5 ms·

tldr; Why not both? I agree that it's odd that we have atomized the writings in the scriptures. You can find reader's editions if you want to remove the verses

tldr; Why not both? I agree that it's odd that we have atomized the writings in the scriptures. You can find reader's editions if you want to remove the verses structure. However, I don't agree that the verses are "diametrically opposed to a Christian reading of the Scriptures". I believe that there is room for both reading whole books and reading short quotes. For instance, I don't think there's anything wrong with taking John 3:16 out of context because it is a very straightforward verse. It's really nice to be able to share verses easily by giving a <Book> <Chapter>:<Verse>. There is danger though when we do that with all verses of scripture, and we should be careful to study the context for verses before coming to any conclusion. The key is to actually study the scriptures, and not just take the easy route and find verses that make you feel good about yourself. But that's easier said than done.

wcarey 6y ago
So, having read the whole of what you wrote, the reason not to do both is that atomization promotes an epistemology that does grave violence to Christian belief. God's self revelation could have been a math textbook: a collection of independent propositions related by logical necessity. But it's not. His self revelation is a person who has a story and who tells stories. When we atomize the scriptures, we're implicitly constructing an argument against the epistemology that God has revealed in the scriptures. That's the thing that Satan does in the wilderness when he puts Jesus to the test. We ought not lead others into that time of trial. So the convenience of being able to cite a verse as quick shorthand comes at the price of a profound argument against the coherent truth of the scriptural witness.
- shampto3 6y ago
  While I would not go as far to say that having verses in scriptures is a tactic of the devil (note that in the wilderness, Jesus also quotes snippets of scripture back to Satan as a rebuttal), I can see your point that it probably does more harm than good. I do wish that the standard was to not have verses, and have the verses version be the exception rather than the rule. I can see the benefit of having verses, but I think there is far more benefit from reading scripture as a whole instead.
- cloakandswagger 6y ago
  The verse structure's practicality as a reference mechanism far outweighs its downsides. It's a bit of a stretch to indict the verse structure for the general decline in Biblical literacy in Christians. It's entirely possible to quote a verse with correct contextual interpretation that conveys its meaning; if we're looking for a culprit for declining Biblical literacy I'd be much more apt to blame loose translations and paraphrases like The Message and The Passion Translation than the concept of verses.
  - wcarey 6y ago
    What are the upsides? What are the downsides? (And to whom?) Note that I'm not saying the downside is "declining Biblical literacy" - by many metrics I'd imagine that's increasing? I wonder how you'd measure that? And I wonder whether whatever scheme you came up with wouldn't presume some hermeneutic and really just measure the extent to which people buy into that hermeneutic? For example, who is more Biblically literate? The person who can quote, verbatim, with correct citation 100 verses of scripture, or the person who can re-tell in paraphrase the story of Jesus forgiving Peter after the resurrection? I'm saying the downside is a transformation in what it means to read the scriptures.
    - reshyith 6y ago
      Are you aware of any movements that aim at solving the problem you are referring to? I am not a chapter and verse person, and almost my entire understanding of the Bible comes through my own remembrances, all paraphrasing now, of what I learned when I was younger. I often wonder if there's a great many people out there like myself. Seems like there is?
      - wcarey 6y ago
        Sure - there are lots of folks aiming at a more authentic reading. In general, the older a church, the more it aims at a reading that avoids the modern atomizing impulse. The Catholic and Orthodox churches do some good work on that score, as do Anglican and Lutheran theologians.
- reshyith 6y ago
  I would like to reply positively to what it is you are insisting that chapter and verse does to the Holy Scriptures. Your reply is beautiful and it is helping me reflect on how I will be presenting information in a forthcoming book on ancient biblical history. To the defense of the creator(s) of this web application, I feel that the chapter and verse divisions have been in existence, and problematic, for a very long time. For certain reference work this is a wonderful tool.

wcarey 6y ago

So, having read the whole of what you wrote, the reason not to do both is that atomization promotes an epistemology that does grave violence to Christian belief. God's self revelation could have been a math textbook: a collection of independent propositions related by logical necessity. But it's not. His self revelation is a person who has a story and who tells stories. When we atomize the scriptures, we're implicitly constructing an argument against the epistemology that God has revealed in the scriptures. That's the thing that Satan does in the wilderness when he puts Jesus to the test. We ought not lead others into that time of trial. So the convenience of being able to cite a verse as quick shorthand comes at the price of a profound argument against the coherent truth of the scriptural witness.

shampto3 6y ago
While I would not go as far to say that having verses in scriptures is a tactic of the devil (note that in the wilderness, Jesus also quotes snippets of scripture back to Satan as a rebuttal), I can see your point that it probably does more harm than good. I do wish that the standard was to not have verses, and have the verses version be the exception rather than the rule. I can see the benefit of having verses, but I think there is far more benefit from reading scripture as a whole instead.
cloakandswagger 6y ago
The verse structure's practicality as a reference mechanism far outweighs its downsides. It's a bit of a stretch to indict the verse structure for the general decline in Biblical literacy in Christians. It's entirely possible to quote a verse with correct contextual interpretation that conveys its meaning; if we're looking for a culprit for declining Biblical literacy I'd be much more apt to blame loose translations and paraphrases like The Message and The Passion Translation than the concept of verses.
- wcarey 6y ago
  What are the upsides? What are the downsides? (And to whom?) Note that I'm not saying the downside is "declining Biblical literacy" - by many metrics I'd imagine that's increasing? I wonder how you'd measure that? And I wonder whether whatever scheme you came up with wouldn't presume some hermeneutic and really just measure the extent to which people buy into that hermeneutic? For example, who is more Biblically literate? The person who can quote, verbatim, with correct citation 100 verses of scripture, or the person who can re-tell in paraphrase the story of Jesus forgiving Peter after the resurrection? I'm saying the downside is a transformation in what it means to read the scriptures.
  - reshyith 6y ago
    Are you aware of any movements that aim at solving the problem you are referring to? I am not a chapter and verse person, and almost my entire understanding of the Bible comes through my own remembrances, all paraphrasing now, of what I learned when I was younger. I often wonder if there's a great many people out there like myself. Seems like there is?
    - wcarey 6y ago
      Sure - there are lots of folks aiming at a more authentic reading. In general, the older a church, the more it aims at a reading that avoids the modern atomizing impulse. The Catholic and Orthodox churches do some good work on that score, as do Anglican and Lutheran theologians.
reshyith 6y ago
I would like to reply positively to what it is you are insisting that chapter and verse does to the Holy Scriptures. Your reply is beautiful and it is helping me reflect on how I will be presenting information in a forthcoming book on ancient biblical history. To the defense of the creator(s) of this web application, I feel that the chapter and verse divisions have been in existence, and problematic, for a very long time. For certain reference work this is a wonderful tool.