those who regard the Bible as a book that fell out of the sky, ready-made for Christians to read and obey - a “Manual-for-Life” as I’ve sometimes heard it called - are remembering the role of the Bible in a remarkable way. They have edited out some inconvenient aspects of the history of the Bible and introduced previously non-existent ideas and concepts which I would argue can best be understood as a reaction to more recent historical developments (as opposed to a faithful ongoing witness from biblical times). as i have said before, the work of re-member-ing is not just clarifying and reinforcing the dominant story. it involves a challenging journey of investigation, in an attempt to recover lost threads - especially when those lost threads have been lost by a certain generation or season in history as they wrestled with their own context and circumstances.
a few thoughts to re-consider:
1. the Bible is not 1 book but a collection of books. Recent Protestant and conservative christian movements (churches) seek to argue that God has determined exactly (i.e. verbatim, word for word) how the book appears to us today. Of course this claim is impossible to deny - how can anyone prove that God didn’t do as they claim. But this conviction that the Bible is verbatim “from God” overlooks a significant historical fact. The church existed before the Bible as we know it today. In fact the church existed and grew for nearly 300 years without the body of text that we call the Bible. of course, fragments existed and were circulating - which suggests that scripture has a very practical origin and purpose - to teach and build the local church. but it was only in the 4th century (from 367) that the 27 books of the New Testament as we know it today began to be regarded as the norm. This list of 27 books was finally authorised by a Council (Carthage) in 397. Trying to deny that this 400 year process of discernment was a product of partnership between the Holy Spirit and the authors is futile. It’s impossible to convince someone that God didn’t intend it all to work out this way. What is worth considering though is how the church survived for those 300-400 years (or even the first 50 years if you want to argue that “scripture” was still floating around and having an effect)… i think it survived without a homogenous and finalised Scriptural TEXT because the Word of God is always first experienced by a hearer (not a reader). It is a living dynamic spoken Word - and that Word is most clearly and dynamically experienced through Jesus. Followers of “the Way” - the early Christians were a community of faith that represented faithfulness to the life, teaching, example, values, witness, death and resurrection of Jesus. This “way” is obviously laid out in the New Testament - the Christian scriptures. But before it was laid out - written down - is was still possible to follow Jesus. the community held the tradition, values and stories and faith of their saviour and lord…
2. for more than 1500 years scripture was only available in a very limited way through the church - which had originally given birth to these texts. scripture was painstakingly copied and recopied so that local church communities would have access to at least ONE copy so that they could follow the instructions offered to Timothy… to “pay attention to the public reading of scripture”. this was the only “way” scripture could be accessed - through the community of faith. it is only with the advent of the printing press and lower printing costs that followers of Jesus could enjoy their own “personal” copy. seems that the call to “pay attention to the public reading” is more relevant than ever! I find it interesting that some of the most individualistic expressions of the Christian faith arise in areas of the world with the greatest access to the Bible…
3. during those first 1500 years of the church, followers of Jesus traced the thread of authority not through scripture, but through Peter! It was the continuity of apostleship that provided confidence that the tradition of “the Way” was being upheld and applied in new and changing circumstances. Always with reference to scripture. But scripture was never the ONLY authority. Neither was it regarded as a purely literal book. The church acknowledged the diversity of it’s texts and encouraged a variety of different approaches to the scriptures. The focus was always on listening and remaining open to the many layers of meaning in the text. Along with all the effort required to guard and copy the scriptures, the church also encouraged dedicated scholarship. Scholars studied scripture and applied their minds to the questions that were raised by new times and changing circumstances.
4. the common contemporary view that scripture is the ONLY authority for all teaching and ethical reflection is a very recent historical occurrence. perhaps only in the last 150 years has this view really taken root. As the excesses of the Roman Catholic Church undermined it’s influence, Protestants looked for another rock (other than the “Rock on which I will build my church”). IN an (understandable) attempt to escape the authority of the Papacy Protestants and Evangelicals have raised the profile of the Bible so that it could take the place of the Church and Tradition in the quest for reliable authority. Making scripture the highest authority hopes to avoid the pitfalls of the Papacy. It tries to eliminate the problem of sinful humanity. The Bible becomes the unquestioned authority - and supposedly the final word on everything. Except, it doesn’t eliminate the problem. Actually, ironically, it exacerbates it! Now it’s not just a carefully chosen select group of human-beings (and their sin) that come into play. Now the sinfulness of every reader comes into play… We need to reflect deeply on the status of church unity since the Reformation (Protestants breaking from the Catholic church) and the easy availability of the Bible. In the last 300 years there have been numerous splits, breaks and divisions in churches, both in main-line denominations and in informal church groupings. Every person is free to read their own copy of the Scriptures, and interpret it how they prefer. Of course, this is democratic. But it’s alos contributed to judgement, division and a lack of united and peaceful Christian witness. We fight more amongst ourselves than we do any significant evil in this world.
I’m not arguing for a return to Autocracy - the rule of the Pope. But I am arguing that the Protestant Project of scriptural authority has failed. What we need is a re-member-ing of the wisdom of Christian History - that reveals a much more rich and dynamic way of dealing with the questions of authority and influence. We must value scripture. The Bible has not continued to have influence by accident. It is a powerful gift to the church. Likewise, we must value the Tradition of the Church, when the community of the the faithful have witnessed passion and obedience to God’s living Word to them - in whatever context and circumstances they found themselves. Could the church’s witness in previous difficult times provide insight for how we can begin to respond to contemporary overwhelming problems… like global warming, poverty…? The church has needed thoughtful and prayerful reflection. We prayerfully engage our minds - common sense must honour God when it applies the best knowledge available to everyday challenges and ethical dilemmas. Finally, we will shoot ourselves in the foot if we fail to recognise the very practicality of God - the work of the Spirit in the secular - the ordinary of our everyday. Our experience of life and God and of relationship and marriage and family and worship etc. will continue to provide helpful insights and wisdom that will most often find resonance in the text of scripture as well as in the wisdom of tradition and reason.
Christians are (by definition) followers of Jesus - followers of “the Way”. How did we get side-tracked by this distortion of our common life of faithful witness?
