There are a couple of other questions listed before this one, but this was the one that was interesting to me:
Studying Scripture can simply increase our information. How do we move from information to transformation?
I wish I knew the answer to that question. Though, I think there's a lot wrapped up in that one question; like a lot of sub-questions. :)
How much do we already know (or feel super-strongly) to be true, but it doesn't penetrate our life in any material way?
That's a harsh way of putting it. I think there are a lot of things that I feel like, I constantly relearn and I remind myself I should already know.
Why not? Do we not believe it enough? Or, have we heard it so much that we've become innured to it?
This happens to me to. Where, I hear a message so much, it loses its potency.
Are our expectations wrong? Do we have an unrealistic expectation that transformation should be immediate and complete?
Whether it's through age or sermons or what have you, I've slowly come around to the idea that, we're all constant works in progress. In some sense, I think Christian spiritual growth is the same as everything else I've found to be a worthwhile pursuit; it just takes time, it's gradual. It doesn't just happen overnight. The analogy breaks down in that, with other things, hard work is the main/sometimes only ingredient in what accomplishes the desired result; not so with deeper/stronger faith.
For me, I also think that for a long time, I held Christ at an impersonal arm's length. Checking my most personal, uncomfortable baggage at the door when I approached Him.
I could nod with the pithy truth seriously intoned in the sermon or come up with the right conclusion to the small group question. But approaching a relationship with Christ in that way really just cheated me... In the end, I'm still trying to answer the original question, I think, by trying to open myself, warts and all, more completely to Him...
Monday, May 9, 2011
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Pauline waters filling stream of consciousness...
Today's study question is:
Paul says that "all Scripture is God-breathed," or inspired. How is the inspiration of Scripture different from an "inspired" speech or writing?
I think there's a sort of semantic twist to this question. If you change the verb-to-be and use the active verb the sentence reads, "God inspires all scripture"
That's a lot different than, "William Wallace, inspired by freedom, delivers the Braveheart speech"
I found one link to one commentary that fixated all the all part of the verse. The commentator writes:
Every single word is truth from the beginning. The totality of God's written revelation is not just true - it is Truth! There is not a speck of untruth in Scripture. It is everlasting.
I think that's a fallacious conclusion as it pertains specifically to 2 Timothy 3:16-17. If Paul were a CS nerd, I think he'd approve of the contrapositive of the original statement (which is still the logical equivalent of the 1st half of verse 16):
There is no scripture that is not God-inspired.
That's a completely different statement than asserting the truth aspect of every word. And please understand that I'm not necessarily disputing the "every word is true" idea here. I'm just saying it's not the same thing as what Paul says there.
Oliver, why does any of that matter to you?
Because it's easier for me to reconcile that everything between the covers is divinely inspired than it is for me to accept that every single statement is crafted to perfection.
If everything is divinely inspired, then there's still some room that inspiration <> dictation. I get that going down that path is a slippery slope to relativism. But lets face it; language is an imperfect device and people are likely imperfect delivery mechanisms for perfection.
And, if you were to assert the absolute truth premise, well, honestly it feels like sometimes Paul can be kind of hard on the ladies:
2 Timothy 3, verse 6: mentioned yesterday; it's not like, he's straight up calling all women silly or gullible or whatever the particular translation says; it's more of a "if the shoe fits" kind of phrasing. Still, he does specifically call out women...
1 Timothy 2:11-15: pretty rough...
1 Timothy 5:13: This verse kind of reminded me of Peggy Bundy caricature from Married with Children...
1 Corinthians 11:2-15 : this is a weird one, b/c it starts out pretty like, "do this, not that" and ends, "well, figure out what works for you"
Good ole TK would remind me that:
1. I might be looking at things through my own sort of cultural/societal prism; the norms of which would very likely offend other cultures, societies that are just as much part of God's kingdom.
2. I might not have the entire story.
3. I might just be flat out wrong.
Paul says that "all Scripture is God-breathed," or inspired. How is the inspiration of Scripture different from an "inspired" speech or writing?
I think there's a sort of semantic twist to this question. If you change the verb-to-be and use the active verb the sentence reads, "God inspires all scripture"
That's a lot different than, "William Wallace, inspired by freedom, delivers the Braveheart speech"
I found one link to one commentary that fixated all the all part of the verse. The commentator writes:
Every single word is truth from the beginning. The totality of God's written revelation is not just true - it is Truth! There is not a speck of untruth in Scripture. It is everlasting.
I think that's a fallacious conclusion as it pertains specifically to 2 Timothy 3:16-17. If Paul were a CS nerd, I think he'd approve of the contrapositive of the original statement (which is still the logical equivalent of the 1st half of verse 16):
There is no scripture that is not God-inspired.
That's a completely different statement than asserting the truth aspect of every word. And please understand that I'm not necessarily disputing the "every word is true" idea here. I'm just saying it's not the same thing as what Paul says there.
Oliver, why does any of that matter to you?
Because it's easier for me to reconcile that everything between the covers is divinely inspired than it is for me to accept that every single statement is crafted to perfection.
If everything is divinely inspired, then there's still some room that inspiration <> dictation. I get that going down that path is a slippery slope to relativism. But lets face it; language is an imperfect device and people are likely imperfect delivery mechanisms for perfection.
And, if you were to assert the absolute truth premise, well, honestly it feels like sometimes Paul can be kind of hard on the ladies:
2 Timothy 3, verse 6: mentioned yesterday; it's not like, he's straight up calling all women silly or gullible or whatever the particular translation says; it's more of a "if the shoe fits" kind of phrasing. Still, he does specifically call out women...
1 Timothy 2:11-15: pretty rough...
1 Timothy 5:13: This verse kind of reminded me of Peggy Bundy caricature from Married with Children...
1 Corinthians 11:2-15 : this is a weird one, b/c it starts out pretty like, "do this, not that" and ends, "well, figure out what works for you"
Good ole TK would remind me that:
1. I might be looking at things through my own sort of cultural/societal prism; the norms of which would very likely offend other cultures, societies that are just as much part of God's kingdom.
2. I might not have the entire story.
3. I might just be flat out wrong.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
2 Timothy 3:16-17
Trying to do my QT's in the morning again, to kick-start my day off on a good note. In MDG, we've been doing a memory verse and going through the various questions in the study guide. Moreover, this week we're going to be reading through the text on how to do inductive Bible study. For now, this is the study question for today...
Read 2 Timothy 3. How is Paul's instruction about the nature of Scripture a contrast to the nonbelieving world that Paul describes?
In verse 16-17, Paul describes scripture as "inspired by God...so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work."
He describes the nonbelieving world in verses 3-5 with lots of colorful nasty-isms: "lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, inhuman, slanderers, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure."
A while ago, I kind of chuckled off my MIL's sandwich-board-The-End-is-at-Hand! theories. She was saying, "Just look! In the last few years, look at Thailand, New Orleans, Haiti and Japan..." (and you could since add Alabama) My counter theory was that natural disasters have happened since forever ago, its just not until the age of television and the Internet have we had images of the destruction beamed into our homes.
But, looking at Paul's laundry list of "oh noes!", maybe she has a point? People loving themselves, loving money and pleasure and being conceited and ungrateful; to me that seems more the rule than the exception?
From what I understand, Paul anticipated the end of days might happen within his lifetime. Even though it didn't happen that way, I think what's more clear than the actual timing is how, as Christians, we're expected to conduct ourselves in the midst of this kind of decadence and spiritual decay;
v5: Avoid them! (profligaters)
v14: continue in what you've learned
v17: be proficient, equipped for every good work.
Total aside, but v6 kind of cracked me up where it says, "those who make their way into households and captivate silly women..." (I wrote a note for that verse, "Oh snap! No he didn't!")
The more I've done MDG, the more I've come to understand that a Christian man's life is meant to be productive and proactively lived. We're to actively build proficiency and make ourselves strong in spirit and character so as to be disciples that bear the fruit of the Spirit. There's no provision (at least that I've read so far) for the couch potato Christian.
So, I think Paul's instruction is to invest your time and energy to scripture to build yourself up. We're charged not to withdraw and keep fighting against the decay of people's hearts turning towards themselves or towards things; towards everything except the only thing that actually does nourish a person's spirit.
Read 2 Timothy 3. How is Paul's instruction about the nature of Scripture a contrast to the nonbelieving world that Paul describes?
In verse 16-17, Paul describes scripture as "inspired by God...so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work."
He describes the nonbelieving world in verses 3-5 with lots of colorful nasty-isms: "lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, inhuman, slanderers, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure."
A while ago, I kind of chuckled off my MIL's sandwich-board-The-End-is-at-Hand! theories. She was saying, "Just look! In the last few years, look at Thailand, New Orleans, Haiti and Japan..." (and you could since add Alabama) My counter theory was that natural disasters have happened since forever ago, its just not until the age of television and the Internet have we had images of the destruction beamed into our homes.
But, looking at Paul's laundry list of "oh noes!", maybe she has a point? People loving themselves, loving money and pleasure and being conceited and ungrateful; to me that seems more the rule than the exception?
From what I understand, Paul anticipated the end of days might happen within his lifetime. Even though it didn't happen that way, I think what's more clear than the actual timing is how, as Christians, we're expected to conduct ourselves in the midst of this kind of decadence and spiritual decay;
v5: Avoid them! (profligaters)
v14: continue in what you've learned
v17: be proficient, equipped for every good work.
Total aside, but v6 kind of cracked me up where it says, "those who make their way into households and captivate silly women..." (I wrote a note for that verse, "Oh snap! No he didn't!")
The more I've done MDG, the more I've come to understand that a Christian man's life is meant to be productive and proactively lived. We're to actively build proficiency and make ourselves strong in spirit and character so as to be disciples that bear the fruit of the Spirit. There's no provision (at least that I've read so far) for the couch potato Christian.
So, I think Paul's instruction is to invest your time and energy to scripture to build yourself up. We're charged not to withdraw and keep fighting against the decay of people's hearts turning towards themselves or towards things; towards everything except the only thing that actually does nourish a person's spirit.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)