offended

I shared this with our Life Group leader just recently (hope you don't find this too redundant, Jim). Sticking with the Revelation theme (kind of), I remember sitting in class at Regent back in 2006. I was excited about the subject matter (learning to interpret the Bible using the book of Revelation as our text). I was, however, having difficulty letting go of my preconceived ideas of what the book was saying. This became obvious on this particular day. Our instructor (Dr. Wilson) was explaining how that much of the imagery in the book of Revelation was borrowed from well known (at the time) Hebrew and mythological imagery. I was greatly offended at the implication. I couldn't take it anymore, and I raised my hand to confront this affront to all that is sacred. I asked Dr. Wilson, "Do you mean to tell me that John was using stories from mythology to try to convey a message, and that John didn't actually 'see' all of these images as God was showing him? Why is it so hard to believe that God actually showed John these things and that they are just difficult for us to understand because he was trying to describe future events?" To me the answer was obvious. Dr. Wilson gracefully but unapologetically responded, "Why couldn't God tell John to use stories that the first readers were all familiar with to convey a meaning that they would more easily understand in light of  those stories?" I was at a loss for words. I stood corrected. Perhaps my position was correct, but Dr. Wilson's was equally as plausible--even moreso. History shows that many of these stories and images did exist during and prior to the first century (See David Aune's commentary on Revelation, World Biblical Commentary, volume 52, 1998, Thomas Nelson, Inc.).

So what do we do when the "facts" mess with our frame of reference? If the images in portions of Revelation were indeed "borrowed" from mythology, does that destroy our faith? It doesn't have to. The only thing it should destroy are the sacred cows we've developed and nurtured over the years. Personally, letting go of some of my prejudices (I say "some" becuase I still have many) has allowed me to enjoy the deeper riches to be found in Scripture.

On another note that is somewhat related to the subject of this post, I would encourage you to take a look at an article posted on the Harvard Icthus website. The article, Augustine on Science, Scripture and Not Being Stupid, found at http://www.harvardichthus.org/fishtank/2010/09/augustine-on-science-scripture-and-not-being-stupid/ is quite eye opening. Basically, Augustine says that people should not speak with authority on subjects about which they know very little. In the interaction with my professor, my ignorance was exposed. Certainly, I had plenty of faith, but faith grounded in my preconceived ideas about what the Bible is saying rather than the message that is really being communicated is misplaced faith at best. Science, history, anthropology, archaeology, mythology, and yes, even theology (along with other academic disciplines) don't need to derail our faith when what they uncover challenges our paradigms. The Bible and faith go hand in hand with truth--wherever that truth is found. What I am saying is, don't be offended the next time someone shows you some bit of truth that doesn't fit your current religious or philosophical context--even if it is a man working miracles and preaching a different kind of kingdom than what you had imagined. Take it as a challenge to dig deeper and discover what else you may be missing. The rewards are great.