Beth Moore Revelation Bible Study
Last Sunday there was an announcement in our Sunday School class that a group of men would be doing the same Beth Moore study of Revelation that their wives were beginning this week. I decided that I wanted to join any group of men in my church that was interested in studying the Bible and forked over the $10 for my study booklet. The first session was fast-paced and I can tell she is really trying to cram as much information as possible into the lessons. The first one lasted 80 minutes and we had about five minutes of discussion afterwards.
I learned a lot about Revelation from the first lesson, and Beth Moore repeatedly goes back to the commentaries and some of the Greek text for her exposition. I am pretty impressed with the nuance that she puts into her teaching as I don’t normally get this kind of detail from a sermon or even a Bible study, usually. The pastor’s wife mentioned on Sunday that she has been praying for the men’s Bible Study group to start back up again (ever since it stopped). At the end of the final eleventh session I plan to ask the group if anyone wants to do a new study and basically restart the men’s Bible Study group.
Incidentally, there was only one thing that I didn’t like about Beth Moore’s lesson (besides being referred to as “sister” and “girlfriend” repeatedly). At one point she mentions that the NKJV uses a word that isn’t found in the other translations and that is the term “signified” in Rev 1:1. Her reason was that “signified’ means “to make known by a sign” and that this sets the tone for the entire Revelation. I agree with her that it does set the tone, but her persistent reference to how accurate the NKJV was in this verse was very disappointing. For one, the KJV also uses the term “signify” and the NKJV is just a revision of it. For those of you that don’t already know, the NKJV is my least favorite of all translations and I don’t recommend it to anyone. Use the KJV, RSV, NRSV, or ESV but not the NKJV… Anyways, Beth Moore is using the NIV for this study and she pointed out that the NKJV got it right here and the NIV left out this critical word. I was following along in the (T)NIV and in this specific passage it uses the phrase “made it known” which is basically the definition she gives for “signified” Ugh. I don’t know why she spent several minutes on this, especially when the NIV still conveys the correct meaning. Fortunately this was the only dumb part of the lesson, though it didn’t help her that she was extolling the virtues of my least favorite English translation, and she was wrong to boot.
On a final note, my father really enjoys studying Biblical prophecy and especially Revelation. When I was visiting my mom in the hospital last week I took the opportunity to swing by their house and borrow a handful of my dad’s commentaries on the book. I now have print copies of Osborne, Smalley, Mounce (2nd), Boxall, Witherington, and Ladd on Revelation as well as Barrett on 1 Cor. since I’m studying that as well. I also have access to Osborne, Aune and Beale on Logos. My wife and I are planning to continue our study of 1 Cor. as well as going over the Revelation material together. It is quite enjoyable spending time together in scripture, and going through Bible Study booklets together seems to be the best method for us to study together. I will try to report back with how things go, as it’s a fresh new time of Bible Study for me right now.