by jimwalton » Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:46 pm
Yes, David, we do have to be open minded. It is safe for us to acknowledge that truth is still true no matter where it is found. It is illegitimate to claim that truth can be false just because it’s in the area of science or theology, history or philosophy, physics or metaphysics. The nature of truth doesn’t change because of the location of truth. If it’s true, it’s true. To be intellectually honest, we have to be good enough thinkers to be discerning rather than obstructing.
But that shouldn't bring misinterpretations of the Bible. First of all, our knowledge in some of these disciplines has nothing to do with the Bible (as I mentioned). Secondly, we must use extra-biblical information cautiously and with discernment as it contributes to our interpretation of Scripture. Assuredly the Bible is the first and last authority on what it is there to reveal, but there are times when cultural clues dug up by the archaeologists help us understand what was going on there, and therefore what was intended by the author, and therefore how we are to either translate or interpret the text.
As John Walton says, "As interpreters of Scripture and as theologians, we are accountable to the Biblical text. As important as our theological traditions are, since interpretations and even the hermeneutics by which we interpret have changed over the centuries, we cannot be unflinchingly accountable to every tradition at every level. New insights and new information can emerge at any time. Several hundred years ago, renewed access to the original languages had significant impact on biblical interpretation. in recent decades, the availability of documents from the ancient world has provided a remarkable resource for our reading of the biblical text. We dare not neglect these tools when they can contribute so significantly to our interpretation."
Last bumped by Anonymous on Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:46 pm.