Bible Study: Going back to square one

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Ethan1942

Active member
Jul 23, 2022
205
88
28
82
#1
It was over 50 years ago I became disillusioned about what I'd been taught about the Bible, the Christian faith, etc. I lost confidence in preachers, teachers and 'study Bibles'. After prayer and serious thought, I chose an approach that began at the basics. I knew of the verse "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isa 8:20, so I saw this was foundational, but how to study the Bible without man's influence on what I was reading? God had blessed and used the KJV for 400+ years so I was okay with that translation.

I purchased a Cambridge KJV Bible with nothing but the text and maps in the back. No cross references, footnotes or concordance. The aid I obtained was the Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible. No computer then, so I bought the long yellow legal pads for notes. My first subject or word I chose to start with was "faith". I saw that the word "faith" translated several Hebrew and Greek words of the Bible. Going to the back of the Concordance, I could see the Greek pistis was translated by several KJV English words: assurance, belief, faith, fidelity.

From Young's I saw that there was a word group: pisteuo, pistoo, pistos. Under each of those related Greek words were the KJV English words. By studying the verses of the various words in context, through the Bible, I was able to make notes on the legal pads of what I learned from the various verses and passages. One major thing I learned was that saving faith is a gift of God that not all men have. I did not have a man tell me that, God's word told me that. Also, a man's claim to saving faith must be justified by his life, but he must judge himself, that is not for others to judge him, 2 Peter 1:4-11, Gal. 5:19-24. The basics of the faith: grace, faith, works, became a way to assess a catechism, confession, commentary, etc.

Using this approach I began to study key words of the faith to see what the Scriptures told me about the words and meaning. Over time I had a limited though solid theology formed that I derived from the Bible itself, apart from man's input. Yes, we all have the subjective side to ourselves, but using dictionaries can help with that. I then began to seek out catechisms and confessions of the historic churches that were at least old enough to be from the KJV generation. If the faith we are to contend for existed in the first century as Jude 3 tells us, I must shun modern ideas in theology that I did not find in church history by a significant body of believers. A person can point out various heretics with weird teachings down through history to justify themselves, but it's foolish to base our understanding on those people.

From the basics at square one, over time I had a foundation to expand my studies into other areas of Christian doctrine, rules of interpretation, theology textbooks, commentaries that stood the test of time, etc. It is amazing how much agreement there was among the various denominations 300-400 years ago; compared to the delusions of this day. I believe we are living in a time quite similar to the time when Jesus taught on earth. The church today has 'pharisees' who add to God's word, the 'sadducees who deny God's word, and we are also living in a modern Roman Empire, similar to Romans 1.
 
May 16, 2022
8
7
3
#2
It was over 50 years ago I became disillusioned about what I'd been taught about the Bible, the Christian faith, etc. I lost confidence in preachers, teachers and 'study Bibles'. After prayer and serious thought, I chose an approach that began at the basics. I knew of the verse "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isa 8:20, so I saw this was foundational, but how to study the Bible without man's influence on what I was reading? God had blessed and used the KJV for 400+ years so I was okay with that translation.

I purchased a Cambridge KJV Bible with nothing but the text and maps in the back. No cross references, footnotes or concordance. The aid I obtained was the Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible. No computer then, so I bought the long yellow legal pads for notes. My first subject or word I chose to start with was "faith". I saw that the word "faith" translated several Hebrew and Greek words of the Bible. Going to the back of the Concordance, I could see the Greek pistis was translated by several KJV English words: assurance, belief, faith, fidelity.

From Young's I saw that there was a word group: pisteuo, pistoo, pistos. Under each of those related Greek words were the KJV English words. By studying the verses of the various words in context, through the Bible, I was able to make notes on the legal pads of what I learned from the various verses and passages. One major thing I learned was that saving faith is a gift of God that not all men have. I did not have a man tell me that, God's word told me that. Also, a man's claim to saving faith must be justified by his life, but he must judge himself, that is not for others to judge him, 2 Peter 1:4-11, Gal. 5:19-24. The basics of the faith: grace, faith, works, became a way to assess a catechism, confession, commentary, etc.

Using this approach I began to study key words of the faith to see what the Scriptures told me about the words and meaning. Over time I had a limited though solid theology formed that I derived from the Bible itself, apart from man's input. Yes, we all have the subjective side to ourselves, but using dictionaries can help with that. I then began to seek out catechisms and confessions of the historic churches that were at least old enough to be from the KJV generation. If the faith we are to contend for existed in the first century as Jude 3 tells us, I must shun modern ideas in theology that I did not find in church history by a significant body of believers. A person can point out various heretics with weird teachings down through history to justify themselves, but it's foolish to base our understanding on those people.

From the basics at square one, over time I had a foundation to expand my studies into other areas of Christian doctrine, rules of interpretation, theology textbooks, commentaries that stood the test of time, etc. It is amazing how much agreement there was among the various denominations 300-400 years ago; compared to the delusions of this day. I believe we are living in a time quite similar to the time when Jesus taught on earth. The church today has 'pharisees' who add to God's word, the 'sadducees who deny God's word, and we are also living in a modern Roman Empire, similar to Romans 1.
 
May 16, 2022
8
7
3
#3
Glory be to God!!! Studyi long the Word without any man made philosophy is what keeps me free in the text as it is written and then asking the Holy Spirit to teach. Have found so much comfort in having an understanding when the LORD sees fit to open my eyes and ears have learned to come to the word with no carnality, personal preference or fear of the passage checking my heart motives. Have to laugh at trying to read revelations and all I kept getting was confused, which is not if God. Returned a few years later and asked the Lord are you ready for me to gain an understanding? Started with chapter one, precept upon precept, then reached for Matthew henry well worn commentaries and oh what a wondrous time!!!The Word cuts deep!!! We are blessed to have an inkling of the power or be giving an unction to study, especially while traveling through the luke warm watered down environments. thank you for posting!! Hallelujah back to basics!!
 
Jul 31, 2022
1
1
3
#4
Should a sister be allowed to ask questions during teaching session of sunday morning worship
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,404
13,746
113
#5
Should a sister be allowed to ask questions during teaching session of sunday morning worship
At the risk of hijacking this thread... if the males are allowed to ask questions in that context, then so should the females be allowed.
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
11,887
8,705
113
#6
It was over 50 years ago I became disillusioned about what I'd been taught about the Bible, the Christian faith, etc. I lost confidence in preachers, teachers and 'study Bibles'. After prayer and serious thought, I chose an approach that began at the basics. I knew of the verse "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isa 8:20, so I saw this was foundational, but how to study the Bible without man's influence on what I was reading? God had blessed and used the KJV for 400+ years so I was okay with that translation.

I purchased a Cambridge KJV Bible with nothing but the text and maps in the back. No cross references, footnotes or concordance. The aid I obtained was the Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible. No computer then, so I bought the long yellow legal pads for notes. My first subject or word I chose to start with was "faith". I saw that the word "faith" translated several Hebrew and Greek words of the Bible. Going to the back of the Concordance, I could see the Greek pistis was translated by several KJV English words: assurance, belief, faith, fidelity.

From Young's I saw that there was a word group: pisteuo, pistoo, pistos. Under each of those related Greek words were the KJV English words. By studying the verses of the various words in context, through the Bible, I was able to make notes on the legal pads of what I learned from the various verses and passages. One major thing I learned was that saving faith is a gift of God that not all men have. I did not have a man tell me that, God's word told me that. Also, a man's claim to saving faith must be justified by his life, but he must judge himself, that is not for others to judge him, 2 Peter 1:4-11, Gal. 5:19-24. The basics of the faith: grace, faith, works, became a way to assess a catechism, confession, commentary, etc.

Using this approach I began to study key words of the faith to see what the Scriptures told me about the words and meaning. Over time I had a limited though solid theology formed that I derived from the Bible itself, apart from man's input. Yes, we all have the subjective side to ourselves, but using dictionaries can help with that. I then began to seek out catechisms and confessions of the historic churches that were at least old enough to be from the KJV generation. If the faith we are to contend for existed in the first century as Jude 3 tells us, I must shun modern ideas in theology that I did not find in church history by a significant body of believers. A person can point out various heretics with weird teachings down through history to justify themselves, but it's foolish to base our understanding on those people.

From the basics at square one, over time I had a foundation to expand my studies into other areas of Christian doctrine, rules of interpretation, theology textbooks, commentaries that stood the test of time, etc. It is amazing how much agreement there was among the various denominations 300-400 years ago; compared to the delusions of this day. I believe we are living in a time quite similar to the time when Jesus taught on earth. The church today has 'pharisees' who add to God's word, the 'sadducees who deny God's word, and we are also living in a modern Roman Empire, similar to Romans 1.
God bless you so much, dear brother Ethan. Welcome to CC. (y)

It is amazing how much agreement there was among the various denominations 300-400 years ago; compared to the delusions of this day. I believe we are living in a time quite similar to the time when Jesus taught on earth. The church today has 'pharisees' who add to God's word, the 'sadducees who deny God's word, and we are also living in a modern Roman Empire, similar to Romans 1.
Amen, brother. I think you are right on the mark. (y)
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
11,887
8,705
113
#7
Glory be to God!!! Studyi long the Word without any man made philosophy is what keeps me free in the text as it is written and then asking the Holy Spirit to teach. Have found so much comfort in having an understanding when the LORD sees fit to open my eyes and ears have learned to come to the word with no carnality, personal preference or fear of the passage checking my heart motives. Have to laugh at trying to read revelations and all I kept getting was confused, which is not if God. Returned a few years later and asked the Lord are you ready for me to gain an understanding? Started with chapter one, precept upon precept, then reached for Matthew henry well worn commentaries and oh what a wondrous time!!!The Word cuts deep!!! We are blessed to have an inkling of the power or be giving an unction to study, especially while traveling through the luke warm watered down environments. thank you for posting!! Hallelujah back to basics!!
Amen! A warm welcome to you also, sister Amustardseed. (y)
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
11,887
8,705
113
#9
Should a sister be allowed to ask questions during teaching session of sunday morning worship
Welcome to CC.
At our church, women have their own Sunday school class. They cackle along just like the men. :giggle:

>
 
Mar 4, 2020
8,614
3,691
113
#10
It was over 50 years ago I became disillusioned about what I'd been taught about the Bible, the Christian faith, etc. I lost confidence in preachers, teachers and 'study Bibles'. After prayer and serious thought, I chose an approach that began at the basics. I knew of the verse "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isa 8:20, so I saw this was foundational, but how to study the Bible without man's influence on what I was reading? God had blessed and used the KJV for 400+ years so I was okay with that translation.

I purchased a Cambridge KJV Bible with nothing but the text and maps in the back. No cross references, footnotes or concordance. The aid I obtained was the Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible. No computer then, so I bought the long yellow legal pads for notes. My first subject or word I chose to start with was "faith". I saw that the word "faith" translated several Hebrew and Greek words of the Bible. Going to the back of the Concordance, I could see the Greek pistis was translated by several KJV English words: assurance, belief, faith, fidelity.

From Young's I saw that there was a word group: pisteuo, pistoo, pistos. Under each of those related Greek words were the KJV English words. By studying the verses of the various words in context, through the Bible, I was able to make notes on the legal pads of what I learned from the various verses and passages. One major thing I learned was that saving faith is a gift of God that not all men have. I did not have a man tell me that, God's word told me that. Also, a man's claim to saving faith must be justified by his life, but he must judge himself, that is not for others to judge him, 2 Peter 1:4-11, Gal. 5:19-24. The basics of the faith: grace, faith, works, became a way to assess a catechism, confession, commentary, etc.

Using this approach I began to study key words of the faith to see what the Scriptures told me about the words and meaning. Over time I had a limited though solid theology formed that I derived from the Bible itself, apart from man's input. Yes, we all have the subjective side to ourselves, but using dictionaries can help with that. I then began to seek out catechisms and confessions of the historic churches that were at least old enough to be from the KJV generation. If the faith we are to contend for existed in the first century as Jude 3 tells us, I must shun modern ideas in theology that I did not find in church history by a significant body of believers. A person can point out various heretics with weird teachings down through history to justify themselves, but it's foolish to base our understanding on those people.

From the basics at square one, over time I had a foundation to expand my studies into other areas of Christian doctrine, rules of interpretation, theology textbooks, commentaries that stood the test of time, etc. It is amazing how much agreement there was among the various denominations 300-400 years ago; compared to the delusions of this day. I believe we are living in a time quite similar to the time when Jesus taught on earth. The church today has 'pharisees' who add to God's word, the 'sadducees who deny God's word, and we are also living in a modern Roman Empire, similar to Romans 1.
That’s great you had the awareness and conviction to do a reality check, take inventory, and start over from scratch. I feel the exact same way. From what I can see, the various church denominations all have something good others can benefit from.

At one point I was like you, but I took a slightly different approach. If you’ll notice, the church has already done some of the work for us. I just ask some basic questions and this is how I investigate the truth:

1. What does this church say?
2. What does the Bible say?

What I noticed is the church has gotten a great many of things wrong. From what I can tell, almost everything the churches I’ve seen say and do are not Biblical.

I’ll say one example. Church isn’t supposed to be gathering in a building for an hour or so to sing songs, give money, and listen to a sermon, but I guess all of the churches do that. Church’s pretense for church is not right. It’s not difficult to become disillusioned in that kind of culture.
 

p_rehbein

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2013
30,669
6,860
113
#11
It was over 50 years ago I became disillusioned about what I'd been taught about the Bible, the Christian faith, etc. I lost confidence in preachers, teachers and 'study Bibles'. After prayer and serious thought, I chose an approach that began at the basics. I knew of the verse "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isa 8:20, so I saw this was foundational, but how to study the Bible without man's influence on what I was reading? God had blessed and used the KJV for 400+ years so I was okay with that translation.

I purchased a Cambridge KJV Bible with nothing but the text and maps in the back. No cross references, footnotes or concordance. The aid I obtained was the Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible. No computer then, so I bought the long yellow legal pads for notes. My first subject or word I chose to start with was "faith". I saw that the word "faith" translated several Hebrew and Greek words of the Bible. Going to the back of the Concordance, I could see the Greek pistis was translated by several KJV English words: assurance, belief, faith, fidelity.

From Young's I saw that there was a word group: pisteuo, pistoo, pistos. Under each of those related Greek words were the KJV English words. By studying the verses of the various words in context, through the Bible, I was able to make notes on the legal pads of what I learned from the various verses and passages. One major thing I learned was that saving faith is a gift of God that not all men have. I did not have a man tell me that, God's word told me that. Also, a man's claim to saving faith must be justified by his life, but he must judge himself, that is not for others to judge him, 2 Peter 1:4-11, Gal. 5:19-24. The basics of the faith: grace, faith, works, became a way to assess a catechism, confession, commentary, etc.

Using this approach I began to study key words of the faith to see what the Scriptures told me about the words and meaning. Over time I had a limited though solid theology formed that I derived from the Bible itself, apart from man's input. Yes, we all have the subjective side to ourselves, but using dictionaries can help with that. I then began to seek out catechisms and confessions of the historic churches that were at least old enough to be from the KJV generation. If the faith we are to contend for existed in the first century as Jude 3 tells us, I must shun modern ideas in theology that I did not find in church history by a significant body of believers. A person can point out various heretics with weird teachings down through history to justify themselves, but it's foolish to base our understanding on those people.

From the basics at square one, over time I had a foundation to expand my studies into other areas of Christian doctrine, rules of interpretation, theology textbooks, commentaries that stood the test of time, etc. It is amazing how much agreement there was among the various denominations 300-400 years ago; compared to the delusions of this day. I believe we are living in a time quite similar to the time when Jesus taught on earth. The church today has 'pharisees' who add to God's word, the 'sadducees who deny God's word, and we are also living in a modern Roman Empire, similar to Romans 1.
Interesting, and I'm sure you have discovered quite a lot.

However, I have found that through the revealing of Scripture by the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, I can learn pretty much all I need to know of Scripture and its meaning.

:)
 

Ethan1942

Active member
Jul 23, 2022
205
88
28
82
#12
I appreciate the kind words I've read in reply to my OP. For serious Bible study, not everyone uses a computer software Bible, but there are great aids online. The following are some online links that students of the Bible will find helpful. I'm not 'KJV only', but it is a version that I believe all accept.

Online is the 1611 KJV that includes the full Preface as well as including the Apocrypha -
https://www.auricmedia.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/kjv_bible_with_apocrypha.pdf

The 1828 Webster's Dictionary gives the best definitions for the KJV English words -
https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/
(The biblical usage as seen in a word study guides us on which dictionary meaning fits the text)

Searching the KJV OT, NT as well as the Apocrypha can be helpful and it can be done online -
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/k/kjv/simple.html

When studying the words, the teachings of Jesus, a harmony of the gospels is great help -
https://www.gbcdecatur.org/files/HarmonyOfGospels.pdf
(You must scroll down a ways to read the texts side by side)

A similar help is a chronology of the Four Gospels -
https://aschmann.net/BibleChronology/ChronologyOfTheFourGospels.pdf

About the Apocrypha - - From a KJV Only web site:
"The apocrypha is a selection of books which were published in the original 1611 King James Bible. These apocryphal books were positioned between the Old and New Testament (it also contained maps and geneologies). The apocrypha was a part of the KJV for 274 years until being removed in 1885 A.D. A portion of these books were called deuterocanonical books by some entities, such as the Catholic church.

Many claim the apocrypha should never have been included in the first place, raising doubt about its validity and believing it was not God-inspired (for instance, a reference about magic seems inconsistent with the rest of the Bible: Tobit chapter 6, verses 5-8). Others believe it is valid and that it should never have been removed- that it was considered part of the Bible for nearly 2,000 years before it was recently removed a little more than 100 years ago. Some say it was removed because of not finding the books in the original Hebrew manuscripts. Others claim it wasn't removed by the church, but by printers to cut costs in distributing Bibles in the United States. Both sides tend to cite the same verses that warn against adding or subtracting from the Bible: Revelation 22:18. The word 'apocrypha' means 'hidden.' Fragments of Dead Sea Scrolls dating back to before 70 A.D. contained parts of the apocrypha books in Hebrew, including Sirach and Tobit [source].

Keep this in mind when reading the following apocryphal books. Martin Luther said, "Apocrypha--that is, books which are not regarded as equal to the holy Scriptures, and yet are profitable and good to read." (King James Version Defended page 98.)"
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Apocrypha-Books/
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
8,256
3,595
113
#13
The gospel is very simple: Christ died for sinners. That's a message anyone can understand and can easily be shared with others.
 

TDidymas

Active member
Oct 27, 2021
311
69
28
#14
I appreciate the kind words I've read in reply to my OP. For serious Bible study, not everyone uses a computer software Bible, but there are great aids online. The following are some online links that students of the Bible will find helpful. I'm not 'KJV only', but it is a version that I believe all accept.

Online is the 1611 KJV that includes the full Preface as well as including the Apocrypha -
https://www.auricmedia.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/kjv_bible_with_apocrypha.pdf

The 1828 Webster's Dictionary gives the best definitions for the KJV English words -
https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/
(The biblical usage as seen in a word study guides us on which dictionary meaning fits the text)

Searching the KJV OT, NT as well as the Apocrypha can be helpful and it can be done online -
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/k/kjv/simple.html

When studying the words, the teachings of Jesus, a harmony of the gospels is great help -
https://www.gbcdecatur.org/files/HarmonyOfGospels.pdf
(You must scroll down a ways to read the texts side by side)

A similar help is a chronology of the Four Gospels -
https://aschmann.net/BibleChronology/ChronologyOfTheFourGospels.pdf

About the Apocrypha - - From a KJV Only web site:
"The apocrypha is a selection of books which were published in the original 1611 King James Bible. These apocryphal books were positioned between the Old and New Testament (it also contained maps and geneologies). The apocrypha was a part of the KJV for 274 years until being removed in 1885 A.D. A portion of these books were called deuterocanonical books by some entities, such as the Catholic church.

Many claim the apocrypha should never have been included in the first place, raising doubt about its validity and believing it was not God-inspired (for instance, a reference about magic seems inconsistent with the rest of the Bible: Tobit chapter 6, verses 5-8). Others believe it is valid and that it should never have been removed- that it was considered part of the Bible for nearly 2,000 years before it was recently removed a little more than 100 years ago. Some say it was removed because of not finding the books in the original Hebrew manuscripts. Others claim it wasn't removed by the church, but by printers to cut costs in distributing Bibles in the United States. Both sides tend to cite the same verses that warn against adding or subtracting from the Bible: Revelation 22:18. The word 'apocrypha' means 'hidden.' Fragments of Dead Sea Scrolls dating back to before 70 A.D. contained parts of the apocrypha books in Hebrew, including Sirach and Tobit [source].

Keep this in mind when reading the following apocryphal books. Martin Luther said, "Apocrypha--that is, books which are not regarded as equal to the holy Scriptures, and yet are profitable and good to read." (King James Version Defended page 98.)"
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Apocrypha-Books/
I'm not KJV Only, but I added some of your links to my Bible tools. Thanks for the info!

I also discovered a lot of what I believed was wrong, because of being based on what I was taught. In addition to some things you found, I also found out that words are defined by the context in which they are used. So the terms judgment, faith, grace, justify, pride, and many others have different meanings in various contexts.

One obvious one is "do not judge according to appearance, but judge with a righteous judgment." This ties with "judge not, lest ye be judged." The command to judge rightly puts judgment in a positive light, which is where it should be. So the "judge not" command means to not judge wrongly. Therefore, we have to know the contexts, and what is right and wrong concerning judgment. A lot of people get mixed up because they don't understand this.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
59,909
29,289
113
#15
The word 'apocrypha' means 'hidden.' Fragments of Dead Sea Scrolls dating back to before
70 A.D. contained parts of the apocrypha books in Hebrew, including Sirach and Tobit [source].
Are you trying to give the impression that the apocrypha was considered inspired? Because it was not.

Of the Apocrypha, Josephus says: “We do not possess myriads
of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. Our books,
those which are justly accredited, are but two and twenty
[the equivalent of the 39 books of the Hebrew Scriptures
according to modern division], and contain the record of all time.”

As to apocryphal fragments being found with the Dead Sea Scrolls: the
Dead Sea Scrolls contain all kinds of documents, not just Scripture.
For instance, calendars, commentaries, songbooks, community
regulations, and/or historical documents unearthed at Qumran
should also not be considered to be part of the Bible. The Qumran
library was much more than just Biblical manuscripts :)