This Advent, I have been doing a wonderful devotional series. It has streaming videos which are available a few per week throughout the season. As I watched and learned a great deal more about the connections between the Old Testament and the New Testament, I found myself suddenly able to articulate something I have felt for a long time.
There is a simple reason the study's author was able to make the connections he did; he went to the documents we have access to from the Early Church. Who better to understand John's Gospel and the Revelation of John than his students? The Apostle John taught Polycarp, Polycarp taught Irenaeus. We have letters written by Irenaeus.
The writers of the New Testament scriptures wrote in the context of the established Church. Jesus was a rabbi. In His time, that meant He taught by word of mouth, and students of rabbis memorized the things their rabbi taught. (This was also the pattern others in the ancient world used to preserve important knowledge) The Apostles memorized what Jesus taught them word for word. As they spread the Gospel, they taught these things to the new Christians. Initially, the Church operated entirely upon the oral teaching (or oral tradition) of the Apostles. The Gospels were written, then, within the context of the established Church. The New Testament was written with the intended audience of Christians who were within the established Church. I say all of this to reinforce my point; the oral tradition Jesus passed down through the Apostles is just as important as the written word.Understanding the context in which the scriptures were written and who they were written for (the intended audience) helps us gain insight into their meaning.
What occurred to me is that trying to interpret scripture outside of the Apostolic Tradition is like trying to drive a lopsided lorry; imagine you have goods you need to transport and the only truck available is missing a wheel- there are only three wheels instead of four. Now, you might get the goods to the intended location, but the trip is going to take longer and be fraught with difficulty. That is the best case scenario. It's just as possible that you won't make it. Without Apostolic Tradition, you are driving the lopsided lorry, but there is an alternative. You can study scripture within the context it was written in by pairing it with Apostolic Tradition. In this way, you are putting a spare where that wheel is missing.
I have been discovering that the Early Church Fathers teach us a great deal more than I had previously realized. For example, Justin Martyr and Irenaeus wrote about the Virgin Mary and drew parallels between the Old Testament and the New Testament scriptures. These connections are important, as they help us understand what the author intended.
Thursday, December 14, 2017
Saturday, October 14, 2017
Start by Reading
As I am sure one gathers from the title of my blog, I am a Christian. If you follow my blog, you know that I am specifically a Catholic Christian. I am writing today about a phenomenon common to all of us.
I am very enthusiastic for my faith and enjoy sharing it with others. I am also very enthusiastic about scripture (the Bible). I often see postings on blogs and social media sites. Some are very good and feature thoughtful commentary on whatever they are covering. Some are not. These posts are invariably trolled. The trolls are the worst.
The thing that drives me bonkers every time is when people make things up and say they come from scripture. There are two ways I most often see this occur; either the person claims to be quoting the Bible when they aren't or they quote the Bible but add in their own commentary which has nothing to do with the scripture they quoted.
When someone says "the Word says" or "the Bible says" and does not include a scripture reference, that is reason to be wary. I have caught this tactic many times. Something just doesn't quite look right about the quote, and a quick check using an online concordance reveals that it isn't actually scripture. Respectfully pointing out the mistake often brings a deluge of insults. That's a very Christian way to handle it, right?
Then we have the armchair commentators. They like to choose a phrase or two from here and a phrase or two from there and then string them together with their own words in such a way as to force the scripture into their theological viewpoint. If you look up the quoted verses and read the passages they belong to, they actually say something entirely different than armchair commentator claims. If you would like to be insulted by these types, all that is necessary is to quote the entire passage they pulled out of context.
It bothers me when people claim to be following scripture, but they don't actually know what the scriptures say. It bothers me that so many are out there claiming to have understanding when they haven't gone to the trouble to actually read the scriptures themselves.
The point I am trying to make is that since the Bible is readily available and most of us are literate, Christians should take the time to actually read the scriptures and learn what they say for themselves. When I have seen so many people offended by the mere suggestion that they read the scriptures for themselves to gain an understanding of what they say, I know there is a problem. To that I say this "If you can't be bothered to read the scriptures, stop posting online as if you know what they say."
I am very enthusiastic for my faith and enjoy sharing it with others. I am also very enthusiastic about scripture (the Bible). I often see postings on blogs and social media sites. Some are very good and feature thoughtful commentary on whatever they are covering. Some are not. These posts are invariably trolled. The trolls are the worst.
The thing that drives me bonkers every time is when people make things up and say they come from scripture. There are two ways I most often see this occur; either the person claims to be quoting the Bible when they aren't or they quote the Bible but add in their own commentary which has nothing to do with the scripture they quoted.
When someone says "the Word says" or "the Bible says" and does not include a scripture reference, that is reason to be wary. I have caught this tactic many times. Something just doesn't quite look right about the quote, and a quick check using an online concordance reveals that it isn't actually scripture. Respectfully pointing out the mistake often brings a deluge of insults. That's a very Christian way to handle it, right?
Then we have the armchair commentators. They like to choose a phrase or two from here and a phrase or two from there and then string them together with their own words in such a way as to force the scripture into their theological viewpoint. If you look up the quoted verses and read the passages they belong to, they actually say something entirely different than armchair commentator claims. If you would like to be insulted by these types, all that is necessary is to quote the entire passage they pulled out of context.
It bothers me when people claim to be following scripture, but they don't actually know what the scriptures say. It bothers me that so many are out there claiming to have understanding when they haven't gone to the trouble to actually read the scriptures themselves.
The point I am trying to make is that since the Bible is readily available and most of us are literate, Christians should take the time to actually read the scriptures and learn what they say for themselves. When I have seen so many people offended by the mere suggestion that they read the scriptures for themselves to gain an understanding of what they say, I know there is a problem. To that I say this "If you can't be bothered to read the scriptures, stop posting online as if you know what they say."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)