I believe the Bible is God-breathed; it is a revelation – a revealing – from God. It communicates to us the will, desire, demands, promises of God. It reveals to us the true nature of reality. All this I believe by faith and without any proof. Not that I think my belief is irrational, though some may feel that it is. But, in spite of the evidence which proves that the Bible has been accurately transmitted and translated through the ages, there is no way of demonstrating in a scientific manner – if that’s what one demands – that it is the word from God to humanity. Still I believe that God speaks through the Bible. Now here’s some important questions, if you’re trying to pin me down – “is he a raging fundy, has he become a liberal?” – Is the Bible inerrant, without errors? Is the Bible infallible, incapable of being wrong? My answer is, so what if it is or isn’t? This is what I think: whether the Bible is inerrant or not we have to respect the authorial intent. We must never twist it in order to make it say what we want. We must not use its authority to promote our own agenda. The author may intend the text to be pregnant with meaning allowing for the possibility for an unfolding of meaning. The author may intend to leave the text purposely vague in order to inspire varying responses from the readers. Still, we must distinguish between what the Bible is saying and what we wish it would say. Once we have identified what we honestly feel is the authorial intent we must be allowed to disagree with it. Even if the Bible is the inspired word of God there are quite a few things it has to say that I don’t like. I want to live with that tension; I want to feel its presence. If the Bible is the inspired word of God should it be expected that I immediately agree with it? If I did, I wouldn’t need it. By allowing for disagreement an honest relationship between the reader and the author can be established. A real discussion can occur; genuine growth can take place. I can say with certainty that the Bible available to you today – even the King James Version – contains errors, which were introduced quite innocently through transmitter and translator error. Still I believe God can and will speak through that Bible. However, I want to be honest about what I believe, how I feel, what I hope. If that means I have to disagree with God, then so be it. God is capable of having an honest relationship with me. The last thing I want to do is try to say my words are God’s words. If you decide the bible is wrong, because it must not really contain the words of God, that is your choice, you stand before God with that choice and must be willing to accept the consequences. Of course, if you think the Bible is right and it turns out it isn’t, you’d also have to pay some consequences.
In a recent post I made the statement, “I will not live in fear”. Perhaps that was a very stupid thing to say. It was the fear of God that was supposed to keep Israel from sinning (Ex 20:20). Now a lot of Christians seem to be under the impression that we should try to scare people straight with the threat of hell. But, fear wasn’t able to motivate Israel, even with the promise of rewards. There is the old proverb (1:7), “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.” Maybe it’s not the fear that motivates, but the wisdom gained as a result. I can’t get away with saying that fearing the Lord is an Old Testament thing. New Testament believers are also said to live in fear of the Lord (Acts 9:31) As well, Paul tells us about all the people who sin because, “There is no fear of God before their eyes” (Rom. 3:18). I could just say that the Bible means “respect” when it says fear, and that would be that, but I don’t think it’s that simple. If Luke, or Paul, `meant respect I think they would have said it. I’m sure the Greeks – who have at least four words for love – could manage the distinction between fear and respect. So, what does the Bible mean when it says “fear the Lord”, and what do I mean when I say, “I won’t live in fear”? I think the Bible means fear. God’s power is immense; he cannot be checked by another power. He is a God of war (Joshua). Jesus himself might be the one who struck down the first born in Egypt (Exodus). God can destroy the body and the soul. To recognize how insubstantial we are compared to the universe, let alone God, will put us on the road towards wisdom. If a person stands on the edge of an abyss, it is fear that will keep that person on solid ground. Why won’t I live in fear? Because, perfect love drives out fear (I John). Before I had a relationship with God, I had reason to fear this foreign, all encompassing, impersonal power. But, what does a child of God have to fear? I am a child of God. Based upon who I believe God has revealed himself to be, I have no reason to fear. If God is actually a tyrant who demands servitude, but does not warrant our worship, I will not serve such a God. I will not live in fear of such a God. I will not live in the fear that there might be such a God running the show. Most importantly, I do not believe that such a God is running the show. God is love; that’s what John says. I’m going to live as if that’s true.
Here are a few thoughts about politics and religion. I will, however, not offer conclusions. It seems that most Americans believe – or at least act as if they believe – that those who are successful/rich, are blessed because they are virtuous. Likewise, those who have trouble making it through life are failures because of their vice. We think God punishes the bad and rewards the good. Because of this, we feel rich people deserve everything they have and can get; poor people are getting exactly what they should get and do not merit our charity. Politically this means we have no real responsibility to care for the poor and weak. In fact the strong have every right to exploit the weak. Any Christian should know that this view of things is rubbish, but do we recognize how it has crept into our daily lives and politics? I assume that most conservative Christians believe in original sin; they believe that people are sinners and are at heart corrupt. If they believe in original sin, they believe people are basically bad. Liberals tend to believe people – though capable of terrible evils – are fundamentally good. Then why do so many conservative Christians as republicans believe in minimal government and regulation/law? Instead they want maximum freedom and they trust people to do the right thing. Why do liberals not trust people to do the right thing? Instead they push for more and more government control and intervention. Does this make any sense? It seems to me that Jesus teaches us to not be concerned for our own personal rights; instead we are to be concerned with the well-being of outcast and neglected humans. However, in the west we live in a culture dominated by self-interest. Have we been corrupted by our culture? There is a debate as to whether we should focus upon trying to change individuals through evangelism, or try to change systems and societies through social justice. Yet, can one change be made without the other? Neither Jesus, nor Paul, ever told a soldier or a politician to quit their job. Wolfhart Pannenberg makes a very interesting point in his book The Church. Since the Church lacks unity – since Christians have fought and killed each other – “political and social life has had to find a new basis that was undamaged by sectarian conflicts.” Here are some links to some very interesting radio shows relating to religion and politics:http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/heschel/http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/liberating_the_founders/index.shtmlhttp://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/niebuhr-rediscovered/index.shtmlhttp://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/democracy/index.shtmlhttp://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/democracy/index.shtmlhttp://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/bonhoeffer/index.shtml
