[Sidenote: D. L. Moody and the International Bible Classes]
My experience in the premises soon began to be that of others. Some theological students under my care at the time undertook the mastery of the English Bible in the same way and with the same blessing. Then the work began to broaden, and God's further purpose to reveal itself. Such Bible institutes as those already spoken of, organised for the purpose of training Christian young men and women as evangelists, pastors' helpers, missionaries and gospel workers generally, were in need of some simple, yet practical, method of putting their students in possession of the facts of the Word of God for use among the people with whom they had to deal, and God had been making ready to supply their need. But out of these institutes again have grown those large interdenominational Bible classes which have become a feature of our church life in different parts of the country. Their origin is traceable, like that of so many other good things of the kind, to the suggestion and support of the late D. L. Moody. One summer, while conducting a special course of Bible study in the Chicago Institute, he said to the writer: "If this synthetic method of teaching the Bible is so desirable for and popular with our day classes, why would it not take equally well with the masses of the people on a large scale? If I arrange for a mass meeting in the Chicago Avenue Church, will you speak to the people on 'How to Master the English Bible' and let us see what will come of it?" The suggestion being acted upon, as a result about four hundred persons out of some one thousand present that evening resolved themselves into a union Bible class for the synthetic study of the Bible under the leadership of Mr. William R. Newell, then assistant superintendent of the Institute. This class continued to meet regularly once a week with unabated interest throughout the whole of that fall and winter, and the next year had multiplied into five classes held in different parts of the city, on different evenings of the week, but under the same teacher, and with an aggregate membership of over four thousand. The year following, this had increased to over five thousand, two or three of the classes averaging separately an attendance of twelve hundred to fifteen hundred. Since that time several similar classes have attained a membership approaching two thousand, and one, in Toronto, to nearly four thousand. At the time of this writing, in the heat of the summer, such a class is being held weekly in Chicago. From Chicago the work spread in other cities of the East and Middle West, and under other teachers. Classes for briefer periods have been carried on in Canada and Great Britain. A religious weekly organised a class to be conducted through its columns, enrolling tens of thousands in its membership, and through its influence many pastors, Y.M.C.A. and Y.W.C.A. workers have instituted classes in their own fields which have, in turn, multiplied the interest in the popular study of the English Bible in increasing ratio.
EXPLANATION OF THE METHOD
PART II
EXPLANATION OF THE METHOD
The contents of the preceding pages may be said to be preliminary to the definition or description of what the synthetic study of the Bible is; for by that name the method to be described has come to be called. The word "synthesis" suggests the opposite idea to the word "analysis." When we analyse a subject we take it apart and consider it in its various elements, but when we "synthesise" it, so to speak, we put it together and consider it as a whole. Now the synthetic study of the Bible means, as nearly as possible, the study of the Bible as a whole, and each book of the Bible as a whole, and as seen in its relation to the other books.
[Sidenote: A Coloured Critic]
A very dear Christian friend and neighbour, the late A. J. Gordon, D.D., used to tell an amusing story of a conversation with a deacon of a church for coloured people in his proximity. He asked the deacon how the people liked their new pastor, and was surprised to hear him say, "Not berry much." When pressed for an explanation he added that the pastor told "too many 'antidotes' in the pulpit." "Why," said the doctor, "I'm surprised to hear that; I thought he was a great Bible man." "Well," replied the deacon, "I'll tell yer how 'tis. He's de best man I ebber see'd to tak' de Bible apart, but he dunno how to put it togedder agin." Principal Cairns, I think it was, who heard this story, said it was the best illustration of the distinction between the constructive and destructive criticism to which he had ever listened. The synthetic study of the Bible, it may be said in a word, is an attempt to put it together rather than to take it apart.
[Sidenote: Illustrations of the Method]
To illustrate, I have always felt a sort of injury in the way I was taught geography; capes and bays, and lakes and rivers were sought to be crowded on my understanding before I ever saw a globe. Should not the globe come first, then the hemispheres, continents, nations, capitals and the rest? Does not a view of the whole materially assist in the comprehension of the parts? Is it not vital to it, indeed? And history—what is the true method of its study? Is it not first the outline history of the world, then its great divisions, ancient, mediaeval, modern, then the separate peoples or kingdoms in each, and so on? How could you hope to interest a child in botany who had never seen a flower? How would you study a picture of a landscape? Would you cover the canvas with a cloth and study one feature of it at a time? What idea of it would you obtain under such circumstances? Would you not rather say, "Hang it in the proper light, let me get the right position with regard to it, and take it all in at a single glance, fasten the whole of it at once on the camera of my consciousness, and then I shall be able and interested afterward to study it in detail, and to go into the questions of proportion, and perspective, and shading, and colouring and all that"? Is it not the failure to adopt the corresponding plan in Bible study which accounts in large measure for the lack of enthusiastic interest in its prosecution on the part of the people?