”

One of the clearest tell-tale signs that someone has not done enough thinking is if you hear them straw manning people they disagree with. There is no logical fallacy easier to commit in our vapid culture than simply straw manning a position you don’t understand to prove your own beliefs that you have not thought through. This is particularly dangerous when theological disagreements occur in the Church.

If you disagree with someone but can’t communicate why you disagree, you probably haven’t filled out a robust map of the issue. If you can’t specifically pinpoint the areas both of agreement and disagreement between positions, you probably don’t actually understand why the disagreement exists. Having an answer, even a dogmatic answer, is not necessarily a sign of good thinking. Rather, being able to robustly explain all sides of a theological disagreement, show where the “sticking points” are, and then demonstrating the truth of your own conclusion are much more likely to demonstrate coherent and careful thought.

Click here to read previous “Book Quote of the Week” posts. If you found this post helpful, share on social media and subscribe below. 

books on wooden shelves inside library
Four Essential Elements of Theology

Four Essential Elements of Theology

By |

Everyone does systematic theology: you fit together large amounts of Biblical texts in your mind to come to conclusions and you answer tough questions with Scripture. The question is, how do you go about answering these questions? What are the essential elements of theology that you should consider as you come to conclusions from Scripture? I recently started reading through Louis Berkhof’s Systematic Theology and, in one of the early chapters, he defines what systematic theology is and the different facets of it. Upon my own reflection of Berkhof’s insights, I think there are at least four essential elements of theology that you should think through when doing a topical or systematic Bible study.

1. The Vertical Side: God’s Authoritative Revelation

Fundamentally any attempt to “do theology” must start with God’s authoritative revelation. Your questions, your conclusions, your doubts, your insights, your applications all must be brought before the inerrant, inspired word. As Berkhof helpfully puts it, the Christian doctrine of revelation assumes that

  • There is a personal God who communicated knowledge
  • There are truths that cannot be known apart from divine revelation
  • Humans can understand this revelation

So theology is not, at its foundation, humanity “figuring out” God. Rather, theology begins when the transcendent God reveals Himself to mankind. The vertical side of theology does not point from earth to heaven, but from heaven to earth. Therefore, your theological investigation will lead to a dead end until you take up the Word and read what it says. Even God’s revelation through His creation won’t be interpreted correctly without the corroborating and explanatory testimony of the Word. The first essential element of theology is God’s authoritative revelation.

2. The Reflective Side: Your Spirit-Empowered Synthesis

However, the Bible itself is not a systematic theology per se. As you read and study, your mind will naturally seek to fit together different texts and synthesize them into conclusions. Understanding what the Bible teaches about the deity and humanity of Jesus, for example, is a large and important theological topic. You cannot hope to understand this topic fully by merely reading one or two texts. Rather, your conclusions will require you to read, study, understand, and synthesize a large quantity of Biblical data from different literary genres.

In short, one of the essential elements of theology is simply thinking and meditating on Biblical texts with the goal of drawing summary conclusions. This takes work and time. It is very easy to come up with bad theological conclusions from the Bible: simply decide what you want the text to say, find a couple support texts, and then “prove” your position. But the careful theologian does not rush to draw broad theological conclusions on a topic until they are confident they have exhausted the pages of Scripture. Synthesis is difficult and, as far as the Christian is concerned, impossible without the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

3. The Corporate Side: What Do Other Christian’s Affirm?

Assuming you take up God’s inspired word, study it, and come to some theological conclusions, how can you check your interpretation? Certainly the first step is to continually compare your conclusions with the whole of Scripture. But another important element of theology is the corporate aspect. Christians are part of the body of Christ. We aren’t disconnected individual atoms that come up with our own theological conclusions on every issue. Rather, if we are reading the same texts and studying them properly under the Spirit’s guidance, we should expect other believers to come to similar conclusions.

Now, just because you find someone who agrees with you does not make your position correct. But if you can’t find a single fellow believer in your local Church that agrees with your theological conclusion, then you should pause and reconsider your analysis. If the Christians who you respect the most and who you know are daily in the Word cannot see from Scripture what you are seeing, you should seek to hear their own thoughts on the issue. Sharpening one another in the local Church theologically oftentimes takes the form of sharing Biblical insights with others and wrestling with conclusions together.

4. The Temporal Side: Church Interpretation Through Time

As you wrestle through difficult questions of theological interpretation, a source of great encouragement is that Christians throughout history have wrestled with many of the same questions and have written down their own analysis and conclusions. One of the most helpful disciplines I have found is to compare my own theological conclusions on a topic with several different historical creeds and confessions. You cannot get away from the fact that you are not the first person to ever read the Bible. In the Lord’s providence and grace, there are intelligent theologians throughout history who have tried to understand and synthesize the same Biblical texts that you have. To not at least consider their analysis would be foolish and border-line prideful.

Now, certainly no creed or confession is inerrant or to be put at the same level as Scripture itself. That is a given. But throughout history, the Church of Christ has worked to understand and externalize Biblical teaching on key doctrines like the Trinity, God’s sovereignty in salvation, what the Church is, baptism and countless others. So see how your theological conclusions fit in with the study of those who have gone before. If you seem to be the only Christian in the history of the Church to see something in the text, tread lightly! It is more likely that you are wrong then every other faithful believer before you was wrong.

Conclusion

Whether you are consciously aware of it or not, these four essential elements of theology are at play whenever you do serious theological study. You may think “I have to examine what the text says” (vertical side) or “I need to think about how these texts fit together” (reflective side) or “I need to check my conclusion with the elders at my Church” (corporate side) or “how do my conclusions line up the the historic confessions?” (temporal side). Consciously and explicitly including each of these four aspects into your own theological study will help you come to more robust conclusions and have more confidence that what you are seeing in Scripture is indeed what God intended you to see.

Visit the Tools page for more helpful Bible study and preaching resources. If you found this post helpful, share and subscribe below.

grayscale photo of concrete building
Abolitionist and Incrementalist Approaches to Abortion

Abolitionist and Incrementalist Approaches to Abortion

By |

In this guest post, one of my close friends Nathan Herr writes an analysis of abolitionist and incrementalist approaches to ending abortion. He is particularly interested in considering which alternative view of how Christians should address abortion is most consistent with the Biblical text. With his permission, I have reproduced the paper he wrote on the topic for the Elders and Deacons of our Church. I found it a thought-provoking piece on a crucial societal issue addressed from a Biblical perspective.

Introduction: Abolitionists and Incrementalists 

In the camp of those that oppose abortion, there has arisen some discussion and division between those who call for the immediate and total outlawing of abortion and those who advocate an incremental approach. Those who take an immediate approach generally refer to themselves as abolitionists. The incremental approach is what has been adopted by the broader pro-life movement. Both abolitionist and incrementalist pro-lifers desire for the preborn to have equal protection under the law. This means the criminalization of abortion at all stages of pregnancy for both abortionists and mothers without exception for rape or similar circumstances.

Now, many are those who would call themselves pro-life that would not be in favor of the criminalization of abortion for the mother and/or would advocate for rape exceptions or other things which undermine the principle of equal protection for the preborn.  But in this analysis, I am only concerned with comparing abolitionist and incrementalist pro-lifers who both want equal protection for the preborn. For the remainder of this post, I will refer to pro-lifers commited to equal protection of the unborn under the law as incrementalists.

Sketches of the Positions 

The key distinguishing mark of abolitionists is that they call for total abolition of abortion by law without intermediate steps, such as heartbeat bills or other restrictions on abortion. In fact, the abolitionists argue that laws restricting or regulating abortion are iniquitous decrees that are wicked and allow for the continued murder of children. Thus abolitionists call for the immediate outlawing of all abortion through a law that establishes equal protection for the preborn. 

The incrementalists see total abolition as an impractical and unachievable goal at the present time. Thus the best way to fight abortion is by passing incremental laws which continue to restrict abortion until it will finally be banned at some point in the future. Incrementalists acknowledge that such restrictions are not sufficient, but prefer to pass such restrictions rather than do nothing so that lives may be saved.  

The Incrementalist Case 

The incrementalist says that the abortion restrictions which are achievable today are good because they help save babies who would otherwise have been murdered. Though such restrictions will not save all babies from abortion, they will save some. To take an all-or-nothing approach and thus delay action today would be to fail to save babies that could be saved today. While it is unfortunate that we are not able to ban abortion outright, the incremental restrictions limit the evil of abortion insofar as it is possible. Thus some incrementalists cite statistics that show that thousands of babies have been saved by incremental restrictions like the Texas heartbeat law.  

A slightly modified incrementalist position argues that as society comes to a greater understanding of the wickedness of abortion over time our laws will gradually change to reflect society’s changing views. While our society should completely reject abortion, these gradations are partial obedience to God’s law. And this partial or delayed obedience is better than disobedience and is the first step toward full obedience. Incrementalists reject that to have a law that places restrictions on abortion is to implicitly affirm the killing of babies when those conditions are met.  

The Abolitionist Case 

Abolitionists see any law which fails to criminalize abortion completely as unjust and therefore unacceptable. For the abolitionist, a heartbeat bill is allowing the murder of preborn without heartbeats and thus is showing partiality against those without heartbeats. Biblically defined partiality is a great sin, thus such restrictions on abortion are not progress but continued injustice via partial laws. To support this case abolitionists cite passages such as  Amos 5:24, Exodus 23:2 and Deuteronomy 16:19.

Second, abolitionists see the law as a teacher which teaches society what is right and wrong. Thus to pass restrictions on abortion is to teach society that abortion is okay in those circumstances. Abolitionists say that on the basis of popular arguments for restrictions like a 20-week abortion ban, a woman will think it is okay to have an abortion earlier in the pregnancy because there is something significant that happens at the 20-week mark (or at whatever stage abortion is restricted). She has effectively been taught that abortion is okay in her circumstance because the law allows it. An abortion ban after the baby can feel pain teaches that the baby’s ability or inability to feel pain is what makes abortion wrong or okay. A heartbeat bill teaches that life begins when the heart starts beating – or at least that there is  some significant difference between a baby with a heartbeat and one without. And similar logic would apply to other abortion restrictions.  

Third, abolitionists cite many historical or hypothetical examples to support their position.  The term abolition is a call back to history, particularly the abolition of slavery in the British Empire and America. Abolitionists state that in the effort to end slavery, there were those that sought to do it gradually, but it was the abolitionists who in the end are the ones who ended  slavery, both in Britain and America. A hypothetical that an abolitionist might use is “If you were living in Nazi Germany, would you support a law that only stopped the killing of some Jews?” These hypotheticals are intended to show that in other situations we would not apply the sort of thinking that is used to defend the incrementalist position.  

Incrementalist Criticisms of Abolitionism 

In responding to abolitionists, incrementalists point out that abolitionists are not demanding that the whole nation or whole world abolish abortion, but generally they are seeking for  individual states to abolish abortion. Thus they call this geographical incrementalism. If one is seeking to immediately abolish abortion why would the abolitionist be satisfied with  abolishing it in one state or even one nation? Is this not compromise? Further is it  compromise to wait for the next legislative session or election to pass a law banning abortion?  Surely abolitionists would agree that by waiting to abolition of abortion they are not affirming the murder of children until that law is passed.  

Incrementalists also raise the contention that abortion is not a solitary issue. Abortion is caused by sexual immorality and our society’s overall desire to disconnect sex from procreation. Thus in order to end abortion there is other work that believers must do to bring our society into alignment with God’s law. To treat abortion as an evil that occurs in a vacuum is to fail to fully understand the evil of our society.  

Incrementalists cite biblical examples of what appear to be incremental handling of sins. They point to where the Mosaic law regulated sins such as polygamy and slavery rather than banning them. These Mosaic laws gave protection for wives in polygamy or slaves in slavery, but did not ban these sins (Exodus 21:10). Thus, just as God was not approving of those sins by regulating those sins, so we are not approving of abortion if we regulate or restrict it. 

Analysis 

A vital point to recognize is that the abolitionist and incrementalist approaches have different goals. While both committed incrementalists and abolitionists work toward equal protection for the preborn, they seek it for different reasons. The incrementalists are seeking to save as many lives as possible and banning abortion is thus one tool to save lives.  Abolitionists are seeking for justice as bibilically defined. So for abolitionists, if a heartbeat bill saves babies that is something to be celebrated, however that doesn’t make that unjust law good.  

Abolitionists and incrementalists have different perspectives of the overall situation.  Incrementalists see the situation like that of a lifeguard who observes a boat capsize and a  dozen people from that boat begin to drown. The lifeguard is only able to save one at a time  and thus may not be able to save them all before they drown. He must save them  incrementally – one at a time. If he can not save them all that is not a moral failure on his  part, his moral duty is to attempt to save as many as possible. 

But the abolitionist does not see our present circumstance like that. Instead it as though there are pirates who attack boats and murder their occupants and this piracy is legal in the  waterways of this hypothetical land. We are like the lawmakers of that land – the duty of the  lawmakers would be to pass a law banning piracy outright. To restrict piracy on the basis of  boat size, color, etc would be to fail in this duty and would be a moral failure on the part of the legislators.  

Both abolitionists and incrementalists would agree that a heartbeat bill is unjust because it doesn’t protect babies without a heartbeat. But incrementalists would prefer a heartbeat bill over no restrictions on abortion. Incrementalists may say that a heartbeat bill is more just than no restrictions on abortion and is thus to be preferred, however it is only more just for those that are protected by it.  

The only ethical lens by which an unjust law can be called good because it saves lives is utilitarianism. Abolitionists reject this utilitarian thinking and thus demand justice for all preborn babies over saving the lives of some preborn. Abolitionists urge believers to work to save babies through sidewalk counseling and similar measures.They show that they care about saving individual babies but on the question of legislative strategy they are not willing to support an unjust law in order to save lives. To support incremental restrictions on abortion is to use “the ends justify the means” thinking. The incrementalist says that the end of saving lives justifies the means of using an unjust law. For the abolitionist, this would be to participate in injustice – something that God has firmly forbidden. As Isaiah  10:1 – 2 states:  

Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, 

 and the writers who keep writing oppression, 

to turn aside the needy from justice 

 and to rob the poor of my people of their right, 

that widows may be their spoil, 

 and that they may make the fatherless their prey! 

If one agrees that this passage applies to incremental restrictions on abortion, then it is impossible to continue to support such restrictions.  

It should be noted that abolitionists are not necessarily opposed to increments. The key distinction for abolitionists is whether an increment would require moral compromise.  Abolitionists want to work issue by issue. So while abortion is linked to other sins in our culture – fornication, adultery and others, we are not compromising to enact a law which addresses abortion but does not address all other related sins. 

If we adopt the abolitionist view of the law as a teacher, then we must consider what the laws are teaching. In order to for an individual to understand that abortion is murder and should  be treated as such, they do not necessarily also need to have a biblical view of sex overall. That the preborn are deserving of equal protection is a distinct issue that can be handled (at least in legislative terms) separate from other issues. The abortion laws and the arguments and media attention surrounding those laws are catechizing society on the topic of abortion. Incremental restrictions to abortion teach society that abortion should be regulated for reasons of the baby’s level of development or the woman’s safety; all such reasons distract from the fact that  abortion is murder. It does not make sense to teach people first that life begins at a heartbeat  with the intention of later teaching them that life begins at conception. Thus if we agree that people learn from the laws that are passed it is difficult to see how we can support incremental abortion restrictions. 

For example to pass an incremental law such as the Texas heartbeat bill is to teach that life begins at a heartbeat or at least there is a significant difference between the baby with a heartbeat and one without. The website promoting the Texas heartbeat bill states “The heartbeat is a key and universal medical predictor of whether human life exists”. In this case not only is the law teaching that a heartbeat is the basis for receiving protection under the law, but also the material produced by the advocates of that law implies that life is not present without a heartbeat. If in the future abortion is to be abolished in Texas it will require the Texas people to be retaught from what they have been taught by their heartbeat bill. 

Abolitionists readily acknowledge that there are other sins in our society – if abortion were entirely abolished tomorrow there would still be other sins to address. However to call this approach of addressing one issue at a time incrementalism is to confuse terms. Abolitionists are calling for abortion to be criminalized immediately, not the immediate establishment of God’s law on all issues. And though abolitionists call for abortion to be ended immediately, that does not mean that they expect success in a short period of time.  

In my opinion “geographic incrementalism” as raised by the incrementalists is a red herring.  Abolitionists are calling for the immediate end of abortion in that jurisdiction, whatever level that may be. To call for abolition in a given state is to take an abolitionist approach. In calling for abolition in his jurisdiction a man is seeking to have just laws for himself and his neighbor. And while establishing just laws on a national level or in other states or nations would be preferable, it is of lesser importance than establishing just laws for ourselves and our neighbors both born and preborn. For one to work to establish just laws in one’s own  jurisdiction and not do so in the same way in another jurisdiction is not a moral compromise.  So while there may be increments in the abolitionist approach they are not increments which require moral compromise, but the incrementalist approach is an approach of increments which include moral compromise. Thus this term of geographic incrementalism is a fruitless attempt for incrementalists to blur the line between incrementalists and abolitionists.  

A practical issue with the incrementalist case is that there are no major pro-life incrementalist organizations which advocate for full equal protection for the unborn. All major pro-life organizations oppose laws which would criminalize abortion for the mother. Though these organizations may use terms like “abolish abortion” or “equal protection for the unborn”, they are unwilling to affirm that everyone involved in a preborn baby’s murder should face prosecution just as everyone involved in a born person’s murder would. Thus most pro-life incrementalists aren’t working towards eventual justice for the unborn; under what these pro life organizations advocate the preborn would have only partial protection under the law. 

Conclusion 

In my analysis, the key issue that separates the abolitionist from the incrementalist is their view of the law. The incrementalist views the law as a tool that can be used to limit the number of lives lost to abortion. For the abolitionist laws must be just and also laws are a teacher, thus any law which is unjust is reprehensible. In my analysis, the abolitionist view is the biblically and practically defensible approach. If one accepts that incremental restrictions are unjust it is impossible to continue to advocate for such restrictions. Further even if  incremental restrictions are not unjust in and of themselves, they are teaching people (including pregnant women) about when and why life has value. The incrementalist may have the best of intentions but that does not mean their approach is correct. 

References 

Texas Heartbeat Law website

Doug Wilson “Smashmouth Incrementalism the Third” Blog and Mablog, October 19, 2017   

Toby Sumpter “Eight Tenets of Smashmouth Incrementalism” Having Two Legs, March 7,  2022

“Responding to Bart Barber and Nathan Lino’s Absurd Arguments at the SBTC | The  Liberator Podcast #67” The Liberator Podcast

“Responding to the Anti-Abolitionist Arguments of Gruber and Klusendorf: The Liberator  Podcast #37” The Liberator Podcast

“Abortion Dies by a Thousand Votes: Why Pro-Life Advocacy isn’t Compromise” Scott  Klunsendorf, January 22, 2020  

Free the States website

For my recent reflection of how Christians should view God’s law and legislation, click here. For my assorted reflections on a myriad of topics, click here. If you found this post helpful, please share on social media below and subscribe.

brown brick wall close up photography
How to Trim Down a Sermon

How to Trim Down a Sermon

By |

For me, the hardest part of preparing a teaching or sermon is figuring out what information to leave out. Cutting down a sermon is incredibly difficult. This difficulty is compounded by the fact that it is very hard to find actual guidance on how to trim down a sermon. There are dozens of great resources for how to write better sermons, how to outline, how to write sermon application. But I have found very little concrete guidance for how to discern what parts of a sermon to keep, and what to edit out.

The Problem of Over-stuffed Sermons

There is an unfortunate tendency to equate a good, Biblical sermon with how many details a preacher or teacher gives. This tendency leads to what I will call “over-stuffed” sermons. These are sermons that are Biblical, sound, but try to communicate too much information in the allotted time slot. Sermons that are over-stuffed end up becoming less clear to the congregation. Listeners spend so much time trying to keep track of the many details you are giving rather than meditating on the main point of the text.

Now, I want to make an important distinction before going on. As a Bible-teacher or preacher, you must go into a great level of detail in your analysis when preparing a sermon. In your Bible study leading up to a preaching or teaching, you must dig into any and all details contained in your text. You must cross-reference, outline, look up the original languages, make observation after observation, and more if you want to get to the meaning of the text you are teaching. However, the art of preaching is in discerning which details to actually present to your congregation in a Sunday morning sermon. In other words, when you go from your study to the pulpit, you must trim down your sermon to only the most important textual details. If you simply go up and preach your detailed Bible study notes, chances are you are preaching and over-stuffed sermon.

The Solution: Trim Down Your Sermon to the Essential Details

In my experience, sermon length is generally driven by how many details you end up communicating in your sermon. How many points and sub-points do you have? How many words do you define from the pulpit? What cross-references do you include? Historical anecdotes? Illustrations? Applications? Therefore, to trim down a sermon, you must discern which of these details are essential to communicate, and which are secondary. The essential details should end up in your final sermon. Secondary details, on the other hand, you can trim out of your sermon to fit your allotted time and to ensure your congregation does not get lost in an over-stuffed teaching.

This seems obvious so far. But the question is how do you trim down a sermon? How can you discern which details are essential and which are secondary? Most of the time when I have asked for guidance on trimming down a sermon, I have gotten some form of “there is an art to it” or “I’m not that great at it myself, so I’m a bad example.” While it is certainly difficult to make universal rules, there is a helpful process you can go through to at least help you discern what details are essential and which are not. The process is simple: go through each section, point, detail, or cross reference in the first draft of your manuscript, and ask the following four questions (in order):

1. Does this detail give information that is mostly repeated elsewhere in the sermon?

I call this the “redundancy” test. Repetition is important in communication, but if you go to 10 cross-references in a sermon which all make the same point, maybe you can cut 8-9 of those cross-references and save yourself (and your listeners) some time. If a sermon point, observation, or application is too similar to information previously given in your sermon, you should probably cut it. Redundant details are by definition secondary and non-essential.

Each detail you choose to include in a sermon should move your preaching forward. If your application contains a point you already made earlier in your sermon, you can safely cut that application. If your text uses the same Greek word twice and you defined it earlier in the sermon, don’t bother going through the definition again when you come to it a second time. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule. But 90% of the time, giving excessive redundant details tires the listener and eats away at the time you have to preach. You can trim down a sermon quickly by removing redundant details.

2. Does this detail give new information that is not directly related to the main point of the text?

I call this the “relevance” test. Sometimes, a sermon point or other detail might indeed give new, non-redundant information. But just because information is new does not mean you should include it. You must discern whether the detail is related to the main point of the text you are preaching or not. There is a time and a place for “rabbit holes” where you go off on a tangent semi-related to the text you are preaching out of. But if you do this repeatedly, you will end up spending most of your time teaching on concepts found elsewhere in the Bible but not in the text you are supposed to be preaching.

A good practice for discerning the relevance of sermon details is to explicitly write out what you think the main point of the text is. Summarize in a sentence or two what the Biblical author is communicating and what reality your text points to. Then, as you go through each point, sub-point, or other detail in your sermon manuscript, ask “does this connect to the main point or reality of the text?” If the answer is no, the information is secondary and can be cut from your sermon. You can trim down a sermon by discerning which details are relevant to the main point of the text and which details are not.

3. Does this detail clarify all or part of the main point of the text?

I call this the “clarification” test. If a detail you want to include in your sermon clarifies all or part of the main point of your text, it is most likely essential. As mentioned in the previous section, if you explicitly write out the main point of your text, this test becomes very easy. If the definition of a word is crucial for understanding the text’s main point, then it is a crucial detail to include. If a cross-reference to a clearer text sheds light on the text you are preaching, then you should probably include that cross reference.

Of course, too much “clarification” can cause you to become redundant. So ensure that each clarifying detail does, in fact, directly clarify the main point of your text and is not repeated elsewhere in your sermon. Check to see that the clarifying details you include are related to the main point of the text, not secondary points. Details that clarify the main point can safely be labeled “essential” and kept in your sermon. But if you find yourself clarifying sub-points, maybe save those details for another sermon.

4. Does this detail connect the main point of your text to a broader Biblical concept or doctrine?

I call this the “connection” test, and it is the most difficult one to do well. Because the Bible is a unified whole, you can always find connections between your text and other texts, themes, and doctrines. If you try to connect your text to everything you will end up failing the other three tests above. But part of preaching is showing how your particular text fits into the rest of Scripture. Details that connect the main point of your text to a great Bible doctrine or a great Bible theme are often essential and should be included.

As an example, imagine you are preaching on a text whose main point relates to justification by faith. You likely will want to connect your text to other passages which deal with this theme, like Romans 3. As long as you avoid being redundant or going down a rabbit hole, such doctrinal or thematic connections can help your congregation see the unity of Scripture and add weight to the text you are currently teaching. To help do this well, after you write out the main point of your text, ask yourself “what key doctrine or key Bible theme does this text most connect to?” From there, you can ensure that you keep any details in your sermon that connect your text with this doctrine/theme or cross-reference to other texts on the same doctrine/theme.

Conclusion: Trim Down Your Sermon Thoughtfully and Carefully

The goal of this post isn’t to cause you to second-guess every detail you include in your sermon. Rather, I want to give you a more structured way to thoughtfully and carefully trim down your sermon. While knowing what to cut and what to include is certainly an art, you can become better at it with practice. By applying the four questions above to different sections of your sermon, you will be surprised how much easier it is to decide what to keep and what to cut. As always, this process requires much prayer and considering your own congregation that you preach to.

If you keep “glorifying God through faithful and clear communication of your text” as the goal of your preaching, then trimming down your sermon can become just another act of faithfulness and worship.

For more tools to help you prepare sermons and teachings, click here. If you want to look over tools to help your own Bible study, click here. If you found this post helpful, share and subscribe below.

gray and brown mountain
The Christian’s Biggest Dream

The Christian’s Biggest Dream

By |

You have probably at one point or another heard phrases like “dream big”. “Don’t settle.” “Everyone has their own mountain to climb.” “Believe in yourself.” And so on. This type of advice can be summarized as “find out what you want or value most inside yourself. Then spend your whole life chasing that thing. Make it your biggest dream, the mountain you spend your life trying to climb.” This is the wisdom the world has to offer. But what about the Christian? What is the Christian’s biggest dream? What mountain should a Christian dedicate their life to climbing?

Glorifying God with your life is the mountain you must climb

Reformed Christians throughout the ages have argued convincingly from Scripture that glorifying God is the reason you and I exist. The famous first question of the Westminster Shorter Catechism says that “Man’s chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.” Jonathan Edwards in his famous treatise “The End for Which God Created the World” argued from reason and from Scripture that God created all things to display His glory and so that His glory could be delighted in.

What is “God’s glory”? I wrote a longer post detailing what “God’s glory” means in Scripture. Simply put, God’s glory is his inherent value, greatness, and importance. You glorify God when you respond to His value, greatness, and importance in thought, feeling, or deed. The Bible is full of references to the fact that you and I exist to know God’s infinite greatness, value Him most highly, and live in a way that draws attention to His significance and majesty.

Therefore, the Christian’s biggest dream is nothing less than glorifying God with his or her life. That is the mountain you must daily climb: how can you live in a way that draws attention to the infinite value and beauty and greatness of God? Christians do not look to their own personal desires or dreams or goals to determine what they should life for. Rather, when the Holy Spirit regenerates a person, He supernaturally allows them to value the Triune God more than anything else. The lifelong goal of a Christian becomes understanding more deeply God’s value and inviting those around them value God in proportion to His holiness and greatness.

All other dreams are infinitely small

The Christian’s biggest dream must be to glorify God because all other dreams are infinitely small. If God is the creator of all things, He is himself greater than what He created. He has more value and is more important than anything He created. And since God is infinite and creation is not, then God is infinitely more important than anything or anyone else. God isn’t just a little bit better than other things, He is in a category of His own. There is nothing and no one that can compete with God’s inherent glory.

Therefore, for a Christian to prioritize any other dream than that God’s glory would be magnified is to dream small. Infinitely small. Unspeakably small. The biggest dream you have ever had apart from God is nothing more than a single grain of sand next to the ocean of God’s greatness. Wealth, fame, comfort, recognition, a big house, a perfect family, might seem like “big dreams” when you think about them in your mind. But when you truly, by the Holy Spirit, have even the faintest glimpse of God’s value and God’s greatness, those “big dreams” suddenly seem petty, small, and idolatrous.

Don’t waste your life pursuing a tiny, insignificant, finite, self-focused dream. The Christian’s biggest dream is to live for God’s glory because no other dream or desire compares. Of course, in our sin, you and I oftentimes prefer the lesser. We become stuck in our small dreams. But God calls you to a bigger dream and a better life than you could possibly imagine for yourself: to live to display God’s worth in everything you do.

You weren’t created to climb any other mountain

Because you are a human created by God, for God, and in the image of God, your life has inherent purpose. You don’t have to create yourself or define your own worth. God didn’t create you and sovereignly place you in the time and place you find yourself in for you to squander your life trying to find a mountain to climb or a dream to realize. God has revealed in His word exactly the mountain you should climb and exactly the dream that should motivate you day in and day out: to live for and delight in God’s infinite greatness, value, and perfection forever.

There are a ton of “big dreams” that the idolatrous modern culture tells you to pursue. All of them are focused on maximizing your comfort, finding your value, showing off your “greatness.” In the end, however, none of those dreams will satisfy or give you peace or comfort you when it comes time to die because God created you for Himself. To live for yourself when you were created for an infinity greater Being is cosmically foolish, sinful, and damning. Don’t “find your purpose” or manufacture life goals for yourself. There is an unspeakable peace that comes when the Christian’s biggest dream matches the purpose for which God created them.

Conclusion: God chooses your mountain, not you

You don’t need to come up with your own dream. God, who created you and loves you with an everlasting love in Christ, has already told you in His word what you should spend your life doing. A life lived for God’s glory is never misinvested. There is more joy and satisfaction to be found in living to know God’s greatness and value and to share God’s greatness and value with others than you could possible imagine.

Don’t follow your dreams. They are small and self-focused and misleading. Instead, follow God, your creator, who has already revealed to you what your greatest dream should be. Daily seek the Lord in the Word to remind yourself of who you should be living for. Pray “hallowed be your name” and “for Thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory.” A life lived for yourself or for a created thing will never satisfy because you are finite. But if you live for an infinite God, your cup will never run dry and daily you will find new opportunities to delight in and display that infinitely glorious God.

For more of my assorted reflections on a myriad of topics, click here. If you found this post helpful, please share on social media below and subscribe. Follow The Average Churchman on Instagram for more content.

gray and brown mountain
Responding to God’s Glory with Glory

Responding to God’s Glory with Glory

By |

Recently, I preached a sermon on Revelation 4:11. What initially intrigued me in this text was the fact that at the very end of the Bible, God is still being worshiped because He is the Creator. As I progressed in my study, however, I was stunned by the all-consuming worship and exaltation of the Lord pictured in Revelation 4. Because of this, I did a word study of some of the key words in the verse, including the word ”glory”. This idea of responding to God’s glory with praise and exaltation has occupied my mind the past few weeks, and I decided it was time I started working through my thoughts by writing them out.

In this post, I want to think through the sense in which the Bible describes God as glorious and the sense in which glorifying God is our proper response to that reality. I want to think through responding to God’s glory with glory: understanding who God is inherently and then how that drives your response to Him. Right off the bat, I am indebted to Jonathan Edward’s The End for Which God Created the World for engaging my mind on this topic and for influencing what I write in this post.

A brief word study

The word “glory” or “glorify” is used so frequently in good Christian conversation and preaching that I sometimes find it difficult to remember what exactly “glory” means. In the Old Testament, the word most often translated “glory” is the Hebrew word “kabod“. The word’s literal meaning is “weight” but clearly in Scripture this is a metaphor for the significance of something or someone. If something is “heavy” it is inherently more important and significant than something that is “light”. Other ways of understanding this idea of “weight” include splendor, reputation, and honor.

When you come to the New Testament, the word translated glory is “doxa“. You likely recognize this word from the English word “doxology.” This word was used outside Scripture to refer to someone’s reputation i.e. an opinion or estimate of someone. The greater a person or object is, the greater it’s “doxa” or it’s reputation. In Revelation 4:11, this word appears next to a word “time” which is translated “honor”. This word means “a value” or esteeming something. So, in both the Old and New Testaments, it seems that “glory” refers to the significance, the reputation, the value of something.

“Glory” is who God is

What does it mean when the Bible talks about “the glory of God?” Theologians answer this by distinguishing between God’s inherent glory and His ascribed glory. God’s inherent glory refers to the reality that God is, in and of Himself, the greatest, most valuable, and most significant of beings. Exodus 34 famously connects God’s glory to His attributes or who He is:

Moses said, “Please show me your glory.” And he said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my name ‘The Lord.’ And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.

Exodus 33:18-19 ESV, emphasis added

The Lord descended in the cloud and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord. 6 The Lord passed before him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, 7 keeping steadfast love for thousands,[b] forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation.” 8 And Moses quickly bowed his head toward the earth and worshiped.

Exodus 34:5-8 ESV, emphasis added

You see from the above passage that God reveals His glory, His value, His reputation to Moses by declaring who He is and what He does. This is God’s inherent glory. God, by the very nature of who He is and what He does, is the most valuable and significant. Notice also that God connects His glory to His name as well as His goodness. This passage is worthy of a much more extensive exposition, but for our purposes today, it is enough to see that God is inherently infinitely valuable because of who He is.

“Glory” is our response to who God is

“Glory” is not only used to refer to who God is inherently. Glory is also used to refer to humanity’s response to God’s inherent glory. Theologians refer to this as God’s ascribed glory. This is what you refer to when you talk about “glorifying God”. If you notice, Moses illustrates what it means to respond to God’s glory in the passage above: immediately after God reveals His inherent glory of Moses, Moses makes haste to worship in response. This pattern of “revelation then worship” is repeated throughout Scripture when humans are confronted with a revelation of God’s inherent glory.

So what is ascribed glory then? I think in the most basic sense, it is agreeing with God’s evaluation of Himself. God declares through Scripture and creation that He and He alone is the most awesome, great, valuable, and significant being. He is ultimate, the “alpha and the omega”. Therefore, the most basic response a human can give when confronted with this reality is to simply say “amen”! It is so. What God has revealed about Himself is true. “Ascribing glory” means you agree with God’s revelation of Himself by faith and attribute to God all the attributes and worth that He declares are true of Him.

The idea here is when you truly grasp God’s worth, gravity, and reputation, you respond in some way. Worship. Exaltation. Singing. Rejoicing. Obedience. The list goes on and on. Each of these actions “ascribe” glory to God when they are motivated by an understanding of and a desire to display God’s glory. There is much that could be said here, but for the remainder of this post, let’s consider how responding to God’s glory with your mind, emotion, and will occurs in your daily life.

Responding rationally to God’s glory

How can you display the worth and gravity and reputation of God in your mind, heart, and will? How can you respond to God’s infinite value, supreme reputation, and greatest significance properly? Starting with your mind, responding to God’s glory means first and foremost holding this high view of God in your mind.

Your mind is constantly assaulted by a culture that elevates humanity and their autonomy while demeaning the reality of God and His glory.

If you want to display God’s worth, value, and importance, you are going to have to guard your mind from internal thoughts and external voices that would de-value God. Internally, pride, sin, and your own flesh will push you to either think less of God or think of God less. By thinking less of God, I mean you will be tempted to lose a mental grip on the sobering reality of God’s inherent glory. And thinking of God less means becoming so distracted or disinterested in the Lord that you never stop to contemplate God’s value.

External assaults to your mental focus on God’s worth come in a myriad of forms. But they all typically have the common factors of elevating mankind by substituting subtle or overt lies about God. The key for fighting both internal and external temptations to belittle God is given in Romans 12:2 “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.”

A mind renewed by God’s word and prayer is a mind ready to remember God’s value.

So positively, how can you value and honor God with your mind?

  1. Daily go to His word to mentally understand who God is revealed to be. Memorize verses like Isaiah 40:21-23 which extol God’s greatness.
  2. Meditate throughout the day on God’s inherent glory. A mind that does not think of God’s greatness is not actively glorifying God. In the clutter of your own thoughts and the voices around you, dedicate mental energy to contemplation of God’s glory.
  3. “Take captive every thought” that comes from within or without that would elevate self and dethrone God or Christ in your mind.

If you would glorify God with your mind, you must be active and vigilant. If you wake up assuming you will naturally glorify God with your mind, you will no doubt fail. You must work to get your mind fixed on God and to keep it fixed on God.

A mind fixed on God and a mind that prefers contemplating God over worldly things displays the value, the greatness, and the importance of the Lord.

Responding affectionately to God’s glory

How do you love the Lord with all your heart? How can your emotions, feelings, and affections show that God is supremely valuable? Jonathan Edwards and John Piper have both expounded this point extensively, but I’ll add my own reflections to the mix. Emotions seem to me to be both responsive in nature as well as volatile. By responsive I mean that almost every emotion you have is attached to an object. That object can be an event, a person, a circumstance etc. Emotions are also volatile in the sense that they seem to shift at a very rapid pace depending on what object you come in contact with or sometimes they seemingly shift on their own without an object.

As Piper and Edwards have written, the proper emotional response to God is joy. Delight. Satisfaction. When you truly grasp the gravity, goodness, and greatness of God, your heart should overflow with delight. Why is this often not your experience practically? I think it is because you and I let other objects besides God grip our hearts and thereby shift our emotional response delighting in God to something lesser. The fight of glorifying God with your emotions is a fight to keep your heart continually delighting in who God is. This is easily said, but hard to do practically.

Responding to God’s glory with affectionate authentic joy requires anchoring your emotional faculties to who God reveals himself to be.

The goal is not to conjure up some sort of fake, excessive, emotional response. Emotions, because they are volatile, come and go rather rapidly. What you can control, however, if the consistency and fervor with which you pursue delight in the Lord. A good analogy would be feeling affection and delight for your spouse. Your emotional response to your spouse is not always proportional to their value. But as you spend time with them, think over their attributes in your mind, talk with them, prioritize them, oftentimes a proper affection follows. The hope is that over time, your emotions become less volatile with regards to your spouse and you enjoy more consistent times of extended delight. By consistently returning again and again to the desired object or your affections, you will likely experience more frequent moments of love and delight and joy in that object.

A heart overflowing with love and delight and joy in who God is shows God’s inherent greatness, worth, and importance.

Responding volitionally to God’s glory

How can you display God’s infinite value with your will? Actions? Lifestyle? This is a big question and a whole post could be written on answering this question in each area of life. But I think at a fundamental level, displaying God’s worth with your actions means obedience. In particular, obedience to the moral commands laid out in God’s word. The world would have you determine your own fate, decide what you want to do, ”do what is right in your own eyes.” When you remove an eternal sovereign God from the picture, you are left to determine and serve yourself.

Therefore, the simplest and most fundamental way to display the worth and weight of God is to deny yourself and live for Him. To let God determine who you are and what you are to do with your life. Was there ever a time that self-denial and prioritizing God were more counter-cultural? By choosing to obey God rather than choosing to obey your own desires, you are effectively saying to the sinful world around you ”I am not ultimate. You are not ultimate. There is a God who is ultimate. And He determines what life is, what life isn’t, and what we, as create creatures, should do.”

Radical, ordinary, everyday obedience is a testimony to God’s glory.

It is a testimony that God is so exceedingly glorious and valuable that He is superior to your own desires and pleasing Him is the greatest good you can do. Now, just because glorifying God with your will is simple at a fundamental level does not mean it is easy. Choosing God over self is a daily battle to ”deny yourself, take up your cross” and follow Christ. But in calling us to lose our life for the sake of the Gospel, Jesus is calling us to show to the world that there is someone greater than anything and is worth us losing our life for.

Obedience and self-sacrifice are both acts of the will by which you can display God’s glory to the world around you.

Conclusion: Responding to God’s glory is the privilege of the Christian

Responding to God’s glory with a life of worship is the great privilege of the Christian. Unbelievers live their lives in this world blind and trapped in the black hole of self-glorification. While the culture pretends this is an enlightened and viable way to live, the Christian knows better. Self-glorification is nothing more than trying to quench your thirst with a broken cup when a fountain of living water is in front of you (see Jeremiah 2:13).

In that sense, the Christian’s chief end to ”glorify God and enjoy Him forever” is not a burdensome duty, anymore than the invitation to drink from a fountain of life is a burdensome duty. It is the highest privilege and blessing you can be given. It is a calling to taste and see that the Lord is good, to come and buy food without price, and to experience the eternal life of knowing the Lord. You cannot be too committed to pursing a deeper knowledge of God’s infinite value. Nor can you be too committed to displaying with your mind, will, and life that knowledge you have of God’s infinite value. If you are a Christian, revel in the knowledge that you get to live a life of ”praising the one who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.”

For more of my assorted reflections on a myriad of topics, click here. If you found this post helpful, please share on social media below and subscribe. Follow The Average Churchman on Instagram for more content.

assorted color bricks
The Most Basic Bible Study Tools

The Most Basic Bible Study Tools

By |

What tools and techniques do you need to understand Scripture properly? If you look up books on hermeneutics, you will be greeted by a host of methods for understanding the Biblical text. Suffice to say, whether you are a new believer or a seasoned expositor, you can always find ways to improve your analysis and application of Scripture. However, just like in an actual tool box, there are some tools that are so fundamental and useful that everyone needs to know how to use them. In this post, I want to give two of the most basic Bible study tools that you need in order to understand Scripture.

Tool #1: Decomposition

Decomposition is simply taking something complicated and breaking it down. You come in contact with decomposition every day without even realizing it:

  • Recipes decompose a dish into a series of logical steps
  • Your GPS decomposes a route into a sequence of turns
  • A to-do list decomposes your day into tasks to complete
  • A puzzle decomposes into a large set of individual pieces
  • Sentence diagrams break apart a sentence into its component parts of speech (nouns, verbs, etc.)
  • A pros and cons list decomposes a decision into its benefits and drawbacks

And those are only a couple examples. Essentially, the goal of decomposition is to take the complex and make it simple. Decomposition allows you to understand the pieces that make up the whole. The best metaphor for decomposition is taking apart a puzzle: you have something big and complex and you want to break it apart into pieces to understand how they fit together.

Decomposition is one of the most basic bible study tools you can apply to a text. You can view any text of Scripture, long or short, as a complicated blend of language, theology, historical context, authorial intent, and a host of other things. Your goal in decomposition is to simply separate each of these pieces in order to examine and understand them. You break text apart so when you put it back together again, you understand how the pieces relate to the whole.

Decomposition Example

There are countless specific ways to decompose a Biblical text. You can decompose it based on the languages, you can decompose it in terms of how it relates to the surrounding context, you can decompose it by looking at the “5 Ws and H”. Any time you divide and examine the parts of a Biblical text, you are doing decomposition. Consider the verse below:

but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

John 20:31 ESV

You might roughly decompose this verse by outlining it as follows:

  • What: These are written
    • Why: So that you may believe
      • What: That Jesus is
      • Who: the Christ, the Son of God
    • Why: and that by believing you may have life
      • How: in his name

As you can see, by simply doing this rough and approximate decomposition, you can already begin to notice some features of the text. The main point of the verse is to describe why John wrote his gospel and there appears to be two related reasons given: that the reader might believe something about Jesus and that the reader might experience the outcome of that belief. You can further analyze the text by asking what specific things does John mention that a person should believe about Jesus.

Again, this is only a rough example of one way you can decompose a text. There a countless other tools that are essentially ways of decomposing a text. But the important thing to notice here is that good decomposition can lead to better observations. Before you make observations of the text, start with decomposing it. Once you have the pieces broken out, you can look at them and then make more insightful observations on each component of the text and how it relates to the whole.

Tool #2: Externalization

The second of these two basic Bible study tools is externalization. Your mind can only hold so much inside it at once. Therefore, a crucial tool for analysis is externalization. This means simply getting what you are thinking in your mind written down on paper. Again, you externalize throughout every day of your life:

  • You write out a meal plan so you don’t have to remember all the meals for the week
  • Your to-do list is simply an externalization of what you think you need to get done in a day
  • When you take notes during a presentation you are externalizing ideas you want to remember so you don’t have to trust yourself to remember every detail of the presentation
  • Any form of writing is externalization and if you are reading this post, you are simply reading an externalization of my own mind and thoughts

Externalization gets your thoughts outside of your mind. And the purpose of this is simple: once your thoughts are written down you can examine them critically, add or subtract from them, reword them in a better way, and otherwise analyze them. The more you externalize, the less you have to hold in your mind at once and the better you can think about an issue.

Externalization stands out amongst other basic bible study tools because a lot of times people don’t actually think of it as a “tool”. Even though a lot of Christians journal or write their thoughts on a text when preparing a sermon, very rarely do they consider how important externalizing their thoughts about a text is. Whether you are doing a brief morning devotion or preparing a 45-minute sermon, you need to externalize all your thoughts about a text.

Ideas for Externalization

Why does this help in Bible study? Because thoughts and insights are fleeting. Don’t ever assume you will remember an insight about a text tomorrow that you noticed today. If you see something noteworthy, write it down. My Bibles are covered with notes and cross references that came to mind when I read a particular passage. If I notice a repetition in the text, I externalize it by circling the repeated word. When I intuitively understand the structure of a passage, I write a quick outline and save it for later.

As with decomposition, there are many ways you can externalize your thoughts when studying a passage:

  • Have a blank journal where you write down your thoughts as you read through the Bible
  • Write down related texts that come to mind in your Bible when you read a particular passage
  • Have a folder of “sermon skeletons” where you have rough outlines of passages
  • Circle, underline, use multi-colored pens, anything to notate to your future self what you notice in a particular text as you study

Your mind will not be able to hold everything you know about Scripture at once. By externalizing your insights, you can come back at a later date and see if you notice the same things you noticed in the past. Externalizing is a Bible study tool because it allows you to connect thoughts you have had in the past to what you are studying in the present. Every time you read a good commentary you are benefiting from someone else externalizing their thoughts. By getting something down in writing, you can come back to it later and analyze it and reorganize it as needed.

Conclusion

Decomposition and externalization, in my opinion, are the most basic Bible study tools and almost every other tool or method depends on both of these. Even if you didn’t know it, you probably have used these tools in the past when you study a text. Improving in Bible study is not just about learning more and more new techniques. You also need to work on getting better at the fundamentals. If you can master the arts of decomposition and externalization, you will see fruit in your Bible study, your teaching, and your preaching.

This post was inspired in part by a section in “Psychology of Intelligence Analysis” by Richards Heuer, Jr. It is a good read if you want more detail on these subjects.

If you want more tools to help you in your personal Bible study, click here. If you found this post helpful, share on social media and subscribe below. Follow The Average Churchman on Instagram to get more content.
The Authoritative Canon (1689 1:2-3)

The Authoritative Canon (1689 1:2-3)

By |

Previously, I discussed how the 2nd London Confession opens with a clear and unambiguous declaration that the Bible is the only sufficient standard for Christianity. But the question is which books are considered the authoritative canon? Which documents has God preserved through the ages for His Church? Confusion about the canon of Scripture is as common in the modern world as it was in the days of the authors of the 1689. In sections 1:2-1:3 of the Second London confession, the authors clearly state where Christians can find the words of God.

(1:2) Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these:
Of the Old Testament:

Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth 1 Samuel 2 Samuel 1 Kings 2 Kings 1 Chronicles 2 Chronicles Ezra Nehemiah Esther Job Psalms Proverbs Ecclesiastes The Song of Solomon Isaiah Jeremiah Lamentations Ezekiel Daniel Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah Micah Nahum Habakkuk Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Malachi
Of the New Testament:

Matthew Mark Luke John Acts Romans 1 Corinthians 2 Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians 1 Thessalonians 2 Thessalonians 1 Timothy 2 Timothy Titus Philemon Hebrews James 1 Peter 2 Peter 1 John 2 John 3 John Jude Revelation

All of which are given by the inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life.

(1:3) The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon or rule of the Scripture, and, therefore, are of no authority to the church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writings.

1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, Articles 1:2-1:3

Good Resources for Further Study

I won’t spend much time today arguing for why the books the 1689 lists are, in fact, the authoritative canon of Scripture. Other authors and theologians have written a number of excellent resources on this topic. I will list a few of them below before analyzing some other parts of this passage from the confession:

Other Texts Affirming the Canon

The authors of the 1689 contain a single verse in support of section 1:2 where the authoritative canon of Scripture is defined. The verse is the most well-known statement on Scripture in the whole Bible.

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

2 Timothy 3:16 ESV

Now, this verse is crucial for any Christian’s understanding of Scripture. The authors likely included this text as a citation for section 1:2 because it states all Scripture has authority because it is breathed out by God. However, 2 Timothy 3:16 doesn’t directly give what books Paul has in view when he uses the phrase “all Scripture.” There are several other passages given in the Westminster Confession of Faith that help clarify this:

…and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

2 Timothy 3:15 ESV emphasis added

For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”

John 5:46-47 ESV emphasis added

But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’”

Luke 16:29-31 ESV emphasis added

And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.

Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”

Luke 24:27, 44 emphasis added

Notice that the Old Testament canon contains the sacred writings which are defined as the books of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms. “Moses, Prophets, and the Psalms” are the three main sections in the Hebrew Bible. Therefore, both Jesus and Paul affirm that the entire Old Testament canon is God’s word. Not only that, the Old Testament is “Christian Scripture” in the sense that it’s main emphasis was communicating truths about the coming Messiah, Jesus.

Time doesn’t permit me to go through the texts which witness to the inspiration of the New Testament Canon. Instead, I refer you to this excellent little article that contains this helpful paragraph:

And far from endorsing a heterodox blend of doctrine, the NT authors always point to one God, one Christ, one Gospel and one faith delivered to the saints. The four Gospel writers are either apostles (Matthew and John) or else close associates who relied on apostolic witness (Mark with Peter; Luke with Paul). The Apostle Paul describes his own teaching, both spoken and written, as the Word of God (1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Thessalonians 2:15). When he tells Timothy that the labourer deserves his wages, he is quoting the Gospel of his friend Luke as Scripture (1 Timothy 5:18; Luke 10:7). And when Peter refers to Paul’s letters (plural) as Scripture (2 Peter 3:16), he shows that even at this early stage, there was a collection of Pauline epistles circulating with scriptural authority.

From: The New Testament canon: Why these 27 documents? by Subby Szterszky

Scripture (Not Human Writings) Have Authority in God’s Church

Notice that the authors of the 1689 are aware that knowing which books are authoritative canon and which books aren’t canonical has immense practical implications for Christians. Notice first that the authors clearly state the canon only contains books that are inspired by God. The implication is that any book not on this list is not inspired by God. Of the thousands upon thousands of books that have been written since the beginning of the world, only these 66 were inspired by the living God.

The authors then connect this idea of inspiration to the inherent authority of Scripture. If you read a book by a great philosopher, they might have some insightful things to say. But their words do not have authority in your life. You can choose whether to believe and apply their words or to reject them. The Bible, on the other hand, speaks with authority because it speaks the words of your all-powerful Creator. As such, you cannot pick and choose which words of Scripture you will believe and obey.

Every word from God carries the authority of God.

The authors of the 1689 then connect this idea of an inspired, authoritative canon to the topic of Church practice. Human writings or ideas do not have the final say in how God’s Church is to behave. After all, it is God’s Church. Any argument about Church doctrine, practice, or structure needs to be based on support from the authoritative canon of Scripture.

The ultimate authority of the Church rests in the authority of God’s Word to the Church.

Practical Implications

1. Spend most of your time reading the only authoritative source on life

John Wesley has a marvelous quote describing how Christians should react to the Bible.

O give me that book! At any price give me the Book of God! I have it. Here is knowledge enough for me. Let me be homo unius libri [a man of one book].”

John Wesley

“Of making books there is no end” the teacher in Ecclesiastes says. You could also say “of reading books there is no end.” If you spent all day every day reading from morning to night, you would not read half the books that have been written. But if you are a Christian, there is only one book you really need to read: the Bible.

But you must ask yourself the following questions:

  • How much time each day do you spend reading the Bible?
  • Do you spend more time in the Bible than you do reading great works of fiction?
  • Is the Bible your preferred source of wisdom over self-help books?
  • Do you use your spare moments to meditate on Scripture or to scroll through your social media feed?

There has never been a time in history where humans have had more ready access to information. The problem is 99.99999% of the information available to you on a daily basis is not given by God and therefore has no authority in your life. Do you want to know how to live? Then there is one place you should go: the Word of God. To live your life by any other authority is damning and to prefer any other source of information to the Bible is a waste.

Examine your information intake throughout the day. How much of it is spiritually profitable? How can you adjust your habits and schedule to get more time in Scripture?

2. The closer a book is to the teaching of Scripture, the more useful it is

One of my favorite J. C. Ryle quotes from one of my favorite J. C. Ryle books is

Value all books in proportion to the extent they agree with Scripture. Those that are nearest to it are the best, and those that are farthest from it—and most contrary to it—the worst.

“Thoughts for Young Men” by J. C. Ryle

Everyone, even unbelievers, can agree that some books are better written than others, are of higher quality than others, and more impactful than others. But the Christian must also evaluate whether one book is more spiritually beneficial than another. The question the Christian asks is how do you evaluate a book written by a sinful human being and tell whether it is profitable or dangerous? The answer is simple: ask how much of it agrees with the authoritative canon of Scripture.

Ryle’s quote applies not only to books. It applies to any form of information intake. What videos do you watch online? Which podcasts do you regularly listen to?

Any time you receive information from any source, your first question should be “can this be true based on what I know about God’s Word?”

Measure, evaluate, examine all things in light of the Bible. Error is subtle. If it wasn’t, it wouldn’t be dangerous. If you want to keep your mind fixed on Christ, you will have to carefully consider whether the sources of information you engage with are consistent with Scripture or not.

This post is part of a new series walking through the 1689 2nd London Confession. For other teachings I have done in the past, click here. If you found this post helpful, please share on social media below and subscribe. Follow The Average Churchman on Instagram to get more content.
Scripture is the Sufficient Standard (1689 1:1)

Scripture is the Sufficient Standard (1689 1:1)

By |

“The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience…” The 1689 Confession of Faith opens with this unambiguous declaration that Scripture is the only sufficient standard of truth. All things pertaining to the Christian faith are found in the canon of Scripture. No where else. The modern world has no objective standard or rule by which to live. Everyone defines their own truth, decides who they are and want to be, and have completely abandoned the idea that there is a God who defines morality and reality. In contrast to this fallen worldview, the 1689 confession summarizes clearly and concisely what Scripture teaches about itself:

The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience, although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.

1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, Section 1:1

Two Sources of Revelation…One Sufficient for Salvation

Notice first that the authors of the confession call out two ways God communicates who He is to humans: the Scripture and the “works of creation and providence.” In doing so, the authors are keeping with Psalm 19 and Romans 1 where the Bible says that God has revealed part of His glory and character through creation. When humans look out at the world around them, they should be able to deduce that there is a powerful, wise, and good ultimate Being who created the universe.

However, the authors are careful to distinguish between Scripture and natural revelation. The former they explicitly say is sufficient, while the latter is explicitly called out as not sufficient. In both cases, the sufficiency in view is “sufficient for salvation.” In other words, Scripture is the only sufficient standard in which you can find how to be reconciled to God. Natural revelation at the best only reveals that there is a God and He must have certain attributes.

Now, what does “sufficient” mean? It means that Scripture has in itself everything you need to be saved from your sins. It exhaustively contains the doctrines needed for being reconciled to God and then living in obedience to Him after you are reconciled. In using the word “sufficient”, the authors are making it clear that the canon of Scripture is all you need for salvation. You don’t need any supplementary or external material in order to understand and believe the Gospel. Not only that, Scripture is the sufficient standard for how Christians are to live in the world.

People can give you wise or helpful life-advice. But at the end of the day, only the Bible contains what the Lord requires of you, your family, or your Church.

Many Ways of Speaking in the Past…One Authoritative Word in the Present

The confession states that in the past God used various means to communicate His will to man. A simple read through of the Old Testament confirms this. God spoke directly to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He communicated to the nation of Israel through Moses, a mediator. When Israel forsook God’s covenant, He sent prophets who said “Thus saith the Lord.” But now, the 1689 asserts, these former ways have ceased. God spoke in many ways in the past, but now His authoritative word is contained in Scripture.

In arguing this point, the authors of the confession cite a very important verse:

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.

Hebrews 1:1-2, ESV

The authors here see a contrast between the past and the present. In the past, God spoke at many times and in many ways. But on this side of the Cross, God has spoken His decisive word: the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The confession sees in this verse an implication that the past ways that God used pre-Christ to reveal His will have ceased with the coming of God’s final word.

I think it is important to note here, however, that even when God was speaking directly through prophets, He established a standard in His Word.

“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams.

Deuteronomy 13:1-3a, ESV

Notice that even if a prophet made a prophecy that came true, the ultimate test of if they are a false prophet or not is if they lead you away from the Lord. Now, the question is, where would Israel have known to not follow other gods? The 10 commandments, which were God’s written commands. So even in the past, direct prophetic communication had to be examined by God’s written revelation. Therefore, in both past and present, God’s written word held the ultimate authority.

In summary, the Word of God is everything. Scripture is the sufficient standard by which you should measure everything you hear, learn, or experience.

Want to know who God is? Go to Scripture. Want to hear God speak directly to you? Go to Scripture. Want to know how to be saved? Go to Scripture. Want to know how to live your life pleasing to God? Go to Scripture.

Until you see scripture as the sufficient standard of truth, you will never be safe from subtle error.

Practical Implications

1. The Scriptures give certain truth in a confused world

The modern culture has no objective truth or standard to cling to or rely on. “Truth” is defined by the individual and any of the “standards” societies adopt are simply those expedient for them at the moment. Every day through social media and the internet, countless thoughts and opinions are offered for you to hear. What can you fall back on? What can you know for certain? The answer: anything spoken by an unchanging God.

Notice, the confession says the Scripture gives a “more sure establishment and comfort of the Church.” The Church and individual Christians find their certainty in the pages of Scripture. They don’t look to the arguments of fallen humans or whatever the current wisdom of the world is. “To the law and to the testimony!” they cry.

You will never have certainty in your life until you find it in Scripture.

All of life is uncertain except what God has declared to be so from the beginning. Cling to the only comfort you can count on: God’s inerrant, infallible, sufficient, unchanging, authoritative word.

2. Hearing from God means reading the Bible

The very last line of this section of the confession gives a not-so-subtle hint at cessationism: “those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.” What former ways are in view here? I take this to mean that God communicating directly by a prophecy given to an individual has ceased. Hearing from God does not require you to travel to hear someone speak. In fact, the only way to be sure you are hearing God’s words when you hear a human speak is if they are reading and expounding the text of Scripture.

Everyone wants to hear directly from God. Everyone wants to comfort of having a message from the all-powerful creator of the universe. The good news is that God’s words have been preserved for you. God has committed His words “wholly into writing”. Hearing from God is as easy as reading what He has recorded for you. Now, reading can be quite difficult. That is why having tools to help you understand Scripture is vital. However, you will never know God’s will any other way than working through the Bible.

This post is part of a new series walking through the 1689 2nd London Confession. For other teachings I have done in the past, click here. If you found this post helpful, please share below and subscribe. Follow The Average Churchman on Instagram to get more content.

single book of the bible
How to Go Deep in a Single Book of the Bible

How to Go Deep in a Single Book of the Bible

By |

The New Year is often a time when Christians choose to read through the Bible in a year. There are dozens of reading plans out there, each with a different path through the whole of Scripture. My wife and I are following this one together this year. However, as I have been going through this Bible-in-a-year plan, I am struck by just how fast you go. Certainly there are many benefits to reading through the whole Bible in a year. But going deep in a single book of the Bible is also an essential part of Christian study.

In this post, I want to lay out the benefits of focusing on a single book of the Bible and give an easy step-by-step method you can use to spend a month or two camped out in one book. As I have argued in another post, you and I need a balanced Bible diet consisting of both high level reading and also deep study. However, it is generally easier to simply read a large chunk of Scripture. Going deep in a single book of the Bible takes a lot more effort and analytical know-how. That said, there is nothing better than feeling like you know and understand deeply a part of God’s word. So, here are my thoughts on how you should study a single book of the Bible this year.

Benefits of staying in a single book of the Bible

There are a number of benefits you get simply from staying put in a book of the Bible for an extended length of time. By “extended” I mean at least a month. If a book is much longer, it will take you several months to dig deep into it’s theology. The idea is to not merely to read through the book. You want to understand the book and the points the author is trying to make. More than that, you want to stay in that book so long that you feel your life being confronted and corrected by it’s theology.

Here is a summary of some major benefits of staying in a single book of the Bible:

  • You understand the author’s intent
  • You will have parts, if not all, of the book memorized
  • You will be able to discuss the book in detail with other people
  • You can see how the book describes reality and applies to your life
  • You can give a summary of the book’s theology

Step 1: Read through the book multiple times

If you want to go deep in a single book of the Bible, the first step is easy: spend your first week or two of study simply reading through the book multiple times. If it is a short book like an Epistle or minor prophet, you might be able to read through it up to 10 times in a week or two. A longer book will take you longer, so 2 or 3 times might be the most you can do in a week.

This step is vital because you want to be familiar with the book. A vague sense of “I read that book before” is not going to cut it when it comes time to deeply study. By reading a book multiple times, you force your brain to start remembering what you read and noticing the overall structure of the book and maybe some of the finer details. You might even have some sections committed to memory by the time this step is over. Once you have a handle on the big picture of the book, it is time to move to step two. But again, don’t move on until you have read a shorter book through 10 times and 2-5 times for a longer book.

Step 2: Note any repeated words or phrases

After reading through a book of the Bible multiple times, you should start noticing patterns. Oftentimes, similar language is used throughout a book of the Bible in order to draw attention to the main themes. For example, if you were going through the Gospel of John, you might notice the repeated use of the words “believe” and “sign”. In this step, you simply go through the book you are reading again but this time, you circle, underline, or notate in some way a repeated word or phrase.

I personally always do this step twice because I might miss a word or phrase the first pass through. I recommend you get a few different colored pens, maybe one color per theme. That way, each time you see a certain color you know what repeated phrase you are tracing. The goal of this step is to start answering the question “what are the main points the Biblical author is trying to make?”

Your goal as a reader of the Bible is simply to see and understand what the author is putting in front of you.

Step 3: Outline the whole book if it is short or identify and outline key passages for longer books

This is where studying a single book of the Bible gets “difficult.” The first two steps were mainly focused on reading through the book and noticing patterns that stood out to you. Now, you need to actually work through the book as a whole. Outlining is simply the process of breaking a section of Scripture down into pieces that you then notate in a meaningful way. Here is a quick example of my outline for Romans 1:11-12 from an older post (which I recommend you read if you don’t understand outlining):

  1. Paul long’s to see the Church in Rome
    1. Why? To impart some spiritual gift to strengthen the Church
      1. What is the definition of “strengthen”?
      2. What is the definition of “spiritual gift?”
        1. “Charisma” -“a divine gift” points to the origin of the gift
      3. Why is encouragement called a “spiritual gift?”
        1. The encouragement of other believers is a gift from God
      4. How does mutual encouragement of faith strengthen a Church?
        1. Strong faith sets an example (Abraham)
        2. Strong faith points us back to God (Hebrews 11)
        3. Seeing faith in action in someone’s life encourages us to stay the course
  2. Paul wants to be encouraged by the Church in Rome
    1. Why is mutual encouragement important to Paul?
      1. Paul’s letters are full of encouragement to local Churches (1 Thess 5:11, Phil 2:1, 2 Corinthians 1:3-4)
      2. Scripture contains a number of “tools” to help Christians grow…one of those is encouragement
      3. Church in Rome was a minority, persecution was coming
    2. What do Paul and the Church in Rome have in common?
      1. Same fundamental need
      2. Need righteousness from Christ
      3. Same ethical implications from Gospel
  3. The source of this encouragement is each other’s faith
    1. How can someone’s faith be an encouragement?
      1. Strong faith sets an example (Abraham)
      2. Strong faith points us back to God (Hebrews 11)
      3. Seeing faith in action in someone’s life encourages us to stay the course
    2. What is the definition of “encouragement”?

Notice that in my outline, I include questions I have concerning the text. You will seek to answer those questions in the next step. Right now though, write them into your outline and bold them so you can easily find them when you come back later. Don’t be afraid to revise your outline multiple times. Very rarely will you perfectly outline a text on your first run through. If you are outlining a book or a larger passage, you might need even more passes before you get the outline satisfactory.

For shorter books, you might want to try to outline the whole book. Each day, work through a paragraph or two until you complete the book. If you are going deep in a longer book of the Bible, maybe focus on a dozen or so key passages or chapters. The goal of outlining is to understand the structure, flow, and logic of a passage. Once you complete your outline(s) for the book you are studying, you can start working on answering the questions you have in your outline.

Step 4: Apply any Bible study tools you know to the outlined book or passage

One of my main goals when I started this site was simply to have a place to contain all the different hermeneutical tools I came across. The tools I have in the personal Bible study page are designed to help you answer the questions you wrote into your outline in step 3. You won’t use every single tool in every Bible study, but you want to have a wide variety of resources at your disposal to answer the questions you have of a passage. Here is a key point though: do not go to commentaries to answer your questions until you have spent some time trying to answer them on your own.

Commentaries often make for lazy Bible study habits. Don’t get me wrong, I use commentaries and appreciate having the thoughts of godly Christians recorded. But commentaries should never replace personal analysis of a text. View commentaries as a way to check your personal study or as a conversation you are having with a “dead” fellow believer about a passage. But never start with them.

As I mentioned, tools you might need to answer your questions of a passage or book can be found here. However, here are three of the most basic methods you can use to answer your questions:

  • Define key words-a lot of times, questions arise from not understanding what an author means by a word or a phrase. The easiest solution is to use a tool such as Blue Letter Bible to do a quick word study. Oftentimes, simply learning the literal meaning of the word and where else in the Bible that word is used is enough to answer your question.
  • Look elsewhere in the book-I once had a professor who said “the answer is never far from the question.” What he meant was when you have a question about a Bible passage, look to see if the author clarifies elsewhere in the book. 9 times out of 10, the Biblical authors anticipate the questions you will ask and answer them somewhere in their book.
  • Find other passages which address the same topic-If defining the term and looking in the book both fail to answer a question, think of other places you know in the Bible which address the same topic. For example, if you are studying a passage about the Christian and the law in Galatians and don’t understand Paul’s point, then realize that Paul deals with the same topic in Romans. You can then go to Romans and see if your question is answered by examining a book other than Galatians.

When you answer a question, I would simply write it into your outline so you have it all in one place. It might take you a while to answer all your questions and some might not be answered completely. That is okay. Bible study is an iterative process and you should expect to spend multiple days and study sessions seeking to answer the same questions.

Step 5: Summarize some big points and then meditate on the implications for your life

If you are studying a single book of the Bible, getting to step 5 might take you a month or a couple months. Don’t rush any of the above steps. Each one is about growing your understanding of what God is communicating to you through His word. Step 5 is about summarizing what you have learned and meditating on some implications of those lessons. To do this, go through your outline and then at the top or the bottom, summarize 3-10 main ideas from the book.

What do I mean by ideas? I don’t mean you simply summarize the passage. You should already be able to do that from your outline fairly easily. Ideas are the fundamental truths taught in the passage. What spiritual realities has the text shown you? What unchanging truths are being pressed by the author of the book? How would you finish the sentence “This book of the Bible teaches…” using only things you’ve learned from your study?

If you cannot do this, then you might need to spend more time studying the book. Once you have these main ideas summarized, spend some time meditating on each one. Maybe only focus on one main idea a day. Ask yourself the question “If this is true, how should it impact my life?” I have written before that I think the Puritan application questions are probably the best for meditating in this fashion. You can read the whole post here, but here are the 6 questions the Puritans used to apply the truths of Scripture to their lives:

  • What following truths does this (idea) imply?
  • What errors does it contradict?
  • What good works does it require?
  • What should you stop doing because this (idea) forbids it?
  • What encouragement does this (idea) offer?
  • Where do you stand spiritually in light of this (idea)?

Conclusion

Going deep in a single book of the Bible takes a lot of time and mental energy. However, your effort is more than worth it in the end. Reading through the Bible in a year is great, and we should all make a habit of consistent Bible reading. But be sure to also make a habit of deep Bible study. The deeper you go into a book, the more you will be rewarded with insights which the Lord will use to conform you further to the image of Christ.

If you want more tools to help you in your personal Bible study, click here. If you found this post helpful, share on social media and subscribe below. Follow The Average Churchman on Instagram to get more content.