{"id":12343,"date":"2014-03-04T10:47:59","date_gmt":"2014-03-04T15:47:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/bryantriangle.wpengine.com\/?p=12343"},"modified":"2022-11-08T04:32:48","modified_gmt":"2022-11-08T09:32:48","slug":"letter-to-the-editor-according-to-the-bible","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/letter-to-the-editor-according-to-the-bible\/","title":{"rendered":"Letter to the Editor: according to the Bible"},"content":{"rendered":"

By James Kendall
\nClass of 2003<\/em><\/p>\n

Like many former and current Bryan students, I have been dismayed over the discussion of the board\u2019s desire to change a small part of the statement of belief of Bryan College. Unlike most of those voicing their opinions, though, I have been dismayed at the response of those who are upset by the change. I realize that there are as many differing opinions as to how the world began as there are species on this earth. I also realize that it is not wise for an academic institution to so severely limit the scope of beliefs of those who teach there that those who attend only hear one point of view. In this situation, from what I have seen of the changes, I believe the board made the correct call, and I wish to voice my support for them.<\/p>\n

It seems that most of those upset with the change are upset because this will seemingly eliminate diversity of thought among Bryan\u2019s faculty concerning origins, and diversity of thought is valued to be a good thing. While it is true that well-rounded educations where students are exposed to a variety of beliefs is a good thing, it is only good insomuch as they are shown the truth from among those differing ideas and opinions. I have an 18-month-old daughter whom I want to have a \u201cwell-rounded\u201d education (like most parents). I want her to learn about Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, etc. I want her to learn the differing views of sexuality that people embrace. I want her breadth of knowledge to be immense. She needs to understand the issues at hand and the beliefs of others if she is going to navigate our current, diverse world. However, it is my job as her dad to guide her through the maze of beliefs and belief systems to help her find the truth. I would not be a good father to simply give her a range of options for religions and let her decide for herself which is correct. It is my duty to teach her about all of them but then show her why Christianity is true and all others are false. It is my job to teach her God\u2019s plan for sexuality and why other ideas are false, damaging, and destructive. My role as a father is to teach various religions, belief systems, and ideas, but then to guide her to the truth.<\/p>\n

In the same way, the Board of Trustees at Bryan College have a responsibility to make sure that the students who come through the college understand the breadth of issues. Bryan needs to have a whole range of issues and viewpoints taught and discussed. However, it is also the role of the board to make sure that the students are guided into the truth. Yes, some may disagree on what is correct and incorrect, but it is the job of the board to do the best they can to make sure that every student is pointed towards the truth. They would be failing at their job were they not to do this.<\/p>\n

The question then that arises is whether or not a certain belief system on the origins of mankind is a necessary doctrine that all faculty must embrace or whether it falls into the category where there are several lines of thought which could all be deemed to be orthodox. There seem to be at least two significant reasons why this doctrine is of the utmost importance. First, it is a vital doctrine as the doctrine of salvation is directly impacted by one\u2019s beliefs concerning the first few chapters of Genesis. Romans 5:12 says, \u201cTherefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned.\u201d It has been common orthodox Christian interpretation of this verse as well as the Genesis account that the sin of Adam and Eve brought death not only upon themselves but upon the rest of creation. Death in the world began with Adam\u2019s sin. This is wholly incompatible with a belief in evolution which requires a belief that death has been happening since the inception of life. According to any evolutionary model, death would be occurring billions of years before Adam evolved. How could that be if death came from Adam? Paul\u2019s argument in Romans 5 is that death came by one man so salvation can came by one man. If death did not come by one man, then Paul\u2019s argument concerning salvation by one man begins to fall apart.<\/p>\n

The second main problem with arguing for a more figurative interpretation of Genesis is found in Genesis 3:1. \u201cHas God indeed said??\u201d That was the question Satan asked Adam and Eve. Did God really mean what He said? In their human pride, they thought that they knew more than God and could decide whether He really meant what He said. They were wrong and shortly found that out. Should we not learn from their example and not place ourselves in the position of asking, \u201cDid God really mean what He said\u201d? When we start making parts of the Bible figurative, we have placed ourselves in the role of authority on which parts are true and which are not. We raise ourselves up to the position of deciding which parts God really meant and which ones we can fudge on.<\/p>\n

Several years ago, I was involved in a Bible study with several other guys. We were going through a particular passage in the Bible and discussing it verse by verse. Verse after verse we talked about the passage and how it should be translated literally. This happened all the way up until the very last verse in the chapter. Suddenly when one of the guys read that verse he realized that reading that verse literally would contradict his theological position. So, he claimed that that verse became figurative. When I asked him what made that verse in particular become figurative when he agreed that the rest of the chapter was literal, he could only claim that it was just clear that it was. The fact is that his theology needed that verse to not be literal. What\u2019s my point? When we view parts of Scripture as being figurative we are able to bring our pre-conceived, extra-biblical viewpoints to the Bible and twist the Bible to fit what we believe to be true. Conversely when we accept what the Bible says at face value we are forced to mold our beliefs based on what God says and not on our pre-conceived ideas. We are forced to mold our beliefs in accordance to God\u2019s Word rather than molding His Words to fit our beliefs.<\/p>\n

Once we begin to accept a figurative Bible we open the door to ourselves and to anyone to really believe anything we desire and to figuratize the Bible away to fit their beliefs. We see the destruction this is causing in our culture with the rise of acceptance of divorce, homosexuality, pre-marital sex, greed, and selfishness among Christians. We have stopped taking God literally and figuratized the Bible away to fit what we want to believe to be true. As Christians, we need to stand on the Bible as being the literal words of God that tell us what is true.<\/p>\n

Is there room at a college like Bryan for diversity of thought and opinions? Yes! But only insomuch as those opinions are based on literal readings of the Bible. There will always be different beliefs like Reformed vs. Dispensational, Calvinism vs. Arminianism, etc.; but those differences come from different people\u2019s emphasizing particular Scripture verses over others. These theologies are all based on Scriptures themselves and originate from the Scriptures. While Genesis 1-2 are not intended to be a scientific textbook laying out in scientific terms exactly how the world was created, these chapters explicitly say that mankind was created out of the dust. There is no passage in the Scripture which lends itself to an evolutionary understanding of how the world got here. There is no passage that even hints at the idea that the world evolved. Why, then, would we, like Adam and Eve, tell God that we have the right and ability to determine whether He really meant what He said?<\/p>\n

While the Bible is not a scientific or historical textbook, it has never been proven to be false in any of its scientific or historical claims. Time and again scientists, historians, and archaeologists have thought they have proven the Bible to be untrue based on their finds. And yet every single time as more research is done, the Bible is found to be 100% accurate and correct. Bryan\u2019s motto is \u201cChrist above all.\u201d Why would we not live up to that motto by raising the Book that He wrote above all other books and honoring His Word above the words of all others? Why would we throw out the Words of a God who was there in favor of scientists who were not there to see how the world was created? Why would we accept the claims of a theory which cannot be proven or observed (and to be quite honest has extreme difficulty reconciling what can be observed) over the claims of a book which has never been disproven?<\/p>\n

I am proud of the board for taking a stand for the literalness of Scripture. I know that is an unpopular stance in the world that we live in and that it is rare for an institution of any kind to become more conservative. Most tend to slowly slide down the slope away from God (see Harvard, Yale, etc.) I view this decision as a positive thing whereby Bryan College is affirming that they hold the Scriptures to be the ultimate authority and truly hold \u201cChrist above all.\u201d I pray that the board will continue to make choices, which although may be unpopular, instill within the students that go through Bryan College a love of Scripture and a desire to follow Christ.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By James Kendall Class of 2003 Like many former and current Bryan students, I have been dismayed over the discussion of the board\u2019s desire to change a small part of the statement of belief of Bryan College. Unlike most of those voicing their opinions, though, I have been dismayed at the response of those who […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":11961,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[4684],"tags":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12343"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12343"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12343\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":16119,"href":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12343\/revisions\/16119"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11961"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12343"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12343"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bryantriangle.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12343"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}