Firmly grounded as a student.
I find it odd that I am not the normal college student. I do not speak of my decision to not smoke, get drunk, or have premarital sex. I am glad I have resisted temptation for these (though most have never really even been an issue for me), though I am not speaking specifically of m relm of belief. I may be one of a few handful of students whose beliefs, values or convictions have not crumbled 'neath the weight of the ivory walls of the University.
One such example is my stance on politics. I was raised in a very conservative home where I learned of the importance of defending the lives of unborn babies from a slaughter at the hands of some who consider themselves "doctors" (more like death dealers). So conservative yes, but I was, by my own admission, truly a 2-issue voter by the time I was 18. The issues I was concerned about were biblically social issues -- abortion and the defense of the institution of marriage between man and wife (as God created it). Sure I cared about the liberation of the Iraqi peoples from the hands of an evil regime... but it was not as important as the life of an innocent and defenseless unborn babe.
Then I got to a political science course once in college and my teacher explained to me the economic system of our country. He even went on to explain the differences between how the conservatives do the economy and how the liberals do the economy. I was astonished at how controlling and money-hungry the liberal approach to the economy is! So instead of turning me into a godless tree-hugging hippie, this course (& instructor) fortified my convictions and made me an even STRONGER conservative!
Along those lines, I also have not crumbled in my beliefs when it comes to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. I am currently enrolled in a Historical Jesus course that attempts to look at the gospels historically and critically... or more accurately, "How much can we attack the validity and reliability of the Bible, and prove that a Winnie-the-Poo book contains more truth than these accounts of Jesus' life." Blah. I still continue to be amused at how liberal the course tends to be, even though the current instructor is no where near as left-winged as the previous one. Even so, the approach taken to the Holy Scriptures is appalling.
When I approach a passage in a gospel that does not perfectly line up with another gospel, I think, OK, how can I make this work logically? The instructor wishes us to think, AHAH! An error-- no way this book is divinely inspired! After a while, this approach just gets rather boring. For instance, just yesterday our class was called to vote (Jesus Seminar style-- colored beads and all) on whether or not Judas kissed Jesus when he turned him over to the Jewish authorities. This event is recorded in Mark 14:45 and Matthew 26:49. Luke 22:47-48 do not mention Judas' kiss, but say that Judas drew near to Jesus to kiss him. From this, we were supposed to arrive at the conclusion that Luke has Judas not kiss Jesus, even though this is not explicitly written. Our instructor mentions (as any good studier of the scriptures) not to read one's own meaning into the text itself. However she was guilty of doing just that! Kevin and I did challenge this, observing that Luke never says that the kiss DIDN'T happen. The word "but" is problematic though, so our instructor looked up the passage in her Greek NT. There are, in Greek, two kinds of "but"s. One is a very final BUT, implying someone went to do something BUT it did not happen. The other "but" may also be translated as "and." I was glad she was looking it up, but I was rather nervous... as if it was the former more final "but," my point would be completely void!... THANKFULLY, it was the later but. :-) w00t! Had it been the other one, scripture would have claimed in Luke that Judas did not kiss Jesus. But God, in his sovereign will, inspired the author to pen the other "but." Funny how one word can have such an impact on meaning, aint it?
This has also happened elsewhere in this class... for instance, dealing with "Is John the beloved disciple who wrote the Gospel of John?" I know it does not matter really if John did or didn't pen the Gospel of John, as his name is not attached to the gospel. However it does seem to be a BIG part of church tradition from very early on.
I am pleased that despite my liberal environment, God has keep my mind grounded in truth (instead of leaving it open for my brains to spew out). I pray I will be able to continue in defending the truth when called upon to do so.
<><
One such example is my stance on politics. I was raised in a very conservative home where I learned of the importance of defending the lives of unborn babies from a slaughter at the hands of some who consider themselves "doctors" (more like death dealers). So conservative yes, but I was, by my own admission, truly a 2-issue voter by the time I was 18. The issues I was concerned about were biblically social issues -- abortion and the defense of the institution of marriage between man and wife (as God created it). Sure I cared about the liberation of the Iraqi peoples from the hands of an evil regime... but it was not as important as the life of an innocent and defenseless unborn babe.
Then I got to a political science course once in college and my teacher explained to me the economic system of our country. He even went on to explain the differences between how the conservatives do the economy and how the liberals do the economy. I was astonished at how controlling and money-hungry the liberal approach to the economy is! So instead of turning me into a godless tree-hugging hippie, this course (& instructor) fortified my convictions and made me an even STRONGER conservative!
Along those lines, I also have not crumbled in my beliefs when it comes to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. I am currently enrolled in a Historical Jesus course that attempts to look at the gospels historically and critically... or more accurately, "How much can we attack the validity and reliability of the Bible, and prove that a Winnie-the-Poo book contains more truth than these accounts of Jesus' life." Blah. I still continue to be amused at how liberal the course tends to be, even though the current instructor is no where near as left-winged as the previous one. Even so, the approach taken to the Holy Scriptures is appalling.
When I approach a passage in a gospel that does not perfectly line up with another gospel, I think, OK, how can I make this work logically? The instructor wishes us to think, AHAH! An error-- no way this book is divinely inspired! After a while, this approach just gets rather boring. For instance, just yesterday our class was called to vote (Jesus Seminar style-- colored beads and all) on whether or not Judas kissed Jesus when he turned him over to the Jewish authorities. This event is recorded in Mark 14:45 and Matthew 26:49. Luke 22:47-48 do not mention Judas' kiss, but say that Judas drew near to Jesus to kiss him. From this, we were supposed to arrive at the conclusion that Luke has Judas not kiss Jesus, even though this is not explicitly written. Our instructor mentions (as any good studier of the scriptures) not to read one's own meaning into the text itself. However she was guilty of doing just that! Kevin and I did challenge this, observing that Luke never says that the kiss DIDN'T happen. The word "but" is problematic though, so our instructor looked up the passage in her Greek NT. There are, in Greek, two kinds of "but"s. One is a very final BUT, implying someone went to do something BUT it did not happen. The other "but" may also be translated as "and." I was glad she was looking it up, but I was rather nervous... as if it was the former more final "but," my point would be completely void!... THANKFULLY, it was the later but. :-) w00t! Had it been the other one, scripture would have claimed in Luke that Judas did not kiss Jesus. But God, in his sovereign will, inspired the author to pen the other "but." Funny how one word can have such an impact on meaning, aint it?
This has also happened elsewhere in this class... for instance, dealing with "Is John the beloved disciple who wrote the Gospel of John?" I know it does not matter really if John did or didn't pen the Gospel of John, as his name is not attached to the gospel. However it does seem to be a BIG part of church tradition from very early on.
I am pleased that despite my liberal environment, God has keep my mind grounded in truth (instead of leaving it open for my brains to spew out). I pray I will be able to continue in defending the truth when called upon to do so.
<><
Comments
Post a Comment