Joseph_Botwinick said:
All Scripture has interpretive authority.
Yes, all scripture is useful and informative for interpreting other scripture, but all scripture, especially the epistles of the New Testament need to be interpreted in the specific context of the life and teachings of Jesus.
What you just promoted is a liberal interpretive theory…
*Bzzz*
Nope, but thank you for playing.
It is actually a sound biblical interpretive method based on the New Testament and common sense.
…that was and still is a controversy.
I’ll give you that. SBC leaders have been very successful misrepresenting the position.
The SBC removed the words "Jesus as the final authority in interpretation" from the BFM for this very reason. Liberal theologians used this to discount the parts of the Bible they didn't like (namely the teachings of Paul).
I don’t know the true motivations of the SBC committee that rewrote the BF&M in 2000, but that fact that some "liberals" have misused this method I recommend does not negate its biblical validity.
In my opinion, the SBC leadership overreacted and took a position that undermines the spiritual authority of Jesus as a teacher.
Folks like Campolo and "Red Letter Christians" still practice this interpretive heresy.
If you think I am advocating the so-called “Red Letter” Christianity, you have somehow managed to miss that I covered the standard “pitting Jesus against Paul” charge in my first post on this thread. I’m not sure if it is worth my time to present my position if you are going to ignore what I write and just make wild accusations. But I’ll give it a shot…
Here is a brief sketch of my understand of the scripture in regard to this issue:
1.) Jesus is the highest and fullest expression of God to humankind. (Hebrews 1:1-3)
2.) Christ is the cornerstone (that is, the One Who defines the position and orientation) of the household of faith, the holy temple built together spiritually as a dwelling place for God. (Ephesians 2:20-21)
3.) Jesus is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15) Who is the Head of the body, the church. (Colossians 1:17-18)
4.) Jesus identified Himself as the Way, the Truth, and the Life (John 14:6), and those who enter into His life will obey His teachings (Matthew 7:17-27) and will do the works that Jesus did. (John 14:12-15)
5.) The purpose of the church is to make disciples of all people, teaching them to obey the teachings of Jesus. (Matthew 28:19-20)
6.) Based on the previous five points (as well as many other scriptures I could cite), we know that Jesus is a trustworthy Leader, Teacher and Master.
7.) The New Testament writers were all disciples and servants of Jesus – Paul was a disciple/servant/apostle (Acts 9-28; Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1; 2 Corinthians 1:1; Galatians 1:1; Ephesians 1:1; Phillipians 1:1; Colossians 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1; 2 Timothy 1:1; Titus 1:1; Philemon 1). James was a servant of Jesus (James 1:1). Peter was an apostle/servant of Jesus (All four gospels; 1 Peter 1:1; 2 Peter 1:1). John was a disciple of Jesus (All four gospels; 1 John 1:1-4; Revelation 1:1-2).
8.) Jesus said, “A disciple is not above the teacher, nor a slave above the master; it is enough for the disciple to be like the teacher, and the slave like the master” (see Matthew 10:24-25a).
9.) All of these New Testament writers had entered into the life of Christ and were living as His mature disciples. They were all ministering out of the riches of their life in Christ as they were led by the Holy Spirit, providing practical insight into the principles of Christ’s teaching and building upon the teaching foundation laid by Christ (the chief cornerstone).
10.) Outside of the gospels, which were written for both believers (Luke 1:4) and unbelievers (John 20:31), the epistles of the New Testament, Acts, and Revelation were all written to the church – a group of believers who were already familiar with the teachings of Jesus and were actively growing in discipleship to Christ.
11.) Therefore all interpretation of the New Testament writings must take into account the life and teachings of Jesus which was the foundation of the apostolic teaching. If you don’t first start with the life and teachings of Jesus as your theological cornerstone (your interpretive guide), they you are very likely to misinterpret the teachings of Paul and the other New Testament writers according to your personal biases and experience. Furthermore, if you are not actively following Christ in discipleship, learning to live life as He did, taking you spiritual nourishment from His teachings and following His guidance through the Holy Spirit, you are very likely to mishandle scripture.
So what is "liberal" and "heretical" about this position?
And please, if you want me to clarify a point or give addition scripture, please just say so instead of launching an attack. We can all act like Christian grown-ups, can't we?
raying: