A Boomer in the Pew

The Bible as a Historical Document

Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem - This post is part of my year-long journey through Dr. Wayne Grudem's world-renowned Systematic Theology.  I welcome and hope for your interaction.

Interpretation of Scripture (Part 2 of 7)

The Bible is a historical document.  Think about that statement.  Do you look at the Bible with this understanding?

One of the greatest testaments to the scoffer is that the Bible contains real people, in real places, in real times in history past.

Most religions require that we believe something that a single person has proclaimed with absolutely no historical authority.

In today's lecture from Dr. Wayne Grudem's Sunday school class, he wants us to understand four "big picture" approaches that we should have as we seek to interpret the Bible:

1. The Bible is a historical document
2. The original authors wanted the original readers to respond in some way
3. The whole Bible is about God
4. The center of the whole Bible is Jesus Christ.  The entire Old Testament leadus up to him, points to him, and the entire New Testament flow from him.

Listen as Dr. Grudem explains:

Grudem - How to Interpret the Bible (pt 2 of 7)

Notes - Download Grudem's How to Interpret the Bible (pt 2 of 7)

The Profound Danger of Saying "This is What the Bible Means to Me"

Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem - This post is part of my year-long journey through Dr. Wayne Grudem's world-renowned Systematic Theology.  I welcome and hope for your interaction.

Interpretation of Scripture (Part 1 of 7)

I wasn't in Dr. Grudem's class back in 2005.  But, for some reason he jumped out of his text and spent seven weeks instructing his class on how to properly interpret Scripture.

Dr. Grudem spent four years going through his Systematic Theology in his Scottsdale Bible Church Sunday school class.

I hope to accomplish this task in this calendar year.  Therefore, rather than ignore his seven week out of text teaching on this subject, I am going to pick up my pace over the next few days on these seven lectures.

When it comes to matters of faith, our post-modern culture seems to be completely satisfied with a relativistic philosophy.  This viewpoint would contend that there is no absolute truth.  Truth, this viewpoint contends, is relative and subjective to each individual.

This is how a post-modern culture can contend that a Buddhist and a Christian, both holding completely different worldviews, can both be right.  Our society tends to believe that truth is whatever you believe it to be, and at the same time, truth is whatever I believe it to be.

Although this seems preposterous, I have often seen this relativism brought into the church as a group of people are seeking to understand a particular passage of scripture.

Sitting around a table you might hear, "this is what this passage means to me", and then someone else will chime in, "nice, and this is what it means to me".  These two views might be completely contradictory, but the group will generally go away giving no heed to where the actual truth might lie, but were pleased to hear the contradictory truths all in the spirit of sharing.

Now, don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the healthy sharing of thoughts and ideas.  The danger lies in allowing a sneaky relativism into our belief system.

The Buddhist and the Christian cannot both be right.  One of them is wrong.  Let's be honest and have a healthy disagreement instead of the nonsense that both can be right.

The writers of the Westminster Confession of Faith dealt with this very issue back in the 17th century.  They wrote:

"The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly."

In other words, there is only one meaning for each text.

Therefore, we should amend our understanding, and our subsequent speech to, "I wonder if this is what God is saying to us", rather than reporting our individual, many times spur of the moment beliefs.

What are your thoughts on this subject?

Here's the audio and notes from Dr. Wayne Grudem's class:

Interpretation of Scripture (Pt 1 of 7)

Download Interpretation of Scripture (Pt 1 of 7)

Note:  hover your mouse over the above audio player to find the start button.

Is the Bible Only Understandable by Those With Seminary Degrees?

Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem - This post is part of my year-long journey through Dr. Wayne Grudem's world-renowned Systematic Theology.  I welcome and hope for your interaction.

Chapter 6 

The Four Characteristics of Scripture: (2) Clarity

There is a school of thought that suggests that the world made a significant change once the Bible was translated so that the common man could for himself read and understand the Bible.

Prior to the Reformation, the Bible was only available in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew.  Therefore, it was nearly impossible for the common man to consider reading the Bible for himself.

John Wycliffe (c. 1328 – 31 December 1384), an early dissodent of the Roman Catholic Church, opposed this harboring of the Bible and in 1382 translated the Bible into English in what is now known as the Wycliffe Bible.

Carol and I attended a traveling museum, a few years back, called From the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Bible in America.  The museum's collection includes hundreds of Bibles.  It was here that I was able to photograph scores of important Bibles in history including Wycliffe's Poor Man's Bible (pictured above).

In the sixth chapter of Grudem's text, we come upon the the doctrine of clarity which he defines as:

"The clarity of Scripture means that the Bible is written in such a way that its teachings are able to be understood by all who will read it seeking God’s help and being willing to follow it."

As Grudem points out in his lecture (see audio below), the Bible itself makes it clear that it is understandable with God's help and obedience.  Further, the Bible instructs that we should become students of God's words protrayed in the Bible.

But here is an important fact for all of us to consider:  if the people in the pews are not reading the Bible for themselves, then they are certain to come under the spell of hucksters seeking their own personal gain.

I remember reading of Martin Luther's humiliation as he witnessed people crawling on their bloody knees giving alms to the Roman Catholic Church hoping to buy their way into heaven.

It was this very scene that birthed the Reformation in Luther's heart and brought about his ninety-five theses that he nailed to the church door in Wittenberg.

I have read the Bible through, cover to cover, twice now in the last two years.  I can personally attest that a great deal of the Bible is easily understandable.  Certainly there are things difficult to understand, and further, there are things in the Bible that are complete mysteries to us.

But, these few things shouldn't prevent us from the blessings of the whole.  As Paul told Timothy:

"All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work." (Timothy 3:16-17)

I desire to be competent and equipped for every good work.  How about you?

Grudem - The Four Characteristics of Scripture - (2) Clarity

Download Grudem's Notes - The Four Characteristics of Scripture - (2) Clarity

Feeling Jealous of Moses' Dinner with God

I was reading in Exodus this morning, on my annual journey through the Bible, and came upon the following verses:

"Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel went up, 10 and they saw the God of Israel. There was under his feet as it were a pavement of sapphire stone, like the very heaven for clearness. 11 And he did not lay his hand on the chief men of the people of Israel; they beheld God, and ate and drank." (Exodus 24:9-11)

Perhaps it is wrong, I'm not sure, but whenever I read of these men of old coming into the presence of God, I find myself filled with a bit of jealousy.

Not jealousy in the way of seeing something spectacular, but jealousy because I desire to be in the presence of my adopted Father.

I desire to be with the one who chose me, who created me.  The one who adopted me as his son, and has given me an inheritance beyone imagination.

Not being a Greek scholar, I'm not sure what "saw" here means, as I know that no one has fully seen God. 

Nonetheless, can you imagine the things that these people witnessed at the foot of Sinai?

As I was trying to decide what image to use for this post, I decided to use an image from the Hubbell telescope as those images are about the most wonderful, and mind-bending images I have ever seen.

Here's a question to ponder:  If you were able to interview Moses after his descent from the presence of God, would you ask, "What was it like?", or would you ask, "What was He like?"

Ponder the difference.  :)

Rightly Raising My Angry Fist To God?

When various trials occur in our lives, it is very common for our human nature to murmur. 

I'm not suggesting that murmuring is necessarily a good or right thing.  I'm just saying that it happens.

Here's what I am saying:  when we murmur, our angst is generally misplaced.

One thing I have learned, in my two journeys through the Bible, is that God is absolutely sovereign.

Theologian R.C. Sproal puts it this way:

"If there is one maverick molecule in all the universe, then God is not sovereign. And if God is not sovereign, He is not God."

When we lost 45% of our cash assets in October of 2008, I said to God, "God, look at what happened to me!"  When a business agreement went south, and significantly impacted our lives, I said to God, "God, look at what this guy is doing to us!"

Misplaced angst?

When Israel began their wandering in the desert, only three days after crossing the Red Sea, they murmured to Moses.

"Then Moses made Israel set out from the Red Sea, and they went into the wilderness of Shur. They went three days in the wilderness and found no water. 23 When they came to Marah, they could not drink the water of Marah because it was bitter; therefore it was named Marah. 24 And the people grumbled against Moses, saying, “What shall we drink?”"

Here's C.H. Spurgeon on this scene:

"Observe—and this is worthy of note—that the murmuring was not ostensibly against God. They murmured against Moses. And have you ever noticed how the most of us, when we are in a murmuring vein, are not honest enough to murmur distinctly against God. No: the child is dead, and we form a conjecture that there was some wrong treatment on the part of nurse, or surgeon, or ourselves; we lay our hold on that for which there may not be a shadow of proof, and the murmuring is upon that point. Or we have lost money, and have been brought down from opulence to almost poverty; then some one person was dishonest, a certain party betrayed us in a transaction by failing to fulfill his part; all the murmuring is heaped on that person. We deny, perhaps indignantly, that we murmur against God; and to prove it we double the zeal with which we murmur against Moses. To complain of the second cause is about as sensible as the conduct of the dog, which bites the stick with which it is beaten. It owes no anger to the stick, but to the person who uses it. Is there evil in the city and the Lord hath not done it? Whoever is the instrument, the Lord overrules. In our heart of hearts our rebellion is against the Lord himself. We have not quite honesty enough to rail against God openly and avowedly, and so we hypocritically cover up our repining against him by murmuring against some person, occasion, or event."

God is not Santa Claus, only there to provide good gifts to us.  God is Lord of all, and sometimes he ordains that trials come upon us.

At the end of the day, am I saying that it was God who removed 45% of my cash assets?  Am I saying that it was God who allowed a written business agreement to head south costing us a significant loss of income?

Yes.

I am learning that it is foolhardy to place anyone, or anything at the very root of life's path.  I'm not suggesting an irresponsible passiveness when we encounter such things, only that God Almighty uses these things to teach and test.

The Israelites should have mumbled to God.  When we lost 45% of our cash assets, I should have mumbled directly to God.  When our business agreement went south, I should have mumbled to God.

It would have been more honest for me to point my finger at God, rather than blaming others, or circumstances.

God is big enough to receive our misplaced angst, and in time will teach us to bow before him as King, Lord, Savior, Creator, and more importantly, Father.

The Inerrancy of Scripture: Are There Any Errors in the Bible?

Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem - This post is part of my year-long journey through Dr. Wayne Grudem's world-renowned Systematic Theology.  I welcome and hope for your interaction.

Chapter 5 - The Inerrancy of Scripture

We are spending the first eight weeks of our study seeking to understand the nature of this Bible that we have in our hands.

You see, as we delve into what the Bible actually says over the course of the year, we are going to come upon doctrines that are very, very difficult to understand with our natural minds.

When this occurs, a natural tendancy might be to allow a crack in our belief about the nature of the Bible itself.  Can we trust the Bible?  Are there errors in the Bible?  How do we know we have the right books in the Bible?  Was anything left out?

Therefore, the seven weeks that we will spend considering the many claims about the Bible, and further understanding the objections of the scoffers is time well spent.

There are quite a few people that would dismiss the whole of the Bible because they believe that the Bible contains errors.  Because of this belief, they dismiss or greatly reduce the Bible's authority for our lives.

On the contrary, there are those who contend that the Bible is inerrant, with every single word therein being absolutely true, literal, and worthy of our complete trust.

Those holding to the Bible's inerrancy, for example, contend that Jonah was literally in the belly of a whale for three days, while some might contend that this story is merely allegory.

Here is Dr. Wayne Grudem's definintion of inerrancy:

"The inerrancy of Scripture means that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact."

In 1978, a collection of nearly 300 noted evangelical scholars, including James Boice, Norman L. Geisler, John Gerstner, Carl F. H. Henry, Kenneth Kantzer, Harold Lindsell, John Warwick Montgomery, Roger Nicole, J. I. Packer, Robert Preus, Earl Radmacher, Francis Schaeffer, R. C. Sproul, and John Wenham, gathered to produce a document called the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.

This document contains 19 affirmations about the inerrancy of the Bible along with a brief exposition giving readers the foundation for these beliefs.

Furthermore, the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerracy contains a "short statement" which compresses the work into five succinct statements:

1. God, who is Himself Truth and speaks truth only, has inspired Holy Scripture in order thereby to reveal Himself to lost mankind through Jesus Christ as Creator and Lord, Redeemer and Judge. Holy Scripture is God's witness to Himself.

2. Holy Scripture, being God's own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God's instruction, in all that it affirms: obeyed, as God's command, in all that it requires; embraced, as God's pledge, in all that it promises.

3. The Holy Spirit, Scripture's divine Author, both authenticates it to us by His inward witness and opens our minds to understand its meaning.

4. Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God's acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God's saving grace in individual lives.

5. The authority of Scripture is inescapably impaired if this total divine inerrancy is in any way limited or disregarded, or made relative to a view of truth contrary to the Bible's own; and such lapses bring serious loss to both the individual and the Church.

Personally, I don't struggle with this issue.  I believe in the inerrancy of the Bible.  For me to think anything else would put my human understanding above God's infinite and perfect understanding.  I just don't see myself in heaven someday questioning God about what He wrote for us in the Bible.

What about you?  Do you believe in the Bible's inerrancy?

If you would like to give further study to the issue of the Bible's inerrancy, Dr. Grudem spent three weeks on this in his Sunday school class at Scottsdale Bible Church. 

Please find below audio from Grudem's three classes and his lecture notes:

Grudem - The Inerrancy of Scripture (Pt. 1 of 3)

Grudem - The Inerrancy of Scripture (Pt. 2 of 3)

Grudem - The Inerrancy of Scripture (Pt. 3 of 3)

Download Grudem's Notes - The Inerrancy of Scripture