The Bible in Christian Education

Is it possible to be biblical, yet realistic and relevant? This is a crucial and haunting question which demands honest confrontation by those engaged in Christian education. We cannot escape it, either by ignoring it, or by quickly and glibly answering in the affirmative, as if the question presents no real problem worthy of careful consideration.

The fact is that there are many who have answered the question negatively. As a consequence they are essentially “post-biblical” in their approach to Christian education. To be sure, they make use of certain broad biblical ideas which are deemed valuable, such as the fact that God is Creator, or that Jesus’ life represents the ideal for humanity. But they do not make a vital mastery of the Bible their ideal. For they are convinced that placing the Bible at the center of Christian education means turning back the clock to the prescientific world of the first century or of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It means, as they see it, betraying historic developments not only in the physical sciences but also in the human sciences, that is, in anthropology, psychology, sociology, and philosophy. To their minds such an idea also means turning our backs on the burning personal and social problems of our day. They hold that the hydrogen-space age is vastly different from that of the Bible, and that we cannot hope to deal with its challenges and threats within a biblical focus.

Fortunately, even in such an approach more biblical ideas are utilized than is consciously realized either by the educators or the educated. Essentially, however, this approach resorts to moralizing, psychologizing, culturing, analyzing, socializing, legalizing, and philosophizing. The result is a natural, common sense theology which is often sound as far as human wisdom goes and is frequently not unbiblical. For who can say that discourses on the appreciation of nature and of art, or on the requisites for mental health, or on the conditions for happy family life are opposed to the Scriptures? But such discourses may well be nonbiblical, in so far as they are based primarily on the word of man. They frequently do not reflect what is essential and distinctive to the biblical faith, and are serviceable equally to non-Christian and Christian. What is lacking is the Pauline concept that whatever is done must be done unto the Lord, with all that such an injunction means and implies.

The Bible And Relevance

Those of us who are biblically concerned are all too quick to point out these deficiencies without at the same time appreciating the values of such an approach. For it embodies a highly commendable desire that Christianity speak decisively to our times. It also bespeaks a judgment, namely, that those who are committed to the primacy of the Bible in Christian education have either failed to relate it to contemporary life, or have done so in such a way as to emerge with vague panaceas which do not really speak to its problems, or with religious, ethical, political, social views which are not distinctively different from the views of those to whom the Bible is unknown. If the study of the Bible leads us to turn our backs on this world, because this world is hopeless and our concern is for the next, or if it results in naïve prescriptions such as the view that prayer solves all problems, or if it issues in basically the same positions and practices with respect to race, nationalism, business and labor ethics, education, politics, marriage, peace and nuclear war, and life under God as those have who do not focus on the Bible, then the question is whether we are right in insisting on the indispensability of the Scriptures in Christian education and in devoting our time and energies to giving the Bible a central place in it. Wisdom is justified by her children. The wisdom of a bibliocentric approach to Christian education will be justified if it makes a vital difference in life, both in its Godward and its manward aspects. The biblical focus will be vindicated if it is shown to be distinctive and indispensable in wrestling with the most pressing problems of the twentieth century.

Such is our task. It is demanding but not impossible, with God’s help. To perform it we must avoid two pitfalls: that of being relevant but nonbiblical, and that of being seemingly biblical but nonrelevant. To steer such a course requires in turn two concerns as regards the use of the Bible: our attitude toward the Bible, and our techniques in its use.

A Proper Attitude

A proper biblical attitude will combine in delicate balance the spirit of conservation and of adaptation. It is our difficult obligation to discover what is essentially and uniquely biblical, and especially what is essentially and uniquely Christian as revealed in the New Testament, and we must conserve its values at all costs, while at the same time adapting ourselves to the changing knowledge and needs of men. In brief, we must find the present, living Word in the past, written Word. For history has amply shown that the failure either to conserve or to adapt has the same result: the Bible no longer has a radical and controlling influence on life. And if the Bible does not speak to life, then whether one’s orientation is biblical or nonbiblical is of no real consequence. The issue is whether the Bible makes a difference! And if it is to make a difference, we must remain in the presence of two worlds: the biblical world and ours. We cannot use the Bible in the twentieth century in the same way as we would use it if we were living in the first century. We do live in a different world. We must adapt to our world while still conserving what is distinctively biblical, else we defeat our purpose.

In order to implement this basic attitude, we need to develop sound and profound study techniques. Two key words come to mind in this connection: penetrate and relate. It is necessary to penetrate beneath the surface of biblical language, statements, and propositions to the experience of God in Christ which is revealed there and which may be realized here and now. It is also necessary to relate such experience to the issues and opportunities of our own times so as to relive it in the twentieth century.

The ability to penetrate beneath the surface of Scripture hinges on the ability to note carefully the crucial words, facts, and relationships of scriptural passages, to ask probing questions about our findings, and to provide at least some profound answers to our questions.

The crux of the matter lies in developing the Socratic art of questioning. The Platonic dialogue Laches, which, incidentally, is worth reading in this connection, tells us how Socrates, when confronted by those who claimed to be courageous, insisted on asking, “What is courage?” And he refused to be satisfied with the superficial concepts of courage extant in his time. He insisted on careful and profound definitions. Like him, we too need to insist on such definitions of biblical language and experiences. The great danger is that a so-called biblical, Christian education will result in the mere parroting of biblical expressions as if they have some inherent magical value, even though they cannot be expressed in contemporary, living language. Too many people who have supposedly received a biblical education are like the woman who thought she had arrived and took it upon herself to criticize a teacher for not having discussed the new birth in a certain connection; but when she was asked, “What is the new birth?,” she replied, “You know, the new birth!” She did not recognize the essence of the experience simply because certain phrases were not used. Such an example could be multiplied many times. We should learn from it to be careful not to equate biblical symbols with biblical realities. When we study the new birth, we must teach our people to ask: What is the new birth? How does it occur? When? Who is born again? Why is it necessary for eternal life? What does it assume and imply? And we must help them not be satisfied with superficial answers. We must teach people to be unrelenting and scrupulous in their pursuit of answers to such questions.

Having penetrated the surface of biblical language, it is then our task to learn how to relate our findings to our day. This process involves several aspects.

Timeless Truths

The first is the decision as to whether the truths we find are timeless in their value and therefore capable of being related to our times. For the Bible contains certain elements which are culturally conditioned and which therefore should not be transferred to a different culture. Most of us would hold that Paul’s exhortation that women wear veils in church (1 Cor. 11) is of this sort. To discover which truths are time-bound we need to gain an intimate acquaintance with the historical background of the Bible and to learn to compare it with our own day to find what cultural differences exist if any. In order to find supracultural truths we must become adept at finding those basic biblical principles which are concretized in Scripture. This takes us back to the need to probe Scripture in depth as a means of discovering truths which are most fundamental and relevant.

Beyond this it is necessary to become well acquainted with the contemporary problems and actually to bring to bear our Christian convictions upon them. It is at this point that the instrumentalism of John Dewey proves helpful by suggesting the problem and project approaches to the learning process. It would be salutary to begin a substantial number of our Bible lessons with the discussion in depth of a present-day issue to which a Scriptural passage is related, and then to find how the passage speaks to that issue. Such an approach provides excellent preparation for projects which are designed to provide an opportunity for putting into effect what is learned. One suspects that it is at this point where the use of the Bible meets its acid test. Maybe what we really need is less biblical sermonizing and discussion, and more biblical practice. And this practice needs to extend beyond the usual “city mission” application of the Christian gospel, as good as that may be. It needs to cover the whole of life.

To accomplish these goals biblical education must involve a constant, long-range approach. A sporadic, hit-and-miss approach may do more harm than good. Further, an effective approach will actively engage members of the group in thoughtful study and in conscientious implementation. There are no shortcuts to the kind of Bible study which makes a difference.

A challenge faces those of us who steadfastly claim that the Bible is an indispensable means of grace. The Scriptures themselves outline the challenge: shall we be true prophets or pseudo-prophets? The pseudo-prophets described in Scripture claimed to speak in behalf of God, but they spoke the false words of man which could not meet the test of their times. On the other hand, the true prophets heard the living God speak, and they spoke genuinely in his behalf to the problems of their day. They were true to God and they were true to their times. We can do no less as we use the Bible in Christian education.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.