Yesterday I introduced "Winston Smith" to you all. It's a pseudonym of course for a good buddy of mine. You can read the intro HERE. (& I even have a pic of him today like I promised yesterday.) I will also say that "Winston" is one of the smartest dudes I know... and he writes like it, so there is a certain level of HIGHER speech in this blog post than are in most of the ones you might read by me. A lot of you might love this and find it a welcomed break from my usual writing style. Below is what he has written and I hope you will enjoy it. These are his thoughts he's laying open for us. [emphasis is mine] Read them and interact with them in the comments section.
Dear reader,
My intent over the summer has been to better understand the nature of the Bible and to process my understanding on “paper.” I have done this by reading much and conversing much (with myself and my dad who happens to be a pastor) and praying much. Below is a snippet from my processing. I admit that my views of all things are finite and are set in a “hermeneutical spiral”: a dialectical continuous process where movement of understanding is from thesis to antithesis to synthesis. I do not claim perfect understanding, as I am prone to error, misinterpretation, and finitude. So take what I have written for what it is worth, and any insight you might offer is welcomed; even if you want to call me a hellish child I would be grateful because then at least I will know that I am on the right track.
Here I begin:
I confess with the body of faithful witnesses in the now-times and in past-times that the Scriptures are true, that is, they are trustworthy and authoritative. They will not lead the seeker-of-truth into error because the Scriptures, I believe, are infallible. They are infallible in such a way that the intention and teaching of the biblical authors and editors does not lead one into theological untruth or falsehood, but rather into the way of true life and the true knowledge of the Son of God by the Spirit who gives birth to the regenerative man. So also I confess the Scriptures are divine and human. They are divine because the Spirit of God who, carrying out the will of the Father, administered his all-encompassing supervision over the text so that the witness in the pages are trustworthy testimony to God the Truth. It is this reality that encompasses and energizes the life of all faith and life of all that truly exists.
For the reason that the Bible is also a human book, that is, it has the stamp of humanness on each page, I cannot accept that the Scriptures are an exact replication of the mind of God to the degree that everything the Scriptures teach is without need of judicious interpretation and wise discernment with what has been revealed in the past. God has accommodated himself to the fallible and finite languages, and thus minds of humanity. I, nor anyone else, can say that everything revealed in ancient Scripture is fully and completely understood (even understandable) as to its historicity, namely its precision, actuality, and factuality of past events such as Jonah and the whale. The possibility of the truth of the events recorded in the book of Jonah is valid (assuming your view of nature is not a sort of natural determinism) and must be considered, but the study of ancient literature and its techniques to convey truth in “untrue” stories and human tendency to embellish past events must also be considered. Though, one must also consider the fact that either way the authority of text and the truth of the text do not change if the fulcrum of opinion swings to the non-historical end of its historical factuality and actuality. The motives for the opinion’s swing of the fulcrum must also be considered.
Because the Scriptures are also divine, to the believer and Holy Spirit-convicted hearer and doer of the word the texts are not simply “another-collection-of-religious-sayings” suspect to human doubt and skepticism, though one may in their heart look upon the text with suspicion. No, rather, the believer and Holy Spirit-convicted hearer and doer approaches the text while appropriating a spirit of humility and obedience and faith in the heart, eyes, and ears.
Those words of Scripture being written down by men and inspired by the Spirit of God are of a different kind. The difference, I believe, is that those responsible for penning the text were faithful not only in their place in history, but in their heavenly view of reality. They were faithful to God toward what they knew was real and true as revealed in their own movements of faith upheld by the graces of true faith flowing from the Spirit of God. The inspiration of the authors cannot mean (in my opinion) the authors volition and intellectual capacities were set aside so that the Holy Spirit could “write” the text without consideration of the personality, social conditioning, political and religious allegiances of the authors' places in the historic timetable. Only modern man with his drive for a sort of Cartesian knowledge seeks for certainty in facts, evidences, and data that the Biblical text is true in the sense that it is “precise” and “without error” in all matters to which it speaks, including historical and scientific knowledge.
Modern man rummages the fields of knowledge in this way: “If the Biblical text speaks to scientific scenarios (even indirectly or implicitly), and is found in error, such as a flat earth or a tri-tiered universe, then the entire corpus of texts must be unworthy of authority because it spoke erroneously of one of the most fundamental truths of the nature of the earth and the universe. Surely if the Scriptures are inspired and God knows everything, then God would know the earth was round and he would tell us so.” This is the irrational fruit of a skepticism produced by an unfortunate tree called rationalism. The only purpose this need for certain certitude appears (from my viewpoint) to be the need to remove the most precious component of religious belief, namely faith, and replace it with illusive notions of scientific and/or historic certainty. My intention is not to negate the positive abilities of biblical criticism or historicism, but to negate the modern assumptions that an ancient text (even if it is inspired) must speak to modern epistemological allegiances. Why do we think our rationalism and scientism and historicism must be the judge of eternal truth? The Holy Spirit is capable of employing the errant and finite minds of both author and interpreter of the text and to lead them from error into true testimony about the Creating-Loving-Redeeming-Retributive God. God accommodates our finitude and fallibility.
Here I end.
There is more. Hope you learned something and gained a better perspective of what it means to trust the authority of the Bible.
What do you think about what "Winston" wrote about the Scriptures?
WHAT DO YOU AGREE WITH OR DISAGREE WITH?





















