I think I may know why the Republicans and John McCain are so obsessed with Barack Obama's celebrity status. There was a very telling incident just this week at the Iowa State Fair. On Thursday, August 7, the state fair (one of the biggest in the country) opened with a local radio sponsored corn dog eating contest. Everyone arriving at the fair before 8:30 AM that day was promised free admission to the fair in exchange for their willingness to join with the others who showed up to eat corn dogs simultaneously. They hoped to set a Guinness World Record for people eating corn dogs at the same time. The station planned for 8000, but 42,000 people created traffic snarls and long lines at the gates! The entire east side of Des Moines,Iowa was in gridlock during the morning commute.
The following day, with much hoopla and local media coverage, it had been announced that John McCain would visit the fair and make a speech. Estimates were that only about 200 diehards huddled together to hear what he had to say. The remaining more than 100,000 fair attendees that day ignored him. That's right. The Republican nominee for president of the United States could only get about 200 people to pay attention to what he had to say when he visited the Iowa State Fair. In comparison, Barack Obama has had hundreds of thousands show up for some of his recent speeches.
I guess we can forgive McCain for a little celebrity envy.
I think we can also say with certainty that, like many voters, Iowa State Fair goers are pushovers for free lunches and pork.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
On Whose Authority?
Recently, I've been reading books from authors with divergent views on how the teachings of Jesus Christ are to be understood and applied to our lives in the 21st Century. (Some reading this are probably thinking I need to get a life. They could be right.) A couple of the books (which ones doesn't matter for the purpose of this blog) state their case based upon the authority of the Bible as the ultimate determiner of how we should believe and live. The problem is, however, that on some key issues the authors draw very different, even conflicting, conclusions as to what the Bible is saying. Which raises a couple of intersting questions.
Is one or the other of these authors more in line with what the Bible is saying? How would we know? Both cite Greek and Hebrew original language constructions. Both quote famous theologians from Christian history. Both were published by recognized and respected "Christian" publishers. Both present solid academic pedigrees. Yet, the Bible speaks a different message to each of them.
Of course, drawing divergent messages out of the Bible is nothing new. All one needs to do is look at the roster of denominations and affiliations of churches in the phone directory to realize people pick up a smorgasbord of "truths" from the Bible. There are even jokes about it. One old jest says, "Put two Baptists (or whatever affiliation you choose) in a room and you'll have three opinions."
I was raised in a tradition that boasted openly of its reliance upon biblical authority. And I confess that I have employed the language of biblicism for many years. Anyone who reads my writings knows that I seldom stray too far from quoting a Bible verse to give weight to points I hope to drive home. The difference for me lately is I'm now willing to admit that I and all the other Bible quoters are in reality appealing to our understanding at the moment of what we think the Bible says as the authority. Clear away all the theological modisms and jargon and what we end up with is little more than perspective--opinions. We quote the Bible to reinforce our conclusions.
Think about it. In the first place, everyone who ventures into biblicism looks to various teachers to expound upon and explain it. No one comes to the Bible with a "clean slate" only to be imprinted by the words of scripture. Nowdays so many of the Bibles have study notes incorporated right within their pages. Furthermore, I don't know of anyone who studies the Bible with any seriousness who hasn't changed their mind about what this or that portion of the Bible means along the way. Many of us have argued various points of interpretation vehemently only to later realize we were off in some way. Someone may point out that the Bible didn't change. That's true, but our understanding of it did; and that is all we ever have to rely upon when talking about the Bible. Some have boasted that they only rely on the Bible, but that is simply not true. They read it, form ideas about what it means, maybe make application to their own life and circumstances and in some way or another compare their thoughts with others'. What they end up with is an interpretation just like the rest of.
So what's the point? Although it sounds good and pious, it simply isn't honest to claim that the Bible is one's final authority for faith and practice. The FINAL authority that everyone employs is themself as developed by their study methods, traditional background and congnitive processes and expressed as their opinion. Ones opinion may be informed by the Bible but the Bible is not and cannot be the final authority for any of us. Once we have formed an opinion about what it is saying, that opinion is the authority that we defer to.
That said, I still prefer the Bible over any other book as the best written source for getting wisdom and insight on who God is and how we are to live. In my opinion the words of God are in its pages.
Is one or the other of these authors more in line with what the Bible is saying? How would we know? Both cite Greek and Hebrew original language constructions. Both quote famous theologians from Christian history. Both were published by recognized and respected "Christian" publishers. Both present solid academic pedigrees. Yet, the Bible speaks a different message to each of them.
Of course, drawing divergent messages out of the Bible is nothing new. All one needs to do is look at the roster of denominations and affiliations of churches in the phone directory to realize people pick up a smorgasbord of "truths" from the Bible. There are even jokes about it. One old jest says, "Put two Baptists (or whatever affiliation you choose) in a room and you'll have three opinions."
I was raised in a tradition that boasted openly of its reliance upon biblical authority. And I confess that I have employed the language of biblicism for many years. Anyone who reads my writings knows that I seldom stray too far from quoting a Bible verse to give weight to points I hope to drive home. The difference for me lately is I'm now willing to admit that I and all the other Bible quoters are in reality appealing to our understanding at the moment of what we think the Bible says as the authority. Clear away all the theological modisms and jargon and what we end up with is little more than perspective--opinions. We quote the Bible to reinforce our conclusions.
Think about it. In the first place, everyone who ventures into biblicism looks to various teachers to expound upon and explain it. No one comes to the Bible with a "clean slate" only to be imprinted by the words of scripture. Nowdays so many of the Bibles have study notes incorporated right within their pages. Furthermore, I don't know of anyone who studies the Bible with any seriousness who hasn't changed their mind about what this or that portion of the Bible means along the way. Many of us have argued various points of interpretation vehemently only to later realize we were off in some way. Someone may point out that the Bible didn't change. That's true, but our understanding of it did; and that is all we ever have to rely upon when talking about the Bible. Some have boasted that they only rely on the Bible, but that is simply not true. They read it, form ideas about what it means, maybe make application to their own life and circumstances and in some way or another compare their thoughts with others'. What they end up with is an interpretation just like the rest of.
So what's the point? Although it sounds good and pious, it simply isn't honest to claim that the Bible is one's final authority for faith and practice. The FINAL authority that everyone employs is themself as developed by their study methods, traditional background and congnitive processes and expressed as their opinion. Ones opinion may be informed by the Bible but the Bible is not and cannot be the final authority for any of us. Once we have formed an opinion about what it is saying, that opinion is the authority that we defer to.
That said, I still prefer the Bible over any other book as the best written source for getting wisdom and insight on who God is and how we are to live. In my opinion the words of God are in its pages.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)