31 thoughts on “How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth – OT Narrative”
When the authors talk about individual narratives and say that their purpose is to not teach a moral lesson then does that mean that we should not pay attention to the sins and the wickedness of the people in those narratives? Sorry if my question is confusing. I didn’t know quite how to phrase it.
On Page 95, it talks about how stories in the OT and NT are paralleled but not to try to find allegories because they aren’t there. Did the NT authors mean to have them parallel the OT stories? Or did people discover that they are similar when the studied the texts?
When searching for implicit meaning of the text, how can we be careful to avoid reading our made up “secret meanings” into it. It seems like it would be an easy thing to do.
In this chapter it discusses that God is always the central focus, but my mind went to the book of Esther which has been debated on being included in the canon because of its lack of mention of God…just wondering your thoughts on this
On page 103 it talks about allegorizing and moralizing the texts. And i guess my question is along the lines of Dave’s, because I’m wondering how we differentiate between whether we’re using those or actually seeing the implicit meaning of the text, because they said on page 101 that we have to use special attention to words and actions and look closely at the text.
My question comes from pgs. 92-93. How is one to discover the implicit teachings from a text?
I think my question is kinda like Alyssa’s. How are we supposed to know when to read in between the lines, and when not to? 99-102
On page 92 it talks about how the OT narratives aren’t intended to teach moral lessons and they are to tell us what God did for Israel, but are there times when it is ok to try and learn things from the text or is that always a wrong thing to do here.
On page 90 it talks about how the story of the Old Testament is God’s story and that it becomes ours as He “writes us into it.” This is kind of confusing for me. I can’t quite grasp how God does this. Oh and one more thing. I bought the mute math cd yesterday. I went to like 4 different places till I found it. I’ve listened to the whole cd like at least 4 times through, but I just now listened to the song You are mine and…wow. That’s really all i can say.
On pg. 98 it says, “…one crucial thing to keep in mind as you read any Hebrew narratives is the presence of God in the narrative.” Is he saying that all Hebrew narratives even if they aren’t related to the bible are still focused on God.
What are some good ways to avoid moralizing?
How can we distinguish what is supposed to be implicitly taught? (P. 98)
This book talked in earlier chapters about not trying to use the Old Testament stories and apply them to our lives right from the text. And you’ve talked to us about that too. But in this chapter it says that there are parallel stories in the Old and New Testaments. It just makes me wonder if they had trouble with doing the same thing. If someone in NT times saw an OT story and applied it straight to their life. Weren’t they far removed from the OT text just like we are?
I know that they say not to read into the narratives of the OT or to turn them into moral stories, but aren’t there places where there sort of is a lesson to be learned? My mind jumped to the good samaritan thing when i read that… But I guess that’s more of a parable isn’t it… How can you really tell the difference, and how can you best not moralize OT narratives (92).
They make a point to talk about repetition on page 97. If the original author says something 15 times does that mean its more important than something thats only said one or two times? I don’t know i just feel that if its in the bible its important and im not seeing how the amount of times a word or phrase is used makes a huge difference.
My question is the same as Alyssa Crane’s….is it always a bad thing to find the moral of the story, or can you see a moral and see “the progress of God’s history of redemption?” pg. 103
On page 92, it talks about the OT is not intended to teach moral lessons. I guess I’m having difficulty understanding that. I feel like that’s all we’ve ever done since sunday school as little kids, trying to find the moral of the story. Abraham sacrificing his son, moral of the story…God will provide. Things like that. Sorry this isn’t phrased as a question, I just don’t understand.
I didn’t read the other questions so if this is the same as others i’m sorry. On page 92, it talks about not interpreting the moral lessons. Should we never look for the moral lessons? Why is it wrong?
pg 103, Are Ezekiel 23 and parts of Revelation the only allegorical portions of scripture? If not, what are the others?
Pg. 99-102 confused me and I guess I have the same question as Dayton. When it comes to the Bible how do we know when to read inbetween the lines?
On page 107 (maybe?) it talks about how many preachers and teachers mistakenly look for a self-contained lesson in Bible characters life. Why is that a bad thing?
It seems like we all have the same question. As Kim mentioned, we are always looking for the moral of the story, and thats how we were always taught them. Does God not intend for us to learn a lesson from them in that way?
On page 91 it’s talking about the 3 types of narrative levels. My question is do all narratives contain these 3 levels?
I remember you saying we could occasionally just make a comment instead of a question. Hopefully I’m correct in that since that’s what I’m going to do. I really really liked this chapter.. I definitely need to process it more, but it really helped me to see once again that the Bible is all about Him and not me. I always have read trying to “get something out of it” and I see that’s not the appropriate way usually.
On page like 99, when they say read between the lines, i don’t get how some of the facts are just implied and we should just know them. because some of their examples i didn’t know before
Ok when we are supposed to learn from what is implicit in the stories how do we know when there is more to the story than the words on the page? I think it could be hard to read a book of the Bible looking for something implicit without unintentionally sometimes taking the verses out of context.
so this chapter kind of confused me… because ever since i was a wee lil one we have always tried to find the moral to the story, but in this chapter it said not to do that. and yes is some cases i can see doing that, but in others not so much.
It says that it is not intended for us to learn moral lessons from the text but it is intended to show what God did for Israel but arent we supposed to see how we can plug it in today just not try to force it to be intended for us? pg. 92
ok well i couldnt think of a question and mr. webster said i could just comment so i think what i would like to comment on is something that comforted me in my reading. on like the first page of the chapter it talks about how the old testament is part of our story if we are a believer and i know everyone has a story but sometimes just being brought up in a christian home is kinda boring and it was cool for me to think about all the miracles of the OT being part of my story.
What do Fee and Stuart mean when they are talking about the three levels of narrative? I know they explain it on pg 91, but I didn’t quite understand it.
Hey i’m still confused on the whole ‘shouldnt use the Bible as a moral lesson’ thing. I know that it is incorrect to use right/wrong ideals here and i also understand that good/bad is a good way to look at the method i used to interpret. So is it still wrong to look at stories as what not to do or to learn from their mistakes rather than just say that it is all divine self-revelation/God’s redemptive-ness?
When the authors talk about individual narratives and say that their purpose is to not teach a moral lesson then does that mean that we should not pay attention to the sins and the wickedness of the people in those narratives? Sorry if my question is confusing. I didn’t know quite how to phrase it.
On Page 95, it talks about how stories in the OT and NT are paralleled but not to try to find allegories because they aren’t there. Did the NT authors mean to have them parallel the OT stories? Or did people discover that they are similar when the studied the texts?
When searching for implicit meaning of the text, how can we be careful to avoid reading our made up “secret meanings” into it. It seems like it would be an easy thing to do.
In this chapter it discusses that God is always the central focus, but my mind went to the book of Esther which has been debated on being included in the canon because of its lack of mention of God…just wondering your thoughts on this
On page 103 it talks about allegorizing and moralizing the texts. And i guess my question is along the lines of Dave’s, because I’m wondering how we differentiate between whether we’re using those or actually seeing the implicit meaning of the text, because they said on page 101 that we have to use special attention to words and actions and look closely at the text.
My question comes from pgs. 92-93. How is one to discover the implicit teachings from a text?
I think my question is kinda like Alyssa’s. How are we supposed to know when to read in between the lines, and when not to? 99-102
On page 92 it talks about how the OT narratives aren’t intended to teach moral lessons and they are to tell us what God did for Israel, but are there times when it is ok to try and learn things from the text or is that always a wrong thing to do here.
On page 90 it talks about how the story of the Old Testament is God’s story and that it becomes ours as He “writes us into it.” This is kind of confusing for me. I can’t quite grasp how God does this. Oh and one more thing. I bought the mute math cd yesterday. I went to like 4 different places till I found it. I’ve listened to the whole cd like at least 4 times through, but I just now listened to the song You are mine and…wow. That’s really all i can say.
On pg. 98 it says, “…one crucial thing to keep in mind as you read any Hebrew narratives is the presence of God in the narrative.” Is he saying that all Hebrew narratives even if they aren’t related to the bible are still focused on God.
What are some good ways to avoid moralizing?
How can we distinguish what is supposed to be implicitly taught? (P. 98)
This book talked in earlier chapters about not trying to use the Old Testament stories and apply them to our lives right from the text. And you’ve talked to us about that too. But in this chapter it says that there are parallel stories in the Old and New Testaments. It just makes me wonder if they had trouble with doing the same thing. If someone in NT times saw an OT story and applied it straight to their life. Weren’t they far removed from the OT text just like we are?
I know that they say not to read into the narratives of the OT or to turn them into moral stories, but aren’t there places where there sort of is a lesson to be learned? My mind jumped to the good samaritan thing when i read that… But I guess that’s more of a parable isn’t it… How can you really tell the difference, and how can you best not moralize OT narratives (92).
They make a point to talk about repetition on page 97. If the original author says something 15 times does that mean its more important than something thats only said one or two times? I don’t know i just feel that if its in the bible its important and im not seeing how the amount of times a word or phrase is used makes a huge difference.
My question is the same as Alyssa Crane’s….is it always a bad thing to find the moral of the story, or can you see a moral and see “the progress of God’s history of redemption?” pg. 103
On page 92, it talks about the OT is not intended to teach moral lessons. I guess I’m having difficulty understanding that. I feel like that’s all we’ve ever done since sunday school as little kids, trying to find the moral of the story. Abraham sacrificing his son, moral of the story…God will provide. Things like that. Sorry this isn’t phrased as a question, I just don’t understand.
I didn’t read the other questions so if this is the same as others i’m sorry. On page 92, it talks about not interpreting the moral lessons. Should we never look for the moral lessons? Why is it wrong?
pg 103, Are Ezekiel 23 and parts of Revelation the only allegorical portions of scripture? If not, what are the others?
Pg. 99-102 confused me and I guess I have the same question as Dayton. When it comes to the Bible how do we know when to read inbetween the lines?
On page 107 (maybe?) it talks about how many preachers and teachers mistakenly look for a self-contained lesson in Bible characters life. Why is that a bad thing?
It seems like we all have the same question. As Kim mentioned, we are always looking for the moral of the story, and thats how we were always taught them. Does God not intend for us to learn a lesson from them in that way?
On page 91 it’s talking about the 3 types of narrative levels. My question is do all narratives contain these 3 levels?
I remember you saying we could occasionally just make a comment instead of a question. Hopefully I’m correct in that since that’s what I’m going to do.
I really really liked this chapter.. I definitely need to process it more, but it really helped me to see once again that the Bible is all about Him and not me. I always have read trying to “get something out of it” and I see that’s not the appropriate way usually.
On page like 99, when they say read between the lines, i don’t get how some of the facts are just implied and we should just know them. because some of their examples i didn’t know before
Ok when we are supposed to learn from what is implicit in the stories how do we know when there is more to the story than the words on the page? I think it could be hard to read a book of the Bible looking for something implicit without unintentionally sometimes taking the verses out of context.
so this chapter kind of confused me… because ever since i was a wee lil one we have always tried to find the moral to the story, but in this chapter it said not to do that. and yes is some cases i can see doing that, but in others not so much.
It says that it is not intended for us to learn moral lessons from the text but it is intended to show what God did for Israel but arent we supposed to see how we can plug it in today just not try to force it to be intended for us? pg. 92
ok well i couldnt think of a question and mr. webster said i could just comment so i think what i would like to comment on is something that comforted me in my reading. on like the first page of the chapter it talks about how the old testament is part of our story if we are a believer and i know everyone has a story but sometimes just being brought up in a christian home is kinda boring and it was cool for me to think about all the miracles of the OT being part of my story.
What do Fee and Stuart mean when they are talking about the three levels of narrative? I know they explain it on pg 91, but I didn’t quite understand it.
Hey i’m still confused on the whole ‘shouldnt use the Bible as a moral lesson’ thing. I know that it is incorrect to use right/wrong ideals here and i also understand that good/bad is a good way to look at the method i used to interpret. So is it still wrong to look at stories as what not to do or to learn from their mistakes rather than just say that it is all divine self-revelation/God’s redemptive-ness?