The fear of God, or the fear of the Lord, is a concept with which Christians are intimately familiar. It is found throughout the pages of scripture, mostly (though not exclusively) in the Old Testament. I would say the majority of Christians have been taught to believe that it is a good and necessary thing to fear God. Of the many texts that can be marshalled in support of this view, perhaps the most frequently cited is Psalm 111:10:
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; all those who practice it have a good understanding.
Most discussions about the fear of God tend to revolve around semantics: does the word fear mean terror, or does it mean respect and reverent admiration? Well, I’m no Bible scholar, but even the most cursory research reveals that the Hebrew word that is here translated fear, yir’ā(h), does indeed carry the notion, among others, of terror or dread.
On the face of it, then, scripture seems to suggest that God is to be feared, that we are to be afraid of him, and that this is a Good Thing.
Consider the following scripture:
Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God; everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love.
(1 John 4:7-8)
So, when the author of 1 John wants to sum up as concisely as possible what God is like, here is what he says: God is love. So far, so uncontroversial. Continue reading
Today’s post is a short review of Undiluted: Rediscovering the Radical Message of Jesus by Benjamin L. Corey, released earlier this year by Destiny Image.
Benjamin Corey blogs on the Patheos platform at Formerly Fundie. I decided to buy the book after I read a few of his blog posts and enjoyed what I read. As the name of his blog suggests, he is someone who has made the transition from a rather fundamentalist flavour of Christianity towards a much freer, progressive style of faith. He also holds two master’s degrees in theology from Gordon-Cornwell Theological Seminary in Massachusetts, USA.
The main premise of Undiluted is that the radical message of Jesus has been watered down (or “diluted”) by a whole host of cultural and religious additives that obscure the heart of that message. Corey tackles different aspects of the Christian faith chapter by chapter (examples of topics covered include community, justice, forgiveness and identity) and draws from his own journey out of fundamentalism to demonstrate how it is possible (and perhaps even necessary) to undergo profound religious deconstruction and come out with a faith that is much more Jesus-centred.
One of the book’s strengths is its semi-autobiographical nature: because the author uses examples from his own life, you rarely if ever feel that you’re being lectured or preached at as you read it. Instead, you’re being told a personal story and invited to give it a try for yourself. Continue reading
As regular readers will know, lately I’ve been on a bit of a posting spree on the subject of biblical inspiration and inerrancy, the supremacy of Jesus over the Bible, and the question of biblical authority. (See my last post, which contains links to other recent related posts, here.)
If I’ve been on such a spree, this is in large part because these are questions I’ve been thinking and reading about a lot in recent times. But it’s also because they seem to be questions that many Christians are thinking about and wondering how to answer. I hope these posts might in some small way have helped some readers begin to find a different and, dare I say, better way to approach the Bible.
So today, I thought I’d try to tie up a few loose ends and offer some concluding thoughts on the subject… for now (I’d say the odds are reasonably high that I’ll be back on the topic before very long).
In my last post, I proposed that the Bible categorically should not be seen as our ultimate authority. I argued that when we claim the authority of the Bible for an opinion or position, what we are often doing is merely using the Bible to give ourselves authority. And, much more importantly, I pointed out that the Bible cannot be our guiding authority since all authority has already been given to Jesus. This means, in fact, that the Bible has no authority of its own; it can only be considered authoritative insofar as it faithfully witnesses to Jesus.
There is, of course, a question that naturally flows out of this argument: if the Bible is not our authority, how then can we trust anything it says? Continue reading
I’ve recently blogged quite a bit on the twin subjects of biblical inspiration and inerrancy (examples are here, here, here and here). One of my Facebook friends has been asking me to follow this up with a post on authority. Denis, this one’s for you.
Before I go on, for anyone who has landed cold on this post without reading anything I’ve previously written about inspiration or inerrancy, let me sum up my position. I don’t believe the Bible is inerrant (which means “without error”); in fact, I don’t believe that’s a credible view at all. I do believe the Bible is inspired, in the sense that the Holy Spirit moved men to try to capture on paper their views of God and his relations with humankind. This means that the Bible contains a mix of voices, some of which assign characteristics and actions to God which, in reality, had nothing to do with him, and others that portray God more accurately. The ultimate and perfect portrayal of God is found in Jesus Christ.
Got it? Okay, let’s talk about authority.
Why is the subject of authority important to a discussion about scripture? The answer, perhaps, is obvious, but I’d suggest it bears thinking about nonetheless.
Authority, I would suggest, is essentially about who gets to make decisions. So, for example, in an organised society, different people and groups have differing opinions on a whole range of matters. Rather than tear ourselves apart arguing and fighting over these matters, we elect a government and vest it with the authority to make decisions, and to enforce those decisions. Authority, in this context, is shorthand for the ultimate arbiter of what is permitted and acceptable and what isn’t. Continue reading
In my last post, I explained why I believe the strict inerrancy of scripture is a myth. If you haven’t read it already, I’d encourage you to take a few moments to read that post as a prelude to this one.
Today I’d like to share some brief thoughts on the closely related subject of the inspiration of scripture. In fact, inspiration and inerrancy are so closely related that many Christians consider them inseparable, like two sides of the same coin.
First, what do we mean when we say the Bible is inspired?
The usual biblical reference is found in 2 Timothy 3:16, which reads as follows:
All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.
Those who know biblical Greek will tell us that the word usually translated “inspired” means something like “God-breathed”. But what does this mean?
For the literalist, God-breathed usually means that God literally breathed or mouthed the words of the Bible via the pen of each writer, so that the words that ended up on the page were the actual, untarnished words of God. It’s easy to see how, in this literalist logic, inspiration and inerrancy are fused together, never to be separated: if God literally breathed the words of scripture, then how can they be in any way errant? Continue reading
I realise I’ve already written quite a few posts about biblical inerrancy. I was going to apologise for writing yet more on the subject, but in the end I will offer no apology, for this simple reason: it seems to me that how we view scripture is the single most influential factor in how we view God and his relationship to the world. Every conversation I participate in about God or the Christian life very quickly circles back to how we interpret scripture. Hence, if we get this wrong, our whole view of God is likely to be skewed. It’s that important.
Simply put, I believe that scriptural inerrancy is a myth. I don’t use the word myth to be edgy or to court controversy; I use it because I believe that, if you are honestly willing to think seriously about the issue, you will realise that there is no intellectually credible way to believe that the Bible is strictly inerrant. Or, for that matter, to believe that it needs to be.
I won’t really be saying anything new in this post; all I’ll be doing is reiterating and summarising arguments I’ve read elsewhere and which, for me at least, are convincing.
First, a quick definition. What I mean by scriptural or biblical inerrancy is the belief that everything in the Bible, no matter how theologically or morally problematic, is true, and that all parts of the Bible are equally authoritative. This is taken as axiomatic by many evangelical Christians. Continue reading
A few days ago, as I was pondering what I might write about Halloween, I came across an article by well-known British evangelist J. John that was published on the website of the Daily Mirror, a UK tabloid newspaper. The article has been widely circulated on social media and, since its author is such a respected figure, will no doubt have some degree of influence in shaping people’s opinion. Since I was struggling a little for inspiration, I thought I might reproduce J. John’s article here and share some brief thoughts of my own in response to each of his main points.
Before I do so, let me just clarify a couple of things. First, I very much respect J.John and his ministry. I think he is a great force for good in the church and in the land. As such, my comments here should not be taken as a personal attack on him or a condemnation of his right to hold and share his views. I’m simply sharing some alternative views in response to the opinions he shared in his article.
Second, I don’t wish to suggest that my views are “right” and that anyone who doesn’t share them is wrong. Christians, and Christian parents in particular, understandably have strong views about such matters, and if you feel it’s important or even crucial for your family not to engage in Halloween in any way, I absolutely respect that stance. Indeed, it’s the one I myself held for many years. The flip side, of course, is that neither should you condemn any Christian who doesn’t adopt that same stance and chooses instead to let their children participate in Halloween. (I think Paul’s guidance in 1 Corinthians 10 on whether or not Christians should eat meat offered to idols is relevant here. Paul’s bottom line is that it’s a matter of personal conscience, but that we should also be careful not to cause those whose conscience differs from ours to stumble.)
With those introductory comments out of the way, let’s get to J. John’s article. The original article can be found here; I’ll reproduce it section by section below, adding my comments where appropriate. (Indented text is from J. John’s article; my comments are unindented.) Continue reading