Sunday, February 15, 2009

"What is truth?"

The Bible is not the truth.

There's a provocative opening sentence to get your attention. Allow me to explain it.

I think in Evangelical circles, where the Bible is held in extremely high regard (and rightly so), there can be a tendency to actually make an idol of it. We can replace God with a book, and thus worship the book rather than its author. It can so easily become the case where we treat God as if He's dead, or as if He's somewhere else attending to other matters, but in the mean time He has left us a book so it is this book alone which is to be the focus of our attention and our love, and our ultimate goal is to know its pages and obey what is written.

If this blog were in any way popular I'm sure there would be people saying 'But hang on a minute...' right about now. However, please don't misunderstand me, imaginary protester. Would it be wonderful if we each knew the pages of Scripture by heart? Absolutely. Should we as Christians have a deep love for the Bible and a hunger to plumb its incredible depths? Of course. In fact one of the marks of the Holy Spirit's presence is the creation of a longing in the heart to read God's Word. As I've said before, you cannot separate the Spirit of God and the Word of God. The two have been innately linked from creation (Gen. 1:2-3), and beforehand.

The Scriptures are an invaluable tool, acting as a revelation of God to us humans and as a means to be instructed, encouraged, taught etc (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

However, contrary to the way we as Bible-revering Christians might act, knowing the Bible is not the be all and end all. This is where some of us -- and this most definitely includes me -- have gotten it wrong, because as far as I'm concerned onlookers could be forgiven for thinking that being a Christian is about reading a book and following its orders, or perhaps reading a book and knowing what is the correct thing to believe (which is my m.o.). Again, there is nothing wrong with obeying the Bible or knowing what to believe. In fact these are indispensable aspects of the Christian life, but they are not the substance. They point to the substance, which is Christ.

I was taught a very important lesson at the beginning of the Biblical Interpretation class which I took last year, and it was this: The goal of reading and studying the Bible isn't to know the Bible better. The goal is to know God. When God proclaimed that a new covenant would be made with His people, one of the promises of God was not "They shall each know My book". The promise we have is that we shall each know God Himself, from the least of us to the greatest (Jer. 31:34).

The Bible is only of benefit to us if it takes us beyond its pages. Remember the Pharisees. They knew the Scriptures as good as anyone in their time. They were not the 'baddies' of the day as we in the 21st century tend to think, but the religious, the people who were the authority when it came to understanding God's Word. If they were around today (though some might rightly argue that they are), they would hold lofty positions in the Church, and be exceedingly respected by you and I. And yet they missed the whole point, and so can we. That is why Jesus said to them,

"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life." - Jn. 5:39-40

To pull a Eugene Peterson, what Jesus is saying is that "You read the Bible, you study the Bible, you meditate on the Bible, thinking that doing this is the goal of your life, but if you really understood the Bible you would realise that it points to something greater than itself; something more authoritative. What it points to is me, and yet you refuse to follow the signs and go to the One whom the pages direct you to".

As I said at the beginning, we can so easily make an idol out of the Bible, turning God's gift to us into something that replaces God Himself.

Charles Price, master of analogy, explains this scenario well. When he bought a car, an instruction manual came with it. However, he didn't read the manual so that he would know more about the manual; he read it so that he would know about the car. As he goes on to facetiously say, he could have done the latter. He could have read a littel bit of the manual each night, underlining the bits he liked best. He could have joined the Toyota fellowship and heard someone expound the manual. He could have put sections of the manual to music and sung it, or perhaps studied Japanese to read it in the original language. However, the time would come when he would get bored of the manual, because he was missing the whole point of it; the point being to get to know and experience the car. The car was the subject of the manual, not the manual itself. The book served a vital purpose, but its purpose was to point him to something beyond the words contained within.

In a similar way, this is what the Bible should do, and so the minute our Christianity is wrapped up in the book alone then something is wrong. It's good to underline its passages, it's good to hear the Bible expounded, it's good to sing songs based on what it says, and if you're so inclined it's good to be able to understand it in its original languages, but if only if all of this points you to a person, Christ Jesus.

Jesus didn't come to earth and say "Scripture is the way, the truth, and the life". His message is that He is the truth, the fulfilment of Scripture. It is Christ who died for our sins and rose again. What the Bible says about these things is true, because a)its words find their source in God Himself, and b) because through His Word God points to Jesus, who is the truth. Scripture acts as an authoritative witness to Christ, who is the supreme authority. The words of the Bible are revelations of God given by God (or God-breathed) and thus uniquely aid us in getting to know God, but only if they lead us to Jesus, who is the definitive revelation of God, for He is God incarnate.

And so once again, the Bible is true, but it is not the truth (although you could say it is the truth about the truth, given to us by the truth...I think [???]). There are things about this that I don't fully understand, and follow-up questions that I most likely won't be able to answer. But please don't let that stop you from asking them.

3 comments:

  1. Hey Declan,

    Great post and a good reminder! I like it, good train of thought, and a great reminder as to how to see the Bible. I liked your Charles Price visual too!

    To stir up controversy? What questions could I ask of you (I'll need help of course, from Tim Chester's total church, which i've started reading). I guess it could be mentioned that Jesus IS the word,in flesh?Maybe you did?

    Can we know God without the Bible?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Greymalkin1.

    I didn't actually mention Jesus as the Word, but that's a good point. However, the 'Word' is more than the Bible. This is a topic much bigger than this post, but in Greek thought at the time the 'logos' (or 'Word') was the underlying principle of the universe, the order in the cosmos which sustains everything.

    In mathematical terms, what im saying is that Jesus = Word is not the same as Jesus = Bible, meaning that the Word is NOT equal to the Bible, though the Bible is a subset of the Word (see the context of Hebrews 4:12 for evidence that the 'word of God' doesn't necessarily mean 'Scripture').

    Can we know God without the Bible? That's a good question. What's clear to me is that we can only know God if He reveals Himself to us, and by inspiring authors to write His words He has given us a vital, authoritative way to know the real Him. To neglect the Bible is to neglect a crucial means to get to know God.

    However, what of someone who doesn't have the mental capacity to read the Bible? A book to such a person is of no benefit, but does that mean they cannot know God? I would say no.

    Also, in Romans 1 Paul talks about people knowing God not through the Scriptures but actually through creation, and so for at least a basic (though I hesitate to use such a word) knowledge of God reading the Bible is not a prerequisite.

    Theres a lot more I could say, but I hope that at least gets you thinking. Perhaps I'll flesh this out better in a post some time.

    Thanks again for the comment.

    Dec

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dec,

    Brilliant observation. Some have named it "bibliolatry". You have a way with words, my friend. Keep writing...

    Mike O.

    ReplyDelete