Recently, an article in the Guardian (a British newspaper) criticised on how much Protestants value the Bible over God. While it is well-written, I find some points raised questionable, and will attempt to handle them here. I encourage you guys to go take a look.
Bear in mind that I am probably not as well-read in Christian history or theology as the author (Stephen Tomkins) in Guardian (I am currently doing a Masters in Biology), so my reply would not be as refined as his.
The problem with Bible literalism
While the author seems to critique Bible literalism, he seems to suggest (he didn't write it explicitly) that just because the some parts of the Bible is not literal, it is not true (referring to the earth was "created in six days"). However, one must recall that something may be true, yet not literal. Take for Songs of Song for instance. It is definitely not literal, but it is an honest expression of Solomon for his beloved.
The author also suggests that we should read the Bible asking questions about context (eg: "What was St Paul saying to the Galatians?" and "How would first-century Asia Minor have understood these words?"). I agree with this point, and would also like to add that I have never been to a Bible study session where we did not consider context.
Jesus vs the Bible
The author raises up an important question-- who do Protestants value more, Jesus or the Bible. While sounding witty and intelligent, the author misses an important point-- which Jesus should we worship then? The Jesus of the Quran who spoke in Mary's womb? The Jesus of the Jesus Seminar who died and remained dead? The Jesus or the Church of Latter Day Saints who also appeared in the Americas? Or Jesus of the New Testament, who died for the sins of mankind. Ultimately, something has to be authoritative.
Furthermore, he also fails to mention that Jesus Himself regarded Scripture highly, and referred that Scripture was about Him (eg: Luke 24:44, John 5:39). So if the Bible is fine with Jesus, it's ok with me. The idea of Jesus vs the Bible is a false dichotomy.
Criticism of Bible writers
While it can be argued the intention of Biblical writers were riffed with political discourse, it's also perfectly possible they were genuine. After all, they were writing what they felt was divine. Wouldn't they carefully write it then?
Summary
While the question of the Bible's authority must be asked, one must to readily to reverse the questions on oneself--without the Bible, how do we know the nature of God? How would God reveal his nature to mankind?
No comments:
Post a Comment