Anti-Vaxxers Take the Bible Out of Context
Taking the Bible out of context to apply its content to a specific, unrelated situation is a common occurrence in every denomination or sect of Christianity. In the Evangelical tradition in which I grew up, it is a particularly grievous offense since one of the doctrinal tennets on which the denomination rests involves Biblical integrity, accepting the traditional sixty-six books of the third century canon of the Old and New Testaments in the Protestant context of Sola Scriptura, the sole authority for Christian faith and practice.
As a result of that belief, a significant amount of the offerings given to the church are devoted to the theological education of its pastors, church leaders and missionaries, an instruction that comes from the Apostle Paul, "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved by him, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly explaining the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:I5, NRSV). In that particular denomination, that means earning a graduate level degree requiring more than 80 credit hours of study, three years for those who go full time, on top of a bachelor's degree, including extensive study in Greek and Hebrew to examine the Biblical text in its original languges, historical studies which include Latin studies and history, the theology and history of Catholicism, Orthodox Christianity and the Reformation, archaological backgrounds and Greek and Roman politics, educational courses in research writing, sermon construction and preparation and public speaking and about 20 hours of behaviorial science. The purpose of all of that is to prevent lifting "verses", which are only textual reference points and not part of the original text, out of their context and applying them in ways that the Bible's writers never intended and which do not represent any form of Christian faith or practice.
In the same paragraph in which Paul outlines the correct interpretation of scripture, he says, "Avoid profane chatter for it will lead people into more and more impiety and their talk will spread like gangrene." (2 Timothy 2:I6-I7a NRSV). The context of that term in bold, "profane chatter," is exactly the kind of thing that John Fea, in the cited article from RNS, is referencing. It's a conversation which takes something from Christian theology or doctrine, and falsely or incorrectly attributes it or uses it to endorse something that isn't consistent with the context.
Even some of the most conservative theological schools, which would include Messiah College, where Dr. John Fea, the author of the article I cited at the top is a professor, recognize the fact that literal interpretations and applications of Biblical doctrine can only occur within a spiritual or theological context. Specific situations which are addressed within the context of the groups or individuals to whom parts of the text were written, no longer exist so interpretation and application of any specific teaching requires attaching it to a principle that is corroborrated elsewhere.
There's nothing that annoys me more than constant references to "this verse" or "that verse," or "my life verse" or "citing chapter and verse." The chapters and verses are not divisions of the original text, they evolved over time as reference points, becoming standard during the mid-fourteenth century. A single verse, lifted out of the text, becomes an easy avenue to "profane chatter." We have some excellent translations in English, the Revised Standard Version being the best of the best, because translators worked for years on understanding the context of the text in its original language in order to render it accurately in other languages.
So this "cherry picking" by anti-vaxxers is nothing more than profane chatter. It is, in fact, an embarassment to those who are pushing it because it isn't a demonstration of the kind of study necessary to meet the standard of approval. Those who engage in it should be ashamed. It comes from a long tradition of anti-education, anti-intellectual bias that is rooted in American Christianity, going back to revivalist movements which led to development and growth of churches beyond any denomination's ability to provide trained, educated pastors and church leaders.
A Biblical Case For Getting Vaccinated and Wearing a Mask
There isn't a situation in any of the Bible's narratives that actually deals directly with healing arts. While there are accounts of miraculous healings, a few in the Old Testament but mostly associated directly with Jesus or the Apostles, there is nothing there on which to build a case against the use of human medical knowledge. In fact, if you accept the standard theological premise that God is sovereign, which is virtually universal among Protestants and Evangelicals alike, then the medical knowledge that has developed and accumulated among human beings over time is the discovery of creation itself through divine revelation. Some use the term, "Common grace."
Luke, the writer of one of the gospel accounts, was a physician, trained in the healing arts known to those in his day. He travelled with Paul and apparently, from accounts in the book of Acts, relied on his knowledge as such. Paul himself advised his protege, Timothy, to "take a little wine for your stomach's sake," words that are in the Biblical text in one of his letters. And it would be taking the scripture out of context to build a case for vaccination on that evidence alone. But it does refute the anti-vax case from a Biblical perspective.
Human intellect, equipped with its own free will is, according to Genesis, that part of each one of us that is created in the image of God himself. So in the process of discovering how the human body works, how it can be healed, stimulated, sedated, be a source of either intense pain or extreme pleasure, free will comes into play and choices can be made that reflect either good or evil.
The evidence that healing physical ailments and relieving pain is one of the greatest acts of mercy, representing absolute goodness, is the fact that physical healing was a cornerstone of Jesus' ministry. With few exceptions, Jesus healed people wherever he went. It was the door that opened people's lives to the gospel. There was no prerequisite required to receive it and no payment required in exchange for it. So if you accept God's sovereignty, his ex nihilo creation, and his gift of free will, then the development of vaccines to prevent devastating, contagious diseases is common grace, and is a direct act of his will. It is an expression of his desire to heal, to relieve human suffering and pain, and is a demonstration of divine mercy.
And so, knowing what we know about the mutually beneficial effects of vaccinations in eradicating disease, humans who wish to exercise that higher order good and mercy can do so by their own participation. Specifically, the more people who are vaccinated, the less likelihood there is that this current virus will mutate. Vaccinated people stop its spread, preventing others from getting sick and in the random way this virus attacks some, but not others, preventing death as well. Those who will survive this because of the vaccinations are just as much a part of God's sovereign will as those who, in their fatalism, simply accept that it's their time to die. Grace and mercy are sovereign, fatalism is profane chatter.
I will study the way that is blameless. When shall I attain it? I will walk with integrity of heart within my house; I will not set before my eyes anything that is base. I hate the work of those who fall away; it shall not cling to me. Perverseness of heart shall be far from me; I will know nothing of evil. Psalm I0I:2-4
Anyone, then, who knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, commits sin. James 4:I7
More specifically, vaccinations have been around for a long time and requiring citizens to get them in order to eradicate devastating illnesses has been codified into law on more than one occasion, and upheld by the courts in the United States. Romans I3:I-7, I Peter 2:I3-I7 and Titus 3:I-2, in their correctly interpeted context, connect the sovereignty of God to the authority of governments, specifically in this case, the undemocratic, dictatorial, pagan Roman government. They are the law and the obediance of Christians is a matter of respect for God's sovereign power which two of the early church's apostles acknowledged. You and I are both more than likely alive today because of medical research and the production of vaccines mandated by government, against a whole variety of contagious, deadly viral and bacterial diseases.
The government, permitted to act by sovereign God, says wear a mask to protect others from the spread of coronavirus. That is an inherently "good" act and the Christian principle that supports it is found in Philippians 2:3-5. That's where the definition of Christ-likeness is found, by the way. So in context, it is correct to say that wearing a mask to protect others from a contagious virus is Christlike. To not wear one is selfish.
Paradigm Shifts and Great Awakenings
William Miller was a Baptist lay preacher and prosperous farmer in northeastern New York whose studies of the book of Daniel, not guided by anything but his own emotion and intellect, and concluded, based on his examination of what he called the "2,300 Day Prophecy," that the second coming of Jesus would occur in I843. It's a long story, worth researching. But built on the emotional fervor of the Second Great Awakening, which was occurring at that time, this "profane chatter" did indeed spread like gangrene. Using the print media of his day, and conducting preaching and revival meetings, Miller succeeded in convincing thousands of his prediction, and also succeeded in gutting churches of members who left because their preachers and pastors wouldn't buy what Miller was selling.
Influenced by others who joined in the movement, the date October 22, I844 was set for Christ's return. The madness that accompanied preparations for this event, and the disappointment that followed when it didn't happen was incredible. While most people simply waited around for it to happen, some sold their property and possessions, and there were accounts of people leaping out of windows and trees to time their jump with the resurrection in the moments before midnight. There were those who came to their senses when it was over, but there were literally thousands of others who continued to pursue setting dates, insisting that the book of Daniel accurately predicted the exact time of Jesus' second coming. Profane chatter that spreads like gangrene.
From my perspective, what I see happening among Evangelicals, not only in the anti-vax, anti-mask positions, but in the whole fascination with and acceptance of a man who is evil incarnate in his behavior as much as any public figure has ever been in America, is another Millerite movement. That's the only explanation for the gross inconsistency they demonstrate when it comes to the claims of their faith on issues such as this. Profane chatter that spreads like gangrene.
No comments:
Post a Comment