Maggi on being "biblical"

A terrific post by Maggi today on those folks who insist that their reading of Scripture is "biblical". Here's an excerpt:

...some people use the term 'biblical' to indicate (or even authenticate) a specific theological interpretation - e.g. 'biblical' is often used to indicate 'a conservative, evangelical interpretation of the Bible'. To use 'biblical' to describe a theological viewpoint, however, is a loaded way of referring to a theology - because it suggests that this theology is "the" theology of the BIble, and therefore the absolute truth, rather than a possible interpretation. But in point of fact, you can draw very different theologies from the same scriptures, all falling within the bounds of orthodoxy; most of the great controversies in Christian history have precisely concerned differing interpretations of scripture. So to use 'biblical' to mean 'the right interpretation' is actually a loaded, political abuse of the term.

And all God's people said: "Amen!"

Comments

[John]

This child of God said: "Resign! Boo! Hiss! SHAME!" The 39 Articles prescribe a "plain sense" of Scripture. You can't proceed to stretch the meaning out of recognition, play theological hopscotch all over the place, and then say that that is (a) a valid interpretation and (b) that such interpretation is grounds for saying that a reading is "contested" and (c) that it's the Holy Spirit's fault. I'm not letting you away with that. Biblical is a perfectly plain word, and just because your opinion is no, I'll be charitable, 'Biblically suspect' is no reason to object to the term.

[Hugo]

You have to admit, John, that even "plain sense" has a variety of meanings. Maggi refers to "staying within the bounds of orthodoxy".

For example, look at the issue of women in leadership. "Biblical" Christians disagree. Pentecostals (whom no one could accuse of not being biblical) generally accept women leaders. Most Anglicans do too. Conservative "bible-believing" Christians have formed alliances with each other even while they disagree about that issue. Heck, the American Anglican Council and the Anglican Mission in America acknowledge that folks can have different opinions and still be biblical.

[John]

You picked Pentecostals deliberately, didn't you? ;-). My problem relates to the fact that for the likes of Susan "I feel your pain, but not if you're a conservative" Russell and Louie "Galatians, Galatians" Crew, 'the bounds of orthodoxy' are somewhat elastic. I say that they are not, and the attack on the word "Biblical" obscures that fact.

[Hugo]

And that's where we need to discern together the degree to which the elasticity stretches. Orthodoxy cannot be stretched to encompass all innovations, nor can it be made so rigid as to exclude all possible areas of ambiguity. That's where we need to work together in community.

[dana ames]

As I understand it (in a very limited way!), unlike RC (Western) ideas of "the Church" as interpreting the bible in terms of a magisterium, Eastern Christians believe correct interpretation happens with Holy Spirit working through the community of believers.

This is another 1500-year-old discussion :)
I love it!

[John]

Does "together" mean "We in ECUSA", "We in the Anglican Communion" or "We Christians" (And do not tell me that one can have two different orthodoxies at once, or I will..oh, never mind, I've just had Philosophy ;-)) Anyhow, if it's the first, you're in a majority of about 60%,( in which case what happens to the other 40, who believe you've stepped outside of the bounds of orthodoxy?). If it's the second or third, you are in deep, deep trouble.

[Bill Ekhardt]

I'm a conservative pastor, trained in an evangelical seminary. I laud your position Hugo. I could say much more. You've already stated it. John, you and I will disagree on this. That doesn't trouble me.

[John]

Me neither, Bill. I frequently disagree with the rest of the world (conservative or not) on many things. Oh, and of course I disagree with Hugo on almost everything. (It doesn't seem to bother him either, bless him!) ;-)

[Hugo]

Few things are more inspiring than cheerful disagreements!