# Do the Scriptures Command Daily Bible Reading?



## satz

When you guys do your daily readings, say you read one chapter, how long, on average do you spend on it? Do you reread it? If so how many times? Or do you meditate upon it? 

Just wanted to know more about your bible reading habits...


----------



## Davidius

When I am able to read I read 3-4 chapters/day (using M'Cheyne's plan) but some days go by in which I do not read any. 

I'd like to add that I think the modern conception that one must read the bible every single day to be spiritually healthy is a legalistic, unscriptural and potentially damaging assertion.


----------



## larryjf

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> I'd like to add that I think the modern conception that one must read the bible every single day to be spiritually healthy is a legalistic, unscriptural and potentially damaging assertion.



Interesting comment.
In your opinion would prayer fall into the same category?
Also, must one do anything to be spiritually healthy? Would doing anything for spiritual health be considered legalistic?

I have counseled folks who were not reading their Bibles to read them every day, even if they didn't feel like it.It paid off for them in the end.


----------



## Davidius

larryjf said:


> Interesting comment.
> In your opinion would prayer fall into the same category?
> Also, must one do anything to be spiritually healthy? Would doing anything for spiritual health be considered legalistic?
> 
> I have counseled folks who were not reading their Bibles to read them every day, even if they didn't feel like it.It paid off for them in the end.



No, I would not say the same thing about prayer. It is something that all Christians everywhere have always been able to do. 

You see, sometimes people forget that the common man did not have his own bible until the 16th century. This was an issue that never really seemed to concern the apostles. Emphasis was given in the early Church to the teachers with whom God had gifted the church. People focused more on the preached word instead of their own reading and their own interpreting. 

If it is necessary to read the bible everyday in order not to fall into spiritual destruction (or, conversely, just to generally grow in grace), then Christians for a very long time were without much hope. As far as your experience in counseling is concerned, I definitely don't think there's anything wrong with reading the bible every day. Of course that can be beneficial. But that's a very different thing than saying that one _must_ read the bible every day. If you've never come across that sort of teaching then it may just be my background. I used to believe that it was banking on sin to not read the bible everyday and that I would undoubtedly fall into some other kind of heinous sin without it as well. The guilt and condemnation that people can fall into for not reading the bible enough when daily reading is not even required in scripture is terrible.

Sermons used to be just a nice thing to do but the "real deal" was in my own "personal time" throughout the week. This just doesn't seem to be what the New Testament teaches. These days I put a lot more emphasis on my teaching elder's exposition of the Word on the Lord's Day. I take notes during the sermon and think about it more during the week instead of being so concerned with finishing the next book of the bible. I also have a much more biblical understanding of the Christian's role in the world and don't despise my secular calling like I used to. Whereas before I would skip doing homework and other such things in order to read, I no longer find that a more spiritual thing to do.


----------



## VaughanRSmith

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> You see, sometimes people forget that the common man did not have his own bible until the 16th century.


Unfortunately. There is a reason they were called the Dark Ages.

I have worries about a Christian who doesn't want to read the Bible every day. How can we train ourselves in righteousness if our days are not soaked in the scriptures?


----------



## Davidius

Exagorazo said:


> Unfortunately. There is a reason they were called the Dark Ages.



The "Dark Ages" did not begin until 500+ years after the Apostles. What did all the Christians do during the first few centuries A.D. when they had no access to their own bibles? Why didn't Paul ever tell the local elders to have his letters copied for everyone? 

Again, I'm not saying that I don't like reading the scripture or that I have a problem with reading it every day. I have problems adding man's commands to God's. 



> I have worries about a Christian who doesn't want to read the Bible every day. How can we train ourselves in righteousness if our days are not soaked in the scriptures?



[bible]Ephesians 4:11-12[/bible]

The short answer, according to Paul, is that we first and foremost are not our own trainers. 

Again, I'm not saying that I don't like reading the scripture or that I have a problem with reading it every day. I have problems adding man's commands to God's. There's way too much emphasis on personal reading and interpretation today and not enough on the sermon.


----------



## InChains620

*-Reading The Scriptures-*



CarolinaCalvinist said:


> I'd like to add that I think the modern conception that one must read the bible every single day to be spiritually healthy is a legalistic, unscriptural and potentially damaging assertion.



I think it is important to read the Scriptures and pray daily. I have been a Christian for less than a year, and fail God often. I have missed days of my daily Bible reading, but I am convicted and set aside time to catch up. I find myself amazed at how easily I can just skip my time with God after all he has done for me. That is why I believe it is important that a child of God prays for a hungry spirit for the Word and for prayer. We should pray remembering Jeremiah 23:29. Pray that God would consume us with the flame of His Word, and that he would use it as a hammer to shatter the hard hearts we so often get. If we rely on God's grace for our salvation, is the same not so with our edification? We should be in constant prayer for God's grace and help with our slothful study habits. May God help us all to delve into the Scriptures and grow in grace!



> Here, then, is the real problem of our negligence. We fail in our duty to study God's Word not so much because it is difficult to understand, not so much because it is dull and boring, but because it is work. Our problem is not a lack of intelligence or a lack of passion. Our problem is that we are lazy. --R. C. Sproul


----------



## VaughanRSmith

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> The "Dark Ages" did not begin until 500+ years after the Apostles. What did all the Christians do during the first few centuries A.D.? They listened to their preachers.


And now, with the advent of the printing press, the scriptures are available to every layman. Would the Christians during the first few centuries AD have preferred to listen to their preachers over owning and reading daily their _very own copy of the scriptures?_ I think not. 

Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so. 
(Acts 17:11)

Your argument really doesn't stand.


----------



## Davidius

Exagorazo said:


> Your argument really doesn't stand.



Yes, I would rather have a trained pastor than my own bible. Try not to be such a product of your time and place in history. Did you totally skip over my quote from Ephesians 4? Teachers are given to train us. I am not an ordained bible teacher. "Just me and my bible" is not my way of going about growth.

Perhaps you could tell me just what my argument is that doesn't stand, because I don't think you're understanding it. Does the Word of God entail a command to read the scriptures every day or does it not? Were Christians in the Early Church and up until the printing press lacking? Did God leave them without everything they needed?


----------



## Civbert

I read daily but not regularly. Often I'm jumping from place to place, and reading for 10 minutes one day and a couple hours another. I might read a whole book in one sitting, or just a few verses. 

I wish I were more disciplined to read the Word regularly - but I find I digest more if I'm not trying to read on a schedule or through a reading plan. I've been working on my reading plan for years now and don't get as much out of it as when I am searching on a topic or comparing different verses and following the cross references in a study bible.


----------



## VaughanRSmith

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> Yes, I would rather have a trained pastor than my own bible. Try not to be such a product of your time and place in history. Did you totally skip over my quote from Ephesians 4? Teachers are given to train us. I am not an ordained bible teacher. "Just me and my bible" is not my way of going about growth.


I apologise for not seeing your Ephesians 4 quote, it wasn't there when I hit reply. I agree, adding man's commands to God's is wrong. However, I believe there is scriptural mandate for the necessity of everyday reading of the word. Just because there are people better trained in it's exposition doesn't mean we are to neglect personal reading. 



CarolinaCalvinist said:


> Perhaps you could tell me just what my argument is that doesn't stand, because I don't think you're understanding it. Does the Word of God entail a command to read the scriptures every day or does it not?


If you mean a command as in "thou shalt", then no it does not. However, as I said above, there is scriptural mandate to necessitate daily reading. 

And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD. 
(Deuteronomy 8:3)

How can we eat bread daily and live, and then be expected not to eat of God's word daily and live? 



CarolinaCalvinist said:


> Were Christians in the Early Church and up until the printing press lacking?


Of course they were. I have several Bibles in my home. Are you suggesting that I am not better off than they were?



CarolinaCalvinist said:


> Did God leave them without everything they needed?


No, but you can bet your life savings that they would give their right arm for the opportunities to read the scriptures that we have.

We are a blessed people, with Bibles coming out of our ears. Blessing brings responsibility. Daily reading of the word is just as much a necessity to Christians as daily eating of food.


----------



## turmeric

The Bible seems to recommend in several places to memorize and meditate on the Scriptures - I have trouble with "through-the-Bible-in-a-year" plans because by the time I've read all that I couldn't tell you what it was about.

And what about the folks where Bibles are illegal and hard to come by? I think it's wonderful that we can own Bibles and I don't want to go back to strictly relying on the preached Word - that's how we ended up with the Bible in an archaic language no one knew and "preachers" making it up as they went along...


----------



## Davidius

Exagorazo said:


> And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD.
> (Deuteronomy 8:3)
> 
> How can we eat bread daily and live, and then be expected not to eat of God's word daily and live?
> 
> 
> Of course they were. I have several Bibles in my home. Are you suggesting that I am not better off than they were?
> 
> No, but you can bet your life savings that they would give their right arm for the opportunities to read the scriptures that we have.
> 
> We are a blessed people, with Bibles coming out of our ears. Blessing brings responsibility. Daily reading of the word is just as much a necessity to Christians as daily eating of food.



I can agree to disagree on this because I know it's a pretty popular view since the Reformation. 

Quickly, I just wanted to point out that your scripture references necessitating the ingestion of God's Word do not imply a commanded daily reading of it. For instance, you quoted from Deuteronomy about living on God's Word. How many of those Israelites to whom that quote is addressed do you think had their own bibles? The same thing goes for pretty much every other like passage, whether it be on meditating on the Word, loving the Word, etc. I can take in God's word by listening to it preached and thinking about the sermon and the text upon which the sermon was based. I have Psalms memorized from singing them in public worship and I meditate on God's word by singing to myself through the day (see Eph 5:19 and Col 3:16). I agree that the Word of God is as important for us as you say it is, but I do not believe that this necessitates daily reading. I will agree with you that in some ways it may be "extra helpful" that we have ready access to bibles unlike previous generations of Christians, but that also does not necessitate anything. It's unfair to say "Look at all these bible we have. Christians should be ashamed of themselves!" People harp so much on that but I hardly ever hear anyone chide Christians for not caring enough about public worship and the preached word. *shrug*


----------



## Civbert

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> ... Does the Word of God entail a command to read the scriptures every day or does it not? Were Christians in the Early Church and up until the printing press lacking? Did God leave them without everything they needed?


 I think we are to be in the Word all the time, just as we are to continually pray for one another. This does not mean one has to have a strict regiment of morning readings, but I think going for a whole day without looking at the Word is too long. Not that I have managed to do this myself, only that I try because I think this is what God demands of me. To always, at any time of the day, be reading or thinking of or meditating on God's Word. 

If your reading the Word once a week, that not enough. If you're reading the Word every hour, than you're retired and living alone. But the Scriptures should be near your heart(|mind), if not your hand, at all times. It would be hard to over emphasis how important the Word is to Christians. If you know the lines from Napoleon Dynamite (or insert some other movie or book) more than you know God's Word, then you know something is wrong. We live by the Word.

P.S. If nothing else, daily reading of the Word is good practice even if it is not explicitly commanded.


----------



## Davidius

Civbert said:


> I think we are to be in the Word all the time, just as we are to continually pray for one another. This does not mean one has to have a strict regiment of morning readings, but I think going for a whole day without looking at the Word is too long. Not that I have managed to do this myself, only that I try because I think this is what God demands of me. To always, at any time of the day, be reading or thinking of or meditating on God's Word.
> 
> If your reading the Word once a week, that not enough. If you're reading the Word every hour, than you're retired and living alone. But the Scriptures should be near your heart(|mind), if not your hand, at all times. It would be hard to over emphasis how important the Word is to Christians. If you know the lines from Napoleon Dynamite (or insert some other movie or book) more than you know God's Word, then you know something is wrong. We live by the Word.
> 
> P.S. If nothing else, daily reading of the Word is good practice even if it is not explicitly commanded.



All I'm saying is that we can't look back into the scriptures at the verses talking about the Word and read our 21st century context with bibles flowing out of our ears into them. Since believers from the beginning of time until 500 years ago didn't have their own bibles then I think it's fallacious to use those verses to _mandate_ daily bible reading. What would "being in the Word" have meant to a devout Jew in the Old Testament or to a believer in the first century? It would've meant attending public worship, meditating throughout the week on the preaching/reading of the word, singing in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, discussing the greatness of God with fellow believers, prayer, etc.

I really hate the fact that this has turned into this much of a debate because it makes me look like I don't like reading the bible or something. Of course we should love the word but it's not a sin if we miss a day of reading. I don't want to derail this thread anymore; sorry for even making the comment.


----------



## Civbert

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> What would "being in the Word" have meant to a devout Jew in the Old Testament or to a believer in the first century? It would've meant attending public worship, meditating throughout the week on the preaching/reading of the word, singing in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, discussing the greatness of God with fellow believers, prayer, etc.


 You are correct. I think that was part of the point I was trying to make. The Jews would meditate on the Word, and memorize it. They did not need to keep a pocket scroll with them at all times in order to stay in the Word. 



CarolinaCalvinist said:


> I really hate the fact that this has turned into this much of a debate because it makes me look like I don't like reading the bible or something. Of course we should love the word but it's not a sin if we miss a day of reading. I don't want to derail this thread anymore; sorry for even making the comment.


 Not a problem. This is part of working out things. Hopefully it leads to more understanding.


----------



## turmeric

Sorry, guys, I'm attempting a very clumsy thread split.


----------



## Davidius

Thanks Meg. Sorry again for hijacking the thread. I think we're pretty much done now, though.


----------



## Dagmire

I'd say it's much more important to have the word of God in your heart and to live by it than it is to read it every day.


----------



## bookslover

Dagmire said:


> I'd say it's much more important to have the word of God in your heart and to live by it than it is to read it every day.



Of course, the best way to get it into your heart is to read it daily. The important thing is to not be legalistic about it. Daily Bible reading is important but, if your circumstances prevent you from reading on a particular day, don't beat yourself up about it, just pick up again on the next available day.

There is no explicit, positive command in the Bible to read it daily. However, there are lots of passages about meditating on the Scriptures, hiding the Scriptures in your heart, searching for God, etc. So, what better way is there to (a) become familiar with the Bible's contents (especially for new Christians) and, therefore, to become more familiar with God, and (b) to inculcate the discipline of reading than to discipline yourself to read the Bible?


----------



## Davidius

bookslover said:


> Of course, the best way to get it into your heart is to read it daily. The important thing is to not be legalistic about it. Daily Bible reading is important but, if your circumstances prevent you from reading on a particular day, don't beat yourself up about it, just pick up again on the next available day.







> There is no explicit, positive command in the Bible to read it daily. However, there are lots of passages about meditating on the Scriptures, hiding the Scriptures in your heart, searching for God, etc. So, what better way is there to (a) become familiar with the Bible's contents (especially for new Christians) and, therefore, to become more familiar with God, and (b) to inculcate the discipline of reading than to discipline yourself to read the Bible?



The disappearance of Psalm singing is an unfortunate thing in this regard.  But I'd say that that and expository sermons are great ways to get the Word in your heart, too.


----------



## Kevin

David, I think I "get" your point and I am inclined to agree. 

Although having the Bible readily available to read at any time is great and something I should be doing more, it could not have been the idea of "meditating" mentioned in scripture. We always have a tendency to think from "is" to "aught". That is we look at the way things are in our own day and think that this is how they aught to be. Since we have Bibles readily available and they are part of our daily lives we assume that everyone, everywhere, at all times "aught" to do as we do.

In a day when "true religion and undefiled" is much neglected it is ironic to me that so many christian people worry more about missing their "private time with God" then they do about caring for the widows and orphans. (BTW these catagories are not mutually exclusive.)

We should remember that christianity is most of all a Public Faith and a Community of Faith, not mostly an Internal and Personal faith.


----------



## larryjf

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> [bible]Ephesians 4:11-12[/bible]
> 
> The short answer, according to Paul, is that we first and foremost are not our own trainers.



My "trainers" tell the congregation to read their Bibles every day.


----------



## Davidius

larryjf said:


> My "trainers" tell the congregation to read their Bibles every day.


***EDITED***

That's fine. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as they're not telling you a) that you are sinning if you don't or b) that you won't grow unless you do. So as long as they aren't shirking their responsibility to be your primary teachers and aren't laying unscriptural burdens on you, I don't really care what they tell you to do.  This is how it's been since the beginning of the Church in the Old Testament. I'm sorry it seems so strange to you, but as I said earlier, try not to be such a product of your place and time in history. It's a shame that the preaching of the word and the public worship of God seem to be so downplayed in exchange for individual religious experience today, even in Reformed churches.


----------



## Kevin

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> That's fine. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as they're not telling you a) that you are sinning if you don't or b) that you won't grow unless you do. But they shouldn't be shirking their responsibility to be your teacher.  This is how it's been since the beginning. I'm sorry it seems so strange to you, but as I said earlier, try not to be such a product of your place and time and history.



 

It is however difficult to Not be a product of our place and time.


----------



## CDM

Dagmire said:


> I'd say it's much more important to have the word of God in your heart and to live by it than it is to read it every day.



And how does one have "the word of God in your heart"? By reading it every day, of course.  



CarolinaCalvinist said:


> ***EDITED***
> 
> That's fine. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as they're not telling you a) that you are sinning if you don't or b) that you won't grow unless you do.



Would you agree that there is no better way for a disciple to "grow" than to consistently be under the preaching of the Word on Lord's Day's *AND* the daily hiding in the heart of God's Word? Would it not then follow if one were only involved in public worship and NOT reading the Word one would not "grow" as well?



CarolinaCalvinist said:


> ***EDITED***
> It's a shame that the preaching of the word and the public worship of God seem to be so downplayed in exchange for individual religious experience today, even in Reformed churches.



 The preaching of the Word is paramount.


----------



## DTK

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> Yes, I would rather have a trained pastor than my own bible. Try not to be such a product of your time and place in history. Did you totally skip over my quote from Ephesians 4? Teachers are given to train us. I am not an ordained bible teacher. "Just me and my bible" is not my way of going about growth.
> 
> ...Were Christians in the Early Church and up until the printing press lacking? Did God leave them without everything they needed?


Well, removing myself from my time and place in history, the Bereans "received the word with all readiness (from Paul), and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so" (Acts 17:11). I don't think the daily searching (which implies reading) of the Scriptures on the part of the Bereans was a discipline that they began under Paul's influence, but it seems rather it was a discipline already in place when they first heard Paul.

This was a discipline that existed in the early post-apostolic church, and notice how ECFs instructed Christians who could not read to be included in this discipline.

*Origen (c. 185-c. 254):* The more one reads the Scriptures daily and the greater one’s understanding is, the more renewed always and every day. I doubt whether a mind which is lazy toward the holy Scriptures and the exercise of spiritual knowledge can be renewed at all. Gerald Bray, ed., _Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament VI: Romans_ (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1998), p. 308.

*Theonas of Alexandria (bishop 282-300):* Let no day pass by without reading some portion of the Sacred Scriptures, at such convenient hour as offers, and giving some space to meditation. And never cast off the habit of reading in the Holy Scriptures; for nothing feeds the soul and enriches the mind so well as those sacred studies do. _ANF: Vol. VI, The Epistle of Theonas, Bishop of Alexandria, To Lucianus_, §9.

*Ambrose (c. 339-97):* The books of the heavenly Scriptures are good pastures, by which we are fed by daily reading, by which we are renewed and refreshed, when we taste the things that are written, or ruminate frequently upon that which has been tasted. Upon these pastures the flock of the Lord is fattened. See William Goode, _The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice_ (1853) Vol. 3, p. 261-262.
*Latin text:* Bona etiam pascua libri sunt Scripturarum coelestium, in quibus quotidiana lectione pascimur, in quibus recreamur ac reficimur; cum ea quae scripta sunt, degustamus, vel summo ore libata frequentius ruminamus. His pascuis grex Domini saginatur. _Psalmus CXXXIV_ (119), Sermo Quartus Decimus, §2, PL 15:11390-1391.

*Chrysostom (349-407):* In what else did this blessed saint excel the rest of the apostles? and how comes it that up and down the world he is so much on every one’s tongue? How comes it that not merely among ourselves, but also among Jews and Greeks, he is the wonder of wonders? Is it not from the power of his epistles? whereby not only to the faithful of today, but from his time to this, yea and up to the end, even the appearing of Christ, he has been and will be profitable, and will continue to be so as long as the human race shall last. For as a wall built of adamant, so his writings fortify all the Churches of the known world, and he as a most noble champion stands in the midst, bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ, casting down imaginations, and every high thing which exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and all this he does by those epistles which he has left to us full of wonders and of Divine wisdom. For his writings are not only useful to us, for the overthrow of false doctrine and the confirmation of the true, but they help not a little towards living a good life. For by the use of these, the bishops of the present day fit and fashion the chaste virgin, which St. Paul himself espoused to Christ, and conduct her to the state of spiritual beauty; with these, too, they drive away from her the noisome pestilences which beset her, and preserve the good health thus obtained. Such are the medicines and such their efficacy left us by this so-called unskillful man, and they know them and their power best who constantly use them. From all this it is evident that St. Paul had given himself to the study of which we have been speaking with great diligence and zeal.
8. Hear also what he says in his charge to his disciple: “Give heed to reading, to exhortation, to teaching,” and he goes on to show the usefulness of this by adding, “For in doing this thou shalt save both thyself and them that hear thee.” And again he says, “The Lord’s servant must not strive, but be gentle towards all, apt to teach, forbearing;” and he proceeds to say, “But abide thou in the things which thou hast learned, and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them, and that from a babe thou hast known the sacred writings which are able to make thee wise unto salvation,” and again, “Every Scripture is inspired of God, and also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete.” Hear what he adds further in his directions to Titus about the appointment of bishops. “The bishop,” he says, “must be holding to the faithful word which is according to the teaching, that he may be able to convict the gain-sayers.” *But how shall any one who is unskillful as these men pretend, be able to convict the gainsayers and stop their mouths? or what need is there to give attention to reading and to the Holy Scriptures, if such a state of unskillfulness is to be welcome among us? Such arguments are mere makeshifts and pretexts, the marks of idleness and sloth. But some one will say, “it is to the priests that these charges are given:” — certainly, for they are the subjects of our discourse. But that the apostle gives the same charge to the laity, hear what he says in another epistle to other than the priesthood: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom,” and again, “Let your speech be always with grace seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer each one,” and there is a general charge to all that they “be ready to” render an account of their faith, and to the Thessalonians, he gives the following command: “Build each other up, even as also ye do.” But when he speaks of priests he says, “Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word, and in teaching.”* _NPNF1: Vol. IX, The Christian Priesthood_, Book 4, §7-8.

*Chrysostom (349-407):* But what is the answer to these charges? “I am not,” you will say, “one of the monks, but I have both a wife and children, and the care of a household.” *Why, this is what hath ruined all, your supposing that the reading of the divine Scriptures appertains to those only, when ye need it much more than they.* For they that dwell in the world, and each day receive wounds, these have most need of medicines. So that it is far worse than not reading, to account the thing even “superfluous:” for these are the words of diabolical invention. Hear ye not Paul saying, “that all these things are written for our admonition”? _NPNF1: Vol. X, Homilies on Matthew_, Homily 2.10.

*Chrysostom (349-407) on the reading of Scripture:* And what is yet more grievous is this, that being in such evil case, we have no idea whatever of the deformity of our own soul, nor discern the hideousness thereof. And yet when thou art sitting at a hairdresser’s, and having thine hair cut, thou takest the mirror, and dost examine with care the arrangement of thy locks, and askest them that stand by, and the haircutter himself, if he hath well disposed what is on the forehead; and being old, for so it often happens, art not ashamed of going wild with the fancies of youth: while of our own soul, not only deformed, but transformed into a wild beast, and made a sort of Scylla or Chimaera, according to the heathen fable, we have not even a slight perception. And yet in this case too there is a mirror, spiritual, and far more excellent, and more serviceable than that other one; for it not only shows our own deformity, but transforms it too, if we be willing, into surpassing beauty. *This mirror is the memory of good men, and the history of their blessed lives; the reading of the Scriptures; the laws given by God. If thou be willing once only to look upon the portraitures of those holy men, thou will both see the foulness of thine own mind, and having seen this, wilt need nothing else to be set free from that deformity. Because the mirror is useful for this purpose also, and makes the change easy.* _NPNF1: Vol. X, Homilies on Matthew_, Homily 4.16. 

*Chrysostom (349-407):* How is it not absurd to send children out to trades, and to school, and to do all you can for these objects, and yet, not to “bring them up in the chastening and admonition of the Lord”? And for this reason truly we are the first to reap the fruits, because we bring up our children to be insolent and profligate, disobedient, and mere vulgar fellows. Let us not then do this; no, let us listen to this blessed Apostle’s admonition. “Let us bring them up in the chastening and admonition of the Lord.” Let us give them a pattern. *Let us make them from the earliest age apply themselves to the reading of the Scriptures. Alas, that so constantly as I repeat this, I am looked upon as trifling! Still, I shall not cease to do my duty.* _NPNF1: Vol. XIII, Homilies on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians_, Homily 21.

*Chrysostom (349-407):* And what saith he? “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly”; or rather not this way alone, but another also. For I indeed said that we ought to reckon up those who have suffered things more terrible, and those who have undergone sufferings more grievous than ours, and to give thanks that such have not fallen to our lot; but what saith he? “Let the word of Christ dwell in you”; that is, the teaching, the doctrines, the exhortation, wherein He says, that the present life is nothing, nor yet its good things. If we know this, we shall yield to no hardships whatever. (Matthew 6:25, etc.) “Let it dwell in you,” he saith, “richly,” not simply dwell, but with great abundance. *Hearken ye, as many as are worldly, and have the charge of wife and children; how to you too he commits especially the reading of the Scriptures and that not to be done lightly, nor in any sort of way, but with much earnestness.* _NPNF1: Vol. XIII, Homilies on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Colossians_, Homily 9.

*Chrysostom (349-407): Tarry not, I entreat, for another to teach thee; thou hast the oracles of God. No man teacheth thee as they;* for he indeed oft grudgeth much for vainglory’s sake and envy. Hearken, I entreat you, all ye that are careful for this life, and procure books that will be medicines for the soul. If ye will not any other, yet get you at least the New Testament, the Apostolic Epistles, the Acts, the Gospels, for your constant teachers. If grief befall thee, dive into them as into a chest of medicines; take thence comfort of thy trouble, be it loss, or death, or bereavement of relations; or rather dive not into them merely, but take them wholly to thee; keep them in thy mind.
*This is the cause of all evils, the not knowing the Scriptures. We go into battle without arms, and how ought we to come off safe? Well contented should we be if we can be safe with them, let alone without them.* _NPNF1: Vol. XIII, Homilies on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Colossians_, Homily 9.

*Chrysostom (349-407): Besides, even if any should be so poor, it is in their power, by means of the continual reading of the holy Scriptures which takes place here, to be ignorant of nothing contained in them.* _NPNF1: Vol. XIV, Homilies on the Gospel according to St. John_, Homily 11.1.

*Chrysostom (349-407), Taken from section 1 of his 3rd sermon on Lazarus: I also always entreat you, and do not cease entreating you, not only to pay attention here to what I say, but also when you are at home, to persevere continually in reading the divine Scriptures.* When I have been with each of you in private, I have not stopped giving you the same advice. Do not let anyone say to me those vain words, worth of a heavy condemnation, “I cannot leave the courthouse, I administer the business of the city, I practice a craft, I have a wife, I am raising children, I am in charge of a household, I am a man of the world; reading the Scriptures is not for me, but for those who have been set apart, who have settled on the mountaintops, who keep this way of life continually.” *What are you saying, man? That attending to the Scriptures is not for you, since you are surrounded by a multitude of cares? Rather it is for you more than for them. They do not need the help of the divine Scriptures as much as those who are involved in many occupations. The monks, who are released from the clamor of the marketplace and have fixed their huts in the wilderness, who own nothing in common with anyone, but practice wisdom without fear in the calm of that quiet life, as if resting in a harbor, enjoy great security; but we, as if tossing in the midst of the sea, driven by a multitude of sins, always need the continuous and ceaseless aid of the Scriptures. They rest far from the battle, and so they do not receive many wounds; but you stand continuously in the front rank, and you receive continual blows. So you need more remedies. Your wife provokes you, for example, your son grieves you, your servant angers you, your enemy curses you, your fellow soldier trips you up, often a law suit threatens you, poverty troubles you, loss of your fortune depresses you, and many causes and compulsions to discouragement and grief, to conceit and desperation surround us on all sides, and a multitude of missles falls from everywhere. Therefore we have a continuous need for the full armour of the Scriptures.* Catharine P. Roth, trans., _St. John Chrysostom On Wealth and Poverty_, 3rd Sermon on Lazarus and the Rich Man, §1 (Crestwood: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1984), pp. 58-59.

*Chrysostom (349-407): In the case of the soul, on the other hand, none of these things is necessary, unless, just as you daily spend money to give nourishment to the body, you are likewise determined not to neglect the soul and let it die of hunger but to provide it with proper nourishment from the reading of Scripture and the support of spiritual advice: “Not on bread alone does man live,” Scripture says, remember, “but on every word coming from the mouth of God.”* _FC, Vol. 82, Homilies on Genesis 18-45_, 21.22 (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1990), p. 66.

*Augustine (354-430):* This, after all, is the reason why a young man corrects his way of life: because he meditates upon the words of God as he ought to meditate upon them, observes them because he meditates upon them, and lives correctly because he observes them. This, then, is the reason for correcting his way of life: because he observes the words of God. John E. Rotelle, O.S.A., ed., _The Works of Saint Augustine_, Answer to the Pelagians, II, Answer to Julian, Book VI:76, Part 1, Vol. 24, trans. Roland J. Teske, S.J. (Hyde Park: New City Press, 1998), p. 528. 

*Caesarius, bishop of Arles (470-543): I beseech you, beloved brethren, be eager to engage in divine reading whatever hours you can.* Moreover, since what a man procures in this life by reading or good works will be food of his soul forever, let no one try to excuse himself by saying he has not learned letters at all. *If those who are illiterate love God in truth, they look for learned people who can read the sacred Scriptures to them.* _FC, Vol. 31, Saint Caesarius of Arles, Sermons (1-80)_, Sermon 8.1 (New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc., 1956), p. 49.

*Caesarius, bishop of Arles (470-543): Therefore consider at once, brethren, and carefully notice that the man who frequently reads or listens to sacred Scripture speaks with God. See, then, whether the Devil can overtake him when he perceives him in constant conversation with God. However, if a man neglects to do this, with what boldness or with what feelings does he believe God will grant him an eternal reward, when he refuses to speak with Him in this world through the divine text?* _FC, Vol. 31, Saint Caesarius of Arles, Sermons (1-80)_, Sermon 8.3 (New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc., 1956), p. 52.

*Caesarius, bishop of Arles (470-543):* For this reason I beseech you with fatherly solicitude, equally admonishing and exhorting you, as was already said, *to endeavor continually to read the sacred lessons yourselves or willingly to listen to others read them.* By thus always thinking over in the treasury of your heart what is just and holy, you may prepare for your souls an eternal spiritual food that will bring you endless bliss. _FC, Vol. 31, Saint Caesarius of Arles, Sermons (1-80)_, Sermon 8.4 (New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc., 1956), p. 54.

*Gregory the Great (Gregory I c. 540-603):* But yet know ye that I did not believe the word you sent me. For you are seeking praise from the work of others, seeing that you have perhaps never yet put hand to spindle. Nor yet does this circumstance distress me, *since I wish you to love the reading of Holy Scripture, that, so long as Almighty God shall unite you to husbands, you may know how you should live and how you should manage your houses.* _NPNF2: Vol. XIII, Selected Epistles_, Book 11, Epistle 78.

I think I've tried not to be a product simply of my time and place in history.

Blessings,
DTK


----------



## Davidius

DTK said:


> Well, removing myself from my time and place in history, the Bereans "received the word with all readiness (from Paul), and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so" (Acts 17:11). I don't think the daily searching (which implies reading) of the Scriptures on the part of the Bereans was a discipline that they began under Paul's influence, but it seems rather it was a discipline already in place when they first heard Paul.



As to your quotes from Acts, who do you think was reading the scriptures? Perhaps the leaders of the Church at Berea, unless you really think every household had a copy of the scriptures. We're Calvinists and that means we understand that terms implying large amounts (e.g. "all" or "the Bereans") don't have to mean "every single individual." 

As to your other quotes, they say nothing with which I disagree. They discuss the importance of knowing scripture, and I've done nothing but uphold that, so they I don't think they really add anything to the discussion one way or the other.


----------



## Dagmire

mangum said:


> And how does one have "the word of God in your heart"? By reading it every day, of course.




By the Lord affixing it there. When you say the word of the Lord is put into our hearts by reading every day, it sounds like it's our own doing. I'm sure that's not what you're saying, but I like to be clear.



> Job 28:28 And to man He said,
> 'Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom,
> And to depart from evil is understanding.'"




There are many people who I'm sure read the Bible every day and have no understanding. They read the Bible with scales over their eyes. Then they walk through their days like a son of the devil.


I don't guess I'm even much on the subject anymore. My only point is that I don't think anything beyond the holy spirit is required for us to be led into the truth. Is reading the Bible helpful? It certainly is. Is daily reading required? No, I don't think so. There are simple truths in the Bible that we fail to live by every day. Does it really profit us if we read these truths every day if we don't learn to live by it?

I suppose I'm making a distinction that no one else is. I just think a lot of "Christians" may think and say "Oh, well I read my Bible every day. I'm a faithful Christian!"

It takes so little to deceive us.


----------



## satz

Interesting discussion... though completely different from what I envisionedwhen I started this thread...


----------



## Reformingstudent

*Legacy Reading Plan*

Here is a bible reading plan I am hoping to use myself:

http://www.equip.org/site/c.muI1LaMNJrE/b.2551803/k.E63E/Legacy_Reading_Plan.htm

Sounds like it might be a good one if I can stick with it.


----------



## DTK

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> As to your quotes from Acts, who do you think was reading the scriptures? Perhaps the leaders of the Church at Berea, unless you really think every household had a copy of the scriptures. We're Calvinists and that means we understand that terms implying large amounts (e.g. "all" or "the Bereans") don't have to mean "every single individual."
> 
> As to your other quotes, they say nothing with which I disagree. They discuss the importance of knowing scripture, and I've done nothing but uphold that, so they I don't think they really add anything to the discussion one way or the other.


The text says that the Bereans ("these" plural) searched the Scriptures. I see no reason to take the text to mean the "leaders in the church," because there was no church in Berea before Paul arrived. Your presupposition concerning "the leaders of the Church of Berea" just demonstrates how lightly you've dismissed something that differs from your opinion. There were no such "leaders" at that point in time. Paul was in a synagogue of the Jews.

As for the quotes, you cannot agree with all of them because some of them insist, contrary to yourself, on the need for daily reading of the Scriptures. Moreover, those quotes are relevant because it indicates, per your question, the access of Christians to the Scriptures prior to printing press. Personally, I think you've simply dismissed what I've posted. You asked one person to "try not to be such a product of your time and place in history." I suppose that such advice is not only good for him, but for the adviser as well. 

I made the mistake of taking your questions seriously. I promise not to repeat that mistake. 

DTK


----------



## Nse007

CarolinaCalvinist said:


> ***EDITED***
> 
> That's fine. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as they're not telling you a) that you are sinning if you don't or b) that you won't grow unless you do. So as long as they aren't shirking their responsibility to be your primary teachers and aren't laying unscriptural burdens on you, I don't really care what they tell you to do.  This is how it's been since the beginning of the Church in the Old Testament. I'm sorry it seems so strange to you, but as I said earlier, try not to be such a product of your place and time in history. It's a shame that the preaching of the word and the public worship of God seem to be so downplayed in exchange for individual religious experience today, even in Reformed churches.



David,

Are you familiar with the Westminster Directory on Private and Family Worship? I think it may speak to this issue...How do you read it? By the way, I aggree with you that far too often we are "products of our own time". Modernism has firmly planted itself in the Church and it's like an uphill battle when you challenge the status quo.


----------



## Davidius

DTK said:


> The text says that the Bereans ("these" plural) searched the Scriptures. I see no reason to take the text to mean the "leaders in the church," because there was no church in Berea before Paul arrived. Your presupposition concerning "the leaders of the Church of Berea" just demonstrates how lightly you've dismissed something that differs from your opinion. There were no such "leaders" at that point in time. Paul was in a synagogue of the Jews.



Actually, _you_ are the one assuming that every Berean had a bible to read! If every single one of them checked the scriptures, they sure didn't do it at home with their own copy. 



> As for the quotes, you cannot agree with all of them because some of them insist, contrary to yourself, on the need for daily reading of the Scriptures. Moreover, those quotes are relevant because it indicates, per your question, the access of Christians to the Scriptures prior to printing press. Personally, I think you've simply dismissed what I've posted. You asked one person to "try not to be such a product of your time and place in history." I suppose that such advice is not only good for him, but for the adviser as well.



Don't be silly, of course I can agree with them that scripture reading is important. What none of them said, as far as I could tell, is that one _must_ read the scriptures daily. If they did, then I disagree. I do think reading is important and helpful but I refuse to take a legalistic stance. And I really don't understand why this is so problematic of a stance for you. This is the the whole point of everything I've been saying, no matter who had scriptures and who didn't. Even if I concede that to you (that people in Augustine's time, 300 years after Christ, had some scripture.) it doesn't change the fact that _scripture_ itself doesn't command it. I'm not going to have my conscious bound by you _or_ Augustine. 



> I made the mistake of taking your questions seriously. I promise not to repeat that mistake.



Aren't you an elder who is supposed to set an example of gracious speech? Why are you talking to me like this? Was I sarcastic and condescending toward you? (just a note: I actually never asked any questions for you to take seriously. I didn't start this thread, it was split-off from another and given an interrogative title by a mod). I think you should take my comments seriously since they're not being given to tear down (like your last statement) but to help out believers who are under the legalistic burden of individualistic teachers who cause them to feel condemned for no reason.


----------



## DTK

Sir,

Yes, I am an elder in the PCA. My remarks were not sarcastic. Your post dismissed my comments. I addressed your questions historically, and I am finished responding to you. 

And for the record, I haven't tried to bind your conscience to anything I've said. That is a presumption on your part.

It is both my desire and prayer that you may know God's richest blessings.

DTK


----------



## Davidius

DTK said:


> Sir,
> 
> Yes, I am an elder in the PCA. My remarks were not sarcastic. Your post dismissed my comments. I addressed your questions historically, and I am finished responding to you.



Right. You said taking my questions seriously was a mistake and put a smug ltitle smiley face next to your comment that you wouldn't make the mistake again. What tone would you say it _does_ convey?


----------



## DTK

I said I was done, but I will make just a few more comments. My smiley face was not an expression of smugness, but rather a desire to convey the friendly nature of my tone. As best I know my heart, no such thought entered my mind. It is my intention not to respond again, because I think you have "received" an offense where no offense was "given."

The Scriptures also instruct us in this regard, 1 Timothy 5:19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three witnesses. 

I meant/mean it when I said and say, is both my desire and prayer that you may know God's richest blessings.

DTK


----------



## Barnpreacher

I would say that it is most edifying and advantageous for the Christian to read and study his/her Bible every day. Of course, it shouldn't be a legalistic burden. That's why as ministers we should teach our people the importance of falling in love with God's Word. When they fall in love with God's Word then there isn't a question about whether they should be in it every day or not. They want to be.

We all have time to get on the internet every day. We all have time to watch television every day. We all have time to read our newspapers every day. Why would we put God's Word behind any of those things?

I don't think it's a sin to not read your Bible every day. (Perhaps some might consider it a sin of omission. I wouldn't argue about it either way.) But I really do believe if we loved it like we should then we would WANT to be in it everyday. I dare say we all struggle with this area, so I'm not pointing out anyone in particular. If anything I'm reminding myself of my own sinfulness that detracts from my love for God's Word.


----------



## Dagmire

DTK said:


> Sir,
> 
> Yes, I am an elder in the PCA. My remarks were not sarcastic.
> 
> DTK




Mr. King, I must say that your comment about his questions did appear quite sarcastic and rude. That's the way I read it. It was actually a little bit shocking. I say this not to divide the two of you, but in hopes that you will be reconciled.

And can you say "I won't make the mistake again of taking your questions seriously" in a friendly way? Do you really think that is a Christlike thing to say? Aren't we supposed to be longsuffering?








Also, on a side note. Should I have sent these concerns in a private message to Mr. King? It was my thinking that since it was a public matter that it was okay to address it publicly. But I'm not really sure. Please let me know.


----------



## DTK

Dagmire said:


> Mr. King, I must say that your comment about his questions did appear quite sarcastic and rude. That's the way I read it. It was actually a little bit shocking. I say this not to divide the two of you, but in hopes that you will be reconciled.


I am sorry that both of you have understood me in a manner that I never intended. I have already said it was not my intention. I simply don't have the desire to interact where I am not given the benefit of the doubt on the part of those with whom I'm interacting, because there is no doubt in my mind. Life this side of eternity is simply too short if exchanges here are often cast in the worst possible light.

DTK


----------



## Kevin

Pastor King, thanks for the citations from the fathers. That was most helpfull.

What is your view on the universality of the practice (of daily bible reading) at the time(s) they were writing? Would it be fair to extrapolate that the "average" layman would have both access and ability prior to the late medieval, pre-modern period.

It seems plausible that they were writing for and to the clergy, and thus for a literate audience. I am of course assuming that the average layman at the times in question was illiterate. What do you think?


----------



## Augusta

It is my understanding that the early Christians had the scriptures at hand because they copied and recopied each one of the books of the NT scriptures and passed them around. And this is mainly why our modern Scriptures are so reliable, because there are so many copies for them to compare.


----------



## Davidius

DTK said:


> I am sorry that both of you have understood me in a manner that I never intended. I have already said it was not my intention. I simply don't have the desire to interact where I am not given the benefit of the doubt on the part of those with whom I'm interacting, because there is no doubt in my mind. Life this side of eternity is simply too short if exchanges here are often cast in the worst possible light.
> 
> DTK



I didn't cast anything in the worst possible light intentionally. It came across as offensive whether you wanted it to or not and that's just the way it is. But I appreciate you explaining your intent and I accept your apology. I understand that, while it is easy to offend (especially on the internet), it is also easy to be offended, and I'll try to be quicker to give the benefit of the doubt in the future.


----------



## larryjf

My teachers being fallible and the word of God being infallible, i would much rather have the word of God than a teacher if i had to pick between the two.

But i thank my God that i don't have to pick!

Individuals throughout history may not have had their own personal Bibles, but i doubt that Christians who did have access to Bibles would have thought that not reading it was an option. They didn't read their Bibles because in God's providence they didn't have them. If in God's providence we have an abundance of Bibles what is our excuse?


----------



## InChains620

Barnpreacher said:


> I don't think it's a sin to not read your Bible every day. (Perhaps some might consider it a sin of omission. I wouldn't argue about it either way.) But I really do believe if we loved it like we should then we would WANT to be in it everyday. I dare say we all struggle with this area, so I'm not pointing out anyone in particular. If anything I'm reminding myself of my own sinfulness that detracts from my love for God's Word.


----------



## satz

OK, since I (sort off) started this thread, I would hate to see it degenerate.

I think what David is saying, if I understand him right, is simpy that the bible never commands that we must perform personally reading though the bible everyday. I think his comments were simply meant to say that if we miss out on our bible reading on day for whatever reason, there is no need to repent before the Lord.

I do not think he meant to say a christian could go though the day without giving any thought to the Lord without sinning. I think what he meant to say was that if a christian were to take, as his spiritual activity prayer, meditation, psalm singing, listening to an audio sermon or review his sermon notes from sunday, and missed out on bible reading one day, there was no sin involved.

If that is indeed what he was saying, I would not disagree.

In any case, let us all consider before we post, especially if it is done in anger.


----------



## MW

This would have to be considered one of the more bizarre threads on PB. Some have shown the common sense of the thing. Others have provided biblical references to daily meditation on the Word of God. Rev. King quoted Scripture and the fathers to prove the duty.

The objections brought against it include a lack of time or means; but the exception doesn't negate the rule. Others have said that meditation on the Word of God is not strictly tied to the letter of Scripture. Be careful, friends, liberals have been making the same divide in their attacks on the evangelical doctrines of revelation, inerrancy, and preservation. And the responses to Rev. King do not deserve mentioning.

Mary chose the better part when she sat at the feet of Jesus. We do not have the physical presence of Christ, but we do have the Bible, which is the undiluted Word of Christ. Reading the Bible every day is the one thing needful! Thomas Watson: "A godly man shows his love to the Word written: (a) By diligently reading it. The noble Bereans "searched the Scriptures daily" (Acts 17:11). Apollos was mighty in the Scriptures (Acts 18:12). The Word is our Magna Carta for heaven; we should be daily reading over this charter. The Word shows what is truth and what is error. It is the field where the pearl of price is hidden. How we should dig for this pearl! A godly man's heart is the library to hold the Word of God; it dwells richly in him (Col. 3:16)."


----------



## Barnpreacher

armourbearer said:


> Mary chose the better part when she sat at the feet of Jesus. We do not have the physical presence of Christ, but we do have the Bible, which is the undiluted Word of Christ. Reading the Bible every day is the one thing needful! Thomas Watson: "A godly man shows his love to the Word written: (a) By diligently reading it. The noble Bereans "searched the Scriptures daily" (Acts 17:11). Apollos was mighty in the Scriptures (Acts 18:12). The Word is our Magna Carta for heaven; we should be daily reading over this charter. The Word shows what is truth and what is error. It is the field where the pearl of price is hidden. How we should dig for this pearl! A godly man's heart is the library to hold the Word of God; it dwells richly in him (Col. 3:16)."



Right on the money!!!  

Without the Word there is no sanctification. Jesus prayed, "_Sanctify them through thy truth, thy WORD is truth_."

In some form or fashion one needs an intake of the Word every day. I tell my congregation all the time to get in it every day in some way. I don't necessarily think you have to beat yourself up if you don't get 10 chapters a day in. And if someone says something to that extent then that is foolish. But even if it's taking a few verses a day and meditating on the Word I really believe it needs to be done every day.

*Ephesians 5:26*, "_That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word_,"

I still think think it is a matter of having that desire and want to be in God's Word. If Christians fell in love with it like they should then they would want to be in it everyday. I don't know about anyone else but I love my wife and my daughter more than anything else apart from the Lord Jesus Christ. One of the ways that I know I love them so much is that I love to be with them and I love to be around them. It should be the same way with Jesus Christ. He's not going to speak to us in dreams and visions. He's going to do it in His Word. Why would we not want to hear what He has to say every day? 

And we can say that we shouldn't beat ourselves up if we miss some kind of study in God's Word every day, but in reality there's no real excuse not to be is there? If there is then I'd like to hear it.


----------



## InChains620

*....agreed*

   I totally agree Barnpreacher.


----------



## DTK

armourbearer said:


> Mary chose the better part when she sat at the feet of Jesus. We do not have the physical presence of Christ, but we do have the Bible, which is the undiluted Word of Christ. Reading the Bible every day is the one thing needful! Thomas Watson: "A godly man shows his love to the Word written: (a) By diligently reading it. The noble Bereans "searched the Scriptures daily" (Acts 17:11). Apollos was mighty in the Scriptures (Acts 18:12). The Word is our Magna Carta for heaven; we should be daily reading over this charter. The Word shows what is truth and what is error. It is the field where the pearl of price is hidden. How we should dig for this pearl! A godly man's heart is the library to hold the Word of God; it dwells richly in him (Col. 3:16)."


Rev. Winzer's words above brought to my mind some other choice quotes from John Chrysostom...

*Chrysostom (349-407):* The mouths of the inspired authors are the mouth of God, after all; such a mouth would say nothing idly — so let us not be idle in our listening, either. You see, if those who dig up metals do not pass over even tiny fragments, but on striking a vein of gold look around carefully for nuggets, much more should we do this in the case of the Scriptures. Admittedly, in the case of metals the search is very difficult for the prospectors: the metals are earth and the gold is nothing but earth, and their natural commonality deceives the eye of the prospectors; yet instead of desisting they give evidence of utter diligence, knowing as they do by sight what is really earth and what is really gold. In the case of Scripture, on the other hand, it is not like this: the gold does not lie mixed up with earth — it is pure gold. “The Lord’s sayings are untainted,” Scripture says, remember, “silver purified by fire, tested by earth” — that is to say, the Scriptures are not metals that require hard labor; rather, they provide a treasure ready for those searching for the wealth coming from them. It is in fact sufficient merely to peep within, and go away filled with every benefit; it is sufficient only to open them, and at once discern the sparkle of the jewels. Robert Charles Hill, trans., _St. John Chrysostom, Old Testament Homilies, Volume Two: Homilies on Isaiah and Jeremiah_ (Brookline: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2003), Homily Two on Isaiah 6, p. 65.

*Chrysostom (349-407) on the communion of saints:* Praise the Lord, my soul. Let us sing this together with David: if he is not present in body, at least he is in spirit. For proof that the righteous are present with us, and sing along with us, listen to what Abraham says to the rich man: when he said, “Send Lazarus so that my brothers may learn what happens in Hades and put their affairs in order,” he replied to him, “They have Moses and the prophets.” *Actually, Moses and all the prophets were long dead in the body, but in their writings they had them. After all, if a person sets up a lifeless image of son or dear one and thinks that person, though dead, is present, and through the lifeless image he imagines him, much more do we enjoy the communion of the saints through the divine Scriptures, having in them images not of their bodies but of their souls, the words spoken by them being of their very souls.* Robert Charles Hill, trans., _St. John Chrysostom, Old Testament Homilies, Volume Three: Homilies on the Psalms_ (Brookline: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2003), Homily on Psalm 146.1, p. 116.

DTK


----------



## Davidius

satz said:


> I think what David is saying, if I understand him right, is simpy that the bible never commands that we must perform personally reading though the bible everyday. I think his comments were simply meant to say that if we miss out on our bible reading on day for whatever reason, there is no need to repent before the Lord.
> 
> I do not think he meant to say a christian could go though the day without giving any thought to the Lord without sinning. I think what he meant to say was that if a christian were to take, as his spiritual activity prayer, meditation, psalm singing, listening to an audio sermon or review his sermon notes from sunday, and missed out on bible reading one day, there was no sin involved.


----------

