Difficult Topics and Doubting Thomas

I had some great discussions today with coworkers about the authorship of the Pentateuch and how to handle such topics in a school setting like ours. It reminded me of something I wrote a while ago on how difficult topics should be treated: 

It is undoubtable in the process of continued learning that many staff will wrestle with difficult passages and theological quandaries that have no simple or immediate answer. These discussions consist of but are not limited to topics such as: creation/evolution, historical adam, mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, historiography and the Bible, inerrancy and authority of scripture, the nature of the historical Jesus, justification by faith, gender roles in ministry and marriage, calvinism/arminiasm, the nature of God’s foreknowledge and various views of the second coming. Those who think there are only two views on all of these above issues, my view and the wrong view or the traditional view and the liberal view, do not do justice to the complex and difficult nature of these topics and the reality of multiple interpretations throughout church history and the church today.

Many of the above topics have been made into book series that display four or five views on each issue, indicating there is more than one “evangelical/christian” view on many of these issues. It is possible and likely that some in the SBS community will disagree with this point or seek to phrase it differently or remove a few of the topics above. That’s fine, disagreement is great for conversation and that is the point- how do we handle the disagreements and tensions that arise as we continue to learn? It is my personal opinion that we ought to encounter the plurality of interpretation and theological viewpoints with humbleness and energetic seeking after the truth; we should seek not to allow fear, name-calling, pride and one voice louder than the others to dominate and steer the conversation. We should seek to avoid both knee-jerking reactions to all things different and a gullible embracing of everything as long as it’s not orthodoxy.  If Jesus is the “way, truth and life” than we as his disciples have nothing to fear from serious engagement in learning truth, for all truth is subservient to him. It is absolutely essential to note here that what are talking about is in the domains of personal wrestling and private conversation not public profession or instructive teaching in the classroom. To talk about what we allow staff to think and question and what we allow staff to teach is to talk about two different things, it is important to realize the difference. Many of these discussions that are wrestled with among staff are not things that need to be thrown out in a lecture or student small group setting. And for that matter it is not even the aim of this program to force questions and challenging views on staff. The question remains though of how to handle staff (and students for that matter) who naturally and personally have these questions arise on their own and seek to privately wrestle through these things (not teach them). I propose that we should treat the serious questions, doubts and challenging views existing in the church today as Jesus treated doubting Thomas. Not with the idea that we are perfect like Jesus and all who question are doubters, but rather encounter the honest questions with love and a simple showing of the evidence (in this case the holes in his hands). So we must encounter these topics of difficulty that have a wide range of interpretation with both love and the simple exchange of evidence from both sides.