So I think there are errors in the transmission and the interpretation. But I don’t see it as such a serious issue, frankly. I think it is reality. We do the best with what we can, and I believe that God helps us in the process. But we are not going to get 100 percent fact…. ever. And besides, I don’t think that’s how the bible times folks viewed historical writing anyway. They were concerned with 100 percent fact… otherwise the gospels would be a lot more similar.

And yes on your second paragraph. The bible is the definitive source we have on jesus.

No worries about being busy. It would be good to meet up sometime though. Which church are you at these days? Sometimes I get a chance to visit other places.
Blessings,
NAte

Regarding submission, to say you don’t submit to the Bible “in and of itself” is fine so long as your submission of Jesus results in submission to the Bible (“if you love me, you will keep my commandments”).

I’d love to meet in person, but it couldn’t be any time soon. I have a new baby, a very busy business, and a lot of traveling in the near future.

As Darren said, I don’t think “God-breathed” means without error. It seems to me that the early followers of Jesus would remember that God breathed life into humans. They would also perhaps remember that Jesus breathed on the disciples. Or even in Ezekiel, where he asks for life to be breathed into the valley of dry bones. That phrase has nothing to do with inerrancy, at least from what I see in the Bible. Human-kind, bones, and the disciples are far from inerrant! Rather, in terms of scripture it seems to have something to do with life being given.

I definitely put confidence in the canon as the “proper” scripture, but I am looking at the whole of it… and I am remembering that it is part of my story, the beginnings of the story of God’s people and the followers of Jesus. I also am fully confident that God can transmit all kinds of things very clearly to his children. I have no doubt about that… but I recognize that it is impossible to separate the human component from how the authors, or you and I, receive it. So no, I don’t have confidence that humanity has ever fully understood what God is trying to get across to us. The bible is full of examples of this! It truly is a beautiful and realistic thing.

To further your inquiry into my statement about not submitting to the bible… remember that I noted that I don’t submit “to the Bible, in and of itself.” As Paul says the bible is helpful in growing in wisdom that leads to faith in Jesus. Emphasis on Jesus. I’m talking about starting places. I don’t start with the Bible which leads me to God… I start with God who leads me to the bible.

Erik, would you be up for chatting in person? I’d love to meet up. Email me: bettger2[at]gmail[dot]com

Thanks for continuing the dialog,
Nate

When you raise the issue of “God-breathed” scripture, you’re leaning very heavily on one particular interpretation of that term/phrase. I think if you were to study what “inspiration” (being God-breathed) and “authority” meant to the early Christians you’d realize it is a far-cry from how some fundamentalists/foundationalists read it now.

So which interpretation should we favor? It seems to me we should rely more heavily on the earlier interpretation. Otherwise we’re calling the Bible central but making it out to say whatever we wish it to. And that’s neither historically accurate nor intellectually honest.

Please remember that the early Christians never assumed that the human factor was squeezed out when God-breathed scripture was written. Both man and God are always present in the text.

So, to conclude, certainly scripture is “inspired” and “authoritative”, but not in the way that is assumed by foundationalists.

The passage in I Tim 3 is one where I would say that scripture’s inerrancy is implicit. If all scripture is God-breathed, and God is without error, then one could come to the conclusion that scripture is without error. To not come to that conclusion would say (to me, at least) that one either isn’t confident in the current christian canon as the proper scripture, or isn’t confident in God’s ability to transmit the scriptures to us successfully.

Your statement that you “do not … submit to the Bible” is a bit confusing. You stated that God gives scripture its authority, and that you submit to Christ. If the Bible’s precepts carry the weight and authority of God, why would you not submit to them? Not worshiping the bible I can understand–but not submitting to it, I don’t follow.

Furthermore, to come to the conclusion that “authority comes from a community interpreting the Bible” is interesting. That is a syllogism I have not yet seen and I’m not sure I agree with (though I haven’t had the time to fully contemplate).

In the end, I feel much of this comes down to semantics. A dialogue of this nature is difficult if we don’t agree on certain terms, definitions, etc. Nonetheless, it is a good discussion.

God’s revelation did not stop 1900 years ago. God is a living presence through the Holy Spirit right now. Jesus is risen and continues to be the source of God understanding to people today.

Yet, humans do not know the whole of God in all of this, much less in the limited set of words in the Biblical texts. God does not fit well in to the Bible box. We in the emerging church and others current movement of the Spirit sense a strong up welling of the Spirit of God that calls us to a much broader view of Grace, God’s chosen, true believers, the saved, etc. than has been perceived by church leaders in the past.

Where does this authority come from? From the guidance of the present Holy Spirit, which/whom Is God, as much or more than the frozen in time words of the Bible.

Authority comes from God, who gives scripture its authority. Also, if we, as the Bible says, are the body of Christ, his presence in this world, and if the spirit of God is manifested in our communities as we are full of his spirit… I would say that there is a measure of authority that comes from the community interpreting the bible as well.

Now communities change, as culture’s change… we, by no means get it right all the time. So a community approaching the bible with humility, seeking God as the spirit reveals things to us and as we look at the whole of scripture (which is given authority by God), will be headed in a good direction.

I do not worship, follow, or submit to the Bible, in and of itself. It is Christ that I worship, follow, and submit myself to. The bible is helpful in the growth of “wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” Paul’s words!

In regards to the sun… do you really think that david was using imagery because he really knew that the sun was stationary… or because he actually thought that it moved? I have a lot of difficulty separating the first half of Psalms from its human component. Are you familiar with the notion of the firmament that the ancient near eastern cultures believed? Sounds a lot like “a tent pitched for the sun in the heavens.” http://natebettger.com/2007/12/12/the-bible-and-ancient-mythology-my-emerging-understanding/

I am ok with saying David didn’t know as much as we do about creation… even God… because it doesn’t shake my faith in God or in Jesus or in the Spirit who is with us. They are bigger than what I see in the Bible. And being ok with this does not shatter my faith either because my faith is not in the bible. It is in something|someone that is bigger than the bible… and scriptures point to.

So you have never witnessed the sun traveling across the sky? Granted, it is the earth moving, but we see the sun start the day on one horizon and finish at another. The earth is the one rotating, but the sun is still traveling across our sky. Any chance that is what was meant by David?