I had the privilege of reading the manuscript of a book set to be published. I was requested to read and give my comments. While reading, I came across the following point, which led me to respond at length. I believe this response is worth sharing with others.
“The Berean believers were called ‘more noble’ because they questioned Paul’s teaching, ‘examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so’ (Acts 17:11, NASB). They were commended, in other words, because they did not simply accept the word of the missionary or evangelist, even though he was an apostle. They examined the Scriptures to see whether he was teaching them according to God’s revealed word.”—from MSS
My question here is not directly related to your book but concerns a general doubt of mine. Which Scriptures were they examining? If the Berean believers were Jews, then they might have been examining the Old Testament. Am I correct?
My next question is: We all agree on the importance of examining the Word of God. However, in the early mandali , where most of the believers were non-Jews, though Sevanand referred back to the Purva Veda, he was sometimes led by the Lord based on common sense. Above all, certain decisions had to be made by the collective deliberation of the bhaktas in a mandali on issues where they could not “examine the Scriptures.” A principle we often follow is, “Anything that is not opposed to the principles of God’s Word” should guide our decisions.
In our mandali, after several deliberations, we make decisions on cultural, social, and religious issues, particularly in relation to our families and communities. Without compromising our devotion to the Lord, we sometimes take actions for which there is no explicit endorsement in the Muktiveda. I must also emphasize that even this principle is not absolute. The so-called “Muktivedic principle” is conditioned by many other factors and may not apply uniformly across societies and traditions. Certain principles, if misinterpreted, might appear to oppose the Muktiveda in some contexts.
For instance, polygamy is often viewed as contrary to the Muktiveda, and we may insist on applying this principle without compromise in every society and culture. Such a misunderstanding has led to disastrous outcomes. For example, in some African countries, many wives of converts were cast out and left to become prostitutes for survival.@ To save one soul, the lives of many women were turned into hell. Even today, in several societies and cultures, some Christians continue to practice polygamy. In Mizoram, for example, a Christian named Jiyona has 39 wives, 94 children, and 33 grandchildren and has expressed his desire to go to America to find more wives. (Kumudam Reporter, Tamil, 29-07-176, pp. 20-21. This news was sourced from Believe it or Not, 2013, book no. 9.) He inherited this practice from his father, who also had many wives.
Another example is the thread ceremony (jenup), a traditional life-cycle event for Brahmin boys. In our mandali, we follow this Hindu tradition, which involves religious rituals that are insignificant to us and, to some extent, to our families as well. It is simply a tradition to be followed. Our family members understand that performing such rituals does not compromise our bhakti to the Lord.
It is important to note that traditions in India are evolving and adapting to the times. For example, in the past, the thread ceremony was performed before a boy reached his teenage years. Now, it is often performed just before marriage. Recently, one bhakta in our mandali performed the thread ceremony for his son. However, the boy no longer follows the prescribed daily rituals and has even discarded the thread. His grandparents, however, were satisfied that the tradition had been upheld.
Thus, while “examining the Scriptures” is crucial, we must also understand the limitations of Scripture, as it evolved within Jewish and Greco-Roman cultural, social, and religious contexts. We often use common sense, with the consensus of the mandali. I share this because the term “biblical” can sometimes be problematic. I often insist that what we call “biblical” is sometimes, in fact, unbiblical.
@ Allen provides an example demonstrating how missionary-imposed laws can lead seekers and believers to violate God’s eternal law:
“Take, for instance, the case of Big Hunter. Big Hunter was a chief among the Sioux who fled from the United States into Canada and sought protection from the Canadian government. Presbyterian missionaries visited them, taught them, and many embraced Christianity, including Big Hunter. He wished to become a Christian but was told he must put away all his wives except one. After a long struggle, he decided to obey but did not know how to arrange for his wives. In his confusion, he hanged them. He then informed the missionaries that he had complied with their demands. Shocked, the missionaries drove him away as a murderer. In despair, Big Hunter abandoned all hope of becoming a Christian, returned to his heathen gods, married two new wives, and lived as a heathen until his death, despite his children becoming Christians.” (pp. 65-66)
Allen adds:
“Men rejected in Christ’s name by us have sometimes done things that appalled us, and women put away in obedience to our law have sometimes fallen into a state17 that troubled us. Very many who might have become good Christians have sought Christ, only to encounter a law and leave without Christ…
In these circumstances, it is not surprising that large numbers of natives, both converts and heathens, view our rules as the imposition of Western civilization rather than the law of Christ.” (p. 66)—Roland Allen, The Spontaneous Expansion of the Church and the Causes which Hinder It, WS Publishers, 1997, pp. 65-66.
Leave a Reply