Oxymoron?
Oxymoron: A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are combined, as in "a deafening silence" and "a mournful optimist". (dictionary.reference.com)
A friend of ours has kindly given us a subscription to "The Briefing" magazine. It is a fairly middle of the road evangelical journal, and to be honest we are so grateful to have reading material in English that we usually read it from cover to cover as soon as it arrives in the postbox.
This month I was reading a book review, during which the reviewer was lamenting the lack of Biblical content in the publication he was critiquing. He gave several examples, as in the following:
"One curious example can be found in chapter 3 where he describes a "World without God" with examples from poetry, Pink Floyd and Nietsche, but without a single reference to any Bible passage.... Another is when he uses Dorcas (of Acts 9:36-42) and the Samaritan woman (of John 4:1-29) as models of the way that we might evangelise. It's not that we can learn nothing from Dorcas and the Samaritan woman, but to choose them as examples over and above biblical instruction...."
Now this guy's Bible might be different to mine, but I have managed to locate both Dorcas and the Samaritan woman in my Bible, and therefore I was left slightly astounded by the inference that these examples were somehow as "unbiblical" as Pink Floyd or Nietsche.
It might be that the guy has an unfortunate writing style, or that the editing job could have been more thorough, but I suspect that it is closely related to the viewpoint that "if it isn't Paul it doesn't count". I haven't seen it on sale, but I know there is a marketing opportunity for a "wallet edition evangelical bible" starting from Romans and ending with Philemon. It would be an instant best seller.
I don't know the reason for this phenomenon, I imagine it might be because actually we have no idea what to do with the Bible, and rather than say "we have no idea what to do with the Bible", we try instead to stick with the bits that we think that we can most easily reduce to "three rules for holy living".
What I do know is that this phenomenon needs challenging, if only because in some quarters the phrase "evangelical thinking" is hovering on the brink of being relegated to our list of favourite oxymorons, along with "police intelligence", "Microsoft works" or "airline food".
Comments
subject
Ah yes, "evangelical thinking" - I actually had a conversation with an 'unnamed church leader' who told me (and this is a direct quote) that: "Jesus restored our relationship with God, and Paul tells us how to live as a result".
Whilst I'm sure that this may paint me as the wishy-washy liberal that this leader now thinks I am as a result of my, ahem, slight disagreement with the statement above, I can't escape the nagging suspicion that maybe, just maybe, Christ has a few comments on lifestyle choices.
Glad to hear the bump progress's well, albeit that your method of transport is being challenged. Our daughter loves riding in a bike seat now, so you've got that to look forward to.
subject
Interesting one. I do find it slightly strange that a certain 'type' of evangelical seems to rate Paul rather more highly than, say, the Gospels, in terms of inspired writing. That goes with another similar trend: to rate salvation as being entirely a spiritual thing, based on Paul's 'justification by faith' as a kind of 'ticket to heaven', whilst conveniently ignoring the wider picture of what salvation is in the Bible as a whole, and therefore down-playing the more holistic aspects of God's work (that we see in the ministry of Jesus - in the Gospels) as being not somehow quite as important.
Post new comment