One of the biggest issues that has come up in my theology is that of Biblical inerrancy. What does it mean? Who says what? and How to come to a laymen's term answer are all questions that instantly pop into my mind. One of the most obvious things that I have noticed is that the arguments folks use to prove that the Bible is inerrant are very difficult to get my head around. I do know that there are key pieces of scripture that are used to prove the Bible's inerrancy.
One of the key passages in the Bible inerrancy question is this one:
For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Matthew 5:18
First of all, what is the law? That's a very basic question isn't it? Could it be the law of Moses? The entire Bible itself? Maybe?
I do believe that Jesus gave a purpose to the law of Moses and that purpose is such: That it showed humanity's weakness and inabililty to follow God on their own. We're completely incapable of being everything that he wants us to be without Christ. Since this is the purpose of the law of Moses, then I do not think that's the law that Jesus is referring to here. It's purpose has been accomplished. It was accomplished then and it is accomplished now. It told the Hebrews back then how incapable they were and it still shows us today how incapable we are. There's got to be a bigger picture here.
I don't think that Jesus is referring to the entire Bible in this passage because that doesn't fit the context. The entire Bible has not been canonized by this point in history. Obviously he can't be talking about the entire Bible here. (And this is something that others would argue against, I know)
However it is important to look at the context of this passage. Jesus is getting ready to reinterpret the Hebrew scriptures. The verses that follow contain the words, 'You have heard..., but I tell you....'. Jesus provides his interpretation of the law. I believe that this is the law he's referring to here. Not Mosaic law, not the entire Bible, but the law that he gives us as he reinterprets scripture.
Okay, so now what. All of Jesus' law has to be accomplished. Everything He gives us to do is impossible to accomplish. He takes the Mosaic law and makes it even harder to follow.
Exactly.
I think His law is accomplished when I am in a relationship with him. Grace is the new factor that wasn't present here. When all of humanity realizes how much we are in desperate need of grace, then the law will be accomplished. I think that this will happen at the final end, when God reveals Himself.
I just think this passage has more to it that just face value interpretation. I don't think it proves that the Bible is inerrant, I think it proves God's grace. Isn't that the purpose of scripture? To see God and his judgement and mercy? Isn't it?
Feel free to comment. Even if you think I'm a heretic. I'm interested to see what people think.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It's an interesting subject. The Bible is claimed by many to be inerrant, but there appear to be contradictions in it, and it was after all written by human hands, albeit inspired by God.
I was surprised to find a liberal Christian from the US! I'm a Christian from England btw.
http://southcheshirexian.blogspot.com
Hey, this is Matt from BTSR (we talked at Louise's party the other night). Your blog is interesting to say the least. Regarding the issue of inerrancy, this subject has caused me stress as well. Right now I would say that I believe in dynamic inspiration. that is, scripture is inerrant in its teaching. However, when it pertains to subjects such as the ancient hebrew cosmology it depicts the viewpoint of the author. Because scripture is the product of humans who were inspired (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:20-21), they are only preserved from error as far as it was deemed necessary. I don't think there is any way to reconcile insignificant details such as differing genealogies in the old and new testament. I think inspiration at best means that the writer of a particular book was being genuinely honest -- they were not trying to decieve.
Post a Comment