Tim Oakes

Made to make you think

Friday, September 16, 2005

Authority

I recently started to read a book by N T Wright titled 'The Authority of Scripture'. One area of the Bible that I've always struggled to understand is the relevance of the Old Testament in light of the New. My old excuse and still one that I use in part is that of contextualisation of verses but that (in my opinion) doesn't go far enough. I've always had the opinion that the bible is and has to be an authority in my life but I’ll avoid a discussion into an infallible text for now.

Wright talks about the Old and New Testament as being the overriding story of God. A biographical narrative that illustrates an amazing, living God. He points out the importance of not reading parts out of the context of the narrative just in the same way we wouldn’t pick up a novel and read chapters 11 -12 and expect to know what’s going on.

The interesting thing I found about this view is that it helped me to find a place for the Old Testament in my life today. One of the beauties of having the narrative paradigm is that chapters and 11-12 aren’t devalued in any way but find there full meaning and purpose when read in the context of the whole story.

With this view it brings a new angle to issues of fornication, tattoos etc into a 2005 setting. I’m not sold out on this whole idea but yet it sits well with me when reading the Old Testament.

I guess I’m looking for to resounding destroy this idea for me and reaffirm it. Regardless of my thoughts what’s your take on the Old and New Testament and the issue of relevance?

5 Comments:

  • At 9:02 pm, September 16, 2005, Blogger Jon said…

    I like the idea of narrative and believe it is important to read the bible as a story but I am struggling to see how that makes the Old Testament (or any other section of Scripture for that matter) more relevant.

    If the OT is viewed as the early chapters of the unfolding Judaeo/Christian drama, then what can it possibly say to us today except inform us of how we got here?

    Come to think of it, most of Paul's letters were written to churches struggling with the Jew/Gentile issue, so does viewing Scripture as narrative mean that Paul is also relegated to an earlier chapter of the story?

    I suppose my questions all boil down to this. In what sense can earlier elements of our story be authoritative for our current context?

    With regards to what I think, no idea. Will do some more thinking though and maybe make a post myself. Cheers for starting a blog badger, lets hope the conversation continues.

     
  • At 7:44 am, September 17, 2005, Blogger Tim said…

    Ok I see your point but I guess it’s about roots. Who I am and the values I hold are almost comprehensively determined by my past, parents, upbringing, experiences etc. Reading the Old Testament on a macroscopic level is like retracing my roots. I think something I’m beginning to see is that the story continues and we’re part of it! With this view I can find a lot more relevance from the Old and it’s just starting to help me discover more of my identity in God by understanding who my father is and what he’s done.

    On the microscopic level here’s an aside - A few months ago we had some food hygiene training which wasn’t fantastic but the guy doing it described Moses as the first food hygienist. Well I would argue that it was actually God but he informed us about some strange things that used to live in pork that if you didn’t cook properly would make you very ill, hence the Jewish law of not eating pork. He also told us about blood and stuff which would go on to explain why Kosher meat has to be drained of blood. I’m sure the reason why the Old Testament says we shouldn’t have tattoos could well be related to the fact that they simply didn’t have hygienic ways of doing tattoos. I could go on but just because we can understand the context of these things and go on to enjoy a lovely pork chop it doesn’t mean that we should avoid areas which illustrate God’s heart on issues. For me God is the same today, yesterday and tomorrow. I simply can’t believe in a schizophrenic God!

    As for the New Testament – I’m quite happy believing it to be totally relevant to me so don’t confuse me on that one just yet!

     
  • At 10:05 pm, September 17, 2005, Blogger Jon said…

    I do like the idea of understanding our roots. And as you say, it does really help us to have better understanding of our Christian identity.

    I still struggle with the issue of interpretation and relavence though, and I am just not sure that viewing the bible as story helps much with that. Or maybe I am just looking for a level of relevance that simply isn't there.

    And I do agree that things become very tricky when the NT is treated in this way. Maybe some cans of worms are best left unopened.

     
  • At 4:32 pm, September 21, 2005, Blogger Tim said…

    My comments might have been a little unclear. For the record my view on tattoos is that they're cool, pork chops are lovely and sex is meant for marriage. If you want me to expand these thoughts then let me know.

     
  • At 2:21 pm, September 30, 2005, Blogger Tim Lovell said…

    Hey man, tried restarting the authority debate over on my blog. We'll see if it gets anywhere...

     

Post a Comment

<< Home