« Offense, free speech, peace, and Arun Gandhi | Main | The power of music »

Is the Bible clear?

From the CBMW website:

Is the Bible clear? It certainly claims to be. By God's grace, it is the Word of God that helps simple people like me become wise: "The law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple (italics mine, Psalm 19:7). The Bible must be understandable because it imparts understanding to simple people (Psalm 119:30). Further, God's words are assumed to be accessible in Deuteronomy 6:6-7 where all parents are commanded to teach them to children and discuss them throughout the daily activities of life. Therefore, seminary can be helpful, but is not required to understand the Bible.

From the NIV Translators’ Preface to the Comparative Study Bible:

There is a sense in which the work of translation is never wholly finished. This applies to all great literature and uniquely so to the Bible...As in other ancient documents, the precise meaning of the biblical text is sometimes uncertain. This is more often the case with the Hebrew and Aramaic texts than with the Greek text. Although archaeological and linguistic discoveries in this century aid in understanding difficult passages, some uncertainties remain.

...Like all translations of the Bible, made as they are by imperfect man, this one undoubtedly falls short of its goals. Yet we are grateful to God for the extent to which he has enabled us to realize these goals and for the strength he has given us and our colleagues to complete our task.

The Bible does not claim to be clear, and none of the examples cited above prove so. The message unto salvation and a transformed life is certainly clear, and the basic nature and status of both God and man are clearly presented. But much of the remaining Scripture is less clear. I believe that these things are of lesser importance, and not necessary for salvation nor crucial for right living. Paul does say that all Scripture is God-breathed and good for teaching, reproof, etc. (2 Tim 3:16-17), yet I don't believe we can infer from this that it is all completely accessible to everyone.

And if it's not, then we need scholars and seminary-trained pastors and the like to attempt to explain these passages to the rest of us (which they do). And if that's true, then it's not all "simple" enough to be understood by even the simple.

(Further note: You might say that I'm focusing on the "empty" portion of this not-completely-full "glass," whereas David Wayne at Jollyblogger looks at the portion that's "full." :-) )

Comments

"In Bible Doctrine, Wayne Grudem concludes:

But in no case are we free to say that the teaching of the Bible on any subject is confusing or incapable of being understood correctly. In no case should we think that persistent disagreements on some subject in the history of the Church mean that we will be unable to come to a correct conclusion on that subject ourselves. Rather, if a genuine concern about some such subject arises in our lives we should sincerely ask God's help and then go to Scripture, searching it with all our ability, believing that God will enable us to understand rightly. (p. 53)

Sola Scriptura is essential to the complementarian position,"

From the cbmw website.

Posted by: Sue at January 25, 2008 10:23 AM

1Co 13:12 "For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. (ESV)"

This suggests that there are mysteries, perhaps things not yet revealed by God to us, and conundrums, things revealed which are difficult for us to understand because of the limitations we live under.

The Holy Spirit is the translator and he speaks our vernacular perfectly, but I don't think we are always able to grasp what he has revealed.

Posted by: Charlie at January 25, 2008 1:39 PM

I read that, and I thought this.

You can tell where I'm spending my time on the internet lately.

I'll try to work up to a serious comment next week. :)

Posted by: Atlantic at January 25, 2008 6:57 PM

I just want to clarify that I believe that the Bible as written in the original languages is the inspired Word of God. And I believe that the Holy Spirit helps translators. But translations are not as perfect as the original, inspired text.

Neither do I believe that the Holy Spirit inspires people with spiritual truth outside of that found in Scripture.

But I do believe that the Holy Spirit illumines Scripture to the seeking reader, though we obviously don't always "get it."

Posted by: Bonnie at January 25, 2008 6:59 PM

I think we need to be very cautious in this area of discussion. We have to ask who the books were originally written for and if it was intended for them to understand. And then we have to ask if God's intention is for us to understand the books as well. And if the answer to that question is yes, then we have to admit that there is potential for understanding. Of course, that doesn't mean we always get it, which is the source of many of our debates. And further more, have you ever come to understand something and wish you could find a loophole to understand it another way? I believe that there is a lack of intellectual integrity in that some people actually reject what they understand and put forth a notion of ambiguity. Our faith, our beliefs, our life suffers an epistemic crisis if we can claim to not understand what God gave us to understand.

This comment is starting to look like a post of its own. ;)

Posted by: Sarah Flashing at January 26, 2008 8:12 PM

Sarah, there are many factors to consider, imo. Did God intend for the original receivers of the particular writings to understand them? I think we must answer, "yes." Did He intend for us, today, to understand them as fully? That's harder to answer -- I think that as much as is really important, those things we can just as fully understand. But I also think that there are some passages that present difficulties, and the problem isn't necessarily with us.

The issue of integrity can go many ways. You mentioned one (or two). It's really a matter of honesty, I think. It's just as possible for a person to be so uncomfortable with not understanding something that they will "adopt" an understanding for the sake of security on some level, as it is for them to deny conviction of the truth of something. I don't think that "not getting it" is always because of a spiritual lack of some type, though of course, often it is.

Hey, if you feel a post coming on, feel free ;-)

Posted by: Bonnie at January 26, 2008 10:15 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.

About

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.