Comment by Reon

August 21, 2006 @ 8:40 am

As jlove and I keep hashing this out, the thought that keeps coming to my mind is the fact that for all of the biblical writers to be 100% accurate in everything they felt, remembered and understood, they would have to have been completely outside of their humanness. Let’s face it, I couldn’t quote to you with 100% accuracy the events of yesterday without the intervention of the Holy Spirit…or maybe some of my neighbor’s…(never mind, I won’t go there).

The question is, were the writers so immersed in the presence of the Lord when they wrote that He gave them every word to say? Are there other examples of this in scripture? I would say, without a doubt, yes. Many writers of scripture heard the voice of God quite clearly in what they were told to say and do (Moses, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, to name just a few). I guess the question there is, did they write it down THEN or wait until later?

If their human/sin natures were NOT overcome by the presence of the Lord at the writing of the Word, then surely there must be room for error. Some would say that’s very dangerous to say, and could be interpreted as though we’re saying the word of God could be false. Not so. The Truth of scripture has stood the test of time for thousands of years in the lives of countless numbers of people. The minor details that you’re questioning don’t change the Truth. I think they’re just a reflection of human understanding.

That’s all I have time for now. I have to go to work. :O( Thanks for the post, Brian!

Comment by Rey

August 21, 2006 @ 3:26 pm

I don’t think anyone reads the Scriptures literally in the millimeter deep sense even those who the common charge of hypocrisy in literalness is leveled at.

I do think there needs further research on things before declaring it a factual error. That’s a slippery slope and you can pretty much call anything the New Testament reveals as a factual error with that argumentation.

As for Sheol there is a place where every Body goes before heaven or hell. It’s called the grave. What if Sheol was a term for grave? Or maybe there’s a place where everyone goes after they die and that’s their Final Destination…what if Sheol was a term loosely referring to the Final Destination? It needs further research.

Comment by Brian

August 22, 2006 @ 4:48 pm

Thanks for stopping by Rey and I appreciate your comments. Let me take a stab at addressing some of them.

I don’t think anyone reads the Scriptures literally in the millimeter deep sense even those who the common charge of hypocrisy in literalness is leveled at.

I hope I haven’t inadvertently levelled a charge of hypocrisy against anyone. If I did it wasn’t my intent. By “wooden” I meant reading the scripture without any feel for stuff like genre, literary devices, historical and cultural context. As if the words on the page could be lifted out of their setting like that. And unfortunately, I do know people who do that.

I do think there needs further research on things before declaring it a factual error. That’s a slippery slope and you can pretty much call anything the New Testament reveals as a factual error with that argumentation.

Let’s forget the Sheol example since it’s meaning is contested and use something else. In fact, I’m just gonna make up a hypothetical case…

At one time the stars were thought to be pinpricks in a black curtain letting light in from the other side. If the Psalmist used this in an analogy about God somehow would that be ok? It would mean that there is a reference in the scripture to something which is factually untrue. Does our notion of inspiration allow the culture of the writer to come through in that way? This gets back to Reon’s comment and is where I’m at right now. We know that a writer’s personality was not suspended in their writings. Would they not have also used elements from their culture(true or not) to communicate the deeper truth that God was revealing to them?

No good answers on this right now. At least none that satisfy me.

Comment by Rey

August 22, 2006 @ 5:50 pm

Nah, I wasn’t saying you were leveling the charge just showing that there is a charge often leveled at folk like that.

But for the wooden reading, heck I know people who read Shakespeare like that. It’s almost reading comprehension needs some bar raising. heh.

Determinists might argue that God is completely capable of making the individual put down his exact words and completely leaving the humaness intact and in that frameset I could see questions arising.

So when you say factually acurate it’s not necessarily wrong perse but taking license? IE: exageration? Cultural references such as Ezekiel’s “Make noise. Perhaps your gods are sleeping.” when there are in fact no gods?

Comment by Reon

August 22, 2006 @ 10:05 pm

Cultural reference is probably the biggest one I can’t wrap my head around. At what point and by whom was it determined that said cultural practices were no longer legitimate or necessary? Or was it just something that slowly happened over time?

I suppose what we have to have an understanding of (which I don’t) is what the principles of those practices were. There’s no point in following the rule anyway if we don’t know the relevance of the application. Once we know the principles behind the concepts, then we can determine how it should be played out in the 21st Century. Right? Does my rambling make sense to anyone else but me?

Reminds me of the story of the woman who always cut off the ends of her roast before she put it in the pan to bake. One day her husband asked her why she did that, and she said, “Because that’s what my mother always did.” So the husband went to his Mother-in-Law and asked her why she cut off the ends of her roast, and she replied, “That’s what my mother always did.” So the husband went to the grandmother and asked her the same question. The grandmother replied, “So it’ll fit in my pan.”

I’m going out on a limb here, but Paul’s (and others’) guidelines for Godly living may have had to do with things very specific to that time, and they’re simply not issues anymore. We’ve got a bigger “pan” now. Obviously, one would have to have a pretty deep understanding of the Jewish culture in the 1st century to answer those questions. Unfortunately, that is not me, so that’s all I have to say about that.

Comment by Jenn

August 22, 2006 @ 10:46 pm

Reon,
I agree with the general gist of your comment with one exception:

There’s no point in following the rule anyway if we don’t know the relevance of the application.

As a parent, I often expect my children to obey me simply because I know and understand more about the consequences of their actions. I see a bigger picture than they do. I could see this same principle carrying over to our heavenly Father. He does know more and sees The Big Picture. I, as the child with a limited perspective, sometimes need to simply (as the old hymn says) trust and obey. And maybe that simple obedience will lead me to a place where I am capable of understanding more.

Like I said, I really do agree with most of what you said and you brought up some stuff I need to think more about. Just wanted to clarify that one point even though Brian would call me “tangential.”

Comment by Brian

August 23, 2006 @ 12:34 am

But for the wooden reading, heck I know people who read Shakespeare like that. It’s almost reading comprehension needs some bar raising. heh.

“Arise fair sun and kill the envious moon…..” Ooooh, that would be ugly.

So when you say factually acurate it’s not necessarily wrong perse but taking license? IE: exageration? Cultural references such as Ezekiel’s “Make noise. Perhaps your gods are sleeping.” when there are in fact no gods?

Well, kinda, but a bit stronger than your example. I think Ezekiel knew that there were no gods and was having a little fun with the boys. In my hypothetical example the Psalmists actually doesn’t know the nature of the stars. I can’t think of an actual example like this from the scriptures - perhaps because there’s not one. So, this could be just an intellectal exercise to hash out our idea of the nature of inspiration.

Comment by Brian

August 23, 2006 @ 11:44 am

Cultural reference is probably the biggest one I can’t wrap my head around. At what point and by whom was it determined that said cultural practices were no longer legitimate or necessary? Or was it just something that slowly happened over time?

Those are all good questions. And like a lot of these that we’ve been asking I have a suspicion that someone else has asked them before us and come up with some pretty decent answers. But, I suppose it’s a good practice to work through them ourselves.

Stuff like no braids or gold I can more readily see as specific to a certain situation because it is not repeated in the other letters. However, the principle of modesty, being known for your good works, not drawing undue attention to yourself - those I see throughout scripture.

Still not a hard and fast science but I think keeping stuff like that in mind helps.

Comment by Rey

August 23, 2006 @ 3:28 pm

…but what if Paul adds some theoligical statement without explaining it. Like a symbol of authority because of the angels. Is it ignored because of being culturally valid or is it adhered to just in case? Where do you draw the line?

Comment by Reon

August 23, 2006 @ 3:48 pm

Jenn: Thanks for that clarification. You’re exactly right. (In fact, when I went back and re-read what I wrote, I didn’t like it much at all. It was late…for me, anyway!) God certainly does not make us privy to the “why’s” of every rule, boundary and calling that He has for us. In fact, some of the greatest times of growth in my faith have occurred when I just had to trust Him without knowing why I was supposed to be doing what He was asking of me.

I suppose what I should have said was that most (if not all) of us have an easier time understanding God’s commandments when we are aware of what the consequences are. It’s our natural tendency to want to know why, even if we don’t have the maturity or knowledge to understand the answer we’re given. For example, I would be much more willing to obey the “No Left Turn” sign at the traffic light downtown on a two-way street with hardly ever any traffic on it if I knew WHY the ridiculous sign was there in the first place!!! I should still (probably) obey the rule regardless of my feelings on the situation. I’d just be more eager to do so if it made sense to me.

I’ve gotten off on an insignificant tangent of a much bigger issue, I realize. But just like I lay awake at night and wonder who put the bop in the bop sh-bop, sh-bop; I also wonder why wearing braids and the various and sundry related issues were wrong at some point in time and who decided that they weren’t anymore, and why. Was it God’s revelation, cultural desensitization, or something else? I don’t think I disagree that such things don’t have to be taken literally. I just can’t give an informed reason as to why.

Brian: And like a lot of these that we’ve been asking I have a suspicion that someone else has asked them before us and come up with some pretty decent answers. But, I suppose it’s a good practice to work through them ourselves.

That sounds too much like work. Can’t I just have someone tell me what I believe?

Comment by Brian

August 23, 2006 @ 4:01 pm

…but what if Paul adds some theoligical statement without explaining it. Like a symbol of authority because of the angels. Is it ignored because of being culturally valid or is it adhered to just in case? Where do you draw the line?

That’s the question isn’t it? If I remember correctly, the Plymouth Brethren practice head covering, right? Is there other stuff y’all don’t practice like the “holy kiss” and do women wear braids and gold? If so, how do you decide to follow one and not the other?

Not trying to turn this around on you just so I don’t have to answer(ok, maybe a little….), but I am truly interested in how other people work these things out.

Comment by Rey

August 23, 2006 @ 5:41 pm

Oh I’m completely fine with re-examining what the PB do: constantly do it myself.

The head-covering bit most of us still do though they vary it by meetings. They don’t worry about the braids and gold as much because there’s never an additive in the Scripture like “because of the angels” which is puzzling but concering enough to wonder if it’s something outside of the cultural context. Personally I think that the use of symbols (cup, bread, water baptism, foot-washing, head covering) is something that transcends cultural background since it illustrates a theological point but I also think that this goes right into the realm of conviction.

Comment by Brian

August 24, 2006 @ 12:46 pm

Rey - Thanks for the insight and for the good conversation. I’m sure issues similar to this will come up on our blog at some point in the future as well.

Reon - I think a glass or two of white zin would make everything so much clearer. When are y’all headed this way next?