Saturday, June 13, 2009

Believing in God and the Bible answers all of your questions.

One thing that bothers me about the outspoken atheism I encounter is the declaration some less-than-educated atheists spew that the Bible is a "stupid book". The Bible may be a lot of things, but stupid is not one of them. As a book, without the religion bits, I think it's actually quite remarkable. Granted, I'm not the most well-read girly around, but still, for a book written when it was, whichever book of the Bible you choose, it really is quite a profound set of words. The imagery, the flow, all of it is pretty crazy when you consider the level of education the authors must have had. Ok, so maybe the translators might help a little, but still, the basic premise remains.

I just finished the chapter called, "You can't take the Bible literally," in Tim Keller's The Reason for God (yeah, I know, I'm totally rusty on reference structure and all that- quotes? Italics? Meh. You know what I mean anyway, right?). What I took from it is that people who have a hard time believing or seeing eye to eye with some parts of the Bible should first decide if they believe the fundamentals- that Jesus died on the cross for our sins and resurrected on the third day- before diving into the smaller details. He also suggests that some of the stuff we have a hard time with because we don't take it in the context with which it was intended. Instead of asking, "how does this passage pertain to me now?" we should be asking, "how was this passage intended to be received by its original audience?"

In the book, Keller uses an example of slavery, but the passage with which I see eye to eye least is one my cousin pointed out to me from 1 Corinthians Ch 14:

34 Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. 35 And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.

How is a fairly feminist girl supposed to handle that?

If I look at the rest, from verse 26 to 40, where Paul is talking about "order in the church" some parts make sense, like "Let all things be done for edification," in the second half of verse 26, while other parts completely do not:

30 But if anything is revealed to another who sits by, let the first keep silent.

Are they talking about not gossiping? Either way, the context without help from a person well-versed in theology doesn't help me decipher what's going on with the silent women in the church. But if I don't agree with the basic premise of Christianity, this passage alone might cause me to close my Bible for good and give up on Christianity, especially if I had just stepped into it. Since I do, however, my mindset is different.

If the Bible is the Word of God, and it's the truth and is infallible, then as a Christian, I shouldn't be satisfied until either I figure it out on my own or it is explained to me by a fellow Christian, because there must be an explanation that satisfies my soul. If a Christian truly trusts the Bible, they won't brush inconsistencies under the rug, nor will they give up when their own interpretation and explanation disappoints them. If you're not satisfied, you haven't gone deep enough into the meaning of whatever passage or book it is that upsets or offends you.

People I know who were raised catholic tend to hold on to the notion that to believe, you can't question the Bible. You can't study it with a scientific or rational mind because you'll immediately find fault with it and possibly lose your faith entirely as a result.

But how are we not supposed to question? Even with Jesus standing right there in the flesh, performing miracle after miracle, his disciples questioned everything. How are we, who are so removed from that original situation, not supposed to question anything?

In Mark Driscoll's talk on idolatry at Advance 09 (I mentioned it in a previous post in the blog if you want the link and all), he talks about knowledge being an idol. Some people study the Bible so much, read commentaries, etc etc, and believe themselves to be not only superior in knowledge than most Christians, but also as a consequence of that knowledge, believe themselves to be superior in general in comparison to other Christians. They believe they have more faith because they have more knowledge about it. Driscoll says that's idolatry. You pride yourself in your knowledge rather than spreading it to further spread the Gospel. Your knowledge brings you power, rather than bringing glory to God.

When I was beginning my Christian trek, and even fairly recently, I encountered that kind of knowledge idolatry. Christians looked down on me as though my questions were absurdly ignorant. Well, you know what? Maybe they were. But looking on me doesn't help me at all. How is a girl supposed to question anything safely when the Christians she asks for help embarrass her with their feelings of superiority? Maybe I've read it all wrong, but I don't think I ever read anywhere where Jesus, who is the all-knowing, all-seeing, almighty God embodied, ever talked down to the people who asked him questions. Sure, he got fed up a couple times (Matthew 23:13-36), but he never stopped teaching in the process.

My all-time favorite teacher was my second biology teacher, Andy. Along with a crazy passion for it, the man had patience I will never understand. You could ask him the exact same question over and every time, he'd answer with the exact same level of enthusiasm. It was fantastic to watch and as an arrogant teen, it humbled me. He taught me that no matter how much you know, it's only worthwhile if you can help somebody else understand it, regardless of their intellectual capacity. He's probably the reason I fell in love with biology to begin with- that's how huge the impact of patience, humility and passion can be.

In studying the Bible, we have people like me, total novices who are clueless as to where to start in grasping God's Word more profoundly and are full of questions and then there are the people who immerse themselves into it but who tend to reach a point where they've begun to hoard the information they've acquired, idolizing it and basking in their feelings of superiority. But just because the two sides can't seem to meet, that doesn't mean the questions should be forgotten. Nor does it mean either the Bible should either be thrown out for its lack of coherence and relevance or we should sweep our questions under the rug for fear of shaking up our faith. What it means is we need patience. We need patience to get answers that satisfy us, patience to answer questions that seem so beneath us, and patience for both sides to become more humble in the process.

The learners have to be more humble in that we (probably mainly me) are so quick to judge those who are in the know as snobby, self-righteous Christians. The teachers have to be more humble in that they might maybe still have a few things to learn, even from brand new Christians.

What if you're wrong?

Take my example above of the women speaking in church. Without any background knowledge, my mind tends to couple that verse with this one:

36 Or did the word of God come originally from you? Or was it you only that it reached?

If I would reword 34-36 in my own words, I'd say this:
The way I (the narrator) see your church, your women are not allowed to speak in church. Their opinions and views are not tolerated. But are you men the only ones affected by the Word of God? Did you write it for yourselves only? Yeah, I didn't think so. For God so loved the world, not just you men.

But according to my study Bible, I'm wrong. Mr StudyBibleGuy says the passage refers to women leading the church and also suggests that women were rude in church, asking questions loudly and disrupting the service.

If God is all-knowing and we aren't, how do we know which of us is right? I suppose Mr StudyBibleGuy has support for his interpretation, whereas I have mere useless feminist gut feelings to support mine.

But what if I'm right?

What if contextualizing the Bible is not what God intended? What if some of it was written for us in the here and now and we miss the meaning because we're busy looking at history?

What if God, being awesome and unfathomable, intended for us to derive multiple meanings from every verse in the Bible? Lowly human authors to it all the time, why not God?

How can such a "stupid" book, read by so many people, leave the world with so many unanswered questions?

Exactly.

No comments: