My Theology #1 The Bible
I've realized lately that I really need to think deeply about what I believe and what I do with that belief. I find myself torn between differing agendas. Perhaps by journaling some thoughts I can make what is insubstantial, firmer. So, this is intended as the beginning of a process and I reserve every right to change my mind as often as I'd like through the process... Comments are very welcome!
I believe that the Bible is inspired by God, written by all too human writers, addressing the various issues/contexts of each book's time and historically documenting the interactions of man and God. I believe it is without error or contradiction when correctly understood. In matters of internal contradiction, I assume the picture that God paints is broader that the verses that oppose each other. I believe that God is unchanging through the ages, His eternal nature is internally consistent. The Bible should be viewed as a picture of the actions of that kind of God.
I believe its purpose is primarily narrative - to tell the story of man and God. In the OT, it's often the good, bad and indifferent of the individuals and nation of Israel and its forebearers. In the NT it is the story of Jesus, his disciples, and the growth/struggles of the early church. Because of these topics, the historical/cultural/individual worldview of the time speaks directly to our understanding of these messages. To understand God's purpose and message we must try to understand His actions within the context of each circumstance - and try to see the worldview we bring to the reading of the scripture.
As someone who has studied four languages, I understand the original language to be an essential ingredient to proper understanding of the text. However, culture and language are inextricably intertwined. I'll let experts render their opinions to me in both, so that I may delve into understanding more deeply who is God and my relationship with Him.
The Bible is essential as a reference and standard. However, I do not believe in worshipping the book, it is a tool, not the goal.
I believe that the Bible is inspired by God, written by all too human writers, addressing the various issues/contexts of each book's time and historically documenting the interactions of man and God. I believe it is without error or contradiction when correctly understood. In matters of internal contradiction, I assume the picture that God paints is broader that the verses that oppose each other. I believe that God is unchanging through the ages, His eternal nature is internally consistent. The Bible should be viewed as a picture of the actions of that kind of God.
I believe its purpose is primarily narrative - to tell the story of man and God. In the OT, it's often the good, bad and indifferent of the individuals and nation of Israel and its forebearers. In the NT it is the story of Jesus, his disciples, and the growth/struggles of the early church. Because of these topics, the historical/cultural/individual worldview of the time speaks directly to our understanding of these messages. To understand God's purpose and message we must try to understand His actions within the context of each circumstance - and try to see the worldview we bring to the reading of the scripture.
As someone who has studied four languages, I understand the original language to be an essential ingredient to proper understanding of the text. However, culture and language are inextricably intertwined. I'll let experts render their opinions to me in both, so that I may delve into understanding more deeply who is God and my relationship with Him.
The Bible is essential as a reference and standard. However, I do not believe in worshipping the book, it is a tool, not the goal.
posted by Charlotte Wyncoop at 7:42 PM
5 Comments:
good thoughts.
what do you mean by without error when correctly understood? how is that understanding arrived at?
I guess I mean that in a theoretical basis or as a goal. If the Bible is true, then what it speaks about should be true. Can we prove the bible is true and inerrant? I don't think so. But I believe it is because I have received a personal critical mass of evidence.
However, that doesn't mean that when the bible documents something historical it should be interpreted as defining a moral code. When it speaks of cultural values, that doesn't mean they should be our cultural values in a later time. When it speaks of morality, it speaks within the cultural, historical and specific context in which it's written. Just because the bible says "I don't allow a woman to have authority over a man" doesn't somehow negate the Judges passage that talks about Deborah's political, spiritual and military leadership of Israel, nor vice versa.
What's your understanding?
If the Bible is true, then what it speaks about should be true.
always? and what do you mean by true? historically true? scientifically true? theologically true? ...
I think I'm just wary of the term inerrant because it comes with so much baggage. It usually is associated with literal reading of scripture that ignore cultural context. I don't think the bible is full of errors, but I prefer to stick to the language the bible uses for itself...
Can you rephrase your question about "true" so I understand it better? I thought what I said in the second paragraph covered that, but maybe I'm missing what you're trying to say.
but I prefer to stick to the language the bible uses for itself...
How would you phrase it? Which self-references are you choosing?
I like what you're thinking Char, and Julie has raised some good questions too. Rather than pursuing that same track though, I want to ask for clarification on another issue. You said:
"I believe that God is unchanging through the ages, His eternal nature is internally consistent."
How deep does this immutability go? Perhaps his nature never changes, but could other, more surface aspeccts change? For example, does God ever change his mind? (Many different Bible stories seem to indicate that he does.) Do his emotions change? Can he be sad, and then angry, and then joyful depending on what is happening in his creation? (Again, scripture seems to indicate that his emotions do change.)
I ask because classical theology, influenced by Greek philosophical ideas about perfection, has typically said that even God's emotions are unchanging and nothing we do can affect him at all (Aristotle's whole "unmoved mover"). Thus they write off passages about God changing his mind as mere anthropomorphism (i.e. He didn't really change his mind, he just pretended like he did. He really knew what he wanted to do all along.)
So that's why I ask how deep you think the "unchanging" thing goes.
Post a Comment
<< Home