So what does "Faithful prayerful reading of the Bible in community puts us in a good position to hear the Word of God" mean? Anyway, the Bible is the only source that describes the resurrection of Jesus. So it seems to me that if you can't trust the literal meaning of the Bible's text, it puts the resurrection into question.
That's correct. But the fact that something is in question doesn't mean it isn't true and can't be encountered. The risen Jesus invites us into relationship with him, to listen to what he is saying to us now, and to follow him. Faithful prayerful reading of the Bible in community is a sacramental discipline that helps us to hear and understand what he is saying to us now. Of course, we can never be 100% sure that we are hearing and understanding him rightly, but that's true of the communication in all our other relationships too. I can never be sure I'm comprehending what someone else is meaning to say to me. We always have to live with uncertainty. Faith would be completely superfluous if we had certainty. The voracious desire among many Christians to create some form of certainty seems to be driven by a fear of living by faith.
This is great. What you say about the Old Testament is awesome. But logically, you can't say it applies only to the Old Testament. It calls every part of the Bible into question. There is no way of knowing, for instance, if the words and acts of Jesus were accurately recorded. Your argument is that one part of the Bible shouldn't be seen as the word of God, but another part should. That is a classic slippery-slope and will lead inevitably to the entire Bible being seen as a work of philosophy.
I think you might be reading someone else's argument into mine. I didn't say that anything "applies only to the Old Testament" or "that one part of the Bible shouldn't be seen as the word of God, but another part should." I said that the Bible is not the Word of God, full stop. Only Jesus is THE Word of God. Faithful prayerful reading of the Bible in community puts us in a good position to hear the Word of God, our living Lord, who becomes sacramentally present to us and guides us towards truth. Perhaps you are right that there is a slippery slope as soon as we abandon the idea that our dearly departed God has left a perfect list of clear instructions for how we are to live after his death, but the slippery slope slides not into philosophy but into relationship - relationship with our living, loving, speaking Lord. There is a lot more joy, freedom, and life at the bottom of that slippery slope than at the top! Blessings, Nathan
YOU MAKE SENSE
So what does "Faithful prayerful reading of the Bible in community puts us in a good position to hear the Word of God" mean? Anyway, the Bible is the only source that describes the resurrection of Jesus. So it seems to me that if you can't trust the literal meaning of the Bible's text, it puts the resurrection into question.
That's correct. But the fact that something is in question doesn't mean it isn't true and can't be encountered. The risen Jesus invites us into relationship with him, to listen to what he is saying to us now, and to follow him. Faithful prayerful reading of the Bible in community is a sacramental discipline that helps us to hear and understand what he is saying to us now. Of course, we can never be 100% sure that we are hearing and understanding him rightly, but that's true of the communication in all our other relationships too. I can never be sure I'm comprehending what someone else is meaning to say to me. We always have to live with uncertainty. Faith would be completely superfluous if we had certainty. The voracious desire among many Christians to create some form of certainty seems to be driven by a fear of living by faith.
This is great. What you say about the Old Testament is awesome. But logically, you can't say it applies only to the Old Testament. It calls every part of the Bible into question. There is no way of knowing, for instance, if the words and acts of Jesus were accurately recorded. Your argument is that one part of the Bible shouldn't be seen as the word of God, but another part should. That is a classic slippery-slope and will lead inevitably to the entire Bible being seen as a work of philosophy.
I think you might be reading someone else's argument into mine. I didn't say that anything "applies only to the Old Testament" or "that one part of the Bible shouldn't be seen as the word of God, but another part should." I said that the Bible is not the Word of God, full stop. Only Jesus is THE Word of God. Faithful prayerful reading of the Bible in community puts us in a good position to hear the Word of God, our living Lord, who becomes sacramentally present to us and guides us towards truth. Perhaps you are right that there is a slippery slope as soon as we abandon the idea that our dearly departed God has left a perfect list of clear instructions for how we are to live after his death, but the slippery slope slides not into philosophy but into relationship - relationship with our living, loving, speaking Lord. There is a lot more joy, freedom, and life at the bottom of that slippery slope than at the top!
Blessings, Nathan