The Ongoing Issue of Biblical Authority
Back in the day, when the early Church first came to faith in Jesus as Messiah but still relied entirely on the Hebrew Scriptures as their only ‘Bible,’ gospel preaching focused on the myriad of texts fulfilled in Christ. They saw Jesus everywhere in what would become the Christian ‘Old Testament.’ Indeed, we read how Jesus himself perceived His life as woven across the whole fabric of Jewish narrative, hymnology, and prophecy (Luke 24:13-35). For decades, the continuity between the Jewish narrative and the Christian revelation was a continuous wonder of discoveries.
But by the end of the first century, believers were also noticing some disturbing discontinuities as well. They noted the disparity between the image of the Father revealed in Christ with the violent images, actions, laws and judgments associated with Yahweh on display throughout the Law, the Writings and the Prophets. It seemed impossible that the God whom Jesus called Father could be responsible for the pattern of hatred and atrocity often described in the text and ascribed to His name.
The issue was so acute that potential solutions triggered schism. Believers attempted three major contrary approaches. The Gnostics preserved the perfection of the Creator God by assigning OT destruction and retribution to lesser gods and demiurges—distortions of God’s will. They included Yahweh among this secondary, violent company. Others, like the Marcionites, could not bear the discontinuity and ultimately abandoned the OT altogether as sub-Christian and unfit for continued use as authoritative Scripture in the Church.
The Church fathers and mothers who represent orthodox Christian belief rigorously rejected these answers … but they did not ignore the question. They only came to peace with the Hebrew text by nodding to its literal origins but interpreting its meaning spiritually or allegorically. Origen systematized this hermeneutic, but he really represents the standard approach of the early scholars en masse. Spiritualizing the Bible was deemed necessary in light of the obvious (to them) discrepancy between God as “the man of war” (Exodus 15:3) and Jesus as “the Prince of Peace.” Up until the Imperial reign of the Holy Roman Empire, the great conquests texts of the Bible stood as real contradictions to the Cross of Christ unless interpreted figuratively as our spiritual battle with a spiritual enemy, a la Ephesians 6.
I love this article - read it numerous times. It not only describes perfectly my own journey but also the thoughts that came with it. Just as the historical revelations of the other two Persons of the Trinity and their are still bringing new insights today, so the revelation of Father is still expanding and triggering new questions. The result is - I believe - going to be a fuller experience of the Trinity. For with the revelation of the Father came also a revelation of sonship and thus a turning o of the hearts of the sons to the father's - the early father's of the church and the questions they struggled with, that is. Scriptures just takes on such a bigger meaning when we consider the nature of its inspiration in this way. Actually I am blown away by its richness when seen through the lens of Christ as you described it in this article. Now I am also really looking forward to the new book!
Posted by: Florian Berndt | October 14, 2014 at 04:23 AM
This is a really important article. It reminded me of a really game-changing bible study I was part of recently - this is what I wrote in my journal afterwards:
'Read Psalm 80 with my worship leaders. First time reading through, I got them to think about who God is - God's character as revealed in the Psalmist's view of Israel. The group emphasised sovereignty, judgement and salvation. Then I got the group to read it with Jesus as their hermeneutical lens. It was amazing! Suddenly we saw God in a new light: Jesus is the God who stands in solidarity with the people of Israel - he is the 'vine' (someone pointed out!), he was mocked and rejected by his enemies. I asked: where is God in the passage now? God is not simply sovereign and distantly ruling, but immersed in sorrow, and drinking the tears of the people. It seems to me this is how to read the OT - upgrading their conception of God with the revelation of the cross.'
Posted by: Martin Little | August 30, 2014 at 01:08 AM