Comments on: Styrofoam Theology: Part 4- The Bible

By: John W Frye

John W Frye — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:24:42 +0000

Jeremy (#13),
I was taken aback somewhat by your comment. It didn’t strike me so much as insulting as, you named it, cynical. I don’t think people need an “education in theology” as such, but some helpful practices in Bible study methods do go a long way in helping people handle the Bible fairly intelligently.

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:53:55 +0000

John,
I’m sorry for my cynical response; my disappointment got the best of me. It was not intended to be insulting.

By: John W Frye

John W Frye — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:46:00 +0000

Jeremy (#10),
Ouch! The chip on your shoulder poked me in the eye. And you convinced me…absolutely no education whatsoever is needed for one to understand the Scriptures. The Bible is as clear and understandable as Reader’s Digest. Are you happy?

By: John W Frye

John W Frye — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:43:14 +0000

Keith (#8-9),
I had a group of people, too, that read through the Scripture texts that I would preach from. I ask them what stood out to them in the text and how they thought the text would work in their daily lives. All this is application and needs to be buttressed with good biblical study like you say you do. That is great. Thanks for stopping by and commenting.

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:00:01 +0000

So if an education in theology is needed to understand the scriptures, and not all theological institutions interpret scripture the same way, not all pastors from these institutions can do an equal job and helping us laypeople understand the scriptures. And if we could somehow determine which institution is interpreting scripture the “best”, not all graduates are of equal ability, so we should only study under the best to make sure we are in fact getting the most accurate interpretation of the Bible. So is it you John, or should we look elsewhere?

By: Keith Foisy

Keith Foisy — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:16:11 +0000

That being said, we do sit around in a circle and i ask people how they understand the text i’ll be preaching on that week. i use their thoughts and illustrations in the sermons. Yet, i’ve always done my homework thoroughly and am able to help keep us on the topic, as well as the context. i also get to determine what ultimately comes forth in the message on Sunday morning and i ensure that it is true to the original meaning of the text based on careful research.

By: Keith Foisy

Keith Foisy — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:04:50 +0000

i understand why the Catholics were so upset about the Bible being translated into common languages and placed into the hands of people to interpret themselves. It wasn’t simply because they wanted them to remain in ignorance, but because “private” interpretation would lead to the splintering of the church. Everyone is a scholar now, and they all end up in different places. i don’t know if it is necessary for a pastor to interpret the Bible, but i certainly do believe it is necessary to have access and ability to do cultural and language studies that are relevant to the text, as well as knowing the historical and traditional interpretations of a text in order to have a clearer understanding of what the text meant in that time and context and then move toward practical contemporary application.

i find that those who don’t take these issues into consideration are the one’s who “know what the Bible says” and are quick to point out “misinterpretation” and accuse others of “deviating” from the Word. It is utterly frustrating.

Yes, i do believe we need someone who is trained in interpreting ancient Jewish texts to give some useful guidance. Otherwise every interpretation is the authoritative one, usually derived through the interpretive vision of contemporary. non-contextualized glasses.

By: Of Pastors, Priesthood & Power « A Living Alternative Our Missional Pilgrimage

Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:21:10 +0000

[...] pastors, leadership and the priesthood of all believers (so far with Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 & Part 4). John, himself a pastor, is down-right angry with some of the talk he has heard in some [...]

By: John W Frye

John W Frye — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:37:54 +0000

Wes,
I have no problem with Jesus’ redefinition of how the hierarchy operates in the kingdom of God. But his redefinition not the same as elimination. That is what I don’t think you accept. Hierarchy is not the enemy; how it operates in the world versus the kingdom is the issue. Peace.

By: Wes

Wes — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:12:15 +0000

I think it’s ironic that your site is titled “Jesus the radical pastor” and yet you are determined to uphold the hierarchal system of leadership Jesus both preached and acted against.

Especially when Jesus took off his outer garment (which I think would have probably included the tassels per Deut 22:12,Mat 23:5) and knelt down to wash his disciple’s feet he pretty much did exactly the opposite of what the clergy/laity system is designed to do.