Reenacting the Way
Join the BOOK conversation on Facebook
  • Book
  • Video
  • Author
  • Reviews
  • B.IQ Test
  • Seminar
    • Watch Bible Seminar
  • Contact
  • Blog

Personal Bible Reading Destroys the Church (Part 1 of 2)

8/29/2014

14 Comments

 
Picture
Would Jesus promote personal Bible reading? You probably never thought to ask yourself that question.

Protestant Christians assume getting a Bible into everyone’s hand is a good thing. Christian donors pump hundreds of millions into Bible translation and distribution every year. With that money Biblica, Wycliffe, and The Seed Company crank out translations in new languages. Scripture Union promotes Bible reading plans. Faith Comes By Hearing and YouVersion build out robust apps with audio Bibles. GoTandem even texts daily Bible verses selected for your season in life.

I wonder: Is all this cash and energy well spent? History says “no.”

How the Bible Broke Jesus’ Dream

Jesus had a dream. He envisioned a community of followers who embraced his way and each other. He prayed, “may they be one” (John 17:21). 34,000 church denominations later, his prayer goes unanswered.

Why? What fueled one man after another to split up the church? What made each group think they had the corner on truth and all others had erred? The answer is simple: The Bible.

The history of church division runs parallel to the proliferation of Bible translation. When leaders can individually interpret what the Bible really says, unity doesn’t stand a chance. Each interpreter mixes assumptions with "what the Bible says" to create a new version of the faith. The graph of church denominations and Bible translations (below) illustrates this dynamic. More Bibles, more languages, and more literacy equal more denominations.
Picture
Protestant Reformation: Hey, Everybody Do Your Own Thing, It’s Biblical!

For the first 1500 years of Christianity, major church denominations didn’t surpass single digits. The split between the Catholic Church (in the Western Roman Empire) and the Orthodox Church (in the East) was dubbed the “Great Schism” of 1054 AD. Why? Because major church splits were so rare. That all changed after the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century.

The Protestants hastened Bible translations into German, French, Spanish, English, etc. More Bibles in everyone’s home meant more individuals could determine what was biblical. So they started new denominations. The Protestant motto Sola Scriptura unwittingly excused any man’s opinions about the Bible from the checks and balances of trusted interpretive traditions and a community of gifted Christian leaders. Me, Jesus and the Bible devalued elders and community. Me, Jesus and the Bible created a divisive dynamic.

The Bible + my preferred meaning = 34,000 church divisions.

How have we let the Bible divide the church for 500 years?
Picture
Martin Luther’s Legacy: Individualistic Bible Interpretation

Martin Luther is the Protestant superhero. He stuck it to “the man”—the big man in Rome. On October 31, 1517 he literally stuck his complaints about the Pope and priests on the Wittenberg church door. He called them out for selling salvation. He took away the church’s power to issue forgiveness via “pardon letters” and gave it back to God. And he didn’t stop there.

Luther wrote and taught boldly for the next 3 years. In the summer of 1519 he declared publicly, “The Bible does not give the Pope the exclusive right to interpret scripture.” Anybody can do it. 

That claim did not go unnoticed. He was excommunicated from the church in 1520. In 1521, he was called before German authorities at the now famous “Diet of Worms” to face the consequences.

At the Diet of Worms, representatives of the Holy Roman Empire gave Luther one last chance to change his mind. Johann Eck, assistant to the Archbishop of Trier, laid out Luther’s controversial writings on a table. He asked Luther 2 simple questions: Are you the author and do you stand by their contents? Luther was prepared for the first question but not the second. He took credit for the writings but asked for a night to prepare an answer to the second question.

The next day Luther came prepared with his reply. His words would become legendary in Protestant circles. His words would embody the individualistic and existential route to determining truth that Protestants have promoted ever since. He said,

“I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience.”
Martin Luther was so proud of his cleverly crafted response that he saluted Johann Eck like a knight winning a bout. Eck was unimpressed. I'm unimpressed. Luther’s self-proclaimed wit and wisdom would be foiled by Eck’s response. 
“Martin, there is not one heresy which has torn apart the bosom of the church, which has not derived its origin from some interpretation of Scripture. The Bible itself is the arsenal from which every innovator has drawn his deceptive arguments.”
Eck understood the devastating consequences of Luther's paradigm. Although Luther was right to challenge the supreme authority of the Pope, he swung the Pendulum back too far. The authority to determine the meaning of scripture went from one man to every man. Now “I” and the “Scriptures” were in charge. If you have a Bible and deeply feel it means something, then follow your conscience. That's Luther's paradigm, intentionally or unintentionally. The Word of God and the conscience of individual men became self-contained authorities.

The irony of Luther’s rejection of papal decrees and church councils escaped him. He thought he had attributed sole authority to Scripture, yet the Bible itself was formed and finalized by church councils (check out The Fourth Council of Carthage in 419 AD). The very books to which he bound himself rested on decisions of the early Catholic Church. 

Later in life Luther’s extreme confidence in his opinions over and against those councils and the Scriptures they trust would become clear. He denigrated the value of Matthew, Mark and Luke and recommended the removal of James, Revelation, and other Bible books that did not suit him. His inner persuasion became the authority for who God is and what we should all believe.

Luther’s unintended legacy has been Bible readers turning their opinions into new versions of the faith. The Bible + my preferred meaning = 34,000 church divisions.
Should We Stop Promoting Personal Bible Reading?

Humanity is constantly threatened by the chaos recorded in Judges. “Everyone did what they felt was right” (Judges 21:25). A world full of independent and untrained Bible interpreters can biblically justify any personal opinion. A Bible in every language can lead just as much to the chaos of “create your own religion” as it does to the truth. Interpreting the Bible on your own does not only demonstrate trust in the Bible's authority; it betrays radical trust in one's self. We must interpret and act on the Bible's message with care.

Should we stop promoting personal Bible reading because it has dashed Jesus' dream of unity? Let me qualify my answer. If we don’t promote anything else to quell the confusion of “biblical” truths, then the answer is yes. Bible engagement is not inherently a good thing. 

So what must we do to use the Bible correctly? My next post provides the first 3 steps to protect the church from unchecked individualistic Bible interpretation: Personal Bible Reading Destroys the Church (Part 2 of 2).
14 Comments
Maria Kirby link
8/30/2014 12:27:31 am

It is not the reading of the Bible that causes church divisions, but hubris. Everyone has their own opinion about God and the scriptures and they are entitled to their opinion. The problem comes when people start being controlling, when they stop having grace for one another. We do not have to all submit to the same political structure to have church unity. Our unity comes from loving each other, not ascribing to the the same set of beliefs. I believe the church is richer today for having diversity. One body, many parts; each organ, many cells; love animating and giving life to the whole.

Reply
Taylor Gregg
8/30/2014 01:30:08 am

The problem regarding the establishment of 'the truth' is as old as humanity. Truth emanated from the Pope, but only for Catholics. Long before Martin Luther, Socrates was sentenced to death for teaching the youth that their elders and priests were not the only source of truth, but that they could of their own right use 'reason' to arrive at truth. Plato & Aristotle preached that gospel. Science was established as a method for finding the truth that was more 'objective' than intuition or a god, but modern physics re-emphasized the inability of humans to escape subjectivity, as you can see in the arguments between Einstein and Niels Bohr. "We only find what we look for, and we only look for what we know..." Ruth Benedict said who you are determines what you see. The search for truth remains a leap of faith.

Reply
Paul Penley link
9/1/2014 12:57:03 am

Taylor - It is true our personal experience, culture, language, and influences affect how we interpret the world and what conclusions we reach. However, the idea that we only find what we know is an inadequate description of what really happens. We do move from the known to the unknown. We do learn new things. So it is important to temper Ruth Benedict's statement. We can see new things, but we are affected by who we already are. That requires caution and care, for example when it comes to Scripture, but not despair.

Paul Penley link
9/1/2014 01:00:43 am

Maria - Great prioritization of love and grace toward one another over the need to precisely align all beliefs. Jesus' words in Mark 9:38-41 reflects that same principle.

Reply
jf
9/20/2014 06:56:13 pm

Hi Paul. I really enjoyed this post. Thought-provoking. I sometimes feel as though many denominations seem to worship the bible more than Christ himself. Anyway, it was interesting to see the correlations and to see Luther re-examined.

Reply
Jim Swartzentruber
9/23/2014 10:17:39 pm

While there is a grain of truth in this article, I would offer three basic responses:
First I would hate to see us return to anything as impersonal as the centuries when only an elite few knew and interpreted God's Word. God's paradigm of relationship to His creation is personal and direct. Being distanced by language and limited access to knowledge of his will does not seem to fit that paradigm.
Secondly, the proliferation of denominations, while a sad testimony to mans' response to God's grace and love, is not because of access to scriptures in the language best understood, but because of the basic sin nature of pride and the innate human need to be right.
Lastly, we cannot ignore the hundreds of thousands even millions of persons who now have a personal relationship with Jesus largely because they are able to understand God's love and gospel without having to learn another language or have someone else understand and apply it for them.

Reply
Paul Penley link
9/29/2014 02:31:42 am

Characterizing the centuries prior to the Reformation as a time when few church members knew the Bible does not square with the vibrant practice of catechism in the early church for the first five centuries. Many new believers were required to complete up to 3 years of training in the Word of God and the way it teaches us to live. The contemporary church built on the post-Renaissance Protestant principle of individual determination of truth has resulted in less training of how to handle the Bible but more individual use of it. It's a troublesome shift when you consider (what you point out) our innate problem of pride. Some folks do get some things right as you mention; others get things wrong but feel they are just as right because that's what God says to them in the Bible. That's why I recommend 4 practices to protect the church from the Bible in Part 2: http://www.reenactingtheway.com/blog/bible-reading-destroys-the-church-part-2-of-2

Reply
Cathy
9/30/2014 10:36:48 pm

I think the unity of the pre-Reformation church does not trump the error that the church was in (ie. Indulgences, persecutions of sects and that list of 95 things... etc.) Divisions have a way of purifying the church and letting what is not "right" fall away and not last. But it sounds to me that you would be more comfortable in the Catholic Church. It is still around and perhaps you should convert? But do not keep preaching that we should not have the Word of God each in our own language with the freedom to read it. The Holy Spirit is given to everyone who receives Him. He is the one who teaches us and leads us into the truth. Those who taught the catechism in the early church were just men as well. And perhaps God allowed this time of training on purpose to keep the truth secure for the coming ages. These men were no more infallible than you or I. I encourage you to watch this video and afterwards decide if people should not have given money so that they could have the gift of the Bible in their own language. http://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=FC1ECCNU God's grace to you.

Cathy
9/30/2014 11:28:08 pm

As I keep thinking about your thought provoking article, I understand your frustration. I feel too that there is a great lack of and a great need for discipleship in the church today but I think personal Bible reading is an erroneous scapegoat to that problem. I am a homeschool mom and my kids and I just read this morning about the conversion of St. Augustine. I found it ironic that his conversion happened when he heard children singing, "Take it and read" so he picked up the Scriptures and read it on his own and was never the same.

Reply
Cathy
10/1/2014 12:18:31 am

Okay, now I have read your part 2. I can agree with most of what you write about in that part. But again, I take issue with your basis for negating personal Bible reading. I heard recently that in China there were no denominations until us Westerners exported them through theological books and commentaries. I do lean more towards the Renaissance as a poison that idealized and permeated the church with individualism and personal authority. And I think you forget that most if not all of those people groups who have had a Wycliffe translator come and translate the Scriptures into their language have been untouched by the Renaissance and have a high regard for teaching and discipleship. But thank you for provoking my thoughts about this subject. However, I seriously question your usage of "destroying the church' in order to catch our attention. A bit over the top, don't you think?

Reply
Paul Penley
10/13/2014 02:19:33 pm

Cathy - Thanks for grappling with this consequential issue in Protestant churches. To be clear, this 2-part blog series is not driven by my secret conversion to Roman Catholicism. And I am not pushing to remove individual freedom to read the Bible. I am advocating for a multi-faceted, proactive response to correcting 500 years of abuse that have not reckoned properly with the Bible's power. My use of the verb "destroy" is primarily in the context of "dividing" the church against Jesus' dream in John 17. You can read Alistair McGrath's elongated case for Protestantism core contribution to the church--that is, individual authoritative interpretations of Scripture--in his well-researched book Christianity's Dangerous Idea - The Protestant Revolution. The divisive power of individual authoritative interpretation (my preferred meaning) plus the Bible in every person's hands must be recognized and responded to with urgency. That is why I have worked to offer concrete and constructive action steps in Part 2 of the blog posting. However, I have received almost no response regarding the recommendations for the Bible should be handled better. Most commenters on all the platforms where the article was posted want to argue about the precise extent of the problem or preserve the right for each of us to make up anything we want from the Bible without attention given to how we can increase the number of people actually finding its meaning.

dis
8/1/2017 04:36:39 am

Heresy and unbiblical understanding and division was there in the church even in the bible...it is a religious mentality product of work

Reply
Bob
7/9/2018 09:50:40 pm

There is one question you neglect to address and that is the corruption that leaving scriptural interpretation to the leaders of the church can bring and that is human corruption. It is this corruption that led Luther to his position. It is pretty hard to defend the position of the Catholic Church in Luther's time as anything close to what Jesus taught or even to what the early church fathers taught.
Take a look at Acts, Chapter 17 verse 11, Paul and Silas preached at Berea, and the inhabitants "... received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.". does that not give guidance that we should refer to the scriptures to make sure we are not being led astray? After all Paul called them noble. In Russia how many priests were martyred while the leadership sat cosey and warm with Stalin?

Reply
Paul Penley (author)
8/24/2019 09:46:38 pm

Bob -
I do talk about the way in which we should assess the character and accuracy of Bible teachers in Part 2 of this post. You are right that we should use Paul’s recipe to identify teachers that can’t be trusted—the same recipe that would have pinpointed the problem with Catholic priests teaching nonsense in Matin Luther’s day.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    BUY the BOOKs

    Picture
    Picture

    Coming June 26.


    Author

    Paul Penley's training as a Bible scholar, life as a human being, and work as a philanthropic advisor overflows into this blog

    View my profile on LinkedIn
    Picture

    Top 5 Blogs

    1. Women Should Not Teach Men What?
    2. John Calvin Killed Rival Theologians
    3. Turning the Other Cheek
    4. I Wish You Were Cold or Hot, not Lukewarm
    5. When Heaven and Earth Passed Away
    Picture
    Picture

    Enter email address to receive monthly blogs:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    Picture

    RSS Feed

    Categories

    All
    Bible Interpretation Gone Wrong
    Faith Isn't Knowing Everything
    How To Follow Jesus
    How To Study The Bible
    Ministries Gone Wrong
    Narrative Theology
    The Character Life Demands

    Archives

    January 2021
    May 2020
    March 2020
    December 2019
    October 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    September 2017
    July 2017
    May 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    December 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    March 2016
    October 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    June 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.