Archive for August 22nd, 2012

Where Do We Go Now?

Wednesday, August 22nd, 2012 | Author:

I got an email today from Marc.  I think you should read it and, if you can offer some useful advice, answer him on this blog.  Here’ what he had to say:

“From the first few pages I read of your introductory “30 Days” series, I knew I had come upon something significant. I am so grateful for your teaching, Skip, and your passionate dedication to God’s Word, its accurate translation and understanding. Your writings have rocked my world.

My predicament, however, is what to do with all this. I now find myself a Hebraic-minded stranger in Christian world. I suppose my plight is not unfamiliar among the community. Now that my wife is onboard, after nearly 3 years of my own study, we’re trying to decide on the direction we go spiritually. We have 2 young children, 11 & 9 – how do we raise them to know God, know Yeshua, love them and Their Word? My 11 year old daughter says, “I don’t want to become Jewish!” LOL, neither do we. Some of our best friends are Jewish, I grew up with many Jewish friends, and its shocking how absent God is in their lives.

You said it recently, Skip. If I shared almost any of the insight and understanding I now have of God’s Word, the importance of Torah, the true teachings of Yeshua and Sh’aul, they’d think me a heretic! They think Fee & Stuart is getting deep – they have no idea… And God bless them, these are people who love Him and are striving to live rightly and obey Him in their lives. But we can’t in good conscience continue to be a part of “that.”

We’ve even gone as far as looking into some of the Messianic Jewish Congregations in the area – there are a few. But I don’t know if I want to wear a kippah and a prayer shawl (not sure the name). That direction doesn’t really look right either, but I’m not sure.

So the dilemma is where to go with all that we now know. Do others have this same struggle? I suppose we are fortunate that there is at least a small core of like-minded believers in Greater Phoenix, mainly because of Roderick. Unfortunately, they’re on the other side of town from us, and most of them are still going to large local Christian churches. Do they feel similarly conflicted?

Our concern is both for ourselves and our children. We all need to be plugged into a community. For now, we’re attending a local Christian church that both we and our kids really like, but I know the teaching is off. Do we go the Messianic route? It is an option”

Marc

 

NOTE:  Marc lives in the Phoenix area, but his dilemma is common.  Now you, all over the world, have a chance to help him and his family find the new way.

Thanks

Skip

Category: Articles  | Tags: ,  | 92 Comments

Prophecy and History

Wednesday, August 22nd, 2012 | Author:

“Yet hear the word of the LORD, O Zedekiah, king of Judah!  Thus says the LORD concerning you, ‘You will not die by the sword.  You will die in peace,  . . . Jeremiah 34:4-5a  NASB

In peace – This seems like an inconsequential verse.  Perhaps not inconsequential for Zedekiah, but certainly nothing more than Jeremiah’s prophecy about Zedekiah’s death.  God assures Zedekiah that in spite of the coming destruction of the kingdom, he will not die “by the sword.”  He will die beshalom.

There’s only one small problem.  Zedekiah didn’t die beshalom.  We know the history from the Bible itself.  Zedekiah was captured and taken before the king of Babylon.  His sons were slaughtered before his eyes.  Then his eyes were plucked out, he was bound and put into prison where he finally died (Jeremiah 52:10-11).  This is hardly peaceful.  So what can we say?  Was Jeremiah’s prophecy untrue?  Does the book of Jeremiah contain an internal contradiction?  Biblical history doesn’t match this biblical prophecy.  Have we encountered an historical error in the text?

There are plenty of people who deny the claims of Scripture because they disagree with the Bible’s theological perspective.  One example might be the continual objection that no real God would command extermination of entire populations including women and children.  Objections like these tend to turn on the differences between an ancient Near Eastern worldview and our contemporary Western ideas.  But that isn’t the case when it comes to Zedekiah.  Either God’s prophetic word about Zedekiah’s death is true or it is mistaken.  And if it is mistaken, as history demonstrates, then how can we trust anything else prophecy might claim about events that have not yet occurred?  This little verse becomes a very big problem.

Before we attempt some sort of reconciliation, we need to ask why this is a problem in the first place.  The answer revolves around a doctrine called inerrancy.  Millard Erickson defines inerrancy as the belief that “the Bible is fully truthful in all of its teachings.”[1]

Erickson goes on to say, “Indeed, whether the Bible is fully truthful is a matter which is of importance theologically, historically, and epistemologically.”[2]  According to Erickson’s view (which represents most conservative Christian thinkers), the Bible must be inerrant if it is to be authoritative.  This is based on the prior doctrines.  As Erickson summarizes:

1. If God is omniscient and if God knows all things, then “He cannot be ignorant of or in error on any matter.

2. Further, if he is omnipotent, he is able to so affect the biblical author’s writing that nothing erroneous enters into the final product.

3. God desires to communicate in a way which will not mislead men.

4. Thus, our view of inspiration logically entails the inerrancy of the Bible.  Inerrancy is a corollary of the doctrine of full inspiration.[3]

In other words, those who follow doctrinal statements like Erickson argue that the Bible is completely dependable in what it claims and teaches.  But Erickson adds one important caveat.  “It is obvious that belief in the inerrancy of the Scriptures is not an inductive conclusion arrived at as a result of examining all the passages of the Bible. . . . Nor is the doctrine of biblical inerrancy explicitly affirmed or taught in the Bible.  Rather, it is a corollary of the doctrine of full inspiration of the Bible.”[4]

Carefully consider what Erickson just said.  Essentially Erickson notes that inerrancy is a statement of faith, not a claim based on evidence.  It is a statement of faith because it depends on a prior doctrine, full inspiration, which is also not the result of examining the evidence.  In fact, Erickson concedes that Scripture neither asserts such a doctrine nor endorses such a doctrine.  And that raises a very important question.  If Scripture itself doesn’t explicitly teach inerrancy or explicitly endorse inerrancy, then where did the idea come from?

Perhaps, while you are roiling this question around, you might ask why we would require a doctrine of inerrancy.  Is inerrancy really about our penchant for certainty?  And is certainty a concomitant of faith or is it faith’s opposite?

“Accepting a tenet of faith is not difficult; the hard part is accepting the attendant consequences.”[5]

Topical Index:  in peace, beshalom, Jeremiah 34:4-5, Jeremiah 52:10-11, inerrancy


[1] Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Baker Book House, 1985), p. 221.

[2] Ibid., p. 225.

[3]   See Erickson’s chapter on Inerrancy

[4] Ibid., p. 229.

[5] Jacques Ellul, The Subversion of Christianity, p. 78.

Category: Today's Word  | Tags: , , , ,  | 35 Comments