Posted on 11/07/2011 7:57:34 AM PST by marshmallow
(ABP) -- The sexuality conference in April will raise many issues. But for the theologically minded, the most important issue will probably be the question of religious authority.
Who or what carries binding authority in the Christian life? If the question is, for example, sexual morality, who or what has the authority to establish norms to which Christians must adhere? In a cultural (and ecclesial) context of innumerable conflicting practices and beliefs, who or what has the authority to settle the matter? Or is that even a coherent question? At least, is it a coherent question from within the framework of Baptist ecclesiology and theology?
The winners in the SBC controversy of 1979-1991 claimed that their fight was always about (re)establishing the authority of the “inerrant, infallible Word of God” in the life of the Southern Baptist Convention. They sought to heighten claims first about the inspiration of the Bible and then about its authority in Christian life.
Sometimes, though not always, they acknowledged that it is not quite sufficient to anchor down claims about biblical inspiration and authority. They acknowledged that the Bible is always an interpreted text. Some person, office, or body must be responsible for “rightly dividing the Word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15 KJV). Often referencing pastoral epistle texts, some SBC leaders heightened pastoral interpretive authority along with biblical authority.
So that is one answer to the question of religious authority. Raise belief in the inerrancy and authority of the Bible as high as possible, deflecting all challenges to such belief, then elevate the pastor’s role in authoritatively interpreting the Bible for the congregation. These moves imply if not demand a posture of submission on the part of the lay Christian, who is trained to yield to the authority of Scripture and to the teaching authority of the pastor.
This approach is not all that different from the Catholic tradition -- a comment offered as observation, not criticism. The differences, of course, are that in Catholicism Scripture is treated as the first stage of Spirit-inspired tradition, and Scripture/tradition are interpreted authoritatively by the magisterium of the Church, organized hierarchically and headed by the pope. But both the current SBC and the Catholic approaches emphasize authority rather than freedom, submission to text and leadership rather than individual conscience or collective Christian discernment.
The potential benefits of such authoritative (if not authoritarian) approaches such are especially apparent when wrestling with issues like sexuality. Today all kinds of voices, both from within Christianity and outside it, are begging, cajoling, even demanding that Christians and churches rethink our purportedly oppressive, backwards, unrealistic, archaic sexual ethics. It would be so much easier -- and less stressful -- to simply go back to inerrant-Scripture-as-interpreted-by-pastor or inspired-tradition-as-interpreted-by-pope to resolve these issues.
Looking at some of the alternatives among non-SBC Baptists, in some cases I am really quite concerned. The Bible (at times) slips out of range of ever functioning as authoritative in any way that might compel behavior contrary to our preferences. Pastors (at times) abdicate any role of offering directive moral guidance through sermon or pastoral counsel. Christian tradition (at times) is sloughed off or treated primarily as a source of oppression.
Human beings are created good yet damaged by sin. In Christian morality we do need Scripture, pastor and tradition to help us discern God’s will for our lives. We need some kind of voice speaking to us to which we grant some kind of authority to exhort, correct and redirect our desires.
I believe we need a heightened role for communal Christian discernment, for listening to the voice of the Spirit together as we seek to follow Jesus together. I believe we need to read the signs of the times and hear the voices of marginalized and suffering people, for in their sorrows we can encounter Jesus himself. I do believe that Scripture can be wrongly interpreted and that both pastors and tradition can be and sometimes are quite wrong.
But I do not believe we do well to jettison all authorities outside the freely choosing Christian self, so prone to interpret fallible emotions and desires as divine authorization. Certainly we can and must do better than that.
David Gushee is distinguished university professor of Christian ethics at Mercer University.
An admission that the Bible does not "self-interpret". Huzzah!
And then there's this:
Pastors (at times) abdicate any role of offering directive moral guidance through sermon or pastoral counsel. Christian tradition (at times) is sloughed off or treated primarily as a source of oppression.
Yes, very good. Tradition does have a place, doesn't it?
Although he gets cold feet when he gets to the subject of authority (OK, I'm a Catholic), I think he's heading in the right direction here.
A Christian with “cold feet when he gets to the subject of authority”?
Weren’t those the “Ten ‘Commandments’”? ‘Commandments’ carries a definite whiff of authority, or have we missed something?
Just wonderin’.
I know it was very uncomfortable for my sister to sit through hours of meetings with a priest, who’s never been married, and listen to him describe what sex acts were and weren’t permitted in a Catholic marriage.
Interpretation is one thing, a completely separate set of man-made articles, Canon law, is something else.
Nice try but Catholicism is 90% tradition and 10% scripture.
I was thinking maybe Jesus Christ and his teachings might take care of that...
...but what do I know?
Some person, office, or body must be responsible for “rightly dividing the Word of truth”
The Bible IS the authority. One should “Work out your salvation with fear and trembling.” A pastors duty is clear. And the congregation should read as much as he does, should understand as much as he does, that they may not be misled by an ‘errant’ pastor.
When did your sister marry? I’ve never heard of this from anyone who married in the Catholic Church. I’m 48, Married in the Church in 96, have known many, many engaged couples who went through Catholic marriage prep in my life, and nobody ever mentioned having such an “interesting” discussion with their priest.
The Bible cannot self interpret.
I didn't say she stole my money - someone else said it
I didn't say she stole my money - I implied it
I didn't say she stole my money - I typed it in an email
I didn't say she stole my money - I said someone did, not necessarily her
I didn't say she stole my money - I considered it borrowed, even though she didn't ask
I didn't say she stole my money - only that she stole money
I didn't say she stole my money - she stole stuff which cost me money to replace
Seven words, seven different meanings. And people will bet their eternal salvation on the belief they get the words of Scripture right! Christians cannot agree on what the meaning of "is" is.
And all this and the fact:
1) Jesus NEVER gave instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book.
2) Other than the specific command to John to pen the Revelation, Jesus never told His apostles to write anything down and compile it into an authoritative book.
3) Nowhere in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book.
4) The Bible does not have an inspired and infallible list of books that should belong in the Bible. Where did the table of contents come from?
She was married in January of 2009. The priest was very explicit to her counseling group regarding various sex acts that were permitted and not permitted. One could do x but not to completion, etc.. He also essentially told her that she shouldn’t work and her job was to stay home and pop out babies.
(””Sometimes, though not always, they acknowledged that it is not quite sufficient to anchor down claims about biblical inspiration and authority. They acknowledged that the Bible is always an interpreted text. Some person, office, or body must be responsible for “rightly dividing the Word of truth” )”
(1 Peter 19-21)
19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Let me tell you whom. The Lord Jesus Christ Himself and His Word, the Holy Bible. NOT MAN!!! I go by what the Bible says to do. I do not go by what a man, local church, or my domination, which is Southern Baptist, says do. If what they say conflicts with my Bible, then I ignore them and go by what the Scriptures tell me to do. I answer to Him and Him only. Not men, a church group here or a domination.
Including a million eastern European, Asian pagan idol worships. And bringing worship of Mary into the deal. Dudden say anything like that in my King James.
“Jesus never told His apostles to write anything down and compile it into an authoritative book.”
And you know this how? Is this where you should have used the Ass U Me word?
Sorry, but that is not what the Bible says:
“But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.” 1Tim 3:15
The Bible says the Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth. Now all you have to do is make sure you have the right Church!
“Seven words, seven different meanings. And people will bet their eternal salvation on the belief they get the words of Scripture right! “
(Romans 1:16-17)
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. 17 For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last,[e] just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”[f]
(1 John 1:1-4
1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)
3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.
4 And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full.
Sounds like some government bureaucracy think tank.
If I were in charge of this silly meeting, conference, or whatever this think tank is, I would say.
“The bible is the “Infallible Word Of God””.
“Go into the world and proclaim the Gospel, meeting adjourned.”
And the dead relics, etc...
It really doesn’t take a trained mind in theology to see that it’s all very contrived and externally focused.
That said, I think Christianity in general is under attack and we, Catholics, Protestants, etc.., should all be aware of coming persecution and work together rather than against each other.
Are you serious? You think you can just make up things you believe Christ said because they fit your beliefs? If it not in Scripture, you are adding it to the book.
You know that the Apostles immediately followed his command to go and make disciples of all nations. But they waited a 35 years to follow this alleged command? Makes no sense whatsoever.
Only by another "organization" which intends to mimic the power of Rome, but under a different banner. All organizations are incorrect. Christ called individuals to associate in small independent congregations at homes/businesses. How do we know? The Scripture describes just this. Any more is part of the cult mentality that captured Rome and swept her away.
Pentecost was 35 yrs? after the resurrection. Who knew?
No. Scripture was completed with Revelation around 68 A.D, 35 years after the death of Jesus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.