This post is actually an addendum to a conversation which has continued in the "comments" section of the post entitled "On why I don't care about the infallibility of Scripture..." (which was an intentionally eye-catching title--sorry, I may have given into sensationalism a bit with this title, but it's been my most popular post because of it!). I wanted to offer this comment as a response to Nick's last comment in that "comments" section, but I also want to offer to the rest of the readers and followers of this blog. Please refer to the "comments" of the other post for the background to this conversation.
Nick, I've been chewing on your thoughts a bit more--I have to say I REALLY appreciate your critique of what I wrote, and I want to offer just one further thought. I've basically already said this in my most recent comment on that blog post, but perhaps not as clearly as I could:
I think what probably all of us in this comments section--and hopefully all Christians everywhere--can agree upon is that we need to trust that the Scriptures are INSPIRED by God. This seems to me to clearly be a central claim of the Church since its beginnings, and it seems to be a fairly clear claim of the authors of the texts themselves. However, we have--post-Reformation--attached this notion of "textual infallibility" or perhaps "internal textual consistency" to our understanding of what "inspired" means, and this is where I think there are obvious problems.
(I think this sort of notion of "inspiration" is indicative of a modern, European way of thinking. Let's face it, the basic litmus test for any argument in Western philosophy in general is its internal consistency; whether or not an argument can be shown to be true, if it is internally consistent we Westerners give it a significant amount of credence. This notion seems to me to be closely related to our idea of textual inerrancy.)
So we have been trained in modern Protestant America to equate "inspiration" with "textual consistency and inerrancy." I think this gives some explanation of the origins of both the phenomena of so-called "modern, liberal biblical criticism" and "conservative fundamentalism."
Now, I am not yet exactly sure how to state the doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture apart from the notions of textual inerrancy, but this is a thought I'm going to really chew on.
Your thoughts?...anyone?
I know I haven't posted in a while, but I feel like I should. I also know this really isn't the blog posting that started my wrestling with a certain piece of scripture that I feel was contradicted in a previous post. So I am really screwing up how this is all suppose to work, but I just want to put it out there.
ReplyDeleteHere's the scripture from Jeremiah 31
29 "In those days people will no longer say,
'The fathers have eaten sour grapes,
and the children's teeth are set on edge.'
30 Instead, everyone will die for his own sin; whoever eats sour grapes—his own teeth will be set on edge.
31 "The time is coming," declares the LORD,
"when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
32 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
though I was a husband to [d] them, [e] "
declares the LORD.
33 "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time," declares the LORD.
"I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
34 No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,'
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest,"
declares the LORD.
"For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more."
In one of the blogs it was stated that only the church as a whole has the right to interpret scripture. I disagree and I believe scripture disagrees. I by no means want to remove the authority of the Body of Christ and community! Because scripture is clear that the Body of Christ should be a vital part of each individual Christians life as well. But there is a very personal and individual relationship that takes place between God and man. It is even demonstrated in Jesus life, whether he wrote a word or not. The Gospels are very clear in stating that Jesus spent time alone with the Father. Now obviously the Jesus would not misinterpret the scriptures, but the important thing is that He always placed His will under the Father's will. And I think that is where we fall short! When we look at scripture individually and sometimes corporately, we come looking for answers that we want. Excuses to say that our behaviors or desires are ok and acceptable. But this is NEVER how Jesus approached or used the scriptures. When Jesus quoted the Old Testament did so to change behavior or to stand against temptation. To point out sin and to encourage correct was of living.
(please continue reading in the next comment)
(continued from comment above)
ReplyDeleteI have a really hard time believe that the only authority of scripture is through church history/ tradition. I believe that God speaks directly to us through His word! That is one of the reason He sent the Holy Spirit. I am not saying we don't get wrong some of the time, and that is why we are to be members of the body of Christ to keep us in balance.
As to the issues of saying oh that was the culture back then and this is the culture now so it is ok to do this or that. I think first of all the biggest question is it a personal selfish gain or does it exalt Christ. If that doesn't answer the question take into consider the Scriptures and the Church history on the issue.
I am sorry but to if you have to play around with word games, definition, translation, miss interpretations to prove your point or what your doing is ok by scripture you missed the boat! That is not the reason the Scriptures were written! The Scriptures were written to exalt Christ and lead us to a restored relationship with Him! And God sent us the Holy Spirit to lead us in guide us. The curtain was torn we can come directly to him, and he allows us to speak directly to him. But we have to allow him to get ourselves out of the way!
I throughly believe that He speaks directly to us through the scriptures He has given us through human authors with all there fallibility so that he might perfect us and purify us. I believe that he speaks to us in every way that he can! Through the Word, through the Church, through his Creation, in big voices, and in small voices. I believe he speaks to us in our hearts, minds, and sometime even audibly. We are asked to trust and obey, and allow him to strip us of any selfishness. We must place our faith in him. I believe that is God was willing to send his only son to die for us, and risk so much for love. That he would protect his Holy Word as it was written down by men, canonized by the church, and interpreted by its readers. When we remove ourselves and our selfish desires and truly seek the will of God, then we will see who truly has authority of the scriptures and that is God himself!
"This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time," declares the LORD.
"I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
Brandon, I hope you're doing well in the Delicious Coast (a.k.a. Costa Rica--did I get my translation right?). I wanted to say thanks for keeping up with and commenting on the blogs. A brief response I might offer:
ReplyDeleteYou have certainly pointed out one of the central passages of all of Scripture: the New Covenant prophesied by Jeremiah in ch.31. This is exactly the covenant that Jesus refers to in his speech before the Last Supper, and the covenant Paul often refers to in his writings as well. The Church teaches that Christ's life and ministry--followed by the all-important event of the pouring out of the Spirit at Pentecost--fulfilled this prophecy. You've definitely hit the nail on the head by referencing this text.
One point I would take issue with is the assumption that the texts can "speak" to us as individuals outside the community of faith. And I know I'm going against the Protestant grain here, but hear me out. While I would never say that the Holy Spirit is unable to speak to an individual, in private, concerning the meaning of the Scriptures, I do not believe that the Holy Spirit will ever say something that disagrees with the Church's (the Church, rightly defined) interpretation. He may use an individual to illuminate or deepen the Church's understanding, but it still comes down to the belief that the NORMATIVE interpretation of Scripture is generated through the consensus of the faithful throughout all time and space--not by any individual, regardless of their claim to understand the Scriptures as aided by the Holy Spirit. I think this is the major error of the Protestant understanding of the Bible. That is not to say that all Protestant understanding of the Bible is in error, but in this sense I believe it is.
Hey Ian,
ReplyDeleteI think the difference between our two points of view is who is doing the leading. I feel like as if you are saying that the church is leading scriptural interpretation, where I believe that the Spirit is and should be leading scripture interpretation. So in other words the Body of Christ is not leading the Head. The Head is leading the Body of Christ. As the body of Christ we are to follow where ever the spirit guides us, and is working. This is not to take away from the importance of the body of Christ or the individual's responsibility. We are the hands and feet. I truly believe that God speaks to the individual through his word! Just as he Speaks to the whole body! I also believe that individuals as well as the body of Christ read the scriptural texts with selfish and impure motives which taints scriptural interpretation.
Lets look at some examples from the scripture where God spoke to the individual. Paul versus the disciples and the majority of the church leaders and the issue of circumcision. Most of Paul's letters correcting wrong practices happening with in the church. Moses received the 10 commandments for the whole nation of Israel. John and his letters to the church. I know there are many more examples.
Maybe the problem isn't that the scriptures can be correctly interpret individuals but the problem is with the protestant reformation we went to the extreme taking the checks and balances of the Body of Christ out of the equation. Think about it though, the Body and its church leaders were not teaching and interpreting the scriptures correctly when the reformation happened. If we only relay on the Church body, and don't seek the Spirits guidance it is just as bad as relying only on your individual interpretation and not checking it with the church. The church has done many wrong and sinful things in the name of Jesus saying that the scriptures teach it. (e.g. The crusades, selling salvation).
I want to be clear! I do not believe that scripture is here to make my life easier or happy! I believe fully in its life changing words and the way to salvation! I fully believe that I am responsible for myself as well as being responsible to the body of Christ!
Brandon, I really appreciate how much you've engaged with this blog and the ideas I've proposed in it. In all, I would imagine you and I are not articulating two very different points of view--we both believe that the Holy Spirit speaks to the Church and to its members; we believe that Scripture is the inspired words of God; we both believe that there is something very important to be said for the "checks and balances" needed within the body of Christ in order to interpret the Scriptures properly.
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate your dialogue, friend, and your interest in keeping up with my blogs. I'm keeping up with yours too!
Ian,
ReplyDeleteI came across this article today on inerrancy, and thought you might be interested:
praisegodbarebones.blogspot.com/2009/10/errant-bible-gateway-heresy.html