A valued, regular reader countered to the Jim Woodroof idea that we read and study the gospels more than anything else. (See prior post.)
He said, in part, “I think we (the modern church) have often neglected the old testament and other books in favor of the Gospels, and while obviously these hold core truths, to leave the rest behind is a folly in my opinion…. If it was good enough for Jesus to learn and quote from, then certainly we should do the same.”
In my experience, the gospels haven’t gotten nearly ENOUGH play! (It’s been Acts, at least until the last 10 years or so of my life, that’s been overworked.) In expressing my personal resolve, I didn’t meant to be suggesting that I don’t care about the other books. My fully “getting” the message of the gospels is central, and the rest is, by comparison, peripheral. The quote wasn’t “Read the gospels and never read the rest.” :-)
It is in the divinity and the person of Jesus that all the rest becomes clear. Maybe we could even say that the gospels hold the key to interpretation in general? All scripture is scripture, and as such, it’s from God, but that doesn’t mean He wants us to pay the same kind of attention to a prophecy meant for the ancient Chaldeans that we pay, for instance, to Jesus’ exhortation to be one as He and the Father are one. The history of an obscure king of the northern tribes may provide an interesting, or even indirectly applicable, factoid, but Jesus’ examples of single-minded focus and nonviolent suffering are of more import. The numbers and specifics of sacrifices under the Mosaic covenant are informative, and I appreciate knowing a good deal about them, but they are spiritually helpful in comparison to our covenant, a la the letter to the Hebrews.
All scripture is authoritative in some sense, but it’s not all equally important. I think it’ll be a long time before I intentionally read Leviticus in its entirety. The Psalms, yes. Genesis and Joshua and 1 Samuel, yes, sometimes. Ruth and Esther have their place, but not alongside John and Mark (and, next for me, such pieces as Romans and Galatians and Revelation and 1 John …).
If I had an infinite amount of time in this life, sure, I’d get immersed in Leviticus, and I’d be the better for it, but not as much the better as if I’d read Luke again, searching out deeply his portrait of the Christ, in order to understand and to drink deeply. Given the lack of time, I must opt for those things that are more central. (It’s analogous to the missions philosophy question that pits France against Irian Jaya or Kenya. If there were infinite numbers of people to send, sure, we can send some to France or Italy, because they might be .05% effective with hardened souls. But given limited resources, we opt first for 2nd- and 3rd-world regions where the receptivity is greater.)
I’ll offer a few more quotes from the Woodroof book Four Realities– this time, not out of my memory, but off the pages:
The central event (the cross) can be understood only in light of the central quality of Jesus’ life.
Jesus’ action toward the thief was, and still is, a perfect miniature of what he, at that very moment on the cross, was doing on a broader scale for the whole world.
More of the record (of the gospels) is spent describing those around the cross than Him on the cross.
There is no power in “believing we ought to believe.”
Acts and the Letters to the churches were not designed to provide power. They were designed, rather, to provide direction.
Though Christ can be communicated through the word alone, it is not the best way. We know this by witnessing how God revealed himself to the human race: He clothed the Word in human flesh.
Perhaps it is not about so much what books we should read; but the understanding we have of what we do read. If we understand that John 1 says that the Word was with God and the Word was God and that the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us; then we begin to understand the importance of that Word. Genesis 1 speaks of the Word of God being spoken and those words created things. It seems that John is telling us that God’s very spoken Word became flesh and we knew that Living Word as Jesus. 2 Timothy tells that all scripture is given by inspiration and is good for doctrine, reproof, etc., but I think we need to pray for wisdom no matter what we read. We must know not only what we believe; but why we believe it.
I think one should read whatever they like or even feel led to read; but more than anything we need to make sure we are reading having eyes that truly see. We need to be spiritually minded in our studies of the scriptures or none of it matters.
Well, to get back to this … after a long while, at least in this phase of my spiritual non-development (depressing, but true), I am being impressed that, at least for me, the issue of what I read is important. THis is pathetic, but real: given such limited time, if I don’t stay anchored in the gospels, I’m even more likely to get off track!
In an essay of Leroy Garrett, a writing/thinking mentor-friend of mine, I find a frequently repeated emphasis of his that I have come to accept: / //all truths are equally true but all truths are not equally important./ http://www.leroygarrett.org/restorationreview/article.htm?rr28_07/rr28_07b.htm&28&7&1986.
This expresses something of where I am now. Can you say more about feeling “led” to read something?
Brian Casey ~ Confidently engaged in restoration, not comfortably ensconced in orthodoxy ~
Pingback: Male Marthas | NT Christianity