Looking for Curriculum Contributors

I have talked about the Bible Class Archive quite a bit on the blog. I continue to search for material to add to the resources there. If you have written Bible classes material and would like to share them please email them to me – matthewdabbs@hotmail.com and I will do two things with it. 1 – Post it in pdf in the Archive and 2 – give you full credit and a link to your blog in the archive. I also continue to look for ways to get the word out on this resource. If you are a minister, consider downloading lessons there. If you are not but know someone who may be interested please share this link with them – Bible class archive

If you need Bible class material please use these lessons. One of the reasons I am pursuing this is because there is a need for quality Bible class curriculum around the world and this gives people access to it who otherwise might not have the resources to purchase it. I have been able to get material to people in several countries thanks to the archive so this is making a difference! I also think it is a waste that we spend hundreds of hours writing curriculum for one local congregation and then it never sees the light of day ever again. So share it here!

About mattdabbs
I am a minister, husband, and father. My wife and I live and minister in Saint Petersburg, Florida. My primary ministry responsibilities include: small groups, 20s and 30s, involvement, and adult education.

8 Responses to Looking for Curriculum Contributors

  1. Ken Sublett says:

    2Peter 1:15 Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease
    to have these things always in remembrance.
    2Peter 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables,

    [Fables would be anything written by a human: rhetoricians, poets, song writers were forbidden to write True History]

    Ephesians 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

    That defines the ONLY material to be used for edification or education.

    when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,
    but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

    2Peter 1:17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
    2Peter 1:18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
    2Peter 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy;
    whereunto YE do well that ye take heed, The only worship word other than falling on your face as unto a light that shineth in a dark place,
    until the day dawn,
    and the day star arise in your hearts:
    2Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture
    is of any private interpretation.

    Peter leaves the Prophets by Christ and prophecies made more perfect by Jesus of Nazareth.
    The direct command was to PREACH the Word by READING the Word.

    Private interpretation means “further expounding”

    2Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man:
    but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost

    That was the Spirit of Christ (1 Peter 1:11; 2 Cor 3; Rev 19:10)

    I doubt that any curriculum is out there which has been the product of publishers who need to fit all of Ephesians in 13 weeks of sermonettes. I have been told that I forget that they are a BUSINESS.

    You need to do your own:
    A hand out of the Biblical Text for that day.
    Read it outloud which is a way to confess or speak together to affirm it.
    Define any unclear words.
    The synagogue is a syllogism:
    You Gather the Bible (only) study (only) group.
    You read the facts.
    You supply any back up such as parallels statements (absolutely necessary)
    You bring people TOGETHER in reaching a conclusion.

    You should be ready to suffer real bad.

    • mattdabbs says:

      Ken,

      I disagree with you on this in almost every possible way. I do appreciate your desire to study the text and much of the curriculum I am uploading is textual rather than topical. But you are taking these scriptures out of context and twisting them to fit your already made conclusion. Peter wasn’t condemning the use of Bible curriculum when he said not to follow cunningly devised fables. Do you really think that? I am talking about Bible-based curriculum that exammines the text, asks questions about the text and helps people make application. Tell me how that qualifies as cleverly devised fables and how from a biblical perspective you can define Peter’s phrase as, “anything written by a human: rhetoricians, poets, song writers were forbidden to write True History”

      You are aware that Paul quoted pagan poets, write. So he was sinning too. What am I missing here.

    • mattdabbs says:

      I re-read your comment and want to mention a couple of things.

      2 Peter is written to combat false teachers and the arguments they are leveling against others in the church. In 2 Peter 1:16 Peter is arguing against the use of made up information/untrue statements (mythos). He is not saying anything written by a human is intolerable and unacceptable. He is saying that the most important thing is letting divinely inspired scripture inform us and that our interpretations of those scriptures are Spirit led (1:20-21). Verse 20 is not about “private interpretation” vs public interpretation. That is a really poor translation in the KJV. The NIV is much closer to the meaning of the Greek here,

      “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”

      This does not mean we cannot interpret the text for ourselves or have a discussion to help interpret the text. All reading requires interpretation. There is just no getting around that. Words have meaning. We read them and try to understand them via interpretation. All communication necessitates interpretation.

      Let’s say I tell you “It’s really hot in here” does that mean I am stating a fact that the temp is high or could I be implying that I really want you to turn the AC on. It is a matter of interpretation and one has to try to figure that out based on the information they are given.

      So how does the model you provide for Bible study work?

      You need to do your own:
      1 – A hand out of the Biblical Text for that day.
      2 – Read it outloud which is a way to confess or speak together to affirm it.
      3 – Define any unclear words.
      4 – The synagogue is a syllogism:
      5 – You Gather the Bible (only) study (only) group.
      6- You read the facts.
      7 – You supply any back up such as parallels statements (absolutely necessary)
      8 – You bring people TOGETHER in reaching a conclusion.

      #3 requires interpretation. Which definition do you give a given word? You have to determine that via context, how the author used that word in other places, broader theology, linguistics/lexicon, etc. Putting all that together is interpretation.
      #7 – How do you determine which statements are parallel to a given verse? That requires interpretation. Which ones are absolutely necessary and which ones are not? Interpretation.
      #8 – Bringing people together to reach a conclusion requires interpretation. What does it all mean? Well, just read it again and again and again….but at some point you have to interpret what the text means in order to understand it.

      Last, how would you see preaching being done according to this model?

  2. Ken Sublett says:

    #3 means define words: if the KJV uses up to 61 words to translate 1 Greek word that means you do have to read it in context. For instance if Paul etal told us to SPEAK one to another you need to grasp that Paul did not command us to SING all together using our own composition.

    If the writers use words like play or sport or revel you need to understand what those words mean. Webster’s or a short lexicon does not define words but how those words were used in context. Any one who can type can now find resources not apparently available to the scholars who write and teach and preach.

    #7 Paul said that he wrote the same things to all of the churches so you need to see what he said maybe in a different form. The search for truth will sharpen swords. People like Perseus.com has a massive library of Greek, Latin and Biblical texts. Psallo is never translated as “melody” in any of the classical literature: it means “pluck” or “twang” something. Anti-psallo would permit playing and singing.

    #8 As facilitator of students if you read the whole thought pattern which might run several chapters (Romans 9-11 to repudiate predestination). If you make certain that everyone understands the surface meaning, and you enrich with word study, the conclusion of the Syllogism (synagogue conclusion) is to try to gather (synagogue) everyone’s agreement so that they–like all historic churches–go home with a portion of Scripture well understood. Application will occur to them. That defines the civil ekklesia more than the Jewish synagogue.

    Nothing is more mind-dulling and “shutting the mouth of the victim” than a preacher who struts and speaks about himself. The word Pathos under the heading of Logos outlaws any personal experience. I know of no “scholarly” work which does not lift isolated texts which has their “word” in it.

    http://www.piney.com/RefLutherPreaching.html

    Presbyterian Dabney: Anti-Campbells and Anti-Instruments

    http://www.piney.com/PreachDab.html

    Ask the mothers: they come for Bible school and tolerate the ritualism (legalism)

    • mattdabbs says:

      Ken,

      Help me understand how to do these things you mentioned without interpretation:
      1 – “If the writers use words like play or sport or revel you need to understand what those words mean.”

      2 – “If you make certain that everyone understands the surface meaning, and you enrich with word study, the conclusion of the Syllogism (synagogue conclusion) is to try to gather (synagogue) everyone’s agreement so that they–like all historic churches–go home with a portion of Scripture well understood.”

      Understanding requires interpretation. You can’t just read a passage uninterpreted. Comprehension demands interpretation. Am I missing your point or are you really saying interpretation must not be done? Because you sure are doing a lot of interpreting yourself, you know😉

    • Barb says:

      Wish I understood what that last statement meant.

  3. Drew Custer says:

    I have some materials at drewcuster.wordpress.com that you are welcome to post. Thanks!

    Drew Custer

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: