Save
Saving
  • Michael Lane

    Brandon, this looks great. Clear headings and well organized.

    posted in Passage discussions read more
  • Michael Lane

    So here’s a nagging question that I have had: Why is there not a label for a Ground-Inference-Ground arc? I might call it an Inverse Bilateral.

    Psalm 86:8-10 seems like a perfect candidate. Because verse 10 is a restatement of verse 8, it does not seem accurate to arc 8-9 together, grounded by 10. Nor 9-10 together as an inference from 8.
    Unite my Heart to Fear Your Name.png

    posted in Passage discussions read more
  • Michael Lane

    Brandon, here is a reference sheet of English conjunctions from the Arcing Course. It is not an exhaustive list but it is quite thorough. The middle symbol for each item is a specific label used for arcing/bracketing. For the sake of the Paraphrase Course, simply note that the symbols S, A, and P are all Parallel connections, while all the rest are Supporting connections.

    posted in Course discussions read more
  • Michael Lane

    My inclination would be to use Action-Result for the first type, that is, a cause-effect. Ground fits here as well if the emphasis is on the logical basis of an outcome as opposed to an event based outcome.

    For the second type (evidence of a reality), Ground is appropriate. As in courtroom law, evidence presented forms the basis (or ground) for the conclusions drawn.

    posted in Discourse (Arcing / Bracketing) read more
  • Michael Lane

    Good question!

    I would suggest either the Phrasing or Bracketing courses. Phrasing will emphasize the grammar, while Bracketing/arcing will emphasize the logical flow, so take your pick.
    I lean (and it is only slightly) toward Bracketing over Arcing only because it has an emphasis on discerning the main point which is a great follow-up to Paraphrase.

    That being said, I’d love to hear what others have to say.

    posted in Course discussions read more
  • Michael Lane

    I think this is a great question Jonathan. I’m posting this comment in order to bring it back up the pile for others to see. I’d love to hear ideas on this.

    My own thought is that the Phrasing module might be a good place to start. It can help show children how words come together to make phrases (which is how we speak) and that phrases are the building blocks for communicating ideas. This module doesn’t require getting technical about grammar and so it can be adapted to whatever level a child is at.

    posted in Theological discussions read more
  • Michael Lane

    Brandon, my biggest encouragement is plunge in. Don’t be afraid to make a mistake… the instructor has made plenty of his own! (that would be me) 😉

    I would also advise you not to get lost in the details. Focus on the big picture. That is, identify the major topics that you see and place a division when the topic changes. Look for the clues the author himself gives that he is shifting gears.

    And prayerfully enjoy your study.
    I look forward to seeing your work,
    Michael

    posted in Course discussions read more
  • Michael Lane

    Great Question!
    I would not agree with your assessment for a few reasons…
    Arcing/Bracketing are quite useful with smaller portions - anything with 2 or more propositions. I have often pulled just a verse or two out of a larger arc simply to highlight a single logical relationship.

    Phrasing can be useful for larger passages. In my own experience, I have regularly phrased whole chapters, in fact this is often the first step in my sermon preparation. (My phrase often gets tweaked as my study progresses.)

    I agree that Arcing/Bracketing does work well with a large, extended passage of multiple chapters. This is called macro-arcing and requires that you condense closely related propositions into single units, otherwise the arc gets unwieldy and the larger thought flow lost in the details. I’ve not tried to Phrase such a long passage, but suspect it can be done in the same manner– that is, by condensing closely knit phrases together.

    The main difference I see is that Phrasing emphasizes the grammatical relationships, while Arcing/Bracketing emphasizes the logical relationships. I say, “emphasize,” because, of course, grammar and logic are closely related.

    posted in Discourse (Arcing / Bracketing) read more
  • Michael Lane

    Those Who Relax the Law.png

    So who are those who relax the commandments of God?

    The Pharisees were commonly considered to be the ones who held the Law in highest regard, And so the relaxers of the law must be at the other end of the spectrum. And yet it is the Pharisees whom Jesus consistently confronted as disregarding or nullifying the Law.

    While reflecting on Matthew 5:19, the question struck me: Might Jesus be referring to the Pharisees here, not their opposite? For they were actually relaxing the law by their multiplicity of qualifications and legalism, thinking, “As long as I do xyz and don’t do abc, then I am ok.” Jesus emphatically says, “No! You can get all your check boxes right and by your wicked heart, be wholly unrighteous.” The examples in Matt 5:21-48 follow this pattern and indeed point even deeper - that the Pharisees’ manipulation of the law into wicked justifications of their self-serving ends was, in fact, a means to avoid true obedience. Thus his declaration that one’s righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees is to say, unlike them, you must actually do, accomplish, fulfill the law. (See Romans 8:2-4)

    posted in Passage discussions read more