Is the Bible a kind of moral self-help book? Is it intended to teach us how best to make ourselves more "holy?" N.T. Wright seems to think that it would be better for us to look at this book as God's "means of equipping and calling the church..." In other words, the Bible's purpose is to "call us out," to draw us into the story of God's people and kingdom and then to send us off on our own kingdom pilgrimage.
He doesn't give us the Holy Spirit in order that we may be infallible—blind and dumb servants who merely sit there and let the stuff flow through us. So he doesn't simply give us a rule book so that we could thumb through and look it up.
It seems to me that people often want to just be right. They figure they've got an infallible book and whatever they quote from it proves their point. One of the criticisms of the emerging church has been that we don't quote enough scripture. I think the difference is that, although people in the emerging church tend to be very "scriptural," we don't tend to just spout out Bible verses in order to prove whatever point we're trying to make.
N.T. Wright suggests that narrative forms are a much better way of transforming lives than a rule book is. A rule book can be simply disagreed with and thrown out the window.
Tell them a story, though, and you invite them to come into a different world; you invite them to share a world-view or better still a 'God-view'. That, actually, is what the parables are all about. They offer, as all genuine Christian story-telling does, a world-view which, as someone comes into it and finds how compelling it is, quietly shatters the world-view that they were in already.
I think about the impact that movies have on me. A really good movie draws me in to the story. That "narrative" might have a slightly (or completely) different perspective on the world that I have never considered. Movies can encourage and embolden me, but they also can cause me to mourn or become depressed. They can inspire me to a greater desire to love, but they can also cause fear in my heart. This is the power of story. I would like to suggest that even the parts of scripture that are not specifically "story" genres are part of a greater story...the "Story We Find Ourselves In," as Brian McLaren puts it.
I think I'm going to end this series here. It's been helpful for me to discover a new way to look at the Bible as authoritative. Dr. Wright says that the authority of scripture "must be understood within the context of God's authority, of which it is both a witness and, perhaps more importantly, a vehicle." He contends that his view of biblical authority "insists that the Bible, not the books that we have become so skilled at turning the Bible into, is the real locus of authority."
(All quotes from an article entitled How Can the Bible Be Authoritative? by N.T. Wright)
*********************************
Links to the rest if this series: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IIIb, Part IV, Part V, Part VI, Part VII, Part VIIb, Part VIII, Conclusion
As I read through the Wright article and dialogued with you about it, I kept scratching my head...
...How am I going to start doing this practically in my personal devotional life and as I engage others in the story (and stories) of the Bible? How will I quit looking for the propositions and begin immersing myself into the narrative? How can I let a story “renew” my mind?
This is great stuff, and I’m on my way. But I have to admit, I’m still just on the journey.
Posted by: Bob Robinson | April 13, 2005 at 10:25 AM
Me, too. I discussed Wright's "5th Act" model with the group I teach on Sunday nights at our church. I thought it was a good way of describing what I'm trying to accomplish in our "study" of 1 Samuel ("trying" being the operative word!):
1. We try to read through at least a chapter as opposed to me delivering a topical sermon based on a few verses.
2. We dicuss as we go. I come to the meeting with preconceived questions, but I hope not to leave it at that. I want the whole community to contribute. When I think of it, I ask God to speak through us as we converse.
3. I try to avoid the trap of making "ready applications," if you know what I mean. This is hard!
4. I try to always ask the following question at the end of meetings: "How can we respond to God tonight?" This can be a tough question because it assumes we have to "get something out of it."
I think that if we can "live" in the text as a community, we'll do better than sitting at home, by ourselves, reading commentaries. I use Brueggemann's commentary, but I only refer to it here and there. The rest of my notes consist of questions and thoughts that popped into my head while reading the text ahead of time. I would like to provide historical clarification where necessary, but I'm not always able to do that. Sometimes I also comment on one of the original Hebrew words.
I'm trying to do something more akin to what Doug Pagitt does with his congregation. I'm still waiting for his new book to come out so I can get a clearer idea of what he does exactly! I'd also like to be able to provide more Rabbinical background, such as Rob Bell does.
Anyway, that probably doesn't really answer your question!
Posted by: Bill | April 13, 2005 at 10:55 AM