Offensive Nature
Today we are going to examine another of the many problems our culture has with Christianity. There are a lot of intelligent and well educated people that have firm opinions about people/Christians that claim the Bible as the central truth of faith.
Perhaps I need to be clear about a point before we get to that direction. The non believing culture has a problem with people that claim that the Bible can be viewed as a literal and authoritative source for people to guide our daily lives.
There is a phrase that is used to describe what Methodist, including united Methodist use as a guide to our theology, our study of God.
The Wesleyan Quadrilateral. That is a mouth full. John Wesley never defined that phrase. He never identified 4 rules for guiding our faith, however, in the tine between the 18th century AND THE 19TH century scholars studied Wesley’s work and identified 4 separate sources that He used to come to a theological conclusion.
Scripture – the Bible OT/NT
Tradition – 2 thousand years of church history
Reason – rational thinking and sensible interpretation
Experience – a Christian’s personal and church experience In Jesus Christ.
The order used is important. It identified that scripture is the primary tool where we are learning about God and Jesus Christ. It is the main source for identifying the character of God and a guide book for people to find direction and knowledge about a relationship with God.
I have heard several objections that non-believers have used to dismiss the value of the Bible as a valid tool to aid people in believing and knowing God. Their objections to the Bible are the basis of discounting Christians as being a little nuts or backward or just plain weird.
Here in our culture and especially in the South the prevailing thought you are likely to hear is that there is plenty of good information in the Bible. However, there is no way that it should be taken literally.
I have heard this from all sorts of people in my life time. As a student at Sorter in Biblical studies I was exposed to all sorts of varied writers, philosophers, Christians and non-Christians as a part of my education.
There are many brilliant people out there over the past several 100+ years that have made statements related to reasons that the Bible cannot be taken literally. That it is filled with myths and fables and many of them suggest that the Bible has been altered and modified by the Romans or early church leaders to change the facts to their advantage.
The basic thought is that for the NT 2000 years is a long time for the book to be corrupted and therefore cannot be taken literally.
That kind of logic seems sound and for a long time and I felt unclear about what they really meant. There were and are things in the Bible that when I read them I get uncomfortable and I have a problem with lots of lifestyles and choices of many of the HEROS in scripture.
Over my years as a person that grew up in the church I have had questions about the Bible that I struggled over and often kept silent because I was worried about what others in the church would think about me and my faith.
-- Do ya’ll remember the Movie Stepford wives? It was about a community where families moved to and all the women seemed so perfect. They loved their husbands and no one ever argued. Couples always agreed….well whatever the man said was always right.
While for a moment that might sound like a dream world to a man it was actually a horror film. The general plot was that after moving to the town the wives were replaced with robots.
The story of the Bible is one where the people that have relationships with God are not robots. They do things that are contrary to what God’s relationship expects.
Basically, for many people, the Bible is fine for you but even if there is some good stuff included they don’t want to be told that that they have to or ought to believe it is all true.
Because everyone knows that there is wrong stuff in there. Stuff that we, as enlightened humans, have out grown.
So many in our culture might say that some things in the Bible are right, and some things are wrong, Some things are good and some things are bad. Something’s are historically unreliable, that there are legends in there.. that there are culturally incorrect things that are best left behind….
Let’s take this to an even more delicate level. There are Christian denominations that would say something similar. To be more direct there are even UM members and clergy that you can find in the news that would say something similar.
My goal this morning is not to directly attack those that might think that way but I do what to deal with some of the reasons that might lead them to not want to trust the whole Bible.
-- My suggestion to you is that you should trust the Bible. Probably not a shock to any of you here that I might have that view.
We don’t have time to deal with every possible objection but I thought we would briefly examine a few.
I suggest that you can and should trust the Bible.
Historically, and culturally
Historically, and culturally.
The most common objection I have experienced when talking to people is the idea that people can be stated something like this. “The Bible has been translated so may times it must have lost something in interpretation, Hebrew, greek, german, english …
It is a common thought that the translations we have today were all translated one from another….I won’t dump any detail on you on this thought except to say that most of the different translations we have were developed through one language translation based on the best ancient documents available at the time.
Most of the English version available have an explanation of how it was developed and even who did the work explained inside the volume. Of course there are probably still errors and interpretation problems but they are not usually compounded by mutable interpretations of interpretations.
Compared to almost any other ancient literature there are more copied of books of the Bible available for study than Homer or Plato.
=.-- How can we overcome inherent human error? Compare different translations to find the most common and hopefully best translation of any difficult passage.
-- Another attack on the historical accuracy of the Bible is that there are people that say that the accounts in the scriptures about Jesus were setup by the winners.
That ancient church leaders with the help of the roman government adjusted the text to fill their goals. That because of the popularity of the Christians faith in Rome in the First century Christians leaders were able to suppress the details of a really good man and human teacher.
They suggest that there is no way to know what the original Jesus was like. All the documentation of Jesus divinity, the miracles and death and resurrection were re- drafted to secure control and power by later Christian leaders.
I suppose that In 2000 years there is obviously ample time for that kind of a thing to happen.
We all know what people are like and most of us in here can remember scandals in the catholic and protestant branches of church leaders in modern times. The accusations of cover-ups and the use of scripture to justify elegant lifestyles.
So how can we address that?
We can start by saying that is not fair to just make a personal judgment about the rewriting of the Bible with no evidence. Personal opinion based on modern events of scandal and greed do not point to the modification of the Bible..
However, there are sources that defend the integrity of the Bible.
First, scholars – not necessarily Christians indicate that the books and letters in the NT are too old to have been directly tampered with.
They use scientific methods of dating….not directly that age of papyrus/paper, as no originals still exist but language and historical descriptions and events to place the time to within the first century for the gospels and Acts and most of the letters attributed to Paul. The use of the hundreds and thousands of ancient documents confirms the accuracy of the words to an amazing degree.
Paul’s letters are dated to be 15 to 20 years after the resurrection of Jesus.
He speaks of people that Jesus appeared to after his death and he even refers to an event when Jesus appeared to 500 people…..HE states the most of the witnesses are still alive…..
Ok in 20 years..if the 1st century attackers wanted to disprove Paul’s claim they could go out and check out Paul’s claims.
The gospels were written some time before 70 Ad because none of them refer to the destruction of the Temple. Not claim the accuracy of Jesus prediction of its destruction….
If you were wanting to offer tangible evidence of Jesus divinity, his prediction of the destruction f the temple would be a biggie….
So historically, according to a large majority of experts, the Majority of the NT is identified as being written too early to be a mythology or tampered with or some kind of history re-write.
Second, idea for historical accuracy is that the events documented are often things that don’t easily support the faith. The first thing that hits me is the Disciples seemed just too dense. They walked with Jesus and witnessed miracles and heard first hand received teaching and yet the look like complete dunces on getting the fill picture.
Ok if I were retelling the history….I would not point out my repeatedly missing the point and being corrected by my teacher.
Why not leave out those uncomfortable details, unless you care about accuracy.
-- Oh, yes, I could always see that this was God walking with us….never a doubt… Now Thomas, he had doubts but not me…
How about the use of women as wittiness to the resurrection? You have all heard that women could not testify in court. If you were building a story to support your claim of Jesus resurrection, it would be better for a disciple or some business man or even the gardener would support the story….not women.
If you were a church leader living 80 0r 100 years after Jesus resurrection….would you tell the story of Jesus praying to God that this plan/ this cup might be removed from him for salvation….
Why as a leader in an attempt to control people and to gain power would you include these details that challenge the story?
These and other details about events don’t help to support the church’s position. The humanity of Jesus is a huge stumbling block that could be avoided by only pointing to the divine nature and power of Jesus.
The documentation by non-Christian authorities as to age and the imperfections, the lack of a smooth story, the flaws in the people and situations support a historically accurate story line.
My second suggestion for trusting the bible is related to identifying that everyone, including Christians has a cultural bias or view point.
Generally, when people discount the Bible as being a valid reference to learn about God, they will use problem that they have in scripture based on their modern set of cultural norms and experiences.
People read things in the Bible that they consider to be offensive, primitive, and backward. And often just plain unfair and wrong. ….They say the Bible teaches things that we in modern society cannot accept.
I thought about making a list of things in the Bible that people might find offend modern people. I quickly decided that the list would be way too long to go over. It seems that people are pretty easy to offend these days. And on to p of that the list is a moving target. It is constantly changing.
The thing we need to be able to do as readers of scripture is to be able to read the text and deal with things we and others find offensive.
The first thing you need to do is to consider that the test may not be teaching or justifying what YOU think is.
Consider our scripture this morning. The two people on the road to Emmaus when asked by Jesus why they were so down…Replied,
"About Jesus of Nazareth, He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel.
Where did these two travelers get their basic information about this prophet and what he was supposed to do…..From the OT prophets….They had a view of scripture that they thought taught of a great leader that would lead a rebellion and bring salvation…freedom…They are disappointed because their view of scripture either read or explained in the synagogue did not match the events they witnessed. OOPS – wrong teacher…..
Jesus ends up explaining the actual and full meaning of the prophecies. The details were there, the descriptions of abuse, and death and resurrection…were all in there….But the idea was offensive to reason. The idea was unrealistic and did not match what God’s power should be like.
Their view point was directed by their culture and human hope of God’s fulfillment if scripture. They wanted a powerful commander that would provide a physical victory and inflict punishment on enemies. They want vengeance….
When we look at scripture from our situation of freedom and comfort we are offended by all kinds of things and believers and our culture is offended even more.
If you just look at the book of genesis we find that God seems to allow men to have all the power from the very beginning. They choose to have mutable wives, which seems to be OK with God. We see how there is a pattern where the oldest son gets everything as an inheritance which includes being made boss of the family when dad dies no matter what a scoundrel they may happen to be.
These simple details in scripture bother and offend people because they think that because it is in the Bible God must think it is ok. But it is not ok with Us….
However when you read the stories the taking of several wives are constantly a source of problems in the household and even in the nation. The oldest son tradition was over written by God repeatedly …as he chose the youngest son for important roles instead of the oldest..
It is easy to see the stories that include cultural norm and believe that it somehow teaches something it does not.
Another example I have heard people use to attack the cultural elements in scripture, People will point to where Paul instructs slaves to obey their masters. They identify that as a culture and as enlightened people we totally reject slavery as being acceptable, so if the Bible contains instructions that it is ok and we know that is wrong…then obviously there could be other mistakes.
I might be wrong, but when we read the word slave in scripture or in a sermon, we tend to think about the slavery in the 1800’s. Slavery that was race based. Slavery where people were kidnapped and placed into a lifetime of service against their will.
Historians describe a different kind of slavery…more like indentured servant hood. The servants did not ware chains or special clothes to identify status. The suggest that most slavery situations had a term of 10 years instead of a life time and that it was a rare case where a person served past 30 years of age.
Paul’s call for slaves to obedience is played up while his encouragement to gain freedom is overlooked.
-- The point is that People… everyone reads scripture through their personal cultural reading glasses every day. People twist and pervert the meaning of scripture without any deep thought.
The twisting of scripture for good and bad happens without a thought of what a passage might really be teaching.
--- That is why it is critical that we don’t assume that we already know what a passage is teaching….context is important. The full story is important. Being aware of our cultural influences and biases and leanings are something we need to be aware of.
How can we tell that we are influenced by our cultural glasses? Whenever we read a passage and become offended and dismiss what we read --- we are not being open to the meaning of scripture.
If we are not open the how can we encourage non believers to be open?
How can we help people to find relevance in the Bible?
-- Here is a big thought, how is it possible that the Bible would not be offensive in some way to every person and every culture?
Example – here in the US – everyone seems to like the and forgiveness and mercy aspects found in the Bible. They agree that we ought to be forgiving and tolerant. But when they read about Sex being restricted to marriage OH goodness how old fashioned.
But if we were to be in the Middle East the sections on forgiveness would be considered ridiculous. They would make you appear week and make you a target. But he sex restrictions would seem reasonable if perhaps not a little lax.
The point is that a cultural definition in the Bible might be offensive to you…it might seem outdated in our culture. But why does the reality of finding challenges and offensive things disqualify it as a resource to know about God.
If we think about it. Don’t we respond most to the things that offend us?
Don’t we get angry about injustice or abuse?
Ya’ll may not know this, but Renee is not here so I can share it. From time to time I say things to Renee that offend her. The same is true with some of the things she says to me. I have a feeling that Renee would like to find a Stepford town for husbands. If we moved there then we would never argue or offend each other and everything would be great.
I think that is what a lot of the culture wants to do with God. In order to believe in God they want a robot that agrees with their opinions. That is supportive of comfortable decisions. That never offends their view of right and wrong.
Folks if there is a God then is not his desire to make everyone happy. It is His desire to reach out and offer a relationship. He did that by sending His son into this world the pay a debt that we are offended to find out that we owe. He offends people by expecting obedience to a way of life and to healthy choices.
The literal nature of scripture is easier to understand when re understand that historically we can find sound evidence and logic that it is true. It is easier to move forward in our relationship with god when we are open to finding the full meaning of scripture instead of limiting to our ideas.
Literal interpretation of scripture is more complex than picking a choosing what we read. It is more specific that finding points that support what we believe and discount what we don’t like. It is about looking at the Bible to fine the full and accurate message from God and paying special attention when we are offended and bothered.
All glory be to God!
