G
GeorgiaPeach
Guest
I joined a “non-denominational” women’s Bible study group. It is sponsered by the military and I know all of the women outside of church. We are currently doing Beth Moore’s Daniel. It is DVD driven and in the first week she reassures her audience that her study is non-denominational. I am half-way through the study and don’t know where to go from here.
Beth Moore is very motivating and on the surface seems to know her stuff. The deeper I get into the study the more disturbed I become. I’m beginning to think that Beth Moore’s version of non-denomination means non-denominational Protestant.
Let me stress, her underlying message seems okay, but her delivery bothers me. She could write some great self-help books from a Christian perspective but her Bible study method is lacking.
What bothers me:
Any ideas, similar experiences or words of wisdom? I’ve been going to Mass every morning with my kids and praying a lot about it. I’m leaning towards using it as a growing experience. I will get up and walk out if any reference is made to the Catholic Church being the whore of Babylon. I don’t see her as being that obvious. I worry that as we get into the Revelation aspect of the study I won’t be able to discern between fact and fiction. I’m currently reading The Rapture Trap (Thigpen), reviewing The Lamb’s Supper as well as a Catholic study I did on Revelation so I am somewhat informed.
Sorry for the ramble, thanks in advance!
Beth Moore is very motivating and on the surface seems to know her stuff. The deeper I get into the study the more disturbed I become. I’m beginning to think that Beth Moore’s version of non-denomination means non-denominational Protestant.
Let me stress, her underlying message seems okay, but her delivery bothers me. She could write some great self-help books from a Christian perspective but her Bible study method is lacking.
What bothers me:
- She comes up with a theory and then searches for scripture to back-up her theory. Seems backwards, but whatever.
- She ties scriptures together by taking them out of context in order to match her theory.
- Many of her nit-picky highlights are pointless based on the version of the Bible she is using. i.e., in Daniel chapter 3 she claims the 4th person in the fire is the Son of God and not an angel of the Lord (NAB says clearly “angel of the Lord”). In chapter 5 the goes on about the importance of the only the gold vessel being taken from the house of God (NAB says both gold and silver were taken). There are many more.
- At the end of lesson 5 she asks everyone to stand up and repeat a pledge/prayer. If I’m going to make a pledge before the Lord I’d like to know what I’m pledging.
- Time after time she says things like “what this could mean.” It is very subtle but she says it with such authority that the women seem to eat up her every word, jotting down what she says as gospel truth.
- Her passive-aggressive attitude towards Catholicism. She makes numerous jabs at Catholic teaching that most Protestants or some Catholics for that matter wouldn’t recognize as such. A Catholic with weak understanding of Church teachings could be swayed by her distortions/ommisions/selective Bible quoting. Day one of Chapter 5 is about Sola Scriptura, although she doesn’t use that term. One of the bolded in red quotes in the margin is “The Bible is Complete and Fully Sufficient.” Ironically, she can’t make this point without referencing 8 sources outside scripture. Of course, she uses 2 Tim 3:16 to drive home her point.
In addition, she says that Baurach is a ‘writing’ and not scripture. Honestly, I had to laugh at her 2 Peter 3:15-16 reference to “self-proclaimed scholars” and “arrogance is not a sign of true intelligence.”
Any ideas, similar experiences or words of wisdom? I’ve been going to Mass every morning with my kids and praying a lot about it. I’m leaning towards using it as a growing experience. I will get up and walk out if any reference is made to the Catholic Church being the whore of Babylon. I don’t see her as being that obvious. I worry that as we get into the Revelation aspect of the study I won’t be able to discern between fact and fiction. I’m currently reading The Rapture Trap (Thigpen), reviewing The Lamb’s Supper as well as a Catholic study I did on Revelation so I am somewhat informed.
Sorry for the ramble, thanks in advance!