Suppose you are a devout Christian and you think that the Bible has been inspired by God. Would this mean that you cannot discuss the historical layers of the Bible? Or would you continue to investigate them, thinking of them as the way in which God assumed a historical form and communicated with human beings? In other words, does not faith regard only the ultimate level, leaving all the others unchanged?
Comments and discussions are welcome. Be sure you are making a point and contributing to the discussion.
It seems to me, this depends mainly on the cultural background of this devout Christian. I know a Bible scholar who is at the same time a Christian. He surely discusses the historical questions (one of his papers was about how the prophecies of the Old Testament were reinterpreted in later patristic works). On the other hand, the fundamentalists generally deny all historical stuff. The uneducated ones see no point in these discussions,whereas the educated deny it as a perversion of the true faith or as a kind of temptation.
Dear Elisa,
Thank you for the post.
First of all, the Bible is not a book of philosophy or science. However, that does not mean that it cannot be critically analysed or studied. A devout Christian, who would like to acquire more knowledge about the inspirtation of God, cannot deny the historical study of the Bible. In fact, the historical-critical method of the biblical interpretation has opened a new era in understanding the text better as it has opened up new possibilities for understanding the biblical word in its originality. Thus the use of scientific methods and approaches can give a better grasp of the meaning of texts in their linguistic, literary, sociocultural, religious and historical contexts.
To your second question, i don’t think the scientific study contraticts or nullifies the way in which God assumed a historical form and communicated with human beings.
Thirdly, the aim of the Bible was to transmit faith to its first readers and the tradition is passed on till today. Therefore, faith is the background against which the Bible is interpreted. This does not leave or deny the other facts of the interpretation, including the non-christian perspective which can provide a better understanding of the truth. I have affirmed this view in your post on understaning and translating early christian texts.
Thank you once again for the intriguing questions.
Thank you for your answers, Evgenija and Christopher! My point is just that the discussion about whether God etc. authored the Bible or any other sacred text should be asked at the end of one’s investigation, and not at the beginning. Believing that a divinely inspired author composed text A does not mean we are not justified in asking questions such as whether A reuses previous material or comparing A with other texts allegedly by the same author.
I see Evgenija’s point about fundamentalism, but I am inclined to think that it is innerly inconsistent, since if you accept that God inspired a given person to write A, understanding more about the background of this person or of A itself should be a way to better understand the way God acted among us.