I look forward to the other two essays by Erwin Barron on this topic. He puts things in place well when he speaks of the seemingly endless battle between the authorities of the Bible versus experience. I also appreciate how he deals with and challenges all of us on how to engage the two authorities in a kind of process dialogue. Still, I think that the problem is deeper than this and Barron may address it soon. The problem is two-fold, as I see it.

One, those who rely on the Bible (admittedly, they also read it in terms of their experience) do not actually base much of their emotional conclusions on what the Bible actually says. They generally lack “good enough” word study, knowledge of content, the culture, etc., on many subjects. The obvious one today is what we all know as “homosexuality.” They base it upon what their own day, culture, and poor English translations (their experience) have led them to believe. We did this with slavery and the place of women in ministry, too. They take their positions as “gospel” when, in Biblical fact, it is not. Such present, deep-seated, hardcore positions often do not reflect a real knowledge of the very Scripture they misuse for their positions. The “plain meaning of the text” has its place, at times, but many accepted interpretations of the Bible today do not render the correct wording for the meaning of a particular term used by the Greek or Aramaic writers in the context of their own day and time. This is THE basis for our fighting! Until we actually know better how to interpret Scripture and allow it to interpret and change us, this problem will remain.

Secondly, experience, reason, science, etc., are good to honor as legitimate secondary authorities, for sure. But, they need to be able to muster past what would be a far better understanding and method of interpreting Scripture. Unfortunately for “experience,” the movement of time, evolving information, discoveries, consensus agreements, etc., also leave us vulnerable to give either not enough, too much, or wrong amounts of experience-authority to any contemporary issue. Even experience, what with human pride, must remain open to questioning. In short, neither “side” really knows enough about what the Bible actually says and means in its own time nor does the other “side” always have a clear picture of various contemporary situations in order for healthy conversation or great positions always to be taken — human hubris being what it is. As such, “Truth” may suffer.

Having said this, it is important for each to remain in dialogue with the other so that all of us might move closer to vs. further from the will of God in matters of faith and practice.

James R. Black, interim pastor

Arlington Church

Jacksonville, Fla.