The quote from Soren Kierkegaard contains much truth, but perhaps not the entire truth. His premise is simple – the Bible is easy to understand. This concept is directly opposed to what I teach my students in my survey classes. I tell them that the Bible is difficult to interpret and requires education and a good grasp of original background and context.
So am I wrong? Or is he? Am I teaching a lie and perpetuating lies or has Kierkegaard just missed it on this one? I think there is a middle ground. On the one hand he is completely correct. In an effort to justify selfishness and avoid sacrifice, we try to explain away verses that seem too difficult. Maybe we assume Jesus is using hyperbole, or perhaps we put limitations on how far we fulfill Jesus’ commands. Let me give it a shot based on some of Shannon’s passages:
“At some point we have to resist an evil person, don’t we? What if no one resisted Hitler? Where would we be? Speaking German and living under a dictatorial regime, that’s where. And in regard to that whole ‘be perfect’ business. Jesus didn’t mean we could actually attain it, but we should just shoot for it and rely on grace if we fall short.”
Yes, Kierkegaard is right – it is pretty easy to dismiss Jesus’ words. But are all of Jesus’ words to be taken literally? Should we actually gouge out our eyes if we have a lust problem? Should we actually cut off our hands if we are kleptomaniacs? It seems unlikely that Jesus expected his listeners to take these words literally. Also, in today’s world we don’t have to walk a mile with anyone (referring to a law requiring them to carry a Roman soldier’s pack). So how could we go 2 miles? Clearly there is some level of interpretation and application that must go on instead of simply taking Jesus’ commands at face value.
The real problem is that theology, especially on the academic level but also in our churches, has become merely an intellectual pursuit instead of a life changing one. Theology that does not impact your life and merely proves or disproves a point about God has little value (Kierkegaard might say “no value”). Like a Medical Doctor who does not practice his/her craft is the Disciple who is not formed, changed, and challenged by his/her doctrine.
"But the aim of such instruction is love that comes from a pure heart, a good conscience, and sincere faith. Some people have deviated from these and turned to meaningless talk, desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make assertions." 1 Timothy 1:5-7 (NRSV)
Posts
2 comments:
I found that quote in "Irresistible Revolution". And I think you would find the rest of it more offensive:
"Herein lies the real place of Christian scholarship. Christian scholarship is the church's prodigious invention to defend itself against the Bible, to ensure that we can continue to be good Christians without the Bible coming too close. Oh, priceless scholarship, what would we do without you? Dreadful it is to fall into the hands of the living god. Yes, it is even dreadful to be alone with the New Testament."
I think you are right, though. It all depends on what we do with it. In general, my (very limited) scholarship has been something that has challenged me to higher standards. But I can definitely see the danger, Soren describes.
I think the problem with some of that type of writing is it swings the pendulum to far. It becomes, at least to readers if not to the authors, anti-scholarship instead of scholarship in it's proper place.
I've met far to many Rob Bellites who's whole Christian philosphcial view can be summed as, "If it looks or sounds like a traditional church it's useless."
I don't think that's helpful or very thoughtful.
Post a Comment