Issue 052 PDF Version - Christian Ethics Today

The phenomenal popularity of The Da Vinci Code and the
record-breaking sales of the Left Behind series has led
some in the news media to say that decoding the Bible has
become a “fad.” But it’s no fad. We Christians have been trying
to decode the Bible for centuries.
Some of our efforts to decode the Bible remind me of a
humorous story about an obnoxious military officer. Still
swaggering from his recent promotion to the rank of captain,
he was addressing his troops. A private ran up to him with a
message from headquarters. The captain, assuming it was
another letter of congratulations, told the private to read it
out loud. “But sir,” the private said, “You may wish to read
this one privately.” “I gave you an order, son,” the captain
barked, “Read it!” So the private read it, loud enough for all
to hear.
The message read: “Captain, You are proving to be the
most incompetent officer that has ever served in the U.S.
army. If you do not shape up within a week’s time, I shall
remove you from command and reduce you in rank.”
Signed: Colonel Smith.
Immediately, the Captain said, “Good job, private. Now
go and have that message decoded.”
Unfortunately, some of our efforts to find “hidden”
meanings in the Bible have been like that—vain attempts to
avoid the obvious.
For example, Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount:
“But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will
not forgive your sins ” (Mt. 5:15). Hoping to “decode” that
passage, I looked it up in some Bible commentaries.
No luck. The commentaries just pointed out that Jesus
made that statement to explain a line in the Lord’s Prayer:
“Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us”
(Mt. 5:12).
What a scary thought.
An even more disturbing passage many have tried to
“decode” is the one where Jesus described the final judgment.
He said we’re all going to be divided into two groups: those
who helped others in need, and those who didn’t. And he
specifically talked about worldly help—for those who need
food, water, clothes, and shelter, and those who are sick,
lonely, or in prison. Jesus indicated that those who engage in
that kind of worldly charity are going to receive a heavenly
16 • CHRISTMAS 2004 • CHRISTIAN ETHICS TODAY
“Decoding” the Bible
By John Scott, Dallas, Texas
“Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened.” Winston
Churchill.
“The obscure we see eventually. The completely obvious, it seems, takes longer.” Edward R. Murrow.
reward. And those who don’t, won’t (Mt. 25:31-46).
I started attending a Baptist church nine months before I
was born. I’ve since heard thousands of sermons. But I have
never heard a sermon based on that warning. One preacher
mentioned it, but only to say we shouldn’t take it literally.
But that same preacher insisted in another sermon that we
should take the Genesis account of creation literally. I wondered:
“Why would he take Genesis at its word, and not take
Jesus at his word? Even if he’s right about the creation, that
won’t matter at the judgment. But if he’s wrong about charity,
that might be the only thing that does matter at the judgment.”
I’ve heard hundreds of sermons saying that salvation is
ours for the asking if we only profess a belief in certain facts
about Jesus, and call him Lord. But Jesus said: “Not everyone
who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of
heaven; but only he who actually does the will of My Father
who is in heaven” (Mt. 7:21). And, “The gate is narrow and
the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are
few” (Mt. 7:14). The Christian martyr Dietrich Bonhoeffer
warned about a “comfortable Christianity” and placing our
hopes on a belief in “cheap grace.”
It’s true that Paul said salvation comes through faith, and
not from works (Eph. 2:8, 9). But he never said that salvation
requires no works. We can’t do enough works to save ourselves,
so there can be no salvation without God’s grace. But
saying works are not enough, is not the same as saying works
are not necessary. So it seems we have stretched Paul’s words
beyond what he actually said, and then acted as if they
trumped what Jesus said. That would appall Paul himself.
The important question is: What did Paul mean by faith?
Or, more accurately: What did he mean by the word later
translated into English as “faith”?
I’m just a layman, but I have read how many scholars
have answered that question. I have found that Protestant
and Catholic scholars, all across the fundamentalist-to-liberal
spectrum, agree on this: a saving faith is not just intellectual
assent to teachings about Jesus; it’s a lifetime commitment to
obey the teachings of Jesus.
Billy Graham called faith a “total commitment” and said,
“There is a vast difference between intellectual belief and the
total conversion that saves the soul.” 1 Dr. Foy Valentine,