Soul Liberty vs. the Bible? I don't think so.
"Soul Liberty" was never intended to be used to deny the very words of scripture. Baptists have historically believed that all people are free to "interpret" the scriptures for themselves. As example note that while all Christians recognize the need for baptism as an expression of faith some use immersion, others sprinkling, others affusion (pouring). Each group recognizes the command of scripture to baptize, they do not reject those words of scripture, but do interpret the form (mode) of baptism in differing ways. When those calling themselves Baptist look at the text of the Bible and say, "The words do not mean what they say." or "We have the liberty to do the opposite." they have perverted the concept of "Soul Liberty," and are no longer following historic Baptist tradition. (July 7, 2005)
posted by St. Louis K at 9:55 AM
1 Comments:
The concept of "soul-liberty" is dependent upon the idea that though the Scriptures are infallible, those who read them are not. Thus, if I understand the Bible to say "X," and you understand it to say "Y," I acknowledge the possiblity that I have understood it wrongly and therefore do not condemn you for reading "Y," even though I disagree with you. In short, your soul-liberty is my hermeneutical humility.
Nevertheless, there is a spectrum of clarity among Scriptural teachings that allows me to be more or less humble and you more or less liberated. Some teachings are so clear in Scripture that I don't need to be very humble in my assertion of their truth. Others are less clear, which requires me to be less assertive and more open to the possibility that I may be wrong.
The big problem that we are dealing with, however, is that when it comes to homosexuality, I believe that the Scripture is quite clear and feel no need to be hesitant about proclaiming that it is wrong and that any interpretation otherwise is wrong. A very large number of people in the ABC think this also. A very tiny but vocal number is equally certain that the Scripture clearly teaches that "discrimination" against the homosexual lifestyle is wrong, and they see no need to be hesitant either. But another very large number--and most influential in the denomination as a whole--believes the issue to be sufficiently unclear that no one should push their theology on anyone else. This is where "soul-liberty" comes in.
I truly believe that this latter mass of people is not opposed to Scriptural authority. Rather, they are blind to the significance that the overwhelming bulk of Christians who have ever lived have believed the Bible to be crystal-clear on this issue. The eroding doctrine for these people is not so much Scriptural authority as it is Scriptural perspicuity and the necessity of a transhistorical, transnational community of interpretation (i.e., the Church throughout the ages) in order to get the teaching right. And their lack of confidence in the traditional interpretation is what gives the sliver of strident pro-gay people their power.
Post a Comment
<< Home