T4G Article II: Canon within Canon

I have been meaning to write about Article II in the T4G Statement for a while.

Article II reads

We affirm that the authority and sufficiency of Scripture extends to the entire Bible, and therefore that the Bible is our final authority for all doctrine and practice.

We deny that any portion of the Bible is to be used in an effort to deny the truthfulness or trustworthiness of any other portion. We further deny any effort to identify a canon within the canon or, for example, to set the words of Jesus against the writings of Paul.

Anyway, I have found an excellent post on the subject at Threads from Henry’s Web: T4G Article II: Canon within Canon.

Three points I want to make, I am a Methodist after all ;-)

1. I cannot understand why a group, who in their own opinion put a higher value on the importance of and power of scripture than anyone else, should be so concerned that God relies on our statements to protect his worrd. Do we have so little faith that we really believe that the Bible needs our protection in this way.
2. It seems to me that the Church dealt with this question way back in the time of Marcion and did so in a way that has lasted centuries. Of course in those days the Church got together to pronounce on these issues which were against groups trying to splinter the church - seems a bit different to this situation.
3. I find it ironic (or maybe scary) that we read so little about the words of Jesus and so much dogmatic interpretation of Paul. As Henry writes:

But more importantly, this phrase is a code-word for those who build a theology out of Paul’s writings and use it as a basis to ignore the words of Jesus. Jesus talks about holiness of life and obeying the law; Paul speaks against the law. It is essential to their theology to keep people from setting the words of Jesus against their interpretation of Paul. It is common in discussion or in theological writings for them to use the words of Jesus and Paul equally because both, they say, are inspired.

Now for an attempt at the Alltogether for the Gospel version.

We affirm the historic canon of Scripture and with the Church through the centuries affirm the validity of all books of the Bible and deny any choice of a sub canon within scripture.

What do you think?

Comments

[sally]

Interesting comment about those who build a theology from Pauls writings. I was told in no uncertain terms by two Bible study group members they would be unable to participate in the Lords supper if I were officiating as St Paul said women should not speak in church....
I did challenge them on the fact that they were happy to participate in a Bible study that I led, and were able to hear my preaching- both of which involve me speaking.
So how has the theology become twisted to exclude women from ordination?

Secondly as to God not needing us to defend the Scriptures, perish the thought that we think our understanding is so full and correct that we are able to defend them!

[Henry Neufeld]

Sally said: So how has the theology become twisted to exclude women from ordination?

The problem as I see it is getting things out of order. Jesus sets the theological context for all my theological reflection. In order to cross the gap that I could not cross between his infinity and my finiteness he was willing to become like me, live like I have to, and die according to the rules of this world. That's a serious effort at inclusion!

When we start with Paul, we tend to see a list of rules for building and managing struggling churches as the key to the gospel message. That's because Paul's job was to plant, build, and manage churches. That's wonderful material, necessary material even, but it is not the gospel. Jesus embodies the gospel; he is the gospel.

When I define the gospel from Jesus, and see Paul as a person who implemented the gospel in his situation, then I can appreciate Paul much more, and I can also adjust how I apply the gospel to my time and circumstances when a wooden, literal application of Paul would not be worthy of the gospel.

Jesus said that all the law and the prophets (and I think even the apostles to come after) hung from the two laws of love to God and love to our fellow human beings (see my essay Hanging Your Interpretation. That love is again best embodied in the incarnation; it is ritually and spiritual implemented in the eucharist, and should be practically demonstrated in our lives and ministry.

When Paul is read as a license for exclusion, then Paul is being used contrary to the essence of the gospel, and one needs to look at how one is understanding Paul. I'm not against Paul. I'm not even against most of his interpreters. But I am strongly against many of the applications I see from his writings because I see the priority of certain doctrines confused.

[Brett]

Everyone seems to be getting so worked up about T4G. In response to your statements: 1. The importance and power of scripture are equally important to everyone. It doesn't just apply to those who read it and accept it. It's truths are universal, it's just that most don't realize it. The Bible doeesn't need our protection, but we have a duty to interpret it correctly. 2. Not sure what the point is. 3. There is no code involved. the fact is that Paul wrote the majority of the New Testament. It is not essential for us to "keep" Paul and Jesus from conflicting. They don't. All scripture is inspired, so it can't conflict. If you think it does, your interpretation is wrong.

I appreciate your thoughts, and enjoy reading what you have to say, even though I disagree at times.

[Tim]

Dave, Sam Norton has a fine post that bears on this issue. You can read it here:

http://elizaphanian.blogspot.com/2006/06/valley-of-achor.html

[Pam]

Tim, thanks very much for that link. It was excellent for this 'fan' of Girard's anthropology.

[Lorna]

Paul's theology must be used in the context of Jesus' Gospel. He reached out to the marginalised - he didn't marginalise them more.

The question of women in ordination will NOT go away, because IMHO too many people take the letters to Timothy and Titus quite out of context. We are all to be submitted to one another. I wish we could learn how to do that - and in love :) There is too much finger pointing and wagging in the body of Christ and it is contrary to the spirit of Jesus.