I am often disgusted by the poor thinking I see coming from many Christians today. Christian radio, TV, books, magazines, and the like are often poorly thought through. The Bible is seen as one big answer book with every story and passage functioning much like a fable with a nice little moral at the end.
To counter this, I present Messy Scriptures. Don’t get me wrong. I believe that the Bible is the unique Word of God. I believe it is useful for teaching, correcting, rebuking, and encouraging. But the Bible presents many difficult and challenging issues if you read it slowly, carefully, and deliberately enough.
For those of us who grow up in the church (myself included) we forget what this book sounds like. We have heard the stories over and over in church. But we forget the moral dilemmas, the challenges, the R-rated Scriptures, the troubling behavior of the “heroes” which often goes unchecked and unchallenged in any real sense.
We have developed a lens with which we see Scripture through. I like chipping away at that lens. I like pointing out that lens. I like trying to remove the lens. And when you remove the lens, you sometimes find a mess. Messy Scriptures. Reading Scripture without a lens (well, at least a different one!).
This idea comes from many classes I enjoyed with Dr. Danny Carroll at Denver Seminary and from some ideas from Dr. Steven Sample’s book “The Contrarian’s Guide to Leadership”.
These readings will prove to be challenging to many, unorthodox maybe even heretical to some, scary to others, unprofitable to still others, but really fun to me! The readings are intended to push our thinking, to challenge our assumptions, to push the envelop, and to foster discussion.
Finally, I reserve the right to contradict and disagree with myself. This gives me freedom to push my thinking, challenge my assumptions, and push the envelop. After all, I’m trying to remove a lens I’ve worn for the better part of my life!
2.15.2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I think you are so right on that "answer book" thing. Not only is the Bible not that, but when it gets reduced to that it can do serious harm to people's relationship to it. This is a great series in part because it forces us to relate to Scripture in decidedly "non-answer book" ways.
Steve,
While I respect your desire not to be simplistic about the Scriptures, the problem is that you seems to cast "shadows" upon them.
You do what John Stott says on pp.84 of his book "Between Two Worlds, the Challenge of Preaching Today". Stott says, "Some[preachers] frankly confess that they see their function as sharing their doubts with their congregation." It is these Scripture "doubts" that mislead your congregation and other hearers. They go away with confusion about the Word of God, not increased confidence in the Bible. Thus you demean the Glorious Name of Christ, the Living Word and His Written Word. Maybe the demeaning is not intentional(?), but nevertheless it is real and damaging to your sheep. Brian McLaren is hardly a role model of someone who trusts fully in the Word of God...His relativism is crystal clear. He doubts the "Truth" even more than you have expressed.
Steve, your role as a pastor is to encourage the true Christians in your church to grow in confidence of the Word of God, not lessen such confidence.
Sadly, based upon what I read of your posts, you have cast doubt on the Bible, even though you veil this doubt by retaining the appropriate "terms" (your words "unique word of God", instead of the Apostle Paul's words "inspired Word of God" which is actually what Scripture says in 2 Tim. 3:16). This indeed must be to disguise your own doubts.
I agree that some things have been taught simplistically by some, but as complicated as certain smaller parts of the Scripture may be, they are the minority, not the majority. With good study, a true desire to focus on the Glory of Jesus Christ and Christ inside us as Lord and Saviour, you and I as pastors ought be able, if we are indeed called of Him to preach, to be able to rightly "divide the Word of Truth."
The passages in Genesis are not so messy after all....it is fairly simple. We see the sinfulness of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Esau and the ladies... We see however that inspite of man's sinfulness, God's Glorious Sovereignty overrules man's sinfulness and continues His promise of the lineage in which the whole world would be blessed, a lineage that leads us to Jesus Christ, the God-man, Messiah, who was without sin and yet fully human. The Scriptures are not particularly messy...IF they are rightly divided, Steve.
In closing, I "intruded" upon your website and will seek not to do so without permission again, but I urge you as a "pastor" to be careful how you "shepherd the flock of God." To fail to uphold the Holy Authority of Scripture ought to be a terrifying thought to both of us.
2 Timothy 4: 1-5
Steve you and I will indeed be faithful preachers if we preach only the Word, nothing else, but the Word....Think about it!!
I would welcome a coffee visit sometime if it centers around "the only sure authority we have", as John Wycliffe wrote, "The Holy Word of God."
The Truth of Scripture is clear and certain and is the only reliable source we have in a very uncertain world...
Scritpure is not messy at all...
Gary, Pastor-teacher of Wray SBC
Steve,
I apologize - I typed my web address incorrect.
www.wraybaptistchurch.org
gry1@plainstel.com
Gary Fore
I just wanted to come in and say I disagree with Gary a little. And I say that has a Baptist as well.
When the WORD is mentioned in the Bible is typically referring to Christ and not the written scriptures. And unfortunately when we say scripture is easy to understand, what we are really talking about is our understanding of scripture.
But anyway just a long winded way of saying I agree with you.
Gary-
I am amazed that someone from Wray has found my blog! Maybe there are others who are lurking and not commenting?
Thanks for your thoughts. Let me clarify a few things. I am not seeking to cast shadows on the Scriptures. If I am casting shadows on anything it is the lens which we read the Scriptures with. The hermenuetic we use is what is in question not the Scriptures.
I love the quote from Stott. I would never preach these thoughts from this blog in this format. This blog is exploratory in nature and especially this series of posts as I tried to clarify in this particular post you commented on.
As to Scripture: I believe I have a very high view of Scripture. I believe it to be the inspired Word of God, which Biran McLaren also states in the post which I referenced. I do not doubt the Bible or its authority. What I do doubt and what I am seeking to challenge in this series is the common interpretations of these passages.
I am seeking to remove my own biases that I bring to the text. I am also trying to understand the text in the way the original author and his audience would have understood it. You and I have the benefit of the New Testament but what did the original author mean and how did his audience understand it is a very important question as well.
Many times our theology doesn't allow for certain readings even if those readings were originally intended. (see, God at War, by Greg Boyd).
I do appreciate you concern. I would really enjoy getting together for coffee. Please know I'll be praying for you and your ministry.
Grace and peace,
Steve
Post a Comment