Yesterday I was listening to a secular
scholar again. (Okay, it was JP.)
He was speaking about the Bible, its value
as a text and its importance in human history. At the same time, he was
expressing disbelief about how it had persisted. It’s a “strange old book”, he
said. It’s “contradictory” and “cobbled together”. He puzzled over how it was
possible it could ever have “such an unbelievable impact on civilization”. But
at the same time, he concluded, “However educated you are, you are not educated
enough to discuss the typological significance of the biblical stories.”
And then he went on to try.
Good for him. It’s better to persist with the Bible in the midst of perplexity even
if you’re afraid you can’t figure things out, than simply to decide that there’s
simply nothing there and arbitrarily dismiss it.
Contradictory Opinions
Most secular sceptics are not that kind. “The Bible is full of contradictions,” they’ll tell you. And then, if they have
anything specific in mind at all, they’ll usually go on to point to something
trivial, like the differential spellings of names, or whether it was on the way
to (Luke) or from Jericho (Matthew) that Jesus healed a man born blind …
or
two. What they really want to say, though, is not that minor details need
working out, but that the larger and more central themes of scripture are
hopelessly contradictory … and that we should therefore reject the entire
text.
I think the most common accusation that the
Bible is contradictory — the one you’re most likely to hear — is that
God cannot possibly be the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New. The
Old Testament God, we are told, is harsh, judgmental and law-giving. The God of
the New Testament is soft, permissive and forgiving. The contradiction, we are
told, is simply too great; it cannot be resolved.
Well, well …
Contradiction or Paradox?
Biblical problems — are they contradictions or are they paradoxes?
If the text says Jesus was born in Bethlehem and also in New York, we’ve got a contradiction, end of story. But if
we read that Jesus was born in Bethlehem but called a Nazarene, as indeed
we do, then we only have a paradox, and one that indicates the lack of
comprehension of Jesus’ contemporaries, not a contradiction at all. And
reconciling the two statements is informative.
A contradiction simply cannot be resolved, but a paradox is supposed to be resolved, even though difficult. That’s the first
difference.
The second is this: that the process of discovering how to resolve it is, in itself, a generative, learning experience.
By considering carefully how two apparently opposite things can both be true,
we come to a more sophisticated, mature, adult understanding of the subject
matter.
If what we are dealing with are actually contradictions, then dismissal is warranted — one is dealing with an incoherent document. But
if they are paradoxes, then one is dealing with something on a whole different
level of profundity, one that uses ambivalence and question-raising to generate
significant and complicated patterns of thought that simply would not be
possible if only one side of a paradox were ever recognized.
Instructive Paradoxes
I give you the case of the parables of Christ. How could an unrighteous
steward become a model of awareness of spiritual values? And yet he does. Thinking
about how and why he does takes us to a whole new level of analysis, in which
conventional values seem violated, but actually recombine into a depiction of
wholesale valuing of the eternal.
That’s paradox, not contradiction.
Or how about the cursing of the fig tree? As a literal event, it seems petty and pointless. As a
symbolic event, it’s full of prophetic power, signalling the impending judgment
of those who are given every opportunity to believe and every reason to
believe, and yet refuse to believe. Yet it’s the very oddness, the very
unnaturalness, of the literal action itself that impels us toward the
recognition of moral condemnation looming over the city and its people. That’s
paradox, not contradiction.
We can go on. How could the first in honor be the “servant
of all”? What can we learn from camels
who can go through the eye of a needle? There are many, many paradoxes spelled out in the teachings of Christ.
The same happens in the epistles. What is a “living
sacrifice”, for example? Or how are people “dead
in trespasses and sins” able to “walk” and “live” at the same time? How
could Paul himself “die”, but do
it daily? How can a man be “justified by faith” and “by
works”? If the one born of God “cannot
sin”, what do we make of the same writer saying, “if anyone does sin”, we
have an advocate? All these questions have answers, of course. But taken at
face value, they could look like mere contradictions.
That’s the thing about paradoxes — they deliberately introduce the appearance of
contradiction so as to startle and awaken the slumbering reader to a deeper
truth or a more sophisticated understanding of the issues in hand. Resolving
contradictions is impossible, but solving spiritual paradoxes makes us grow up.
God of Wrath, God of Love
Perhaps the grandest seeming-contradiction, and the one most often indicated by sceptics of the Bible is the paradox of the
seemingly angry and law-approving God of the Old Testament, in comparison to
the putatively loving and merciful God of the New Testament. Paradox of
paradoxes! How can God be both just and loving? How can the God who speaks in thunder
and smoke from Sinai be expected to be merciful, or Christ “the Lamb” inspire
terror?
Of course, it is in the resolution of this paradox that we come to understand God
as both perfectly holy and perfectly loving. Let go of one of those extremes,
and what you have left is a skewed understanding of God. The whole revelation
of God’s character consists in the affirmation of both. A God who is not just
has no love to show, since he would allow sin to flourish eternally; and a God
who is loving without reference to justice has not really freed anyone from
guilt. The holy love of God is what we learn from keeping both in permanent
view … it is, indeed the whole meaning of the gospel, without which there
is no “good news” at all.
Reacting to Paradox
So let’s say we find any two things that seem to us to be affirmed in scripture,
and they look to us like a contradiction. What do we do?
Well, I suppose we could turn into sceptics. We could say, “Now that I’ve found
something I don’t understand, I have to throw over everything I’ve
previously believed, because there’s a contradiction here. I can’t get on
so long as I don’t have a resolution to this, so I guess I can’t
be a Christian anymore.” That’s what the world’s cynics think we should do. But
is that the right answer?
Christianity has a different strategy. First, it looks to see if there really are two things difficult to
reconcile in play. Sometimes we’ve just read carelessly, misinterpreted a
passage, or jumped to a conclusion. Many things that seem at first to be contradictions
do resolve in this way.
But what if we find out that the conflict we perceive is genuinely scriptural: the Bible does actually say two things we don’t know how to reconcile. What
should we do then?
The Christian response is not to let either one go. Instead, we
should pray as follows: “Lord, I do not understand how both these things
said in your word can be true; but since I know who you are, and I believe
you, I will wait for you to show me how to resolve the paradox you have
put before me. Until you do, I will continue to live with both, and
believe every word you have said because you have said it.” And in my experience,
it is not long after that before the Lord will reveal to you how the paradox
works.
Ecclesiastes 7:18 says, “It is good that you grasp one thing and also not let go of the other; for the one
who fears God comes forth with both of them.” This applies to many
situations, of course, but perhaps none more obvious than this.
To live the life of faith, we need to get used to trusting God’s word, especially when we don’t see precisely how it
works out yet. And when we are perplexed, we need to learn to trust the Spirit
of God to guide
us into all truth.
The Upshot?
We must be careful what we call a “contradiction” in regard to the biblical record. Much of the paradox, so key to its power and
its instruction, is capable of being misunderstood and dismissed if we don’t
know what paradox, as a teaching tool, is really all about.
We Christians grow by resolving such paradoxes. Our eyes are opened as we struggle to make sense of them — because
assuredly, they do make sense. Biblical truth, however, is rarely simple: it’s
complex, nuanced, subtle and profound … in a word, it’s paradoxical.
Watch for the paradoxes: they’re key opportunities to grow.
No comments :
Post a Comment