Matthew 15:8 "'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; 9 in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'"
8 ὁ λαὸς οὗτος τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ· 9 μάτην δὲ σέβονταί με διδάσκοντες διδασκαλίας ἐντάλματα ἀνθρώπων.
Every time I read through the gospels I am amazed at how Jesus' teaching applies so well to today. In other words, people have not fundamentally changed. Although the writers could not have imagined that we would communicate to each other with telephones, blogs, twitter, etc, what they wrote applies today as much as it did 2000 years ago because the human condition has not changed.
When I read this passage I immediately put my "team" mode on and think how great it is that Jesus is sticking it to the Pharisees again. Way to call out those hypocrites! I'm so glad that my heart is close to Jesus! I'm glad that I don't follow the commandments of men. After all, I have no real creed but the Bible, right?
This attitude is problematic for a couple of reasons. One is that my heart is not as close to Jesus as I would like to think it is. I realize how easily distracted I am by the world. I give lip-service to Jesus, but I don't stay as close to Him as He commands. I've addressed this in numerous posts and I'm sure I will again. I know how easily my heart strays since it is an idol factory after all.
The other is that the idea of "no creed but the Bible" is impossible. We say that, but ultimately we follow the traditions of men. Suppose that we think church should only be on Sunday mornings at 11:00 AM with wooden pews. That's fine, except pews did not exist in the first-century. So we've already started following a tradition of men. It's not a bad one, but it's naive to think that we don't.
Then there is how we read Scripture. We're all informed by our lives. We all bring certain prejudices to the text. For example, when Luther read Galatians he saw it as a condemnation of the Catholic Church. I suppose it can be used that way, but that's not what Paul had in mind since the Roman Catholic Church was not invented yet. He read his situation into the text. We may say that we don't want to do that, but we all do it to some degree.
This is not necessarily wrong as long as we don't change things to suit our moods. That's what happens when we read a feminist understanding into 1 Timothy 2:12, for example. We are all in a hermeneutical spiral. Let's just be honest about it rather than pretending that we truly have "no creed but the Bible." And let's obey this passage by not elevating those secondary matters above the clear teachings of Scripture, amen?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
"A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety."
(1 Timothy 2:11-15)
It is biblical Orthodoxy to take this passage as it stands, and feminism is anathema.
We do follow traditions, but not necessarily those of men: some are of divine origin and cannot be changed. Others are admittedly human conventions, and can change with the times. Nothing explicit in the Word of God, such as the passage quoted above, can change.
Why then do we not make women cover their heads in worship, or men uncover them? Does God really care?
We are all apostates from the Word of God, some of us running away from it, others trying to retrace our steps back to it. But either way, though heaven and earth pass away, this Word shall never pass away. We're simply stuck with it.
Does God really care if we cover our heads in worship if we are women and uncover them if we are men?
I don't think He cares about the action of covering or uncovering, or the state of being covered or uncovered, as much as He cares about the state of our souls, hearts, mind, spirits and bodies, in short, about us as He made us and intended us to be.
The externals, though, are part of the full commandment that the Lord expects us to obey. We are only making it harder on ourselves and prolonging our exile from the Father, Son and Holy Spirit by picking and choosing what we want to obey and what we want to disobey, calling some commandments mere human convention.
The Word of God does not lie, because God does not lie. But we do, to Him, to others and to ourselves.
May the Lord give us all time to repent and to accept Him wholeheartedly and, doing what pleases Him, let our obedience produce faith, so that by faith we can be saved.
Lord, have mercy on us!
Funny you should mention head-coverings. That was the topic of one of my first serious papers at seminary. I think that one of the keys of hermeneutics is figuring out what is applicable for the time and what is timeless. For example, here in America we rarely greet each other with a holy kiss. Is it sinful for us not to do that? I don't think so. I think that we can accurately translate that command as "greet each other warmly."
I do not think that Paul was giving us a specific practice for all time. Here is the link to it if you're interested: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0BzzUJWVBJ-z9YWY2NTAwZTktNTBiMi00NGVhLTlmMGQtNTgwYTZlZDExODQ5&hl=en&authkey=CPeqoy8
Sins of omission as well as commission are still sins, no matter how minor we think they are. Are we satisfied to just be sinners? No, we should always want what God wants, in everything, knowing that God in Christ is merciful to us when we miss the mark.
The Orthodox single or triple peck on the cheek is how the "greet one another with a holy kiss" is materialised among us. Like the ceremonials of courtesy in East Asian countries (and probably in other "primitive" cultures), the biblical ceremonials never detract, but always add, to our quality of life. Isn't that what God wants?
By the way, not to contradict you, but in good faith I feel I must challenge you, and say that I think you are entirely mistaken when you write, I think that we can accurately translate that command as "greet each other warmly."
To me this is not even open to discussion, so I won't respond to a counter-challenge. Cultural translations of the Word of God are not permissible. Commentaries, yes. Translation must be faithful, or else, don't translate at all: learn Greek and Hebrew.
Sorry for this comment trail, but I pressed the wrong button on the previous. I meant to press preview so I could add something, but instead I pressed publish.
I want to add, that I personally use many translations into English of the Bible, and I acknowledge that the various strict and loose translations, even paraphrases, have value, and so your cultural translation of the holy kiss passage as "greet each other warmly" is one I think I've seen in one of the modern paraphrases. That doesn't offend my sense of sense of scriptural integrity, precisely because those versions are acknowledged to be cultural paraphrases. The same is true of the Message version of the Bible, which I still don't own, but I want to buy a copy, as soon as I can find one with a metal cover.
As long as the ground rule understood by all is that the original language version is the only 100% authoritative one, you can use whatever translation is indicated by the ministry work at hand.
Actually, I appreciate you being pedantic and calling me on my choice of words. Instead of "translate" I should have written "understand." In other words, of course the words in the verse tell us to greet each other with a holy kiss. But how do we interpret that?
Also, we have to be careful to note that the autographs were 100% correct, but we don't have them. Personally, I prefer the eclectic text as I think that represents the best we know about what the autographs read. Plus, they are clear about additions like 1John 5:7-8 and the long ending of Mark.
"Also, we have to be careful to note that the autographs were 100% correct, but we don't have them."
If God meant for us to have the autographs, we'd have them. Are they 100% correct or not? It doesn't matter, because only God Himself is 100% correct. Our faith in the veracity and fidelity of all that God reveals is what puts this question outside our consideration. Bible scholars and such people have all kinds of uses for analytical work, but the bottom line is, nothing they come up with will ever add more to or take anything away from, the written Word of God. It's all just playing with speculation.
It seems that you're setting yourself up for a circular argument. Yes, if God wanted for us to have the original autographs we would. But we don't. So what do we trust? The Byzantine Text? The Majority Text? The Eclectic (Alexandrian) Text?
Most of the text-critical issues are fairly trivial. But what do we do with the longer ending of Mark, for example? Folks who practice snake-handling use that as a basis for what they do. And I can see why based on the plain reading of the text. Personally, I don't think that the evidence warrants its inclusion.
What do you do with the text-critical issues? That is a very fundamental question because before we get to hermeneutics we have to agree that we are reading the correct words.
Brother, it is obvious that you are way too smart, too educated and sophisticated to even be wasting your time responding to me. I apologise profusely.
Yes, which original text? And yes, the differences are trivial. And yes, there's that text about handling snakes, and yes, idiots try to force their way into God's hands by imitating such things and justifying themselves and their carnal and base beliefs, using it. And yes, something about that snake handling passage seems somehow inconsistent with the rest of God's Book, just as the other New Testament pseudepigrapha also seem somehow alien to the Spirit of the Bible. And yes, even if you leave it in, it is still forcing yourself into God's hands to try to imitate that and seek your deliverance in it.
We are not idiots, however, we have minds and spirits trained by the Word of God, if we only let Him train us.
The Bible says, "You have not lost the anointing He gave you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. The anointing He gave you teaches you everything.
Who writes this? The human author was John the author of the gospel and the epistles and the one to whom the Revelation was granted. And yes, I don't care what bible scholars tell me, I believe it is the same person, but, yes, it doesn't really matter, as long as we believe what it says.
Because not man, not woman, not bible scholars, not pontiffs, not saints, not bishops and presiding elders, not the king, not the emperor, not my mother or father, not you, and not me have anything to add, elaborate, amplify, enlighten, make comprehensible or comprehensive, or more useful, or more relevant, than what God the Author, the Revealer, the Sanctifier, the Enlightener, the Teacher, the Father, the Savior tells us into our obedient and welcoming ears, directly and fully and without doubt, and salvifically.
No, we are not idiots. I do not pick up snakes to prove I am a Christian. I do not speak in strange tongues to prove that the Holy Spirit is in me, upon me, and with me. I don't need to prove my faithfulness to God's Word by going out and blasting sinners, holding them up to ridicule, hating them or judging them and excluding them from the promises of God. But though everything be taken away from me, I will not, cannot deny the Word of God, and with the saints I will stand my ground, I will defend them even when I don't agree with them one hundred per cent, and I will stand on the Word of God, because there is no other foundation, there is nothing solid in the whole created universe to stand on, except that precious, holy, divine Word, who is the Son of God, one of the Holy Triad, glorified in the heavens and on earth, and fed to us spiritual infants, verse by verse, spoonful by spoonful, day after day, until we are fully grown and mature, fully reflecting His glory, fully alive in Him with that life that has existed from before the beginning of all things.
Sorry for getting in your way, brother, and in the way of all those whose brilliance and accomplishments in theology and learning have put you beyond the reach of people like me, arrogant and ignorant, amnd deserving censure. And I thank you for putting me in my place. Like Job, having been chastised by the Lord of all, in dust and ashes I repent. Farewell. Go with God.
I'm not quite sure how my question prompted this reaction. I do not think myself better than anyone, but I do want to ask questions as you have been one who has written as one with authority. I am curious how you resolve these matters. You haven't really addressed that.
I certainly don't think you "deserve censure." But I do think it is fair to ask questions, no? I appreciate you visiting my blog and posting comments. I'm sorry if I have not made that clear.
Post a Comment