Tag: disagreements

Mystery of the traditions and the Bible

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 2 – The Kingdom Revealed – Chapter 13 – Distinctives within the body of Christ

Mystery of the Traditions and the Bible

[Bible reference: Matthew 15:1-14; Mark 7:1-23; 2 Timothy 3:10-17]

What is the relation between the Bible and church traditions?

Christ came to establish the church, not the Bible. The Bible is the product of the church recognizing which of its writings should be considered to be inspired by God. Within the Orthodox and Roman Catholic traditions, there are unwritten as well as written traditions (including the Bible and other writings by the church Fathers) and both have equal weight. The Protestant denomination, reacting against the corrupted traditions of the Roman Catholic denomination, gave the Bible the authority over tradition.       

How were writings selected to get included in the Bible?

Throughout history, there were various “lists” denoting which books should be accepted as scripture.[1] Eventually, most congregations agreed on the New Testament writings, but there has been significant disagreement about which books to include in the Old Testament.

The Masoretic text is a set of writings that were preserved in oral form by the Jews until they were set in writing by Masoretes during the 6th through 10th centuries. This “Hebrew Bible” contains all the writings included in the current Protestant Bible and are arranged in three groups: the Torah, the Prophets and Writings.

The Roman Catholics and Orthodox use the Greek translations of the Hebrew scripture that were created around 200 BC.[2] The writings that are in the Septuagint that are not in the Masoretic canon but are accepted by the Orthodox as scripture are: I Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiastical by Sirach, Baruch, the Epistle of Jeremy, the First, Second and Third Books of Maccabees, and parts of Esther and Daniel. The Roman Catholic canon includes all those books except 3 Maccabees, Psalm 151, the Prayer of Manasseh in Chronicles, 1 Esdras.

The Protestants use the Masoretic texts but put the texts in the same order as the Septuagint[3].

How do we interpret the Bible?

The Bible was not constructed as a book of doctrines, but rather a collection of different types of poetry and prose: songs, wisdom literature, letters, civil and religious law and narratives, stories of God interacting with people and people trying to respond to God. More than that, each of those genres use a variety of literary techniques: hyperbole, poetry, allegories, anthropomorphisms, metaphors, etc.

That complexity, combined with the complexity of the historical context and language barriers, means that it is not straightforward as we try to use the Bible to construct theologies, statements of faith, and rules for behavior. The result is that many disagreements have arisen in how to interpret the Bible.[4] One of the current controversies has to do with that when we say that the Bible is true, how literal do we need to be in Bible interpretation.[5] That discussion is very serious as various heretical teachings have arisen when some individuals or groups put the community to the side and developed their own interpretations. For example, an individual, Marcion, rejected the Old Testament entirely and most of the New Testament except for what Paul had written.

The main types of interpretative principles used by various church communities are:

  • Interpreting the Bible according to its historical, socio-political, geographical, cultural, and linguistic / grammatical context.[6]
  • Analyzing the Bible by applying various literary genres that it uses,[7] including the differing levels of symbology, allegory, figurative language, metaphors, similes, and literal language. Also, each verse should be analyzed in context of surrounding chapter and book.
  • Presuming that the original texts of the Bible are without error or contradiction.[8]
  • Presuming that the basic message of the Bible can be easily understood by the average person.[9]
  • While some basic content can be understood by the average person, those understandings need to subject the expert knowledge of those who are trained in Bible interpretation.
  • While there are many academic disciplines used in interpreting scripture, proper interpretation can only be done by those who are spiritually discerning. The main goal of Bible study is not to gain knowledge but to gain sanctification.

How do you apply Biblical views to todays’ issues when the Bible is silent on those issues?

Particularly in regards in how to do worship, there are two main schools of thought on how to apply scripture: that we are allowed to do whatever is not specifically restricted by Scripture, or we cannot do anything that is not specifically permitted by Scripture.[10]

[1] Canonical books are the writings that are accepted as scripture from God

[2] Septuagint, a translation form Hebrew into Greek which was created by seventy-two scholars in the 2nd and 3rd century BC.

[3] Oakes, John. “When was the Old Testament Canon Decided?” Evidence for Christianity 3 Dec 2013 evidenceforchristianity.org/when-was-the-old-testament-canon-decided-was-it-at-the-council-of-jamnia

[4] The technique of interpreting the Bible is called hermeneutics, with the first step of hermeneutics being exegesis which means to interpret a text by way of a thorough analysis of its content.

[5] Christian Bible Reference Site. “Should the Bible Be Interpreted Literally?” christianbiblereference.org www.christianbiblereference.org/faq_BibleTrue.htm#:~:text=Literal%20Bible%20Interpretation%20Many%20fundamentalists%20believed%20the%20Holy,true.%20Anything%20less%20would%20be%20unworthy%20of%20God Different Church communities have different ideas on how to use a high level of literal interpretation or whether to use allegorical interpretation in various sections of Scripture; Bible Project “How To Read the Bible” Podcast Series bibleproject.com/podcast/series/how-to-read-the-bible-series

[6] Historical-grammatical Interpretation considers the historical, socio-political, geographical, cultural, and linguistic / grammatical context.

[7] Literary analysis – Each genre of Scripture (narratives, histories, prophecies, apocalyptic writings, poetry, psalms, and letters) has a different set of rules that applies to it.

[8] The principle of Inerrancy – The original autographs were without error or self-contradiction or contrary to scientific or historical truth (when the original authors intended historical or scientific truth to be portrayed).

[9] Principle of perspicuity

[10] Jackson, Wayne. “The Silence of the Scriptures: Permissive or Prohibitive”; also known as permissive view of scripture vs the restrictive view Christian Courier christiancourier.com/articles/the-silence-of-the-scriptures-permissive-or-prohibitive

Limits of theology

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 2 – The Kingdom Revealed – Chapter 13 – Distinctives within the body of Christ

The limits of theology

[Bible references: Isaiah 55:1-13; John 8:43;21-30; 41-48; Acts 1:1-11]

The church is the body of the incomprehensible Christ, and this incomprehensibility creates tension because many of us who are in this body think we understand different aspects of God. Somehow, we end up disagreeing on issues that each of us thinks should be clear to everyone else, resulting in us taking sides and dividing because: not only can’t we understand everything about God, but we are also subject to our personal human frailties (e.g., sins, particular inclinations and weaknesses), the cultures we live in and the languages we speak (which inform the way we interpret scripture) and the events around us (e.g., wars, revolutions, politics, etc.). Those frailties have led to a rather mixed history of how the church has lived into what it knows about the gospel. Sometimes we seem like the Indian fable about six blind men and the elephant,[1] we end up seeing God from such different places that we seem to be describing a different God.

Language may not determine thought, but it focuses perception and attention on particular aspects of reality, structures and thereby enhances cognitive processes, and even to some extent regulates social relationships. Our language reflects and at the same time shapes our thoughts and, ultimately, our culture, which in turn shapes our thoughts and language.[2]

Our culture and our language are inseparably bound together, they affect how we think and how we perceive the world and, particularly, they tend to cause misunderstandings when people from two or more different language/cultural groups communicate with each other.[3] In the case of the church, there were four major languages involved at the beginning: Aramaic, the local language of the Jews in Israel and the region to its east; Greek, the international language of the Roman Empire; Latin, the legal language of the Roman Empire; and Hebrew, the language in which the Old Testament was written.

The majority of the church first developed in the Roman Empire. While the legal language of the empire was Latin, the international language of the empire was Greek, and it was Greek culture that had been strongly adopted within the empire. Even the cultural influences of Plato, Zeno, Aristotle, and Epicurus persisted affecting the development of the church and its values.

Aramaic was the language of the “Church of the East” which developed primarily outside the Roman Empire. In addition to some isolation because of the language differences, it was further isolated by being outside the Roman Empire.

Even within the same people group, misunderstandings occur when people from one time period are interpreting information from an earlier time period. All these factors were in play at the time the church was forming. For example

  • The scripture from the Old Testament was written over a 1400-year time period with different authors using different literary styles.
  • As the church grew across the world, different cultural issues arose.
  • and the New Testament documents written about them were high-context documents but were being interpreted with low-context.[4]

There are also other issues creating internal tensions within the church. We also have a natural propensity to segregate ourselves into different groups. All our communities also experience cultural changes.

The game plan for spreading the gospel throughout the world didn’t follow any typical conventions. The people Jesus selected to be apostles did not receive any training in building organizations, neither did he tell them to plan for the long-term survival of the church that they were charged to begin building. The key instruction that they did receive was “wait,” that is, wait for the Holy Spirit. Jesus may have a master plan, but he only let them know (just as he lets us know) one step at a time. Naturally then, we respond to his revealed plan only one broken step after another and, as we do, we discover our need to lean on him as we work through our frailties and sin. The plan is and was for us to follow the Great Commandment and the Great Commission and the Holy Spirit. Not much detail, no written instructions, sometimes confusing, but that was the plan. Some would characterize the apparent plan as “Love people and tell them about Jesus.”

[1] All About Philosophy “Blind Men and the Elephant” www.allaboutphilosophy.org/blind-men-and-the-elephant.htm ; Saxe, John Godfrey. “The Blind Men and the Elephant” Poetry.com www.poetry.com/poem/101535/the-blind-men-and-the-elephant

[2] Burton, Neel. “How the Language You Speak Influences the Way You Think” Psychology Today www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hide-and-seek/201808/how-the-language-you-speak-influences-the-way-you-think

[3] White, James Emery, “the Greek, the Latin and the Hebrew” Crosswalk.com 2 Sept 2008 www.crosswalk.com/blogs/dr-james-emery-white/the-greek-the-latin-and-the-hebrew-11581208.html; Leveridge, Aubrey Neil, “The Relationship between Language and Culture and the implications for language teaching” TEFL.net Sept 2008 www.tefl.net/elt/articles/teacher-technique/language-culture

[4] High context communication occurs when people are in a shared environment with common values, history, etc. where many things are not said because it is assumed that the other person already knows and assumes those things as well. In low context communication, there is much less assumed about what the other person knows and so many more details are included in the communication.

Observe

Read Acts 1:1-11. When it comes to leading the church, what are the strengths and weaknesses of relying on the Spirit?

The Spirit and the servant-leaders

Dancing in the Kingdom- Table of Contents

Dancing In the Kingdom – Part 2 – The Kingdom Revealed – Chapter 12 – Launching the church

The Spirit and the Servant-Leaders

[Bible references: Matthew 23:8-11; Acts 1:12-26; 2:42-47; 4:32-37; 6:1-6; 8:14-17; 9:26-31; 11:1-18; 13:1-3; 15;1-29, 36-41; Galatians 2:1-14]

God had created the church as a community: a community to share life and resources, to support one another, to share the gospel and send out missionaries, and to pray together and make decisions together. It was as a community, a council of apostles, that they:

  • Chose Mattias to replace Judas Iscariot
  • Chose seven men to oversee the daily distribution of resources among the church
  • Accepted Saul into their ranks as an apostle.
  • Decided that the gospel was to be shared among the Samaritans and the Gentiles
  • Decided that Gentiles did not have to become circumcised to become believers.

It is normal that within the community decision-making, disagreements were a part of the discussion and those disagreements needed to be worked out. For example, there was at least one occasion where Paul had to correct Peter’s concession to the circumcision group within the community who were denying grace of the gospel. In the end though, the apostles’ decision-making included God, so their decisions always included prayer.

Outside the venue of the council, there were other disagreements as well, including one where Paul and Barnabas disagreed about whether to take Mark along on a mission trip. That result ended up with Barnabas and Paul splitting up and with Barnabas taking Mark with him.

Observe

Read Matthew 23:8-11; Acts 1:12-26; 2:42-47; 6:1-6; 13:1-3. What do these passages say about church leadership?