Quote:
|
Do you really believe that? That the written word isn't open to interpretation? That translations don't skew the meaning? If it's so absolute, why all the different denominations?
|
No, I didn't say it wasn't open for interpretation. But the Bible itself says that it is the Holy Spirit of God who gives insight (illumination) into the Bible's meaning. There are issues that the Bible is very black and white about--such as murder and adultery. Approached with a normal-literal literary approach, the ten commandments do not budge. Never is it right to kill in the sense of murder. Never is it right to take another man's wife. But the Bible is also a whole book that should be read as a whole. It should not be seen as a contradiction when the Bible says "Never" and yet allows for killing (under wartime circumstances for example) or for taking another's wife (say, if the guy dies).
There is a difference between skewed/biased/narrow interpretation and honest/as-objective-as-possible/measured-against-other-factors interpretation. We recognize this in the literary world. If I watch a movie like <i>The Matrix</i>, and I walk out of there and join you in a restaurant, and I say, <b>"You know--'There is no spoon.'"</b> Well, in what sense is that the weirdest thing you've ever heard? Taken in its context, understood in the scenario with which it was presented, that statement is a great symbolic representation of the movie's whole message. BUT... You're sitting with me in the restaurant, you hear me give that statement out of the blue, you look around the table settings and see spoons everywhere--well, you may be pretty confused and probably ticked at the apparently-ludicrous nature of the statement. You may start to worry that I'm a few French fries short of a Happy Meal.
But for some reason, people want to get all mystical and/or skeptical when it comes to the Bible. We want to jerk 10-word verses out of context and construct a system of guidelines by which we can read the rest of the Bible or just as soon not.
Being absolute truth and being interpretable are not mutually exclusive properties. I'm not saying the written Word isn't open for interpretation. On the contrary--I'm saying it is, but that we should acknowledge our human interpretations for what they are. By its definition, an absolute truth does not move--rather we are expected to live our lives in light of it. We can choose to ignore it, or we can twist it to mean what we want it to mean, but that action on our part does not necessitate change on its part.
As I mentioned above, there are issues that the Bible is black and white about. The Bible doesn't contradict itself. If there is an apparent contradiction, then the fault lies with the interpretation. When I read "God so loved the world" and I read "Jacob have I loved; Esau have I hated"--I realize that there are aspects of God that I will never be able to reconcile in my mind. I am unable to comprehend the mystery of a God who is fully good and a God who is fully great, a God who is just as loving as he is terrible. Too often, we try to squeeze God into a human-shaped box. We forget that we are like him, but he is not like us. There is a big difference.
There are other issues that the Bible is kind of grey on. For instance, good Christians have, throughout the centuries, agreed to disagree on issues such as prophecy--what is going to happen in the last times, baptism--what is the best method? sprinkling? dunking? pouring? These issues are not laid out in black and white in the Bible. They are therefore subject to broader speculation, and there are broader resulting viewpoints. You can still be a Christian and disagree with other Christians on issues like eschatology or baptism. These issues are not what we call "essential to the gospel," meaning, if they are not laid out for us in the Scriptures, then they are not essential to salvation or to a relationship with God, and are not part of the basic, fundamental creed of Christianity.
Where different people "land" on various grey issues usually does cause them to bundle up in distinct denominations--birds of a feather do flock together. Remember, there is a difference between <b>religions/faiths</b> (e.g. Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, etc.) and various <b>denominations</b> within a religious category (e.g., Presbyterian, Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist, etc.).
<b>A truly <i>Christian</i> denomination is...</b>
> one that adheres to the black and white truths of Scripture (not necessarily the passed-down man-made traditions of its institution),
> one whose basic/fundamental creed is faithful to the gospel of Jesus Christ (no other Way to heaven),
> one made up of people who don't just talk all the above talk but genuinely walk it (as opposed to compromising, automatic, paid-for or inherited membership).
Wow, I'm out of time. I'll be back with other feeble explanation attempts later.
