# Grant Horner's Bible-Reading System



## bookslover (Jan 31, 2011)

Well, I completed my first month using his system - 31 days, 310 chapters read (10 chapters per day, following the ten lists).

My main thought is that this system probably works better for those who already have a pretty good grasp of the Bible's content since, for most of the lists, you begin reading somewhere in the "middle" of one narrative or another. For those new to Christianity and not as familiar with its contents, the system might seem kind of "jerky" since one is not beginning at the beginning and reading straight through. But, as I said, for us vets (I've been a believer for 30 years), it's a great way to cover lots of ground quickly and to be reading in the entire canon at once.

Anyone else doing this? How's it going? What are your thoughts?


----------



## Jeffriesw (Jan 31, 2011)

I have also been using the system since the beginning of the year and I believe I do like it. I have only been a believer for a couple of years and have only read through it (the Bible) entirely twice so far, but the thing I like about this system is that it breaks up what your are reading and you can find yourself looking forward to what's next in ten separate places. Although a couple of days ago I did find myself reading more than one chapter in the book of Joshua because I became so engrossed in it. 

Overall I like it so far


----------



## Steve Curtis (Jan 31, 2011)

I started a modifed version at the beginning of the month, as well (I read 12 chapters a day). I am really enjoying spending a bit of time in several different genres, periods, etc. in addition to my more intensified study of a particular book. At this rate, I will read the entire Bible every six months, with several books being read much more frequently. 
So,  with the


----------



## Pilgrim (Jan 31, 2011)

One thing that I like about it is that if you miss a day or two you can just pick up where you left off and don't have to try to catch up the way you would with something like M'Cheyne's plan. It also appears to focus more on the OT (especially the Wisdom books) compared with other plans. It's also easily modified. You can swap out Acts for Romans or Hebrews from time to time, etc. 

I think it's excellent for reading big portions of the Scriptures in a relatively short period of time. Reading from 10 different books everyday helps to see how the books relate to each other over time, something that reading slowly from Gen-Rev is less likely to do unless you are making frequent use of cross references and other helps. The idea is pick one Bible and use it every time, thus becoming very familiar with where everything is, although it seems that a lot of people are reading it on the internet or smartphones instead and thus are missing out on that benefit. There are several sites that have been set up to facilitate with reading online and are also helpful for keeping up even if you're reading the old fashioned way. 

Dr. Horner would readily admit that this plan isn't geared toward in-depth study and unlike M'Cheyne isn't geared toward family worship.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jan 31, 2011)

Steve,

How did you modify it if you don't mind me asking?


----------



## Steve Curtis (Jan 31, 2011)

Chaplainintraining said:


> Steve,
> 
> How did you modify it if you don't mind me asking?



Well, I wanted to reduce the maximum list to about six months so I had to tweak his lists 8 & 9.
Also, I was more interested in being "saturated" in books other than Acts.
In the end, this is what I came up with:
List 1 (89 days): Gospels (no change here)
List 2 (187 days): Pentateuch (no change)
List 3 (71 days): Acts, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians (I removed Romans and replaced it with Acts; also, I removed Ephesians and Hebrews)
List 4 (65 days): Thessalonians through Revelation, minus Hebrews (no change)
List 5 (62 days): Job, Ecclesiates, Song of Solomon (no change)
List 6 (150 days): Psalms (no change)
List 7 (31 days): Proverbs (no change)
List 8 (151 days): Joshua through 2 Kings
List 9 (98 days): Chronicles through Esther (My lists 8 & 9 combined were Horner's list 8 - but that would take 249 days)
List 10 (181 days): Major prophets
List 11 (69 days): Minor prophets (My lists 10 & 11 combined were Horner's list 9 - but that would take 250 days)
List 12 (35 days): Romans, Ephesians, Hebrews (This is my biggest change. I just wanted to spend more time in these three books for the time being; of course, this could always change!)

I find that I can usually read all 12 chapters in 30-45 minutes. So far, so good!


----------



## LeeD (Jan 31, 2011)

Steve,

Do you use a chart or something to help keep track of your modified plan?

I was using this for the normal plan: http://www.takebackyourtemple.com/files/Grant_Horners_Bible_Reading_System_Checklist.PDF


----------



## Steve Curtis (Jan 31, 2011)

LeeD said:


> Steve,
> 
> Do you use a chart or something to help keep track of your modified plan?



I put this together for folks in my church View attachment 2026.
It's not pretty (when you start erasing a lot), but it seems to get the job done!


----------



## LeeD (Jan 31, 2011)

Thank you!


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jan 31, 2011)

Thanks Steve!


----------



## bookslover (Feb 6, 2011)

It's amazing how much reading you get done. In January's 31 days, you read 310 chapters, and read 12 complete books of the Bible. I definitely plan to stick with this!


----------



## Augusta (Feb 6, 2011)

I started it this month as well. I really like it. I am getting the added benefit of becoming a more brisk reader while still absorbing what I am reading.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 6, 2011)

While I am grateful that Prof. Horner's method has given many believers an increased thirst for the Word, I have to point out the huge flaw in this method -- you read through a single book in very, very small increments and progress incredibly slowly, while reading volumes of other Scripture in between. It's like watching 1 minute of every scene of a movie in sequence, and then the second minute, etc. You gain many connections between the scenes, but miss the coherence of each scene within itself.

I maintain, for instance, that if you read Joshua 1/24th per day for 24 days while reading massive amounts of other Scripture in between, you will understand the book of Joshua only marginally better than you did before. In my humble opinion, reading larger amounts from a single book (or the whole book) at one time is better overall.

With that said, Prof. Horner's method may still work really well for many people. I'm not writing this primarily for the benefit of those who have been doing it for a while and found it effective, but rather for those thinking about jumping in. Before you make that decision, please take these points into consideration.


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 7, 2011)

austinww said:


> While I am grateful that Prof. Horner's method has given many believers an increased thirst for the Word, I have to point out the huge flaw in this method -- you read through a single book in very, very small increments and progress incredibly slowly, while reading volumes of other Scripture in between. It's like watching 1 minute of every scene of a movie in sequence, and then the second minute, etc. You gain many connections between the scenes, but miss the coherence of each scene within itself.
> 
> I maintain, for instance, that if you read Joshua 1/24th per day for 24 days while reading massive amounts of other Scripture in between, you will understand the book of Joshua only marginally better than you did before. In my humble opinion, reading larger amounts from a single book (or the whole book) at one time is better overall.
> 
> With that said, Prof. Horner's method may still work really well for many people. I'm not writing this primarily for the benefit of those who have been doing it for a while and found it effective, but rather for those thinking about jumping in. Before you make that decision, please take these points into consideration.


 
I think this is definitely a valid consideration. The objection could be raised with the M'Cheyne plan or any other plan that has you reading one chapter a day from several books. Many plans from M'Cheyne to the Discipleship Journal's have you reading from 4 books a day. It's a difference in degree and not in kind. 

In my case, I find that something like Horner's plan actually works better because it has you reading most parts of Scripture much more often than you otherwise would tend to. I don't find that it's difficult to keep up with the flow of a book, at least no more difficult than any other plan that would have you only reading one chapter at a time. 

That being said, it is no substitute for in-depth study and isn't designed to be. But the downfall of an exclusive focus on the latter (i.e. spending weeks or a month or so on a book) is that many people rarely if ever make it through the Pentateuch, the Historical books or the Prophets. 

There are pluses and minuses to any plan. But I think it's important to read through the Scriptures systematically, even if that simply means starting from the beginning and reading straight through to the end.


----------



## Steve Curtis (Feb 7, 2011)

This is why I find it helpful to follow a plan like Horner's (to keep one's nose in many places of Scripture) _*as well as*_ spending time each day in indepth study of a paticular book. Thus, I read through my modified Horner plan in about 30 minutes each day, after which I turn to a book (presently Ephesians) and spend a good 30-60 minutes there, using commentaries, etc.


----------



## JennyG (Feb 8, 2011)

austinww said:


> While I am grateful that Prof. Horner's method has given many believers an increased thirst for the Word, I have to point out the huge flaw in this method -- you read through a single book in very, very small increments and progress incredibly slowly, while reading volumes of other Scripture in between. It's like watching 1 minute of every scene of a movie in sequence, and then the second minute, etc. You gain many connections between the scenes, but miss the coherence of each scene within itself.
> 
> I maintain, for instance, that if you read Joshua 1/24th per day for 24 days while reading massive amounts of other Scripture in between, you will understand the book of Joshua only marginally better than you did before. In my humble opinion, reading larger amounts from a single book (or the whole book) at one time is better overall.
> 
> With that said, Prof. Horner's method may still work really well for many people. I'm not writing this primarily for the benefit of those who have been doing it for a while and found it effective, but rather for those thinking about jumping in. Before you make that decision, please take these points into consideration.



Austin, I'm smiling here as I recall that the last time you made pretty much this point (it was a different thread, before Christmas) I disagreed quite strongly!
However I must have been taking your thoughts on board even then, since now (as you know...) I'm in total agreement. Horner was a step up for me from what I was doing before, but now I'm convinced there's no substitute for just keeping your head down and reading straight ahead, whether starting with verse 1 of the whole Bible or of any of the books in it.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 8, 2011)

Thanks, Jenny. I agree.

Just to be clear, I do not intend to question the devotional value of the Horner plan. I just wanted to point out it is not a very good way to study the content of the books of the Bible (and I agree that neither is the M'Cheyne), unless someone just has the type of mind that can really learn well that way. Perhaps some people do. I prefer reading a small epistle (usually the same one every day Monday through Friday) and a psalm or two on weekdays, and buckling down with a larger book or two on weekends. This seems to work better for me in learning the content.

One place in the Bible where this is especially important is 1 Kings through 2 Chronicles. I can't imagine how I'd ever get a grip on who reigned when and who was related to whom and who prophesied in whose reign and in which kingdom, if I read a chapter a day along with lots of other Scripture.


----------



## Wayne (Feb 8, 2011)

By some accounts, at least half of the books of the Bible can be each read in 1/2 hour or less.

Does your avg. reading speed measure up to that rule of thumb? (i.e., is that an accurate statement in your estimation?)


----------



## JennyG (Feb 8, 2011)

Wayne said:


> By some accounts, at least half of the books of the Bible can be each read in 1/2 hour or less.
> 
> Does your avg. reading speed measure up to that rule of thumb? (i.e., is that an accurate statement in your estimation?)



It sounds reasonable - it turned out to be possible to read Isaiah in a day, (or to be absolutely accurate, chapters 3-66, since I made a start the night before). It's true that was in the Christmas holidays. 
Of course I agree that slow study is important too, but having always been a rapid reader, I now wonder why for so long I used the faculty for every book *except* the Bible 


austinww said:


> I prefer reading a small epistle (usually the same one every day Monday through Friday) and a psalm or two on weekdays, and buckling down with a larger book or two on weekends. This seems to work better for me in learning the content.


I like the sound of that. I'm experimenting with different ways at the moment so I may give it a try.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 8, 2011)

Wayne said:


> By some accounts, at least half of the books of the Bible can be each read in 1/2 hour or less.
> 
> Does your avg. reading speed measure up to that rule of thumb? (i.e., is that an accurate statement in your estimation?)


 
I think so. I would cover around 6-10 chapters in a half hour, at a comfortable reading speed.


----------



## bookslover (Feb 10, 2011)

austinww said:


> Just to be clear, I do not intend to question the devotional value of the Horner plan. I just wanted to point out it is not a very good way to study the content of the books of the Bible.


 
Of course, neither Horner nor anyone who uses his plan claims that the purpose of this particular reading plan is to study the content of the books of the Bible. That's what making an in-depth study of a particular book is for. The purpose of Horner's plan is just to keep the reader in the text, soaking himself or herself in the Bible daily. The idea is to deliberately read quickly through the 10 chapters for the day. And, since the mix of chapters you read is constantly changing over time, you're getting different juxtapositions of chapters - discovering (or rediscovering) that there are, for example, no contradictions in Scripture. Basically, the idea is to get a bird's-eye overview of the Bible by reading large swaths of it daily.

When you feel the need to dig deepr, then you can choose a book and have at it.


----------



## JennyG (Feb 13, 2011)

bookslover said:


> Of course, neither Horner nor anyone who uses his plan claims that the purpose of this particular reading plan is to study the content of the books of the Bible. That's what making an in-depth study of a particular book is for. The purpose of Horner's plan is just to keep the reader in the text, soaking himself or herself in the Bible daily. The idea is to deliberately read quickly through the 10 chapters for the day. And, since the mix of chapters you read is constantly changing over time, you're getting different juxtapositions of chapters - discovering (or rediscovering) that there are, for example, no contradictions in Scripture. Basically, the idea is to get a bird's-eye overview of the Bible by reading large swaths of it daily.
> 
> 
> When you feel the need to dig deepr, then you can choose a book and have at it.


I only realised relatively recently that I was not properly distinguishing those two things, reading through and studying.
I think the key is to keep them totally separate, both in principle and in practice


----------



## Augusta (Feb 13, 2011)

bookslover said:


> austinww said:
> 
> 
> > Just to be clear, I do not intend to question the devotional value of the Horner plan. I just wanted to point out it is not a very good way to study the content of the books of the Bible.
> ...



This is exactly right. At first this plan sounded not so devotional to me as well. When I read up further on the aims of this plan I was excited to start. To add to what Richard has already said, one of the things that hooked me is that Horner recommends using the same bible all the time because you are learning not only by repetition but you also remember scriptures better by where they are on the page. I am very visual so I remember where certain scriptures are based on where on the page they were in my personal bible. The main aim is to remember the scriptures and become very familiar with them which is the aim of every student of the Scriptures.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Feb 25, 2011)

As I continue with this program what is really nice is that I am not really bound to just one chapter per list. I can read much more if I choose. So if a narrative continues for a couple chapters, I am perfectly capable of finishing the narrative. It does not goof up the plan. 

Thanks again for bringing the plan to my attention.

How is everyone else's reading going?


----------



## bookslover (Feb 26, 2011)

In another two days, I'll have finished my first two months using the system (maybe that should be The System). I'm going to make two tweaks: (1) I'll do what many people using The System have done, which is swap out Romans (List 3) for Acts (List 10), for the very good reason that I, like others, need to read Romans repeatedly more than I need to read Acts that way; and (2) I'm also going to move Hebrews (List 3) to join Romans (List 10) since these two books are probably the most theologically important books (generally speaking) in the New Testament.

I definitely love The System.


----------



## Wayne (Feb 27, 2011)

I like your idea of pairing Romans and Hebrews, together 29 chapters, and so once a month coverage for those two.

Is Horner a dispensationalist? That might account for why he affords Acts such a prominent place in his system.


----------



## Jeffriesw (Feb 27, 2011)

57 Days in and still going strong.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Feb 27, 2011)

I like Steve's tweak where he put Romans, Hebrews, and Ephesians in one grouping. Those three juggernauts end each of my days.


----------



## matthew11v25 (Feb 28, 2011)

I have used the Horner plan for about a year. I enjoy it but can resonate with those that say it can feel a bit ADD at times.

To compensate there is a little game I play a couple times a month that gives a short break from the Horner plan: 

_I list the books of the bible on index cards then throw in a bowl/hat. I randomly draw a book and then read it straight through (tossing the name so I get a new one next time). For every 15 chapters I give myself one day (eg. Genesis would take about 3 days). I enjoy this because it's random and I allows me to experience the full flow of thought in a book without stopping every chapter. 

I tend to group some books together on the index card as well (eg. minor prophets) so the reading is not too short_


----------



## bookslover (Feb 28, 2011)

Wayne said:


> I like your idea of pairing Romans and Hebrews, together 29 chapters, and so once a month coverage for those two.
> 
> Is Horner a dispensationalist? That might account for why he affords Acts such a prominent place in his system.



Well, Horner works at The Master's College, a wholly-owned subsidiary of John MacArthur (heh), so I guess he's, at least officially, a dispensationalist. On the other hand, Horner teaches English literature, so dispensationalism probably doesn't inhabit the front part of his mind too often. Since he doesn't teach Bible or theology at the college (as far as I know), he probably doesn't have to swear fealty to dispensationalism.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Mar 1, 2011)

I think his list of Joshua-Esther and Isaiah-Malachi shows that he leans Dispensational.


----------



## bookslover (Mar 2, 2011)

Chaplainintraining said:


> I think his list of Joshua-Esther and Isaiah-Malachi shows that he leans Dispensational.



No, I don't think so. He has said that the lists were created more or less by genre (something you might expect from an English prof), so Joshua-Esther is the history genre and Isaiah-Malachi is the prophecy genre.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Mar 2, 2011)

Point taken. For whatever reason I did not see the genre as basis.


----------

