During our vacation last month, my family and I visited Redeemer Community Church, a nondenominational Bible church in Little Rock, Arkansas. I have been listening to their minister Bob Lepine's online sermons and reading his blog for some time now. Although we were unable to meet Mr. Lepine during our visit since he was away on vacation at the same time, we enjoyed our time with the church. Our son Christopher loved it because the guest speaker was an Army chaplain.
A couple of Sundays ago, I was listening to Bob Lepine online as he was preaching through the twenty-first chapter of the Gospel of Luke, a text focusing on the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem and the coming of Jesus Christ in power and glory.
In the introduction to his multi-part lesson on this text, the preacher presented the four major views of the end times: historic premillennialism, dispensational premillennialism, postmillennialism, and amillennialism. He explained that your view of the end times will influence the way you interpret Luke 21.
Then the pastor said something that I found extremely interesting. He warned the congregation to hold their views softly, with a large dose of humility, because there is a good chance that you are wrong.
He pointed out that many biblical doctrines are very clear and need to be held firmly. For example, every Christian would affirm that Jesus is the only Way to the Father. "Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me'" (John 14:6). However, some biblical doctrines are less clear and more difficult to understand. Bob Lepine reminded the church that whether they chose to believe the historic premillennial view, the dispensational premillennial view, the postmillennial view, or the amillennial view, they had a 75% chance of being wrong. However, that is not an excuse to ignore difficult passages in the Bible. Mr. Lepine encouraged the assembly to wrestle with such passages, but to do so with humility.
I had not thought of it in such a way before, but I found Bob Lepine's advice to be wise. We should hold on to clear biblical teachings firmly, but hold on to less clear understandings of the Bible softly. We may be wrong, and we need to be open to correction.
Showing posts with label Interpretation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Interpretation. Show all posts
Monday, July 18, 2011
Thursday, June 02, 2011
Over-Interpreting the Bible
Justin Taylor has posted a good parody of over-interpreting the Bible at the link below.
A Parody of Over-Interpreting the Bible
A Parody of Over-Interpreting the Bible
Friday, March 25, 2011
Gender Inclusive Language in the Bible
While attending a Christian conference yesterday, someone asked my opinion of the revised New International Version (NIV) of the Bible and its use of gender inclusive language. I have not bought a copy of the latest NIV, but I have read portions of it online. I have not read enough of it to give an informed opinion about whether the NIV has been improved or damaged by the changes.
However, I read a couple of versions of the Bible that use gender inclusive language. The Message and the New Living Translation do a good job of capturing the general spirit of the text, but I'm not comfortable with relying on either when I'm engaged in a serious study of a biblical text. I'm not an expert in the original biblical languages, so I depend on essentially literal translations of the Bible to guide my studies. I want to study from a version of the Bible that places an extremely high value on accuracy.
I like the approach taken by the translation team of the English Standard Version (ESV):
"In the area of gender language, the goal of the ESV is to render literally what is in the original. For example, 'anyone' replaces 'any man' where there is no word corresponding to 'man' in the original languages, and 'people' rather than 'men' is regularly used where the original languages refer to both men and women. But the words 'man' and 'men' are retained where a male meaning component is part of the original Greek or Hebrew." (Preface to the English Standard Version)
It's important to get an accurate understanding of the Scriptures. Sometimes a more accurate understanding can be achieved with gender inclusive language, but sometimes it can't. Whatever the case may be, I want to be able to study from a Bible that gives me a highly accurate translation of the original words in a text.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
The Evil Desires of Youth May Not Be What You Think
This is a passage from The Strength of a Man by David Roper. The Scripture quotations are from the New International Version of the Bible. His books are available from Discovery House Publishers at www.dhp.org.
"Most of us are biblically educated beyond our character, perhaps because we confuse the means with the end. We falsely assume that the purpose of Bible study is mere learning, a fallacy particularly characteristic of those of us who take the Bible straight.
"But mere orthodoxy is never enough. Even the demons are orthodox (James 2:19). They study the Bible too. They make their own prophetic charts and draw their own theological lines, but the Book doesn't alter their behavior. They're devilish to the end.
"In Paul's second letter to Timothy, he encouraged his young friend to be an approved workman 'who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth' (2 Timothy 2:15).
"The word here translated 'who correctly handles' means 'one who goes for a goal.' Classical Greek writers used the word of road builders who cut their way straight through a forest to a predetermined location. The Septuagint (the first Greek translation of the Old Testament) used the word in the last phrase of Proverbs 3:6. 'In all your ways acknowledge him and he will make your paths straight (direct you to the goal)."
"Paul contrasted good Bible study with the flawed methods of those who were 'quarreling about words,' which he said, 'is of no value, and only ruins those who listen' (2:14). Further, 'godless chatter'--mere discussion of the Bible without the goal of godliness--will make one become 'more and more ungodly' (2:16). Ironically, God's Word, when misused, can make us less and less like God!
"Paul therefore warns Timothy to 'flee the evil desires of youth' (2:22), a command that in context has little or nothing to do with youthful sexual desires. Paul rather had in mind the wrong-headed passion of the young and the immature to argue about meaning--'word-fight' is the term he coins. Those who mishandle God's Word in this way are workmen who ought to be ashamed.
"Instead of arguing about meaning, Timothy was to 'pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart' (2:22). In other words, he was to seek God and his goodness through the Book. To do so is to handle the Word correctly--to go straight to the goal.
"The purpose of Bible study is clear. It ought to produce worship and make us more and more like our Lord. To the extent that we read the Scriptures for that reason our Bible reading is valid; to the extent that we do not, it's nonproductive. Worse, it's counterproductive, making us less and less like our Lord. Thus the hymnist prayed:
"Beyond the sacred page, I seek Thee, Lord,
My spirit pants for Thee, O living Word."
(Pages 70-71)
"Most of us are biblically educated beyond our character, perhaps because we confuse the means with the end. We falsely assume that the purpose of Bible study is mere learning, a fallacy particularly characteristic of those of us who take the Bible straight.
"But mere orthodoxy is never enough. Even the demons are orthodox (James 2:19). They study the Bible too. They make their own prophetic charts and draw their own theological lines, but the Book doesn't alter their behavior. They're devilish to the end.
"In Paul's second letter to Timothy, he encouraged his young friend to be an approved workman 'who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth' (2 Timothy 2:15).
"The word here translated 'who correctly handles' means 'one who goes for a goal.' Classical Greek writers used the word of road builders who cut their way straight through a forest to a predetermined location. The Septuagint (the first Greek translation of the Old Testament) used the word in the last phrase of Proverbs 3:6. 'In all your ways acknowledge him and he will make your paths straight (direct you to the goal)."
"Paul contrasted good Bible study with the flawed methods of those who were 'quarreling about words,' which he said, 'is of no value, and only ruins those who listen' (2:14). Further, 'godless chatter'--mere discussion of the Bible without the goal of godliness--will make one become 'more and more ungodly' (2:16). Ironically, God's Word, when misused, can make us less and less like God!
"Paul therefore warns Timothy to 'flee the evil desires of youth' (2:22), a command that in context has little or nothing to do with youthful sexual desires. Paul rather had in mind the wrong-headed passion of the young and the immature to argue about meaning--'word-fight' is the term he coins. Those who mishandle God's Word in this way are workmen who ought to be ashamed.
"Instead of arguing about meaning, Timothy was to 'pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart' (2:22). In other words, he was to seek God and his goodness through the Book. To do so is to handle the Word correctly--to go straight to the goal.
"The purpose of Bible study is clear. It ought to produce worship and make us more and more like our Lord. To the extent that we read the Scriptures for that reason our Bible reading is valid; to the extent that we do not, it's nonproductive. Worse, it's counterproductive, making us less and less like our Lord. Thus the hymnist prayed:
"Beyond the sacred page, I seek Thee, Lord,
My spirit pants for Thee, O living Word."
(Pages 70-71)
Thursday, September 24, 2009
My Hopes for the Revised NIV Bible
I love the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible. I also like the English Standard Version, New American Standard Bible, the New King James Version, and The Message; but the New International Version is my favorite.
In 2011, a revised edition of the NIV will be released. The translation team is working to update the language, making it a little easier to read and to understand.
I would like to see three changes in the revision of the NIV.
1. I would like to see "atoning sacrifice" and "sacrifice of atonement" changed to "the one who would turn aside his wrath, taking away sin." In places like Romans 3:25, Jesus Christ is referred to as a "sacrifice of atonement." Some translations call him a "propitiation" in those places. However, neither phrase or word is as easily understood as "the one who would turn aside his wrath, taking away sin" (as the footnote in the current NIV states in an alternative reading of the verse). Such a phrase is both accurate and easily understood. It would be a great improvement.
2. I would like to see all weights, measurements, and monetary units changed so that they would be easily understood. The TNIV (Today's New International Version) had its flaws, but it did an outstanding job of making changes in translating weights, measurements, and monetary units into terms that can be easily understood by today's readers. For example, the parable of the talents in Matthew 25:14-30 was changed to the parable of the bags of gold. When contemporary English-speakers use the word "talent," we do not usually consider it to be a monetary unit. When we are teaching a Bible class to children or to people unfamiliar with the Bible, we need to stop and explain the definition of talent. With this type of change, a Bible study would not need to be interrupted in order to explain the word.
3. I would like to see gender-accurate language without the attempt to neuter the language. The TNIV never became popular because it seemed to try to neuter the language. For example, Matthew 5:41 states in the TNIV, "If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles." In trying to neuter the language, the translators butchered the grammar. It should have read, "If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles." I could never enjoy reading the TNIV because of the problems with the grammar. However, the revised NIV could improve the gender-accuracy of its translation by changing "brothers" to "brothers and sisters" when the original intent of a verse meant "siblings." For example, 1 Corinthians 1:10 states, "I appeal to you, brothers..." It would be more accurate to state, "I appeal to you, brothers and sisters..." Such a change would enhance the accuracy of the NIV and the ability to understand it.
Hopefully, the new NIV will contain these kinds of improvements. It's already my favorite translation, but a few changes would make it even better.
In 2011, a revised edition of the NIV will be released. The translation team is working to update the language, making it a little easier to read and to understand.
I would like to see three changes in the revision of the NIV.
1. I would like to see "atoning sacrifice" and "sacrifice of atonement" changed to "the one who would turn aside his wrath, taking away sin." In places like Romans 3:25, Jesus Christ is referred to as a "sacrifice of atonement." Some translations call him a "propitiation" in those places. However, neither phrase or word is as easily understood as "the one who would turn aside his wrath, taking away sin" (as the footnote in the current NIV states in an alternative reading of the verse). Such a phrase is both accurate and easily understood. It would be a great improvement.
2. I would like to see all weights, measurements, and monetary units changed so that they would be easily understood. The TNIV (Today's New International Version) had its flaws, but it did an outstanding job of making changes in translating weights, measurements, and monetary units into terms that can be easily understood by today's readers. For example, the parable of the talents in Matthew 25:14-30 was changed to the parable of the bags of gold. When contemporary English-speakers use the word "talent," we do not usually consider it to be a monetary unit. When we are teaching a Bible class to children or to people unfamiliar with the Bible, we need to stop and explain the definition of talent. With this type of change, a Bible study would not need to be interrupted in order to explain the word.
3. I would like to see gender-accurate language without the attempt to neuter the language. The TNIV never became popular because it seemed to try to neuter the language. For example, Matthew 5:41 states in the TNIV, "If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles." In trying to neuter the language, the translators butchered the grammar. It should have read, "If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles." I could never enjoy reading the TNIV because of the problems with the grammar. However, the revised NIV could improve the gender-accuracy of its translation by changing "brothers" to "brothers and sisters" when the original intent of a verse meant "siblings." For example, 1 Corinthians 1:10 states, "I appeal to you, brothers..." It would be more accurate to state, "I appeal to you, brothers and sisters..." Such a change would enhance the accuracy of the NIV and the ability to understand it.
Hopefully, the new NIV will contain these kinds of improvements. It's already my favorite translation, but a few changes would make it even better.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
The Pledge and the Appeal of Baptism
I have noticed a difference among scholars of the biblical languages when it comes to translating 1 Peter 3:21 from the ancient Greek into modern English.
The New International Version reads, "...and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also--not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."
But the English Standard Version reads, "Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."
I'm not an expert in biblical Greek, but from what I have read, the Greek word in dispute could legitimately be translated as either pledge or appeal. Perhaps it could be both a pledge and an appeal at the same time, since the Greek word seems to carry some degree of ambiguity. I'm not sure.
Whatever the case may be, both definitions provide some insight into what happens during a believer's baptism.
If the New International Version is correct, baptism is a pledge of a good conscience toward God. The believer is making a promise to follow Jesus Christ. He or she is saying, "I believe in Jesus. I understand my need for him. I accept him as my resurrected Lord. As such, I promise to follow him for the rest of eternity."
If the English Standard Version is correct, baptism is an appeal to God for a good conscience. The believer is asking for grace. He or she is saying, "I've messed up my life. I have sinned. I need your forgiveness, God. Please forgive me and show me grace because of what Christ has done to save me."
In reality, during baptism, the new believer is appealing to the grace of God while pledging to follow Christ. Neither definition excludes the other. Both work together in a God-honoring way.
The New International Version reads, "...and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also--not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."
But the English Standard Version reads, "Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."
I'm not an expert in biblical Greek, but from what I have read, the Greek word in dispute could legitimately be translated as either pledge or appeal. Perhaps it could be both a pledge and an appeal at the same time, since the Greek word seems to carry some degree of ambiguity. I'm not sure.
Whatever the case may be, both definitions provide some insight into what happens during a believer's baptism.
If the New International Version is correct, baptism is a pledge of a good conscience toward God. The believer is making a promise to follow Jesus Christ. He or she is saying, "I believe in Jesus. I understand my need for him. I accept him as my resurrected Lord. As such, I promise to follow him for the rest of eternity."
If the English Standard Version is correct, baptism is an appeal to God for a good conscience. The believer is asking for grace. He or she is saying, "I've messed up my life. I have sinned. I need your forgiveness, God. Please forgive me and show me grace because of what Christ has done to save me."
In reality, during baptism, the new believer is appealing to the grace of God while pledging to follow Christ. Neither definition excludes the other. Both work together in a God-honoring way.
Monday, December 08, 2008
A Defense of Biblical Christianity
"In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil men and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:12-17).
In defending homosexuality, Newsweek magazine has attempted to launch an intellectual attack on biblical Christianity at www.newsweek.com/id/172653. Thankfully, Albert Mohler has responded with a good analysis of the article, showing the inconsistencies and inadequacies of the attack, at www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2881.
In defending homosexuality, Newsweek magazine has attempted to launch an intellectual attack on biblical Christianity at www.newsweek.com/id/172653. Thankfully, Albert Mohler has responded with a good analysis of the article, showing the inconsistencies and inadequacies of the attack, at www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=2881.
Monday, October 20, 2008
The End of Spiritual Gifts
"Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known" (1 Corinthians 13:8-12).
As a young Christian, I was taught that the Holy Spirit ceased to give spiritual gifts to believers when the New Testament writings were complete. 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 was the primary text being used to support the conclusion. As my teachers (who were very good men) reasoned, the "perfection" referenced in the passage was the complete New Testament, since "perfection" could also be translated as "completion." When the New Testament was completed, the gifts of the Spirit would cease.
However, I became skeptical of their interpretation of the passage. Was the Holy Spirit intending to communicate that idea when he inspired those verses? Did the apostle Paul have the completion of the New Testament in mind when he wrote those verses? Would the Corinthian Christians who received the message have interpreted Paul's words in such a manner? Nothing in the context of 1 Corinthians suggested an affirmative answer to any of my questions. The interpretation I had been taught seemed to have been forced onto the passage, rather than derived from it.
A better explanation of the passage could be found in understanding "perfection" as referring to the return of Jesus Christ. Paul had already written, "Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God" (1 Corinthians 4:5). In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul would describe in more detail the return of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, and the transformation of believers. Until then, as I understand 1 Corinthians 13, the Holy Spirit would continue to provide God's people with spiritual gifts.
I have not found anything within the context of 1 Corinthians supporting the idea that spiritual gifts were expected to end at the completion of the New Testament. However, I have found evidence within the text that the return of Jesus would usher in a time of completion or perfection. Therefore, I must conclude that spiritual gifts were expected to continue until Christ returns.
As a young Christian, I was taught that the Holy Spirit ceased to give spiritual gifts to believers when the New Testament writings were complete. 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 was the primary text being used to support the conclusion. As my teachers (who were very good men) reasoned, the "perfection" referenced in the passage was the complete New Testament, since "perfection" could also be translated as "completion." When the New Testament was completed, the gifts of the Spirit would cease.
However, I became skeptical of their interpretation of the passage. Was the Holy Spirit intending to communicate that idea when he inspired those verses? Did the apostle Paul have the completion of the New Testament in mind when he wrote those verses? Would the Corinthian Christians who received the message have interpreted Paul's words in such a manner? Nothing in the context of 1 Corinthians suggested an affirmative answer to any of my questions. The interpretation I had been taught seemed to have been forced onto the passage, rather than derived from it.
A better explanation of the passage could be found in understanding "perfection" as referring to the return of Jesus Christ. Paul had already written, "Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God" (1 Corinthians 4:5). In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul would describe in more detail the return of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, and the transformation of believers. Until then, as I understand 1 Corinthians 13, the Holy Spirit would continue to provide God's people with spiritual gifts.
I have not found anything within the context of 1 Corinthians supporting the idea that spiritual gifts were expected to end at the completion of the New Testament. However, I have found evidence within the text that the return of Jesus would usher in a time of completion or perfection. Therefore, I must conclude that spiritual gifts were expected to continue until Christ returns.
Thursday, August 07, 2008
You Shall Not Murder
"You shall not murder" (Exodus 20:13).
A few years ago, I learned a method of developing a richer understanding of negative biblical commandments. For example, what is at the heart of God's negative commandment against murder? By approaching the prohibition from a positive perspective, we can discern more of the intentions of God when he gave the commandment. You shall not murder becomes You shall protect the lives of innocent people.
As God built upon the prohibition against murder, he legislated against hitting a pregnant woman in order to protect her life and her child's life (Exodus 21:22-25). He prohibited anyone from allowing his violent animal to roam unrestrained so that it would not kill an innocent person (Exodus 21:28-32). He even ordered his people to build guardrails around the roofs of their houses so that people would not fall to their deaths (Deuteronomy 22:8). In many ways, the Lord designed legislation to protect the lives of innocent people.
So how can we apply the commandment against murder today? How can we protect the lives of innocent people? If we own violent dogs, we must keep them away from people at all costs, even if it means euthanizing the animals. If we own swimming pools, we need to build fences around them so that small children cannot wander into them and drown.
I heard about a creative and effective way of protecting the lives of innocent people a few months ago. A husband and wife wanted to adopt a baby. Every weekend, they stood outside an abortion clinic, handing out business cards with their phone numbers printed on them. Each card stated that they wanted to adopt a baby. Finally, after approaching dozens of girls and young women over a period of several weeks, they were able to arrange for the adoption of their child. This couple protected the life of at least one innocent person: their child.
When we dig deeply into the 10 commandments, we can see the heart of God. When we approach the commandments with a positive attitude and a little creativity, we can change our world.
A few years ago, I learned a method of developing a richer understanding of negative biblical commandments. For example, what is at the heart of God's negative commandment against murder? By approaching the prohibition from a positive perspective, we can discern more of the intentions of God when he gave the commandment. You shall not murder becomes You shall protect the lives of innocent people.
As God built upon the prohibition against murder, he legislated against hitting a pregnant woman in order to protect her life and her child's life (Exodus 21:22-25). He prohibited anyone from allowing his violent animal to roam unrestrained so that it would not kill an innocent person (Exodus 21:28-32). He even ordered his people to build guardrails around the roofs of their houses so that people would not fall to their deaths (Deuteronomy 22:8). In many ways, the Lord designed legislation to protect the lives of innocent people.
So how can we apply the commandment against murder today? How can we protect the lives of innocent people? If we own violent dogs, we must keep them away from people at all costs, even if it means euthanizing the animals. If we own swimming pools, we need to build fences around them so that small children cannot wander into them and drown.
I heard about a creative and effective way of protecting the lives of innocent people a few months ago. A husband and wife wanted to adopt a baby. Every weekend, they stood outside an abortion clinic, handing out business cards with their phone numbers printed on them. Each card stated that they wanted to adopt a baby. Finally, after approaching dozens of girls and young women over a period of several weeks, they were able to arrange for the adoption of their child. This couple protected the life of at least one innocent person: their child.
When we dig deeply into the 10 commandments, we can see the heart of God. When we approach the commandments with a positive attitude and a little creativity, we can change our world.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Creation (Part One)
These are my notes for next week's Sunday night Bible study at the Normandy Apartments. We are starting a study of Genesis.
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1, NIV).
In the opening chapter of Genesis, God reveals the origin of the universe. It began with him. God is seen as incomprehensibly knowledgeable and powerful. In a series of miracles which will never be completely understood by the most intelligent people on earth, God created the universe, prepared Earth for life, and created life (including humanity).
The first chapter appears in a poetic format. However, poetry is not a synonym for mythology. Truth can be found in poetry. For example, read Job 29. In it, we find a poetic description of Job's life and character before Satan attacked him. Although poetic, the passage describes a real man and his life accurately.
Since Genesis 1 was written as poetry, should we believe that God created everything in 6 literal days? Or should we believe the author never intended for us to believe in a 6-day creation? In Exodus 20:11, we read, "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy" (NIV). When God himself gave the 10 commandments, he interpreted the Genesis account as a literal 6-day event. Since he worked 6 days during creation week and rested 1 day, the Israelites were commanded to work 6 literal days and rest 1 literal day, too. A non-literal interpretation of the rule and the reasoning behind it would have been unthinkable. So we accept the Genesis account of the days as accurate.
Does Genesis 1 conflict with current scientific understanding of our origins? In some areas, I'm sure it does. However, scientists continue to discover, study, and modify their theories. They do not possess all knowledge. They are still learning, just as biblical scholars are. We may never understand the miracles of creation completely, but we can accept that they happened.
Finally, what do we do when the scientific community presents evidence that seems to contradict the Bible? Do we consider God a liar for planting contradictory evidence in nature and in the Bible? No. We must not assume God to be a liar when we must admit that we don't have all the evidence or a complete understanding of the evidence we possess.
In the end, we can trust God even when we do not understand how he has performed his miracles.
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1, NIV).
In the opening chapter of Genesis, God reveals the origin of the universe. It began with him. God is seen as incomprehensibly knowledgeable and powerful. In a series of miracles which will never be completely understood by the most intelligent people on earth, God created the universe, prepared Earth for life, and created life (including humanity).
The first chapter appears in a poetic format. However, poetry is not a synonym for mythology. Truth can be found in poetry. For example, read Job 29. In it, we find a poetic description of Job's life and character before Satan attacked him. Although poetic, the passage describes a real man and his life accurately.
Since Genesis 1 was written as poetry, should we believe that God created everything in 6 literal days? Or should we believe the author never intended for us to believe in a 6-day creation? In Exodus 20:11, we read, "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy" (NIV). When God himself gave the 10 commandments, he interpreted the Genesis account as a literal 6-day event. Since he worked 6 days during creation week and rested 1 day, the Israelites were commanded to work 6 literal days and rest 1 literal day, too. A non-literal interpretation of the rule and the reasoning behind it would have been unthinkable. So we accept the Genesis account of the days as accurate.
Does Genesis 1 conflict with current scientific understanding of our origins? In some areas, I'm sure it does. However, scientists continue to discover, study, and modify their theories. They do not possess all knowledge. They are still learning, just as biblical scholars are. We may never understand the miracles of creation completely, but we can accept that they happened.
Finally, what do we do when the scientific community presents evidence that seems to contradict the Bible? Do we consider God a liar for planting contradictory evidence in nature and in the Bible? No. We must not assume God to be a liar when we must admit that we don't have all the evidence or a complete understanding of the evidence we possess.
In the end, we can trust God even when we do not understand how he has performed his miracles.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Reading Too Much Into Scriptures
"Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord" (James 5:14, NKJV).
A few days ago, I saw a brief news report about a father and mother who were arrested and charged with negligent homicide for allowing their child to die of a treatable disease. Apparently, according to the report, the couple did not believe in seeking medical care because of their understanding of the Bible. They called the elders of the church to pray for their child and to anoint her with oil in the name of the Lord, but they believed the Bible passage that they were following also prohibited them from seeking medical care.
Now the parents are grieving the loss of a daughter and facing prison time. Did they love their daughter? I'm sure they did, or they would not have called the elders of the church to pray for her healing. Was their faith sincere? I have no reason to question it. They acted upon it with the expectation that their daughter would be healed. Did they misunderstand the Bible? Yes.
I have a lot of sympathy for the couple. I have made similar mistakes in reading the Bible. I too have read a passage, missed the intent of it, and added a prohibition that was not there. As far as I know, my misunderstandings have not cost anyone his or her life. However, I have missed the intent of God in reading Scriptures at times. I have read prohibitions into a text that were not there.
Faith in Christ saves us, but it does not make us infallible. We can be saved and still make very costly mistakes. That's why it's so important to continue learning the will of God in the Scriptures. We need to have as accurate an understanding of the Bible as possible in order to live as God intended.
A few days ago, I saw a brief news report about a father and mother who were arrested and charged with negligent homicide for allowing their child to die of a treatable disease. Apparently, according to the report, the couple did not believe in seeking medical care because of their understanding of the Bible. They called the elders of the church to pray for their child and to anoint her with oil in the name of the Lord, but they believed the Bible passage that they were following also prohibited them from seeking medical care.
Now the parents are grieving the loss of a daughter and facing prison time. Did they love their daughter? I'm sure they did, or they would not have called the elders of the church to pray for her healing. Was their faith sincere? I have no reason to question it. They acted upon it with the expectation that their daughter would be healed. Did they misunderstand the Bible? Yes.
I have a lot of sympathy for the couple. I have made similar mistakes in reading the Bible. I too have read a passage, missed the intent of it, and added a prohibition that was not there. As far as I know, my misunderstandings have not cost anyone his or her life. However, I have missed the intent of God in reading Scriptures at times. I have read prohibitions into a text that were not there.
Faith in Christ saves us, but it does not make us infallible. We can be saved and still make very costly mistakes. That's why it's so important to continue learning the will of God in the Scriptures. We need to have as accurate an understanding of the Bible as possible in order to live as God intended.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
