I have been thinking a lot about the Biblical canon lately and pondering some things in regards to that. One of the main things I've been thinking about is the books that were in consideration for the Bible, but weren't included (the Apocrypha, the Pseudopigrapha and other deuterocanonical books). Many of these are books that almost made it into the Protestant canon (and many of them are included in other canons, such as the Roman Catholic canon). Some were the runners up for glory, and didn't make the cut. Others, by contrast, were just ridiculous, though funny (Infancy Gospel of Thomas, for example) and were tossed due to their lack of legitimate truth. I have to take it in faith that our canon was inspired by God and that I have all I need before me in the Bible. However, at the same time, what do we do with these other books? And what do we do with the books that are in the Bible that got in under certain assumptions that were later proved false (for example, New Testament letters that made the cut simply because they were assumed to be authored by Paul, but later scholarship showed that they weren't necessarily written by him)?
Another thing that has been on my mind is that we don't encourage the reading of such books. In the early days of the canon being formed, many of these books were encouraged to be read, as long as they weren't read with the same authoritative voice as the books that made it into the Bible. In other words, they could be used for encouragement and edification, but not to be viewed as the authoritative Word of God as the Bible is supposed to be viewed. It was understood that the Bible was the place to go for true nourishment from God, and these other things were like an extra brownie at the end of the meal.
In recent church times, however, I would guess that at least 50% of the Church (in the United States, at least) has no idea what these books even are. Many have never heard the word apocrypha. Most churches don't teach about it. At the same time, nearly 100% of the Church (again, in the United States) has been bombarded with Rick Warren's Purpose Driven Life and it has become required reading in many congregations. This serves as an example of the fact that while we don't encourage the reading of books that nearly made it in between the leather binding of our Bibles, we highly encourage the reading of books written by Christian authors. I am all for reading Christian authors, that isn't my issue here. My issue is that we often take someone like Rick Warren, Max Lucado or Joyce Meyer as being more authoritative than these books.
Along with that, if we are going to focus on the reading of Christian authors, we should encourage a "balanced diet" of old and new authorship. If we believe that God can still speak through people and their writings (though not in the same way as through the Bible), shouldn't we want to hear what he spoke through Thomas a Kempis, Augustine, Bernard of Clairvaux and Teresa of Avila as much as we want to hear what was spoken through C.S. Lewis and Dietrich Bonhoeffer as much as we want to hear the newest word from Rick Warren, Max Lucado and Joyce Meyer? If we are going to encourage extra-Biblical reading (which I do), let's at least encourage what is good and not just who is popular right now in mainstream Christianity. Much of what is written today is amazing and there are some great truths being explained and great Biblical principles for daily life out there. There are also some great writings that speak prophetically into the life and mission of the Church and which speak deep truths of God in new ways. There are also a lot of books that are shallow and lacking, but that are making tons of money. (It makes me want to write some books and see what happens).
Another thought is that I think many people, sadly, take these readings as more of an authoritative word spoken into their lives than the Bible itself. I think we need to raise the level of Biblical literacy so that when we are reading things (newly revealed, specific revelation, or rhema words), we know whether or not they line up with the logos Word of God in our Bibles. Nothing should be digested as Truth that doesn't line up with the Bible (in my opinion). At the same time, we need to study and search these things out. We need to not just accept things as truth because a big name said them. We also need to not throw out the things that make us have to think hard about where they do or don't line up. I won't even get into translations right now and the problems and difficulties that brings to this subject.
These are thoughts that I have been thinking and wondering where others stand on them. I will admit that I haven't read through most of these extra-Biblical works, but I plan to do that soon. I also admit that I could take in a lot better nourishment at times than I do. I am not seeking to condemn anyone here, but just trying to challenge us to think about such things.
"Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things." (Philippians 4:8, NASB)
Another thing that has been on my mind is that we don't encourage the reading of such books. In the early days of the canon being formed, many of these books were encouraged to be read, as long as they weren't read with the same authoritative voice as the books that made it into the Bible. In other words, they could be used for encouragement and edification, but not to be viewed as the authoritative Word of God as the Bible is supposed to be viewed. It was understood that the Bible was the place to go for true nourishment from God, and these other things were like an extra brownie at the end of the meal.
In recent church times, however, I would guess that at least 50% of the Church (in the United States, at least) has no idea what these books even are. Many have never heard the word apocrypha. Most churches don't teach about it. At the same time, nearly 100% of the Church (again, in the United States) has been bombarded with Rick Warren's Purpose Driven Life and it has become required reading in many congregations. This serves as an example of the fact that while we don't encourage the reading of books that nearly made it in between the leather binding of our Bibles, we highly encourage the reading of books written by Christian authors. I am all for reading Christian authors, that isn't my issue here. My issue is that we often take someone like Rick Warren, Max Lucado or Joyce Meyer as being more authoritative than these books.
Along with that, if we are going to focus on the reading of Christian authors, we should encourage a "balanced diet" of old and new authorship. If we believe that God can still speak through people and their writings (though not in the same way as through the Bible), shouldn't we want to hear what he spoke through Thomas a Kempis, Augustine, Bernard of Clairvaux and Teresa of Avila as much as we want to hear what was spoken through C.S. Lewis and Dietrich Bonhoeffer as much as we want to hear the newest word from Rick Warren, Max Lucado and Joyce Meyer? If we are going to encourage extra-Biblical reading (which I do), let's at least encourage what is good and not just who is popular right now in mainstream Christianity. Much of what is written today is amazing and there are some great truths being explained and great Biblical principles for daily life out there. There are also some great writings that speak prophetically into the life and mission of the Church and which speak deep truths of God in new ways. There are also a lot of books that are shallow and lacking, but that are making tons of money. (It makes me want to write some books and see what happens).
Another thought is that I think many people, sadly, take these readings as more of an authoritative word spoken into their lives than the Bible itself. I think we need to raise the level of Biblical literacy so that when we are reading things (newly revealed, specific revelation, or rhema words), we know whether or not they line up with the logos Word of God in our Bibles. Nothing should be digested as Truth that doesn't line up with the Bible (in my opinion). At the same time, we need to study and search these things out. We need to not just accept things as truth because a big name said them. We also need to not throw out the things that make us have to think hard about where they do or don't line up. I won't even get into translations right now and the problems and difficulties that brings to this subject.
These are thoughts that I have been thinking and wondering where others stand on them. I will admit that I haven't read through most of these extra-Biblical works, but I plan to do that soon. I also admit that I could take in a lot better nourishment at times than I do. I am not seeking to condemn anyone here, but just trying to challenge us to think about such things.
"Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things." (Philippians 4:8, NASB)
No comments:
Post a Comment