Tag: interpret

Mystery of the kingdom and eschatology

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 kingdom and eschatology

[Bible references: Isaiah 2; 60; Joel 2; Micah 4; Daniel 7; Matthew 24; Luke 17; Revelations 20]

What is the kingdom of God/Heaven?

The kingdom of Heaven refers to where Jesus reigns. Heaven has always been under his rule and when he returns and our current earth is transformed into the new earth, Jesus’ kingdom will include that as well. In the meanwhile, His kingdom includes all those who have accepted Jesus as their king. Some only apply the Kingdom of God to only the reign of God in heaven or the reign of God after earthly governments are done away with.

How and when will Jesus return?

Discussion about the end times[1] has always been problematic because of the nature of prophetic language. This has led to much contention in the church about how events will occur or have occurred. Even though Jesus has cautioned us that only the Father knows when that will happen, people have not stopped trying to “read the signs.”

The clues about the Messiah in the Old Testament were confusing to interpret. Even after the incarnation of Jesus, we know that the disciples were confused about how the events of the end times such that Jesus’ death was incomprehensible. Even after Jesus’ resurrection and ascension there was still confusion, and it took some time to sink in that Jesus’ return was not going to happen for a while.

There are a wide variety of thoughts about the Biblical prophecies concerning the end times. The questions deal with such things as: is the book of Revelation about events now past us (e.g., the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70) or about future events or both, does the 1000 years talked about in Revelation 20:1-15 occur now or in the future and is the 1000 years literal or metaphorical, will there be a “rapture” of believers before a coming time of great tribulation, since there was no nation of Jews after the destruction of Jerusalem do the promises that applied to Israel now apply to the church – and other questions.

There are various historical factors and hermeneutical questions that led to some of the variations in the way that these questions were answered: whether the prophecies should be interpreted literally or metaphorically, whether the Old Testament laws should be kept in effect by the church, the importance of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 and the consequent re-creation of the nation of Israel in AD 1948. Regardless of the way those questions are answered, the more important issue is our behavior in the present.

The role of the prophecies in the past had been to either warn people of behaviors they needed to change or to provide encouragement and hope in the times of difficulty. Wherever we stand on these prophecies, those intentions should be our focus; our behaviors in the present life and our hope to sustain us.

[1] Herrick, Greg. “9. Eschatology: End Times” Bible.org bible.org/seriespage/9-eschatology-end-times

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

Mystery of the church

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 church

[Bible references: Acts 2:42-47; 1 Corinthians 12:17, 27; 2 Corinthians 5:20; 1 Peter 2:9]

What is the church?

As commonly used in current times, the “church” is a building to go to. In biblical terms it referred to an assembly of believers (called out ones).[1] How we understand this idea can influence our behavior. There are a few biblical metaphors that describe the church.

  • The body of Christ – This metaphor brings the ideas: that Christ is the head of the church, and we are His presence in the world, that each of us has a unique role in bringing Christ’s presence in the world. Our unique roles are distinguished by the spiritual gifts imparted to each of us to enable us to build each other in our faith.
  • A holy priesthood – This metaphor brings the idea that we have a relationship with God and can act as intermediaries.
  • A temple – This metaphor describes each individual as a stone in the temple and that it is all of us together who make up the temple, that is, the place where God resides on earth.
  • Ambassadors – This metaphor highlights our role in representing God’s to those not reconciled to God.

In the beginning, the organization of the church was not given in detail but seemed to be a cohesive group that “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer … had everything in common … broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts.”

Is the church more than a Jewish sect?

[Bible references: Romans 11:17; Ephesians 3:6]

At first the church was mainly a Jewish sect. Jesus focused his ministry within the borders of Israel and his disciples were mainly Jewish. After Jesus died, that situation did not change much until Jesus took definitive steps with Peter and Paul to reach the non-Jews (Gentiles). Until that happened, the church mainly consisted of Jews who happened to also be believers, and as Jews, kept up many Jewish practices. But when Gentiles started to be included, there was the question of whether they needed to become Jewish to belong. It took a council of the church to determine that Gentiles were not bound by the Jewish practices. But even after that council, the debate persisted.[2]

In the Old Testament, we are told that Israel will be a blessing to the rest of the world, but it was not revealed just how that would happen. In Ephesians 3, the apostle Paul explains that “through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus.” And then in Romans 11, Paul explains that the Gentiles were “grafted” into the family of believing Jews, of whom Abraham is the root, so that the Gentiles may receive all the same blessings.

What is the visible and invisible church?

The invisible church consists of all those, past, present, and future, who have put their trust in Christ. Only God knows who they all are. The visible church is the groups of people gathered together as communities. Both believers and unbelievers may be in the visible church.

Some congregations/ denominations are very strict about how to interpret scripture and/or have a limited view of forgiveness, and so would put limits on who they would consider to be in the church.[3] Other congregations/denominations have an extreme view that all of society should be under Christian rule[4] and then misused Luke 14:23, “Go out into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in,” that they would even resort to torture in order to persuade a people to make a “confession of faith.” Then there are those who think that everyone will ultimately be saved.[5]

Who has authority in the church?

As the church grew and spread throughout the Roman Empire, the natural development was to “institutionalize” the church, trying to make the church more effective with more formal organization. While the apostles were still alive, it was possible to unify the church around the apostles, but of course that was temporary.

Over time, different governance models emerged within the church as there was no model within the church except for the synagogue. In the episcopal model, there is a single leader, or bishop, who oversees a group of congregations and selects the pastors for each congregation. In the presbyterian model, there is a “plurality” of elders, who oversee a congregation or a group of congregations – the congregation may elect their pastor, but the Presbytery has to approve whoever is selected. In the congregational model, the congregation itself is its ultimate overseer and selects its pastor.

Some congregations are independent from one another, and some are affiliated with other congregations. The affiliation may be a denomination where there is strong oversight by the denomination over the individual congregations, but some affiliations are mainly an association for the purpose of sharing resources, but the association has no oversight function.

Some congregations emphasize the importance of maintaining apostolic authority by maintaining the transfer of authority of the apostles and trace the leadership of the church from one generation to the next beginning with the apostles.[6] The Roman Catholic denomination further emphasizes their authority is transferred from the apostle Peter, whom they think was given the most authority from Jesus. Other denominations will maintain that they are apostolic because of their faithfulness to scripture and therefore to the apostolic teachings.

One issue related to authority within the church is related to gender roles. Due to apparent conflicts in some Bible passages, two main views have emerged regarding the role of women in the church On one side, there is no restriction of ministry roles because of gender, but on the other side, women are restricted from any role in which they have spiritual authority over men.

What is the role of elder, bishop, deacon, priest?

The New Testament doesn’t clearly specify how to organize a congregation and that has resulted in congregations organizing themselves in a variety of ways. The New Testament does show examples of elders (aka bishops) serving as spiritual leaders of a congregation and deacons serving the physical needs of the congregation. Priests, in the Old Testament performed duties for God on behalf of the other people. The New Testament talks about Christ being the high priest for all of us but then talks about all Christians as being priests since we all have direct access to God and our role as Christians is to present ourselves as a living sacrifice to God.

The first denominations that emerged did keep the title of a priest, no longer offering the Old Testament sacrifices but rather now sharing the sacrament of the Last Supper. The Orthodox and Catholic traditions consider the bishops who oversee the priests to be the elders of the denomination. The priests are chosen to serve the sacraments, although they also serve in other ways with deacons helping the priests in carrying out the liturgy in the worship service or serving in other ways as well. In this context, the spiritual leadership of bishops or priests is recognized by the use of honorific titles such as Reverend or Father.

Protestant traditions vary. Anglican and Episcopal congregations retain the title of priest, while in other Protestant traditions congregations are led by pastors or elders.[7]

In some congregations, the pastor is considered to be the elder and the lay leaders are considered to be deacons. In other congregations the pastor is considered to be a teaching elder (if that title is used) while the lay leaders are considered to be ruling elders, or just elders. Some congregations are governed primarily by the pastor, some by a group (plurality) of elders, and some by the congregation itself.

What is the function of a creed?

As explained at the beginning of this chapter, there is much of God that is beyond comprehension. So, when God revealed himself through the prophets, the revelations were more in the form of stories and the interactions of God with the world than a spelled-out theology. That type of revelation requires us to do some of amount of interpretation as we try to better understand God, and that process of interpretation has been the function of the church at large. However, some individuals in the church came up with teachings that seemed to be more than minor differences and actually opposed the more accepted teachings of the church. Those ideas were considered to be heretical. Over time, to combat the heresies that arose, the church developed abbreviated teachings of the church called creeds.

As conflicts within the church developed, different sets of creeds started to emerge. The Protestant section of the church caused even more divergence with the creation of more detailed creedal statements called “confessions of faith,” while other congregations claimed to be non-creedal, stating that the Bible as a whole was their creed because creedal statements are limited and could never present a comprehensive theology of the church.

How can broken people within broken congregations can be instruments of God?

[Bible references: Romans 7:7-25; 1 Timothy 5:10; 2 Timothy 2:21; 3:17; Ephesians 2:10; Colossians 1:10; Hebrews 13:21]

In this time between the Kingdom has come and is yet to come in full, even those of us who trust in Christ have wills that are internally divided between the desire to do good and the desire to do evil. Despite our brokenness, God still desires to use us to accomplish His will on earth. He did not remove the mandates given to us back in Genesis. We may be broken instruments, but God knows how to use broken instruments.

Is the church an Organism or an Organization?

[Bible references: Matthew 28:16-20; 1 Timothy 3:1-6; Titus 1:6-9; 1 Peter 5:1-3]

When Jesus gave the command to “go into all the world” he didn’t specify how to do it, particularly how they should organize themselves to do it. They were to be his body, that is, his hands, feet, legs, eyes, ears, etc. on the earth to continue to do what he had begun. He left no instructions that we know of on how to organize themselves to complete the mission.

The apostles did have the model of synagogue that they could refer to.[8] The first people they reached out to were already in synagogues. But the Bible makes no specific mention of them using that model to organize themselves. In the apostles’ letters to churches and individuals that we have preserved in the Bible, there are some details from which various organizational models have been proposed, ranging from congregation choosing their own leaders to leaders over the congregations choosing leaders for each congregation.

What the Bible is clear on, is the qualifications for those who would lead the church. Some of those qualifications are to be blameless, even tempered, hospitable, to love what is good, to be disciplined, and to encourage others with sound doctrine. The biblical focus seems not to be on how leaders organize their congregations but on the qualifications that those leaders should have.

[1] Biblehub. “1577. Ekklesia” Bible Hub biblehub.com/Greek/1577.htm

[2] Marcos, Juan. Gutierrez, Bejarano. “The Judaisms of Jesus’ Followers” (Chapter 10, The Church Fathers and Jesus Oriented Judaisms) Yaron Publishing, 2017. Nazarenes held orthodox beliefs except in their adherence to Jewish law. Not deemed heretical until the fourth century. Ebionites, possibly a splinter group from the Nazarenes held that circumcision is necessary for salvation.

[3] This “rigorist” viewpoint was held by various people such as the “Novationists” (third century) and “Donatists” (fourth century).

[4] This idea is known as Christendom. Mere Orthodoxy mereorthodoxy.com/christendom-1200-words-give-take/

[5] Encyclopedia Britannica, “Universalism” Encyclopedia Britannia www.britannica.com/place/Universalism

[6] Encyclopedia Britannia “Apostolic succession” Encyclopedia Britannia www.britannica.com/topic/apostolic-succession

[7] Whitaker, Alexander. “The Protestant Problem with Priesthood” The North American Anglican 8 June 2020 northamanglican.com/the-protestant-problem-with-priesthood; Patheos “Leadership”

[8] Burtchaell, James Tunstead. “From Synagogue to Church: Public Services and Offices in the Earliest Christian Communities” Cambridge University Press 1992 (pp.349-352)

Reflect

The quality of church governance is more dependent on the quality of the leaders than the type of governance structure. What qualities do you think church leaders should have?

Observe

Read 1 Corinthians 12:17, 27; 2 Corinthians 5:20; 1 Peter 2:9. How does the different metaphors for the church help you to understand the church?