It has often bothered me as I have watched young people from Christian homes come to the university and loose their faith. I argued earlier that the Church has many times been too defensive and failed to “truth proof” our young people. I want to finish this series of posts on Biblical interpretation to show how the tools I am suggesting can be used to refute one of the more serious underminings that occur at the University and even in the “Church”. The deceptions can be subtle, since many of those who advocate them are fully sincere. Sincerely wrong, fully sincere but, in my opinion, deceived.
Much modern scholarship has anti supernatural presuppositions. It permeates everything from Science to Philosophy to Psychology to Sociology to Religious Studies etc. etc. For the most part, this is the right thing, but not if you are wanting to investigate the supernatural. So the starting point of much of these studies is the assumption that miracles simply don't happen. So when investigating a miracle “we must find an alternative explanation”. This presupposition must not be questioned, and anyway it is “obvious”, because you cannot explain miracles by Science (but see “I know too much Science to believe in God” June 2010). They don't tell you this is an underlying presupposition though, in fact they many not even know it. But as I have argued earlier all world views are held by faith (see “The faith of the atheist” July 2010). These anti supernatural presuppositions permeate not only University scholarship, but also many Seminaries and even Bible Schools. It all becomes very confusing when the “Church” is saying these things. We must not close our eyes to the existence of what, for what of a better phrase we could call “unbelieving believers”. It should not really surprise us, since we live in a culture of unbelief and 1. Even Jesus could do no mighty works because of unbelief (Mark 6:5), and 2. When the scriptures tell us not to be conformed to the World (Romans 12:1,2) it clearly implies that even the Church is in danger of doing just that!
Some of the stuff that comes even out of our seminaries then, can come across something like this. “Do you mean to tell me that you believe that God really parted the Red sea (Exodus 14:21). They will then tell you as “fact” that the Red sea is really the reed see, and it was 2 inches deep. How God managed to drown the whole of the Egyptian army in 2 inches of water is a bit of a mystery, but if you don't believe miracles can happen, then you have to come up with some other explanation. As I said earlier, its easier to believe that God can perform miracles when you have seen them and even been used to perform them in Jesus' name!
But I want to suggest that the central issue in the “miracle or not miracle” debate is resurrection. If you can disprove the resurrection, you have essentially demolished New Testament Christianity. One unbelieving explanation, with its accompanying interpretation of the Bible, might declare that the “resurrection” talked about in the Bible is not a resurrection of the body, but of the spirit. The “spirit of what Jesus said and did lived on”. What happened (in this explanation of things) is that the boys invented the story of the resurrection because they wanted to continue the cushy lifestyle they had enjoyed with Jesus. They carried on, the explanation continues, in the spirit of what had gone before. So the resurrection was not literal at all. It becomes difficult when such opinions come from a pulpit, claim to be what the Scripture is actually saying, and declare this to be the essence of Christianity.
This is just one of many theories put forward to explain away New Testament Christianity. Another is the so called “swoon” theory, that is Jesus did not really die, but fainted. But none of the suggested theories fit the facts. Concerning the swoon theory, we are asked to believe after the sever flogging Jesus received at the hands of the Romans (See Mel Gibson's “The passion of the Christ”), after the exhausting agony on the cross, after all the loss of blood and being laid in a dank tomb for three days, He suddenly revived, rolled away the huge stone from the mouth of His grave, overcame the guards put there to ensure the disciples would not steal the body, and appeared as the Lord of life. All in the natural. It takes more faith to believe that theory than to believe in the resurrection!
Concerning the “cushy life theory”, we are in fact asked to believe that with the possible exception of John all the boys were willing to die for this lie. Some cushy life! And these were the same boys who ran from the garden at the arrest, and who denied and even swore that they did not even know Jesus. These were the same boys who changed from a bunch of unlearned cowards into a band of bold evangelists who would defy death and arrest, and could speak eloquently enough to confound the Sanhedrin (Acts 4:13, 19). What was it that changed them? The best explanation, however unlikely it may seem to a skeptical world whose views as I have pointed out before are also based on faith, is that the story about Jesus rising from the dead is true.
But the main reason for bringing all of this up here, is to illustrate the tools of interpretation I have been advocating. In particular let us ask, “Is a spiritual resurrection a valid interpretation of the Scriptures?”
Our tools remember are the various expressions of the believing community across time and geography, with the primary documentation being the Bible. All the rest has to do with making sure we have correctly understood.
It has been said and it is true that the Bible is its own best interpreter. What do the Scriptures have to say about this question? Firstly Jesus really was dead. In John 19:34 we read that after the soldier pierced His side, blood and water poured out. I am told that the separation of blood and water is strong medical evidence of death. The empty tomb (John 20:5) shows the body was gone. In order to calm the boys (for they initially thought He was a ghost) Jesus asked for and ate a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb (Luke 24:42,43). Thomas who was absent at that time declares that “Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.” When he is later convinced, he falls down and declares that Jesus is “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:24,25). The fact mentioned earlier that, with the possible exception of John, the disciples all died for their faith, is strong evidence that they were really convinced of that to which they testified, and which formed the basis of the Apostolic teaching (i.e. Acts 2:22-32, 42). That this is how the early church understood the resurrection is confirmed by the early church fathers (Google “early church fathers”), and in fact down through history by the fruit of transformed and transforming lives in those who embrace this truth. No that the resurrection was a “spiritual resurrection” fits none of the facts, and we must reject it as a possible interpretation/explanation of New Testament Christianity.
I earlier raised the question do I take the Bible literally? Well many parts I do. Do I take the part about the resurrection literally? I answer a resounding yes. I see the fruit in my own life, of what I have believed (I am not claiming that that I have arrived. If you think I am bad now, you should have seen be before the Lord started working on me!). I see the fruit of this faith in the lives of others who similarly believe and surrender and so begun the process of being transformed. I see the fruit of revival down through history as things like the abolition of slavery, of child labour and the like that followed revival. I see the fruit that remains even in our post Christian era, as we still value justice and equity and freedom, even the freedom to disagree (though we are rapidly loosing this!). So we can have confidence that we are on the right tack because “By their fruit you will know them” (Matthew 7:20).
Many who reject Christianity fail to realize (or refuse to recognize, as they reinterpret history in terms of their presuppositions) this legacy and the positive influence of the Bible on our Justice systems, and many other places, for example in the positive gains of the Women's movement that have their genesis in the (ahead of His time) way that Jesus dealt with the fairer sex. After all in Christ there is neither "slave nor free, nor is there male and female..."(Galatians 3:28).
I close this month's posts with the Gospel invitation. He who has ears to hear, let him hear, she who has eyes to see let her see and understand. If the son shall set you free you will be free indeed. But he who sins is the slave thereof. We are here to choose our eternal destiny. And we choose it by receiving or not what Jesus did for us at the Cross. God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to eternal life (John 1:11; 3:16-21). Make no mistake about it, we do choose. The choice to put it off is a choice, the choice to ignore it all, is a choice. The Bible tells us to “Choose you this day whom you will serve”. But like Israel of old this generation has “made a lie our refuge, and falsehood our hiding place” (Isaiah 28:15). But as for me and as many as will follow, we will serve the Lord! (Joshua 24:15). So what does He require, what must we do to work the works of God? "This is the work of God that you believe in Him (i.e. Jesus) whom He has sent” (John 6:28, 29), for “without faith, it is impossible to please God” (Hebrews 11:6).
Have you received Christ as your Lord and Saviour? If not will you do it now? Just ask Him into your life, surrender it all to Him, and you will enter the Kingdom. You will not regret it. I would love to hear that you have, or to speak more with you. My email is at the top of the blog. May the Lord bless you.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Sunday, February 27, 2011
No private interpretation VII. Moves of God.
I said last day that putting Ephesians 4: 12-14 into practice is so big a task that no one group or denomination could possible answer all the questions that need to be answered. To say it another way, we need to trust a wider community that our own traditions can provide. We must not be naive, we have an enemy who robs, steals and destroys. Isolation and disunity is one of his primary tools and goals. Over the years, he has had a lot of success, but God is forever countering Satan's strategy and is restoring in an on going basis, what was stolen from us both in our own lives and in the Church. I am talking of course about revival/renewal and/or 'moves of God'. In addition to being a thief, Satan is also a liar, and is not happy when God is on the move. He whispers many lies into believers hearts. We therefore need to be as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves.
In this month's series of blogs I am not seeking to answer every question that can be asked, rather I am seeking to suggest appropriate tools and some guidelines for boundaries of who and what we should take into account as we "continue in His Word, seeking the Truth" (John 8:31f). We do of course need to listen much more widely than from within these boundaries. Part of the problem is that though we rightly believe that we have the answers (in the Bible), when we don't listen, we do not know the questions the current generation are asking!
There are many pitfalls. The Scripture tells me that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday for ever (Hebrews 13:8), and yet our God is forever doing a new thing (Isaiah 43:19). One of the parables that Jesus taught was of the new wine and old wineskins (Mark 2:22). They did not have glass bottles in those days, so wineskins were cured leather containers into which the new wine was sealed. The leather would stretch as the wine fermented, and all would be well. However these were not recyclable wineskins. There is only so much stretching that a particular skin (container) could make. After a single use, the skins hardened and would crack if new wine was put into them. We need to understand that the wineskins are the structures that we as humans place around the new wine of the Holy Spirit. Rick Joiner puts it this way, movements of God too easily become monuments.
I do not want to pick on any particular move of God, but I am thinking of one where when God showed up, there was a lot of things good things happened. The bars emptied, alcoholics were set free. The people in the group stopped drinking. Well they were enjoying a very different kind of Spirit, and they simply did not want the old wine. The problem was that generations later what happened was that not drinking became a rule. Now the Bible certainly warns of the dangers of excess (Ephesians 5:18; Proverbs 20:1), but it is clear that the use of wine in New Testament was widespread (John 2:2). Some, to enforce the rule, have tried to say that the word 'oinos' (Greek for wine) is grape juice. This makes no sense, for this would render (Ephesians 5:18) as “Do not get drunk with grape juice ...”. Now an alcoholic or someone for whom drinking is a problem, needs to make a rule for him or herself, but to make this a rule for the whole church is with the Pharisees to move towards legalism, and is why Jesus spoke the above parable. Making rules like this not only leads us into legalism, but it quenches the Spirit.
I said earlier that History has been described as a series of cycles consisting of progress, decline (destruction) and recovery. This is illustrated graphically in the Old Testament. This is why God needs continually to do a new thing. And His new things are almost always controversial. Take prophetic symbolism for example. How would you feel if someone who loudly claimed to be a Prophet of God showed up walking the streets downtown stark naked? Even if you didn't, if this happened in my fellowship, I would have a lot of trouble believing that was of the Lord, a lot of trouble. I mean that could not possibly be God could it? I mean He would never tell a Prophet to do that would He? Are you sure? Read Isaiah 20:2.
I would really be uncomfortable with that would you? I also don't think (but what do I know) that God would do that in this culture of pseudo hyper sexuality, since it would be misunderstood in the worst possible way. What I do want to say though, is that the questions we should ask are not along the lines of “am I comfortable with this?” We should be asking "Lord is this really of you?" When we don't like something, or are afraid of it, we must not (as many do) go to the Scriptures to prove that it cannot possibly be of God. We should go to the Scriptures humbly asking “Lord if this is of You, please show me”.
There have been some very strange things that have come out of the recent move of God in Toronto, really strange. Actually strange things have come out of almost every "revival", but they tend to get hushed up in the history, since they are always controversial. Concerning Toronto, google “gold teeth Toronto”. There are widespread reports of people miraculously receiving replacement fillings of gold in their teeth. I have seen it from someone I know. I asked her “How does it make you feel?” 'Loved' was her reply. Can I conceive of God wanting to make His people feel loved? Yes. Is this weird? Yes! Is God allowed to move outside my box? Is it Biblical? Well is it a 'sign and a wonder'(Jeremiah 32:21)? It was a sign to my friend of God's love for her. Is it a wonder? It made me wonder. Is there a definitive list of signs and wonders? Is it of God? Should we rush to decide, or should we check it out carefully, knowing that there is a long history of God's people rejecting God's new things?
I picked on that very strange manifestation, because such things are what you tend to hear first, and need to be dealt with. There is a huge tendency to consider only the controversial or the spectacular. But should not these things be taken in context? There is after all a Biblical way to check things out. It is "by their fruit you will know them” (Matthew 7:20). It takes time to check out fruit. Fruit is not as immediate as are strange and puzzling happenings. Perhaps the most outstanding (though by no means the only) example of good fruit is the example of two of my heroes Roland and Heidi Baker. They met God in a new way through the Toronto movement. Check out the fruit of the ministry they attribute to this encounter (http://www.irismin.org/) - over 10,000 new Churches of brand new Christians (as opposed to recycled believers), since their encounter, and this is just the very tip of the iceberg.
New moves of God are always controversial, and there is always a danger of the old moves of God persecuting the new ones (the old moves become the old wineskins). Part of this is that when God shows up, it is almost always messy (and so open to criticism). Written histories of the moves of God often try to suppress or minimize the messiness, but when God shows up and people get delivered from all kinds of addictions (1 Corinthians 6:11) – they do not become mature over night. On top of this when God shows up, the fellow with the pitch fork shows up too, and he has his people in the very midst of every revival (Matthew 13:24-30), seeking to give is a bad name.
I was weened as a new Christian by a “Word emphasizing fellowship", and the "Spirit emphasizing fellowships" were essentially dismissed as being of the Devil (see "no private interpretation IV"). The “Holy Spirit” move of God, that characterized much of the last century, had and has many problems and difficulties. These difficulties “proved” that this could not be God. But I came to see that this was wrong in spite of my church, rather than because of it. I had encountered some very interesting people, and some very interesting experiences. But I could also see the abuses and excesses. At the very time I was wrestling with what it all meant, the Lord put this book in my hands “Bursting the wineskins” by Michael Cassidy. Michael had been on the very same journey, and encountered the very same difficulties I was at that very moment experiencing. There was one part of the book that grabbed me. Michael tells of saying in frustration to his charismatic friend “Two thirds of this is fake”. 'Yes', his friend replied, ' but that means that one third is genuine, and one third genuine is a lot of genuine!' So I had to decision to make. Was I was going to allow what the Devil was doing along side what God was doing, to rob me of this part of my inheritance? I prayed “God if You have something for me, that will help me in my walk and bring glory to You and Your kingdom, then I want it”. I need to warn you though, following the Lord in this way could very well cost you everything you hold dear (Luke 14:26). On the other hand in His time we will see that it is worth it all.
In this month's series of blogs I am not seeking to answer every question that can be asked, rather I am seeking to suggest appropriate tools and some guidelines for boundaries of who and what we should take into account as we "continue in His Word, seeking the Truth" (John 8:31f). We do of course need to listen much more widely than from within these boundaries. Part of the problem is that though we rightly believe that we have the answers (in the Bible), when we don't listen, we do not know the questions the current generation are asking!
There are many pitfalls. The Scripture tells me that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday for ever (Hebrews 13:8), and yet our God is forever doing a new thing (Isaiah 43:19). One of the parables that Jesus taught was of the new wine and old wineskins (Mark 2:22). They did not have glass bottles in those days, so wineskins were cured leather containers into which the new wine was sealed. The leather would stretch as the wine fermented, and all would be well. However these were not recyclable wineskins. There is only so much stretching that a particular skin (container) could make. After a single use, the skins hardened and would crack if new wine was put into them. We need to understand that the wineskins are the structures that we as humans place around the new wine of the Holy Spirit. Rick Joiner puts it this way, movements of God too easily become monuments.
I do not want to pick on any particular move of God, but I am thinking of one where when God showed up, there was a lot of things good things happened. The bars emptied, alcoholics were set free. The people in the group stopped drinking. Well they were enjoying a very different kind of Spirit, and they simply did not want the old wine. The problem was that generations later what happened was that not drinking became a rule. Now the Bible certainly warns of the dangers of excess (Ephesians 5:18; Proverbs 20:1), but it is clear that the use of wine in New Testament was widespread (John 2:2). Some, to enforce the rule, have tried to say that the word 'oinos' (Greek for wine) is grape juice. This makes no sense, for this would render (Ephesians 5:18) as “Do not get drunk with grape juice ...”. Now an alcoholic or someone for whom drinking is a problem, needs to make a rule for him or herself, but to make this a rule for the whole church is with the Pharisees to move towards legalism, and is why Jesus spoke the above parable. Making rules like this not only leads us into legalism, but it quenches the Spirit.
I said earlier that History has been described as a series of cycles consisting of progress, decline (destruction) and recovery. This is illustrated graphically in the Old Testament. This is why God needs continually to do a new thing. And His new things are almost always controversial. Take prophetic symbolism for example. How would you feel if someone who loudly claimed to be a Prophet of God showed up walking the streets downtown stark naked? Even if you didn't, if this happened in my fellowship, I would have a lot of trouble believing that was of the Lord, a lot of trouble. I mean that could not possibly be God could it? I mean He would never tell a Prophet to do that would He? Are you sure? Read Isaiah 20:2.
I would really be uncomfortable with that would you? I also don't think (but what do I know) that God would do that in this culture of pseudo hyper sexuality, since it would be misunderstood in the worst possible way. What I do want to say though, is that the questions we should ask are not along the lines of “am I comfortable with this?” We should be asking "Lord is this really of you?" When we don't like something, or are afraid of it, we must not (as many do) go to the Scriptures to prove that it cannot possibly be of God. We should go to the Scriptures humbly asking “Lord if this is of You, please show me”.
There have been some very strange things that have come out of the recent move of God in Toronto, really strange. Actually strange things have come out of almost every "revival", but they tend to get hushed up in the history, since they are always controversial. Concerning Toronto, google “gold teeth Toronto”. There are widespread reports of people miraculously receiving replacement fillings of gold in their teeth. I have seen it from someone I know. I asked her “How does it make you feel?” 'Loved' was her reply. Can I conceive of God wanting to make His people feel loved? Yes. Is this weird? Yes! Is God allowed to move outside my box? Is it Biblical? Well is it a 'sign and a wonder'(Jeremiah 32:21)? It was a sign to my friend of God's love for her. Is it a wonder? It made me wonder. Is there a definitive list of signs and wonders? Is it of God? Should we rush to decide, or should we check it out carefully, knowing that there is a long history of God's people rejecting God's new things?
I picked on that very strange manifestation, because such things are what you tend to hear first, and need to be dealt with. There is a huge tendency to consider only the controversial or the spectacular. But should not these things be taken in context? There is after all a Biblical way to check things out. It is "by their fruit you will know them” (Matthew 7:20). It takes time to check out fruit. Fruit is not as immediate as are strange and puzzling happenings. Perhaps the most outstanding (though by no means the only) example of good fruit is the example of two of my heroes Roland and Heidi Baker. They met God in a new way through the Toronto movement. Check out the fruit of the ministry they attribute to this encounter (http://www.irismin.org/) - over 10,000 new Churches of brand new Christians (as opposed to recycled believers), since their encounter, and this is just the very tip of the iceberg.
New moves of God are always controversial, and there is always a danger of the old moves of God persecuting the new ones (the old moves become the old wineskins). Part of this is that when God shows up, it is almost always messy (and so open to criticism). Written histories of the moves of God often try to suppress or minimize the messiness, but when God shows up and people get delivered from all kinds of addictions (1 Corinthians 6:11) – they do not become mature over night. On top of this when God shows up, the fellow with the pitch fork shows up too, and he has his people in the very midst of every revival (Matthew 13:24-30), seeking to give is a bad name.
I was weened as a new Christian by a “Word emphasizing fellowship", and the "Spirit emphasizing fellowships" were essentially dismissed as being of the Devil (see "no private interpretation IV"). The “Holy Spirit” move of God, that characterized much of the last century, had and has many problems and difficulties. These difficulties “proved” that this could not be God. But I came to see that this was wrong in spite of my church, rather than because of it. I had encountered some very interesting people, and some very interesting experiences. But I could also see the abuses and excesses. At the very time I was wrestling with what it all meant, the Lord put this book in my hands “Bursting the wineskins” by Michael Cassidy. Michael had been on the very same journey, and encountered the very same difficulties I was at that very moment experiencing. There was one part of the book that grabbed me. Michael tells of saying in frustration to his charismatic friend “Two thirds of this is fake”. 'Yes', his friend replied, ' but that means that one third is genuine, and one third genuine is a lot of genuine!' So I had to decision to make. Was I was going to allow what the Devil was doing along side what God was doing, to rob me of this part of my inheritance? I prayed “God if You have something for me, that will help me in my walk and bring glory to You and Your kingdom, then I want it”. I need to warn you though, following the Lord in this way could very well cost you everything you hold dear (Luke 14:26). On the other hand in His time we will see that it is worth it all.
Friday, February 25, 2011
No private interpretation VI. So exactly who or what is the believing community?
In the last couple of post I have been suggesting that we allow the “believing community” to test, refine and deepen our understanding of Biblical truth. I want to emphasize that I do not mean to say that this is to be independent of the Holy Spirit. As I said earlier, even Paul felt he had to confirm what the Spirit has told him concerning the Gospel (Galatians 2:1, 2). If Paul felt this way, surely we need to too! Coming back to the subject in hand, I said specifically (Feb 22) that fullness of truth can be found (confirmed) only in the furnace of loving interaction and debate within the the community of believers down through history, and across the globe. But exactly who or what is the believing community?
It is a good question. Are we talking about Christians, are we thinking about the Church? I deliberately avoided using these terms, though I feel I need to say why. The problem is that we don't all mean the same thing by either of these words. Lets look first at the word Christian. Like many Biblical words it has come to mean something other than what it originally meant. In Acts 11:26 we read “the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch”. So first and foremost a Christian in the Biblical sense is a disciple. The closest we have in our culture would probably be graduate student, or close follower of Jesus Christ, but even that is not the whole thing. Today in the West “Christian” can mean anything from not Muslim or Hindu to “born again believer” (a term which has also lost its meaning) to only someone who belongs to my Church or group. But the word Church is likewise ambiguous. The Greek work is transliterated ekklasia the called out ones. So the Biblical idea of Church is that is it “the body” (Colossians 1:18) i.e. those who belong to Him as His disciples. It is not a building, it is not a denomination, it is the people.
The first references to the “Church” (and therefore the most important in terms of the Biblical understanding of what the word means) includes the one in Acts 5:11. Here it is referring to those who were giving sacrificially to each other (Acts 4:32f), but also those who “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer” (Acts 2:42). In light of this, I want to suggest that it is appropriate to take the phrase “believing community” in what I am writing here, as those who are substantially and faithfully following the example of the practices and teachings of this early “Christian” community (Church). Again we need to ask what does that mean, and how are we to differentiate between those who do this, and those who merely claim to “do it Biblically”? After all those who are widely regraded as cults make this claim. This is where my phrase “ down through history, and across the globe” comes into play.
Let me say up front, that we must not put anything on a par with the Scriptures, which of course are precisely the Apostles' teachings, and include both Old and New Testaments (i.e. Acts 8:35). In particular, it cannot be the Bible plus anything. This is one place where we must be firm in our stand. To quote the Intervarsity statement of faith again (and I will say more later) the Scriptures are both unique and divinely inspired. The cry of the reformation was “Sola Scripture” - Scripture alone. There is a problem however, and it is that we all bring our baggage to the Scriptures, and we all read them through our cultural glasses. We must prefer Truth to tradition, but we are all at some level, resistant to change. This is one very good reason why we need each other across space and time (geography and history), and why I have described it as a furnace. I don't pretend it is easy, but then neither is growing up. The Scriptures themselves tell us “As iron sharpens iron so man sharpens man” (Proverbs 27:17). We are diamonds in the rough, and need to rub up against each other under the care of the Holy Spirit in order that those rough edges be rubbed off. It can be painful. Is it any wonder we cut each other loose! But when we do this we are neither walking in love, nor in maturity (Ephesians 4 again), and it is moving in the exactly the opposite direction to God's primary purpose in sending His Son (Ephesians 1:9,10). It also short circuits His work in our lives.
But while the Scriptures alone are to be the supreme authority upon which we base our teaching, it should also be clear that not one of us has arrived in our understanding of them. In particular while we inhabit these bodies we will all at some level and in various places in our understanding, be out of balance. And hence we will (again at some level), in our own minds and in the collective minds of the fellowships to which we belong, be holding private interpretations. There are many reasons for this. They relate to the biases and peculiarities of our environment, to our woundedness, to our reactions and over reactions to the error we see in other parts of the body. However the primarily reason is because we have listened to the enemy who kills, steals and destroys. He has an agenda which is the exact opposite of God's primary purpose in redemption. He loves to cause division and to keep us from the fullness of all that God has provided, and he uses all our wrinkles, weaknesses and finiteness in his quest to isolate us from each other, and so pervert the truth. The architect behind the Roman Empire's strategy of divide and conquer was Satan. We need to be aware of his devices, since we all too often far too willingly cooperate with him in his strategy. We do this though pride, through ignorance, through our weakness and woundednesses.
I want to close today's post with some guidelines. In our quest to understand the Bible, our tools in summary are the various expressions of the believing community across time and geography. We need to understand “believing community” to mean those who stand in accord with the early church as described in the New Testament. The New testament church devoted itself to the Apostles teaching. This was in the process of being written down. The primary reason, by the way, that the various writings were included in the New Testament cannon, was that from the beginning the early Church regarded them as authentic.
You will see immediately using these guidelines that this excludes a number of cults. What I am saying is that many (though not all) cults add to the Bible, and place their addition either above or on a par with it. In doing so, they produce interpretations of the Bible that deviate from the historic Christianity of the early Church. A general principle is that if a teaching is unique, it is very likely to be wrong. This is not to say that there will not be insights into Scriptures, that are new to us. Secondly, the Bible distinguishes between the essentials and the deep things of God. In my post “milk and meat”, I suggested that there is a central message that is and was clear to the early church, but that there are also things which are deep and hard to understand. There are things upon which the believing community in space and time agree. These things are the basis for our unity. Such things include the unique divine inspiration of the Scriptures; the dual nature of the deity and humanity of Christ; the physical bodily resurrection of our Lord (more later); the justification by God’s grace to all who repent and put their faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation; the indwelling presence and transforming power of the Holy Spirit; the victorious reign and future personal return of Jesus Christ; the existence of a personal and very real enemy who is intent on destroying our unity and witness and robbing us of our inheritance etc. etc. (this list is not meant to be exhaustive).
Thirdly the task is formidable for all sorts of reasons, but was important enough that even without the distance of time and culture that we face, the early apostles felt it necessary to devote all their time to teaching the Word and to prayer (Acts 6:2-4). This being the case, it should be obvious that the task is so big that no one group or denomination could possible answer all the questions that need to be answered. The fact of the matter is that we are hugely dependent on the believing community even for questions of which texts should form the basis of the Scriptures, as well as which translation should we use. Since every translation is at some level an interpretation, we will want to be sure the Scholars who translated the Bible we use are believers. Arbitrary decisions about which translation is “the inspired one”, are naive and divisive. A missionary friend of mine in Argentina was asked if he used only the King James version. But there is no Spanish King james version! We must get past such pat and shallow answers to complex questions. To give such answers is to do the very opposite of loving God with all of our minds.
The task is certainly challenging, but we need to realize that the process (Ephesians 4 again) is every bit as important as the end result. Also to repeat an earlier point, there is sufficient agreement among the believing community that we can be fully confident of the basics. This certainly includes the last two questions I raised in the last paragraph. In particular though there was a proliferation of hand copied manuscripts as the Church grew, in the end the variants are minor, and we can say with confidence that no major teaching of the New testament is compromised by the differences in these manuscripts. The same is true of the translations accepted by the believing community. I have used KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASNB, then Amplified Bible, the Message etc. in my quotations. There are many others. We must not also forget, that God is alive and at work in His Church to bring us to “unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God”. His purposes will not be thwarted. He is God after all!
It is a good question. Are we talking about Christians, are we thinking about the Church? I deliberately avoided using these terms, though I feel I need to say why. The problem is that we don't all mean the same thing by either of these words. Lets look first at the word Christian. Like many Biblical words it has come to mean something other than what it originally meant. In Acts 11:26 we read “the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch”. So first and foremost a Christian in the Biblical sense is a disciple. The closest we have in our culture would probably be graduate student, or close follower of Jesus Christ, but even that is not the whole thing. Today in the West “Christian” can mean anything from not Muslim or Hindu to “born again believer” (a term which has also lost its meaning) to only someone who belongs to my Church or group. But the word Church is likewise ambiguous. The Greek work is transliterated ekklasia the called out ones. So the Biblical idea of Church is that is it “the body” (Colossians 1:18) i.e. those who belong to Him as His disciples. It is not a building, it is not a denomination, it is the people.
The first references to the “Church” (and therefore the most important in terms of the Biblical understanding of what the word means) includes the one in Acts 5:11. Here it is referring to those who were giving sacrificially to each other (Acts 4:32f), but also those who “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer” (Acts 2:42). In light of this, I want to suggest that it is appropriate to take the phrase “believing community” in what I am writing here, as those who are substantially and faithfully following the example of the practices and teachings of this early “Christian” community (Church). Again we need to ask what does that mean, and how are we to differentiate between those who do this, and those who merely claim to “do it Biblically”? After all those who are widely regraded as cults make this claim. This is where my phrase “ down through history, and across the globe” comes into play.
Let me say up front, that we must not put anything on a par with the Scriptures, which of course are precisely the Apostles' teachings, and include both Old and New Testaments (i.e. Acts 8:35). In particular, it cannot be the Bible plus anything. This is one place where we must be firm in our stand. To quote the Intervarsity statement of faith again (and I will say more later) the Scriptures are both unique and divinely inspired. The cry of the reformation was “Sola Scripture” - Scripture alone. There is a problem however, and it is that we all bring our baggage to the Scriptures, and we all read them through our cultural glasses. We must prefer Truth to tradition, but we are all at some level, resistant to change. This is one very good reason why we need each other across space and time (geography and history), and why I have described it as a furnace. I don't pretend it is easy, but then neither is growing up. The Scriptures themselves tell us “As iron sharpens iron so man sharpens man” (Proverbs 27:17). We are diamonds in the rough, and need to rub up against each other under the care of the Holy Spirit in order that those rough edges be rubbed off. It can be painful. Is it any wonder we cut each other loose! But when we do this we are neither walking in love, nor in maturity (Ephesians 4 again), and it is moving in the exactly the opposite direction to God's primary purpose in sending His Son (Ephesians 1:9,10). It also short circuits His work in our lives.
But while the Scriptures alone are to be the supreme authority upon which we base our teaching, it should also be clear that not one of us has arrived in our understanding of them. In particular while we inhabit these bodies we will all at some level and in various places in our understanding, be out of balance. And hence we will (again at some level), in our own minds and in the collective minds of the fellowships to which we belong, be holding private interpretations. There are many reasons for this. They relate to the biases and peculiarities of our environment, to our woundedness, to our reactions and over reactions to the error we see in other parts of the body. However the primarily reason is because we have listened to the enemy who kills, steals and destroys. He has an agenda which is the exact opposite of God's primary purpose in redemption. He loves to cause division and to keep us from the fullness of all that God has provided, and he uses all our wrinkles, weaknesses and finiteness in his quest to isolate us from each other, and so pervert the truth. The architect behind the Roman Empire's strategy of divide and conquer was Satan. We need to be aware of his devices, since we all too often far too willingly cooperate with him in his strategy. We do this though pride, through ignorance, through our weakness and woundednesses.
I want to close today's post with some guidelines. In our quest to understand the Bible, our tools in summary are the various expressions of the believing community across time and geography. We need to understand “believing community” to mean those who stand in accord with the early church as described in the New Testament. The New testament church devoted itself to the Apostles teaching. This was in the process of being written down. The primary reason, by the way, that the various writings were included in the New Testament cannon, was that from the beginning the early Church regarded them as authentic.
You will see immediately using these guidelines that this excludes a number of cults. What I am saying is that many (though not all) cults add to the Bible, and place their addition either above or on a par with it. In doing so, they produce interpretations of the Bible that deviate from the historic Christianity of the early Church. A general principle is that if a teaching is unique, it is very likely to be wrong. This is not to say that there will not be insights into Scriptures, that are new to us. Secondly, the Bible distinguishes between the essentials and the deep things of God. In my post “milk and meat”, I suggested that there is a central message that is and was clear to the early church, but that there are also things which are deep and hard to understand. There are things upon which the believing community in space and time agree. These things are the basis for our unity. Such things include the unique divine inspiration of the Scriptures; the dual nature of the deity and humanity of Christ; the physical bodily resurrection of our Lord (more later); the justification by God’s grace to all who repent and put their faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation; the indwelling presence and transforming power of the Holy Spirit; the victorious reign and future personal return of Jesus Christ; the existence of a personal and very real enemy who is intent on destroying our unity and witness and robbing us of our inheritance etc. etc. (this list is not meant to be exhaustive).
Thirdly the task is formidable for all sorts of reasons, but was important enough that even without the distance of time and culture that we face, the early apostles felt it necessary to devote all their time to teaching the Word and to prayer (Acts 6:2-4). This being the case, it should be obvious that the task is so big that no one group or denomination could possible answer all the questions that need to be answered. The fact of the matter is that we are hugely dependent on the believing community even for questions of which texts should form the basis of the Scriptures, as well as which translation should we use. Since every translation is at some level an interpretation, we will want to be sure the Scholars who translated the Bible we use are believers. Arbitrary decisions about which translation is “the inspired one”, are naive and divisive. A missionary friend of mine in Argentina was asked if he used only the King James version. But there is no Spanish King james version! We must get past such pat and shallow answers to complex questions. To give such answers is to do the very opposite of loving God with all of our minds.
The task is certainly challenging, but we need to realize that the process (Ephesians 4 again) is every bit as important as the end result. Also to repeat an earlier point, there is sufficient agreement among the believing community that we can be fully confident of the basics. This certainly includes the last two questions I raised in the last paragraph. In particular though there was a proliferation of hand copied manuscripts as the Church grew, in the end the variants are minor, and we can say with confidence that no major teaching of the New testament is compromised by the differences in these manuscripts. The same is true of the translations accepted by the believing community. I have used KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASNB, then Amplified Bible, the Message etc. in my quotations. There are many others. We must not also forget, that God is alive and at work in His Church to bring us to “unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God”. His purposes will not be thwarted. He is God after all!
Thursday, February 24, 2011
No private interpretation V. Refining Truth in the beleiving community
Years ago I observed a mother wearing a face mask with her baby when she fed her, or changed her diaper. She was of course trying to protect the child from harmful bacteria. What she did, was to so overprotect her daughter, that the girl did not develop a natural immunity to everyday bugs. The result was that when this young girl eventually got out into the world, into school, she was constantly sick, as her body sought to catch up with the immunities that the other children had developed.
We in the Western Church have done a very similar thing with truth. In particular we have failed to “truth proof” our young people by allowing healthy debate. As I will argue below, healthy debate sharpens the truth, and takes us into a deeper understanding and appreciation of the Scriptures, and in fact of each other. The nature of our God and very often of His truth, can only be understood in terms of unity in diversity. The Sovereignty of God and the free will of man, or the Word and the Spirit are not things to be settled in terms of 'either or', but of 'both and'. Too often our unity is more like conformity, where we are not even allowed to question the teaching of the group, let alone disagree and still be in good standing. This results in a bland and boring uniformity, rather than, as is intended, a rich and haunting harmony.
We have been so concerned that our people should not embrace error, that we have isolated them both from the World, and other expressions of Christianity. The Scripture has something to say about this. As I have quoted before “The first one to plead his cause seems right, Until his neighbour comes and examines him” (Proverbs 18:17). There are many persuasive arguments out there, and when having heard nothing but your group's teaching, you are suddenly exposed to other views, you are likely to be defenceless in the face of them. Part of the problem here is that even when some small understanding of the faith is challenged, and doubt entertained, the person who is not used to the give and take of debate, is likely to throw the whole thing our. Many times, in reality all that needs to happen is to make a small adjustment. But we present our theology as complete package deal systems, where if you discover but a single error or imbalance, the whole pack of cards collapses. I am convinced that this is one of the reasons why so many of our young people loose their faith at University. This and that many times our Christianity is not real, and/or lacks the demonstration of the power of the Gospel (1 Corinthians 2:4; 4:20, 1 Thessalonians 1:5)
One of the objections I hear when I talk about these things is “Yes, but people get confused”. I admit that it is quite easy to confuse people when they have been sheltered over and over from even hearing a different point of view. But sheltering people from different points of view is unBiblical, and in fact it is very dangerous. Paul was well aware of the problem of “infants” being “tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching” (Ephesians 4:14), and we are all infants at the beginning. From Hebrews, it seems that many were “infants in Christ” much longer than they should have been (see Hebrews 5:12; 6:1). Coming out of infancy in our faith and knowledge has to do with study and disciplined reading of the Word (2 Timothy 2:5; Psalm 1). It has to do with learning (under the direction of the five fold ministry of the wider Church) to discern all things including truth and error (1 Corinthians 2:15). It has to do with taking ownership of our faith and knowledge, and while still listening, learning not relying solely on the faith of our pastor or our parents.
So then how exactly are we to deal with the problem of people getting confused? Certainly not in isolation and arbitrary proud exclamations that our group alone has the truth. In the context of Ephesians 4 Paul is saying that the exercise of the five fold ministry gifts, are intended to “prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. (Ephesians 4:12,13). He is saying that the solution to the “being tossed to and fro” problem, to the “people get confused” problem is that through the process of the five fold ministry in the wider Church, we are to enter the process of being equipped to grow up into unity of faith and knowledge. Note that this is a process “until we all reach unity...and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ”, until we all reach “unity of faith and knowledge”. We do not do this by isolating ourselves from the wider body of Christ, nor by allowing only our denominational views and expression of Christianity. “But what” I hear you ask, “if some of the things that the people are hearing are wrong”? In these days of the internet, can you even begin to prevent it? Look at what is happening in the Middle east! But Paul has something rather interesting to say on the place and role of error.
In 1 Corinthians 11:19 he says “there must also be differences (NIV )/ - factions (NJKV)/ - heresies (KJV) among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you”. What Paul is saying is that if we are going to grow up into the unity of faith and knowledge, it is will be as that faith and knowledge and understanding of what God has revealed is tested and refined, through the process of interacting with each other in the believing community. What do we have to fear, if we have the truth? It will become clear in debate, as we allow God to “approve” the truth, and to reveal His teachers among us. If we are wrong, or out of balance, we need to see that too. Remember no one has all the truth (see 1 Corinthians 8:2). Still more to come.
We in the Western Church have done a very similar thing with truth. In particular we have failed to “truth proof” our young people by allowing healthy debate. As I will argue below, healthy debate sharpens the truth, and takes us into a deeper understanding and appreciation of the Scriptures, and in fact of each other. The nature of our God and very often of His truth, can only be understood in terms of unity in diversity. The Sovereignty of God and the free will of man, or the Word and the Spirit are not things to be settled in terms of 'either or', but of 'both and'. Too often our unity is more like conformity, where we are not even allowed to question the teaching of the group, let alone disagree and still be in good standing. This results in a bland and boring uniformity, rather than, as is intended, a rich and haunting harmony.
We have been so concerned that our people should not embrace error, that we have isolated them both from the World, and other expressions of Christianity. The Scripture has something to say about this. As I have quoted before “The first one to plead his cause seems right, Until his neighbour comes and examines him” (Proverbs 18:17). There are many persuasive arguments out there, and when having heard nothing but your group's teaching, you are suddenly exposed to other views, you are likely to be defenceless in the face of them. Part of the problem here is that even when some small understanding of the faith is challenged, and doubt entertained, the person who is not used to the give and take of debate, is likely to throw the whole thing our. Many times, in reality all that needs to happen is to make a small adjustment. But we present our theology as complete package deal systems, where if you discover but a single error or imbalance, the whole pack of cards collapses. I am convinced that this is one of the reasons why so many of our young people loose their faith at University. This and that many times our Christianity is not real, and/or lacks the demonstration of the power of the Gospel (1 Corinthians 2:4; 4:20, 1 Thessalonians 1:5)
One of the objections I hear when I talk about these things is “Yes, but people get confused”. I admit that it is quite easy to confuse people when they have been sheltered over and over from even hearing a different point of view. But sheltering people from different points of view is unBiblical, and in fact it is very dangerous. Paul was well aware of the problem of “infants” being “tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching” (Ephesians 4:14), and we are all infants at the beginning. From Hebrews, it seems that many were “infants in Christ” much longer than they should have been (see Hebrews 5:12; 6:1). Coming out of infancy in our faith and knowledge has to do with study and disciplined reading of the Word (2 Timothy 2:5; Psalm 1). It has to do with learning (under the direction of the five fold ministry of the wider Church) to discern all things including truth and error (1 Corinthians 2:15). It has to do with taking ownership of our faith and knowledge, and while still listening, learning not relying solely on the faith of our pastor or our parents.
So then how exactly are we to deal with the problem of people getting confused? Certainly not in isolation and arbitrary proud exclamations that our group alone has the truth. In the context of Ephesians 4 Paul is saying that the exercise of the five fold ministry gifts, are intended to “prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. (Ephesians 4:12,13). He is saying that the solution to the “being tossed to and fro” problem, to the “people get confused” problem is that through the process of the five fold ministry in the wider Church, we are to enter the process of being equipped to grow up into unity of faith and knowledge. Note that this is a process “until we all reach unity...and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ”, until we all reach “unity of faith and knowledge”. We do not do this by isolating ourselves from the wider body of Christ, nor by allowing only our denominational views and expression of Christianity. “But what” I hear you ask, “if some of the things that the people are hearing are wrong”? In these days of the internet, can you even begin to prevent it? Look at what is happening in the Middle east! But Paul has something rather interesting to say on the place and role of error.
In 1 Corinthians 11:19 he says “there must also be differences (NIV )/ - factions (NJKV)/ - heresies (KJV) among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you”. What Paul is saying is that if we are going to grow up into the unity of faith and knowledge, it is will be as that faith and knowledge and understanding of what God has revealed is tested and refined, through the process of interacting with each other in the believing community. What do we have to fear, if we have the truth? It will become clear in debate, as we allow God to “approve” the truth, and to reveal His teachers among us. If we are wrong, or out of balance, we need to see that too. Remember no one has all the truth (see 1 Corinthians 8:2). Still more to come.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
No Private Interpretation IV. The role of unity in the Community of believers
The unity of believers in both heart and mind, is important in the New Testament. Paul tells us that “There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism!”. This just after telling us to “be diligent to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3-5). Furthermore, we are to “be of the same mind one toward another”, and we are “with one mind and one mouth (to) glorify God” (Romans 12:16, 15:6). We are to “be of one mind, and live in peace" (2 Corinthians 13:11), we are to “stand fast in one spirit, with one mind” and be “likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind (Philippians 1:27; 2:2). Well you get the point.
Unity, oneness, peace, love, harmony etc. are qualities that are high on God's agenda for His Church. God has made known to us “the mystery of his will" ... that "in the fullness of time" .... He would "bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ" (Ephesians 1:9,10). Jesus Himself is “our peace, who has made us both one, and has broken down every wall of separation” so that “He might reconcile them (us) both (all) to God in one body through the cross” (Ephesians 1:14,16). He gives the World the right to judge that we are His disciples by the love we have one for another (John 13:35).
You don't have to look far, to see that the Western Church is seriously out of sink with this ideal to which God is calling us. I am told that there are over 10,000 registered Christian denominations, most of which are saying “We do things Biblically”. I don't doubt there is great sincerity in what is being said, but when you see this through the eyes of the unbeliever, you want to shake your head. It has to grieve the heart of God.
If we are to advance the Kingdom, if we want the Lord to come and heal this desperately wicked and hurting land, then we need collectively to repent of our disunity, arrogance in effect claiming that we, or our group, or denomination is the way the truth and the life. We joke “You don't have to agree with me, you have every right to be wrong”. The problem is half the times, we are not really joking! It is Jesus who is the Way the Truth and the Life (John 14:6), it is not me or my group, and it is not you or yours.
Christianity is exclusive certainly, for “there is no other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). However the “One Faith” mentioned above, is much bigger and much much richer than that expressed by any single group or denomination. Here once again reflecting our God, it is unity in diversity that gives the best expression of His body (the Church) here on earth. The history of the Church is of reaction and overreaction to the truths we hold or neglect. The denominational distinctive are important many times, but being a reaction to real and perceived error, we go too far in the opposite direction, and we go there at the speed of light. This results in false dichotomies. Perhaps the biggest such divide in the last centenary was between those who stressed the Word, and those who stressed the Spirit. Those who stressed the Word cited certain excesses of those who stressed the Spirit. Those who stressed the Spirit pointed out the legalism that attended many who stressed the Word pointing out that the letter kills, but the spirit makes alive (2 Corinthians 3:6). Well which is it? None of the above, for if we take the Word without the Spirit we dry up, and if we take the Spirit without the Word we blow up. But if we take the Word and the Spirit progressing towards the unity intended in the Church, we grow up (Ephesians 4:14-16).
It is easy to dismiss and/or vilify others, when we isolate ourselves, keeping those who differ at arms length. The Scriptures tell us that “The first one to plead his cause seems right, Until his neighbour comes and examines him” (Proverbs 18:17). But what if the neighbour is prevented from coming and examining him? This is one of the main problems with “Political correctness”, we are shouted down and disbarred from the court of public opinion. We should not follow this same tactic in the Church!
Debate is healthy when it is handled Biblically. What else does it mean that “As iron sharpens iron, so man sharpens man” (Proverbs 27:17). We are told that we do need to contend for the faith (Jude 3). Truth is important. But but we need to be eager to maintain unity (Ephesians 4:3). We need to realize that we can have all intellectual knowledge and faith that can move mountains, but if we do not operate in love we are nothing, zilch, a big fat zero! (1 Cor 13:2). So we are to contend for the faith, but we are not to be contentious (Titus 3:10). We are to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15). We must not quarrel, but be gentle to all and apt to teach (2 Timothy 2:24). We must also be slow to speak and quick to hear (James 1:19). Sounds impossible? We need to grow into this. This is Paul's vision for a mature Church growing up into the Unity to which we are called. It should be our goal too.
In fact this is the purpose and goal of what has been called the five fold ministry (Ephesians 4:11). The goal is that “we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ” (Ephesians 4:15). You may have noticed in the natural that young siblings fight. But if those who surround them are mature and love one another through their differences seeking to put these Scriptures into practice, then the children will likely grow up that way too. It needs to start with us, it needs to start with me, being diligent to maintain the unity of believers.
So what has this to do with interpretation of the Scriptures? Well to coin a Biblical phrase, much in every way. What I am saying is that fullness of truth can be found only in the furnace of loving interaction and debate within the the community of believers down through history, and across the globe. I want to take this up again next day.
Unity, oneness, peace, love, harmony etc. are qualities that are high on God's agenda for His Church. God has made known to us “the mystery of his will" ... that "in the fullness of time" .... He would "bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ" (Ephesians 1:9,10). Jesus Himself is “our peace, who has made us both one, and has broken down every wall of separation” so that “He might reconcile them (us) both (all) to God in one body through the cross” (Ephesians 1:14,16). He gives the World the right to judge that we are His disciples by the love we have one for another (John 13:35).
You don't have to look far, to see that the Western Church is seriously out of sink with this ideal to which God is calling us. I am told that there are over 10,000 registered Christian denominations, most of which are saying “We do things Biblically”. I don't doubt there is great sincerity in what is being said, but when you see this through the eyes of the unbeliever, you want to shake your head. It has to grieve the heart of God.
If we are to advance the Kingdom, if we want the Lord to come and heal this desperately wicked and hurting land, then we need collectively to repent of our disunity, arrogance in effect claiming that we, or our group, or denomination is the way the truth and the life. We joke “You don't have to agree with me, you have every right to be wrong”. The problem is half the times, we are not really joking! It is Jesus who is the Way the Truth and the Life (John 14:6), it is not me or my group, and it is not you or yours.
Christianity is exclusive certainly, for “there is no other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). However the “One Faith” mentioned above, is much bigger and much much richer than that expressed by any single group or denomination. Here once again reflecting our God, it is unity in diversity that gives the best expression of His body (the Church) here on earth. The history of the Church is of reaction and overreaction to the truths we hold or neglect. The denominational distinctive are important many times, but being a reaction to real and perceived error, we go too far in the opposite direction, and we go there at the speed of light. This results in false dichotomies. Perhaps the biggest such divide in the last centenary was between those who stressed the Word, and those who stressed the Spirit. Those who stressed the Word cited certain excesses of those who stressed the Spirit. Those who stressed the Spirit pointed out the legalism that attended many who stressed the Word pointing out that the letter kills, but the spirit makes alive (2 Corinthians 3:6). Well which is it? None of the above, for if we take the Word without the Spirit we dry up, and if we take the Spirit without the Word we blow up. But if we take the Word and the Spirit progressing towards the unity intended in the Church, we grow up (Ephesians 4:14-16).
It is easy to dismiss and/or vilify others, when we isolate ourselves, keeping those who differ at arms length. The Scriptures tell us that “The first one to plead his cause seems right, Until his neighbour comes and examines him” (Proverbs 18:17). But what if the neighbour is prevented from coming and examining him? This is one of the main problems with “Political correctness”, we are shouted down and disbarred from the court of public opinion. We should not follow this same tactic in the Church!
Debate is healthy when it is handled Biblically. What else does it mean that “As iron sharpens iron, so man sharpens man” (Proverbs 27:17). We are told that we do need to contend for the faith (Jude 3). Truth is important. But but we need to be eager to maintain unity (Ephesians 4:3). We need to realize that we can have all intellectual knowledge and faith that can move mountains, but if we do not operate in love we are nothing, zilch, a big fat zero! (1 Cor 13:2). So we are to contend for the faith, but we are not to be contentious (Titus 3:10). We are to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15). We must not quarrel, but be gentle to all and apt to teach (2 Timothy 2:24). We must also be slow to speak and quick to hear (James 1:19). Sounds impossible? We need to grow into this. This is Paul's vision for a mature Church growing up into the Unity to which we are called. It should be our goal too.
In fact this is the purpose and goal of what has been called the five fold ministry (Ephesians 4:11). The goal is that “we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ” (Ephesians 4:15). You may have noticed in the natural that young siblings fight. But if those who surround them are mature and love one another through their differences seeking to put these Scriptures into practice, then the children will likely grow up that way too. It needs to start with us, it needs to start with me, being diligent to maintain the unity of believers.
So what has this to do with interpretation of the Scriptures? Well to coin a Biblical phrase, much in every way. What I am saying is that fullness of truth can be found only in the furnace of loving interaction and debate within the the community of believers down through history, and across the globe. I want to take this up again next day.
Friday, February 18, 2011
Do you take the Bible literally? No Private interpretation III
When somebody asks me this question I usually answer that this is like asking me if I have stopped beating my wife yet. No matter if I answer yes or no, I am in trouble. The point is that both questions hold the hidden assumptions that they can be answered with a simple yes or a no. In fact, depending on the passage, the answer is sometimes yes, sometimes it is no, and sometimes I need to answer “I still have not quite figured that out yet” (i.e. huge chunks of the book of Revelation, see also 1 Corinthians 8:2). We Christians, if we are to be real, need to learn to say “I don't know”. Other times I might answer “I take the Bible seriously”.
Let's look at a couple of examples. “Do not murder, do not commit adultery” (Exodus 20). These commandments, as with most commandments are meant to be taken literally. But what do you do with the saying of Jesus that “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple” (Luke 14:26)? To take this literally would be to contradict the whole thrust of both the Old and New Testaments. In particular it would contradict the "Great Commandment" to love God with all your heart and soul and mind and strength, and your neighbour as yourself (Mark 12:30). It is also contrary to “Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar” (1 John 4:20).
As I have suggested elsewhere when we encounter apparent contradictions like this, we need to ask the question “What am I missing here? It is a mistake to think that every statement the Bible makes can be understood by taking it literally. We must , for example, take into account the genre, that is the style or type of expression of the writing. The Bible contains a great many genres, poetry, prophecy, wisdom literature, history, apocalyptic writings etc. etc. It also uses many literary devices in order to make a point, or to cause you think deeply about something. We short circuit the intention that lies behind what is written when we insist on interpreting everything literally. The literary device that Jesus is using here is hyperbole. That is it is an over the top exaggeration of the point He is wanting to make. He does not want you to pass over this lightly, it is shock value. His intention is for you to pause and say “Wait a minute, what does He really mean here?” We will not fathom the deep things of God if we insist on taking everything at face value. Jesus can be clear, and Jesus can be subtle (see last day's post). Loving God with all of our minds, involves searching out the deep things of God (1 Corinthians 2:10)! We need to be sure of the basics, but we also need to go on to maturity (Hebrews 6:1,2). It is a tragedy when a child does not grow up. Reciting “Mary had a little lamb” is cute in a 4 year old, but not so cute in a 25 year old!
If we look at the context of the passage in Luke, we see that Jesus is talking about the cost of discipleship. In Luke 9:23 Jesus says “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me”. So discipleship has to do with self denial and frankly with suffering. You might encounter opposition, even strong opposition, from your parents, siblings or children. Jesus did (see Mark 3:21). What if it is your spouse? What is being required here is a radical commitment that excludes all else. If and when it comes down to a choice between following the Lord or following the desires of our family (or even of our own hearts - “yes, and his own life also”) then the true disciple will choose the Lord, even if that looks to others, like hate.
Some Christians insist that we take the whole of the Bible literally. When I read their defense of this, the impression I get it that what they are really insisting on, is the radical obedience to the Word that Jesus is calling for, in passages like the one we have been discussing. I don't however think that they would council one caught up in the grip of pornography, to literally blind himself (see Matthew 5:29). This is certainly not what Jesus intends. He does however intend that we deal radically with such things. This is what I mean when I say we need to take the Bible seriously. By and large it is a pretty soft option, here in the West to become a Christian. But there are places in this word in this day and age where it can cost you your job, your family or your very life. However if we follow Jesus in the radical way He is calling us to follow Him, it is more than possible that our contemporaries will conclude, as they did with Jesus that “He is out of His mind” (Mark 3:21 again). What are you and I willing to sacrifice to follow Him? How far are you willing to go to enter into the fullness of what Jesus is offering us, or even to see if it is all true?
Are you a God chaser (see Tommy Tenney - God Chasers), or are you a limp lover (see "A safe place to be real II" October 2010)? Are you willing to go where they are telling us God is at work (check it out carefully – years ago I went to Africa seeking revival, but by the time I got there, revival had moved on!)? God is doing some amazing things today in our world. We do hear about them, but we too easily dismiss them as fake, and certainly some are. But not all are fake. If you want to experience the miraculous, you may have to leave the comfort of home. You may need to be willing to go to the ends of the earth. The Kingdom is advancing in the here and now, and these things are totally worth checking out. What if it is all true and you miss it? I will suggest three places. Visit Bethel church (http://www.ibethel.org/site/) where miracles happen on a regular basis (see also http://www.bjm.org/home.html and check out the testimonies). Go to Iris ministries in Mozambique and elsewhere (http://www.irismin.org/). Take a short term mission with Randy Clark (http://www.globalawakening.com/).
I said above, that I take the Bible seriously. It is easier to do this when you have seen, and been used of the Lord to perform miracles in Jesus name. Do I take the Bible literally? In many places I do. I take the promises literally, and most of the commandments. “All things are possible to he who will believe”. I pray and mean it “Lord I believe, help my unbelief” (Mark 9:23). I have not yet fully entered in, but I want to press forward towards the goal of the high calling in Jesus Christ (Philippians 3:14). How about you?
Let's look at a couple of examples. “Do not murder, do not commit adultery” (Exodus 20). These commandments, as with most commandments are meant to be taken literally. But what do you do with the saying of Jesus that “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple” (Luke 14:26)? To take this literally would be to contradict the whole thrust of both the Old and New Testaments. In particular it would contradict the "Great Commandment" to love God with all your heart and soul and mind and strength, and your neighbour as yourself (Mark 12:30). It is also contrary to “Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar” (1 John 4:20).
As I have suggested elsewhere when we encounter apparent contradictions like this, we need to ask the question “What am I missing here? It is a mistake to think that every statement the Bible makes can be understood by taking it literally. We must , for example, take into account the genre, that is the style or type of expression of the writing. The Bible contains a great many genres, poetry, prophecy, wisdom literature, history, apocalyptic writings etc. etc. It also uses many literary devices in order to make a point, or to cause you think deeply about something. We short circuit the intention that lies behind what is written when we insist on interpreting everything literally. The literary device that Jesus is using here is hyperbole. That is it is an over the top exaggeration of the point He is wanting to make. He does not want you to pass over this lightly, it is shock value. His intention is for you to pause and say “Wait a minute, what does He really mean here?” We will not fathom the deep things of God if we insist on taking everything at face value. Jesus can be clear, and Jesus can be subtle (see last day's post). Loving God with all of our minds, involves searching out the deep things of God (1 Corinthians 2:10)! We need to be sure of the basics, but we also need to go on to maturity (Hebrews 6:1,2). It is a tragedy when a child does not grow up. Reciting “Mary had a little lamb” is cute in a 4 year old, but not so cute in a 25 year old!
If we look at the context of the passage in Luke, we see that Jesus is talking about the cost of discipleship. In Luke 9:23 Jesus says “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me”. So discipleship has to do with self denial and frankly with suffering. You might encounter opposition, even strong opposition, from your parents, siblings or children. Jesus did (see Mark 3:21). What if it is your spouse? What is being required here is a radical commitment that excludes all else. If and when it comes down to a choice between following the Lord or following the desires of our family (or even of our own hearts - “yes, and his own life also”) then the true disciple will choose the Lord, even if that looks to others, like hate.
Some Christians insist that we take the whole of the Bible literally. When I read their defense of this, the impression I get it that what they are really insisting on, is the radical obedience to the Word that Jesus is calling for, in passages like the one we have been discussing. I don't however think that they would council one caught up in the grip of pornography, to literally blind himself (see Matthew 5:29). This is certainly not what Jesus intends. He does however intend that we deal radically with such things. This is what I mean when I say we need to take the Bible seriously. By and large it is a pretty soft option, here in the West to become a Christian. But there are places in this word in this day and age where it can cost you your job, your family or your very life. However if we follow Jesus in the radical way He is calling us to follow Him, it is more than possible that our contemporaries will conclude, as they did with Jesus that “He is out of His mind” (Mark 3:21 again). What are you and I willing to sacrifice to follow Him? How far are you willing to go to enter into the fullness of what Jesus is offering us, or even to see if it is all true?
Are you a God chaser (see Tommy Tenney - God Chasers), or are you a limp lover (see "A safe place to be real II" October 2010)? Are you willing to go where they are telling us God is at work (check it out carefully – years ago I went to Africa seeking revival, but by the time I got there, revival had moved on!)? God is doing some amazing things today in our world. We do hear about them, but we too easily dismiss them as fake, and certainly some are. But not all are fake. If you want to experience the miraculous, you may have to leave the comfort of home. You may need to be willing to go to the ends of the earth. The Kingdom is advancing in the here and now, and these things are totally worth checking out. What if it is all true and you miss it? I will suggest three places. Visit Bethel church (http://www.ibethel.org/site/) where miracles happen on a regular basis (see also http://www.bjm.org/home.html and check out the testimonies). Go to Iris ministries in Mozambique and elsewhere (http://www.irismin.org/). Take a short term mission with Randy Clark (http://www.globalawakening.com/).
I said above, that I take the Bible seriously. It is easier to do this when you have seen, and been used of the Lord to perform miracles in Jesus name. Do I take the Bible literally? In many places I do. I take the promises literally, and most of the commandments. “All things are possible to he who will believe”. I pray and mean it “Lord I believe, help my unbelief” (Mark 9:23). I have not yet fully entered in, but I want to press forward towards the goal of the high calling in Jesus Christ (Philippians 3:14). How about you?
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
No private interpretation II Meat and Milk.
What I was saying last day is that if we want to understand what is intended when we read the Bible, we must firstly approach the Scriptures with a childlike humility, looking to learn and to understand, rather than looking for excuses to dismiss it, or to use it to justify our already existing positions. The secrets of the Kingdom are given to those who are truly seeking. Secondly the Bible has a central theme/message /purpose which when received by faith is clear. Outside of this central message, there are things that are difficult to understand, and require much careful work and study. There is the milk of the Word and there is the is meat of the Word. Thirdly we are not to engage in private interpretations of the Bible. There are checks balances and discernments that the Bible itself requires we take. Even the Apostle Paul checked out his teaching with the leaders of the Church in Jerusalem (See Galatians 2:1-2). Today I want to say a bit more about the second point. In particular the essentials are clear when we come in faith and humility (the milk of the Word), but some things are hard to understand (the meat of the Word).
One of the characteristics of a cult (a religious movement or group sharing certain highly unorthodox (read wrong) religious beliefs), is that they claim that they are right and everybody else is wrong. Of course, not every group that takes this stand is necessarily unorthodox in the majority or even the most important, aspects of their teachings. But if they claim in black and white that “We are right and everybody else is wrong”, then they are incorrect at least in this statement. Paul puts it this way “And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know”. He also says that “We know in part,...” (1 Corinthians 8:2; 13:12).
So then can we be confident of nothing? There are two groups of Scriptures that we need to take into account, to hold in tension, and to discern how to apply. Paul certainly does not mean we are to be wishy washy in the essentials of the Faith, since he also tells us that we need to beware lest we become like those who are “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” (2 Timothy 3:7). The writer to the Hebrew tells us that faith is “ being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (Hebrews 11:1).
So then there are two sets of Scriptural references which at first sight seem to contradict each other. The unbeliever will seize on such things and tell you “See the Bible contradicts itself”. Let me say what I said last day in a slightly different way. We will not be able to understand the Bible if we look at it through the eyes of unbelief. If we are childlike as in curious and humble we will ask “What am I missing here?”
I dealt with another example of this need to balance teachings in my December post “Salvation by Faith, Assurance by Works I”. What I am saying is that over and over we will find Scriptures that need to be held in tension. More often than not, the solution is to understand them as both and, rather than either or. For me the resolution of the two sets of Scriptural references we are considering today is easy. We are I believe being told on the one hand that we can have assurance of the essentials of the faith of the things that pertain to salvation. But we need to be careful that we do not give pat and shallow answers to complex questions on the other. I remember one Pastor I challenged on this last point. “Well the congregation wants simple answers”, he said. I suppose it saves us the bother of having to think, and to think deeply. But as I said last day, the Scriptures are so simple a child can understand them, but deep enough to drown an elephant. If we are to love the Lord with all our minds (Matthew ), we need to avoid pat and shallow answers in the “meat” of the Word.
If you are a babe in Christ, you can relax. Ask the Lord to guide you and then to drink, and drink and drink from the Word. The Lord will guide you, and show you when you need to take more notice of the deeper things we need to consider as we grow up in Christ. You don't feed steak to a baby. In 1 Peter 2:2 new converts are admonished “as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby”. In other words as a baby is greedy for milk from its mother's breast, the newly born Christian should be greedy for the nurture of the Word as he or she reads. If this is you, I say to you what I was told as a baby Christian “Get your nose into God's feedbag” - His Word. Read the Word, feed on the Word, believe the Word, do the Word.
One of the characteristics of a cult (a religious movement or group sharing certain highly unorthodox (read wrong) religious beliefs), is that they claim that they are right and everybody else is wrong. Of course, not every group that takes this stand is necessarily unorthodox in the majority or even the most important, aspects of their teachings. But if they claim in black and white that “We are right and everybody else is wrong”, then they are incorrect at least in this statement. Paul puts it this way “And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know”. He also says that “We know in part,...” (1 Corinthians 8:2; 13:12).
So then can we be confident of nothing? There are two groups of Scriptures that we need to take into account, to hold in tension, and to discern how to apply. Paul certainly does not mean we are to be wishy washy in the essentials of the Faith, since he also tells us that we need to beware lest we become like those who are “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” (2 Timothy 3:7). The writer to the Hebrew tells us that faith is “ being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (Hebrews 11:1).
So then there are two sets of Scriptural references which at first sight seem to contradict each other. The unbeliever will seize on such things and tell you “See the Bible contradicts itself”. Let me say what I said last day in a slightly different way. We will not be able to understand the Bible if we look at it through the eyes of unbelief. If we are childlike as in curious and humble we will ask “What am I missing here?”
I dealt with another example of this need to balance teachings in my December post “Salvation by Faith, Assurance by Works I”. What I am saying is that over and over we will find Scriptures that need to be held in tension. More often than not, the solution is to understand them as both and, rather than either or. For me the resolution of the two sets of Scriptural references we are considering today is easy. We are I believe being told on the one hand that we can have assurance of the essentials of the faith of the things that pertain to salvation. But we need to be careful that we do not give pat and shallow answers to complex questions on the other. I remember one Pastor I challenged on this last point. “Well the congregation wants simple answers”, he said. I suppose it saves us the bother of having to think, and to think deeply. But as I said last day, the Scriptures are so simple a child can understand them, but deep enough to drown an elephant. If we are to love the Lord with all our minds (Matthew ), we need to avoid pat and shallow answers in the “meat” of the Word.
If you are a babe in Christ, you can relax. Ask the Lord to guide you and then to drink, and drink and drink from the Word. The Lord will guide you, and show you when you need to take more notice of the deeper things we need to consider as we grow up in Christ. You don't feed steak to a baby. In 1 Peter 2:2 new converts are admonished “as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby”. In other words as a baby is greedy for milk from its mother's breast, the newly born Christian should be greedy for the nurture of the Word as he or she reads. If this is you, I say to you what I was told as a baby Christian “Get your nose into God's feedbag” - His Word. Read the Word, feed on the Word, believe the Word, do the Word.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
