Category Archives: Biblical interpretation

Just how clueless were the biblical writers?

Apostle PualThe title to this post reflects a question that’s been growing in my mind as I read what many are writing about the Bible these days. Seemingly, the biblical writers were pretty clueless.

You know, like when the Pentateuch talks about God wanting people to offer sacrifice for sin. Fortunately, later writers (the prophets) corrected this misconception. There’s no sin between people and God. Just bad feelings and frustration. God didn’t want sacrifice. He just wants people to feel better.

And that talk about God being angry? That’s just ancient writers projecting their feelings into the text. God is love. God is forgiveness.

Hints that salvation is a privilege and not a right? Merely a reflection of the views of ancient people living near God’s people. God wants everyone to be happy and plans to save everyone. The apostles risked their lives preaching the gospel to let people know that they would be saved no matter what they did or believed.

And as clueless as the biblical writers were, I must be even more so. Because I just can’t wrap my mind around the rewrites of the Bible progressive Christianity offers. And I’m silly enough to think that inspiration counts for something. Go figure.

Elders, families, and law keeping

gavelRecently I was discussing some topics about elders with some friends on the Internet. Specifically, they were questioning the need for an elder to be married and to have children.

In his Declaration and Address, Thomas Campbell expressed:

That although the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are inseparably connected, making together but one perfect and entire revelation of the Divine will, for the edification and salvation of the Church, and therefore in that respect can not be separated; yet as to what directly and properly belongs to their immediate object, the New Testament is as perfect a constitution for the worship, discipline, and government of the New Testament Church, and as perfect a rule for the particular duties of its members, as the Old Testament was for the worship, discipline, and government of the Old Testament Church, and the particular duties of its members.

Many of us, myself included, have moved away from this way of seeing the Bible as some sort of constitution for the church. One can look at Exodus and Leviticus and see what religious law code looks like; such language is absent from the New Testament.

For some, that means that the New Testament is little more than a snapshot of how the church was then; at best we’re seeing one possible expression of Christianity.

I view the writings of the New Testament differently, specifically the letters. I see in them an expression of how things should be. We take things like culture and context into consideration, but we don’t use them to render the epistles meaningless.

Especially when looking at elders. Among the things we see in the New Testament are the lists of elders’ characteristics in 1 Timothy and Titus. These letters are written to churches in very different situations. Timothy was in Ephesus, where the church had functioned for decades. Titus was on Crete, where the church was apparently just gaining a foothold. Because of this, when we see things in the list that overlap, those teachings are especially powerful.

So it is with elders and their families. It’s especially telling in Timothy, where we’re talking about men who aren’t new converts. Even so, Paul tells Timothy

He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? (1 Timothy 3:4–5)

You expect these instructions to be given to Titus (and they were: Titus 1:6), who wouldn’t have the luxury of seeing how candidates had behaved themselves in church for years and years. But even in Ephesus, Paul says that the home life of a man will show his aptness for the job of elder.

That’s why elders need to be married. And have children.

“Is that a law? Will we go to hell if we do things differently?”

It doesn’t seem to be stated as a law. For me, it’s like the need to change the oil in my car. The owner’s manual doesn’t state that as a law. I don’t know of any state or federal regulations that require me to change the oil in my car. But I trust the car manufacturer and other knowledgeable people who have told me of the need to perform this needed maintenance. Frankly, I’d be foolish to do otherwise.

I trust the New Testament writers to describe what is best for a church. I want to do what will edify the church. In my life, I want to do what will most please God. For me it’s not a matter of law. It’s a matter of trying to be the best Christian I can be.

Form versus function, revisited

DCF 1.0OK, let’s get back to the discussion of men and women in the church… soon. This weekend I downloaded Jay Guin’s e-book Buried Talents, and I’d like to at least familiarize myself with Jay’s work before going to much further. I deeply respect Jay and his approach to God’s Word. We are both members of the Church of Christ, so we not only share a common background, but a common present reality. I’d like to hear his voice on this subject. I encourage you to download the free book and read it as well (I’d like to post a link to it, but Jay’s site doesn’t seem to be responding right now. You can find a link at http://oneinjesus.info/books-by-jay-guin/).

So let me review a concept that I think can be important as we look at all of this: the idea of form versus function. It’s the idea that, when studying biblical examples, we need to look not only at what was done but why it was done. What was the purpose of the action? Then we have to consider whether the same function can be fulfilled in better ways in our culture, or if the original form is so tied to the function that it should not be changed.

The classic example is foot washing. Foot washing was an act that conveyed a lot of meaning in the ancient world, particularly about social hierarchy and relationships. In short, it was something done by the person at the bottom of the totem pole, i.e. the least important person. (in the views of the ancient world, at least) When Jesus commanded his disciples to wash one another’s feet, he wasn’t merely addressing hygiene.

Foot washing is very different today. In our culture, it’s as likely to make the recipient uncomfortable as it is to please them. It rarely comes across as an act of service; more often than not, it communicates that someone wants to perform an artificial act of service. (I’m not talking about mutual foot washing assemblies; I know that those can be special, spiritual moments)

The function of foot washing can be better served by other acts of service in today’s culture.

I think the act of baptism is a form closely tied to its function. I have yet to see a better expression of the death and burial of the old man, as well as the beginning of the new life. While there can be much debate about its significance, baptism continues to be the form that best addresses its original function.

When we look at the New Testament letters, for example, the question really isn’t whether or not these are rules and regulations for the modern church. The question is what function did each teaching serve and how is that function addressed today.

Photo courtesy of Annika on MorgueFile.com

Law and Grace, Faith and Works

legalLast week we were looking at some unhealthy attitudes toward the Old Testament (and the Gospels, along the way). But it’s not just about the attitudes toward that (huge) section of Scripture. It’s really about how we look at the Bible itself.

For some people, the Bible is merely a book of rules, a legal code, the constitution for God’s Kingdom. Wade Tannehill said it well the other day:

But here is what has changed. The legal texts of Moses were in some cases highly detailed and prescriptive. Some would read the New Testament literature as if it were the same genre as the Book of the Covenant or the Holiness Code. This amounts to viewing the New Testament books, not as occasional literature written to aid disciples in a Christocentric reading of the Hebrew Scriptures, but as a flat law code of new legal stipulations for Christians.

Where the old law / new law dichotomy really misses the point is its misunderstanding of law in Scripture. Those seeking to understand the New Testament writings as a legal code are making a similar mistake to the Judaizers of old. The law is imagined to be in a position it was never intended to hold. The law has never been a means of salvation. No one has ever been saved by law-keeping, under any covenant. Salvation has always been by grace through faith.

Yes! Exactly. When we think that what Jesus did was substitute one written code for another, we fall into the trap that Paul condemned in the Galatian letter. When we depend on law, any kind of law, then we are no longer depending on grace. And that’s a dangerous thing: “You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.” (Galatians 5:4)

I heard a man speak at a youth camp 30 years ago, presenting the argument that the New Law was merely an improvement on the Old Law. He argued that when Paul says we aren’t saved by works, he only means works of the Law of Moses;”obviously we are saved by works.”

No! The New Testament is not a revised copy of the Pentateuch. It’s about coming into a relationship with God through Christ, seeking to live out our lives as an imitation of our Redeemer. We do that not to be saved but because that’s who we were called to be.

“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” (Ephesians 2:8-10)

Not saved by works, but created for works.

We don’t need a new legal code. We need a Savior.

Nailed To The Cross

“And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross” (Colossians 2:13–14)

This has been one of the classic verses used against the Old Testament. I’ve mentioned before one of the horrible moments in my ministry, when one young man referred to the Psalms during a heated discussion at a men’s meeting. One older man, who had been in ministry for over 30 years, interrupted him, saying, “My Bible says that was nailed to the cross.”

Really? The Psalms were nailed to the cross? Is that what Colossians says?

Well… no, not at all. What was nailed to the cross?

The King James says “the handwriting of ordinances.” The word “handwriting” is cheirograph in Greek. That word appears nowhere else in the New Testament. However, the word is seen in some writings found in Egypt. In those writings, the word referred to an I.O.U., a record of debt. That reading makes sense in this context.

In an article about this verse, Bobby Valentine notes:

In Jewish apocalyptic there was an idea that there existed a book of records that kept track of our evil deeds. This book, like the mortgage (an I.O.U.) at the bank, provided powerful leverage with less than friendly spirit beings called principalities, powers, angels and the like. This book is mentioned often in Jewish literature of the time (1 Enoch 89.61-64; 108.7; Testament of Abraham 12.7-18; 13.9-14; and many other places). Enoch, for example, tells how he heard the words “write down every destruction {sin} … so that this may become testimony for me against them.” We have an IOU that stands against us and that IOU is our own sin debt. It is that sin that the malignant powers hold over us.

The translators of the ESV understood this passage to refer to a record of debt. They phrased it:

“And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.” (Colossians 2:13–14)

But what if Paul were referring to the Law here? That doesn’t seem to fit with other passages where Paul quotes the Law as authoritative, but it is a possibility.

The removal of the Law from a position of opposition to Christians doesn’t mean that every writing before the cross loses validity for Christians. We have to remember that God’s Word is not merely a law book; it is a living, sacred document which teaches us about the nature of God and the way God’s people should live. I’m not talking the plan of salvation; I’m talking about sanctification.

It’s true that we are no longer under the Law of Moses. We no longer offer sacrifices. We await the eternal sabbath rather than keeping a weekly one. Our hope for salvation comes through Jesus and his sacrifice, not through law keeping.

That doesn’t mean that the writings of Isaiah and Jeremiah suddenly cease to be God’s Word. That doesn’t mean that the lessons we learn from David and Moses and Abraham no longer hold truth. The Psalms still speak volumes about the nature of God and his creation.

It’s easy to confuse the Old Law with the writings we call the Old Testament. (remember that the term “Old Testament” wasn’t used to refer to Scripture until well into the second century) The Jews referred to the first five books of the Bible as the Law. If Paul really says that “the Law” is nailed to the cross, he is only referring to those books! And even at that, who among us thinks that the creation story was against us and needed to be nailed to the cross? Can anyone read Paul and think that he felt a need to nail Abraham’s story to the cross? Or the story of the exodus?

We need to read Colossians 2 as a celebration of Christ’s victory, not a proof text for dispensationalism. Eugene Peterson’s translation in The Message can help us capture that feeling:

“Think of it! All sins forgiven, the slate whiped clean, that old arrest warrant canceled and nailed to Christ’s Cross. He stripped all the spiritual tyrants in the universe of their sham authority at the Cross and marched them naked through the streets.”