In a few of my courses, especially one on the historical-critical method, I've been struggle with the issue of how one is to read the Bible. Our readings, tracing the history of historical criticism, have presented us with a variety of perspectives on the value of emphasizing the fact that the Bible is a historical document.

On the one hand are writers like Spinoza. With no real idea of inspiration, he sees the Scriptures as just a bit of historical writing, although one which contains some elements of real truth. He trims away outdated concepts, searching out the lasting wisdom. For example, Spinoza upholds the central command that we are to "love God and your neighbor", but sees narratives involving miracles as a result of superstition and simplistic minds.

On the other hand, we have the venerable Danish Saint: Kierkegaard. He describes the proper approach to the biblical text as follows:

Think of a lover who has now received a letter from his beloved -- as precious as this letter is to the lover, just so precious to thee, I assume, is God's Word; in the way the lover reads this letter, just so, I assume, dost thou read God's Word and conceive that God's Word ought to be read.

For Kierkegaard, critical reading is not really reading the biblical text. If you read God's Word, it must be read as if God is directly speaking to you alone by means of the text. Sure, the historical text must be translated into words we can understand, but such translation is not really reading God's Word. Kierkegaard goes as far as to argue that critical interpretation can only distance one from God's call as encountered in the Scriptures.

Karl Barth is heavily influenced by Kierkegaard in his proposed approach to reading the Bible. However, he is less stringent in his critique of (historical-)critical readings. He writes:

The demand for a 'historical' understanding of the Bible necessarily means, in content, that we have to take it for what it undoubtedly is and is meant to be: the human speech uttered by specific men at specific times in a specific situation, in a specific language with a specific intention.

This is a helpful starting point. There is no sense in denying the truth that the Bible is a historical document and thus can be studied like a historical document. However, Barth does not stop there. On the contrary, he holds that the historical-critical method "assuredly achieves no more than a point of departure for genuine exegesis," which operates with the following maxim: "The Word ought to be exposed in the words." That is to say, the eternal Word of God is to be encountered in its temporal expression in the Bible.

I think I'm with Barth on this one.

So, I decided to spring-clean my blog since I had a snow day today. (Interestingly enough, I believe this is the first time I was ever disappointed to have an unexpected day off from class. We were set to discuss selections from Kierkegaard concerning how to read the Bible, and I found his thoughts incredibly stimulating. I was really looking forward to the discussion. Maybe I'll post on it later. Anyways...) I know it isn't spring yet, but as Michael Scott once said, “If you do your spring cleaning in January guess what you don't have to do in the Spring... anything.” As you probably have noticed I've got the new template, entirely because I thought the old one was really ugly. The sole downside is that all my comments have been erased, mais c'est la vie. I've also removed the dead links from the list of blogs on the sidebar, and added a few new ones.

The redesign of the aesthetics comes along with a re-thinking of the purpose of this blog in general. The truth of the matter is, I'm not sure exactly in which direction to take it. My uncle John Harsevoort, a man whom I respect a great deal, has encouraged me to make this space a bit more personal, to share whatever wisdom God has blessed me with. I'm actually quite uncomfortable with the thought of taking up this challenge. To put it bluntly, I really don't think of myself as having a great store of wisdom to share. At least, nothing that jumps to mind. However, this may be because I am not the most reflective person out there. I do think that God has granted me special gifts to help me face the special physical struggles that come with spinal muscular atrophy. And I am convinced that I have this disease with a purpose, part of which is to show an example of the joy and contentment with which God blesses his children even in difficult circumstances.

Now, people seem to assume that my physical struggles bring with them emotional struggles, self-pity and frustration, and spiritual struggles, anger at God for giving me a broken body. The truth of the matter is that I have never really suffered. I do not now, nor have I ever battled sorrow or depression. As for blaming God, I can honestly say that the thought has never seriously crossed my mind. I am incredibly happy with my life, even with its imperfection. This is entirely due to the fact that God has provided for my every need: a large and loving family and good friends to care for whatever physical assistance I require, lots of opportunity for mental and social stimulation, the chance to have a productive life, the list goes on and on.

This is part of the problem. People with wisdom to share are, I think, those who have experienced overcoming a trial or a test of some sort; the greater the trial, the greater the achievement of overcoming, the more their lives have to offer. For me, my physical suffering has been easy to bear because I have been richly blessed with joy and peace from a young age. I have never had to climb Mount Moriah. Yet, still, whatever wisdom I do have to offer I will attempt to share, to the glory of God.

This is not to say that every post from here on in will be meaningful. Be warned that I still reserve the right to post stupid videos, inane thoughts and useless information! In fact, I'm seriously thinking about posting a video a week, care of YouTube or Google Video. Exciting times ahead!

Campfire! Reflections 2006

Last week I spent another week at Campfire! (The more I use it, the more that exclamation mark in the name annoys me.) This was, I believe, my eighth year of service at this camp, and my 10th week. Apart from one week serving as chaplain I have always been a counselor, looking after and mentoring a group of 5-6 boys along with a co-counselor. I started off doing Discovery Weeks for 8-12-year-olds, but now stick to Teen Weeks for those between the ages of 13 and 16. This past week was one of the easiest I've ever had.

Hobbe Smit and I, known for the week as Hobiwan and R2-D2 respectively, were responsible for the oldest group of guys, four 16 year olds and one 15 year old. The guys were really mature, making our job easy. The best part was seeing them grow spiritually, in terms of their relationships with God and with each other.

Beyond the basic facts, it is difficult to communicate about one's time at Camp. It is a unique place with a unique atmosphere. What I will say is this: At Camp, more than any other place, I am able to focus myself on coming to know God more. At Camp we are free from the regular, worldly distractions of everyday life: bad language, suggestive advertising, etc. This is a good thing, but it is not unique. Any wilderness getaway boasts the same advantage. What I noticed at Camp, especially this year, was a freedom from internal distraction. Gone were the stupid, wasteful daydreams and often improper fantasy life that usually takes up a lot of my mental energy. Instead, I was able to focus my entire mind and will on growing in knowledge of God and on serving him and those around me.