Is It "Biblical"?

(This post continues the conversation about the Bible and how it is used - see my two previous posts: 3/11/19 - Even the Devil Quoted Scripture; 3/18/19 - More Thoughts About How We Use the Bible.)

So both sides in The UMC controversy over LGBTQ+ issues quote scripture to support their position. How do we know which position is the "Biblical" position? For that matter, how do we know what is "biblical"?

When we talk about something as being "biblical," our thinking is based on the following logic.

• Premise A: the Bible is from God. It is God-breathed, inspired (2 Timothy 3:16). 
• Premise B: because the Bible is from God, it is totally trustworthy and reliable. 
• Premise C: the Bible says such-and-such. 
• Conclusion: this such-and-such position is God's position and, therefore, the "right" position.  

This kind of thinking seems clear; the logic, sound. And it keeps things simple: what the Bible says settles any issue because the Bible is from God and reflects God's position on the issue.

The logic, however, is flawed. Premise A is only partially true. The Bible is indeed God-breathed or inspired. So, it has a divine nature. It is how God has revealed the Divine Self to us so we can know God and God's ways. However, the Bible is not just divine. God's self-revelation and self-communication came through human beings ... which means the Bible also has a human dimension to it. (The divine-human nature of the Bible was presented in last week's blog: More Thoughts About How We Use the Bible, 3/18/19.)

Premise B is also only partially true. The Bible is indeed trustworthy and reliable. 2 Timothy 3:15-17 and 2 Peter 1:19-20 speak of how the scriptures (the Hebrew scriptures) instruct and guide us. Through the Bible, we catch glimpses of God's nature, God's character, and God's ways. The Bible helps us know God and guides us in how to live in relationship with God. It helps us to know the ways of God and, thereby, how to live as God's people. But the Bible also presents the partial, incomplete, culture-bound thinking and understanding of its human authors and editors (as I said in last week's post). It reflects the effort of various authors and editors to understand and explain the mystery of God in their different historical times and situations. So, in reality, the Bible contains a variety of theological views and understandings, some of which contradict one another!

Because Premises A and B are only partially true, the conclusion is false. Just because something is in the Bible does not mean it reflects God's position or the "right" position. More often than not, when we argue a position is the "biblical" position, what we are really doing is using the Bible to validate and support my position. We are saying, "My position is the right one. See, the Bible says so."

Which brings us back to the original questions: how do we know which position is the "Biblical" position? For that matter, how do we know what is "biblical"?

Perhaps we are asking the wrong question.

A better question: which position/thinking reflects the nature and character of God? the ways of God? the teachings and ministry of Jesus? Which position is the most Christ-like position?

More about that in next week's post.