These past few months I have been trying to examine what do I believe, why do I believe, and from where did I learn to believe it that way?! I do that periodically just like I clean out my garage in the spring.
I think many of what I believe came from strange places different places than scripture. Some were by omission and some commission. Some were from reactions to strange phenomena and some were intentionally misinformed because it would require too much faith and it couldn't be explained easily. Christmas pageants, bumperstinkers and clichés developed some. Authors of mass produced books and christian celebriatti developed some.
I was in a conversation with a guy who was pretty adamant that it has to be Sola Scriptura (scripture alone) that guides our theology. I do think that the Scriptures must direct it and that they should not be watered down by culture but I am wondering about some of the things I believed that might be a reaction by the reformation with anti-Catholic sentiments, by the Azusa Street Revival (which may also have a bit racial prejudice attachments), by anti-jewish, white-male-western-institutional-dominated thoughts, that shaped how I looked at Scripture, from hence my theology came.
Please understand, I am not trying to be liberal or anti-Conservative or even cool, but I was humming "We Three Kings of Orient are..." and started asking, "who are those guys?" At first just dismissing them as couple of oriental guys on camelback come looking for the Messiah. I carefully reread the story in Matthew 2 and found myself completely baffled by what I believed. I have read through that story many times getting to the Jesus as a babe part but never stopped long enough to consider it much who these guys were. Star gazers, prophet readers, political strategist, and probably Persians (who were enemies of the Roman empire-not to mention our enemies today Iran and Afganistan)... These are messengers of faith? Star gazers used by God? And don't forget the shepherds? Shepherds were farm workers, and God used farm workers to announce the birth of the one who He sent to save us.
Stargazers and farm workers became the evangelist of the time! Today, those people are easily dismissed. Uneducated or miseducated. But these are people of faith, and it takes people used by God, not just people who check off "Christian" on the census questionnaire, to proclaim the truth of God. Is my theology open to stargazers and farm workers to tell me the truth of God?
Sola Scriptura is good as long as it is not tainted with neo-conservative philosophy or liberal disregardation. Seminaries teach the scriptures but they also teach "the correct way" to view scripture - their bent way. I am sure that my bent way of looking at the Scriptures have twisted my religion (the way I live out my faith), and must be open to The Voice to correct my course from time to time...
Sola Scriptura + Sola Spiritus = Soli Deo gloria (Glory to God alone)
2 comments:
Thanks for this post. It is a sobering thing to remember that we have our biases when we turn to Scripture and those biases shape how we understand and live out what we read there. We all have our ways of approaching the Bible and I take a generally provisional and kaleidoscopic view of reading the Bible. That is, I think we need to hear lots of different perspectives and learn lots of different ways to read the Bible. No one interpretation or one way of interpretation is perfect.
I think Sola Scriptura is a terrific doctrine, when not elevated beyond its original intentions. Ironically enough, Sola Scriptura is an extra-biblical doctrine.
is that baby a W.A.S.P.
Post a Comment