Honesty and the scriptures.

[Paige]

I placed this thread here, because I think the issue I'm tackling is a hold over from habits formed in church.

I'm noticing a new sensitivity in myself when reading the works of others, or listening to people's presentations. This sensitivity springs up over the phrase, "the bible teaches (fill in the blank)."

What I'm realizing more than ever before is that we can pretty much string together any number of verses and proclaim that the bible teaches just about anything. As long as we begin our case with the bible teaches, we feel we have asserted an authority behind our words and viewpoint that cannot be challenged.

Wouldn't it be more honest to begin by stating that "my studies of the scripture, and the hermeneutic I feel most closely harmonizes with the authors intent, leads me to believe (fill in the blank)?"

One way seems to enforce a power over way of being in this world. The latter, IMO, reinforces that we are all on equal footing in being able to read and interpret scripture, and are also open to hear from others to sharpen our own understanding. One way seems to insist that I can't be wrong, while the other leaves that possibility open and allows for change and growth.

Anyway, just some thoughts this a.m. before I head out the door. Thanks for letting me get this off my chest.

Paige

[Barry]

Great points Paige.

This brings with it several side points and topics that are IMHO attached to the subject.

Personally what I find continually frustrating is how little scripture is seen through an overall filter of "love". The idea that destruction and or punishment cannot be understood as beneficial in some way.

How much the subject of darkness and light are seen in terms of elitism. What "lost in darkness" meant as opposed to seeing clearly because of the "light". Light does not positionally change where one is as a loved one, it changes positionally where one is at between the ears.

The Gentiles of old for example were in darkness. IMO, meaning not that they were not loved but that they were kept out of the "loop" as to where things were headed and how they would be accomplished, because God is love.

It seems to me that everyone has their own little filters that they see the Bible through. If "love" is not there (as a filtering system) then how can "God is love" ever be reconciled or attributed to God in our minds?

Personally speaking I would go so far as to say the the Bible is purposely written so that one's own filter system will greatly affect one's conclusions. Thus implying a needed social and evolutionary development within both society at large and "church society" simultaneously to bring about a more advanced understanding of the larger more accurate interpretation of the bible message. And such an understanding will have a deep message of love and patience for us as we as offspring take up the challenge of being participators in creation with God.

The magnitude of the responsibility explains the difficulty of the journey. Thus the overall conclusions IMHO of "I am blessed infinitely when it is no longer just about me".

Just a few thoughts and hope it does not take your thread to far off topic.

Thanks Paige.
Barry

[Paige]

Barry,

I love your thoughts, and I think they fit anywhere :)

Paige

[Amie]

Hmm,

I wonder if I've used that phrase, lol. Your point makes sense to me though and I wonder whether anyone would use it in reference to any other book.

(Interesting thoughts Barry!)

Amie

[Jason Hall]

While I agree that the majority of anything that begins with "the Bible teaches" will have major presuppositional issues, I do think that the Bible does teach some things. Paul said the Scriptures are good for teaching. And to imply that the Bible doesn't teach anything would be silly.

I think we're all sick of hearing people say something is a certain way, and then find out, after accepting it for so long, that it's not true. Disillusionment leads many people to the rejection of any objective truth. We must realize that though when a long paper or sermon, given by a single person, especially about the Bible or God, begins with "the Bible teaches", that they will probably be wrong...but there IS a truth that the Bible does teach.

Case in point:
The Bible teaches...love.

[Paige]

Case in point:
The Bible teaches...love.

I won't argue with that ;)

Paige

[Jack]

Yes, 30,000 denominations prove that the Bible can be made to say just about anything. How often I have read some scriptures and garnered life changing direction for myself within a set of circumstances. Then years later I will read those same scriptures and they will speak of a whole different direction within the same circumstances. Both were right for the time. The bible is a wonderfully inspired instrument in which God veils and unveils Himself. I know there is errancy sewn into the translations and I believe none are there by accident but perfectly ordained of God. Speaking of translations I love this little story I copied somewhere years ago.

Four ministers were once discussing the various translations of the Bible. One liked the King James Version because of its majestic English; another preferred the Revised Version of 1881 because of its literal translations of the original language; the third chose James Moffatt’s translation for its up-to-date vocabulary. The fourth minister was silent. When pressed to express his opinion, he said, “I like my mother’s translation best.” The others were surprised. “We had no idea that your mother had translated the Bible.” Oh yes,” he said, “she translated it into life, and it was the most convincing translation I ever saw!”

God bless,

Jack

[Me Again]

Amen Jack. Good anecdote.

The bible is a story - a story about God and his redemption of his people. Those who wish to make a systematic theology are missing the point.

[ozark]

Jack,

You are bringing some good points to our forum. The Bible is about relationship with God. Too often we separate the two, and that is when the fighting starts.

[Jason Hall]

Jack said:
I know there is errancy sewn into the translations and I believe none are there by accident but perfectly ordained of God.

God intended us to translate it wrong and get confused? Would you say that he did so with the intent of showing us that understanding every last detail doesn't matter so much as the main theme of the whole thing: love? Maybe it's all a lesson on basing a relationship with God on personal interraction, rather than logic? While that sounds good, I think it misrepresents God as a teacher via misdirection.

I think it makes more sense to leave the translation errors in the doctrine-oriented attitudes of men. I think the errors in understanding the Bible, when broken down into little segments (verses, chapters, books even), prove the point is not in the details, but in the message: God loves us.

Me Again said:
The bible is a story - a story about God and his redemption of his people. Those who wish to make a systematic theology are missing the point.

A systematic theology can be as simple as "Love God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind. And your neighbor too!" Certainly God operates in systems, since he designed an entire universe wherein all operate within systems. However, the problem is the pride of man, claiming he understands the system. While I agree with the concept of this quote, I think the point is missed that it is pride that is the issue, and not the systems held to under that pride.