Until we agree on Bible, we’ll remain house divided

What do you believe about the Bible? Do you believe it to be God-inspired, dependable and authoritative? Do you believe it so strongly that you submit your mind and life to the teachings of scripture?
James Billings recently asked with glaring clarity the question that is beneath all other questions and debates plaguing the church today (“We can’t find clear ‘truth’ in our ancient scriptures,” Oct. 28): “What does the Bible—written some 2,000 years ago by people little better educated than peasants—have for us today as we cope with a vastly more complex world of science, engineering and huge cities?”
While Mr. Billings acknowledges the Bible is “a beautiful book,” he suggests it is neither authoritative nor helpful to many of the issues we wrestle with today. While doubting scripture, he quotes from theologians such as Hans Kung and Reinhold Niebuhr as dependable authorities.
Mr. Billings’ comments are representative of many in the church who think of the Bible as a less than dependable witness to eternal truth in the 21st century, convinced that we have superior insights available through more recent theological minds and perhaps even societal trends.
George Ricker suggested the same thing in an article presenting a flurry of issues including polygamy, Levirate marriage, concubinage, divorce, kosher food laws, Old Testament stories of killing, Paul’s supposedly negative view of women and homosexuality (“Our perceptions of God’s intentions keep evolving,” Oct. 28).
He does not, however, cite any responsible biblical scholarship that interprets these issues in historical context. He lifts ancient texts, plops them into our 21st century setting and declares them solely human, fallible and obsolete.
Like Mr. Billings, Mr Ricker finds better teaching in the more recent theological writings of Paul Tillich. We must, I guess, be more open to and trusting of “new truth” than to plain biblical teaching.
Other United Methodists find themselves more akin to John Wesley, who referred to himself as “a man of one book.” Though he drew extensively on the richness of tradition, experience and reason, he used these tools in the interpretation and application of scripture, not as independent sources of truth that could overrule scripture.
Wesley’s conviction is reflected in The Book of Discipline, which states, “Scripture is primary, revealing the word of God, ‘so far as it is necessary for our salvation.’ Therefore, our theological task, in both its critical and constructive aspects, focuses on disciplined study of the Bible. … Scripture is the primary source and criterion for Christian doctrine” (Paragraph 104).
This statement is not a call for a narrow fundamentalism but the insistence that we must take the Bible more seriously than simply “a beautiful book” from a bygone era that can be corrected by more modern ideas.
We United Methodists argue endlessly about such things as homosexuality, usually talking past each other rather than to each other. As long as we have such differing views of the inspiration, reliability and authority of the Bible, we will remain a house divided.
Is the Bible divinely inspired, dependable and authoritative? If not, what is the Bible worth? From what source(s) shall we draw distinctly Christian insights? If you believe the Bible is inspired, dependable and authoritative, does it shape your life?