WEEKLY COMMENTARY: How Bible Readers Bring Some "Blinders" To Their Bible

Consider the origins of Scripture.  Some of it is more than 2,000 years old, was written in various languages by authors who may not have compared notes very carefully, and has been translated for us by people of different cultures and different eras.  Should we be surprised that Bible text is sometimes confusing, or even beyond our belief?

Nevertheless, many of us believe that Scripture is divinely inspired and contains very important guidance and truth on how we should live our lives.

But, some "outside factors" may also color a reader's interpretation of the Bible.  Let's examine four such "outside factors," to keep them in perspective.

1.) Failure to distinguish between the Bible's major themes and message, and its less primary teachings.

Some people say, for example, that they cannot accept what the Bible says about gender roles or politics, so they are not sure about any of the other things the Bible tells them. However, Christians all agree that Jesus rose from the dead on the third day.  Are the doubters saying that because they do not like what the Bible says about gender roles, let's say, that Jesus could not have been raised from the dead?  If Jesus is the son of God, then we have to take his teaching seriously.  If he is not whom he says he is, then why should we care what the Bible says about anything else?  In short, people should not worry about such things as gender roles, until they have decided whether they believe that Jesus' teachings are central to our faith.

2.) Forgetting that the New Testament is all about Jesus.

If you think the Bible is only about you ---- what you must do and how you must live ---- then you do not need Jesus.  All you need are the rules.  Actually, there are just two ways to read the Bible:  a.) you can read the Bible as if it is all about you and what you must do to please God and be a good person; OR  b.) you can read the New Testament as if it is all about Jesus and what he has done for you.

3.) Jumping to conclusions that may be false, about what a Bible passage is actually teaching.

Be patient with the text.  Many of the things people find offensive can be cleared up with a decent commentary reference book that puts the issue into historical context. The Bible text may not be teaching what you first thought.

4.) The culture in which one grows up may uniquely shape how we "hear" what the Bible teaches.

This can be the source of some misunderstanding.  Perhaps one is offended by certain biblical texts because of an un-examined assumption of the superiority of our own cultural moment.  The Disciples traveling on the road to Emmaus misunderstood the prophesies about the Messiah because as Jews they were thinking of the redemption of Israel, and not the redemption of the world.  It is so easy to unconsciously read a Bible passage through one's cultural "blinders" and therefore misunderstand what the text really teaches.

Some people may say a passage is regressive and offensive because it creates a conflict with principles in their particular culture, but other cultures may think the same passage is perfectly acceptable.  For example, in some cultures, what the Bible says about sex is a problem, but there are no issues with what it says about forgiveness.  In other cultures, there may be acceptance of what the Bible says about sex, but what the Bible says about forgiveness is considered ridiculous.  Why should one set of cultural sensibilities trump everybody else's?

If the Bible really is the revelation of God and not the product of any one culture, why wouldn't it be inevitable that someone's cultural sensibilities will be offended at some point?  Could the interpretation problem with some Biblical texts simply arise from an un-examined belief in the superiority of one cultural moment over all others? Furthermore, if the Bible was authored by persons inspired by the Holy Spirit, could the spiritual message be clouded to some extent by the "blinders" of today's readers?

So, here's a suggestion.  Might there be value in reading and re-reading, discussing and pondering, a Scriptural passage over and over, in hopes of weakening our reader's "blinders".  Through the use of such "cultural humility," gradually the truer meaning of the Scriptural teaching may become more clear.  For many Bible students, part of the thrill of reading and studying Scripture is precisely wrestling with the text and pondering the questions with which it leaves us.

________________________________________________________________________

These thoughts are brought to you by CPC's Adult Spiritual Development Team, hoping to encourage some personal growth this year at CPC.

________________________________________________________________________

WEEKLY COMMENTARY: Does Central Church Offer Opportunities To It's Members?

At "Take Ten" one Sunday last spring, I was waiting to pour myself a cup of coffee.  Just ahead of me were a man and a woman I did not recall seeing before at our church.  As we stood there awaiting our turn, I introduced myself and asked if they had enjoyed the worship service.  They smiled and enthusiastically told me that both the sermon and the music had been very meaningful.  They were husband and wife, new to Summit, and had been visiting several local churches, hoping to find a church home.

A few days later, I needed to take the train to Manhattan for the day.  By chance, on the station platform waiting for the New York train I saw the same man I had chatted with a few days before at CPC's "Take Ten."  We recognized each other.  He said his name was Chris, and I asked if he would mind if I shared a seat with him ---- I wanted to be a little bit welcoming to this newcomer to Summit.

Our train had barely left the station, when Chris asked me to tell him about Central Church. He wondered, "Does Central Church emphasize evangelism (as 'conservative' churches often do) or  mainly social justice (as many 'liberal' churches do)?". 

WOW!  How does one give a simple answer to that question?

I started by telling Chris that Central Church has about 700 members, and was established more than 100 years ago as a Presbyterian church; and that like any church, we have evolved over the years and today we continue to evolve.  I told Chris that if he had put his question to any ten members at Central, he might have heard ten different answers, because each of us try to continue growing ---- not to increase the number of church members, as much as to increase our impact on the lives of our members, and our impact on the Summit community and beyond.

I noted that the particular spiritual gifts and callings of our congregation's leaders, together with our social context (Summit, a small-sized city, 30 miles from New York City) necessarily means that Central Church tends to be better at doing some roles and doing some kinds of ministry, than for others.  Some churches are best at evangelism, I said; others at teaching and discipleship; others at gathered worship and preaching; and still others at service to those in need.

"We know," I said, "that a particular Christian individual can not carry out all ministries equally well, nor have a complete range of spiritual gifts."  Chris saw my point, and said, "Nor can one congregation have all the spiritual gifts (at least not all in proportion), and therefore may be unable to do all things equally well."

"Okay," said Chris, "but let's focus on Central Church ----- how is it different from other area churches?"

"Well, Chris." I said, "and this is just my opinion, we seem to provide four major areas of ministry, and they are four areas of personal involvement opportunity for our members:

     1.) Connecting people to God.  We seek to do this through organized church school classes for youth and adults, and activities like mission trips for teenagers.  We also try to provide very engaging worship and music on Sunday mornings.

     2.) Connecting people to one another.  We continually seek member participation in our church activities.  Many friendships are born out of these joint activities.  For example, while many churches have 8 or 10 on-going committees ----- Central Church has 19 "teams" reporting to the governing body (the Session), which creates many participation opportunities.  Of course, some members are very active as leaders and other members may seldom be seen.  But the opportunities are there.  Perhaps we could do a better job in the cultivation of participation, but that is an on-going challenge.

     3.) Connecting people to the community.  We seek and find many opportunities for our church members to practice mercy and justice for people in our community, people who are outside our church.  Mindful of what Jesus taught, we give both time and money to those in need of mercy and justice, even though our resources are not unlimited.

     4.) Connecting people to the culture.  By our  example, we try to integrate our faith with our work life.  Our faith is not just a "Sunday thing."  We encourage each other to live by our faith and the teachings of Jesus, all week long.  Some people call this kind of ministering and service to the world, "witness."

I told Chris we do not actually give equal attention to all four of these areas of ministry. However, we attempt to engage in all four areas concurrently, to the extent of our collective individual gifts and resources of time and money.

Chris said our conversation had been helpful, and that he thought he and his wife would want to know better the opportunities at Central Presbyterian Church.

I saw them again at our next "Take Ten"!

________________________________________________________________________

These thoughts are brought to you by CPC's Adult Spiritual Development Team, hoping to encourage you to pursue some personal growth this year at CPC.

________________________________________________________________________

WEEKLY COMMENTARY: Reasons To Reach Out To God -- Or To Not Reach Out

I seldom travel into New York City to meet someone for lunch, but I had been invited by Richard, a good friend from college days, and I was eager to see him again.

We had planned to meet at a restaurant near Union Square, and while waiting for our food and drink to be served, we tried to give each other a quick story about what we had been doing since we had last met.  I learned that Richard, his wife and their two kids now live in New York City, and seem to be enjoying city life and its many diversions.

Later, Richard mentioned that he had become a member of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan.  The Senior Pastor of that church, he said, was a man named Timothy Keller.  Rev. Keller had been preaching recently on the subject of one's relationship with God.  Richard paraphrased Pastor Keller as saying,

         "Our identity is not built on our earthly record or our performance,

          but on God's love for us in Christ.  Our main purpose is fellowship

          with God.  Our self-view is not based on our moral achievement.

          In Christ, we are simultaneously sinful and lost, yet accepted in

          Christ.  We are so bad that Jesus had to die for us, and we are

          so loved that Jesus was glad to die for us."

Richard stopped to take a breath, and then continued to paraphrase Pastor Keller,

          "This leads us to deep humility and confidence, at the same time.  

           Our identity and self-worth are centered on one who died for us.

           We are saved by sheer grace, so we cannot look down on those who

           believe or practice something different from us.  Only by God's 

           grace are you and I what we are."

Frankly, I knew all of this, so I was a little surprised that Richard found it so astonishing.

Then Richard reminded me that in his college days, he had always been his own boss, and that he had not believed there was a God who cared about humankind, so that Richard had seen a need to be his own Savior.  Later, after college, Richard said, as he saw a bit more of the world he had looked upon God as his helper and teacher, and through Jesus as the model for his daily behavior.  Richard claimed that in those years he had always tried to obey God's law (that is, to be really righteous and really moral), but he was still the boss.

I wondered to myself whether this had been just so Richard could be his own Savior and bargain better for his own salvation.  I was thinking that if Richard had given thanks to God merely in the hope that it would earn Richard blessings in heaven, then he was not actually doing anything at all for God?  It would be for Richard's benefit only.  I was remembering the Pharisees of Jesus' time, who were so fixated on the letter of the law, but not the spirit of the law.

Richard seemed to be admitting that he had been obeying God in order to get things from God.  He said that when circumstances in his life would go wrong, he was angry at God, as he believed that anyone who is "good" deserves a comfortable life. In those earlier days, he said, if he were criticized, he would become furious or devastated, because it was critical that he think of himself as a "good person."  He said that his prayer life had consisted mainly of petition, and prayers that he would employ only when he was in a "time of need."  Richard admitted to me that in those days his main purpose in prayer was to control his environment, not to develop a relationship with God.

Richard said of himself that his motivation then was based on fear and insecurity.  "If and when I was living up to my standards," Richard continued, "I felt confident, but then I was prone to be proud and unsympathetic to failing people.  If I was not living up to my standards, I felt humble, but not confident ----- I felt like a failure.  My identity and self-worth were based mainly on how hard I worked, or how moral I thought I was ---- and so I had to look down on those I perceived as lazy and immoral."

I thought hard about where Richard said he had come in seeking a compass for his life.  It seemed that before hearing Pastor Keller, Richard was avoiding God as the Savior and Lord.  He was trying to keep control of his life by looking to something besides God for salvation ---- HIMSELF.  It occurred to me that perhaps "religious legalism and irreligious relativism" are just different strategies for "self-salvation."

Now I needed to react to Richard's description of his path to spiritual discovery ---- his personal discovery of a relationship with God.

"Only an experience of grace," I said, "can change us so we do not avoid Jesus Christ as Savior, but do good things for goodness's sake.  What is this grace?  It is not fundamentally an invitation to get more religious.  No, though we often do fail to obey the moral law, the deeper problem is why we are trying to obey it.  Even our efforts to obey it may have been a way of just seeking to be our own Savior."

In my opinion, I said, the way to live does not involve only an attempt to repent.  Richard's earlier way to live had involved repentance of his sins.  But followers of the way to live as described by Pastor Timothy Keller, repent both their sins and their self-

righteousness.  

"So," I concluded, "we must change not so much the amount, but the object of our faith.  We have to do more than just subscribe to a set of doctrines about Christ.  It is more than that ----- we must transfer our trust from our own works and record, to Christ's work and record."

Having said that, I felt obliged to pick up the tab for lunch.

________________________________________________________________________

These thoughts are brought to you by CPC's Adult Spiritual Development Team, hoping to encourage you to pursue some personal growth this year at CPC.

________________________________________________________________________

WEEKLY COMMENTARY: It's YOUR Choice: Anger or Forgiveness

So, how do we forgive?  What does it mean to reconcile with your "enemy"?
Can we learn to forgive those who have hurt us so deeply that the pain does
not seem to go away?

Forgiveness is not a weak substitute for revenge, just because forgiveness
is soft and gentle.  Actually, it is the best alternative because it is the
only creative route to *less* unfairness.  Hard as forgiveness seems at the
time, forgiveness has creative power to move us away from a past moment of
pain, block us from an endless chain of pain-giving responses, and to
create a new situation in which both the wrongdoer and the wronged can
begin in a new way.  There is no guarantee, but forgiving is the only door
open to possibilities of renewal.

Forgiveness, of course, is not an easy practice to master.  Sometimes hurts
seem too great, betrayals too treacherous, to be forgiven.  Sometimes
forgiveness can be mistaken for weakness and vulnerability, even by those
who would forgive.

Forgiveness is about being able to accept our human situation with all the
ambiguity and messiness it entails.  It's about accepting the fact that
inevitably people do disappoint one another.  Because we are limited in
time, in talent and in ability to understand everything about one another,
we often miss the mark.  Forgiveness means accepting others ---- and
ourselves ---- as human, and not being divine.  Forgiveness means resisting
a defensive response when we are hurt ---- a response that effectively cuts
off the other person.  As much as we might like forgiveness to be a
"forgive and forget" moment, our lives do not work that way.  Forgiveness
loves the sinner while saying clearly that the sin is unacceptable.

In the summer of 2004,  my wife and I spent a week living on a Blackfoot
Indian reservation in western Montana.  We were members of a volunteer
project sponsored by a national organization that gives a helping hand to
needy communities.  It was a little like CPC's high school mission trips,
except ours was not church-sponsored.

We spent time with some very friendly Blackfoot Indian families, and were
invited to their community meetings.  One night, a tribal elder shared a
lesson  I still remember, even to this day.  But could this lesson really
be relevant to my wife and me, whose real home is so far from the
reservation?

                "An old Indian grandfather said to his grandson, who came
                 to him with anger at a friend who had done him an injustice,
                 .  .  .  .  'Let me tell you a story.' "

                 "I, too, at times, have felt a great hate for those who have taken
                 too much, with no sorrow for what they do.  But hate wears you
                 down, and does not hurt your enemy.  It is like you taking poison
                 and wishing your enemy would die.  I have struggled with these
                 feelings many times."

                 He continued .  .  .  "It is as if there are two wolves inside me.
                 One is good and does no harm.  He lives in harmony with all
                 around him, and does not take offense when no offense was
                 intended.  He will only fight when it is right to do so,and in the
                 right way.  He saves all his energy for the right fight."

                 "But the other wolf, ahhh.  He is full of anger.  The littlest thing
                 will set him into a fit of temper.  He fights everyone,all the time,
                 for no reason.  He cannot think because his anger and hate are
                 so great.  It is hopeless anger for his anger will change nothing."

                 "Sometimes it is hard to live with these two wolves inside me,
                 for both of them try to dominate my spirit."

                The boy looked intently into his grandfather's eyes and asked,
                 'Which one wins,Grandfather?'

                 The grandfather smiled and quietly said . . ."The one I feed."
________________________________________________________________________

*These thoughts are brought to you by CPC's Adult Spiritual Development
Team, hoping you will pursue some personal spiritual growth this summer.*
________________________________________________________________________