|
LIQUIDTHINKING IS: Stephen Zedler Jimmy Doyle Andy Mullins Current Sountrack
OTHER BLOGS SYNDICATE
OUR READING LIST Currently Reading Church and Theology Culture and Society Biblical Studies ARCHIVES |
Friday, December 16, 2005
Venus de Milo and the ScripturesI was part of a discussion recently concerning the Canon of Scripture...is it complete or not and should other books have been included. My first answer is that if I trust the Bible at all then I have to trust the process used to create it as well. Overall, the issue of "did they pick the correct books" doesn't bother me. I don't view it as a "get it wrong/get it right type" of thing. Those are the ones that were chosen and are the ones the Church has used historically. It doesn't exclude my ability to read something like the Gospel of Thomas and find meaning in it. Just because it wasn't chosen doesn't mean it is completely invalid (although obviously if it goes against the Canon it would technically be considered heretical). I also don't think Christianity will ever again be at the place globally to come to the same concensus of opinion on which books should be used to measure doctrine and practice. I think of it kind of like an art thing...it's difficult to ask "did the artist get the picture correctly" or "did he leave something out". How would you have him/her fix it? It is what it is. Maybe a good picture of the Scriptures is the Venus de Milo. The arms are missing...so it isn't quite complete. The process of time may have damaged it in some way. But what could you or I add to it to make it more complete or fix it without ruining it? Who would dare do it? It is beautiful as it is...at once incomplete and whole. What a great peace of work for our God who reveals Himself and hides in the clouds, and who is at once God and Man.
Comments:
Post a Comment
HOME |
||