Doesn’t it drive you nuts how slippery people can be when it comes to theology? Frequently this comes in the form of treating (what would appear to most people) straightforward statements as if they were fiendishly complex and impenetrable riddles. Now I don’t want to appear to be a simpleton here – I know language can be complex, nuanced and multi-faceted. But increasingly Christians seem to be using these considerations as an excuse to kick unpopular doctrines into the theological ‘long grass’. So Scripture texts that jar with our 21st century Western sensibilities can be ignored on the basis of, ‘
scholars are divided on the precise meaning of this passage’ etc etc. This linguistic ‘get out of jail free’ card is also increasingly deployed whenever we are faced with a dodgy public pronouncement of some Christian leader we admire – ‘
oh, I don’t think he/she was actually saying…’ – when if words mean anything it is abundantly clear that Christian Leader X was undoubtedly saying…
You’ll not be surprised to learn that I’m going to blame Post-Modernism for this. It is one more manifestation of the belief that there is no absolute truth – or at least that no-one can ever be certain they have it. Consequently any interpretation of a statement is as valid as any other even if they contradict each other – the old ‘
what is true for you may not be true for me’ approach. But like much Post-Modern thinking the situations in which this approach is employed are conveniently selective. So no-one would say, “
murder – it’s not my ‘cup of tea’ but I’m happy if it works for you”. Whereas when it comes to something like religious belief it is simply a case of ‘what makes you happy!’
Take the Bible’s apparently clear statements about the existence of Hell. Statements we are told, even by some who call themselves Evangelical, that are not to be taken at face value. Yes, the Bible has all these warnings and depictions of a place of eternal torment but they are just to make a point rather describe an actual reality. The point being to emphasise how strongly God feels about sin and people rejecting Him. We are not to think there is actually such a place - it’s just hyperbole to stress how awful it is to reject God.
The problem is that it all seems just a bit too convenient. Something we are happy to apply to things we don’t like but when it comes to Heaven for example, we tend not to say, ‘
Well actually all that Heaven stuff is just there to emphasise how pleased God is when people respond to Him positively – but hey you’re not to think it actually exists’.
Secondly, not only is it self-servingly convenient, but we would never accept such a premise in other areas of life. Imagine you have bought a new DVD player and within the first week it develops a serious fault and no longer works. You read the guarantee which says, ‘
In the event of a fault developing we will replace this product with a new DVD player’. However, back at the shop you are told there will be no replacement, the assistant explains: ‘
Well of course, the guarantee says we’ll replace it, but that’s just a way of letting you know how much we really hoped it would work - we never intended that people should take it literally’. Or you get a memo from your Boss telling you to sort out some problem but you do nothing on the basis of ‘who is to say what they really mean’– it may just be a way of them telling you something of their inner feelings rather than something to actually be acted upon.
Of course, the reason we don’t generally ignore, reinterpret or plead bafflement with the words of employers, policemen or even friends is that we tend to take those people seriously – we would view it as patronising and even disrespectful to presume that what they say is not really what they mean.
When it comes to God’s words, however, it is difficult not to conclude that the widespread readiness to disregard or fudge them is because we don’t think they really matter that much. We have persuaded ourselves that our relationship with God exists in some mystical sphere unaffected by what we actually believe about Him and that theology is essentially irrelevant to the quality of that relationship. Big mistake! Words are the basic currency of relationships – the ability to be known by and to know another. To say, ‘I am obedient to someone’, but then to disobey what they say is a nonsense. To say, 'I know someone', but to have ignored their own self-disclosure and constructed your own image of them is a delusion. You don’t obey them and you don’t know them.
Much of the linguistic ‘smoke and mirrors’ used in Christian circles today has the effect of refusing to allow God the possibility of having spoken with any significant degree of clarity. Evangelical Christians need to start having a bit more confidence in the ability of God to communicate clearly and to have a bit more courage in accepting what He says.
