Epistomology

People sometimes turn epistomology into this game of hide and seek, where the truth is out there somewhere, maybe, and we all have to try and find where it's hidden. Fundamentalist Christians claim we have to look in the Bible. Determinists tend to say we should use empirical induction and deductive reasoning. Relativists like to say that we can find it anywhere.

I guess, in some ways I take the stand of all three. I think the Bible is a great source for truth. We find some very clear messages on ethics, particularly. That doesn't mean empirical induction and deductive reasoning don't work. They definitely seem to. Even relativists have a point. After all, if there is a God, why wouldn't He show Himself in more than one place?

Ultimately, where we go to find our "truth" says a lot about what we consider to be most reliable. Fundamentalist Christians say the Bible is the most reliable. Determinists think that they themselves are the most reliable. Relativists don't seem to think that anyone in particular is all that reliable.

This time, I may have to side with the relativists.

Fundamentalist Christians tout the Bible for basically everything. However, looking historically, how many times has a Biblical interpretation of something scientific turned out to be the right one? Flat Earth? Nope. Geocentric universe? Not quite. Couple thousand year old Earth? Not looking good.

Of course, after the fact people did a fine job of using Bible verses to support the new, scientifically proven view. However, if all Biblical scholars reading the Bible got one interpretation out of it, what are the odds they were all just reading it wrong? Even if they were, what does that say about the reliability of our track record of interpreting the Bible on a scientific basis?

Reason doesn't fare much better. Deductive reasoning is only as good as its premises, which are by necessity known by experience or intuition. Both of those things have been pretty shady for me in the past, and I consider myself a fairly reliable guy. Inductive reasoning is far from conclusive. To base an entire worldview on reason is to accept that we cannot know anything for sure. We could be completely wrong about most things.

And Relativists? Well, realistically, it is pretty unreasonable and unbiblical all at the same time. It does have a sort of appeal to it though. It's kind of like standing up from the frantic hide and seek game and setting up a lawn chair on the side lines.

The Bible's True Place

                I feel like lately I have been propagating a very serious error regarding the Bible. I have written a bit about how I believe the Bible is not completely true and how we should not trust in it, but in God. I stand behind everything I’ve said so far, but I have one important caveat.

                Why should I be able to take down what God has inspired? Reason and science are great achievements of mankind, but they are only that: achievements of mankind. The Bible was inspired by God! Whether God chose a people and hand-made their history step by step or took an ordinary culture and used it for extraordinary things, both amount to essentially the same thing, don’t they? I feel humbled today, thinking that I could deem to say so much about the Bible without looking at myself first.

                The biggest error I’ve made lately is the cultural relativism I’ve subjected the Bible to. Who am I to throw out 39 of the books of the Bible (40 if you count Revalations) and say the remaining 26 or 27 will do? Who am I to take the Bible’s teachings and try to mold them into the cultural expectations of today? If we are going to believe in an absolute truth, why go halfway? Most importantly, who am I in this lost age of chaos to undermine the only reputable source of direction we can find?

                Maybe I’ve gotten this way through familiarity. It is certainly Biblical to feel rebellious, and it is socially acceptable to question “common sense”. I feel my attitude has been misdirected. The Bible is not at fault here. People who use the Bible as a curtain to hide their own sins of pride and laziness are the ones at fault. Just as much, the people like me who trivialize the Bible’s place in our society are also to blame.

                Here’s to the Bible: God’s word. Whether perfect or imperfect, literal or figurative, complete or partial, God-spoke or God-breathed, the Bible is not outdated or irrelevant or worthless. If we believe Christianity at all, we should treat this book with the respect it deserves. I’ve lately been using God’s word as a footstool, helping me reach other things, but relatively unimportant once I’ve done so. God’s book should be my ladder, which I continually climb, because it is folly to trust in my own understanding. Reason only gets me as far as I am able to use it, and to say I can discern everything is simply self flattery and self deceit.

                Finally, here’s to finding the Bible’s place in our lives: somewhere between my view and a fundamentalists, I guess, but ultimately still at the top.

The Bible Idol

I think when I talk about the Bible, people often get the vibe that I do not respect the Bible. I know I sometimes say things like, “the Bible is not the final authority” and “the Bible is not always 100% literally true” or “there are parts of the Bible that are downright contradictory to what Jesus said”. When people hear me say these things, I get the impression that they view me as a heretic, or even blasphemous. At the very least, they think I am seriously confused.

I understand the appeal of viewing the Bible as absolutely correct and the only sure way to know truth. It means we know exactly what happened, what we should do, and what is expected from us. The Bible gives us a sure footing for faith, if only because it is something we can turn to as explanation for anything we do:

                “Why shouldn’t we steal?” Because the Bible says so.

                “How do I know Jesus loves me?” Because the Bible says so.

                “Why is homosexuality wrong?” Because the Bible says so.

                “Why should we believe the Earth was created in 6 days?” Because the Bible says so.

                “How do we know Jesus really said the things He did?” Because the Bible says so.

                “How do I know I’m going to heaven?” Because the Bible says so.

I can see how having this fail proof way of interpreting the world is alluring and even convenient.  

Now, here is where many Christians will stop me. “I don’t act like that,” they’ll say. “I have reasons for why I believe the way I do.” Do you really? If you pretended you never read the Bible and then looked at the evidence with an open mind, would you still come to the conclusion that the Earth is only a few thousand years old?

More importantly is the answer to other questions.  “How do I know Jesus loves me?” Well, if the Bible is the only thing that tells you this, I can understand why you’d feel under attack when the Bible is under attack. When the Bible is the foundation of your faith, I can understand why you guard the Bible so carefully. I'm not saying faith is bad. Faith is good! Reason does not supplant faith in importance. Reason should support Faith. Faith is not always blind. Faith can be earned.

Yet, I propose that Faith not only can be earned, but should be earned.

There are several reasons why the Bible can be considered by anyone who claims to have an open mind on the subject to be wrong in several key areas. I think the Genesis 1 story fairly obviously contradicts the science we have found. The chilling accounts of infanticide and genocide in the Old Testament should be more troubling. The changing moods of the Old Testament God, the evil spirits He sends to torment men and cause them to sin, the games He plays with Job are all concepts that cannot be explained away, although it is often tried. When a respected pastor of a congregation believes that if any Amelekites were alive today it would be his duty to destroy them, we know there is a moral problem. At that point, it is difficult to split differences between Christian fundamentalism and Islamic jihad. The merciless injustice of the Old Testament is in direct conflict with the humble love shown by Jesus. To portray God in this horrific light is perhaps the greatest blasphemy of all.

Regardless of whether you agree with any of the last paragraph, there will come a time when you will hit a troubled spot in the Bible where you cannot quite understand a passage, or seem to feel the Bible is being self contradictory (maybe it is…). Whatever it is, not only will your faith in the Bible be tested, but the entire weight of your faith will be tested along with it. Because, remember, the Bible is what justifies your faith. This is perilous. It almost killed my faith. Because, even though the Bible is a great great book, the most inspired book ever written, to build your faith on anything other than God is to build your house on the sand.

This is a big problem I see in Christians’ faiths today. They view the triune God as the Father, Son, and Holy Bible. We place what the Bible says above what Jesus and, more often, what the Holy Spirit says. I understand that it is hard to listen to the Holy Spirit sometimes. It is difficult to pick out what it says amongst the mumbo jumbo of our own lives and our own inner thoughts. That is one of the reasons it is important to pray together and to have a sense of community: so none of us develops the God complex. When we start viewing our own thoughts as God’s, we are in dangerous waters. However, at the same time, when we start viewing Paul or Peter or Isaiah or Jeremiah or Moses’ words as God's, we are in almost as dangerous waters. Maybe more, because in some cases these words were handed down for generations orally before they were ever written down.

What does Jesus have to say about this? As stated elsewhere, Jesus had the biggest problem with the Pharisees. The Pharisees were the keepers of the Law. The Pharisees knew the Bible inside and out, memorized it backwards and forwards (literally), and studied it for hours every day. The Pharisees knew their stuff. Not only did the Pharisees know the Bible, but they meticulously carried out every law they could find and even some that were a stretch (sound familiar?) The Pharisees condemned anyone who did not or could not follow this rigid set of codes. However, one very important law the Pharisees did not keep: “I am the Lord your God. You shall have no other gods before me”.  In God’s place, the Pharisees honored the idol of the Bible.

Jesus came to abolish this. John says Jesus is the Word. Not the Law. Not the Bible. Jesus says “I AM the Way.” Not the Law. Not the Bible. Jesus says “I AM the Truth.” Not the Law, and not the Bible. David sings out in Psalms, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path.” Jesus gives the controversial response, “I AM the light.” Not the Law, and not the Bible.

Does Jesus say He’s here to abolish the Law? No and yes. He does not give us free reign to run rampant through the street. He did come to put things in their proper perspective with the proper prioritization. God is first. Nothing comes before the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit. Not even something as gifted as the Bible.

This is why I do not have a problem saying the Bible has a couple spots where things aren’t completely accurate. I don’t have a problem saying that the Bible is imperfect, or that the Old Testament writers seriously misrepresent God at times. Our savior is Jesus. We can believe in a just, holy, perfect God who detests sin without condoning the merciless, unjust, imperfect actions of so many Old Testament characters. In this fallen world, only God is perfect. Not even the Bible can claim that title as well. Only God is worth the dedication and commitment I see people give this book.

The Pharisee and the Gnostic

“Throughout history, the Christian church has had to guard against the heresy of Gnosticism. Gnosticism is not an ordinary heresy, because it does not manifest itself as a set of beliefs. Rather, Gnosticism is a tendency: the tendency to replace the historical facts of Christianity with philosophical ideas. Gnosticism transforms history into ideology and facts into philosophy.” James Jordan in Chapter 4 of Creation in Six Days

There is something scary about the idea of Gnosticism. James Jordan describes Gnosticism as the replacing of solid truth with ideals. He describes Gnosticism as being one of the motivators of the failing church. James Jordan believes in a completely literal interpretation of the Bible: to take as much from it as possible and to analyze all of it, because it is all the literal words of God. To not believe in Jonah and the Big Fish or Noah and the Ark is as much a heresy to James Jordan as not believing in the literal birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ himself, for to not believe in any of these stories is to doubt the inerrant word of God, and by extension to doubt God Himself. Gnosticism, James Jordan says, is the trivializing of these stories. To see this rich history the Bible gives as mere myths is to start down a dark, crooked path that leads to believing that God did not create the Earth, that the Israelites were not the Chosen People of God, that the apostles made stories up, that Paul imagined Jesus came to him, that the Virgin Mary wasn’t so virgin after all, and that Jesus was just a man who never said He was God, who never really died on a cross, who possibly married Mary Magdelene, and how many other heretical theories about the Bible. 

Gnosticism is scary for three reasons. First, there is truth in the dark path story. It is easy to start doubting everything in the Bible once part of it has been demoted to mere fable. If Jonah wasn’t really swallowed by a Great Fish, why should we believe Daniel survived the lion’s den? Why believe Elijah was swept up to heaven by chariots of fire? Noah’s ark sounds a little far fetched. Maybe that is allegorical. I don’t like that the Israelites killed so many seemingly innocent people. Maybe that was exaggerated, or simply made up. No Egyptian sources seem to mention the plagues on Egypt. Maybe those are symbolic, or simply an embellishment of past stories. After all, these stories were written down years after they happened. Something must have been changed in the passing of information from generation from generation, like a game of telephone with eternal consequences. And sooner or later, if one gives in to these thoughts, the question of whether Jesus actually lived the life of the gospels, whether his disciples truly understood his intentions, and even his mental sanity all come into question, because we cannot simply take the Bible’s word for it. This questioning of the deepest foundations of our faith is hauntingly chilling.

The second reason is that Gnosticism tends to view reality as a sort of badness that needs to be punished. This part of Gnosticism takes its roots in Greek thought, where the material world was considered evil and only the spiritual should live on to the next world. Pure spirit and pure thought were the truly sacred. Thinking this way leads to traditions like communion, with real food and real wine (or grape juice), to be thought of first as merely helpful, then as kind of boring, and finally to downright destructive. We begin to see heaven as a sort of ethereal floating spirit world, where we are held timelessly in a state of perpetual happiness, where nothing really happens and nothing really exists except for us in a bright light of pure goodness, which is God. The reason this is a scary side of Gnosticism is that the material world is not our enemy. As so many others have put it so appropriately, God doesn’t hate matter: He created it! And this viewing of our problems as material takes the blame off of ourselves and onto our bodies. It allows us to step back from our responsibility. Most harmfully, we stop worrying about what we’re thinking and only on what we’re doing, even though God says we will be judged on the intentions of our heart.

The third reason Gnosticism is a scary thought is the propensity for us to view truth as relative. When historical occurrences never really occurred, why should any of the Bible really be true? Why shouldn’t all of the Bible be relative? Maybe homosexuality is wrong in Biblical times, but nowadays, we are perfectly justified in saying that we are more advanced and morally mature.  Things are different now. The morally ambiguous thrive under this atmosphere. When there is no real right, there is also no real wrong.

James Jordan is right to fear this attitude. Gnosticism is one of the scariest doctrines the church has known.

Here’s the clincher though…

Jesus didn’t only attack the Gnostic.

The Sadducees were the Jewish synagogue’s equivalent of the Gnostic. The Sadducees took very few things as absolutely true, and they often changed their religious views when it was politically convenient. Jesus attacked them once in a while throughout the New Testament.

But who did Jesus really have problems with?

When you think of Jesus’ number one "enemy" so to speak, we all generally jump to the Pharisees, don’t we?

Jesus and the Pharisees did not get along. The Pharisees saw Jesus as a Gnostic of sorts. He often seemed to treat the Law with contempt. He would make outrageous claims. Jesus would heal the sick on the Sabbath and his disciples violated holy laws of cleanliness. Jesus broke the mold.

But at the same time, Jesus was not a Gnostic. Jesus did not believe in a relative truth. Jesus said “I AM the Truth.” What Jesus said, and why it is so hard to accept, is that there IS Truth. It’s just not found in the Law when viewed by itself. Truth is found in Jesus Christ. Truth is not found by reading the Bible. That may sound heretical, but it’s not. The Pharisees knew the Bible. The Pharisees memorized the Bible, forwards and backwards, literally. The Pharisees kept the laws the Bible gave them. The Pharisees today would have been the “perfect Christians”. They would be clean, college-educated pastors and deacons. They certainly wouldn’t have any teen pregnancies. They certainly wouldn’t get drunk. They would be respectable and respected. The Pharisees would teach their children to grow up and act responsibly too.  Maybe even home school them because you just can’t trust what public schools might teach your kids.

Jesus calls us to be more than Pharisees. Like it or not, there is a reason the Bible was made. There is an underlying meaning to the stories in the Bible. The Gnostic gets it wrong. There is a reality. There is Truth. But some Christians run so far away from this idea that they run right into the camp of the Pharisee. Instead of God being their God, they make the Bible their God. In following the Law so closely, they break the most important Law of all.

God says to love our enemies. Are we doing that? Jesus today would be a peace maniac. Jesus would probably be a little granola. Jesus was a bit of a rebel. Jesus would hang out with the GLBT community and the liberal left wing. Those are the people Jesus got along with. It’s not because Jesus was gay or even necessarily liberal, although he was definitely a proponent of change. It’s because those people were the ones open to conversation.  Conservative Christians tend to do things because they are compelled to. The one who are concerned about reasons are the ones in the liberal camp. The ones open to a change in perspective are liberal. As Christian, we should have, if the not the reckless perspective toward truth that liberals often have, at least the attitude towards change that God has gifted them with.

My propensity is for both. I tend to like a relative truth while being religiously self-righteous about it. How about you? Are you a Pharisee, or are you a Gnostic? Or are you truly seeking after Jesus’ own heart?