Reading the Bible Responsibly in a Polarized Church & World – Part 14

Opening Prayer

Early in the morning we seek your presence, O God, not because you are ever absent from us, but because often we are absent from you – at the heart of each moment where you forever dwell. In the rising of the sun, in the unfolding color and shape of the morning, open our eyes to the mystery of this moment that in every moment we may know your life-giving presence. Open our eyes to this moment that in every moment we may know you as the One who is always now.

• John Philip Newell, Sounds of the Eternal – A Celtic Psalter, p. 74.

Questions and Answers

When was The Canon of Scripture Formed?

By the end of the first century, all the New Testament writings were in existence. But the 27 New Testament writings did not yet exist as a completed collection. The canon of Scripture formed over time most significantly between the second and fourth centuries.

What is the Date of The Nicene Creed?

The Nicene Creed originally dates from the year 325 CE when it was agreed by the First Council of Nicaea. Part of the purpose of developing the creed was to give expression to the understanding of God as Trinity. This means that Christians believe in one God in three persons – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Since 325 CE, the creed has been modified, expanding particularly on the description of the Holy Spirit. Some of these modifications were not accepted by all churches and remain a point of disagreement between western and eastern churches.

Reading in the Kingdom of Love (cont’d)

“Reading the Bible according to the rule of love involves engaging with those who read the text differently with compassion and awareness of fundamental human solidarity. It is important that such conversations happen face-to-face. Too often digital interaction, because it shields one person from the other person and masks the other’s embodied humanity, encourages otherwise decent human beings to resort to vitriol, ridicule, or insult when disagreeing with others.”

“A favorite tactic in these kinds of interactions is to cite laws from the Bible that are clearly untenable today in response to someone appealing to a biblical text to support a particular moral conviction or take a side on a social issue. The implicit criticism in this strategy is that the person appealing to the biblical text is ‘picking and choosing’ which parts of the Bible to follow or ignore. Yet, we come to the biblical text with theological and ethical convictions that act as interpretative standards for our reading. It is unreasonable and impossible for any person to take the Bible whole and entire as authoritative without recourse to the interpretive strategies and external standards that have been developed over centuries. Rather than engage in a ‘gotcha’ moment to earn fictitious points in some imaginary contest that views serious disagreement about an issue as a zero-sum game to be won at all costs, both parties in conversation can explore which values and reading traditions underlie the selection of certain biblical passages rather than others. This can lead to a discussion of the issue on the level of values and how they are expressed in the texts which might allow for exploration of potential areas of consensus around certain values.”

“I would like to return to the Great Commandment story one last time. Whereas Augustine read the text as an indication of how Jesus interpreted the Bible, I also want to look at how Jesus provides a positive model for the kind of dialogue that I envision. In Marks’s version (12:28-34), we notice that Jesus and the scribe mutually affirm each other’s interpretation and, by extension, each other’s character. The scribe affirms that Jesus is a true teacher and that his selection of the Great Commandment is correct. Jesus in turn affirms the scribe’s character based on the latter’s explanation of those two commandments (‘You are not far from the kingdom of God’; 12:34). In Luke’s Gospel Jesus engages with the lawyer despite the fact that the latter appears to have less than noble motives for engaging Jesus (he ‘stood up to test Jesus’; 10:25). In fact, by answering the lawyer’s question with one of his own, Jesus invites the lawyer into a deeper conversation when, as is the case in Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus could have simply answered the question himself and ended the encounter. Moreover, even though we are told that the lawyer’s follow-up question is driven by his desire to ‘vindicate himself,’ there is no trace of impatience or rebuke in Jesus’ response. Jesus tells the lawyer the parable and then follows up with a question to make sure the lawyer has understood.”

“The limited multiplicity of all texts includes that of the Bible. While it [the Bible] means many things, it cannot mean anything. But among the many things it can mean are readings that are beyond are own determined ‘historical horizon.’ While our horizons are a given, they are not a prison. They can be expanded by interaction with the textual ‘cuisines’ (the cultivation of methods that take the elements of diet and seek to create as much variety as possible) of others and, in those encounters, lead to greater empathy and understanding.”

(Thomas M. Bolin, An Inspired Word in Season – Reading the Bible Responsibly in a Polarized World, 2025.)

For this week: For reflection: How will you partake of the textual ‘cuisines’ of others?

An invitation to our virtual participants: Discussion and comments are very much encouraged and welcomed. Online discussions can be held in the comments section in the upcoming post on Social Media for this week’s Deacon’s Reflection which is part of adult formation at St. Francis Episcopal Church.

Some Suggested Study Resources:

• The New Oxford Annotated Bible, NRSV, with the Apocrypha; 5th edition.
• The Harper Collins Study Bible, NRSV, Fully Revised and Updated (Including Apocryphal Deuterocanonical Books); Society of Biblical Literature; (e-book).
• The Jewish Annotated New Testament, NRSV, 2nd edition, Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler, editors; Oxford University Press.

Closing Prayer – Prayer of Blessing

In the many details of this day let us be fully alive. In the handling of food and the sharing of drink, in the preparing of work and the uttering of words, in the meeting of friends and the interminglings of relationship, let us be fully alive to each instant, O God, let us be fully alive.

May the light of God illumine the heart of my soul.

May the flame of Christ kindle me to love.

May the fire of the Spirit free me to live this day, tonight, and forever. Amen.

• John Philip Newell, Sounds of the Eternal – A Celtic Psalter, p. 77.

Reading the Bible Responsibly in a Polarized Church & World,” Deacon Joe Dzugan, St. Francis Episcopal Church, 2026