Doubting Doubt
(Table of Contents - Click This Link)
The Process
Step 5
All Things Being Equal
We know what the
traditional teaching of the Church is.
We know what it is saying about the suspected doubt (I might say,
‘alleged’ doubt) by Mary and John the Baptist on the one hand and about the
compassion that Peter saw in the eyes of Jesus on the other hand. This is the “common view.”
Do
you know what else it is? It’s a
double-standard.
We
read one passage of scripture that tells us only that “the Lord looked at him,”
and we know without the slightest question all that is built into that line and
we know it in many different ways, such as, scripturally, intellectually and
spiritually.
Then we read a couple of other passages, written in exactly identically
equivalent literary forms. The one says,
“he [John] sent them to the Lord to ask, ‘Are you the one who is to come, or
should we expect someone else?’” Then we
think we are explaining that one by giving another, which says, “they said, ‘He
is out of his mind.’”
We
have a wealth of information about the characters and the locations and the
circumstances of both of these. We can
support these passages scripturally just as we did with the first passage
(Jesus looking at Peter). We can
comprehend these two intellectually just as we could the first one. Lastly, we still (hopefully) have the Spirit
of truth (John 15:26) that we had when reading the first selection. But for some reason, with these two passages,
we disallow any of those resources and we choose instead an explanation that
contradicts the resources that we have.
And what we are left with is “the common view.” This is a double standard.
The fact is that the passages I have been writing about are secondary
issues and our salvation does not hinge upon how we interpret them. But as I said near the beginning of this
project, I see them being used again and again for purposes for which it
appears that they do not qualify. I know
that we are concerned that what we teach is being taught correctly. But in these two instances, the vast majority
of us are not even investigating if we are teaching them correctly or not. Moreover, not a few of us are revolted by the
suggestion that we do investigate our own teaching.
Is
there a double-standard being employed?
I sincerely hope that I am wrong.
There is an easy way to find out.
Keeping Luke 22:61 in mind, explain Mark 3:21 and Luke 7:18-19 (or
Matthew 11:2-3). There are just a few
guidelines which I submit are legitimate guidelines. I apologize that by listing them I give them
the appearance of being some kind of legal contract. They are only guidelines that I am
recommending.
A.
Avoid using speculation and supposition in the place of any other
material. Try to support the explanation
with other source material, preferably scripture. Commonly, speculation can be recognized by
sentences that begin with “I think …”
B.
When stating facts within the context of your explanation provide reasons for
the plausibility of those facts. For
example, if, when explaining Mark 3:20-21, you state that Jesus’ family made
the trip from Nazareth, provide the reason(s) why that statement is plausible.
C.
Avoid using the lack of an explanation for one event as a test case to explain
another event. The reason for this is
because you might not be able to explain the test case but someone else might
be able to.
Those are the only guidelines.
I
hope the reader will forgive me for coming across so formally with the points
above. My desire is that we all are
seeking to be of one mind with one another, that we all are striving to be as
accurate as possible with what we teach one another, that we all are receptive
to learning with the congenial help of one another and that we all are
conscious that we are a family continually growing in Christ with one another.
No comments:
Post a Comment