Author Related – Threads from Henry's Web

I’m Taking a COVID-19 Vaccine

January 1, 2021 Henry Neufeld Comments 0 Comment

Back in 2016, I was interviewing my mom about her experiences as a nurse. At the time she was 98 years old. She lived to one month short of her 100th birthday.

She had the opportunity to watch as many of the vaccines we use today were introduced. There were many moments of passion, but one of the strongest was when she discussed vaccines.

“Can these people imagine what it was like before these vaccines were introduced?” she asked. “I can’t imagine that anyone would like to go back to what we had before.”

I have a simple point here. Experts make mistakes. Indeed they do. Medical opinions can be wrong. Just so!

But those mistakes and missteps are nothing like the arrogant ignorance of the non-experts.

I get to observe this with people who are ignorant on subjects in which I have some expertise. Jody says she avoids meeting my eyes when a preacher is using Greek or Hebrew in a sermon, because she knows how frequently I will have a fixed expression on my face, trying to avoid revealing what I’m thinking about what is said.

I have read and studied about vaccines, and I’m convinced my mother, and so many other experts, are right. But my conviction isn’t the issue. I’m so very not-an-expert. What I am doing is relying on those people who are.

When I get the vaccine (2nd dose as applicable), and the appropriate time has passed so that I can reasonably expect immunity, I will continue to wear my mask and social distance until we have a level of vaccination that I can expect the persons I come in contact with will not be threatened. Again, I will do this because the best expert opinions say it is likely possible to spread the virus. I see this not as an infringement on my rights, but as my Christian duty.

I could, of course, be wrong. But experience and mountains of data suggest that the best option is to follow the consensus opinion of those with the appropriate expertise.

And on a humorous note, no, I do not include Facebook posts that start out “I am a doctor” or even “I am an epidemiologist.” I have no way to verify that the person making that claim is actually what they claim. But more critically, that single opinion is not the consensus of the experts.

Image by Michal Jarmoluk from Pixabay

Approaches to Bible Reading

January 7, 2011 Comments 5 comments

I want to list some attitudes to Bible reading and some approaches with a brief discussion. I may choose to post some more on this. I think there is too much of an either-or approach to how one goes about reading the Bible. Different times may call for different methods and attitudes.

Fast Reading (Overview)
When I returned to active church membership some years after I left seminary, I chose this approach first. I had kept up some reading so as not to use my language skills, but that was always short passages with focus on grammar and vocabulary. I chose to read the entire Bible (NIV at the time) as I would a novel. It was the book I kept by the bed. I completed the reading in 11 days. I find great value in this approach to help orient oneself in the canonical text, though it would be excessively confusing for someone not already acquainted with the text, I think.
Detailed reading (outlining, exegesis)
This involves slower reading and spending time over specific texts. Most of my reading ends up here. I’ll read longer passages quickly, but some specific text will drag me in and then I’ll spend time dissecting the passage from all points of view.
Passage Overview, Multiple Readings
One of my own approaches to studying shorter passages is to read the passage multiple times. This differs from the fast reading in that I choose a reasonable length passage along with a more temperate pace. Sometimes I read the passage in other languages (not original, usually modern, Spanish, German, French) to slow my reading. The longest passage I’ve done this was was the book of Ezekiel. Normally I choose something more like the Sermon on the Mount.
Original Languages
Obviously this method is for those who know the languages. Here I vary my reading speed and approach much as I do in English. At the slowest level, I’ll go through the scripture indexes in the Greek or Hebrew grammars I have on my shelf and read the sections that cite the verse I’m reading. I might also prepare a personal translation. At the faster level I try to read several chapters in succession, and mark words or constructions I want to go back and look at in more detail.
Devotional Reading
This is simply reading my Bible prayerfully, listening for what God has for me. This is one of the more difficult options for me; I slide into a more technical reading very easily.
Historical Reading
Reading biblical books either as history or from a historical point of view. I find that Samuel-Kings and Chronicles reads very differently when seen devotionally rather than historically.
Literary Reading
This is a fairly broad category. Think of Samuel-Kings. One might read this to study the history of Israel (historically), one might read it looking for theological points, one might read it devotionally (What is God saying to me here?), or one might look at it as literature, looking for characters, plot, and so forth. What type of literature? That’s part of the fun!
Critical reading
Reading the text looking for sources, redactional issues, genre, canonical connections, and so forth. I don’t specialize in one or another of the tools of biblical criticism. I think they all have their place, and they also all have places where they don’t work so well. In my view Form Criticism is probably the most abused by being applied where it just doesn’t apply.
Liturgical reading
Reading as worship or as preparation for worship. In my experience, this is largely lectionary reading. I like to read the lectionary passages for the week several times, and I also have occasionally, but not consistently, read from one or another daily lectionary. I would see this as an attitude to reading as well–reading the Bible as part of the church’s heritage and as part of the church’s worship.
Bible Year, or Reading the Bible Through
Other than my 11 day thing under the first point, of course! Right now I’m trying a year’s reading from a booklet by Robert Murray McCheyne, More Precious Than Gold: READ THE BIBLE IN ONE OR TWO YEARS (Didasko Files),which tends to line up a chapter each from four different places in the Bible. I haven’t warmed to it very much thus far, but I’m going to try it for a while before I decided it doesn’t work for me.

That’s the list for today. I’ve probably left out plenty, and have certainly left out details. I may blog some more about Bible reading. In the meantime I recommend two things: 1) Find and use a Bible reading method that is comfortable for you and 2) Make sure you use some methods other than the one you found in #1.

Choosing a New Church

August 23, 2010 hneufeld Comments 0 Comment

No, I’m not choosing a new church. In fact, I really like my home church, First United Methodist Church in Pensacola. But today I received an e-mail from someone who asked me to share a blog post with my readers. I get few enough such e-mails that I normally at least read them, though I’m not going to link unless I feel there’s something worthwhile.

In this case, while I think the post makes some interesting points, I have a major problem with the entire approach. The post is 10 Tips for Finding a New Church Home.

The points are generally valid. I have some objection to the fact that “mission” is #9. But that is only the minor point.

My major point is that the primary thing we should consider when choosing a church congregation is how we will be able to serve through our membership in that congregation. Now all of the other points in the article may well contribute to our ability to minister. For example, if your church does not have adequate ministries for children, or if you are not challenged and convicted by the sermons, you may find it more difficult to use that congregation as a base for your own ministry.

Christianity is about serving others. When my wife and I have changed congregations, we generally ask first about the mission of the church. In fact, I have quite a “thing” about church mission statements. Most churches have one. What I’ve found in visiting churches is that if the members in general can tell you what the focus of their church is in ministry, you’ll find you have a vibrant church. If the members in general aren’t sure what they are there for, you’ll find the church is dead.

So while this list of tips for finding a new congregation includes many things that should characterize a good church, it looks much too much like the way I’d choose a grocery store.

This leads to point #10: Keep trying until it feels right. I’d suggest instead a prayerful process of selection that ends when you know you will be able to carry out your personal part of the overall mission of the body of Christ as part of that congregation.

I Believe Some Bizarre Things

July 23, 2010 hneufeld Comments 0 Comment

The Sunday School class I currently attend uses a random selection process for the questions we’ll discuss. Class members put questions in a container, and we draw a question for each week. Last week the question was: Why am I such a doubting Thomas?

As we were discussing how much we doubted, what we doubted, and why, someone commented that what we believe as Christians really is quite bizarre if you haven’t gotten used to it. Most commonly we would cite things such as the resurrection. I believe that one person who died about 2,000 years ago didn’t stay dead, but came back to life. That’s a fairly bizarre thing to believe, or better to base an entire system of belief on.

The person who made the comment cited the belief that Jesus died for our sins and thus we can have salvation. I believe that’s equally bizarre. Who these days would think of such a thing? The idea of atonement was much more common in the ancient world, but not so much in western civilization today.

And that brought another question, which seemed to be addressed to me. Did Christianity seem less bizarre back in the first century. My answer is “yes,” though different things would seem bizarre and likely in different ways. As I’ve already mentioned, the atonement would seem more natural, provided one was drawing on a range of ideas prevalent in the ancient world, but there are aspects of it that are odd. For example, the idea of a single, universal atonement, reconciling the whole world to God, was unique to Christianity, I believe.

I don’t think it came out of thin air. There are many, many parallels that come close, but I think the full idea of atonement as expressed especially by Paul, is unique.

But what first comes to our modern, or even slightly post-modern minds, is generally the question of miracles. But there is where I think we differ less from the ancients than we generally think. We imagine that they were much more naive about miracles in general than we are, that they would tend to believe whatever miracle might be claimed. I see little evidence for this. In fact, the resurrection was very hard for either Greeks or Jews to believe, and was often a stumbling block, as noted, for example, in Acts 17:32.

I observe two things. First, there are quite a number of miracle stories even today, and plenty of people to believe in them. Second, there is plenty of evidence of ancient people who were quite unwilling to believe miracle stories. In both cases, such belief tends to be easier regarding miracle stories in one’s own religious tradition than in those of others. As a Christian, I find it much easier to accept the idea that Jesus ascended to heaven than that Muhammad did.

I’d suggest that this has a substantial impact on the way I read the Bible, as opposed to how I might read other literature, especially religious literature. While I look at evidence regarding historical events related to my faith, at some of the most critical points, it is faith, without that much sight involved.

One important reason to recognize this, I think, is that it will impact the way we relate to other people. When we understand that, in a sense, one must put on a whole new religious culture before our religious faith makes sense, we may be somewhat more charitable. I’m afraid I may lean the other way. I find doubt and even rejection of things I hold dear quite reasonable, despite the depth of my own commitment to those beliefs.

So I may not believe at least six impossible things before breakfast every morning, I do believe some things that, to someone outside my faith tradition, are bizarre.