Sunday, January 01, 2006

How to Respond to "Are there contradictions?"

Russ Gunsalus and I did a session at the area youth convention called "Ask a Genius." We figured that since they couldn't find one genius, they must have thought we two "half-wits" at least added up to one "wit" together.

One of the questions was, "What would you say to someone who said there were contradictions in the Bible?" My answer was swift: "Get a life."

My response to the question went on... "Christ has died; Christ has risen; Christ will come again." My faith rises or falls on the resurrection and divine identity of Christ, not on whether there was one blind man or two and whether Jesus performed the healing going into Jericho or coming out. "On Christ the solid rock I stand. All other ground is sinking stand."

I went on to say that some people felt called to answer questions of contradictions. I mentioned the 700 page book I have called Alleged Discrepencies. A person like Josh McDowell feels called to put out the question fires. More power to him.

But some people lose their faith in the pursuit of fire putting out. And the sad thing is, the fires aren't anywhere near the fortress. They're in Christian territory, but the faith fortress is in no danger of burning from questions like whether Jesus died on Passover or on the day before. In theory, 98 percent of the biblical stories could be historically inaccurate and the Apostle's Creed would be unscathed. (please don't read into that comment... it's an "in theory" statement)

Don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing for errors in the Bible. I am arguing that a lot of Christians have their priorities out of order when the historicity or "scientific accuracy" of the biblical text is more central to them than the real center--Christ, a real person who lived, died, and rose again from the dead to reconcile us to God.

And when you think of it, it's really silly to stake your faith on questions like whether Peter denied Jesus three times before the cock crowed once or it crowed twice. After all, there are so many disagreements over what each text means exactly that the uncertainty of the Bible's interpretation is way bigger an issue than the particulars of whether there was one or two angels at the tomb. He is risen from the dead; he is risen indeed.

And when you're looking at the subject from the standpoint of a PhD in New Testament, then you're bound to wonder if half the things people get out of the Bible really have much to do with what it was originally about anyway. They're often hearing God, but more often through the Spirit than from some fixed meaning in the text. The "read this for the timeless message" banner is often really in practice, "read this for what our tradition believes."

Again, I'm not faulting this. I'm just pointing out what's really important is that we get the "fortress" part of the tradition straight... and it's in the Apostle's Creed.

So let's read the Bible this year, and let's increase our children's knowledge of its content and message! They gave out one year Bible's at the conference. Great! I hope every single youth reads it.

And let's make sure they know where the fortress is too! There's no need for them to have faith crises over some very nice trees in Haggai. And it's really important for them to know that Christ is risen from the dead.

6 comments:

::athada:: said...

I wish I could've read this 4 years ago.

Thanks for explaining this to the youth!!!

pk said...

Great stuff! Your straight forward words here have the potential to revolutionize the way some people approach scripture. Thank you!

Jonathan Dodrill said...

Schenck, I'm still learning from you 700 miles away! Maybe someday we'll all read the Bible the way we're supposed to and not beat people down with it, and not place our faith in it for salvation. Think it could happen?

tonymyles said...

So... which parts are true and useful for teaching, rebuking, and training in all righteousness...

and which ones shouldn't we preach off of?

;)

Ken Schenck said...

Tony,
In practice: Few preach from all parts. When's the last time you heard a sermon on "Blessed will be the one that bashes your babies against a rock" Psalm 137

In theory: In theory all parts are profitable, when they are rightly interpreted. It is this last clause that is the sticker, because the New Testament writers don't play the game on a historical plane.

Ken Schenck said...

Proseandpromise: I definitely hear what you're saying, but we have set this up because of the way we operate in Scripture. The way so many work with the Bible is a little like those who denied the humanity of Jesus in deference to his divinity. Some of us don't realize that we have become bibliolaters, mistaking the written word for the divine Word, Jesus Christ.