My Take on the Bible

This is just a random collation of some thoughts of mine regarding the nature of the Bible:

  • The Bible is the word of God insofar as it witnesses to the ontological Word of God, Jesus Christ. In other words, the Bible is the instrumental witness to the living Word (Jesus).
  • The Bible witnesses to what God was doing in Jesus Christ, but it does so through the conduit of fallible human beings.
  • I do not believe in the supposed inerrancy of the Bible (such as that put forth in the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy).
  • On a related note, while I would deny the historicity of the Genesis account of the creation of Adam and Eve (seeing as I accept evolution), this is not due to my denial of biblical inerrancy, nor is it because I do not take the Bible literally. In fact, it is because I take the Bible very literally! As taking the Bible literally means taking into account such factors as literary genre, literary purpose, authorial intent, etc.
  • I am not convinced that systematic theology is the best way of teaching the biblical text (see here).
  • While I would agree with Christians that the Bible was written by humans, I am not sure as to where God’s role comes into the picture. How did God inspire the text? What do we even mean by saying that the Bible is “inspired by God”? Why do we believe that the biblical text is divinely inspired? In answer to that last question, I am not satisfied with someone merely pointing to the word theopneustos in 2 Tim 3.16 because it is not talking about the Bible, it is only talking about the Old Testament and perhaps not even the same Old Testament canon that we have today.
  • I do, however, believe in some sort of divine intentionality behind the text, even if only through God providentially making sure that Bible was preserved throughout the millenia (though this then brings up the complicated, but fascinating, issues of the formation and extent of the biblical canon).
  • I do not think that one’s opinion on the nature of the Bible should use as a litmus test to determine one’s “orthodoxy” or whether we should cast someone “outside the camp” (i.e. brand them a heretic). After all, it is not your view on the nature of the Bible that shows whether you are living your life under the lordship of Christ (and if you think that it is then you seriously need to read through the New Testament again!)

One last thing. Whereas most would point to 2 Tim 3:16 or 2 Pet 1.20-21 when asked what is the most important biblical passage regarding the nature of the Bible, I would point to the following passage, in which Jesus says:

You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.  (John 5.39-40)

5 Responses

  1. I don’t think I’d change a word of this post, Diglot! I’ve used the very same words at times, such as “divine intentionality behind the text.” Good post.

  2. Pingback: Christocentric readings of the Bible in the blogosphere at Undeception

  3. Pingback: Elsewhere (10.08.2011) | Near Emmaus

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 29 other followers