JWJeffery.com

A friend of mine yesterday told me about a book that several of his friends are reading that questions the validity of the historicity of the Old Testament, and that basically makes the claim that we shouldn’t attempt to make claims about history, science, etc. based on scripture, but that scripture is a spiritual message from God, and thus, we must discern the message.

My friend asked my opinion, which I gave, and it sparked some other thoughts about the issue. The question really gets down to asking what the nature of scripture is.

Since I’m not a fundamentalist, I don’t automatically affirm verbal plenary inspiration. Why not? Because I don’t think we can find that concept in scripture.

We can read in scripture that all scripture is inspired, or “God-breathed.” But what does this really mean? Does it mean that the spirit told each author the words to say, word for word? I guess it could. Does it mean that God gave each author a sense of what to say, and let them write it the way that they would naturally do it? It could as well. Could it be a mixture of these two methods? I think it could. Might God have given one author exact words, and given another a sense of what to say? Who is to say? The point is, we don’t know the exact nature of scripture, because God doesn’t reveal that information to us.

That topic goes into another topic hot topic: the inerrancy of scripture. Is the bible free from all error, historically, scientifically, theologically? Fundamentalists in general, and probably most in Churches of Christ today, would probably affirm the general inerrancy of scripture. The problem I have is that we don’t know, for certain, the nature of scripture. If we don’t know the nature of scripture, is then becomes very difficult for us to make a claim that scripture is completely inerrant. If the nature of scripture is plenary verbal inspiration, then we can feel very comfortable stating that scripture is generally inerrant, because the Holy Spirit, as part of the Godhead, would not make errors.

However, if scripture is inspired in some lesser way, which I think is possible based on the lack of information we are given in scripture on the topic, then we must affirm that it is possible that a human author might have made a mistake in writing his portion of scripture.

However, as I noted above, scripture doesn’t tell us one way or another about its full nature. So, I cannot make an authoritative claim regarding the full nature of the inerrancy of scripture.

So, where does this leave us? It leaves us with mystery. God doesn’t provide us with all the answers, and I’m fairly sure that he does that for a reason…and with mystery, we must have faith. I have faith that scripture is as inspired as it needs to be, and I also have faith that scripture is as inerrant as it needs to be. All else…is a mystery to me.

-Josh

Hello everyone:

I recently wrote about some of my reading about the covenants. In that post, I stated my understand that New Covenant Theology was the theology behind preterism in Churches of Christ.

After reading through a significant portion of New Covenant Theology, and finding nothing that pointed towards a Preterist theology, I went and did some research at Eschatology.org, which is a preterist website sponsored by a preterist Church of Christ congregation.

After doing some checking, I found that I’ve mixed some things up in my head and was mistaken. New Covenant Theology has nothing to do with preterism, but is instead a way to view Christ as the lense with which to view everything in the old covenant, including the law. Preterism uses the term “Covenant Theology” to describe itself, and hinges itself on the transition from old covenant to new covenant.

Josh

Odd things that have come to mind in the last few days…none are original to me, of course:

We are a unity movement that hasn’t just divided, that hasn’t just fragmented, we’ve splintered

Disciples of Christ are theologically liberal and driven by a desire for Christian unity. Churches of Christ are theologically conservative and driven by a desire for restoration of the ancient order. Christian Churches and Churches of Christ, who on first glance might appear to be moderate…are fundamentalists. I’m pretty sure I understand the basic religious dynamics which make this true, but the concept still feels odd to me. Sometimes I wonder if we are somewhat closer to the Disciples theologically then the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ….

Our movement has birthed, or at least midwifed, some interesting children. The Christadelphians, with their heterodox beliefs..including their rejection of the doctrine of the trinity, are a fascinating sect. The Mormons probably wouldn’t have made it very far without the help of Sidney Rigdon, a good friend and traveling companion of Alexander Campbell. Jessie Ferguson, whose grave I visited this summer in Nashville, built up a large congregation and then proceeded to destroy it with his tales of necromancy. Jim Jones, whose People’s Temple killed 900 or so people in Guyana, was a Disciples of Christ pastor. Kip McKean transformed many Church of Christ congregations into International Churches of Christ, some of which were accused of being cult like (I think we can safely say that the ICOC is not a cult, however).

What a strange group we are…

Josh

In Ephesians 2, Paul speaks to a Gentile audience, reminding us that at one time we were cut off from citizenship, but now, through the blood of Christ that we are “no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household.”

This got me thinking about what the implications are of being a citizen of God’s Kingdom. A few thoughts come to mind:

• Christ is our king, our ruler.
• Our allegiance is to Jesus’ Kingdom.
• We don’t have dual-citizenship.
• As citizens in the Kingdom, we are foreigners and aliens in our own land.
• As aliens in this nation, we must obey the law, and pay taxes.
• As aliens in this nation, we should not vote.
• As aliens in this nation, we should not bear arms for the state.
• As citizens of the Kingdom, we must work towards advancement of the King’s will.
• As aliens in this nation, we should not work towards the advancement of the state.
• Finally, as citizens of the Kingdom, we must adhere to the Commands of our King above the laws of the state.

Josh

I’m reading my second book on Covenant Theology. Scott Hahn’s A Father Who Keeps His Promises was written for the layman, but has some interesting theology from a Catholic slant. Some of it is quite interesting…. one of the things that interests me about Hahn is that he’ll put forth a theory…often a very good one…which he’ll then try and use to advance Catholic Theology. The problem is, it doesn’t seem that he advances Catholic Theology well. Instead, he puts forth an interesting theory that solves some of the problems of the text, and that instead points towards a more Protestant understanding of the the text. Hahn is a former Presbyterian pastor, so sometimes I wonder if he is just confused. It is either that, or I’m doing quite a bad job of understanding his words.

The first book was God of Promise: Introducing Covenant Theology by Michael Horton. Horton writes for a more sophisticated audience, from a Reformed point of view, and provides one of the best descriptions of the sacraments I have read. Horton’s work has really helped me to really wrap my head around God’s covenants with Israel, and the implications that has for the New Covenant. I really recommend Horton’s book. I just found that he has written several more books on different aspects of Covenant Theology…I hope to pick those up soon.

Once I’m done with Hahn, I have New Covenant Theology by Tom Wells and Fred Zaspel. My current understanding is that New Covenant Theology is the soil from which Preterism springs….I’m looking forward to reading it to gain a better understanding of what our few Preterist congregations in the Churches of Christ are coming from.

It seems to me that a proper understanding of the covenants is of utmost importance in understanding scripture. Reframing many of our beliefs in the context of covenant brings those beliefs back into a truly biblical and God honoring posture.

Josh