Sweetly enough, I received comments to post something from both of the people who read my blog. So here goes.
I had Bible Study today. Actually, Bible study was only the first half. After we talked about Genesis 47 (and, once again, I had the marvelous experience of discovering something new in the Bible that I had never seen before), we spent as-much-and-a-half-as-much time talking about other things. All spiritually related. All uplifting.
One thing that we talked about I thought that I would get in trouble over, but I didn't. We were talking about how we should interact with people who say they are believers but are in some unrepentant sin. In this particular case, we were talking about people who say they are believers but who are in sexual sin. How do we treat them? Is how we treat them dependent on how well we know them or how much we interact with them?
We were focused on what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 5:
11 But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.
We discussed what this means for us today. Is discipline like this effective in today's America, where we are so independent and where, if we refuse to associate with someone, they can just go to the church down the street? Is "do not even eat" a cultural thing - what might the equivalent be today? One person was insisting "but if this is what the Bible
says, shouldn't we do it? Shouldn't we forget about whether such an action is effective, and just do it, because the Bible says it?"
This is when I said what I feel is true, but I was nervous about saying. I was nervous because I know that many believers, some even that I respect, would say that I am off on this. What I said is that the Bible, and particularly the New Testament, is not a rule book. If we try to treat it that way, we will miss out. We have to account for the fact that this letter was written to a a specific community at a specific time 2000 years ago. Is some of what was said generally applicable? Yes. Are we to emulate everything? Not necessarily. So how do we tell what we are to emulate, what to apply, what to hold on to, and what to release? Only through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Now, many believers see this as a slippery slope. "If everything in the New Testament is open to the guidance of the Holy Spirit," they might say, "then anyone could do anything they want, or ignore anything they want, and claim the inspiration of the Holy Spirit." That's true. But the true believer would, I feel, be able to discern when someone is doing this. And I would also say that just because it is messy and may feel tenuous is not a real reason to not follow the Spirit.
I believe that the Spirit affirms the Bible, and speaks through the Bible, but
ultimately we are to follow the Spirit for faith and practice and not an objective, cold reading of the Bible. The Bible is subordinate to the Spirit of God, and so it is the Spirit that guides into understanding what the Bible really means and how to apply it.
I could write a whole lot more about this, but I think that is enough. I invite your comments.
