DOES IT MEAN WHAT IT SAYS

I went to a men’s Bible study at a church I once attended where the pastor trotted out his “the primary purpose of the Old Testament is to show Jesus Christ” routine.  I don’t dispute it is A purpose of the Old Testament but I wonder about being the PRIMARY purpose.  It makes it seem that anything else we get out of reading the Old Testament is of lesser value - - value that is inferior.  Therefore any other application we can draw, since it is inferior, can be lightly esteemed or even discarded.  According to this man such applications are more or less worthless.

Why then should we have an Old Testament study if the only answer of worth must be “How does this demonstrate Christ?”

What do I do with a scripture that says, “All Scripture is given for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”?

So, now that I know (according to this pastor) that the Bible is only about Christ, what good is the rest of it?  All I really have to do is see how it relates to Christ, then close the book and forget about the rest since it is minor anyway.  Once I know the one important fact - - that the writing is somehow showing me about Christ - - what else do I need to know?

If I want to find out about homosexuality I should read contemporary books about homosexuality.  The Bible may define the homosexual act as wrong but, so what, since that is not the main intent of the Scriptures, which is to reveal Christ, not necessarily to teach us what is right and what is wrong.

It it permissible for me to ask of the Bible, “does it mean what it says”?

Here are three statements encountered from that particular Pastor:

Statement 1. “Because the culture today is different from the culture of Biblical times we can think of things differently than what the Scriptures say.”

This depends upon what the overarching intent of the Scripture is.  Although some things are definitely different between past and present cultures, other things are comparable.  The role of family, for example, existed and was important in the past as it is today.  While I may not tend sheep as many in ancient Biblical lands did, I can learn from the role of the shepherd basic, important character traits like faithfulness, watchfulness and diligence.  A problem arises when we try to relieve ourselves from the types of personal and social responsibility that is called for in the Scriptures:  for example a life-long marriage to one person.  Because in this present day culture it is easy and acceptable to get divorced does not mean it is an option to choose because it is convenient.  Because today’s society embraces sexual intercourse between people of the same sex does not relieve us from the prohibition of that activity as expressed in the Bible.

Statement 2. “The primary purpose of the Scriptures is to reveal Christ and other revelations are of lesser importance.”

Of course the revelation of Christ is important - - crucial - - to the eternal life of any person, but to say other lessons that could be learned from the Scriptures are of “lesser” importance seems to be a semantical trick.  We know that knowing Christ is vital, yet we still need to know other things like:  we should not kill, we should not steal, we should not commit adultery, etc.  Clearly we must first breathe to stay alive after which we need to do other things like drink water and eat food.  I can not (or at least I should not) pick up The Book, learn about Christ, and then toss it aside as if it’s all I really need.  There is so much more of inestimable value to be found, if we will but pay attention.

Statement 3. “The context of certain Scriptures eliminate the reader from taking the plain meaning of the text as for himself.”

Without an example of a specific scripture this statement makes no sense.  It seems to me you have to first know the plain text meaning of the words you read.  Then you compare what knowledge you have of the context to the meaning of the text.  From the comparison of the text and context you arrive at a conclusion about the intention of what was written.  Whatever conclusion the reader arrives at has meaning for the reader.  What I think this pastor was really wanting to say is that he only is capable of interpreting the meaning.   The average parishioner must look to him, the seminary graduate, for the correct interpretation.  He once said, "The Holy Spirit teaches your pastor, and your pastor teaches you."  The Pharisees said that too.