Author, Adam.
Published, September 10, 2008.
“Zande doctrines are so numerous, varied, and plastic that a man can always find in them an element to serve his interests in any given situation. He does not deny the doctrine, but he selects from them what is most to his advantage in each situation and excludes the rest” – Evans-Pritchard.
I find this quite an enlightening quote. It was written by a well known anthropologist who was observing a certain society in Africa in the early 1900s. When I first read it, I immediately thought of my Christian beliefs. In what ways do I use them to my advantage and how often do I oscillate between different theological ideas? It probably is not in the switching from one idea to another that I work to my advantage (even if the ideas are both Biblically plausible), but the decision to choose a certain doctrine and persistently adhere to it. If I like the idea of capitalism and the free-market, for example, I will be inclined to find evidence of its godliness in the Bible. However, if I’m opposed to capitalism I shall find evidence in the Bible that opposes it.
I am raising the question of how we decide on what direction we take when reading and interpreting the Bible. Is it possible to read the Bible without preconceived ideas and bias? Or do we merely use scripture to peg up our own particular worldview?
I think doctrines are statements that describe aspects of a total life with God. They should not be confused with the life itself. In addition we should avoid falling into the trap of focusing on one doctrine and neglecting another. For example the bible contains both the idea of personal responsibility (if you don’t work you don’t eat) and care for others (true religion is to look after widows and orphans in their distress). These (and many other doctrines and seeming paradoxes) need to be held in creative tension a bit like walking a tight rope. At one point we may need to correct to the left to maintain our balance and at another point to correct to the right.
It is a human tendency to buttress our own viewpoint. If read the bible that way we are placing it below ourselves and shape it by ignoring all the bits that don’t agree with our position. We need to continually and humbly come under the bible and let God challenge and shape us through it.
It is utterly impossible to read the Bible without preconceived bias. I think careful readers of the Word let it shape their worldview, as opposed to the other way around. That is a tricky thing, though, because who’s to judge who is doing that correctly? We can only attempt to come to the Bible free from pre-conceived bias; I think if we are brutally honest with ourselves, this is possible. When we submit that we are unable to read the Word without pre-conceived bias, then we offer to God the prospect of guiding and transforming our mind. Then, the supernatural work of the Spirit begins. Sounds great doesn’t it!? We can only pray that we do it successfully.
David, it must be very difficult not to confuse the doctrines with the life itself. For isn’t it by the doctrines that we make sense of life? Life and our perception of it doesn’t come to us unpackaged or uncatergorised in some pure state. Rather, we make sense of it via certain doctrinal lenses. It mediates for us life events and phenomena and therefore provides an order in which to view the world. Ah… I’m sounding all too philosophical. I am not arguing that there isn’t any real world (or absolutes) out there, but even if there is we all still operate in the same way - through worldviews.
However, I appreciate your point that if we are Christian we should not focus on one point and lose focus on another. We must hold them all in balance. I guess it like NT Wright in saying that the Bible isn’t the highest authority; God is. The Bible points to the highest authority.
The bible can be used to support just about anything, when taken out of context.
I don;t think anyone will disagree with that, and if you do, you’d best look for that clip of John Safran talking to the guy from the KKK.
Half because it’ll make my point, and half because it’s absolutely hilarious, while being just slightly petrifying at the same time. (so that’s “haha-eeek!!-wow, he’s got a point”)
We cannot underestimate the importance of hearing from the Holy Spirit when reading the bible. When Jesus said he’d send HIS helper down for our benefit… his helper? Jesus had a helper that’s ABSURD but it drives home the importance of hearing the words of the holy spirit. And yes, sometimes that’s easier than other times, but that is what we have to look for.
luv josh
I think that was a part of the point of the quote. Firstly, we make all sorts of assumptions as to what the context of the Bible is. We’re up against plenty of biblical historians who will read the Bible and explain its origins whilst not believing it. Similarly, they can point to the particular historical processes that allowed a relatively small sect called ‘Christianity’ (or perhaps a movement called ‘the Way’) to be preserved through time thanks to the Roman empire. Secondly, the Holy Spirit is one such doctrine which can certainly be used and abused by people to further their interests. But who am I to say that ‘this’ is the Holy Spirit and ‘that’ isn’t.
And as a side note, the guy from the KKK has rational beliefs - they are just fairly removed from what the rest of society believes. Mind you, there seems to be a lot more hatred than love in what they believe. However, I think they just believe in a God that favours certain people and judges the rest quite harshly. But if you’ve read the Old Testament, can you blame him? (I am not sticking up for him… I’m just saying his beliefs are rational.)
Really, all I am saying is that as human beings we all operate in a very similar way. With that being so, I’m not trying to suggest that there isn’t any absolutes, or that being a Christian hasn’t any definate attributes, but I think it is necessary to stop and reflect upon our beliefs from time to time. Because sometimes we get caught up in this strange little world which we think is perfectly normal but probably is a lot more fabricated than we realise. I am thinking of ‘praise and worship times’, ‘moving in the Spirit’, ‘listening to God’, the list goes on. We think synths and mood lighting is the Spirit, for example. Anyway, before I get shot down for being a cynic or deceived I shall stop.
Adam, you make such a good point! You don’t sound cynical. You are simply being careful. Someone who did exactly what you suggest in that comment is Martin Luther. He carefully considered widely held beliefs at the time, and found them to be very, very bad and false. He turned the world upside down.
Interestingly, at my bible study at the moment we are spending each week investigating those sort of cliched Christian phrases like “worship” and “relationship with God”. We’re asking some hard questions, and it’s a really healthy and helpful process.
I forgot to add that the ambiguity of ‘listening to the Spirit’ makes it all the more resilient to criticism. It is very easy for people to respond to any criticism with ‘Well, true, it can be manipulated… but I don’t. I listen to the real Holy Spirit’. It becomes an almost untouchable doctrine.
My qualm with it is that people can just drop the old ‘God told me so’ to justify or validate anything they do. To me, this is the equivalent to the ‘if it feels good, do it’ doctrine of the secular world. Time and time again, the shamans of the Christian world feel it their duty to tell others how to live their lives and make these promises that God is going to do something amazing in their life etc. They act as some mediator between the heavens and the human subject, telling them this and that with such baseless authority and assumptions. Usually, it is underpinned with this rhetoric of ‘radical faith’ or whatever… it’s very paternalistic and arrogant. Ahem. Excuse the rant.
As a clause at the bottom of what I just said, I believe people are sometimes given insight - but NOT ALWAYS. It is unbiblical to say that we can ALWAYS know what God’s will is in unclear situations.
Two further points: 1) This spiritual insight should always be done with true humility - not opportunistically in order to promote one’s spiritual status. 2) I believe the Holy Spirit works in subtle and organic ways, so that it is usually upon relection that we look back and recognise His presence and operation. However, I agree, that we can be aware of the Spirit in a present tense, but to assume that we always know what is going on isn’t right.
There. I’m done (for now).
I guess what I think about is how much self-deception there must be out there… like you said, Adam, people use the “God told me so” to justify what they are doing, and some of them, at least, truly believe that. I reckon it’s the same for people like that KKK dude - probably started out relatively ‘orthodox’ in many beliefs, but gradually was able to get more and more whacked out and transmuted (perhaps post-apocalyptically?!) into something which most people now find abhorrent. It’s not as if most people would just decide to do this for the fun of it… there are just so many ways to get ‘it’ wrong and as we have well established, true insight is unpredictable at best (I don’t use unpredictable in a negative sense, I just mean subtle, not-always-the-same and so on).
And of course I don’t consider myself or any other ‘orthodox’ peeps immune from that kind of self-deception. I guess we need to be very open to correction (however THAT might happen!) and be cautious and un-self-interested in what we are doing.
or something.
Some things to consider:
‘Go and sin no more.’- Jesus, somewhere.
‘If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.’ 1 John 1:8
‘If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and the truth is not in us.’ 1 John 1:10
‘Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him.’ 1 John 3:6
I disagree with very little that has been said in these posts. We do indeed need to be careful of those who justify everything they do by saying “God told me so”. We also need to be aware that not everything that is called “the Holy Spirit” is indeed the working of the Holy Spirit!
I recently met a lovely older lady who goes to a church I used to attend. She told me how excited she was about the revival that was happening in the US, which she’d been watching on God TV(however did the disciples get by without it?) and how by hoping and believing we would see the same thing happen in Australia.
Being in a hurry, I passed on my family’s greetings and left.
Why do we think that God is the reason there has been no massive revival in Australia? Does anyone honestly believe that God is holding back, waiting for everyone to HOPE at the same time? Or is this whole thing more to do with ‘and in the end times there will be a great deception’?
How do we test such a thing?
How do we examine ourselves so that we might not be deceived as well? We’ve all been caught up in things that we look back on in a negative light.
We need to consider things prayerfully, checking it against scripture.
If Jesus instructed us to live without sin, then surely that’s viable, but definitely would require his help.
You’re right: SO SO much of what’s branded as ‘the ebb and flow of the Spirit’ is nothing more than elaborate manipulation.
But to write it all off as just that, calls into question the sovereignty of God. (of which I’m not accusing anyone of doing, I’m just trying to get a point across)
Living under the instruction of the Holy Spirit remains something to strive for.
And absolutely, Stuart, we need to be open to correction, and examination, because if what we do IS inline with God, then it will stand up to testing.
Cynicism in itself is not always such a bad thing.
*Apologies for the length of my posts. Apparently I have a lot to say.
Josh, I appreciate what you have said. But so I am not misunderstood, I shall reiterate what I have already said. I am not saying that is ‘all manipulation’ - and thus writing it off.
I don’t get the connection between this discussion and the scripture you quote. Are you saying that if we don’t sin then we can be sure of whether God has spoken or that the Spirit has moved or something?
And, no need to apologise for the length of comment. Say what you want… unless we totally disagree with it. :)
Ah… revivals… it’s like Geelong winning the Premiership again.
Yes, but they didn’t. See the banners fly down, down…
Moreso (i think, i was on a fair speel at the time) that it is not only possible but expected of us to live an obedient life, without sin.
So yes, we can be sure of the movement or guidance of the spirit, direction of God, all that.
Which would raise the question ‘So why aren’t we?’ which is another comment for another night.
Preferably a night where I’m not procrastinating and actually have spare time, instead of just acting like i do. Like now.
Confused yet?
True, it is a comment/ discussion for another night. I think if we are commanded to live life without sin then we should have the means by which to do so. That expectation should only exist when we have the ‘means’ (which I can’t be bothered qualifying), and without the means to live without sin we can end up living fairly destructive lives because of that unrealistic expectation. I’m thinking of Mike Gug, which may or may not be a fair example. The pharisees had the law down pat. They were flawless. Jesus criticised them because they heaped expectations and burdens on to other people. I think grace and love first, means second, and expectations last. Transformation takes a life time.
I mournfully agree with the first statement. I think many, nay every, Christian denomination does this to some extent. Reading and amplifying one facet of scripture, and avoiding certain others.
All talk on scripture being authoritative, or God being sovereign mean nothing if we do not first assume that we are wrong and we don’t know how to interpret scripture!
On the second ‘phase’ of discussion, I think people ought to say “God told me so”. I think every act ought to be “God told me so” (maybe without the ’so’, for God does not often, in my opinion, say ‘new’ things). Furthermore, I think we all should encourage one another in the claims of “God told me so”; we need to have faith, and be encouraged in faith. There is much abuse of this statement, oh! there is much abuse.
I think we simply do not know the scriptures well enough to rebuke those who are not listening to the Holy Spirit. I understand the argument, I do. Many do peg up their beliefs. It is a problem, but the solution is not to say just “you have no authority to say”, this is useless unless we add “God has the authority!”.
It is possible to be ‘correct’. I think it is easy to approach the scriptures without bias. As mentioned above only in truth, honesty, humility; with a broken and contrite heart can we do so. However, the Gospel is not difficult, the gospel is not complex, we often want more than the gospel, we complicate it with doctrine.
“We have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.” 2 Corinthians 4:2 (NIV)
Hey Rog. I think I’d have to agree with what you have argued. But you can see my point? It’s very ambiguous, and because it is so, it is very open to manipulation etc. I dare say, unwittingly manipulated most of the time. There are plenty of occasions in the Bible where God has told someone to do some pretty out there stuff, and each time it has been ‘new’. So whilst I would agree that God doesn’t say ‘new’ things, it seems as though He has in the past. Personally, I can hardly comprehend being in the shoes of Abraham being asked to ’sacrifice’ my son. How do I judge that it is God? Surely, if God is the absolute basis of what is ethical, he cannot ask me to kill my son. We all know that it works out in the end, but Abraham was just resigned to the fact that he was to kill his son, and without letting his wife know. Problems, so many problems. Apparently Dallas Willard has a book called ‘Hearing God’, which would be well worth a read. Also, as a final note, I don’t think we should use the word ‘faith’ as a pseudonym for ‘hearing God’. That aspect is just one of many parts to faith. As John Piper would argue, those moments in which we don’t know what God would have us do (ie; He hasn’t soken to us) are designed for our faith. Faith isn’t naming and claiming.