2 Timothy has long been one of my favorite books in the
Bible. I suppose that is the case because when I was a young man, planning to
enter full time ministry, and then when I was a young pastor, I totally
identified with the character of Timothy as Paul’s young protégé. I could
imagine what he was like and I could picture myself in his place. Now that I am
older, I think I look at and feel about this letter, in a different manner. But
I think we all can benefit from the Bible by “putting ourselves in the
picture,” by imagining what it would be like to be Timothy, or Paul, or
Priscilla, or Deborah, or a hundred other characters in the Bible—even
Jesus—because, after all, we are called to “put on” Jesus Christ.
One of the most memorized verses in 2 Timothy is 3:16-17,
“All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for
correction, and for training in righteousness, so that everyone who belongs to
God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.”
The nature of the Bible’s inspiration has been debated
for centuries, if not millennia. Personally, as you might imagine, I like C. S.
Lewis’ approach to this difficult subject. In a letter to a correspondent named
Janet Wise, Lewis wrote the following on October 5, 1955….
My own position is not Fundamentalist, if Fundamentalism
means accepting as a point of faith at the outset the proposition “Every
statement in the Bible is completely true in the literal, historical sense.”
That wd. break down at once on the parables. All the same commonsense and
general understanding of literary kinds wd. forbid anyone to take the parables
as historical statements, carried a v. little further, wd. force us to
distinquish between (1.) Books like Acts
or the account of David’s reign, wh. are everywhere dovetailed into a known
history, geography, & genealogies (2.) Books like Esther, or Jonah or Job which deal with otherwise unknown
characters living in unspecified period, & pretty well proclaim themselves to be sacred fiction.
Such distinctions are not new. Calvin left the
historicity of Job an open question
and, from earlier, St. Jerome said that the whole Mosaic account of creation
was done “after the method of a popular poet.” Of course I believe the
composition, presentation, & selection for inclusion in the Bible, of allthe
books to have been guided by the Holy Ghost. But I think He meant us to have
sacred myth & sacred fiction as well as sacred history.
Mind you, I never think a story unhistorical because it is miraculous. I accept
miracles. It’s almost the manner that distinguishes the fictions from the
histories. Compare the “Once upon a time” opening of Job with the accounts of David, St. Paul, or Our Lord Himself. The
basis of our Faith is not the Bible taken by itself but the agreed affirmation
of all Christendom: to wh. we owe the Bible itself.
Comments