The Bible doesn’t play by our rules

Posted on April 26, 2012 by Tim Archer

Continuing yesterday’s discussion, I need to emphasize that I’m NOT (edit, 11:55 a.m.) denying the historical nature of the Bible. I’m saying that the Bible was written differently than we might expect or even want.

Here’s why:

  1. The Bible wasn’t written to record history. I know I’ve said that, but it needs to be emphasized. Look at the book of Genesis. We blow through centuries of the world’s existence, then come to a screeching halt when we get to Abraham. We stroll through his life and that of the next few generations. Then in Exodus we blow by several centuries before stopping again at Moses. It’s not the story of everyone; it’s the story of certain people that shaped the formation of the nation of Israel.
    At first glance, the stories from the books of Samuel and the books of Kings are repeated in the books of Chronicles. But they’re not. The first four books were written to a nation in exile, explaining how they ended up in exile. The last two were written to a nation that was rebuilding. Chronicles emphasizes the covenant and the temple, because the people were being called to rally around those two elements. It’s not just history about the different kings. It’s the history that’s needed to teach.
  2. The Bible was written in a way that fit its original context. It wasn’t written for Westerners. It wasn’t written to satisfy the modern mind. It doesn’t treat facts the way we treat them. Numbers are more symbolic than they are quantitative. When one writer says 7000 were killed and another says 70,000, we say it’s an inaccuracy. They don’t see it that way. The 7 is symbolic as are the thousands. Lots of people were killed in an impressive victory (perfect, even, with the numeric symbolism).
  3. The Bible expresses things within the understanding of its readers. We know that the sun doesn’t really rise nor set. The ancient readers didn’t know that. We know the earth doesn’t have four corners; they weren’t aware of that. Much has been made of people finding scientific clues in the Bible, but I think that’s a misguided effort. God wasn’t teaching them natural science. He was teaching them how to live according to His covenant.

Others express these concepts much better than I. I lay them out to show my current understanding of inspiration and revelation, that they intentionally occurred within human contexts, adapting themselves to those contexts. When we try to force them to play by the rules of our context, we find that they don’t always oblige.

Posted in Biblical interpretation | Tagged , , | 9 Comments

When the Bible doesn’t meet our expectations

Posted on April 25, 2012 by Tim Archer

Getting back to some of our discussions of late, I want to talk a bit more of our expectations of the Bible. Included in that, I guess, are our expectations of inspiration or of the results of inspiration.

One common view is that every detail mentioned in the Bible must be precise or the Bible can’t be considered to be an inspired book. One verse that fuels that view is Matthew 5:18: “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.” In the language of the King James, Jesus says that jots and tittles are important, that every stroke of the Law must remain unchanged. (In my experience, this is a key passage for King James Onlyists, who argue that every word must remain unchanged. None of them tell me why that doesn’t apply to the Tyndale version or the Bishops’ Bible; apparently version inspiration skipped from the Textus Receptus to the KJV)

From this stems the view that every scientific fact mentioned in the Bible must be 100% true, every historical detail must be 100% accurate, every geographical description must be 100% precise.

In my view, this is an attempt to make the Bible something that it never declares itself to be nor was intended to be. God wasn’t trying to teach ancient man modern science. Jesus can call the mustard seed the smallest of all seeds without obliging Christians to argue with the scientists who can point to numerous smaller seeds. Jesus was speaking within what those people knew and understood.

In the same way, because the thrust of the Bible was not to provide a historical record but was instead to teach religious truths, we can have varying accounts of the same incident. Take, for example, the description of the setting of one of Jesus’ miracles, as seen in three different gospels:

“And as they went out of Jericho, a great crowd followed him. And behold, there were two blind men sitting by the roadside, and when they heard that Jesus was passing by, they cried out, “Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!”” (Matthew 20:29–30)

“And they came to Jericho. And as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the roadside. And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”” (Mark 10:46–47)

“As he drew near to Jericho, a blind man was sitting by the roadside begging. And hearing a crowd going by, he inquired what this meant. They told him, “Jesus of Nazareth is passing by.” And he cried out, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”” (Luke 18:35–38)

If we just read these three accounts as they are, we have to deal with some interesting things. Just on the location and number of blind men, we get no agreement:

Matthew: Leaving Jerusalem, two blind men
Mark: Leaving Jerusalem, one blind man
Luke: Entering Jerusalem, one blind man

If we want to force the Bible to be precise in every detail, then we have to do some gymnastics here. Maybe Jesus was entering new Jericho as he left old Jericho (yes, I’ve heard that one argued). Maybe there were two men, but Mark and Luke just chose to speak of one of them. Maybe these are three separate incidents in which almost the exact same thing happened.

Or maybe we need to accept that the intent of Matthew, Mark and Luke wasn’t to write a history book or a biography, but a gospel. Maybe we need to adjust our expectations of the Bible and its content.

Posted in Biblical interpretation | Tagged , | 13 Comments

Trip to El Salvador

Posted on April 24, 2012 by Tim Archer

I spent this past weekend in San Salvador, El Salvador, on a trip for Herald of Truth ministries. We’re doing a media project there this year. The project will involve two different radio programs that I will be doing, as well as Bible/literature distribution and a preaching campaign in October.

The churches in El Salvador are very active and seem to be extremely well organized. There is little dependence on outside influences, and we’re doing our best not to interfere with that. That’s why these trips are so important, so that we can talk with the brothers, get their input, hear their concerns and learn from their suggestions. It’s also helpful to them to know exactly who they are partnering with.

Steve Ridgell and I arrived on Thursday. Our colleague from Honduras, Rigoberto Vargas, had arrived on Wednesday. He came to the airport with Julio Mejía Mateo, the local preacher that will be spearheading our effort. We spent Thursday afternoon visiting with them, finalizing our plans for the next few days.

On Friday we visited two radio stations, a print shop and the local Bible society. We worked on getting final prices so that we can give the project a definite structure. Friday evening, we met with a small group at Julio’s congregation. He encouraged them to “ask us questions about anything.” The first question concerned what Peter writes about Jesus preaching to the spirits in prison… and the questions didn’t get much easier from there.

Saturday morning Steve did some sessions on leadership. We didn’t know how many to expect since the seminar was arranged on somewhat short notice, but we had approximately 70 people there. They really appreciated what Steve had to offer. Then I described the project to them, letting them know that we wanted all of their congregations to participate and feel a part of the project. Saturday evening, we went with Adrian Larin to his congregation, where they were having a meeting of married couples. I got to share some thoughts on marriage with that group.

Sunday morning we were with Julio Mejía Mateo’s group. They have Bible class at 8 with small groups, then a general study at 9, followed by worship at 10. Steve taught a men’s class at 8, then I taught at 9 and preached at 10. After lunch, we had a strategy meeting: me, Steve, Rigoberto, Julio, Adrian and Jorge Navidad.

Sunday night wasn’t a work night, so we went to the small store of one of the sisters from Julio’s church and got to eat pupusas, a famous dish that is very popular in El Salvador. The woman let us know that her food was very safe, that many famous people had eaten her pupusas, including Pope John Paul II. I pointed out that that was no real comfort, since John Paul II is deceased! She got a good laugh out of that one.

Monday we headed home. Gotta say it… I love my job.

Posted in Herald of Truth | Tagged , | 1 Comment

After Easter

Posted on April 19, 2012 by Tim Archer

Since I won’t get a chance to write this morning, I thought I’d share an article I wrote recently for Heartlight magazine:

I think they were suffering a bit of post-Easter depression. Not the kind that comes from too many chocolate eggs or lack of sleep from going to a sunrise service. No, this was the real thing.

Peter and the other apostles had lived an emotional roller coaster that few of us can imagine. Their beloved Teacher, the one they thought was going to be king, had been arrested and killed. Then, a few days later, they learned that He had risen from the dead! They saw Him, ate with Him, then were told to go to Galilee to wait.

It was during that wait that I think they got the blues. Or, if not that, they at least got bored. So Peter suggested they do what they had always done before meeting Jesus: go fishing.

Chapter 21 of the gospel of John tells us how they worked all night without catching anything. A few weeks before, they had been part of the big show. They were the disciples of the Great One, the Maestro, the Messiah. Now they were spending all night throwing nets into cold, dark water, without anything to show for their efforts.

That’s when Jesus showed up on the shore. That’s when everything changed. That’s when one command from His lips filled their nets to the breaking point and almost capsized their boats. That’s when Peter and the others knew they were back in the presence of the Risen Lord. Jesus had come to meet these Galilean fishermen at the place they knew best.

How far is it from the temple in Jerusalem to the banks of the Sea of Galilee? It’s the same distance as it is from church on Sunday to the office on Monday. It’s the distance from Holy Communion to lunch out of a bag. It’s the distance from Easter bonnets to oil-soaked coveralls.

Special religious days can be nice for recharging our batteries, but the Christian life is lived out 24/7, both in holy places and on dirty streets. God comes to meet us anywhere and everywhere. He doesn’t just wait for us inside a church building on Easter Sunday. He’s willing to be there with us, every day of the year.

Jesus came to tell the apostles that it was okay for them to be fishermen. He also came to remind them that they had been called to be fishers of men. God wants to come and make your job a calling, to make your employment a vocation. He wants to make every day a holy day, and every place a sanctuary.

The day we call Easter comes once a year… but today and every day can be just as special! Let God transform your ordinary into something high and holy.

Posted in Vocation | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Inspiration, inerrancy, infallibility

Posted on April 18, 2012 by Tim Archer

As much as I hate to validate a tangent, the comment thread from yesterday touched on something important. Interestingly enough, Patrick Mead has been writing on the same subject: how should we understand inspiration?

Patrick explains in yesterday’s post:

When I was a boy and up until I was in my late 20s I only heard one version of how we got our Bibles. I was told that every single word came directly from the mouth of God (via the Holy Spirit). There was no input from the human writers. They were merely stenographers for the Spirit. As an illustration of this my father and other ministers would bring up the story of Balaam’s donkey. “God didn’t just give that donkey an idea and let him express it in his own words” they would say. And they said that the exact same mechanism was involved in writing the Bibles – Jeremiah, Peter, Paul, and Amos all wrote down what they were told to write, word for word.

I have talked with many people who think that the Bible was dictated, word for word, by the Holy Spirit. Any perceived humanness is the Spirit’s attempt to make the Bible more understandable, they say.

Patrick does a good job of reminding us that this view of the Bible arose with fundamentalism in the 19th century. It is a child of modernism, an attempt to make the Bible fit the scientific method.

So what do we expect of this holy book? If it is inspired, what does that mean? Terms get tossed around like inerrancy and literality. Patrick describes the Chicago Statement on inerrancy:

It says, in part, “Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God’s acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God’s saving grace in individuals’ lives.” It goes on to state that the Bible’s words came directly from God and are, therefore, completely moral and without error in everything it affirms – historically, scientifically, and theologically.

Is that what inspired means? Does every detail in the Bible have to be correct for the Bible to be inspired? I have some thoughts on the subject, but I’d like to hear yours. How much room for “human error” is there in the text of the Bible?

Posted in Biblical interpretation | Tagged , | 19 Comments