Inductively Studying the Inductive Method.
We live in a pragmatic culture - and I am often reminded of how I seem to be wired very differently than a good bit of Christians out there.
In a recent conversation with a long-distance acquaintance, the subject of "Inductive Bible Study" came up. Now, from the word go here I want to be careful in how I proceed. So here's your disclaimer: I am aware that the inductive method of Bible study can be and is often an effective method by which people can dig into scripture - I studied the Bible 'inductively' (though modified and under a different name) quite oftenly during my Undergrad years via this method, and quite fruitfully I might add.
For those not aware of what I mean when speaking of 'Inductive' Bible study - here's a source I found on the web that effectively explains the method while throwing in some of the considerations necessary for the method to be balanced and therefore the most beneficial.
http://www.sunsetpres.org/leaders/teachingmaterials/inductive
Now that we've got that out of the way - the point of this entry. When asking your typical person about why they want to study the Bible this way, the common and almost universal answer is, "To know God's Word better." I have no qualm with this desire. I believe that such a desire is a grace given by God (in honest cases) and is therefore glorifying to Him and results in joy for those who love Him.
Aside from that assertion, I would be remiss if I said that I believed the trend toward 'inductive' Bible Study was entirely good. There are significant and legitimate concerns about organizations that instruct and train people using this method as the "optimal" choice. So let's try something shall we? Let us observe the "Inductive Method" of Bible Study using an Inductive method of our own :) This should be fun.
First, we start with a hypothesis - what shall it be? Since (in the method) a hypothesis is almost always topical, let us follow suit. *Note* This isn't going to be as thorough as I would like, given this is a blog and not a 15 page research essay. I hope it is sufficient to arrive at a good conclusion.
Hypothesis: Is the inductive method of interpreting scripture an optimal and stand alone choice for balanced and biblical hermeneutic?
And we're off. (small font used for space saving)
Observation
Historical Context
First, some fact gathering. Where does this method find it's origins? Conventional understanding places the ascension of this method during Medieval period, and alter coming to fruition during the Enlightenment. Near A.D. 1158, a fellow by the name of Peter Lombard wrote his most noteworthy theological work, Book of Sentences. Now, this is important in the development because this began the pattern that one could study scripture using logic to deduce or induce conclusions given via observations made from the text. Skip several hundreds of years to an era known as the Renaissance. During this time, Francis Bacon developed the inductive method.
Now, it should be noted that the 'inductive method' was not presented as a method of Biblical interpretation then. It was a scientific development that helped usher in the modern age of what we know as "credible science." For all practical purposes, it is the forunner of our modern day Scientific Method - also construed during the Enlightenment.
I mentioned the Enlightenment - and this is when Organon of Scripture or The Inductive Method of Biblical Interpretation was produced by author James S. Lamar. This movement continued, as well meaning Christians sought to counter the rational criticisms of folks like Voltaire - and the host of emerging "Enlightenment Rationalists" who began regarding Christianity as antiquated, ineffectual, and otherwise replaced by scientific discovery.
The modern day Inductive Method is denoted by the process of topical hypothesis, observation, analysis/interpretation, and finally application. One might say that the method's goal is objective, consistent, application-based interpretation. It is only fair to say that there are many modified versions classified as "Inductive" - but this is the skeleton description of it. (Note: what I studied in hermeneutics in my undergrad - Methods of Biblical Interpretation- was a much modified inductive method.) http://http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0310228328/102-8552833-5353723?v=glance
Until the enlightenment, both Eastern and Western traditions studied scripture via different methods - historically speaking, the inductive method is a recent development.
Biblical Context
Now this isn't by my measure exhaustive, but lets cap off our observation for now with the question, "What does the Bible say about 'digging into scripture' so to speak? So I queried my favorite study index on that very topic. (publications search "search, search + Scripture, scriptures.)
While the searches on "search" and "scripture" left a lot of results to sort through, the most notable verse in regard to the action/desire to "digging into scripture" is found in John ch. 5.
John 5:39-47 (NASB)
39 "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;
40 and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.
41 "I do not receive glory from men;
42 but I know you, that you do not have the love of God in yourselves.
43 "I have come in My Father's name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, you will receive him.
44 "How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?
45 "Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have set your hope.
46 "For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me.
47 "But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?"
So the closest passage to our question is a warning Jesus gives the Pharisees about intent. Without exegeting the passage, that is the most objective conclusion we can make. What shall we derive from all of this?
Interpretation
Here is where we begin to depart from what cannot be argued.
So let us make some conclusions based upon our observations:
Historically, the Enlightement is more recent - and the process known as the Inductive method for the interpreting of Scripture is a fairly new player in the grand scheme of Christendom. It's basic applications find it's origins in scientific thought derived from the Renaissance, fleshed out in the Enlightenment in response to attacks against Scripture and Christianity. It has since been applied to modern science, modern methods of teaching and public speaking, and is a primary way Biblical Teaching is taught in many institutions in the 20th Century.
The inductive method lends itself to looking for direct application in it's most basic form. The method must be "caveated" to broaden it's scope to more encompass the study of Doctrine - since the Inductive method is derived from the more evidence based, application/conclusion seeking Scientific Method while Theology can be a much more subtle art.
Scripture speaks only to the intent of scriptural study, and offers no directly quotable evidence on what is the answer to our hypothesis concerning the Inductive method.
Further Interpretation (size emphasis added)
So here is where the rubber meets the road, and where many of the "inductive apologists" will part company with me. It cannot be honestly denied that there is value in studying scripture via the Inductive Method. My own personal experience would not allow me to testify otherwise.
My experience, however, is tempered with a modified and expanded training in interpreting scripture. I solemnly hold - based on observation (presented in cursory fashion here) - that the inductive method (while holding value) is a fundamentally flawed way of reading and interpreting scripture - and therefore not "optimal" or "stand-alone" as our hypothesis queried.
Without being whittled down, clarified, and carefully intercepted by introducing elements of other methods the conclusions can be entirely subjective given that the source of query comes NOT from the TEXT, but from the individual. This is where Inductive (unmodified) can depart from 1500 years plus' study of Scripture. The method itself is an exercise in human self sufficientcy, which to a Reformed chap like me is rather disconcerting. Think about it - where are things like prayer, meditation, and historical orthodoxy immediately found in the inductive method? They aren't - they have to be introduced from trends that existed long before the Renaissance or Enlightenment.
Now we get to the meat of the issue - and my point entirely. At a glance or "application read" of scripture it offers nothing to our question, regardless of our observation skills, we miss the peril we stand in.
Jesus indicates in Jn. 5:39 -47 that it is entirely possible to "search the scriptures in vain." We know this... Or do we? Remember "the most common answer given.... Inductive method" statement at the beginning of this entry? The answer given is "to know God's Word." Well guess what, that virtue isn't as rose colored as one might think in the view of Scripture now that we've had "Our intent" come up against "Scriptures Intent."
Now before someone responds thinking I don't read Paul's letters to Timothy, please follow me. There is a fundamental but subtle difference between the response given by most "To know God's Word" and the response given in Scripture. Maybe.... just maybe there's a difference between looking into the Holy Scriptures to "know God's word" and what can only be phrased "to know God."
If someone asked me, "Why do you study Scripture" - Invariably the short response would be "To know God."
And such is my point - the Inductive method is critically flawed in it's pure form because it is entirely possible for someone to read scripture to "find eternal life in them" but not encounter Christ. Now do you see the need - you who scoffed - the absolute necessity for meditation, prayer, and the Spirit when studying scripture? A firm look at Historical Christianity helps too. As with all things for me - they must be Christ Centered, focused on magnifying Him, revealing Him, and growing in intimacy with Him. Studying Scripture to "know God's word" is not enough. We must know God - and it is life and death. If you think that's too dramatic, then I suggest you re-read John 5, because Jesus throws that very issue in the face of the Religious, 'righteous', morally careful and observant people of the day.
The sentiment "all I need is the Bible" is arrogant and foolhardy, and if you apply Jesus' point in John 5 it can lead to death. Death! Meditation, Prayer - for goodness sakes, the Holy Spirit, - the Church-Bride, and the study of Orthodox Christian Doctrine MUST be a part. Without these things, we are biblical scientists, making observations, equations, and applications that fall short of the ultimate goal of our lives - intimacy with Christ! Is it any wonder that the Western Church has declined so much in the last century since we have admittedly become so obsessed with application? The correlation, if considered, is worrisome.
Application
So where does that leave us, if you see what I see. Otherwise I guess the better question is, "where does that leave me." Permit me to play the shepherd for a moment:
Don't settle for the clinical, scientific examination of scripture. If you study inductively, realize it's a method and not a dogma - and there are terrible weaknesses in it. Realize them, counter them, and submit your entire heart and mind to the reality that you're not reading stereo instructions or a "troubleshooting" guide. You're engaging something that is ancient, sacred, and most importantly living and active. It's not a "love letter" from God. It's a chance to engage and be engaged in a two-way relationship with Jesus. Letters are only one way.
Pray, fast, wrestle, suffer - and don't let it be a book by book application to your life. It's more, and if you don't feel it when you dwell in it then be aware of your peril. You're missing the point, and Christ leaves little room for debate on the matter. Let it start with Him, end with Him and be about getting near Him - like you would a lover.
Reading scripture is a spiritual affair: John 6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. So why do we settle for a carnal experience of a spiritual thing? The 'Inductive Method' is based on the carnal reasoning of science - Scripture is far, far more.
And Pray. Pray, Pray and Pray. Don't pray for things, just pray. Sound quaint? Sound Silly? Sound not like what you want to do? If so - then you've no business buying into the inductive method. As one who has walked the halls of, and sat in the classroom seats of a seminary, let me tell you. The head swells and the heart shrinks - and many "search the scriptures in vain."
Don't miss Him.
Now for me to take my own advice.
Farther You are incomparable. There are none and there is nothing in all the beauties that exist that are more than a shadow to Your Glory. Help us to be a people that do not merely know Your Word, but know You. Drive us to seek you, rend our hearts til the soft and sensitive things are exposed! Make those who read and study Your Word like it's some ordinary source for Christian Principles look deep inside at the vanity of it all. Dissatisfy Your people with this facsimile of having a Relationship with You - of Knowing You - of Being Near you, and of Enjoying You. Those things bring You Glory, so Glorify Your name in us Lord. Christ shine, and let deception be exposed for what it is! We revel in You and if we do not, afflict us until we do. Make us a people that know You - for we are helpless to do it ourselves.
-Amen
In a recent conversation with a long-distance acquaintance, the subject of "Inductive Bible Study" came up. Now, from the word go here I want to be careful in how I proceed. So here's your disclaimer: I am aware that the inductive method of Bible study can be and is often an effective method by which people can dig into scripture - I studied the Bible 'inductively' (though modified and under a different name) quite oftenly during my Undergrad years via this method, and quite fruitfully I might add.
For those not aware of what I mean when speaking of 'Inductive' Bible study - here's a source I found on the web that effectively explains the method while throwing in some of the considerations necessary for the method to be balanced and therefore the most beneficial.
http://www.sunsetpres.org/leaders/teachingmaterials/inductive
Now that we've got that out of the way - the point of this entry. When asking your typical person about why they want to study the Bible this way, the common and almost universal answer is, "To know God's Word better." I have no qualm with this desire. I believe that such a desire is a grace given by God (in honest cases) and is therefore glorifying to Him and results in joy for those who love Him.
Aside from that assertion, I would be remiss if I said that I believed the trend toward 'inductive' Bible Study was entirely good. There are significant and legitimate concerns about organizations that instruct and train people using this method as the "optimal" choice. So let's try something shall we? Let us observe the "Inductive Method" of Bible Study using an Inductive method of our own :) This should be fun.
First, we start with a hypothesis - what shall it be? Since (in the method) a hypothesis is almost always topical, let us follow suit. *Note* This isn't going to be as thorough as I would like, given this is a blog and not a 15 page research essay. I hope it is sufficient to arrive at a good conclusion.
Hypothesis: Is the inductive method of interpreting scripture an optimal and stand alone choice for balanced and biblical hermeneutic?
And we're off. (small font used for space saving)
Observation
Historical Context
First, some fact gathering. Where does this method find it's origins? Conventional understanding places the ascension of this method during Medieval period, and alter coming to fruition during the Enlightenment. Near A.D. 1158, a fellow by the name of Peter Lombard wrote his most noteworthy theological work, Book of Sentences. Now, this is important in the development because this began the pattern that one could study scripture using logic to deduce or induce conclusions given via observations made from the text. Skip several hundreds of years to an era known as the Renaissance. During this time, Francis Bacon developed the inductive method.
Now, it should be noted that the 'inductive method' was not presented as a method of Biblical interpretation then. It was a scientific development that helped usher in the modern age of what we know as "credible science." For all practical purposes, it is the forunner of our modern day Scientific Method - also construed during the Enlightenment.
I mentioned the Enlightenment - and this is when Organon of Scripture or The Inductive Method of Biblical Interpretation was produced by author James S. Lamar. This movement continued, as well meaning Christians sought to counter the rational criticisms of folks like Voltaire - and the host of emerging "Enlightenment Rationalists" who began regarding Christianity as antiquated, ineffectual, and otherwise replaced by scientific discovery.
The modern day Inductive Method is denoted by the process of topical hypothesis, observation, analysis/interpretation, and finally application. One might say that the method's goal is objective, consistent, application-based interpretation. It is only fair to say that there are many modified versions classified as "Inductive" - but this is the skeleton description of it. (Note: what I studied in hermeneutics in my undergrad - Methods of Biblical Interpretation- was a much modified inductive method.) http://http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0310228328/102-8552833-5353723?v=glance
Until the enlightenment, both Eastern and Western traditions studied scripture via different methods - historically speaking, the inductive method is a recent development.
Biblical Context
Now this isn't by my measure exhaustive, but lets cap off our observation for now with the question, "What does the Bible say about 'digging into scripture' so to speak? So I queried my favorite study index on that very topic. (publications search "search, search + Scripture, scriptures.)
While the searches on "search" and "scripture" left a lot of results to sort through, the most notable verse in regard to the action/desire to "digging into scripture" is found in John ch. 5.
John 5:39-47 (NASB)
39 "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;
40 and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.
41 "I do not receive glory from men;
42 but I know you, that you do not have the love of God in yourselves.
43 "I have come in My Father's name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, you will receive him.
44 "How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?
45 "Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have set your hope.
46 "For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me.
47 "But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?"
So the closest passage to our question is a warning Jesus gives the Pharisees about intent. Without exegeting the passage, that is the most objective conclusion we can make. What shall we derive from all of this?
Interpretation
Here is where we begin to depart from what cannot be argued.
So let us make some conclusions based upon our observations:
Historically, the Enlightement is more recent - and the process known as the Inductive method for the interpreting of Scripture is a fairly new player in the grand scheme of Christendom. It's basic applications find it's origins in scientific thought derived from the Renaissance, fleshed out in the Enlightenment in response to attacks against Scripture and Christianity. It has since been applied to modern science, modern methods of teaching and public speaking, and is a primary way Biblical Teaching is taught in many institutions in the 20th Century.
The inductive method lends itself to looking for direct application in it's most basic form. The method must be "caveated" to broaden it's scope to more encompass the study of Doctrine - since the Inductive method is derived from the more evidence based, application/conclusion seeking Scientific Method while Theology can be a much more subtle art.
Scripture speaks only to the intent of scriptural study, and offers no directly quotable evidence on what is the answer to our hypothesis concerning the Inductive method.
Further Interpretation (size emphasis added)
So here is where the rubber meets the road, and where many of the "inductive apologists" will part company with me. It cannot be honestly denied that there is value in studying scripture via the Inductive Method. My own personal experience would not allow me to testify otherwise.
My experience, however, is tempered with a modified and expanded training in interpreting scripture. I solemnly hold - based on observation (presented in cursory fashion here) - that the inductive method (while holding value) is a fundamentally flawed way of reading and interpreting scripture - and therefore not "optimal" or "stand-alone" as our hypothesis queried.
Without being whittled down, clarified, and carefully intercepted by introducing elements of other methods the conclusions can be entirely subjective given that the source of query comes NOT from the TEXT, but from the individual. This is where Inductive (unmodified) can depart from 1500 years plus' study of Scripture. The method itself is an exercise in human self sufficientcy, which to a Reformed chap like me is rather disconcerting. Think about it - where are things like prayer, meditation, and historical orthodoxy immediately found in the inductive method? They aren't - they have to be introduced from trends that existed long before the Renaissance or Enlightenment.
Now we get to the meat of the issue - and my point entirely. At a glance or "application read" of scripture it offers nothing to our question, regardless of our observation skills, we miss the peril we stand in.
Jesus indicates in Jn. 5:39 -47 that it is entirely possible to "search the scriptures in vain." We know this... Or do we? Remember "the most common answer given.... Inductive method" statement at the beginning of this entry? The answer given is "to know God's Word." Well guess what, that virtue isn't as rose colored as one might think in the view of Scripture now that we've had "Our intent" come up against "Scriptures Intent."
Now before someone responds thinking I don't read Paul's letters to Timothy, please follow me. There is a fundamental but subtle difference between the response given by most "To know God's Word" and the response given in Scripture. Maybe.... just maybe there's a difference between looking into the Holy Scriptures to "know God's word" and what can only be phrased "to know God."
If someone asked me, "Why do you study Scripture" - Invariably the short response would be "To know God."
And such is my point - the Inductive method is critically flawed in it's pure form because it is entirely possible for someone to read scripture to "find eternal life in them" but not encounter Christ. Now do you see the need - you who scoffed - the absolute necessity for meditation, prayer, and the Spirit when studying scripture? A firm look at Historical Christianity helps too. As with all things for me - they must be Christ Centered, focused on magnifying Him, revealing Him, and growing in intimacy with Him. Studying Scripture to "know God's word" is not enough. We must know God - and it is life and death. If you think that's too dramatic, then I suggest you re-read John 5, because Jesus throws that very issue in the face of the Religious, 'righteous', morally careful and observant people of the day.
The sentiment "all I need is the Bible" is arrogant and foolhardy, and if you apply Jesus' point in John 5 it can lead to death. Death! Meditation, Prayer - for goodness sakes, the Holy Spirit, - the Church-Bride, and the study of Orthodox Christian Doctrine MUST be a part. Without these things, we are biblical scientists, making observations, equations, and applications that fall short of the ultimate goal of our lives - intimacy with Christ! Is it any wonder that the Western Church has declined so much in the last century since we have admittedly become so obsessed with application? The correlation, if considered, is worrisome.
Application
So where does that leave us, if you see what I see. Otherwise I guess the better question is, "where does that leave me." Permit me to play the shepherd for a moment:
Don't settle for the clinical, scientific examination of scripture. If you study inductively, realize it's a method and not a dogma - and there are terrible weaknesses in it. Realize them, counter them, and submit your entire heart and mind to the reality that you're not reading stereo instructions or a "troubleshooting" guide. You're engaging something that is ancient, sacred, and most importantly living and active. It's not a "love letter" from God. It's a chance to engage and be engaged in a two-way relationship with Jesus. Letters are only one way.
Pray, fast, wrestle, suffer - and don't let it be a book by book application to your life. It's more, and if you don't feel it when you dwell in it then be aware of your peril. You're missing the point, and Christ leaves little room for debate on the matter. Let it start with Him, end with Him and be about getting near Him - like you would a lover.
Reading scripture is a spiritual affair: John 6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. So why do we settle for a carnal experience of a spiritual thing? The 'Inductive Method' is based on the carnal reasoning of science - Scripture is far, far more.
And Pray. Pray, Pray and Pray. Don't pray for things, just pray. Sound quaint? Sound Silly? Sound not like what you want to do? If so - then you've no business buying into the inductive method. As one who has walked the halls of, and sat in the classroom seats of a seminary, let me tell you. The head swells and the heart shrinks - and many "search the scriptures in vain."
Don't miss Him.
Now for me to take my own advice.
Farther You are incomparable. There are none and there is nothing in all the beauties that exist that are more than a shadow to Your Glory. Help us to be a people that do not merely know Your Word, but know You. Drive us to seek you, rend our hearts til the soft and sensitive things are exposed! Make those who read and study Your Word like it's some ordinary source for Christian Principles look deep inside at the vanity of it all. Dissatisfy Your people with this facsimile of having a Relationship with You - of Knowing You - of Being Near you, and of Enjoying You. Those things bring You Glory, so Glorify Your name in us Lord. Christ shine, and let deception be exposed for what it is! We revel in You and if we do not, afflict us until we do. Make us a people that know You - for we are helpless to do it ourselves.
-Amen
posted by Robert at 12:19 PM
0 comments
