Should We Challenge the Values, Ethics, or Portrayals of God in Scripture

A professor at Messiah College recently said:

"When the Church grandly proclaims the Bible to be the Word of God, it gives the impression that the words of Scripture are above critique and beyond reproach. We are taught to read, revere, and embrace the Bible. We are not taught to challenge its values, ethics, or portrayals of God."

I discovered this quote here: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thoughtlife/2013/02/can-a-messiah-college-ot-professor-really-teach-the-bibles-immoral/ An excellent initial rebuttal by Dr. Owen Strachan, Professor SBTS and Christian rapper.

And the original blog is here: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/peterenns/2013/02/when-the-good-book-is-bad-challenging-the-bibles-violent-portrayals-of-god/

Here’s something about the author of the quote above: Dr. Eric Seibert, Professor of Old Testament, Messiah College. Much of Seibert’s work is centered on addressing the problematic portrayals of God in the Old Testament, especially his violence. He is the author of Disturbing Divine Behavior: Troubling Old Testament Images of God (Fortress 2009) and The Violence of Scripture: Overcoming the Old Testament’s Troubling Legacy (Fortress 2012). Seibert is also a licensed minister in the Brethren in Christ Church and the Director of the Peace and Conflict Studies Initiative at Messiah College. He is currently working on his third book, Disarming the Church: Why Christians Must Forsake Violence to Follow Jesus (Cascade).

And one more link by another reviewer: http://questiontradition.wordpress.com/2013/02/03/the-good-book-is-good/

OK, here’s the deal. As the reviewer in the link at wordpress (just above) points out, there’s a difference between a friendly discussion at Starbucks and keeping a wolf out of your sheep. Dr. Seibert obviously has a problem with God Almighty and has taken it upon himself to de-violence God, and perhaps even to emasculate Him; and, to do so in addressing the church. In other words he is a wolf among the sheep.

But let me talk to you as if across the coffee table. (Laying down the gun I would use on the wolf, and I’m sure Dr. Seibert would not approve of that imagery.) Does the Bible have Sin in it? Certainly! Is God ever the author of sin, as in its originator? No. Does God act Sovereignly to affect people in such a way that their sin becomes greater? Yes. Take Pharaoh for example, God hardened His heart. But that is a far cry from what Dr. Seibert is saying. And I point this out because he is not alone!

Dr, Seibert said, “the Church … gives the impression that the words of Scripture are above critique and beyond reproach.” Well, yes, and it should. The words are above reproach. That doesn't mean we are to emulate everyone in scripture. We should not brag like Joseph, lust like David, or deny Christ like Peter. We are not to use violence to advance our own ends. But then we are not the nation of Israel, executing God's judgment on groups of people who had taken the land that God promised Abraham. The USA is not Israel. I’m not even positive that modern day Israel is the same Israel of the Bible. (But I would err on the side of caution and not stand against modern day Israel either.)

But that’s not what Dr. Seibert said; he said we are too use human judgment to critique the Word of God, and that we should bring reproach upon it. That’s something else altogether!

He also says, “We are not taught to challenge its values, ethics, or portrayals of God." Implying, I believe, that we should do so!

I believe we are called to study and understand it’s portrayals of God. Sometimes those portrayals are conditioned toward human understanding and attribute to God certain emotions that in humans would be borderline, if not fully, sinful or at least human-centered. Emotions like jealousy, anger, shock, and revenge come to mind. But to understand God is to see these played out in a divine and holy way. No one else has the right to be jealous except God the creator and deliverer. God is wrathful God and He has the right to be because He is also the God of perfect love. Not knowing Love like He does keeps me from fully understanding His wrath and anger.

I also want to say there is room in the Christian life for a discussion on the role of violence and whether Christian passivity in the face of violence is always right. While I believe in the concept of a “just war” I’m not sure I’ve seen one in my life time. Maybe so, maybe not. But I do not believe the OT passages that Seibert has trouble with teach me to go to war, or use violence, especially at the drop of a hat. What we need is responsible teaching and understanding of scripture not his way of dealing with it.

There are difficult to understand passages in the Bible. I do not find the bloody wars of Israel to be joyful portrayals except to note when the shackles of oppression are thrown off. I do not rejoice in the doctrine of Hell. Which is more fully developed by Christ Himself that any OT prophet. But I know this. His ways are higher than mine. His thoughts are higher than mine. His love and holiness and vengeance and wrath are greater than mine and I trust Him.

Chas. Spurgeon on Church Growth - A Guest Blog

Does it really need to be more complicated than this? 

Have people changed so much in 125 years? 

Most importantly, has the gospel lost it's power?

Spurgeon:

Are you afraid that preaching the gospel will not win souls? Are you despondent as to success in God’s way? Is this why you pine for clever oratory? Is this why you must have music, and architecture, and flowers and millinery? After all, is it by might and power, and not by the Spirit of God? It is even so in the opinion of many.

Brethren beloved, there are many things which I might allow to other worshipers which I have denied myself in conducting the worship of this congregation. I have long worked out before your very eyes the experiment of the unaided attractiveness of the gospel of Jesus. Our service is severely plain. No man ever comes hither to gratify his eye with art, or his ear with music. I have set before you, these many years, nothing but Christ crucified, and the simplicity of the gospel; yet where will you find such a crowd as this gathered together this morning? Where will you find such a multitude as this meeting Sabbath after Sabbath, for five-and-thirty years? I have shown you nothing but the cross, the cross without flowers of oratory, the cross without diamonds of ecclesiastical rank, the cross without the buttress of boastful science. It is abundantly sufficient to attract men first to itself, and afterwards to eternal life!

In this house we have proved successfully, these many years, this great truth, that the gospel plainly preached will gain an audience, convert sinners, and build up and sustain a church. We beseech the people of God to mark that there is no need to try doubtful expedients and questionable methods. God will save by the gospel still: only let it be the gospel in its purity. This grand old sword will cleave a man’s chine [i.e., spine], and split a rock in halves.

How is it that it does so little of its old conquering work? I will tell you. Do you see the scabbard of artistic work, so wonderfully elaborated? Full many keep the sword in this scabbard, and therefore its edge never gets to its work. Pull off that scabbard. Fling that fine sheath to Hades, and then see how, in the Lord’s hands, that glorious two-handed sword will mow down fields of men as mowers level the grass with their scythes.

There is no need to go down to Egypt for help. To invite the devil to help Christ is shameful. Please God, we shall see prosperity yet, when the church of God is resolved never to seek it except in God’s own way.

Charles Haddon Spurgeon
Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 1888, vol. 34, p. 563

Do you know what a "Creche" is?

Do you know what a "Creche" is? I've only learned that word in the last 15 years or so. I always called it a Nativity scene! But a creche is not a painting but a 3 dimensional representation of the birth scene of Jesus Christ.

"Creche" is a French word and I'll tell you it's original meaning in a moment. But first, Creche also has a couple meanings besides the nativity. It can refer to a day care center or a "foundling hospital" where children are taken care of by someone other than their parents. 

In Zoology it refers to the practice of some animals to care for the young ones of another in the colony. For instance, lions often do this for defensive purposes. one or two lionesses will care for several young that aren't theirs so other lionesses can be involved in hunting or protection of the pride of lions. (A "Pride" is a lion colony.)

There are also some birds, including penguins, who do this, and a breed of crocodile called the Spectacled Caiman. (I don't think it actually wears spectacles.) So its like a "day care" for animals. The operative idea is one of certain beings taking care of the children of another. Interesting how that fits in with Joseph and Father God.

But back to the word "Creche." It is french for manger, or feeding trough. It has nothing to do with the care of babies or children, except of course that Mary laid the Son of God, the Messiah, in a manger.

Some say it was St. Francis of Assisi who first put together a Creche. It was a living representation of the manger scene formed to promote the worship of Christ and celebrate his humble birth.

Unfortunately there is that little often overlooked command of God that says in Ex 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing in heaven above, or beneath the earth , or in the water... And to shed light on that: Lev 26:1 Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the LORD your God. 

So what do we do about pictures of Jesus? Or carvings of Jesus on the cross, or in a manger? After all "Graven" would include a carving, or and image stamped in metal, and by extension, even a painting. (I was going to include photo, but alas, there are no photos of Jesus.)

First, we need to be careful with them. I wouldn't have them in a room intended for Christian worship. Now the carving of a baby in a manger maybe so small as to be unseeable at a distance, and if that's the case I'm not going to be legalistic about this. But one reason I prefer an empty cross to one with a body attached is I don't want us to ever confuse who we are worshiping. There are other reasons for the empty cross to be sure, but the words, "No graven image" tend to resound in my brain.

I have seen a number of paintings depicting Jesus as a shepherd, healer, teacher, or hanging on a cross, that were very moving, beautiful! But I wouldn't have one at the front of the room - as a point of focus- dedicated to worship of God, because its not God, it's just a picture. And God wants us to be very careful about this.

So, we'll have a "Creche" in our church during this season. And hopefully it will stir up gratefulness in our hearts for the one who left the splendor of heaven and came to a dirty fallen wicked world, to die on a cross for us. And as much as I appreciate a nativity scene, I also appreciate the simplicity of a Cradle, a Cross, and a Crown.

Merry Christmas y'all! Clark