The Inerrancy of Scripture III
When it comes to Jesus it may be alot more necessary to believe He was a historical figure. In fact you'd be hard pressed to find someone who doesnt believe He was historical. It would be impossible to explain many things about our history without a man named Jesus who died and rose again. If he did not live He wouldn't have had followers, if He did not rise again they wouldn't have kept following (no one would follow a dead Messiah... read the Maccabees). But it's not my belief that he came along time ago that makes me His follower, it's the fact that I believe he is here now and calls us to follow Him now. Someone can actually follow Jesus without a history lesson.
For me it is also important that Jesus came into history because I believe the Kingdom of God is here. I believe that the Kingdom of God is historical reality either now and/or in the future. Jesus coming into history helps make sense of that. Heaven is not some transcendant "pie-in-the-dky." It is here for us and it will continue to change the world within history.
when it comes to what is allegory and what is literal I don't get to draw the line, it seems to me that the Bible does. Scripture, if we know it well enough, will reveal what is truly important within itself. You must always ask yourself what the text is really trying to say. And we must alway treat the text as it is and not make it whatever we want it to be. You'll find in reading my blog I usually interperet scripture historically. I always ask the question, what did this mean to the writer in his place in history? Because we cannot argue that the writer didn't live, he must have, he wrote. I also ask what did it mean (in case of a story) for the character (Jesus, Paul, Moses, etc.) in his/her place in history. becuase the writer must have written with that question in mind (weather the story actually happened or not). What cannot be argues is that the text itself is historical, it was written by a real person in real history. And we must always examine the text consiouely.
Some books to spark your interest on these issues: Adventures in Missing the Point by McLaren and Campolo, The Challenge of Jesus by N.T. Wright, Christian College Christian Calling Particularly Keith Reeves’ chapter, The meaning of Jesus by Marcus Borg and N.T. Wright, Velvet Elvis by Rob Bell (AMAZING BOOK), why not The Divine Conspiracy by Dallas Willard, and the Historical figure of Jesus by E.P. Saunders.
For me it is also important that Jesus came into history because I believe the Kingdom of God is here. I believe that the Kingdom of God is historical reality either now and/or in the future. Jesus coming into history helps make sense of that. Heaven is not some transcendant "pie-in-the-dky." It is here for us and it will continue to change the world within history.
when it comes to what is allegory and what is literal I don't get to draw the line, it seems to me that the Bible does. Scripture, if we know it well enough, will reveal what is truly important within itself. You must always ask yourself what the text is really trying to say. And we must alway treat the text as it is and not make it whatever we want it to be. You'll find in reading my blog I usually interperet scripture historically. I always ask the question, what did this mean to the writer in his place in history? Because we cannot argue that the writer didn't live, he must have, he wrote. I also ask what did it mean (in case of a story) for the character (Jesus, Paul, Moses, etc.) in his/her place in history. becuase the writer must have written with that question in mind (weather the story actually happened or not). What cannot be argues is that the text itself is historical, it was written by a real person in real history. And we must always examine the text consiouely.
Some books to spark your interest on these issues: Adventures in Missing the Point by McLaren and Campolo, The Challenge of Jesus by N.T. Wright, Christian College Christian Calling Particularly Keith Reeves’ chapter, The meaning of Jesus by Marcus Borg and N.T. Wright, Velvet Elvis by Rob Bell (AMAZING BOOK), why not The Divine Conspiracy by Dallas Willard, and the Historical figure of Jesus by E.P. Saunders.
Comments
I too read a lot of N.T. Wright. I have been heavily influenced by his historical approach.
A couple of his former students, Walsh and Keesmaat, wrote a powerful book putting much of his analysis in contemporary application. It is called COLOSSIANS REMIXED: SUBVERTING THE EMPIRE. I highly recommend it.
Good blog, keep up the good work.
Many blessings...
Thanks... I've actually heard of that book but haven't yet had the chance to read it.
Have you read "For All God's Worth" by N.T. Wright?
yes... We need other resourses to help us understand the bible. The idea that we can just stick to the bible alone is irresponseble.
There are alot of things that guide us to the truth in the scripture.
Once again you've completely missed the point.
I guess I'm still learning patience.
Yes... ok this might be a little post modern but no we're not thinking like the Devil. Everything I question and every observation I make is in submission to Scriptural authority and, ultimately, God's authority. The Holy Spirit is my teacher.
Please try to understnad what we are saying.
good for you I'm glad you're so educated. I wish your education was reflected in your comments. If you read the Church fathers and the reformers there was constant debate about the gospel. They had to come up with creeds to explain some of their conclusions. The reformation was a result, in part, of disagreement on how one can be saved and what happens to them when they die. We're in the same tradition. I know what the gospel is but I don't try to chrystalize it and claim that I totally understand it. Even C.S. Lewis questioned the gospel.
i understnad you are very set in your ways and sometimes that's ok. I don't expect you to be in agreement with me but I will ask that you be respectful to me and my fellow bloggers. Realize this is just a blog. It's not the end of the world if something unconfortable comes us. it's ok for you to disagree with me and it's ok for me to disagree with you.
Michael Exum here... I saw your comment on my blog. Glad to have you visit. Please come again.
I like yours too. I will be revisiting.
I thumbed through your discussion here. I know that "gnostic" vibe. I have bumped into it head on where I go to church. I think I was very much headed down a similar road before I studied a little philosophy in college. It can be very frustrating to deal with. I simpathize with Pastor Art's observation.
Part of me sympathizes with Jason too. I'm not sure I know why. If he sniffed an attitude in Pastor Arts comment that actually suggests that Pastor Art has it all sowed up, then he is right to challenge it. I am not sure I sniffed it myself, but if it is there it is a worthy challenge. Perhaps my approach would differ, but it seems to me that all of us in this conversation would take a conservative approach. Perhaps we are not really that different. I dont know. I only just read a few lines from each, and have never met or experienced any of the participants before.
A little humility on all our parts, and I have no doubt that the Holy Spirit and even small voices in each of us will honor each other as Bros.
Jesus is Lord! That is not in dispute here, as far as Ive seen. And that is so deeply foundational for our love and care as we explore life and scripture etc...
Many blessings...
I've never suggested that we cant know truth in fact I believe we can. Of course there are some things we won't know and just won't be able to figure out for sure but every question has a right answer in every situation. Dallas Willard is working on a book, I believe, on a reformed view of epistomology. He suggests that not only can we know things but we can know morals as well and can therefore teach them.
I don't think epistemology was ever a disagreement between us.
There are alot of things we can't know, at least not now. We cannot fully grasp God, for example. Thomas Aquinas once said "No created intellect can comprehend God wholly." Augustine gives a similar statement in his book 'Exposistions on the Psalms' saying "God is always greater, however much we may have grown."(p.262) No matter how close we may think we're getting God wil always be greater. Luther said it like this, "God has hidden himself in Christ." Carl Barth even suggested that all knowledge of Christ begins with the knowledge of His "hiddenness." Theologians have discussed it for years; our minds are just too small. It is not that there is no truth about God and it's not that we can't know God at all but we must accept that God is infinate. And an infinate God cannot be fully grasped by finite minds.
"To the King of the ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen."
-1Timothy 1:17
To, as you say, inherit eternal life Jesus is our only hope. Following Him brings salvation and Life abundantly.
I don't know much beyond my answer. Who goes to hell? well, of course, it's the people who don't follow Jesus. Now, the nature of following Jesus is debatable. IS it based solely on an indidviduals intellectual decision on who Jesus is? Does someone really have to know the name and hisory of Jesus in oder to follow Him? these question are much harder to answer.
Based on performance? no, but it does have something to do with the way you live your life. I guess your eternal destination, heaven or hell, has something to do with your present reality. wether you end up experienceing Hell or Heaven has something to do with how you respond to the heaven and hell in our world today. Jesus mission was about bringing heaven to this reality. If we share that same mission, through the Power of the Holy Spirit it will become our eternal reality.
There are alot of references to salvation through Jesus.
Hell being here is an anciet belief and Jesus follows the tradition. Jesus talk of Hell being here but He talk of it being eternal more often because that was not the popular belief. Jesus spoke of Gehena which was an actual place outside of Jeruselem which was nicknamed the "place of whipping and gnashing of teeth" and the "place where fire never dies." It was a dump. This symbolism gives us a picture of an horible exsistence. Jesus took an already esistent belief of Hell here and made it something that lasted forever. The Hell refered to in The Old Testament (sheh-ole') is usually best translated "a hole" or a "Pit" or "the grave" (check your strongs) and it's usually referring to a present physical state.
The grave [Hell] wrapped its ropes around me;death itself stared me in the face. But in my distress I cried out to the LORD;
yes, I called to my God for help.
He heard me from his sanctuary;
my cry reached his ears.
2 Sammuel 22:6
There are alot of references like this one.
If you'd really like to know more I encourage you to read some of the books I suggested earlier. If you decide that books are a waste of time and you just want to "stick to the only book God wrote, the Bible" then God bless you in that journey.
that's a very good verse to use in this situation. Test yourself... don't test me. I've been testing myself this entire time... that is why we question things like the gospel.
I am confortable in my salvation and I have a very good grasp on the concept of justicication... why would you assume that I can't explain it? simply because I didn't answer you?
Are you always this pushy and arrogant? is it a non-emergent thing?
No wonder so many people hate Christians.
this conversation has to end somewhere.
Thanks for the great conversation once again... I hope that you'll continue reading my blog. Hopefully you'll get a better idea of where I'm coming from.
God bless.
Do you see your relentless questions as loving? What are you achieving? It looks like a power trip from my view point. In fact it looks like you are trying to make Wes look stupid from my view point. Can you explain how it is not?
How about I draw the fire on me for a while. Give Wes a break. I think he has been deeply tested by you. Take me on for a while instead!!!
I get the sense that your questions do not really seek either your own edification or anybody elses. This has become a full blown interrogation. Questioning people is one way of making power plays. It says, in a sense, that "I get to examine you". Yet, it always leaves you looking like you are just asking a harmless question. But there is more to it than that. And it does not look loving or Christian to go around trying to prove people wrong.
Several suggested readings have been put forth. If your questions are so innocent and truth seeking, go read some of them. If you still think the teachers people like Wes and I have been reading are off base, then come make a case.
I do not agree with everything Wes says either. But I do not interrogate him to death. If I raise an issue with him, I will let him wrestle with it, not hound him about it.
Wes has demonstrated great love for Jesus, and his neighbor. He has demonstrated it toward you, and then has apologized when his frustration with you came out ugly. He has done a superb job of it. In doing this, he has proven himself to fulfill the two greatest commands of the entire Bible. Jesus said that all the law and the prophets, I interpret that to cover the whole enchilada, hang on these 2. This means that if he gets this right, he gets it all right. If he blows it here, he blows the whole thing.
I think he is shining.
I hate to imagine what this "Christian" questioning to death of a fellow pilgrim looks like to a non-Christian observer who might read this. It repels me, and I am a believer!!
Do you think your endless questions are attractive to outside observers? Do you think Jesus did this to people He disagreed with? Did Paul? Who benefits? How? How about I ask you some questions?
It is you that speaks untruth here. Check the record. I replied to you directly two times already.
Now your cards are out on the table: You have an agenda here that has nothing to do with learning and growing or sharing and edification. Your questions are not innocent or disinterested; they were intended as an offense all along, huh? They are intended to "call" Wes out on his "false doctrine". If it is a debate you want, why not come clean with it to begin with? Why all the passive/aggressiveness? That actually is not loving; it is deeply manipulative. Very unChristlike.
Have some humility. Treat people better.
Have you got a verse for how "love is impossible without the truth"?
I do not see any possitive achievement in your questions. Do you?
I, for one, was ejoying this blog before I realized just how offensive you are willing to carry on. If you wanted to make a point that Wes is promoting false doctrine, you have now done so. Why not dust your feet and move on?
Otherwise, I suggest you follow the Ben Witherington rules for blog etiquette, and move your ugly comments/questions to private email.
We've all presented a pretty good argument I think and it's getting us no where. I hope that this conversation will somehow profit all of us down the road. Thanks!