|
Genesis
37:3-4, 12-35 James 1:1-15
Reading
the Bible Relationally
The
Bible is our Code. The Bible
is our rule. The Bible is the
standard by which all things are measured.
Every church, every minister, every sermon, every doctrine must
conform to the Bible. So the
Bible is not just a standard for individual piety.
It is the standard for all of life. I
believe that, and the Anglican Orthodox Church believes that. It is a corner-stone of our faith. After all, how could we know the will of God if we could not
find it in the Bible? We
would be reduced to nothing more than our own opinions and ideas of what
God ought to want, or what God ought
to be like or what God ought to
say. But if God reveals these things to us in the Bible we have confidence that what
we believe is the truth. But
how is the Bible to be read? I
believe we need to read the Bible primarily in view of our relationship
with God. We need to read the
Bible relationally.
We
need to remember that the Bible is not primarily a book of theology.
When I was in seminary I majored in Systematic and Historical
Theology, which is the analyzing and systematizing of Biblical teachings.
The Bible does not have a chapter titled, The
Church, with sub-points, A. the Nature and Ministry of the Church.
B. the membership of the Church, C. The Sacraments of the Church,
D. The Ministers and Government of the Church.
It would be nice if it did, but the Bible was not written that way.
The Bible was written to lead us into a relationship with God, and
its teachings on the Church are interspersed with other teachings, and are
subservient to its main purpose. So,
to understand the Biblical doctrine of the Church we must examine the
teachings about the Church in one part of the Bible, and compare them with
the teachings in other parts. Then
we systematize them into the doctrine of the Church.
Now we do need to study the Bible theologically.
Clergy, especially, need to study it this way.
And, we also need to
remember that this is not the end or even the goal of Bible study.
Nor
is the Bible primarily a book of morals and ethics. Again, it does contain
them. It does teach morals and ethics, and we need to study it this way.
But that is not its primary message, nor is this the goal of Bible
reading.
Many
people study the Bible analytically.
Clergy especially do this. We
are taught to do this in seminary. Seminary
is not like Sunday School. In
seminary we analyze the Bible. We
learn as much as we can about the lives and times of the people to which
each book was written. We try
to determine the date it was written, the purpose of the book, and we try
to learn as much as possible about the author.
This helps us understand the Bible.
For example, many have seen The
Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe movie, or read the book and found it
an interesting story about children transported to a magical land called
Narnia. But if you know
something about C.S. Lewis, you will read the book differently. You will look for the Biblical symbolism that permeates the
story, and you will be able to understand the book more fully.
This is very important because some books are filled with
symbolism, while others have none. I remember reading a part of William Faulkner’s The
Bear in a college literature class.
After reading the story we discussed its meaning and symbolism,
reading the conclusions of some of the “great” literary critics on the
story. Some of the discussion
was very interesting, saying the bear is the symbol of the vanishing
wilderness, and the boy is the axe of civilization destroying what it
professes to love. Others
said it was a coming of age story symbolizing people coming to grips with
the realities of life and death. Others
said it was a symbol of America’s military and economic aggression. But after the discussion was over, at the end of the class,
the professor said someone interviewed Faulkner about the story and asked
him what the symbolism meant. Faulkner
said there was no symbolism in it. It
was just a story about a boy going hunting.
So
there are different kinds of literature, and a full understanding of a
book requires us to know what type of literature it is.
You do not read a math book the same way you read a novel.
I personally never read math books (laughter).
I know some do, and God bless ’em, but I don’t generally read
math books, (more laughter). Likewise,
there are different types of literature in the Bible and it is helpful to
know what type of literature you are reading at the moment in order to get
the best understanding of The Book. So
we need to read the Bible analytically.
This kind of analyzing must be done.
It is necessary, and, again, clergy, especially, must be diligent
about studying the Bible in this way.
But clergy sometimes forget, and lead church members to forget too,
that this is only the beginning of Bible study, not the end.
I
would compare this theological/analytical study of Scripture to reading
music. No one learns to read
music so he can have a philosophical discussion about why Beethoven used a
certain note in the tenth measure of the first movement of The Moonlight Sonata. We
read music to play an instrument, or enjoy a concert, or write a song.
We study the notes to enjoy the song.
Likewise, we study the Bible to enjoy God.
As the Presbyterians say, the Bible is the rule to direct us how we
are to glorify and enjoy God. But
if we only study the Bible theologically and analytically we miss much of
the enjoyment of the Scriptures, and of our relationship with God.
So,
we need to put the enjoyment back in our Bible reading.
Or, to put it another way, we need to read the Bible devotionally.
I do not mean that we are to digress into what we often find in
some “devotional” books, which attach a story, usually a very
emotional one, to a verse of Scripture.
I do not mean to condemn those books, and if you read one, by all
means continue. Just don’t
let that be the whole extent of your Bible reading. But
I am not talking about that when I say we must read the Bible
devotionally.
Perhaps
I should not even use the word, “devotionally.” Perhaps I should suggest, as I did at the beginning of the
sermon, that we read the Bible relationally,
meaning, in a way that enhances our relationship with God.
In
a sense we should read the Bible as we would a letter from a trusted and
beloved mentor in life, or as a soldier would read a letter from home.
I have been a soldier and I know how important letters from home
are to them. Every detail is
important. He is not bored
with talk about the weather, or the dog or the cat, or how the car has a
new rattle in it and Dad can’t quite figure out what it is.
The soldier treasures every word.
He loves every word, and reads it and re-reads it many times.
Why? Because, at that moment, the letter is the means by which his
relationship with that person is accomplished.
That is the way I am suggesting we should read the Bible.
I am not saying we should throw out the other ways of reading it.
Read it theologically. Read
it analytically. Do all the
interpretive studies we are able to do.
But don’t stop there. Go
on to read it relationally.
Perhaps
I can best explain what I mean here by using an example.
Theologically, we have studied the Scriptures to systematize the
doctrine of the Atonement, which means, the way God saves us in Christ.
There is the Substitutionary aspect of Atonement, which says that
Christ died in our place. You
can find a good summary of this doctrine by a well-known minister of the
Church of England, John Stott in, Christian
Basics; an Invitation to Discipleship, pp. 16-17).
Then
there is the Victory of the Cross aspect of the Atonement.
This teaches us that, on the cross, our Lord conquered the enemies
of our souls. He conquered
sin and death, and hell, and He released us from our bondage to them.
He released us from the need to live only for our egos and bodily
desires that Paul called “the flesh” in his epistle to the Ephesians,
and James described as “lust” in the New Testament Lesson for this
morning. We were enslaved to
these desires in the sense that we lived for them. But
through Christ’s cross He conquered them and set us free to live a
higher and better life, and this is a life so wonderful, and so powerful
it can only be described as a foretaste of Heaven itself.
And God loves us, you, and me, so much, and He wants us to have
this Heavenly life so much that He somehow came to earth Himself, to live
and die like a human being, so He could bring this life to us.
Substitution
and Victory are part of the doctrinal, or theological, teaching of the
Atonement. They are not all
of it, for this is not a sermon on the Atonement, but they are a big part
of it. And they are true and
Biblical doctrine. But let me
suggest that there is also a relational side to the Atonement, which we
miss if we only learn the doctrine.
The
relational side is that in the Atonement we see God loving us and giving
Himself to and for us. We see
Him relating to us; giving us gifts we could not gain for ourselves,
accomplishing for us that one thing we most need, yet are completely
unable to do for ourselves. We
not only learn theologically that God is merciful, we also see Him
extending mercy to us. We learn theologically that God is love, and relationally we
see His love expressed and acting on our behalf, and we learn to love back
the great God who loves us so much. Theologically
we learn that Christ died to give new life to us; life in which we are
free to enjoy Him and His goodness and His fullness. Relationally
we step into that new life, and live it in all its fullness; a life in
Christ.
What
I’m really trying to say is that we need to read the Bible less for
information or as a religious duty, and more as a means of grace. Expect to relate to God through its pages.
Expect God to address you, your life, your needs and situation in
the Bible. Expect Him to
relate to you through it. It
is one of the means through which your relationship with God is
accomplished.
In
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, amen.
The Anglican Orthodox Church
P.O. Box 128 Statesville, NC 28687
The Most Rev. Jerry Ogles, Bishop Metropolitan
The Rev. Dr. R. Dennis Campbell, Vicar, Holy Trinity
Anglican Church,
[ Home ] [ Up ] [ Eighth Sunday after Trinity ] [ Tenth Sunday after Trinity ] [ Eleventh Sunday after Trinity ] [ Twelfth Sunday after Trinity ] [ Fifteenth Sunday after Trinity ] [ Sixteenth Sunday after Trinity ] [ Seventeenth Sunday after Trinity ] [ Eighteenth Sunday after Trinity ] [ Twentieth Sunday after Trinity ] [ Sunday Next before Advent ] [ Twenty-Second Sunday after Trinity ] [ Twenty-third Sunday after Trinity ]
|
|