People of a Person
Spending four years at a liberal arts university forced me to take a wide spectrum of courses, which for me, held varying degrees of interest and relevance. Asian Art History, while having its place in academia, wasn’t as interesting and relevant to me as, say, Intermediate Spanish, or Introduction to Philosophy. I suppose this is part of the educational journey- the process of learning and growth that is formative to your identity as a person.
The spring semester of my junior year I took a course in the religion department called Religions of the Book. The following paragraph is the class description from the course catalogue of my alma mater:
REL 204 Religions of the Book: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam
“This course surveys the major monotheistic traditions of the world - Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - from their origins to the present day. The course fosters an appreciation of the distinctiveness and inner coherence of each of these traditions as well as to discern facets of unity among the three. Religious expression assumes many forms and is considered in traditional theological and philosophical texts as well as in political systems and the arts. The class is conducted as a combination of lecture and discussion.”
This course traced the historical traditions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam back to the Abrahamic covenant found in Genesis 12 and traced the development of these religions through the centuries. As a class, we compared and contrasted these religions in light of the Abrahamic tradition as well as they way in which these religions were expressed in culture today through art, literature, and worship. I found the class to be interesting, engaging, and informative. It did not occur to me until years later that the entire class was built upon a tacit premise- that we as Christians, like Judaism and Islam, consider ourselves to be “people of the book”.
It also occurred to me that the name “people of the book” was more than just a title given to Christians by professors of one university’s religion department, and that, perhaps, more in conservative Christian circles than others, we as Christians embrace that identity. We proclaim that we are indeed people of the book. The book is the Bible. The book is formative and normative to Christian life. The book is the final authority in the Church and Christian life. The book is the Word of God. Period.
I would suggest that our Christian identity as “people of the book” is a misnomer. I would also suggest that if we as Christians are simply people of the book, that there is very little difference to distinguish us from Islam, Mormonism, or any other mono-theistic religion having their own holy scripture. The only difference is our book is a little different than the others.
Before I am excommunicated as a heretic (again), I should say that my seminary education is constantly reminding me of the importance of scripture to Christian life in such verses as Paul’s instruction to the young pastor Timothy in 2 Timothy 3:16, “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” While I do affirm the integral role that scripture (even Old Testament scripture, which is likely Paul’s reference to Timothy) plays in Christian formation and discipleship and that it is very necessary for us as a Christian community (with the Spirit as our guide) to study scripture and interpret it correctly, I do not believe that scripture is meant to be the object of our identity.
I would suggest that a self-proclaimed identity as “people of the book” promotes Christianity as a religion of rules, legalism, and a grand disappointment. Elevating scripture to an unwarranted level of importance, almost deification, can create an unhealthy reliance on humanly contrived rigid ethical systems of Christian norms and behaviors that actually divert away from the Person of Christ rather than pointing toward Him.
During Jesus’ ministry, the Pharisees and many other Jews, who were largely a “people of the book”, struggled to understand the true nature of God that Jesus embodied. Jesus tells them in John 5:39, “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me.” The Pharisees were unable to see God when He was standing right in front of them. That is cause for pause and reflection for all Christians.
I believe it is part of our life as Christians to make Scripture part of our lives, but, as Jesus says, the intent of Scripture is to point us toward Him. Scripture is of value to Christians because it points to the person and work of God the Father in Jesus Christ.
Jesus indicates that we are not simply a people of a book, but people of a Person. Christian identity is found in the Person of Jesus Christ. This is not simply a matter of semantics. It means that our identity is found in knowing and being known by God. It means our identity is embodied rather than codified. It means our identity is taken from the two-dimensional page into the life of the Person we follow. It means that our identity is rooted in relationship.
As my education and personal formation continues, I see that Christianity becomes real, tangible, and effective when we start by embracing our identity as being found in Jesus Christ, the Person that all Scripture points toward.
Posted on December 10, 2007 12:00 AM
Comments
Interesting article, Ryan, you are not anti-semantic are you? Being people of the Book is always a great challenge, it is kind of like higher education in the way that too much of it can render a person fairly dull and useless. Not enough however will reveal that very same person to be full of hot air. Great notions but no substance. It is in the book where we get to read all the cool things Jesus said about our relationship with God. Like when He summed up the law for the Pharisees. Love God with everything you've got and then you will love people more than you love yourself.
We must be on guard not to become Pharisees because then we become people of the tradition and we dont read the book the same as when we were young in Christ.
I like your idea of our identity being embodied rather than codified but how do I get Him into my body if I dont consume Him from the Book?
I understand you are not suggesting we do away with the book just raising a flag of warning about forgetting the practical application of Christ.
Kind of like knowing a lot about the history of Asian art when you are in Ensenada and need to ask directions.
Posted by: Jed Hummell | December 12, 2007 11:25 AM
Dear sir,
Now this is a noble can of worms...
Good on you for cracking it.
Nothing like asking people for some honest, critical thought about the supremely, divinely significant. That is never heresey as far as I am concerned, but many seem to resent it to a degree reaching the comical. Go figure.
I'm surprised there's not at least a few angry posts here.
Posted by: Ben Rogers | December 13, 2007 2:18 PM
An issue I've been thinking on. In the middle ages, the major concern or disagreement seems to have been Christ's divinity. Could, or was he both fully human and God. Now, the issue among Protestants in the 21st century is whether Scripture is inherent or infallible. Just ask a Protestant? They will fight on the drop of a dime if you tell them it's not.
My personal belief is it's a guide, a loose guide that points to Jesus. I believe it was inspired, but as people have gathered to translate and decide what's in and out of the cannon, I have serious doubt. I in no way believe anyone's humanity was suspended for a period of time to write. They had prejudices and insecurities that effected their message.
My argument is why not through the whole thing out. Obviously, we don't require women to wear head covering and the texts of slavery are no longer relevant. By keeping the new testament around, it begs you to shoplift what you like and don't. The homosexuals have a great argument. How do you know we have not evolved and left behind Paul's restrictive teachings?
The whole point as I see it is Protestants are struggling to find God and need something tangible to point to. Then all this pressure gets put on a bunch of stories that were never intended to be anything but just that-stories
If the truth were to be discovered, we might have to leave our rooms, explore nature, explore ourselves and others to find God. And of course the scriptures could assist, but not take the full blow.
Posted by: springercaleb | December 13, 2007 5:01 PM
I don't think there are any angry posts because fringe-conservative Christians (of the American kind) read this site. Non-Evangelicals(Catholics and Orthodox), or progressive Protestants (whether they are Mainline or Evangelcals) recognize the poverty in reading Scripture alone. It is a non-self-explantory book, indeed a dangerous book and its misinterpretations have led to many egregious sins.
When we recognize that Jesus is the Logos, a person we enter into a living relationship with our perception of Scripture changes. We do well to heed to the mystics of our past. Theology (and reading Scripture) is intrinsically a mystical encounter, a conversation with the Divine.
Because Scripture is a living part of Christian Tradition, as the Yale historian and scholar Jaroslav Pelikan said "Tradition is the living faith of the dead. Traditionalism is the dead faith of the living."
We must never, as Ryan said, become merely people of the Book.
Posted by: Guy | December 13, 2007 5:19 PM
The Bible is not a book of rules, lagalism and grand dissapointment. The Bible is a narritive of the greatest love the world has ever known. Because of God's grace and love and his sacrifice on the cross, we can be saved! Thats not legalism to me. Thats Grace!!!
Posted by: Kevin J. | December 16, 2007 5:54 PM
First of all Ryan, I appreciate your thoughts. I would add that it seems to me that we have made too much and too little of the Scriptures depending on how comfortable we are in doing what they are calling us to. For example, if there is something tangible we can look at in the Bible and define ourselves as �good Christians� we will do it. The Pharisees did this with circumcision and Christians have done it with baptism, the 10 commandments or any number of �sacred cows� we have put forth. Yet, as Jesus said we neglect the weightier matters of the law � justice, mercy and faithfulness. But these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others. Hmmm?
Another mistake I think we have made is in equating the Scriptures with the Word of God. I personally believe that the Scriptures are inspired (I think to believe otherwise makes Christianity a waste of time). However, John said that the Word was made flesh and was made evident in the person of Jesus. Jesus himself told us that we cannot live by bread alone but by �every word that proceeds from the mouth of God�. Does the Bible contain every word from the mouth of God? I believe that every word (small �w�) in the Scriptures are consistent with the Word of God, but I do not see those 66 books as the complete revelation of who God is. Wouldn�t that be a little limiting in defining an infinite God? (I don�t believe the Koran or the Book of Mormon or other religious books are inspired.) I admit that it makes me nervous to let go of my systematic theology and allow myself to believe that there will always be more gray in this life than black and white. For peace in that realm I will trust God. I simply know that I can no longer squabble and divide over things that even the Bible itself is vague in. Perhaps the Scriptures are vague precisely for the reason that God wants us to be driven in getting to know the living Word � Jesus and not just be known as �people of the book�.
Jesh
Posted by: Mark Pollock "Jesh" | December 26, 2007 10:32 PM