scripture

The Reformation as a Movement of the Scripture

Kirk E. Miller

The printing press was invented in 1440, allowing written works — like the Bible — to be widely produced and distributed.

Desiderius Erasmus’ Greek New Testament of the Bible, the first of its kind to be made, was published in 1516, facilitating the movement “ad fontes,” and a close examination of scripture in its original language.

The Protestant Reformation kicked off contemporaneously, circa 1517.

Coincidence? I think not.

When the Word of God is unleashed, expect theological reform.

At the heart of the Reformers’ agenda was to put the scriptures into the hands and ears of the people. Contrast that with the Roman Catholic Church, who, at the time, forbid preaching or translating the Bible into the common language. (Of what were they afraid?)

The Reformation was a movement of the scriptures.

#500Reformation

What not to say about interpreting the Bible literally – Gregory of Nyssa

Kirk E. Miller

The following is taken and modified from a outline on Gregory of Nyssa’s Life of Moses I will be presenting for a class.

In this work, Gregory of Nyssa presents a spiritual-moral-contemplative-allegorical interpretation of Moses’ life with the theme of virtue as its driving paradigm for his interpretive ‘insights.’ To say the least, most of his interpretations are rather outlandish. His goal is that “by transferring to your own life what is contemplated through spiritual interpretation of things spoken literally” (II.320) “those who have been striving toward virtue may find aid in living the virtuous life” (II.49, 148).

Below I’ll present something like a critique of his interpretive method that I’ll offer in my class presentation. My critique is stated as such: “Inappropriate use of allegorical interpretation.”

  • Allegorical interpretation of literature is legitimate if the literature is meant to be interpreted allegorically (e.g., Pilgrim’s Progress). The Pentateuch is not such literature.
  • Continue reading →

Have the Christian Scriptures Been Falsified? –Evaluating an Islamic Critique

Kirk E. Miller

I originally wrote this post last spring, but, for whatever reason, never got around to publishing it. So, long over do, here it is.

Falsified?

Prominent among Muslims is the belief that the Christian and Jewish (implied) scriptures have been falsified, the text having been changed and corrupted. They seek support for this in the Qur’an and the Hadith (their two authoritative texts). This is how Muslims explain that, although Muhammad was predicted in the Christian and Jewish scriptures, he was rejected by both groups.

But is this a legitimate claim? The evidence argues to the contrary.[1]

1. The word of God reflecting the character of God.

The falsification of scripture is incompatible with the character of God as recognized by Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike. God is truthful, trustworthy, and faithful. Therefore, His word cannot be corrupted or become unreliable. God is sovereignly powerful. But a God who intends to communicate yet fails to preserve His message from falsification is not a sovereignly powerful God.[2]

The Qur’an itself says,

We [referring to God with a “royal we”] have sent down the Qur’an Ourself, and We Ourself will guard it. – Sura 15:9.

Or again,

[Prophet], follow what has been revealed to you of your Lord’s Scripture: there is no changing His words…. – Sura 18:27.[3]

And the witness of the Christian scriptures correspond to this.

So, I ask, how does a falsification of scripture fit with this theology?

2. The manuscript evidence.

There are more manuscripts for the Biblical text than any other ancient document. And when we examine these manuscripts, we can confidently determine that the Biblical text has been transmitted with incredible accuracy.

Continue reading →

The Institutes of the Christian Religion (Abridged Version) by John Calvin

Kirk E. Miller

The following is a summary of and reflection upon an abridged version of Calvin’s Institutes produced by Tony Lane and Hilary Osborne (see it here on Amazon). I should note that I did not read the final book, Book IV: Outward Means by which God Helps Us, in its entirety; and therefore, it was directly not taken into consideration in the writing of this review.

* * * * *

Summary

Calvin’s understanding of how men know God, know themselves, and the relationship between these two types of knowledge is seemingly foundational to the entirety of his theology (1:1:1). For Calvin, knowledge of self is intrinsically linked to knowledge of God while knowledge of God results in proper assessment of self (1:1:1). Genuine knowledge of self necessarily assumes knowledge of God. One cannot fully grasp the existence of the creature apart from his fundamental relationship to his Creator and Sustainer (1:1:1). Comprehension of man’s falleness assumes an ideal, one that is rooted in God’s creative-design; transgression implies the reality of Judge (1:1:1). On the other hand, without knowledge of God, no one ever truly knows himself (1:1:2). Lacking insight into the purpose for which He was created, ignorance of his original nature and its divine intent flourish. Unaware of God’s standard of righteousness, man consequently assesses his moral condition inaccurately (2:1:1).

Continue reading →

“Okay, So What Does This Have to Do with My Life?

Kirk E. Miller 5 Comments

Hear me out. I full heartedly believe that practical application is important. And I also believe that every portion of Scripture has practical implications for our lives because every text has theological significance and all theology is practical; don’t misunderstand me. But, over the past few days I’ve been thinking…

Currently I am in the middle of writing a sermon on Acts 1:15-26 for a class. This passage was assigned to me; I don’t have choice. It’s not an easy passage on which to write a sermon (which is why they assigned it). It’s about the 11 apostles casting lots for the 12th apostle to replace Judas after his suicide. This passage does not provide any direct or explicit application for our lives today. It does not tell us to do something, to do anything! That’s not to say it lacks practical implications. Luke puts this section in his book for a reason. Therefore, through this literary purpose, it communicates theology at some level. And since all theology has practical implications, the text is practical.

But the passage isn’t directly about me. It’s not about you. It wasn’t written for this reason–to be about us. And I’m okay with that. “Devotional literature” is not the Bible’s overarching genre. Contrary to the common cliche, the Bible’s genre is not “love letter to Kirk Miller.”

Continue reading →