Updated 12:58 pm.EST, Sat November 21, 2009

World|Thu, Jul. 31 2008 06:12 PM EDT

Anglicans Wrestle with How They View the Bible

By Lillian Kwon|Christian Post Reporter

Before entering talks on human sexuality on Thursday, Anglican leaders took a deep look at the issue underlying the ongoing and highly publicized gay debate – the Bible.

"The issue of homosexuality comes down to an issue about the Bible," said the Most Rev. David Moxon, Archbishop of New Zealand, according to VirtueOnline, a conservative Anglican publication. "Underneath all the discussions and debates is how do we view the Bible?"

Archbishop Phillip Aspinall, primate of the Anglican Church of Australia, said a lot of the division in the Anglican Communion "has to do with the Bible."

Bishops attending the once-a-decade Lambeth Conference in Canterbury, England, this week spent Wednesday in conversations under the theme "Living Under Scripture: the Bishop and the Bible in Mission."

"Everyone in the Anglican Communion has their own process of making sense of the Bible. People who claim that their way of making sense is taking the Bible more seriously than someone else are just trying to talk more loudly or stamp their foot more firmly," said Prof. Gerald West, Professor of Old Testament at the University of Kwazulu-Natal in South Africa and coordinator of the Bible Studies at Lambeth, according to VirtueOnline.

While noting that he doesn't believe there are wide differences in the Anglican Communion over biblical authority, West said Anglicans maintain a "common commitment" to Scripture, as reported by VirtueOnline.

During the discussions, bishops were asked to look at the way they view details of Scripture from various perspectives and to discuss whether the theme of homosexuality is in the Old and New Testaments in the same way that it exists for marriage, polygamy and rape, according to the Anglican Journal.

"Is there such a thing as homosexuality in the ancient world? Did it exist then?” West explained. He also said bishops looked at the context in which Scripture is engaged.

In most cases, according to West, "what you think is important in your context shapes the way you see Scripture."

Weeks before the Lambeth Conference, renowned evangelical theologian Dr. James Innell Packer affirmed that homosexual behavior is sin and that those who affirm such behavior "are understanding the Bible in a very different way from that in which the rest of us think that it asks to be understood."

"God uses language to tell us things, and the Bible is the language that He's used," he said. "The Bible is personal communication from the Creator to us creatures, and in personal communication you speak and write to be understood. You don't communicate in code; you don't say one thing in a way which is intended to be understood as meaning its opposite."

"God is, we believe, straight forward; the Bible, in that sense, is straight forward, and Paul in 1st Corinthians is straight forward."

Packer left the Anglican Church of Canada earlier this year, citing "poisonous liberalism" and arguing that top leaders in the Canadian church body have changed their interpretation of Christianity.

"I'm simply being an old-fashioned mainstream Anglican," Packer said.

The Anglican Communion has been wracked by divisions, particularly since the 2003 consecration of openly gay bishop Gene Robinson of New Hampshire and the blessing of same-sex unions in the British Columbia diocese of New Westminster.

Conservative Anglicans have argued that The Episcopal Church in the United States and the Anglican Church of Canada have departed from Scripture and Christian orthodoxy.

According to Moxon, Wednesday was the first time Anglican bishops together discussed the question of "how do we use the Bible?" He added that the intent of the discussions was to simply ask "What’s the high common ground when we approach the Bible?"

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
  • Tue Aug 12, 2008 4:23 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Isn't it self-righteous to claim anyone who does not agree with you to be self-righteous?

  • Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:19 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    150 years ago the Christian Church was literally splitting up over the issue of slavery. The Bible was clear,cf. http://docsouth.unc.edu/church/string/string.html. Today other read back into those Scriptures different interpretations. It has all happened before, and it will all happen again. It is not the interpretations of either side that embarrass now, only the self-righteousness.

  • Sun Aug 03, 2008 11:19 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    This describes those who want sin to be welcomed into the church:
    Jude 1:4
    For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

    If you love God, you will not continue to live a life of sin.

    1 John 5:18-20
    18 We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the one who was born of God keeps him safe, and the evil one cannot harm him. 19 We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one. 20 We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true - even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.

    Continually sinning goes against what Christ said were the two greatest commands because if you truly loved God OR your neighbor OR yourself, you will love God with all your strength, mind, and spirit. You would be obedient to GOD rather than thinking your thoughts and feelings should take precedence over what God has said.

    Also, you would not lead your neighbor into sin if you truly loved them or yourself.

    But instead, you choose to argue and justify rather than Love and Obey.
    Christ is only the savior for those who trust in His saving work - and if He is, then they will obey Him, If they do not obey, then that is evidence that He is not their savior.

  • Sun Aug 03, 2008 10:34 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    feet, you act as if the law is no longer our schoolmaster that points us to our need to be saved and that will also be used to determine the degree of punishment to be received by those who reject Christ and are cast in hell at the Great White Throne Judgement.

  • Sat Aug 02, 2008 3:19 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Let us test the idea of whether homosexual sex and desire is from God:
    1) it fails the first tes: Scripture is clear that homosexual sex and desire are sin...........the law
    2) It fails the second test: disobedience is not from God............the law.
    3) It fails the third test: The homosexual behavior publically displayed at gay parades is abnormal and unhealthy and against God.................too ridiculous to respond to.

  • Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:02 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    To me, the Anglican Church is not wrestling with how to interpret the Bible. They understand well its interpretation. They are just struggling to find a loophole for what they want to do. Let us pray for them as they struggle with their crosses.

  • Fri Aug 01, 2008 4:48 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    feet,

    "aside from scripture"

    For a Christian who believes God, there is NO "aside from scripture".

    And if you don't believe God, you gotta question just what does being a Christian mean to you. The term 'Christian' was a derogaroy tag placed upon those who followed Christ. It meant to be little-christs, to be Christ-like. If you are not believing God that Christ died for your sins that you might be reconciled to God through faith in Christ's redeeming work, you are not a Chrisian, but a member of a club.

    People who want to invite sin into the church have no business being in the church. Form some other club, but not a church.

    But lets humor you...

    "as believers do we have license to ask, what is your test? the three parts to testing
    (1) reasoning thru the scriptures
    (2) witness of the spirit and the fruit of the spirit of what is being tested
    (3) witness thru daily living... thru what god has made "

    Let us test the idea of whether homosexual sex and desire is from God:
    1) it fails the first tes: Scripture is clear that homosexual sex and desire are sin.
    2) It fails the second test: disobedience is not from God.
    3) It fails the third test: The homosexual behavior publically displayed at gay parades is abnormal and unhealthy and against God.

    Ok, so now using the tests you defined, homosexual sex is wrong.

  • Fri Aug 01, 2008 1:11 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

    "Anglicans Wrestle with How They View the Bible"

    Therein is the problem and the revelation folks.

    Humanism in essence says that everything that exists is for my betterment and enjoyment. The end of all being is the betterment of man.

    So, we take that philosophy that has been pounded into our minds from birth and we apply it to the Bible. Except for one thing. This philosophy does not fit reality. The end of all being is not the betterment of man, but the GLORY OF GOD.

    Anglican church (enter stage left).

    Then the question is raised, how can we fit the BIBLE into what the culture wants? How can we appease the masses?

    The problem is, they've got it backwards. They are superimposing their "views" of the Bible on the plainly written text. The real issue is rebellion, not context or clarity. The human heart wants what it wants, and don;t tell it otherwise. In rebellion, we dismiss the scriptures so that, in classic humanistic form, happiness will be my end.

    Jesus did not die on the cross to make us happy or to put us in good standing with the culture. He died to save us from our sins so that we can be RECONCILED to God. The church has ignored that and so have the American Anglicans

  • Fri Aug 01, 2008 10:17 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    feet,

    "internal testing"???

    Are you high? If God said jumping off a cliff is bad, would you test it? No. Its obvious. Now, sometimes people who jump off cliff live to talk about it, some even walk. But the norm is that they die or are crippled at best.

    The same is true for homosexual sex. God said to not do it. God called it a sin, an abomination. Jesus spoke out against it in the Gospels. Paul spoke out against it in Romans and Corinthians.

    You can lie to yourself all you want and pretend he did not, or you can choose to believe the Bible. If you call yourself a Christian, then you must repent, turn to God, and live a life that proves the faith you claim to have. Living a life of sin is not showing love of God or your neighbor, it is living a lie (since you tell yourself and others God has not said homosexual sex is a sin). It is heresy.

  • Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:45 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 0

    (Packer left the Anglican Church of Canada earlier this year, citing (poisonous liberalism) and arguing that top leaders in the Canadian church body have changed their interpretation of Christianity).

    Attempts to discredit the (WORD OF GOD) will continue to the end; liberal scholars, textual critics, new agers, and all the rest will have to discredit the scriptures in order to elevate a false Christ and a false gospel.

    We (Christians) are in a battle for (truth); we need to continue follow Jesus example of always utilizing the (IT IS WRITEN) approach when discussing matters of faith.

    But he (Jesus) answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God (Matthew 4:4).

  • Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:28 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 3

    aside from scripture, bishops of third world countries refuse to acknowledge that part of the basis for their belief is that culture of their own country incarcerates and in some cases executes homosexuals.

    they are in effect saying because our cullture reenforces what we already believe our country has it right and the culture of your country counters the old teaching, therefore you and your country your country have it wrong! and we cannot commune with you because conduct not only offends our belief but our culture as well.


    those of third world countries are incapable of an objective discussion. their cultures dont allow for it. there is little open discussion. the wrong comment in the wrong place could quite possibly forfeit someones life.

    there is really no possibility in discussions about homosexuality vs heterosexuality, or what do the actual words of scripture say about homosexuality or what is the essence of the homosexuality that would make it of the sin nature.

    so there is cultural pressure,

    in addition in third world countries, the subjective is held with much higher regard, and belief is much more a part of identity.

    we know that objective discussion can severly threaten belief

    belief is about things of god. therefore anything that threatens belief is considered to be against god. ................ergo objective discussion is against god.
    CONTINUED

  • Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:27 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 3

    CONTINUED
    the same can be seen in our own country even with all our free discussion


    a while ago, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace, declared that homosexual acts are immoral.

    Kansas Republican Senator Sam Brownback agreed: "I believe that homosexual acts between individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts."


    In addition, Brownback explicitly claimed that homosexuality isn't immoral, while homosexual acts are: "I do not believe being a homosexual is immoral, but I do believe homosexual acts are."





    General Pace compared homosexual acts to adultery. Both are external behaviors, not internal states, so fair enough. But adultery necessarily has all sorts of negative consequences. Consensual sex doesn't. He does offer a clue, though: "My upbringing is such that I believe that there are certain things, certain types of conduct that are immoral." .


    The apparent basis for Senator Brownback's position is a bit more straightforward: "I'm a Catholic and the church has clear teachings on this."




    its interesting that neither man credits his position on his personal testing and examination of the facts but instead on belief.of others..... handed down to him.

    what is also interesting that this kind of putting the responsibility on others is acceptable. that is why they said what they said.

    is that what was meant in 1 thess 5:20 test everything, keep the good.


    as believers do we have license to ask," what is your test?"


    the three parts to testing

    (1) reasoning thru the scriptures


    (2) witness of the spirit and the fruit of the spirit of what is being tested


    \
    (3) witness thru daily living............................... thru what god has made

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • Church
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Baker Publishing Group

This full-text Bible is perfect for children who have outgrown Bible storybooks, but who would struggle to read the small type of most Bibles. The large, easy-to-read 12.5 point ty

Featured Advertiser Links