Comments (3)

By Richard Hamilton, October 14, 2009 2:11 pm

…fortunately, only 14 people go to the Amazing Grace Baptist Church. Unfortunately, they are not the only ignorant people running around making fools of themselves supposedly in the name of God. It is also unfortunate that this is getting noticed because people tend to lump all things named Christian in the same pot. Check out what the Amazing Grace Baptist Church in Canton has planned for this Halloween.

According to their website, they are burning all English bible translations other than the KJV. They call these “Satan’s bibles.” Be warned, if you go to their website you will be inundated with ignorant spew set to hillbilly music. They are also burning Satan’s music, and Satan’s popular books.

Where to start. I could talk about all the mishandling, poor translations, and outright mistakes in the King James Version. Or I could address the way language changes over time and how a lot of the texts not only are hard to read, but don’t mean the same thing in contemporary vernacular. Maybe, it would be good to discuss the process of how the Bible came together in the first place and how if we honestly evaluate the cannon over the years, preservation doctrines become indefensible (especially in regard to the KJV). It might be important to evaluate some of their arguments and show how many of the KJV only claims are distortions at best (like when it is said that modern translations remove the word God).

But, I think there are bigger issues afoot. Namely issues of arrogance and ignorance. Unfortunately, these often go hand in hand.

There is also a touch of irony in the church’s name (although it is only irony if you know nothing about churches). All the talk of saving souls and amazing grace, but there doesn’t seem to be a shred of love in that place. Their actions are the exact type of hyper-religious absurdity Jesus fought to destroy.

Sadly, well-intentioned, good-hearted, followers of Jesus will be lumped in with this nonsense. Not only do these people make Christians look foolish and insecure, but they make the Jesus distasteful to people who desperately need him.

Comments (7)

By Richard Hamilton, October 31, 2008 1:20 pm

Where does our understanding of Jesus (his life and mission) come from?

The answers to this question (if we were somehow able to draw out an honest answer from within ourselves) would probably be as varied as the number of respondents. So many factors effect how we interpret Jesus. Texts. Traditions. Perspective. Limitations.

Maybe, the real question I have in my mind is, do the gospel texts serve as the primary interpretive framework for our understanding of Jesus or do other christian texts? More specifically, does Paul shape our understanding of Jesus, or Jesus understand our understanding of Paul?

Before we even get into that, I am well aware that all the christian texts this brings into play are said to bring equal weight. It’s hard to claim that is actually the case though. Let me sight a few examples.

Example 1. The kingdom vs. the church. Jesus seems vaguely (at best) interested in discussing the church. Apart from Matthew, (and only twice there) Jesus doesn’t talk about the church. Jesus’ rhetoric centers around the kingdom. Paul, on the other hand, talks of kingdom twelve times, but church sixty. Which language dominates today’s Christianity? (I am well aware that kingdom talk/theology has come back into vogue. For that matter, Jesus scholarship in general is much more popular today than it was 100 years ago. But, I tend to write in broad strokes misrepresenting and offending the general evangelical community. You know this. I think my point remains the same)

Example 2. What is our example for christian living? The gospels or Acts? I can speak specifically for my faith tradition. We have always made an appeal to Acts as our guide for practice. (I know this deviates slightly from my question about Paul and Jesus, but I think we rely more heavily on the Pauline model from the latter half of Acts than we do on the beginning of Acts)

Christians frequently teach that “difficult” texts of the Bible are to be interpreted based on what is “known” from “simple” passages. (Let it be known, I think this hermeneutic is faulty on many levels.) Interestingly, we often turn to Paul to understand other texts. The problem is, Paul’s writings “contain some things that are hard to understand.”

Is it possible, we have started with Paul and therefore misunderstood Jesus? Or at very least changed Jesus’ emphasis?

Maybe the academic trending toward Jesus scholarship will benefit Christianity after all, if, by nothing else, drawing attention back to Jesus.

Comments (11)

By Richard Hamilton, October 7, 2008 8:55 pm

Inspiration of Scripture. The very thought of it brings the most impassioned debates to the forefront. This issue has divided churches, gotten professors fired and incited riots (okay, I don’t know of any riots, but it doesn’t seem to be too far fetched). Why is this issue so powerful and divisive? The inspiration of Scripture has historically been at the core of Christian theology and the center of Christian debate. It was debated at Synod of Hippo (393), the Councils at Carthage (397 and 419), and the Council of Trent (1546). It was the first issue addressed in the Westminster Confession of Faith (1664). And it was the reason for the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy and the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978). It was a driving force of the Reformation. In the Restoration Movement, it was at the center of two splits (the Disciples of Christ and the United Churches of Christ).

Today, most of the debate revolves around the understanding of two key passages, 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and 2 Peter 1:20-21.

“All Scripture is inspired by God [God-breathed in the NIV] and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (NASB)

“…knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” 2 Peter 1:20-21 (ESV)

From what I’ve seen, most “born-again” types understand these verses to mean that God forcibly possessed the various authors of the Bible. While in one breath, they would say the Holy Spirit superintended the process and used the author’s language and culture, in the next, they would say God hand-picked and was the source of each word and the writers were not the source, nor were they compliant with the process. It seems they admit as little humanity in the texts of the Bible as they feel they can get away with.

When teaching on 1 Peter , famed author/speaker John MacArthur says,

“Now these two verses are just loaded with significance with regard to this matter of inspiration. The key word here is the word “moved” in verse 21. “Moved,” carried along, borne along, it’s a word that is used in secular Greek sources to refer to something floating down stream like a leaf. They were literally carried along by the Holy Spirit. The writers of Scripture, the men who wrote the Scripture…and by the way, there are no female writers of Scripture, all 66 books are written by men…so the Spirit of God moved these men along so that they actually spoke from God borne along by the Holy Spirit.”

It seems to be his understanding that the biblical writers were completely passive through the process, almost as though they were in a trance and didn’t know what they were saying. (I also find his aside on women interesting.) It is quite likely Joe six-pack evangelical view inspiration in these very terms.

Let me give you three hypotheticals and see whether they would make the cut under these standards of inspiration.

One. An early Christian writer sits down and dictates letters to a secretary. He even, on occasion allows the secretary to add a personal comment or two to the letters. Inspired?

Two. Early Christians are worried about their favorite Apostle dying and his stories about Jesus not being passed on. As a solution, they ask a scribe to write down the teachings. After it is finished, he shows them to the Apostle who says the writing is good. Inspired?

Three. An early convert to Christianity, who never physically met Jesus, went around talking to eyewitnesses and compiled what they said into a concise account to Jesus’ life. Inspired?

These don’t fit into the typical understanding of “men moved by the Holy Spirit” or “God-breathed.” But, without their inclusion, the New Testament would be short a few Pauline Epistles, the Gospel of Mark (if you trust Eusebius’ account of its composition…I am skeptical, but many evangelical apologists appeal to him…at least when it is convenient) and the Gospel of Luke.

My favorite is Luke. “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word,it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus.” Luke 1:1-2 (NASB) The text itself claims to be a massive research project, an ambitious journalistic undertaking.

So, what does this mean? Well, either Luke-Acts doesn’t belong in the cannon or we misunderstand inspiration.

**the text below was not contained in the original post bu was added Wednesday, October 8.**

Let me be clear. I do believe the bible is inspired, accurate and authoritative! It just seems my understanding of what that means and why that is differs from some.

Comments (0)

By Richard Hamilton, May 2, 2007 2:35 pm

I was preparing a Bible lesson for a high school group recently and wondered about the integrity of the typical approach to Bible study. The passage was Nehemiah 7 and the theme was “A Leader Actively Administrates.” No one is taking a pot shot at a certain publishing company; most sermons, talks, and lessons from Nehemiah focus on leadership. 2 Timothy 3:16,17 is as trademark verse for those who say that every verse has an application in everyday life. So we take a passage of Scripture and dissect it into “application bites.” Often teachers look so closely for nuggets of wisdom in the text that one misses the big picture.

If a person going to teach the Bible with any integrity, it is important to understand what the text meant to the original reader. I cannot tell you for sure how the original reader understood the text of Nehemiah. But it must be asked: do you think they naturally thought, “Leadership is influence (John Maxwell was re-writing that one book back then), and every person has influence over at least one person, so I am a leader and like Nehemiah I should administrate, equip, and motivate those I influence in the same manner?” In my mind this could be what we call in the industry “a stretch.” This approach lacks the common sense we use when reading any other book, fiction or non-fiction.
Imagine you approached a children’s book in the exact same manner. Perhaps I will open the Chronicles of Narnia and read about a talking Beaver rescuing children from talking wolves. Would a couple of pages gives us a clue as to what is going on in the bigger story? Can we draw conclusions from a segment of the story? Of course not. So we should not look closely at each verse if it means we miss how each narrative fits into an overarching story.

When one opens the book of Nehemiah or any other book of the Bible, the focus should be massaging the bigger questions out of those we teach. Why was the wall broken down? Why was Nehemiah in Persia? Why did God allow his people to go into exile? Does God always deal with sin in this manner? How does he give man freewill and still control the destiny of nations? How does God redeem His people?

There are overarching themes woven throughout Scripture-how mankind is designed to interact with their Creator, the power of sin, how God punishes, redeems and calls out of chosen people; teachers should consider showing how each story is a piece in a larger puzzle.

Perhaps the only books in the Bible where we dare even attempt pull specific commands straight out of the text into everyday life is the epistles, but even then we need to be aware of cultural considerations.