My last post on how we should understand the Bible seems to take almost a pre-modern view where its authority is assumed. However, for the last 500 years the mantra of Western thought has been to question all authority, including the Church, the Bible, education, family, and government, just to name a few. This begs the question that many have asked and many more will continue to ask, namely “Why should we accept the Bible as authoritative?”
This question of authority deals with foundation. What is the foundation we base our beliefs and morals? Or in other words, where do we begin? And so, for a few posts, here is my present attempt at answering that question.
Before we can answer why the Bible is authoritative, we need to look at this idea of authority. Tim Keller makes the following important observation:
“The root idea of modernity (even more fundamental than confidence in rationality) is the overturning of all authority outside of the self. In the 18th century, European Enlightenment thinkers insisted that the modern person must question all tradition, revelation, and external authority by subjecting them to the supreme court of his or her own reason and intuition. We are our own moral authority.” [1]
Many today claim that we are living in a “post-modern” culture – that we have moved past the vestiges of modernity. And in many ways that is true. Keller argues, however, that rather than being “post-modern”, we are living in a type of “hyper-modernity” because our ideas of authority being rooted in the self are stronger than ever. He continues:
Modern society continued to be dominated by relatively stable institutions for a long time. People still were able to root their identities to a great degree in family and clan, in local civic communities, and in their work or vocation. Yet now even these institutions seem to be passing, worn away by the “acid” of the modern principle, namely individual happiness and autonomy must come before anything else.
The traditional roles of society (“Christian”, “father”, “lawyer”) have been worn away and replaced by the authoritative and autonomous self. You can notice this in conversation as well – that we all make the assumption that there is no true authority outside of the self. The individual autonomous self is the ultimate authority of morality, ethics, and truth. This assumption is what led to our original questioning of the Bible’s authority.
Rather than blindly assume authority of the self, we do need to also question whether it ought to be our ultimate authority. Does the individual self have the capabilities to determine truth by her or himself? Is this assumption even possible to live with? How does relying on the self for authority influence our ideas of freedom and identity? Can we honestly say that the veracity of morality can be determined from within?
Much more could be said about this (and perhaps needs to be said), but regardless, we must realize our dependence on self for authority.
The following song lyrics make a similar statement:
You may be an ambassador to England or France,
You may like to gamble, you might like to dance,
You may be the heavyweight champion of the world,
You may be a socialite with a long string of pearlsBut you’re gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed
You’re gonna have to serve somebody,
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you’re gonna have to serve somebody.–Bob Dylan
We do serve somebody, and it might ourselves. We must all submit to some type of authority whether we recognize it or not.
June 14, 2011 at 10:53 am |
I agree with you that much of the authority found in the scope of post-modernity is self based. I don’t think that the same argument can be made for Modernity; it is a post-modern view to say that modernity is based on self authority. To the Modern, modernism is based on 3rd party authority. In Modernity we gave all authority to Imperialism with the assumption that Science and the laws of our world are exterior to our own influence. In so much as post-modernism is a critique of modernism we have reclaimed much of that authority for ourselves.
You are right to say that, for many, the ultimate authority is self and I am interested to see where you go with the question of why we should give authority to the Bible. That is a question I have asked many times and never come up with more than simply, “You must give authority to something.” Which is not satisfactory, to me.
You can count on my reading what you have to say here. I hope you blow my mind.
June 14, 2011 at 10:15 pm |
Explain further. What are some 3rd party authorities that modernism is based on? And what do you mean by Imperialism?
… don’t hold your breath.
June 15, 2011 at 8:54 pm |
To those in the enlightenment, Reason reigned as king, something determined by the self. Before then, you have others like Decartes with his most famous line “I think; therefore, I am.” His proven existence was based completely on the self. The reformation was a turn from traditional authorities to a more personal faith where each individual could read the Bible and interpret it themselves. This of course has had its benefits but has also led to the fragmentation of Protestantism. The multitude of denominations is because of authority being placed on the self.
But to argue about post-modernism verses modernism is secondary. The main point I wanted to make is that there is no unbiased perspective that can avoid authority. We all submit (and serve) some type of authority, and today the emphasis is more and more on the self.
June 15, 2011 at 5:55 am |
i get the sense the even writers of the bible had thought about the authority of self. in the older scriptures, wily and headstrong people were asked to make changes in the world according to god’s vision. in the case of abraham, moses, elijah, jacob (and probably almost every other), god couldn’t just give a command and these people follow without question. that is important to me. god already knew this about them, he knew their autonomous and self-sufficient natures and when he called them out, he dealt with those natures in real conversations (ex: abraham asking for sodom, moses arguing his worth, elijah complaining that god had given him an impossible task, and jacob actually wrestling with god). he didn’t just say “look, who’s the authority here? you or almighty me?”
this attitude towards the self is also apparent in the new testament. the christians are told to “test the spirits” and they seem comfortable assuming authority to work out ethical guidelines for living together (conference about jewish/greek customs). jesus tells his listeners to ask, even to the point of obstinacy (in the parable of the woman who annoys the judge until he grants her wish).
What I think is important in all of these examples is the context. In the old testament God sent individuals to lead a community. He used the example of the one relationship to show the whole community how he wanted to relate to them. In mutual respect and with candid rapport. In the new testament, many of the statements are made to a group of people. You could read “test the spirits together” or “ask god together.” The writers believed the spirit of God dwelled in the community, all together. What made the community holy, though, was not a kind of groupthink directed by a domineering spirit. Each individual was participating in that relationship with God in a unique way (see 1 Cor 12), according to the self created by God.
People often feel their own authority as a natural thing bc it is granted by God. It’s the origin of our freedom, to choose, to reject, to love. Alone, self authority is nothing special and sometimes destructive. In relationship with God it becomes dynamic. As iron sharpens iron (if you are comfortable believing that God relates to us in this mutual respect). In relationship with a community this self-authority acts as a revelation of God to one another.
June 15, 2011 at 9:08 pm |
Thanks for your thoughtful response.
You make some great points, and I will try to address some of this in future posts. Make sure I fully respond to your ideas. It is interesting though that you have shown the importance and authority of the self by looking at the Bible. In doing so, you place the authority of the Bible above authority of the self. My tendency is to do the same thing but in reverse by rationalizing the Bible’s authority with reasons, hence the dominance of authoritative self. I appreciate your approach.