Berean vs. Free Bible Study - a recent reversal?

by slimboyfat 11 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  slimboyfat

  The early group around Russell studied the Bible by reading it, discussing it and drawing conclusions.

  When Russell reached firm conclusions on various matters he began to be a bit down on this method of Bible study for his followers. Instead the brethren should stick to reading the Studies in the Scriptures or WT studies (of questions with cited scriptures) rather than reading the Bible alone.

  It has been suggested that the reason he started to insist congregations in his fellowship study the Bible only in conjunction with provided WT material, questions and cited scriptures was due to the split in 1909 over the New Covenant doctrine where some Bible Students were coming to different views than Russell on the so-called "mystery doctrine" as a result of "free Bible study".

  Such "free Bible study" also had an impact during the Bethel apostasy of the early 1980s, as is well-known.

  So it was that from 1909 until around 2000 congregations of JWs/Bible Students never sat down and discussed passages of scripture without the "aid" of WT publications, providing both the questions and relevant scriptures, and most often the "answers" too.

  But then a significant reversal took place. With the new Theocratic Ministry School arrangement ordinary members of the congregation are once again invited to offer their own comments on the passage of scripture allocated as the weekly Bible reading. Few seem have picked up on the significance of this development. It is the first time in nearly 100 years that JWs have been allowed to make their own comments from a personal reading of the Bible in an official meeting.

  Not surprisingly most in the congregation deviate very little from standard WT responses to favourite prooftexts and the like. In other words, this new freedom has not prompted spontaneous outbursts of "independent thinking" in the congregations. But I still think it is an important development nonetheless.

  Witnesses who are beginning to think for themselves will be attracted to the idea of making comments that are a little outside the predicted range of loyal JW responses to certain passages of scripture. Where whole congregations may be out of sinc with tight organisational direction (it has been known) this little segment in the official program may provide an outlet for some lateral reasoning, outside the Watchtower box.

  Has anyone who still attends meetings noticed any interesting comments made during this segment of the TMS?

  Slim
• 

  Narkissos

  If my memory serves the TMS Bible reading was introduced in the late 70s or early 80s. There were two TMS parts devoted to it, one short reading generally alloted to a child or a new member, and a "highlight" exposition on the whole passage (usually 4 chapters or so), usually allotted to an elder.

  When I was in Bethel (1981-85) we used to gather in small informal groups to study the texts, with the help of both WT (especially the Aid Book) and non-WT (commentaries, study bibles, Bible dictionaries) reference works. This was very eye-opening, but I haven't noticed any change for the average congregation members, who just read the texts quickly and occasionally referred to WT literature through indexes.

  But I do agree that in principle, Bible reading should raise a lot of questions. Unfortunately I'm afraid it is too little too late: the average JW only ventures in reading the Bible when the WT doctrinal structure is already set in his/her mind.
• 

  slimboyfat

  Narkissos,

  Interesting about what goes on in Bethel, but let me be more specific: There have always been Bible readings for as long as I can remember -i.e. a brother reads a passage of scripture and offers a short application. What is new (since around 2000) is that after the Bible highlights talk by an elder, the congregation is asked to offer their own comments as an audience discussion on chapters allocated as the weekly Bible reading. Any member of the congregation is allowed to pick any scripture from the reading they like and make a comment on it. At first this portion of the meeting was scheduled for just 2 minutes, then last years it was extended to 5 minutes, and in practice I find that elders often give it longer so as to cut down the length of the "highlights" talk they need to give.

  If you have not been to meetings in a while the idea of this new arrangement will no doubt seem strange, but it is a new development as far as I can see.

  Slim
• 

  DannyHaszard

  In 1988 being the science geek that i am,i corrected the error in the "Creation" book on bats who use ultra sound echo-location the book's text wrongfully read that they used supersonic

  I did this ever so discreetly first privately to the book study conductor then i wrote a private letter to the WT writing dept.Well all hell broke lose....
• 

  Narkissos

  What is new (since around 2000) is that after the Bible highlights talk by an elder, the congregation is asked to offer their own comments as an audience discussion on chapters allocated as the weekly Bible reading. Any member of the congregation is allowed to pick any scripture from the reading they like and make a comment on it. At first this portion of the meeting was scheduled for just 2 minutes, then last years it was extended to 5 minutes, and in practice I find that elders often give it longer so as to cut down the length of the "highlights" talk they need to give.

  Interesting, I didn't know about that.

  (Although I see a little practical problem: if the audience comments after the elder's "highlights," how can the latter adapt to the discussionr?)

  Can the audience ask questions?

  The problem of course is that most JWs still have little time for cursive Bible reading, do not feel allowed to consult non-WT reference books, and will naturally look to WT literature (either directly or through the elders) to explain the "difficult passages" which do not seem to fit their overall doctrinal structure.

  When I attended the pioneer school in the late 70s (I don't think the TMS Bible reading had been instituted yet) one teacher (a CO) told us: "Always put Bible reading first. All the rest you'll always manage to do because you have to. If you don't put Bible reading first you may never read the Bible." In the context, that was good advice.
• 

  Midget-Sasquatch

  (Although I see a little practical problem: if the audience comments after the elder's "highlights," how can the latter adapt to the discussionr?)

  You're right. There's never any discussion of the material presented by the one on the platform. Most of the time the publishers comments vary. That latter segment is simply a free-for-all where the only direction being given, is to those handling the mics.

  Can the audience ask questions?

  I'll assume thats a rhetorical question. They're simply to make a comment on how one passage or other can "deepen their appreciation for Jehovah" or how some "principle" could be applied to their lives/ministry. All that and limited to 30 seconds.

  The problem of course is that most JWs still have little time for cursive Bible reading, do not feel allowed to consult non-WT reference books, and will naturally look to WT literature (either directly or through the elders) to explain the "difficult passages" which do not seem to fit their overall doctrinal structure.

  In fact the current wt mags, also have articles roughly in step with the bible books being considered in the school, that makes comments on specific verses. There's a section that covers questions some may have about certain passages and one on lessons we can learn from some verses. Most of the people doing the parts and commenting just parrot the info there. Much easier for all those hard pressed for time servants of the Borg...uhhh...I meant Jehovah.

  Its almost like the Borg realizes they have to virtually script every bloody part. Even the ones that supposedly encourage one's own thoughts.
• 

  Joe Grundy

  Can I ask (yet another) naieve question, please.

  I have avoided a 'bible study' with my JW neighbours, and it's not going to happen now.

  But if it HAD happened, suppose they came to my apartment, and as they went through their book/text, and I said 'Hang on a moment' while I checked the reference, or the verse, or against previous JW publications on-line - in other words if I'd wanted an ON-LINE study aid - would that have been allowed?
• 

  Star Moore

  Yes, I left last Sept. I do remember that new feature...Thing is, the person giving the talk..has to use the literature to write his talk and can't deviate in any way...That's a given...

  So, not a good as it sounds..
• 

  Pistoff

  SBF wrote:
  
  But then a significant reversal took place. With the new Theocratic Ministry School arrangement ordinary members of the congregation are once again invited to offer their own comments on the passage of scripture allocated as the weekly Bible reading. Few seem have picked up on the significance of this development. It is the first time in nearly 100 years that JWs have been allowed to make their own comments from a personal reading of the Bible in an official meeting.
  
  You make too much of this very minor adjustment. While this is true, every other segment of the TMS has been dumbed down and made to allow NO room for individual comment by the ones who give the talks. For example, the reading is done with NO comments before or after, just a straight reading.
  
  That seems a minor point, but the weight given to comments is not the same as that given to something "from the platform".
  
  And how about the regular reminder to keep comments before SM parts to less than 60 seconds, and to follow the questions given?
  
  The idea that individual expression is being encouraged is completely false.
• 

  Terry

  The early group around Russell studied the Bible by reading it, discussing it and drawing conclusions.
  

  When Russell reached firm conclusions on various matters he began to be a bit down on this method of Bible study for his followers. Instead the brethren should stick to reading the Studies in the Scriptures or WT studies (of questions with cited scriptures) rather than reading the Bible alone.

  
  

  
  
  Historically, from the Christian era onward to the Protestant split from the church you had two competing philosophies:
  

  
  
  1.The Church has the power to proclaim matters of Faith and Morals and Interpretation of scripture (called Magesterium)
  

  
  
  2.Protestants declared a competing philosophy: SOLA SCRIPTURA (we can find it in the bible for ourselves).
  

  
  
  Russell started off with #2 and ended up with #1.
  

  
  
  Maria Russell, the adulation of his flock and the success of his book publishing corporation drove him from #1 to #2.
  

  
  
  The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has a peculiar amalagam: they try and combine #1 and #2 by putting it this way:
  

  
  
  ALL scripture is inspired by God and he tells only us how to interpret it. The Bible is for us and not you. We tell you what to think. But, we are nice enough to show you were you can find it in the bible.