One of the things that can make Christian doctrine confusing at times - and quite
frankly for some people unbelievable, - is an inaccurate Bible interpretation.
I'll use a metaphor to explain what I mean…
let's say, thousands of years from now, someone is reading a 2008 account of a newly elected mayor who was praised
for having, “cleaned up the entire town” after taking office. Now let's say that this person who is
reading this 2008 account thousands of years in the future were unfamiliar with our current day expressions and colloquialisms;
we might be able to imagine them saying something like this…
years ago there was a newly elected leader who scrubbed and cleaned every square inch of the town. While we don't
know where he attained all of the necessary cleaning supplies, it is fair to assume that he managed to clean the town by himself,
as there is no mention of anyone else being involved as he, ‘cleaned up the entire town’”.
Exacerbating this problem is the presence of sensationalism in the Christian apologetics marketplace (so to
This type of thing is a very real problem in current day Bible interpretation. That
is why I find people like N.T. Wright to be of such value to the church. And while persons such as Bishop Wright do
not practice “sensationalism”, I believe that what they offer is of sensational consequence,
as it makes Scripture more accessible and believable, which leads more people to the Christian faith, and leads many Christians
to a more authentic, and therefore more powerful, faith.