I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty
uesdnatnrd waht I was rdgnieg.
The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the
ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat
ltteer be in the rghit pclae.
The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a
porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not
raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.
Amzanig huh? (via)
The reason you can comprehend the above paragraph is because you naturally read the individual parts of the words in light of the whole word and the whole sentence. After you start the sentence, it becomes easier to read the words because you can anticipate what is coming next.
My question: if our mind works this way when reading words, why don't we read the Bible like this? I don't mean with jumbled letter orders, but rather with a view toward the whole story of the Scriptures.
If you study John 3:16 and never the book of John, or Rom 9 and never Paul's entire argument, or the NT and never the OT, or if you read "God is love" without reading 1 John, then you will certainly miss something that was never meant for oversight. If in your sermon/lesson/devotional time, you only focus on one verse or one passage, or if you never read the Bible from Gen to Rev, or even Matt 1:1 to Matt 28:20, you will never catch the fullest meaning of the text.
Such a practice would be like seeing and studying the letter "J" one day, and then "h" the next, and then "i" the next, and never realizing that these letters function as a part of the complete sentence, "Jesus is the Messiah."
The Bible is a book that requires every word it contains
to be read in light of the story it tells.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
An slpime alipcatoin of a wrod tcrik to rdeanig bliabcl nratveirs
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Cehd,
Geart Psot!! I tinhk I psoted teh smae praagprah a wilhe bcak on my own bolg...of cuorse wthiuot the blicbal alcatippon. And by the way, taht is a fnattsiac blicbal alppcaiiton.
Good wrok as uuasl.
Cioln
I can't do that tricky word stuff. But you in that there post learned me good. I spent many nights on the porch of Pa's cottage cleaning my gun and playing the banjo and picking the fleas off of good ole hunting dog. I like them stories in the good book and will try and cipher what those Bible people say. Thank ya for the good advice.
I do not know why I typed that in some weird southern dialect. I guess I was wanting to see if we can read hillbilly as well. Good post. I think you are exactly right.
BH- CARL
Wow! I have seen that trick before, but it is amusing to see it once again.
Great analogy as well. O how we all are guilty of reading isolated passages, hampering us from grasping the richness of the fullness of God's Word.
AMEN!!! This is a campaign I fight for constantly. THANK YOU!
I actually heard some famous person give a sermon last year saying that all of the Bible is God's word, but we want to find what's REALLY important, don't we? And of course that would be the NT, and of course that would be the Gospels, and of course that would be John...I forget his whole argument but he ended up at (what else) John 3:16...then took it entirely out of context and - voila! - delivered an entirely warped and useless "gospel" summary.
I was nearly sick. Everyone around me ate it up like chocolate sauce.
Of course, you know I'm with you on this issue. Your post triggered a quote that I've been trying to remember from Reading Scripture with the Church from Vanhoozer's article which says: "Because God is the ultimate author of the whole of Scripture, however, some illocutions will emerge only in light of the canonical context: the whole of Scripture considered as a single work. It is primarily at the canonical level that we see what the divine author is doing in, with, and through the various interrelated parts of Scripture."
delivered an entirely warped and useless "gospel" summary.
That is truly tragic...
a quote that I've been trying to remember
It seems your memory is working just fine :) Vanhoozer references are always welcome at SaysSimpleton.
Post a Comment