@TRiG Good article. Thanks for the link. Concordances are useful. But they're no substitute for actually knowing the Bible story in its full sweep and context.
@TRiG I find that most Christians I've encountered who "know the Bible" "know" it through a thick lens of doctrine, and know scattered passages that are commonly quoted to support that doctrine. Very few have a real, living sense of the whole sweep of the Bible story, its characters, and the unfolding story told in it.
I have the annoying habit of actually looking up all the Bible references in Christian tracts. Most of them don't say what the tract says they say even taken out of context, let alone taken in context. I come away assured that the writer of those tracts really doesn't know the Bible at all, but is just parroting the doctrine accepted in that particular sect, and giving it a veneer of "biblical basis" that is totally flimsy and shot through with holes.
I've come to the conclusion that most traditional Christians are simply unable to read the Bible with any real comprehension of its storyline and meaning. They've had their minds so crammed with doctrinal formulas that when they read the Bible, that's all they see. And you can point out until your blue in the face, "Actually, the Bible doesn't say that," and it will all fall on deaf ears.
They already "know" what the Bible says without actually having to read the thing. And if it doesn't actually say what they think it says, well then, dammit, that's obviously what it really means! ("But it doesn't say that." "So what!?!")
It's a massive, classic example of, "Don't confuse me with the facts. My mind is made up."
The Upper Room
The Upper Room