[Biblemat] "Lessons from the Scriptures">

[Churchmousejd at wmconnect.com]

                        MORE INFORMATION WOULDN'T HURT

I was teaching a class several years ago and had come to the end of the 
chapter. I didn't stop there but continued on for several more verses in order to 
complete the thought the writer was trying to convey. After class one of the 
brethren approached me saying he thought I was wrong for not stopping at the end 
of the chapter. And that he didn't think I had the right to treat the 
scriptures in such a manner; after all he said,  'the scriptures are inspired and you 
are not.'
While I agreed the scriptures are inspired, and I was not, I pointed out to 
him neither are the chapter and verse divisions we are so familiar with. Those 
came later. Chapters, around A.D. 1244 (by cardinal Hugh of St. Cher). 
Division into verses can be traced back to around A.D. 900 to the Masoretic family of 
Ben Asher. They divided the Old Testament into about twenty three thousand 
verses. No doubt to aid in quickly finding or memorizing certain verses. Chapter 
summations before each chapter is credited to Myles Coverdale in the A.D. 
1500's
Another widely popular view held down through the centuries is the order in 
which the books appear are also inspired. But this was strictly man's 
arrangement also, putting them in some logical order and not a historical one. And 
there was quite a controversy over what books belonged and where they should be 
placed. Revelation almost didn't make it. And that is why it is the last book in 
our New Testament. Italics, by the way, first appeared in A.D. 1560 in the 
so-called 'Geneva' bible (because it was produced in that city). It is also know 
as the "breeches" bible because of the verse in Gen.3:7 where it says, "they 
sewed fig leaves together and made themselves breeches."(Which has been 
corrected to read 'aprons').
While we in the Lord's church like to focus 100% of our time to teaching its 
contents, it is good for us to know other things about its secular history. 
This becomes very apparent when trying to teach.
I've known teachers (?) who would begin teaching a book with chapter one, 
verse one, and continue from there; without giving any background about the book 
whatsoever. Without understanding why a letter was written or under what 
circumstances, it's not likely one will get the full benefit of what the book has 
to offer.
Consider the book of first John: it becomes a lot clearer when you understand 
it was written primarily to refute 'Gnostic' doctrine. But I don't think I've 
ever heard anyone mention that while teaching in the book. I've advocated for 
years special classes should be taught just on early church history as well 
as the Old Testament. If nothing else it would help us understand how religion 
got into the mess it has.
J.D.Williams
   </HTML>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.biblematters.net/pipermail/biblemat/attachments/20071119/714c14aa/attachment.html