For Doug: Why Claire needs commentaries
Claire E. O'Connor claireoc@softdisk.com
Mon, 24 Nov 1997 15:13:53 -0600 (00880427633, 3479EE11.AEB@softdisk.com)
Douglas R. Larson wrote:
>
>
> Claire,
>
> Why? Doesn't this passage apply to you Claire? John 16:13-15 states :
> "13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all
> truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and
> he will tell you what is yet to come. 14 He will bring glory to me by
> taking from what is mine and making it known to you. 15 All that belongs
> to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is
> mine and make it known to you." In Jesus' words, is there room for the
> "traditions of men" whether they be found within Protestantism or Roman
> Catholicism? Are other books written by men, "inspired" by the Holy
> Spirit, that will bring you to an understanding of God's truth? Are
> Christ's words spoken in John 16:13-15 valid, inerrant, and true? Are
> those words spoken as a promise to all believers, or simply only those to
> whom Christ chose as Apostles? Ian makes an incredible point--as a former
> pastor, I can assure you that he is quite correct in his advice to you.
> God's word should speak for itself--it should not be viewed through the
> lens adding evolutionary changes as found in the Roman Catholic exegetes,
> or the exegetes of propagating Protestants that claim to recover
> soteriological errors.
>
> These books, and sincere advocates of truth, that you seek, are simply
> scholars, wise, trained and learned men. But I see that even you disagree
> with some of them, specifically on the "creation event." But why? How is
> it that you can be such a wise arbitrator of truth, discerning "truth from
> error?" How do you know, that these wise biblical scholars will not lead
> you into error with their crafty arguments?
>
> St. Paul wrote in his first letter to the Corinthians, chapter 1, verses 19
> & 20 these inspired, inerrant words. "For it is written: "I will destroy
> the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will
> frustrate." Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the
> philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?"
>
>
> Seems to be sincere advice coming from one of God's chosen and inspired
> writers doesn't it? You must address the words of the writer of Hebrews,
> which says in chapter 13, verses 8 & 9 that "Jesus Christ is the same
> yesterday and today and forever. Do not be carried away by all kinds of
> strange teachings..." As I pointed out in the passages from John
> 16:13-15, you have to discern who the final authority of truth is for you
> life. Either learning these truths from the Roman Church, or learning
> them, as Ian pointed out, by yourself, using the gift of the Holy Spirit as
> the final teacher of all truths--living in you. Do you believe the words
> of the wise, biblical scholars, or will you learn the truths for yourself
> as Jesus pointed out His promise to you? Ian is very much correct. Let's
> God's Word stand and speak for itself. Why let the wise fool you?
>
> Finally, above you stated: " Why run the risk of interpreting the Bible
> anachronistically? With my late 20th - century American sensibilities, how
> could I hope to understand the customs and concerns of people who lived
> thousands of years ago in the Near East, unless I had a good commentary
> with me?" A true believer in Christ, would never "LIMIT" the power of God
> in being the teacher of "all truths." You do believe that God the Father,
> and His Son Jesus Christ, along with the power of the Holy Spirit, is more
> than capable of teaching you THEIR truths, don't you Claire? I'm sure you
> believe that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and so
> are people. Times and traditions change, but people haven't in my humble
> opinion, nor have they in the opinions of those inspired godly writers. If
> scripture is just as valid today as that "blueprint" of eternal life, then
> that "God Breathed" scripture must apply as universal truths for all people
> in all ages--including our "20th century American sensibilities--correct?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Doug Larson
CLAIRE
Dear Doug:
By the way, the book we used was not named "A Catholic Understanding of
the Bible". That was the name of the class. The name of the book was
_People of the Book?_ by John Barton (who is Episcopal).
Let me give you an example of a passage for which I need a commentary:
2 Kings: 23-24
>From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on the way, some small
boys came out of the city and jeered at him. "Go up baldhead," they
shouted, "go up baldhead!" The prophet turned and saw them, and he
cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two she-bears came out of the
woods and tore forty-two of the children to pieces.
If I read that passage without benefit of a commentary, I'd be pretty
upset! Am I supposed to take that passage literally?
According to the footnote in my Catholic Study Bible (NAB), "This story,
like the one about Elijah and the captains (ch. 1) is preserved for us
in Scripture to convey a popular understanding of the dignity of the
prophet. Told in popular vein, it becomes a caricature, in which neither
Elisha nor the bears behave in character." Elisha is portrayed elsewhere
as being kind and gentle. The likelihood of two bears massacring
forty-two children at once is infinitesimally small. The number 42 also
has significance. Forty-two months is equal to 3 1/2 years; which is
half of seven years. Seven is a "complete" or "good" number; half of
seven is a bad number.
By having the information provided in the footnote, I now have a better
understanding of how the people felt about Elisha. With my late 20th -
century American sensibilities, I would have invented a different
anecdote to convey the dignity of Elisha, but I didn't write this stuff.
I just completed a group study of the Book of Revelation. With all the
apocalyptic symbols, significant numbers, coded references, etc., how
could I understand it without a commentary?! It would be like trying to
understand a document written in code without having a "key" to the
code!
You mentioned that I disagree with my commentaries about the "creation
event"? How so? The commentaries didn't insist that the sky was a bowl
with windows turned upside down over a flat earth; they just said that
the ancient Near Eastern peoples thought of it that way.
I'll write more later about this - I have to get ready to go out of
town.
~Claire O'Connor