1. What important topic do you think our Christian generation (20s) has
to deal with the most? Why must we deal with this
issue?
The issue of how we approach the Bible in general.
For me
as an evangelical, I affirm the full inspiration and inerrancy of
Scripture and see it as the highest guide on all matters concerning
faith and practice. But we need to grapple with what is the best way to
approach and deal with the Bible. We have generally been handed two
options: the literal approach, believing that every event and statement
recorded in the Bible is scientifically, historically, geographically,
and absolutely true in the modern sense of the word or a rejection of
the Bible as a reliable guide for anything. Neither of these approaches
works for the new generation of Christians. Most of us are ready to
accept things like the fact of evolution and many of us want to embrace a
hermeneutical framework that allows for egalitarianism to exist within
our churches. But most of us have been told that to do these things we
are either “selling out” or that we have to disregard the Bible as our
authority all together.
Neither option is healthy. Neither option gets
us anywhere.
If we don’t begin to look into history and try to find a
better way to approach the Bible, we are going to see divisions continue
to spring up and more and more injustice committed in the name of “the
Bible”. Many support war, anti-environmental, anti-homosexual etc.
sentiments with Biblical passages based on a skewed literal hermeneutic.
Likewise, many Christians disregard the Bible and are embracing any new
and colorful thing that comes their way. These postures will destroy
the faith. Want proof? Look at the last 500 years since the Protestant
Reformation.
2. In what (positive or negative) ways has our generation already engaged with this issue?
I
think there is no doubt that we are all engaging with this issue. But
the reality is, many of us don’t have a framework to engage this other
than the two postures I mentioned earlier. Derek Flood, a young budding
theologian, does an awesome job understanding and interpreting scripture
in a serious, literal, but not fundamentalist way. So does N.T. Wright
(who was born in the wrong generation).
Karl Barth and folks from the
Neo Orthodox perspective also bring a fresh perspective to the table
that I think our generation can relate to. Folks like The Gospel
Coalition (whom I love) are unfortunately rehashing a fundamentalist
approach to the Bible that isn’t very helpful but because of their
popularity among millennial is being embraced. The answer to this issue
is not to rehash the same old answers from the past 200 years. We need
to stretch further forward and reach farther back in order to get a
fresh and renewed way of dealing with Scripture. Scoffed, Edwards,
Owens, and Calvin just aren’t cutting it anymore. We need some Clement
and Chrysostom along with, dare I say, J.R. Daniel Kirk and Derek Flood.
3. What can we do to improve our relationship with addressing this issue? Or can things be improved?
We
just need to be open. We need to work on not being so sectarian, so
defensive. We need to be willing to rethink, reform, and renew our
faith. (and that’s not just a shameless plug for the Revangelical
movement). Until we can begin, with epistemological humility, to admit
that we may not have the right way or the best way and begin to listen
to traditions beyond our own, then we will never be able to address any
of the pressing issues that face our generation. We need to listen. To
learn. And to discern with grace what is best and true. If we can’t
learn from Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Progressive, Liberal,
Conservative, and Fundamentalist streams concerning hermeneutical
approaches to scripture, then we are doomed to never see any change and
instead see increased division and hostility.
I was recently having a
conversation with an Evangelical friend of mine who comes from a
fundamentalist background. I was suggesting that Evolution could be
reconciled with the Genesis narrative. After a half an hour of
discussion, he finally said something to the effect of, “You know what, I
am a black and white guy! And I think you’re a heretic. Not the kind
who is going to hell, but the kind that is teaching falsehoods.” I
understand where he is coming from. Many of us have been taught a view
of the Bible that has been fenced off with the warning “If you change
this, you lose everything.” That kind of rhetoric is absurd, untrue, and
stunts the movement of God in his Church. I used to believe that. I
used to believe that our way was the only way. But that’s just not the
case. Things aren’t as black and white as we want to make them. And our
approach to the Bible cannot be reduced by modernism to simply either
“everything is factually true in every regard” or “nothing is factual
and is complete fiction.”
Neither is good. Neither is faithful. Neither
helps anyone in the long run.
I hope that as we continue to discuss
these topics as a generation, we will see new life spring up. I pray
that walls will come down. I pray that we will grow closer to Jesus. And
I pray that we would be pulled by the Spirit of God ever forward to
fresh and new ways and ever backwards towards tried and true ways-
living in that sacred and divine tension.
Brandan Robertson is a theology student at Moody Bible Institute, a
blogger, podcaster, aspiring minister, and dreamer behind The
(Re)vangelical movement.
You can find him on the web, twitter and facebook.
Showing posts with label The Inspiration of Scripture. Jesus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Inspiration of Scripture. Jesus. Show all posts
Friday, May 17, 2013
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Origen on the Inspiration of Holy Scripture
This is according to the Greek translation of Origen.
Thoughts?
--Nick
1. Origen, "On First Principles" pgs264-5.
2. Christian Smith, "The Bible Made Impossible" pg97.
"And now we must add that it was after the advent of Jesus that the inspiration of the prophetic words and the spiritual nature of Moses' law came to light. For before the advent of Christ it was not at all possible to bring forward clear proofs of the divine inspiration of Scripture. But the advent of Jesus led those who might have suspected that the law and the prophets were not divine to the clear conviction that they were composed by the aide of heavenly grace.Apparently, these problems were going on back then, particularly with the rise of Marcionism. Origen appears to be arguing for what we would call a Christocentric hermeneutic. Christian Smith defines this principle as following: "the purpose, center, and interpretive key to Scripture is Jesus Christ" (2). Simply put, the only thing by which Scripture makes sense is Jesus.
{paragraph break in Greek}
And he who approaches the prophetic words with care and attention will feel from his very reading a trace of their divine inspiration and will be convinced by his own feelings that the words which are believed by us to be from God are not the compositions of men" (1).
Thoughts?
--Nick
1. Origen, "On First Principles" pgs264-5.
2. Christian Smith, "The Bible Made Impossible" pg97.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

