Introduction
Last week we started our discussion of the Bible, and how it’s viewed from what I believe to be the three main theological perspectives most popular today: Fundamentalist, Modern, and Modified. We covered the Fundamentalist View last week. This week we’ll dive into the Modern and Modified Views. I suggest you may want to review the comments made in last week’s Post about the Views we’ll be discussing today.
Again, I remind the reader that these are my own thoughts and conclusions. They are not necessarily in alignment with those espoused by specific denominations or congregations, or even friends of mine. They are intended to stir your own thought process and to allow you to come to your own conclusions regarding these matters.
The Modern View
The Modern View seems to be that although the Bible is to be read and respected, it is not to be taken literally. This View holds that there are simply too many inconsistencies and self-contradictions in the book for the Bible to be taken literally. Since it is not the literal Word of God, its meanings are more open to self-interpretation. Stories are to be viewed more for their moral messages than for their historic fact. Rules and laws are to be taken in their historical and societal context rather than as being strictly applicable for today’s time and society. Thus, the Bible is valuable but is not Literal.
Neither is the Bible Immutable. Its contents may have been inspired, but the process of selecting its books for inclusion was a long, arduous, and argumentative one; conducted by men guided by their own conscience and understanding. The selection of content may have been inspired, but was not dictated by God. In fact, the ‘modern’ Bible was not officially codified until after the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. That meeting was called by the Roman Emperor Constantine. Having only recently become a Christian himself, he was confused by the plethora of “Christian” belief systems vying for dominance at the time. He decided that an “official” book holding the core of the Christian faith should be assembled, and that all the disparate Christian groups should be united under one church, the new official Christian Church of the Roman Empire (the catholic church of today).
So, if the contents of the Bible were not determined by God, but by contentious men, it is entirely possible that there was some “good stuff” left out. And that God could still be speaking to us today in further revelation and inspiration. Works thus inspired could at some point be found to be sufficiently authentic and revered to be included in a new Book (or Books) of the Bible.
There are already several versions of the Bible in use today. The protestant denominations tend to use the King James version (translated and compiled in 1611 A.D.) or one of the many subsequent variants. The catholic church uses its own version which has several books not found in the protestant Bible. And the eastern orthodox Bible contains books that are not recognized by either protestants or catholics. Which is the “correct” one? A Modernist would say that they are all equally valid and that the differences between them are insignificant. All of this to the Modern View believer ‘prove’ that the Bible is not Immutable.
Finally, the Modern View is that the Bible is Fallible. The Old Testament in particular is filled with inconsistencies (see last week’s Post for examples) and was written for different people in a different time and society. Stories are intended to provide moral or theological instruction, but need not be relied upon to provide accurate historical information. The Bible is to be understood within whichever context the reader finds himself. And that many of the stories should be seen as more allegorical than factual (such as the story of Adam and Eve).
The Modernist would say that there ARE facts, moral truths or absolutes found in the Bible. But they would contend that those truths and absolutes are dependent upon each reader’s understanding and acceptance of the words found in the Bible. And, that those truths and absolutes may be applicable in different ways in different situations. In other words, the truths and absolutes that are correct for you or me in one situation may not be the correct ones in another. They are “contextual.”
As a result, each of us must continually interpret and reinterpret the Bible and its message in all situations. If the Bible’s application to and meaning for each situation can change, then the believer must make new interpretations for each situation in which he finds himself. The Bible is not, therefore, Infallible because it can mean different things to different readers at different times.
(By the way, I want to remind the reader that I am not espousing or endorsing these Views. I’m simply attempting to report them to you as I see and understand them.)
The Modified View
If the Fundamentalist View can be construed as very ‘conservative’ and the Modern View is seen as the most ‘progressive’, then the Modified View could be viewed as the “middle of the road.” In fact, this is the View that’s supported by most of today’s “main line” Christian denominations. Here we can see some elements of the others, but also some ideas that are unique to this View.
The Modified View does not say that the Bible is Literally the Word of God. Modified View scholars contend that while the contents of the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit, it was not dictated to its authors by Him. Some passages may have been directly quoted (such as the Ten Commandments). And the sayings of Jesus certainly are clearly from Him since the Modified View sees God and Jesus as the same (see previous posts on the Trinity). However, most of the Bible presents the Word as it was understood by its authors at the time the books were written. This means that they may have tried to be as faithful to their inspiration as they could be, but that they were unable to record all God’s words exactly as He said them.
This can be seen even in the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The contents of these books are very close to each other and contain many of the same stories about and sayings of Jesus. However, they differ from one another in several ways. Sometimes, the stories and actions of Jesus are portrayed at different points in Jesus’ life. Sometimes Jesus is quoted slightly differently, or details of events don’t always exactly align. Some stories that appear in one don’t appear in the others and vice versa.
So, the Modified View would say that while each writer was inspired, he was not conveying the actual dictated Word of God. Rather he was conveying the information as accurately as he could. The words of the Bible are Authentic in that they are what the writers put down as they were inspired by the Holy Spirit to do. They also have Authority since the Holy Spirit was ultimately their source. But there are clearly cases where the Bible does not ‘agree’ with itself, and therefore cannot be taken Literally.
The Modified View does not see the Bible as Immutable. The Bible is seen to be wholly sufficient to explain God, His will for man and the revelation of Jesus as it is written. However, revelation and inspiration are still possible and even probable. To say that the Bible is Immutable is to say that God has said all He’s going to say to us, and that no further inspiration or revelation will occur worthy to be appended to its current content.
The Modified believer would answer that the Bible IS complete and enough for us. It explains God’s will for man and His creation and contains as much of and about Jesus as we need to be able to hear and respond to His word and intent. However, God is not static. He is still creating every day. Jesus certainly wasn’t static. Jesus’ last words to the Apostles were that they should be anything BUT static. The Modified View would present the Bible as a living breathing document, divinely inspired, and carefully assembled by pious men after much thought and prayer. But it is not static, nor dead. Rather it is alive with new messages and meaning for each person who reads it, studies it and listens to it.
Additional revelation IS possible and inspiration continues to occur (some believe that the Rapture qualifies as such) . Read Martin Luther, John Wesley, C.S. Lewis, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, or any of the dozens of celebrated Christian authors of the last thousand years, and you can see that inspiration is still occurring. God has not stopped speaking to us. Some of us have stopped listening. But the Holy Spirit is still affecting what is being said and giving guidance to those who listen. While what’s being written may not rise to the level of authority and reverence of the Scriptures, some of it comes darn close! So, the Bible is not Immutable.
Finally, the Modified View person would say that the Bible is not Infallible. While it DOES contain innumerable and immutable Truths, not all that’s in it is absolutely correct. Because it was written by men, some mistakes were inevitable and it is those mistakes that keep it from being Infallible. As an example, there are two stories of Noah and the Flood in Genesis, and they don’t agree with one another. If two different stories are in the Bible, and they don’t agree, one of them must therefore be incorrect. If that is the case the Bible cannot be said to be Infallible because it contains incorrect information. Other examples were cited in last week’s post, so I’ll refer you there if you want to investigate this further.
The Modified View would say that this in no way diminishes the worth of the Bible, or the Truths and inspired instructions contained therein. Truths do not have to be Fact. Jesus taught many of His Truths in the form of Parables. No one at His time expected them to be events that had actually occurred. The listeners took them for what they were … examples of Truth and how it was to be applied in our lives. Jesus used analogy and stories to serve a greater purpose than to just communicate events. He used them to explain and to clarify who God is, what He demands of us, and how we are to apply His principles to our relationship with Him and with one another. To the degree that these stories allow us to better comprehend and understand His message, they elevate the Bible. They don’t diminish it.
So, the Modified View would say that while the Bible may not be Infallible, it is close enough for His purpose. The reader needs only to listen closely to what the Bible is saying, and he is likely to hear the Voice of God.
Wrap-up
Which (if any) View you prefer is up to you. But regardless of which View you take, ALL of them would agree on the following:
- The Bible is the greatest and most influential book ever written.
- The Bible’s purpose is to communicate God’s plan for history, to show His workings within that plan, and set out the revelation of Jesus Christ. And, it does that in spectacular fashion.
- There are Truths that find their meaning only in the Bible, and
- That whether Literally the Word of God, or the Word Inspired by God, the Bible is the foundational work that every person aspiring to understand or participate in Christianity MUST read.
I hope this has helped to answer some of the questions you may have about the Bible. Even so, we’ve only begun to scratch the surface. So, look for additional postings as we go forward. And, be sure to send your questions or suggestions for topics in. We’ll get to them all eventually.
Until next week,
Richard
September 7, 2018
Biblical writers didn’t decide one day and say, “Gee, I think I’ll write a story about God creating the world.” or ‘Gee, I think I’ll tell about Jesus speaking His parables.” For instance, the isolated writers of the Dead Sea Scrolls on the mountain top at Qumran, Israel spent hours praying to God, discussing, then in solo writing as they were inspired. Then compared their writings were the same, confirming to them that they were the inspired Words from our Father in Heaven. Standing in the ruins of prayer and writing rooms at Qumran, that’s the story described to me by my guide, a college professor and deeply devout Christian. He has spent days alone with God in the Wilderness – a bleak, barren land in Israel where John the Baptist lived a time.
I don’t think our God, Who IS Perfect, would Allow any Word to represent Himself for all time, to be written in any way but in Truth and Inspired by Himself. Read a verse ten times and God Will Give you ten insights at different levels.
Others who are bible scholars could speak more intellectually than I. I just believe what I read. Some of those verses you sighted are harsh then and now, but I see their relevance and levels of meaning from God’s Viewpoint. Whew! This is tough stuff, isn’t it? Thank God that He still Speaks to us. If we will just listen.
Susan —
Thank you very much for your Comment! I think these posts will all be made better with Reader engagement. The whole site is designed to encourage readers to start thinking so that their faith can be deepened and expanded. Different ideas, different ‘takes’ on the posts, additional facts, other insights, challenges to the posts, etc. are all welcome and will be helpful to us all. Your information about the writers at Qumran is an excellent example of the type of reader engagement I’m looking for. Please keep reading and commenting!
Richard
Good evening Richard, Thank you again for a great insight to how PEOPLE look at the Bible. I do not understand how some can say it is not the word/work of God/Jesus. Even though the Bible may have been written by scholars manyyyyyyy years ago, we as His creation have the responsibility to read His book and learn from it. So there are some differences in the books. They were written many years after the exact event and we have learned that no matter what, man has a habit of turning things around to suit themselves and their point of view. I believe that the scholars who wrote the Bible were guided by God to write and interoperate what should be written and how. Thank you again.