The Big Picture

As a Christian do you understand the "big picture" presented in the New Testament or do you have a fragmentary view?

How do you understand the New Testament, from the perspective of the "big picture" or based on scriptural fragments?

Picture this fictional Christian for a moment. His name is Joe Smith. Joe reads the King James Version of the Bible and considers it the authoritative literal word of God. Joe does not understand that the Bible was not authored in English and that there are serious difficulties is translating from the original non-English manuscripts into an English counterpart. That is to say, he knows there are original manuscripts in the Greek and Hebrew but he does not comprehend the difficulties involved in transferring the intent of these writings into a modern day "equivalent".

Joe has somehow convinced himself that God would not let a situation come about where the once dominant English translation called the King James Version could be considered "weak" in conveying the intent of the writers such as Paul, Luke, John, James, and others. There are other Christians that Joe associates with that favor the NIV or some other version better than the King James Version. But Joe and most of these others he associates with have this fixated attitude that they simply have to narrow in on some verse in their favorite English translation and God as the Holy Spirit will simply convey to them the intent being conveyed by the writer.

Associated with Joe and his crowd are a few that like to use the interlinear Greek New Testament and a Lexicon so they can check out a kind of word for word translation for a given verse that interests them. But even these few don't realize that a synchronized word for word translation can fail to convey the writer's intent.

These people like Joe and his associates will for example, pick a verse and ask themselves the question, "What does this verse mean to me?" When they do this they are misapplying the intent. For example, if they pick the verse, "women should be silent in church". Most of them will apply that verse literally to all the women they know unless of course they find some other verse that causes them to moderate this view. They have developed, on the basis of a pick and choose process, an inadequate understanding of the writers intent and misapplied their perceived meaning (to them) to become a doctrine they ruthlessly apply.

In all of this they have not considered the context, the situation that was being addressed by the writer, the people and their background involved in this situation, the problems coming out of this situation, the cultural background, education, and society that these people in this situation came out of. They have failed to consider the idioms, figures of speech, assumptions, and other teachings and the different situations in which these relevant teachings were applied. In short they have failed first of all to identify the block of discourse that deals with a specific situation or situations and the place the verse they are considering occupies within that discourse. Within that discourse block they have failed to consider how the other verses bear on the meaning of the verse they are considering. In addition, they have failed to consider other related discourse blocks by the same and other writers while also examining for each the cross impact of verses. Then they had failed to apply a studied knowledge of the culture, language, teachings and other issues mentioned above. And finally they have failed to correlate this subject matter between all related subject matter discourse blocks.

For this particular situation the women involved came out of a religious cult where the worship of the goddess involved sexual rites and a frenzy of noise with meaningless yelling and screaming. They were uneducated and unfamiliar with the scriptures and had intellectual problems because of poor or no education most of whom could not read or write or even intelligently communicate. In addition the society they were living in was very carnal and superstitious in character. In other words, these particular women were incapable of contributing to the activities of fellowship. They were therefore advised by Paul to keep quiet and their husbands would later convey to them the significance of the church activities so they could begin to acquire a proper understanding of church teachings and expected behavior.

We simply have to turn to the book of Acts to see just the opposite situation where a woman acting very much as a church elder takes a visiting apostle/preacher (not one of the twelve) and kindly and gently corrects various misunderstandings and provides various teachings. In fact, the church activity was taking place in her home. Look it up for yourself in the book of Acts. But there is much more in the way of discourse sections that bear on this subject. The point I am trying to make here is that those that pick and chose their way through the scriptures with out applying discourse analysis of the sort explained here are not only dangerous to themselves but also to others and the church as a whole. They may be well meaning but they have been improperly or inadequately prepared to be a witness of Christ. It is also important to note at this point that it is the responsibility of so-called church leadership to prepare those in the church to be intelligent and well informed witnesses of the love of Christ and the kind of fellowship between Christians that that love demands.

Unfortunately, a lot of bible schools and churches that profess to accept the bible and/or New Testament as the authoritative reference in their life are doing just the opposite. They have adopted the fragmentary approach, which de-emphasizes the discourse analysis approach mentioned above. By so doing they make their own minds their God by imbibing faulty information as the basis of their thinking. They create for themselves a mental trap closing off the advance of truth from the Holy Spirit because of the gross misunderstanding they have adopted as doctrine. Thereafter, their minds become a filter accepting only those that teach what they have decided is doctrinally correct. Then they advance into church leadership and prepare others to think exactly the same way as they think with everyone missing the "big picture" that is right in front of their eyes as they read the scriptures.

The big picture if of course a picture where Christ is central and very few would disagree regarding that statement. We could even say that most would agree that the big picture starts with the requirements of salvation involving forgiveness, repentance, transformation, and eternal life. But when we get into the main issue of the character of transformation and our responsibilities in that regard that is when we see the greatest breakdown in agreement and understanding.

Transformation involves a process of mind alteration from the old carnal natural mind to a mind considered to be Christ Like in character. To be so we must develop and exhibit the same general attitudes and motivations and behavior as Christ. Christ has a specific role as savior. We as Christians also have specific roles as co-workers with Christ and our roles and contribution in this regard can significantly differ.

That is to say we must each embark on an experience with God that makes our minds an extension of the Divine Mind, as was the mind of Christ. This means that the main characteristic of our mind must be the same as the main characteristic of the Divine Mind. Christ made it very clear after his resurrection that if we have the love (caring) of God we do so through a "oneness" with God. This "oneness" is explained in other articles. In addition, the proof that we have such "oneness" is evident in our fellowship with one another.

This issue of fellowship between Christians is acknowledged by most Christians and then quickly swept under the carpet so they can continue to collide over doctrines, distrust of one another, compete for members to their congregations, practice deceit and jealousy and other conflicts, and so on. Christian fellowship is to be a way of life for Christians. It is not just a doctrine, it is a God centered caring social intercourse between Christians and is to be our main preoccupation. In other words, those that live Christian lives in disregard of this experience risk their salvation because they do not exhibit the love (caring) of God. The Caring of God is firstly aimed at the transformation of each Christian individual. Christians must see Christ active in the lives of other Christians and submit (cooperate and support that activity providing leadership and counsel to one another in that regard) to one another. Over and over and over again, all through the New Testament we have writers like Paul, Peter, John, and others providing correction, teaching, encouragement, warning, hope, and testimony to the kind of mental character Christians should possess. We are to take upon ourselves the mind of Christ in a powerful and binding relationship with other believers. We are to foster this growth in one another. Our mind, the thoughts and feeling thereof are to manifest as attitudes, motivations, and behavior that is Christ like and demonstrate his social orientation to others, both his followers and those in the world. Relative to fellowship, one Christian with another, this is to manifest as caring typified by recognizing Christ in others as we engage each other in a collaborative, supportive, trusting, and honest sharing done in an intimate social discourse called "church". Church leaders are to prepare members of the church for this type of interaction. This Divine Fellowship, as I call it, is the Body of Christ. There is more on this in other articles.

This Divine Fellowship is the true witness by example and word (walking the talk) of the Living Christ who said 3 times after his resurrection to Peter (who symbolizes the average Christian), "If you love me then care for my sheep". But Peter also symbolizes church leadership where the role is to prepare Christians for Divine Fellowship. The discourse sections relevant to this subject make it very clear that our relationship or experience with God implies a necessary relationship with one another. In other words the good news or gospel is the news of the Living and Saving Christ as demonstrated in the Divine Fellowship of Believers. All the surrounding subject matter and teachings are towards one single objective, which is the Divine Fellowship of Believers, being maintained as previously explained in this very unique kind of social intercourse.

The big picture is therefore the Divine Fellowship of Believers the proof and witness of the Living Christ.

Our responsibility as Christians is for each of us to show leadership in ensuring that the "big picture" is truly a picture of the Living Christ and not a man made disguise to justify practices in the form of attitudes, motivations and behavior that are anti Christ (not Christ Like). The New Reality of being joined to God is only complete if we are also so joined to other believers. The New Reality is the Divine Fellowship that cares for the transformation of those individuals within it. It is the collective relationship operating according to an intimate and trusting social discourse where God is all in all and fosters the individual personal relationship or experience each believer has with God.

Most Christians have it wrong. They think their personal relationship with God is somehow exclusive as a "me and God" relationship. They think interaction between them and other Christians and their fellow man is only a secondary concern. But the New Testament is crystal clear on this. The object of being a Christian is to be a co-worker with Christ in the kingdom of God. The term kingdom of God is an analogy, which refers to our social relationship with one another. We are to be citizens together in this kingdom. To use another analogy, we are to be a close knit family having one Father. If we make Christianity anything other than this then we act in defiance of the Holy Spirit and His love is not in us and we are not His.

In this connection, remember that all so-called love is not the love of God. We must identify with the Love of God - that is the way God expresses His caring. Other kinds of caring or love can lead us away from the purpose and plan of God. Love as lust for fleshly desires and pleasures, self indulgence, material goods, status before men, money, power over others, and so on are all forms of love or caring that do not identify with God. The Love of God is expressed by being a citizen of the Kingdom of God, a member of the family where we have one Father. This is an intimate and trusting social discourse where we care for one another's transformation and well being in Christ. We also demonstrate this caring, individually and collectively, as the Divine Fellowship. We do this by both word and example, as a testimony, so the world can see our love for one another which is the Love of God.