Showing posts with label Bible. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bible. Show all posts

20151218

Scripture Questions

I was just reading a recent letter from my acquaintance, Abdu Murray, about his interaction with a Muslim questioning a fact about Jesus. Abdu answered the questioner by turning to the actual text of the Bible. The answer was clear and the questioner was corrected in his thinking. The issue, as presented by the questioner, was ‘Here is a scripture that speaks against your position.’ But Abdu wasn’t so easily put off, he did what we all should: he opened up his copy of scripture and read it.

If I remember anything that Dr. Breshears hammered into my thick skull it was this: “Look at the text.” There is no good interpretation outside or detached from the text. You would think that would be obvious: how can you interpret words when you will not read them? But it happens all the time – embarrassingly, especially in the church.

I used to be guilty of this all the time. Somebody at work would make some claim about what the Bible said. Usually some verse or phrase taken wildly out of context. But I would make a mistake; I would say something like, “No, that’s not right” and correct the error, talk about the text, and all of that without looking at the text! That was a weak response.

What I should have done was just respond with, “Well, open up your Bible…,” (always have the questioner use their copy, which they trust) “… and let’s look at the text.” The answer is usually there in the context of that stray verse or clause. That means looking at the sentences above, and then below; understanding the whole paragraph. That means understanding the flow of thought through the paragraph, what the paragraph really is about, and where that stray verse or phrase fits.

Dr. Breshears encouraged us to have the questioner read the text themselves and then to ask them “simple interpretive questions.” Questions like:
            “Who is the author talking about here?”
            “What do you think was happening at that point?”
            “What does this word refer to?”
            “What point is the author trying to make?”
            “After reading the whole paragraph, was the author talking about this, or that?”

Simply looking at the text, rather than talking about the text, is really why the Bible exists. Recently, somebody made an assertion, ‘supported’ by scripture, in a group setting that I ‘felt’ was wrong but was momentarily thrown. So I said the right thing: “Let’s look at the text.” We opened to the passage, read through the relevant paragraph, and by the time we got to the end of the paragraph, it was clear that the assertion was ‘foreign’ to what the text was really communicating.

So what I’m urging you, fellow Christian, to do next time you get into one of those workplace or classroom ‘discussions’ about scripture is to find the passage, get your questioner to read the actual passage, in context, and ask them ‘simple interpretive questions.’


As a postscript, there is a great little essay by Greg Koukl on why you should “Never Read A Bible Verse” that speaks to the importance of context. You should read that!

20130102

Weird “Christians”


Generally, those in the pastorate very much want to interact with people outside their church. We see ourselves not only as helpers but also as those with the ‘treasure in jars of clay.’ We want to help and we have something of value that we want to share. But it gets weird, in some cases.
We got a call from a guy some time ago who initially asked about the church but then had very specific questions. The call was initially fielded by our church secretary who took the name and number of the caller and said she’d gotten rather flustered by him. The questions were getting specific and she did not feel confident to address them.
So I called this guy. It was a very unpleasant conversation with this guy insisting that churches don’t do the things in the Bible. His grammar was poor and his manner both abrasive and confrontational. At one point he said that we should never do things that are not in “the book.” So I asked him about democracy, automobiles, and English – all things that are not in the Bible that he himself participates. Not many people like being drawn into a debate like this. I’m one of those, as well. It went like that for ten minutes.
Finally I asked what church he regularly attends. He said he goes to lots of churches. But I asked; do you attend any one church regularly? No, he replied. I offered, "Then you yourself are not obeying the fellowshipping commanded in the book of Hebrews." (Hebrews 10:25). He was quiet for a second and I followed up with the fact that his whole conversational posture here was argumentative. He denied that – of course – and insisted that he was “just asking questions.” I don’t know about you all, but somebody who tells me they are “just asking questions” is not “just asking questions.” Every lawyer knows that hostile cross-examination is always done “just asking questions.”
He had a theological hot button about being saved. How did it really happen? I quoted the epistle to the Romans – one of the most powerful discussions on our need for salvation in all of scripture. But that wasn’t "good enough" (scripture isn’t “good enough?”); at the same time, he insisted that I find a place in the Bible where people were actually saved because they believed on Jesus and were baptized. I countered, if the Apostle Paul says that’s the way it is, then it is true. The Bible doesn’t have to provide an example – why do you insist on that? Again, a moment of silence.
He sounded like a “discernment” guy and his whole ‘conversation’ was about telling rather than listening. I gently confronted him on his tone, his attitude, and his judgmental posture and suggested that if he wanted to actually engage the truths of scripture then he would need to do more conversing (that is, listening) than broadcasting. That didn’t seem to be likely so I told him that he would not be interested in coming to our church.
I have no doubt that on some discernment website or blog, this nutcase will state that I or my church do not really believe or practice the Bible.
What is really annoying about people like this is their assumption that they know more than they do. Reading the Bible is fairly easy to do for a literate person – fully understanding it takes a lifetime of rigorous, detailed, and humble study. Those who have actually done that report that the Bible is richer, deeper, far more complex and nuanced than they ever imagined when they began. “Great is the mystery of godliness.”
But for people like my caller (and other so-called ‘discernment’ crusaders), the truth is simplistic and must correspond only with what they wish to believe. They can’t imagine that they might be wrong. Humility is not a virtue and certainly not a characteristic they possess. In fact, actual ignorance and lack of education is held up as a strength. These are weird people.
But what is even more worrying is that there are many contemporary ‘Evangelicals’ who can’t tell the difference. I mean, as an example, people who don’t know the difference between a Benny Hinn (heretic) and Charles Stanley (good guy) – they’re both on T.V. It turns out that actual and real discernment among most Christians is not that common. What passes as ‘discernment’ on the internet is a dressed-up version of old-school Neo-Fundamentalism. You know who those are: the people who don’t seem to be for anything but are very much AGAINST nearly everything. I am concerned because there are a lot of shallowly-planted followers of Jesus who actually can’t tell the difference between real discernment and the angry discernment.
So, what can be done? Is it hopeless? Is there any way to beef-up the true discernment of the average American Evangelical? What do you think?

20080824

"Grey" Scripture

One of the questions that was brought up during this last course was a question about the concept of the "sufficiency of scripture." One of my classmates provocatively asked whether the Bible speaks mostly in guidelines, suggestions, and is mostly "grey" rather than being "black and white." That got me thinking.
We learn, in Bible classes, the Interpreting Scriptures course, and the theology classes that the Bible is "sufficient." But we don't spend a lot of time poking at that idea.

I'm going to quote a guy named Ken Myers:
We don't hear much about the "insufficiency of Scripture." But it is an important point to keep in mind when thinking about Christianity and culture. Scripture does not present itself as the only source of truth about all matters. It does not even present itself as a source of some truth about everything. It presents itself as the only authoritative source of truth about some things, and they are the most important things.
So, seems to me that the issue is whether the Bible presents the down-to-the-last-detail truth about those important things. In agreement with the folks posing the "grey" question, I think the answer is occasionally: "no." That is, not all the details of how to live life are filled in by the Bible in such a way that we in our modern (or post-modern) mindset would like. I think that God does grant us the dignity of discovery and wants us to work a bit at connecting the dots that he's laid out.

As to the not-as-important-things? For example: the Bible doesn't directly speak to whether I should buy and use a Mac or PC - much less whether I should use electricity. From that, I would conclude that issue (Mac or PC) is not really as important as stuff like: what's our relationship to The Creator; do we understand that we have a HUGE sin problem; do we see that the answer is Jesus; do we connect with a well-done church; do we do (as well as believe) a true gospel? Those are The Important Issues and the Bible speaks clearly to them. Though not even those matters are always covered in complete detail.

While I am, even now, going through a thought experiment about the concept of biblical "ambiguity" (in a technical sense) I'm not at all comfortable with the thought that most of the Bible is 'grey.'

But I sense that's not the core of the question. It seems my classmate is responding to an overly-literalistic tradition. And to that, I certainly agree that scripture gives us more freedom and liberty in Christ than some of our Fightin' Fundies brothers and sisters are willing to admit.