I will step out on a limb a bit in an attempt to answer a theological point arising in my mind. Before I discuss the point, in the next post or two, I want to make another point about exegesis. Exegesis is the discipline of analysis of the Biblical text. The Greek word means 'to lead out', i.e. to bring out meaning form the text. The term is increasingly used when texts other than the Bible are being analyzed, but it is the Bible I am concerned with here.
A brief Google search of any well known Christian teacher past or present will bring up numerous 'heresy hunter' websites. Most of these sites seem a tad acrimonious and blinkered to me. I have met one leader written off as a bad job by one of these sites that I had read just days before. I feel it would be very helpful for some of these heresy hunters to talk to their 'victims' before writing. That is not to say they sometimes don't have a point.
Now the meaning of the word 'exegesis' was, as I said, 'to lead out' or 'to draw out'. We are looking for underlying meaning; what is not necessarily spelled out verbatim in the text or set of texts. There is going to be an element of speculation at times. There is going to be an element of opinion.
To interpret scripture, to form a worldview based on it, we are going to have to experiment with our thinking, meditating on various verses and ideas. If we don't do this, there is no need for preaching. Just reading the Bible out will do. There is certainly a place for that. But most areas of knowledge rely on this type of 'thought experiment' in order for them to develop.
That said, there is a balance between orthodoxy and controversy. We can stay in the safe orthodoxy, or try to. We can look for what everyone agrees on in Christian belief. That is a good thing to do at times, so we can decide on what is unshakable common ground. Things like the full deity and full humanity of Jesus Christ. Something like the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the Second Coming. Also the full and sufficient sacrifice for sins made on his cross. Things like this should distinguish the true church. However, we should let fundamentals be fundamentals, and details, details, and be aware and wise concerning the shades of gray in between too.
The Body of Christ includes people from all sorts of diverse denominations who truly believe; some very ancient and traditional. I recently read about a Russian Orthodox couple who showed great faith and compassion in the way they took in orphans. However, we cannot include people from groups like Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons who deny the deity of Christ, or plainly distort or add to the Scriptures. We cannot include, obviously, faiths which rest primarily on personalities other than Christ, such as Islam or Rastafarianism. We can see these people best as potential members of God's family, rather than enemies.
In my next post I want to get back to exegesis within the Body of Christ and make a point about how revelation from Scripture develops.
A brief Google search of any well known Christian teacher past or present will bring up numerous 'heresy hunter' websites. Most of these sites seem a tad acrimonious and blinkered to me. I have met one leader written off as a bad job by one of these sites that I had read just days before. I feel it would be very helpful for some of these heresy hunters to talk to their 'victims' before writing. That is not to say they sometimes don't have a point.
Now the meaning of the word 'exegesis' was, as I said, 'to lead out' or 'to draw out'. We are looking for underlying meaning; what is not necessarily spelled out verbatim in the text or set of texts. There is going to be an element of speculation at times. There is going to be an element of opinion.
To interpret scripture, to form a worldview based on it, we are going to have to experiment with our thinking, meditating on various verses and ideas. If we don't do this, there is no need for preaching. Just reading the Bible out will do. There is certainly a place for that. But most areas of knowledge rely on this type of 'thought experiment' in order for them to develop.
That said, there is a balance between orthodoxy and controversy. We can stay in the safe orthodoxy, or try to. We can look for what everyone agrees on in Christian belief. That is a good thing to do at times, so we can decide on what is unshakable common ground. Things like the full deity and full humanity of Jesus Christ. Something like the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the Second Coming. Also the full and sufficient sacrifice for sins made on his cross. Things like this should distinguish the true church. However, we should let fundamentals be fundamentals, and details, details, and be aware and wise concerning the shades of gray in between too.
The Body of Christ includes people from all sorts of diverse denominations who truly believe; some very ancient and traditional. I recently read about a Russian Orthodox couple who showed great faith and compassion in the way they took in orphans. However, we cannot include people from groups like Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons who deny the deity of Christ, or plainly distort or add to the Scriptures. We cannot include, obviously, faiths which rest primarily on personalities other than Christ, such as Islam or Rastafarianism. We can see these people best as potential members of God's family, rather than enemies.
In my next post I want to get back to exegesis within the Body of Christ and make a point about how revelation from Scripture develops.
No comments:
Post a Comment