Higher Criticism, Pete Enns, and Biblical Authority

[SeekerKid (Skyler A)]

Hi Laura, thanks for your thoughts!

@Laura

For example, what does it even mean for the Bible to be “authoritative for my life”? Does it mean that I must abide by every out-of-context phrase I encounter that reads like a command (or only the ones in the NT)?

Well no, most inerrantists would acknowledge that context is important, even when it comes to the NT. But if the Bible says that something is sin and it doesn’t seem to be a cultural prohibition, they would take that as something to be avoided today.

@Laura

Pete Enns has said that one of the Bible’s main purposes is to lead us to wisdom. To me that may include some “authoritative” commands, but also more of a general orientation in how we view God and others. It’s hard for me because I often have a black-and-white view of thing so as I try to get away from the “rulebook” view of the Bible while still understanding it to contain rules, I have been trying to consider more about what the overall purpose of the Bible is, as a whole and as specific parts.

Yeah, that part of his theory (about the Bible leading us to wisdom) really stood out to me. Because the Bible obviously isn’t just a list of rules, it’s mostly a narrative along with a lot of poetry and theology and wisdom texts. It’s very difficult to navigate it all and figure out how it applies to my life today.

@Laura

Yes, absolutely. How exactly that has to work is still a mystery to me. But when it comes to authority, I have to remind myself that that authority is ultimately a person, not a book. So the Bible is authoritative to the point that it presents Jesus to us. The other information it provides can still tell us about the culture that Jesus was coming into, to help give more context to his ministry. But I still struggle with the “OT warrior God” characterization.

Yeah, that’s one of the main stumbling blocks for me in taking the Bible at face value. Even after hearing (what I assume are) the best apologetics arguments from the conservative evangelical side, I still have a hard time believing that the warrior, mass-killing conception of God as presented in the Old Testament is really what God is like. But I can’t see how the Bible can be considered authoritative if at least one part of the Bible (the Book of Joshua) doesn’t speak with authority on what God is like, on who God is. At best we could say that some parts of the Bible are authoritative, or that the Bible as a whole is authoritative, but not every part.