Do you dare?

[Clare73]

No, it's really NOT convenient because the fact that there are some reasonable, bright people out there who are skeptics makes my effort to read, value, apply, and even DEFEND the Bible that much more difficult.

While doing intensive word studies of the Bible is always a necessary thing, we should all know [by now] that understanding the Bible goes beyond mere word studies. And if you've studied D.A. Carson, you'd realize this, Clare.

The Bible is for those of faith by the Holy Spirit.

Those who don't believe it, are in no position to truly understand it.

It is not the "credibility" of Scripture that is the source of belief, it is the Holy Spirit who is the source of true belief.

One believes it because the Holy Spirit bears witness to one's spirit that Scripture is God's truth.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I basically agree with this. While God has a special covenant with the Hebrew people, I believe that he loves all of us and works to reveal himself to people across the planet. Inspiration from God does not seem to be limited to Jews and Christians. I think the bible itself supports this - for example the magi who follow the star to find Jesus.

So I think there can be kernels of truth in other religions, and that we don’t need to be ‘scared’ when it comes to learning about other faiths and engaging with friends and neighbors of other faiths. We could gain insights from them, but as always the insights would need to be tested against scripture and tradition, using reason and being lead by the Holy Spirit. (Edit: I bet you would be shocked to learn I am in the process of moving to the Episcopal Church!)

Ultimately my theology is orthodox. i think the incarnation of Christ is unique, and am happy to accept the scripture we have, warts and all. Do I ever have doubts about that? Yes! But that is part of the story as well. The end of Matthew makes that pretty clear.

This is where David Tracy has been helping me. For some he is way too intellectual and academic. I know I found him so most of my life. But now I am hungering for his more sophisticated reflections on Christology. He values pluralism and appreciates other cultures, other theologies , other traditions. And yet he identifies Jesus as The unique manifestation, revelation and disclosure of who God is, even on the cross.

 

[Clare73]

I have no quarrel with folks who are only comfortable with a face-value interpretation. But I thought this thread is about considering other non-face-value interpretations of the story of Adam and perhaps other parts of scripture.

For what purpose. . .

Are you also looking for other non-face-value interpretations of the laws of physics?

Can we just do that?

Neither in physics nor Scripture unless it is in 100% agreement with context.

And that doesn't sound like what you are proposing.

Anyway, in addition to being inspired, I think the bible is great literature. And like a lot of great literature it can have more than one interpretation. Thinking about more than one interpretation or meaning in scripture is something faithful Jews and Christians have been doing for a long time. Second-temple Jews and early church fathers did this all the time, and it has continued until today. Considering a different interpretation does not take away or invalidate other interpretations.

It does if they are not in 100% agreement.

 

[okay]

To many secular standards being applied to God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16) literature. . .

I respect your opinion on this. I just happen to have a different view.

The two are not the same. . .one of the ways the sheep are separated from the goats.

The goat sins are 100% sins of omission: not caring for sick, poor, immigrant, refugee, widow, orphan, prisoner, etc. These are sins that I struggle with, and I know they are very serious.

I don’t think that parable is talking about biblical interpretation, though.

Edit: perhaps I should have asked a question instead of making statements. At face-value the parable of the sheep and goats is about caring for the sick, poor, etc. Do you have another interpretation where it can be about biblical interpretation?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The Bible is for those of faith by the Holy Spirit.

Those who don't believe it, are in no position to truly understand it.

It is not the "credibility" of Scripture that is the source of belief, it is the Holy Spirit who is the source of true belief.

One believes it because the Holy Spirit bears witness to one's spirit that Scripture is God's truth.

Right. I agree that the Bible is for those who have faith. I fully agree that it is the Holy Spirit who bears witness to our own whole person by whom we come to God in His Triune fullness, but at the same time, I'm also both an epistemological and historical explorer of the faith, as well as a defender of the Faith.

To elucidate a little more here, ever since I became a Christian at age 17, I've wanted to know as much as I can about the the Lord and about the Bible, about the World and Universe we live in, and about the Historical development of our faith. I appreciate education and I like to learn. It's not enough for me to read the Bible alone, and I've realized this ever since those earlier days of my faith and after my year at Bible College.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The Bible is for those of faith by the Holy Spirit.

Yes

Those who don't believe it, are in no position to truly understand it.

Perhaps, but sometimes those who claim to be Christian don't always understand the Bible very well either and they make all sorts of crass, obtuse and inflated attempts to explain what the Bible means, only to end up creating a new sectarian denomination. The funny thing is, each denomination, while disagreeing with the others, each claims, "WE HAVE THE HOLY SPIRIT!!! LISTEN TO US!!! WE HAVE THE HOLY SPIRIT!!! LISTEN TO US!!!"

And who dares to cite the obvious? .... I DO!!!

It is not the "credibility" of Scripture that is the source of belief, it is the Holy Spirit who is the source of true belief.

Actually, the biblical writers such as John suggest that on some level, the "credibility" of what it is they're sharing is a reason for belief, along with the work of the Holy Spirit (and that of the leaders of Christ's Church who have written our New Testament).

One believes it because the Holy Spirit bears witness to one's spirit that Scripture is God's truth.

One believes it because, as Paul says, they've "heard" the Gospel message, and this is always through the Church, which the Scriptures are an expression of.

 

[okay]

This is where David Tracy has been helping me. For some he is way too intellectual and academic. I know I found him so most of my life. But now I am hungering for his more sophisticated reflections on Christology. He values pluralism and appreciates other cultures, other theologies , other traditions. And yet he identifies Jesus as The unique manifestation, revelation and disclosure of who God is, even on the cross.

Interesting. I can understand the appeal of sophisticated discussions of theology. It just isn’t my thing at this point in my journey.

My faith was pretty stagnant (almost dead) for quite awhile, then a kind of crisis of faith lead me to a different view of scripture (the topic of this thread) that brought my faith back to life. So the past handful of years I have been leaning into scripture, trying to jump-start my prayer practice, think about ‘simpler’ (less intellectual) aspects of theology, and basic stuff like that. It has been pretty exciting and I hope I am (slowly!) becoming more Christ-like.

Someday I hope to dive deeper into aspects of theology, but I am just not ready yet. In the interim I am enjoying the journey. God is truly good!

Edit: it can be hard to get tone across online sometimes. I just realized this post might come across as being a judgemental ‘you are doing theology, but I am doing discipleship’ kind of thing. That is not how I meant it! I believe theology is crucial, and I think it is cool that you are diving in deep. That is part of discipleship too. The Christian faith is endlessly rich, and each of us has a different journey. Cheers!

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Interesting. I can understand the appeal of sophisticated discussions of theology. It just isn’t my thing at this point in my journey.

I can hardly believe this is where I am now. I had Tracy's Blessed Rage for Order for 30 years an thought it was dry and beyond my understanding. Now I got so much out of it. So I moved on to a more recent book, Fragments. I am finding it to be amazing but when I try to share a quote with others they look at me as if I am speaking alien.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I can hardly believe this is where I am now. I had Tracy's Blessed Rage for Order for 30 years an thought it was dry and beyond my understanding. Now I got so much out of it. So I moved on to a more recent book, Fragments. I am finding it to be amazing but when I try to share a quote with others they look at me as if I am speaking alien.

Does it upset you that others here don't share your interests in specific theological authors, Akita? I'm just wondering because I actually sympathize with you if you do, but at the same time, I also realize that there are literally tens of thousands of theological voices---professional theological voices and fellow Christians---for any one Christian to choose to listen to, or to trust. While I have my own sources that I wish others would engage, I know they won't. Try not to let it frustrate you too much. It's just a part of living in a society that has resources piled up to the sky.

 

[okay]

year at Bible College

Cool! I would imagine even one year of such training would be really valuable.

I went to a normal secular university. I did take a Jewish studies course on the prophets, but at the time was not in a place where I could get the most out of it. Sigh…

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Does it upset you that others here don't share your interests in specific theological authors, Akita? I'm just wondering because I actually sympathize with you if you do, but at the same time, I also realize that there are literally tens of thousands of theological voices---professional theological voices and fellow Christians---for any one Christian to choose to listen to, or to trust. While I have my own sources that I wish others would engage, I know they won't. Try not to let it frustrate you too much. It's just a part of living in a society that has resources piled up to the sky.

I have some friends that I an share this stuff with. And then they share what they have been reading.
And that is also why I started this OP. After all, higher Biblical criticism has been around since at least the renaissance.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Cool! I would imagine even one year of such training would be really valuable.

It was useful and informative for what it was at the time.

I went to a normal secular university. I did take a Jewish studies course on the prophets, but at the time was not in a place where I could get the most out of it. Sigh…

That's awesome! I later went to a secular university as well, and there's nothing wrong with that.

I'm into Jewish studies. What sort of class or classes did you take in your university experience?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I have some friends that I an share this stuff with. And then they share what they have been reading.
And that is also why I started this OP. After all, higher Biblical criticism has been around since at least the renaissance.

Yep, that's all true, and you and I are on very similar pages in that regard, Akita. Unfortunately for us, I know I can count on two hands the number of fellow Christians here on CF who get into the sorts of Hermeneutics and Higher Criticism that you and I do.

I know that for a number of people, topics like Higher Criticism sort of scares them. For me, it's not upsetting because it has always been a standard aspect of inquiry into the world of ancient Biblical paradigms. It's where I started.

So, as far as I'm concerned, you can share whatever you want and I'll consider it.

 

[okay]

It was useful and informative for what it was at the time.


That's awesome! I later went to a secular university as well, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm into Jewish studies. What sort of class or classes did you take in your university experience?

I am an electrical engineer, so something like 75% of my classes were math/science/engineering. Not a lot of electives, and I was in a little over my head so I admit to taking ‘easy’ electives for the most part. I did take intro philosophy, logic from the philosophy dept, a few econ courses to keep my dad happy (he was an economist) and required freshman writing courses where we read books by Nietzsche, Freud, Durkheim, etc. and wrote critical papers.

How about you?

 

[Derf]

No. It is simply recognizing and acknowledging the fact that human beings were instrumental in the process and there is a great deal more going on than God simply writing a verbatim history book.

I get it. Some here dare not even think that. Others here do not see it as a theological problem.
A different view does not change the message.

The problem isn't looking at other ways the scriptures might have been compiled, the problem is the "dare" language. As if you are telling a kid to do something dangerous, something that will hurt or maybe even kill him if he does it. Truth hurts when it deals with reality, and such hurt is necessary, but freeing. Falsity hurts BECAUSE it moves us away from reality, and it enslaves.

A different view, one that says the text we have is not true in some way, might indeed change the message. The Mormon view of the death and resurrection of Christ is a different view...and a different message. The Muslim view of the deity of Christ is a different view...and a different message.

 

[Derf]

Just ask yourself, Why do you believe that a literal interpretation is needed in all cases? And why must you believe it to be "inerrant"?
There are many examples of errors. You don't need to answer here. We don't need to argue a point that has been argued for centuries.

I started this thread as a safe place for those who have a broader view.

Why do you think a broader view needs a "safe place"?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Why do you think a broader view needs a "safe place"?

That is why I used the "dare" language. We are a minority here and subject to attack.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I am an electrical engineer, so something like 75% of my classes were math/science/engineering. Not a lot of electives, and I was in a little over my head so I admit to taking ‘easy’ electives for the most part. I did take intro philosophy, logic from the philosophy dept, a few econ courses to keep my dad happy (he was an economist) and required freshman writing courses where we read books by Nietzsche, Freud, Durkheim, etc. and wrote critical papers.

That's all solid and highly respectable. I appreciate the knowledge and skills of anyone who has an occupation in math/science or engineering, mainly because they can do things that at this point in my life, I can only dream about doing.

How about you?

I'm pretty much just a run-a-bout peon, especially now that I got laid-off several months ago and am having difficulty finding a job. ('Cuz presently, I have no tactile, marketable skills of any substance, nor the appropriate academic degrees to go with whatever little I do have to be seen as marketable. But, such is life ....... however depressing it might feel at times. )

... at least I have my degrees in Philosophy and Education to keep me preoccupied and directed in my theological explorations. Like you, I'm familiar with Nietzsche and Freud and a whole gamut of others, and I studied Durkheim a while back in a 'Sociology of Education' course I took. I've been studying Philosophy now for about 20 years, and Christian Theology for about 37 years.................all with very little to show for it.

And that's my short story. At the very least, I've made it one of my life's ambitions to attempt to encourage or aid others to walk toward the Lord with whatever philosophical or personal method they feel helps them explore the Christian Faith, some of which is the sort of thing represented in this very thread.

 

[Derf]

That is why I used the "dare" language. We are a minority here and subject to attack

Maybe it's because your point of view is weak, because you haven't made a strong case for it.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Maybe it's because your point of view is weak, because you haven't made a strong case for it.

Actually, a strong case for Akita's "Dare" in the OP was already undertaken by Kenton L. Sparks years ago.

As for Akita, it doesn't bother me if he's here to kick the tires on a new model. I don't think it can hurt to browse and look around.