the bible and our views

You know the truth. To the best of your ability, you have researched and come to some conclusion about this matter or that. You believe that _____________. Okay, sounds good.

But what is the purpose of this truth discovered? Well, it seems clear from Scripture that we are to bathe in the truth, allowing it to shape our thoughts and lives. Likewise, we are to always remember that any truth we come up with, anything actually revealed by God in Scripture, is intended to connect us with our Maker; thus, truths should intersect with the One who is the Truth.

That being said, we are also to share the truth. To the degree that it is appropriate and fitting, we should convey the truth to others. But how? This is where traditional evangelicals are predictable, for many of their views are encapsulated in propositional statements, doctrinal formulas, announcements of what they stand for.

The reason I’m saying this is because I recently stumbled across a few web sites that do everything in their power to state up-front that they believe the Bible is the inspired Word or God. It almost appears, though I could be wrong, that they do this to pacify the evangelical guardians of the faith, wherever they are. This comes across like there must be someone, somewhere who checks up on these things to make sure that “we, the first church of _______ are remaining faithful.” “We’ve crossed our T’s and dotted our i’s; we’ve stood boldly and uncompromisingly for the faith. Amen!” :-)

Now, I am not at all arguing that it’s wrong to state what we believe about the Bible. Indeed, I maintain that the bible is the inspired Word of our Creator, the special inscripturated revelation of God. That said, how does the Bible itself approach these matters? Does Jesus initiate every conversation with “I believe the Old Testament is the word of God”? When he meets new people, does he always set these matters straight first? Well, there is no doubt that Jesus does indeed verbalize his belief in the veracity and relevance of Scripture. But, is this the primary way he introduces his ministry? No, it’s not. Though Jesus did confront the religious establishment with the true intent of Scripture (those who already theoretically believed in the Bible), though he was clear in unfolding the meaning of God’s Word, and while he believed that he was actually the fulfillment of the Scriptures, he was not compelled to provide some elaborate view of Scripture before addressing his various audiences. He believed in the Bible but did not feel obliged to explain how it should be packaged. (It’s not that formulating a stance on such things would have been wrong, of course, but that he didn’t deem it necessary.) Instead, he thought it more important to unfold, embody, and complete/fulfill Scripture in his own life.

Then, there is Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles. When he speaks to the pagans of his day (e.g., Athens), he doesn’t preface his remarks with some philosophical defense of the Bible. He simply assumes (but does not state) certain things about Scripture, meets people where they are, and leads them gradually to Jesus. Simple enough.

Please understand, I am not arguing that it is improper to defend the Scriptures or to elaborate on them in a philosophical manner. I am also not promoting a weak and anti-intellectual view of Scripture, and I am not at all advocating that we refrain from the articulation of a position in our statements of faith. All of these things are good in their place. However, when we feel that we are required (by others, our official church stance, or by logic) to throw a bibliological hypothesis at people, when we treat our verbal affirmations as if they are of first importance, we can hinder people from investigating the very truth we are defending. Yes, we should believe the Bible is God’s special grouping of documents. Yes, it is special revelation from God. Yes, it points to Jesus. Yes, we can and should–humbly yet confidently–live out and share its contents. But, do we really need to make our belief in the infallible, inerrant, verbal, plenary, inspired . . . etc., etc. Word of God the first thing others hear? Must this be the highest priority and the first thing our of our mouths? Should belief in the Bible be put forward as the first principle and primary pathway to the gospel? Cannot we, at least sometimes, simply believe these things are true and then attempt to live them out in much more unforced ways? Cannot we be confident enough in the Scriptures that we don’t have to frantically run around waving flags (our flags!) as if our statements about the Word of God (accurate as they may be) are equivalent to the Word itself unleashed in our lives?

I’m not saying it’s quite this obvious, but I sometimes wonder if we “cage” the word, or at least block people’s access to it, when we make our bibliology the doorway into the truth, the pathway to conversion. Sometimes (not always), I think it is enough that we accept Scripture ourselves and believe in its power without making known our views within the first 5 minutes of our conversations. Sometimes, I wonder if it might be better to share the truth in subtler ways. Sometimes, it may be best to live among those in error (or those who simply lack access to certain facts) without having to incessantly remind them of it. Sometime, it makes more sense to embrace people and share our lives with them than to provide an outline of what they should/must believe. Sometimes, it is healthier to engage others with Spirit-energized concern than to provide an outline of what they must first believe. Then again, that’s just me. :-)

Note: The manuscript pictured above is of what might be the earliest New Testament fragment. It contains John 18:31-33 and 37 and is called the Rylands Papyrus (P52). Dating from about 125-130 A.D., this papyrus, which was discovered in Egypt, forced scholars to place the date of the fourth gospel back to the first century.